he oversaw the worst foreign policy disaster since World War 2:

I meant Vietnam War – not WW2.

But Alan Dershowiz says: “It is a tremendous mistake for Barack Obama to select as a foreign policy adviser the one person in public life who has chosen to support a bigoted book,” – referring to ‘The Israel Lobby,’ by American academics Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer.

An inexperienced candidate like Obama will have to rely upon his advisers; if those advisers are antagonistic with an important ally like Israel, then why shouldn’t those of us who support Israel not be concerned?

After all, to get back to the point, Hamas sees something it likes in Obama. What do they see? And if a terrorist organization sworn to the destruction of Israel likes him, explain exactly why those of us who support Israel should not be concerned?

Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..The Papacy and Jon Stewart

At any rate, Obama has been defended as pro-Israel in the pages of the jerusalem post…

Yep and he’s criticized in the same space. In a piece titled “It’s Barack Obama’s advsiors who concern me,” Lawrence Zell writes that since Obama’s voting record is scant, we have to look at his advisors to judge whether he will be good for Israel or not:

While we took the family association into account, we also looked at George W. Bush’s circle of foreign policy advisers and we concluded that the new Bush administration’s foreign policy would likely be good news for the region in general and Israel in particular to the amazement of scoffing local pundits. Today, the vast majority of Americans living in Israel vote Republican for this very reason.

As for his advisors spanning the “gamut of policy positions”, Merrill “Tony” McPeak is his military advisory; Zbigniew Brzezinski is his foreign policy advisor; another foreign policy expert Robert Malley; foreign policy adviser, close personal friend and former employee Samantha Power. Obama is also heavily supported by George Soros, and attended fundraisers thrown by Allan Houston, an anti-semite who holds the Jews responsible for murdering Jesus Christ.

Then there’s Susan Rice, John Kerry’s foreign policy advisor, who advised her candidate to appoint Jimmy Carter and James Baker – both men viewed as antagonistic to Israel’s interest – to mediating peace in the region. Kerry had to back down by blaming his staff – Susan Rice. Scott Lasensky wants to Israel to negotiate with Hamas… The list goes on… As does the article. I’d continue but I’m tired of hardcoding the links.

At any rate, Obama has been defended as pro-Israel in the pages of the jerusalem post:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1200308099552

and is characterized as a zionist by the usual lefty suspects, so really i think this whole thing about hamas is just a hail mary pass to try and convince american jews to vote GOP again – which reduces them to one dmensional automatons in the same way that dems think appealing to economic issues will peel off lower middle class values voters who “should” be voting D.

Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..The Papacy and Jon Stewart

which is why his endorsement is irrelevant to anything.

Um… No… It says alot when you think about it.

You’re right that AQ endorsed Bush in ’04. But why did they do so? Because their ideology is apocalyptic, and keeping Bush in office furthered this belief. Bush of course was happy to oblige, by sending thousands of AQ to whatever after-life awaited them after experiencing their own personal “apocalypse” through hellfire missiles and USMC and US Army bullets.

So why is Hamas backing Obama? Hamas does not follow an apocalyptic ideology – so their reasoning must be more pragmatic.

What could their reasoning be? At the very least that they will get a better deal from Obama than they would from McCain. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Yes, because they have not moderated since seizing power and remain dedicated to the destruction of Israel – an American ally.

This is the “murderers scenario” – a zero sum “game” whereby you have a winner and a loser. Hamas wins at Israel’s expense. Contrast this with the “mugger’s scenario” which is not zero-sum; each participant has a chance of surviving through compromise.

Obama believes that an Obama administration would be much more antagonistic to Israel than a McCain one. Given Obama’s anti-semitic “spritual mentor”, his backing by Nadhmi Auchi, the presence of Zbigniew Brzezinski on his foreign policy team, and his refusal to condemn Carter’s meeting with Hamas leaders as virulently as he has attacked Don Imus, and I’d say that Hamas’s position makes sense from their perspective.

scott, i linked to my comments, not those of others, for whom i am not responsible.

and yes you are exactly correct about Yousef. which is why his endorsement is irrelevant to anything.

Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..The Papacy and Jon Stewart

If Gaza is a democracy explain what happened in June 2007. Also, which election did Khaled Mashaal win and who did he defeat?

For example on paper Iran is a democracy. If we targeted our critism of Iran to the guardian council we would resonate within the country far better than we do.

Likewise China is a democracy within the top level of the party.

By the definition thrown around your post, Aziz, a democracy is any form of government where a single man doesn’t make a decision. The junta in Burma is a democracy; the government of WW2 imperial Japan wasm a democracy. By this definition nearly every government in the world except North Korea is a democracy.

As for Ahmed Yousef, he’s a propagandist. I especially like how he says the Palestinians simply want to live in peace – and then blames the US for their failure not to. America is forcing the Pals to fire missiles from Gaza into Israel. The US is compelling the Pals to strap on bombing belts and attack civilians.

Chomsky would no doubt agree.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/18/74439/0284#4

Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..The Papacy and Jon Stewart