Posts

The L.A. Times Should Release the Khalidi Video

Here’s one way to keep hope alive: journalists are still more concerned with transparent journalism than they are with seeing Barack Obama cosseted all the way to the White House. Ron Rosenbaum and Jeff Goldberg have all come out against … Read More

By / October 31, 2008

Here’s one way to keep hope alive: journalists are still more concerned with transparent journalism than they are with seeing Barack Obama cosseted all the way to the White House. Ron Rosenbaum and Jeff Goldberg have all come out against the L.A. Times‘ collapsible refusal to disclose a videotape of a 2003 banquet at which Obama spoke warmly of Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies’ at Columbia University, and director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs. According to the Times’ description of the piece it ran six months ago, "speakers expressed anger at Israel and at U.S. foreign policy, but that Obama in his comments called for finding common ground." Nothing especially shocking in that, one might think. So why can’t we all see what’s on the tape?

The Times is claiming that releasing the footage would compromise its source, which seems unlikely even if the source narrates the entire film. (Since when are video editing skills absent on the West Coast?) The newspaper’s intransigence had led many on the right to presume that Obama sat in silence or approval as the worst type of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric was loosed in his presence. Therefore, goes this logic, he’s a covert sympathizer with the PLO who’s just waiting to get elected before he invites AIPAC and American Jewry to join Jeremiah Wright and his white grandmother under what has got be the most merciless bus since Speed.

You can decide for yourself what kind of scholar-activist Khalidi is. John McCain, acting as chairman of the International Republican Institute in the 90′s, gave a $500,000 grant to the Center for Palestine Research and Studies, which Khalidi co-founded. The New York Sun accused him of misinterpreting international law when he called violence against IDF soldiers "resistance," but denounced violence against Israeli civilians. Jeff Goldberg, in a post about to be reprinted at Jewcy, writes,

[Khalidi's] a fierce partisan of the Palestinian cause, of course, and in my conversations with him, and in his writing, I see that his sympathies frequently cause him to distort Middle East history. But an anti-Semite? I don’t think so. In fact, Rashid Khalidi is one of the rare Palestinian advocates who argues, as he has with me, that Arabs must study Jewish history, including and especially the history of Jew-hatred, in order to better understand Israel, and to reach a compromise with it.

As for Obama’s relationship with Khalidi, his remarks in that original L.A. Times piece are indeed revealing:

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It’s for that reason that I’m hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid’s dinner table," but around "this entire world."

This quote has been widely circulated, but nowhere in quarters critical of Obama has it been pointed out that he acknowledges "biases" counter to Khalidi’s own. What might they be? And do "conversations" between the senator and the professor consist of arguments, debates, attempts to carve out a middle-ground position? Can the Times‘ videotape shed any light on these and other questions? Even if it can’t, the very fact that the tape has now become newsworthy in itself makes its exhibition a public good.

The L.A. Times has no legitimate excuse for keeping it from inquiring eyes.

Tagged with:
  • David N. Friedman

    Thank you Michael Weiss for coming donw on the correct side of this controversy and thanks for the link to the NY Sun article which makes it plain that Khalidi is wrong about international law–no surprize.

    Khalidi has had influence on Obama and the tape proves Obama has been poisoned by Khalidi’s radical re-write of morality and law as it relates to the Arab-Israeili conflict and this point further cements the fear Americans and Jews have about an Obama Presidency.

    Michael Weiss has something at stake in promoting transparent journalism and even if he is not voting for McCain (I do not know for whom who he is voting), this rare writer on Jewcy actually has something at stake in promoting positive values in this forum.

    Good for you, Michael. 

  • Phantom

    If pundits didn’t exist and journalists simply reported news and didn’t spin it, then I would agree that news should be reported when it is discovered.  But we know the real world.  Far right "journalists" will spin whatever is in there into something that isn’t even remotely recognizable as the progeny of the original video, and I don’t want that further distracting already confused Jews in Florida.  Because that’s what will happen.  Hannity and O’Reilly and every other far right hack will turn an apple pie into a turd, and with only 4 days left before the election, the Voters won’t have time to look at the facts rather than the spin to figure out the truth.  Instead, they’ll remember only the fabricated sound-bites of the far right, letting fear take hold and voting again against their interests.

    And if you can think of an example when Obama made an unprovoked attack during this election against McCain, go ahead and write about it; I’m open to hearing about it.  It’s not like I know every single thing that happened during this election.

  • Michael Weiss

    That still doesn’t make a case for why a major newspaper should wait until after the election to release a much-discussed video featuring one of the candidates for president, especially when that newspaper has already reported on the contents of that video. You admit in your first comment that the Khalidi tape is newsworthy (such was the implication of your suggestion to wait until next Wed. to release it). Don’t you think voters have a right to see what’s on it and decide for themselves whether or not Obama is still worth voting for?

    The fact that robocalls, etc. exist doesn’t change the roles of journalists into guardians of the maligned front-runner. Obama may well have secured the nomination quicker — and found himself in a far stronger position now, as a better known Democratic candidate — had newspapers reported on the Edwards affair a year ago. Instead, it fell to a supermarket tabloid to tell the country what every hushed-up journo on both coasts knew to be true.

    And really, all distractions were created by McCain? You can name nothing at all underhanded or mendacious or willfully point-missing that ever came from Team Obama?

     

  • Phantom

    Mike, I disagree.  I think all of the lies, the robocalls, the false accusations of socialist and communist and terrorist, all of these have hurt his campaign; fortunately, they’ve hurt McCain’s campaign also.  Even so, I think Obama would be leading by well into the double digits by now if this was a clean and honest campaign by both sides, rather than an election full of distractions, all of which were created by McCain.

    As for Media, if the LA Times is a disgrace, then what’s Fox and the WSJ?  How come you never complain about them?  They can’t even hide their heavy bias any more.

  • Rob

    "I’ve never met Rashid Khalidi, but he is (a) Palestinian and therefore (b) a semite, so the charge of anti-semitism is fatuous"

    OK Joe Klein, how about Jew hate if your so worried about semantics.

    The LA Times is a disgraceful shill for the Obama campaign.

    If the tape had national security secrets it would be on YouTube yesterday.

  • Rob

    "I’ve never met Rashid Khalidi, but he is (a) Palestinian and therefore (b) a semite, so the charge of anti-semitism is fatuous"

    OK Joe Klein, how about Jew hate is your so worried about semantics.

    The LA Times is a disgraceful shill for the Obama campaign.

    If the tape had national security secrets it would be on YouTube yesterday.

  • Michael Weiss

    The far right media have a much more powerful grievance with its non-release, and would have an even greater one if the L.A. Times followed your advice and held off until after the election. (Ann Coulters will still be with us on Nov. 5).

    It’s not the job of journalists to guard us from our own worst tendencies to misread, distort or lie about the news. It’s to report. 

    Besides, Obama’s managed to out-maneuvre all sorts of conspiracies about him; an unexpurgated video, however "spun," wouldn’t hurt him with voters if there was nothing in it that could hurt him.  

  • Phantom

    Here’s the problem, whatever is in that video will be spun by the far right media and McCain’s campaign into Obama being an anti-semite that will appoint Ahmedinejad into his cabinet.  The far right pundits and McCain himself have already compared Khalidi to NeoNazis, so I can only imagine what fantastic tales they would spin if given the opportunity.