From Beirut, Chawki Freiha reports* on a provocative editorial that appeared in the Al Quds Al Arabi newspaper on November 3 written by Abdelbari Atwan, the first journalist to have met with Osama bin Laden. Titled “Obama’s Historic Intifada,” Atwan praises the probable election of Barack Obama to the White House and claims that with Obama installed in Washington, Islam will be able to “impose its point of view” on the world.
As to be expected, Atwan’s editorial decries the Bush administration because it is “controlled by Zionists… whose objective is to destroy the Arab world and Islam.” Displaying true Muslim conspiratorial thinking, Atwan further claims that all Middle Eastern countries have been under the control Israel, even though the Arabs have the “largest wealth” in the world in petrodollars.
The most alarming part of Atwan’s editorial, however, is that he imagines that with a President Obama in office, Islam will be able to use its oil wealth to control the world.
We have the largest wealth and could save the world from the crisis. If these resources are properly harnessed, we could impose our point of view and serve our cause… The conditions are now fulfilled for the Arabs use their wealth to obtain a U.S. promise favorable and correct historical mistakes committed in Palestine.
Atwan is merely echoing the feeling in the Mid East that a Barack Obama will look upon them with favor or will be so weak that he will not be able to stop Islam from “imposing” its “point of view” upon the world.
If Joe Biden is right that a new president Obama will be “tested in the first 60 days” of his term, it seems as if certain forces in the Mid East are poised to do just that. But, it is obvious that many in the Mid East imagine Obama stands in agreement with their goals in the first place.
A president Obama is no friend to Israel or the west, at least as far as Abdelbari Atwan and many of his comrades are concerned.
The most pressing question that Americans have is: should we support a man for President of the United States that our enemies imagine to be on their side?
*Original report is in French.
(Photo of Abdelbari Atwan courtesy of www.tlaxcala.es)



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
It is my hope
November 3, 2008 - 11:43 ET by ahusserJewish persons, who as a rule, overwhelmingly vote Democratic will not vote against their self interest as an Obama administration will more than likely see if not the end of Israel a terrible conflagration in the Middle East as the radical muslims will no longer be constrained but encouraged by what has to be an anti-Israel administration true destabilisation could be at hand.
"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox
It's already been shown that
November 3, 2008 - 11:50 ET by Warner Todd HustonIt's already been shown that over 70% of Amer. Jews living in Israel have already voted for McCain and against Obama. Unfortunately, that seems exactly the opposite for Jews that live in the USA. They are foolish.
It's because they have
November 3, 2008 - 11:57 ET by mattmIt's because they have abandoned Judaism for the religion of Liberalism. (This is according to a Rabbi who was a guest on some radio show about a month ago - I wish I could remember who.)
we have the true
November 3, 2008 - 13:32 ET by TruthMongerwe have the true Jews...
but striesand, speilberg et al will vote obama - screw the isreali state - they got theirs in malibu
Government is the "greedy capitalism" of marxists
Historically
November 3, 2008 - 12:14 ET by ahusserJews have always been in the forefront of socialist movements. Julius and Ethel Rosenbers were jews. Israel is a Socialist country (European Style). One of the reasons Hitler reserved much of his hatred towards them. But the Democratic Party in this country has recently been proven to be Anti-Israel with their support of the Palestinians in whatever actions they took terrorist or otherwise. The election of Obama would be looked at with a jaundiced eye. I imagine overtures will be made to Obama's administration on what the U.S. policy towards Israel will be. Even if we go from staunch defender to just neutral could spell disaster for Israel. I wouldn't be surprised if they wouldn't go to a war footing just in response to an Obama win and unlike the US and other countries have no qualms with preemptive strikes if they feel they are threatened.
"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox
Hitler was also a socialist.
November 3, 2008 - 12:14 ET by Warner Todd HustonHitler was also a socialist.
WTH...that gives socialists a bad name
November 3, 2008 - 12:16 ET by LionKingSaying Hitler was a socialist is like saying Stalin was a socialist...sheesh! Can we stop with the over-the-top rhetoric?
LOL I didn't think it was
November 3, 2008 - 12:21 ET by Warner Todd HustonLOL
I didn't think it was possible to give socialists a GOOD name in the first place?
The biggest difference between Stalin
November 3, 2008 - 12:27 ET by ahusserand Hitler. Is Stalin seized power from an already un-democratic society but Hitler was voted in by those living in a free country (although one with multitudes of problems).
"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox
One major difference
November 3, 2008 - 13:16 ET by Prester JohnThe Soviet military had become a thoroughly politicized institution that Stalin could control from the very beginning. When Hitler took power the military was the one institution he was afraid of. It was only when the professional military lost its nerve and gave in to the Austrian corporal, thinking that it could control him, that Hitler truly was able to seize power.
Now then, to what extent would BHO and his Leftist supporters try to politicize the U.S. military and to what extent would those efforts be resisted? OR, is BHO serious about creating his Civilian Security Force and making it a politicized rival of the U.S. military? Remember, he said that this Force of his needs to be just as well funded and equipped as the traditional military.
Hmmmmm.
I haven't heard anything about Obama's Civilian Security Force
November 3, 2008 - 13:22 ET by ahusserIs it true and where can I find out anything about it. If true it could be the start of an Obama SA or SS.
"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox
This is true
November 3, 2008 - 12:22 ET by ahusserBut he hated other Socialist parties, communists and jews. I don't know the exact gradation or manifestaition of socialism Hitler's Nazi Party promoted or what it entailed but his enemies were also Socialists. He seems to have come to some arrangement with the Capitalists of the day and allowed them to make a profits during the war probably for a share. But all this aside an Obama win would probably be a disaster for Israel and destabilise the middle east (what little stablility there is). Iraq's progress would probably be pushed aside and internecine strife in Iraq would flash anew with the balkinization of Iraq and the asendency of Iran as a major power in the region.
"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox
The Nazi Party was called
November 3, 2008 - 12:25 ET by Warner Todd HustonThe Nazi Party was called the National Socialist Party. Still, there is very little difference between a communist a socialist and a Nazi. The only substantive twist the Nazis add to the concept is to allow private owners to own major businesses. But that is just a veneer of a difference because in the Nazi system the businesses are still fully controlled by the state.
Hitler was not really against "socialists" per se. He was against ANYONE that threatened his own grasp on power. It was far less ideological than it was authoritarian.
My point still being
November 3, 2008 - 12:29 ET by ahusserthat an Obama administration would be a probable disaster for Israel with all my points buried below the Nazi dialogue.
"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox
And with that you are
November 3, 2008 - 12:34 ET by Warner Todd HustonAnd with that you are correct!!
Or to sum up this
November 3, 2008 - 12:48 ET by TexasteacherOr to sum up this article...
If you want to be forced into Islam, vote Obama
We are OBAMA resistance is futile
November 3, 2008 - 13:09 ET by allamericangirlI'm not ready to get fitted for a Burka and refuse to give up the fight but it looks like a President Obama will be prepared for resistance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
Obama civilian security force
O B A M A
November 3, 2008 - 13:07 ET by misterbillObama's
Black
Activists
Managing
America
No one found it remarkable
November 3, 2008 - 13:19 ET by jcollins9No one found it remarkable that the Arabs are of the opinion that he is a muslim?
Interesting perspective...
Man is not free unless government is limited. - Ronald Reagan
You repub RACIST
November 3, 2008 - 13:27 ET by TexasteacherYou repub RACIST BAS****!!!!!
How dare you mention any of that about his holiness!
Sorry, had to get my sarcasm/irony fix. Anyway, when you have muslims calling him a muslim, is that racist?
... and "legislation" shall
November 3, 2008 - 13:33 ET by SickofLibs... and "legislation" shall be called fatwas.