Muslim Unite Sunni and Shia KHUTBAH : THE IMPACT OF THE US ELECTIONS ON THE MIDDLE EAST

 

THE STREET MMBAR JUM'AH KHUTBAH (8 February 2013) webpage: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=182501078290&ref=ts http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_street_mimbar/ PLEASE e-mail Suggestions & Criticisms to khutbahs@yahoo.com It is in such a manner that We make plain Our signs so that the course of the Criminals may become clear.

Bismillah Ar-Rahmaan Ar-Raheem.

Alhumdulillah. Peace and blessings on Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam), his Noble Companions and Family.

Committed Brothers and sisters, Committed Muslims …

In the name of the Mercy giving and the Merciful Creator. I greet you all with the greetings of peace and justice.

Audio on http://www.islamiccenterdc.com/apps/videos/videos/show/17627573-the-impact-of-the-u-s-election-in-the-middle-east-imam-muhammad-al-asi-10-30-2008 (10-30-2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALbRD7SESCM

THE IMPACT OF THE US ELECTIONS ON THE MIDDLE EAST

I'd like to begin by thanking all of you for being here this evening. I'd like to caution those of you who are here that this presentation is not for those who are faint at heart. Some of you who'll be listening, this is going to be academically strong language and probably not the average presentation that you would hear from mainstream speakers. I'd like to begin by saying that it just happens that we are located about less than one week before the presidential elections here in the United States. This coming presidential elections will probably be the most critical in the contemporary history of the United States. It will mean a lot not only for the American citizen who goes and casts his or her ballot but it's going to be also very meaningful for the rest of the world. The American elections and the Middle East are intertwined in a way that is kept out of public attention. I don't mean that the American elections are centred around the realities of the Middle East, what I mean to say is the developments in the Middle East have much to do with the elections that take place. Now, we have been subjected to a theatre of the so called differences between Republicans and Democrats, between John McCain and Obama and some of us believe that there is a substantial or noticeable difference between the two candidates. I don't belief that for one moment. I believe that both of them represent American financial corporate and military interests. They may have slight differences in their tactics on how to apply the inevitable policies of the American interests and interference in other parts of the world but as far as the end result is concerned it remains exploitation, procuring natural resources, spreading military bases around the world and in as much as possible securing the economic lifeline of the capitalist system in the United States- none of them disagree on that at all.

Now, I'm going to try to take a quick walk-through some of the previous Presidents in the United States, at least, and how they showed that they were impotent and disabled when it came to making decisions that impact the American foreign policy or developments in the Middle East. Eisenhower may have been the last American President who actually took a position that we can consider to be defiant of Israeli foreign policy. During the 1956 tri-partite attack the French, the British and the Israelis attacked the Suez Canal and Egypt and resulted in these three military forces gaining the upper hand against the Egyptian government. At that time President Eisenhower took a position that in effect told the Israelis that they're going to have to go role back their military advantages and recede to their prior positions before this three pronged attack against Egypt. That was the last on record official American foreign policy objection to Israel. Since that time we've had the following noticeable developments in as far as American Presidents are concerned: the first one after Eisenhower, we have is John F Kennedy. John F Kennedy- this is a part that is omitted from your mainstream and official reading of his presidency- met with the Foreign Minister of Israel at that time. The Foreign Minister was Golda Meir. She came to the United States and, (I believe the meeting took place in Florida), they had a very frank exchange of ideas and President Kennedy told the Israeli Foreign Minister, Golda Meir "you are developing nuclear weapons." Israel at the time was relying on French technology to develop its nuclear bomb and it was finishing up the whole project and, of course, President Kennedy was of course versed and briefed on the details of where the Israelis are in their Dimona nuclear program and he told, point blank, Golda Meir "if you finish this project and Israel becomes a nuclear power in the Middle East then there will come a time when Israeli and American interests are going to diverge and are going to part." He told Golda Meir "at that time you'll have to go on your own way and we, meaning, the American government is going to have to go its own way." In other words you can't now rely on our blind support to you anymore if you become a nuclear power in the Middle East. Of course, the Israeli officials, as is the case all the time, don't listen to advice that comes to them even from their major supporter- the government of the United States. They went ahead and finished the project and Israel became a nuclear power in the Middle East and since that time it has procured at least three-hundred to four-hundred nuclear bombs that has in its arsenal. Of course, we know what happened to President Kennedy.

After President Kennedy we had President Johnson. President Linden Johnson was faced with a litmus test of the independence of American policy towards the Israeli government and President Johnson could not stand for the American interest when it came to Israeli national security. What happened was during the six day war of 1967 the Israeli air force attacked the United States naval vessel that was stationed in the Eastern Mediterranean to eavesdrop on the information and the communication that was going on especially during the flare up of that war during those six days from June fifth to June eleventh of 1967. The Israelis knew very well that American communication and eavesdropping vessel was stationed in the vicinity of the South Eastern quadrant of the Mediterranean and they were not to attack it obviously because it was a ship that belonged to a friendly country; but the Israelis once again when it comes to their national security priorities are not subject to reason. They sent in their air force and bombed the USS Liberty (and) they also sent in some navel vessels that torpedoed the USS Liberty and as a result of that thirty-four young American sailors were killed and around a hundred-and-seventy-two young men serving their country and their flag were injured. During the aftermath of that deliberate premeditated attack on an American military vessel what was supposed to take place was (that) during the attack the American military was supposed to protect the USS Liberty. We have news about this incident that at least two of the American military air force planes in the Mediterranean were dispatched to protect the USS Liberty. When they were airborne and on their way to do just that they were given orders to fly back to base so they never reached their comrades. After that there was supposed to be an American investigation at a congressional level of what really happened in that incident. That official congressional investigation never materialised. One of the contributors to blocking that investigation was Admiral McCain, the father of the current candidate who's running for President of the United States. So we never had an investigation on this deliberate, unprovoked Israeli attack on a United States navy vessel in the Mediterranean, even up until this time from 1967 to the year 2008 where we are. We're talking about forty-one years. President Linden Johnson, the President of the United States, also part of this cover-up concerning this Israeli attack on an American vessel. After President Johnson we had Nixon.

Nixon was also a President of the United States who didn't have the necessary backbone to tell the Israelis that the aggression (and) the war of 1973 has to stop. In the form of his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at the time and before that National Security Chief in the United States we had the American military re-supply drawing on much needed weapons in the European theatre at that time. This was a bipolar world with the United States on one side and the Soviet Union on the other side and they had to stand down most of the weapons that was in Europe to go to the rescue on the Israelis in their war in October 1973. What happened after that, of course, was what was called an Arab oil boycott and the United states still in the form of the shuttle diplomacy undertaken by Secretary of state, Henry Kissinger- who happens to be one of the main, if not the main adviser of the McCain campaign on American foreign policy- which ended with some agreements in 1975 between the combatants with the United States obviously solidly backing the Israeli side in these types of agreements. Once again, they failed at the highest level of the United States government in the office in the White House not to stand for American interests rather to protect Israeli interests at all costs. I may add here another element that is not spoken of in the public and that is the assassination of King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. One of the little known aspects that preceded that assassination is the visit that Secretary Kissinger had to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in the conversation that he had with King Faisal at the time he was told in no uncertain words by the King of Saudi Arabia, (I'm obviously paraphrasing King Faisal in his conversation with Henry Kissinger), "take a look at that desert out there." Kissinger proudly cast his vision out there into the empty domains of the Arabian Desert and King Faisal told him "it wasn't a long time ago that we were out there in the sand in our tents and if the liberation of Jerusalem…" King Faisal had this big thing about liberating Jerusalem not of liberating all of Palestine. "… means that we're going to go from the palace that I am in back to those tents, we would certainly be willing to do that if that means that Jerusalem is going to be liberated." Another thing that is unconventional and probably a little awkward in these types of encounters was that King Faisal had a book called The Protocol of the learned elders of Zion and he gave that book to Secretary of state Henry Kissinger and said "maybe you want to take a look at the contents of this book." It was only a matter of a year or so after that and King Faisal was assassinated. We go from President Nixon to President Carter.

President Carter comes to the White House and there's American foreign policy and diplomatic momentum in the Middle East and President Carter manages to bring both sides, the Egyptian and the Israeli side, into what has been called Camp David. Both of the agreed on certain things i.e. the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Sinai and a termination of hostilities between Egypt and Israel, the normalization of relations and the establishment of diplomatic missions by both states in the capitals of the other state. All of that actually materialized and what we have had since then is a cold peace between Israel and Egypt. There's no warm peace in which people are going across the borders from one side to the other and relations are normal- far from it. What the United States government ended up doing was financing this cold peace. It has been giving Israel between $5billion and $6billion every year on the record. The population at the time was about three-million Jews in Israel and the United States giving them $6billion every year. That's on the Israeli side. On the Egyptian side is a population of more than sixty-million people and the United States giving them around $2,5billion every year. So that is an American financed peace in the Middle East which still continues up until this day as tenuous as it is. Then we have after President Carter, President Reagan who comes to the White House.

During President Reagan's time in office we had a major flare up in the Middle East and that was the Israeli attack and occupation of Southern Lebanon.

Then, after President Reagan we had President Bush. President Bush the father managed to cleverly manoeuvre two Arab states into a position of hostility with each other and that was the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait. There was Desert Storm- the American involvement in that area which continues still up until our very day to become an American quagmire that was inherited by Bush the son from bush the father and in the process we had Israeli advocates in the United States who were cheering the American effort in the Persian Gulf, in Iraq and even in Afghanistan hoping that this will drain the potential opposition of the peoples around the Israeli occupation of Palestine and put an end, at least for the foreseeable future, to any type of serious consolidation of power against the Israeli nation state. Then we had President Clinton who came into office.

President Clinton had himself surrounded by warm Israeli-Zionist Jews who could care less about the priorities and the interests of the United States when it came to Israeli interests. Also, President Clinton approved in his years in office to be an Israeli firster. He tried to broker at Rye River an agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis that failed and the blame was put on the weakest chain in those negotiations which turned out to be Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organisation- they were blamed for the failure of thee talks.

Now we've had President Bush who has given us the past eight years of a limping and a paralyzed the United States policy in that part of the world. It is with this backdrop of information concerning the prized office in the land, the White House in Washington DC, that we have these two contenders for that office- Barack Obama and John McCain who want to move into that office and show us their colours when it comes to the Israeli interest in the Middle East. If you've been following their statements, their debates and their announcements, none of it- absolutely none- would have anyone believe that they would stand for America before Israel. When they appeared at the AIPAC Conference last June and they gave these statements of support and fealty to the State of Israel, you would think that they are more Israeli than the Israelis themselves.

I would like to go through some of these names- and these names are taken from the Israeli press- and these names are of individuals who are Jewish American citizens who are supportive of the Republican and the Democratic runners for the White House. Many times when we say these types of things people want to point and say "this is an Islamic radical who is taking it out on Israel." We are not here trying to load anyone's senses with sensationalized information. We want you to take the facts as they are and then after considering these facts to look at the Presidential elections in the United States and realize that they cannot be fair when it comes to what is called "the Palestinian-Israeli conflict." This is an article that was written in the Israeli newspaper called Ha'aretz. This was considered by some to be on the left of the political spectrum. Some very fanatical types of Israelis call it a pro-Arab newspaper. It ran an article roughly ten days ago under the title "Members of the Tribe. Thirty-six Jews who have shaped the 2008 US elections" I'm just going to go through them quicker than I did last night at the other presentation, these are by alphabetical order:

Sheldon Adelson- Republican, neoconservative and a mega-donor for the McCain campaign.

David Axelrod- Chief strategist and media advisor for the Obama campaign.

Steven Bob and Sam Gordon- The two Reform rabbis from the Chicago area founded "Rabbis for Obama" which has persuaded hundreds of rabbinical colleagues to go on record by name supporting Obama. This is the first time in my life that I have realized that there are so many Rabbis supporting someone who has an Islamic middle name.

Matt Brooks- The executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition.

Mark Broxmeyer- A businessman and chair of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs conservative think tank, Broxmeyer serves as national chairman of the McCain campaign's Jewish Advisory Coalition and as a member of the candidate's national finance committee. Notice how most of these individuals are lodged in the financial section of these campaigns and notice what finances mean to elected officials.

Eric Cantor- This Virginia congressman, the sole Jewish Republican in the House, has emerged as a primary McCain surrogate.

Laurie David- The global-warming activist and producer of "An Inconvenient Truth," starring Al Gore, she is ex-wife of "Seinfeld" and "Curb Your Enthusiasm" creator Larry David and one of Jewish Hollywood's most prodigious fundraisers.

Ira Forman- The executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council. Barney Frank- The Massachusetts Democratic congressman is one of the most visible, outspoken liberals in the House. He is openly gay and a frequent target of pro-McCain commentators, particularly on Fox News, where, because of his role as chair of the House Financial Services Committee, he has been said to bear crucial responsibility for the sub-prime mess that the country finds itself in. He's pro-Obama of course.

Malcolm Hoenlein- Formally nonpartisan as professional chief of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, he invited Sarah Palin to speak at an anti-Ahmadinejad rally at the UN, then bowed to pressure to rescind the invitation. You may recall that there was some type of disagreement because the invitation went out to Palin and to Hillary Clinton and Hilary said "she's not going to attend if Palin is going to be attending" and it went through that type of tailspin.

Cheryl Jacobs- A McCain campaign co-chair in Broward County, Florida, the Conservative rabbi, a long time Democrat, supported Hillary Clinton's primary race for president, but then switched to McCain.

Henry Kissinger- The New York Times calls the former Secretary of State a "close outside adviser" to McCain's campaign. I don't know why they put the word outsider. He is regularly called upon by the candidate for advice on foreign affairs, and held a high-profile briefing session with Palin prior to the vice-presidential debate. Again, this reminds me of one of those pictorial moments in the McCain campaign when he was out there in the Middle East and he was speaking about how "the Revolutionary Guards in Iran were involved in the terrorist operations inside of Iraq." At that moment, Joe Lieberman steps right up to his ear and whisper in his ear after which we heard McCain say "no, I'm sorry. It was not the Revolutionary Guards." I guess he said it was the terrorist Muslims or Al Qa'eedah or however way he corrected himself. But he has whisperers in his ears.

Ed Koch- The former New York City mayor is still a gold standard for Jews of a certain age. He backed Bush in 2004 and Hillary Clinton during the primaries. Now Ed Koch for Obama.

William Kristol- As editor of Rupert Murdoch's Weekly Standard magazine, a New York Times columnist and a Fox News commentator. This guy gets around. Imagine- at the New York Times and at Fox at the same time. This speaks columns for those of you who know what I'm talking about. He is an extremely influential neoconservative voice.

Sherry Lansing- The first woman to head a major Hollywood studio (Paramount), she is a major Democratic donor and fundraiser. You realize these words donors and fund raisers and finance committee and contributors, etc. are always coming up and you know how money speaks in political circles. Some shallow voters think there's something positive about the Obama campaign. I'm not here to try to knockdown Obama to build up McCain or vice versa. I think both of these are two heads belonging to the same body. In one of his appearances in front of the camera and in front of the media there were two young Muslim ladies who were located just behind him and his campaign was incensed that there were two identifiable Muslim young ladies who were wearing their Islamic head-dress who if they were left to stay where they were would appear in front of the camera and in front of the electorate and this person didn't have the moral muscles that it would take and the social courage that is required at times like this to say "these are Americans and if they're going to appear on camera they have all the right to appear just like all other Americans who would appear on camera." No. In order for him to prove that he is not a Muslim he's going to do this little act of omitting two Muslim American citizens from appearing on camera in one of his presentations. What do you think he would do if he is told by his financiers and his handlers- these are the names of the handlers of these two individuals- that the requirement of the hour now is to launch a war some place in Africa or in Asia. He couldn't defend two innocent American Muslim women appearing as innocuous as they would on camera how's he going to stand up and say "it doesn't serve American interests to begin a war somewhere in Africa or somewhere in Asia?!"

Ed Lasky- Through the American Thinker Web site, his articles helped spawn the widespread Internet campaign alleging that Obama is anti-'Israel'. Henry Lehman- We want to skip him and his brothers. These are the ones who around one-hundred-and-sixty years ago established this bank that just went under in this financial crisis last month.

Then we have Joe Lieberman- The Connecticut senator was Al Gore's 2000 Democratic running mate. Here we have a very interesting person. Joe Lieberman has been a Democrat all of his political career. He switched to becoming an independent and now he is supporting and he is John McCain's point man for undecided Jewish voters. Now you tell me- playing the political ropes here- this person is fantastic.

Mik Moore and Ari Wallach- Launched Jewsvote.org, utilizing high-tech methods to counteract Web-borne attacks on Obama.

Eli Pariser- He heads MoveOn.org, a liberal on-line advocacy group that has raised large sums for Democratic candidates.

Martin Peretz- The editor of The New Republic who wrote an influential article entitled- listen to this- "Can friends of 'Israel' - and Jews - trust Obama? In a word, Yes."

Dennis Prager- He is an influential, outspoken and often strident nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. Despite reservations over McCain's campaign reform bill, he has thrown his weight behind the GOP ticket.

Penny Pritzker- She is the national finance chair of the Obama campaign. One again finances, money, financial support. These are the ones who are running the show not the "make you feel good" statements by McCain and Obama who cannot deliver once one of them is elected into the White House. Remember Bush senior or Bush the father when he said in his campaigning… This is a problem that we have i.e. we have short memories. We can't recall the recent past. We go through these cycles every four or eight years Bush the father said "read my lips- no more taxes." He got elected and the machinery of the US Imperialists and the Capitalists had him lick his own words. Bill Clinton who… Some of you I can't blame because you're too young and when Bill Clinton was running for President the first time around you were too young to remember. But the word change- the same word that Obama is using- was used repetitiously, ad nausea by Bill Clinton. Change change change! Every other sentence had the word change in it. He was elected President- what type of change do you recall? Was there any significant change that happened on his watch during those eight years? Nothing whatsoever. The machinery, the locomotive, the direction of American Imperialist policies continued.

Ed Rendell- The governor of the key swing state of Pennsylvania, he is former head of the Democratic National Committee and a top Democratic campaign spokesman.

Denise Rich- The socialite and ex-wife of disgraced billionaire Marc Rich is a Democratic mega fundraiser. This is the person whose husband was amnestied by President Clinton during his last days in office. This is Clinton all over again.

Dennis Ross and Dan Kurtzer- They are the centre-right and centre-left anchors of Obama's Middle East advisory staff.

Robert Rubin- The top Obama economics advisor has unsurpassed knowledge of the workings of Wall Street and was treasury secretary in the Clinton administration.

Dan Shapiro- A former Clinton administration National Security Council official, he is a senior Mideast policy advisor and Jewish outreach coordinator for the Obama campaign. He is said to have co-written Obama's speech before AIPAC (the pro-'Israel' lobby), in which the candidate declared, (we quote and these are Obama's words written by this pro-Israel insider), "'Jerusalem' will remain the capital of 'Israel' and it must remain undivided". Sarah Silverman- A "shock comedian."

Alan Solow- The Chicago lawyer is active in the Jewish community and in the Conference of Presidents. He has been an Obama supporter for a dozen years.

Jon Stewart- As host of the satirical TV news program "The Daily Show," he has become perhaps the most listened-to liberal voice in the nation. The New York Times called Stewart's program "a genuine cultural and political force."

Barbra Streisand- The superstar singer is a Jewish-liberal icon and mega-fundraiser. She endorsed Hillary Clinton in the primary race and has backed Obama since the Democratic convention. She also headlined a Hollywood fundraiser in September, which included a $25,800-a-plate dinner.

Robert Wexler- Another key Obama surrogate, the Florida congressman has campaigned extensively in the Sunshine State.

And finally Fred Zeidman- McCain's lead Jewish strategist, he is chairman of the US Holocaust Memorial Council, and a heavyweight among Jewish Republicans.

Now we come to, (and I'm going to try to wrap it up), the Palestinian part of the Middle East conflict and what type of influence it may have in Washington and I can tell you the influence is nil, zero, zilch- nothing. That's simply because the governments in Arab countries are second fiddle to US priorities. They don't have a backbone of their own. They can't come and tell Washington that we oppose your policies anywhere in the Middle East. Just like Eisenhower was the last President who had some political backbone and could speak back to Israeli interests, just like King Faisal was probably the last leader in the Arab governments who took a principled position on the Palestinian issue and we know what happened to him- since that time in the Arab context as we look at the Kings and Presidents in those countries none of them have had any backbone in speaking back to US foreign policy in that area. So right now the avenue is wide open for the American President to do whatever they virtually want to do in the Middle East provided that they can get away with it or at least they assume they can get away with it. Unfortunately the United States government no longer has any objectivity that it takes to make decisions that are in favor of US interests in the area (or) in the general Middle East. A superpower like the United States that begins to think with its muscles is going to go nowhere and that's the position that the United States government has been demonstrating in the past at least eight to sixteen years- thinking with its muscles. If they want something done then it's sending in the American seventh fleet or the sixth fleet or constructing American military bases- that's not going to get them anywhere. A simple lesson in history! The United States doesn't need rocket scientists it just needs some historian that can tell it "you don't go into Afghanistan as an occupier and then leave that country safely." Afghanistan has been the burial grounds of invading forces since time immemorial. Anyone with a superficial understanding of the history of that part of the world will confirm that but it seems like the US doesn't have level minded historians who can speak to the United States government and tell them look this is an adventure into infamy. If you go and occupy Afghanistan and now recently just in the past few days news is beginning to break out that the US government wants to speak to the Taliban. Have you heard this? It's sending feelers to its contacts here and there of sitting down with the Taliban. These are people that we are told "contributed to 9/11" and now you want to sit down with them?! This is American foreign policies ladies and gentlemen. This is unfortunately a bleak and a gloomy future if the likes of these types of Democrats and Republicans are located in the White House. Look- the United States had Collin Powell and Condoleeza Rice in this past administration, it's virtually past. In another three or four months and it's all over. It had African Americans in the State Department. The State Department is supposed to be this face unto the world. It placed two African Americans there and what did we get by virtue of African Americans being in the State Department? We got wars in Central Asia, in the Middle East, in the horn of Africa. Now imagine if they wanted to put an African American person in the White House?! They're not looking at a peaceful four or eight years to come. They are looking at more belligerent policies in that part of the world. You see, I've been asked many times, (and I'm probably preempting some of your questions), what do you think, who is going to win in this race to the White House. Many months ago and up until this very moment I maintain that if nothing drastic, dramatic, sensational, out of the blue development takes place- on the order of 9/11 (like) the poisoning of the water supply of a major metropolitan area of the United States that could be attributable to some terrorists and then strung together to include some area in the Middle East and rationalize an outbreak of hostilities by the US government against a particular government or if something like apprehending Osama bin Laden or Ayman Adh Dhawahiri and bring them to the United States (and) put them in front of the cameras and score a jingoistic victory for the types of Republicans that are in the higher offices of the United States- barring anything like that Obama is going to be the next President of the United States. It's not because we elected him. It's because global policies dictate that the United States shall have a President who is at least visually an African American. Global policy dictates that because there are two items in American foreign policy that are going to serve Israel more than anything else: a war against Islamic self determination in that part of the world. Islamic self determination is represented by the Islamic state in Iran and it's also represented by an attempt at Islamic self determination in Sudan. These are the two areas that are disturbing American foreign policies so much and that are irritating the national security of Israel so much that they're going to have to put a black man in the White House to initiate two wars, one of them strictly in the Islamic context and the other one strictly in the African context. They can't do that with a white man in the White House.

This presentation was presented by Imam Muhammad Asi on 30 October 2008. The Imam previously led the daily and Jum'ah prayers inside the Masjid. His speeches were revolutionary and thought provoking, and eventually irritated and threatened the Middle-East Ambassadors who control the Masjid. Finally, the Imam, his family, and /other Muslims faithful to the course of Islam were forced out, into the streets. This khutbah originates from the sidewalk across the street from the Islamic Center, currently under seige.

__._,_.___

Reply via web post

Reply to sender

Reply to group

Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback

.

__,_._,___