The Campaign Against Obama Begins

The incident of black professor Henry Gates, who was forced to break down his own front door because he had lost his keys following a trip abroad, has been exploited no end by the U.S. media.

The media has hurled violent accusations against President Obama, the least of which being that he has reignited the spirit of racism in America, not to mention that the president’s comments on this incident do not merit such anger. Obama had described as Gates’ being handcuffed as “stupid,” and taken down to the police station, despite his verifying to the police that the house was his own. “Stupid” is the least that one could say about such behavior.

To put it another way, had the professor been white and the police officer who handcuffed him black, and the president’s reaction had been the same, then the U.S. media would certainly not have objected to the way in which the president described the incident. This reconfirms the racist remnants which are still deeply rooted in the minds of some Americans. The strongest pieces of evidence for this are the incidents publicized from time to time about the behavior of the American police force toward black suspects, and all the insults and beating that it entails (similar to those incidents that have been filmed and aired on satellite television), in clear violation of U.S. law.

The other incident that demonstrates the lack of objectivity of most of the American media is the FBI’s arrest of some Jewish rabbis who were part of two gangs involved in money laundering and trade in human kidneys for many years. After it was made public, the news was completely hushed up.

Let us imagine that they had been Arabs or Muslims. American newspapers would have filled the minds of the world with non-stop, long-lasting and daily coverage about Arab and Islamic “terrorism,” and the U.S. authorities would have intensified (even more than at present) their censorship of Arab and Muslim communities.

From another perspective, and as evidence of the bias of the U.S. media and its double standards, is the media cover-up of a statement made by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, leader of the Shas Party (which has five ministers in the current fascist Israeli government), and who was also Chief Rabbi of Israel for many years. He described Obama as a “slave,” simply because of his opposition to the Israeli settlements, despite the president making clear in a meeting with the American Jewish lobby that his opposition is no more than a difference of opinion within the same household.

Had these words been spoken by an Arab or Muslim politician or sheikh, someone high-ranking in their country, the U.S. media would have had the whole world up in arms about it.

It would seem that the U.S. media attack on President Obama is as far as can be from such an incident. Six months after Obama took office, American newspapers were focusing on his decline in popularity (which is perfectly normal in opinion polls of presidents). What was not normal was for the media to then exploit this as a launch pad for their attack on Obama in light of previous incidents. It appears that highly influential spheres in Washington are not happy with a president such as Obama.

Among them, for example, is the Military Industrial Complex, which commands enormous influence in U.S. foreign policy, and the AIPAC organization and its supporters from among the Christian Zionists, whose political and economic interests would be harmed by the possibility of the U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq by the end of 2011 (as specified by Obama), and who are angry at Obama and his administration’s opposition to the Israeli settlements. In reaction against this opposition, 73 members of the U.S. Senate, the majority of whom are Democrats (the president’s own party) signed a memorandum directed at Obama demanding him not to pressure Israel to end its settlements! These spheres are not happy with the style of dialogue with which Obama has engaged Iran over its nuclear issue. Their calculations are spoiled by what he said in his Cairo speech about the importance of focusing on dialogue with Arabs and Muslims.

These spheres are mobilizing the streets of America to believe that these last two groups are “terrorists,” and that the only language with which to deal with them is the language of force. The beginning of the campaign against Obama is a prelude to a calculated attack against the president. This brings to mind the Kennedy era, not only because of all the new policies he introduced to America, in particular anti-racism policies, nor in the arena of U.S. foreign policy, in particular over his belief in the importance of international détente at that time in “the world of two poles,” but also because of his tragic end!