It’s not that we have forgotten Obama’s AIPAC blunder or that we disregard Biden’s outspoken support of Israel. It’s that unlike Senator McCain, Obama’s campaign does not thrive off of the fear-mongering and finger-pointing shamelessly practiced by the Republican campaign. As proof, take the latest McCain ad which falsely accuses Obama of lying about his relationship with “terrorist Bill Ayers.”

Yet too many Arab Americans still associate with the GOP. And this association may prove disastrous for our future as citizens and members of society.

Along with American Muslims, Arab Americans suffered the consequences of the politics of fear; with increased terror alerts came a decrease in their civil liberties, a blow to their reputation (both at work or in social groups), and sometimes even threats to their personal safety. The fact that Obama does not rely on the played-out terrorist card should be reason enough for Arab Americans to support him.

Here is another:

Last month, the Clarion Fund, a supposedly non-profit organization funded by a $400,000 dollar grant from a “secret donor”, paid 70 newspapers in 14 of America’s swing states to distribute their DVD, “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.” This is right-wing propaganda similar to that advocated by the McCain campaign advocates.

Among the experts in the film are necons like Daniel Pipes and Walid Shoebat. Clarion, a registered 501 (c) cannot endorse a candidate, but “Obsession’s” message is clear enough: Arabs and Muslims are terrorists who will destroy Israel and the West. More of this information can also be found at Clarion’s website.

That Clarion refused to disclose who its funded by, as required by the IRS, is indicative of the manipulative nature of the information it disseminates. When probed, Rabbi Raphael Shore, Clarion’s founder and the film’s Canadian-Israeli producer, said 80 percent of the money came from Peter Mier – an alias meant to protect the identity of Obsession’s real producer.

On Friday (Oct. 10), Tikun Olam, a liberal Jewish blog, reported that Clarion’s secret donor is NBC Producer and former Clinton Administration adviser on “homeland security issues,” Erik Werth. Why was this information withheld? And what role is Clarion ultimately trying to play in the election? Considering McCain and Palin’s repeated attempts to paint Obama as a “terrorist,” the dots begin to connect themselves.

According to Clarion’s Website, “Obsession is a film about the threat of Radical Islam to Western Civilization. Using unique footage from Arab television, it reveals an insiders view of the hatred the Radicals are teaching, their incitement of global jihad, and their goal of world domination.”

For most Arab Americans, the aforementioned footage is not unique; access to Arab media and political on goings in the Middle East are part of daily life. It is therefore more difficult to fool us into believing “Obsession” was made with the good intention of informing the public, but rather, that it advocates a right-wing militaristic approach to U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

It should therefore be harder to convince us to vote for a candidate who shares that view. Yet come Nov. 4, too many Arab Americans may once again vote with their party affiliation. With only three weeks left, I hope they consider how why groups like Clarion want them to vote for McCain.

Last month, free screenings of “Obsession” were held in Dearborn, Michigan, where Arab Americans, overwhelmingly Republican, account for about 5% of the state’s vote. Will this propaganda work on Arab Americans? We’ll have to wait until the election to find out for certain, but I have a feeling most Arabs will see through the propaganda.

One part of the film attempts to compare radical Islamic movements with the German Nazis, through a series of interviews and cut-and -paste footage. Most Arab Americans I know think Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is eerily similar to the Nazis treatment of the Jews. The question remains, come Nov. 4 will most Arab Americans look past the “McCain the Maverick” rhetoric and see his candidacy for what it really is: continuation of the right-wing, militaristic ideology.

“Obsession” is only one example of what we are to continue to expect out of non-government agencies, empowered by a president that shares their views. The Middle East is not aided by policies which produced the unlawful imprisonments of Arabs in Guantanamo and the catastrophe of Iraq. Any of those are enough to remind voters why it’s necessary to avoid a similar fate in the future.

Arab Americans in particular need to realize that voting alongside party lines or voting for a third party candidate only aids the fight against them. In the American right’s mind, the connection between “Arab” and “Radical Islam” is clear, but that connection must be apparent to those of us still considering to vote McCain.

Now that US presidential candidate Barak Obama has officially clinched the Democratic party vote and seems a possible presidential candidate come the November elections, the Arab States must start setting their agenda. Obama has made clear his intention to start a dialogue with Iran- rather than continuing the Bush Administration’s policy of boycott. Where do the Sunni Arabs fit into all of this?

To date, the Sunni Arab States seem unsure of how to deal with Iran. Open dialogue with the intention of integrating the Islamic Republic into the Middle Eastern fold has been impossible. Now that the US might change its modus operandi should a Democrat leader be elected, the Arab States may need to redress their policies vis a vis Iran and the place of Shi’ism in the Arab World in general.

The new reality in Lebanon, with the official inclusion of Hizbulla as a foremost power broker in the country, cannot be ignored. While some may hope that Hizbulla will at least have its wings clipped should a Syrian-Israeli peace deal come to fruition, the truth is that this political party is an intrinsic part of Lebanese society that may need to eventually have its military might controlled, but should not, and cannot, be marginalized politically.

In many ways, a McCain win would be more in line with Sunni Arab States policies and would be more to their short term benefit. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt would much rather deal with a Republican president whose fears match those of the Arab States. Such a president would be much more likely to carry out the policies of these states on their behalf.

But on the long term, such a president would prove to be deadly for the Middle East. What we need now is a process of introversion across the Middle East where we question how it is that we got to this point, in terms of inter-Muslim relations, Arab-Iranian politics, as well as the long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict. To keep going on as we have and playing by the same rules is no longer an option, as the stakes are getting higher.

What the Arab states cannot afford is a scenario in which there is dialogue between the US and Iran in which new agendas for Iraq, Lebanon, and indeed the Arab World at large are set, while the Sunni Arab States find themselves yet again on the sidelines of historic changes.

There is a need for the Arab states to accept the changing realities in the Middle East, and to realize that there is no use, and indeed no legitimacy, in fighting it. What will need to take place is a process of negotiation with the Iranians on rules of engagement in the Middle East and a new modus operandi.

We are also in need of an Arab-Iranian rapprochement to heal Sunni-Shia relations, and end sectarianism in the Arab and Muslim World. The fact that both the Iranian and Arab political leaders are fanning the flames of sectarianism in their battle for political influence in the region does not escape anyone. However, this front in the battle is one that should remain a no-go area. It is unforgivable that the Sunni-Shia card is being played in this cold war between the Arab World and Iran.

Iran does have a role to play in this region by virtue of its size, its power, and its geographic location – both in its proximity to Iraq as well as to Central Asia and China. Not to mentions well as its influence on Syria, Hizbulla, and Hamas, and its direct and indirect influence on Iraq. Iran simply cannot be ignored.

Giving Iran a seat at the decision-making table of the Middle East, might force them to somewhat modify their stance and moderate their opinions. It might also lessen their appeal to those sitting on the sidelines, because Iran is often seen as having kept its hands clean, as opposed to other countries in the region.

For their part, the Iranian political establishment will need to start behaving much more like a civilized and modern player in the Middle East. This includes not sticking purely to ideological rhetoric, not exporting religion, not interfering in the affairs of other states, not siding with one political faction at the expense of an entire nation (as in the case of Palestine and Lebanon), and not supporting the Shia militias in Iraq.

The solution to the ‘problem’ that is Iran should be three pronged: a long-term dialogue on Sunni-Shia relations and the place of Shi’ism within present-day Islam across the Middle East, bringing Iran back into the Middle Eastern fold, and forcing the Iranian state to play by the rules while negotiating the role of Iranian and Arab spheres of influences across the Middle East.

to cleanse that impure pedigree
And with Oprah at your side
You’re sure to glide
Tell America about your papa
the one in heaven
In one afternoon a campaign boon

A reverent scene
Beside the media Queen
Spreading the American dream
We are all one in the body of Christ
So don’t you go traveling
among the disbelievers
the Allah deceivers
they may not like your version
of the great conversion
and go after your ass
till you do the reversion
Stay safe man
You’re in America now Obama
The religious freedom nation
of personal salvation

Your name is Obama
Barack allah feek

Baruch ha shem Ya Hussein
you’re related to the Queen!!*

* – See Juancole.com for Arabo/Islamic lineage of British royalty

Two years later, a West African Muslim immigrant by the name of Amadou Diallo had his turn to experience Giuliani Time. The encounter would be brief, and it would cost him his life. The unarmed man was walking home in his Bronx neighborhood and was approached by the NYPD. When he made a gesture to reach for his wallet the officers fired 41 shots, killing an unarmed, hard-working man with no criminal record in cold blood. This was Giuliani Time in New York, a time when the rules and regulations on the police had been loosened and residents of many African-American, Latino and immigrant neighborhoods lived in fear of mostly white elite units in the department who, under the direction of Giuliani, often cracked down brutally on any perceived threats.

The police tactics of the Giuliani administration were not in vain; they coincided with the massive uprooting of the poor and working-classes of New York City in order to make way for the more affluent crowd that sought to turn NYC into their own playground. Rudy led the fight to turn NYC from a place made up largely traditional, working-class families in ethnic neighborhoods to a mecca of hedonism and mindless consumerism. Many of those who worked with Rudy all came away with the same impression: he is hard on the little guy, and an authoritarian. In other words, “he does not play well with others”.

The style of conservatism that Rudy championed is not that of Evangelical Christians or that of grassroots white populism. The conservatism of Rudy in New York was based on a tough law-and-order stance, a pro Wall Street view of economics, hostility towards minorities, and “small government”. While Republicans around the country were railing against gays, Rudy left his second-wife in order to go and live with a gay couple while publicly committing adultery. While the grassroots was railing against abortion, Rudy was funding it.

Far from being an enemy of Hollywood and the “cultural elite,” Rudy was a friend to that particular crowd. This occurred at the same time that the coalition of the traditional America left waned, and many who thought of themselves as liberal no longer had much concern for issues of racial and economic justice, being more interested in lifestyle issues. And on those issues, Rudy was in agreement with them.

Giuliani’s role as the mayor of New York city gives you a pretty good idea of what Rudy will be like as a President on domestic issues; he will do little in the way of making health-care accessible to all, he will favor immigration that benefits the business class, he will not push on social issues, and he will do very little to fight for racial and economic justice. In addition to this, Rudy has a history in NYC of putting his own cronies (such as former Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, who is now under indictment and has alleged ties to the Sicilian Mafia of New York) in high positions. We could expect a Rudy cabinet to be stacked with yes-men and women, much like in the Bush White House.

What does Giuliani’s past tell us about what kind of a world leader he would be? New York’s elected officials, more so than any other American politicians, have to take an undiplomatic stance on issues regarding Israel and her Arab neighbors. This is done for political necessity. Rudy was a mayor who had strong support from the pro-Israel lobby, and throughout political career has remained an uncompromising supporter of the right-wing line of thought wherein Israel is concerned. Rudy, for example, personally ejected Yasser Arafat from a concert for world leaders in New York. He’s even gone as far as compare Ariel Sharon to all-American hero Babe Ruth.

Prior to 9-11 Rudy simply known for being pro-Israel; but post 9-11 the man with no military experience or a previous foreign policy post, has sought to define himself as the ultimate warrior against “Islamic fascism,” and is seeking to dance on the blood of the 9-11 victims all the way to the White House. He crassly exploits the tragedy at every possible opportunity. In an average speech, he mentions 9-11 in practically every other sentence.

In America, Rudy was seen as a great “take-charge” leader following 9-11and he wants to keep reminding people of this. I, however, fail to see how founding his campaign on a tragedy that he did nothing to cause or prevent is at all justifiable. In the grand scheme of things, Rudy was a bystander to 9-11 (a bystander who has gone as far as to claim that he was “one” of the clean-up workers at the rubble of WTC) , so why exactly is he still allowed to use 9-11 to such an extent?

The answer is simple: average Americans are still too preoccupied with following professional sports and the lives of celebrities while paying lip service to the political process, so a guy like Rudy can easily continue to piggyback on the deaths of thousands when he is not being asked the tough questions.

It is not hard to figure out what Rudy will do on a global level if elected; he will continue the disastrous and costly traditions of George W. Bush. He will most likely bomb Iran, he will keep American troops planted firmly in Iraq, he will expand the so-called “war on terror” (possibly to Saudi Arabia and Syria), and he will let Israel go unchecked wherein Palestinians are concerned. He is likely to severely curtail minority rights, immigration, and student visas to America, visas from Muslim countries whose younger generations cannot afford to be isolated from the West. He will be in prime position to infringe upon the rights of Muslims living in America, all in the name of his war against “Islamic fascism” – a war whose real purpose is mere political capital.

Umar Lee can be contacted here: umarlee [at] gmail [dot] com