« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tom Campbell’s story still doesn’t check out

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  March 12th, 2010 at 11:26 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

This is not a straightforward point to make, and takes a little dot connecting, but I think that Tom Campbell’s excuses for defending Sami Al-Arian are falling apart.

At the California Republican Party Convention currently under way, Tom Campbell claimed that he would not have written the 2002 letter for Al-Arian had he known that the man called for “Death to Israel,” implying it was not a widely known thing.

There’s a problem with that claim. Al-Arian himself defended the statement on FOX News. Here’s what he told Bill O’Reilly on September 26, 2001:

O’REILLY: … In — in 1988, you did a little speaking engagement in Cleveland, and you were quoted as saying, “Jihad is our path. Victory to Islam. Death to Israel. Revolution. Revolution until victory. Rolling to Jerusalem.” Did you say that?

AL-ARIAN: Let me just put it into context. When President Bush talked about crusade, we understand what he meant here. The Muslim world thought he is going to carry a cross and go invade the Muslim world and turn them into Christians. We have to understand the context. When you say “Death to Israel,” you mean death to occupation, death to apartheid, death to oppression, death to…

The whole world knew in 2001 about Al-Arian’s support for violent jihad and death in the name of Islam. But in 2002, Tom Campbell wrote “I never heard Professor Al-Arian utter a single word disloyal to the United States. Nor did I ever hear him say anything anti-Semitic, or racist, or religionist, against any group.” So Victory to Islam, Death to Israel doesn’t count as any of those? Come now.

One defense of Campbell might be that he didn’t watch Bill O’Reilly. I sure don’t. But read the letter further. “I read a transcript of the O’Relly Factor interview last autumn,” Campbell said. He knew.

Tom Campbell knew when he wrote his letter in defense of Sami Al-Arian that the man had shouted “Death to Israel,” as well as “Victory to Jihad.” He wrote anyway. Why is he saying otherwise at the convention?

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Richard Mullins

    any time someone like Sami Al-Arian comes up. Really, when does he not say “death to Israel” or other Radical Islamic phrases. In his sleep?

  • http://truthupfront.blogspot.com jsanzone

    I’m still wondering whether this is being used by Campbell’s opponents as a mere smear tactic, esp. considering, what is being insinuated? That Tom Campbell secretly agrees that death ought to be brought upon Israel?

    That he’s a closet Muslim?

    If there’s substance here, it would be regarding his honest, articulated views, and maybe substantive associations. But so far, a letter of recommendation isn’t enough. It’s starting to sound like a “smear” that’s really, really reaching.

  • Adjoran

    - and being caught doing it – not a legitimate criticism?

    Is it a “smear” to honestly question the factual record now?

    You can spread jam on Campbell now, he’s toast.

  • JadedByPolitics

    If he cannot pick his “friends” which is the most basic of one’s sensibilities then he really doesn’t have the CHARACTER to represent Conservatives and that is the point!

  • GOPlady

    that during the time and during the interactions Tom Campell personally had with Sami Al-Arian, that he wasn’t shouting Death to Isreal? It seems that Tom was speaking to someone and working with someone with whom he had the same mind on that topic; the illegal detaining of someone without allowing them the opportunity to view the evidence against them.
    What is interesting is that this was happening, not after 9/11, but after the World Trade Center bombing, and during the Clinton years! But I digress.
    It seems to me that this is not the same as, er, writing a Supreme Court brief defending Jose Padilla, or making a pedophile your Safe School Czar.
    This is an honest person who wrote his opinion, included the bit about having funds contributed to his own campaign, and said this was his thoughts. It wasn’t like he was on the board and voted to keep the guy. It wasn’t like he said, hey so what if he’s the leader of Iran, we’re Columbia, let him speak!

    Tom spoke/wrote from his heart. He was asking for patience and not knee jerk reactions. It is possible that the person he knew was not the reactionary, terror supporter.

    No, I think this is is macaca. Take one isolated instance and then drum beat it into a mantra to hang someone out to dry.

  • mbecker908

    was truckloads of independent evidence to the contrary of what he was hearing. Campbell was apparently willing to disregard all of it.

    It’s pretty obvious that Campbell’s judgment sucks. You’re right about one thing, it’s not “macaca”. It’s a thousand times worse.

  • GOPlady

    that there were truckloads of evidence at the time he wrote the letter. He wrote what he knew. He asked for careful deliberation. He asn’t pressuring or strongarming or poking someone in the chest while naked. He was asking for pause before firing someone to make sure all the evidence was weighed.

    We can all be experts in hindsight. Nice that we can be perfect almost a decade later but this doesn’t rise to a level where we are attacking his conservative values or his future contribution or current committment to limited government. What exactly is the problem with him in the here and now? Is he not a free market kind of guy? Is he all touchy feely around cap and trade? Is he secretly hugging trees and shouting Do It For the Children? Is his wife and/or daughters caught out with Che t shirts and wearing PLO scarves as fashion?

    Before we burn this guy at the stake, I would like to know if there is something this week that shows he is not a conservative because frankly, his opponents aren’t! So we win by shooting ourselves in the foot? Good strategy.

    If there are better candidates, more viable conservatives, more winnable people we can respect, then bring them forth. Before we trash bin Tom for an almost decades old letter, where is the plus side? Do we have someone who can take our shared goals forward or are we willing to be the Inquisition and burn everyone?

    I just don’t get the up side to doing this.

  • mbecker908

    to be buried alive. What part of Tom Campbell knew when he wrote his letter in defense of Sami Al-Arian that the man had shouted ?Death to Israel,? as well as ?Victory to Jihad.? don’t you get?

    Your last paragraph is also interesting. Of the candidates running in CA, I wouldn’t say Campbell “shares our goals”. Would I be willing to burn him? You bet, and Carly too.

    The key is to support the most conservative candidate in the primary. That isn’t Campbell and it isn’t Carly.

  • GOPlady

    gets your stamp of approval? I’m not asking in a snarky way. I’m just asking.

    I’m not sure what Tom “knew” or that he was “standing up for terrorists”. Stating or forming an argument in those terms is exactly like folks who used to ask me if I was for “clean air” or if I wanted the little children to be forced to work for my capitalism. Geez. Cheap shot.

    I don’t have my Sherlock magnifying glass on every zig or zag of Tom Campbell so I don’t know if he does or does not represent conservative values. I’m saying, IF he does and we burn him because of something that may be out of context and out of time, then we are not the winners.

    Where are the cool heads here? Where is the fabric? If this represents a common thread of his belief system, then there must be more. If not, it does not rise to the level of “supports terrorists” and you sir, are a reactionary of the worst kind. Willing to bury him? And Carly too? And then what? Oh Joy, we get some tax and spend liberal and the rest of the country gets to bail out California.

    Personally, I would like to hear Erick weigh in. I know I don’t know if this is significant but it feels like reaching. If I am wrong, then I bow to wiser and deeper thinkers than me. But all things considered, it was a mistake on Tom’s part. Was it fatal? Should it be? I’m not so sure.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Take that information to the bank.

  • SteveLA

    Tom Campbell has problems with even us moderates out here in CA, Tea Party types and RP RP RP followers over real issues of spending and the role/size of government. CA is the example of the worst of out of control government led by Democratic majorities and Campbell is a prime example of the hide under their desk breed of Republicans in the assembly.

    Throw in Campbell voted NO on Prop 8, ignoring the fact that the whole Gay marriage issue was caused by Gods in Black robes overruling the will of the people. The CA electorate has a history of not liking activist judges overturning the will of the people, check the history of the rejection of CA Supreme Court Justice Rose Bird to see how much so.

    Also throw in Campbell proposed a one-year, 32-cents-per-gallon increase in the state gasoline tax to help bridge the deficit a few years back. In car dependent CA, that’s just dumb and tone deaf.

    This side issue of support to Samili, small potatoes in my view and is just the opening act for pointing out how bad Campbell really is.

  • allergic2libspin

    you look at ALL the candidates before jumping to conclusions. You previously stated:

    I would like to know if there is something this week that shows he is not a conservative because frankly, his opponents aren?t! So we win by shooting ourselves in the foot? Good strategy.

    Again, I ask that you do your research before making a remark that “his opponents aren’t”.

    Seriously GOPlady, the REAL conservative candidate who has a voting record in the CA state assembly to back that up is CHUCK DEVORE. He’s my district representative and I couldn’t be more thrilled to have him there as a “voice of reason”. Those are hard to come by in Sacramento. He’s the one I want representing CA in Washington.

    I find it odd that you only reference Tom Campbell and Carly Fiorina in your threads. That tells me you haven’t taken the time to research ALL candidates.

    Chuck is an outstanding candidate. He’s intelligent, well rounded with military service, private sector business, public service, he’s well versed in Middle east issues, he’s a staunch defender of the Constitution, he’s authored a book, he’s practical, pragmatic and applies common sense principles. I encourage you to research him and perhaps attend one of his speaking engagements. Perhaps you might want to consider supporting his campaign…..:)
    https://chuckdevore.com/donate/?ref=6beccm

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    He wrote a letter for a guy who a year before went on television to defend his “Death to Israel, Victory to Jihad” statement, and later was convicted of being complicit in anti-Israeli terror.

    You tell me what that says about Tom Campbell.

  • Adjoran

    In each party, there are just some errors of judgment you are not allowed to make if you want a future in the party. For Republicans, sucking up to a terrorist supporter is pretty much a big one. Democrats would overlook it and trash the guy who is for traditional marriage or something.

  • GOPlady

    I had to search awhile to find this article again but I wanted everyone to know that I appreciated their input about the record of Mr. Campbell.

    That being said, I come here because this is the new WFB This is the place where conservatives can be unabashed and openly joyful for our core values. We don’t have to pretend to look down on the riff raft. We can be intelligent and conservative and we got the guys here with the wattage that can match anyone.

    So when I hear someone call a GOP candidate a person who “supports terrorists”, I am wondering if indictments are pending, FBI watch lists are getting checked, if instead of public office, they are going behind bars. Please don’t destroy someone with words that are angry and shocking and meaningful. These are real people. If you don’t like their votes or their stance, that is one thing. But to say something that might haunt them forever, well, just THINK about it before you write it.

    I can see Mr. Devore might best represent us but given the liberals in CA, if I have to choose between someone on the far left and Mr. Campbell, I hope we haven’t shredded him so much he couldn’t be dog catcher. That was my point.