Thursday, February 24, 2011

AXIS OF EVIL; Obama, Wright, Farrakhan... GADHAFI



Aaron Klein, author of the devastating "The Manchurian President", brings us yet more devastating information about Barack HUSSEIN Obama...


Jeremiah Wright, former pastor of Obama's longtime Chicago church, went with Farrakhan to visit Gadhafi in 1984.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Wright himself noted the trip could cause problems for Obama.

"When [Obama's] enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli to visit [Gadhafi] with Farrakhan, a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell."

Farrakhan, a close friend and associate of Wright, has been financed by Gadhafi, including with a $5 million interest-free loan in 1985.

Later that year, Gadhafi spoke by satellite to Farrakhan's Saviour's Day Convention in Chicago, and reportedly told Farrakhan supporters he was prepared to provide weapons to a black army in the U.S. to destroy "white America."

Fecking scary as hell, no?  WTF is Barack Hussein Obama doing being connected to these, as well as many, many other frighteningly dangerous pieces of crap?

Right.  I know.  "All lies".  "Racism".  Etc., etc.  Obama's defending brownshirters will be fast and furious with the retaliation against the inconvenient truth, without even looking at the evidence.

Shee-it.  If a Republican or Tea Partier had such ties, their political career would be instantly dead.

But Barack Hussein Obama will be protected by his propaganda forces in the so-called "mainstream" media, and millions of guillible voters will be unaware of the truth.

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs tells us some other stuff...

Gaddafi stressed that Obama's presidency is "a major historical gain" and said, "He is someone I consider a friend. He knows he is a son of Africa. Regardless of his African belonging, he is of Arab Sudanese descent, or of Muslim descent. He is a man whose policy should be supported, and he should be assisted in implementing it in any way possible, since he is now leaning towards peace."

He continued, "I urge all peoples to give him this chance and to support this policy, because America is a country that, when its policy is bad – harms the world, and when it is good – it helps the world." 

This endorsement ought to be poisonous, toxic and fatally radioactive politically.  But for millions of American voters, they will not "be told" because their "trusted sources" will not tell them about it.

AND BECAUSE millions of American voters are unaware of the dangerousness of Barack Hussein Obama, they would be willing to vote for him in the admittedly highly unlikely event that he'd somehow be nominated a second time for Democratic Presidential Contender...

So, if, in the unlikely event that he were to be President a second time (despite never proving his Constitutional Eligibility therefor), America (and the world) would be in grave danger...

45 comments:

Balbulican said...

I greatly enjoy the "Six Degrees of Separation" game that forms the apparently basis of your worldview.

So - a former pastor of Obama's visited Gadaffi when Obama was 13 years old, and therefore Obama is a member of the Axis of Evil.

What then do you make of George Bush's restoration of full diplomatic relations with Libya, and the declaration that Gadaffi was a "model" for other Arab states because of his decision in 2003 to dismantle weapons of mass destruction and renounce terrorism, and Condoleeza Rice's visit to Gadaffi?

Does that make George Bush a member of the Axis of Evil as well?

Canadian Sentinel said...

Obama was 13 in '84? LOL check again.

I was 12 in '84, and Obama's years older than I.

Bush got Libya to abandon terrorism by telling 'em he'd destroy 'em next unless they did.

Obama the pussy let Libya do whatever they wanted.

Nice "logic", dude, by the way. ;)

Balbulican said...

Whoops, you're right. He was 24.

But you're losing me on the logic thing. I think you're getting your US presidents mixed up. Bush was full of praise for Gadaffi from 9/11 on. I think you're confusing Bush and Reagan.

As for "logic" - well, yours appears to be that Gadaffi is evil: and so Wright is evil for having met him: and so Obama is evil for having been a member of Wright's congregration.

And since Bush thought Gadaffi was a good guy...well, can you straighten that out for me?

glacierman said...

Hey Balb, since when have you gotten an interest free loan for $5 mil from somebody across the ocean who is known to be mentally unstable, a warlord, and who has no problem ordering the armed forces to exterminate those who disagree with you? Is this the kind of people you feel comfortable hanging on a Saturday afternoon with sharing a couple of wobbly-pops?

These people play in a completely different league of nasty and dirty than you (I hope) and I. They have their hands dripping with the blood of those who they have killed to get to power and maintain that power, just look at the Clinton's, not to mention all the deaths in Reverend Wrights church of all the male sex toys who have gone missing and shown up mysteriously dead over the years.

If you would spend a little time turning over some rocks, there are more than enough reasons to be disgusted enough to never defend the likes of these leaders.

The parlay with you is entertaining, but could you come to the table with something more than your fuzzy feelings and hopey-changey thinking?

Balbulican said...

Glacierman; sorry, I don't think you understood my point. Read more carefully. Thanks.

∞ ≠ ø said...

Quatrain 9:73
The Blue Turban King entered into Foix,
And he will reign less than an evolution of Saturn:
The White Turban King Byzantium heart banished,
Sun, Mars and Mercury near Aquarius.

Balbulican said...

Hexagram 46 - Sheng (Pushing Upward):

There will be great progress and success. Seeking to meet with the great man, its subject need have no anxiety. Advance to the south will be fortunate.

Jen said...

How many times has Obama mentioned Mubarak name and times demanding that he steps down to the will of the people? Countless.

How many times has Obama mentioned Qaddafi name and at times accusing him of the slaughter (executional style)of the his people and ask him to stepped down? NONE.

Balbulican said...

Gee, Jen - maybe Obama agrees with George Bush?

Naw, but seriously - It's rare that an American President would demand that the head of any allied state "step down", and I wasn't aware Obama had done so "countless times" before Mubarak announced his resignation. Could you provide a link to one of Obama's "demands" for Mubarak's "stepping down", "by name", before Mubarak's actual quitting?

Thanks!

∞ ≠ ø said...

Hi Jen!
We were almost down to Limericks. Here is a great look at the comic tragedy U.S. foreign policy has become.

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/02/change-hillary-clinton-refutes-obama-says-mubarakmay-need-to-stay-on/

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49292.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/31/us-egypt-israel-usa-idUSTRE70U53720110131

And the Band Plays on:

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/us-starts-farsi-twitter-account-aimed-at-iranians-dpgapx-20110214-fc_11872066

WTF is this? Clintonian Rose.

∞ ≠ ø said...

Jen said "that he steps down TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE." Not that he just steps down.

hmmmmm.

Edit others as you would have others edit you.

In Balbulican's last comment he said: "Gee Jen...I wasn't aware... Thanks!

Balbulican said...

Ah. So what Jen MEANT was that Mubarak should respond to the will of the people?

∞ ≠ ø said...

Very well.
Limericks it is then.

Behold the derisive Balbulican,
Kleverly playing the fool again.
He keeps all his wits
In his big ol' man tits.
He's just an internet Hooligan.

Balbulican said...

My dear boy, your rhyme scheme is as horribly flawed as your scansion. Allow me.

Cicero would say "Squiggles Abominem"
There is simply no tactic for calmin' him.
When confronted by wits,
He just babbles "Man Tits",
And resorts to a childish ad hominem.

Remember the Dutch jeweler's first maxim: Never let the setting dim the luster of the gem. Just because you can get away with lower standards before some peanut galleries doesn't mean you should.

∞ ≠ ø said...

Balbulican, we know, is no gem.
And Romans, why pray tell involve them?
The setting is fine.
There's no gem to rhyme.
And the Dutch, tits are their anthem.

Balbulican said...

No, no, no. Weren't you listening? If you're going to do a limerick, do it right.

- One too many syllables in the first line (could have abbreviated to "Balbully", which would have given you a nice, rolling rhythm, as well as another light insult.

- The cadence of the second line is good, but unfortunately doesn't match the scansion of the first and third lines at all. Sloppy. You should have used "invoke" rather than "involve" - would have given you a soft vowel rhyme with line 1 for the second last beat (which you'd have to do again in line 5, of course.) To respond to your substantive question, Cicero is deployed for two reason - to assert the self-mocking pedantry of the Balbulican persona, and to provide an excuse for the use of pidgin latin phrase "Squiggles Abominen", thus enabling a pleasing and consistent three-syllable rhyme and rhythm scheme for lines 1, 2 and 5.

- Lines three and four aren't bad. Scansion works, and the periods are a nice touch. However, you've echoed my use of "gem" once already (which was good): returning to it a second time is weak. as a key point However, "fine" and "rhyme"? Not so good.

-Last line is a real catastrophe, I'm afraid. Rhythm staggers like a drunken sailor, wrong number of beats (two more would be required between "Dutch" and "tits" - except that, as noted earlier, you're not matching the first and second line).

- The final rhyme is clumsy but serviceable: however, the last rhyme of a limerick should emphasize a substantive point - and since yours really has no point beyond the message "I can sort of construct a mildly insulting limerick", that's difficult. More critically, however, the final rhyme should always embody a bit of technical joke, often a humorous vindication of odd or laboured word use in the preceding lines (as was the case in my previous abominem - calmin' him - hominen triptych.) "Anthem" serves, but does not sparkle.

No, really, don't thank me. All part of the service.

Canuckguy said...

"And the Dutch, tits are their anthem"

I don't get this reference.
Anybody want to enlighten me?

Balbulican said...

CS, to return to the actual theme of your thread: Obama has called for Gadaffi to step down. Prime Minister Harper is still "considering potential sanctions".

How does your world-view rationalize that?

Acanthus said...

Wright and Farrakhan traveled to Libya with Jesse Jackson in order to secure the release of a captured...well, I'll just post the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Goodman#Freedom

Balbulican said...

Funny, World Net Daily completely failed to mention that.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Hmm.

Soooo Wikipedia is a reliable source, in youse guys' opinion?

Ah...

Balbulican said...

Well, considerably more accurate than WND, it would seem.

However, in the interest of accuracy, please let me know which of the relevant facts cited in the Wikipedia article you actually dispute, and I will be glad to provide additional sources.

a) Do you dispute that Wright and Farrakhan traveled to Libya with Jesse Jackson to negotiate the release of Bobby Goodman? Are you claiming that's not true?

b) Do you dispute Ronald Reagan praised the mission, and Jesse Jackson?

c) Do you dispute the fact that the WND article ignored those rather important facts?

Let me know which of those you disagree with, and I'll be happy to provide further links.

Canuckguy said...

Never mind your silly debate, what about the Dutch tits thingy.

Balbulican said...

Ah. Well, that's a query for Squiggles.

∞ ≠ ø said...

Bla-bla
What a kill joy. Your rule mongering is quite flawed but more importantly, entirely misses the point. First and foremost, the Limerick is pure entertainment; originally sung back and forth in a merry group with a refrain. Individuals taking the floor and receiving boos or cheers as a measure of success. These were not proffered to a professor sitting at his desk, how absurd that would be.
Canuck
I gather this is a boo. While Bla-bla suggests my limerick is marred by the very audience who reads it. I suggest that the phonemes of his moniker and himself are the flaw. There is no gem to recognize. As for the Dutch; Amsterdam is home of the world’s most famous brothels. This paired with their relaxed view of nudity inclined me to suggest that the gem of my limerick may be tits and attributed this as a symbol of the gem expert Dutch. (Shhhhhh! I think they have some knowledge about tits too.)

In general
What nonsense. (If you don’t get that… can’t help you.)

P.S. According to Wikipedia St. John has the oldest documented reference to “Limericks”

∞ ≠ ø said...

Balbulican.
Serious stuff here:

A: Jackson traveled to Damascus in late '83 for Lt. Goodman. He had met with Syrian Pres. Assad before.

B: Farrakhan and Wright went to Tripoli, on an unrelated trip in '84 (June, I think). Tripoli is HQ for the Muslim Brotherhood

C: From the Wikipedia link we see, plainly, that there were two trips. Roland Martin, a Chicago based CNN contributor actually confirms this in an effort to lend Wright credibility.
“”, a lot of folks don't mention the fact that it was Reverend Wright who accompanied Reverend Jackson to get a Navy pilot, Goodman, out of Syria, who also was on that trip with Louis Farrakhan. Reagan praised that mercy mission for getting the pilot back.””
(The first sighted reference confirms nothing)
(Also, I found no confirmation in Jackson’s biography)
C: Reagan praised the Jackson mission, not the latter.

D: WND omitted nothing.

E: Wikipedia has never been a reliable source for politics or recent political history as it is open to alterations by anyone for any purpose. Well intended or not, things are often misrepresented.

Balbulican said...

My dear Squiggles: oh, now, don't be huffy. Artistic form is inevitably derided by those who cannot achieve it. Keep trying, and remember how you get to Carnegie Hall.

WV: Versetr.

Balbulican said...

A: And?

B: Italy is said to the world headquarters of the Mafia. I guess my visit to the Vatican was ill advised.

C: You have two "Cs".

D: Heh. No, not even the ad for the book on the topic they're peddling, embedded right in the story. You don't take them seriously, do you?

E: I don't take Wikipedia as the ultimate source for anything, dear boy. When interested, I follow the links to their original sources. I do consider them a vastly better source of information than the hallucinatory birther Bible WND, which is to politics what the old Weekly World News was to journalism.

Balbulican said...

Sorry, hit "send" too soon.

Your speculation about various trips to Tripoli is endlessly fascinating. But you're missing the point. Our host's original contention was that Obama is somehow "evil" for having once had a pastor who met Gadaffi. We have since established:
- that no less a conservative luminary than W. himself praised Gadaffi as a model for Arab Leaders
- several "good guys" met Gadaffi before and after Bush's praise, including Condoleeza Rice.

So - our host's tenuous condemnation - backed by an article in a wretched crime against journalism by an author flogging his book - is silly.

∞ ≠ ø said...

O.K. I’ll dumb it down for the learning impaired.

a) “Do you dispute that Wright and Farrakhan traveled to Libya with Jesse Jackson to negotiate the release of Bobby Goodman? Are you claiming that's not true?”

Yes, I refute this pile of convenient leftist thinking because:
1. No one went to Libya
Jackson went to Damascus in ’83, perhaps Wright was with him, Farrakhan was not.
2. In ’84 Farrakhan and Wright went to Tripoli and met with Qaddafi and the Muslim brotherhood.


b) “Do you dispute Ronald Reagan praised the mission, and Jesse Jackson?”

Yes, I refute this manipulation as the Tripoli trip was obviously not praised by Reagan. Reagan praised Jackson for his mission to Damascus, with no mention of Wright, for the success.

c)” Do you dispute the fact that the WND article ignored those rather important facts?”

Yes. You have presented no facts.

You sir, once again, stand refuted.

Balbulican said...

"In ’84 Farrakhan and Wright went to Tripoli and met with Qaddafi and the Muslim brotherhood."

Wow! And your source for this assertion?

∞ ≠ ø said...

My computer is absolutely FUBARed !!! Somehow I have Chinese characters all over the place. Hmmmmm. If this is a repost, sorry. The first one seems to have gone down in the crash this afternoon.
Enjoy!
It may be a while before I am back.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,926646,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan
(under ‘gutter’ religion)

http://www.blacksandjews.com/Min._Farrakhan_%26_the_Jews.html
(same type reference, more hate speech)

In August 1981, two Libyan jets fired on U.S. aircraft participating in a routine naval exercise over international waters of the Mediterranean claimed by Libya. The U.S. planes returned fire and shot down the attacking Libyan aircraft. In December 1981, the State Department invalidated U.S. passports for travel to Libya and, for purposes of safety, advised all U.S. citizens in Libya to leave.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5425.htm

Oh, of course the original source of Wright’s comment placing him on the trip.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/us/politics/06obama.html

Earlier I was convinced they convened in Tripoli Lebanon. But now I think they just broke the travel and embargo laws and went straight into Libya despite our complete break off of diplomatic relations. What balls. And what putzes we are for not throwing them in jail the moment we caught wind of it.
Bye for now.

Balbulican said...

I'm sorry, perhaps you misunderstood my request.

Not one of your links mentions a meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood. Is this one of those things that you just KNOW must have happened? :)

I ask because, of course, Gadaffi despised the Muslim Brotherhood; banned it shortly after coming to power; and exiled, jailed or tortured many of its supporters. So your surprising revelation is going to require a major rewrite of Middle Eastern modern history. Unless, of course, you're just making stuff up.

Please provide your evidence: I am all ears.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Sorry I didn't pay attention, guys- got far more important stuff happening for a while now, hence the light blogging...

But rest assured: I'll be back.

And big-time. Working on it... When "big-time" happens, I don't know yet, but it WILL. The exact nature of "big-time", TBD later. ;)

Balbulican said...

So dude - where are your co-bloggers??

∞ ≠ ø said...

It’s a small adjustment. You see given the invalidation of passports, Tripoli Lebanon and the Muslim Brotherhood as host seemed a logical conclusion. This far back, one can truly see the advantages of print material and a decent periodical index. As stated I am now convinced they went to Libya. So there was no third party host, I should have removed that upon resolving the Tripoli vs. Tripoli problem. There's not much primary source evidence as the trip was illegal, a violation of U.S. policy, and therefore clandestine.

You are still refuted of course.

Wishing our host well, and hoping there's no need to.

∞ ≠ ø said...

Aha! Still alive and well.

Balbulican said...

Wow. That's the longest iteration of the simple statement "I pulled it out of my ass" that I think I've ever read.

∞ ≠ ø said...

No, I posted a conclusion based on incomplete research. I hastened the post and erred in detail. You are still disproved, and picking at this detail will not save you. You leaped to the support of an unknown commenter, while doing no fact checking, and obnoxiously attempted to gain a point by point capitulation by C.S.
You stand refuted on each of those points.

Balbulican said...

"I posted a conclusion based on incomplete research."

My dear boy, you have more ways of saying "I just made it up" than Carter has Liver Pills. It's immensely diverting. Treat us to another. Or explain gongs to me again. That was fun too.

Gabriella Grizzly of U.S. said...

Balbulican,
If you were asking about me in one of your previous messages, I too am right in the middle of something huge! Im sorry I havent been on, but have no fear,I will be back soon. In the meantime, Im enjoying all the blogging going on with everyone :) Thanks for caring Balbulican.

Gabriella Grizzly of U.S. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gabriella Grizzly of U.S. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gabriella Grizzly of U.S. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Balbulican said...

I was indeed asking about you, G. You have brought a very civilizing influence to our neighborhood, and you are missed. Glad to hear all is well.