Barack Obama's radical associations including terrorists

[GarfieldJL]

Well if anyone has been paying attention this weekend Governor Palin accused Senator Obama of being friends with terrorists. The "mainstream" media is calling it a smear.

 

Some are even calling it racist:

 

In an analysis piece out today, AP writer Douglass K. Daniel slammed Palin’s recent shots on Obama’s past association with radical militant Bill Ayers as “ unsubstantiated and carried a racially-tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.”

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/05/palin-counters-ap-slam-the-associated-press-is-wrong/

-- I also have seen the article this blog talks about in my home paper.

 

Thing is Governor Palin is correct that Obama is associated with terrorists, radicals, etc. In fact she understated it, Obama has a pattern of associating with radical lunatics. People involved in voting fraud, terrorism, racists (referring to racism against whites and Jewish people), etc.

 

I've already talked about ACORN, but ACORN is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

The New York Times has been forced to acknowledge that Obama is more closely associated to Domestic Terrorist William Ayers than he admits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

 

While the New York Times is still trying to downplay his associations, because he's an ultra-liberal Democrat, but the story still ended up on Page 1. In other words I'm flat out accusing the New York Times of still practicing dishonest journalism because they are still trying to cover up the depth of his association with the terrorist.

 

Thing is Fox News has been pointing out Senator Obama's association with Bill Ayers for about a year now, and the "mainstream" press is finally picking up on it.

 

So here is the question, do we want someone like this to be President of the United States, heck I wouldn't want anyone with all these associations like what he has on the city council, let alone President of the United States.

 

The Obama's campaign's response is to call it a racist attack, but I don't think this is racist to point out he's associated with a man that committed terrorist attacks.

 

Oh here's a Wallstreet Journal article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html

[mimartin]

The "mainstream" media is calling it a smear.

Well if it was a bowl of poop, would you really expect the "mainstream" media to call it chocolate pudding. It is a smear and the media is calling it a smear. I fail to see the problem.

[GarfieldJL]

Well if it was a bowl of poop, would you really expect the "mainstream" media to call it chocolate pudding. It is a smear and the media is calling it a smear. I fail to see the problem.

 

I see it a problem because the media is outright lieing, and yes I'm accusing them of outright fraudulent journalism that's really the only way to describe it:

http://www.bucksright.com/kurtz-explodes-obamas-ayers-myth-1254

 

It sources the wsj and other sources, granted it's an opinions column, but the opinion is by a reputable source.

 

And remember Obama has lied about his associations to Ayers in the past.

 

The Obama campaign has cried foul when Bill Ayers comes up, claiming "guilt by association." Yet the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html

 

Another article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/obama_lied_about_his_tight_lin.html

 

Remember Obama has lied about the associations.

 

For the record this is just one of three radical associations that I remember that begin with the letter "A". I've got a whole bunch of other associations to bring up still.

[Q]

Well if it was a bowl of poop, would you really expect the "mainstream" media to call it chocolate pudding.

If it serves its political agenda, absolutely.

 

I think that the funniest thing regarding the Weathermen is that the dumb****s actually blew themselves up. I don't think that cretinism is much of a defense against the charge of domestic terrorism, however.

 

Stupid hippies.

[Yar-El]

re: Barack Obama's Radical Associations

 

Some people are concerned with his associations with -

Rev. Jeremiah Wright

ACORN

Bill Ayers

Tony Rezko

Rev. Al Sharpton

Obama's Father

Obama's Stepfather

 

Up until somewhere in the 1980s, Obama had a dual citizenship with Kenya and the United States. Some people find it awkward for this type of dual connection. So, what other associations does he have.

 

(Some news just got to my desk. I will be back in a few minutes. DOW just dropped below 10,000. Heading over to the thread now.)

[GarfieldJL]

Okay, please refrain from swearing...

 

Anyways here's another radical association given:

 

Rashid Khalidi -- Member of the PLO when it was a on the terrorist watch list in the United States. (Oh and this guy is also associated to William Ayers)

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/obamas_good_friend_rashid_khal.html

 

The co-founder of the Arab group in question, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, also has held a fundraiser for Obama. Khalidi is a harsh critic of Israel, has made statements supportive of Palestinian terror and reportedly has worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was involved in anti-Western terrorism and was labeled by the State Department as a terror group.

 

In 2001, the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit that describes itself as a group helping the disadvantaged, provided a $40,000 grant to the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, for which Khalidi's wife, Mona, serves as president. The Fund provided a second grant to the AAAN for $35,000 in 2002.

 

Obama was a director of the Woods Fund board from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund's website. According to tax filings, Obama received compensation of $6,000 per year for his service in 1999 and 2000.

 

Obama served on the Wood's Fund board alongside William C. Ayers, a member of the Weathermen terrorist group which sought to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.

 

Ayers, who still serves on the Woods Fund board, contributed $200 to Obama's senatorial campaign fund and has served on panels with Obama at numerous public speaking engagements. Ayers admitted to involvement in the bombings of U.S. governmental buildings in the 1970s. He is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

 

The $40,000 grant from Obama's Woods Fund to the AAAN constituted about a fifth of the Arab group's reported grants for 2001, according to tax filings obtained by WND. The $35,000 Woods Fund grant in 2002 also constituted about one-fifth of AAAN's reported grants for that year.

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231

[Astor]

Thing is Governor Palin is correct that Obama is associated with terrorists, radicals, etc. In fact she understated it, Obama has a pattern of associating with radical lunatics. People involved in voting fraud, terrorism, racists (referring to racism against whites and Jewish people), etc.

 

So he's not been hanging round with people who aren't whiter than white. So what? Associating is very different to actually taking part in these activities.

 

All I see here is Palin trying to shift focus from her abuse of power allegations.

 

Thing is Fox News has been pointing out Senator Obama's association with Bill Ayers for about a year now, and the "mainstream" press is finally picking up on it. [/Quote]

 

Hardly suprising no-one's taken any notice of it till now then. Fox is hardly a paragon of 'honest journalism'.

 

So here is the question, do we want someone like this to be President of the United States, heck I wouldn't want anyone with all these associations like what he has on the city council, let alone President of the United States.[/Quote]

 

Associations. Were he actually convicted, or proved to have taken part in terrorist activities, i'd probably feel the same.

 

The Obama's campaign's response is to call it a racist attack, but I don't think this is racist to point out he's associated with a man that committed terrorist attacks.

 

Again, Obama can hardly be held responsible for the actions of another person, which happened at a time when Obama was young.

 

Also, why should Obama holding a dual citizenship be an issue?

[GarfieldJL]

So he's not been hanging round with people who aren't whiter than white. So what? Associating is very different to actually taking part in these activities.

 

That depends, if this is one association it's not a big deal, especially if he is honest and forthright about it. Furthermore, his radical associations interconnect and he's given them money while on a board that was just supposed to be funding legit education projects. Instead it was funding radical indoctrination, among other things.

 

All I see here is Palin trying to shift focus from her abuse of power allegations.

Uh huh, problem is if this were an unbiased investigation the investigators would look like fools because if the reason for firing that Safety officer is what they're saying it was for, the reason is not only legit but it is one that women would rally behind.

http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/tasergate-not-troopergate/

 

As it stands though there is stuff that supports Governor Palin's stated reasons for firing the man: (hesitate to use these sources but the second one has a pretty damning picture)

http://saberpoint.blogspot.com/2008/09/troopergate-dem-smear-job-of-palin.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/09/new_documents_released_in_troo.asp

 

It has a picture of the people trying to prosecute Governor Palin and they work for the Obama Campaign. So we have the judge and jury being members of a campaign that stands to gain from a conviction...

 

Hardly suprising no-one's taken any notice of it till now then. Fox is hardly a paragon of 'honest journalism'.

 

That's your opinion, I'm going to say in response that comparing their honesty to the other media outlets is insulting Fox News.

 

Associations. Were he actually convicted, or proved to have taken part in terrorist activities, i'd probably feel the same.

 

Again he lied about them and they interconnect, then there is a money trail.

 

Again, Obama can hardly be held responsible for the actions of another person, which happened at a time when Obama was young.

 

He can be held responsible for continuing to associate with a man that said on 9/11/01

"I do not regret setting bombs, I feel we didn't do enough."

-- Bill Ayers in a New York Times article 9/11/2001

 

Also, why should Obama holding a dual citizenship be an issue?

 

I'm wondering that too unless this involves Odinga?

[Astor]

That depends, if this is one association it's not a big deal, especially if he is honest and forthright about it. Furthermore, his radical associations interconnect and he's given them money while on a board that was just supposed to be funding legit education projects. Instead it was funding radical indoctrination, among other things.[/Quote]

 

So, he's a terrorist for donating money that may have been spent inappropriately?

 

That's your opinion, I'm going to say in response that comparing their honesty to the other media outlets is insulting Fox News.[/Quote]

 

It's not just my opinion. It's the opinion of a lot of people. I'm not saying that your opinion isn't valid, however.

 

But you're right, it is insulting. To other news outlets.

 

He can be held responsible for continuing to associate with a man that said on 9/11/01 <quote>

 

No, he can't. He doesn't control what other people say, and the only words he should be held accountable for are his own.

[GarfieldJL]

So, he's a terrorist for donating money that may have been spent inappropriately?

 

I didn't say he was a terrorist, I'm saying he either had bad judgement or he agrees with their viewpoints. Fact is he was in charge of the money on that foundation, so that would make it his responsibility to make sure the money is spent appropriately.

 

I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's like our current President in the fact he has a lot of bad judgement when it comes to people. Then again, I'm probably insulting President Bush there.

 

It's not just my opinion. It's the opinion of a lot of people. I'm not saying that your opinion isn't valid, however.

 

But you're right, it is insulting. To other news outlets.

 

Fox News wasn't the one to come up with a story that people in the National Enquirer would have been fired over for lack of sources, and it being nothing more than a Hit Piece.

 

Fox News wasn't the one that aired that bogus story that CBS did, using "evidence" that was clearly bogus because the font style didn't exist during the time in question because it was a computer style font for a modern printer.

 

Fox News wasn't the one that sat on this story for over a year, so it's insulting Fox News to compare them to the mainstream media.

 

Fox News wasn't the one to use bogus pictures to try to accuse Israel of deliberately targeting civilians in the Israeli/Lebanon War in 2006.

 

No, he can't. He doesn't control what other people say, and the only words he should be held accountable for are his own.

 

It does illustrate bad judgement to associate with them even after they make statements like that.

[Astor]

I didn't say he was a terrorist,

 

Oh, but you have, throughout this thread and a few others. You haven't actually said he was, but you've basically condemned him as one, taking every opportunity to villify him for his 'radical associations'.

 

It does illustrate bad judgement to associate with them even after they make statements like that.

 

Everybody makes mistakes. He's free to keep whatever company he chooses. Or, are you implying that McCain is infallible?

[GarfieldJL]

Oh, but you have, throughout this thread and a few others. You haven't actually said he was, but you've basically condemned him as one, taking every opportunity to villify him for his 'radical associations'.

 

I don't really need to villify him, the fact his associations all interconnect does that all by itself. Especially since he lied about the associations, if he was straight up and honest it would have blown over rather quickly.

 

 

Everybody makes mistakes. He's free to keep whatever company he chooses. Or, are you implying that McCain is infallible?

 

I haven't implied McCain is infallible, difference is though that McCain has a habit of being honest about things.

 

If you look at the Keating Five situation you'll note he was the only Republican in the bunch, so the Democrats had to charge him otherwise it would be a Democrat scandal. This is after the Prosecutor (whom is a Democrat) recommended McCain not even be charged because there was nothing there.

 

McCain also testified against Keating in the civil trial where people were suing to try to get their money back.

 

McCain was straight up and honest about the situation, furthermore the Keating situation was about 20 years ago at least, compared to Obama's associations that he broke off after they are made public and he lies about them.

 

While McCain does have lobbyists on his campaign, he has a history of going after them when they do illegal activities. Rick Davis apparently was getting money from the Banks McCain was going after saying they needed more regulations.

 

Well if they were paying Mr. Davis to convince McCain to stop going after them, they should either sue Mr. Davis for simply pocketing the money and walking off, or Mr. Davis tried and McCain seeing corruption (which is like waving a red flag in front of a Bull) was determined to root out that corruption.

 

Thing is during part of that time Senator Obama was taking kickbacks from the banks Senator McCain was trying to regulate them concerning the subprime mortgages and actually fix this mess.

 

Furthermore, McCain also hires a lot of ex-lobbyists, like the CIA and FBI hire hackers, sometimes the best way to catch a lobbyist doing something illegal is hire an ex-lobbyist.

 

Is McCain a saint, I don't think he is, but unlike he doesn't associate with terrorists, he isn't a member of a church for 20 years whose reverend is a racist and hates America...

 

 

Oh and found more about Obama's Ayers connection:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-45A6I-N5I&eurl=http://ace.mu.nu/archives/273431.php

(starts off with Fox News interview then goes to a video that was recently found).

[Web Rider]

re: Barack Obama's Radical Associations

 

Some people are concerned with his associations with -

Rev. Jeremiah Wright

ACORN

Bill Ayers

Tony Rezko

Rev. Al Sharpton

Obama's Father

Obama's Stepfather

 

Up until somewhere in the 1980s, Obama had a dual citizenship with Kenya and the United States. Some people find it awkward for this type of dual connection. So, what other associations does he have.

 

(Some news just got to my desk. I will be back in a few minutes. DOW just dropped below 10,000. Heading over to the thread now.)

 

If people are concerned about Obama's associations with his own father and step-father, they really need to get a life. I don't have any choice in who my father was just as Bush has no choice that his grandpappy did business with the Nazis.

 

Does that make Bush a Nazi? No it does not.

[GarfieldJL]

If people are concerned about Obama's associations with his own father and step-father, they really need to get a life. I don't have any choice in who my father was just as Bush has no choice that his grandpappy did business with the Nazis.

 

I don't really care about Obama's family associations he didn't have a choice there, I'm concerned about the associations he's made as an adult.

[Astor]

I'm aware i've already replied in this regard, but I would like to point out some things.

 

"I do not regret setting bombs, I feel we didn't do enough."

 

That's a misquote. Also, he happens to write something on the day of a terrorist attack, so that means he condones it?

 

If you'd done some more research you'd have found Ayers wrote this a few days after the attack...

 

"Today we are witnessing crimes against humanity on our own shores on an unthinkable scale, and I fear that we may soon see more innocent people in other parts of the world dying in response."

 

Now, please take note that i'm not defending anything he may have done in the past, as a member of the Weathermen, but your claim that he supported the 9/11 attack is grossly innacurate.

[GarfieldJL]

Uh huh, where is your source?

[Astor]

Uh huh, where is your source?

 

Bill Ayers Wikipedia Article

 

But of course, it'll no doubt be biased against conservatives, or outright lying...

 

EDIT:

 

Also, let's look at the sources section of that article, referring to the interview from which you quoted:

 

NB that although the interview was published on 9/11, it was completed prior to that and cannot be properly construed as a reaction to the events of that day.

[Arcesious]

And it's all ending in a political smear contest... This shows that they're both getting desperate.

[ET Warrior]

I find it interesting that every single non-partisan fact checking organization that has looked into these allegations has declared them false or insignificant, yet you continue to perpetuate them as though they hold some true meaning. (Probably because your candidate is so far behind in the polls you need to ramp up the smear campaign in a desperate attempt to get some of those votes).

[Inyri]

And it's all ending in a political smear contest... This shows that they're both getting desperate.

Nah, that's just politics as usual.

[GarfieldJL]

Also, let's look at the sources section of that article, referring to the interview from which you quoted:

 

Woah stop, just stop right there, I posted up an actual copy of the interview piece, you are quoting an analysis of that interview. The actual interview trumps a talking head when it comes to what they said in the interview.

 

 

Anyways here is the logical argument that makes Governor Palin's argument that Senator Obama is friends with terrorists valid.

 

1. Senator Obama's campaign Manager at the time this was brought up a while ago said that the two were certainly friendly.

 

2. Obama started his state senate campaign in the guy's house.

 

3. The served on boards together

 

4. Barack Obama met his wife via introductions by Bill Ayers and his wife.

 

 

So we've established it's more than them just happening to be in the same neighborhood.

 

Evidence suggests that Senator Obama is friends with William Ayers.

 

William Ayers is a known terrorist.

 

Therefore evidence suggests that Barack Obama is friends with a terrorist. That makes Governor Palin's accusations at the very least have merit.

 

 

The big thing here though is that Barack Obama has repeatedly changed his story and outright lied about his association with William Ayers.

 

And it looks like the McCain Campaign has hit a nerve considering how the Obama campaign immediately reacted and started their attempts to go after the Keating Five situation from nearly 20 years ago when McCain had just started his first senate term.

[Inyri]

Even if he was friends with a terrorist, that doesn't mean he knew the man was a terrorist, supports terrorists, or is a terrorist himself. So what exactly are you trying to get at?

[Astor]

Woah stop, just stop right there, I posted up an actual copy of the interview piece, you are quoting an analysis of that interview. The actual interview trumps a talking head when it comes to what they said in the interview.[/Quote]

 

You claimed that Ayers was talking in reference to the 9/11 attacks. I am merely pointing out that the interview was conducted before 9/11.

 

2. Obama started his state senate campaign in the guy's house.

 

Proof, other than the fact that Ayers donated $200 towards it?

 

4. Barack Obama met his wife via introductions by Bill Ayers and his wife.[/Quote]

 

Proof? If you had any, you'd know he met his wife while they worked at the same law firm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Obama

 

So we've established it's more than them just happening to be in the same neighborhood.

 

You haven't proved anything. I've never once denied that he knows him, I've been saying that simply knowing someone doesn't make them guilty by association.

 

William Ayers is a known terrorist.

 

Was.

 

Barack Obama was a child when Ayers was a political activist. Or does that not matter?

 

And it looks like the McCain Campaign has hit a nerve considering how the Obama campaign immediately reacted and started their attempts to go after the Keating Five situation from nearly 20 years ago when McCain had just started his first senate term.

 

I don't see what's so different about that and claiming that Obama's entire Senate run is sponsored by Terrorism.

[Achilles]

Come on Inyri, don't you usually have someone vet the people that you meet before you decide to associate with them?

[Inyri]

Sure, but I'm not naive enough to think that being friends with someone who was once a radical makes that person exactly the same as his friend. I try to base my opinions on something more than that.