US News
May 15, 2008, 16:39 GMT
Obama slams Bush for false attack with appeasement remarks
And Also
Similar articles
- Increased risk of terrorist attacks, security chief says
- Obama pledges to review Guantanamo cases
- US presidential candidates to honour 9/11 victims
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Suspect in US police killing shot dead
- 2. In Pictures: 'World War II Fighter Recovered'
- 3. Supreme Court overturns decision on detainee abuse photos
- 4. White House gate crashers: Reality TV in the making (News Feature)
- 5. Suspect in quadruple police execution evades capture (Roundup)
Older Talkback
'I want to know why would anyone put anything into anything GWB says.'
George Bush didn't even mention Barack Obama. Barack Obama simply heard the word 'appeaser' and presumed he was talking about him.
History on Chamberlain and appeasement
How Bush Sr. failed to depose Saddam 1991
And Prescott Bush and the Nazis from 'counterpunch'
Thanks for non sequitur spam from an encyclopedia and a leftest tract from counterpunch. Ol man Kennedy actually DID do business with the Nazis, the only thing you have on Prescott bush is that he owned shares UBC, a publicly traded company that did not own but did business with ANOTHER company that did business with a THIRD company that did business in Germany before they declared war on the USA.
'Harriman, Bush and Walker were never charged. '
Neither were Kennedy, Roosevelt, Cordell Hull and Frances Perkins... All of whom owned pre-war shares in German companies.
Obama's Diplomatic Partner: 'The Hidden Imam Manages All the Affairs of the World'
Barack Obama wants to sit down and have tea and discuss the issues (using his amazing diplo-fu) with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It’s all about hope! and change! and waffles!
I hope they have plenty of extra syrup if/when they meet, because here’s the mini-Hitler himself, explaining that “the Hidden Imam manages all the affairs of the world.”
Diplomacy is the only answer, obviously.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: 'Some people see only the external aspect of the enemy, and not its ulterior motives. The people who came to occupy Iraq – it seemed as if all they wanted was to take over the region and its oil. But when you peel off the outer layer, you see that their analysis is different. They have realized that something is about to happen in the region. The hand of God is about to emerge and eradicate the injustice in the world. They discuss this among themselves. Look how much attention they have given it. Some people believe the Hidden Imam is living his life somewhere, without any concern for the problems of humanity. If this were the case, there would be no existence at all. Everything would be in chaos. The Hidden Imam manages all the affairs of the world.'
Littlegreenfootballs.com via www.memritv.org/clip/en/1768.htm
This evil little man needs to be appeased? Glorified? Locked up and medicated is more like it.
'Like you can read.'
Infantile response, what are you 9 years old?
'So he set a timetable? Like I said, as if you could read.'
Like I said (speaking of not being able to read) he is flip-flopping. Where did I say anything about 'setting a timetable'? Need meds?
'Do you ever tire of being wrong?'
Maybe I would tire if I ever was. Don't know that feeling, but you should.
(Since he cannot deal with reading all of that information, here's a synopsis small enough for his mind to grasp - watch him complain about the source, or some other excuse)
www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=11539
The September 11 attacks created an entirely new strategic context for engagement with Iran. The evening of 9-11, Flynt Leverett, a career CIA analyst who was then at the State Department as a counter-terrorism expert, and a small group of officials met with Powell. It was the beginning of work on a diplomatic strategy in support of the U.S. effort to destroy the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and the al-Qaeda network it had harbored. The main aim was to gain the cooperation of states that were considered sponsors of terrorism.
'The United States was about to mount a global war on terrorism with complete legitimacy from the United Nations,' recalls Leverett, 'and these states didn't want to get on the downside of it.' Within weeks, Iran, Syria, Libya, and Sudan all approached the United States through various channels to offer their help in the fight against al-Qaeda. 'The Iranians said we don't like al-Qaeda any better than you, and we have assets in Afghanistan that could be useful', Leverett recalls.
It was the beginning of a period of extraordinary strategic cooperation between Iran and the United States. As America began preparing for the military operation in Afghanistan, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ryan Crocker held a series of secret meetings with Iranian officials in Geneva. In those meetings, Iran offered search-and-rescue help, humanitarian assistance, and even advice on which targets to bomb in Afghanistan, according to one former administration official. The Iranians, who had been working for years with the main anti-Taliban coalition, the Northern Alliance, also advised the Americans about how to negotiate the major ethnic and political fault lines in the country.
(In this link, the Times offers a link to their redacted story, but also many links to the original details from other sources. Flynt Leverett co-authored the linked article below.)
www.nytimes.com/2006/12/22/opinion/22precede.html
'Linked within is the redacted version of a draft Op-Ed article we wrote for The Times, as blacked out by the Central Intelligence Agency’s Publication Review Board after the White House intervened in the normal prepublication review process and demanded substantial deletions. Agency officials told us that they had concluded on their own that the original draft included no classified material, but that they had to bow to the White House.
Indeed, the deleted portions of the original draft reveal no classified material. These passages go into aspects of American-Iranian relations during the Bush administration’s first term that have been publicly discussed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; former Secretary of State Colin Powell; former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage; a former State Department policy planning director, Richard Haass; and a former special envoy to Afghanistan, James Dobbins.'
'Like I said (speaking of not being able to read) he is flip-flopping. Where did I say anything about 'setting a timetable'? '
If he is not setting a timetable he is not flippflopping.
explain to me why ANYONE would bother to type these long comments which no one in their right mind would bother to read or have already read elsewhere? My god, don't they have a life?
What Obama actually said is HERE, HERE IS THE VIDEO:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1dSPrb5w_k
No nuance, no wiggle room, just flat out agreeing to meet with Ahmadinejad or whatever other grubby little terrorist monster wants to destroy us for 'negotiations'. Be it Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela... This naive child will 'negotiate' with them without 'preconditions'.
IT EVEN SAYS IT ON HIS WEBSITE:
'Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.'
He has also said he would negotiate with Hezbollah. (Again, without preconditions) Hezbollah is the terrorist organization sponsored by Iran that has killed more Americans before 9/11 then any other terrorist organization.
Even in the snippet that you chose:
Moderator:'You had said in a previous CNN debate that you would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Iran, North Korea, among others....'
SEN. 'OBAMA: That's correct'....
'
He also recalled President Ronald Reagan excoriating Soviet leaders publicly while negotiating with them privately '
Gorbachev didn't threaten to wipe Israel off the map every other week or believe the world was being run by the hidden fricking imam.
Obama is a dangerous appeaser who will legitimize these terrorist thugs and REWARD their inhuman behavior bu giving them what they want: Legitimacy on the world stage. He is a dangerous neophyte that will invite more terrorism on the USA.
RE: explain to me why ANYONE would bother to type these long comments which no one in their right mind would bother to read or have already read elsewhere? My god, don't they have a life?
==================
If you know how to source the material, getting a post up here takes less than 2 minutes, content and all. The original stuff gets written just about as quickly.
If the American people would learn to READ and LEARN, and not be deceived by the bullcrappers, they'd have impeached Bush years ago.
The same reason Carter stopped, the same reason Reagan didn't, the same reason Bush sr didn't, the same reason Clinton didn't.... They are the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world and they have killed more Americans with terrorism before 9/11 then anyone else has.
Since 1979,Iranians or Iranian funded and controlled terrorist groups have; invaded the US embassy and held our diplomatic staff for 444 days, took American journalists and a British minister hostage in Lebanon, killing William Buckley, bombed the US embassy in Lebanon killing 17 Americans, bombed the US barracks Beirut which killed 241 Americans on a peacekeeping mission, bombed the Khobar Towers killing 19 Americans, hijacked an aircraft and killed Robert Stethem and dumped his body on the tarmac, bombed a Jewish center in Argentina, killing 85, their proxy Hezbollah has started several conflicts with Israel, including the one last summer which left hundreds dead. They still have a bounty on the head of Salmon Rushdie for writing a book that they didn’t like, they have provided the Shiite death squads in Iraq with training and material as well as the Sunni death squads that go after the Shiites with the objective of creating as much bloodshed in Iraq as passable. They have also been supplying shaped charges and shoulder launched anti-aircraft missiles to kill coalition troops. They Chant 'death to America' on a daily basis in their schools and Mosques, they continually threaten to wipe Israel off the map, they have mined the Strait of Hormuz, they publicly lynch girls for being 'disobedient', they publicly lynch boys for being homosexual, they publicly lash women for the crime of being raped, they stone women to death for infidelity, they censor their news, They beat a Canadian journalist to death because she wrote unflattering stories, they murder political dissidents, invented the suicide bomber, kidnapped British sailors and held them hostage, kidnapping american aid workers and holding them hostage...ect, ect....
The author of these looooong drawn out bursts of propaganda is an iranian who desperately wants the USA to capitulate in Iraq in order to give power to the mullahs and thugs who make daily life a nightmare for the country that he cowardly escaped from and now plays apologist for.
Iran is a country that STONES people to death, in 2008... And this creep wants to help the mullahs solidify their power over the people they oppress.
In addition to their crimes against the USA, Lebbanon, Israel and the west, this is what they do to their own people:
www.liveleak.com/view?i=aea_1185836331
www.liveleak.com/view?i=271_1189517695
www.liveleak.com/view?i=518_1190245078
Take a look at what you and Obama want to legitimize. Seriously, register and sit through it. This is what you want to help.
'White House censorship of the facts on Iran'
They are trying to get an atomic bomb to destroy the enemy that they were raised to hate from birth, and probably that enemy's defenders. They are ruled by someone who believes that he is being guided by a 12 year old child who has been locked in a well for 1600years... They have defined themselves as our enemy since 1979 and have been acting like it to the best of their abilities. Take a look, Iranian, at what they do in Lebanon... in Sadr city, in Argentina wherever they can: They sew terrorism in the furtherance of their Shiite revolution.
I know that sounds wonderful to you, but I will NEVER submit to islam and I will fight against my government appeasing islamist terrorists. That is why I will not vote for Obama and will support anyone running against him,
'If you know how to source the material, getting a post up here takes less than 2 minutes, content and all. The original stuff gets written just about as quickly.'
Instead of spamming forums by dumping truckloads of 'cut and paste' blather that was written in about 2 minutes why don't you actually go out and read something that wasn't written by an adolescent Trotskyite or an islamist propagandist. In other words; get a life you neurotic, Rainman of BS.
RE:
'I know that sounds wonderful to you, but I will NEVER submit to islam and I will fight against my government appeasing islamist terrorists. That is why I will not vote for Obama and will support anyone running against him.'
==========================================================
There were some clips of West Virginia voters saying the same stupid things as you did. Amazing that you can get through the door without walking into it. No one is asking anyone to 'submit to Islam'. You sound like you're on an ego trip - the same one that's led Bush down this road to making things worse. Bigotry and ignorance are a bad mix.
Bush brought things to this point by creating a long-term mess in Iraq, while leaving Afghanistan to fester. He should not be ON Mount Rushmore; but rather under it.
You resolve problems by getting the sides together ... example:
COLIN POWELL:
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&c id=1 184766015860
Colin Powell: Quartet should find way to talk to Hamas (July 2007)
Former US Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday the international diplomatic Quartet on the Middle East should find some way to talk to Hamas.
'I don't think you can just cast them into outer darkness and try to find a solution to the problems of the region without taking to account the standing that Hamas has in the Palestinian community,' Powell said in a radio interview.
... having his head up Roggio's ass ...
'He's a CHRISTIAN, you idiot'
He is an APPEASER you idiot.
' No one is asking anyone to 'submit to Islam'.'
The Iranians are. Indeed, that was pretty much the text of the letter that Ahmadinejad sent to Bush. Come to think of it, those were Bin Ladens demands as well...
'You sound like you're on an ego trip '
So not wanting to legitimize these little monsters is somehow egotistical?
'Bush brought things to this point by creating a long-term mess in Iraq, '
The mess in the middle east predates Bush by about 1650 years.
' He should not be ON Mount Rushmore; but rather under it.'
A threat?
''I don't think you can just cast them into outer darkness and try to find a solution to the problems of the region without taking to account the standing that Hamas has in the Palestinian community,' '
Not exactly the call for negotiations with terrorists that you make it out to be now is it?
You can start your fatwa against him PB, in the eyes of his 'negotiating partners' Obama is worse then I am. I am just a kuffar, HE is irtidad!
From that neocon rag, the New York Times: (Abridged for brevity)
One danger of [Obama's] charisma, however, is that it can evoke unrealistic hopes of what a candidate could actually accomplish in office regardless of his own personal abilities. Case in point is the oft-made claim that an Obama presidency would be welcomed by the Muslim world.
[...]
It is a mistake to conflate his African identity with his Muslim heritage. Senator Obama is half African by birth and Africans can understandably identify with him. In Islam, however, there is no such thing as a half-Muslim. Like all monotheistic religions, Islam is an exclusive faith.
As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.
Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.
His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).
With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered — as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy — but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)
It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries do not mandate execution for apostasy (although a law doing exactly that is pending before Iran’s Parliament and in two Malaysian states). But as a practical matter, in very few Islamic countries do the governments have sufficient authority to resist demands for the punishment of apostates at the hands of religious authorities.
For example, in Iran in 1994 the intervention of Pope John Paul II and others won a Christian convert a last-minute reprieve, but the man was abducted and killed shortly after his release. Likewise, in 2006 in Afghanistan, a Christian convert had to be declared insane to prevent his execution, and he was still forced to flee to Italy.
Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama — not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law — another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing.
At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards. More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known — as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad.
That an Obama presidency would cause such complications in our dealings with the Islamic world is not likely to be a major factor with American voters, and the implication is not that it should be. But of all the well-meaning desires projected on Senator Obama, the hope that he would decisively improve relations with the world’s Muslims is the least realistic.
Edward N. Luttwak, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is the author of “Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace.”
'Hidden Dum-Dum's definition of -embedded-'
Go drive your cab.
Not only did the Prince of Peace say at the YouTube debate last July that he'd meet personally and without precondition with Iran, he reaffirmed that position in November in an interview with the New York Times:
'Senator Barack Obama said he would 'engage in aggressive personal diplomacy' with Iran if elected president, and would offer economic inducements and a possible promise not to seek 'regime change' if Iran stopped meddling in Iraq and cooperated on terrorism and nuclear issues...
Making clear that he planned to talk to Iran without preconditions, Mr. Obama emphasized further that 'changes in behavior' by Iran could possibly be rewarded with membership in the World Trade Organization, other economic benefits and security guarantees...
Mr. Obama's willingness to conduct talks at the highest level with Iran ... differs significantly from the Bush administration.'
www.nytimes.com/2007/11/02/us/politics/01cnd-obama.html?_r=1&ei=5088&en =6e53bced62b78a88&ex=1351656000&oref=slogin&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewant ed=all
Your Talkback on this Story