http://www.jewishpress.com/displayc...alestinian Group§ionid=14&mode=a&recnum=0
Not that it matters...
Obama Served On Board That Funded Pro-Palestinian Group
- Thread starter frasier
- Start date
Hank Reardon said:
The ghetto out the vote campaign is drugged up on media hype. Their darling can do no wrong.
Obama's a likable guy and in a political campaign, that can be enough to get you elected. Just look at Bubba.
However, what happens if this guy becomes POTUS?
Is Barack Huisein Obama just a left-wing, well meaning fool like Jimmy Carter? Or is something more?
Obama says, Muslim call to prayer one of the prettiest sounds on earth:
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/200...ayer-“one-of-the-prettiest-sounds-on-earth”…/
Ohio Mosques for Obama
http://ohioagainstterror.blogspot.com/2008/02/does-obama-campaign-email-tell-of.html
Obama praised by nation of Islam: Farrakhan
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-farrakhan_webfeb25,1,6348050.story
However, what happens if this guy becomes POTUS?
Is Barack Huisein Obama just a left-wing, well meaning fool like Jimmy Carter? Or is something more?
Obama says, Muslim call to prayer one of the prettiest sounds on earth:
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/200...ayer-“one-of-the-prettiest-sounds-on-earth”…/
Ohio Mosques for Obama
http://ohioagainstterror.blogspot.com/2008/02/does-obama-campaign-email-tell-of.html
Obama praised by nation of Islam: Farrakhan
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-farrakhan_webfeb25,1,6348050.story
China was the 'Sleeping Giant' and Nixon's visit was the start of China's contact with the wider world.
Iran does not have anywhere near the same potential to be a major power and is lead by a publicity seeking primadonna.
Iran does not have anywhere near the same potential to be a major power and is lead by a publicity seeking primadonna.
What, no link to the debate where he denounces Farrakhan and rejects the endorsement on national television?Cinema Face said:
I'm waiting for someone to explain what the problem is with the stuff that was in that article.
No doubt it's a gross misrepresentation of the truth: Something key has been omitted. It's election season. Par for the course.
Let's say it's all true anyway. Is there something wrong with supporting Palestinians? Note that not all Palestinians are terrorists. It says it was a "pro Palestinian" group, it does not say it was pro Hamas or even pro Fatah.
I would also expect, given the strife that Israel has caused Palestinians, that there would no doubt be speakers at their events that were critical of Israel. Whether that makes those speakers "anti-Israel" is another stretch that is no doubt par for the course in an election season.
At any rate, even if you grant that it is all true as written I can't see a problem.
No doubt it's a gross misrepresentation of the truth: Something key has been omitted. It's election season. Par for the course.
Let's say it's all true anyway. Is there something wrong with supporting Palestinians? Note that not all Palestinians are terrorists. It says it was a "pro Palestinian" group, it does not say it was pro Hamas or even pro Fatah.
I would also expect, given the strife that Israel has caused Palestinians, that there would no doubt be speakers at their events that were critical of Israel. Whether that makes those speakers "anti-Israel" is another stretch that is no doubt par for the course in an election season.
At any rate, even if you grant that it is all true as written I can't see a problem.
Anything the iranistanis might have ever done was long before the cult of terror known as the islameoterrorists took over hundreds of years ago. Since then they have amounted to squat and thats pretty much all they'll be.
.
.
Other Wanderer said:
Gee. all that wonderful stuff you say they did and all they can do now is blow people up and screw camels!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thats progress.
.
Wanderer, you are right, Iran WAS a major power. Besides sponsoring Hezbollah and Hamas, and Shia groups in Iraq, what impact have they had on current events? One could also ask what positive effects their sponsorships of these (no they're not terrorist) groups have had?
China has always had the potential for superpower strength and this was realized once they became involved in the world as a whole. Before Nixon, China had been involved greatly in their sphere of influence. Nixon was involved simply in oppening positive communication with the West.
Besides oil, what does Iran have to base it's power on? They already communicate with the West on a regular basis, most the time with their leader acting like an idiot.
Unless Iran gets the proper leadership you talk about, any visit by a US politician will simply be used as propaganda, not an invitation to integrate with the world in a positive way.
Is getting involved in wars and proxy wars really a contribution to the world? Where are these great great effects modern Iran is having on the world?
China has always had the potential for superpower strength and this was realized once they became involved in the world as a whole. Before Nixon, China had been involved greatly in their sphere of influence. Nixon was involved simply in oppening positive communication with the West.
Besides oil, what does Iran have to base it's power on? They already communicate with the West on a regular basis, most the time with their leader acting like an idiot.
Unless Iran gets the proper leadership you talk about, any visit by a US politician will simply be used as propaganda, not an invitation to integrate with the world in a positive way.
Is getting involved in wars and proxy wars really a contribution to the world? Where are these great great effects modern Iran is having on the world?
Nixon was probably one of the most anti-communist presidents ever. When he went to communist China, nobody seriously questioned it because if Nixon of all people thinks it’s a good idea to open dialog with China, then it must be a good idea.Other Wanderer said:
Imagine if Kennedy had done the same thing? Kennedy had a reputation for being soft on communism. If Kennedy had made a deal with Mao, then he would’ve been crucified in the media. It would be political suicide because it would be regarded as communist sympathizing and unpatriotic.
Nixon was the right guy to pull that off. Kennedy would’ve been the worst guy.
This is why I disagree with you about Obama changing the game in the middle east. He’s just the wrong guy to do it. It would be like Kennedy going off to communist China.
Iran has the power to cut off the flow of oil from the Middle East to the United States, and a fighting chance of surviving any American retaliation.basketcase said:
Lately they have been showing off techniques that could be effective at sinking a US Carrier Group.
It's true they have a bunch of econonic illiterates running the country at the moment, who squander the massive oil resources at their disposal. If they shape up a bit, though, they have incredible potential.
Iran is THE power in the Middle East at the moment. It is unable to project that power much beyond the Middle East, but it's strong enough to defeat the US in Iraq.
Your post is kind of funny, it's like, "Other than all the mots important things that have been going on in the world lately, what impact has Iran had?"
Speaking of funny, that's like saying that you're the smartest kid in your grade 6 class. Iran is not a world superpower and doesn't have the ability to be so. All they have accomplished is to support terrorist (insurgent if you prefer) activity. Simply put, the comparison to Nixon visiting China isn't valid.fuji said:
No, Iran is not the power in the ME, that would be Israel. Iran is not even second !fuji said:
Saying what you did is no more rational than saying Fuji is the top rugby team in the world
