Iraqi Billionaire Threatens Reporters Investigating Rezko Affair
AIM Column | By Andrew Walden | August 24, 2008
U.S. media outlets are historically strong defenders of press freedoms. But there has been near-total silence about the UK-based legal threats to public discussion of the Rezko affair.
Why aren’t the American media investigating the role of British billionaire businessman Nadhmi Auchi in supplying loans to Barack Obama fundraiser Tony Rezko? Some point to media bias, but there is another factor. Working for Auchi, who was born in Iraq, attorneys from London law firm Carter-Ruck have for several months been flooding American and British newspapers and websites with letters demanding removal of material they deem “defamatory” to their client.
In its June 28 edition, British satirical magazine Private Eye explains: “Until Carter-Ruck and Partners and England’s stifling libel laws got to work, the few American journalists not caught up in Obama-mania were turning to the archives of the British press to answer an intriguing question: who is Nadhmi Auchi?”
What is so “stifling” about English libel law? In the U.K., as Carter-Ruck explains on its own website, “A libel claimant does not have to prove that the words are false or to prove that he has in fact suffered any loss. Damage is presumed.”
The Obama campaign recently issued a non-denial denial in response to claims that Obama met with Auchi―contained in Jerome Corsi’s bestseller, The Obama Nation. They cited only two references. One is, “Mr. Auchi’s lawyer” who told the February 27, 2008 London Evening Standard, “As far as he can remember he has had no direct contact with Mr. Obama.” Another is, “A lawyer for Auchi, Alasdair Pepper” who says, according to the April 16, 2008 Washington Post, “Auchi Had ‘No Recollection’ Of Meeting Obama or Michelle.” Alasdair Pepper is the attorney whose name appears on the Carter-Ruck demand letters.
The Secret Loan
A secret $3.5 million loan from an Auchi company to key early-money Barack Obama fundraiser Antoin Rezko was exposed while Rezko was awaiting trial on fraud and money-laundering charges earlier this year. Rezko’s bail was revoked and police showed up banging on the doors of his Wilmette Chicago mansion to drag him off to jail early in the morning of January 28th. Auchi’s loan to Rezko had come on May 23, 2005 but had not been disclosed to the Court as required in his bail agreement. Three weeks later, on June 15, 2005, Rezko’s wife assisted the Obamas in the purchase of their South Chicago mansion by purchasing a next-door undeveloped lot being sold with the house.
According to the Times of London, “Mr. Rezko’s lawyer said his client had ‘longstanding indebtedness’ to Mr. Auchi’s General Mediterranean Holding (GMH). By June 2007 he owed it $27.9 million. Under a Loan Forgiveness Agreement described in court, M. Auchi lent Mr. Rezko $3.5 million in April 2005 and $11 million in September 2005, as well as $3.5 million transferred in April 2007. That agreement provided for the outstanding loans to be ‘forgiven’ in return for a stake in the 62-acre Riverside Park development.”
Rezko’s relationship with Barack Obama goes back to at least 1990, when Obama’s law firm did work relating to thousands of now-decaying Rezko apartment units in South Chicago. Rezko was a key early-money fundraiser in Obama’s state Senate campaigns and his failed run at the U.S. Congress.
According to The Times of London, “Mr. Auchi first met Mr. Rezko after the 2003 Iraq war and they have a business relationship.” At the time Auchi was facing the possibility of extradition to France. The Times of London explains: “Mr Auchi was convicted of corruption, given a suspended sentence and fined £1.4 million in France in 2003 for his part in the Elf affair, described as the biggest political and corporate scandal in post-war Europe. He, in a statement from his media lawyers, claims he is appealing against the sentence.”
In 2003, Nick Cohen of the UK Guardian wrote:
Allow me to introduce you to Nadhmi Auchi. He was charged in the 1950s with being an accomplice of Saddam Hussein, when the future tyrant was acquiring his taste for blood. He was investigated in the 1980s for his part in alleged bribes to the fabulously corrupt leaders of post-war Italy. In the 1990s, the Belgium Ambassador to Luxembourg claimed that Auchi’s bank held money Saddam and Colonel Gadaffi had stolen from their luckless peoples. In 2002, officers from the Serious Fraud Squad raided the offices of one of Auchi’s drug companies as part of an investigation of what is alleged to be the biggest swindle ever of the (British National Health Service). With allegations, albeit unproven, like these hanging over him, wouldn’t you think that British MPs would have the sense to stay away?
But after threats from Carter-Ruck, Cohen’s “defamatory” article became one of six Guardian and Observer articles scrubbed from the Internet this April.
Blogger “A Jacksonian” received a similar demand on or before June 24. His article is still up. It details much of the information contained in the six deleted Guardian/Observer articles.
Source of Wealth
Auchi in 1967 began an Iraq Oil Ministry career eventually rising to be Director of Planning and Development under the Baathist dictatorship. He formed GMH in 1979 and then left Iraq. A key source of weapons procurement for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, GMH became the largest single private shareholder of Banque Nationale du Paris (BNP) which later merged with Paribas to form BNP-Paribas. BNP and BNP-Paribas, at Saddam Hussein’s insistence, handled all Oil-for-Food transactions until 2001 when the incoming administration of George W. Bush demanded change.
Investigative journalist Bill Gertz explains:
“A 2004 Pentagon report obtained by The Washington Times identified Auchi as a global arms dealer and Iraqi billionaire ‘who, behind the facade of legitimate business, served as Saddam Hussein’s principle (sic) international financial manipulator and bag man.’
“The report to the Pentagon inspector general stated that … ‘significant and credible evidence has been developed that Nadhmi Auchi has engaged in unlawful activities working closely with Iraqi intelligence operatives to, Bribe foreign governments and individuals prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom to turn opinion against the American-led mission to remove Saddam Hussein.’”
The web scrubbing did not stop with the six Guardian/Observer articles. New Statesman writer Martin Bright reports that Auchi lawyers “have written to ask us to remove the names of the articles concerned.” Removed, the six titles are now available for reading only in difficult-to-find independent web archives:
“Labour blocks extradition of Iraqi tycoon” Observer, 2 February 2003
- “Billionaire linked to Labour arrested in London” Guardian, 2 April 2003
- “So, Norman, any regrets this time?” Observer, 6 April 2003
- “Tycoon in quiz over ties to Labour” Observer, 6 April 2003
- “Politics of sleaze” Observer, 16 November 2003
- “MP questions Iraq role of Briton tainted over Elf” (this has also been titled “British fraudster to profit from Iraq contract”) Observer, 16 November 2003
Auchi’s Middle East Online April 23 celebrates the removal of the six articles with a photo of a sphinx-like Auchi. The caption: “Tracking even the search engines.” In addition to the UK Guardian, the MEO article speaks proudly of articles forced off the Internet sites of the UK Sunday Times, the Financial Times, and Italian business weekly Il Mondo.
Crows Carter-Ruck attorney Alasdair Pepper: “Another publisher is now shortly to be sued over false material it is publishing on the internet, having failed to heed a warning letter. A fulsome apology, injunction and substantial damages will be sought against it.”
Carter-Ruck’s website touts the UK Daily Mail’s description of the firm as “London’s best known and most feared libel lawyers.” But dead men cannot sue. On December 23, 2003 former Carter-Ruck partner David Hooper wrote:
“The libel lawyer Peter Carter-Ruck, who died on Friday, had a chilling effect on the media. He was a chancer, out for the maximum fee. And he did for freedom of speech what the Boston Strangler did for door-to-door salesmen… He established the idea that libel law was complicated and merited very high fees. In the process he became very rich. ‘I like to bill the clients as the tears are flowing,’ he told me.”
In another article now missing from its original website, Jack Kelly of RealClearPolitics.com wrote:
“‘The name Nadhmi Auchi was just another name for Saddam’s intelligence service, or so we thought,’ said Nibras Kazimi, a former Iraqi dissident who is now a visiting scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C.
“Mr. Auchi is a business partner of Syrian-born businessman Antoin ‘Tony’ Rezko, who has supported Mr. Obama financially since his first run for the Illinois state senate in 1996.”
Additional Targets
Journalists are not the only targets. The former Wikipedia entry for Auchi’s GMH remains available on Answers.com. It reads in part: “In 1996, according to European news accounts, Belgium’s ambassador to Luxembourg charged that Banque Continentale du Luxembourg, a bank that Nadhmi Auchi and Paribas jointly controlled until 1994, had handled personal accounts for former dictator of Iraq Saddam Hussein.” Banque Continentale denies the charges.
But the original GMH Wikipedia article has been taken down, replaced by an entry flagged as being “written like an advertisement” which mentions none of the controversy swirling around GMH.
Lead is joined by silver. In the scrubbed article, the Guardian’s Cohen wrote: “(Auchi) has been able to collect British politicians the way other people collect stamps.”
The London Times, which has held out against most of the Carter-Ruck litigation threats writes:
“On the 20th anniversary of his business in 1999, Mr. Auchi received a greeting card signed by 130 politicians, including Tony Blair, William Hague and Charles Kennedy, who were then leaders of their respective parties.”
But even this Times article has been tagged. At the end is a disclaimer added after the original publication:
Note: we wish to make it clear that, in the original piece “Obama bagman is sent to jail over $3.5m payment by British tycoon” (Feb. 1), we did not intend to suggest that there was any connection between the $3.5m loan from Mr. Auchi to Mr. Rezko and any approaches Mr. Rezko may have made to Illinois State Officials. We apologise to Mr Auchi for any misunderstanding.”
Sanitizing the Record
Web scrubbing begins at home—in this case with Middle East Online, owned by GMH. The Real Barack Obama documents January 2008 deletions taken down from Auchi’s website as Rezko prepared to go to trial. Also scrubbed: the website of the press secretary of Rep. John Knollenberg (R-MI) and even an ABC news article. The deletions appear aimed at obliterating all reference to Auchi’s April, 2004 visit to Michigan and Illinois.
Auchi is photographed meeting with Rezko, Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D-Il), and President of the Illinois Senate Emil Jones during the visit. Jones and Rezko were both key early-money Obama backers. The Chicago Tribune and numerous other reports place Obama at the dinner at the Four Seasons hotel with Auchi, Blagojevich, Rezko and others. Court testimony by Stuart Levine in the Rezko trial places Obama at an April 3, 2004 party held in Auchi’s honor at Rezko’s house.
In spite of his British connections and an earlier 2004 U.S. visit, Auchi was denied entry into the U.S. in 2005. It is believed that he was attempting in 2005 to win a U.S. visa with the help of Rezko and several as-yet-unnamed Illinois political figures. Among Auchi’s many international awards is a 2005 election as an “Honorary Member in the International College of Surgeons in Chicago, Illinois.” Obama has denied trying to help Auchi.
Media Protection
In the U.S. efforts are underway to prevent foreign court libel judgments from infringing on the First Amendment guarantees of press freedom. On May 7, Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) was among those announcing introduction of the Free Speech Protection Act which has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for consideration. He explained: “The United Kingdom has become a popular venue for defamation plaintiffs from around the world, because under English law it is not necessary for a libel plaintiff to prove falsity or actual malice as is required in the United States.”
Lynne Bradley, Director of American Library Association’s Office of Government Relations, explains the ALA’s July 31 decision to support the bill: “ALA is concerned that foreign libel lawsuits threaten U.S. authors and publishers and our freedoms of speech and the press. Through its chilling effect, such ‘venue shopping’ also denies the American people the right to read and to access information―another inherent First Amendment right essential to our democratic form of government.” The ALA has endorsed the bill, which is cosponsored by Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Charles Schumer (D-NY).
Auchi is not the only one taking advantage. In the UK, several books have been pulped and removed from libraries and booksellers after threats of expensive, drawn out litigation by wealthy Arabs and others.
While Islamist illegal combatants captured in combat on foreign soil and held at Guantanamo are moving closer to attaining the legal rights of U.S. citizens, American authors investigating and writing about subjects related to Islamist terror and Mideast corruption have been sued under a foreign legal system with inferior free speech protections and subjected to six-figure judgments entered in foreign courts.
Carter-Ruck’s efforts on behalf of Auchi go beyond major newspapers. Several websites carrying articles by RezkoWatch writer and progressive investigative journalist Evelyn Pringle were threatened with UK-based lawsuits. This was the second demand letter directed at RezkoWatch; the first arrived February 9. In response, RezkoWatch editors scrubbed any reference to Auchi as “corrupt” from their website except when quoted from an external source. In its posted response to Pepper, RezkoWatch indicates it also “archived” numerous articles pending verification of their contents.
In a June 29, 2008 AmericanThinker.com article: “Free Speech, the Obama Campaign, and the Washington Post”, this author wrote: “A Presidential candidate must be prepared to face extraordinary levels of scrutiny. If Obama and his supporters think they can silence questions about his background, his leftist terror-bomber backers, his ‘God damn America’ pastor, his cocaine use, his financial dealings with indicted Syrian-born businessman Tony Rezko, or with Saddam Hussein crony and oil-for-food banker Nadhmi Auchi, they are mistaken.”
Intimidation
Apparently I was mistaken. After American Thinker received a letter from Carter-Ruck, the sentence was chopped off after the word “Rezko.” Many website operators simply do not have the legal or financial resources necessary to face off with Carter-Ruck.
Larry Johnson of the No Quarter Blog received and posted online a February 18 demand letter from Carter-Ruck which claims Auchi “was not involved in any of (Saddam Hussein’s) operations.” Carter-Ruck even demands removal of material in the comments section below Johnson’s blog postings.
Similar claims, as well as misspellings, are contained in other of Pepper’s letters seen by this writer—perhaps indicating that the Auchi threat letter machine is nearing its operational limits and might fail if Internet users revolt and begin randomly posting deleted Auchi material all over the Internet in an act of cyber-civil-disobedience.
Senator Lieberman’s Free Speech Protection Act is modeled on “Rachel’s Law” signed April 30, 2008 by New York Governor David Paterson. Rachel’s Law had passed both houses of the New York state legislature unanimously March 31 after being introduced with bi-partisan support. “Rachel” is Rachel Ehrenfeld, an investigative journalist and author of Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It.
Ehrenfeld’s 2003 book, published in the U.S., pointed to Saudi multi-millionaire Khalid Salim Bin Mahfouz as a funding source for al-Qaeda prior to 9-11. Mahfouz sued. He is Saudi; the book, its author and publisher are American; but rather than coming to a U.S. court, Mahfouz selected English jurisdiction in a typical case of “libel tourism.” Ehrenfeld did not answer the English suit and instead countersued in U.S. federal court.
Legal assaults from Middle Eastern sources are becoming so widespread that the Middle East Forum has founded The Legal Project to raise funds and recruit some of the nation’s finest attorneys willing to stand up pro-bono for free speech and defend writers against lawsuits and intimidation.
Six weeks after Governor Paterson signed Rachel’s Law, the New York Times published “Out of Step with Allies, U.S Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech” painting U.S. free speech as “out of step” with almost every other country because so-called hate speech is not banned. The Times’ primary example―a trial in British Colombia, where the Canadian Islamic Conference accuses MacLean’s magazine of violating Canadian ‘hate speech’ laws for publishing an excerpt from Mark Steyn’s book America Alone: The End of the World as We Know it.
According to the Times, the Muslims demand, “the magazine should be forbidden from saying similar things, forced to publish a rebuttal and made to compensate Muslims for injuring their ‘dignity, feelings and self-respect.’” Canada’s laws are similar to those in Britain and the many other countries with which the U.S. is “out of step.” As negative comment raged across the Internet, the Times scrubbed its own article, removing “Out of step with allies” from the title.
Also quoted in the Times, Jeremy Waldron, a New York University law professor, wrote in the New York Review of Books May 29: “It is not clear to me that the Europeans are mistaken when they say that a liberal democracy must take affirmative responsibility for protecting the atmosphere of mutual respect against certain forms of vicious attack.”
Silent Treatment
U.S. media outlets are historically strong defenders of press freedoms. But there has been near-total silence about the UK-based legal threats to public discussion of the Rezko affair. While Auchi’s interference may explain part of the media’s lack of interest, the attitude of the New York Times and New York Review of Books goes a long way towards explaining the rest.
If elected President, Obama will be required to swear to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Will Senator Obama now join in co-sponsoring S-2977, the Free Speech Protection Act of 2008, and call upon his fellow Democrats to bring the bill to the floor of the Senate for a vote? If not will Obama explain why the Free Speech Protection Act is not necessary to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution?”
Will reporters covering the campaign ask Obama whether, if elected, he would approve a request for U.S. residency from Auchi?
Are the media now cooperating in their own silencing? The attitude of the New York Times does not bode well.
Andrew Walden is Editor of the Hawaii Free Press in Hilo, Hawaii.
183 Comments | Post a Comment
Uh, is he Iraqi or British? The headline says Iraqi and the first line of the “piece” says British.
You don’t suppose AIM chose to put “Iraqi” in the headline to be inflammatory, do you?
Nah.
Good heavens! Is there anybody who still thinks that Jerome Corsi can be trusted about anything? As the review of his latest collection of lies in the current Time Magazine reports, there are at least 8 significant factual errors - all defamatory - in the first 50 pages. I myself counted 12. But, after all, I must be a Commie agent, right? Or am I an al Qaeda operative? Or - please don’t let it be true - a LIBERAL! I keep getting confused. I don’t even know if dave and I are one and the same person. So, I don’t know if I can be trusted.
Seriously, this latest piece of AIM fantasy seems to have been written by a deranged buffoon.
Uh, is he Iraqi or British?
“Auchi, who was born in Iraq”
Duh.
Too complicated for Obamabots?
Mr Z and too many L’s-
Do you actually think it’s clever to refer to someone as an “obamabot”? Seems pretty stupid to me.
Major Sullivan:
If you’d read more than the first couple of paragraphs, you’d see that references to Corsi’s material is significantly less than material produced by others referenced in the article. The Auchi - Rezko - Obama links have been explored (insufficiently in my opinion) for many many months if not years in both the print and video media.
Obama’s “Chicago Machine” political rise (his first election “win” was due to there being no other candidates for the post because his supporters successfully challenged his opponents’ petitions to have their names on the ballot) would indicate he has powerful backers in that corrupt environment. Auchi and Rezko were both Baathists (Auchi in Iraq and Rezko in Syria) before they moved westward, likely as agent provocateurs for Saddam and the al-Assads.
It is critical that Obama’s potential links to such characters as Auchi, Rezko, Wright, Davis, Dohrn, et. al. be placed in public view for voters to judge his character and agenda.
You’ll also be interested to see that your threatened libel suit on another thread here is frighteningly close to what this Carter-Ruck specializes in. The 1st Amendment guarantees people’s right to speak: it does not guarantee a right to not be offended by such speech.
“Dave and BS, you aren’t obamabots, you are simply retarded”
My, how clever. Kill yourself!
Obviously, the Obamsnots are now trolling on AIM, since so much damaging information is being posted here. Their special ops also assigns trolls to Politico.com to suppress and drown out any and all pertinent questions directed to their messiah’s past. Comrade Osama Barack Hussein Obama is toast, and with him,the traitorous designs of the loony leftists and their terrorist and terrorist-supporting allies. Just watch the Demoncratic clown show in Denver, with Repeat ‘68, and all the other leftist radicals in the streets, to realize the danger that must be confronted and defeated.
dave (in a response to two posters): Do you actually think it’s clever to refer to someone as an “obamabot”?
Only if it’s accurately descriptive, which it is. I doubt that many people have forgotten the obamania that erupted repeatedly during the first half of ‘08…while O merely had to smile brightly and read prepared text from a prompter. Or how his favorite word, when denied the canned speech and prompter, seems to be “uh”, often used sequentially several times in a row, eg, “uh, uh, uh…?”
Sadly, the obamabots seem to have been programmed using Orwell’s “1984.”
You got any evidence to prove the article false… or are you just reflexively spouting the usual nonsense we’ve come to expect from you? Much like an obamabot?
Then again, as we watch the presidency slip from Obama’s grasp, I can feel your pain.
It becomes increasingly obvious that the obamabots have totally lost it when McCain barely lays a glove on The One (Paris Hilton and some other celebrity bimbo shown for a fraction of a second in an effective commercial showing that O is a celebrity, but not presidential material) in hopes of reigning in McCain.
It’s only gonna get worse for obamabots. Keep your oil can handy, tin man.
The bright side: the average American couldn’t read and understand the column above. The bad side: the average American understands only too well how lots of money can corrupt nearly everybody and everything.
Sure hope McCain picks Sen Kay B Hutchinson (R-TX) as his running mate. Personally, I don’t give him that much credit, but hope springs eternal.
Every other pick would add nothing to the ticket or is a total unknown…and I haven’t seen any that I would want to know. Romney? This would be the height of stupidity.
The election has now become McCain’s to lose. So, Obama has a fighting chance as McCain is likely to self-destruct. Then again, he’s unpredictable, so he might not act as irresponsibly as one might expect.
As I read Andrew Walden’s “Iraqi Billionaire Threatens Reporters Investigating Rezko Affair,” I thought of what AIM commenters on this site have been going through the past almost two weeks now. We could call it: “Obamabots Threaten Commenters Investigating the Prophet Obama.”
Thank you, Mr Z, Llewellyn, Tony, John Galt, cowboyup6 and voxoreason. BS and dave need to be put in their place - and frequently - and don’t forget BlackHat too. These Obamabots/Obamasnots have cowed, intimidated and threatened commenters, and anything else they could think to do in the assured hopes that the prophet Obama’s rot will not see the light of day until early November - when of course it would be too late.
McCain may be a sad sad choice, and hopefully after four years we can upgrade to better, but he is far better that the prophet Obama. We have lost ground in our fight for America these past 8 years, so losing ground 4 more years (and probably losing at a faster rate) still seems better to me then surrendering America to the leftist criminals and traitors that are hell bent on destroying our once great Republic.
the hateful incessant babble from the boring al gore, not so swift kerry, comrade obama crowd is much like the smog in LA. you simply ignore it as much as possible since it is the ugly byproduct of a free, capitalistic country.
#13 Jack…I agree, but sadly I don’t think we have four more years. It is a small niggling I have in my mind that becomes an incessant annoyance, that the Dems with the help of ACORN and other organizations that are being funded by Soros, will steal this election. I hope that feeling that I have always called my little professor is incorrect this time. Correction….I pray that it is wrong. On your last post, ignoring is fun, poking a little bit is mo fun.
THESE ARE JUST MY OPINIONS.
Intriguing article. I believe it gives rise to asking more questions.
This seems to be only ONE multi-billionaire’s quest. Are their others who might be pursuing other (economic, military, cultural/social, education, our Constitution) paths towards the decaying or destruction of the United States?
Wouldn’t it be interesting if in one of these cases, (of some ‘plaintiff’ using such English law on slander/libel/damages, whatever, to bring a case against an American author, publishing house, or any other avenue of free speech, to attempt to prevent/destroy written/published works of American authors,) if ONE ‘defendent’ would stand up and take such a case all the way to the Supreme Court for a ruling to find out if ENGLAND’S LAW is applicatble, under OUR CONSTITUTION, created for U.S. CITIZENS?
Would such a ‘plaintiff’ using England’s law
against the ‘defendent,’ under the protection of our Constitutional rights to free speech/free press WIN OR LOSE at the Supreme Court level?
Are there any such heroes left in America, willing to chance losing it all?
Is there such a hope of that happening?
Is there any hope that the Supreme Court would rule in favor of OUR Constitutional rights of
free speech or other applicable rights? Is this no longer a government OF the American PEOPLE, BY the American PEOPLE, FOR the American PEOPLE?
Isn’t that what has made American so great?
Does THAT need ‘change,’ also?
the best way to stop these thugs, is stop tuning in msnbc, cnn, stop buying nytimes, newsweek, stop going to movies that are made by traitors of this country, anyone that is on the bandwagon, of the gore scheme, and obama scheme know full well the hoax, they laugh all the way to the bank, boycott them, boycott oprah, stop watching and listening to cultists, get educated it requires some time and effort but the return is priceless dont cow down to these commys not now not ever!
The best way to get rid of harassment and nuisance lawsuits would be to adopt a “looser pays” rule. You start a lawsuit, cause expense for your opponent in defending himself, cause expense in the judicial system to hear and adjudicate your case and you ultimately fail to prove your case, you pay ALL those expenses in addition to paying your own lawyer’s expenses.
People like Auchi, Carter-Ruck, and Khalid Salim Bin Mahfouz would just go away. Well, maybe a person who has more money than they know how to use productively wouldn’t be deterred from such nuisance lawsuits.
“If a man is equal to his money, it will serve him; if not, it will destroy him.” - Fransisco d’Anconia
Yes, this huge outpouring of Obamabots to register so many to vote, and yes, I suspect all are those that would vote for Obama, scares me. I think they tried to steal the 2000 and 2004 elections, and with all their best efforts to cheat, still were unsuccessful. They whined about Gore getting rooked, but if they withdrew all the sham votes from that election, I suspect Gore would have definitely lost. I believe they will pull out ALL the stops this time, and even go overboard.
Remember Obama is part of the Chicago Democrat machine of the Daleys - and they have been rigging the votes there since the late 1800’s. There are people still voting there that died and were buried before 1900. Boss Tweed’s Tammany Hall was not even close to being as corrupt paying and beating immigrants to vote repeatedly for Democrats!
I have been following the governor’s race in Washington State as it is a repeat of the race four years ago. Gregoire the Democrat, versus Rossi the Republican (Demo lite). Democrats stole the election last time. Rossi won by a few hundred votes, Gregoire appealled, and in King County (Seattle), the Central Seattle precincts (the MOST Democratic of the entire state) were recounted and recounted. Each time, they came up with extra votes for Gregoire until she finally won, and the corrupt Washington State Supreme Court, condoned it (appointed by liberals).
And that is probably the worse part in our Republic, our NOW corrupt courts. There was a time, not all that long ago, whether they were Democrat or Republican leaning or appointed, most judges, both federal and state, were mostly uncorruptable - and we lost that. Ideology took over the reins of these “LAWYERS” and they now could care less about the law, what is right and wrong. It has even hit the US Supreme Court, in judges such as Ginsberg especially. There are certainly judges with different views such as Brewer and Souter, that are a little to left but mostly not completely ideologists, but when you get Clinton appointee Ginsberg in there you get leftist ideology in the mix.
Yes Jack….and that is why Obama is so confident that it is “in the bag” You forgot about the approx 250,000 military votes that Gore somehow got rid of. My memory is sliding on that one, but a few cells hold on the the unpleasantness of it all.
That old,sad,and hollow whine of the left about how Bush was appointed and how the cretin Gore was deprived his due, always try to use Florida as their trump card. Please do not let them forget, and remind them incessantly and without fail, that if the most detectable cause of “global warming” which is Gasbag Gore himself had been able to win his home state of Tennessee, then Florida would not have mattered. The people that know him best did not want him. I also believe that he lost southern states Arkansas and West Virginia. So much for his being abused by the Supreme Court.
Re: #13 - ”...leftist criminals and traitors…”
Anybody remember “rightist criminal” VP Spiro Agnew? (Who, by the way, continually criticized “the nattering nabobs of negativity” - - even though he was one.
How about “rightist traitor” Pres. R. Nixon, who put the country through months of unending political hell for his own hoped-for personal benefit ... and the “traitors” to the country who assisted him?
And, for record-breaking criminality and national treachery, how about the administration of the infamous Pres. Warren G. Harding ... whom, I believe, was very, VERY conservative and an extreme rightist?
For every pile of crap that an ideologue can generate about the opposition ... an equally large, ideologically-based and stinking pile can be generated by the opposition. The constant competition to see who can piss bigger ideological holes in the snow is what has polarized and paralyzed this country over recent years and sent it down the road to inevitable decline!
Much of the time, the stuff on this forum sounds like a reading of the scribblings found on the walls of a padded cell!
The more the leftists claim that well-detailed investigations like this are garbage, the more I encourage others to read and examine this for themselves.
The liberals remind me of the scientologists who maintain that ANY tactics are legitimate in defense of their point of view.
I live in North Carolina where you can walk in and vote with no Id or voter registration card. We are a sanctuary town where illegals from all over American can come and buy drivers licence with out any ID except the good old American Greenback, go to our colleges for free. . Where the head of the NAACP can write an article in the news telling their members who to vote for without losing their non exempt status. So that goes to tell you who has won the primaries and who will be the Next President, you don’t need a brain to live here.
to my request as to whether calling people “obamabots” is supposed to be clever, vox sez:
“Only if it’s accurately descriptive, which it is.”
OK. It’s neither accurately descriptive (I could give a rat’s ass about Obama and his campaign) nor clever. Now where does that leave you?
also vox:
“Then again, as we watch the presidency slip from Obama’s grasp, I can feel your pain.”
Please spare me the tortured and tepid attempts at sarcasm. Again, I have no favorite in the fall race, but I’m VERY concerned regarding McCain’s foreign policy advisory team.
KBH as a veep pick for McCain is interesting. It would certainly be a poke in the Dems’ collective (get it?) eye. She is clearly considered “conservative” enough to get the call.
Jag-
“BS and dave need to be put in their place - and frequently - and don’t forget BlackHat too. These Obamabots/Obamasnots have cowed, intimidated and threatened commenters, and anything else they could think to do in the assured hopes that the prophet Obama’s rot will not see the light of day until early November - when of course it would be too late.”
I’m not a doctor, (I don’t even play one on TV) but I really think you need help. I never threatened you, I only pointed out your idiocy. But I now sense that you are quite disturbed. I apologize for antagonizing a sick man, and I will not disturb you further.
So what gives Dave? You have been antagonistic, rude to the extreme and a mirror image of a Daily Kos Kid. I have been reading your tirades, and not commenting, because frankly, you, B.S, Blackhat and Mark bore the fire out of me…..and whoever else comes on here or is part of the Obama bums rush team and tries to monopolize and intimidate. Jack is not Jag, and whoever else you blast. You have come on to this sight and told everyone off for how and what they believe and then get frustrated and start whining. Go blow Dave or Mark or Brian or whoever you are. Join your gang somewhere else. Go where you belong. Huff Post is a good beginning. Have someone accept you somewhere else. It ain’t happnin here. I will pray for your sorry ass because I am supposed to. Doesn’t make me real happy tho.
John Galt,
For years there have been efforts in a number of states to pass “Loser Pays” laws with regard to lawsuits but the pettifogger lobbies have been too powerful. Another law which exists in some states is one penalizing frivolous lawsuits but it’s rarely enforced. I’d like to see it extended beyond paying the other side. Such a law should state that a lawyer or firm being found guilty of such a transgression three times have their right to practice law suspended or terminated depending on the severity of the cases.
dave notes about my suggestion that Sen Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) be McCain’s vp choice:
>>KBH as a veep pick for McCain is interesting. It would certainly be a poke in the Dems’ collective (get it?) eye. She is clearly considered “conservative” enough to get the call.
Obama picked FOI (Friend of Iran) Joe Biden (who will no doubt be a topic of a future AIM column), which wasn’t too bright.
BTW, some may have deduced that I am female because I suggested a female vp. Nope. I’m male, but don’t have a problem with a female veep. All the male choices are poor, but I don’t put anything past McCain: he’s just dumb/stubborn enough to pick a running mate as bad as Obama’s.
Ah, Julie, Julie, Julie!-
“I have been reading your tirades, and not commenting, because frankly, you, B.S, Blackhat and Mark bore the fire out of me”
translation: you’re not in lock step with the other right wing automotons who post here one-handed. “And yet you claim to read my posts. Fascinating!)
”.....and whoever else comes on here or is part of the Obama bums rush team and tries to monopolize and intimidate.”
To those for whom facts are intimidating I offer no solution. This is your problem, not mine.
“Jack is not Jag, and whoever else you blast.”
Yeah, he is. Jagoff is much more in the vernacular than jackoff. Jag is my simplification.
“You have come on to this sight (sic)and told everyone off for how and what they believe and then get frustrated and start whining.”
I’ve whined? I don’t think so. And I don’t tell people off for what they believe, I take them to task for blind faith and failure to educate themselves. The whole “republican: good, democrat: bad” thing is very sad to see. When I was a teen, during the Viet Nam “police action”, the phrase was “My country, right or wrong.” It was apparently meant without irony, and even as wet behind the ears as I was I KNEW that was wrong. Still is.
“Go blow Dave or Mark or Brian or whoever you are. Join your gang somewhere else. Go where you belong. Huff Post is a good beginning. Have someone accept you somewhere else. It ain’t happnin here.”
heh heh heh. In other words, you won’t/don’t listen to any point(s) of view other than your own. Thanks for the headsup, but I already gleaned that. I’m kinda savvy like that.
“I will pray for your sorry ass because I am supposed to. Doesn’t make me real happy tho.”
Gee thanks. What I need is the prayers of a goose-stepping alleged Christian. (I seriously doubt Jesus ever suggested that you pray for anyone’s “sorry ass”, unless it was the donkey they rode in on.) And are you supposed to pray in order to make you happy?
I take them to task for blind faith and failure to educate themselves.
So typical of lefty crap Dave….and if they don’t march in lockstep with your educational diatribe you call them demeaning names. Blah blah blah blah
You are going to love Marxism Dave if The Obamessiah gets elected. Historically the useful idiots are the first to go. Heh heh heh heh
“You are going to love Marxism Dave if The Obamessiah gets elected. Historically the useful idiots are the first to go. Heh heh heh heh”
You have some serious blind spots.
Not only will the useful idiots at Sullivan’s IP love how marxists PURGE them at the get go, but the National Socialists of Hitler did the same. In fact, history has many examples of the PURGES that the Marxist/Socialist/Communists reward their minions with after they get the power, and they especially purge those that have inflated egos and think they are more than they really are. They purge because these idiots are really a threat to them and their consolidation of power in their hands.
Buh bye - BS, dave, faux ann, BlackHat, and your other manifestations Sullivan lol
And I guess you don’t…..Have blind spots? You Dave are a Socialist. All Dems are Socialist/Marxist now. It has never worked anywhere else and even the socialism we have adopted slowly for almost a century has been what has taken us down the economic tubes. But, you Mr. Blind spot wouldn’t catch onto that if it slapped you in the face. Yes…...there have been other economic mistakes…but going full blown socialism with Marxism mixed in. Say goodbye to your home Dave….you won’t like it.
Thanks for the question on “Mr.” Hansen. I consider that a compliment. My husband would consider it amusing.
Thank you Julie, that was my thought exactly that it is an honor.
I find it typically liberal though that they always accuse others of what they do - AIM has traced many on this site to Sullivan’s IP, and frankly, I guess I was a bit naive in that as I had not even considered such until I was seeing it with my own eyes. Also typically liberal, they will do and say ANYTHING to force feed their rot - the ends justify the means to these perverts. And now, typically liberal, they say we are doing what they do.
Me thinks the sickness and rot comes from the left and the rot is so deep they cannot see as they rot before their own eyes. lol
Thanks for hanging in there Jack. Good to see you. I like this spot. But, as long as aim puts out these articles that shed light on the Obamessiah we will have the Obamaguards manning the blogging tanks. Check out Malkins site. She has written about Obamas minions going after the bloggers. This is an example. I can’t even imagine the blowback I am going to get after mentioning her name. Their insults do not affect me in the least and I am not letting them run me off. They will find another place to go eventually.
Projection…It is actually a personality disorder. I have a relative that is a really sick narcissist. Everything he does and says is projection. Mr. BS is really a Narcissist with his incessant puffing like a peacock. His obsession with venereal diseases really makes me chuckle. Is that his problem? Brian…see a doctor soon. The Dem/socialists lie like dogs then turn around and accuse the Republicans of lying when the facts have already been put out there. The lie covers the facts so often that the truth disappears. But isn’t that part of the program?....Tell a lie long enough and people begin to see it as the truth. Dave keeps talking about facts…....what facts?
“And I guess you don’t…..Have blind spots?”
Sure I do.
“You Dave are a Socialist.”
So wrong you’re not even on the map.
“All Dems are Socialist/Marxist now.”
A preposterous broad-brush stroke that shows your absolute lack of critical thinking skills.
“It has never worked anywhere…”
That is essentially true. See? We agree.
“But, you Mr. Blind spot wouldn’t catch onto that if it slapped you in the face.”
So far, no slap.
“Yes…...there have been other economic mistakes…but going full blown socialism with Marxism mixed in. Say goodbye to your home Dave….you won’t like it.”
Hyperbole and paranoia: perfect together!
Julie O: Their insults do not affect me in the least and I am not letting them run me off. They will find another place to go eventually.
Good for you!
But put yourself in your typical “progressive” (they use this term instead of “socialists” to define themselves; same thing spelled differently) poster’s place: if you had to spend your time reading the spew at liberal sites, wouldn’t you prefer to be here, too?
Conservative sites reprint posts (with lots of #%&* characters to replace words that they won’t print) from liberal sites. If you call any republican a Nazi or Hitler, you make their “A” list. At conservative sites, you’re more likely to find true and useful information.
Note how the worst offenders here ALWAYS have this air of smug superiority? They’re on the “Dean’s” list at liberal blogs.
”... AIM has traced many on this site to Sullivan’s IP ...” -Jack
Jack, look up “Network Address Translation” on wikipedia. Many Internet Service Providers NAT RFC 1918 addresses to a single or small number of routable IP addresses.
jack h-
“AIM has traced many on this site to Sullivan’s IP…”
You’re making this up, correct?
vox-
“But put yourself in your typical “progressive” (they use this term instead of “socialists” to define themselves…”
Interesting “thought”. Making these words synonomous suggests that you feel progressive thinking, which should be considered a GOOD thing, carries a decidedly pejorative connotation. VERY interesting.
Yeah, dave, and liberalism in America was once a good thing also as was progressiveism - but then unfortunately, the far left of the Democrat Party took the handle and totally destroyed all that had been good about these American movements, as their way of being liberal was either socialistic or communistic. Recently, they have so discredited the word liberal and liberalism, that they decided to call themselves by a new handle - so we hear them saying progressives. But sorry, dave, these new “progressives” are just the same old “liberals” which means they are just worthless socialists/communists. So yes, voxoreason has it pegged perfectly
Dave….Progressive in lieu of socialism/communism began in the early 20th century. Yes…making progress should be a good thing…but the term progressive, a noun is a person believing in moderate political change and social improvement by Government action. Such as members of the Progressive Party running in the Presidential campaigns of 1912, 1924, and 1948. The Progressives have become far more radical since 1948 looking more like the Marxist that tutored the Obamessiah. This is because they were a part of the CPUSA that received their marching orders from the Kremlin. So, for those of us that see the damage Marxism has caused and will cause (Maxine Waters wants to Socialise the Oil Companies)the word is to us….perjorative
I was cheering for Maxine “nobody’s more socialistic than me” Waters to be Barack’s VP choice. Wouldn’t that have been fun? lol
Oh Lord help us. I could never watch t.v. again! Could you imagine Hils reaction…LOL over and over
Gee, I guess if you say “all Dems are Socialists/Marxists” and “progressives are really Socialists/Marxists”, it MUST be true, because you keep saying it OVER AND OVER.
You don’t back it up with a scintilla of evidence, mind you, but you make up for that with repetition.
Jack or Vox could you take over this first grade class for me. Don’t let Brian hit Carol with his book or take over the class…Dave needs to study current events to learn what makes up a socialist and socialism again…Vox you did that so well earlier and of course Jack you are a current event specialist. I know this is a burden but I am running late for an appointment. Thanks guys.
JulieO-
“Jack or Vox could you take over this first grade class for me.”
outta the mouths of babes…
“Dave needs to study current events to learn what makes up a socialist and socialism again…”
I’m conversant. You’ve missed the point. again.
and again.
“I know this is a burden but I am running late for an appointment.”
Not, we can safely assume, a MENSA meeting…
Back!
Having fun with you Dave. At least for the most part you are being less abusive and crude. I say all Dems are Socialist, because if they call themselves Democrats and vote Democrat they are socialists. Why? That is what I find so elementary Dave and why I was being a smart ass.
1. High taxation= Redistribution of wealth..Even the dimmest economist knows that low taxes builds the economy. The only reason for high taxation is to equalize the populace. To lessen their influence/threat on the powerful Government.
2. Nationalization of Companies…Maxine’s Dream
3. Regulation and taxation of private enterprise
4. Obamas dream of a National Civil Police force. As Vox said, “The Brownshirts”
5. Socialized Medicine…We can experience the same Horrors as the Canadians, Brits, French, Cubans etc. I’m excited aren’t you? So much for all the World Renowned Medical Centers and Universities.
6. First Amendment gone by the way of The Unfairness Doctrine.
7. Gun ownership be gone
Why don’t you see or grasp what we are talking about Dave? These are things we don’t want to lose. This is not the change we want to have. We live in the greatest Country in the World. Yes, she has had her faults, her growing pains. So did England, so did France…so has every Country on earth. Our mistakes are minor in comparison. But the I hate America crowd just crows louder. The Democrat Party is now the Socialist Party Dave. They have almost started admitting it. Maxine came out and said it. Why can’t you?
“Having fun with you Dave.”
That makes it all worth while for me.
“At least for the most part you are being less abusive and crude.”
Again, I give what I get. If you look at any of the threads I’ve been on, you’ll see that I ask a question THEN get called commie/libby/socialist/obamabot etc. I riposte. That’s how I am.
“I say all Dems are Socialist, because if they call themselves Democrats and vote Democrat they are socialists.”
Are you a tautology professor?
“1. High taxation= Redistribution of wealth..Even the dimmest economist knows that low taxes builds the economy. The only reason for high taxation is to equalize the populace. To lessen their influence/threat on the powerful Government.”
that’s one take. there are many. It ain’t socialism.
“2. Nationalization of Companies…Maxine’s Dream”
I don’t think it’s a plank in the Dem platform.
“3. Regulation and taxation of private enterprise”
You want all private enterprise to be free of regulation? That could be ugly. And while my reaction to the WAY the government spends our tax money is likely VERY similar to yours, I’m OK with companies paying for the privilege of making piles of money.
“4. Obamas dream of a National Civil Police force. As Vox said, “The Brownshirts” ”
I dunno. Something like “Homeland Security?” Is that bad?
“5. Socialized Medicine…We can experience the same Horrors as the Canadians, Brits, French, Cubans etc. I’m excited aren’t you? So much for all the World Renowned Medical Centers and Universities.”
Our health care system is as sick as a plane to Lourdes. I don’t know if socialization will fix it, but I also don’t know if it could make it worse.
“6. First Amendment gone by the way of The Unfairness Doctrine.”
I need to know more about this one. It certainly won’t result in “first amendment GONE”, for crying out loud.
“7. Gun ownership be gone ”
I don’t see that happening, either; it’s an overreaction. But while you’re mentioning the second amendment, it says “arms”, not guns. Are you okay with just plain folks keeping rocket launchers and grenades? (I’m not saying I’m not, just asking)
“Why don’t you see or grasp what we are talking about Dave? These are things we don’t want to lose. This is not the change we want to have.”
Again this smacks of severe over-reaction, seriously out of proportion.
“We live in the greatest Country in the World.”
Agreed. Not perfect, but light years ahead of whoever can claim second place.
“The Democrat Party is now the Socialist Party Dave. They have almost started admitting it. Maxine came out and said it. Why can’t you?”
I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but she doesn’t speak for me.
A Suggestion
Since Obama’s February primary victories, a fear has risen in the African-American community. More recently, similar concerns have drawn the attention of the FBI and Secret Service. In both cases, worries center on the possible assassination of Obama.
A growing amount of racist hate mail and blogs has already suggested good cause for such apprehension. But now, the arrests of Shawn Adolf, Tharin Gartrell and Nathan Johnson, as well as the unrelated conviction and sentencing of David Tuason, have pushed such issues into general public awareness. I do NOT accuse AIM and many of the bloggers reacting to its anti-Obama tirades of any legal wrong doing. I DO suggest a measure of self-restraint.
Recent comments by Nana, Hansen, cowboyup6, Oscar Y. Harward, Julie O, JayMar, Jhn Blake andTim contain the following references to Obama: “arrogant ass,” “American traitor,” “Osambama,” “a true closet muslim and marxist,” “dirtier than a pig in a mud puddle,” “Osama Obama,” “Barry’s Marxist promises,” “Barry Obama,” “Sheik Obama,” “anti-American,” “treasonous snake,” “creep” and ”[not] a good American.” Other AIM bloggers have avoided such moronic insults but still have accused Obama of evil intentions and wicked associations.
All such comments enjoy First Amendment protection. None constitute actionable threats nor place any of the above-named in any legal jeopardy. However, they contribute to a miasma of paranoia and hatred. Thus, they raise questions of moral responsibility.
Remember the atmosphere of nonsensical conspiracy theories, vicious remarks, unfounded fears, accusations of treason etc. that surrounded people like Timothy McVeigh and many in the so-called Militia Movement some dozen or so years ago. McVeigh and Nichols alone (it seems) acted on such groundless imbecility. But the horrible murders they committed were at least partially motivated by that kind of “thinking.”
Those of you that do so have every right to express anti-Obama sentiments. You have the right to believe and give vent to almost any statement in his regard, however meritless. BUT I STRONGLY SUGGEST AWARENESS OF POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS. It is in nobody’s interest to foment assassination fantasies in the minds of the unstable. It would be even more dangerous to inspire - however unintended - the tiny number of individuals prepared to act on such expressions of deranged hostility and unfounded fears. ANY OF YOU ARE FREE UNDER OUR LAWS TO EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS. But please, for your sake and the good of our nation, consider the possible consequences.
There are some sensible ideological reasons to oppose Obama’s election. There are, in my opinion, many more to support him for president. In either case, however, reason and logic should prevail. Too much of what has and is appearing on AIM goes beyond logic, facts and common sense, and into the realm of bizarre paranoid fantasies. If any harm - even if only distantly related to such comments - should befall Obama, his wife and their two young daughters, that would raise the question of moral responsibility, however beyond legal implications. The murder of outstanding African-Americans has hardly been unknown in American history. While our society is much less racist than before, pools of the old poison continue to fester here and there. Who knows what might arise from such attitudes after the nomination of the first African-American for president by a major party.I don’t think any of us want to witness a contemporary imitator of James Earl Ray. I certainly hope not.
SO, FOR LOVE OF ALL THINGS HOLY AND DECENT, CONSIDER THAT WORDS HAVE CONSEQUENCES - WHATEVER THEIR ENUNCIATORS INTENDED.
BRIAN: “that everyone will be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” -Martin Luther King Jr
I may not have the exact words above as I am quoting it from memory but its really close. You start by bringing up three people that Colorado authorities have already stated very firmly had NOTHING to do with Obama - that was media hype because they were on the edge of the Denver Metro area. But I will agree, anyone in the public scrutiny as is Obama will certainly attract crack pots wishing him harm and is the reason the FBI and Secret Service watch them so closely. And McCain is getting the same.
After listening to the pure hate coming from the left about W for over 8 years, and you start by once again doing the Obama thing and dropping the race card, when not ONE racist thing has been said about him that I can remember on this site.
Then you warn us repeatedly about words that are common words used to describe someone Conservatives on this site DO NOT LIKE as if they are wrong words.
They are not wrong words to use, they are reasonable words to use about a man that we do actually see as a traitor to what America has been and he and his minions have actively been trying to “change” that and as we see he is trying to run this Republic down a path to ruin.
Yes, you are correct, it IS free speech, and in our opinions he is that man we use the adjectives to describe. I have heard worse elsewhere, and I have certainly heard worse when it comes to Bush, and I don’t even like Bush, and I don’t like McCain - but worse has come from the left than usually comes from the right.
The adjectives you use are mostly mild and YOU KNOW THAT. You suggest that you are trying to shame use into using other words flattering to Obama? Won’t happen - he is an empty suit, a con man, a sham, a cad, a snake oil salesman - he is the worst thing that could happen to America. I have little good to say about the Clinton’s but he is worse than if Hillary were the nominee. And by rights she should have been the one winning. Your corrupt party manipulated your own process to get him in.
Hillary could have beaten McCain, Obama will not win, and we will do whatever it takes to make sure he does not, and if calling him a muslim lover, which he is, such as Osamaobama is what it takes over and over again, so be it.
This is a man who covers up his relationship with people that should still be in prison for terrorism and for treason - yet they have walked free because they are leftist darlings. This is a man that went to a racist church for over 20 years - the words on public TV coming out of the mouth of Wright ARE hate words, and every single example you used above are VERY mild in comparison to what we say on this site.
Oh, and yes, he IS an arrogant ass, the way he struts says that.
And the ONLY racism I have seen in this campaign has come from the mouth of Obama repeatedly as he drops the race card to shut up those he opposes, and the only racist words were from his despicable church and pastor, and that Catholic priest who should have been ex-communicated, and he is there at that church at their invitation, and leads a congregation that is obviously just as racist as is Obama’s church. The Archbishop of Chicago should have shown this stain on the church to the cathedral door and booted him out.
I just looked at the list of words that in your PC mind you see as offensive. I see nothing on that list that go to far, though the one about the pig in the puddle comes close in my mind, but I never remember seeing that comment, though I will not challenge it, as if you say you saw it here, then it probably was. But that is the only word I would question.
He is a marxist, and sheik Obama is mild compared to what Americans think of the Muslims that hate us, and it doesn’t help him when he has the clearly Muslim middle name of Hussein. And as for Barry Obama - excuse me Brian, but that is his nickname given to him by himself.
In fact, your diatribe will probably only incite commenters to use the MILD language even more, I predict, as Conservatives HATE to be told what are the PC approved words, and what is not PC. Conservatives will use the NON PC words everytime. Authoritarion states tell their people what is accepted speech and what is not, and those telling us that are the worse offenders and actually DO use offensive language - and they are called liberals.
You want us to show tolerance, and as every single Conservative knows, the MOST intolerant people in America ARE the liberals. And you should know that Brian, as the most intolerant people on this site are YOU, DAVE, and BLACKHAT. You know every single word in the Thesaurus to describe Conservatives as ignorant for what they believe. It is your intolerance of us, and your offensive words telling us smugly how ignorant we are, that started problems on this site. It is your cowing, your intimidation, and your veiled and some unveiled threats that is intolerable.
So don’t preach to us about tolerance, we know what we think of Obama, and WE WILL SAY IT, and say it often, and you can continue to tell us how ignorant we are, and we will see you as the truly ignorant one here. Don’t even think you should cast the first stone after what you have said about people on this site.
Dear Master Hansen,
To go through what you have written and point out every piece of nonsense, irrational thinking, falsehood, and self-contradictory attempts at argument would take far more time than I care to devote to the exercise. But I will point out a few of your mindless statements.
1) Having convinced yourself that lies told about Obama are true, you defend the repeating of them. But if they were true, surely what is obvious to you would alos long ago have come to the attention of the CIA, FBI and other such agencies. Do you think that if any such nonsense had been established as true, it would not have been made public? Consider how the Bush administration has used other information that should have remained classified? But perhaps YOU should report such matters to the FBI. I urge you to do so. After all, if you think Obam is a threat to all you revere, isn’t it your duty to bring that to the attention of the authorities? I would suggest yu contact the agent you already have in my regard.
2) I am a loss to understand the argument that if others say or do bad things, that somehow gives you license to do the same.
3)My “corrupt party.” What makes you think I am a Democrat? That is quite extraordinary. Did it ever occur to you that I reject your nonsensical ideas about liberals because they are not true. I have done so in every other such regard. I was especialy astounded when you called me a Nazi. I replied with a general definition of what the word meant. Did that mean I was defending Nazis? Do you think that I and that noblest of men, Fred Miles, agree about anything?
4) Are you a Catholic? If you are, your sure exhibit amazing ignorance of the powers of an archbishop. If not, do you think it appropriate to state what the head of the archdiosces of Chicago should or should not do?
5) My middle name is Robert. I bear it because one of my aunts was a nun called Sister Mary Robertine. In turn, she took the name in honor of Roberto Belarmino, the Jesuit Cardinal appointed to that honor by Clement VIII. Bellarmino played a major role - if not the major role - in the sentence that the Roman Inquisition imposed on Galileo. Does that mean I believe that the sun rotates around the earth? Just as I don’t recall taking that name for myself (I was about a week old at the time) I doubt that Obama chose to adopt the name “Hussein.”
6) Do you know what giving the name “Hussein” implies and what that suggests about his ATHEIST father? Your “logic” could be applied like this: Stalin’s father gave his son the name Josef. Josef is both a Jewish name and a Christian name. Josef Stalin was educated in an Orthodox seminary. Therefore, Stalin was either a Christian or a Jew pretnnding to be one.
7) As so often in the past, you either can’t understand or can’t remember what I wrote. I didn’t call for tolerance. I suggested common sense. I didn’t use “Politically Correct” arguments. I did point out the possible consequences of stating stupidities.
8)I remain astounded that you think I am a liberal. I’m a conservative in most of my political opinions. But I don’t think that liberals who disagree with me are evil or part of some vast conspiracy.
9) I have “cast the first stone”? How? Have I described McCain in the terms you and others have described Obama? Has anything I have written be even vaguely considered an incitement to unstable minds to carry out an assassination? What I have done is to point out ignorance, stupidity, irrationality, and the replacement of logic by emotion. I urge you and others to do the same.
Jack-
“Oh, and yes, he IS an arrogant ass, the way he struts says that.”
Wow! Someone’s threatened by a handsome, confident black man! (hint: it’s YOU!)
“He is a marxist,...”
your understanding of Marxism is poverty stricken…
“and sheik Obama is mild compared to what Americans think of the Muslims that hate us…”
WTF does that have to do with Obama?
“In fact, your diatribe will probably only incite commenters to use the MILD language even more, I predict, as Conservatives HATE to be told what are the PC approved words…”
Amazing. Is that the nyah nyah doctrine?
Great response Jack….when I read Brians threatning diatribe on how WE should pick and choose our words carefully and not insult the Obamessiah I got a cold chill.
Anyone that threatens to harm one hair on any politicians head needs to be punished. Words that have been used on this site have not one time even come close to that. It is Brian and his arrogant intolerance that gives me the chill. His warnings are a threat. He has some serious control issues that go along perfectly with his Narcissim. I was raised in a very Catholic town. I had many Catholic friends that attended all Catholic Private schools. Don’t know one that came out without some form of neurosis. The Nuns cracking the knuckles with rulers back in those days really did some damage. Just one of the forms of punishment. I remember the stories well.
I was just accused of fomenting hatred against the chosen one, most likely by an Obama troll, since my description of him as a closet muslim and marxist is spot on. No, I will not refrain from speaking the truth. Where is the protest against the leftist loons and their completely over-the-top obscene and violent slanders against any and all for McCain, or even just non-Obambots. No, this unsigned post is bogus, unless and until they also protest against the extremist left like Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Moveon,Org., CPUSA, and their useful idiots. This is not a party about nice, but rather one for the literal soul of this country. Comrade Osama Barack Hussein Obama and his supporters, at least most of them, are the biggest danger threatening our Republic. The unbalanced kooks seem to be predominately on the left, so aim your sermons there friend.
Dear Ms. O,
As a special favor to me, please quote (accurately) what words of mine constitute threats. But also, as another favor, read my previous blog s-l-o-w-l-y and try to understand my point.
Do I need to point out that your anti-Catholicism is shameful? May the Founder of the Catholic Church forgive you.
By the way, do you also share the religious opinions of that great champion of decency, the Honorable Fred Miles?
JulieO-
“Great response Jack….when I read Brians threatning diatribe on how WE should pick and choose our words carefully and not insult the Obamessiah I got a cold chill.”
Like when you were little and your mom told you to “play nice”? Was that your cue to do the opposite, as Jack suggests?
Oh, and there’s a vast difference between a reasoned admonition and a “threatening diatribe”.
Brian’s was an example of the former.
Julie O: There was nothing in your post that was anti-Catholic, except in Sullivan’s pathetic mind. And in fact, in his case, the nuns just may have made him the sick worm that he is. I have heard worse stories from being raised in a strict Catholic upbringing.
Now, I will state that I was raised as a Catholic, consider myself a Catholic ala a Roman Catholic, and not an adherer of the American Catholic way of being a Catholic. Coming from a small town, we did not have a Catholic school, though we did see nuns in the summer at Catholic school for three weeks. In fact, the first year I went, I screamed “a witch” when seeing a nun in her full habit and ran home. lol The nun nearly laughed herself to death.
And yes, Brian, even though you like to think yourself the resident authority on all things Catholic, most of what you spout are plain lies. The Archbishop of Chicago does have the right to end the sick Catholic Priest’s pastorship at his parish, he has just chosen not to do so, as is typical of the American Catholic church. I went to the Archdiocese’s website when I first heard that despicable priest’s racist rants at Wright’s church. The Archbishop stated he had investigated it and put the Priest on short leash and one more transgression and he would be kaput. And obviously the Archbishop lied, because the priest has made further transgressions and he is still there - but I expect that from the American Catholic Church that seems to think they do not have to adher to Rome. Pope Benedict would have shown the priest to his cathedral door and kicked him squarely through it. Racism is racism, and that priest is a racist.
I know there wasn’t Jack. I have no reason to be anti-Catholic. I am probably more anti-Presbyterian now since that is how I was raised. If it had not been for the Catholic Church, I could have been an entirely different person. I was Raised by two parents that did not want another child, so at times I just needed someone to listen. I would walk down two short blocks to St. Patrick Cathedral when I needed to talk or have some feeling of God which was not in my home except on Sunday morning. The Priests were always there for me when I needed them, even though I was not Catholic. Never in my life even now as a born again Christian have I ever had negative feelings toward Catholism. The events were very true with my friends, some who still bear the effects. Brian is such an opportunistic blowhard. Just like those lunatics that accuse one of being racist because they say something negative about Obama. Piss on you Brian for your unfounded stupid allegations based on precious little information. And you think you are so damned smart.Pffftt
“Never in my life even now as a born again Christian have I ever had negative feelings toward Catholism”
other than observing that every one you knew who went to Catholic school emerged with ‘some sort of neurosis’...
“Piss on you Brian for your unfounded stupid allegations based on precious little information. And you think you are so damned smart.”
Not very Christian, methinks. And “precious little information”??? Your blinders are on too tight!
“Pffftt”
well put!
Dear Ms. O,
So the following words of your do not refelct anti-Catholic animus? ” I was raised in a very Catholic town. I had many Catholic friends that attended all Catholic Private schools. Don’t know one that came out without some form of neurosis. The Nuns cracking the knuckles with rulers back in those days really did some damage. Just one of the forms of punishment. I remember the stories well.” They sure strike me that way.
Are you put here on this earth to aggravate people Dave? Is it your job to take apart a sentence paragraph by paragraph so you can prove something is wrong with what they are saying? You have a real big emotional problem Dave. You weren’t even a part of this conversation you terminal jerk…or are you really a part of Brians split personality and don’t have one of your own. My interaction with you is done Bozo
Dear Master Hansen,
Whehter or not you would like it to be so, there really is only One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Furthermore, the contradictory remarks you made about the situation inside the Archdiocese of Chicago and Benedict XVI’s impotence to do anything about it is either hilarious or
August 24 at 3:06 am | #1 | Link
Enjoy