The libertarian/conservative website NewsMax dropped a bombshell this morning. Their special investigative reporter was actually in church with Obama during one of Pastor Jeremiah White's controversial sermons. According to NewsMax:In fact, Obama was present in the South Side Chicago church on July 22 last year when Jim Davis, a freelance correspondent for Newsmax, attended services along with Obama.
In his sermon that day, Wright tore into America, referring to the “United States of White America” and lacing his sermon with expletives as Obama listened. Hearing Wright’s attacks on his own country, Obama had the opportunity to walk out, but Davis said the senator sat in his pew and nodded in agreement.
Addressing the Iraq war, Wright thundered, “Young African-American men” were “dying for nothing.” The “illegal war,” he shouted, was “based on Bush’s lies” and is being “fought for oil money.”
Ironically, the headline article goes on to point out that Obama's close friend and supporter Oprah Winfrey had been a member of the church for many years, but more recently decided on her own to resign her membership over Pastor Jeremiah's controversial remarks. NewsMax again:
Obama’s most famous celebrity backer, Oprah Winfrey began attending Wright’s church in 1984. Last year, Newsmax magazine reported that Winfrey abruptly stopped attending years ago, and suggested that she did so to distance herself from Wright’s inflammatory rhetoric. She soon found herself a target of Wright, who excoriated her for having broken with “traditional faith.”
Posts
22 comments:
More about Wright's "church":
http://www.youtube.com/user/TRINITYCHGO
They seem to favorite/support Kwanzaa - African-American holiday
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwanzaa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68aNhCdcW10
Hope the youtube link on the church reveal more about them. Some reaction:
http://barelyablog.com/?p=520
In the infamous "sermon" by Wright (he looks like a "mixture", just like Obama), he clearly identifies Jesus
as black. Wonder whether he is related to the groups in NY etc. that describe themselves as "black Israelites"?
Obama's mother was an atheist, studied at Columbia, and especially in those days of student revolution, one wonders whether she has been or connected with marxist-communist groups?, in any case strong left wing. Obama is smart to play a certain role and portray a certain picture, and very cautious so as to not portray his possible true colors at this stage...
Breaking news:
Watch Obama in this interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwLDq1SnkGw
He says most of the congregration would probably be objecting to the inflammatory statements by pastor Wright. Well, everyone could clearly see they were jumping and clapping when Wright made the statements, only one seemed to object, but were silenced then by Wright. Obama must have seen this video before the interview.
This proves he is a clear spinner, no different or new Washington politics, he is simply lying publicly.
What I find interesting is what people are objecting the most about in those videos are Rev. Wright's "it's our fault" rhetoric about 9/11. I guess that sort of masochistic thinking is not as popular as some have suggested.
yeah he's a less articulate ron paul, many of the same conspiracy theories with some in slightly different form.
looks like Youtube is removing some obama/wright videos...not shocking though.
Well, yes Wright blamed America (the whole country ex
African-AMericans) and mentioned the WW2 bombings (nothing to do with 9/11), while Paul and others are saying the neocon dominated foreign military basis and action and unilateral support in the Middle East has played a significant role in inciting hatred and subsequent action. there is a HUGE difference between these two reasons for 9/11.
The reason for 9/11 that the US were attacked because it is rich and free is really very laughable: if so, it is NOT since 2001 that the US is free and rich, the last time I checked, no the US has been rich and free since decades....in which case the US should have been attacked long time ago.
Another issue: As capitalists, do you not OBJECT to the absolute government interference and moral hazard of interfering in the public market for Bear Stearns, with the shareholders in the company making almost a total loss, but tax payers money wasted in any case?
stefan,
They want to restore the medival calphite.
Hinduism is considered by Bin Ladenists to be a worse heresy even than Christianity or Judaism or Shiism, In Bali and Kashmir, al-Qaeda is foisting terrorism on these people.
In parts of Thailand, Bin Laden's people are waging war to create a sepratist Islamists provience.
Bin Laden has called for Indonesia to retake the Christian islands of East Timor.
What sort of western imperialism have the Thai and Indian Buddhists and the East Timor Christian done to deserve attention from Bin Laden??
They same thing we are guilty of, we are not 7th century Islamists
Andrew: ask yourself who has funded and provided arms to Al Qaeda over a decade ago already? Answer: CIA and the US with an interventionist foreign policy.
(Jeanne Kirkpatrick for instance represented some of the neocon. movement, she worked with PNAC later).
Note also that we NEVER said there were no problems with extremists through the centuries. There are militant extremists everywhere. Stepping into the snake pit ENHANCES extremists and one should not expect them to not bite if you step into the snake pit.
If you follow an interventionist foreign policy, as you supports, you have to be absolute accurate with ALL your statements about other countries, e.g. not make loose unsubstantiated statements AND also know the whole history and motives. You cannot use "cowboy politics"!! I can already say you are WRONG about a previous comment in South Africa.
If Al Qaeda is all about a religious war, why have they not attacked symbols of Christianity like the Vatican and christian churches in the US??? Fact is it is political in the first case.
With regard to SE Asia it is true that Jemaah Islamiyah has some relationship to extremist terrorist groups and theya re active in Malysia, Indonesia. With regard to the three southern Thai provinces, the Muslims want to restore the sultanate that existed decades and centuries ago.
DO you really buy all that Robert Spencer and jihadwatch.com is telling you?
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/001807.php
The Thai government rejected these assertations:
"Thailand rejected claims violence in its Muslim-dominated south was linked to international terror groups, while the defence minister confirmed two arrests had been made. Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai said no evidence supported the theory that culprits behind the deadly attacks were linked to regional terror group Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), as claimed by a top security official".
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/thailand2.htm
There are still violent incidents constantly in the three southern provinces. Al Qaeda has been associated with big explosions, not small incidents.
And if Al Qada were in Thailand and they attack countries because they are rich and free, then they should attack Bankok, Chiangmai etc. but there are NO reports on this. By the way, there is MORE freedom in Thailand than in the US with its Patriot Act etc.
Also: in both India and China about 18% of the population are Muslim, but there are no violence and attempts reported.
Stefan, You still didn't answer the question, what are those Hindu, Buddhists and Asian Christians done to deserve Bin Laden's attention? What sort of "blowback" are they paying for? What Western imperalistic crimes are the 'chickens coming home to roast' for them......Not familiar with Jhiad Watch, if that is Daniel Pipes' outfit, no thanks. Pipes is to the right of General Sharon on the Israel question, he smears his opponents, fabricats lies about Palesitians like the late Edward Said and I think he has called for a return of interment camps for radical Muslims in this country(like the Japanese ones in California in WW2). Don't care for him at all.
Andrew, I have PROVEN to you with the links that Osama Bin Laden has NOTHING to do with the three southern Thai provinces desire to return to their sultanate, in any case a group among the Thai Muslims. This is a regional skirmish, just like in Tibet in China now: Tibetian Buddhists want autonomy and some independence. You have to tool at each case individually, and not trust anyone automatically that says Al Qaeda is involved. In some cases (Indonesia perhaps) it could be that AL Qaeda is assisting local Muslim groups in their political aspirations.
Forgot: check out and tell me what you think.
http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200602241451.asp
stefan, Islamists acolytes can be just as militant as Bin laden himself. They may no be "offically" Bin Ladenists but they share his worldview.........As far as Buckley is concerned, yes, he was against Bush and the war, which is why it is so hilarious to see libertarians after Buckley's death call him a "neocon"
Just as funny is that you try to connect Bin Laden to Muslims in the South of Thailand. Any Thai will laugh at such a comment, which is unsubstantiated.
Frankly, we also find comments and titles linking all anti-war proponents as being "left", "extreme left", "isolationist" etc. as extremely hilarious.
The denoucing of socialism in the Democratic Party is also so funny given the socialism of McCain and the current Keynesian Fed, bailing out the system using taxpayers's money, while the stock market still dropped dramatically and the shareholders of Bear Stearns only left with 2 USD per share, which constitute almost a total loss.
I would still like to know what sort of "blowback" people in Nigeria, Sao Tome, Principe, Thailand, India and so forth are paying for? Whether or not Bin Laden I'd behind it, Islamists are waging jihadists actions against regions in these areas. They have not been part of western crimes(in fact most of these areas suffered from brutal western colonialism) nor have they had soliders in Saudi Arabia or given $$$$ to Israel. Why are they targets of Islamists?.......As to domestic politics, I have no shame in admitting I am more of an Adam Michnik and Christopher Hitchens libertarian then Austrian economics uber alles
10746 Jihad attacks since 9/11...since this has been going on for 1300 years the total number isn't knowable less the major attacks.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and England and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Turkey and Kabardino-Balkaria and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Argentina and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Germany and Australia and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives and...
...and pretty much wherever Muslims believe their religion tells them to:
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, ... nor follow
the religion of truth... until they pay the tax in acknowledg-ment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."
Qur'an, Sura 9:29
no different in ideology than the Islamist that Thomas Jefferson went to war with in the early 1800's....
jonathan: nobody claimed there were and are no extremists elements within Islam. Mind you, the Koran is being interpreted allegorically, and therefore it is understood differently. DO you believe every website uncritically?
I have already argued that there is NO Al Qaeda in Thailand, as that website tries to imply. That is simply total BS!!!
So your answer is then to attack ALL the countries where Jihadists are, it is a war..kill innocent people int he process, because otherwise "they will follow you home", so you have to be 50-100 years or more there. This is in effect what is implied. Can you see how ridiculous it is?
Interesting how you and Andrew simply IGNORE Buckley's description of the war in Iraq as a big failure and that the troops should return home.
Well, when they are out of Iraq, Al Qaeda do not have any American troops to attack in Iraq, correct?
Support for them, which comes mostly from outside Iraq (Egyptians, Saudia Arabia etc.) would then dry up and they will have no reason to be in Iraq anymore.
Stefan, did not ignore your Buckley op-ed. I said he was not a neocon so it is so funny to see numbnut libertarians calling him that when he passed away. Buckley was wrong on this......As for the rest, I am all for a democratic Saudi Arabia and Egypt, it is so sad to see so called libertarians so silent on that issue and on supporting democratic movements and feminist groups in both countries. Egypt has a growing democratic movement and a growing feminist movement in Saudi Arabia. One of the foulest regimes in the world is Saudi Arabia and they spread their Wahhabi extremism in places like Gaza and the West Bank. One can hope the next US Administration tells the Saudis that not one cent of their money can come to the USA for propaganda. No Salafist inmans in our military. Whahhabi Korans in our prisons. UNLESS, they allow Christians, Jews and secularist to do the same in their country
Libertarian Republican? Isn't that an oxymoron?
Any way, right wing hypocrisy on this issue is absolutely astounding. Right wing Christians are regularly courted by the Republicans and yet regularly make ridiculous and inflammatory statements every bit controversial as Wright's. Let me post this comment from one of the founders of right wing evangelicalism.
****************************************
Frank Schaeffer says:
"When Senator Obama's preacher thundered about racism and injustice Obama suffered smear-by-association. But when my late father -- Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer -- denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.
Every Sunday thousands of right wing white preachers (following in my father's footsteps) rail against America's sins from tens of thousands of pulpits. They tell us that America is complicit in the "murder of the unborn," has become "Sodom" by coddling gays, and that our public schools are sinful places full of evolutionists and sex educators hell-bent on corrupting children. They say, as my dad often did, that we are, "under the judgment of God." They call America evil and warn of immanent destruction. By comparison Obama's minister's shouted "controversial" comments were mild. All he said was that God should damn America for our racism and violence and that no one had ever used the N-word about Hillary Clinton.
Dad and I were amongst the founders of the Religious right. In the 1970s and 1980s, while Dad and I crisscrossed America denouncing our nation's sins instead of getting in trouble we became darlings of the Republican Party. (This was while I was my father's sidekick before I dropped out of the evangelical movement altogether.) We were rewarded for our "stand" by people such as Congressman Jack Kemp, the Fords, Reagan and the Bush family. The top Republican leadership depended on preachers and agitators like us to energize their rank and file. No one called us un-American."
****************************************
The whole foundation of the religious right whom every republican from "W" Bush to Romney to Huckabee regularly jumps into bed with is based on an "Anti-Americanism" every bit as flagrant as Wrights!
****************************************
Frank Schaeffer says:
"Was any conservative political leader associated with Dad running for cover? Far from it. Dad was a frequent guest of the Kemps, had lunch with the Fords, stayed in the White House as their guest, he met with Reagan, helped Dr. C. Everett Koop become Surgeon General. (I went on the 700 Club several times to generate support for Koop).
Dad became a hero to the evangelical community and a leading political instigator. When Dad died in 1984 everyone from Reagan to Kemp to Billy Graham lamented his passing publicly as the loss of a great American. Not one Republican leader was ever asked to denounce my dad or distanced himself from Dad's statements.
Take Dad's words and put them in the mouth of Obama's preacher (or in the mouth of any black American preacher) and people would be accusing that preacher of treason. Yet when we of the white Religious Right denounced America white conservative Americans and top political leaders, called our words "godly" and "prophetic" and a "call to repentance."
We Republican agitators of the mid 1970s to the late 1980s were genuinely anti-American in the same spirit that later Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson (both followers of my father) were anti-American when they said God had removed his blessing from America on 9/11, because America accepted gays. Falwell and Robertson recanted but we never did.
My dad's books denouncing America and comparing the USA to Hitler are still best sellers in the "respectable" evangelical community and he's still hailed as a prophet by many Republican leaders. When Mike Huckabee was recently asked by Katie Couric to name one book he'd take with him to a desert island, besides the Bible, he named Dad's Whatever Happened to the Human Race? a book where Dad also compared America to Hitler's Germany.
The hypocrisy of the right denouncing Obama, because of his minister's words, is staggering."
****************************************
How republicans can get away with such blatant two-faced nonsense is film at eleven to me!
And for the record, I'm a Black Libertarian who despises all politicians, whether of Demican or Republocrat persuasion.
Ron Paul is the only exception.
Couple of things. Schaeffer was a Christian Reconstructionist to the best of my limited knowledge, so unlike Rev Wright, I doubt he would play footises with Libya or the Nation of Islam. The Hitler comparison I sure was about abortion(why the Religious Right like to use Hitler here I am not quite sure since Nazi Germany outlawed all abortion for German citizens) but don't think Schaeffer was actually saying the USA was the same as Nazi Germany as a whole. As to Robertson and Falwell, yes they did say similar things after 9/11 and they also backtracked from those statements once it went public, Wright has yet to do so. The real story about Pat Robertson that nobody seems to cover is how in the 1990s his hands were way deep in blood from African conflict diamonds. He had a business realtionship with Charles Taylor of Liberia who is currently on trail at the Hague for war crimes. Taylor even was invited to Robertson's organization at the height of his dictatorial rule during Liberia's civil war.
So Andrew, do you also agree with Buckley that the US should pull out of Iraq?
Also significant to note that during Saddam's reign in Iraq, as a sunni he had interest and there were promotion of women's right: they had models and Iraqi women displaying beautiful clothes. In the current Iraq it is outlawed. The buildings they used before has been destroyed by US bombs and now that they have built up one again, the women are even threatened with murder.
What a wonderful new safe democracy and Iraqi freedom the US & UK has created! Once again, the US govt. has - with their interventionist policies - managed to make a bad situation under Saddam much worse than before.
Iran is next, as McCain mentioned today. Funny that he first said that Iran was connected with Al Qaeda, untill Lieberman had to correct him. And the GOP think such a man is a viable candidate?
Also: McCain said his beech boys song before veterans about "Bomb Iran" was merely a joke. What would happen if the Iranese revolutionary guard had such a similar joke about bombing the USA? The Bush-Cheney-McCain type administration would have nuked them almost immediately.
Yes Buckley was wrong.
Frankly, the very idea that Saddam regime " he had interest and there were promotion of women's right" is crazy.
That is why he promoted honor killings and around 1993, basically forbide women to have jobs out side the home.
Likewise, yes he was a sunni but he promoted as most dictators a divide and rule policy. State newspapers in Sunni areas, editorialized about the "flithy" Shite's and in Shite regions, the Sunni's were cast as villians.
McCain is wrong if he wants to use military action against Iran. The best way to overthrow Iran is to undermind it from within, the young, the women, the trade unionists all hate the mullah's.
Andrew: Surprising good news, we have found a common point of agreement. (How should be celebrate it?):
"McCain is wrong if he wants to use military action against Iran. The best way to overthrow Iran is to undermind it from within, the young, the women, the trade unionists all hate the mullah's" VERY TRUE!
also:
Bush/Cheney was wrong when they wanted to use military action against Iraq. The best way to overthrow Saddam Husseinwould have been to undermind it from within, the young, the women (not all) , the trade unionists, the Kurds many hated
Saddam and they would have sorted it out over time.
Also: if invading a country to get rid of a military dictator is a justified political philosophy (as soem want to argue), why the waiting to invade North Korea and get rid of Kim Jong Il????
AHA maybe the authentic conservative argument just make very sense (and the neocon foreign policy lead to disaster).
One could also say: the US propose to be in a trade war with China, is afraid of the military build up in China etc. and the dangers of a communist government, so why condemn this but at the same time borrowing and aiding money from the Chinese in order to fund the war in Iraq???
Post a Comment