Hamas is funding Barack Hussein Obama


Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
Yes it is true, and I am sure the Obam-antics will have a fit over this. It seems an official in Hamas, in violation of Federal Campaign financing rules, is funding Obamba's campaign. To Quote the article....   JERUSALEM – Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip are listed in government election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama's campaign. The donations would violate election laws, including prohibitions on receiving donations from foreigners and guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election, Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission, told WND in response to a query. The contributions also raise numerous questions about the Obama campaign's lax online donation form, which apparently allows for the possibility of foreign contributions. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71431  
Average: 5 (1 vote)

cowboy1539
cowboy1539's picture

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 746
Isn't Obama the one who actually kidnapped the Lindberg baby in a failed attempt to use his birth certificate to establish citizenship? Is he not now hiding a Chupacabra (An illegal Mexican immigrant I might add) in his shower at home, which he plans to release in his plan for world domination after he is elected, or defeated, which ever occurs? Stoney this is why you have never been able to get a photo of the goat eating (or blood sucking depening on one's beliefs) monster. You see it's all a Democratic conspiracy!
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
References all. The one possible exception might be world domination--he seems to be more concerned with his popularity in Europe then the US; and some might add that he is more focus on serving European needs rather then American. Generally I do not get a sense that you have read the article presented or want to engage in a serious conversation.   You do not think it is problematic if a terrorist group like Hamas funds Obama, maybe because his best friends are American terrorists.  
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Dearest Clayton, it's your sincere belief in the absurd that is, and always has been the hallmark of your postings. I mean seriously old man! Quoting World Nut Dailey and expecting to be taken seriously!!! Have things changed so little in the year that I've been gone? "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
and the transcript of the Revco trial--where a great deal of this informaton has been collaborated. Better yet, provide evidence that Barack Hussein Obama is not taking funds from Hamas.  IF Obama were honest, he would publish a list of his donars for public scrutiny--but he will not do that will he?  Nor will he provide his Birth Certificate, or allow Hawaii to make public his birth certificate to contradict the romours his own sister is spreading that he is a muslim.  If only Hussein were honest these romours would not have substance--but clearly and in the opinion of this Board's readers--he is not honest.
ScreenName
ScreenName's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 226
Claybrain, why would anyone believe the utter nonsense you keep posting to these threads? If you are going to rely on complete falsehoods as a basis for your propaganda, at least make them somewhat believable. The stuff you post is so incredible its a joke! 
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
You can insult all you want, but you have no substance. You can not prove I am wrong. Name call all you wish, but it is way too serious a crisis if Obama is elected given the ugly truth about who and what he is, to let your juvenile behavior have any weight. Obama is a liar Obama is a racist Obama is friends with; and is supported by terrorists. Obama is not a lot different from you; but people with a modicum of common sense do not want either of you to be president.
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Despite the fact that you are correct on every point, that is no reason to get nasty with the Nazi! After all, he is obviously suffering from some sort of chemical imbalance in his brain. That level of paranoia does not occur with out at least SOME degree of mental illness.   "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
are attempting to censor the truth and I am the Nazi?  Think about it, and I think you will dscover who the real Nazi is. Let me repeat my opinions, based on the facts I have seen and are presenting… Obama is a liar Obama is a racist Obama is funded by and friends with terrorists Obama is a Marxist whose hidden agenda is to destroy the sovereignty of this nation.   Guess what, you do not get to censor this.  If fact I am probably not writing it for you.  
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
are attempting to censor the truth and I am the Nazi?  Think about it, and I think you will dscover who the real Nazi is. Let me repeat my opinions, based on the facts I have seen and are presenting… Obama is a liar Obama is a racist Obama is funded by and friends with terrorists Obama is a Marxist whose hidden agenda is to destroy the sovereignty of this nation.   Guess what, you do not get to censor this.  If fact I am probably not writing it for you.  
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
I'm not trying to censor ANYONE honey bunch! I'm a FIRM believer in free speech and everything that goes with that.  For that matter, there is no way anyone on these boards (with the exceptions of the staff moderators) have the ability to censor anyone else here. So just wind that paranoia back a bit there Bub, OK? SHEESH! So, what makes Obama a Marxist? Do you even know what a Marxist stands for? Why don't you tell us the hallmarks of a Marxist and how it applies to Obama's campaign instead of just throwing aroung around these baseless accusations backed up with fantsy articles from World Nut Daily. OK?   "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Honesty3
Honesty3's picture

Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 284
Cincin AKA Clayton thinks that anyone who tells the truth and disagrees with its lies is a Marxist. LOL This character must have been created by liberals in order to let everyone see how bigotted and biased radical right wingnuts can be.
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
Obama falling in the polls? What I am providing is opinions that differ from yours--why do you object to the opinions of others?  Or do you really not believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and to here all of the relevant theories nand facts. Why are you attempting to censor the truth?
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Oh Clayton, you dear dear boy, it must be a strange world you live in indeed! First, how in the name of the Goddess are you going to find the religion of the man from his Birth Certificate of all the bloody documents one could possibly choose from? Logically speaking, this is akin to trying to find out a person's eye color strictly from the information provided on one's Social Security Card! In short, it can't be done.  And with the problems of identity theft today I don't blame him for not releasing it! Would YOU publish YOUR Birth Certificate? I know I sure as H3LL wouldn't! Now I'll agree with you, EVERY candidate should disclose their full list of contributors, PERIOD! No bones about it. But that doesn't mean you should immediately jump to the concussion (I say concussion because with you that's how far you jump!) that they are up to some nefarious back room dealings just because they don't! But I guess you just prove the old adage... a little parinoia goes a LONG way! "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
Oh Clayton, you dear dear boy, it must be a strange world you live in indeed! First, how in the name of the Goddess are you going to find the religion of the man from his Birth Certificate of all the bloody documents one could possibly choose from? Reality is tough for you, I know—but Birth certificates give mothers the OPTION of listing parants faith.    Logically speaking, this is akin to trying to find out a person's eye color strictly from the information provided on one's Social Security Card! In short, it can't be done. No, it is like determining a person’s eye color from their driver’s license—it is commonly done.   And with the problems of identity theft today I don't blame him for not releasing it! Again, reality is not really hitting on all cylinders for you. I am not running for office, and there is not a cloud of suspicion hanging over my head that I am not a US citizen. Should a candidate have to prove that he is eligible for the office he is running for?  Now I'll agree with you, EVERY candidate should disclose their full list of contributors, PERIOD! So would it be a problem if Hamas was contributing through a third party to Obama’s campaign? You may want to read the case summary of the Rezko case in conjunction with the information on this thread. I think is  a very real possibility, made even more certain by the anti-semetic, pro Arab stance of his advisors. Your confusion seems to be in whether this is theory or fact. I am presenting it as a theory—but one with quite a bit of supporting evidence.   But you are free to read it and make up your own mind—that is what an election is about. What you are not free to do is to censor theories because they do not support your conclusions.  
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
"Reality is tough for you, I know—but Birth certificates give mothers the OPTION of listing parants faith." Not in any state I'm aware of.  It wasn't an option when on either of my daughter's birth certificates here in California. Where are you getting this information from? World Nut Daily again?  In ANY case the parents religion at someone's birth is not really that reliable an indicator of what one's religion will be as an adult... ESPECIALLY given the HUGE influence of Christian Evangalism and the New Age acceptance of Eastern Religions and the return to the Earth Religions during the 1970's, 80's, and 1990's! I'm a PERFECT example of that! My Father was a Roman Catholic, my mother was an Antioch Baptist, and I was raised by my maternal Gran'ma in one of the Cherokee Native American Religions which I quit practicing when I was 13 and joined another faith (in which I became a minister) altogether! And I am FAR from unique in having such a series of circumstances though maybe not the in the same actual faiths.  My Gods man! 9 out of 11 of my closest friends have the same sort of circumstances in thier religious background! There would be no reason at all to assume that Barak Obama would not have the same circumstances in his background. Do you follow me? And one more thing Clayton. I have absolutly no problem with reality.  If you continue with the gratuitus insults I'll put you back on ignore.   "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy Edited for clerity and grammar.
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
Or will ever be intented unless you insult me.  In terms of references, mine are as valid as any you can produce, and have a better record in terms of professionalism then most. Not in any state I'm aware of.  It wasn't an option when on either of my daughter's birth certificates here in California. Check it out, it is now. I am getting my information from HHS. In California it has been an option for 6 years.  In Hawaii in has been an option for a longer period. In ANY case the parents religion at someone's birth is not really that reliable an indicator of what one's religion will be as an adult.  I really do not care what Obama’s religion was or is; but I do care if he lies. He—repeated,--- said that at no time was he ever a muslim, and multiple sorces, (this being only one) contradicts that statement.  Sources are saying that he studied Islam in religious classes, in Indonesia; that in Kenya he attend a mosque multiple time and can recite muslim prayers with little accent. Antoher issue along this same line is why hide his middle name, or change his first name?  Why staff his advisors with anti-semites and pro-islamo-facsists? If he lied in the past, are his campaign promises today,(which change depending on who he talks to) also lies. Catch McCain in a lie and I would be just as interested, but I really do not think he lies, and Obama does. DAnd I am FAR from unique in having such a series of circumstances though maybe not the in the same actual faiths.    Does your religion or my religion matter, no. But truth does matter.  Do you follow me? Yes, but Obama’s faith is not the issue, Obama’s honesty is—do you follow me? I have absolutly no problem with reality. I mean no insult, but but I really am not sure of this. The issue is that Obama is hiding something with his birth certificate. It may be religion. I have heard some very likely theories on this, which I have presented. This thread pertains to Hamas donating to Obama’s campaign through third parties in violation of Federal law.  His lies about his birth certificate may be related to this; they may not. But are you not concerned that the truth of this issue be determined. Some Liberal democrats do not want these issues discussed, because just discussing such a possibility will convince people that it is true( not a very high estimate of most people’s intelligence). I disagree, and I want an exploration of all theorires. Ever ask your self why they want the censorship? Let me repeat my opinions, based on the facts I have seen and are presenting… Obama is a liar Obama is a racist Obama is funded by and friends with terrorists Obama is a Marxist whose hidden agenda is to destroy the sovereignty of this nation.   If I am right, and I do think the facts support me on this, is this want you want for president, or does it not matter because he is (partially) black?
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Are you trying to tell me that McCain doesn't and hasn't lied in this campaign? OH PLEASE! I'm a McCain supporter and I KNOW he's lied! It's like the old joke: Q: How do you tell if a candidate is lieing? A: His lips are moving! Q: How do know if a candidate is about to lie? A: He's breathing! I worked in politics for more than twenty years and I'll tell you right here and now that a man does not get into the circle that Obama runs in by being stupid enouh to accecpt money from Hammas no matter HOW well disguised it is! THAT is political suicide! The FEDS would have been on that in a New York City SECOND and GW Bush would have had his little brown bottom in Guantanamo faster than you can say "secret subpeona"! Naw... your arguments just aren't compelling. "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
to agree or disagree.  But if you are going to accuse MCCain of lies, it is incumbant upon you, if you are honest and ethical; to support your accusation. So where is your support?  
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
And as such I've been spending the last several days attending to it. Now, I remember just last election you and your cronies ranting AGAINST McCain, calling him all kinds of anti-American! So don't EVEN start that with me. I'm taking this election about as casually as I can on advice of my cardiologist. I'm doing everything in my power to NOT end up having open heart surgery (which based on my background is a wonder I didn't end up on that table LONG ago!).  So no, I'm not going to get drawn into a long drawn out debate with you or any of the other nut jobs here that make it hard for those of is who really are hard working, regular people who happen to be conseratives to be so. You can have your conspiricies. But just remember this, anytime you spread rumors that Hamas is funding so-in-so you are doing the work of Hamas better than any dozen Hamas agents by spreading desent and lies that they want spread.  So keep up the good work for the enemy... you are saving them BILLIONS in money they don't have to spend on diseminating this garbage. "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
And as such I've been spending the last several days attending to it. Now, I remember just last election you and your cronies ranting AGAINST McCain, calling him all kinds of anti-American!   Your memory is failing, four years ago, I was not blogging. I'm taking this election about as casually as I can on advice of my cardiologist. I'm doing everything in my power to NOT end up having open heart surgery (which based on my background is a wonder I didn't end up on that table LONG ago!).  So by all means don’t. We are never going to agree, and the point of the discussion would be for an audience.  Your health is not worth any political discussion. But just remember this, anytime you spread rumors that Hamas is funding so-in-so you are doing the work of Hamas better than any dozen Hamas agents by spreading desent and lies that they want spreadI really do not think I am spreading rumors as much as pointing out reasons to be suspicious.   AM I serving Hamas’s ends? That depends whether Obambi as presiend would be good for them, and I think he would be better then McCain, because Obambi will give them legitimacy.  So keep up the good work ... I will.
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
You asked for a McCain lie and I gave you one.  You choose not to respond to it, but instead respond to something apparently safer to your view of things.  That's okay with me.  But it shows that you hold Barack Obama to a different standard than you do his presumed opponent. You are spreading rumors.  Nothing more.  Your primary source is the hogwallow and hogtrough of all political rumor mongering and smear campaigning -- World Net Daily.  When you branch out into other grounds, you seem incapable of either reading the entire source or understanding what you read (case in point, the Fox News story about the Tony Rezko trial).  Julie Dee hit the nail on the head ... terrorist groups may intend or desire to sail across the sea and lay our country to waste, but they do not have the means to do so; however, they can accomplish very similar ends when we divide amongst ourselves along petty and even fictitious issues. Why don't you avoid issues of character (since you seem to be such a horrible judge of character -- especially of people you only know through second hand sources), and address the REAL issues, of which there are plenty.  Both major candidates have proposed radically different agendas for America.  And Bob Barr merges the two and even offers a few new wrinkles of his own.
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
On June 4, 2008, at a townhall meeting in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, John McCain lied about his record in regards to hurricane relief.  A CNN reporter asked him why he “voted twice against the creation of a commission to investigate the levee failures in New Orleans.” McCain quickly responded that he has supported “every investigation” into the levee failures.  His actual words: I’ve supported every investigation and ways of finding out what caused the tragedy. I’ve been here to New Orleans. I’ve met with people on the ground. I’ve met with the governor. I’m not familiar with exactly what you said, but I’ve been as active as anybody in efforts to restore the city. I also voted against one of the bills that came down that was loaded with pork barrel projects that had nothing to do with New Orleans too. It had billions for projects and programs that had nothing to do with the recovery of the city of New Orleans. In the past, McCain has actually bragged about opposing the levee commission. “[T]here have been many investigations taking place – the causes are well known,” he said in April, adding he thought most people in America know “what caused that mismanagement.” Additionally, he opposed a 2006 spending bill “that would have provided $28 billion in hurricane relief, and legislation that would have extended unemployment and Medicaid benefits to hurricane victims for several months.” McCain also tried to establish his Katrina record by bragging, “I’ve been here to New Orleans. I’ve met with people on the ground.” But until traveling there one month ago, McCain had “made just one public tour of New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina touched down in August 2005.” McCain was on Face the Nation on August 28, 2005, as Katrina gathered in the Gulf Coast. He said nothing about it. One day later, when Katrina made landfall in Louisiana, McCain was on a tarmac at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona, greeting President Bush with a cake in celebration of McCain's 69th birthday. Three days later, with the levees already breached and New Orleans filling with water, McCain's office released a three-sentence statement urging Americans to support the victims of the hurricane. Though McCain issued a statement the next week calling on Congress to make sacrifices in order to fund recovery efforts, he was quoted in The New Leader on September 1 cautioning against over-spending in support of Katrina's victims. "We also have to be concerned about future generations of Americans," he said. "We're going to end up with the highest deficit, probably, in the history of this country." That attitude was borne out in McCain's actions and votes. Forty Senators and 100 members of Congress visited New Orleans before he did; he finally got there in March 2006. He voted against establishing a Congressional commission to examine the Federal, State, and local responses to Katrina in med-September 2005. He repeated that vote in 2006. He voted against allowing up to 52 weeks of unemployment benefits to people affected by the hurricane, and in 2006 voted against appropriating $109 billion in supplemental emergency funding, including $28 billion for hurricane relief. Shortly after the disaster in New Orleans, McCain did introduce a bill that sought to improve communications mechanisms for first-responders and authorities. The bill failed to go anywhere, and McCain later voted against other bills that had similar provisions. But then, this is a common practice for John McCain.  Karl Rove and bloggerhead spreaders of filth, like yourself, jumped all over John Kerry for a single statement he made (I was against it before I was for it) … but John McCain consistently changes positions and even votes against bills he himself has presented to the Congress.   
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
You had best resign yourself to insults ... when Clayton hits tough spots (like his reasoning is not supported by the very evidence he himself provides as "proof" that his "theories" are "correct"), he starts with the name-calling.  It starts out simple enough ... but before long, he has lumped you into a category (mostly of his own devising, again with little factual evidence to support his assumptions) and addresses you (and your thoughts) as if his stereotype is 100% accurate and correct. Good luck sustaining a conversation critical of his assumptions and theories.
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
What insult would that be?
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
You may want to read the case summary of the Rezko case in conjunction with the information on this thread. I think is  a very real possibility, made even more certain by the anti-semetic, pro Arab stance of his advisors.  I read the "case summary" of the Rezko case that you provided.  While you at least now refrain from calling it a "transcript" (or even a "summary of a transcript"), it is NOT a "case summary".  It is a summary of the notes taken by two Fox News Reporters who covered the story and sat in the courtroom audience.  All that your "case summary" reveals are their observations of the proceedings.  I would point out that you have now stepped so far out of bounds of the very document that you claim to be describing that you are quite possibly living in LaLa Land. "His advisors", I would assume, refer to Barack Obama (the "his" antecedent) and to Rezko (the "advisor").  The Rezko trial was not about Barack Obama.  It was about a fellow who, among other things, built and managed low-income housing units and received government money (state and federal) to do so.  He was accused of applying strong-arm tactics (extortion), fraud, bribery, and money-laundering tactics to skim money from the top of his operations.   He was acquitted on the extortion charge, he was convicted on 6 of the 9 fraud charges, he was convicted of only 2 of the 6 bribery charges, and convicted on both of the money laundering charges (for those keeping score, he was found guilty on only a little more than 1/2 the things he was accused of doing). Barack Obama was not on trial.  He is associated with this case only because Rezko, while the Senator was still attending university, offered him a job because Obama was focusing on law related to urban housing.  Obama refused the job, and went to work, instead, for a different law firm.  Because the firm handled clients involved with government contracts and housing, the firm often had dealings with Rezko's company.  Barack Obama actually spent a total of five hours on one of five cases his law firm handled.  Rezko also gave Obama a head's up about a home for sale in an exclusive Chicago neighborhood (two adjoining lots were for sale, and Rezko wanted one of them), and two separately bought them from the same owner (hence, the sale of both homes closed on the same day, which were the terms of sale demanded by the seller).  Rezko also sponsored several fund-raising events for Barack Obama's state senate and Congressional campaigns, and donated about $200,000 to those campaigns (the last being in 2004).  Obama donated that money to charity when Rezko was charged. The end. The "pro-Arab" bit comes into play based on the testimony of a single individual, Ali Ata, who testified on May 1-2 (according to the Fox News report).  During his testimony, Ata said he donated $5000 to Barack Obama's campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2003.  He said Tony Rezko also asked him to donate an additional $10,000 to that Senate campaign, but Ata declined.  This bit of testimony is referred to twice in the Fox News report (perhaps Clayton thinks that referring to it two times means that it happened two different times?) ... once on the May 1 and once on the May 2 journal entry. That's it.  That is the full report of the "pro-Arab" connection to Barack Obama in this trial.  True, Ali Ata was born in Jordan, but he immigrated to the U.S. in 1970 at the age of 18.  He attended the University of Chicago and received his Bachelor's degree in chemical engineering.  He lost his job in 2001, and Rezko convinced him that if he donated $50K to the campaign of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, Rezko would secure him a position as head of the Illinois Finance Authority.  He did.  He plead guilty to corruption charges and offered to testify in the Rezko case in exchange for a lighter sentence.  Clearly, Ali Ata is not a "terrorist" (as Clayton both implies, in this message, and has directly stated, in other threads).  But hey ... a racist finds it really hard to tell one Arab from another (they all look the same, and they all have such similar sounding names!) ... and if he came from JORDAN, he must be a Hamas terrorist! But Clayton is not a very careful reader of the "documents" he submits as evidence.  On May 12 at 5:19 PM ET (for example), Fox News producers Marla Chichowski reports, "The evidence shows Rezko spent more time in 2003-2004 fundraising for St. Jude's Children's Hospital, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, than he did for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich".   By his own logic, does this mean that George W. Bush is supported by "terrorists" and "gangsters"? And there's more.  On three separate occasions in the Fox News report (May 2, May 1, and April 23), the authors explain that Rezko was convinced that the case against Ata would be dropped or that the Federal Prosecutor (US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald -- the same guy who prosecuted White House criminals in the Valerie Plame case) would be replaced.  He claimed to be on good terms with Republican National Committee member Robert Kjellander, who was working with Karl Rove to remove Fitzgerald (remember the rumors that he was going to be the 10th US Attorney dismissed by the Justice Dept for not being conservative enough, and not prosecuting enough Democrats?). Since guilt-by-association is the modus operandi of Clayton, does this then implicate Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzalez, Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush in the money-laundering, "terrorist" supported antics of Tony Rezko?  Seems to be a pretty good assumption! Then again, I am a much better critical thinker than Clayton ... I do not assume that my assumptions are true, and then carry on as if they were. Your confusion seems to be in whether this is theory or fact. I am presenting it as a theory—but one with quite a bit of supporting evidence. You are doing no such thing.  Your "theory" is baseless speculation, born of selective misreading of a report issued by two Fox News producers who did a pretty good job of describing a trial from the audience's perspective.  In fact, the very evidence you provide contradicts your "theory" in multiple places.  In 13 weeks of trial, one witness testifying over two days admitted to making a small political donation to the Senatorial campaign of Barack Obama FOUR YEARS AGO.  From that tiny little factoid, you extrapolate an anti-Semitic, pro-Arab, terrorist-backed campaign to get Barack Obama elected President of the U.S. I suspect you are secretly a writer for The Onion!
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
activities of your hero with an open mind.   I read the "case summary" of the Rezko case that you provided.  While you at least now refrain from calling it a "transcript" (or even a "summary of a transcript"), it is NOT a "case summary".  It is a summary of the notes taken by two Fox News Reporters who covered the story and sat in the courtroom audience.   Which is a case summary ( ie  a summary of the case).   Do you have a better source document,  or do you nothing to compare the case summary I presented to validate your claims?  I thought not—you just do not like the information and are attacking it with baseless concerns. " The Rezko trial was not about Barack Obama.  It was about fraud that included Barack.  Barack was a facilitator of the fraud.   So, whether you like it or not it is about Obama.  (for those keeping score, he was found guilty on only a little more than 1/2 the things he was accused of doing). The point is that he was found guilty. Half guilty is not a qualifier. Barack Obama was not on trial.  No, but according to your account as well as the summary he did receive benefits from the fraud.   ë   The law firm Obama worked for hat multiple dealings with Rezko’s fraudulent company. ë   Barack Obama actually spent a total of five hours on one of five cases his law firm handled. ë   Rezko also gave Obama a head's up about a home for sale in an exclusive Chicago.  And what again was the price Obama paid for that home? Was the price not less then the average home prices in the area, and  did not Rezko subsidize that low price through the purchase of the adjoining lot at higher then market value?    ë   Rezko also sponsored several fund-raising events for Barack Obama's state senate and Congressional campaigns, and donated about $200,000 to those campaigns (the last being in 2004). And you really see nothing suspicious here?  This trial was not, by extension, about Obama?    The "pro-Arab" bit comes into play based on the testimony of a single individual, Ali Ata, One is enough, but more  Obama’s islamofacists connections are being more fully detailed beyond the evidence provided in this trail. He lost his job in 2001, and Rezko convinced him that if he donated $50K to the campaign of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, Rezko would secure him a position as head of the Illinois Finance Authority.  He did.  He plead guilty to corruption charges and offered to testify in the Rezko case in exchange for a lighter sentence.    Which is a good example of the political machine that produced Obama. But Clayton is not a very careful reader of the "documents" he submits as evidence.  On May 12 at 5:19 PM ET (for example), Fox News producers Marla Chichowski reports, "The evidence shows Rezko spent more time in 2003-2004 fundraising for St. Jude's Children's Hospital, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, than he did for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich".  Which has  little or no relevance to the links between fraud and Obama.   How does ignoring an irrelevant factoid define how carefully I read a document. And there's more.  On three separate occasions in the Fox News report (May 2, May 1, and April 23), the authors explain that Rezko was convinced that the case against Ata would be dropped or that the Federal Prosecutor (US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald -- the same guy who prosecuted White House criminals in the Valerie Plame case) would be replaced.  He claimed to be on good terms with Republican National Committee member Robert Kjellander, who was working with Karl Rove to remove Fitzgerald (remember the rumors that he was going to be the 10th US Attorney dismissed by the Justice Dept for not being conservative enough, and not prosecuting enough Democrats?).    And the relevance of a accused criminal’s claim is? Then again, I am a much better critical thinker than Clayton , Sure, you are a Liberal who has never read the foundation documents of your creed, or of other creeds, yet you are a critical thinker.  I do not assume that my assumptions are true, and then carry on as if they were. Yes you do.  Your "theory" is baseless speculation, born of selective misreading of a report issued by two Fox News producers who did a pretty good job of describing a trial from the audience's perspective. Sorry, but I disagree completely, nothing was misread. I think your reaction is based on the fact the you do not like the presentation of information negative to your candidate. It is the expected reaction. From that tiny little factoid, NO that little factoid is one small piece of a larger compilation of evidence.   you extrapolate an anti-Semitic, pro-Arab, terrorist-backed campaign to get Barack Obama elected President of the U.S. It may be just a picky bit of terminology, but I would prefer to say that I postulate an Anti-semetic, pro ISLAMO-FACIST terrorist back campaign to get Obambi elected.  Clearly the Islamo-Facists are supporting Obambi for president, see the sum of data on this point, and I would have to guess it is because they believe that he is as anti-semitic as them.
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
I think you may need to go back to school: George W. Bush's name was mentioned more than Barack Obama's name in the Fox News report you cite.  Each time the President's name was mentioned, it had something to do either with fundraising and campaign contributions Rezko and Ata made to him, or to the efforts of his underlings to abuse the Justice Department.  Based on your criteria, George W. Bush is supported by the same people who support Barack Obama (and is lying about it), AND he had criminal intent in manipulating the justice system. Additionally, there is no "mounting evidence" of foreign funding of the Obama campaign.  There are two stories, both told in slightly different ways and reported from different sources, giving the appearance of "multiple accounts".  This is reminiscent of the strategy used to impose Direct Instruction and Reading First on our nation's schools ... take one study (itself full of errors, flaws and false assertions), have six different people interpret its findings in a slightly different manner, then print each of those interpretations in six different right-wing think-tank blogs to give the impression that it is (1) a hot topic, and (2) widely accepted, and (3) widely reported.  Next, have some highly placed government officials make reference to the study(s) and then have one key contact (well-paid, eager to be a lapdog spokesperson to "keep the doors of access open") at each of the major US newspapers write a story on these "hot new finding(s)".  Before you know it, that single academically challenged study has presto chango become "multiple lines of evidence" that instructional practice must be transformed.
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
If only Hussein were honest these romours [sic] would not have substance--but clearly and in the opinion of this Board's readers--he is not honest. According to five or six people on this board, Barack Obama does not tell the truth -- and all of them have demonstrated some rather startling lapses in critical thinking skills. Only people somewhat weak in the critical thinking arena would demand proof that something is NOT real (of course, these are the same people who required that critics of President Bush prove that wmds do NOT exist in Iraq). When the Senator posts his donor lists (which he has consistently done, by the way ... and which John McCain still refuses to do), these same people find flaws in them. When the Senator releases a copy of his birth certificate, they demand to see the real one. So ... it is time for these people, if they are honest, to start holding the other candidate to the same set of criteria.
MikeSar
MikeSar's picture

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 242
What's Next? Someone will find his birth certificate proves he is an Illegal Alien! 
JulieDee
JulieDee's picture

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
He was born on Mars!   "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
That Obambi is not an American.  This would not be surprising since his mentors and his rhetoric are so anti-American. The real question should be what is he hiding from the American voter?
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
He is hiding a second set of thumbs and big toes ... we all know what happens when the races mingle, don't we (nudge nudge, wink wink ... you know what I mean, all who think he is half black and all who think he is half white)?  That's why Osama bin Laden had Barack HUSSEIN Obama smuggled out of Hawaii to Indonesia, where they could hide him in that madrassa.  Unfortunately for the whacko conspiracy theorist of Whacko Daily Net, that particular madrassa did not teach radical Islam, as they keep trying to tell us.  Instead, it taught mind-control mechanisms.  According to ancient Theravada Buddhist texts, multi-digited individuals are channels of energy, and Barack HUSSEIN Obama embarked on a life-long and highly disciplined pathway to mental supremacy (hence, those right wing whackos who claim he is "mental" are partially correct).  This is why, when he speaks, women are known to swoon and even the most virulent of political opponents fall under his sway, passively concurring with everything he says until many days pass and they regain their senses.  So beware ... not only does he intend to control the entire world, but he also intends to convert its people to believe as he does: • insight comes from experience, critical investigation and reasoning, and not blind faith; • the advice of the aged and wise (not necessarily the same, but possibly so) is critical; • craving is the cause of all human suffering, and carry with it certain defilements, including anger, ill-will, greed, jealousy, conceit, hatred, fear, obsession, irritation, vengeance, depression, anxiety, etc. (gosh, sounds a bit like Clayton ... you might wish to go to Barack HUSSEIN Obama and subject yourself to his cleansing ways, rather than continue to oppose him) • these defilements are born of ignorance, and infest the minds of unenlightened beings; they furthermore block the mind from seeing the truth • only mindful introspection, analysis, and understanding of each defilement can be used to uproot and dispose of them; only after ridding the mind of each defilement does one reach the enlightened state of Nibbana, where one is liberated from the perpetual cycle of birth, illness, aging and death. • each individual is personally responsible for attaining their own enlightenment, as it is they who experienced (or created) the conditions causing defilement; it is not enough to be taught by someone else, and no one else can take your burden for you. Somehow, once he gains control of all of us, it seems that ultimately the goal and purpose of Barack HUSSEIN Obama is to lead us all to a state where we can renounce material possessions, revert to a state of minimal consumption, and find happiness in the simple life (hence the connection to Paris Hilton!).  
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
He is hiding a second set of thumbs and big toes ... we all know what happens when the races mingle, don't we (nudge nudge, wink wink ... you know what I mean, all who think he is half black and all who think he is half white)?  That's why Osama bin Laden had Barack HUSSEIN Obama smuggled out of Hawaii to Indonesia, where they could hide him in that madrassa.  Your theory, not mine—but given that your candidate is hiding something it is as likely to be this as any other theory.   • insight comes from experience, critical investigation and reasoning, and not blind faith;   And Obama has no experience, so by your suggestion, he has no insight. • the advice of the aged and wise is critical; The advice of the aged and wise, in Obama’s case is the advice of terrorists (Ayers) and racists (Farakan). Thus his advisors and there backgrounds in very important in determining whether Obama should be president. • craving is the cause of all human suffering, and carry with it certain defilements, including anger, ill-will, greed, jealousy, conceit, hatred, fear, obsession, irritation, vengeance, depression, anxiety, etc. (gosh, sounds a bit like Clayton ... you might wish to go to Barack HUSSEIN Obama and subject yourself to his cleansing ways, rather than continue to oppose him)   You do understand that you are paraphasing Marx and Engels.  By your analysis Obama should be a religious not a politcal leader? • only mindful introspection, analysis, and understanding of each defilement can be used to uproot and dispose of them; only after ridding the mind of each defilement does one reach the enlightened state of Nibbana, where one is liberated from the perpetual cycle of birth, illness, aging and death.  You are going into a religious backwater that nobody but you understands. Nor do the rest of us care.  But maybe it clarifies why a Liberal can not be trusted to vote or express a political position.
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
Ignorance exposed through humor ... Simply because your knowledge of world religions is limited does not mean that someone taking the time to describe one is venturing into a "backwater" ... it merely shows your own intolerance of other perspectives.  I doubt very much if Marx and Engels received enlightenment or instruction from ... let alone were inspired by ... the teachings of Theravada Buddhist monks.  In fact, though I wrote the piece as a parody, it is far more likely that Barack Obama has been influenced by this ancient branch of one of the planet's oldest religions as it pre-dated Islam in Indonesia by nine or ten centuries. You also misjudge and miscast the entire belief system ... but hey, we all know that you are entitled to your opinion and it doesn't really matter if it is informed or otherwise.
shays
shays's picture

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 971
He is hiding nothing.  If he is, then you must show what he is hiding by uncovering it (with real stuff, not conjecture, hearsay, rumor and speculation).  You must also show he is an American. I notice you still have not produced evidence that you are American, or (since you are not running for President), that John McCain is an American.  Nor have you produced any evidence showing that John McCain is not hiding things from his past.
Honesty3
Honesty3's picture

Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 284
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} Hey Julie, nice to see you’re back! You are correct; nothing in the itinerary of Cincin has changed since you left. It is still Hades bent on dominating the boards with dis-information rants and raves. Just think how poorly educated the children are who are taught by this pseudo intellectual. Poor babies will have a great deal of difficulty overcoming all of the falsehood they have heard over the years. There really ought to be a litmus test for teachers to determine if they have lost touch with reality.
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
confirms that they gave the Obama Campaign funds and that those funds were never returned.  So who is lying Obama, or the poor victimized Palestinians? Palestinians Deny Obama Returned Illegal Contributions, Says Reporter Aaron Klein Last update: 1:39 p.m. EDT Aug. 6, 2008 JERUSALEM, Aug 06, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Candidate's staffers insist Gaza brothers refunded, but men say, 'We did not receive any money back' In response to a WND story, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign contends it returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza, but the donors told Aaron Klein of WND today they have not received any money. The Wall Street Journal reported it spoke to Obama officials who said the donations from three Palestinian brothers were received between Sept. 20 and Dec. 6 last year, and virtually all of the money was returned by Dec. 6. The campaign said, however, the refunds were not reported to the Federal Election Commission due to a technical error. The Obama camp insisted the remaining $2,500 was refunded Monday and all of the refunds will be reflected soon in an amended report. The campaign said new controls are in place to prevent any similar attempts in the future. But WND asked two of the brothers - Monir and Hasam Edwan - to respond to the campaign's claims. "No, we did not receive any money back from the Obama campaign at any time," said Monir Edwan. Last week, the blog Atlas Shrugs outlined the series of donations made last year by Monir Edwan and Hosam Edwan, totaling $29,521.54. A third brother, Yousef, reportedly gave the campaign about $4,000. The Edwans continue to maintain - as they told WND earlier this week - that the financial transactions made on Obama's campaign website were not actual donations but purchases of "Obama for President" T-shirts. The transactions, however, were listed as donations in U.S. government election filings. The donations violate election laws, including prohibitions on receiving contributions from foreigners and against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election. A WND investigation tracked down the Edwans in the Tal Esaltan neighborhood of Rafah, a large refugee camp in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. The Edwans are a large clan that include top Hamas supporters. The brothers denied their financial transactions were actual donations to Obama's campaign, claiming they purchased about $30,000 in Obama T-shirts from the presidential candidate's online store - a contention that did not hold up during a WND interview, when they changed their story several times. "My brother Hosam and I knew that Obama will be a big hit even before he became a candidate. We knew the guy would be a celebrity in Gaza so we decided to invest the amount of $29,000 to buy Obama T-shirts from his website and sell them in Gaza," Monir Edwan told WND, speaking by cell phone from Gaza. Asked how he managed to get shipments of T-shirts into the Gaza Strip during the time Israel imposed a tight closure, Edwan maintained the packages were sent to him by the U.S. Postal Service. Monir Edwan said he wants Obama to be president. "Not just the people in Gaza but people from all over the world are rooting for this great man," he told WND. http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71597
ScreenName
ScreenName's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 226
...incredible post from an incredible poster (Claybrain) which relies on an incredible source, World Net Daily.
Clayton
Clayton's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1154
and no substance makes screenbrain look stupid. But does it surprise anyone that screenbrain looks stupid, again.
ScreenName
ScreenName's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 226
criticizing ANYONE for engaging in name calling, as you are the all time champion name caller on these boards. But can't you come up with something more clever and original than 'screenbrain'? And as to your assertion of 'no substance'...I think calling you, your posts and your sources what they are is quite subtantial.