Ignorant and Despicable Imbeciles.
| Read More Here |
KKK Fliers Put on NewsPapers
Popularity: 9% [?]
Sphere: Related ContentIgnorant and Despicable Imbeciles.
| Read More Here |
KKK Fliers Put on NewsPapers
Popularity: 9% [?]
Sphere: Related ContentHe went to Kenya to discredit Barack Obama and to sell a book full of garbage and bigoted innuendo, but was kicked out of the country Tuesday night.
Immigration officer Dume Wanda (right) leads Dr Jerome Corsi, the WorldNetDaily writer and author of The Obama Nation, to a waiting security vehicle at Laico Regency hotel, on Tuesday.
Jerome Corsi was arrested shortly after 8a.m. just as he was about to address a news conference to launch his anti-Obama book in Nairobi.
He was taken to the Immigration headquarters at Nyayo House and later deported on the British Airways midnight flight out of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport.
Dr Corsi, author of The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, which has been heavily criticised worldwide for its inaccuracies, came to Kenya more than a week ago, and had been staying with friends in Runda.
Radical Islam
He was due to launch the book, which depicts Mr Obama, whose father was Kenyan, as a sympathizer of radical Islam and communism, at the Laico Regency Hotel.
But he was arrested there before he could speak and driven with an assistant, Mr Timothy M. Bueler, to Nyayo House, around 500 metres away.
The Immigration officials also impounded copies of the Obama book.
At Nyayo House, the two were held for four hours and questioned by officials led by the Director of Immigration, Mr Albert Musasia, about his presence in Kenya.
The decision to deport him was made after it emerged that Dr Corsi and Mr Bueler had entered the country as tourists, stating they intended to visit game parks.
The book launch was a commercial venture, therefore, they had contravened their immigration status.
After questioning, the two were taken to the office of the Permanent Secretary, Mr Emmanuel Kisombe, and from there through the basement to a car in which they were driven to the house where Dr Corsi had been staying in Runda for verification of his passport and visa before they were escorted to the airport.
There he and his aide were held in the Immigration office to await their flight out of the country.
A US embassy official said they were not told officially about the arrests, saying they had learnt about them from the media.
The official said Dr Corsi’s was a private individual’s visit and did not warrant comment from the embassy since he was not a US government official.
Questioned
Police spokesman Eric Kiraithe commented later that the two US citizens were summoned by the Immigration department to be questioned on the status of their stay in the country.
He also said that they had chosen to fly out of the country voluntarily after being questioned.
Dr Corsi flew into Kenya last Tuesday and was booked to stay at the Laico Regency (formerly Grand Regency) at 7.55am, although hotel communications manager Jenifer Wanza said he had been staying in Runda.
Dr Corsi was expected to stay at the hotel for one month.
General manager Solomon Adede later issued a statement distancing the hotel from the planned news conference, scheduled to take place at the Bogoria room.
He said the management would not allow such a function, and added: ‘Laico Regency is a law-abiding institution and does not condone any smear campaigns.‘
He said the booking for the Press conference had been made by Mr Peter Mbae, editor-in-chief of The Eagle Christian magazine.
NTV Kenya — Obama smear author deported
Mr Mbae founded the newspaper and has played an active role in religious organisations. Posters that were announcing the news conference were quickly pulled down at the hotel.
Kenya features prominently in Dr Corsi’s book, The Obama Nation, which has been seen primarily as a vehicle to run a smear campaign against Mr Obama.
Dr Corsi states early in the book that Kenya will play a key part in his account because ‘Barack Obama himself tells us that Kenya is an important part of who he is, even today.’
But the book has been widely criticised for containing many inaccuracies and distortions.
When it was released, Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said: ‘Jerome Corsi is a discredited liar who is peddling another piece of garbage to continue the Bush-Cheney politics he helped perpetuate four years ago.‘
Similar attacks were published about former presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton during their campaigns to reach the White House.
Perhaps significantly both went on to win the presidency.
Dr Corsi, a well-known right-wing author, used Prime Minister Raila Odinga as a means of attacking Mr Obama on the two fronts of radical Islam and communism.
The Prime Minister, portrayed as a close associate of Mr Obama, is described as ‘a Muslim sympathizer with well-known communist political roots.”
Obama’s father
The book suggests that Mr Odinga might be a Muslim, even though, as it admits, he ‘today professes to be an Anglican.”
The book also attacks Obama’s father Mr Barack Obama Snr, who came from Siaya in Nyanza Province and who died in 1982, referring to him as ‘an alcoholic polygamist‘ and a Muslim who gravitated to the ‘more extreme communist position openly advocated by and identified with Oginga Odinga.‘
The book distorts Mr Obama’s political views and associations — often by means of inaccuracies — in an attempt to destroy his image as a new-style politician able to bridge cultural, racial and ideological divides.
References:
1. Anti-Obama author kicked out of Kenya
2. Drama as anti-Obama author is deported
3. Jerome S. Corsi Spearheads incendiary ‘Bigot Ad’ Campaign in Macomb County, Michigan
4. Debunking Jerome ‘Bigot’ Corsi’s Smear Attack Book: ‘The Obama Nation’
Popularity: 9% [?]
Sphere: Related ContentWho’s More Realistic: McCain or Obama?
On the campaign trail, the debate over foreign policy has been muted of late. That might be because more important topics such as lipstick and hockey moms have taken center stage. But the contrasts between the presidential candidates also seem to have softened. Their differences over Iraq policy have shrunk as the place has stabilized somewhat and the Iraqi government looks for a timetable for a U.S. withdrawal. Both candidates oppose Iran’s nuclear ambitions and Russia’s incursion into Georgia. Both support a vigorous fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Yet there’s clearly a fundamental difference between the two that might best be captured by asking a simple question: What kind of world do we live in? Neither candidate has been asked this, and I doubt either would answer as frankly as I am suggesting, but here’s my guess — drawn from their writings and speeches — about what each might say.
We live in a very dangerous world, John McCain would respond. In his eyes, Islamic extremism is the transcendent challenge of the age. Jihadist warriors — funded and supported by states that adhere to their views — pose the central threat to the United States. In the rise of China, Russia and India, McCain sees turbulence. Russia and China, being autocracies, represent a special danger. Moscow’s attack on Georgia was, for McCain, the “first serious crisis since the end of the Cold War.” The role for America, in such an environment, is to aggressively use its power — hard power — to defeat the enemy and spread freedom.
Barack Obama’s sense of the world is more optimistic. The dangers are real but not so all-encompassing. Obama speaks less of Islamic extremism in general and more of al-Qaeda and its affiliated groups specifically. He points out that compared with the Cold War — when thousands of Soviet nuclear missiles were pointed at American cities — we face lesser threats today. He argues that most people in the Islamic world want development and a better life, not jihad. America’s promise remains alive even in these
countries.
America’s role, for Obama, is to restore its military strength, fight al-Qaeda and its ilk, and deter rogue regimes such as Iran. But it is also to stay calm, because in overreacting to dangers, we often cause new problems and crises. To lump together all Islamist groups is to exaggerate and misunderstand the threat. The Iraq war, for Obama, is a prime example of an alarmist overreaction, one that led the United States to an unprovoked and hugely costly invasion and occupation. If America can keep its cool and provide the help that countries really seek — in development and democracy-building — we will gain in both security and legitimacy.
There is some truth to both visions, but in my view the reality is much closer to Obama’s — more so than most U.S. politicians seem willing to admit. We live in remarkably peaceful times. A University of Maryland study shows that deaths from wars of all kinds have been dropping dramatically for 20 years and are lower now than at any point in the past half century. A study from Simon Fraser University finds that casualties from terrorism have been steadily declining since Sept. 11, 2001. It is increasingly clear — look at their voting from Indonesia to Iraq to Pakistan — that very few Muslims anywhere support Islamic fundamentalists. More countries than ever before now embrace capitalism and democracy.
It’s also worth noting that since World War II, the United States has tended to make its strategic missteps by exaggerating dangers. During the 1950s, conservatives argued that Dwight Eisenhower was guilty of appeasement because he was willing to contain rather than roll back communism. The paranoia about communism helped fuel McCarthyism at home and support for dubious regimes abroad. John Kennedy chose to outflank Richard Nixon on the right by arguing that there was a dangerous missile gap between the Soviets and the United States (when in fact the United States had almost 20,000 missiles and the Soviets had fewer than 2,000). The 1970s brought a frenzied argument that the Soviet Union was surpassing the United States militarily and was about to “Finlandize” Europe. The reality, of course, was that when neoconservatives were arguing that the U.S.S.R. was about to conquer the world, it was on the verge of collapse.
Since the end of the Cold War, similar alarms have been sounded several times. In the 1990s, the Cox Commission argued that China was building a military to rival ours, citing numbers that soon proved to be bogus. Then there was Saddam Hussein, who was described as a powerful and imminent threat to the United States. In fact, the greatest problem we have faced in Iraq is its weakness, its utter dysfunction as a state and a nation.
Rhetoric about transcendent threats and mortal dangers grips the American imagination. But it also twists U.S. foreign policy in ways that can prove to be extremely costly to the country and the world.
[Enlarge] About The Author: Farid Zakaria is Newsweek’s International editor and PostGlobal co-moderator.
Fareed Zakaria was named editor of Newsweek International in October 2000, overseeing all Newsweek’s editions abroad. The magazine reaches an audience of 24 million worldwide. He also writes a regular column for Newsweek, which also appears in Newsweek International and fortnightly in the Washington Post. Starting this year, Fareed has been hosting a new foreign affairs show on CNN Worldwide — Fareed Zakaria GPS, an hour-long program that takes a comprehensive look at foreign affairs and the policies shaping our world. Every week they bring you an in-depth interview with a world leader, as well as a panel of international analysts who examine the major global developments of the week. As always, Fareed’s emphasis is on new ideas and innovative approaches to solving the world’s toughest problems. Fareed Zakaria GPS airs each Sunday, at 1pm, on CNN. |
Popularity: 9% [?]
Sphere: Related ContentWrites: Leonard Pitts Jr.
Of course, we all have questions for Sarah Palin:
Does she actually think living across the Bering Strait from Russia constitutes foreign policy expertise? Does she really take the parable of Adam and Eve as literal truth? How, exactly, does one field dress a moose? And why would one want to?
My first question, though, would not be one of those. I’d simply ask which books she wants to ban - and why.

Yes, there’s a list of titles floating around the Internet right now, but it’s a fake. It is, however, established fact that our would-be vice president has in the past tried to pull books off library shelves.
The New York Times reports that as a member of the City Council of Wasilla, Alaska, Palin complained to colleagues about a book called “Daddy’s Roommate,” described in promotional material as being “for and about the children of lesbian and gay parents.”
Laura Chase, who ran Palin’s campaign for mayor, explained that the book was harmless and suggested Palin read it.
Chase told the New York Times that Palin replied she “didn’t need to read that stuff. It was disturbing that someone would be willing to remove a book from the library and she didn’t even read it.”
Later, as mayor, Palin reportedly asked the town’s librarian three times whether she would agree to remove controversial books from the shelves. Three times, the librarian refused. Palin fired her, but eventually bowed to public pressure and gave the woman her job back.
“I’m still proud of Sarah,” said Chase, “but she scares the bejeebers out of me.”
And in that context, it seems apropos that next week is Banned Books Week. As you doubtless know, that’s the week set aside each year by the American Library Association to bring attention to attempts by some of us to regulate what others of us may read. The ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom reports that it has seen 9,700 “challenges” - a challenge is defined as a formal written request to remove a book from a library because the content offends or is deemed inappropriate - since 1990. Chillingly, the office suggests that’s probably an undercount. It says that for every challenge reported, four or five are not.
So Palin has company, to say the least.
Count among that number the woman from a Cuban exile group who bragged to a Miami Herald reporter how in 2006 she checked out and kept an elementary school library book she felt painted too rosy a picture of life on that Communist island. Like Palin, she thought she had good reason. Would-be book banners always do.
I’m reminded of how someone challenged me the other day on my contention that anti-intellectualism has overtaken this land. I mentioned by way of example Palin’s Bible literalism, but really, there’s so much more. There’s the “Jay Walking” segment on Leno. There’s this notion that “elite” is a four-letter word. There’s the White House’s censorship and politicization of science. There’s the recent survey that found that more people can name all five Simpsons than all five freedoms enumerated in the First Amendment.
And there’s this: as many as 50,000 incidents since 1990 in which a book was forced to justify its existence. We’re talking books like “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” books like “The Color Purple,” books like “Harry Potter” and, yes, books like “Daddy’s Roommate,” books that offended because they expressed ideas that made someone uncomfortable. As if any other kind of idea was worth expressing.
We are becoming the stupid giant of planet Earth: richer than Midas, mightier than Thor, dumber than rocks. Which makes us a danger to the planet - and to ourselves. This country cannot continue to prosper and to embrace stupidity. The two are fundamentally incompatible.
So do us all a favor: Annoy Sarah Palin. For goodness’ sake, read.
[Enlarge] About The Author: Leonard Pitts, Jr. is a nationally-syndicated columnist and winner of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.
He was originally hired by the Miami Herald to critique music, but within a few years he received his own column in which he dealt extensively with race, politics, and culture. He lives in Bowie, Maryland. He has won awards for his writing from the Society of Professional Journalists and the American Society of Newspaper Editors, and was first nominated for the Pulitzer Prize in 1993, eventually claiming the honor in 2004. He is also the author of the bestselling book Becoming Dad: Black Men and the Journey to Fatherhood. Pitts gained national recognition for his widely-circulated column of September 12, 2001, “We’ll Go Forward From This Moment,” in which he described the toughness of the American spirit even in the face of such a horrible attack. In June 2007, Pitts was the subject of a campaign of death threats and harassment by neo-Nazis angry at a column he wrote about two whites raped and murdered in Knoxville, Tennessee. In his column addressing the murders, Pitts stated “for the crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists who have chosen this tragedy upon which to take an obscene and ludicrous stand. I have four words for them and any other white Americans who feel themselves similarly victimized. Cry me a river.” More death threats were made in April 2008 before his appearance at the University of Puget Sound. | Read More About Leonard Pitts Jr. | Visit his website at www.leonardpittsjr.com. |
Popularity: 8% [?]
Sphere: Related ContentSince yesterday, when John McBOMB’s chief economic adviser, the “Whining” Phil ‘McGramOfPot’ Gramm got thrown under the straight-talk express wreckage, McCain and Bush have been pivoting towards Obama’s positions on Iraq and Afghanistan, shamelessly trying to camouflage their moves with “benchMURK” talking points like a “general time horizon” for withdrawal from Iraq.

Pic Courtesy: seedsofdoubt.com
Obama has consistently stated that he wants the U.S. to start withdrawing from Iraq for re-deployment in Afghanistan within sixteen months.
As Obama landed in Afghanistan today, the German magazine newspaper “Der Spiegel” reported that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told them that he supported Barack Obama’s proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months, essentially endorsing Obama, and slapping Bush upside the head.
al-Maliki said: “U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.”
Asked if he supported Obama’s ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for….”Whoever is thinking about the shorter term is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems.”
Meanwhile, the White House said on Friday George W. Bush and Maliki had agreed that a security deal under negotiation should set a “time horizon” for meeting “aspirational goals” for reducing U.S. forces in Iraq.
In a speech earlier this week, Obama promised to commit at least two more combat brigades - up to 10,000 men - to Afghanistan, if he wins November’s election. He also said the US military should focus on that country rather than Iraq.
Copycat McCain upped the ante — to 3 brigades. Asked where he would get the troops while bogged in his “100 year Iraq war,” McCain said: “We need to work that out. We need to have greater participation on the part of our NATO allies, as I said in my opening remarks today and we need a lot more help.”
NATO Allies? You mean your cousins in Great Britain?
To the best of my knowledge the Brits are not thrilled at all with this illegal war.
In a campaign stop McCain said: “I know how to win wars. And if I’m elected president, I will turn around the war in Afghanistan, just as we have turned around the war in Iraq.”
And my question is: Which WAR has McCain ever won?
Being caged like an animal in Vietnam — another illegal war that America lost, is not winning, in my opinion.
In Vietnam 2,000,000+ civilian lives were lost, most from South Vietnam. 58,000+ American soldiers also lost their lives in the war.
Just like in Iraq, U.S. military personnel often went on civilian killing rampages — For example:
Nixonian cover-ups and protests followed world wide.
The Vietnam war started because American president Eisenhower did not want “communism to spread throughout the world” and eventually to America. Essentially the U.S. was asked by France, via NATO, to keep the communists from “taking over” the French “Colonial” Territory — Vietnam. A European colonialist (France) asked Neo-European-Colonialist (America) to help it maintain a grip on it’s illegally acquired colony, resulting in Vietnam being split into two, and causing Vietnamese to slit each others throats — just like the Shia and the Sunni have been doing in Iraq — the fruits of an illegal OIL war.
Of late, the U.S has been bribing the Sunnis with the almighty Dollar — hence the “artificial peace.”
“Fear of Communism,”…”Fear of Muslims,”…”Fear of The Obama-Fist-Bump,”…”Fear of Islamo-Fascists,”…”Fear of Black Panthers,”…”Fear of Foreign Languages,”… “Fear of Mexican Immigrants,”…”Fear of a Black President,”…”Fear of Imaginary ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction‘” …RING A BELL?
Lynch them ALL!……AGAIN and AGAIN!
Hallelujah,… Sweet Home Alabama!
That’s what the criminal ‘High Cabal‘ a.k.a The Republican Party has drafted John McCain For — To beat up, lynch, burn, bomb, steal-oil-from and dominate everyone who does not toe the line.
“You are either with us or against us.” — George Bush, November 6, 2001
The world and many Americans are tired of this Moronic Cowboy Republican Dictatorship, and Obama is a much needed fresh face. The whole world is desperately “Clinging To Obama,” and his current tour will only serve to stamp that point.
Contrary to what the right-wing thugs hope — Obama will shine in the Middle-East and in Europe, and will come home fortified and ready to thump McCain’s sorry ass in November — thoroughly well, with or without Hillary Clinton’s racist and un-principled “Angry-White-Whore” army.
[Enlarge Image]

Pic Courtesy: seedsofdoubt.com
Popularity: 18% [?]
Sphere: Related Content