Is Obama’s Life at Risk?

From the desk of Amil Imani, Freedom of Iran;

Thursday, 28 February, 2008

In eloquent speeches, presidential candidate Obama has made copious promises, understandably to attract voters. He talks about “change”, without really spelling out change from what to what. It just sounds good: “change”. A great sound bite, indeed. Change is getting elected, and worrying about delivering later.

The electorates are both short on memory and long on forgiving. So, the farce of empty high-sounding promises fill the air at campaign times. But there are instances that a promise during vote-gathering can later haunt the person. This may indeed be the case with at least one of Barack Hussein Obama’s promises.

Obama boasted that he would embark on a personal diplomacy to solve our foreign policy problems with countries such as, Syria and Iran. He said that he would meet their leaders without any preconditions to settle our disputes. Doesn’t that sound like change, a real change of great relief to us all? Never mind the fact that he has about zero experience in foreign policy matters, he is foolish enough to aim to negotiate with the ever-conniving Assad of Syria and masters of deceptions such as the Mullahs of Iran.

Okay Obama, don’t claim that no one warned you. If you get elected President and you receive an invitation from your fellow Muslim brother Ahmadinejad to make good on your promise and visit him in Tehran for a tête-à-tête, don’t you do it. BBC’s recent report ought to be enough for you to recant your foolish and naïve promise:

“The European Union has criticized the new penal code being drafted in Iran,
particularly a section that imposes the death penalty for giving up Islam…Death
for apostasy already exists in Iran under Sharia or “Islamic-law.” But the
changes would for the first timebring the punishment into the criminal
code. An EU statement expressed deep concern about what it calls the
ongoing deterioration in the human rights situation in Iran. It singled out
Section Five of the draft penal code currently before the Iranian parliament,
imposing the death penalty for apostasy. In the past, Iranian courts have
handed down the death penalty in such cases, but have done so relying on Sharia
law. If the draft is approved by parliament, the sentence will be
formalized in the country’s criminal code.”

Who is an apostate according to the legislation? Anyone in the world, not just Iranians, born to a Muslim parent; also any convert to Islam who leaves it. Only one parent needs to be a Muslim at the time of conception for Islam to own that child for life.
* emphasis added.*
Islam is Ummehist. Islam doesn’t recognize nationalities and national boundaries. And these Islamist zealots are very serious and have no sense of humor. Some say they have no sense at all, and they may be right. What they certainly have is a thirst for blood, particularly for the blood of infidels and apostates.

My advice, Obama: Elected President or not, don’t you hazard a trip to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In fact, don’t you go anywhere near where the crazed Islamists can get their hands on you. You don’t even rate a fatwa from one of many bloodthirsty crafty Ayatollahs or Moftis, asking for your head. Your fate is already sealed. You are on automatic, so to speak—a person who was given the gift of Islam and who ungratefully turned his back to the one and only faith of Allah, so the Muslims believe. The punishment for this kind of betrayal is haad (most severe), meaning death.

You may protest that you are free to choose your religion and that you have chosen to be Christian. Nothing doing! You are stamped as Muslim at conception because your father was Muslim. Further, you have been doubly-stamped by your middle name Hussein. Muslims name their sons Hussein in honor of one of Islam’s most revered saints. Hence, the Muslims want what is theirs and you either repent and return to the fold or prepare yourself for the ultimate punishment: Death.

The only time that these inveterate liar killers of Allah mean what they say is when they threaten violence and killing. So, please be careful. Stay close to home where a whole platoon of Secret Service at the taxpayers’ expense is shielding you from the thugs who would be just too happy to slash your throat while they joyously scream: Allah is the greatest.

Is Obama’s Life at Risk?

From the desk of Amil Imani, Freedom of Iran;

Thursday, 28 February, 2008

In eloquent speeches, presidential candidate Obama has made copious promises, understandably to attract voters. He talks about “change”, without really spelling out change from what to what. It just sounds good: “change”. A great sound bite, indeed. Change is getting elected, and worrying about delivering later.

The electorates are both short on memory and long on forgiving. So, the farce of empty high-sounding promises fill the air at campaign times. But there are instances that a promise during vote-gathering can later haunt the person. This may indeed be the case with at least one of Barack Hussein Obama’s promises.

Obama boasted that he would embark on a personal diplomacy to solve our foreign policy problems with countries such as, Syria and Iran. He said that he would meet their leaders without any preconditions to settle our disputes. Doesn’t that sound like change, a real change of great relief to us all? Never mind the fact that he has about zero experience in foreign policy matters, he is foolish enough to aim to negotiate with the ever-conniving Assad of Syria and masters of deceptions such as the Mullahs of Iran.

Okay Obama, don’t claim that no one warned you. If you get elected President and you receive an invitation from your fellow Muslim brother Ahmadinejad to make good on your promise and visit him in Tehran for a tête-à-tête, don’t you do it. BBC’s recent report ought to be enough for you to recant your foolish and naïve promise:

“The European Union has criticized the new penal code being drafted in Iran,
particularly a section that imposes the death penalty for giving up Islam…Death
for apostasy already exists in Iran under Sharia or “Islamic-law.” But the
changes would for the first timebring the punishment into the criminal
code. An EU statement expressed deep concern about what it calls the
ongoing deterioration in the human rights situation in Iran. It singled out
Section Five of the draft penal code currently before the Iranian parliament,
imposing the death penalty for apostasy. In the past, Iranian courts have
handed down the death penalty in such cases, but have done so relying on Sharia
law. If the draft is approved by parliament, the sentence will be
formalized in the country’s criminal code.”

Who is an apostate according to the legislation? Anyone in the world, not just Iranians, born to a Muslim parent; also any convert to Islam who leaves it. Only one parent needs to be a Muslim at the time of conception for Islam to own that child for life.
* emphasis added.*
Islam is Ummehist. Islam doesn’t recognize nationalities and national boundaries. And these Islamist zealots are very serious and have no sense of humor. Some say they have no sense at all, and they may be right. What they certainly have is a thirst for blood, particularly for the blood of infidels and apostates.

My advice, Obama: Elected President or not, don’t you hazard a trip to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In fact, don’t you go anywhere near where the crazed Islamists can get their hands on you. You don’t even rate a fatwa from one of many bloodthirsty crafty Ayatollahs or Moftis, asking for your head. Your fate is already sealed. You are on automatic, so to speak—a person who was given the gift of Islam and who ungratefully turned his back to the one and only faith of Allah, so the Muslims believe. The punishment for this kind of betrayal is haad (most severe), meaning death.

You may protest that you are free to choose your religion and that you have chosen to be Christian. Nothing doing! You are stamped as Muslim at conception because your father was Muslim. Further, you have been doubly-stamped by your middle name Hussein. Muslims name their sons Hussein in honor of one of Islam’s most revered saints. Hence, the Muslims want what is theirs and you either repent and return to the fold or prepare yourself for the ultimate punishment: Death.

The only time that these inveterate liar killers of Allah mean what they say is when they threaten violence and killing. So, please be careful. Stay close to home where a whole platoon of Secret Service at the taxpayers’ expense is shielding you from the thugs who would be just too happy to slash your throat while they joyously scream: Allah is the greatest.

When Will the Cult of Barack Hussein Obama Start Answering Questions?

There has been quite a tempest in a teapot lately over the use of Barack Hussein Obama’s middle name. You see, it’s quite alright to use a white candidate/white president’s middle name throughout history. Apparently, it’s “racist” to use the arab-muslim’s middle name. What do I mean by that?

How many out there have heard of “FDR”? How about “JFK”? “LBJ”? “RWR”? “WJC”? “GWB”?

How about “Franklin Delano Roosevelt”? “Dwight David Eisenhower?” “John Fitzgerald Kennedy”? “Lyndon Baines Johnson”? “Richard Milhouse Nixon”? “James Earl Carter”? “Ronald Wilson Reagan”? “George Herbert Walker Bush”? “William Jefferson Clinton”?

How about “HRC”? “Hillary Rodham Clinton”?

All white–and all known by their full name. So, what’s the big deal with Barack Hussein Obama? Here’s the catch–the only reason the left wants to make a big deal out of it is because it reveals something they don’t want people to question–his muslim ties. It could all be handled so simply if he just said, “hey, my father gave me his name and there’s not a lot I can do about it”. But he doesn’t, does he? He allows people to play the racism card for him, doesn’t he?

Why doesn’t he just step up to the plate and be a man?

Let’s ask another question. Why do we hear so much about his arab family, see all kinds of pictures of him in his muslim garb, generally being so proud of his arab family–and we hear very little about the white half of his family? Particularly the white grandmother who made his college dream possible? Is he ashamed of them? I guess so–his mother, his white mother–was a complete and total flake from all reports. While the left would have you believe she was “ahead of her time” as far as being a whacked out hippy goes, the stark reality was she was an abusive mother. She provided no stability for her children, she modeled no love for a country who had treated her and her family well, she shacked up with not one but two muslims (admittedly she married them)–the first abandoning her for his fly-ridden country in pursuit of a government position. That’s not what a good parent does–that’s what an abusive parent does and models. But then, to the left, this is considered good parenting.

No, we don’t hear about his white family, do we?

Just how did his white grandmother afford an Ivy League education for him? How many jobs did she have to work, how much did she sacrifice so he could have that vaunted mind twist, the mind twist that he’s entitled to do whatever he wants because he’s black and he’s entitled?

How about his ties to the Weather Underground–ties he maintains to this day with confessed, unrepentant, non-remorseful bombers. The only reason they weren’t prosecuted was because of a legal technicality. At the very least, as an officer of the court, this association is highly suspicious.

Who is funding his campaign? What groups are behind his money? Hmmm…the Muslim Legal Defense fund for one. A British-Iraqi banker (Rezko) for another. But he has no muslim ties, right?

Why did his cousin Odinga call Barack Hussein Obama for help/counsel during the recent Kenya crisis? Just what did he hope to accomplish in calling a freshman senator? What strings did he think that freshman senator could pull for him? Common sense would say none, relative or not. and yet, he was given permission by the State Department to call his cousin regarding the upheaval. Why? What is the connection? Again, common sense states it should be just a familial thing, but it quite obviously is not.

Why is Barack Hussein Obama so ignorant on the Iraq situation? The man is ignorant about the al Qaida presence in Iraq and seems to think John McCain invaded. He has no clue about the actual situation, wanting to withdraw troops from what he calls a failure only to state he would send them back into [another] failure if the situation were proven to be what we have been saying it actually is all along. He certainly has no clue as to the logistics of such a feat.

Why is it a requirement of the left to continue to blame others for your actions? In several of his speeches Barack Hussein Obama has misquoted people, using third hand information, regarding ammunition and troop equipment. He blames the lack of equipment on the president, completely discounting his hand in refusing funding for the troops. He’s proud to continue to vote against the troops and what they need–but when he’s shown the results of his actions it is no longer his and his fellow congress critters’ fault–it’s the president’s. What reality is he living in?

Oh yeah–entitlement, take no responsibility for your actions fantasy land.

If Barack Hussein Obama wants people to think of him as a Christian instead of an apostate muslim, why doesn’t he do more to distance himself from a muslim friendly, black supremacist church who proudly endorses Louis Farrakhan? Why doesn’t he distance himself from Farrakhan instead of grudginly–after much stammering and stuttering–accepting his endorsement? Why doesn’t he distance himself from his days of going to the mosque with his father and step-father and his madrassas education?

Just what is his stand on islam? Well, maybe this quote from his book, “Audacity of Hope”, will give you a clue (HT Debbie at Right Truth here):

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

Debbie’s entire article is well worth the read.

She also quotes David at The Strategic Failure regarding Barack Hussein Obama:

We are the ones we have been waiting for.
–Barack Obama

and:

For these reasons, Barack Obama is a perfect symbol of Chicago. Arrogant and motivated, he is a natural self-promoter. A practicing Christian, he bears a Muslim name. Identifying himself as an African-American, Obama is the offspring of a man from Kenya and a woman from Kansas. A self-proclaimed son of Chicago, he attended school overseas and spent most of his childhood in Hawaii, the last state, the state that doesn’t appear on most maps. Obama, like Chicago, is from everywhere, and he is from nowhere. And he promises great, ambiguous things: change, hope, unity. His critics call him messianic, and there is no doubt that he is peddling his own religion. Five days before the Texas and Ohio primaries, the questions about Obama do not concern his intelligence, his judgment, his oratory, or his political acumen. No, the questions are more basic: Who is he? Where did he come from? What does he believe in? What does he want?

Another excellent article and well worth the read.

Ultimately, these questions need to be asked and investigated thoroughly. Barack Hussein Obama needs to step up to the plate and state unequivocally what his stand is on islam, why he ignores his white family and clings to his arab-muslim family, how does that family feel about his apostasy to islam, why he’s chosen to belong to a black supremacist church who welcomes dual faith–both muslim and Christian, as has been documented elsewhere in the blogosphere (the quote below is here at Sons of Pigs and Apes):

IF I AM MUSLIM AND I BELIEVE IN PROPHET MOHAMMED, PEACE BE UPON HIM AND I ALSO BELIEVE IN JESUS, PEACE BE UPON HIM, DO I HAVE TO GIVE UP MY ISLAMIC FAITH TO BE A MEMBER IN YOUR CHURCH?” SHE ANSWERED, “NO. WE HAVE MANY MUSLIM MEMBERS IN OUR CHURCH.” It is important to note that Muslims would not attend church.

He needs to outline how he rose from the child of a comfortably middle class white mother, abandoned by his power hungry black father, into the political persona he is today. You would think as long as he and his wife are clinging to the racism card they would be proud to outline their rise to power, as an inspiration to others. I have to question why we don’t.

He as to answer why he flaunts his allegiance to his arab-muslim ties while ignoring his white family.

He needs to put meat on the bones of his “hope and change” rhetoric.

He also needs to quit believing in partial birth abortion on demand, big government, how he’s going to fund all his socialistic plans, etc.

In short, Barack Hussein Obama has some ‘splainin to do. The question “is” when will he start answering questions instead of relying on empty rhetoric? There have been many messianic orators throughout history–unfortunately, charismatic oratory doesn’t necessarily equal someone who is capable of doing the job. Or of doing it in a way beneficial to the populace (i.e., Fidel Castro, Evita Peron, Mao, Hitler, ad nauseum).

When Will the Cult of Barack Hussein Obama Start Answering Questions?

There has been quite a tempest in a teapot lately over the use of Barack Hussein Obama’s middle name. You see, it’s quite alright to use a white candidate/white president’s middle name throughout history. Apparently, it’s “racist” to use the arab-muslim’s middle name. What do I mean by that?

How many out there have heard of “FDR”? How about “JFK”? “LBJ”? “RWR”? “WJC”? “GWB”?

How about “Franklin Delano Roosevelt”? “Dwight David Eisenhower?” “John Fitzgerald Kennedy”? “Lyndon Baines Johnson”? “Richard Milhouse Nixon”? “James Earl Carter”? “Ronald Wilson Reagan”? “George Herbert Walker Bush”? “William Jefferson Clinton”?

How about “HRC”? “Hillary Rodham Clinton”?

All white–and all known by their full name. So, what’s the big deal with Barack Hussein Obama? Here’s the catch–the only reason the left wants to make a big deal out of it is because it reveals something they don’t want people to question–his muslim ties. It could all be handled so simply if he just said, “hey, my father gave me his name and there’s not a lot I can do about it”. But he doesn’t, does he? He allows people to play the racism card for him, doesn’t he?

Why doesn’t he just step up to the plate and be a man?

Let’s ask another question. Why do we hear so much about his arab family, see all kinds of pictures of him in his muslim garb, generally being so proud of his arab family–and we hear very little about the white half of his family? Particularly the white grandmother who made his college dream possible? Is he ashamed of them? I guess so–his mother, his white mother–was a complete and total flake from all reports. While the left would have you believe she was “ahead of her time” as far as being a whacked out hippy goes, the stark reality was she was an abusive mother. She provided no stability for her children, she modeled no love for a country who had treated her and her family well, she shacked up with not one but two muslims (admittedly she married them)–the first abandoning her for his fly-ridden country in pursuit of a government position. That’s not what a good parent does–that’s what an abusive parent does and models. But then, to the left, this is considered good parenting.

No, we don’t hear about his white family, do we?

Just how did his white grandmother afford an Ivy League education for him? How many jobs did she have to work, how much did she sacrifice so he could have that vaunted mind twist, the mind twist that he’s entitled to do whatever he wants because he’s black and he’s entitled?

How about his ties to the Weather Underground–ties he maintains to this day with confessed, unrepentant, non-remorseful bombers. The only reason they weren’t prosecuted was because of a legal technicality. At the very least, as an officer of the court, this association is highly suspicious.

Who is funding his campaign? What groups are behind his money? Hmmm…the Muslim Legal Defense fund for one. A British-Iraqi banker (Rezko) for another. But he has no muslim ties, right?

Why did his cousin Odinga call Barack Hussein Obama for help/counsel during the recent Kenya crisis? Just what did he hope to accomplish in calling a freshman senator? What strings did he think that freshman senator could pull for him? Common sense would say none, relative or not. and yet, he was given permission by the State Department to call his cousin regarding the upheaval. Why? What is the connection? Again, common sense states it should be just a familial thing, but it quite obviously is not.

Why is Barack Hussein Obama so ignorant on the Iraq situation? The man is ignorant about the al Qaida presence in Iraq and seems to think John McCain invaded. He has no clue about the actual situation, wanting to withdraw troops from what he calls a failure only to state he would send them back into [another] failure if the situation were proven to be what we have been saying it actually is all along. He certainly has no clue as to the logistics of such a feat.

Why is it a requirement of the left to continue to blame others for your actions? In several of his speeches Barack Hussein Obama has misquoted people, using third hand information, regarding ammunition and troop equipment. He blames the lack of equipment on the president, completely discounting his hand in refusing funding for the troops. He’s proud to continue to vote against the troops and what they need–but when he’s shown the results of his actions it is no longer his and his fellow congress critters’ fault–it’s the president’s. What reality is he living in?

Oh yeah–entitlement, take no responsibility for your actions fantasy land.

If Barack Hussein Obama wants people to think of him as a Christian instead of an apostate muslim, why doesn’t he do more to distance himself from a muslim friendly, black supremacist church who proudly endorses Louis Farrakhan? Why doesn’t he distance himself from Farrakhan instead of grudginly–after much stammering and stuttering–accepting his endorsement? Why doesn’t he distance himself from his days of going to the mosque with his father and step-father and his madrassas education?

Just what is his stand on islam? Well, maybe this quote from his book, “Audacity of Hope”, will give you a clue (HT Debbie at Right Truth here):

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

Debbie’s entire article is well worth the read.

She also quotes David at The Strategic Failure regarding Barack Hussein Obama:

We are the ones we have been waiting for.
–Barack Obama

and:

For these reasons, Barack Obama is a perfect symbol of Chicago. Arrogant and motivated, he is a natural self-promoter. A practicing Christian, he bears a Muslim name. Identifying himself as an African-American, Obama is the offspring of a man from Kenya and a woman from Kansas. A self-proclaimed son of Chicago, he attended school overseas and spent most of his childhood in Hawaii, the last state, the state that doesn’t appear on most maps. Obama, like Chicago, is from everywhere, and he is from nowhere. And he promises great, ambiguous things: change, hope, unity. His critics call him messianic, and there is no doubt that he is peddling his own religion. Five days before the Texas and Ohio primaries, the questions about Obama do not concern his intelligence, his judgment, his oratory, or his political acumen. No, the questions are more basic: Who is he? Where did he come from? What does he believe in? What does he want?

Another excellent article and well worth the read.

Ultimately, these questions need to be asked and investigated thoroughly. Barack Hussein Obama needs to step up to the plate and state unequivocally what his stand is on islam, why he ignores his white family and clings to his arab-muslim family, how does that family feel about his apostasy to islam, why he’s chosen to belong to a black supremacist church who welcomes dual faith–both muslim and Christian, as has been documented elsewhere in the blogosphere (the quote below is here at Sons of Pigs and Apes):

IF I AM MUSLIM AND I BELIEVE IN PROPHET MOHAMMED, PEACE BE UPON HIM AND I ALSO BELIEVE IN JESUS, PEACE BE UPON HIM, DO I HAVE TO GIVE UP MY ISLAMIC FAITH TO BE A MEMBER IN YOUR CHURCH?” SHE ANSWERED, “NO. WE HAVE MANY MUSLIM MEMBERS IN OUR CHURCH.” It is important to note that Muslims would not attend church.

He needs to outline how he rose from the child of a comfortably middle class white mother, abandoned by his power hungry black father, into the political persona he is today. You would think as long as he and his wife are clinging to the racism card they would be proud to outline their rise to power, as an inspiration to others. I have to question why we don’t.

He as to answer why he flaunts his allegiance to his arab-muslim ties while ignoring his white family.

He needs to put meat on the bones of his “hope and change” rhetoric.

He also needs to quit believing in partial birth abortion on demand, big government, how he’s going to fund all his socialistic plans, etc.

In short, Barack Hussein Obama has some ‘splainin to do. The question “is” when will he start answering questions instead of relying on empty rhetoric? There have been many messianic orators throughout history–unfortunately, charismatic oratory doesn’t necessarily equal someone who is capable of doing the job. Or of doing it in a way beneficial to the populace (i.e., Fidel Castro, Evita Peron, Mao, Hitler, ad nauseum).

Myth vs Fact-Part 252

Myth	Fact
Islam: Religion of peace.	Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57: Narrated ‘Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”
Tafsir

Myth vs Fact-Part 252

Myth	Fact
Islam: Religion of peace.	Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57: Narrated ‘Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”
Tafsir