Wow, completely agree with everything the op says, some wisdom at last!
Obama has lied on many, many occasions.
I actually had to go back to the OP to even remind myself. 🙂
The thread was begun on the subject of Iraq (with the feeling that people had irrationally canonised Obama), and continuing operations there, as well as the record of the last several years. We seem to have gone down an alley-way about the Middle East and nukes.
Back to Iraq, and the today we have the 400,000 secret documents of torture in Iraq, known of by the USA and UK, released on the net.... It remains to be seen how much that will stir things up again.
V
Lots of people around the world, particularly the Americans and British believe Obama is actually Muslim, I thought this was rubbish UNTIL I started researching..sadly everything would appear to point that way. Obama lied from get go about his childhood, and upbringing etc, from then on it's been non stop.
'IF' things ever do get messy it's 100% clear where Obama's loyalty will be.
'IF' things ever do get messy it's 100% clear where Obama's loyalty will be.
I'm sorry, I think this is off the wall. I think, and I apologise for my rudeness to a new member, that this is completely meaningless. Are you saying, that Obama, being Muslim - as your researches have revealed(?) - will, in some unspecified future crisis, be on the 'side' of the Muslims? I'm sorry, I think this is tosh. But, of course, as per forum guidelines, I respect your belief in this possible scenario. I, however, do not share your point of view.
Lots of people around the world, particularly the Americans and British believe Obama is actually Muslim, I thought this was rubbish UNTIL I started researching..sadly everything would appear to point that way. Obama lied from get go about his childhood, and upbringing etc, from then on it's been non stop.
'IF' things ever do get messy it's 100% clear where Obama's loyalty will be.
Obama's father hails from Kenya and belongs to the Luo tribe from the shores of Lake Victoria. Obama's father converted to Christianity and married a white American woman. Barrack Obama was born to Christian parents and brought up as a Christian. He's always claimed to be a Christian and regularly attends church with his wife and children.
Does that make it more acceptable for you Edwina? That he belongs to white christian civilisation?
Kaif
Kaif, most of your post is actually incorrect.
I could start posting various links, you could do the same, the thread could go on and on, but people should look at both sides and decide. Google searches and you tube proof are only the tip of the iceberg.
The war between Islam and the West will only get worse.
I support Kaif entirely on the information that the Luo Tribe inhabit the area on eastern shores of Lake Victoria, 600 miles from the coast. The religion there is Christian. There is very little following of Islam in Kenya except along the coastal regions where there has been long contact with the Arab traders. Tribes inland were extremely fearful of the Arab slave traders in the past and would avoid them as far as possible and their beliefs. I know because I was brought up there, and I believe, so was Kaif. It is highly unlikely Obama was brought up a Moslem.
I don't know where you got your information from, but all sources can be suspect unless you have personal knowledge to the contrary.
The war between Islam and the West will only get worse.
Edwina, you sound like the voice of Doom. Last I knew, there is no war between Islam and the West. This is overblown overheated rubbish. And IMVHO it's views like these which are more dangerous to everyone than anything else, including Barack Obama's reputed Muslim leanings. (And I for one would be interested to see your links and the kind of website that they are gleaned from.)
Obama as Liar...
I recently discovered that the great O has decided to charge people to land on American soil, even if just in transit for a couple of hours. Previously you could apply for a free ESTA, sort of ridiculous in itself when you're not leaving the airport, but now you have to pay for the privilege.
Hardly a saviour of the western world. My sister who lives in NY says support for the big O wanes as discontent rises. Muslim, Christian, whatever, nothing has changed
That sounds delightfully morose doesn't it?!
J
I thought the Big O was a name reserved for Roy Orbison! I've not heard it used for Obama before now.
What your post says to me is that anyone who chooses to be a politician has to be off their rocker, given the fact that they will be blamed for any and everything that annoys people. Truly I can't imagine why anyone would want to be a) President of the USA b) Prime Minister of UK. They must be mad. (Well, they probably are!)
Its true! It was the name given to Big Roy Orbison - it must have spilled out of my subconscious!
How many politicians are anything more than figure heads with various degrees of self serving self interest? Not many, and yes, I expect you would have to be mad to want to be one, especially one at the top taking all the flak 🙁
Hi V,
Not that I know of, though there has been a 'lack of denial', accompanied with the refusal to be part of the non-proliferation it all seems to add up, if they do not have them then why not say so?
Actually it does not matter, the perception is that they have (and have offered them to other countries), and that perception will drive other countries to arm up to the same level, the race is omn and it will all end in tears.
Following the wikileaks stuff there are calls for Obama to investigate nad do something about the torture issues in Iraq, this is of course because it all became public, Obama knew about this as part of his job, he has sat on it for a year or so and done nothing. No different to any of the others as far asd I can see.
chris
Is there documentary evidence that the UK (or the USA for that matter) supplied Israel with nuclear weapons? (Putting emphasis on the UK question.)
V
Hi V,
Not that I know of, though there has been a 'lack of denial', accompanied with the refusal to be part of the non-proliferation it all seems to add up, if they do not have them then why not say so?
Actually it does not matter, the perception is that they have (and have offered them to other countries), and that perception will drive other countries to arm up to the same level, the race is omn and it will all end in tears.
I'm no expert on this, Chris, but as a semi-learned layman I strongly doubt that - my question was re evidence that the UK or even the US gave Israel its nuclear arms. I doubt it in terms of the US, I feel sure of it in terms of the UK. Israel is replete with physicists: they had no lack of funds; Israel has its military stongly on the agenda for obvious reasons: within my lifetime it was attacked twice by four surrounding nations all at once - and won. Why would such a nation, which was not the aggressor, want to protect itself? For purely defensive reasons. My layman's 'take' is that Israel was easily able to develop nukes, maybe with unspoken US help.
One point is that we surely don't want to see nukes used? Israel never has. But Iran, a known terrorist-sponsoring nation, began enriching uranium as of two days ago I believe. Iran has no need to defend itself: no one is threatening Iran. The nukes it is now about to build will be for at least threatening purposes, or possibly given the instability of the regime, for offensive purposes, even if through proxy parties. This is so serious.
This is such a serious matter, and not to be taken lightly as in (not writing to you) banter.
And it's been posted that in effect, why should not all nations have nukes, or else none? This was posted as a serious PoV as being aligned with "reality". The true reality is that nations which have nukes are going to keep them - that's just reality. After that we come to the question of whether we want wayward nations to also develop nuclear weapons, which they might even sell on to terrorists, in 2010-1. Who on earth would really, rationally, want that? When you realise what the consequences of this "policy" may be in blood terms?
V
Iran has no need to defend itself: no one is threatening Iran.
LOL! Whatever you say... Just keep in mind that the U.S. has military bases situated to either side of Iran, plus ships in The Gulf. Then try to say that again with a straight face...
LOL! Whatever you say... Just keep in mind that the U.S. has military bases situated to either side of Iran, plus ships in The Gulf. Then try to say that again with a straight face...
It's self-evident that no one is threatening Iran, so long as it backs down and does not threaten others.
It's that subject that we really, very much, none of us, want to think about. But what if one is used? Who is likely to be the user? Why make more? What will you have to say for yourself when they bring us to the brink or beyond? They only have to simply back down.
V
It's self-evident that no one is threatening Iran, so long as it backs down and does not threaten others.
Whenever I read these statements, I have to think about the history of the issue, i.e. how did we get to where we are today?
Are the Iranian people so naughty that nobody in the world should trust them? No, I don't think so.
So why is it that they end up with a government that is seen as threatening? Why is it that the people of Iran have enabled the country's politics to get into this state?
The problem is that nothing in the world is black and white as many would want us to believe. Why does the USA think that it's got the right to be the world's police?
Yes, I could rattle on about the USA's human rights record, but that would be just counter productive. IMO what is important is not governments, it's the mass feeling of the people that create the governments of the world, and that's why politicians go to great leangths to manipulate public opinion. We all fall in to the trap of giving more weight to those we agree with, than those who hold opposing opinions.
Now with Iran we have a lot of posturing between the bigger powers and the non-aligned states. The reality is that most of the world finds it offensive that a country is the self proclaimed authority of morality in the world.
There have been too many wars this century already, nobody wants more other than those who hold stocks in defence countries. The USA needs to justify its military and get support from the people. Having enemies makes that job all the more easier. However, a large military is expensive and has a huge arms industry behind it. So in priority governments need to find a return for its investment and see its weapons to other countries. The USA has a big fat customer in the form of NATO to buy its wears.
Iran a baddy? maybe, but how did it get there and why?
Myarka.