Obama Exposed
Reverend Manning on the attack in this video
Investor’s Business Daily
Barack Obama — Magna Cum Saudi?
Election ‘08: Does Barack Obama owe his meteoric rise to an Israeli-hating adviser to a Saudi billionaire? Why did a race-baiting mentor to the Black Panthers favor this yet unknown community organizer?
In her stunning national political debut as the Republican candidate for vice president, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin described Obama as a man who had written two memoirs but no significant laws or reforms. So how did this unaccomplished community organizer rise to fame and fortune? He had some interesting help.
We know he’s a Harvard graduate and was editor of the Harvard Law Review. Less known is the story of how he got into the prestigious Ivy League university. As Newsmax’s Kenneth Timmerman reports, he was helped by a letter written by Percy Sutton, former Manhattan borough president and a credible candidate for mayor of New York in 1977.
In an interview earlier this year on New York’s all-news cable channel NY1, the 88-year-old Sutton made some interesting revelations about his relationship with the young Obama. He told NY1 reporter Dominic Carter on “Inside City Hall” that he was introduced to Obama by a friend raising money for him. The friend asked Sutton to write a letter in support of Obama’s application to Harvard law school.
“The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas,” Sutton said. “He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.”
Sutton recalled that al-Mansour said, “There is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?” Sutton did.
According to Timmerman, “At the time Percy Sutton, a former lawyer for Malcolm X and a former business partner of al-Mansour, says he (al-Mansour) was raising money for Obama’s graduate school education (and) al-Mansour was representing top members of the Saudi Royal family seeking to do business and exert influence in the United States.”
One of those Saudi royals was Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a nephew of Saudi King Abdullah. He was the Saudi prince who offered to donate $10 million to help New York rebuild after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. After the prince publicly suggested (as Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright, did recently) that U.S. policies brought on the attacks, then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani told Prince Alwaleed where he could deposit his check.
Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour, born Donald Warden, is another interesting fellow from Obama’s past. He himself is a graduate of Harvard and has been a guest lecturer there. His writings and statements reveal him to be an ideological clone of the Rev. Wright, who married Barack and Michelle and baptized their children.
In his 1995 book, “The Lost Books of Africa Rediscovered,” al-Monsour alleged that America was plotting genocide against black Americans. The first “genocide against the black man began 300 years ago,” he said at a book-signing in Harlem, while a second “genocide” was on the way “to remove 15 million black people, considered disposable, of no relevance, value or benefit to the American society.”
Al-Mansour told an audience in South Africa that “the Palestinians are treated like savages,” something our worst ex-president, Jimmy Carter, as well as Wright might agree with. He has accused Israeli Jews of “stealing the land the same way the Christians stole the land from the Indians in America.”
When he was known as Donald Warden, according to the Social Activism Project at the University of California at Berkeley, al-Monsour was the mentor of Black Panther Party founder Huey Newton and his associate, Bobby Seale.
California Congresswoman Barbara Lee entered an official statement of appreciation of Warden and his Black Panther colleagues for their role in founding a radical group known as the African-American Association into the Congressional Record of April 23, 2007.
What did this radical extremist see in young Barack Obama that he would seek to sponsor and perhaps finance Obama’s education? Obama says he paid his way solely through student loans. How did they meet? Where did the money he raised come from? Now that we know who the father of Bristol Palin’s baby is, maybe the mainstream media will have time to find out.
Nice to see the passion of Reverend Manning. Nice to see some appreciation from the black community (at least some of it) at a time when it seems that most of them have become Islamofascist supporters. That’s the way it appears.
As for the Jews boycotting these media corporations; EVERY decent person should boycott them.
Comment by keelie — September 6, 2008 @ 6:09 am
That’s very interesting. It supports the notion that “U.S.A.” has come to mean “Under Saudi Arabia“. Giuliani seems to grasp this well; as for the others in his party and elsewhere, I’m not too sure. I seriously look at Obama as a fifth columnist.
Comment by BlandOatmeal — September 6, 2008 @ 6:47 am
what nonsense. again. The Saudis are married to the Bush clan and the Cheney family…deny that if you will!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=955Y3NJTRIE
Comment by davidstill — September 6, 2008 @ 10:22 am
Can anyone imagine being more in the Saudi and Islamic pocket than the Current G.W Bush? As evidence of his non existence in his own party and the almost total disengagement of Republicans from even mentioning his name at their convention attests to how much over 70% of America and almost 99.9% of the rest of the world view him. (for different reasons) Only stupid Israel persists in calling him friend and bending head, knee and will to such a Zero. The situation today speaks volumes as to how incompetent if not insidious George bush has been and still is.
I have spoken many a time to my political theory that for the benefit of Israel and America as well, never to elect an incumbent President for a second term, no matter how well we may like him and no matter who is in opposition to him. Second term American presidents are notoriously devastating for Israel in particular and America in General.
For all you previous supporters of Bush and that defiantly includes Glick and others like her should temper their current views of McCain and Obama. I would include levinson and Ted here as well. Felix is correct in that most likely both candidates will be bad if not devastating for Israel.( I just have not heard of any alternatives to his criticisms except class revolution) a non starter today.
I urge my fellow commenter’s to not get sidetracked with what for us are non issues and concentrate on the positions of ea. candidate re; Israel positions and future policies of ea that might be helpful or not helpful for Israel, keeping in mind that America is not Israel, and what is good for America, does not automatically mean it is good for Israel.
Comment by yamit82 — September 6, 2008 @ 11:17 am
Yamit, have you always been this cynical?
Comment by Ed D — September 6, 2008 @ 1:24 pm
Cynical? No I haven’t, it comes with age and experience and high learning curve. I don’t understand those who aren’t cynical these days.
The absolute min. I would expect as a re. of a country of over 300 million is that they choose one who is literate and can speak with without a prepared speech in hand.
Comment by yamit82 — September 6, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
Ed,
Democracies are not good at war,The US elections once again ring the bell: democracy can decide on method, not values.
Republicans and Democrats are equally corrupt, incompetent, and populist. Their programs are equally murky. No wonder US voters split between the Republican and Democrat electorate randomly, approximately half in each camp. In a democracy, when major forces are more or less equal, minor swing groups become decisive. Religious parties in Israel and swing districts in the US hold disproportional power over the countries’ policies.
The US, accordingly, fluctuates between pro-business and welfare policies, militancy and pacifism, moral conservatism and permissive nihilism. No policy is implemented, no end achieved, no constituency satisfied.
The ancient Greek democracies never debated such basic issues. All agreed on values: family, plunder, and trade are good. The democratic process determined how to reach those goals.
Their enemies need not fight the US but only wait for the democratic reversal. A war that drags four or eight years changes the US public mood, unseats the ruling party, and ends up with an American retreat.
Democracies should require a super majority vote to change an existing policy.
I don’t follow internal US politics closely enough to bet on the elections, but my impression is that we shouldn’t expect significant changes in voter preferences. Politics in liberal democracies long since became a matter of faith. People vote Republican or Democrat often without a clue about platform differences. The parties’ programs blur and converge in the effort to hook more voters and repel none. Voters, like football fans, stand by their team no matter what. Neither Democrats nor Republicans can tell the nation how to end the Iraqi fiasco with decency.
Republicans did not pursue their tax-cut agenda, and have Bush for ballast. They lost a rare chance for thorough economic and security reforms and for enforcing basic societal values like children-oriented (not gay) marriage. While the total number of people who vote Republican might not decrease tremendously, a small margin will make the swing states Democrat. Still, many undecided voters could vote for the Republicans who have at least a semblance of a policy on Iraq.
The current American system of voting by state produces extremely biased results when the candidates are tied as has been the case between Republicans and Democrats for some time now. Countrywide proportional elections would be more just.
Comment by yamit82 — September 6, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
This doesn’t just disturb me because of the Saudi connection, but because of the Muslim ummah at large. Al-Mansour has ties to Africa, even having attended an African Summit meeting where he was more extreme than Qaddafi in his view, and has African business ties to such African nations as the oil-producing Muslim nation of Nigeria, which just this week was in the press because “Nigerian anti-graft investigators have seized money raised by the head of the Nigerian Stock Exchange to support US presidential candidate Barack Obama” (BBC). What’s up with the Obama Nigeria Initiative anyway? And Jewish Israpundit readers might be interested to know that according to Al-Mansour, you’re not Jewish! That’s right, you’re Khazars, land promises not given to you, you’ve been replaced. He may be currently “in captivity” in the “land currently called America,” but this “African-Arabian” has plenty of access to unsavory leaders from the ummah, openly advocates for Obama (see his videos), and while claiming not to have actually met Obama, even Al-Mansour himself seemed to suggest the truth of Sutton’s claims (though he’s recently backpedaled or, ahem, clarified that), and I’m inclined to believe Percy Sutton and his comments that came up naturally in an interview, even if he is old and Al-Mansour now suggests he might not be well.
Comment by soren — September 6, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Oops.
Comment by BlandOatmeal — September 6, 2008 @ 7:34 pm
I had to take a break for dinner.
Yamit,
Your continual criticism of everyone who wants to help Israel in any way is simply insane. It seems, every potential ally has to be halachically clean before he or she is allowed to say anything nice about your country. You have criticized George Bush. You have criticized FDR; in fact, I believe you’ve criticized every American President. You have criticized all Americans and all Christians, and all Jews who aren’t Orthodox. I think there are even Orthodox Jews who have not escaped your labelling as ENEMY.
Please tell me, in 25 words or less, how you plan to execute your coup against the whole world. Let me start, by telling you that George W. Bush has been more zealous of Zionist aspirations than has any Israeli PM since Binyamin Netanyahu… no, Netanyahu gave away Hevron; Bush stood by and allowed Sharon to one-up him by giving away Gaza — he never told Sharon to do it. No, we have to go back further. Who were those great Zionist leaders? Rabin? Peres? I don’t think you would say they are on your side. How about Begin? Your very username seems to tell me you don’t approve of him. Golda Meir managed to drive back the Syrians and Egyptians (or do you give the credit to Sharon?), and to astound the world with Entebbe. Is SHE your hero? She’s from my home town, so I would be pleased with that.
The bottom line is, I doubt if you could even count on many ISRAELIS to join you in your insurrection against humanity; much less any Americans. Why criticize McCain, when you’ve already written off my entire country? I think it’s just Yamit and Messiah, against everyone else. If that’s the case, I don’t want to oppose you. Just tell me who Messiah is — Is it you? Tell me plainly.
Comment by BlandOatmeal — September 6, 2008 @ 8:04 pm
If you guys think that’s something, GOLDMAN SACHS gave over $600,000 to the Obama campaign Poor smucks!
Comment by Michael Sunstar — September 6, 2008 @ 9:29 pm
Oat. You tell me what good Bush has done for Isreal ? What do you consider his pro Zionist Credentials? Road Map? 2 State Solution? 50 Billion in military and Nuke aid and sales to Israels Enemies? Enforcing tight sanctions against Iran?
My criticisms of Israeli leaders past and present are on record. I really hated Sharon and not just for Yamit , I also served under him and saw his work up close. As far as my being against everyone , well it might seem so but not true I do and did support many who lost or never ran, they as well, good people that they were, would not receive my profiles in courage award.
Briefly here is a synopsis of American perfidy against Israel: Debate the points true or false!
In 1948, America did not force the Arabs to stay out of the war. American companies went on working with Arabs during the war. America did not sell Israel weapons. When Israel began to win, America quickly got involved and arranged an armistice. America perceived Israel as a Soviet proxy, and did not want an expansion of Soviet influence.
In 1956, the story is well known. Russia did not support Israel, and America felt free to press for Israeli withdrawal. America never exerted such pressure on Egypt or other Arab countries at war with Israel. In 1963, Arabs conducted an undeclared war of attrition. The number of victims was close to a conventional local war. Seven years before that, Israel proved her ability to deal with the strongest Arab army. Why did not Israel mobilize in response to incessant provocations? The memoirs are available, and a few years ago one could still talk to cabinet ministers of the time. America strongly urged Israeli government to desist from war, and warned of international isolation if Israel starts it. In 1967, America did not prevent Egypt from re-militarizing Sinai (compare that with American tolerance of Germany re-militarizing Alsace-Lorraine). America, however, twisted hands of Israeli government, pushed it to wait, wait, and wait, perhaps Arabs won’t attack. Again, America expressly prohibited Israel to preempt. Only in the nick of the time, Israeli government broke free from its American masters and let the IDF to smash the Arabs. America forced Israel to stop short of Cairo and Damascus - when every military strategist agreed that repelling aggression without disarming the enemy is a recipe for a new war. And it came in 1973. Russia supported Egypt and Syria with military shipments years prior to the war and during it. Russians manned SAM batteries and piloted Egyptian planes. America did nothing to help Israel. Only when Israelis crossed the Suez, clearly winning the war, the first American aid has arrived - too late to be used. In return for its non-existent help, America forced Israel to stop at the Suez, rather than flatten Cairo, as the Egyptians would have done with Tel Aviv.
American involvement in the Middle East is unnecessary and quite contrary to the interests of the American people who pay hundreds of billions of dollars only to see oil prices skyrocket. Involvement works against Israel as well. That American aid promotes systemic deviations in the Israeli economy is one thing. That American assistance buys the US the right to stop Israel from pursuing efficient policies is another. More important, however, politically correct America balances help for Israel with help for the Arabs. Israel can live and fight without American aid; the Arabs cannot. The balance of aid works against Israel. And the invasion of Iraq, which created a failed state, a terrorist base at Israel’s borders instead of an acceptable dictatorship, is also a product of American involvement in the Middle East.
In 1948, America did not force the Arabs to stay out of the war. American companies went on working with Arabs during the war. America did not sell Israel weapons. When Israel began to win, America quickly got involved and arranged an armistice. America perceived Israel as a Soviet proxy, and did not want an expansion of Soviet influence.
In 1956, the story is well known. Russia did not support Israel, and America felt free to press for Israeli withdrawal. America never exerted such pressure on Egypt or other Arab countries at war with Israel. In 1963, Arabs conducted an undeclared war of attrition. The number of victims was close to a conventional local war. Seven years before that, Israel proved her ability to deal with the strongest Arab army. Why did not Israel mobilize in response to incessant provocations? The memoirs are available, and a few years ago one could still talk to cabinet ministers of the time. America strongly urged Israeli government to desist from war, and warned of international isolation if Israel starts it. In 1967, America did not prevent Egypt from re-militarizing Sinai (compare that with American tolerance of Germany re-militarizing Alsace-Lorraine). America, however, twisted hands of Israeli government, pushed it to wait, wait, and wait, perhaps Arabs won’t attack. Again, America expressly prohibited Israel to preempt. Only in the nick of the time, Israeli government broke free from its American masters and let the IDF to smash the Arabs. America forced Israel to stop short of Cairo and Damascus - when every military strategist agreed that repelling aggression without disarming the enemy is a recipe for a new war. And it came in 1973. Russia supported Egypt and Syria with military shipments years prior to the war and during it. Russians manned SAM batteries and piloted Egyptian planes. America did nothing to help Israel. Only when Israelis crossed the Suez, clearly winning the war, the first American aid has arrived - too late to be used. In return for its non-existent help, America forced Israel to stop at the Suez, rather than flatten Cairo, as the Egyptians would have done with Tel Aviv.
Our American friends are not only ours. America is also the friend of Wahhabite Saudi Arabia, totalitarian Egypt, the Al Jazeera state of Qatar, Bedouin Jordan, Islamist Kuwait, terrorist Iraq, and just about every other enemy of Israel. Even Russia would be a more reliable and attractive imperial master for Israel than is the US. Our American friends sell immense quantities of advanced weapons to Saudi Arabia, provide $1.4 billion annual aid to Egypt, fought for Kuwait, and spent more in Iraq in the four years than given to Israel in forty years. The US plays it nice: vetoes the UN’s empty proclamations against Israel, scorns Ahmadinejad for genuine anti-Israeli feelings of all Muslims, and pats amenable Israeli leaders on the shoulder. Only the stupid Jews imagine that the US Administration seeks Israeli benefit in the peace process.
My position always has been: Arabs must be the only victims of the peace process.
As for my being anti American see list—-Google
Results 1 - 10 of about 70,300 for anti Bush
postings on israpundit. (0.30 seconds)
Comment by yamit82 — September 6, 2008 @ 10:59 pm
Ted, you sight the source for this article as INvestors BUsiness daily… but no date or publication Issue #.
I was not able to find it at Investors BUsiness Daily… can you post the link when you quote something so the source cna be viewed??
Please email the link to the article… or a copy of it… I’d like to get the word out… Obama must be stopped
Comment by Eric Kossian — September 6, 2008 @ 11:35 pm
Have a look at IsraelMatzav’s entry on this subject, from 2 weeks ago: Obama’s Saudi Connection.
I emailed the link to Ted (and many others) at the time but I don’t think it got covered until now.
Comment by Shy Guy — September 7, 2008 @ 12:04 am
Oat, sorry for the double, it was redacted from an earlier post of mine. I didn’t proof read, apologies.
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 12:07 am
Based on a comparison of both Democratic and Republican party platforms re: Israel and ME: for what these platforms are really worth all I can say is that both are for Israel a disaster and at best Same O Same O !
Israel/Middle East http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/augustweb-only/135-31.0.html
Democrats: “Our starting point must always be our special relationship with Israel, grounded in shared interests and shared values, and a clear, strong, fundamental commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That commitment, which requires us to ensure that Israel retains a qualitative edge for its national security and its right to self-defense, is all the more important as we contend with growing threats in the region—a strengthened Iran, a chaotic Iraq, the resurgence of al Qaeda, the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah. We support the implementation of the memorandum of understanding that pledges $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade to enhance and ensure its security.
“It is in the best interests of all parties, including the United States, that we take an active role to help secure a lasting settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a democratic, viable Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel. To do so, we must help Israel identify and strengthen those partners who are truly committed to peace, while isolating those who seek conflict and instability, and standing with Israel against those who seek its destruction. The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements. Sustained American leadership for peace and security will require patient efforts and the personal commitment of the president of the United States. The creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel. All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.”
Republicans: “The momentum of change in the Middle East has been in the right direction. From Morocco to the Gulf States, the overall trend has been toward cooperation and social and economic development, especially with regard to the rights of women. We acknowledge the substantial assistance the U.S. has received from most governments in the region in the war on terror. Those countries that have made peace with Israel, whether officially or in fact, deserve our appreciation and assistance. We urge the continued isolation of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah because they do not meet the standards of the international community. We call for the restoration of Lebanon’s independence and sovereignty and the full implementation of all UN resolutions concerning that country. …
“We reaffirm America’s commitment to Israel’s security and will ensure that Israel maintains a qualitative edge in military technology over any potential adversaries. We recognize Israel’s need for secure, defensible borders and its right to exist as a Jewish state able to defend itself against homicide bombings and other attacks against its people. We support the vision of two democratic states living in peace and security: Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital, and Palestine. For that to become a reality, the Palestinian people must support leaders who reject terror, embrace the ethos of democracy, and respect the rule of law. We call on Arab governments throughout the region to help advance that goal. The U.S. seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, negotiated between the parties themselves, without the imposition of an artificial timetable, and without the demand that Israel deal with entities which continue to pledge her destruction. … Part of that [negotiation] process must be a just, fair, and realistic framework for dealing with the Palestinian refugee issue.”
“Discrimination against Israel at the UN is unacceptable. We welcome Israel’s membership in the Western European and Others Group at the UN headquarters and demand its full acceptance and participation at all UN venues.”
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 12:45 am
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/augustweb-only/135-31.0.html
Republican and Democrat platform positions on Israel and ME: Yawn looks like more of the same from either party.
Israel/Middle East
Democrats: “Our starting point must always be our special relationship with Israel, grounded in shared interests and shared values, and a clear, strong, fundamental commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That commitment, which requires us to ensure that Israel retains a qualitative edge for its national security and its right to self-defense, is all the more important as we contend with growing threats in the region—a strengthened Iran, a chaotic Iraq, the resurgence of al Qaeda, the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah. We support the implementation of the memorandum of understanding that pledges $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade to enhance and ensure its security.
“It is in the best interests of all parties, including the United States, that we take an active role to help secure a lasting settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a democratic, viable Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel. To do so, we must help Israel identify and strengthen those partners who are truly committed to peace, while isolating those who seek conflict and instability, and standing with Israel against those who seek its destruction. The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements. Sustained American leadership for peace and security will require patient efforts and the personal commitment of the president of the United States. The creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel. All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.”
Republicans: “The momentum of change in the Middle East has been in the right direction. From Morocco to the Gulf States, the overall trend has been toward cooperation and social and economic development, especially with regard to the rights of women. We acknowledge the substantial assistance the U.S. has received from most governments in the region in the war on terror. Those countries that have made peace with Israel, whether officially or in fact, deserve our appreciation and assistance. We urge the continued isolation of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah because they do not meet the standards of the international community. We call for the restoration of Lebanon’s independence and sovereignty and the full implementation of all UN resolutions concerning that country. …
“We reaffirm America’s commitment to Israel’s security and will ensure that Israel maintains a qualitative edge in military technology over any potential adversaries. We recognize Israel’s need for secure, defensible borders and its right to exist as a Jewish state able to defend itself against homicide bombings and other attacks against its people. We support the vision of two democratic states living in peace and security: Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital, and Palestine. For that to become a reality, the Palestinian people must support leaders who reject terror, embrace the ethos of democracy, and respect the rule of law. We call on Arab governments throughout the region to help advance that goal. The U.S. seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, negotiated between the parties themselves, without the imposition of an artificial timetable, and without the demand that Israel deal with entities which continue to pledge her destruction. … Part of that [negotiation] process must be a just, fair, and realistic framework for dealing with the Palestinian refugee issue.”
“Discrimination against Israel at the UN is unacceptable. We welcome Israel’s membership in the Western European and Others Group at the UN headquarters and demand its full acceptance and participation at all UN venues.”
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 12:46 am
Notice the complete absence of any re: to moving American Embassy to Jerusalem from either party platform, I would call both party platforms either status quo or a retreat from past more pro Israel positions. Notice that in Republican position itmentions comprehensible peace(old democratic positions) but makes no mention of current Republican admin. positions on calling for a 2 state solution outright.
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 1:01 am
Right, Yamit — Don’t believe what they say, see what they do.
Comment by elvis — September 7, 2008 @ 1:09 am
Try verifying any of Loftus’ undocumented claims. Good luck.
Comment by Shy Guy — September 7, 2008 @ 1:32 am
Shy Guy, is your comment due to the fact that he is a Democrat?
The Secret War Against the Jews by John Loftus and Mark Aarons
Comment by elvis — September 7, 2008 @ 1:46 am
Reminds me of the movie Syriana
Plot
Oil drives greed in Oscar-winning Traffic screenwriter Stephen Gaghan’s labyrinthine sophomore directorial effort that traces the corruption of the global oil industry from the backrooms of Washington, D.C., to the petroleum-rich fields of the Middle East. Based in part on the writings of former CIA case officer Robert Baer, Syriana combines multiple storylines to explore the complexities that befall a proposed merger between two U.S. oil giants. Reform-minded Gulf country prince Nasir (Alexander Siddig) is in favor of making his nation more self-sufficient rather than U.S.-reliant, and his money-minded Western connections couldn’t be less pleased. Before settling into a cushy desk job for the remainder of his career, CIA agent Bob Barnes (George Clooney) is sent on one last assignment — to assassinate Prince Nasir and reinstate U.S. ties in the oil-rich region. Though his loyalty dictates that Barnes carry out his current mission despite lingering doubts of a previous blunder, his mission goes horribly awry when his field contact goes turncoat and Barnes becomes a CIA scapegoat. Meanwhile, up-and-coming Washington attorney Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) attempts to walk a fine line in overseeing a tenuous merger between two oil giants that’s plagued with shady business dealings. Hotshot energy analyst Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) is in talks to form a lucrative partnership with Prince Nasir, though the death of his son during a party at the prince’s estate makes him question his loyalty to business over family. Back in Washington, D.C., Bennet’s boss Dean Whiting attempts to undermine Prince Nasir’s attempts to make his country less reliant on the U.S. dollar by planting the seeds of dissonance between the progressive prince and his money-minded younger brother Prince Meshal (Akbar Kurtha). ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Review
Syriana utilizes topical subject matter in order to put a human face on complicated world events. The film tells a very intricate story in that the actions of over a dozen characters all impact the others. Putting all the pieces together might require more than one viewing, but the performances are so vivid and the filmmaking so assured that one never feels lost during a viewing. With this many characters and plot threads it is easy for directors to trip, but Stephen Gaghan manages to make each scene feel like it is in the right place at the right time. The film shows an obvious debt to not only Steven Soderbergh’s Traffic (which Gaghan scripted), but also such gritty, paranoid ’70s films as All the President’s Men. George Clooney plays very much against type as a burned-out CIA agent, based on a real CIA agent whose nonfiction book served as the jumping off point for the film. His performance exudes a weariness that he has never shown before. The most underappreciated actor of his time, Jeffrey Wright turns in yet another pitch-perfect performance as a lawyer who keeps his motivations hidden. Matt Damon does angry and articulate as well as anybody, and he benefits greatly from some outstanding speeches. These performers, and all of the others as well, help keep the sprawling film to a digestible experience. The political content of the film is pretty basic; Gaghan simply hopes to show the human price paid when government and big business are so closely intertwined as to be almost indistinguishable. ~ Perry Seibert, All Movie Guide
Syriana plot: compare to Enron and loftus!
Plot
American energy giant Connex is losing control of key Middle-East oil fields in a kingdom ruled by the al-Subaai family. The emirate’s foreign minister, Prince Nasir (Alexander Siddig) has granted natural-gas drilling rights to a Chinese company, greatly upsetting the American oil industry and the energy interests of the U.S. government. To compensate for its decreased production capacity, Connex initiates a shady merger with Killen, a smaller oil company which recently won the drilling rights to key oil fields in Kazakhstan. Connex-Killen ranks as the world’s twenty-third largest economy, and American anti-trust regulators at the Department of Justice (DOJ) have misgivings. The Washington law firm headed by Dean Whiting (Christopher Plummer) is hired to smooth the way for the merger. Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) is assigned to promote the impression of due diligence to the DOJ, alleviating any allegations of corruption.
The filmmakers used the exterior of the Royal Mirage hotel in Dubai as the emir’s estate in Marbella, Spain
Enlarge
The filmmakers used the exterior of the Royal Mirage hotel in Dubai as the emir’s estate in Marbella, Spain
Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) is an energy analyst based in Geneva, Switzerland. Woodman’s supervisor directs him to attend a private party hosted by the emir at his estate in Marbella, Spain, to offer his company’s services. At the party, Woodman is prevented from speaking directly with the emir, who is busy showing off the estate’s remotely controlled electronic systems to Chinese oil executives. They try to control the swimming pool’s lighting system, but it is not working due to faulty wiring. As this is happening, Woodman’s son jumps in the pool and is electrocuted by the faulty wiring.
In reparation and out of sympathy for the loss of his son, Prince Nasir grants Woodman’s company oil interests worth US$75 million, and invites Woodman to become his economic advisor. Prince Nasir is dedicated to the idea of progressive reform, and understands that oil dependency is not sustainable in the long term; Nasir desires to utilize his nation’s oil profits to diversify the economy and introduce democratic reforms, in sharp contrast to his father’s repressive government, which has been supported by American interests. Nasir hopes to succeed his father as emir, but his younger brother is willing to continue the status quo and American military presence, and is chosen as the King’s successor instead. Nasir plans a military coup, but American intelligence assassinates him and his family via a remote missile attack on his convoy.
Robert Barnes (George Clooney) is a veteran CIA field operative trying to stop Middle Eastern illegal arms trafficking. While on assignment in Tehran to assassinate two Iranian arms dealers, Barnes notices that an anti-aircraft missile intended to participate in the explosion was diverted to a blue-eyed Arab. Barnes makes his superiors nervous by writing memos about the missile theft, and is subsequently reassigned to a desk job; however, unaccustomed to the political discretion required, he quickly embarrasses the wrong person by speaking his mind and is sent back to the field with the assignment of assassinating Prince Nasir. Prior to his reassignment, Barnes confides with his friend and ex-CIA agent, Stan Goff (William Hurt), about returning to Lebanon and Goff advises him to notify Hezbollah of his arrival. Barnes travels to Lebanon and seeks safe passage from a Hezbollah leader, and hires a mercenary named Mussawi to murder Nasir. But Mussawi turns out to be an Iranian agent, who has Barnes kidnapped and tortured. The Hezbollah leader ultimately arrives at the scene of Barnes’ torture and stops Mussawi from beheading Barnes.
When the CIA learns that Mussawi plans to broadcast its intention to kill Nasir, the agency seeks to distance itself by scapegoating Barnes and portraying him as a rogue agent. Whiting (Christopher Plummer) becomes worried, first about Robert talking about the Nasir assassination plan, second that the coup that Nasir is organizing would have a greater likelihood of success, and thirdly that the assassination of Nasir by Predator drone would be evident as an American hit. However, after being threatened, Whiting ensures the release of Barnes’ passports through his powerful political connections. Barnes eventually learns why he was portrayed as a rogue agent, and approaches Prince Nasir to warn him of the assassination plan. It is too late and Nasir, his family and Barnes are killed in the explosion.
Pakistani migrant workers Saleem Ahmed Khan (Shahid Ahmed) and his son Wasim (Mazhar Munir) board a bus to go to work at a Connex refinery, only to discover that they have been laid off due to a Chinese company outbidding Connex for the rights to run that facility. Since the company has provided food and lodging, the workers face the threat of poverty and deportation due to their unemployed status. Wasim desperately searches for work. Wasim and his friend join an Islamic school to learn Arabic in an effort to improve their employment prospects. While playing soccer, they meet a charismatic blue-eyed Muslim fundamentalist cleric, who eventually leads them to execute a suicide attack on a Connex-Killen LNG tanker using a shaped-charge explosive from the missing Tehran missile.
Bennett Holiday meets with U.S. Attorney Donald Farish III, who is convinced that Killen bribed someone to get the drilling rights in Kazakhstan. While investigating Connex-Killen’s records, Holiday discovers a wire transfer of funds that is traced back to a transaction between Danny Dalton (Tim Blake Nelson) and Kazakhstani officials. Holiday tells Connex-Killen of his discovery, and they pretend not to have known about it. Holiday advises Dalton that he will likely be charged with corruption in order to serve as a “body” to get the DOJ off the back of the rest of Connex-Killen. Farish then strong-arms Holiday into giving the DOJ information about illegal activities he has discovered. Holiday gives up Dalton, but Farish says this is not enough. Holiday meets with ex-Killen chief Jimmy Pope (Chris Cooper), and informs him that the DOJ needs a second body to drop the investigation. Pope asks Holiday whether a person at Holiday’s firm, above him, would be sufficient as the additional body. Holiday acknowledges that if the name were big enough, the DOJ would stop the investigation, and allow the merger.
Holiday brings his colleague and mentor Sydney Hewitt (Nicky Henson) to meet with the CEO of Connex-Killen, Lee Janus (Peter Gerety). In a surprise move, Holiday reveals an under-the-table deal that Hewitt made while the Connex-Killen merger was being processed. Holiday has given Hewitt to the DOJ as the second body, thereby protecting the rest of Connex-Killen. Janus is able to attend the ceremony “oil industry man of the year” with a load taken off his shoulders.
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 2:26 am
Truth is stranger than fiction.
Comment by elvis — September 7, 2008 @ 3:01 am
Oat:
SORRY TO EXCEED 25 WORS OR LESS AS YOU KNOW IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO BE SHORT AND CONCISE
Golda Meir, fearful of the American reaction and procrastinating in the face of Jewish holiday, did not preempt in 1973 when the Egyptian military buildup was unmistakable though one could have deluded herself about its purpose. Compounding a grave error with grave crime, Golda sent Jewish reservists to the slaughter which resulted in 10,000 casualties – instead of employing nuclear weapons. Golda’s fear of the world opinion greatly exceeded her concern with Jewish lives. That ugly character famously announced that she can forgive the Arabs for killing Jews but not for making the Jews to kill Arabs. Likewise, her accomplice Moshe Dayan remarked during the early stages of the Yom Kippur war, “We’re witnessing the Third Temple’s destruction” – and reportedly was on the way to offer capitulation instead of nuking the Arabs.
The appeasement of gentiles, a policy brought to the fore by Golda Meir, produced bloody fruits: the IDF was instructed to save Arab lives. In practice, that meant not firing at the civilians used by the terrorists as shields, so that Jews often operated without air support and suffered heavy casualties. No doubt, the gentiles were concerned with civilian death toll, the very gentiles who designed blockbuster bombs to rip away the roofs so that subsequently dropped incendiary bombs could set the houses on fire more reliably; fried (and rightly so) Dresdners caused no public outcry in Albion.
The establishment’s answer to massive Jewish deaths was, well and good. The Peres-Beilin-Rabin gang launched the worst war of them all, the peace process which has killed and maimed more Jews than the Yom Kippur war. To give the murder a purpose, they coined the unimaginably cynical term, “victims of peace process.” When else in history thousands of people have died to further peace negotiations? You die to win a war, not to procure media coverage for negotiators. It is critical to understand that the dead end of the peace process is not only the Left’s business: Rabin was as right as it gets, the hysterical “Mr. Security” who ordered breaking hands and legs of Intifada participants. Netanyahu continued the peace process, and Lieberman never even tried repealing it while in the government.
Sharon, someone with the brain of a bulldozer, with proven history of disregard to Jewish lives, from the 1956 Mitla slaughter to the bloodthirsty destruction of Yamit. Who could think of electing him a prime minister? Sharon loved oppression. When oppressing the Arabs proved to be not a politically correct option, he turned to oppressing Jews, and turned thousands of Jewish refugees from Gush Katif into social corpses, broke and broken.
No, Golda was not one of my favorite Zionist heroes. Nice to know though that she was one of yours though. As for the rest; I stand by my opinions of them.
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 3:08 am
Oat,
Just in case no one has told you, there are explicit commandments to eradicate non-Jewish worship from the land of Israel, expel the natives, and build the Temple. Every rabbinical commentator, no exception, agreed that those commandments are binding upon Jews. God calls Jews “the people who shall dwell alone?” Jews who intermarry with gentiles act on a simple realization: there is no rational reason to be Jewish. There are nice, ethical, honest, smart, funny, and good-looking Gentiles. No trait is unique to Jews. Jewish culture? There is no specific Jewish culture; we have assimilated cultures of various nations, from Holland to Iraq. Jewish history? But past shouldn’t determine the present. Jewish heritage? Our only heritage is religious, and once the religion is abandoned, heritage becomes an empty name. Jewish ancestry? That’s racism: I was born Jewish, and he was born Black. There is a single conceivable reason to not marry a gentile: because God told us to be his people and dwell alone.
(Universal Brotherhood) The Torah indeed calls non-Jews our neighbors, but you wouldn’t like to know where. Close your eyes to the politically correct world. God told the Hebrews to borrow valuables from their Egyptian neighbors before Exodus. The only time in the Torah when non-Jews are called our neighbors is when we’re about to defraud them. Why? Because only at that time were the foreigners willing to help us, as God instilled temporary love of Jews into their hearts.
If that smacks of being dangerously un-Christian, rest assured that the Christian approach was similar. In the Parable of Good Samaritan, Jesus implies that even despised Samaritans are our neighbors if they are ready to help us.
Comment by yamit82 — September 7, 2008 @ 3:29 am
Nope. My comment is due to the fact that what you linked to is hearsay. There are tons of political cranks of all persuasions making a name for themselves. They come in every color, affiliate with all the parties, some are anti-Semites and others are super Zionists.
Makes no difference to me. Bunk is bunk until proven otherwise.
Like WOW!
/end sarcasm
Comment by Shy Guy — September 7, 2008 @ 4:18 am
..but you ignored the 100 pages of verified notes to which the reviewer refers in Secret War (which I have read and ends with the typical liberal hope that the PLO and Israel could come to some accord). And you show no proof for your wild accusations against Loftus.
I have to go to work now so you have plenty of time to come up with something other than ignorance.
Comment by elvis — September 7, 2008 @ 7:48 am
I cannot help it if you take it for granted that we all have Mr. Loftus’ books on our shelves at home, right next to the encyclopedia and the dictionary.
I based myself on the link you pointed to. There are no references there whatsoever.
Is this the same John Loftus who, in 2003, quoted “sources” who claimed that Saddam was killed and Saddam’s dead body was being hidden in the Russian Embassy in Baghdad and then smuggled out of Iraq?
Give us a break! These guys are a dime a dozen.
Comment by Shy Guy — September 7, 2008 @ 10:34 am
I posted the Investor’s Business Daily link to Free Republic.
Comment by Bill Levinson — September 7, 2008 @ 1:34 pm
[...] Obama – Magna Cum Saudi? Investor’s Business Daily, zitiert bei IsraPundit, 06.09.08 in einem Text über einen wichtigen Helfer des Kandidaten. (Was im übrigen eine weitere Unwahrheit [...]
Pingback by Zitate! « abseits vom mainstream - heplev — September 7, 2008 @ 1:39 pm
ShyGuy- RE: your 28 –
…an ad hominem — Almost three hours later and that’s the best you can do?
The reviewer of the book did the fact checking as stated in my #21 which I deliberately set in bold face. What’s the matter? …reading-challenged?
Not as far as I know
Inuendo
In addition to being a truth teller for us Jews against a sea of morally depraved careerists at foggy bottom he’s also doing the pro bono civil lawsuit on behalf of the 911 Families VS your friends the Saudis and their lawyer of Baker-Botts, James “FTJ’s” Baker.
Comment by elvis — September 7, 2008 @ 4:31 pm
As America approaches a period of intensified election campaigning, it is facing:
*Mounting job losses.
*Fiscal deficit, now approaching $500-billion, not counting roughly the $15-billion a month being spent in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
*Growing U.S. foreign debt- imports more than it produces.
*Increasing costs of social security,medical insurance, medicaid and medicaire.
*Credit crunch.
*Stock market declines.
*Banks and mortgage insurance failures.
*General economic recession.
*Housing crises.
In a 2008 interview, Senator McCain stated,
.
Comment by h peskin — September 7, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
Peskin, would you rather have Husein still paying $25,000 to each homicider’s family for each death in Israel. Would you rather still see Al Quida entrenched in Iraq? Would you still bitch about any attacks Israel has to make in Lebanon, Gaza or Iran? I don’t think so.
Comment by Ed D — September 7, 2008 @ 5:45 pm
:
Ed D: How in the blankety blank does America committing economic Hari-Kari, have anything
to do with any success accruing in the war on terrorism or safeguarding Israel. None whatsoever.
And if I had a penny(us) for every pu-tz who voiced an opinion similar to your’s , I would be a multi-zillionaire.
And when I use the word pu-tz, I am being kind.
Comment by h peskin — September 7, 2008 @ 8:51 pm
Once again you make some ridiculous assumption that people press the refresh button just to see your most recent post and reply within under a minute. Do you need a life?
I never bothered following the link in post 21. My original response was to the direct link to the first Loftus article you posted, where indeed there are zero/zippo/zilch references.
And are you now telling me that book reviewers are responsible for referencing? Anyway, now I looked at the book review and if YOU had any elementary reading abilities, you would see that even the reviewer (an unheard of nobody with his very own web page - WOW!) mentions how speculative Loftus’ book is.
Thanks for confirming.
A quick google finds this:
The source is Loftus himself, on his own web site: Text of Loftus on MSNBC July 25, 2003.
The Saudi, Bakers, Botts and what-nots, are not my friends. Live with it.
Comment by Shy Guy — September 7, 2008 @ 10:58 pm
[...] Israpundit " Blog Archive " Obama Exposed [...]
Pingback by Government Grants for Women « .GOV Grants — January 18, 2009 @ 1:40 am