It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Obama's Pastor Blames America for 9-11

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 07:05 PM

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by IAmTetsuo
The historical Jesus was white; he just wasn't Nordic. He could have easily passed for an Italian (or Roman as they were called back then) or Greek.

When and where was historical Jesus born according to you?

The Roman province of Iudaea (Judea), in the approximate place as modern Israel, in 40 BC or so. That would make him Mediterranean.

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 07:33 PM
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen

well, maybe the republicans can finally denounce their religious leaders as they obviously see how detrimental they can be... o yeah, i forgot, only democrats and liberals are to be held to a higher standard. i had a moment of clarity and i just lost it.

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 07:59 PM
Most of us here think 9/11 was an inside job and love America.

Point is, Obama didn't say this. His pastor did. His pastor is entitled to speak his mind, but because of the timing the media is bringing attention to it.

I've found a link of Obama condemning the remark Here

Cheers to Obama!!

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 08:58 PM
reply to post by IAmTetsuo

I the context that I referred to African I meant Black Africans. Sub-Saharan Africans. At any rate the comment was made in deference to Pastor Wright who may believe that Jesus Christ is Black because of the possibility that Jesus hailed from Africa. When Blacks speak of their racial identity in the context of Africa, they speak of Black Africa. Therefore my statement of what Pastor Wright might believe passes since he did say that Jesus was Black.

You posted the following:

Originally posted by Areal51
Third, there is over the true race of Jesus Christ. (Why does it even matter?)

The above quote originally read:

"Third, there is great debate over the true race of Jesus Christ. (Why does it even matter?)"

Perhaps that helps to clarify.

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 10:13 PM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

When coming to an understanding of Jewish people, culture, history and religion through the lens of Semitic peoples one enters a labyrinth. (Of course, you would know this.) I mentioned Caucasian Jews to refer to Western Jews or Ashkenazi Jews. The predominant Jewish people throughout Eurasia. This was mentioned to be distinct from Black African or Sub-Saharan African Jews. There are Ethiopian Jews and the Lemba Jews, for example. From what I understand Black African Jews had nothing to do with the creation of Jewish Zionism, and the movement itself does not seem to have been initially established to address the plight of Black African Jews. I do, however, recognize that Ethiopian Jews have been recognized by the state of Israel.

Also, there seems to be a tremendous amount of distinction among people claiming Semitic heritage. To make the matter clear I did not refer to anti-Semitism as being applicable to Semitic non-Jewish people (for example, Hebrews). Rather I used it in its commonly understood context as applying strictly to Jewish people.

Therefore, I do not understand how using the term Caucasian Jews can be equated with racism. Especially since I did not declare any superior or inferior race of people. Nor did I mention Caucasian Jews in any prejudicial context. (Clearly I did not "lump all Jews together" under the heading "Caucasian". To do so would only be incorrect, not racist.)

You mention that Jesus was a Semite. If he really was that does not preclude him from being African and Black.

Again, regardless of what the nuclear attacks on Japan are alleged to have prevented, they can still be considered terrorist attacks. Many people, including myself, agree with this determination. Especially when nuclear armed governments have used their position to dictate and influence foreign policy. Muslim terrorists seek to accomplish the same thing through the use of suicide bombers.

On race based legislation in America:

To the fugitive slave fleeing a life of bondage, the North was a land of freedom. Or so he or she thought. Upon arriving there, the fugitive found that, though they were no longer slaves, neither were they free. African Americans in the North lived in a strange state of semi-freedom. The North may had emancipated its slaves, but it was not ready to treat the blacks as citizens. . . or sometimes even as human beings.

Northern racism grew directly out of slavery and the ideas used to justify the institution. The concepts of "black" and "white" did not arrive with the first Europeans and Africans, but grew on American soil. During Andrew Jackson's administration, racist ideas took on new meaning. Jackson brought in the "Age of the Common Man." Under his administration, working class people gained rights they had not before possessed, particularly the right to vote. But the only people who benefited were white men. Blacks, Indians, and women were not included.

This was a time when European immigrants were pouring into the North. Many of these people had faced discrimination and hardship in their native countries. But in America they found their rights expanding rapidly. They had entered a country in which they were part of a privileged category called "white."

Classism and ethnic prejudices did exist among white Americans and had a tremendous impact on people's lives. But the bottom line was that for white people in America, no matter how poor or degraded they were, they knew there was a class of people below them. Poor whites were considered superior to blacks, and to Indians as well, simply by virtue of being white. Because of this, most identified with the rest of the white race and defended the institution of slavery. Working class whites did this even though slavery did not benefit them directly and was in many ways against their best interests.

Before 1800, free African American men had nominal rights of citizenship. In some places they could vote, serve on juries, and work in skilled trades. But as the need to justify slavery grew stronger, and racism started solidifying, free blacks gradually lost the rights that they did have. Through intimidation, changing laws and mob violence, whites claimed racial supremacy, and increasingly denied blacks their citizenship. And in 1857 the Dred Scott decision formally declared that blacks were not citizens of the United States.

In the northeastern states, blacks faced discrimination in many forms. Segregation was rampant, especially in Philadelphia, where African Americans were excluded from concert halls, public transportation, schools, churches, orphanages, and other places. Blacks were also forced out of the skilled professions in which they had been working. And soon after the turn of the century, African American men began to lose the right to vote -- a right that many states had granted following the Revolutionary War. Simultaneously, voting rights were being expanded for whites. New Jersey took the black vote away in 1807; in 1818, Connecticut took it away from black men who had not voted previously; in 1821, New York took away property requirements for white men to vote, but kept them for blacks. This meant that only a tiny percentage of black men could vote in that state. In 1838, Pennsylvania took the vote away entirely. The only states in which black men never lost the right to vote were Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts.

My listening to Pastor Wright (his taped sermon and his video captured sermon featured on the first page) does not yield the same understanding that you and other have. My impression is that Pastor Wright preaches in metaphors. A point I've already made. He talks about division in order to address the problem of division. One cannot address unity without addressing the causal factors of division. Pastor Wright does so, albeit in a provocative way, but he seems to do so in a way that demands his audience to think for themselves and reflect. To go and do their own research. To me he does not seem to be telling his congregation what to think.

Pastor Wright does use language that seems divisive, but he uses it in the way it is presented in our indoctrination of what the America is. I've read many exposés and interviews on American CEOs. Almost without exception, those who are White remark how lucky they were to be born White, male, and American. So when Wright speaks of rich White America he is only using terminology that successful White Americans have used and are using that describe factors that they thought were important to their success. Being a CEO and White and male matters to many American CEOs. And the images that go along with that help to foster division and prejudice. As an example:

Over a longer period, the market lifted the value of Mr. Buffett’s judicious investments and timely acquisitions, and he emerged as the extraordinarily wealthy Sage of Omaha, in effect, a baron of the new Gilded Age whose views are strikingly similar to those of Carnegie and Mr. Weill.

Like them, Mr. Buffett, 78, sees himself as lucky, having had the good fortune, as he put it, to have been born in America, white and male, and “wired for asset allocation” just when all four really paid off. He dwelt on his good fortune in a recent appearance at a fund-raiser for Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is vying for Mr. Buffett’s support of her presidential candidacy.

I agree with you and your message for unity. I think Pastor Wright and Senator Obama agree with your message as well.

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 10:36 PM
How can anyone say Obama is not the preacher or the messenger? He is the vessel that has been absorbing Rev? Wrights message for 20 years. He choose that church because he liked the message. Go to the churches website. They swear allegiance to "Mother Africa" His family has given thousands and thousands of dollars to this church (Rev? Wright). If George Bush or Rush Limbaugh had been going to the church of David Duke for so long, had been so involved had given so much money, had their kids BAPTIZED in the David Duke church they would be tared and feathered. End of story.. Blacks are pissed and that I understand. As has been taught for the last 50 years "blame somebody else" for your failures. If one doesn't take responsibility for their self,their neighborhood, their city, they have to place blame somewhere -whites.. But, what is even more worrisome is how many in this forum blame America for 9-11-01 and so many of the worlds problems. MUSLIM Terrorist attack us because we can give our Government the finger if we choose. We can have a beer or a Vodka Gimlet while we watch football. We can kneel and pray or we can hoolla hoop. They have been attacking us before most in this forum were born I suspect. America didn't give Israel their land. That piece of dirt was a colony of Great Britten since before WW1. (look up the White Papers) American technology built the Middle East dynasties. America has never told any of them... give us this, give us that... we have never taken 1 inch of soil form any of them. Well, yes we did.. we conquered Kuwait and gave it and every oil well back to them. MUSLIM Terrorist want to convert or kill every single person on this planet PERIOD. We are just the biggest bullseye on the block.

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by vision

Obama and his Pastor discussed the fact that he (Rev. Wright) was radical in his views and shouldn't introduce him as planed because it may hurt Obamas run for office . This was more than a year ago. Obama likes the church, the Pastor, the message... just didn't want it to follow him into the lime light. To come out now and denounce those things is liken to a "plan" ... if this happens Rev. you know what Ill have to do. Heres another donation brother. Obama said he considers Rev. Wright an Uncle and a spiritual adviser.

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:18 AM
Well were the ones who are gullible enough to eat the garbage the western media gives out. Hes right in a way.

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:28 AM

Originally posted by sy.gunson
What sickens me most here is those who are trying to make Obama's candidacy about race or about religion.

Note: In almost all states, blacks voted 9 out of ten times for Obama - in fact, the only states where Obama had white votes almost as high were those with the least amount of blacks - coincidence?

Of course, if 9 out of ten whites voted for Clinton in nearly every state, there would be calls of "racism", "discrimination" etc.

But hey - if you think Obama's hot stuff, why not look at his voting record - I recall a powerful supporter of Obama not being able to name a single thing Obama had created/improved....

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:46 AM

Originally posted by Areal51
I the context that I referred to African I meant Black Africans. Sub-Saharan Africans. At any rate the comment was made in deference to Pastor Wright who may believe that Jesus Christ is Black because of the possibility that Jesus hailed from Africa. When Blacks speak of their racial identity in the context of Africa, they speak of Black Africa. Therefore my statement of what Pastor Wright might believe passes since he did say that Jesus was Black.


It's not impossible that Jesus was black.
It's not impossible that Jesus was Nordic White.
It's not impossible that he was at least part Malayan (just to pick a nation/race at random).

In the absence of historical records of his appearance, we can only speculate, and look at probabilities. As I said before, most likely he was Mediterranean White, like most people from that region.

As an irony, there are records of what Mohammed looked like, and he was definitely Nordic in appearance (red hair, fair skin, IIRC blue eyes) It is very probable that Mohammed was whiter then Jesus!

You posted the following:

Originally posted by Areal51
Third, there is over the true race of Jesus Christ. (Why does it even matter?)

The above quote originally read:

"Third, there is great debate over the true race of Jesus Christ. (Why does it even matter?)"

Perhaps that helps to clarify.

I'm sorry for that mistake.

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:46 AM
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen

I think what we need to realize is who cares if the the pastor said "God **** America, but that those in power behind the scenes have already damned this country long and still continue to this day. Remember "actions speak louder than words". While it easy to focus on the racial aspect, that's exactly what the PTB want, focus on the bigger picture here. I love America, just not those who have betrayed her.

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:59 AM

Originally posted by StellarX
I suppose the people that got strung up in public for being born black?

LOL! Please tell that to the 1,293 white victims of "lynching" between 1880 and 1951 (courtesy of the Tuskegee Institute)

Originally posted by StellarX
As if i care for your ( if your part of the imperialist family normally unidentified as being white ) deluded belief that your parents and their grandparents managed to move so much wealth on you to entirely fairly!

"Wealth"? Please tell that to my working-class ancestors.

Originally posted by StellarX
If you feel sure that you have not gained ANYTHING by imperialism that's up to you but please don't attempt to burden the rest of us with such a shameless and self interested disregard for modern history.

And when you admit that most of the life you enjoy has been built up on the backs of innumerable white workers, scientists etc...

As i said please don't waste your time responding to posts that you do not feel applies to you. If you do not think your ancestors gained anything by imperialism obviously you can just disregard the fact that some whites did in fact engage in all the crimes previously stated. If you can not grasp why large sections of the third world ( and native populations in imperial conglomerations) have very legitimate anger about their treatment that's also something you can deal with in your own good time.

"Legitimate anger"? Please, if they are as pathetic to be holding century old grudges....

And since new Zealand was not inhabited at the time luckily the new settlers could not step on any native toes! Yeah.

Go blamin' Whitey!

Originally posted by StellarX
Sure we are as if we never colonized the rest of the world those diseases would not have spread. Who cares who discovered those vaccines given that the native populations were long dead?

So other travellers wouldn't spread these diseases? And you "should" care, unless you want a good dose of smallpox, yellow fever...

Originally posted by StellarX
Against the objections of leaders almost everywhere. Popular forces forced their European leaders to get rid of the practice and it had everything to do with the liberation struggles in various European countries. Sure some African and Arab leaders did not want to see the practice ended but did they create the market they were supplying with their enemies and local dissidents?

LOL! So, wait - "popular forces" wanted to end slavery, but no "colonialism". And it was the British Navy.
And slavery has had a long, long history in sub-Saharan Africa, beginning with Arab "colonists".

Originally posted by StellarX
Lol... Modern agricultural methods came into practice around the world almost simultaneously and if you are talking about the industrial revolution African populations have been devastated in the last century due to imperialism in general and cheap agricultural exports from the west specifically. Why did we need a population increase in Africa and why do populations normally increase rapidly in times of dire distress?

"Modern agricultural methods"? I'm sorry, I didn't know China had reached 19th Century agricultural science LOL! And African "populations" weren't really devastated, as villages and "kingdoms" of medieval scale cannot easily enable population growth - and this is ignoring Arabic slavery....

Originally posted by StellarX
If they had those they would have used em but since there are alternative methods and a lack of theta rays starvation, assasination and general persecution seems to be getting the 'job' done.

Yes, definitive proof (and the acquisition of it) is a bitch straight after leaving The Esteemed Academy of White Studies

Originally posted by StellarX
Thanks for telling me what i knew! What i did not know is that you discriminate so precisely otherwise i would have bothered to be precise.

I was just nipping the "blacks are responsible for all European knowledge blah-blah-blah" in the bud.

Originally posted by StellarX
What about Byzantium? If you have a problem with convention that's fine with me as long as you tell me why you have decided to move the center of modern thinking, of the last thousand years , and civilization from the ME to elsewhere.

Yes, Byzantium clearly classifies as "Arabic civilisation"

Originally posted by StellarX
The only reason it is what it is is because the American people did not take no for a answer when it come to fighting the capitalist classes that had been running the country from it's inception. The American people ( well most of them and when they were not hanging African Americans and other minorities) brougth about all the good, against great resistance and brutal oppression, that can still be found in the USA today.

You clearly fail to grasp that the development of Industrial-Era societies was less about some Marxist struggle between "worker and capitalist parasite", than a complex mixture of economic/political/social factors.

Originally posted by StellarX
No better than African Americans but certainly better than they did before the China invaded them

LOL! Tell me:
* Has your Internet access been cut-off due to riots against "white Imperialists"?
* Have thousands of white National Guard, Police Riot Squads, Military units etc moved to quell protests in majority-black neighbourhoods?
* Did capitalist white America invade the "native blacks"?

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:07 AM

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Why would I say that?
That's not the root of the problem, that's just a symptom.

LOL! Why does this pop-up in "every" single discussion about blacks and crimes?
"It was poverty, it was institutional racism, it was the White Devil's Theta Rays" - clearly, accepting blame for one's actions is alien to certain people.

Originally posted by Chaoticar
haha, so what?
America used to burn "witches" at the stakes, LMAO
Mass Slavery, I used the word mass here
Then War corporatism
and a whole bunch of minority oppression all in between does burning a few "witches" equate to feudalism? And tell that to the blacks in Africa killing/expelling students "possess by the devil".

Originally posted by Chaoticar
Then you talk about India and Rajahs?
lol, please allow a country to develop on it's own and only then comment on it, unfortunately at the moment that's not possible for India.

Wait - on it's own?

Without Whitey's technology?

Originally posted by Chaoticar
Wow, Currently there is mass hate on islam because the media feeds the people that they hate your freedom and want to impose their religious beliefs on you. And here you are imposing your "business" beliefs on an entire ancestry?

No, it's because Islam is clearly a religion still grappling with barbaric interpretations of it's religious texts.

Originally posted by Chaoticar
Who are you to tell these very simple people that in order to live freely they must adhere to some law of ownership which had nothing to do with their way of living at the time?

I was just destroying your argument that white Americans are "technically" still immigrants.

Originally posted by Chaoticar
Please expand on what you mean exacly in this friendly debate
I mean the friendly part btw

Basically, the "core belief" of FCW (outside whites being afraid of "genetic annihilation" and "black genitalia" :@@
are that everything - from Iraq, to Africa to America - relative to non-whites is "systematic oppression by albino whites".

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
lol at your ficticious analogy, ya that big of a drug order is done in broad daylight in front of the public.
Tonight might be a good night for u to rent some Al Pacino Movies

So...your saying that "minorities" INVOLUNTARILY begin to take drugs?

Originally posted by Chaoticar
Oh no don't get me wrong, I never thought that
India and China invented math and science before any other race

True, but I think we're well advanced beyond those forms of mathematics...

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:18 AM
reply to post by Areal51

I'll try to elaborate on Zionism. Zionism was a reaction. Zionism came into being due to the racist anti semitic policies of Europe. Oppression and Persecution by Europeans propelled Jews to the ideology of Zionism or Jewish Identity.

The word Zion itself is a name for Jerusalem or Israel. In essence Zionism is an ideology that identifies with Jerusalem and Israel. It is an ideology of Liberation from Oppression and Persecution.

Zionism itself is not unified there are many types of Zionists and branches of it. Some are Nationalists, Secular, Socialists, Communists, Liberal, and Religious. The Zionists of the 1890s are not the same as the Zionists of the 1920s. Though initially began by Ashkenazim, it has spread to include Mediterranean Jews, Sephardim and Mizrahim. In the 1980s spreading to Lemba and Ethiopian Jews. Zion is really an idea, a goal, an almost Messianic liberation of the Jewish people from the Diaspora and the oppression of the Gentiles.

On the topic of Jesus I would not be surprised if he had Nubian or Ethiopian ancestors or relatives. I have no problem with that. What I do have an issue with is Celtic or Nordic looking Jesus with long straight blonde hair and snow white skin. That is simply not accurate.

On racism in America,
Powerful English Americans passed all kinds of racist laws. If you go back and study American history you'll see the English simply did not like other races. They did not assimilate Africans or Native Americans like the French and Spanish did. You can trace racism from the early US and even modern racism back to that Protestant English Culture of the 17th and 18th centuries. Again it is not a White issue, its an Anglo American Issue. The Spanish and Portuguese, who are White but Catholic, were not afraid to intermarry with Africans and Native Americans. Like the whole concept of WASP, white anglo saxon protestant, applies here. Only a certain section of White American society are the priviliged elite.

One thing people fail to mention was how the Non WASPs were treated. People fail to mention White Slaves, Scots and Irish who worked along side African slaves. Slavery was a universal horror driven by profit and greed.

The real issue here though is the potential election of a man to the most powerful office on the face of the Earth. America is not a few people who ordered atomic bombing on Japan, wealthy plantation owners who enslaved hundreds of thousands before the Civil War, or dirty officials who did secret testing on minorities during the Cold war. America is an Idea like Zion. Its stands for hope and liberty. The people who have held office in it who have made terrible mistakes are not America. They are terrible people who have tried to corrupt the idea of America. America is the shining beacon. This American dream is the vision that Dr. King saw. The same American dream that Thomas Paine envisioned when the nation was established. I just dont see how Wright is compatible with them. He is too angry and blames an entire Nation and Race for the actions of the few. We need someone who really understands, who looks at History, the Nation and People objectively. We can't condemn an entire people and country for mistakes its leaders and its elite made. Out of all people, a man of G-d should know this. Forgiveness and Love that is what the Bible teaches, that is what Jesus teaches, not G-d Cursing America. G-d would of spared Sodom had just Ten righteous people been found within its walls. If G-d can spare Sodom for the sake of Ten, I am sure he blesses America on the account of the many who give to charity and work to heal the world.

So no I will not support someone who calls for G-d to condemn America. I will not support one whose mentor calls for G-d to curse America. America is a nation of blessings. It may of not started out that way, but it has become a refuge, a haven to many people. It has become the greatest source of charity in all of human history. G-d Bless America

[edit on 18/3/08 by MikeboydUS]

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 09:56 AM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

Protestant is just another wing of the catholic corp.
Who is the Federal Reserve? Your facts are so diluted and strange. Everyone knows who backed those clowns you mention as well as the protestant corp. It's no diff than the gov saying we have this 'enemy' when it was them all along -you know, the 'war' in iraq. There's that old patriotism crap. You are probably a christian who gives praise to the us flag right?
Pawns in one big game! Surely you can have a hierarchy structured to produce the society in which we see today. Some can't see the big picture because it's not real enough to them. But if you look behind the scenes and find who owns the major corps, networks and media, you will find who these 'elite' people are. You will also discover the system that was put in place many years ago to keep the divisions in tact so the lower classes would continue to fight over things that made no sense; black/white, god/devil/santa, and on and on and on. while behind the scenes they continue to rake in the dough.
Society as a whole was designed to keep the euro rich and in power/control. you mean to tell me with all the information that is pouring out in opposition to the scheme that you still believe this is not so? How incredibly gullible you must be.
You trust and believe they cannot find osama? hahaha - what a crock of booboo.
Wright is EXACTLY whats needed! instead of people like obama who bow down to the pressure of people like you. no need to sweep crap under the rug since we all knows of the many ills in society. the euro has enjoyed this freedom and liberty for hundreds of years and it needs to be shouted over and over again until slave money is returned!
I just heard on the radio that when a family in iraq is killed, the soldiers are ordered to give reparations to them. so they drop off a little cash and keep moving.
The African has NEVER received this and everyone knows that slavery existed and still exists. and you want us to sit and remain quiet about it while the slave masters siblings continue to live off the money my ancestors made for them! Mr. Wright should do just what he is doing and more people should do it.
Even you! your gov has sold you out and you don't even realize it. your churches are corps - that means they are a business, nothing to do with a god/devil/satan/santa. they make money off of you in the church and on the streets which is the same way they control you!
dr king wasn't a martyr for anyone! he allowed people to kill kids, spit on women, sick dogs and children and women - i don't think so! just to pacify the power structure? you are incredibly influenced if you think for one second that anyone in your gov would allow that to happen to their kids. but, the euro has always had the luxury of standing on top of folks, so it's hard for you to relate. For instance, a couple years back the euros in texas tied the African to the back of a truck and drove until he was shredded to lil pieces. it was a human! i don't hear euros crying about that and coming to the rescue. all i hear is gangs, alcohol, drugs, crime - which are all the things your gov makes money on! They recently found a cia plane that crashed in mexico with tons of coc aine. do you think they were bringing it here for research or to sell it?
be blind and dumb if you want to, but they are closing in on the euro as well. most of you don't even trust your gov anymore and they know it. they are about to buy up the real estate market and i suppose by next year, gas will be at about $5.00 per gallon - when it's something we don't even need. cars run off of electricity, water, and many other things beside gas/oil, but they keep us hostage by selling only the cars that use it while over-pricing hybrids and electrical cars. does it need to be spelled out more for you?

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:10 PM
reply to post by cmptrwhiz

Quite right . I only use the term because calling it a massacre makes me "a bleeding heart liberal" according to the skin head nazi brigade and thats just asking for slaps from scumbags who agree with the fight .

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:39 PM

Originally posted by IAmTetsuo
It's not impossible that Jesus was black.
It's not impossible that Jesus was Nordic White.

Actually, it is.

His mother was of the lineage of David and came from Nazereth. He was not lilly white and he wasn't african black. He wasn't asian either. He was a Jew. Olive skinned most likely. Brown eyes. Probably brown hair.

* I say that his mother was of the line of David because it was promised to David that his decendent would be the Christ. Joseph's lineage to David doesn't matter because he wasn't Jesus' biological father. God was.

Originally posted by cmptrwhiz
Protestant is just another wing of the catholic corp.

Not even close. I triple dog dare ya' to say that in the deep south - where the bible thumpers are.

Society as a whole was designed to keep the euro rich and in power/control.

No. American society was designed specifically to garuntee the right to 'persue happiness'. It isn't promised to be handed to anyone. So go persue it.

it needs to be shouted over and over again until slave money is returned!

You want 'slave money returned'?? You weren't a slave and didn't earn any. Oh .. and if you are looking for handouts then start with AFRICA - since they are the ones that sold the ancestors of american blacks into slavery to begin with.

you want us to sit and remain quiet about it while the slave masters siblings continue to live off the money my ancestors made for them!

1- It's not 'siblings' .. that denotes brothers and sisters. And if you are making that vile claim about 'slave masters children' ... try again. VERY FEW white people in this country owned slaves. Most white people in this country are NOT decended from slave masters. However, many free blacks were slave owners. Almost all blacks in Africa owned or sold black slaves. The chances are much higher that a black american had ancestors owned by blacks rather than by whites.

2 - You offer no proof that anyone in this time period is enjoying money that their ancestors made from slavery. The FACT is that most slave owners lost everything in the civil war. There was no 'slave money' left after the civil war. Give proof that some family now has $$$ from slavery and that they were able to hold it through the war.

3 - If it was really money your ancestors made for someone else, then it doesn't belong to you anyways. Even if it still existed .. which it doesn't .. it would belong to THEM, your ancestors, .. not you. You haven't raised a finger to work for it.

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:34 PM
Here's an interesting link that sheds a little light on Obama's Church. Pay special note to the to the links cited. Forgive me if someone has already posted this link. I didn't see it anywhere.

[edit on 3/18/08 by LLoyd45]

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:38 PM
reply to post by FlyersFan

I say it all the time - anywhere. Again, they are merely another wing of the catholic corp!
No america (the corp, owned by the queen/catholic corp) was setup for the elite. it was never intended for freedom or liberty. playground for the rich only. you go pursue it! and let us know how much they still tax you. freedom/liberty - what an absolute joke. freedom from what? liberty in what sense? Justice for whom? you have got to be kidding me...
you are watched and monitored 24/7 - that's freedom? what rights do i have or do i have to follow the law of the land? (which the rich and most of the police/politicians happen to be well above.)
they enforce laws that dont exist and most dare not question it: TAXES. Where is that law?
of course it should be returned - it would be considered inheritance! my ancestors worked for your evil ancestors and built industries from the proceeds. that allowed most euros a level of advancement that wasn't provided to the African. Remember? scary butt euros: making laws where other humans couldn't read and write! how sad is that?
so lets go back - maybe they sold a slave or two. i'm certain that they didn't agree on the killing of 15-60 million of them (depends on who does the counting) with countless others held in oppression for over 500 years which allowed the power structure to become more powerful because they controlled the money, laws, real estate, politics - oh and the wonderful fairy tale of jesus/god/satan and santa. all of which i understand you trust in.
so your thread should be read with caution and hesitancy because if you believe that as well as worshipping a flag, then you are delusional and most can agree on that.
lazy euro are taking all the handouts: check out the welfare stats!
stop trying to justify your lazy ancestors! i'm certain the slavery there was/is much different than any slavery that ever existed on this planet. between your diseases, mind conditioning, rape, molestation, re-writing of history, piggy-backing, drug pushing, alcohol pushing, and laws to oppress any opposition, you have no grounds to speak. it has been exposed - the truth about the euro, one invention: thievery.
go read - i will not do it for you. the facts are the facts and you can trace your heritage like anyone else. if you want to find the slave masters, look them up. for you to write dumb comments like you do, really isn't worth a response, but you make me laugh to say that they lost all their money. is that what they told you in class along with santa and rudolph and jesus? it's all good - you wouldn't understand facts anyway.
again, your lazy ancestors left money as inheritance for the next group of thieves to live off of. you can trace the history for yourself instead of hoping and wishing it's not true. its your fault as well as your families fault for not leaving you any of it and you having to go out and work like the rest of us. even after the years of abuse, torture, rape, removal of culture/education/belief we still manage to climb our way up your ladder and do better than most of you. you and your ancestors had a 500 year headstart and trillions of dollars and authors and scholars to try and re-write history and keep the lies going. they are being challenged now and its upsetting to the euro that their light doesn't shine as brightly as they were taught. I can blame my African ancestry for selling us; which I do. they are at fault as well. but you have got to admit that the things that were done to those humans was absolutely grotesque and you have to be pretty sick to do that for hundreds of years. and this same group has been in charge of religion and politics - you mean to tell me they can cut off their sickness to do the right things when it comes to that? You can kill a slave and still pray on sunday? i guess you can being that none of it's real anyway.

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:56 PM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

I do understand that Zionism is an umbrella term. That's the reason I used the term Jewish Zionism to make a distinction. Thanks for the brief explanation of how Jewish Zionism spread throughout Europe and into Africa.

I've already placed into historical context where Pastor Wright is coming from. When he speaks of White America, he is not speaking of the entire White race. He is speaking of White America in the sense of those who are the oppressors. Wright did speak of Hillary and Obama in metaphorical terms. Because of that he did address the W.A.S.P. issue and the underprivileged issue. And I don't think that Pastor Wright's comment of "God damn America" is meant to be taken literally. It's meant to convey disgust with what America has become. We've all heard folks using the term "goddamn" before, and that is all that I think that Pastor Wright has exclaimed.

The recent scrutiny of Pastor Wright is due to nothing more than an attempt by the Clinton campaign to discredit Obama. Recently Hillary's credibility took a major hit from Black voters. Much of it to do with the recent statements made by Clinton's now ex-campaign fundraising manager, Geraldine Ferraro. Ferraro said recently, "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position".[1] A nearly identical statement that she made regarding Jesse Jackson during his presidential bid in 1988. "In an April 15, 1988, article in The Washington Post, Ferraro is quoted as saying that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."[2] Both are clearly racist statements. Ferraro completely disregards any contribution of substance that either candidate could offer. For Ferraro being Black is all that matters for a Black man, the rest is just easy street. Never mind that history doesn't support those statements. A racist who uses reverse racism rhetoric -- how's that for a new twist in an ancient and ugly ballgame?

I haven't heard Pastor Wright say anything about anyone that is remotely close to what Ferraro has said. However, Clinton, Ferraro, and Wright are all from the same generation of heated, toxic, divided politics and country. It's not surprising that the three of them are associated with divisive rhetoric and policies. Race, gender, and wealth are the issues one would quickly be confronted with when researching either person.

Obama on the other hand does not hail from that generation. His message is diametrically opposite in content and tone:

"The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into red states and blue states; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and, yes, we've got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America."[3]

I can certainly understand how one could get riled up by the things that Clinton, Ferraro, and Wright have said, but it's a mystery why anybody would sensibly include Obama in with that group's message. It's true that Obama is a member at Pastor Wright's church. Obama is but one generation removed from Wright. There are many forward thinking young people, of any race and ethnicity, from Obama's generation who have to graciously endure the consistently fresh anger from their parents and grandparents generation that seeps and spurts from old, bitter wounds.

"In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, 'I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial.' He said Rev. Wright 'is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with,' telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in their family."[4]

Many young people hold an abiding and deep respect for the survivors who represent their history and heritage. Even though they might not agree with everything that the older generations say and stand for.

People who are going to stand up and fight for change and unity do not usually come from comfortably ideal backgrounds. The genuine persons usually come from backgrounds that resemble things that we most dislike. Obama has been called the anti-Christ because he stands for unity. Now he is being labeled a wolf in sheep's clothing. Clinton's campaign and the media cannot portray Obama as the stereotypical angry Black man that America loves to hate. So instead, Obama is being cast in the guilty by association scenario along with the ideally angry Pastor Wright. All of it indicative of just how deep fear is seated in many people's hearts and minds.

Obama stands on his own. He has brought his own unique message to US citizens. His message is undeniably unique and some people distrust him because of it. Projecting their fears upon him -- using Pastor Wright as the lens in order to do so.

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright does not result in the sum of Senator Barack Obama.

When and where has Obama sown fear?

When has he uttered divisive rhetoric?

When has he shown himself to be a bigot?

None of those questions can be answered because answers for them do not exist. But the fear of many people is alive and well. That's for sure.


new topics

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in