End the slander : Obama is a Christian, page 8

Originally posted by Maxmars
I am not a regular 'defender' of political figures, but some of your comments strike me a ill-considered. If I may explain, respectfully.

Originally posted by sara123123
Hello Maxmars! I will do my best to answer your questions and address your points. To launch this, though, I think you need to understand this about me. I am a constitutionalist.

As such, I am for the constitutional structure of Federal and State power and for individual the rights listed in the constitution in it's original intent as documented in the Federalist papers and including the lawful amendments to the constitution. By lawful amendments, I mean amendments that have been made to the constitution via the process prescribed in the constitution. Judicial activism that has demolished the constitution and illegally rewritten it, at judicial whim, does not count to me. Presidential and congressional violations of the constitution are illegal to me. Treason comes to mind.

Total power corrupts totally and we have a totally corrupt government, no matter which party controls it. They do no respect the rule of law which they swear an oath to after each election. They do not look out for our interests; they look out for our interests; they look out for the interests of their own bank accounts and power, special interests, foreign governments and international corporations and global multi-billionaires.

So here we go!

I expect that any executive of the US administration meets - from time to time - with all manner of groups, so simply meeting with them is likely a function of foreign policy; since our government hides almost all things as 'secret' I can't say that I know the purpose of the meeting (aside from what the press and PR people report).

Could you please elaborate on the 'infiltration' of the government? I am curious because the same characterization can be laid upon the 'infiltration' of the government by corporate banking cartels, Christian and non-Christian groups, Shriners, Masons, etc, etc. I mean to ask, at what point is it infiltration? Since most such groups are guilty of self-serving reasons to occupy what is ostensibly 'public service' responsibilities, our entire government could be said to be 'infiltrated.'

Life in the US is so odd these days, I can't even assume when addressing you that you agree that the Islamic ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is violent and dangerous to other peoples and governments. I can't assume that you are not rooting for harm and violence against the US; angry at our government for it's many sins. We have become pretty strange, self hating, raging and suicidal bunch since Bush angered the Nation with the Iraq war and thereby elevated radical anti-American voices and agendas through the anti-war movement. It's like Viet Nam insanity all over again except we can now add the MB. I will give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you love this country and our people as much as I do, dispite our faults, and that you want nothing exceedingly bad to happen to us.

Islam is a Koran perscribed legal, social, economic and political system. Jihad, to the Muslim Brotherhood, is enacting Islam rule over every government and people of the world. That is their goal. That is their plan. That is behind every action they take in every Western nation.

The MB is well educated, organized, well funded (by the Saudis, Mosques, Non-profits, etc.) aggressive and committed international organization. It advances it's cause through stooge organizations like Cair in the name of Muslim rights, through Mosques, University Muslim schools, University departments, professors and student groups and through violent organizations like Hamas and al queda. (The CIA used Al Queda, but Al Queda existed via the MB before the CIA used them in Afghanistan). Through these roads, it has infiltrated US Congress, government agencies and the White House - big time since Obama took power.

You will not understand what it means when I say Islam is a politcial, social and economic governing system unless you study the truth about it rather than the political correctness about it. You can look at Turkey and say, it is a moderate, modern, secular State that is majority Muslim and I would say you must study the MB's view of Turkey as a State that is in need of being brought under Islam rule and they operate in Turkey to radicalize the young people and the government of Turkey. You must look at the Afghanistan's Taliban or Iran to see a Muslim country under Islamic rule per the ideology and goals of the MB. (Iran the the MB are different sects of Islam but close enough for you to see.) It is not moderate. It is total unreformed Islam in absolute and total control.

Either Obama does not recognize all the dangerous agenda and ideology of the MB organizations of the United States or he does not care because he is advancing the power and cause of the Muslim Brotherhood to rule over the Middle East (and then Europe and the US). He does not care that known MB agents have infiltrated the US government as he protects them in the name of civil rights.

Is the church you refer to in Chicago really "his" church? Or is it simply the church he belonged to for the purpose of garnering local political support? Do you have any reason to believe he specifically chose THAT church because of its rhetorical stance against what they call social and cultural offenses, and thus shares that church's leaders' view of the world? Not trying to be argumentative here but I don't agree with many, if not most, of my church leaders' views (or government for that matter)... why can the same not be true in his case?

Come on now. He went to the church for twenty years and if your political enemy went to a racist church for twenty years and he told you - "don't worry about it! I was only there for the votes!" would you accept that nonsense? I think Obama chose that church because it is in line with the outlook of his anti-Colonial upbringing as an African Muslim and because the Nation of Islam and Rev. Wright's church is well connected in the Black community of Chicago. He knew he could not run for National office as a Muslim so he had to find a Christian-Muslim church and Rev. Wright, a former Imam, fit the bill.

But let's say, you lived in KKK country and you wanted to run for President. Let's say you were a Senator and belonged in the KKK church because it was well connected in the white community of your city. Would that be okay with you? Could you really stand to send your wife, children and yourself to the KKK preacher's church so that you could get power to represent their interests and mentality if you if it was actively hateful towards Jews and other races of people? Does the means justify the ends of power? To me, it does not. And I am not a racist so I don't hold double standards for people seeking power. I don't want any color of hater or anti-American fool in power no matter their excuse or rationale. The stakes are too high for a President.

I suspect that I cannot reason with you regarding how these matters felt to you. I can understand that he might (as any president might) want to influence Americans not to take their pain and outrage out on Muslims because the shooter at Fort Hood was a Muslim acting, allegedly, on his religious convictions. I'm sure that he didn't demonize Americans in general, but American gun owners in the Arizona case.... which is keeping with his ideological conviction that guns are 'bad' for society. I didn't see the comments as a reflection of the nation, but on those who demand the right to bear arms.

It would have been honorable to me for him to protect innocent Muslims at that time by focusing guilt on the guilty individual and the Army brass that failed to act on the intellegence they had on the jihadist. They knew he was a radical and they knew he was in contact with a man who advises radicals on violent operations. He was reported as such to the Army brass. They were negligent to leave him in that position, COUNSELING broken American soldiers returning from war. Why did they do this? Because they did not want to take the heat of removing a Islamist from the Army because of his ideology. Everyone is to pretend Islam is the "religion of peace." (Thank you, liar Bush and company.) Obama, in the name of protecting Muslims, played down the terrible tragedy and loss to those soldiers families. He demoralized the troops acting like their lives did not matter.

"He" is behind that? I believe you are mistaken. That is part and parcel of the national mistake known as the Department of Homeland Security and it's operational subordinate the TSA. I don't believe that any political party is singularly behind that practice; instead, I attribute it to interests that have 'truly' infiltrated the government..., but that is another conversation entirely.

Is he behind the policy and actions of Homeland Security's air port policy? Is Homeland Security in the Executive Branch? Yes! Is he the head of the Executive Branch and the supervisor of Jan N. who is in charge of airport security? Yes! He has direct supervisory power to stop the abuse at any time he chooses to. The Congress bought all those machines in a deal with the crooked former head of Homeland Security, but Obama did not have to deploy them. He could have ordered homeland security to focus their searches on likely offenders and leave everyone else alone. Obama recently joked about the sexual molestion of flyers at our airports. He thinks it's funny to do this to Americans. Why is that funny to him? Go back to his "church" and it's ideology."

Several assumption herein. First off, the state of the border is unchanged .... not only did his administration have nothing to do with the situation, they remain disconnected from it. Why? I would say globalization agenda, but that's just me. As for it being done for the benefit of terrorists, well.... I can't see how that can be proved... although I understand that it is frustratingly incongruent with national security.... especially in light of the way American citizens get treated by the same government when they travel.

It is his policy that is carried out on the border and he as his own immigration policy different from Bush. Border Patrol is part of ICE and ICE is a part of Homeland Security. You know that chain of command from above now.

I agree that open borders is a globalist ideology and I agree that he's not the first President to refuse to guard the border from massive illegal immigration. But he is the president now and we are supposedly under the threat of Islamic terrorism. We have evidence Islamic radicals have crossed the border through Mexico and we know (according to Wikileaks) our government knows they have access to nucelar materials and biological weapons. His policy of molesting everyone at the airports and soon - buses, trains, arenas and malls, is supposedly to stop terrorism - yet he leaves the opportunity for the largest possible terrorist attack of all to happen - the release of nukes and biological weapons on Americans!

I'm sorry but that is an action of a man who said "The US can afford to take a nuclear attack." He said that! Who's he gonna knowingly "afford" to sacrifice? I hope it's not you. I like you. I hope it's not me. I like me, too. And please, can we stop with the "everybody does it" corruption excuse? We have to stop that or nothing will get better - ever - and it will only keep getting much worse. We have to make anti-constitutional mentalies and all corruption a real big deal and it won't happen as long as they can divide us into "everybody does it" camps! We lose. Freedom loses.

I expect that you are assuming the Muslim Brotherhood will take control of Egypt. I'm not sure even THEY think that would be in the best interest of their membership, but thats just my opinion. I have been waiting for him to demand the resignation of Mubarak, he really hasn't. The political elite are friends, they always cover each other; and even when they do, they are careful with their rhetoric so as not offend any other friends who might disagree.

I know the MB wants to take over power in Egypt just like every other country, especially Muslim majority countries. That is their feverent mission. Obama has demanded Mubarak resign this week. Murbarak said he will step down but not in the middle of chaos because that will give the MB the government. The other factions are not organized yet. A Parlimentary system has to reflect that organization of factions. If it was turned over now as Obama demanded, the most organized, brutal and powerful group to assume power is the MB. And they would assume power. They also said they would attack Israel as soon as they assmed power.

Fortunately, we have a renigade foreign service staff in Egypt and sane European and Arab allies who announced that Mubarak will step down at the end of his term in order to give the country a change to organize and establish a new representative government. The desires of Obama and the MB were rejected.

He trained revolutionaries? I didn't know that. I know our country trains insurgents ans revolutionaries all over the world; but it usually turns out that it has to do more with commercial and financial exploitation of the regime than any religious ideology, which is mostly used as a tool of political expedience.

According to State Department leaks via wikileaks, our State Department was "secretly" involved in training revolutionary leaders to overturn the Egyptian government. (also leaked today, by the way, Obama agreed to give Russia Britian's nuclear secrets in the new arms agreement). The Telegraph published both these wikileak reports.

It was "on his watch" that this trend became prevalent, that much is true. But it started well before he took office. Sadly, political success relies heavily on the ability to name and vilify enemies... especially when they are vulnerable. I don't want our nation to persecute any religious group, including Muslims. I suspect he would say he agrees. But everyone has a right not to agree, including you.

He can politically name and vilify all his heart's desire as long as he does not act like a dictator and sic law enforcement and spy agencies he controls on his political enemies like he is Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro or like he is running the KGB of the former Soviet Union. His Homeland Security named these groups as breeding grounds for "domestic terrorists": Second Amerndment rights groups and gun owners, constitutionalists, pro-life groups, veterns of the Iraq war, third party voters, Survivalists, Christians who believe in Revelations...

That means these "terrorist" breeding ground groups fall under the extra-constitutional Patriot Act powers which was passed to control Islamic terrorism on the US. He's redefined terrorism from Islamic terrorism to American crime. And it's Americans selected based on who is his political enemy. That is a tad more than just vilifying people for an election. It would take a lot of material to explain to you what it means to be a Homeland security identified terrorist group in America. This possibility of power abuse is why I was against the Patriot Act. You too, probably. All of us will be sorely abused by it if we don't stop politicans using terrorism powers on non-Islamic terrorist US citizens. If they are really worried about Islamic terrorism keep those powers for Islamic terrorists. American crime is to be handled through constituional justice just as it has always been.

Finally, when Obama's gang villifed his political enemies they demanded these enemies be stripped of their first and second amendment rights BY THE GOVERNMENT. The classification of his enemies as terrorists, makes all that possible, actually. He can arrest them and hold them w/o a trial. He can even have American terrorists killed - an executive order he passed for himself.

I'm sorry. I am too tired to go any further in addressing the rest of this now. It is late. But I sure enjoyed chatting with you and I hope we can talk more as time go by. Thanks for being polite during this discussion.

Forgive me if this is not formatted right; it is my first try at this kind of response with interspersed quotes. I hope I did it right!