Obama’s Whining…and the Company He Keeps? Try Iranian Agent Imam.

Behold! you talking to me…you talking bout me? Whine..whine…

Did You all note the little rumble between George Bush and Barack Obama over the president’s remarks in Israel last month?

The Company He Keeps: Obama Hangs With Hezbollah’s Iranian Agent Imam

Add Hamas and Hezbollah together and what do you get? Is that a question eh? My mama told me if it quacked like a duck and walked like a duck..well, you got a duck!

By Debbie Schlussel

Barack Obama claims he’s against HAMAS and Hezbollah. So why is he meeting with one of Hezbollah’s most important imams and agents in America, Imam Hassan Qazwini? And why is this open anti-Semite and supporter of Israel’s annihilation getting to discuss “the Arab-Israeli conflict” in a private one-on-one meeting with Obama? What was said? I think we can do the math.

DS has written about Qazwini and his mosque for almost a decade. He is tight with the Government of Iran, and he is an agent of the Iranian government, spreading its propaganda. He was sent to the U.S. by Iran to help radicalize his mosque, the Islamic Center of America, which–at the time–was becoming moderate with women not covering their hair and mixing with men. All that has changed, under Qazwini.

qazwiniobama.jpg

qazwinifadlallahsmaller.jpg

Extremist Imam Hassan Qazwini w/ ObamaAND w/ Hezbollah Spiritual Leader Sheikh Mohammed Hussein FadlallahQazwini is very open about his support for Palestinian homcide bombings, HAMAS, and Hezbollah. And he’s a good friend of Hezbollah spiritual leader, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah–the man who issued the fatwa to Hezbollah terrorists to murder over 300 U.S. Marines and U.S. Embassy civilians in cold blood. Qazwini’s mosque has held rallies and celebrations in support of Hezbollah, and many of Hezbollah’s biggest money-launderers and agents in America are his congregants.

When Debbie S. went undercover to his mosque in 1998, he and others welcomed Nation of Islam chief racist Louis Farrakhan as “our dear brother” and “a freedom fighter.” Qazwini applauded Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic statements saying that Jews were the “forces of Satan” and that there needed to be a “jihad” on the American people.

Above is a photo of Qazwini hanging out with Hezbollah’s Fadlallah–who is on the State Department Terrorist List–in South Lebanon, where he went to visit him and pay tribute. Juxtapose that with the photo of Qazwini and Barack Obama. It says a lot about the company Obama keeps . . . and why he shouldn’t be President:

A Muslim leader from Dearborn met privately with Sen. Barack Obama during his Wednesday visit to Michigan.Imam Hassan Qazwini, head of the Islamic Center of America, said in an email that he met with Obama at Macomb Community College. A mosque spokesman, Eide Alawan, confirmed that the meeting took place. During the meeting, the two discussed the Presidential election, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the Iraq war, according to Qazwini.

At the end of the meeting, Qazwini said he gave Obama a copy of new book, “American Crescent,” and invited Obama to visit his center.

The meeting with Obama came about after Qazwini had asked David Bonior, the former U.S. Rep. from Michigan, if he could meet with Obama during his visit. Qazwini was not selected to be part of a group of 20 people who met with Obama, but Qazwini later got a private meeting with Obama, Alawan said.

“They gave him an opportunity for a one-on-one,” Alawan said. . . .

Born in Iraq into a long line of Shi’ite clerics, Qazwini and his family left for Iran to escape persecution under the regime of Saddam Hussein. He later moved to the U.S. and become head of the Dearborn mosque, one of the largest Shi’ite Muslim centers in the U.S.

Um, Saddam wasn’t off the mark regarding Qazwini and his family. They were agents of Iran who were trying to overthrow him on behalf of the Khomeini’ists. And the Islam and form of government Qazwini espouses isn’t different from Saddam Hussein’s killing fields (though it’s far less secular than Saddam was). It’s just that in his view those bloody fields should be dominated by victorious Shi’ites, not Saddam’s Sunnis.

Well, Obama has the support of HAMAS . . . and now, Hezbollah. And we should send him to the White House because . . .?

Advertisements

14 Comments

  1. Now this is an interesting debate! Should U.S. presidents (or candidates in this case) have open dialogue with enemy leaders?

    If we look at the case through history’s eyes, I think the answer is yes. These guys aren’t going to go away, and respect is very important to them. Continuously sanctioning them (which is nearly worthless) and ignoring their leadership doesn’t work. I don’t think invasion is the answer either. At this point, I don’t think it’s even feasible.

    If the goal is that Iran doesn’t obtain nuclear weapons, then we should focus on that. Talking to them may bring these guys to the point where they won’t try to get weapons (it’s not unheard of as in the case of Lebanon). Why NOT talk to them?

    The alternative is war. Is that better? Do we sacrifice more U.S. lives just because we are too “proud” to talk with these guys first? Talking never hurt anyone.

    That being said, I think these meetings should be open as much as possible. We don’t want another Iran/Contra on our hands!

    Do you suggest that we cater to terroists and those that support terroism with their words, their teachings and their money? Do you really believe they are going to suddenly love the infidels? In study of Islam…they view that as winning…when you honor them with ‘talk’ of peace,…give an inch and they will take many miles.. I think our esteemed candidate knows this. If he does not..well, he is certainly inexperienced and must think this is a change that will sound good to Americans that do not know anything about them.They are not going to just kill Christians and Jews given the chance Duh..they will take your families heads unless you convert to Islam.

    No I do not want war but at the same time people who will not defend their way of life will not long endure. Lebanon was certainly a different case.Lebanon was run by mostly christians…they operated as a democracy and was called the Paris of the Middle East…A beautiful country. Of course, Syria had to send their thugs and destroy as much as possible..Besides, they had a better aim at Israel there…And most of all, they despise democracy.

    Yes, on open meetings..that would certainly take the speculation out of it.

  2. Duh said Now this is an interesting debate! Should U.S. presidents (or candidates in this case) have open dialogue with enemy leaders?

    That’s one possible interpretation; or you might just assume that he’s a presidential candidate with delusions of grandeur wanting to be all things to all men and who wants to garner a few conservative and Jewish votes while still reassuring his Muslim fanclub. He’s nothing if not very, very clever.
    Great post, Angie. I’ve linked to you.

    Thanks Aurora, you may not be too far off on your take..problem is, sooner or later you can’t be all things to all men. Politicans try that to get elected…sooner or later we see what they really believe.

  3. Yes, because the Muslims are a huge voting bloc. He can’t win the white house without them, right? Duh. If he really is a friend to the Muslims (I really don’t think he shouldn’t be since there are Muslim Americans, but whatever), and he’s really, really, clever as you claim, don’t you think he wouldn’t meet with them at all since that will hurt his chances of getting the ignorant, white vote. Now that’s a voting demographic he can not lose!

  4. Very curious indeed. Endorsements from such people and groups makes me wary, and does not instill confidence. Seems that there are good ol’ Americans he could be courting instead. I have never seen a politician so gifted at talking out both sides of his mouth. He makes the Clinton’s look downright rightous.

    Did you see that John McCain’s captor in Vietnam endorses McCain and said he would vote for McCain if he were American. Now how is that for strange.

    Crazy crazy.

    It is too curious..imho. Yes, I saw that sometime ago and now I noticed it is being reported again. I have a draft for later this week to be published on their strange endorsers. May be old news by then..Using my little pub thingamajeg..whoo hoo! Yeah, its all nuts and driving me nuts.or maybe bananas..:) LOL!

  5. Holy Crap! You guys will appreciate this article:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25372743

    It’s the unholy union of warmongerers and tree huggers. AAAAAAHHHHH!! We’re all gonna diiiiiiie!!

    Just thought I’d share.

  6. Yeah i saw this the other day, Obambi is coddling Hezbollah now, i had to wonder why Muslims were whining that he was ignoring them then. Even with most eyes on leftists, they can’t help themselves from coddling terrorists, imagine what they’d be like when they have the reins of power and don’t need you peasants to vote for them. Why, it’ll be unconditional talks with the terrorists and tyrants alike, because you know it just might work. Why didn’t anyone think of talking to Hitler, Kim Jong IL, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Che, Saddam, Osama etc They are just misunderstood and we just need to reach out, that’s all.

  7. MK, take some history classes. It does a body good.

    We did talk to some of those guys. We talked to Stalin during WWII when we needed him to help defeat Hitler, whom Chamberlain talked to before he invaded Poland. It seems like we only talk to folks who have similar military capabilities as we do or if we need them for something. Kind of makes getting nuclear weapons look really good, right? All of a sudden the world takes your demands seriously.

    Nixon visited China in 1972 (4 years before Mao died) in an unbelievably successful PR move. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nixon_Mao_1972-02-29.png Damn is that a REPUBLICAN??? Shaking hands with a dictator?? NO!

    Need I go on?

  8. This is fun! Look we talked to Saddam when we needed him. Was he less of a mad man back then?

  9. And look what’s in the news today:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25384533

    North Korea is starting to cooperate. And this came about through military force. Oops. No sorry. My bad. It came about through TALKING to them.

    BTW, when that first North Korean nuke hits California, you have my permission to come to my house and beat my ass.

  10. Duh, get a life.

  11. MK, I have a life. Get an education.

  12. Talking to your enemies wins another round! Angie, did you see that North Korea destroyed it’s nuclear reactor today? Hopefully American diplomats will do as good a job with Iran that Chinese diplomats did with N. Korea. Talking works sometimes.

    It’s kind of like on The Godfather when they called that meeting of the five families. The Tataglia’s had lost people; the Corleone’s lost people. But they decided that there had been enough killing, and brokered a deal. Do you think it was easy for Don Corleone to do that after the way they shot Sonny like that, like a dog in the street? Heck no! Sometimes you have to swallow your pride for the greater good.

  13. Duh, since when do Hamas and Hezbollah and Imans that want to destroy America count as the heads of state? The last I heard they were terroist organizations just as Osama Bin Laden’s group.

    Yes, the sarcasm MK pointed out that talking to those heads of state did not really do much good..

    Hitler lied to Chamberlain and in the process England had a false sense of security for a short while..Stalin wanted countries which the leaders of the free world gave over which they had no right to do.

    Our foreign policy has been to talk ..I do not think it has included talking to what I referenced above. Nixon did open the door to China and balls of fire…look at it now…most things are made in China…whether they are defective or poisoned or whatever..They also own us financially…on 60 minutes out of their own mouth they said they could ruin us if they were so minded…Is that not great! Same with the oil situation..while not an isolationist..we should be as independent as possible..

    North Korea? their people are starving to death…our country has sent food as well as many charitable groups and faith groups.. Now do you suppose we bought it? What I mean is this: I wonder how much money we had to give the NK dictator to get some assurances that he woudl’nt use his nuke? How many do they have besides the Reactor they blew up? Like a blackmailer he will probably threaten again after he spreads some food around to his poor people.

    Let’s see, do you really believe (if you have studied their imans teachings) that Iran will not lie..do you think you can believe them? Oh well, how much money can we print to send them too?

    You are talking up my alley now when you mention ‘The Godfather’ Movie. I have always been interested in the ‘Mafia’.I studied Organized Crime..did a paper on it once..
    Yep, really interesting..now if I could get as interested in this techi stuff..who knows? I might get a history sidebar…

  14. Angie, if bad people didn’t do bad things, there would be no reason to talk to them at all. Everything would be hunky dorey all the time! We all know the bad things these people have done, what I’m saying is closing the lines of communication always makes the problems worse.

    I mentioned Stalin because the U.S. policy NOT to talk a leader is not based on any kind of moral code, as you guys seem to feel. We don’t NOT talk to someone because they are killing their people or developing weapons. We talk to people who do that stuff all the time. Heck, we even put people into power who do that stuff (again read the history of the U.S. in South America and Africa). The only question the U.S. government asks when it’s deciding to talk to someone is “Is this country powerful enough to give us something we want?” Bush clearly wants to go to war with Iran, he just doesn’t have the numbers to do it. Does he have a motive to open talks with Iran? NO. Talks could bring us to a point where we don’t have to use force, and he is not interested in that course of action.

    Those Muslim leaders don’t have to be heads of state. The countries in the Middle East were divided by Western Civilization into what they are today. Most Muslims feel no loyalty toward their country, only toward their tribe or group. Those men are just as powerful and influential to the people that follow them as the President is to us. Well maybe not the President. Maybe their just as powerful and influential as Brad Pitt is to us? 🙂


Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s