Posted on 11/27/2008 10:52:28 AM PST by Brian_Baldwin
What was Obama’s fascination with Pakistan in those decades past when he traveled and spent three weeks there in 1981 during his college years?
Why Pakistan? Germany, or France, or even India or the Philippines, yes … But, it is not typical, not even normal at all, for a student of Occidental College in Los Angeles and transfer to Columbia University to leave the States to go to … Pakistan? Was he seeking out his Muslim roots?
Who were these college friends of his from Pakistan that he travelled with, and what associations do they have in Pakistan? Obama stayed at the Karachi home of a prominent Pak politician, Ahmad Mian Soomro, Soomro’s son served as President before the appointment of Pak President Asif Ali Zardari. In addition, the background of Obama’s visit to Pakistan, or visits?, were obscured by his supporters in reporting that he once visited Hyderabad, India on the way back from Pakistan – but it is now seeming more that the Hyderabad was Hyderabad Pakistan.
How many times has Obama been to Pakistan? Once? Or twice?
In 1981, Pakistan was under martial law. War could have come anytime. What was Obama’s fascination to go to a place that was under travel restriction? Why? There are very reliable reports that Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother, worked and lived off and on in Pakistan during sojourns as a consultant to the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
I ask this exactly at this time, and precisely because of the current Islamic terrorist attacks in India, India which has suffered so much at the hands of Islamists not only for decades but for centuries.
I made comment yesterday as the first reports of the attacks began – the first word in my mind was “Pakistan” and “Islamic terrorists”. Many Americans do not understand the long, deep, roots of politicized Islamic terror that run directly to the Moslem Brotherhood and other such 20th Century politicized Islamic movement that did not begin in the Middle East, but began in the heart of what we now call Pakistan.
But when I heard the word “Pakistan” in my mind, it was the voice of Obama saying it. Obama says the word like a native – “PAWQ-es-Stan”.
Why? Why does he say the word Pakistan just like a native, and what was he looking for there?
I ask the question. I ask, and I will ask and I will tell all the liberals freaks to go to hell.
I am currently in the S.F. Bay Area – and I have already heard the liberal freaks comments in regards to these horrific Islamic terrorist attacks that have occurred in India yesterday, and into today, what is becoming India’s 911. And do you know what the liberal freaks are already saying?
That “it’s America’s fault” – that these terrorist attacks are the fault of America.
That it is “America’s image” abroad that are the root cause of these attacks upon India and the world. This is what the liberal freaks, the San Francisco Democrats are saying.
And they say that Obama will bring about a new, positive, image for America.
I say, what role did the Pakistani ISI have in this? I say, what role Pakistan? What role Islamic terrorists?
And I ask these liberal San Francisco freaks who are more interested in investigation the Mormon Church then they are in investigating the Islamic terrorist threat to the S.F. Bay Area – what was their “messiah’s” interest in Pakistan that made him travel so far to a restricted place under martial law, what is it that he was looking for there?
Why?
“And I ask these liberal San Francisco freaks...what was their “messiah’s” interest in Pakistan..”
Don’t forget to ask the same question to the Obama Catholics who are no better than the SF freaks.
First-hand lessons in proper turban etiquette.
We are going to find out some very dark stuff about this “thing” that the brainless zombies elected. It will make your hair stand up on end. We are in for a ride through hell right after January 20th.
Having an Obama In Its Future--- Good Or Bad For Us (India)?
By B. Raman
The world has seen made-in-the-Internet scholars, made-in-the-Internet stock-brokers, made-in-the-Internet lovers and even made-in-the-Internet terrorists.
If Senator Barrack Obama is elected the President of the United States on November 4, the US and the rest of the world will be seeing for the first time a made-in-the-Internet President.
The way his advisers and entourage have effectively used the Internet to make him known to the people, to collect funds for him and to project him as a right-thinking person, who will take the US into a brave new world, will form the theme of many likely best-sellers if he wins the elections, as he seems destined to do.
Large sections of the American people are in a state of guilt----- over having suppressed the Blacks for so many years, over having supported President Bush and his Neo Conservatives in their Iraq adventure under the pretext of removing non-existent weapons of mass destruction, and over so many other perceived wrongs of the Bush Administration.
What better way of ridding themselves of their gnawing sense of guilt than to vote for a candidate, who is an Afro-American and who promises to rid the US of the legacies of the Bush administration. Just by casting their vote for him on November 4, they would in one stroke be able to get rid of all their guilt feelings and start a new life as Americans. So they think. As they stand before the voting machine, it will be their hour of the confessional ---- that they were wrong in having supported Bush.
His advisers and entourage have skillfully exploited the widely prevalent mood of guilt in the US to project him as a transformational figure (to quote Colin Powell) the like of which comes but rarely. Vote for Obama and vote for all that that is good and great in the US.
The liberals---- in the civil society, in the media, among the opinion-makers--- have made Obama seem a cult figure. For them, it will be blasphemous to ask questions about his past, to find out who he really is.
Had a White been the Democratic candidate like Senator John McCain, the Republican candidate, they would not have had the least qualms in researching into his past and in dissecting every inch of him.
How can one do it for a transformational, cult figure? Cult figures have to be accepted as such without questions. How can one do that for a Black, who is on the threshold of history by being the first Black to become the President of the US? To question his past and his credentials would be racist. So the American voters have been told.
Can anyone in the US or in the rest of the world assert that he knows Obama well ---- his past and his present and what he will be in future? Future is the child of the past. Obama is a mix of two vintages. The old pre-2006 vintage and the new post-2006 one. All his admirers know Obama of the new vintage. How many know Obama of the old vintage? Very few. There is no desire to find out either. Obama of the new vintage has nothing but the highest words of praise for India and Indians. He wants to continue with Bush’s policy of promoting a strategic relationship with India. What about Obama of the old vintage? Cautious and reserved in exuding any warmth for India and the Indians lest his Pakistani friends and constituents misunderstand. It is said that as a student he had more Pakistani friends than Indians. He felt more comfortable in the company of the Pakistanis than Indians. It was his choice and nobody could grudge it. It was at the invitation of one of his Pakistani friends that he visited Islamabad, Karachi and Hyderabad (Sind) in the 1980s. Nobody can hold that against him. As an Indian, one will be but human if one felt troubled that he did not disclose this till he became the Presidential candidate. He disclosed this----as if in passing--- when it was alleged that he did not understand the Islamic world and its divisions. He mentioned his visit to Pakistan to show that he knew about the divisions in Islam, about the Shia-Sunni differences. Why did he keep mum on his visit to Pakistan till this question was raised? Has he disclosed all the details regarding his Pakistan visit? Was it as innocuous as made out by him----to respond to the invitation of a Pakistani friend or was there something more to it? One would have expected the US journalists to have gone into this, to have quizzed him on it. But, they didn’t. As I read about Obama’s visit to Pakistan in the 1980s, I could not help thinking of dozens of things. Of the Afghan jihad against communism. Of the fascination of many Afro-Americans for the jihad. Of the visits of a stream of Afro-Americans to Pakistan to feel the greatness of the jihad. Of their fascination for Abdullah Azzam, who came to Pakistan in the 1980s and started teaching in the International Islamic University in Islamabad. Of the fascination of some Afro-Americans for him. Of the frequent visits of Cat Stevens, the pop singer, to Pakistan and of his fascination for Islam and the on-going jihad. Of his conversion to Islam. One might think that I am morbid in entertaining such thoughts and questions in my mind. But morbidity is understandable when one has a feeling that one has not been told the whole story, but only a part of it. It is the right of the Americans to decide who should be their President. It is my right to worry about the implications of their decision for the rest of the world, including India.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.)
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers30%5Cpaper2905.html
Palling around with terrorists.
It is all coming together.
BTTT.
the title should read:
WAKE UP AMERICA: WHY DID OBAMA GO TO PAKISTAN IN 1981?
If true, what passport Obama used to enter Pakistan?
Pakistan does seem like an odd place to visit unless one has relatives, business or religious interests there. Pakistan isn’t ordinarily a place that tourists visit in that part of the world such as India for example.
Is there reason to believe that Obama is involved in this Mumbai terrorist attack?
If someone had told right after 9/11 that we were going to have Hussein O. as president in 2009, I would have laughed my butt off and told them they were insane. I really would have thought they were on drugs or something. I still can’t believe it. Every day, I think I can just pinch myself and wake up and it all will be just a dream. What is scary is it isn’t.
From what I’ve read - poring over the birth cert. threads - it wasn’t forbidden, but “restricted” or under advisement not to visit.
Stiil, no one (except the 0thugs who illegaly went into State Dept docs) know what kind of passport he used.
>>>>>>do you know what the liberal freaks are already saying?...... That “it’s America’s fault” – <<<<<<
They’re also saying that the attack “targeted Americans” despite ZERO American deaths and only a handful of injuries.
Conversely, at least 95 of 105 killed were Indian citizens, and many other Indians hav been wounded.
The train station attack killed 10 and wounded 30 yet NONE were Americans or even Westerners.
The terrorist shooting from a stolen police van was directed EXCLUSIVELY at Indian journalists and onlookers. Again, no Westerers were present.
There is more.
So quite the contrary, this phenomenal lie that “Americans were the target” is not supported by anything whatsoever.
When the lie gets this big I begin to wonder if these people are actually Communists with a Big Lie to promote, or are they paid by the Saudis and other Islamists, or what.
It’s bizarre, the truth is 180 degrees opposite of what they’re saying.
Learning to recite the Shahada with a Paki accent.
I don’t have anything official but it is thought he used a passport from Indonesia to get in. 0bama of course lived there for years. Of all the issues surrounding 0bama’s citizenship this is one of the more interesting to me.
Indonesian.
Yes, India felt rightfully snubbed by Obama when he did not call them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.