About Me

Name: Gabrielle Cusumano
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Obama's Woods Fund Contributed $75,000 to AAAN, Where Khalidi condone the killing of armed Israelis.

Posted by Gabrielle Cusumano on Saturday, November 01, 2008 2:30:39 PM
Obama Served On The Board Of The Woods Fund When It Contributed $75,000 To Mona Khalidi's  (AAAN) At Whose Conference in June, 2002 Rashid Khalidi said “…Killing civilians is a war crime. It’s a violation of international law.They are not soldiers. They’re civilians, they’re unarmed. The ones who are armed, the ones who are soldiers, the ones who are in occupation, that’s different.That’s resistance.” 

 "The New York Sun has obtained an audio recording of a speech Mr. Khalidi gave on June 7, 2002, at a conference of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. "

"While condemning violence against innocent civilians, which Mr. Khalidi said “means condemning Israel,”he appeared to condone the killing of armed Israelis in the next breath. "

“…Killing civilians is a war crime. It’s a violation of international law.They are not soldiers. They’re civilians, they’re unarmed. The ones who are armed, the ones who are soldiers, the ones who are in occupation, that’s different.That’s resistance,” Mr. Khalidi said. 

"The text of Mr. Khalidi’s speech is posted on the Web site of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee with the above remarks omitted. "
 
From: SAID CHAIR AT COLUMBIA ALSO BACKED BY SAUDIS  By ADAM DAIFALLAH Staff Reporter of the Sun  
http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2003/07/23&ID=Ar00103


"Obama Was A Director Of The Woods Fund Board From 1999 To Dec. 11, 2002, According To The Fund's Website. According To Tax Filings, Obama Received Compensation Of $6,000 Per Year For His Service In 1999 And 2000." (Aaron Klein, "Obama Served On Board That Funded Pro-Palestinian Group,"
The Jewish Press, 2/27/08)

 NOTE: Khalidi Was A Member Of The Woods Fund Board. "Like Ayers and Obama, Khalidi was a member of the Woods Fund board..." (Edward McClelland, "The Crazy Uncles In Obama's Attic," Salon, 3/18/08)

" In 2001, The Woods Fund ... Provided A $40,000 Grant To The Arab American Action Network, Or AAAN, At Which Khalidi's Wife, Mona, Serves As President. The Fund Provided A Second Grant To AAAN For $35,000 In 2002." (Aaron Klein, "Obama Served On Board That Funded Pro-Palestinian Group," The Jewish Press, 2/27/08)
 
It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table,' but around 'this entire world.'" (Peter Wallsten, "Allies Of Palestinians See A Friend In Obama," Los Angeles Times, 4/10/08)
 
Khalidi quotes from artice below:
 
"At this point, Mr. Khalidi boiled over: “By God, I say that the participation of the sons or daughters of the Arabs in the plans and affairs of this institute is a huge error, this Israeli institute in Washington, an institute founded by AIPAC, the Zionist lobby, and that hosts tens of Israelis every year. The presence of an Arab or two each year can’t disguise the nature of this institute as the most important center of Zionist interests in Washington for at least a decade. "   Rashid Khalidi

 “I very much regret the participation of Arab officials and non-officials and academics in the activities of this institute, because in fact if you look at the output of this institute, it’s directed against the Palestinians, against the Arabs, and against the Muslims in general. Its products describe the Palestinians as terrorists, and in fact its basic function is to spread lies and falsehoods about the Arab world, of course under an academic, scholarly veneer. Basically, this is the most important Zionist propaganda tool in the United States.”        Rashid Khalidi
 
 
Columbia’s Radical Caravan

 

By MARTIN KRAMER Mr.Kramer is editor of the Middle East Quarterly. (www.martinkramer.org)
http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/01/06&ID=Ar00901


    On December 11, Al-Jazeera’s program “From Washington” held a discussion on Middle Eastern studies in America. Chief guest: Professor Rashid Khalidi, the newlyseated incumbent of the Edward Said Chair in Arab Studies at Columbia University, and director of that university’s (government-subsidized) Middle East Institute. He said little that was original or surprising — until the end, when he blew a gasket and uttered the sort of thing he would only dare to say in Arabic. It happened like this.

    At one point in the discussion, Khalidi criticized think tanks “that don’t want true dialogue with people whose views differ from their own, but who want to force their opinions on American citizens and the world.” He mentioned, by way of example, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which he labeled “the fiercest of the enemies of the Arabs and the Muslims.”

    The moderator,Hafiz al-Mirazi,played devil’s advocate. Hadn’t the institute often hosted Arabs and others holding diverse views? It had provided a podium for Nabil Amr, Palestinian information minister, as well as Egyptian presidential adviser Osama al-Baz. Just recently, Washington Institute mainstay David Makovsky had written a joint op-ed with an Egyptian writer from Al-Ahram (the reference was to Dr. Hala Mustafa, a visiting fellow),on democracy promotion in the Arab world.

    At this point, Mr. Khalidi boiled over: “By God, I say that the participation of the sons or daughters of the Arabs in the plans and affairs of this institute is a huge error, this Israeli institute in Washington, an institute founded by AIPAC, the Zionist lobby, and that hosts tens of Israelis every year. The presence of an Arab or two each year can’t disguise the nature of this institute as the most important center of Zionist interests in Washington for at least a decade.

    “I very much regret the participation of Arab officials and non-officials and academics in the activities of this institute, because in fact if you look at the output of this institute, it’s directed against the Palestinians, against the Arabs, and against the Muslims in general. Its products describe the Palestinians as terrorists, and in fact its basic function is to spread lies and falsehoods about the Arab world, of course under an academic, scholarly veneer. Basically, this is the most important Zionist propaganda tool in the United States.”

    This is the intimidating language of Arab boycott, aimed against an institution with entirely American credentials. The Washington Institute is directed by Ambassador Dennis Ross, who was the chief Middle East peace negotiator in the presidential administrations of Presidents George H.W. Bush and Clinton. He has always been a model of balance (unlike Mr. Khalidi, whose forays into politics have always been to advise Yasser Arafat). The Washington Institute is run by Americans, and accepts funds only from American sources. (Contrast that with the donors of Mr. Khalidi’s chair,whose precise identities Columbia still refuses to reveal.)

    And it is outrageous for Mr. Khalidi to denounce the Arabs who have come to the Washington Institute as blundering dupes. I was there in the fall, when the institute brought to the nation’s capital a group of Palestinian Fatah activists associated with the Tanzim (an invitation for which Mr. Ross took a lot of flak. While in Washington, D.C., these Palestinians said things that could hardly be squared with “Zionist propaganda.” Who is Mr. Khalidi to tell them they made a “huge error”? For its annual fall conference, the institute flew in three members of Iraq’s governing council, whose country would still be under Saddam Hussein’s iron rule if Mr.Khalidi had had his way. Who is he to tell them they made a “huge error”?     The year before last, my stay coincided with that of Ali Salem, the Egyptian playwright who has faced down Egypt’s entire literary establishment, and who once was detained for his collaboration with a democracy activist, Saad Eddin Ibrahim. Who in the world is Mr. Khalidi to tell him that he made a “huge error”? I doubt these steel-belted Arabs would ever allow themselves to be intimidated by a pampered professor enjoying the full Columbia treatment.

    I note that Mr.Khalidi has never made a comparable statement in English, probably for this reason: It would damage his reputation as a bridge-building moderate. To maintain that image, he’s even shared podiums with members of the Washington Institute (see his smiling mug with David Makovsky). However, Khalidi in Arabic,on Al-Jazeera,is someone else altogether. There he is the bridge-burner, the zealot who would warn other Arabs away from the Washington Institute because it is “Israeli,” and a “Zionist propaganda tool.”Behold, Arab-style McCarthyism.

    Mr. Khalidi’s crude outburst won’t stop the caravan, but it does put yet another question mark alongside his name. I have never called him an apologist for terrorism, and I respect some of his historical scholarship. However, I once heard him speak to a predominantly Arab audience, and it alarmed me. This latest statement confirms something I’ve suspected ever since: He isn’t all he appears to be. Caveat emptor — buyer beware. (Too late for Columbia, but not for the rest of us.)

    And speaking of Columbia, what has Mr. Khalidi done to promote what he calls “true dialogue” since his September enthronement in the Edward Said Chair? Two Israelis — academic post-Zionists — spoke at his institute this past semester. He and they would have nodded in agreement over Israel’s alleged misdeeds. I don’t think that’s good enough, and it leaves me wondering (again) why his institute receives what the Washington Institute doesn’t: a $400,000-a-year Title VI handout from the American taxpayer. It’s a dubious mechanism that puts such a hefty subsidy at the disposal of an Arab boycotter. It really should be fixed.

EPA/LAURENT GILLIERON


http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/01/06&ID=Ar00901
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Khalidi said "killing armed Israelis is legitimate Palestinian “resistance” to occupation." NY Sun Has 2002 Tape Recording.

Posted by Gabrielle Cusumano on Saturday, November 01, 2008 1:19:10 PM
“Killing... The ones who are armed, the ones who are soldiers, the ones who are in occupation, that’s different.That’s resistance,” Mr. Khalidi said.

Rashid Khalidi, newly appointed to the Edward Said Chair at Columbia University, speaking on June 7, 2002, at a conference of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee did endorse terrorism and state that Palestinians have the right to murder any uniformed Israeli.

“…Killing civilians is a war crime. It’s a violation of international law.They are not soldiers. They’re civilians, they’re unarmed. The ones who are armed, the ones who are soldiers, the ones who are in occupation, that’s different.That’s resistance,” Mr. Khalidi said. "
 
New York Sun; :Jul 23, 2003; :Front page; :1


Hauser Helped Fund Professor of Hate

 

SAID CHAIR AT COLUMBIA ALSO BACKED BY SAUDIS

 

By ADAM DAIFALLAH Staff Reporter of the Sun  http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2003/07/23&ID=Ar00103



    A professor coming to Columbia University this fall to head up a Middle East studies institute has said that killing armed Israelis is legitimate Palestinian “resistance” to occupation. 

    The money Columbia is using to pay the professor comes in part from Rita Hauser, a high-profile New York philanthropist whose former law firm was a registered agent of the Palestinian Authority.Also contributing was a foundation with close ties to Saudi Arabia.

    Rashid Khalidi, a professor of history and Near Eastern languages and civilizations and director of the Center for International Studies at the University of Chicago, is set to move to Columbia University this fall, where he will teach as the Edward Said professor of Middle Eastern studies, a new — and supposedly anonymously funded — position at the school. He will also direct the school’s Middle East Institute. 

    The New York Sun has obtained an audio recording of a speech Mr. Khalidi gave on June 7, 2002, at a conference of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

    While condemning violence against innocent civilians, which Mr. Khalidi said “means condemning Israel,”he appeared to condone the killing of armed Israelis in the next breath.

    “…Killing civilians is a war crime. It’s a violation of international law.They are not soldiers. They’re civilians, they’re unarmed. The ones who are armed, the ones who are soldiers, the ones who are in occupation, that’s different.That’s resistance,” Mr. Khalidi said.

    The text of Mr. Khalidi’s speech is posted on the Web site of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee with the above remarks omitted.

    Reached for comment in Chicago, Mr. Khalidi first said that he did not recall making the remark. Then he defended the position and acknowledged that he may have said it.

    “Killing civilians is a war crime, whoever does it. But resistance to occupation is legitimate in international law.” Mr. Khalidi said.

    Asked if it is okay to kill soldiers, Mr. Khalidi replied,“Resistance to occupation is legitimate,” but said that he would not say the same thing today, one year later. 

    “Things change and there are differences…. There’s no such thing as a blanket statement. I was describing a specific occupation at a specific time. At the time I said it, I think that, saying resistance to occupation, is legitimate.”

    As for the current situation in Israel, “I would say it would be wise to show restraint because there is a political process under way,” he said.

    A terrorism expert who heads The Investigative Project, which tracks militant Islamic activities, Steven Emerson, said Mr. Khalidi’s comment “raises serious questions about his attitudes on violence.”

    “It’s constitutionally protected speech, but the question is whether he should be teaching this stuff to young students,” Mr. Emerson said.

    Columbia University is refusing to disclose publicly the list of donors to the Edward Said chair, but The New York Sun has been able to independently confirm three of them after they were provided by the Investigative Project.

    The funding of Middle East-related activities on campus has come under increasing scrutiny since the attacks of September 11, 2001. Harvard University’s divinity school, for example, has recently come under fire for a $2.5 million donation it accepted from the president of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan.

    “Donors’ names are confidential, we don’t disclose them without their permission,” said a spokeswoman for Columbia, Katie Moore, adding that Columbia has “the same policy that every school would have.”

    The Hauser Foundation, headed by New York philanthropist Rita Hauser, is one of the donors to the fund.

    “I made a contribution,” Ms. Hauser said, describing the chair’s namesake, Professor Edward Said, as “a friend of mine. I admire him.”

    As for the appointment of Mr. Khalidi to the position, Ms. Hauser said she was happy with his selection.

    “I like him very much. He’s a splendid guy, a Palestinian intellectual, a first-class choice, and I think everybody’s pleased,” she said.

    Ms. Hauser declined to disclose how much her foundation donated to the Said chair. According to disclosure forms filed with the Internal Revenue Service, her foundation gave a total of more than $1.8 million in gifts in 2001 to a wide variety of causes including the American University in Cairo, Refugees International, the Nixon Center, and the Manhattan Institute.

    Ms. Hauser’s former law firm, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, was registered with the Department of Justice as recently as 2001 as an agent for the Palestinian Authority.

    Another donor is the Olayan Charitable Trust, a New York-based charity affiliated with the Olayan America Corporation, an arm of Saudi-based The Olayan Group.

    The vice president of corporate communications at Olayan’s New York offices, Richard Hobson, said the trust doesn’t publicize its donations but that it is “very proud of that donation and every other donation we make.”

    Mr. Hobson declined to say how much the trust had given to the Said chair, other than to say he believed they are “one of the lead donors but not the lead donor.”

    IRS disclosure forms for 2001 show that the Olayan Charitable Trust listed a $50,000 gift to Columbia University.

    Other donations listed for 2001 include $20,000 to an anti-Israel group called Americans for Middle East Understanding and $5,000 to the Arab American Institute Fund.

    A third donor is Gordon Gray Jr., a graduate of Harvard and Columbia. Mr. Gray, a New York investor, gave $1.5 million to each university after September 11 for the study of Arabic, the Harvard Crimson reported.

    Mr. Gray said he couldn’t remember how much he gave to the Said chair, but it was “in excess of $500,000.”

    The vice president of development at Columbia University, Susan Feagin, said that the school often releases names of donors who have given permission to do so.

    She confirmed the three donors the Sun had independently confirmed because they gave her permission to do so. She declined to release the full list.

    Ms. Feagin said that as of July 1, 2003, the minimum amount to endow a chair at Columbia is $2 million. The minimum amount was $1.5 million before then, she said.

    The author of the book “Ivory Towers on Sand,” a critique of Middle East studies in America, Martin Kramer, said the list should be made public.

    “There are donors who wish to remain anonymous, and you can’t always turn away donors who want to remain anonymous,” Mr. Kramer said. “But there’s a significant difference between a donor who wants to give to medical research and one who wants to give to the study of the contemporary Middle East. They may have an agenda.”

    Mr. Kramer said that the Middle East Studies Association, an organization of Middle East academics that Mr. Khalidi has served as president, has passed a resolution calling for program funding disclosure.

    The head of the Philadelphiabased Middle East Forum and a critic of bias in Middle East studies programs, Daniel Pipes, criticized the school’s reluctance to make the donor list public.

    “What is surprising is that the administration of Columbia is unwilling to be public about the sources of its funds. It’s highly unusual for a university. It points to the sense of guilt that they have that they are doing something this shady,” Mr. Pipes said.

    Columbia University is this year receiving a federal grant for its Middle East program, worth about $300,000 a year for the next three years. Mr. Khalidi, as director of the Middle East Institute, will oversee those funds.

    This is the first time the school has received such a grant in three years, said Richard Bulliet, a Middle East professor at the school.

KHALIDI


http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2003/07/23&ID=Ar00103
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Where in the world is all that money Obama's raised coming from?

Posted by Gabrielle Cusumano on Saturday, November 01, 2008 12:53:00 PM
Since Obama, allegedly, represents the poorest, most unfortunate members of America society, where in the world is all that money coming from?

YOU could be Funding the Obama Campaign?

 By JB Williams  Friday, October 31, 2008  http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/5958

Among the many unasked and, thus, unanswered questions swirling around the most secretive presidential campaign in history, is the question of where that mountain of Obamessiah money is coming from? Barack Obama has raised more than $600 million thus far in his campaign! That explains why he reneged on his campaign pledge to use public funding like John McCain. He raised a reported $150 million just last month, mostly in small donations from undisclosed online donors.

Since Obama, allegedly, represents the poorest, most unfortunate members of America society, where in the world is all that money coming from?
“Where in the World?” - is right!
 
It takes a lot of money to buy 24/7 media coverage, 30 minute prime-time professionally produced infomercials, and around the clock TV ads. It appears that fraudulent ACORN voter registration is not the only fraud Obama is willing to commit in order to win the White House.

Questions about Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign opened up a can of campaign worms that the Obama campaign wishes Newsmax journalist Ken Timmerman had never opened. But with so much funny international money flowing into the campaign of an unknown done-nothing candidate, someone, sooner or later, had to ask where all that money was coming from. Obama was hoping the question would be asked after the election…

Thank God Timmerman had the backbone to ask what NO “lamestream” member of the Obama-Press would ask. And then he kept asking whenever an answer led to a new set of questions.

(Excerpt) Read more at :  http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/5958

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A NIXONESQUE MOVE FROM TEAM OBAMA, Kristen Powers of NY Post Unnerved By Purge

Posted by Gabrielle Cusumano on Saturday, November 01, 2008 12:44:07 PM

"The  (Purge) move is utterly at odds with a central part of Obama’s message: the idea that he’s a different kind of candidate - one who won’t demonize opponents or critics, but will instead work hard to bring people together."

Kirsten’s Article:  (Kirsten Powers (the democrat columnist, is unnerved by her paper being censored)

 

A NIXONESQUE MOVE FROM TEAM OBAMA

November 1, 2008

TEAM Obama veered off message yesterday, kicking off the campaign bus reporters from three newspapers deemed unfriendly to the campaign - The New York Post, The Dallas Morning News and The Washington Times.

This is bipartisanship?

The move is utterly at odds with a central part of Obama’s message: the idea that he’s a different kind of candidate - one who won’t demonize opponents or critics, but will instead work hard to bring people together.

Let’s hope this isn’t a harbinger of what would happen in an Obama administration.

Read more at http://www.nypost.com/seven/11012008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_nixonesque_move_from_team_obama_136286.htm

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hawaiian officials admit withholding Obama's original birth certificate

Posted by Gabrielle Cusumano on Saturday, November 01, 2008 12:36:42 PM
"A statement by Hawaiian officials Friday that they have seen but won't release an "original" birth certificate that has never been released raises more questions than it answers. It undercuts the indignant claims of Obama spokesmen and supporters that the "birth certificate" has been published for months, and the ridicule and claims of "smear" that the Obama camp has made against anyone claiming otherwise."
 

Hawaiian officials admit withholding Obama's original BC

Now it's pretty apparent why Barack Obama made his sudden, last minute visit to Honolulu. It wasn't Granny's health problems that interested him but Hawaii's Health Department.

The strategy may have backfired. A statement by Hawaiian officials Friday that they have seen but won't release an "original" birth certificate that has never been released raises more questions than it answers. It undercuts the indignant claims of Obama spokesmen and supporters that the "birth certificate" has been published for months, and the ridicule and claims of "smear" that the Obama camp has made against anyone claiming otherwise.

Image: the "certification of live birth" claimed by Obama campaign as his "birth certificate"

According to an AP report, Hawaii Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said Friday that she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

But they won't say one word about what's on it.

Conspicuously, Hawaiian officials refuse to confirm that the information on the "original" certificate conforms to what has appeared on the "Certification of Live Birth" produced in 2007 that has so far been passed off as original by the Obama "Fight the Smears" site (here) and the Annenberg-backed site FactCheck.org (here). The latter dedicated a photoshoot to examining in pornographic detail a computer-generated facsimile that may bear no relation to the original document that the State of Hawaii now admits holding.

Can anyone smell "red herring"?

All of the obfuscation, which has been going on for more than four months, begs the question that the Obama campaign and its media supporters have steadfastly refused to answer: why won't the original birth certificate be released?

Why can't the Obama campaign do as the McCain campaign did, and release the original, typewritten document that the State of Hawaii, finally and in the last days before the election, admits exists in its "vaults"? What could be so damaging or contradictory that Obama has felt the need to keep hidden all these years and has created elaborate cover-ups to put forward computer-abstracted certification of live certificate instead of the original birth certificate?

Fukino says that no state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's birth certificate be handled differently. But state officials, including Lingle's office, have consistently refused media requests for the release of the document, saying that only Obama himself, or a close family number, was authorized to have access to the "original" certificate. She says state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest.

Apparently that does not include the American People.

And yet Obama claimed in his memoir Dreams from my Father that he had in his possession his birth certificate. Unless the document has been "lost," he could publish the original without visiting grandma in Honolulu.

Trumpeting victory in Hawaii's admission that a suppressed "original" birth certificate exists is Chicago-based journalist Andy Martin, a long time nemesis of Obama, whose trip to Hawaii preceded the candidate's. (Obama arrived just as Martin left). Martin takes credit for forcing the State's hand in a press release:

Obama has falsely claimed to have placed the "original" on the Internet. Factcheck.org has falsely claimed to have seen this document and posted it on the Internet; that is not true. CNN has falsely ridiculed Martin. Hawai'i officials have now refuted Obama's false assertion.

Martin's victory in Honolulu will roil the final weekend of the presidential campaign. Internet chatter is expected to explode as the issue moves to the front page over Saturday and Sunday. Swing voters may be swayed by the exposure that Obama has brazenly been lying to the American people. "We just lobbed a grenade into the final weekend of the presidential campaign," says Andy.

"I am ecstatic. I called Obama a liar. I called Factcheck.org 'ObamaLies.org.' I said CNN was sloppy and lazy and wrong. And I was right. The State of Hawai'i has now backed me up. Whew. I knew I was right, but I feel a lot more comfortable knowing that I have started to get the machinery moving in state government. The original document is now obviously protected and safe from any tampering by Obama.

"My lawsuit started a firestorm in Hawai'i. The circuit judge has set a hearing for November 18th (a report in the Honolulu Advertiser for November 1st for an earlier hearing date of November 7th is inaccurate; that date was cancelled).

"CNN also has egg on its face, because, once again, Hawai'i backs my contention that the original document has never surfaced in public. CNN tried to demean me by contradicting my accurate claim.

"Now Obama, Factcheck.org and CNN have been exposed as liars. I said there was a 'secret,' original, typewritten birth certificate that had never been disclosed, and that document was the original COLB, not the phony 'original' that CNN placed before its viewers.
Martin, who has advanced the theory that the candidate has suppressed the original certificate because it would show that his father is not in fact Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., claims that Frank Marshall Davis -- a high profile Communist and journalist that Obama II referred to in his memoirs only as "Frank" -- is in fact Obama's father. (more)
Excerpt from: http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/hawaiian-officials-admit

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

AP: Obama aunt from Kenya living in US illegally

Posted by Gabrielle Cusumano on Saturday, November 01, 2008 12:28:47 PM
 
 
 

AP: Obama aunt from Kenya living in US illegally

By EILEEN SULLIVAN and ELLIOT SPAGAT – 12 hours ago 10/31/08 http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iVVj5SjAgqpjIbqdmcOB74FtqRIAD945SUUO0

Posted on Friday, October 31, 2008 11:59:09 PM by Fred

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.

Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a U.S. immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late Friday. This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case.

Information about the deportation case was disclosed and confirmed by two separate sources, one of them a federal law enforcment official. The information they made available is known to officials in the federal government, but the AP could not establish whether anyone at a political level in the Bush administration or in the McCain campaign had been involved in its release.

Onyango's refusal to leave the country would represent an administrative, non-criminal violation of U.S. immigration law, meaning such cases are handled outside the criminal court system. Estimates vary, but many experts believe there are more than 10 million such immigrants in the United States.

The AP could not reach Onyango immediately for comment. No one answered the telephone number listed in her name late Friday. It was unclear why her request for asylum was rejected in 2004. (more)

 

Obama says he didn't know aunt's illegal status

Immigration judge denied Kenyan woman’s request for asylum in 2004   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27481680/

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Saturday he didn't know that one of his relatives was living in the United States illegally and believes the appropriate laws should be followed.

The Associated Press found that Obama's aunt had been instructed to leave the country four years ago by an immigration judge who rejected her request for asylum from her native Kenya. The woman, Zeituni Onyango, is living in public housing in Boston and is the half-sister of Obama's late father. (more)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1234Next »