Obama's Pastor Blames America for 9-11

Obama's pastor is racist bigotted scum. He is the epitomy of what America needs to get past and move on. I think every statement he makes is a slur to all races, and nations. He does not deserve the title of American or Pastor.

America neither asked for or perpetuated or deserved what happened on 9/11. It is a jealous nation that cannot stand our freedom and liberties that spends it's time and effort to destroy anything it can that stands for such freedom. The real babylon is those coutries whose soil is stained with centuries of their own people's blood, they revel in it. It is pure blood lust that comes out of the middle east, lust for blood and jealousy of freedom.

[edit on 24-3-2008 by space cadet]

To put this in perspective, Condi Rice, a black woman, is GW's right hand girl, in my opinion, the most respected person in GW's admin.. I am too tired to discuss this further, but considering that GW's admin. is probably the most controversial in modern U.S. history, this reality certainly throws a monkey wrench into the argument the current supposed liberal establishment espouses. I am too tired to discuss this point further, but how can this be ignored.

Exhaustion is taking over.

where do you find the relevance of the pastor's racial and political views in a church sermon? his personal views aside, should this type of hate inspiring divisive talk be heard in a religious setting? also another question how many times a year do you think Obama attends church? just wondering since in his 20 years attending he says he never heard these specific things from Reverend Wright.

reply to post by poet1b


Do you really think it is possible to solve the problems that we face by ignoring what we have done? You talk about rehabilitation, what does rehabilitation mean?

How does one arrive at an understanding of one's fellow man without understanding his point of view?

And so you continue to blame. Blamed Pastor Wright, academics, and me because you do not understand. Does this not strike you as being divisive? If you want unity, why do you separate yourself from that which you claim to want to be joined with?

A tree. Can one understand a tree solely by studying its branches? Its trunk? Its roots? What about the earth it depends on? Its water source? Its light source? Its food source? The climate that it lives in? To gain a better understanding of a tree one has to necessarily narrow one's focus time and time again in order to expand one's understanding of the tree as a whole. One cannot just look at a tree and understand it. One has to assume responsibility for gaining an understanding of the tree. And that understanding can begin simply by eating its fruit or raking its leaves.

Obama's pastor should be running for president.


Not Obama.

reply to post by jedimiller


Obama's Pastor should have his Tax Exempt status revoked.

Same for every other church that even uttered the word "OBAMA" this past Easter weekend.

reply to post by Areal51


What are you talking about, your comments have nothing to do with what I have posted. You are the one who keeps talking about "appropriate context", which means only talking about things from the perspective that you choose.

I am not ignoring what anyone has done, but Rev Wright certainly does ignore most of what rich white people have done, and I suspect white people in general, and the U.S. as a nation.

I am not blaming anyone for anything, I am just pointing out how the comments made by Rev Wright are Wrong, and the intellectual arguments that supposedly justify Wright's racists remarks. Wright puts rich white people all into one category, and that is racism, discrimination, racial stereotyping, and there is no justification for this type of bias.

In order to have a discussion, everyone's perspective needs to be taken into account, not just some narrow focus.

reply to post by poet1b


You continue to do the same thing over and over again. Now instead of all White people, it is all rich White people. You don't know what White oppression means and it shows. We've reached an impasse on this issue.

Yes, I do talk about appropriate context. I do so because it matters. You want to disregard context in order to advance an emotional plea outside of addressing the facts. You want your opinion to be perceived as being true without providing support for it. This cannot be done. If you are going to accuse someone and tell the community that this person has done something wrong, you need to establish factually what that person has done. In the case of Pastor Wright, you need to also establish what his comments mean. To do that you have to regard his comments in the context that he originally made them in.

Appropriate context does not mean " see things my way". Appropriate context means the right way in which to view something. We can all view the world and conclude that there is no right way to view the world. That all viewpoints are valid. However, it is nonsensical for a doctor to consider a patient who has a cold in the same context as another with a broken leg.

Your point of view is valid and it has been taken into account. Proof provided by your comments and my responses to them. However, your argument is wrong. Addressing issues of White oppression does not equal racism. Addressing race based legislation and economic bias does not constitute racism, stereotyping, or discrimination. In fact, it addresses those issues. Pastor Wright has not declared that Whites or Blacks or any other race are superior or inferior to another race. Therefore, Pastor Wright is not guilty of racist commentary.

reply to post by Alxandro


So fundamentalist churches that support candidates friendly to Christian conservatives should also have their tax exempt status revoked?

Synagogues that support candidates friendly to Israel should also have their tax exempt status revoked?

Or does this only apply to "left wing" churches?

Originally posted by Areal51

If you are going to accuse someone and tell the community that this person has done something wrong, you need to establish factually what that person has done. In the case of Pastor Wright, you need to also establish what his comments mean. To do that you have to regard his comments in the context that he originally made them in.

By your own logic then Rev. Wright needs to factually explain how the US was responsible for 9/11. He should accept one of those media interviews that have repeatedly been offered to him, and enlighten us all. But instead, he keeps ducking them and refusing to comment. I wonder why?

Adressing issues of White oppression does not equal racism. Addressing race based legislation and economic bias does not constitute racism, stereotyping, or discrimination. In fact, it addresses those issues.

While we're discussing white oppression, let's also discuss the oppression of blacks by Freed black men and women too. They were some of the largest slave owners of the time.

Source

The fact is large numbers of free Negroes owned black slaves; in fact, in numbers disproportionate to their representation in society at large.

It's really frustrating to listen to this by the multimoney news groups,and even radio can't dole out the money and time to veiw all the video that has been out there for a small price.They are fueling this for ratings and filler.HNN finally broke the big news today that they had fotage of one soundbite in the full context.This has been so easy to get it's laughable.Every news station i listen to is holding back or just unwilling to spend the money to obtain these videos.

I myself think this preacher has a big bias.might hold true to Oboma???

reply to post by LLoyd45


On your first point. There exists considerable controversy over the validity of the official version of 9/11. And so, to claim that Pastor Wright has no right to his point of view on this matter is hypocritical. He doesn't buy the official version of events, so he demands a new investigation because he demands a credible explanation, what is wrong with that?

As for avoiding media coverage, maybe he's doesn't trust the media to cover him fairly? Recent events certainly wouldn't provide him confidence. Besides, he's not obligated to defend his remarks. Also, any comments that he makes could jeopardize the Obama campaign. Even if he appeared on 60 Minutes the interview, however fair, would still result in out of context soundbites that the rest of the media would be virtually guaranteed to create and distort. Sounds like he is being shrewd, to me. He's a public speaker, so I doubt he's being a coward. Maybe an interview will be forthcoming after the primaries or November presidential election.

On your second point, chattel slavery in the US was a system of White oppression, those slave owners who were free slaves operated under that system and not their own. It is still considered White oppression. This does not excuse the Negro slave owner but makes him or her complicit in the system of White oppression that was chattel slavery in the US. It is very good that you brought this point up, maybe now folks will come to understand better what White oppression really means.



[edit on 24-3-2008 by Areal51]

reply to post by TheAgentNineteen


How can you people blame a man who lived through the civil rights era as a black man?

We have John McCain, a Presidential hopeful calling Vietnamese people gooks, calling for the death of Fidel Castro, saying we'll be in Iraq for 100 more years, and in general an all around bigot.

Hillary Clinton and John McCain are even buddies according to Bill Clinton.

Do we really want to have exactly the same candidate as President?

The choices aren't the best: The Whore of Babylon, the Antichrist, and the Shill.

Which one is the lesser of all the evils?

Pick your poison.

[edit on 3/24/2008 by biggie smalls]

reply to post by PopeyeFAFL


Can I get a quote on that one?

Where has he said anything that is racist? xmotex has been asking and asking, and I've seen nothing so far to prove anyone's "racist" point.


reply to post by OralFixation


I actually agree with pretty much all of Wright's statements. And I'm an Irish-American. I must be racist against whites.

Originally posted by Areal51
[
On your first point. There exists considerable controversy over the validity of the official version of 9/11. And so, to claim that Pastor Wright has no right to his point of view on this matter is hypocritical. He doesn't buy the official version of events, so he demands a new investigation because he demands a credible explanation, what is wrong with that?

I never said he didn't have a right to his own opinion. I said by your logic if he was accusing the US of causing 9/11 his should be willing and able to back his statements up with facts, not hypotheses or conspiracy theories. Also to damn a whole country over its government's actions is wrong. Since when has it been acceptable for pastors to use the Lord's name in vain like that even in a rhetorical sense?

As for avoiding media coverage, maybe he's doesn't trust the media to cover him fairly? Recent events certainly wouldn't provide him confidence. Besides, he's not obligated to defend his remarks. Also, any comments that he makes could jeopardize the Obama campaign. Even if he appeared on 60 Minutes the interview, however fair, would still result in out of context soundbites that the rest of the media would be virtually guaranteed to create and distort.

He'd be on national television with all eyes watching.. I'm sure if the media tried to distort what he was saying the American people are smart enough to realize that, don't you? Besides, he could point out any discrepancies between what he actually said and what the videos show just like they could.

Sounds like he is being shrewd, to me. He's a public speaker, so I doubt he's being a coward. Maybe an interview will be forthcoming after the primaries or November presidential election.

It sounds like he afraid of being proven a bigot and American hater on national TV to me. You can call it shrewd if you like.

On your second point, chattel slavery in the US was a system of White oppression, those slave owners who were free slaves operated under that system and not their own. It is still considered White oppression. This does not excuse the Negro slave owner but makes him or her complicit in the system of White oppression that was chattel slavery in the US.

So you acknowledge blacks did own slaves. How does that differ from white owning slaves? If anything, I think it's worse! They oppressed their own people for profit.

It is very good that you brought this point up, maybe now folks will come to understand better what White oppression really means.

I'm afraid you've lost me there.. What white oppression have you witnessed in the last 40 years? How have you been personally oppressed? I really would like to know.


[edit on 24-3-2008 by Areal51]

I hope these and other statements in the future would be made after reviewing the video of the sermons that are being sold and not on the clips every news outlet has been throwing out there. I have not seen them myself.But they spent twenty minutes on the Detroit mayor today,how about some fair time?


Vote for Pat Paulson.

Originally posted by biggie smalls

Where has he said anything that is racist? xmotex has been asking and asking, and I've seen nothing so far to prove anyone's "racist" point.

I posted this earlier for XMotex, so maybe it will suffice for your request as well.


Here's a small sample of one of his racially imflammatory monologues which I guess even Obama seen as incendiary:


Source

Clips aired through the week show Wright shouting that 'Hillary never had a cab whiz by her and never pick her up because her skin was the wrong colour' and that 'Hillary ain't never been called a 'n-word'.'

Wright, a leading national religious leader in the African American community, also stirred controversy by saying the song God Bless America should be sung God Damn America because 'rich white people' rule the country.

After several days of questions about his relationship to Wright, Obama late Friday removed him from a committee of religious advisors to his campaign and gave interviews to distance himself from the man.

Obama said he did not hear any of Wright's incendiary remarks at the church he has attended for 20 years, and he only learned about them when he launched his campaign for president.

'These are a series of incendiary statements that I can't object to strongly enough,' Obama told CNN.

Or here's another from the same source:

Wright, a leading national religious leader in the African American community, also stirred controversy by saying the song God Bless America should be sung God Damn America because 'rich white people' rule the country.

Still want to claim he isn't a bit racist? Obama seemed to believe he was.

reply to post by xmotex


Sounds good to me. Any church that engages in political activities should have their tax exempt status revoked.

reply to post by Areal51


When you come up with an argument based on logic and reason to discount the points I have made, let me know. This whole intellectualized racism you have going isn't convincing anyone but the choir. Sounds to me like you are just trying to hang on to special victim status. Discrimination is discrimination, and it has nothing to do with race.

People will see what they choose to see, and ignore what they choose to ignore. The U.S. was the first country to ever give rights to the common man. If countries ran by rich white people are so bad, how come so many people are willing to sacrifice to much to come an live in a countries ran by rich white men. Why is it that only countries ran by rich white men offer the type of equal opportunity that draws people from around the globe? As a nation the U.S. generously gives to people around the world to attempt to free them from their poverty, but some people will never be realistic about the difficulties an divisions of this world, and people like Rev Wright make it too easy to blame the people at the top and paint all of them with a racist brush.

People in the U.S. do not know what it means to be poor, but that never stops them from complaining.