PDA

View Full Version : THE OBAMA APOLOGY/TREASON TOUR CONTINUES ...



LWW
10-12-2011, 11:38 AM
When will the democrooks apologize for this Obamination? (http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/587698/201110111829/Apologies-Not-Accepted.htm)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Leadership: Leaked cables show Japan nixed a presidential apology to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for using nukes to end the overseas contingency operation known as World War II. Will the next president apologize for the current one?

The obsessive need of this president to apologize for American exceptionalism and our defense of freedom continued recently when Barack Obama's State Department (run by Hillary Clinton) contacted the family of al-Qaida propagandist and recruiter Samir Khan to "express its condolences" to his family.

Khan, a right-hand man to Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed along with Awlaki in an airstrike in Yemen on Sept. 30. We apologized for killing a terrorist before he could help kill any more of us.

It's yet another part of the world apology tour that began with Obama taking the oath of office to protect and defend the United States and its Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, something he immediately felt sorry for.

One stop on his tour was Prague in August 2009. There he spoke of "America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons," ignoring that before 1945 we lived in such a world and it was neither peaceful nor secure.

Another stop on the tour was in Japan, where Obama in November 2009 bowed to the emperor, something no American president had ever done. It could have been worse if plans to visit Nagasaki and Hiroshima to apologize for winning the war with the atom bombs had come to pass.

A heretofore secret cable dated Sept. 3, 2009, was recently released by WikiLeaks. Sent to Secretary of State Clinton, it reported Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji Yabunaka telling U.S. Ambassador John Roos that "the idea of President Obama visiting Hiroshima to apologize for the atomic bombing during World War II is a 'nonstarter.'"

The Japanese feared the apology would be exploited by anti-nuclear groups and those opposed to the defensive alliance between Japan and the U.S.

Whatever Tokyo's motive, Obama's motive was to once again apologize for defending freedom, this time for winning with devastating finality the war Japan started.

While Obama envisions a world without nuclear weapons, and moves steadily toward unilateral disarmament of our nuclear arsenal, we envision a world without tyrants and thugs willing to use them against us. We do not fear nuclear weapons in the hands of Britain or France, countries that share our love of freedom and democracy. </div></div>

Soflasnapper
10-12-2011, 12:46 PM
Odd that Obama has never apologized, despite what has been said.

As for this: Another stop on the tour was in Japan, where Obama in November 2009 bowed to the emperor, something no American president had ever done.

This is a clumsy lie at this date, as it's been well disproven back when these issues first arose.

Here's President Nixon (http://images.google.com/hosted/life/l?imgurl=5c8f4325f5d81345&q=hirohito%20source:life&prev=/images?q=hirohito+source:life&ndsp=12&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N&start=12&um=1) doing exactly the thing 'no other American president had ever done.'

ON US SOIL, no less! "<span style='font-size: 14pt'>At their 1971 meeting in Alaska</span>, the first visit of a Japanese Emperor to America, President Nixon bowed and referred to Emperor Hirohito and his wife repeatedly as 'Your Imperial Majesties.'"

LWW
10-12-2011, 01:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Odd that Obama has never apologized, despite what has been said.

As for this: Another stop on the tour was in Japan, where Obama in November 2009 bowed to the emperor, something no American president had ever done.

This is a clumsy lie at this date, as it's been well disproven back when these issues first arose.

Here's President Nixon (http://images.google.com/hosted/life/l?imgurl=5c8f4325f5d81345&q=hirohito%20source:life&prev=/images?q=hirohito+source:life&ndsp=12&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N&start=12&um=1) doing exactly the thing 'no other American president had ever done.'

ON US SOIL, no less! "<span style='font-size: 14pt'>At their 1971 meeting in Alaska</span>, the first visit of a Japanese Emperor to America, President Nixon bowed and referred to Emperor Hirohito and his wife repeatedly as 'Your Imperial Majesties.'"



</div></div>

<span style='font-size: 26pt'>OMFG HOW INCREDIBLY LAME WAS THAT!!!!</span>

You use Nixon nodding his head as an equivalency argument for Obama bowing completely to the waist like he did ...

... that reminds me of a quote:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I always and on all occasions 'slavishly defend dear leader,'</div></div>

eg8r
10-12-2011, 02:21 PM
Hardly seems like someone Obama would brag about copying.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-12-2011, 04:00 PM
Obama bowed incorrectly; Nixon bowed correctly.

However, Nixon bowed correctly BY BOWING FROM THE WAIST (see picture).

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Not so bright, are you? I like that in a man!" Kathleen Turner, 'Body Heat'</div></div>

They BOTH bowed, despite technical differences, making the author's statement incorrect as written. (And yours, the comment of a blind man!) If he was trying to emphasize the incorrect nature of Obama's bow, he should have been clearer, as bowing to the emperor of Japan was not unprecedented as he claimed.

But why do you leave out my more important correction? Which is that Obama has not apologized, let alone for our defense of freedom or American exceptionalism.

Soflasnapper
10-12-2011, 04:02 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hardly seems like someone Obama would brag about copying.

eg8r </div></div>

Perhaps explaining why, in fact, Obama has not bragged about copying him?

Not to criticize this first step toward mastering Alinsky tactics. You'll get the hang of it, just keep trying (and watch LWW for helpful hints on the technique. He really has it down!)

Qtec
10-13-2011, 03:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Leaked cables </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>What leaked cables? The ones you stuffed up your b--t?</span>

Got a link to these <span style='font-size: 20pt'>leaked cables</span> or do we all have to beg????????


Q

LWW
10-13-2011, 07:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Leaked cables </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>What leaked cables? The ones you stuffed up your b--t?</span>

Got a link to these <span style='font-size: 20pt'>leaked cables</span> or do we all have to beg????????


Q


</div></div>

Why don't you get an internet that uses the google nitboy?

But, since you are completely incapable of independent thought, HERE (http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/09/09TOKYO2033.html) is the wikileaks cable.

This is where you don't read it, scour the web looking for the party's approved "OPINION" to be spoon fed to you, and then regurgitate it here for our amusement.

LWW
10-13-2011, 07:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obama bowed incorrectly; Nixon bowed correctly.

However, Nixon bowed correctly BY BOWING FROM THE WAIST (see picture).

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Not so bright, are you? I like that in a man!" Kathleen Turner, 'Body Heat'</div></div>

They BOTH bowed, <s>despite technical differences</s> except for the one which didn't, making the author's statement <s>in</s>correct as written. (And yours, the comment of a <s>blind</s> sane man!) If he was trying to emphasize the incorrect nature of Obama's bow, he should have been clearer, as bowing to the emperor of Japan <s>was not</s> is unprecedented by a POTUS as he claimed.


</div></div>

I fixed that for you.

eg8r
10-13-2011, 07:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps explaining why, in fact, Obama has not bragged about copying him?</div></div>LOL, nope he is smart, it was you doing it.

eg8r

LWW
10-13-2011, 08:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps explaining why, in fact, Obama has not bragged about copying him?</div></div>LOL, nope he is smart, it was you doing it.

eg8r </div></div>

Dear leader has always counted on the O-cultists to tote his water ... and they always have.

Soflasnapper
10-13-2011, 03:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps explaining why, in fact, Obama has not bragged about copying him?</div></div>LOL, nope he is smart, it was you doing it.

eg8r </div></div>

There's nothing wrong about copying a man's proper use of diplomatic protocol, whoever that man was.

Perhaps he SHOULD have more closely copied RMN, who did it correctly.

Soflasnapper
10-13-2011, 03:29 PM
So in your opinion, Nixon having a clearly visible approx. 15 degree lean of his upper body to his lower body was NOT bowing from the waist at all, but a result of his scoliosis? Or something else? What? An early flareup of his later phlebitis problems? Or, just that when his head bowed, his torso came with it naturally, or something?

But you are wise to concentrate on this subjective issue, and ignore my claim that Obama never apologized for our defending our freedoms, or defending freedom in general, or apologized for American exceptionalism. Because he did not do those things.

Qtec
10-13-2011, 11:48 PM
LOL. I read it, did you? <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Nowhere does it say an apology was asked for or offered.</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WikiLeaks Cable Shows Yabunaka Was Addressing Speculation From "Anti-Nuclear Groups" Following The President's "April 5 Prague Speech On Non-Proliferation." From the September 9, 2009, cable that was published on WikiLeaks website:

[Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji] Yabunaka pointed out that the Japanese public will have high expectations toward President Obama's visit to Japan in November, as the President enjoys an historic level of popularity among the Japanese people. Anti-nuclear groups, in particular, will speculate whether the President would visit Hiroshima in light of his April 5 Prague speech on non-proliferation. He underscored, however, that both governments must temper the public's expectations on such issues, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>as the idea of President Obama visiting Hiroshima to apologize for the atomic bombing during World War II is a "non-starter."</span> </div></div>

Q

LWW
10-14-2011, 04:08 AM
What I claim is that the human spine can bend from mid back without bending from the lower back.

It's done all the time.

No magic is involved.

LWW
10-14-2011, 04:11 AM
Is it true you are going to be in a new movie titled "DUMB AND DUMBER AND SNOOPY"

Qtec
10-14-2011, 06:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Leadership: Leaked cables show Japan <u>nixed a presidential apology</u> to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for using nukes to end the overseas contingency operation known as World War II. Will the next president apologize for the current one?

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The obsessive need of this president <u>to apologize</u></span></div></div>

What the article is <u>claiming and implying</u> is that Obama wanted to apologise for nuking the Japanese and they refused.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever Tokyo's motive, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Obama's motive was to once again apologize </span>for defending freedom, this time for winning with devastating finality the war Japan started. </div></div>

Its a load of crap. The author ignores the facts, and so do you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When will the democrooks <u>apologize for this Obamination?</u>
</div></div>

See, you yourself show here that you believed the allegations, so its not so easy to distance yourself from its conclusions. ie That Obama was guilty as charged.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>You made a claim, it got shot down with facts and now you want to change the subject. How original.

Q</span>

Q

Soflasnapper
10-14-2011, 10:33 AM
Fox and Friends APOLOGIZED (sort of) for carrying this story.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DOOCY: We'd like to clarify a story we told you about yesterday during our program. The story was about a possible apology from President Obama to Japan for the U.S. dropping atomic bombs on that country during World War II. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>We want to be very clear. There was never a plan for President Obama to apologize to Japan. We should have been clear about that, and we're sorry for the confusion. </span></div></div>

Cue LWW's alibiing that F&F are left-wingers, and Obamatrons.

Qtec
10-15-2011, 01:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We want to be very clear. There was never a plan for President Obama to apologize to Japan. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“The president, in 2009,” Kilmeade said, “was heading to Japan, at which time evidently <span style='font-size: 14pt'>the White House had a great idea. Let’s apologize for dropping that bomb on Hiroshima.</span>” </div></div>

Q

Soflasnapper
10-15-2011, 02:05 PM
"Evidently" = 'evidently not'?

Stretch
10-15-2011, 11:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Evidently" = 'evidently not'?

</div></div>

Lawrence loves to incite. It's all he's got and he gets off on it. Trouble is, when it comes to defending any of his BS it always ends the same. Short on facts, and looooong on spin, when that fails it's his go to one liners and cartoons. It's the heading that's the message, over and over, same propoganda. Defending it is irrelevant so he doesn't devote a lot of time to it.

On the plus side, You and Q, Gayle, even Mac bring a lot of great information to the table....food for thought. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif So i thank you for that. You know what he is.....hang in there buddy. St.

LWW
10-16-2011, 04:09 AM
WOW! According to you folks awhile back the wikileaks were unimpeachable sources of absolute truth.

What changed?

Qtec
10-16-2011, 04:31 AM
The truth is, and this is what the memo shows...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> There was never a plan for President Obama to apologize to Japan. </div></div>

Accept it.

Q

LWW
10-16-2011, 04:36 AM
Oh ... wait ... I get it now.

Wikileaks was supposed to vindicate dear leader and blame Bush.

Instead it cleared Bush and implicated dear leader.

Qtec
10-16-2011, 04:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh ... wait ... I get it now.</div></div>

No you don't.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Wikileaks was supposed to vindicate dear leader and blame Bush.</div></div>

Not according to their mission statement. doesn't mention Bush at all (http://wikileaks.org/About.html)

The fact that many wikileak emails embarrassed the Bush admin is what happens when you tell the people one thing and do another...and then get found out.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Instead it cleared Bush and implicated dear leader. </div></div>

That's such a stupid statement.

Q

LWW
10-16-2011, 06:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<s>That's</s> THIS POST IS such a stupid statement.

Q </div></div>

I fixed that for you.

Soflasnapper
10-16-2011, 12:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WOW! According to you folks awhile back the wikileaks were unimpeachable sources of absolute truth.

What changed? </div></div>

I posted up Zbiggie's interview remark where he explained the release, and the content selection, were a nation-state intelligence agency effort, edited for a purpose.

eg8r
10-16-2011, 05:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not according to their mission statement.</div></div>Their mission statement didn't need to. They knew they could rely to people like you to do that.

eg8r

Qtec
10-17-2011, 07:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not according to their mission statement.</div></div>Their mission statement didn't need to. They knew they could rely to people like you to do that.

eg8r </div></div>


You will never get what OWS is about.

Q

eg8r
10-17-2011, 08:28 AM
I don't need to. They are not doing anything that is going to affect me positively or negatively. It is a bunch of hot air at this point. You never "got" what the Tea Party is about either.

eg8r

Qtec
10-18-2011, 05:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I don't need to. They are not doing anything that is going to affect me positively or negatively.</div></div>

Its all about you, is it? Mighty Christian of you.


WATCH IT (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugAnDWxHPoM)

They are fighting for YOUR rights. All you have is contempt.

Q

eg8r
10-18-2011, 08:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its all about you, is it? Mighty Christian of you.
</div></div>Alright dillhole, let's see if we can help you out with your remedial comprehension issues...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dillhole qtip</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You will never get what OWS is about.</div></div>There you are singling me out. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r responding directly to the dillhole</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't need to. They are not doing anything that is going to affect me positively or negatively.</div></div> So to wrap up your lesson, you tell me I don't "get" what OWS is about and I tell you I don't need to "get" what OWS is about because it won't affect me. You then proved yet again why you are the resident village idiot. They aren't fighting for anything and they are all hot air right now. As I said, nothing that comes out of this will impact me positively or negatively.

To clarify that for your comprehension-challenged brain, that means if they were to get one thing done that they are trying for and it worked in favor of MY rights, then that would be a positive. Right? Great idiot, now go back to what I said...nothing they will do will positively or negatively affect me. It is all hot air. I am saying they are not going to change anything and all they are doing is keeping themselves out of work and wasting my taxpayer money.

eg8r

Qtec
10-19-2011, 01:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They aren't fighting for anything </div></div>

Only a MORON like you could say that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't need to. They are not doing anything that is going to affect me positively or negatively. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I said, nothing that comes out of this will impact me positively or negatively. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What else does the fortune teller say is going to happen?

eg8r </div></div>

So now YOU are now the fortune teller!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To clarify that for your comprehension-challenged brain, that means <span style='font-size: 14pt'>if they were to get one thing done that they are trying for and it worked in favor of MY rights, then that would be a positive.</span> Right? Great idiot, now go back to what I said...<span style='font-size: 14pt'>nothing they will do will positively or negatively affect me</span> </div></div>

Brilliant. You contradict yourself in the same sentence. Way to go moron.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is all hot air. I am saying they are not going to change anything and <u>all they are doing is keeping themselves out of work and wasting my taxpayer money.</u>

eg8r </div></div>

Finally the truth. "I'm all right Jack".

Like I said, you have contempt for those who are exercising their Constitutional rights.

Q....BTW, their were protests in 900 cities around the world, inspired by the OWS protesters.





<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1. I'm all right Jack!

(originally: "Fuck you, Jack, I'm all right!!" - described the bitter dismay of sailors ("jacks") returning home after wartime in the Navy to find themselves not treated as patriots or heroes, but ignored / sneered at by a selfish, complacent, get-ahead society - phrase was subsequently toned down for acceptable general use.)
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Attitude of "every man for himself, survival of the fittest, devil take the hindmost", ... but also, that all the possible advantages (however gained), success (however won) and satisfaction (whatever the cost to others) belong to me first!" <u>Narrow-focus, narrow-gauge pseudo-Darwinian selfishness glorified as a sensible philosophy of society and life</u></span> </div></div>

eg8r
10-19-2011, 07:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So now YOU are now the fortune teller!</div></div>Time will tell, dillhole. Will you continue to be the hypocrite you are and not quote me when I am right simply because you were wrong?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Brilliant. You contradict yourself in the same sentence. Way to go moron.</div></div>No you misread it. Go back and try again. Maybe if you had bolded the question "Right?" then you would understand what was going on. I am basically saying if they did do what you say they are doing that would be a positive, but that is not going to happen. The next time you get to the trigger that quickly you might think about shutting up, reading everything and then take a few minutes to read it to someone else so they can explain to you what is being said.

Your piss poor comprehension is probably what is inspiring honduh's piss poor comprehension.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Finally the truth. "I'm all right Jack".

Like I said, you have contempt for those who are exercising their Constitutional rights.

Q....BTW, their were protests in 900 cities around the world, inspired by the OWS protesters.</div></div>I don't know what you think you are right about but I have no contempt. I am pleased they are exercising their Constitutional right. On top of that I am also aware that they are wasting taxpayer money and they would do their families a lot more good if they were out trying to get a job.

eg8r