Muslim woman: Scarf kept her from seat near Obama
A young Muslim woman said she and another woman were refused seats directly behind Barack Obama – and in front of TV cameras – at a Detroit rally because they wear head scarfs.
Discrimination! Or is it he’s just too scared to be associated with Muslims?
Aref, a 25-year-old lawyer, said a member of her group was told by a volunteer that she could not invite Aref because of “a sensitive political climate.”
What’s so ’sensitive’ about our political climate? Is this some sort of double-speak???
“It is offensive and counter to Obama’s commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run. We sincerely apologize for this behavior,” the statement read.
Ahhh, they’re sorry. Move along kiddies, nothing to see here. Everyone will forgive you for your discrimination and forget about it. They’d do the same for McCain too. Right?
Still, she said, it was difficult to hear Obama’s message of unity among races.
“As he’s saying it, I’m thinking, ‘Well, wait a minute, I was obviously … profiled and discriminated against an hour ago.’”
From the same person that wants to bring us all together! LOL! Suckers!!!
Aref said she replied by thanking Burton, but requested Obama apologize directly to her and Abdelfadeel, as well as invitations to sit behind him at a future campaign event. Obama spokeswoman Amy Brundage said the campaign has apologized.
“He needs to take the matter seriously and send a strong message against any kind of discrimination,” Aref said.
Actions speak louder than words.
Presidential campaigns routinely invite audience members they believe will enhance the image their candidate wants to convey on TV to stand behind the candidate at rallies.
Apparently, the message is white girls love me so vote for me!
It’s funny how the guy who says he can bring us all together can’t even get his church to move away from racism, or his friends away from their terrorist views. If you believe his tripe, then I have one good word for you: Suckers
June 24, 2008 at 7:50 pm |
If you really think that right-wing propagandists would not exploit a picture of Obama surrounded by Hajib clad women and attach negative connotations to same, then you are either a little slow on the uptake or handy with the odd terminalogical inexactitude. C’mon, frznagn, please, try, huh?
Cheers
Elroy
June 24, 2008 at 10:44 pm |
“C’mon, frznagn, please, try, huh?”
Uh, some of that was intentionally exaggerated and there was some humor/sarcasm. But the facts do remain the facts. So instead of admitting them, you point to the others. Wow, where have I seen lefties do this before???
June 24, 2008 at 11:30 pm |
In what way have I not admitted the facts? Obama did what he did for good reason, and I can’t say I blame him. Why play into your hands like that?
And I point to the other what? Facts? Oo-er! Can’r have that, can we? What do you think a conversation is?
I worry about you sometimes.
Cheers
Elroy
PS Where HAVE you seen Lefties do this before?
June 25, 2008 at 5:24 pm |
“In what way have I not admitted the facts?”
You didn’t acknowledge them. You didn’t say he did was wrong or right. All you did was blame the right on what they ‘would’ do.
“Facts? Oo-er! Can’r have that, can we? What do you think a conversation is? ”
Yes, we can! And conversations can take place without a fact. (Your cue to blame Bush for something)
“PS Where HAVE you seen Lefties do this before?”
Jenns place, Kayinsanse’s place to name two that you know. No good to mention the ones you don’t know.
June 25, 2008 at 6:10 pm |
I absolutely did acknowledge the facts. I don’t dispute that he did what he did, I’m just trying to explain why he did it.
You, however, have ignored my question: do you, or do you not, think that a picture of Obama surrounded by visibly Muslim women would have negatively exploited by his opponents?
Cheers
Elroy
PS Seen Lefties do what, exactly?
PPS I don’t blame Bush for something – I blame him for everything. Well, everything that’s his fault.
June 25, 2008 at 6:26 pm |
“do you, or do you not, think that a picture of Obama surrounded by visibly Muslim women would have negatively exploited by his opponents?”
Yes. But it’s a Catch-22. McCain would’ve been in the same situation. It’s politics. Silly season as the Big O says.
June 26, 2008 at 1:35 am |
That’s not a Catch-22. McCain wasn’t in the situation, and neither is he likely to be, and neither is the media trying to paint him as a closet Muslim busting to put the USA under Sharia law, so once again your analogy is shot to buggery.
But thank you for your admission that, yes, Hannity et al would have used the picture to their own efarious ends, as would the McCain campaign. It is silly season, and when you are a black candidate named Hussein Obama, you have to be extra vigilant.
Cheers
Elroy
June 26, 2008 at 1:01 pm |
“That’s not a Catch-22.”
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Close enough.
“McCain wasn’t in the situation, ”
No kidding.
“and neither is he likely to be,”
It’s very likely.
“so once again your analogy is shot to buggery.”
Nah, you just don’t understand my what I’m saying. Take off that filter that says ‘He’s attacking Obama- must defend at all costs’.
“But thank you for your admission that, yes, Hannity et al would have used the picture to their own efarious ends, as would the McCain campaign. ”
I never said Hannity would. I did agree that ‘opponents’ would. I can’t guarantee that Hannity would, but yes, he could. As for McCain, I doubt he’d stoop that low. I was thinking of bloggers mainly. Named people like Rush, Coulter, Hannity, etc. are- or should be- held to higher standards and would be different. I could call you the ‘n’ word and nobody would give a rats arse. But let one of the big names do it and all hell will break loose. Nice of you to put words in my mouth. If you meant Hannity or McCain, then please be man enough to state it directly.
“It is silly season, and when you are a black candidate named Hussein Obama, you have to be extra vigilant.
I’ve made lots of posts against him and I haven’t used his name or race against him, but your framing it that way. Looks like the left is the one that is racist. Thanks for showing your racism, now I know where you stand. You must be in the group that believes a vote against Obama is a vote cast by a racist.
June 29, 2008 at 4:26 pm |
‘Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Close enough.’
No, it’s not. A catch-22 is from the Joseph Heller novel and is defined by the Oxford American Dictionary as ‘a dilemma of difficult situation from which there is no escape’. I Heller’s book, fighter pilot Yossarian pretends to be nuts in order to get out of flying any more missions on account of the danger, but the fact that he wants to avoid the proves that he is sane ¬– if he was truly mad then he wouldn’t have realized how risky the flights were.
So, ho does this apply to McCain?. It doesn’t. If McCain had been photographed with the hajibed women it wouldn’t really matter as no one is trying to paint McCain as a closet Muslim sympathizer, Barack, however, faces a different situation.
Obama is damned both ways, but it still isn’t a catch 22. If he hides the Muslims he gets accused of manipulation, and if he appears with them he gets accused of being in the thrall of Islam. He is fighting the kings of the gutter, the pioneers of ‘smash-mouth’ politics – the GOP – and so must carefully weigh up every move, as every move will be scrutinized for a possible advantage.
‘No kidding.’
No, I’m not.
‘It’s very likely.’
You think? Ah well, even if it does happen Hannity et al will just use it to show what a broad-minded, inclusive uniter McCain is, but the chances of a Muslim women in hajib turning up to a Republican party event are about the same as my fathering the love-child of Michelle Malkin.
‘Nah, you just don’t understand my what I’m saying. Take off that filter that says ‘He’s attacking Obama- must defend at all costs’.
You can say I’m wrong, but you can’t say I’m stupid, that I don’t understand. I understand perfectly – I just disagree. I’m not saying that Obama was right in doing what he did – personally I’d prefer that he had put them in the picture and defy the nutbag media – I’m saying that what he did was logical and understandable.
“But thank you for your admission that, yes, Hannity et al would have used the picture to their own efarious ends, as would the McCain campaign. ”
‘I never said Hannity would.’ I did agree that ‘opponents’ would.
Hannity is not Obama’s opponent? RATFLMAOUIDURF.
‘I can’t guarantee that Hannity would, but yes, he could.’
He’d be onto it quicker than George Bush on a bottle of Rye.
‘As for McCain, I doubt he’d stoop that low.’
Oh, frznagn, you are so quaint. McCain personally, himself, doesn’t have to stoop that low ¬ – there are lots of other people to do it for him. Can you spell ‘Swiftboating’? Having said that, McCain is a bit of a loose cannon and is not that crash hot at staying on message so he could easily join the fray in a bit of temper tantrum and say anything.
‘I was thinking of bloggers mainly.’
Like you.
‘Named people like Rush, Coulter, Hannity, etc. are- or should be- held to higher standards and would be different.’
Ho ho. Should be, maybe; are they? No.
‘I could call you the ‘n’ word and nobody would give a rats arse.’
Try me.
But let one of the big names do it and all hell will break loose.
Limbaugh: ‘And for Barack Obama, a — well, he’s a half-minority’.
Hannity: “(Obama) goes to the Million Man March and is on the cover of a magazine with Louis
Farrakhan, one of the biggest anti-Semites and racists in American history,”
Coulter: ‘I do think someone named B. Hussein Obama should avoid using hijack and religion in the same sentence.’
No, I don’t think L, H & C would ever bring Obama;s race or background up at all.
‘Nice of you to put words in my mouth. If you meant Hannity or McCain, then please be man enough to state it directly.’
It wasn’t obvious? Yes, Hannity, Rush, Coulter, McCain, O’Reilly, Boorzt, Levin, Styn, Morris, Malkin, Ingrams, all of them will doing whatever it takes.
What don’t you understand about the right-wing media tactics? A picture of Barack with hajib-clad Muslims woufd be used extensively ¬– it’s an absolute gift. They don’t even have to put any words or commentary to it – a picture speaks a subliminal thousand words.
‘I’ve made lots of posts against him and I haven’t used his name or race against him, but your framing it that way. Looks like the left is the one that is racist. Thanks for showing your racism, now I know where you stand. You must be in the group that believes a vote against Obama is a vote cast by a racist.’
Wow! This is crazy stuff. If you thinks race/ethnicity is not an issue in this election then you really aren’t paying attention. Mentioning it is not racist, it is stating the bleeding obvious, addressing the elephant in the room – what is racist is pretending that race isn’t an issue in America when it so plainly is and thereby denying the systematic and intsitutionalized racism that is everywhere.
I don’t think a vote against Obama is necessarily a racist vote, but I am not so daft as to think that some people will not vote because of who he is and what he looks like, and not what he says and what he stands for.
Finally, I need to ask you how you imagine Obama was supposed to get his church to move away from anything? Obama didn’t run the church – he went there. There is more to that church than Barack Obama, more people in it, so how was he supposed to influence the whole thing?
And if he had, it’s a fair bet that the conservative commetariat would have critisized him for wielding his supreme ego in forcing thousands of people to alter their faith and spurn their church in order to suit Obama’s political aspitrations or somesuch nonsense. But yes, that is assumption, conjecture, and all the other stuff, but there you go.
Cheers
Elroy
October 18, 2008 at 6:06 pm |
MUSLIMS FOR OBAMA
October 18, 2008 at 6:08 pm |
OBAMA,S FATHER WAS A MUSLIM THATS A FACT BUT WHAT I WANT TO ASK IS WHATS WRONG WITH BEING A MUSLIM?
October 19, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
Yeah! What IS wrong with being a Muslim?
Cheers
Elroy
October 19, 2008 at 6:35 pm |
Nothing. Just as ‘nothing’ is wrong with being a christian. But for some reason, lots of lefties have a problem with christians and not muslims. Funny thing is, muslim extremists are blowing themselves up, and others with them, at an alarming rate. The last christian that I recall blowing things up was Timothy McVeigh. And how many years ago was that?
For more info on muslim extremists:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Over 12,000 attacks from them since 9/11. You do the math and tell me which group spills more blood.
November 7, 2008 at 11:22 am |
hey!!!!!!!!! EXCUSE ME MORONS FIRST OF ALL RELIGOUN DOES NOT MAKE SOMEONE COMMITT KILL SOME1 OR BLOW UP THINGS IAM A MUSLIM N I HAVE NEVER KILLED NOR DO I ENTEND TO ( DNT WORRIE IM NO TERRORIST)
IAM A PEACEFUL HUMAN BEING WHO WANTS N I TRUELY MEAN THIS ” PEACE” FROM ALL THIS RACISM CRAP!!! THE QURAAN MY DEAR FRIEND TELLS US TO ACT IN PEACE AND NEVER KILL N PREY IT DOESNT SAY GO OUT THERE N KILL EVERY1 WHO ISNT A MUSLIM !! ACTUALLY I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT ANY OF THESE MUSLIM TERRORISTS ACTUALLY KNOW THEIR RELIGOUN SO DNT GO JUDGING SOME1 BY THEIR RELIGOUN BCOZ ITS THEIR PERSONALITY N HOW THEY WERE RAISED THAT COUNTS N NOT UR RELIGION N HEY FRZNAGN WATEVER LEARN ARABIC N READ THE QURAAN ITS DOESNT SAY ANYTHIN ABOUT BEING AN ASS N KILLIN PPL!!! ( im not angry was just writin in capslock to get ur attention X) )
November 7, 2008 at 8:14 pm |
Two words: Spell Check.
November 8, 2008 at 5:59 pm |
I’m a Muslim (I was born here in New York in 1987) and I agree with what the title of this article says: Obama does in fact hate Muslims, to the best of my knowledge. I’m not a racist, and Islam condemns racism. In fact, Obama is a racist and I condemn him for his racist attitudes. This man has a liberal and Afro-centrist agenda, where he wants to legalise abortion, but Orthodox Sunni Muslims like myself believe that it a sin and cannot be performed except for emergency circumstances. Homosexuality is an abomination, and shariat calls for stoning the sodomites (although it is impossible for them to perform the ruling in the absence of an Islamic state. The Fairness Doctrine is also messed up, because this will stifle the civil liberties of the United States in the guise of protecting them. Who will suffer under the Fairness Doctrine? The conservative media, who in fact is the best possible friend to the Muslims – because they are giving the Muslims what I would refer to as “tough love.” Muslims must maintain a fair balance of conservative values, while liberalising in an extent which would allow them to enjoy their equivalent of a Zion: a caliphate. Muslims have more in common with Christians and Jews than one can think, and Obama is more likely to be an Islamophobe than to be a Muslim.
To all those people who want to demonise me, you are in fact attacking a Muslim because he is a Muslim. Keith Ellison is a Muslim, not B.O. Why cannot Muslims have a right to align themselves with the conservatives? By the way, I am doing this out of my own free will. Why should liberals impose their phony agenda on Muslims, when we can learn so much from America in order to succeed in this world and the hereafter. In conclusion, I say to my Muslim bretheren who voted for Obama (a shocking 90% of them), you should repent to Allah for the sin you have committed by associating with a man who must prove that he HATES Islam by seeking to kill as many Muslims as possible. Remember that Hussein (Alaihis-Salaam, peace be upon him) was a martyr in Karbala (the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad Salallahu Alahai Wassalam) in the Umayyad Caliphate, not a corrupt demagogue from the political machine of Chicago.
November 9, 2008 at 5:32 pm |
I just wonder how long it’ll take before the left figures out who he truly is. Just how long can one bury their head in the sand? We’ll see.
November 12, 2008 at 8:15 pm |
You are all, of course, completely nuts. What about us atheists? Don’t we have a voice? Societies must be secular because you can’t both be right but you can both be wrong.
And the left has always known what Obama is – a boring old centrist who merely tinker at the edges. Still, after 8 years of Bush, that seems pretty radical.
Cheers
Elroy