The Facts About Barack Obama and Raila Odinga

[ogibillm]

Why didn't the American press investigate this when Obama was running for POTUS??

Oh wait. I forgot. They all wanted him elected and they were to busy sending 200 reporters to Alaska to dig up dirt on Palin. Never mind.

for one, the claims of the OP are BS.

Hogwash. You simply have no answer for them. There is no doubt that Odinga agreed, in writing, to impose Sharia law if he won the election. There is no doubt that Obama campaigned for Odinga--there's video of this, and the Kenya government even complained to the State Department about Obama's conduct. And there is no doubt that Odinga's supporters murdered thousands of Christians. These things are a matter of written and video documentation.

Let's see it then

 

[ogibillm]

Why didn't the American press investigate this when Obama was running for POTUS??

Oh wait. I forgot. They all wanted him elected and they were to busy sending 200 reporters to Alaska to dig up dirt on Palin. Never mind.

for one, the claims of the OP are BS.

Hogwash. You simply have no answer for them. There is no doubt that Odinga agreed, in writing, to impose Sharia law if he won the election.

Framing Obama: what the Spectator and the New York Sun won't tell you - WikiLeaks

Let's just ask ourselves - why would a Christian candidate promise a muslim minority (15%) that he would alienate 80% of the population?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

In this video - interview with news media - you learn that Obama took a tax payer funded trip as a Senator fact finding trip but he used it to support Odinga campaign for President of Kenya - Odinga was promising Sharia law would be enforced to the radical Muslims - Obama was in full agreement with Sharia law plan and stayed in contact with Odinga daily throughout the election - this is confirmed in interview - and Obama supported Odinga in the use of violence to steal the election - 800 Christian churches were burned down - NOT ONE CHURCH - but 800 churches. There were 800 emails from Obama's Senate office to Odinga sending documents advising him step by step - he even told them whip up the tribal animosity - Obama advised in his email to Odinga -" lets use this Muslim force (to win) and if we lose claim voter fraud and use violence to force your way in "- that was Obama's advise to Odinga. Think he might be planning on taking his own advice in 2016? The man in video has the documents in his possession and the documents are 100% verified.

if you're going to make such a stupid claim, produce the emails.

Listen to the video - he's telling you on the video!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Why didn't the American press investigate this when Obama was running for POTUS??

Oh wait. I forgot. They all wanted him elected and they were to busy sending 200 reporters to Alaska to dig up dirt on Palin. Never mind.

for one, the claims of the OP are bullshit.

I thought a picture was worth a 1000 words, and here we have a video. Are you saying that is not Barry in the video?

then senator obama did take a trip to kenya in 2006, and made one appearance with odinga.
that's about where the truth of the op ends.

Are you saying he did not campaign for him? Are you also saying that there was no complaining from the ethics office or from others in Washington, (tread very carefully here, or your argument will go up in smoke) that there was a sense of Obama interfering in another country's election process?

i believe he made one appearance with him, and i don't know if there was a 'sense ' of anything, although i think there was a complaint. i'd have to look into it.

but that's not really what the op is about, is it?

It's about exposing the truth which you obviously can't handle.

 

[rdean]

Republicans want to turn this country into a theocracy. Why is it a surprise people in other countries want to do the same ugly thing.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Liberals, simply calling the OP "crap" and "BS" does not refute the indisputable evidence that it presents. WND is nothing like StormFront, and that is an absurd comparison to make. And what about the other sources, including the Jerusalem Post article and the Washington Times article? What about the memo that Odinga signed--you know, the one where he pledged to impose Sharia law, to an Christian broadcasts on Kenyan TV, and to exempt Muslim Kenyans accused of terrorism from extradition? The OP contains a link so you can read that memo yourself. And how about the videos showing Obama campaigning for Odinga? Are you suggesting the video footage was fabricated?! And how about the fact that the Kenyan government complained to our State Department about Obama's stumping for Odinga? And how about the fact that Odinga's supporters murdered thousands of Christians in response to inflammatory, false claims by Odinga? These facts are a matter of written and video record. Simply dismissing them does not change them.

Just admit it: You simply don't care that Obama flew to Kenya to campaign for a thug who wanted to impose Sharia law, who wanted to exempt Muslim Kenyans from extradition, who wanted to force Kenyan schools to hold madrassa classes, who vowed to ban Christian broadcasts on Kenyan TV, and whose supporters murdered thousands of Christians. You just don't care. Now, if McCain or Romney had gone to Germany and had stumped with and for a neo-Nazi candidate who wanted to destroy Israel, well, you'd be all over that with condemnation and outrage (well, except you wouldn't care about the part about destroying Israel, since many of you are anti-Semitic). But if it's Muslim despotism, you really don't seem to care.

 

[ogibillm]

In this video - interview with news media - you learn that Obama took a tax payer funded trip as a Senator fact finding trip but he used it to support Odinga campaign for President of Kenya - Odinga was promising Sharia law would be enforced to the radical Muslims - Obama was in full agreement with Sharia law plan and stayed in contact with Odinga daily throughout the election - this is confirmed in interview - and Obama supported Odinga in the use of violence to steal the election - 800 Christian churches were burned down - NOT ONE CHURCH - but 800 churches. There were 800 emails from Obama's Senate office to Odinga sending documents advising him step by step - he even told them whip up the tribal animosity - Obama advised in his email to Odinga -" lets use this Muslim force (to win) and if we lose claim voter fraud and use violence to force your way in "- that was Obama's advise to Odinga. Think he might be planning on taking his own advice in 2016? The man in video has the documents in his possession and the documents are 100% verified.

if you're going to make such a stupid claim, produce the emails.

Listen to the video - he's telling you on the video!

Any jackass can make a YouTube video and make any claim they want. Why cant you show us these emails?

 

[ogibillm]

Liberals, simply calling the OP "crap" and "BS" does not refute the indisputable evidence that it presents. WND is nothing like StormFront, and that is an absurd comparison to make. And what about the other sources, including the Jerusalem Post article and the Washington Times article? What about the memo that Odinga signed--you know, the one where he pledged to impose Sharia law, to an Christian broadcasts on Kenyan TV, and to exempt Muslim Kenyans accused of terrorism from extradition? The OP contains a link so you can read that memo yourself. And how about the videos showing Obama campaigning for Odinga? Are you suggesting the video footage was fabricated?! And how about the fact that the Kenyan government complained to our State Department about Obama's stumping for Odinga? And how about the fact that Odinga's supporters murdered thousands of Christians in response to inflammatory, false claims by Odinga? These facts are a matter of written and video record. Simply dismissing them does not change them.

Just admit it: You simply don't care that Obama flew to Kenya to campaign for a thug who wanted to impose Sharia law, who wanted to exempt Muslim Kenyans from extradition, who wanted to force Kenyan schools to hold madrassa classes, who vowed to ban Christian broadcasts on Kenyan TV, and whose supporters murdered thousands of Christians. You just don't care. Now, if McCain or Romney had gone to Germany and had stumped with and for a neo-Nazi candidate who wanted to destroy Israel, well, you'd be all over that with condemnation and outrage (well, except you wouldn't care about the part about destroying Israel, since many of you are anti-Semitic). But if it's Muslim despotism, you really don't seem to care.

Your outrage is based on a memo that was falsified by the opposition.

And I'll ask you again - why would a Christian in an 80% Christian country do what you're claiming?

You realize Odinga's supporters were Christians, don't you? You realize that "thousands" were not killed - the total was around 1500, and that the violence and killing was perpetrated by both sides?

You've decided on a narrative and you are bending and inventing facts to fit it. Why are you opposed to the truth?

 

[rdean]

Liberals, simply calling the OP "crap" and "BS" does not refute the indisputable evidence that it presents. WND is nothing like StormFront, and that is an absurd comparison to make. And what about the other sources, including the Jerusalem Post article and the Washington Times article? What about the memo that Odinga signed--you know, the one where he pledged to impose Sharia law, to an Christian broadcasts on Kenyan TV, and to exempt Muslim Kenyans accused of terrorism from extradition? The OP contains a link so you can read that memo yourself. And how about the videos showing Obama campaigning for Odinga? Are you suggesting the video footage was fabricated?! And how about the fact that the Kenyan government complained to our State Department about Obama's stumping for Odinga? And how about the fact that Odinga's supporters murdered thousands of Christians in response to inflammatory, false claims by Odinga? These facts are a matter of written and video record. Simply dismissing them does not change them.

Just admit it: You simply don't care that Obama flew to Kenya to campaign for a thug who wanted to impose Sharia law, who wanted to exempt Muslim Kenyans from extradition, who wanted to force Kenyan schools to hold madrassa classes, who vowed to ban Christian broadcasts on Kenyan TV, and whose supporters murdered thousands of Christians. You just don't care. Now, if McCain or Romney had gone to Germany and had stumped with and for a neo-Nazi candidate who wanted to destroy Israel, well, you'd be all over that with condemnation and outrage (well, except you wouldn't care about the part about destroying Israel, since many of you are anti-Semitic). But if it's Muslim despotism, you really don't seem to care.

Your outrage is based on a memo that was falsified by the opposition.

And I'll ask you again - why would a Christian in an 80% Christian country do what you're claiming?

You realize Odinga's supporters were Christians, don't you? You realize that "thousands" were not killed - the total was around 1500, and that the violence and killing was perpetrated by both sides?

You've decided on a narrative and you are bending and inventing facts to fit it. Why are you opposed to the truth?

Good question. Seems Republicans are opposed to the truth on everything.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Sorry, Libs, but there was a memo between Odinga and Muslim leaders. When reports about the memo first surfaced, Odinga denied that it even existed. Then, when the memo was produced, Odinga admitted to signing it, but then changed his tune and claimed it was a forgery. Then, he changed stories again and released his own version of the memo. If all was innocent and kosher about the memo, why the changing stories from Odinga about it? Also, the version of the memo that Odinga published is not substantially different from the one cited in the OP.

Talk:MOU between Raila Odinga and Muslims - WikiLeaks

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711280012.html

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

And, your answers about the videos are evasive and lame. Among other things, the videos show a Kenyan official accusing Obama of being Odinga's "stooge." They also show Obama and Odinga campaigning together.

Oh, so "only" about 1500 people were killed and there was killing by both sides. Go read the links. Odinga incited violence by making wildly false claims. For more on Odinga's role in the violence, see the following:

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Finally, you have not really touched the evidence discussed in the articles published in the Washington Times and the Jerusalem Post, not to mention the other articles.

 

[ogibillm]

Sorry, Libs, but there was a memo between Odinga and Muslim leaders. When reports about the memo first surfaced, Odinga denied that it even existed. Then, when the memo was produced, Odinga admitted to signing it, but then changed his tune and claimed it was a forgery. Then, he changed stories again and released his own version of the memo. If all was innocent and kosher about the memo, why the changing stories from Odinga about it? Also, the version of the memo that Odinga published is not substantially different from the one cited in the OP.

Talk:MOU between Raila Odinga and Muslims - WikiLeaks

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711280012.html

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

And, your answers about the videos are evasive and lame. Among other things, the videos show a Kenyan official accusing Obama of being Odinga's "stooge." They also show Obama and Odinga campaigning together.

Oh, so "only" about 1500 people were killed and there was killing by both sides. Go read the links. Odinga incited violence by making wildly false claims. For more on Odinga's role in the violence, see the following:

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Finally, you have not really touched the evidence discussed in the articles published in the Washington Times and the Jerusalem Post, not to mention the other articles.

your op is built on lies. they have been exposed. why is it you cant' accept that you have been duped?

 

[mikegriffith1]

Sorry, Libs, but there was a memo between Odinga and Muslim leaders. When reports about the memo first surfaced, Odinga denied that it even existed. Then, when the memo was produced, Odinga admitted to signing it, but then changed his tune and claimed it was a forgery. Then, he changed stories again and released his own version of the memo. If all was innocent and kosher about the memo, why the changing stories from Odinga about it? Also, the version of the memo that Odinga published is not substantially different from the one cited in the OP.

Talk:MOU between Raila Odinga and Muslims - WikiLeaks

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711280012.html

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

And, your answers about the videos are evasive and lame. Among other things, the videos show a Kenyan official accusing Obama of being Odinga's "stooge." They also show Obama and Odinga campaigning together.

Oh, so "only" about 1500 people were killed and there was killing by both sides. Go read the links. Odinga incited violence by making wildly false claims. For more on Odinga's role in the violence, see the following:

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Finally, you have not really touched the evidence discussed in the articles published in the Washington Times and the Jerusalem Post, not to mention the other articles.

your op is built on lies. they have been exposed. why is it you cant' accept that you have been duped?

Why can't you deal with the evidence? Just because a few liberal sites claim the memo was a forgery does not prove anything. All those sites are doing is taking Odinga's word that the memo was forged. If the memo really just said Odinga would protect Muslim rights, why the extreme secrecy, the denial that there was any memo at all, and the subsequent changing stories? Is not that Odinga's signature on the memo that was released first? Is it just a coincidence that in 2010 many of the provisions listed in the memo were in fact imposed? From an article in African Press International:

Perhaps most troubling is Odinga’s links to Islamic extremists in Kenya. According to Voice of America and the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, on 8/29/07, Odinga signed a secret agreement (exposed 11/27) with Sheikh Abdullah Abdi of the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF) in which he agreed to institute Islamic law in exchange for Abdi’s support (eakenya.org)–thereby potentially disenfranchising and curtailing the liberties of millions of Christian Kenyan women. Further, he promised that Muslims suspected of terrorism would be safe from extradition—thereby establishing a ‘safe haven’ for terrorists in Kenya. After the public outcry, Odinga denied signing a secret agreement. Angry at Odinga’s apparent repudiation, a member of NAMLEF subsequently released the agreement to the press.​

Odinga then claimed the document was a forgery, but acknowledged a secret agreement had been signed in exchange for Muslim support. Finally, under constant pressure, Odinga released what he claimed was the actual document (“Real” MOU) a considerably watered down version of the original; but still anathema to many Christian groups. “In response to the revelations, The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya released a statement in which church leaders said Raila, in both MOUs, comes across as a presumptive Muslim president bent on forcing Islamic law, religion and culture down the throats of the Kenyan people in total disregard of the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of freedom of worship and equal protection of the law.” ( Obama's Radical Ties: Raila Odinga )​

And what about all the other facts, such as Odinga's role in violence, Obama's stumping for him against the pro-Western and pro-Christian administration then in power, Obama's fundraising for Odinga, the Kenyan government's complaints about Obama's conduct while in Kenya, etc., etc.? What about those facts?

What Obama's "Change" Meant for Kenya, by Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Raila rallies Coast residents to register as voters

All you guys ever do when faced with facts you can't handle is you cite some liberal denials that don't even deal with most of the evidence, and then you pronounce yourselves the winners and refuse to deal with the substance of the rebuttals to your nonsense. This is a perfect example of that pattern.

 

[Syriusly]

Liberals, simply calling the OP "crap" and "BS" does not refute the indisputable evidence that it presents. WND is nothing like StormFront, and that is an absurd comparison to make.

Neither has anything to do with news.

 

[Syriusly]

Sorry, Libs, but there was a memo between Odinga and Muslim leaders. When reports about the memo first surfaced, Odinga denied that it even existed. Then, when the memo was produced, Odinga admitted to signing it, but then changed his tune and claimed it was a forgery. Then, he changed stories again and released his own version of the memo. If all was innocent and kosher about the memo, why the changing stories from Odinga about it? Also, the version of the memo that Odinga published is not substantially different from the one cited in the OP.

Talk:MOU between Raila Odinga and Muslims - WikiLeaks

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711280012.html

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

And, your answers about the videos are evasive and lame. Among other things, the videos show a Kenyan official accusing Obama of being Odinga's "stooge." They also show Obama and Odinga campaigning together.

Oh, so "only" about 1500 people were killed and there was killing by both sides. Go read the links. Odinga incited violence by making wildly false claims. For more on Odinga's role in the violence, see the following:

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Finally, you have not really touched the evidence discussed in the articles published in the Washington Times and the Jerusalem Post, not to mention the other articles.

your op is built on lies. they have been exposed. why is it you cant' accept that you have been duped?

Why can't you deal with the evidence? Just because a few liberal sites claim the memo was a forgery does not prove anything.

Because of course- there is no actual evidence.

Just the usual crazed anti-Obama crap that we have seen for years- and has been debunked for years.

But hey there are still people making money on selling this crap to dupes like you- hope you can afford it.

 

[ogibillm]

Sorry, Libs, but there was a memo between Odinga and Muslim leaders. When reports about the memo first surfaced, Odinga denied that it even existed. Then, when the memo was produced, Odinga admitted to signing it, but then changed his tune and claimed it was a forgery. Then, he changed stories again and released his own version of the memo. If all was innocent and kosher about the memo, why the changing stories from Odinga about it? Also, the version of the memo that Odinga published is not substantially different from the one cited in the OP.

Talk:MOU between Raila Odinga and Muslims - WikiLeaks

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711280012.html

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

And, your answers about the videos are evasive and lame. Among other things, the videos show a Kenyan official accusing Obama of being Odinga's "stooge." They also show Obama and Odinga campaigning together.

Oh, so "only" about 1500 people were killed and there was killing by both sides. Go read the links. Odinga incited violence by making wildly false claims. For more on Odinga's role in the violence, see the following:

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Finally, you have not really touched the evidence discussed in the articles published in the Washington Times and the Jerusalem Post, not to mention the other articles.

your op is built on lies. they have been exposed. why is it you cant' accept that you have been duped?

Why can't you deal with the evidence? Just because a few liberal sites claim the memo was a forgery does not prove anything. All those sites are doing is taking Odinga's word that the memo was forged. If the memo really just said Odinga would protect Muslim rights, why the extreme secrecy, the denial that there was any memo at all, and the subsequent changing stories? Is not that Odinga's signature on the memo that was released first? Is it just a coincidence that in 2010 many of the provisions listed in the memo were in fact imposed? From an article in African Press International:

Perhaps most troubling is Odinga’s links to Islamic extremists in Kenya. According to Voice of America and the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, on 8/29/07, Odinga signed a secret agreement (exposed 11/27) with Sheikh Abdullah Abdi of the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF) in which he agreed to institute Islamic law in exchange for Abdi’s support (eakenya.org)–thereby potentially disenfranchising and curtailing the liberties of millions of Christian Kenyan women. Further, he promised that Muslims suspected of terrorism would be safe from extradition—thereby establishing a ‘safe haven’ for terrorists in Kenya. After the public outcry, Odinga denied signing a secret agreement. Angry at Odinga’s apparent repudiation, a member of NAMLEF subsequently released the agreement to the press.​

Odinga then claimed the document was a forgery, but acknowledged a secret agreement had been signed in exchange for Muslim support. Finally, under constant pressure, Odinga released what he claimed was the actual document (“Real” MOU) a considerably watered down version of the original; but still anathema to many Christian groups. “In response to the revelations, The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya released a statement in which church leaders said Raila, in both MOUs, comes across as a presumptive Muslim president bent on forcing Islamic law, religion and culture down the throats of the Kenyan people in total disregard of the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of freedom of worship and equal protection of the law.” ( Obama's Radical Ties: Raila Odinga )​

And what about all the other facts, such as Odinga's role in violence, Obama's stumping for him against the pro-Western and pro-Christian administration then in power, Obama's fundraising for Odinga, the Kenyan government's complaints about Obama's conduct while in Kenya, etc., etc.? What about those facts?

What Obama's "Change" Meant for Kenya, by Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Raila rallies Coast residents to register as voters

All you guys ever do when faced with facts you can't handle is you cite some liberal denials that don't even deal with most of the evidence, and then you pronounce yourselves the winners and refuse to deal with the substance of the rebuttals to your nonsense. This is a perfect example of that pattern.

i'm going to ask you one quick question, the answer will decide for me if you can be reasoned with or not.

what religion is odinga a follower of?

 

[the_human_being]

 

[mikegriffith1]

Sorry, Libs, but there was a memo between Odinga and Muslim leaders. When reports about the memo first surfaced, Odinga denied that it even existed. Then, when the memo was produced, Odinga admitted to signing it, but then changed his tune and claimed it was a forgery. Then, he changed stories again and released his own version of the memo. If all was innocent and kosher about the memo, why the changing stories from Odinga about it? Also, the version of the memo that Odinga published is not substantially different from the one cited in the OP.

Talk:MOU between Raila Odinga and Muslims - WikiLeaks

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711280012.html

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

And, your answers about the videos are evasive and lame. Among other things, the videos show a Kenyan official accusing Obama of being Odinga's "stooge." They also show Obama and Odinga campaigning together.

Oh, so "only" about 1500 people were killed and there was killing by both sides. Go read the links. Odinga incited violence by making wildly false claims. For more on Odinga's role in the violence, see the following:

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Finally, you have not really touched the evidence discussed in the articles published in the Washington Times and the Jerusalem Post, not to mention the other articles.

your op is built on lies. they have been exposed. why is it you cant' accept that you have been duped?

Why can't you deal with the evidence? Just because a few liberal sites claim the memo was a forgery does not prove anything. All those sites are doing is taking Odinga's word that the memo was forged. If the memo really just said Odinga would protect Muslim rights, why the extreme secrecy, the denial that there was any memo at all, and the subsequent changing stories? Is not that Odinga's signature on the memo that was released first? Is it just a coincidence that in 2010 many of the provisions listed in the memo were in fact imposed? From an article in African Press International:

Perhaps most troubling is Odinga’s links to Islamic extremists in Kenya. According to Voice of America and the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, on 8/29/07, Odinga signed a secret agreement (exposed 11/27) with Sheikh Abdullah Abdi of the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF) in which he agreed to institute Islamic law in exchange for Abdi’s support (eakenya.org)–thereby potentially disenfranchising and curtailing the liberties of millions of Christian Kenyan women. Further, he promised that Muslims suspected of terrorism would be safe from extradition—thereby establishing a ‘safe haven’ for terrorists in Kenya. After the public outcry, Odinga denied signing a secret agreement. Angry at Odinga’s apparent repudiation, a member of NAMLEF subsequently released the agreement to the press.​

Odinga then claimed the document was a forgery, but acknowledged a secret agreement had been signed in exchange for Muslim support. Finally, under constant pressure, Odinga released what he claimed was the actual document (“Real” MOU) a considerably watered down version of the original; but still anathema to many Christian groups. “In response to the revelations, The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya released a statement in which church leaders said Raila, in both MOUs, comes across as a presumptive Muslim president bent on forcing Islamic law, religion and culture down the throats of the Kenyan people in total disregard of the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of freedom of worship and equal protection of the law.” ( Obama's Radical Ties: Raila Odinga )​

And what about all the other facts, such as Odinga's role in violence, Obama's stumping for him against the pro-Western and pro-Christian administration then in power, Obama's fundraising for Odinga, the Kenyan government's complaints about Obama's conduct while in Kenya, etc., etc.? What about those facts?

What Obama's "Change" Meant for Kenya, by Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

Raila Odinga: Unmasking the archetype of violence | The Herald

Raila rallies Coast residents to register as voters

All you guys ever do when faced with facts you can't handle is you cite some liberal denials that don't even deal with most of the evidence, and then you pronounce yourselves the winners and refuse to deal with the substance of the rebuttals to your nonsense. This is a perfect example of that pattern.

i'm going to ask you one quick question, the answer will decide for me if you can be reasoned with or not. what religion is odinga a follower of?

Let me ask you a question in return: Are you suggesting that all the evidence relating to Odinga, and to Obama's association with him, can be waved aside merely because Odinga claims to be a Christian? Is that your argument? Gee, by this gullible standard, we'd have to conclude that Hitler was a Christian just because he initially pretended to be one.

Some bonus questions: If Odinga is really a Christian, why did he side with the Muslims against the Christian government that was then in power? Why did he sign a secret agreement with Muslim leaders to support Sharia law, ban Christian broadcasts on TV Kenya, etc., etc.? If the least damning version of the memo is the real one, why did Odinga first say there was no memo, then say it was a forgery, then say yeah uh there was a memo, and then release a version of the memo that Christian groups condemned as indicating that Odinga supported imposing Sharia law? Why did the Kenyan government complain to our State Department about Obama's stumping for Odinga? Why did Obama feel to need to distance himself from Odinga once the facts came out about Oding'a affiliations and support of violence?

As for the reply that claimed that "there's no actual evidence," how can anyone say that with a straight face given the fact that there is video footage of Obama stumping with and for Odinga, given the fact that even the version of the memo that Odinga released was condemned by Kenya's largest Christian group as indicating that Odinga supported imposing Sharia law (after Odinga first claimed there was no such memo, then claimed it was a forgery, and then released his own version)? How about the massive evidence, from African newspapers among other sources, that Odinga's supporters murdered Christians and that Odinga's reckless claims sparked some of that violence? How about the video evidence of a Kenyan official calling Obama an Odinga "stooge"? Etc., etc. etc.

 

[whitehall]

The fact that Barry Hussein Sotoro Obama (or his ghost writer, Bill Ayers) titled his autobio "dreams of my father" says it all. Barry's father was an African nationalist bigamist alcoholic thug like Odinga.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

You know what.............I am requesting that conservatives keep this thread alive until the lefties on here answer these allegations, and explain the links and videos. I will listen to the lefts excu........errr, I mean reasons, but I believe they have some explaining to do. I haven't seen Mike post something with no basis in fact, so I am assuming this is relevant behavior to discuss on here about our current Commander and Chief!

That response will be.

Your all racist.
But Reagan ....
Its all Bush's fault
This is a typical Liberal response to almost every subject.

 

[imawhosure]

You know what.............I am requesting that conservatives keep this thread alive until the lefties on here answer these allegations, and explain the links and videos. I will listen to the lefts excu........errr, I mean reasons, but I believe they have some explaining to do. I haven't seen Mike post something with no basis in fact, so I am assuming this is relevant behavior to discuss on here about our current Commander and Chief!

That response will be.

Your all racist.
But Reagan ....
Its all Bush's fault
This is a typical Liberal response to almost every subject.

See, everybody knows the lefts response. It is so weak, it is funny-)