Saturday, May 24, 2008

"Obama's Character and the Kenya Association"

Character, in the long run, is the decisive factor in the life of an individual and of nations alike.
- Theodore Roosevelt

The character and beliefs of a person who would be president of the United States are just as important, if not more so, than the "issues" on the war in Iraq, economy, world trade, health care and immigration, etc. It is this character and associated beliefs that will drive decisions of the President on major cultural, domestic and foreign policies. It is not something that can be swept aside as a “distracter” or “that association thing really doesn’t matter.”

Character counts. The strength of our nation’s government and its economy rests on good character. In fact, character is the foundation for any successful individual, team, enterprise or nation. The building blocks of character are purpose and principle. Character is shaped in terms of the ultimate purpose in our life, the moral precepts that are to guide us, and the grace by which God empowers us. We cannot be free spiritually, politically, morally, or economically without strong character. There is no top-down solution to our character dilemma. Character is a matter that is developed in each of us, one by one, from the inside out.1 One needs to consider the character of those who would lead our great nation.

This paper is an attempt to address a few of the associations (past and present) that Senator Obama has made which reveal his overall character and thought process. Recognizing that one needs to be very specific when making statements of this nature, an attempt has been made to use only reliable facts and filter out any hearsay, gossip or innuendo. Granted, it can always be said that not everything you read is the truth, but cross-checking sources one can surmise the truth. Sources have either been stated in the text or provided in the footnotes.

It is recognized that the critics of this paper will say that there is no solid evidence that all of Obama’s associations and their outlook on life has had any impact on Obama’s thinking or that he ascribes to their thought process. The counter to this argument is for all politicians there is a gap between the public persona and the authentic person. But in Obama's case there is reason to believe that this gap is greater than for most because he has never been fully vetted. He has been protected by his race, political correctness, and his short time on the national political scene. He has said that he learned as a teen how not to frighten white people. He perfected this skill at Columbia and Yale so that when he went to live in Chicago it was necessary to prove to the blacks that he was "black enough." It is second nature to assume a persona that is to his advantage for any given situation.

An examination of his character and past associations is the best way to distinguish the authentic Barack Obama from the public persona needed to be elected president. Other critics will say
that Obama has not been given a chance to explain himself. The counter to this is how long does one have to wait for an explanation? It took months (years) for him to finally disavow Reverend Wright. One can verbally disavow something but down deep really feel something different. Obama’s 20 years of listening to this black liberation theology and indicating he was not aware of the Rev. Wright’s teaching is highly questionable and raises the honesty and integrity question concerning Obama’s true feelings. If asked, Obama would disavow any of the other associations beliefs if it proved detrimental to his pursuit of the Presidency—once again political expediency!

Dr. Charles Krauthammer recently stated, “Obama understands that the real threat to his candidacy is less Hillary Clinton and John McCain than his own character and cultural attitudes. The three amigos: Tony Rezko, the indicted fixer; Jeremiah Wright, the racist reverend; William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist. And then Obama's own anthropological observation that "bitter" working-class whites cling to guns and religion because they misapprehend their real class interests. Obama had extreme difficulty answering questions about these associations and attitudes.”2 To these can added both Oprah Winfrey and his Kenyan family.

Oprah Winfrey has pronounced to her global audience over time she has totally rejected biblical Christianity. How does this measure up with Obama’s claim to be a Bible believing Christian? Obama’s own actions suggest that he agrees with Oprah and that his words are mere political rhetoric. Oprah has made statements on her show in the past that provide a small glimpse into her personal spiritual beliefs, speaking mostly about her belief that there are many ways, millions even, for a person to "get to what some call God."

This more recent exposure of her beliefs revolves around the book "A New Earth" by Eckhart Tolle. There is no room for Jesus Christ the Messiah, neither the God-Man, nor His teachings in Oprah's and Tolle's belief system. In fact, they propose that all people free their minds from such beliefs. Truly, deception is the only true thing that Eckhart Tolle and Oprah Winfrey offer. They, and those that follow their teachings, have fallen for Satan’s original lie, “you will be like God” (Genesis 3:5). There is a real disconnect between the purported religious beliefs of Obama and those of Oprah. Why does he continue to cling to her coat tails? Is it because she has a large audience and can be influential in garnering votes for him as well as donations? Is this another indication of poor judgment, of his faulty character? Or is it simply political expediency?

The recent speeches by Rev. Jeremiah Wright to the NAACP on 27 Apr 08 and at the National Press Club on 28 Apr 08 illustrate black liberation theology. They also illustrate black separatism and postmodern thought. Wright questions the United States as one indivisible nation--he favors diversity and multiculturalism. He turns patriotism upside down by stressing the failings of the United States rather than a willingness to sacrifice, by placing global interests over national interests. In his addresses he does not refer to love, support, and defense of the United States. Rather he argues against those policies and actions of the United States government that he considers unfair, unjust, or oppressive of the disadvantaged.3 Recently Senator Obama has disavowed himself from these remarks but his association does raise the question as to what has been engrained in his thinking over the past 20 years of listening to this theology. What impact has it had on his character and beliefs?

In respect to William Ayers, Dr. Holliday states, “Obama's real Bill Ayers problem is not the planting of bombs, as he did in the 1960s, but how he has worked to indoctrinate America’s future teachers in postmodern thought. For years he has urged all ‘progressive’ teachers to turn their classrooms into laboratories of revolutionary change. As of yet we do not know how many of Obama's ideas about change came from Ayers. [Postmodernism] is what Bill Ayers has used to make the education department at the University of Illinois a hotbed for radical education. It should be noted that the revolutionary change which Ayers has promoted is compatible with the ‘black liberation theology’ which Rev. Wright advocates.”4 How has Obama’s character been affected by Ayer’s philosophy and to what extent can we expect him to integrate Ayer’s teachings of revolutionary change into his decision processes while leading others?

Now enters a relatively new, and politically damaging association that has been reported on in bits and pieces, yet has not been picked up by the major news media—one wonders why? The internet is loaded with various stories concerning Obama’s association with Raila Odinga of Kenya, who is arguably a relative or cousin.5 Many articles have been nipping at Senator Obama’s heels for some time now over the Kenya association but the specifics seem to be rather allusive. BBC News reported in January 2008 of Obama’s kinship with Raila Odinga.6 Enquirer did an article on Obama’s potential terrorist links on 6 February 2008.7

The story of his visit to Kenya in 2006 goes beyond the family kinship and desire to see where his father was born and raised. This was a four-country tour in Africa to raise awareness for AIDS and to reconnect with his roots during a five day stay in Kenya. Obama’s father and stepfather were Muslims. His Kenyan grandmother and extended family are all Muslims. In Islam, all children of Muslim fathers are Muslim (Obama claims he is a Christian). Raila Odinga hosted Senator Obama when he visited Kenya in August of 2006, which was a taxpayer funded trip. It was at this time that Senator Obama spoke publically in praise of Raila Odinga at rallies in Nairobi. This was also construed by Kenyans as campaigning for Odinga. Obama and Odinga share the same Luo heritage and history and that made it possible for them to share the same spotlight at this defining moment in Kenyan and American histories about hope, change and fear. In fact Odinga also used the words hope and change as a part of his election speeches.

On August 29, 2007 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was dated and signed between Raila Odinga representing the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and Sheikh Abdullah Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF) of Kenya. This MOU established a relationship between Odinga and the National Muslim Leaders.

The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) has posted on its website a photograph copy of this three page MOU.8 A top-level summary of this agreement is as follows:

  • It pledges the support of Kenyan Muslims for Raila’s election. In return, as President of Kenya, Raila agrees to 14 actions, listed a) through n) on page two.

  • Within 6 months re-write the Constitution of Kenya to recognize Shariah as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions of the MOU.

  • Disband the imperialist Anti-Terror Unit (ATPU).

  • No Muslim residing in Kenya whether a citizen, visitor or relative of any of the above shall be subjected to any process involving the laws of a foreign country and in particular any Muslim arrested for or suspected of Terrorism or any other International crime shall only be tried within the borders of Kenya and shall be granted a competent lawyer of his/her choice at the expense of the Government.

  • Within one year facilitate the establishment of a Shariah court in every Kenyan divisional headquarters. [Note: everywhere in Kenya, not just in Muslim declared regions.]

  • Popularize Islam, the only true religion… by ordering every primary school in Kenya in the regions to conduct daily Madrassa classes.

  • Impose a total ban on open-air gospel crusades by worshippers of the cross…

  • Outlaw gospel programs… on KBC, the National Broadcaster.

  • Impose a total ban on the public consumption of alcoholic beverages…

  • Impose an immediate ban on women’s public dressing styles that are considered immoral and offensive to the Muslim faith…

On the 28th of November 2007 the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) issued a press statement where they expressed grave concern regarding the MOU. EAK indicated that the content of the MOU had serious implications on Kenya’s unity and the peaceful coexistence of all Kenyans. EAK further indicated that Raila Odinga 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 the equal protection of the law for all Kenyans.9

For additional information see the TV Press Conference with Raila and Muslims agreeing on the MOU regarding Kenya via YouTube.

In December 2007 Kenya voted for a new president. One of the major contenders was Obama’s cousin Raila Odinga. On 30 December 2007 when Raila Odinga lost the presidential election to Mwai Kibaki, he claimed the vote was rigged, whereupon his tribal followers went on murderous rampages. Raila supporters had stated repeatedly that if he was not elected, “No Raila, No Kenya.” The election results caused many Christian churches to be burned down whereas not one mosque was touched. There are varying reports on the amount of damage done, over 600,000 were run off their land with their homes and property stolen and 1,500 people were killed or injured.10

Based on the situation that occurred in Kenya last year, is it conceivable that an upheaval of some degree could occur in America in the event Obama is not selected as the Democratic nominee? This is not too far out thinking when one relates back to April 4, 1968 when Martin Luther King was assassinated and riots erupted in many cities nation wide. First hand experience of the devastation that occurred in Washington, D.C. during the riots of April 4–8, 1968 revealed how quickly all of this came about. The riots and civil unrest affected at least 110 U.S. cities; Washington, along with Chicago and Baltimore, was among the most impacted. The riots utterly devastated Washington's inner city economy. With the destruction or closing of businesses, thousands of jobs were lost, and insurance rates soared. Made uneasy by the violence, city residents of all races accelerated their departure for suburban areas, depressing property values. Crime in the burned out neighborhoods rose sharply, further discouraging investment. The worst case scenario is if Obama loses the Democratic nomination. The potential is present for mass demonstrations or a race war similar to the tribal war in Kenya. Recently, Rev. Al Sharpton stated on Fox News,11 “If the Super Delegates do not support Obama for the nominee after gaining the lead in the popular vote and number of delegates during the Democratic primaries, then there would be mass demonstrations that could lead to a civil war.” When Raila cried the Kenyan elections were rigged, it triggered a tribal war. The question before us--is there a similar parallel here with race becoming the main issue? Indications from various sources within Africa indicate all eyes are turned to the American presidential race. It is perceived by some that blacks are no longer analyzing the candidates regarding issues, but looking at Obama because he is of the same color. Whether we like it or not the Rev. Wright’s sermons and speeches based on Black Liberation Theology, which includes the ideas of anti-American, anti-government and anti-white, have inflamed the embers of the racial hatred of years past, much to the chagrin of Obama and America in general.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on January 1, 2008, asked Senator Obama to tape a Voice of America message, calling for calm in Kenya. Obama taped and sent the message on January 2. On January 3 he had a conversation with Bishop Desmond Tutu, who had flown to Nairobi to see if he could begin negotiations with the factions. In subsequent days, Obama had near-daily conversations with the U.S. Ambassador in Kenya or with opposition leader Raila Odinga.12 It is also reported by various sources that several conversations occurred between Senator Obama and Raila Odinga before the election and subsequent thereto. Suffice to say, there has been communication between Odinga and Obama on several occasions—before and after the riots. Through his actions, Obama has provided a glimpse into his character and beliefs. On the 28th of February 2008, President Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga signed an agreement on the formation of a coalition government in which Mr. Odinga would become Kenya's second prime Minister. Would this have occurred without Obama’s intervention, one can only speculate.

However, the real devil is in the details. Of paramount interest to this overall situation is the existence of an Internal Memo from Shakeel Shabbir (Campaign Resources Accounting Section) addressed to Hon. O. Magara (National Treasurer) on the subject: “Consolidated Statement of Campaign Financial Activities,” dated 9 November 2007.13
This list contains some 72 names or organizations and the amount donated to Raila Odinga’s campaign, shown in Kenyan Shillings (KES). Contained in this list is a line that states “Friends of Senator BO” and the amount shown is 66,000,000 Kenyan Shillings, which equates to $1 million USD. Another listing shows an Islamic group, Seif-Al-Islam Gaddafi, donating 53,450,000 KES, which equate to an amount less than $1 million USD.14

As a side note, you will see Dick Morris Associates listed providing the value (21,335,000 KES or ~ $344,000 USD) of his pro bono work for Raila Odinga. A detailed review of the Internal Memo provides some insight into the game plan devised for Raila Odinga’s campaign. The plan highlighted some weaknesses or threats of the Raila Odinga campaign such as “The public’s perception of the candidate’s Communism and the association with Communism Potential for linkage to the underdevelopment in Nyanza [Province].”15 Also sighted was the need “to propose trips to DRC {Democratic Republic of the Congo], Dubai/Kuwait and Venezuela to ease current [campaign funding] pressures.” (Copy of pages 1 and 2 of Internal Memo attached. See link at footnote 14 for entire memo).

Shown in this picture is Senator Obama speaking alongside Raila Odinga in Nairobi August 2006. For additional information concerning these events go to Atlas Shrugs.

This background information shows there is a very strong association between Senator Obama and Raila Odinga and that Raila Odinga’s motives and actions are Muslim oriented and questionable at best. Raila Odinga had the 100% backing of the Muslims and had he won he would have made Islam the only recognized religion in Kenya. This should not be too surprising as Raila Odinga is said to be a socialist trained in East Germany. Previous attempts by Raila Odinga to bring down Kenya resulted in his being thrown in jail for trying to subvert the country. Raila Odinga is considered by the Kenyan people to be a radical Muslim and a racist. His continued association with Obama raises the question as to just how close this association may be and, are some of Raila Odinga’s beliefs those of Senator Obama. This question has not been posed publically to Obama for response. The Muslim thrust in Kenya could be an extension of the battles for Islamic control going on in Somalia, Sudan and Iraq. Senator Obama's involvement in Kenyan politics, whether tribal or religious, is extremely bothersome. As an example of how Barack Obama is perceived in Kenya’s newspaper, Daily Nation press, the following cartoon depicts that sensing. It should be noted that the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) shown in the cartoon is the same party as Obama’s purported cousin, Raila Odinga.

This is but one more association of questionable characters that Senator Obama has surrounded himself with in recent years. This shows Barack Obama’s poor judgment on selection of people to be associated with and, especially, one of such poor moral fibers. As Dr. Charles Krauthammer clearly pointed out, “Obama’s distractions [associations] are the things that most reveal character and core beliefs. These distractions are seriously damaging his candidacy. As people begin to learn more about this just-arrived pretender, the magic dissipates.16

Currently, Senator Barack Obama’s character is an unknown. While the focus has been on his associations and their questionable character, another thought that surfaces is the question of Obama's character and whether it is more about his disloyalty than the specific purpose or principle of the associations we have so much trouble accepting. His character could be called into question by all sides. On the one hand, he appears to have a close association with Rezko, Wright, Ayers, Winfrey, and Odinga. On the other hand, whenever publically questioned, he appears to disown or disavow any shared purpose, principle or belief that these people hold so dearly as their life's cause. Which is it? With respect to character, either answer indicts Senator Obama as deceptive and disloyal. His "purpose" is self serving (if anything). His "principles" are compromised either way. His speeches together with his intelligence and charm have inspired millions and yet most of his followers have no idea of what he stands for except platitudes of “change” or he says he will “unify people to bring them together.” The power of speech from a charismatic person can be a powerful thing. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the American people to thoroughly examine what Senator Obama stands for along with his record before caving into his rhetoric from the campaign trail. As Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) recently advised, “Be as shrewd and ruthless in your demands on our leaders as the wizards running campaigns are in their strategies to get your vote.”17

Having established that his character is unknown or questionable by everyone involved, the discussion can turn to what the implications may be if he is indeed not being truthful to the American people about his beliefs on radical revolution, Muslim religion and racist turmoil.

What if Obama’s dishonest about his own Christianity and his Muslim intentions in this country? We have to ask the question, "What if he's deceitful to me?" Another question one needs to consider is, "What if he's double-dealing to them?" (Them being any one of the radical reformist, racist revolutionaries, or Muslims associations he maintains). In other words, what if he intends to totally “denounce” their beliefs as he has done with Rev. Wright? What are they going to do in response to his disloyalty to them? Will they retaliate against Senator Obama or the USA?

The bottom line is that in supporting Obama the American people are borrowing trouble either way. If he's not telling the truth to all camps…Well, that won’t really matter to the more radical parties—Will it? What can be done to expose this situation? The association of Barack Obama and Raila Odinga should receive the same degree of scrutiny and public exposure to ascertain the truth as is being done on Tony Rezko, Reverend Wright, William Ayers and other questionable associations in order to “smoke out” Barack Obama’s true character and beliefs.

"You are judged by the company you keep. The purpose and principles we choose are eternally more significant."

Attachment: Internal Memo

Jerry Max Bunyard
Alexandria, VA
21st May 2008

-Filed on Articles in "The Pomo White House" -

No comments: