Obama Afixes Image @ Temple Wall

[Alycin]

Is it too much to ask that people educate themselves before stating things af if they were facts?

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1608541' date='Jul 25 2008, 06:11 PM']The bottom line on this is that the campaign especially this campaign controls every image possible. That is the job of a campaign. If they did not want these signs, they would have removed them.[/quote]

No, the campaign does not control every image possible, nor is it the job of the campaign. If you believe, that, you are sorely misinformed. That's an understatement, but I can't think of a better word at the moment.

If you checked the links of the blogs I provided, you would have read that Obama was originally supposed to appear at the wall at 10pm. The grassroots supporters were passing out flyers and posters the day before the event was to take place. The convoy had not even arrived at the hotel they were to be staying at yet. The people wanting to see him gathered at the wall well before 10pm to wait and were there until he made his delayed appearance at 5:00am or so. There was a huge time gap between the time the signs were being held by supporters, and the time Obama actually got to the site.

As I am sure you, (like any informed individual,) realize, Israel has freedom of press. In fact, it is the only country in the middle east that compares to the U.S. in terms of press freedom. So to suggest that Obama or his campaign control these photographs is to suggest that his campaign controls the freedom of press in Israel, which, as you can see, is a completely ridiculous statement.

As for them not wanting signs... why would they remove supporter's signs? These signs were held in place by Israeli residents. I can think of no reason why Obama would demand they be removed. It would be quite presumptuous of a non-Jewish, non-Israeli person to assume they know better than Jewish, Israeli residents what is or is not appropriate.

Edited July 25, 2008 by Alycin

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608495' date='Jul 25 2008, 04:06 PM']I hate you burst your bubble, but perhaps you missed the part where it says that it is just like, literally, THOUSANDS of other groups that are based of the site. Yeah, they are "strongly affiliated" in that they are huge supporters, but there is no official affiliation.

In case you weren't aware, ANYONE, including you, me, or my great uncle George can sign up for a blog at my.barackobama.com and have that "special setup" that you erroneously suggest was made especially for the group by the campaign. It's just like any other fundraising site; I have the exact same function on my Avon Walk for breast cancer page.[/quote]

The bubble has not bursted, whilst any group of people can make a setup something similar to the deal 'Jews for Obama' has with Obama's campaign. The vast majority take in little to no money what so ever, this group however does to the sum of 4,000+, with a goal of 15,000 which most groups have not set as there goal, most I seen where a goal 1,000 bucks. Also unlike most groups this group does not consist of nobodys but a long list of life long well connected Democratic and Liberal activists. Here's a list...

[quote]Board of Directors

Gidon D. Remba, President, New York, NY

Jordan Pollack, Treasurer and Chief Technology Officer, Professor of Computer Science, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA

Ilana Bryant, Chief Strategic Officer, Strawberry Frog, New York, NY

Lori Lippitz, Director, Maxwell Street Klezmer Band, Chicago, IL

Joel Ackelsberg, M.D., MPH, Epidemiologist, Infectious Diseases, Emergency Preparedness, Montclair, NJ

Marc Caplan, the Zelda and Myer Tandetnik Professor in Yiddish Language, Literature, and Culture, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD

Allon Fisher, Sociologist, Roosevelt University, Chicago, IL

Noam Alon, Airline Pilot, Pilots’ Union Mediator, Chicago, IL

Board of Advisors

Rabbi Andy Bachman, Senior Rabbi, Congregation Beth Elohim, Brooklyn, NY

Dr. Daniel Loeb, Publisher, Philadelphia Jewish Voice

Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, Emeritus, KAM Isaiah Israel Congregation, Chicago, IL

Irv Ackelsberg, public interest lawyer, Langer, Grogan & Diver, PC; former Managing Attorney, Community Legal Services, Inc. of Philadelphia, nationally recognized advocate for consumer justice and national expert on predatory lending

Laurie Zoloth, Professor of Medical Humanities & Bioethics and Religion, Director of Center for Bioethics, Science and Society, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL

Professor Gerald Bubis, Founding Director of the School of Jewish Communal Service, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, and Adjunct Professor of Social Work at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA

Rabbi Michael Cohen, Director of Special Projects, Arava Institute for Environmental Studies, Vermont & Israel

Stuart Schoffman, Writer, Jerusalem, Israel

Rabbi Herbert Bronstein, Emeritus, North Shore Congregation Israel, Glencoe, IL.

Rabbi Brant Rosen, Jewish Reconstructionist Congregation, Evanston, IL

Jeff Weintraub, Visiting Associate Professor, Political Science & Sociology, University of Pennsylvania

Andrei Markovits, Karl W. Deutsch Collegiate Professor of Comparative Politics and German Studies, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

Jeffrey M. Wice, Special Counsel, New York State Senate; Coordinator, Orthodox Project, National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC); Election law attorney, NY; Law Professor, Hofstra Law School.

Rabbi Josh Feigelson, Evanston, IL

Haim Watzman, Writer, Jerusalem, Israel, SouthJerusalem.com Blog

Jordana Gerson, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Fifth Year Rabbinical Student, New York, NY.

Rabbi Melissa Weintraub, New York, NY

Rabbi Gary S. Gerson, Oak Park Temple, Oak Park, IL

Sam Fleischacker, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, University of Illinois at Chicago and Brady Distinguished Visiting Professor of Ethics and Civic Life, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

Louis Levitt, D.P.A., Professor (Emeritus), Wurzweiler School of Social Work, Yeshiva University

[url="http://kahalamerica.com/?page_id=3"]SOURCE[/url][/quote]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608495' date='Jul 25 2008, 04:06 PM']They knew about the "surprise visit" apparently because it wasn't all THAT much of a surprise, as these things usually aren't... they get leaked, if not before the event, then usually the day of. I linked you to blog but I guess you didn't take the time to read it or you wouldn't keep posting things full of error.[/quote]

Full of error? Now I may have missed it, but all the only mention that I could see about a date and time of the visit was posted [b]after[/b] Obama's visit to the Western Wall, not before, but I may have missed it. Here's what I did see about the date and time...

"Barack was supposed to visit the Kotel (The Western Wall) at 10 that night..." "As Barack postponed his visit until the early morning, we were the only news there and pictures of us made it to YAHOO NEWS, for a while this morning one of those pictures was headlining the Haaretz English News story."

The poster does not reveal to the reader how he knew about the coming visit, just that it was to be 10pm and the time had been postponed to early morning. Again his bragging that they were the only 'news' there reveals that it was a secret that the real Press was unaware of, but somehow this group was aware?

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608495' date='Jul 25 2008, 04:06 PM']Yes, the Israeli officer wanted to make it clear that the police did not put the posters up... why WOULD police be responsible for putting them up? Who would think that? He more than likely just misspoke by saying "campaign" instead of "supporters", also "grassroots campaign" and "official campaign" could be used in this situation correctly...[/quote]

Yet the police, who are generally trustworthy and clearly spoken, and who was actually there in communication with the group said "These posters were [u]his campaign[/u] and not the doing of the police," He did not say "supporters" he said "his campaign" meaning Obama's Campaign. And an eyewitness stated that "[u]No one knew[/u] Obama was coming in advance." It makes since if one accepts that this group is a least affiliated with the official Obama Campaign. Because if the visit was a surprise as the evidence seems to show, for this group to have knowledge of the visit would have taken at least an contact within the official campaign of Obama.

Edited July 26, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[BG45]

[quote name='Galloglasses' post='1607562' date='Jul 24 2008, 05:27 PM']The Mundane is the public face of the magnificent.

Our Petty politics will affect millions for years to come, Jesus is above us, of course He is, but He is involved in us and our petty affairs, he accepts our pettiness, he helps us with our pettiness, for our pettiness can mean the life and death of people. Our petty politics will affect millions of unborn babies. And Christ will ignore this?

I know that Christ is not a politician, nor is he a member of a political party or ideaology, (quite clever of you to through Fine Geal in there BG), He is a King, which in itself, means He is both above and involved in our affairs.[/quote]


Galloglasses, thanks; I really had to rack my brain on world political parties to pull that out of my hat.

To both you and DS I offer proof and disproof of your ideas of a mundane war in place of the magnificent.

Ephesians 6:12, [i]For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens.[/i]

[Alycin]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1608597' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:14 PM']The bubble has not bursted, whilst any group of people can make a setup something similar to the deal 'Jews for Obama' has with Obama's campaign. The vast majority take in little to no money what so ever, this group however does to the sum of 4,000+, with a goal of 15,000 which most groups have not set as there goal, most I seen where a goal 1,000 bucks. Also unlike most groups this group does not consist of nobodys but a long list of life long well connected Democratic and Liberal activists. Here's a list...

Full of error? Now I may have missed it, but all the only mention that I could see about a date and time of the visit was posted [b]after[/b] Obama's visit to the Western Wall, not before, but I may have missed it. Here's what I did see about the date and time...

"Barack was supposed to visit the Kotel (The Western Wall) at 10 that night..." "As Barack postponed his visit until the early morning, we were the only news there and pictures of us made it to YAHOO NEWS, for a while this morning one of those pictures was headlining the Haaretz English News story."

The poster does not reveal to the reader how he knew about the coming visit, just that it was to be 10pm and the time had been postponed to early morning. Again his bragging that they were the only 'news' there reveals that it was a secret that the real Press was unaware of, but somehow this group was aware?
Yet the police, who are generally trustworthy and clearly spoken, and who was actually there in communication with the group said "These posters were [u]his campaign[/u] and not the doing of the police," He did not say "supporters" he said "his campaign" meaning Obama's Campaign. And an eyewitness stated that "[u]No one knew[/u] Obama was coming in advance." It makes since if one accepts that this group is a least affiliated with the official Obama Campaign. Because if the visit was a surprise as the evidence seems to show, for this group to have knowledge of the visit would have taken at least an contact within the official campaign of Obama.[/quote]

1. Liberals and Democrats support Obama??? NO WAY!!!! You're kidding?!!!??? (I'm not addressing the money issue as I think it's irrelevant.)

2. They were the only news there, as in, the only subject of news, and since Obama had not arrived, the press photographed them instead. Obviously they are not a news crew, if that's what you're trying to suggest. This seems like a "duh" thing to me. If you'd like I can e-mail Tony for clarification of his statement, but I'd bet you 300 bucks I'm right.

3. I can e-mail him to ask him how he knew about his supposed super-top-secret-invisible-magic-ninja trip if you'd like.

4. Sometimes grassroots organizations are referred to as part of the overall campaign, but there is a huge difference between "grassroots campaign" members and "official campaign" members. I already clarified that. It's not that complicated. Individuals who have no official affiliation with Obama, but encourage people to vote for him, are "campaigning" for him, but are not official campaign members. I don't know how to break it down any simpler than that.


But if you want to remain willfully ignorant, there isn't gonna be anything in the world I can say to change your mind. You've made that obvious.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='BG45' post='1608610' date='Jul 25 2008, 07:31 PM']Galloglasses, thanks; I really had to rack my brain on world political parties to pull that out of my hat.

To both you and DS I offer proof and disproof of your ideas of a mundane war in place of the magnificent.

Ephesians 6:12, [i]For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens.[/i][/quote]

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1596582' date='Jul 9 2008, 09:11 PM']Our fight isn't really with Obama and persons....it's with the principalities of darkness......they are clearly the "behind the scenes" in this campaign against LIFE...[/quote]

WE THINK ALIKE!!!

[BG45]

Sure DS. I play Devil's Advocate though. If someone would just bash McCain...

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='BG45' post='1608636' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:00 PM']Sure DS. I play Devil's Advocate though. If someone would just bash McCain...[/quote]


[img]http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/{b502fa37-24b1-442d-b621-07981605e99f}.gif[/img]

I think McCain is way way too old for a stint in the White House!

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608627' date='Jul 25 2008, 07:55 PM']1. Liberals and Democrats support Obama??? NO WAY!!!! You're kidding?!!!??? (I'm not addressing the money issue as I think it's irrelevant.)[/quote]

The point is ma'am the group is not some little group of regular folk, or just some teenager supporters with signs.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608627' date='Jul 25 2008, 07:55 PM']2. They were the only news there, as in, the only subject of news, and since Obama had not arrived, the press photographed them instead. Obviously they are not a news crew, if that's what you're trying to suggest. This seems like a "duh" thing to me. If you'd like I can e-mail Tony for clarification of his statement, but I'd bet you 300 bucks I'm right.

3. I can e-mail him to ask him how he knew about his supposed super-top-secret-invisible-magic-ninja trip if you'd like.[/quote]

Email him if you would like ma'am but do understand he would have a bias view. It was my understand that they had taken the photos, I would like to double check that by reading the blog but it is currently down as of this moment.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608627' date='Jul 25 2008, 07:55 PM']4. Sometimes grassroots organizations are referred to as part of the overall campaign, but there is a huge difference between "grassroots campaign" members and "official campaign" members. I already clarified that. It's not that complicated. Individuals who have no official affiliation with Obama, but encourage people to vote for him, are "campaigning" for him, but are not official campaign members. I don't know how to break it down any simpler than that.[/quote]

Yes thank you, I do understand the concept of "grassroots campaign" and "official campaign". What I suggest that this group is connected to or affiliated with the official campaign, and not a completely independent group. But again the fact the police called it "His Campaign" leads one to believe that the official campaign had something to do with these banners.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608627' date='Jul 25 2008, 07:55 PM']But if you want to remain willfully ignorant, there isn't gonna be anything in the world I can say to change your mind. You've made that obvious.[/quote]

I do not understand why you must nearly always employ the tactic of belittling your rivals personally. I try very hard not to employ this tactic, with avoiding the use of "you" "your" "I" and the like, only using them where they are necessary. The above statement is not necessary. If you offer proof that is not questionable, I will concede to that truth.

Edited July 26, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[XIX]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1608671' date='Jul 25 2008, 10:30 PM']I do not understand why you must nearly always employ the tactic of belittling your rivals personally. I try very hard not to employ this tactic, with avoiding the use of "you" "your" "I" and the like, only using them where they are necessary. The above statement is not necessary. If you offer proof that is not questionable, I will concede to that truth.[/quote]
I hate to say, I'm really starting to agree with this.


Disagreeing with Alycin =/= willfully ignorant. Come on, Aly, that's just arrogant. Be better than that.

[BG45]

Great cartoon DS. Ah South Park was so right and I can't even post the words to describe any election here without PM getting a red rating.

[kujo]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1608671' date='Jul 25 2008, 10:30 PM']I do not understand why you must nearly always employ the tactic of belittling your rivals personally. I try very hard not to employ this tactic, with avoiding the use of "you" "your" "I" and the like, only using them where they are necessary. The above statement is not necessary. If you offer proof that is not questionable, I will concede to that truth.[/quote]

I don't understand how SOME PEOPLE (no names) employ this tactic whenever he/she makes any comment and yet get away with it while the rest of us get called out on it always.

[Alycin]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1608671' date='Jul 25 2008, 09:30 PM']The point is ma'am the group is not some little group of regular folk, or just some teenager supporters with signs.
Email him if you would like ma'am but do understand he would have a bias view. It was my understand that they had taken the photos, I would like to double check that by reading the blog but it is currently down as of this moment.
Yes thank you, I do understand the concept of "grassroots campaign" and "official campaign". What I suggest that this group is connected to or affiliated with the official campaign, and not a completely independent group. But again the fact the police called it "His Campaign" leads one to believe that the official campaign had something to do with these banners.
I do not understand why you must nearly always employ the tactic of belittling your rivals personally. I try very hard not to employ this tactic, with avoiding the use of "you" "your" "I" and the like, only using them where they are necessary. The above statement is not necessary. If you offer proof that is not questionable, I will concede to that truth.[/quote]

1) You are taking a list from kahal and making it unanimous with the israeli individuals that I'm talking about. This is false logic. Yes, they are partners, no, they are not one and the same.

2) They did take some photos, as did the press. The album I linked to contained the photos they took, the photos that the press has are different. If it was all the same, the press photos would be identical to some of the photos you find in the pic album I linked to; they are not. This is no different than other events in which excited participants are present with members of press. I will be taking pictures of my own when I go to March for Life, and I'm sure there will a couple pictures in the paper of this, as well. It's very commonplace.

3) A "bias view"? Give me a break. How would someone have a bias when answering questions of 1) How did you know Obama was gonna be there?, and 2) Was the press present? I mean really... what is there to be biased about? They are simple questions. Not to mention he would probably think I was a complete moron for asking if the press was there when it is very obvious that they were, but I am willing to risk that to prove a point. Haha.

4) The fact that you are giving so much weight to the quote of one police officer suggests your lack of actual evidence. The officer could have easily said "campaign" meaning "grassroots campaign", i.e., supporters, or, someone could have shortened his statement if he originally said "people campaigning for"... it happens all the time... I am unsure why you insist on bringing this up over and over when it is obviously not the definitive proof you're making it out to be.

5) I am not belittling you. I used sarcasm, and I apologize for that, because I have complained a lot about sarcasm and condescension being allowed to run a muck here at Phatmass. I don't want to contribute to that so I do apologize for the sarcasm... that said, I *have* offered proof and you are grasping at straws now instead of just saying, 'oh, maybe you're right.'... The proof that I have offered far outweighs your personal thoughts on the matter because I have taken screen shots and quoted sources and used the process of likelihood instead of just going off on something and blowing it up and speculating and stating things that may not be true (slander) as if they have any real basis in fact in order to try to defame someone's reputation. In my opinion, when you dismiss strong evidence against your own thoughts and refuse to admit the possibility that you're wrong, yes, you're remaining willfully ignorant.

I'm not saying what you are suggesting is impossible, I am saying that the evidence I have provided builds a much more complete puzzle than going off of your theories which you have little-to-no evidence for, and therefore it is intellectually dishonest to continue to tote your opinions of the matter as if they are more likely to be the truth, especially when defamation of character is involved.

Edited July 26, 2008 by Alycin

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kujo' post='1608724' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:50 PM']I don't understand how SOME PEOPLE (no names) employ this tactic whenever he/she makes any comment and yet get away with it while the rest of us get called out on it always.[/quote]

But I do not believe I use this tactic when I make 'any comment', I believe my practice of avoiding yous, and yours, helps prevent the use of such a tactic. However I could be wrong, and I know I have not been prefect, but I do not agree I do such a thing when I make 'any comment' or even most.

[Alycin]

I'm done here by the way... permanent vacation starts now.

[kujo]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1608748' date='Jul 25 2008, 10:58 PM']But I do not believe I use this tactic when I make 'any comment', I believe my practice of avoiding yous, and yours, helps prevent the use of such a tactic. However I could be wrong, and I know I have not been prefect, but I do not agree I do such a thing when I make 'any comment' or even most.[/quote]

I never said you were one of those people, KoC. Though I find you to be stubborn, you are usually pretty respectful. We cool .

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1608518' date='Jul 25 2008, 04:42 PM']A Jewish seminarian of all people violated one of the most holiest sites in Jerusalem! But the prayer itself is beautiful. May God grant Obama exactly what he asks for![/quote]

You may have missed my point.

Why, of all the famous and interesting people in the world who have left prayers at the wall, was only Barack Obama's violated and printed in a newspaper?

I don't have the answer myself. I'm suggesting there is something strange about it.

[dominicansoul]

Yeah...I wondered about that myself....surely a Jewish seminarian would want to have read what Pope John Paul II left there....but that didn't happen....


things that make you go "hmmmmmm.........." Edited July 26, 2008 by dominicansoul

[kujo]

It's definitely an invasion of privacy, but what if some supporter or member of his *official campaign* thought leaking his private prayer would benefit him in some way, make him seem like a "normal guy" who just wants God to "look after his family" and stuff. I have no evidence to suggest this is what happened, just speculating.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1608761' date='Jul 25 2008, 09:07 PM'] Yeah...I wondered about that myself....surely a Jewish seminarian would want to have read what Pope John Paul II left there....but that didn't happen....
things that make you go "hmmmmmm.........."[/quote]


Exactly. And it's possible that many, many, many people in Jerusalem get curious and read those prayers when cameras and journalists are not around. But they are discreet enough not to report it to the newspaper.

One thing I know about Obama that has been obvious from the start and more rampant in the past months, is that he is heck-bent on creating an "image" for the world. He is very ambitious and thus, very deceptive. Everything he does and says is for image. One example is how he reacts to criticism and personal affronts: he pretends to not be offended, and graciously accepts any apologies that come his way. But he stands by silently while his supporters lambast whomever it was that criticized him. So he comes away with his image untarnished and gets to look like the most amiable and forgiving of men.

Right now, Obama desperately needs to appear as a humble man (after months of being accused of being uppity and arrogant), a faithful man (after numerous accusations that he's not a real Christian), and an honorable man (after months of being called a liar and a flip-flopper). The contents of this prayer that was posted in the newspaper seems rather too conveniently well-suited to that image.

If you think I'm suggesting that Obama or his people may have leaked the contents of the prayer note, you would be right.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608729' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:51 PM']1) You are taking a list from kahal and making it unanimous with the israeli individuals that I'm talking about. This is false logic. Yes, they are partners, no, they are not one and the same.[/quote]

They are actually the Founders of the group, 'Jews for Obama' is a daughter of KAHAI.


[quote name='Alycin' post='1608729' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:51 PM']2) They did take some photos, as did the press. The album I linked to contained the photos they took, the photos that the press has are different. If it was all the same, the press photos would be identical to some of the photos you find in the pic album I linked to; they are not. This is no different than other events in which excited participants are present with members of press. I will be taking pictures of my own when I go to March for Life, and I'm sure there will a couple pictures in the paper of this, as well. It's very commonplace.[/quote]

Very well I concede that the press took the photos and not the group, I was unclear on that anyway. This however does not conclude that there was not a secret visit that the group was tip off by the campaign.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608729' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:51 PM']3) A "bias view"? Give me a break. How would someone have a bias when answering questions of 1) How did you know Obama was gonna be there?, and 2) Was the press present? I mean really... what is there to be biased about? They are simple questions. Not to mention he would probably think I was a complete moron for asking if the press was there when it is very obvious that they were, but I am willing to risk that to prove a point. Haha.[/quote]

It would be a bias view yes, by answering any questions on behalf of the group, he would be representing the group and will answer any questions in favor of the groups interest. Thus his statement would be questionable.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608729' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:51 PM']4) The fact that you are giving so much weight to the quote of one police officer suggests your lack of actual evidence. The officer could have easily said "campaign" meaning "grassroots campaign", i.e., supporters, or, someone could have shortened his statement if he originally said "people campaigning for"... it happens all the time... I am unsure why you insist on bringing this up over and over when it is obviously not the definitive proof you're making it out to be.[/quote]

I am attempting to defend what the officer actually did say, against what maybe he 'could' have said 'if'. His actual words or quote backs my stance which is why you attempt to add to what he has stated.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608729' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:51 PM']5) I am not belittling you. I used sarcasm, and I apologize for that, because I have complained a lot about sarcasm and condescension being allowed to run a muck here at Phatmass. I don't want to contribute to that so I do apologize for the sarcasm... that said, I *have* offered proof and you are grasping at straws now instead of just saying, 'oh, maybe you're right.'... The proof that I have offered far outweighs your personal thoughts on the matter because I have taken screen shots and quoted sources and used the process of likelihood instead of just going off on something and blowing it up and speculating and stating things that may not be true (slander) as if they have any real basis in fact in order to try to defame someone's reputation. In my opinion, when you dismiss strong evidence against your own thoughts and refuse to admit the possibility that you're wrong, yes, you're remaining willfully ignorant.[/quote]

Apology fully and truly accepted, the peace of Christ be with you! And yes I have notice the rise in harshness on phatmass. I pray it goes soon, and a joy takes it's place...

[quote name='Alycin' post='1608729' date='Jul 25 2008, 08:51 PM']I'm not saying what you are suggesting is impossible, I am saying that the evidence I have provided builds a much more complete puzzle than going off of your theories which you have little-to-no evidence for, and therefore it is intellectually dishonest to continue to tote your opinions of the matter as if they are more likely to be the truth, especially when defamation of character is involved.[/quote]

I also believe what you are suggesting is not impossible, I could be wrong. But I also say that the evidence I have provided leads one to think there is a link between this group and the official Obama Campaign.

Edited July 26, 2008 by KnightofChrist