5 Responses to “Barack Obama Busted”

1. DMG
   September 22nd, 2008 - 8:07 pm

   Rude, this was discredited not only by Hagel, but the Bush Administration people at the meeting. This isn’t accurate.

2. admin
   September 22nd, 2008 - 9:11 pm

   Here is some details about it, seeing that you took the time to comment.

   http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=78602FB7-8047-4E7C-9C15-2C623F998B3C

   Hagel doesn’t carry much weight, he says stuff to be popular, and Zebari is not discredited, he just doesn’t agree with Hagel.

   Check out the frontpage stuff, it’s a bit to read, but it’s right from the guy who wrote the story.

3. DMG
   September 23rd, 2008 - 8:24 pm

   Since when does Hagel NOT carry much weight? Don’t kill the messenger. Hagel isn’t a neo-con.

   Looks like your boy Taheri has made quite a few other false claims. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amir_Taheri

   From ABC News:

   Buttry said that Hagel agrees with Obama’s account of the meeting: Obama began the meeting with al-Maliki by asserting that the United States speaks with one foreign policy voice, and that voice belongs to the Bush administration. (This is fitting. Contrast McCain jumping all over himself during the Georgia crisis, calling for all sorts of action…in other words stepping all over the CURRENT President).

   A Bush administration official with knowledge of the meeting says that, during the meeting, Obama stressed to al-Maliki that he would not interfere with President Bush’s negotiations concerning the U.S. troop presence in Iraq, and that he supports the Bush administration’s position on the need to negotiate, as soon as possible, the Status of Forces Agreement, which deals with, among other matters, U.S. troops having immunity from local prosecution.

   Obama did assert at the meeting with the Iraqis that he agrees with those -– including Hagel and Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee — who advocate congressional review of the Strategic Framework Agreement being worked out between the Bush administration and the Iraqi government, including the Iraqi parliament.

   Two officials of the Bush administration say that if Obama had done what the Post story asserted –- which they believe to be untrue -– Crocker and embassy officials attending the meeting would have ensured that the Bush administration heard about it immediately. If such an incident occurred in front of officials of the Bush administration, it would have constituted a foreign policy breach and would have been front-page huge news; it would not have leaked out two months later in an op-ed column.

4. admin
   September 23rd, 2008 - 10:52 pm

   Sourcewatch the liberals? Forget it. I don’t traffic with those who play at neutrality.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceWatch#Criticism

   I read the ABC stuff. Your argument is with Taheri, go get him.

   http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=78602FB7-8047-4E7C-9C15-2C623F998B3C

   Hagel is a wrong on-the-surge Obama supporter. I will gladly trade him for Joe Liberman.

5. DMG
   September 24th, 2008 - 2:39 pm

   Look Rude, I don’t care which side of the aisle they are on. If anyone right or left can back up their claim with references, I’m going with them.

   Taheri has been called out as a liar. I wouldn’t cite him in my argument. And his claim doesn’t meet the smell test. Bush insiders WERE IN THE ROOM, and said nothing for two months? That doesn’t smell right. I think Taheri is lying on this one. Nobody seems to be making a big deal out of this so I tend to lean away from Taheri’s piece.

   You can have Lieberman. Please. You may agree with him now, but don’t turn your back. A traitor will always be that, no matter which side he’s on. Hagel is still a Republican. There are politicians I respect on both sides, and there are those I wouldn’t trust (cough, cough Hillary Clinton, cough…)

Leave a Reply