Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Barack Obama endorsed by Nation of Islam

Louis Farrakhan, the anti-Semitic and black supremacist leader of the ‘Nation of Islam’, has praised presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama as ‘the only hope for healing the nation's racial divisions’.

To prove his point, he then makes race the issue by saying: ‘We are witnessing the phenomenal rise of a man of colour in a country that has persecuted us because of our colour.’


Cranmer can understand a certain disquiet in the Obama camp, but surely, in a democracy, a vote is a vote? Does one reject a vote from an odious individual or group? Is one tarnished by such an endorsement?

What would happen if the BNP ever endorsed David Cameron and urged its supporters to vote for him?

Or, even more unlikely, what would happen if UKIP said that the Conservative Party was the only hope of healing the nation’s divisions?


Anonymous Gouv. Morris said...

C'mon your Grace, be serious. UKIP's relationship to the political center is not to be compared with the BNP's or the Nation of Islam's. That's sloppy and insulting.

The BNP is a group of tormented nationalists. UKIP, on the other hand, is gracious, dignified, and honest. Surely you can see the difference?

27 February 2008 at 17:20  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr gouv.morris,

His Grace was having a little jest (at the expense of the Conservative Party), hence the 'even more unlikely...'.

He apologises for any offence he may have caused, which was not intended. He has absolutely no truck with the accusation that UKIP is made up of 'closet racists'.

27 February 2008 at 17:24  
Blogger Evil of Dron said...

If Caliban were to praise Prospero, of whom would that tell the most piercing truth?

27 February 2008 at 17:47  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

Apart from the nation of islam,obamas website also links to,
"Radical muslims for obama"who inturn link to MAS,MANA,ICNA,ISNA.All of these organisations espouse muslim supremacy and the destruction of the western world.
On another topic ,would an apology be forthcomming to the BNP who i am sure would be offended at being called racists?or is freedom of speech only for those that one agrees with?

27 February 2008 at 18:03  
Anonymous gouv. morris said...



27 February 2008 at 19:00  
Anonymous hear o israel said...

your grace
in democracy a vote is a vote, but it is important that it based on the truth.
mr obama says he has converted to christianity , his father is of the muslim faith. i would have thought the questioning of religous thinking , and his outreach to hopefull american voters is important to the americans.
they have a republic based on christian founders , i would imagine they would be very wary of changing that foundation.

of course we are seeing the erosion of christian values in this country , the end of the authority of the bible being touted as a lberal freedom . inits place is new authority based on , well exactly your grace what is it based upon , we are not informed by gordon brown , where he stands on any of the major institutions of our nation.

so we have a power not based on the support of what is right , but on what isnt revealed to criticise. i have observed this sheer lack of debate for some time , tony blair did it with his more presidential style and circumventing debate , but this backlog of debate is conspiring to assume that mr brown cannot either debate , or is stifling it (and acting in a communist state way ) and fooling the public and even decieveing them of the true power of there vote under our current system vs the EU treaty .

in case you havent noticed he only answers questions on his pre annoucements. this agenda setting in the hopefull pleasent marriage "of question to answer" to me is a deception , as is the EU treaty .

i maintain that we can govern our country quite well , with our own parliment having its full powers to govern its own people ,land sea and air .
i also maintain that having an active church , and laws based on its understandings , is an institution that i cannot see being betterd .
those that whish to portray it as old and outdated , but then do not allow debate , can only be painted as communist with the fear of being found out as not having the intellect to discern what is good , but build power based on the base desires to justify there position .

when the debate and oppresion are cashed in on mr browns despatch box , i hope he hasnt spent what he owes !!

27 February 2008 at 19:02  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

I am disappointed. The one thing I have always respected about the BNP is that I thought they were happy to say that they are racist.

Your Grace
It is a disaster for Obama. That Farrakhan should have kept his mouth shut. And he must know that his endorsement would hurt Obama. So that makes me think that there is something else at play here. He took down Malcolm X - why not take Obama down too? He should be locked up.

And clearly an endorsement from the BNP would be a disaster for Cameron too.

27 February 2008 at 19:35  
Blogger mongoose said...

Your Grace, Obama should decline the endorsement and swiftly - if he hasn't done so already.

Of course, Mr Farrakhan's agenda is not served by the Great Infidel freely electing a man such as Obama as president. Why would the US need a pressure group/movement such as the Nation of Islam when the Prez's dad is a phonecall away?

27 February 2008 at 21:28  
Anonymous oiznop said...

""in democracy a vote is a vote, but it is important that it based on the truth"

What does that mean??!!

How can a vote be based on the truth? What politicians are based on the truth? Cranmer has a point that a vote is a vote. Politicians sell their souls to Satan to win every vote they can - they are all things to all people, and they never even ask about the motives or 'truth' of a person's vote because they're not remotely concerned.

And Farage isn't likely to endorse Cameron, but if he did Cameron would be a fool to reject it. So why accept an endorsement from a 'closet racist' if you reject them from real racists?

27 February 2008 at 21:38  
Blogger jailhouselawyer said...

"in a democracy, a vote is a vote? Does one reject a vote from an odious individual or group? Is one tarnished by such an endorsement?"

Is his Grace thinking of America when referring to a democracy? Many of the states do not allow prisoners the vote. In the UK, the government still has not implemented the ECtHR decision whereby it is a breach of human rights to deny prisoners the vote.

I have already opined elsewhere that the Tory Party is closely linked to the BNP.

27 February 2008 at 22:27  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

evil of dron

if Caliban were to praise Prospero, of whom would that tell the most pierceing truth.

it rather depends if Prospero had been badly informed about Caliban in the first place.Poor Prospero if only his powers were compassionate and educational , rather than cruel , how much more easy it would have been to determine if he was great.

28 February 2008 at 01:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You talk crap as usual. Your views are closer to the BNP then any I have ever witnessed in any of the membership of the Conservative party in 30 years.

You murdered someone for C.....s sake, do you have no shame?

What on this earth do you want a prisoner vote for. To make murder or crime in general legal or punishable by a rather nasty tickle under the chin?

If you want to make sure innocent people dont go to prison in the first place, then good for you. But you can wait until your time is up as you personally have had to, before having the right to vote like civilized people.

However in your case if I or any ex cons I have ever talked to had had there way, you would still be inside wanking all day. Or strung up at the nearest tree before the cops got anywhere near you.

28 February 2008 at 02:01  
Blogger jailhouselawyer said...

anonymong: Don't forget to renew your membership of the KKK.

28 February 2008 at 11:51  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older