LA Times Refuses to Release Controversial Barack Obama Video Tape

 Cross posted on Grizzly Groundswell

 The Los Angeles Times claims that they have a video tape of Barack Obama praising an anti-Semite, former mouthpiece of the PLO, Rashid Khalidi. But they are refusing to release it.

This man was a mouthpiece for the PLO while it was still considered a terrorist organization.

The Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a videotape that it says shows Barack Obama praising a Chicago professor who was an alleged mouthpiece for the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was a designated terrorist group in the 1970s and ’80s.

 I suppose that this is just another acquaintance from the neighborhood and was not somebody that Obama knew intimately. Not exactly, according to the Los Angeles Times.

According an LA Times article written by Peter Wallsten in April, Obama was a “friend and frequent dinner companion” of Rashid Khalidi, who from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO

“Khalidi was a frequent dinner guest at the Obama’s home and at his farewell dinner in 2003 Obama joined the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers in giving testimonials on Khalidi’s role in the community,” 

 Barack Obama has shown unbelievably horrible judgement as to who he called friends. All of these people just happened to be “just people in the neighborhood?” That is one hell of a neighborhood. Wasn’t Barack Obama born in Hawaii (or Kenya)? That means he chose to move to Chicago and he chose to move to this neighborhood. Did he know that he could find these people there? Did he seek them out? There are just too many coincidences with this man.

 The question has to be asked, does the Los Angeles Times have this tape? And if they do, why won’t they release it? They claim that the tape was given to them by a confidential source who only gave it to them if they wouldn’t use it. This excuse doesn’t fly with me. Why would someone give the paper this tape and then effectively say, don’t use it.

 There are only three scenarios that I can come up with as to why they wont release the tape.

 Number one, the tape doesn’t exist. I find this unlikely. Why would the paper report the story about the tape and some of what is on it if they didn’t have it? That makes no sense to me.

 Second, the paper wants Barack Obama to be president and are unwilling to release the tape because it may harm him. Why then would they even report the story? If that is the reason than it is probably because they know that the video would be seen thousands of people where this story will not be. (At least until the internet came across this story.)

 Third, they are afraid of repercussions after Barack Obama becomes president. I think that this is the most likely. We have seen an inordinate amount of examples of the Obama campaign threatening and bulling television stations with their FCC licenses if they run ads that Barack Obama doesn’t like. We also know that a Barack Obama administration will re-institute the fairness doctrine, thus shutting down talk radio and conservative blogs and websites.

 Barack Obama has shown a willingness to silence all of those that oppose him. I don’t find it too hard to believe that the newspaper is afraid of what might happen to them if Barack Obama becomes president. In fact I find this likely. 

  This is what comes from a totalitarian regime.