But this screw up at the New York Daily News is major, since the timeline of President Obama's meet up with the Salahi gatecrashers is crucial to the further discovery of administration deception, to Obama's possible knowledge of Tareq Salahi's Middle East ties, and to the ongoing investigation of the failed Secret Service security procedures. Publishing the photo of then-Senator Barack Obama at the 2005 Rock the Vote Awards, here's the New York Daily News' report, "Wanna-Be TV Duo Tareq and Michaele Salahi Hunting for Payday for Party Crashing Story." And check the introduction there:
The brazen White House party crashers met the President months before they waltzed into the A-list state dinner and now they're seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars for their story.But as I reported yesterday here, I picked up the Polo Contacts entry at Atlas Shrugs, and the Canada Free Press nailed the timeline of Obama's meetup with the Salahis, "'Party Crashers' Had Five-Year Relationship With Obama Before State Dinner." Regarding the Obama-Salahi photo-op with Black-Eyed Peas, the report indicates that the picture "was published in June 2005, Barack Obama was still Senator Obama and not the President Elect."
A photograph from an America's Polo Cup party in May shows Tareq and Michaele Salahi hobnobbing with President Obama, Randy Jackson and the Black Eyed Peas.
The photo was taken during Tareq Salahi's America's Polo Cup fashion show - known as Rockin' the Runway, the Huffington Post reported.
Plus, by checking the page for Polo Contacts Worldwide, "Americas Polo Cup Pre-Event - Invite Only - with President Elect Obama and Black Eyed Peas, " we find that the entry is dated "November 26, 2008 at 2:15pm." (Added: The date stamp at America Polo Cup's photo jpg is marked "June 8, 2005.)
Now, notice that this is a "pre-event" invitation, so the timing's not right. And here's another 2008 announcement from Polo Contacts Worldwide, seeking polo players for the event, scheduled for the following May, "Call for Polo Players for Televised Polo Fashion Show May 8 - 2009."
May 8, 2009 - The Americas Cup hosts the Worlds premier Televised POLO Fashion Show - featuring the best of the United States & Australia.Looking around online and we don't see anything on Barack Obama's appearance at the fashion show. We do find this society page entry, however, "America’s Cup of Polo (May 10th, 2009)," with this picture of the Salahis:
The America's Polo Cup host thus annual Rockin the Runway Polo Fashion Show on the second Saturday in May, in the Washington DC region. In 2009, the Rockin the RunWay Fashion Show will feature a evening not to be missed.
The New York Daily News piece is sourced to Lisa Derrick at Huffington Post, "Party Crashing Salahis Met Obama in May 2009":
A photo from May's Rockin' the Runway™ televised fashion event shows party crashers Tareq and Michaele Salahi posing with the Black Eyed Peas, Randy Jackson, and PRESIDENT OBAMA.Derrick, a Firedoglake blogger, first posted the entry at "Hammering" Jane Hamsher's hate dump, "Guess Who Came to Dinner? Crashers Met Obama Earlier This Year."
But folks should check the Washington Post's May 2005 piece, "At Rock the Vote Awards, 15 Bipartisan Candles." Then-Senator Barack Obama joined Arizona Senator John McCain for some "hard-core partying ($25 a ticket) at Dream nightclub, hosted by the Black Eyed Peas with a performance by pop star Nikka Costa."
So, basically, with the major media outlets flailing over each other to pump up the celebrity angle, Tareq Salahi's shadowy background's getting little play in the press. The sleeze-blog Gawker even cheerleads the security breach as some kind of triumph of the common man, "Seven Reasons Why White House Party Crashers are Awesome for America." Plus, The Moderate Voice does a little updated roundup, but misses the damaging issue of Salahi's Palestinian-Islamist ties.
So, we have to go back over to Canada Free Press, with its report yesteday, "Pro-Palestine Party Crashers." At the entry we find Tareq Salahi's bio-blurb page at the Polo website site, which indicates that our White House intruder made excursions to the Middle East, including Dubai -- which is significant, as the news this week reveals not just the Debai World debt default, but also the country's maze of deep-seated ties to sharia finance networks, where "Islamists were working behind the scenes," not to mention the fact that some of the Dubai-UAE royals have links to Osama Bin Laden.
Here's Salahi's biography at America's Polo Cup, with a screencap just in case the celebrity wannebe decides to take it down:
*****
Does Tareq Salahi identify as an ambassador to the Middle East's terror-financing networks?
The mainstream press ain't asking.
CNN's Ed Rollins is calling for Salahi prosecutions, however, "Prosecute the White House Gate-Crashers." Might be a good idea, not just to guarantee the integrity of the justice system and to restore the status of the Secret Service; we might also get some new information on President Obama's ties to radical Palestinian activist networkds and the Persian Gulf's "Golden Chain" financers of jihad.
See also my previous reports, "Obama Met Gatecrashers in 2005: Salahi's ATFP Tied to Academic Radical Rashid Khalidi; Security Breach Rekindles Issue of President's Islamist Ties!," and "Tareq Salahi, Gate-Crasher at White House State Dinner, Tied to ATFP, America-Bashing Palestinian Group Calling for Power-Sharing With Hamas!"
**********
UPDATE: World Net Daily has picked up some of my earlier reporting on this story. See, "White House 'Gatecrashers' Tied to Terror Sympathizer: Salahi Served in Same Anti-Israel Group as Obama's Palestinian Professor Pal."
Plus, Blazing Cat Fur links to this post, here. Also, The Rhetorican links as well, here.
More: Dan Collins links, "The Unintended Consequences of Party Crashing." And Theo Spark, "News."
15 comments:
OKAY. GREAT.
BUT...
IF THEY WERE FRIENDS/ACQUAINTANCES THEN WHY'D THE SNEAK IN?
WHY DID THEY HAVE TO SEE THE POTUS THAT NIGHT?
WAS IT THEIR PERSONAL AGENDA?
WAS IT A POLITICAL ONE?
HIS?
I DON'T GET IT.
THERE'S MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE - AND YES: BLOGGERS ARE DOING MORE DIGGING THAN THE MSM.
ARMY OF DAVIDS AND ALL THAT.
BUT IT STILL BAFFLES ME.
KUDOS TO YOU.
NOW: KEEP DIGGING!
Philippe, you must be new around here.
It's not enough to just disagree with Obama while granting him the respect of being the president. He must be constantly opposed and vilified at every turn for every thing he says and does and this can not be let up until he's out of office. Worst president ever and all that noise...
Not the first time the Obama White House has had gatecrashers.
See:
http://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2009/02/05/masked-raiders-infiltrate-white-house/
JBW, with respect, I don’t think we have the hate factor that I see on the left. I think a lot of us on the right do not want to malign a president. I prefer to, theoretically, be able to support our U.S. president, but not if it means sacrificing American freedoms and economy. That said, I don’t want to get into a debate with you. Obama is brilliant, a very likeable guy, we think is misled. We are worried. I have to believe that a lot of us on the right, thought, hell yea! Okay, we lost the election, but an African American is in, and that is truly unprecedented for this country, and a nod to the great MLK; now let’s see how we do (we did very well under JFK, not so well with LBJ, terrible under Carter, passable under the centrist Clinton)! This isn’t about vilifying a Democratic president. It is about keeping this country safe and economically viable in a global downturn.
The right is starting to think that we cannot trust him. Perhaps it is too soon to tell, but it is a very serious timeline with our economy Iran, terrorists and in an economic downturn we see outrageous spending for Health Care.
Philippe, I wouldn't visit here if I wasn't having fun and being entertained.
Rusty: socialist, communist, secret Kenyan, secret Muslim, racist, sexist, traitor, terrorist sympathizer, worst president ever, the Antichrist, and the latest being Don's favorite supposed insult: gay.
The fact that at least one, and often several, of these sobriquets are applied to Obama on a daily basis by Don and his right-wing acolytes I think somewhat undermines your argument, as does the fact that they began labeling him as such almost immediately after his inauguration.
With respect, a Republican administration is responsible for the current recession, our two open-ended and unfunded overseas wars and adding trillions to the federal deficit. The current level of outrage on the right over government spending was virtually nonexistent for eight full years before Obama took office and I find it to be the height of partisan hypocrisy.
The Iraq war was sold to Americans at a cost of $50 billion; it will top $3 trillion. I don't remember seeing any tea parties. I'm not trying to get you to debate me but these facts are glaring and Don's constant exclamatory intakes of breath over every single thing this president says and does don't lend your side a great deal of legitimacy.
JBW: Face it, I'm getting results. You come here and ridicule but never rebut - because I lay down the facts. Obama's a radical fraud who can't be trusted. He'll be a one-term loser, that's for sure. Mark my word.
"...He'll be a one-term loser, that's for sure. Mark my word."
AMEN and AMEN! AN MIT guy is now "endorsing" the fraudbama and totally discredits the United States Constitution.
Obama: effete futz.
First of all Don I wasn't talking to you, just about you. But since you bothered: If by results you mean getting right-wingers who hold the same views as yourself to agree with your hysterical faux-outrage then yes, you are indeed getting them.
As you well know, I used to try to engage your sycophants in honest debate here and I was called all manner of names, constantly libeled and worse for my troubles. I even tried to debate you yourself about the merits of Photoshop recently and your response was to call me names, intimate that I'm gay (your favorite insult mentioned above) and accuse me of hating the mentally challenged.
I've stopped bothering to rebut you and all but the few intellectually honest of your followers because it's a wholly futile effort. Your version of what you try to pass off as "facts" is comical at best and I might worry that it could actually do some damage if you had a more sizable readership. As it is, I just laugh.
And given your supreme confidence in predicting that Obama wouldn't win last falls election you'll excuse me if I don't start quaking in my liberal America-hating boots at this newest prognostication of yours. But keep writing; as I said I find it all quite entertaining, especially that you and your fans take yourselves so seriously.
Typical libtard troll moron this idiotic JBW is. Too bad we can't just round them all up and send them to the socialist nation of their choice instead of making this one like a socialistic idiotic state of stupidity.
Good idea Don, why don't I waste my time debating with brain donors like your little buddy SR here. I find his creative use of the term "libtard" to be not only colloquially charming but also a highly engaging intellectual argument.
You said it better than I ever could, SR. Kudos. You're a credit to your side of the ideological aisle, guy.
AWWWWWWWW!!! Poor brain dead moron, JBW.
And your side is what? Intellectual?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
You were saying, Rusty?
LOL! Okay, that was, I must admit, a fairly entertaining exchange, James. I was thinking last night how, or if, I would respond to you, because you had finally put some interesting points out there (By the way, Donald is clearly a fighter that can hold his own, even if some of us sparring are not in your weight division). I was going to counter that both parties in congress contributed to the deployment of troops and financial mess, and that regardless of party affiliation one must question motives and potential end results regardless party affiliation; and so on, but reading this string - this was a fairly amusing back-and-forth left to its own devices. My final comment is that having a patriotic, but perhaps, more independent point of view, I will stop presuming what the right believes and speak for myself in the future, lest I get swept along in the rhetorical, turbulent current.
Intellectual honesty is all I ask of anyone, Rusty. I hear broad sweeping generalizations being made about both sides of the aisle coming from both sides of the aisle all the time and they just seem like a shortcut to thinking. Good talking to you.
Never a dull comments moment, eh Donald?
Linked to at:
PALESTINIANS AT THE GATE
Post a Comment