Wednesday, July 25, 2012

OBAMA BULLSHIT, LIES & HOGWASH. THE LEFT & THE BLIND BLACK SYCOPHANTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE ALL THIS HORSE SHIT !!

OBAMA BULLSHIT, LIES  & HOGWASH. THE LEFT& BLIND BLACK SYCOPHANTS ACTUALLY MIGHT BELIEVE ALL THIS HORSE SHIT !!  Here's what he said...

"And most of all, I would wake up every single day, every single day and spend every waking hour thinking about you. Fighting as hard as I knew how for you."




Last week, Barack Obama wanted a Jacksonville, Florida audience to know that he spends all of his time selflessly devoted to their best interests:

And most of all, I would wake up every single day, every single day and spend every waking hour thinking about you. Fighting as hard as I knew how for you.
Unfortunately, that statement came out the day after this story broke:
President Barack Obama is at odds with some of his handpicked outside advisers on hot-button election topics such as regulations and corporate taxes.
Many of the recommendations at issue stem from the president’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, a group of business and labor leaders with whom Mr. Obama hasn’t met in six months.
Jay Carney tried spinning it for the media:
“‘There’s no specific reason [for not meeting with his own Jobs Council], except the president has obviously got a lot on his plate, but he continues to solicit and receive advice from numerous folks outside the administration about the economy about ideas that he can act on with Congress or administratively to help the economy grow and help create jobs,’ Carney said in the White House’s first on-the-record response to a POLITICO story noting the hiatus.”
A lot on his plate?  According to National Journal’s Daybook, Carney’s right.  Obama has held 106 fundraisers in the six months since he last met with his jobs council, and not a small number of rounds of golf, either.  Looks like those supporters in Jacksonville need a waking up moment.


Got an Obamateurism of the Day? If you see a foul-up by Barack Obama, e-mail it to me at obamaisms@edmorrissey.com with the quote and the link to the Obamateurism. I’ll post the best Obamateurisms on a daily basis, depending on how many I receive. Include a link to your blog, and I’ll give some link love as well. And unlike Slate, I promise to end the feature when Barack Obama leaves office.
Illustrations by Chris Muir of Day by Day. Be sure to read the adventures of Sam, Zed, Damon, and Jan every day!

Obama is Killing our economy! Obama and The Left Lies about the economy past and present.....and who is to blame!

Obamanomics is the "Intentional destruction of the US ECONOMY" to convert our country to Socialism.

Don't be fooled otherwise! . He is the great DESTROYER!.. Bottom line we must destroy or he will destroy us... YOU CHOOSE!

THE OBAMA SUMMER PLAN...100,000 JOBS FOR FOREIGN STUDENTS while 1 in 6 young Americans have no job????

These Tactics cannot be the act of madness. That leads to only one simple conclusion it is premeditated and evil. Like a planned assasination!

Obama has 50% unemployement in Young Blacks, 23% Unemployemnet of young Hispanics... 20% Unemployement of American Teenagers who need summer jobs...

BUT... he approves ... 100,000 JOBS FOR FOREIGN STUDENTS while 1 in 6 young Americans have no job????

Only 80,000 jobs were created in June remember ??

OBAMA'S... "THIEVES R US" Backdoor RAPING of the USA. Air Force Buys $59/Gal Biofuel from Company Connected to Big Democratic Donor. So far $639,000 on 11,000 gallons of alcohol-to-jet fuel !

Air Force Buys $59/Gal Biofuel from Company Connected to Big Democratic Donor
Obama's Backdoor "Thieves R US" Program.
80 percent of the Department of Energy’s $20.5 billion loan program went to companies owned by or connected to Mr. Obama’s campaign donors. 


23 Jul 2012

In an effort to make good on President Barack Obama’s commitment to “green energy,” and so he can line his pockets like a good old THIRD WORLD TIN POT DICTATOR....now the United States Air Force spent $639,000 on 11,000 gallons of alcohol-to-jet fuel from Gevo Inc., a Colorado biofuels company, at $59 a gallon.

The cost of petroleum is presently $3.60 a gallon.
Similarly, in preparation for last week's "Green Fleet Demonstration,” the U.S. Navy purchased $12 million in biofuels to prove that a carrier strike group could be run on biofuels for the day. It’s all part of the Obama Administration’s decision last year to direct the Navy, Agriculture department, and the Energy department to spend $510 million in taxpayer monies on alternative jet and marine fuels.
But what may appear on the surface to be a green energy initiative may instead by yet another example of cronyism between the green energy industry and Democratic lawmakers.
As it turns out, one of the venture capital funders behind Gevo Inc. is Vinod Khosla.  Since 1996, opensecrets.org reports that Mr. Khosla has made $474,534 in campaign donations, 86 percent of which went to Democrats.
There’s more.
As Reuters reports:

Khosla's firm owned a 27 percent stake in Gevo as of the company's March federal filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Khosla also has close ties to another venture capital firm whose team includes Al Gore, the former vice president and Democratic presidential candidate in 2000.

Mr. Khosla is no stranger to failed biofuel projects involving taxpayer monies. He was the chief backer of Range Fuels, a biofuels company that received a government-guaranteed $64 million loan only to later go bust and leave taxpayers holding the bag.

In his book, Throw Them All Out, Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer revealed that 80 percent of the Department of Energy’s $20.5 billion loan program went to companies owned by or connected to Mr. Obama’s campaign donors.
WAIT THERE'S MORE:
Thus, we learn from Wynton Hall at Big Peace that the United States Air Force spent $639,000 on 11,000 gallons of alcohol-to-jet fuel from Gevo Inc., a Colorado biofuels company, at $59 a gallon. The cost of petroleum is presently $3.60 a gallon, and one imagines that the government can use its purchasing power to get a considerably lower price than that.

So why pay $59 per gallon? It turns out that one of the venture capital funders behind Gevo Inc. is Vinod Khosla. Since 1996, opensecrets.org reports that Mr. Khosla has made $474,534 in campaign donations, 86 percent of which went to Democrats. As of this March, when Gevo filed with the SEC, Khosla’s firm owned a 27 percent stake in the company.

Similarly, the U.S. Navy has purchased millions in biofuels to demonstrate that a carrier strike group could be run on biofuels. The company that sold this fuel to the government reportedly is owned by the husband of Sen. Diane Feinstein.

Unfortunately, using clean energy policy to funnel money to big Democratic contributors is standard operating procedure under the Obama administration. In his book Throw Them All Out, Peter Schweizer revealed that 80 percent of the Department of Energy’s $20.5 billion loan program went to companies owned by or connected to Obama’s campaign donors.

Indeed, Khosla himself is no stranger to failed biofuel projects involving taxpayer monies. According to Big Peace, he was the chief backer of Range Fuels, a biofuels company that received a government-guaranteed $64 million loan only to later go bust and leave taxpayers holding the bag.
The sad truth about many forms of clean energy is that they don’t make economic sense. But if they make political sense, that’s more than good enough for Barack Obama.

100 Million Poor People In America..Obama is working on making more at hyperspeed... STOP HIM NOW !!

100 Million Poor People In America And 39 Other Facts About Poverty That Will Blow Your Mind

 From:  http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/100-million-poor-people-in-america-and-39-other-facts-about-poverty-that-will-blow-your-mind


Every single day more Americans fall into poverty.  This should deeply alarm you no matter what political party you belong to and no matter what your personal economic philosophy is.  Right now, approximately 100 million Americans are either "poor" or "near poor".  For a lot of people "poverty" can be a nebulous concept, so let's define it.  The poverty level as defined by the federal government in 2010 was $11,139 for an individual and $22,314 for a family of four.  Could you take care of a family of four on less than $2000 a month?  Millions upon millions of families are experiencing a tremendous amount of pain in this economy, and no matter what "solutions" we think are correct, the reality is that we all should have compassion on them.  Sadly, things are about to get even worse.  The next major economic downturn is rapidly approaching, and when it hits the statistics posted below are going to look even more horrendous.
When it comes to poverty, most Americans immediately want to get into debates about tax rates and wealth redistribution and things like that.
But the truth is that they are missing the main point.
The way we slice up the pie is not going to solve our problems, because the pie is constantly getting smaller.
Our economic infrastructure is being absolutely gutted, the U.S. dollar is slowly losing its status as the reserve currency of the world and we are steadily getting poorer as a nation.
Don't be fooled by the government statistics that show a very small amount of "economic growth".  Those figures do not account for inflation.
After accounting for inflation, our economic growth has actually been negative all the way back into the middle of the last decade.
According to numbers compiled by John Williams of shadowstats.com, our "real GDP" has continually been negative since 2005.
So that means we are getting poorer as a nation.
Meanwhile, we have been piling up astounding amounts of debt.
40 years ago the total amount of debt in the United States (government, business and consumer) was less than 2 trillion dollars.
Today it is nearly 55 trillion dollars.
So we have a massive problem.
Our economic pie is shrinking and millions of Americans have been falling out of the middle class.  Meanwhile, we have been piling up staggering amounts of debt in order to maintain our vastly inflated standard of living.  As our economic problems get even worse, those trends are going to accelerate even more.
So don't look down on the poor.  You might be joining them a lot sooner than you might think.
The following are 40 facts about poverty in America that will blow your mind....
#1 In the United States today, somewhere around 100 million Americans are considered to be either "poor" or "near poor".
#2 It is being projected that when the final numbers come out later this year that the U.S. poverty rate will be the highest that it has been in almost 50 years.
#3 Approximately 57 percent of all children in the United States are living in homes that are either considered to be either "low income" or impoverished.
#4 Today, one out of every four workers in the United States brings home wages that are at or below the poverty level.
#5 According to the Wall Street Journal, 49.1 percent of all Americans live in a home where at least one person receives financial benefits from the government.  Back in 1983, that number was below 30 percent.
#6 It is projected that about half of all American adults will spend at least some time living below the poverty line before they turn 65.
#7 Today, there are approximately 20.2 million Americans that spend more than half of their incomes on housing.  That represents a 46 percent increase from 2001.
#8 During 2010, 2.6 million more Americans fell into poverty.  That was the largest increase that we have seen since the U.S. government began keeping statistics on this back in 1959.
#9 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of "very poor" rose in 300 out of the 360 largest metropolitan areas during 2010.
#10 Since Barack Obama became president, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by 6 million and the number of Americans on food stamps has risen by 14 million.
#11 Right now, one out of every seven Americans is on food stamps and one out of every four American children is on food stamps.
#12 It is projected that half of all American children will be on food stamps at least once before they turn 18 years of age.
#13 The poverty rate for children living in the United States is 22 percent, although when the new numbers are released in the fall that number is expected to go even higher.
#14 One university study estimates that child poverty costs the U.S. economy 500 billion dollars a year.
#15 Households that are led by a single mother have a 31.6% poverty rate.
#16 In 2010, 42 percent of all single mothers in the United States were on food stamps.
#17 According to the National Center for Children in Poverty, 36.4 percent of all children that live in Philadelphia are living in poverty, 40.1 percent of all children that live in Atlanta are living in poverty, 52.6 percent of all children that live in Cleveland are living in poverty and 53.6 percent of all children that live in Detroit are living in poverty.
#18 Since 2007, the number of children living in poverty in the state of California has increased by 30 percent.
#19 Child homelessness in the United States has risen by 33 percent since 2007.
#20 There are 314 counties in the United States where at least 30% of the children are facing food insecurity.
#21 More than 20 million U.S. children rely on school meal programs to keep from going hungry.
#22 A higher percentage of Americans is living in extreme poverty (6.7 percent) than has ever been measured before.
#23 If you can believe it, 37 percent of all U.S. households that are led by someone under the age of 35 have a net worth of zero or less than zero.
#24 A lot of younger Americans have found that they cannot make it on their own in this economy.  Today, approximately 25 million American adults are living with their parents.
#25 Today, one out of every six elderly Americans lives below the federal poverty line.
#26 Amazingly, the wealthiest 1 percent of all Americans own more wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined.
#27 The six heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton have a net worth that is roughly equal to the bottom 30 percent of all Americans combined.
#28 At this point, the poorest 50% of all Americans now control just 2.5% of all of the wealth in this country.
#29 Back in 1980, less than 30% of all jobs in the United States were low income jobs.  Today, more than 40% of all jobs in the United States are low income jobs.
#30 Right now, the United States actually has a higher percentage of workers doing low wage work than any other major industrialized nation does.
#31 Half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
#32 In 1970, 65 percent of all Americans lived in "middle class neighborhoods".  By 2007, only 44 percent of all Americans lived in "middle class neighborhoods".
#33 Federal housing assistance outlays increased by a whopping 42 percent between 2006 and 2010.
#34 Approximately 50 million Americans do not have any health insurance at all right now.
#35 Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid.  Today, approximately one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid.
#36 It is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls.
#37 Back in 1990, the federal government accounted for 32 percent of all health care spending in America.  Today, that figure is up to 45 percent and it is projected to surpass 50 percent very shortly.
#38 Overall, the amount of money that the federal government gives directly to the American people has risen by 32 percent since Barack Obama entered the White House.
#39 It was recently reported that 1.5 million American families live on less than two dollars a day (before counting government benefits).
#40 The unemployment rate in the U.S. has been above 8 percent for 40 months in a row, and 42 percent of all unemployed Americans have been out of work for at least half a year.
Recently, I wrote a long article about why there will never be enough jobs in the United States ever again.
That means that a whole lot of Americans are not going to be able to take care of themselves.
As our economy gets even worse, there is going to be a tremendous need for more love, compassion and generosity all over the country.
Don't be afraid to lend a helping hand, because someday you may need one yourself.

Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere:

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

The Economic Collapse: Are You Prepared For The Coming Economic Collapse And The Next Great Depression?

The Economic Collapse

Are You Prepared For The Coming Economic Collapse And The Next Great Depression?

DO YOU KNOW THAT ALLAHU AKBAR SHOOTER MAJOR RAG HEAD HASSAN.... The Fort Hood Shooter is Still Receiving $6,000 a month Pay ??

DO YOU KNOW THAT ALLAHU AKBAR SHOOTER MAJOR RAG HEAD HASSAN.... The Fort Hood Shooter is Still Receiving $6,000 a month Pay ??

The 2nd Amendment was put in not for Hunters and Civilian Self Defense. It was to Defend against Government Tyranny!

GUN CONTROL IS NOT GOOD FOR THE PROTECTORS OF LIBERTY!!
Understand: The 2nd Amendment was put in not for Hunters to hunt and for Civilians to protect themselves in their homes. (Self Defense! ).

The 2nd Amendment was put in by our founding fathers to Defend against Government Tyranny!

READ ABOUT THE SAFEST PLACE IN THE WORLD...

SWITZERLAND!! The Swiss Militia: The First Defenders of Liberty...

 Since the origins of the Swiss Confederation in 1291, it has been the duty of every male Swiss citizen to be armed and to serve in the militia. Today, that arm is an 'assault rifle,' which is issued to every Swiss male and which must be kept in the home. During Germany's Third Reich (1933-1945), that arm was a bolt-action repeating rifle, which was highly effective in the hands of Switzerland's many sharpshooters.

Americans of the wartime generation were familiar with the fact that brave and armed little Switzerland stood up to Hitler and made him blink.

As a map of Europe in 1942 shows, the Nazis had swallowed up most of everything on the continent but this tiny speck that Hitler called 'a pimple on the face of Europe.' The Fuhrer boasted that he would be 'the butcher of the Swiss,' but the Wehrmacht was dissuaded by a fully armed populace in the Alpine terrain. ...

The Swiss federal shooting festival, which remains the largest rifle competition in the world, was held in Luzern in June 1939. Hitler's takeover of Austria and Czechoslovakia was complete, both countries had been surrendered by tiny political elites who guaranteed that there would be no resistance.

Swiss President Philipp Etter spoke at the festival, stressing that something far more serious than sport was the purpose of their activity. His comments demonstrated the connection between nationaldefense and the armed citizen:

'There is probably no other country that, like Switzerland, gives the soldier his weapon to keep in the home. The Swiss always has his rifle at hand. It belongs to the furnishings of his home. ... That corresponds to ancient Swiss tradition.

As the citizen with his sword steps into the ring in the cantons which have the Landsgemeinde (government by public meeting), so the Swiss soldier lives in constant companionship with his rifle. He knows what that means. With this rifle, he is liable every hour, if the country calls, to defend his hearth, his home, his family, his birthplace. The weapon is to him a pledge and sign of honor and freedom. The Swiss does not part with his rifle.'

On September 1, 1939, Hitler launched World War II by attacking Poland. Within a day or two, Switzerland had about half a million militiamen mobilized out of a population of just over four million.

In 1940, after the rest of central Europe collapsed before the German army, Swiss Commander in Chief Henri Guisan assembled his officers at the Rotli meadow near the Lake of Lucerne. He reminded them that, at this sacred spot, in the year 1291, the Swiss Confederation was born as an alliance against despotism. Guisan admonished that the Swiss would always stand up to any invader. One has only to recall the medieval battle of Morgarten, where 1400 Swiss peasants ambushed and defeated 20,000 Austrian knights.

In World War II, the Swiss had defenses no other country had. Let's begin with the rifle in every home combined with the Alpine terrain. When the German Kaiser asked in 1912 what the quarter of a million Swiss militiamen would do if invaded by a half million German soldiers, a Swiss replied: shoot twice and go home. Switzerland also had a decentralized, direct democracy which could not be surrendered to a foreign enemy by a political elite. Some governments surrendered to Hitler without resistance based on the decision of a king or dictator; this was institutionally impossible in Switzerland. If an ordinary Swiss citizen was told that the Federal President--a relatively powerless official--had surrendered the country, the citizen might not even know the president's name, and would have held any "surrender" order in contempt.

When Hitler came to power in 1933, the Swiss feared an invasion and began military preparations like no other European nation. On Hitler's 1938 “Anchluss” or annexation of Austria, the Swiss Parliament declared that the Swiss were prepared to defend themselves "to the last drop of their blood.

When the Fuehrer attacked Poland in 1939, General Guisan ordered the citizen army to resist any attack to the last cartridge. After Denmark and Norway fell in 1940, Guisan and the Federal Council gave the order to the populace: Aggressively attack invaders; act on your own initiative; regard any surrender broadcast or announcement as enemy propaganda; resist to the end. This was published as a message to the Swiss and a warning to the Germans; surrender was impossible, even if ordered by the government, for the prior order mandated that it be treated as an enemy lie.

Even old men and children were issued armbands, identifying them as Ortswehren (local defense) so they could not be shot as partisans under international law, when the time came for them to shoot any invader they saw. Hitler never invaded Switzerland. Would you have? Nor has any dictator -- military or otherwise -- ever attempted to rule the Swiss cantons by "executive order".

There was no holocaust on Swiss soil. Swiss Jews served in the militia side by side with their fellow citizens, and kept rifles in their homes just like everyone else. It is hard to believe that there could have been a holocaust had the Jews of Germany, Poland, and France had the same privilege.

» » » » [Target Switzerland: Swiss Armed Neutrality in World War II], by Stephen P. Halbrook



Why Switzerland Has the Lowest Crime Rate in the World

When thinking about the mass extermination camps of a holocaust think....

The key to freedom is to be able to have the ability to defend yourself &, if you dont have the tools to do that, then youre going to be at the mercy of whomever wants to put you away.

Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.

The country has a population of six million, but there are estimated to be at least two million publicly-owned firearms, including about 600,000 automatic rifles and 500,000 pistols.

This is in a very large part due to Switzerland's unique system of national defence, developed over the centuries.

Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives.

Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as frontline troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home.

Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles. Women do not have to own firearms, but are encouraged to.
» » » » [Youtube (03:13)]



Death by “Gun Control”

Why must all decent non-violent people fight against "gun control"? Why is the right to keep and bear arms truly a fundamental individual right? You can find the answers in this new book.

The message is simple: Disarmed people are neither free nor safe - they become the criminals' prey and the tyrants' playthings. When the civilians are defenseless and their government goes bad, however, thousands and millions of innocents die.

Professor R.J. Rummel, author of the monumental book Death by Government, said: "Concentrated political power is the most dangerous thing on earth." For power to concentrate and become dangerous, the citizens must be disarmed.

What disarms the citizens? The idea of "gun control." It's the idea that only the government has the right to possess firearms, and that citizens have no unalienable right to use force to defend against aggression.

Death by Gun Control carefully examines the "gun control" idea: its meaning, its purposes, its effects. It comes in many forms, but in every form it enables the evildoers and works against righteous defense.

The Mother of All Stats

The Human Cost of “Gun Control” Ideas



When the gun prohibitionists quote a statistic about how many people are killed by firearms misuse, the discussion sometimes bogs down into whose crime stats to believe and how to count crimes vs. the defensive firearm uses. Death by Gun Control works on a level that nobody can dispute: documented world history.

In the 20th Century:

  • Governments murdered four times as many civilians as were killed in all the international and domestic wars combined.
  • Governments murdered millions more people than were killed by common criminals.
    How could governments kill so many people? The governments had the power - and the people, the victims, were unable to resist. The victims were unarmed.


Truth They Cannot Refute

Death by Gun Control delivers the essential - and gut wrenching -- truth that the anti-self defense "gun control" advocates never try to refute. They simply cannot refute the facts or the formula.

Here's the Formula: Hatred + Government + Disarmed Civilians = Genocide

What makes the argument so powerful? Two factors. First, it makes common sense: unarmed defenseless people have no hope against armed aggressors. Second, it states the historical truth: evil governments did wipe out 170,000,000 innocent non-military lives in the 20th Century alone.

» » » » [Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership]


Gun Control = Genocide

The Gunrunner

All creatures, from the largest whale down to the smallest bacteria, have the innate ability and willingness, to defend themselves. Contrary to the perversion preached by psychiatrists (that man's basic urge is for sex), “survival” is the basic goal of all living things.

To suppress this most basic instinct will ensure the destruction of that group, race or society. Yet that is exactly what certain humans who have political or social power over other humans have been doing for thousands of years. They do so because they “know what's best for you” and can justify killing you to prove it.

Today, most of the American species of these deviant creatures suffer from the genetic disorder called “Democrat.” However political hybrids who identify themselves as has “Republicans” and “Libertarians” have also been heard recently speaking in favor of restrictions on one's ability to defend oneself.

Where self-defense is restricted, to the same degree survival is also restricted. If a certain class of people is denied the right to defend itself, then that class will die off. This is called “genocide.”


ALL ACTS OF GENOCIDE ARE PRECEDED BY GOVERNMENT RESTRICTIONS OF PERSONAL WEAPONS.

Not one time in the history of this planet have mass murders occurred without the above axiom occurring first. Here's a small list of the deaths attributed directly to a government restriction on personal ownership of weapons and the ability to defend oneself:

1.5 million Armenians, 3 million Ukrainians, 6 million (?) Jews, 250,000 Gypsies, 6 million Slavs, 25 million Russians, 25 million Chinese, 1 million Ibos, 1.5 million Bengalis, 200,000 Guatemalans, 1.7 million Cambodians, 500,000 Indonesians, 200,000 East Timorese, 250,000 Burundians, 500,000 Ugandans, 2 million Sudanese, 800,000 Rwandans, 2 million North Koreans, 10,000 Kosovars.

» » » » [Idaho Observer]


Gun Control and Genocide, by Gary North

Sunday, April 24th marked the 90th anniversary of the first genocide of the twentieth century: the Turkish government’s slaughter of over a million unarmed Armenians. The key word is "unarmed."

The Turks got away with it under the cover of wartime. They suffered no greater postwar reprisals for this act of genocide than if they had not conducted mass murder of a peaceful people.

Other governments soon took note of this fact. It seemed like such a convenient international precedent.

Seventy-nine years after that genocide began, Hotel Rwanda opened for business.

The Hutus also got away with it. Ironically, at least a decade before – I wish I could remember the date – Harper’s ran an article predicting this genocide for this reason: the Hutus had machine guns. The Tutsis didn’t. The article was written as a kind of parable, not a politically specific forecast. I remember reading it at the time and thinking, “If I were a Tutsi, I’d emigrate.”

It did not pay to be a civilian in the twentieth century. The odds were against you.


BAD NEWS FOR CIVILIANS

The twentieth century, more than any century in recorded history, was the century of man’s inhumanity to man. A memorable phrase, that. But it is misleading. It should be modified: "Governments’ inhumanity to unarmed civilians." In the case of genocide, however, this is not easily dismissed as collateral damage on a wartime enemy. It is deliberate extermination.

The twentieth century began officially on January 1, 1901. At that time, one major war was in full swing, so let us begin with it. That was the United States’ war against the Philippines, whose citizens had the naïve notion that liberation from Spain did not imply colonization by the United States.
McKinley and then Roosevelt sent 126,000 troops to the Philippines to teach them a lesson in modern geopolitics. We had bought the Philippines fair and square from Spain for $20 million in December, 1898. The fact that the Philippines had declared independence six months earlier was irrelevant. A deal’s a deal. Those being purchased had nothing to say about it.

Back then, we did body counts of enemy combatants. The official estimate was 16,000 dead. Some unofficial estimates place this closer to 20,000. As for civilians, then as now, there were no official U.S.-reported figures. The low-ball estimate is 250,000 dead. The high estimate is one million.

Then World War I opened the floodgates – or, more accurately, the bloodgates.

» » » » [Lew Rockwell.com]

Solyndra figures attend swank Obama fundraiser.. AFTER THE BANKRUPTCY AND THE PILLAGING OF THE COMPANY. These thieves must be arrested!

Solyndra figures attend swank Obama fundraiser.. AFTER THE BANKRUPTCY AND THE PILLAGING OF THE COMPANY
FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

Obama's Secret Fund. Funnel Personal Finances and Campaign Contributions through GREEN Companies.

The Green Graveyard of Taxpayer-Funded Failures: Obama's Secret Fund. Funnel Personal Finances and Campaign Contributions through GREEN Companies.

NOW THIS VENTURE MIGHT BE THE ONLY ONE THAT MAY SUCCEED. CREATED AND TESTED IN CUIBA AND VENEZUELA!




THE LIST OF FAILURES?? WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO ??? TO OBAMA !! THROUGH THE BACK DOOR: FIGURES !!


Monday, July 23, 2012

Obama's Long Form BIRTH CERTIFICATE is a LONG FREAKING BULLSHIT LIE... CHECK IT OUT...REVEALED LINE BY LINE.

Obama's Long Form BIRTH CERTIFICATE is a LONG FREAKING BULLSHIT LIE...

OF course the HUMPY DOG MEDIA IS NOT GOING TO EVEN CONSIDER IT. YOU SHOULD!
 
 Not only Is the released copy of Obama's Birth Certificate in deletable layers, but the letters have white shadowing behind them which no typo writer had the capability of producing in 1961. 

AND WHERE IS THE SEAL?  A embossed seal is placed on every United States birth certificate EXCEPT Obama's....   The most OBVIOUS missing information is being ignored once again by the media.

Obama's fathers race is listed as African, everybody knows that "African" defines a geographic region, an entire continent, and there are people of every race living in Africa. The correct and accurate response for "race" in 1961 was "negro" but liberal forgers are conditioned to believe somehow that word is ruled "out of bounds".

Why in the hell does the green paper look rolled on the left side?

If you open this document in Adobe Reader (free, please download and try yourself). You'll notice that as you drag to expand the page via arrows right, left, up, or down, some of the words disappear... ?

I have still copied the image using printscreen...


This was simply trying to expand the view slowly via the window border.


Further more, there is a videos documenting it all...






Pamela Geller and Eric Bolling discuss the documents curl and border meshing not matching up.



AND MSNBC grossly under minds information clearly disputing Obama's Hawaiian Birth Certificate

Obama's Long Form is a LONG LIE....

 Not only Is the released copy of Obama's Birth Certificate in deletable layers, but the letters have white shadowing behind them which no typo writer had the capability of producing in 1961. 

AND WHERE IS THE SEAL?  A embossed seal is placed on every United States birth certificate EXCEPT Obama's....   The most OBVIOUS missing information is being ignored once again by the media.









Obama's fathers race is listed as African, everybody knows that "African" defines a geographic region, an entire continent, and there are people of every race living in Africa. The correct and accurate response for "race" in 1961 was "negro" but liberal forgers are conditioned to believe somehow that word is ruled "out of bounds".

Why in the hell does the green paper look rolled on the left side?

If you open this document in Adobe Reader (free, please download and try yourself). You'll notice that as you drag to expand the page via arrows right, left, up, or down, some of the words disappear... ?

I have still copied the image using printscreen...


This was simply trying to expand the view slowly via the window border.


Further more, there is a videos documenting it all...






Pamela Geller and Eric Bolling discuss the documents curl and border meshing not matching up.



AND MSNBC grossly under minds information clearly disputing Obama's Hawaiian Birth Certificate



Not done yet.... According to WND :

The problem since the short-form certificate was released during the 2008 presidential campaign has always been this:
  • As WND reported, the long-form birth certificates issued by Kapi'olani to the Nordyke twins have certificate numbers lower than the number given Obama, even though the president purportedly was born at the same hospital a day earlier than the Nordykes.
  • Note, Susan Nordyke, the first twin, was born at 2:12 p.m. Hawaii time Aug. 5, 1961, and was given certificate No. 151 – 61 – 10637, which was filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961.
  • Gretchen Nordyke, the second twin, was born at 2:17 p.m. Hawaii time Aug. 5, 1961, and was given certificate No. 151 – 61 – 10638, which was also filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961.
  • Yet, according to the Certification of Live Birth displayed by FactCheck.org during the 2008 presidential campaign – and now according to the long-form birth certificate the White House released yesterday – Barack Obama was given a higher certificate number than the Nordykes.
  • Note, Obama was given certificate No. 151 – 1961 – 10641, even though he was born Aug. 4, 1961, the day before the Nordyke twins, and his birth was registered with the Hawaii Department of Health registrar three days earlier, Aug. 8, 1961.

In 1961, the birth certificate numbers were not assigned by the hospitals.

Instead, the numbers were stamped to the birth record by the Hawaii Department of Health at the main office in Honolulu.

This is the only place birth certificate numbers were assigned.

At the last step of the process, the documents were accepted by the registrar general, with the date of registration inserted in box No. 22 on the lower right hand corner of the long-form birth certificate.

The date the birth document was accepted by the registrar general was the date the birth certificate number was stamped on the birth record.

The birth certificate number was stamped on the form by a rubber stamp that automatically increased by one each time a birth certificate was stamped.

The question, therefore, is how was it possible that the Nordyke twins had their birth certificates accepted by the registrar general in Hawaii three days later than the registrar general accepted Obama's birth certificate, when the twins' numbers are lower than Obama's number?

Here are the Nordyke twins birth certificates:


And lets not forget the 2004 report by AP

Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate



This entire "birth certificate" thing REAKS of fraud.

FROM: http://crashpolitics.blogspot.com/2011/04/obamas-long-form-looking-like-long-lie.html

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Obama White House provides "Doctored" Family Photos WHY ??? Anyone into Photo Forensic Analysis ??

ANTI AMERICAN FORCES HAVE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF Work..TO CREATE THIS FAKE CABAL FRONT MAN. HERE IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE!


A much older Stanely Armour and Madelyn Dunham are purported to have visited a 21-year-old Barack Obama, Jr. upon "his graduation from Columbia University, New York, NY, in 1983." Obama's dark clothes were chosen to hide the composite imperfections (see below) which would be more apparent had he worn lighter clothing. Both the Dunhams’ and Obama’s clothing is multi-hued, showing effects contradictory to those of natural sunlight, including the absence of (otherwise) natural shadowing.

Photo 3

Barack Obama sits on a bench in Central Park South, New York City with his grandparents, Stanley Armour and Madelyn Dunham.

Photo 3: Analysis
Stanley Armour Dunham was reported to have died on February 8, 1992, so he could not have been in a photo which simultaneously includes Obama's wedding ring, obtained (and worn) on or about October 18, 1992. If this is a genuine photo taken in 1983, Obama would have actually been wearing his wedding ring prematurely—by 9 and 1/2 years.
The most glaring anomaly is the fact that his grandfather appears to be suffering from a severe anatomical distortion: he has 3 arms! Look closely at his left shoulder. His arm is obviously hidden but is clearly hanging at his side. Simultaneously, Stanley Dunham puts his 'third hand' over Barack's shoulder (without raising his arm), but it doesn't quite rest on the shoulder -- it floats in the air! 
A closer examination reveals that even the park bench is fraudulent. The photo appears to have been compiled in layers and in the following order: the bench, Stanley Dunham, Barack Obama, Madelyn Dunham, Stanley Dunham's suit jacke—entire left side, and Madelyn Dunham's suit jacket — entire right side.
The background, if in the actual setting of Central Park South, should have water on the other side of the wall nearest the bench—not trees. A closer look reveals two walls, the first near the base of the bench, and the second behind that wall. As in the previous set of photos, the subjects are not looking at the same photographer because there wasn't just one photographer—there were at least three, and most likely, six. The alteration/reinsertion of clothing is most visible along Stanley's left lapel and Madelyn's buttonhole side of her suit jacket, which is, abnormally, a straight line. The buttonholes are aligned, but the right-side lapel is definitely smaller than the left lapel, and so, it is out of proportion. 
This photo is a complete composite fabrication intended to perpetuate the lie that Barack Obama attended and graduated from Columbia University and was subsequentlyvisited by his grandparents.


PHOTO 3 -A
Photo 3-A: Analysis
The original photo has been edited (by the author) in order to reveal the darkened aspects of the composite manipulations. Changes were made by altering the white/black-point aspect ratios and by lowering the gamma drive. The actual sunlight patterns of the background become brighter, while the foreground becomes more distinct. The light anomalies of the foreground still remain opposite of what they should be and have little or no affect on Obama's clothing. Because the background is actually lighter, the foreground should be darker. It is not. Therefore, the subjects appear to be together due to composite construction.
With the brightening of this photo, Obama's left trouser leg now appears to be composed of three different types of material, due to the recropping of his leg onto the photo, after the insertion of Madelyn Dunham's image. The pant leg near the cuff is a light grey color which mutates into black. Below his left hand, the trousersturn light gray, then coal black. Still not convinced? Then notice that Obama's upper-left leg (femur) appears to be larger (thicker and taller) and longer by 5-6 inches (up to the knee) than his right leg. This is 'Photoshopping' at its worst.
As is seen in most of Barack Obama's photos, his ears protrude closer to his skull, less than can be seen in live television shots. His ears normally protrude outward by an additional 22.5 degrees or so.
There are far too many abnormalities within this photographic rendition for it to be genuine—a “D-” grade in Photoshop 101—and that’s being generous.


NOW SEE OBAMA ADDED IN ??
CHEEZY PHOTO SHOP !!


YOUR THOUGHTS ...   ??

Saturday, July 21, 2012

IS OBAMA THE SON OF MALCOLM X??? YOU DECIDE !!

COULD THE REAL REASON OBAMA GOT ELECTED BE THAT HE IS THE SON OF MALCOLM X ??

YOU DECIDE AFTER READING THIS ARTICLE.


 


Given the possible implications of the information contained herein we cannot exclude attemtps to surpress it. Futhermore at this stage of the investigations oilforimmigration does refrain from expressing a clear opinion about the validity of the theories and conclusions reached by Israëlinsider.
morphIf Barack Hussein Obama II is Malcolm X’s biological son and ideological heir, it would uniquely explain the mystery of why he was so generously helped by so many Arab and communist “friends in high places” long before he was a “somebody.”
Malcolm ensured his secret son would learn the ways of Islam, of revolution, tutored by the finest socialist ideologues of his time, and the future, funded by Saudi and Syrian financiers. He would be groomed for leadership, educated and trained to organize the community called the United States of America.
Morph of Barack O to Malcolm X courtesy Polarik.
by Reuven Koret, Israel Insider Publisher
In August I received a curious email. As a magazine that covers international politics, with a focus on Mideast affairs, Israel Insider gets more from its fair share of baseless tips and phony rumors. I ignore most and delete them unread. This one was a bit different. It came from a national security lawyer with extensive credentials and intelligence connections that checked out, and a phone number.
Israel Insider had been running a series of articles exploring the vagaries of Barack Obama’s birth, and his concealed documentation, and this was the jumping off point of the email, which confirmed the claim that Obama was not born in Hawaii, that “Mossad are going with Mombasa” but “Proving Mombasa is not so easy, as NSIS in Nairobi are clamming up tight, as are MI6 in London, who have the original Mombasa file and full details of the birth.”
He said that “Disproving Honolulu is child’s play. You’ve already shown that the birth certificate put forward by Obama (whose people privately are not denying Mombasa, by the way) is a fake. Why fake it? If he was born in Honolulu he could obtain a genuine one. Hawaii Dept of Health would hardly denounce a potential presidential candidate’s birth certificate as fraudulent without cross-checking birth records for August 1961. No birth was registered in the name of Obama in Honolulu in August 1961.”
(This last detail may explain why Hawaiian officials last Friday confirmed that a birth certificate does indeed exist but conspicuously refused to release any details or even confirm that the details conform to those on the computer-generated Certification of Live Birth. The name on the “original” certificate may in fact not be Obama nor the birthplace Honolulu. But Obama’s recent visit “to his grandmother” may well have had less to do with her health than eliciting this vague and inconclusive statement from the Hawaiian Health Department.)
The source continues: “There is no evidence Ann Dunham had even met Obama Senior in or around November 1960, the alleged time of conception, indeed it is not even clear Obama was in Honolulu at that time, although he may have been. Ann Dunham was only 17 and although she might have been in Honolulu the timing is tight.” “More to the point, she was in neither of the medical centers put forward by the Obama campaign (question: why do they not know in which hospital he was born?) on August 4th, nor are there medical records to back up the claimed birth, nor has an attending physician been named. I’ve heard of births with the father absent, births with the mother absent a bit trickier.”
“There are said to be photos of Ann Dunham on Waikiki Beach taken in or about July 1961, when she is supposed to have been in her third trimester, in a bikini, taken by a fellow female student. AD is clearly not pregnant. Media have not yet talked to fellow students, but it can’t be long. There are bound to be other photos of AD in existence taken during the alleged 2nd and 3rd trimesters. Obama campaign are terrified some one will press for her medical records, which have been accessed by CIA.”
“Moving to Indonesia the Obama campaign are also suppressing the Indonesian immigration and passport records, which I believe show him as a Kenyan citizen, and the naturalisation records. They have not denied Internet claims he was naturalised in Indonesia. If he was a US citizen there should be a visa record to back that up.”
“Obama Senior was murdered in Kenya in 1982 to silence him. Interesting story re his sister Auma as well — she appears to be a full sister, not a half-sister as he is claiming, i.e. they share the same mother. She was ordered back to Kenya in 2007 to prevent DNA testing …. CIA did a DNA test on the grandparents, using saliva from glasses, which conclusively rules out any relationship between Obama and the Dunhams.”
“The source said that the Dunham family became involved because Stanley Dunham, Sr. was suspected of espionage. Boeing, he said, has “a 1944 security file on Stanley Dunham in connection with suspected sabotage of B-17G aircraft at their Wichita Kansas plant and the theft of B-29 blueprints, a full set of which were passed to the German Abwehr via Lisbon by June 1944. Ann Dunham appears to have been chosen as the surrogate mother in 1963 because of the family connection to German Intelligence. German assets in the US, including Rezko, who is connected to the Syrian Mukhabarat and the German DVD, sponsored his career.
“Effectively,” the source concludes, “Obama is a German sleeper agent.”
Well, this is a lot to take in, and on first reading it struck me that the source had been reading too many Le Carre novels or Bond movies. I mean, really: “The Manchurian Candidate” meets “The Boy from Mombassa”?
It seemed completely preposterous, and indeed I initially dismissed it as preposterous. Obama a “German sleeper agent”? Of course, in those days the East Germans were a Soviet satellite, and the DDR was perhaps the most feared and ideological of the communist states, with more than a sprinkling of rehabilitated Nazis uncured of their genetic fantasies and experiments. 1961-1963 were the peak years of the Cold War, with Berlin playing a central role in East-West hostilities.
But what made no sense to me was why anyone in the spy business, or anyone in East Germany for that matter, would give a damn to find a foster parent for a newborn illegitimate offspring of mixed black-white parentage. What made him so special that the Syrians and the German would go to all the trouble or see some potential in grooming him? What could possibly make intelligence agencies groom from infancy a sleeper agent.
The source didn’t answer this, nor could I, over the succeeding months of the campaign. We exchanged a few more emails, but the nagging question of “why” anyone would bother with this baby would not leave me. What did come out in the ensuing weeks, however, was a litany of unexplained facts in Obama’s youthful history, of help from strangers in high places all along the way, benefactors who had either Arab-Muslim or Communist-Social connections. There was his Islamic education in Indonesia. There was the fact that in Hawaii the boy was tutored in the ways of revolution by leading black activists, Muslim activists, and Communist activists. Influentia black nationalist and Communist Frank Marshall Davis would become a huge influence in the young Obama’s life.
But things really got strange with the revelation that Khalid al-Mansour, close adviser to a Saudi billionaire and royal family helped Obama get into Harvard Law School (and reportedly Columbia before that) and financed his education and advancement.
It was al-Mansour who asked Percy Sutton, a high profile black lawyer active in the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s, to help Obama get into Harvard. Sutton described Mansour as “the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama and asked him to “write a letter in support of Obama’s application to Harvard Law School, Sutton recalled.  “And his introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?” Sutton obliged:“”I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly.”
How in the world would Percy Sutton know that Obama, a young man he had never met, was a “genius”? It turns out that Sutton was among the lawyers for Malcolm X.
And why would a big wheel like al-Mansour take such an interest in a drug-taking party boy from a second-rate college? While helping Obama get into Harvard, he was representing top members of the Saudi Royal family, Saudi billionaires Abdul Aziz and Khalid al-Ibrahim, and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, nephew if King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia. So there was, early on, a direct connection between Obama and Saudi royalty and an aggressive effort by a Saudi agent to make Obama’s way in the world.
It was this connection to Saudi wealth that has led to Obama being dubbed the “Mansourian candidate”.
Then there were the revelations about Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dohrn — unrepentant terrorists and communists both — who helped launch Obama’s political career from their home. Ayers, indeed, may well have ghost-written Obama’s memoir Dreams from my Father, creating the impression that Obama was also skilled in writing as well as “community organizing.”
More substantially, there was Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the Syrian born real estate wheeler-dealer and convicted racketeer, who helped Obama raise his first campaign funds and assisted him financially.
There were influential Palestinian scholars and propagandists Rashid Khalidi and Edward Said, colleagues and personal friends of Obama, despite his unconvincing efforts to distance himself from them and squelch his praise for their anti-Israel ideologies.
There was Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s spiritual mentor, who conducted his marriage, baptized their children, and gave Obama’s campaign manifesto “Audacity of Hope” its title before being distanced (at least for the duration of the campaign) when their close twenty year relationship came to light.
And, of course, there is neighbor Louis Farrakhan, current leader of the Nation of Islam, who recently spoke of Obama as the “Messiah” and — as a report from Ken Timmerman, citing an insider, today confirms — enjoys an “open channel” of communication with him.
Why did all of these important scholars and ideologues, fundraiser and networkers, these millionaires and billionaires – especially from the Arab and Islamic world, and extreme socialist and communist party activists — reach out to help this unknown, undereducated young man, many before Obama was anybody of known importance? Was it just that he was tall and handsome and bright, with a silver tongue?
Or was there some other factor – a genetic factor, a secret legacy of heredity — that mysteriously opened the doors and wallets and elicited the kindness of strangers?
obamasrLast week, a long and rambling post attributed to one Rudy Schultz was made to the Atlas Shrugs blog of Pamela Geller. The starting point for the post was revelation of school records that show that the supposed mother of Barack Obama enrolled in the University of Washington just a few weeks after her son was purportedly born in Hawaii. But the intention of the poster was apparently to imply that Obama’s father was unlikely to have been Barack Hussein Obama, Senior (photo at left).
xobThe post provides photos and a video of Malcolm X, with a notation that he and Obama had the same height (6′2-6′-3″) and striking physical resemblances: identical hairline, jawline, and other distinctive facial features, similarities not shared by Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. or other members of the Luo tribe bloodline.
The post noted striking similarities in speaking cadence and style, not to mention a bright flashing smile and a wry sense of humor. The man born in Nebraska as Malcolm Little also was a light shade of brown, the product of a mother from Grenada who, he said, “looked like a white woman” and a black father.
See more striking similarities from insider Octaman here.
The post also traced the path of Malcolm X in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, a journey that took him to Africa and the young leadership circle to which Barack Hussein Obama Sr. also belonged, including the activist Tom Mboya who was behind the program which airlifted, with US funding, young African leaders to Hawaii to study at the university, a cohort to which Obama senior belonged.
But Schultz concludes his post by pulling his punches a bit: “While Malcolm X may not be Obama’s biological father, Malcolm X is demonstrably Barack Hussein Obama’s philosophical father, and the lineage is undeniable! Obama Jr. was sired in the social soup stirred by Malcolm X.”
xandobamaWhile Schultz backed away from claiming that Obama’s biological father may in fact be Malcolm X, the hereditary claim cannot be discounted. If he was indeed the illegitimate offspring of Malcolm – the closest that one can get to “royalty” in the messianic broth of black radical Islamic and Communistic politics – that would explain the otherwise inexplicable:
why this “illegitimate” baby, and later this young man – a druggie and underachiever — would have had paved for him the royal road to privilege and power, paid for his Ivy League education, got him jobs and a home, raised millions of dollars for his political career, got him selected to address the DNC in 2004, got him into the senate in 2006, and led him straight to where he is today, just two years hence, on the verge of the US presidency, powered by hundreds of millions of untraceable overseas contributions.
In the minds of the leftist and Islamic leaders, he is the heir to the throne of “freedom fighters”, the revolutionary prodigal son – heir to legacy of black powers and black Islam — come home to rule.
Nothing short of a DNA test is going to prove who Obama Jr.’s father really is, or, indeed who is real mother is, or is not. His long-suppressed birth certificate, which he wrote about possessing in Dreams from my Father and which Hawaii now admits is on file, could help solve the mystery.
No one to my knowledge has explored the possibility that Stanley Ann may not be the birth-mother. That would explain the lack of hospital records in Honolulu and the fact that no one can remember seeing her pregnant. Suddenly she just appeared in Washington state with a little baby boy.
There is, too, a curious comment that Stanley Ann Dunham reportedly made after high school, remembered by a friend, that “I don’t need to get married or date to have a baby.” And the fact that in June 1960 her family – who were reportedly highly sympathetic with left-wing causes — suddenly left Washington state for Hawaii, where they continued to be involved with socialist-communist causes and personalities, such as Frank Marshall Davis (identified by Obama only as “Frank” in Obama’s Dreams from my Father), who proved so influential in his upbringing.
There is also new information, published in Atlas Shrugs and confirmed elsewhere, from the University of Hawaii that she was only enrolled only in the fall of 1960, and that from the Fall of 1961 (weeks after Barack Jr. was reportedly born) and through the following spring, she was enrolled at the University of Washington.
There is the fact that she abandoned this baby on repeated occasions, and the fact that Obama returned the favored when he refused to visit her as she sickened and died. If she was merely his foster mother, then she was just a means to an end, to be discarded when she had outlived her usefulness.
If Barack Hussein Obama II is Malcolm X’s biological son and ideological heir, it would uniquely explain the mystery of why he was so generously helped by so many Arab and communist “friends in high places” long before he was a “somebody.”
Malcolm ensured his secret son would learn the ways of Islam, of revolution, tutored by the finest socialist ideologues of his time, and the future, funded by Saudi and Syrian financiers. He would be groomed for leadership, educated and trained to organize the community called the United States of America.
Malcolm broke with Elijah Muhammad in large measure because the then-leader of the Nation of Islam had conducted illicit affairs and sired illegitimate children. If Malcolm himself had sired a boy, it is not something he would have wanted to advertise, or to bring along with him in his hectic and dangerous revolutionary path. But he may well have arranged to give the boy a first-class upbringing and education, free from the burden of his own violent legacy, his history as a convicted felon, his likely fate as a martyr, to realize the legacy he never could. He knew he was “a walking dead man,” marked for death — how could he perpetuate his principles beyond the grave?
Malcolm X was marginalized even from the black leadership after he said, following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, that the “chickens had come home to roost.” That term would be resurrected by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, much to Obama’s chagrin, in a sermon discussing the reasons for the Islamic attacks on the United States, reasons that Obama echoed in his own post-9/11 statements, in somewhat less inflammatory terms.
Malcolm himself was assassinated in 1965, reportedly by agents from the Nation of Islam.
If indeed Obama is not just Malcolm’s spiritual son but his biological one as well, it would represent the realization of a lifelong preparation to seize power, not by guns but by genes, and the genius of Obama’s handlers, mentors and assistants along the way who prepared his path to power.
According to this scenario, the sleeper agent is now wide awake, although it is also conceivable that Obama himself may not be fully aware of the role he was programmed to play. Nor is it clear who has supplanted his initial handlers — which my source identified as East German and Syrian — although the Saudis and their allies, including those within the US government and not just the Democratic side of the aisle, clearly seem implicated with pulling some of the strings and pouring some of the huge funding that has brought him to where he is today.
Those who have helped him reach to the threshold of power — some knowingly and some “useful idiots” — have been working in concert to fulfill the revolutionary goals of Malcolm’s by putting his boy in power, using the system to destroy the system. Early voting. ACORN. Untraceable online funds. Brilliant. But that, of course, is just the means to the end.
Barack Obama wrote, in Dreams from My Father, of the huge impact this black revolutionary hero’s memoir had on him, as none others did: “Only Malcolm X’s autobiography seemed to offer something different. His repeated acts of self-creation spoke to me.” Self-creation indeed.
If Malcolm X secretly sired Barack Obama, then the title Dreams from My Father would indeed take on a whole new meaning, with Obama Sr. revealed as a kind of paternal proxy, a stand-in for a revolutionary of a higher spiritual and political order whose identity the self-creating son could never reveal if his own ambitions, and his real father’s ambitions for him, were to be realized.
In 1964, the year before his death, Malcolm gave an address, “Ballots or Bullets” (audio available here) in which he urged African Americans to turn away from violence and create revolutionary change through the US electoral system.