Obama's Multimillion Aid to Syrian Rebels Might Fall into Terrorists Hands
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is asking Congress for $500 million in aid to give to moderate Syrian rebels. The White House says the money would go toward stabilizing areas under opposition control, facilitate the provision of essential services and promote conditions for a negotiated settlement.
Claude Salhani, senior editor of Trend News Agency in Azerbaijan, asks, "Who are the good guys, who are the bad guys?" How the U.S. will differentiate between extremists and moderates will be a hefty task. "The U.S. is going to have put together some fancy tricks to try and figure out who these moderates are, and how do we go about arming them and training them and supplying them. It's not an easy answer."
Why Black Americans Vote Unquestioningly for Obama
To be Black in america, there is a notion that white people do not understand. Although we do not live in Black communities, like Asians, Italians, Jews, Mormons etc. do, we pressure each other to act, behave and think alike. The worst of this pressure is political pressure. This pressure is exerted upon us by preachers, leaders and the media that is bought and paid for by the Democrat party.
With the advent of the internet and an endless amount of information, I see no reason why Black people should vote for not only Democrats, but precisely Obama.
Obama has single-handedly impoverished more Black people than any other president since Lincoln.
- promised illegal aliens no persecution, so that they can continue to compete for low end jobs Black americans desperately need right now, A.K.A. the current depression
- extended NAFTA which depresses the mexican economy, creating more of the same problem we already have with mexicans looking for a better life in america
- handed down new policies of "don't ask don't tell" for mexicans not needing to show proof of residency to obtain welfare and other benefits they have never contributed taxes to
- received the largest campaign contribution from wallstreets own, monolithic financial firm Goldman Sachs
- railroaded the country and congress into signing the obamacare bill, after failing the first time, after americans called in droves telling their representatives to not sign for it
- not only extended but expanded the patriot act
- not only extended but expanded the campaign in afghanistan, even after the false flag of "killing Bin Ladin" the last boogie-man
- promised to lower payroll taxes for americans, but raised all other income taxes for a net tax INCREASE on everyone's paychecks
- oversaw the largest wealth depletion amongst Blacks than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT EVER, IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE COUNTRY
That's Obama
There is no defense for him. It galls me to no end that my own Black people defend him. They listen to what he says, but do not pay attention to WHAT HE DOES.
I'm not a republican, but facts are facts: Blacks have ALWAYS done better under republican adminstrations. However, the Black leaders keep telling their sheep that democrat is the way to go, although democrats have torn down what little games Blacks have made under republican administrations.
It is maddening that the Black middle class votes democrat, while the evidence is plain as day: they have done better under republicans than democrats.
It is also plain as day that more Black families have slipped from middle to lower-class under Obama than under any other president. And, he has said time and time again that he is "not a Black president and will do NOTHING specifically to help Black people"... BUT THANKS FOR ALL THE VOTES MORONS.
Conclusion
If Black people want a fighting chance, they should vote Libertarian. Most of the social programs that the poor Blacks subsist on, do so at an egregious price, the Black family.
You cannot be on public assistance and have an intact family. A woman on assistance has to get rid of her husband, fiance, boyfriend, in order to receive assistance.
However, that being said, a minority of Blacks are even on assistance. The media hypes and portrays Blacks as being nearly overwhelmingly impoverished. It is not the case.
Most Blacks are:
educated
middle-class
employed
Losing the social programs would not hurt millions of Black people. With the money that we would save in taxes, we could go back to helping the poor directly, like we did for 150 years in this country.
When discussing destroying or removing welfare, most arguments center on the notion that ONLY government can help the poor. The truth is that, even with welfare, most poor people are still helped by charities, not the government.
Charities are now hurting because Obama and his administration reduced the amount you could claim off of your taxes that you donate to charity.
Also, the Black middle-class do not start up businesses because of the tremendous road blocks in the way, and being cut off from capital via institutional racism.
Libertarians would remove most of the local and federal obstacles to starting business. Oponents love to talk about Libertarians not believing in governmental assistance, but they never bring up that government is a huge obstacle the hinders progress. This is the progress that Blacks desperately need, more than welfare.
It is common, among the American public, for the average everyday citizen to NOT educate themselves, nor double-check the facts that they hear on the news, magazines, television, internet. Most Americans struggle with jobs and working for other people, for a single source of income, to be bothered with doing anything extra to make sure they are making the right decisions day in and day out. They are shown this by their parents, generation after generation, that you simply turn on a television and accept everything that they say as factual. They are shown this by their parents, generation after generation, that you simply go to a church and accept everything the minister says, and the book he goes by, as factual, and even worse, unquestionable.
Paul Robin Krugman is an American economist, Professor of Economics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times
It saddens me then, when someone who is older than me, and perceives himself to be learned, that he thinks to argue something he has never studied, researched, nor took the time to dissect and fit all the pieces together to see the sinister undertones. Case in point, one such discussion occurred when a picture was presented showing the insanity of how the tremendous debt the federal government has, and the state of the economy, can be fixed by going into more debt. This fool, and I mean the term in the technical sense, proceeded to defend and argue that going into debt had nothing to do with the state of the economy and even if it did, it did not make the situation worse. He tried to defend the statement that Paul Krugman made saying, "debt killing the economy? More debt will fix that."
The house and senate create the annual spending budget for things like: military; research; welfare and its ilk; social security and its ilk; wars and 3rd party contractors; national state programs which it promptly defunds after a year or two.
They take in taxes.... wait, we'll get to the taxes last.
They are sorely underfunded for all of their concerns, to the tune of trillions of dollars. The private monopoly banks, known as the federal reserve system, LENDS them money AT INTEREST, instead of congress simply printing its own money, selling bonds, or raising capital WITHOUT INTEREST. This creates debt. This debt is created annually, to the tune of MORE interest than taxes ALONE can cover.
The taxes that the federal government then collects, goes only to pay off a PORTION of the interest it owes to the private consortium, known as the federal reserve Bank system. And why wouldn't they do this, because the population is none the wiser, because there is absolutely NO accounting for what the private bank does. All we see is a price tag, AND ITS PAID. And, they play a smoke and mirrors game to say "taxes cover everything" wink wink nudge nudge, "so we must raise taxes, because the budget has gone up". OR EVEN WORSE, "we are balancing the budget, so we must raise taxes to help *balance* it", muahahahahaha we're sneaky.
So, getting back to the original premise, that debt is horrible, let's raise the debt... either you don't know the above system exists, because if you do, then you would have to be a more sinister than the federal reserve private banks itself. You seem smart, so i'll just call you The Dastardly Mr. Beasley.
Politics is smoke and mirrors. Now you see the budget, now you don't. Voila! Presto chango, we spend trillions and no one accounts for where it comes from.
Obama the Darling of Wallstreet
I saw a video of Tony Robins, of all people... it has to be serious, for him to make an economy video, where he talks about taking everyone's money, all the "rich" people in america, sports players, movie producers, wall street moguls, corporations, oil companies and he goes down the list. And, he covers day by day of taking all of their money, not just taxes. And, when the calculation is done it still does not cover al 52 weeks, it falls short of two weeks in one year. But then, he concludes that the next year, NONE of the budget would be covered, because now you have seized all of the rich people's money. It's a very graphic example of how out of whack the debt is.
Many learned people have said, by congress simply coining its own money for 5 years, the entire debt of the US would be wiped out.5 years, that's one presidency.
No thinking man, knowing both the current system, and knowing that the debt could be wiped out, would agree that debt is bad nor would say it has NOTHING to do with the current economic DEPRESSION [ a word the government refuses to admit, despite all indicators that this is WORSE than the great depression ] [ oh and everyone is doing their part to hide the fact:
- shadow inventory of housing
- hiding true unemployment rates
- hiding business failures
- hiding stock manipulation
- hiding the real value of the USD
- hiding the 70% wealth lose across the board for all racial groups, in America
- not even acknowledging the 35% unemployment rate amongst Blacks
- hiding the Black incarceration epidemic amongst Blacks [which has single-handedly led to a 90% drop in Black wealth]
- hiding the failures of fannie and freddie
- hiding the debt owed to foreign banks
- hiding the payments going to foreign banks
- hiding the real money down a hole, going to wall street corporations [ we're talking, watchdog groups are saying 10s of trillions have already been spent, and more is being spent secretly] the real reason the federal reserve does not wish to be "audited".
• The typical American household would have paid nearly all of its income in taxes last year to balance the budget if the government used standard accounting rules to compute the deficit, a USA TODAY analysis finds
• Under those accounting practices, the government ran red ink last year equal to $42,054 per household — nearly four times the official number reported under unique rules set by Congress
• A U.S. household's median income is $49,445, the Census reports
• The big difference between the official deficit and standard accounting: Congress exempts itself from including the cost of promised retirement benefits
• Yet companies, states and local governments must include retirement commitments in financial statements, as required by federal law and private boards that set accounting rules
• The deficit was $5 trillion last year under those rules
• The official number was $1.3 trillion
• Liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and other retirement programs rose by $3.7 trillion in 2011, according to government actuaries, but the amount was not registered on the government's books
• The federal government calculates the deficit in a way that makes the number smaller than if standard accounting rules were followed (in trillions)
• Social Security had the biggest financial slide
• The government would need $22.2 trillion today, set aside and earning interest, to cover benefits promised to current workers and retirees beyond what taxes will cover
• That's $9.5 trillion more than was needed in 2004
• Deficits from 2004 to 2011 would be six times the official total of $5.6 trillion reported
• Federal debt and retiree commitments equal $561,254 per household
• By contrast, an average household owes a combined $116,057 for mortgages, car loans and other debts
• "By law, the federal government can't tell the truth," says accountant Sheila Weinberg of the Chicago-based
The big difference between the official deficit and standard accounting: Congress exempts itself from including cost of retirement perks.
Conclusion
So in essence, until we can get the government to use real math, real numbers, reveal the true hurt that is going on, we cannot even start to have a dialogue of how to fix it. For example, if we base a set policy to fix $1 trillion of debt, but then we find at the end of the fix that it was actually $16 trillion, we almost did absolutely nothing with the fix.
And that is the problem with the Obama presidency in a nutshell. He constantly says how he is saving us money, or lowering our taxes. But, the problem is he's raising it in other areas far higher than it ever was to begin with.
We see this over and over in all of his policies. He promised to remove the troops from the "wars". But, he actually doubled and tripled the troops in Afghanistan. I'm not going to say he is lying, but it's a lie.
As more people drop off of unemployment benefits, after 3 years of collecting unemployment, the already fake unemployment rate drops, almost like a rock.
Understand, there are no new jobs and the millions that were lost are not coming back. If you liberals / RINOs cannot understand this, I don't know what else to say to you.
Deer in Headlights
The government tracks who is ON unemployment. Once your unemployment payments stop, and you cannot receive any more, you fall off the government's unemployment list. So yes, in 2009 millions lost their jobs, after 3 years of collecting unemployment they used up all their payments and cannot get any more. There was not people being hired by the millions all of a sudden. It would take millions upon millions of people getting a job for the unemployment rate to drop so drastically. However, the real explanation of millions using up their unemployment explains the drop.
"The U.S. economy created jobs at the fastest pace in nine months in January, and the unemployment rate unexpectedly dropped to 8.3 percent, its lowest level in three years, since just after Obama took office.
The report meant that unemployment has dropped every month since August, when it was 9.1 percent." - Reuters
The good folks at ZeroHedge [some schmo that goes by the name of Tyler Durden *sigh*][ no i'm not a fan Tyler ] explained it best, so as not to confuse the idiot public.
"A month ago, we joked when we said that for Obama to get the unemployment rate to negative by election time, all he has to do is to crush the labor force participation rate to about 55%. Looks like the good folks at the BLS heard us: it appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that's not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation. As for the quality of jobs, as withholding taxes roll over Year over year, it can only mean that the US is replacing high paying FIRE jobs with low paying construction and manufacturing. So much for the improvement.
This is the largest absolute jump in 'Persons Not In Labor Force' on record... and biggest percentage jump in 30 years."
Floyd Norris of The New York Times says:
"How many jobs did the American economy add in January?
The Labor Department estimated on Friday that the economy gained 243,000 jobs.
The department also estimated that the economy lost 2,689,000 jobs in the month.
The difference in the two numbers is in seasonal adjustment. Employment always falls in January, as temporary Christmas jobs end. So the government applies seasonal adjustment factors in an effort to discern the real trend of the economy apart from seasonal fluctuations. The actual survey showed the big loss in jobs. The seasonal adjustments produced the reported gain of 243,000 jobs.
A reason to doubt the number is that there has been a tendency in this cycle for the seasonal factors to overstate moves, in both directions. Labor mobility is down, as fewer workers quit to seek better jobs and employers both hire and fire fewer people than they used to do. If the seasonal adjustment was too large, then the gain should be smaller."
And for a real kick in the nuts, we have Numerian over at The Economic Populist reporting:
First, ever since the credit crisis of 2008, there has been a trend in the unemployment report that shows a declining participation rate in the job market. While a whopping number of jobs were created in January, a far larger number of people left the labor force - 1,752,000 in fact. The percent of the total working population who did not have jobs rose to 36.7%, an all time high. It’s no wonder the unemployment rate fell, when the denominator shrinks so markedly. The total number of people employed fell by 737,000. So what do you want to celebrate – the 243,000 who got jobs, or the million or so people who dropped by the wayside and are no longer counted in the data?
To put it bluntly, Obama is not your savior and there was no job creation that rocked 2 million strong in the month of January. People are not working, so much, that their not working dropped them off the list, to the tune of 1.2 million people gone off list. If you account for those people, unemployment is going strong at 10.9%. The numbers reported are faked.
What everyone who is ignorant of the constitution, all non-lawyers, fails to understand, the constitution of the united states is an actual law that governs all other laws and cannot be overturned. as such NATURAL BORN CITIZEN does not mean what common people think it means. it actually requires MORE than what is the common belief of the meaning:
both mother and father have to be citizens of the united states
the child must be born inside U.S. soil OR a U.S. embassy in foreign lands [ which is assumed U.S. soil anyway ]
Narutal Born Citizen
John Bingham stated in the House of Representatives in 1862:
The Constitution leaves no room for doubt upon this subject. The words 'natural born citizen of the United states' appear in it, and the other provision appears in it that, "Congress shall have power to pass a uniform system of naturalization." To naturalize a person is to admit him to citizenship. Who are natural born citizens but those born within the Republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth--natural born citizens.
He reiterated his statement in 1866:
Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen; but, sir, I may be allowed to say further that I deny that the Congress of the United States ever had the power, or color of power to say that any man born within the jurisdiction of the United States, not owing a foreign allegiance, is not and shall not be a citizen of the United States. Citizenship is his birthright and neither the Congress nor the States can justly or lawfully take it from him.
Obama by his own admission is not a NATURAL BORN citizen. You don't even have to look at his birth certificate. He loses on the constitution alone.
Careful, when you understand things like this, you see that the entire debate is just a distraction. No, the man is not president, is unqualified, by the constitution, to be president. He should not be on any state's ballot. It's not a Democrat nor Republican thing. It is a cut and dry constitutional issue. If you are a Democrat and you think this hurts your side and somehow think that he should continue being president, you are a complete hypocrite and unfit really to be an American citizen yourself. People died to ensure that the constitution would be the law of the land. Why, now knowing what you know, would you disregard it.
Finally, it is easy to find a replacement for Obama as president. You could probably get Hillary Clinton to step in his shoes anyway.
ok you democrat loving people defend this: NDAA .... wait what?
ok defend this: unemployment has actually gone UP, instead of down, you do know that millions have fallen off the unemployment charts, so the 9.5% is somewhere near DOUBLE ... WAIT WHAT?
ok defend this: the dollar has fallen 5,000 basis points ... oh i get it, you don't even know what a god damned basis point is to begin with ... wait what?
ok defend this: Obama raised fica, SS, and federal taxes, then cut payroll taxes by 1% so that your end result is a 10% increase in taxes and then claimed he lowered taxes ... wait what?
ok defend this: TARP has yet to be paid and the negative assets that the entire economic meltdown was the reason for, has never been removed off the books of the financial institutions, oh that's right, common americans forget something if it's not in the news for 2 days ... wait what?
ok defend this: credit card reform did NOT happen, you actually now pay more than you ever did before the crash and the congressional hearings on credit card reform ... wait what?
ok defend this: Obamacare is unconstitutional and does nothing for healthcare, it just makes it so everyone is charged, by force of jail time to purchase health insurance, just for being alive ... the people that needed healthcare before and didn't have health insurance WILL STILL BE UNINSURED UNDER OBAMACARE ... wait what?
ok defend this: the shadow economy of what wall street owes each other and foreign banks is actually close to $60 trillion, with a T, the entire world economy is like $15 trillion ... wait what?
ok defend this: credit default swaps, which was the major cause of Leahman Brothers and other too big to fail financial institutions to go under, deemed illegal and gambling by many attorney generals, namely the New York attorney general, has not been outlawed, nor prosecuted by the FDIC ... wait what?
ok defend this: the consumer financial protection bureau, promoted by obama was an entirely newly created agency, which actually does nothing for everyday citizens has an anual budget of $340 million ... wait what?
ok defend this: Obama went to libya and launched a full scale assault, without congressional approval, beyond the time that he was allowed, meaning it's treason, meaning he should have been impeached ... wait what?
In short, there is nothing you can defend against any of these points. This is what is NOT in the news. Whatever you thought of Bush, Obama is giving you that and destroying constitutional freedoms, going outside the power of the president, handing out money to foreign countries that we don't have, devaluing the dollar, signing stuff into law by executive order [unconstitutional]. If you're a democrat, you should call for him to be repealed and ask for an entirely new candidate, which IS A DEBATE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS ACTUALLY HAVING AT HIGHER LEVELS, WHICH YOU ALSO DO NOT SEE ON THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA. They are literally hoping democrats will forget all of these points and more, and simply go along with him. They fear that as the internet is available and information like this is available that democrats will call for his ouster. Don't worry, the republicans are actually playing along with the democrats, because realistically, it's just one party, anyway.
A Message to Black People That Think Obama Loves Black People
Speaking with 60 Minutes’ Steve Kroft in an interview that aired Sunday
night, the president said Republicans chose to stand on the sidelines
while the economy worsened so that they could capitalize on blaming him.
*facepalm* What a load of horse pucky. The presidency has moved from an equal branch of government, WELL into a powerhouse and Obama has made it rise even more than the prior president Bush. Obama has unchecked power to do whatever he wants and some silly republican house members can't do anything to stop him.
Anyone who buys that he is a victim is a fool, no no a DAMN FOOL. Pay attention, he has issued presidential edict after presidential edict. He has NEVER helped Black folk and has said it point blank that he won't.
Now, after giving his wall street friends billions, he turns around to play the victim?
FOLKS HE'S TRYING TO GET REELECTED. WHERE IS YOUR BRAIN.
If you don't understand politics why are you even commenting on his interview? He has created nearly all the legislation that has passed these past 3 years. Where's your brain? He is the one that has done nothing for the economy. He is the one that offered up social security cuts. He is the one that offered up social program cuts. He is the one that offered domestic spending cuts. He is the one that pitted the rich people vs poor people debate, so he could appear to be on our side, after giving away 20 trillion dollars of money we will all have to pay back. Where's your brain?
If you don't understand politics, go read a damn book. The library is free.
He doesn't love US. He doesn't care about US. He could give 2 flying leaping lizards about US. He hasn't done anything for US. But, he's done plenty to US.
Don't be fooled by the color of his skin. Obama is against the middle class and the common american citizen. If he wasn't ... just go look up all the presidential edicts he's made against us ALL. Take your head out of your hind-side and pay attention.
A guy asks, "what state governor runs the Federal Reserve Bank"? The question is like asking "what rifle does the pope use when he goes hunting?" I think we can all safely agree the pope doesn't go hunting, and probably is forbidden from hunting.
President Jackson Made it His Life's Work to Kill the Central Bank
The Federal Reserve Bank is not a federal entity, nor is it publicly funded "in theory". It is a private bank, just like Bank of America, Chase Bank and Wells Fargo.
No politician has anything to do with it, nor can they even be present in their private meetings. In fact the government has about as much to do with the Fed as they do with my local credit union, which has far more privacy than Wells Fargo.
In 1798, Thomas Jefferson said the following....
"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing."
So your question is completely wrong. Sorry to say. No state governor is over any part of the Federal Reserve bank, nor its regional banks. The entire system is completely privately owned banks. They have tried their best to acquire banks into their system. If your bank uses them to verify funds before cashing checks, they are hooked into the system. If your bank sends checks for them to verify the check itself, they are hooked in the system. If you can imagine, banks get hundreds of checks each day, directly and indirectly.
Gouverneur Morris, one of the authors of the U.S. Constitution, solemnly warned us in 1787 that we must not allow the bankers to enslave us....
"The rich will strive to establish their dominion and enslave the rest. They always did. They always will... They will have the same effect here as elsewhere, if we do not, by (the power of) government, keep them in their proper spheres."
The only way local banks can avoid being under the Fed is by not using any of their programs or by not selling to a larger bank that is already under the Fed.
Rich Bankers Drafted the Federal Reserve Act in Secret
The Fed runs as any corporation. They have a board and a chairman. The current chairman is Ben Bernanke. By statute the president is allowed to pick the chairman. However, this is merely ceremonial, as everyone on the board and the chairman are picked for him. You can see this clearly, by the fact that Bernanke, who was chosen by a Republican president, was also kept by a Democrat president. Normally, in politics, any political candidate for a position is always picked based upon the political party of the politician in question, i.e. liberal judges are picked by Democrat presidents and legislature and visa versa for conservative judges.
Clearly the Fed is outside of that political system, altogether.
Obama Blames Everyone But His Corporate Banker Buddies
A message to all of you. It makes me proud and happy that you all see through this snake oil salesman's speechifying. As a Black man, I am shamed and chagrined that this is the first representation that we got in the White House.
Snake Oil Obama
So many people were caught up in the momentum of getting a Black man in the seat, that they ignored the very real and blatant evidence that this guy was a corporatist beyond all corporatist.
He was going to, and has, put George Bush to shame. Big oil, big banks and multinational conglomerates funded his campaigns, not the $1 bills the media kept trying to portray along his campaign.
Obama is no more for you than you are for preserving roaches in your homemade pie. If anything you should always be asking, what is the corporate angle on this speech, he's making.
To my great shame, though, my fellow Black Americans, and yes, I am Black too, still hold on to the notion that Obama is somehow beyond reproach.
I fear, they do not see what is right in their face. They will vote for him again. Although, he has been the worst president for Black in the past 40 years.
GW Bush aside, Republican policies have done more for Blacks than any other party policies. As a Libertarian that is also hurtful, because my party would see a zenith of Black and American prosperity if elected, regardless of what the media says.
For the rest of you, thank you and make sure everyone around you is aware that Obama is not for the main street, make sure they know he's not for the common American, make sure they know he sees you as consumers and not citizens.
What would happen if we found out that Obama is not only not a US born citizen, but is being considered to be the leader of an entirely different country due to his real nationality? Imagine the embarrassment that it would cause the US government, the democrat political party and Americans in general. Well that is exactly what is about to happen in a few short years. As soon as he steps down from the US presidency, he is to be crowned in another country.
Geoffrey Robinson, Pompous Windbag, explain why The Wons weren't invited to the royal wedding:
The Queen
'It is an open secret at the Commonwealth Secretariat that they do not want Charles III to be the next head of the Commonwealth when the Queen retires -- they are looking for someone more inspiring. Mandela, once the favourite candidate, is now too old. But there is an even better candidate whose name is being mentioned as an alternative to Charles in due course, namely ex-President Obama, with his Kenyan ancestry (as some believe, Kenyan birth). There are rumours that the palace's refusal to invite him to the wedding was neither oversight nor overslight but a fear that Barack and Michelle would appear to the "black Commonwealth" as superior to Charles and Camilla as future leaders of the Commonwealth.'
For you Americans reading this, the royal house of England and the British Commonwealth will Crown Obama as head of the Commonwealth. Most Americans do not think the Queen of England has any authority. But, she wields probably the most power on the planet and controls the destinies of many countries. We, in America are made to believe that feudalism is dead and gone, but the truth is that it is just modernized. Our beloved Obama, was handcrafted and hand picked to not only lead the US and deliver the country into the right hands, ripe for picking, but since he is the subject of the British crown, by birth, he will be selected to head the Commonwealth.
Prince Charles III
(Honolulu) A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Barack Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says.
State Attorney General David Louie told the governor that privacy laws bar him from disclosing an individual’s birth documentation without the person’s consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said Friday.
“There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document,” said Dela Cruz. “Unfortunately, there are conspirators who will continue to question the citizenship of our president.”
Have you never questioned several overlooked facts about the death of Osama bin Ladin?
1. Osama bin Laden, on the CIA website top 100 wanted persons, is not listed in connection with the world trade center bombing and has his denial of doing so on record, i.e. they believe he had nothing to do with it.
Completely Fake Osama Death Picture
2. on the CFR website they have Osama's denial of bombing the world trade center on record, i.e. they also believe he had nothing to do with it
3. 7 of the hijackers allegedly in the world trade center bombings are ALIVE, 2 of which are suing the US government for defamation of character
4. Al Quaeda was formed by the CIA in afghanistan during the 90's when they were fighting the Russians and the actual word means, THE LIST, i.e. of guys in the group
5. Osama bin Laden was asked to join the CIA in afghanistan AFTER the Al Quaeda group was formed, to serve as their inspirational speaker and help with financing, since he was so filthy rich
6. the Bin Laden family is a staunch friend of the US government
7. the Royal Family was HERE during 9/11 INCLUDING BIN LADEN
8. Bin Laden was here during and days after 9/11 for treatment for his kidneys
9. Pakistan's First woman Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated 4 years ago 2007, when she revealed in a world wide interview that Osama died in 2001
"Many believed that Benazir damaged the justification for thecontinued US presence in Afghanistan by saying to Sir David Frost on Al-Jazeera that Osama Bin Laden was dead, killed by Omar Saeed Sheikh, the former or current MI6 agent,"
10. On 2 November 2007, Bhutto participated in an interview with David Frost on Al Jazeera, stating Osama Bin Laden had been murdered by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, who is one of the men convicted of kidnapping and killing U.S. journalist Daniel Pearl. Frost never asked a follow up question regarding the claim that Bin Laden was dead. Her interview could later be viewed on BBC's website, although it was initially distorted by the BBC as her claim about Bin Laden's death was taken out. But, once people discovered this and started posting evidence on YouTube, the BBC replaced its version with the version that was originally aired on Al Jazeera.
Completely Faked War Room Pic
11. Al-Qaeda commander Mustafa Abu al-Yazid claimed responsibility for the attack, describing Bhutto as "the most precious American asset." The Pakistani government also stated that it had proof that al-Qaeda was behind the assassination. A report for CNN stated: "the Interior Ministry also earlier told Pakistan's Geo TV that the suicide bomber belonged to Lashkar i Jhangvi—an al-Qaeda-linked militant group that the government has blamed for hundreds of killings". The government of Pakistan claimed Baitullah Mehsud was the mastermind behind the assassination. Lashkar i Jhangvi, a Wahabi Muslim extremist organization affiliated with al-Qaeda that also attempted in 1999 to assassinate former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, is alleged to have been responsible for the killing of the 54-year-old Bhutto along with approximately 20 bystanders, however this is vigorously disputed by the Bhutto family, by the PPP that Bhutto had headed and by Baitullah Mehsud.
12. even if Osama wasn't killed by an MI6 agent, his kidney disease would have killed him within months following his 9/11 visit to a US hospital, especially since he was in fact, living in a cave, a fact that is documented by his very unhappy wife, who thought marrying a prince would mean endless shopping.
Any one of these facts clearly decimates any credibility the US government has for continuing these wars, the facts surrounding 9/11 and the reasons for our staying in these countries. Also, if Benazir Bhutto can be believed, Osama was dead before even going to Afghanistan. Even if you do not believe her, his kidney disease killed him before we went to war in Afghanistan. That means not only were we lied to about Afghanistan, we were triply lied to about why we went to Iraq.
Let's return to point #7. Do you really think the Bin Laden royal family would tolerate the US government calling one of their sons all sorts of names and still remain close allies, if he were not already dead? The US government is so deep in bed with this corruption it is cannot even be fathomed.
But people have really short memories. Osama was ALREADY REPORTED DEAD IN 2001.
CIA Faked Countless Osama Videos After His Death
>>2001<<
- Radio chatter from Bin Laden stopped
- Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, claimed that Bin Laden was dead and had been buried in the mountains
- Fox News report that Bin Laden died of a lung complication along with Pakistan
- The Bush administration claimed that a video released was probably hiding the fact he was dead
- The Afgan President claimed that Bin Laden was probably dead long ago
FOX News Report: Bin Laden Already Dead
Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader.
[Fox News. December 26, 2001]
Bin Laden has often been reported to be in poor health. Some accounts claim that he is suffering from Hepatitis C, and can expect to live for only two more years. According to Le Figaro, last year [2000] he ordered a mobile dialysis machine to be delivered to his base at Kandahar in Afghanistan.
[Guardian]
But by December, of course, that tape that was aired then, he's barely moving the left side of his body. So he's clearly got diabetes. He has low blood pressure. He's got a wound in his foot. He's apparently got dialysis ... for kidney problems.
[CNN]
9/11 Families Want Pictures to Prove Osama Death
Renal dialysis -- talking about hemodialysis -- is something that really is reserved for patients in end-stage renal failure. That means their kidneys have just completely shut down. The most common cause of something like that would be something like diabetes and hypertension. Once that's happened, if you're separated from your dialysis machine -- and incidentally, dialysis machines require electricity, they're going to require clean water, they're going to require a sterile setting -- infection is a huge risk with that. If you don't have all those things and a functioning dialysis machine, it's unlikely that you'd survive beyond several days or a week at the most.
[CNN]
Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader. "The Coalition troops are engaged in a mad search operation but they would never be able to fulfill their cherished goal of getting Usama alive or dead," the source said.
[FOX News]
al-Wafd, Wednesday, December 26, 2001 Vol 15 No 4633
News of Bin Laden's Death and Funeral 10 days ago
A prominent official in the Afghan Taleban movement announced yesterday the death of Osama bin Laden, the chief of al-Qa'da organization, stating that binLaden suffered serious complications in the lungs and died a natural and quiet death.
[Welfare State]
Israeli intelligence: Bin Laden is dead, heir has been chosen
Israeli sources said Israel and the United States assess that Bin Laden probably died in the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan in December. They said the emergence of new messages by Bin Laden are probably fabrications, Middle East Newsline reported.
Any Black person that supports Barack Obama is either insane or in denial. He has consistently and openly said he will NOT support any Black issues, nor address Black unemployment staggering numbers, nor tackle any public policies that run counter to Blacks.
Cornell West
This man, again and again and again has intentionally come out AGAINST Black people. And yet, he and his ilk take the Black vote as a given.
I will say it now, anyone Black, that votes for Obama is a fool and not an adult with a sound mind. It's as plain and simple as that. We have to start hiring each other, supporting Black businesses and removing politicians that will not listen to us, nor do anything about public policies against us. And, yes that includes members of the congressional Black Caucus. Not everyone in the caucus is honky dory with supporting Blacks, just because they happen to be Black.
More intelligent Blacks are running from Obama in DROVES. The congressional Black Caucus is running from Obama. Maxine friggin Waters is asking her constituents if it's ok to go against Obama and they, in a town hall meeting, yelled YES PLEASE DO. Cornell West, who traditionally has called Obama "brother", has now come out against Obama.
It is not a minority of Blacks that are against Obama. Any Black American with a brain, is against Obama. And, why, you might ask? Because Obama is against US. We have our eyes clearly opened and see it.
For the Blacks that still try to support Obama the real question is, WHAT DON'T YOU SEE?
*sigh* I've said it before, but apparently, I was ignored. I AM BLACK. I VOTED FOR OBAMA. However, I have a political science degree and can see quite easily what is going on in the country.
Blacks are approaching nearly 50% unemployment. There has NOT been a pull from Iraq and Afghanistan. We have lost millions upon millions of jobs. The dollar has not only sunk to a new low, but is in danger of DEFAULTING EVEN MORE. Yes, that's right, WE'VE ALREADY DEFAULTED YEARS AGO.
If you have a college degree, even in liberal arts, you'll easily be able to see that Obama has done everything in his power to staff his cabinet with wall street heavy hitters, not just the peons, but the heavy hitters.
I was also registered democrat. But, with a modicum of homework, I quickly realized that the two parties are one and the same. *GASP* oh shocking... oh my zeitgeist is come crashing down around my ears, democrats and republicans can't be the same. Oh, come on. Really? You can't be in that much denial.
Anything Bush did, is long gone. This is the 3rd year of this guy's term of office. He has signed into law, much legislation of his own. Also, he was never forced to sign into law anything that was going on during the Bush term. You do recall that Bush was a Republican and this guy is a Democrat.
I don't need to go into a brief history lesson of how Clinton did not sign into law anything that his Republican predecessor arranged.
Come on, you all are smarter than this. There have been Black women, men, on this page, Latinos and others who are OBVIOUSLY not republicans. We are all saying the same thing. This president is not speaking for the people, he is speaking for wall street. In fact, Bush wasn't even Republican. At the end the Republican party and congress fought him tooth and nail. WHY? Because, he too, was a corporatist. He ramped up the deficit higher than any democrat / republican preceding him. This guy is doing the same exact thing.
Give up. Take your licking and admit that you were duped. Remember, Obama is POLITICIAN. Who cares about his speaking abilities when china is raping us, jobs are flooding out of the country, food prices are skyrocketing and the darling of the Democratic party of issues, SOCIAL SECURITY, is the first thing on the chopping block. What's worse is he has committed unconstitutional crimes over and over and over.
The time for giving him a pass is way over. Who cares that he's half Black. Who cares that he's articulate. Who cares that the country was bad under Bush. I have a clue for you. Bush wasn't the cause of the housing bubble. We Americans were the cause of the housing bubble. Bush wasn't the cause of this economic depression. We were the cause of this economic depression. Bush wasn't the cause of jobs hemorrhaging out of the US. We were the cause.
For all the blame that I, personally, laid at Bush's feet, the reality was that he no more caused it, than I did. In fact, the housing bubble started under Reagan, skyrocketed under Clinton and came to a halt under Bush.
For all the bleeding and weeping we have for these people losing their homes, at the end of the day, it is their own greed that got them into it. Do you think for a second that someone purchasing a $30,000 home EVER got into trouble? Do you think someone that paid CASH for their home, [ oh an yes 30% of homes are STILL paid for in cash, like everyone did in the 30's 40's and 50's ] got into trouble?
Obama is not special. He doesn't deserve your worship. He deserves your scrutiny. And, do NOT rely on the news to do your thinking for you.
I offer you an olive branch. Without you, the country cannot be healed. If the millions of Obama worshipers do not quickly wise up, we are going to be plunged into the worst nightmare, even this current session could not hold a match to. Please, just stop the Obama worship and think for a second about what is going on. The wars, the money, the budget, the drop in the dollar, the wall street CONTINUOUS bailouts, the food inflation, the energy inflation, the middle class slipping into poverty, the staggering job loss.
There is an alternative, to this two party monopoly.
He's no fashion trend setter, but he is the president. President Barack Obama is the leading man of the free world. As such, he commands the attention of a lot of people. Not only does such attention extend to all of his words and speeches, but how he looks as well. Not too few people notice he is not goofy looking, like Bush, or homely like Carter. He glides into a room and commands attention, all in one fell swoop. While everyone cannot afford a $5,000 suit or a $2,000 tie / shoes, most anyone can ante up to buy the same exact watch he wears for a few hundred dollars.
Surprised? Yeah, the price is pretty amazing. The couple, Michelle and Barack, have some things in common, wearing sensibly priced clothes. Remember she made it a point to mention, not too few of her dresses were from Old Navy, which tops out at about $30,00 for a dress. While his clothes were never in question, they did mention he has a "body man", someone that dresses him and makes sure he is looking neat and clean at all times, among other things.
President Obama Wearing Watch
President Obama has worn the Jorg Gray 6500 Chronograph on many historic occasions since August 2007 and most recently as President of The United States, with sightings including Election Night, the Inaugural Ball and Inauguration Day.
The Commemorative Edition Jorg Gray 6500 Chronograph offered here by Presidential Watches is the same make and model watch worn by President Barack Obama.
Probably the watch will be a collectors item one day. Not everyone even knows the company and watch exist. I can see people putting this one ebay in the near future.
