Barack Obama 2012

[anklebiter]

Posted by mariposafe (here)
If this video is as Earth shattering and important as it's being claimed to be, why announce that it will be realeased in n days ? What's wrong with now ?

Simple to answer, my friend. It will take the gubment n days to edit the tapes and try to make Obummer look like the good guy, as well as remove any potentially incriminating portions...

[etm567]

Posted by kcbc2010 (here)
Look, Viking, anyone who disagrees with Liberalism is somehow a fascist, neo-con, nut-job. It doesn't make the Left correct, it just makes them angry hate-mongers (who, for some reason, seem to think that they are the most tolerant people in the room).

Breitbart had the balls to stand up against the Left and their propaganda. That's why his death is celebrated. The Left doesn't realize that it comes off like a bunch of loons/fanatics/radicals because they assume that everyone who has a brain should (naturally) agree with them. They don't allow for the possibility that they could be wrong and that other viewpoints and lifestyles are just as a valid. Other people have just as much right to their opinions and beliefs as they do. However, the Left's goal is to suppress anyone or anything that doesn't go along with their ideology.

The truth is the truth, regardless if it fits a political ideologically or not. The fact is that there are valid reasons why President Obama is disliked. Breitbart used the tactics of the Left to go after the Left. Of course, he's going to get this kind of treatment when he dies. That's what the Left always does. They're going to shut down anyone who doesn't buy into their propaganda. Meanwhile, on the right, the elites wish they could get their grassroots to shut up and drink the Kool-aid too.....Neither side is 100% right on every issue. To think that is very short-sighted and means that people are excluding a lot of inconvenient data to keep their ideology in tact. That's what's dangerous about this whole political climate we are in.....I'm not delusional because I don't agree with you. I'm exercising my right to have independent thoughts that don't agree with yours.

The journalism Breitbart did could hardly be called such. He cut and spliced to make people seem to be saying the opposite of what they were saying, and caused them a great deal of grief. What he did to Sherod was indefensible. Indefensible. There is no way it can be defended. He was not honest.

If you want to sing his praises and jump on his bandwagon because he's selling something you want to believe is true.... Well, that doesn't make it true. No matter how badly you or his other followers want it to be true.

ETM

[etm567]

Posted by Siberia9 (here)
I am constantly amazed that people actually think Obama is some kind of "good guy". I have a relative that is a Family adviser to him, he was also an adviser to the both Bush's when they were up there. The kind of adviser that is not on the books, so trust me they all work for the same secret group and do as they are told. The Bush's were Nazi's and Obama is a Marxist, but they got were they are because they have taken an oath to push the Family agenda forward regardless of what they think.

The people that they work for also own ALL of your television media, stop watching it, its all lies. YOUR NEWS IS FAKE. My mother was a CIA asset and was involved in many CIA/military black projects involving mind control. She used to do TV commercials and then was involved in the civil rights movement back in the sixty's. You see ALL sides of that mess were funded and ran by the secret govt, and the TV media reported on it and made up the rest. Most members of your major TV news today are actually either CIA themselves or are members of Bloodline Family's. Ever wonder who Anderson Cooper really is? No? you should. Its all there to give you a belief in a false reality. Everything you have seen on TV is either fake or told in some way that is part of their agenda. Stop giving your energy to this, TV programing is mind control programing, period.

Anyway people like Breitbart are just doing their job. If however you get deep enough to blow the whistle then you have already made the agreement to go along with the agenda or pay the price. They will take you out if you betray your oath, you will have a heart attack or shoot yourself twice in the head. The internet is full of people that have no such agreements, if they have no connections to the mainstream. Spend your time there and throw out your television.

Excuse me, are you saying the CIA made up the civil rights movement?

Excuse me for asking, but would you mind saying how old you are? I'm going to guess you are young, because only someone young would say "were funded and ran" instead of "were funded and run," but I'm almost sixty and I grew up in Memphis, Tennessee watching the civil rights movement all around me. My mother was in it, and she wasn't any CIA asset. Neither was Mattie Singstack or Jesse or Allegra Turner or a multitude of other activists. The CIA didn't make up the Saturday Luncheon Group, either.

And I think it was, all in all, a rather good thing. I would imagine the CIA certainly infiltrated it, or the FBI did, or both, as they infiltrated all social movements. But they were just tagging along until they could do some damage or maybe bring someone like MLK, Jr. down.

You are right that all the news today is fake. But back then it wasn't. Back then there were still newspapers that were owned by families -- although they were disappearing at a great rate! But they were still there. Like the one in Little Rock, Arkansas (the Little Rock Gazette, I think? Not family owned anymore, of course), where the editor went up against his advertisers to tell the truth about what was happening there with desegregation.

Breitbart shouldn't even be called a journalist.

ETM

[Unified Serenity]

ETM, can you give an example of what you are talking about in regards to:

The journalism Breitbart did could hardly be called such. He cut and spliced to make people seem to be saying the opposite of what they were saying, and caused them a great deal of grief.

Are you saying all of his reporting what this sort of journalism and he was just a dirty disinfo agent in all forms or maybe he did some editing as has happened to conservatives in the major media for years? I won't defend shoddy dishonest journalism, but I've read a lot of Breitbart articles that did not seem to do this sort of thing.

Thank you

[etm567]

Posted by Unified Serenity (here)
ETM, can you give an example of what you are talking about in regards to:

The journalism Breitbart did could hardly be called such. He cut and spliced to make people seem to be saying the opposite of what they were saying, and caused them a great deal of grief.

Are you saying all of his reporting what this sort of journalism and he was just a dirty disinfo agent in all forms or maybe he did some editing as has happened to conservatives in the major media for years? I won't defend shoddy dishonest journalism, but I've read a lot of Breitbart articles that did not seem to do this sort of thing.

Thank you

How much would you like? This is just a taste....

[To summarize, though, he took a video of Shirley Sherrod making a speech at an NAACP meeting or dinner or something, in which she told a story about dealing with a farmer in the south. He edited this video to remove all context, said that it proved that she was performing her job in a way that was racist, and that this racism was deliberate, and that the people at the NAACP dinner applauded this display of racism. She lost her job because of this.

Then it came out that he was presenting the opposite of the truth: she was telling the story to make the point that racism could be overcome, left behind.... Not that she was proud of being a racist!

Breitbart even admitted he took her comments out of context. But he said he used just that portion because it was all he had. Then it was demonstrated that it had even been edited, to make her look even worse. Needless to say, it was all cut, snipped, taken out of context and then lied about to make a completely false point, by Breitbart. Not my idea of good journalism.]

From Media Matters:

Breitbart Posted Heavily Edited Video To Smear Shirley Sherrod


Breitbart Posted "Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism" By Sherrod. Breitbart posted heavily edited video of Sherrod speaking at an NAACP function and falsely suggested that Sherrod discriminated against a white farmer in her capacity as the Agriculture Department's Georgia Director of Rural Development:
We are in possession of a video from in which Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, speaks at the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia. In her meandering speech to what appears to be an all-black audience, this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions.


In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn't do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from "one of his own kind". She refers him to a white lawyer.


Sherrod's racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups' racial tolerance. [Big Government, 07/19/10]


Full Video From NAACP Exonerated Sherrod From Accusations Of Racism. On the evening of July 20, the NAACP posted the full video of Sherrod's speech, proving Breitbart's accusation of racism false:
The video of Shirley Sherrod released by Andrew Brietbart's Big Government Blog on July 19 didn't tell the full story. It was selectively edited to cast her in a negative light. Here is the video, shot by the local NAACP unit that hosted Ms. Sherrod. Watch the video, and judge for yourself. [NAACP, 07/20/10]


Breitbart On Why He Did Not Post Full Video: "I Don't Have It." In an interview with Talking Points Memo, Breitbart confirmed that he never had the full video of Sherrod's remarks:



The crux of the Shirley Sherrod controversy is what she said outside of the two-minute video clip posted by Big Government -- whether she was, as she claims, telling a story about how she overcame racial prejudice while helping poor farmers in Georgia, or whether the clip is a good encapsulation of her views. So we asked Andrew Breitbart, the founder of Big Government, why he hasn't posted the full video.
"I don't have it," Breitbart told TPMmuckraker in an interview. Breitbart said his source sent him just the edited clips at first, but is in the process of sending the full video. [Talking Points Memo, 07/20/10]


Breitbart On Whether The "Edited" Sherrod Video He Posted Was "Out Of Context": "Well, Yes." In an interview with Daniel Stone of Newsweek, Breitbart did not object to Stone's characterization of the Sherrod video as "edited" and admitted that he "took things out of context":

From Wikipedia:

Resignation of Shirley Sherrod
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


On July 19, 2010, Shirley Sherrod was forced to resign from her appointed position as Georgia State Director of Rural Development for the United States Department of Agriculture[1] because of video excerpts from her address to a March 2010 NAACP event and commentary posted by blogger Andrew Breitbart on his website.[2] Based on these video excerpts, the NAACP condemned Sherrod's remarks as racist and U.S. government officials called on the official to resign. But, with review of the complete unedited video in full context, the NAACP, White House officials, and Tom Vilsack, the United States Secretary of Agriculture, apologized for the firing and offered Sherrod a new position.


Extensive media coverage of the excerpted videos, various parties' comments, and later corrections when the full story was discovered, exacerbated the affair. The event brought to the forefront current debates regarding racism in the United States, cable news reporting, ideological websites on the internet, and decisions made by President Barack Obama's administration.[3][4]


The Obama administration apologized to Sherrod, and offered her a full-time, high-level internal advocacy position with the USDA[5][6][7], which she ultimately declined.[8] In 2011, Sherrod initiated a libel lawsuit against Breitbart and co-defendant Larry O'Connor for defamation.[9] Their attorney filed for dismissal two months later on First Amendment grounds. In February 2012, defendant's's motion for dismissal under provisions of the "SLAPP" act was denied and subsequently appealed to the U.S. District Court for the D.C. Circuit.

From Huffington Post:

Shirley Sherrod Case Against Andrew Breitbart Begins
WASHINGTON — Lawyers for conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart asked Tuesday that a federal judge throw out a defamation case that former government employee Shirley Sherrod brought against him.


Sherrod was ousted from her job as a Georgia rural development official last year after Breitbart posted an edited video of her making supposedly making racist remarks. She sued Breitbart, his employee Larry O'Connor and an unnamed defendant for defamation and emotional distress. Sherrod's lawyers say the unnamed defendant is the person who they believe passed the video on to Breitbart.
The video on Andrew Breitbart's website turned out to be edited, and when Sherrod's full speech to an NAACP group earlier that year came to light, it became clear that her remarks about an initial reluctance to help a white farmer were not racist but an attempt at telling a story of racial reconciliation. Once that was obvious, Sherrod received public apologies from the administration – even from President Barack Obama himself – and an offer to come back to the Department of Agriculture, which she declined.


In the first hearing in the case Tuesday, exactly a year to the day Sherrod was ousted, lawyers for Breitbart argued that Sherrod's case is an attempt to dampen free speech and should be dismissed. They also argued to have it dismissed under a District of Columbia statute that aims to prevent the silencing of critics through lawsuits.


If the case is not dismissed, Breitbart and O'Connor's lawyers argued to have it moved from the District of Columbia to California, where the two men live. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon said he would consider all of the requests but did not indicate how he would rule.


Sherrod's complaint says the incident has affected her sleep and caused her back pain. It contends that she was damaged by having her "integrity, impartiality and motivations questioned, making it difficult (if not impossible) for her to continue her life's work assisting poor farmers in rural areas" even though she was invited to come back to the Agriculture Department.


Breitbart's original posting a year ago showed an excerpt of a March 2010 speech to an NAACP group in which Sherrod talked about her reluctance to help a white farmer who came to her more than two decades ago when she worked at a farm aid nonprofit group. The video was posted amid ongoing friction between the NAACP and the tea party movement, each of which were accusing the other of having racist elements among their ranks.


The blogger said at the time that the video showed the NAACP condoning racist comments from a government official.


The full video, however, shows Sherrod explaining to the audience how she eventually became friends with the farmer and helped him save his land from foreclosure. .

Of course, the best would be to show his "edited" version, the one he presented as proof of her racism, and the real video. I don't know if I can find those, and if I could, if I could post them, but I'll give it a shot. Unless someone more technically savvy than I would like to volunteer?

And, sad to say, this is just one case. There are others, of course.

I didn't know it was possible to live in this country and not know what Brietbart did to his videos, but I guess it is possible. I don't watch the news anymore myself, so, if it were now I probably wouldn't know either. But that was then...

ETM

[Mandala]

It seems that giving a time table, allows the ptb time to get rid of it before it is released. They shouldn't have given a heads up.

[Siberia9]

Posted by etm567 (here)

Posted by Siberia9 (here)
I am constantly amazed that people actually think Obama is some kind of "good guy". I have a relative that is a Family adviser to him, he was also an adviser to the both Bush's when they were up there. The kind of adviser that is not on the books, so trust me they all work for the same secret group and do as they are told. The Bush's were Nazi's and Obama is a Marxist, but they got were they are because they have taken an oath to push the Family agenda forward regardless of what they think.

The people that they work for also own ALL of your television media, stop watching it, its all lies. YOUR NEWS IS FAKE. My mother was a CIA asset and was involved in many CIA/military black projects involving mind control. She used to do TV commercials and then was involved in the civil rights movement back in the sixty's. You see ALL sides of that mess were funded and ran by the secret govt, and the TV media reported on it and made up the rest. Most members of your major TV news today are actually either CIA themselves or are members of Bloodline Family's. Ever wonder who Anderson Cooper really is? No? you should. Its all there to give you a belief in a false reality. Everything you have seen on TV is either fake or told in some way that is part of their agenda. Stop giving your energy to this, TV programing is mind control programing, period.

Anyway people like Breitbart are just doing their job. If however you get deep enough to blow the whistle then you have already made the agreement to go along with the agenda or pay the price. They will take you out if you betray your oath, you will have a heart attack or shoot yourself twice in the head. The internet is full of people that have no such agreements, if they have no connections to the mainstream. Spend your time there and throw out your television.

Excuse me, are you saying the CIA made up the civil rights movement?

Excuse me for asking, but would you mind saying how old you are? I'm going to guess you are young, because only someone young would say "were funded and ran" instead of "were funded and run," but I'm almost sixty and I grew up in Memphis, Tennessee watching the civil rights movement all around me. My mother was in it, and she wasn't any CIA asset. Neither was Mattie Singstack or Jesse or Allegra Turner or a multitude of other activists. The CIA didn't make up the Saturday Luncheon Group, either.

And I think it was, all in all, a rather good thing. I would imagine the CIA certainly infiltrated it, or the FBI did, or both, as they infiltrated all social movements. But they were just tagging along until they could do some damage or maybe bring someone like MLK, Jr. down.

You are right that all the news today is fake. But back then it wasn't. Back then there were still newspapers that were owned by families -- although they were disappearing at a great rate! But they were still there. Like the one in Little Rock, Arkansas (the Little Rock Gazette, I think? Not family owned anymore, of course), where the editor went up against his advertisers to tell the truth about what was happening there with desegregation.

Breitbart shouldn't even be called a journalist.

ETM

If you think that being older than me invalidates my post you are wrong. I know what my family does for a living. Im the one that grew up with this CIA/Army/Illuminati crap.

Anyone that made any noise needed people to write the speech's, generate funding etc etc. The people that showed up to do that were almost all govt asset's, didn't matter if it was the Black Panthers or the Klan or MLK. They quietly controlled all these groups from inside.

The secret govt liked the civil rights movement as much as you did. They also ran the womens lib movement from beginning to end. Good well meaning people showed up to help and the News Media did their part.

This social engineering is all part of their agenda not yours. I wish there was a way that I could help people see it but I know it isn't going to happen so I say believe what you like. Frankly I'm out of gas, I no longer try to help people see the truth in all this, its not my job and its a waste of energy. I know what they did and are doing, however this type of information only serves to generate anger toward me because it challenges everything folks think is real. It also gets "Them" angry at me, and recently was asked why I bother, it was suggested that I no longer speak on private subjects. For the first time I think they are correct, so on that note I will bow out.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Who was Obama before becoming president, I mean, did he have a solid political history?

Obama served six years in the Illinois state senate (1997 to 2004) and was in his first term as US Senator for Illinois when he ran for Presidency (running during 2007, winning election in Nov 2007, to begin serving Jan 2008).

He was not particular distinguished (in my view) in either capacity. His history prior to that claims degrees from Columbia University and Harvard Law School ... though there are massive gaps in the record ... it's not clear to me where he was prior to 1997.

No ... not a solid political history.

Rather it is a demonstration of how readily the powers that be can install their preferred candidate into the White House, regardless of the candidate's background.

[TargeT]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Who was Obama before becoming president, I mean, did he have a solid political history?

Obama served six years in the Illinois state senate (1997 to 2004) and was in his first term as US Senator for Illinois when he ran for Presidency (running during 2007, winning election in Nov 2007, to begin serving Jan 2008).

He was not particular distinguished (in my view) in either capacity. His history prior to that claims degrees from Columbia University and Harvard Law School ... though there are massive gaps in the record ... it's not clear to me where he was prior to 1997.

No ... not a solid political history.

Rather it is a demonstration of how readily the powers that be can install their preferred candidate into the White House, regardless of the candidate's background.

he got his state senate seat through redistricting.... I'd say his political career is FAR from even qualifying as "not particularly distinguished" more like very particularly curious, groomed and catapulted into office...

[Referee]

Dr Corssi with more on AJ 3/5/2012

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=goWgPA1vHVo

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=IK_QJRKu8CY

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=XpjMrXJ0JLM

[Debra]

Siberia,
Your voice is valid. What you bring is valuable. It is a hard job delivering the truth, as you know it. People are being raw on here, stating what they know to be true. And when paradigms are jolted, there can be countless directions in which responses go ... open and curious, confused and speechless, outraged and reactive. Some give everyone the space to speak and support them lovingly, others tend to joke .. etc., etc..

You are brave to bring details of your background to the table. The context you share is as valid as the next person. I would hope it all serves the emergence and shared understanding of what the truth really is.

No one should be cast into quarantine, and certainly not put themselves there either.


[QUOTE=Siberia9;442156]If you think that being older than me invalidates my post you are wrong. I know what my family does for a living. Im the one that grew up with this CIA/Army/Illuminati crap.

Anyone that made any noise needed people to write the speech's, generate funding etc etc. The people that showed up to do that were almost all govt asset's, didn't matter if it was the Black Panthers or the Klan or MLK. They quietly controlled all these groups from inside.

The secret govt liked the civil rights movement as much as you did. They also ran the womens lib movement from beginning to end. Good well meaning people showed up to help and the News Media did their part.

This social engineering is all part of their agenda not yours. I wish there was a way that I could help people see it but I know it isn't going to happen so I say believe what you like. Frankly I'm out of gas, I no longer try to help people see the truth in all this, its not my job and its a waste of energy. I know what they did and are doing, however this type of information only serves to generate anger toward me because it challenges everything folks think is real. It also gets "Them" angry at me, and recently was asked why I bother, it was suggested that I no longer speak on private subjects. For the first time I think they are correct, so on that note I will bow out.
[QUOTE=Siberia9;441192]

[Calz]

Clues Left in Obama 'Birth Forgery' on Purpose?

Friday, March 02, 2012 – by Staff Report

An investigative "Cold Case Posse" launched six months ago by "America's toughest sheriff" – Joe Arpaio of Arizona's Maricopa County – has concluded there is probable cause that the document released by the White House last year as President Obama's birth certificate is a computer-generated forgery. The posse says it has identified at least one person of interest in the alleged forgery of Obama's birth certificate. – ABC News

Dominant Social Theme: It was a great cover-up, but now it's been found out. Obama is not what he seems to be. So what are you gonna do about it?

Free-Market Analysis: While we have always believed that President Barack Obama was controlled by the larger forces of the Anglosphere elite, the apparent forgery of his birth certificate raises even more questions.

Is it possible that Obama, one of the most powerful men on the planet, released an apparently hideously flawed document on purpose? The alternative is to believe that he put out an electronic document with NINE LAYERS that clearly seems to show evidence of tampering.

All the man and his (hypothetical) handlers had to do was print out the document and run it through a scanner (thus re-condensing the layers). Heck, they probably could just have re-saved the document as a jpeg, pdf, etc.

It seems crazy, doesn't it? Anyone who has the patience to sit through yesterday's Cold Case Posse presentation (see article excerpt above) should come away astonished by two salient facts:

One, the US President is apparently occupying his position illegally (so it seems); and two, the release of the "long form" and its clumsy manipulations must be comparable to the Watergate cover-up in terms of its ineptness. This is not too strong a statement, in our humble estimation.

There are tens of millions in the US who work with Photoshop or Illustrator regularly or irregularly. Ask almost any of these individuals if they would release a document with nine separate layers showing evidence of tampering (when trying to establish the authenticity of a document) and listen to their responses.

We can't say for sure but we'd be surprised if more than a handful would indicate that they'd follow the path Obama (or those around him) took ... providing what seems to be a kind of documentary proof that Sheriff Joe Arpaio has now seized upon (though it took his "cold case posse" six months).

With all the resources at his disposal, Obama still evidently managed to release an easily exposed cover-up. This despite plenty of apocryphal evidence that Obama is a direct product – or outcome – of US Intel, with its literally millions of spooks, "spook support" and high-tech gadgetry.

We do believe that Obama is "handled." What else CAN we believe? He won't let any of his records be examined, going back all the way to kindergarten. And his activities are in line with what the elites want to accomplish – one-world government.

The elites apparently are creating a formal world government in the modern era via global depression and war. We don't believe the US economy is improving and we don't believe the EU "crisis" is over.

Nikolas Sarkozy was just chased into a French pub in Basque country and had to hide out there for several hours while the crowd raged outside. The mood in Europe is foul. In the US and Britain it's just as bad. China isn't so happy, either.

And yet ... this is exactly what can be expected given the policies that are in place. There is no doubt the current economic environment is a "controlled" outcome. Central banks are not flora or fauna; they are not "potted plants." They do not occur naturally.

Monopoly fiat money is a ruinous phenomenon. Those who have built and implemented some 150 central banks around the world understand full well what they do and what the ramifications are.

It is the Internet itself – through what we call the Internet Reformation – that has challenged the plans of the powers-that-be. Like the Gutenberg Press before it, it has exposed the larger strategy of the elites of the day.

We're not sure if there was a larger, cohesive conspiracy 700 years ago, but there sure seems to be one now. An entire globalist system is now in place including NATO, the UN, the World Criminal Court, the IMF, the World Bank (which wants to take over jurisdiction for the oceans) and the World Health Organization.

The elites have moved their plans forward via dominant social themes – fear-based promotions – that frighten Western middle classes into giving up power and wealth to globalist facilities. But in the Internet era, these promotions are working a good deal less effectively.

It is to the benefit of the elites to continually sow doubt and confusion within the mind of the larger public when it comes to any kind of modern facility, either governmental or technological. We believe the power elite through its controlled Intel operations is pouring resources into undermining the alternative 'Net media.

The idea is to create a narrative of confusion, one in which the outlines of the REAL story are gradually blurred and no one knows whom to trust or what the outlines of objective truth (yes, there is such a thing within the purview of our experiences) might look like.

But we also believe the historic release of this questionable Obama long-form gives us another tactic to ponder. As the Internet Reformation has had a continual impact on the plans of the elites they have grown far more brutal and obvious. As someone recently wrote, "the gloves are off."

Thus, we figure the clumsiness of this long-form forgery (if that is what it is) is perhaps predictable, and even PURPOSEFUL. The idea might be that those who are "running the show" want to provide us with irredeemable proof that they can basically do whatever they want.

They're SHOWING us that they're in charge; that they can put a man in office who has no business being there and is actively trying to destroy what is left of the US Republic. Yes ... it could be argued this is part of a larger methodology of intimidation.

There may be even more to it, by the way. We're not necessarily big fans of either "Sheriff Joe" – an authoritarian bully, in our view – or the hyper-conservative/hyper-theological World Net Daily (though its editors and writers certainly break courageous stories now and again).

But we can't help noticing this entire incident has ended up pitting these two elements against an even more objectionable opponent (from a freedom standpoint) in the Obama administration. Once again, we're being presented with a conservative/liberal dialectic. The world is being framed in illogical, but compelling, ways.

We find it really difficult to believe that with all the resources available to him, Obama (knowingly or not) released this apparently clumsy forgery. One can, of course, make an argument that it was created so badly because only a very few people were involved. But we also think there could be more to it.

Alternatively, the idea is simply to sow confusion and dissent. Obama may be reelected, but the result will be an even more polarized society as many will have good reason to believe the president is not legally viable. This would certainly provide increased fodder for social disruption and a subsequent crackdown.

One grants, with this latter argument, that Obama is in a sense the ultimate disposable man. But we are not surprised that logic leads to this latter conclusion. In our view, many of those who work directly for the great central banking families are continually surprised that they can be world leaders one day and scapegoats the next. But that's how these people seem to work.

Conclusion: You make your deal. Don't be surprised by the consequences. Obama may be in for a rough ride. And his "fellow citizens" as well ....

Editor's Note: Feedbacker Marty, in the thread below, offers several scenarios including one along the lines that we mentioned, but also this thought-provoking one: "The forgery is intentionally of low quality, so that it will be found out. It will be shown that the original was lost, or destroyed inadvertently, by an incompetent clerk (probably one of a male Caucasian republican persuasion), and that he created the document to cover up his own incompetence. Thus the discoverer of the fraud, can be ridiculed in the eyes of the public, for being correct, and a nobody (a now wealthy nobody) can be scapegoated." In fact, "Sheriff Joe" indicated at the press conference that his office already had identified a "person of interest." And it's true that the Sheriff made a point several times that the forgery was not necessarily coordinated from the top down. In other words, President Barack Obama may have had nothing to do with it. Or, so, according to Marty, the scenario could play out ...



http://thedailybell.com/3665/Clues-L...ery-on-Purpose

[Debra]

Thanks Calz_Avaretard !

The future scenario of a patsy who has created a fumbled document has crossed my mind as well. It may indeed be the case that they are stringing for time, with a number of decoys to bring them back into golden favour, whilst they continue their agenda. The birth certificate is tangible evidence but what about the case that is built by Anthony Basiago and Project Pegasus. Basiago and the other whistleblower who has come forwards - Brett Stillings?

Mars visitors Basiago and Stillings confirm Barack Obama traveled to Mars
By Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd

Two former participants in the CIA’s Mars visitation program of the early 1980’s have confirmed that U.S. President Barack H. Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and was among the young Americans from the program who they later encountered on the Martian surface after reaching Mars via “jump room.”

Andrew D. Basiago, 50, a lawyer in Washington State who served in DARPA’s time travel program Project Pegasus in the 1970’s, and fellow chrononaut William B. Stillings, 44, who was tapped by the Mars program for his technical genius, have publicly confirmed that Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and that each later encountered Obama during visits to rudimentary U.S. facilities on Mars that took place from 1981 to 1983.

http://exopolitics.blogs.com/exopoli...to-mars-1.html

[Solstyse]

Has anyone here gone to the website, and seen the Birth Certificate? Downloaded it and checked?

[Calz]

This continues to be an interesting "storyline" developing from the veteranstoday site. I expect we will find out for sure soon enough ... but dramatic in departure from mainstream news (big surprise).

__________________________


Obama to AIPAC – No War, No Way, Just Promises

Press Lies About Key Areas Of President’s Talk


After hours of the usual AIPAC drivel, a presidential speech in the midst of an AIPAC spying trial, Obama made a plea for as much Jewish support, votes and money as possible, promising everything everything Israel demanded.

Then, in the end, he took it all all away, warning that “war talk” was irresponsible and that the US would seek a diplomatic solution.

What did he really say:

~ War is off the table

~ Sanctions have to be allowed to go forward

~ Loose talk about war is unacceptable

~ No attacks are planned or prepared for

In a talk about this today on live on Press TV’s International Service, Veterans Today’s Senior Editor, Gordon Duff, predicted this election year performance. Video will be included as soon as available.

In the midst of the controversy, Veterans Today published the transcript of an interview with former Nuclear Weapons expert Clinton Bastin, advisor to Veterans Today, who briefed both Netanyahu and President Obama on Iran’s nuclear weapons program as he had on India’s and North Koreas.

Bastin simply sites that IAEA inspectors have no weapons knowledge and seem to be tasked with misidentifying medical engineering programs that are not weapons oriented as something else. He calls them “political.”


cbs news video and much more:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03...just-promises/

_______________


related from same site:


_______________


Liar: Netanyahu’s Official Briefing-Iran Has No Nuclear Weapons Program

Briefed Netanhau, Top Nuclear Weapons Expert from Veterans Today

Iran Has a Nuclear Power, Not a Weapons Program

Clinton Bastin, a nuclear scientist, chemical engineer, and former Department of Energy official, was interviewed on the recent IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear program.
By Clinton Bastin for Jim W. Dean of Veterans Today


Clinton Bastin was responsible for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission(AEC)’s reprocessing of plutonium, and plutonium scrap operations, plutonium-238 production, transuranic materials processing, tritium and deuterium production for weapons programs, radioactive waste management, and related activities at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Plant in South Carolina.

He was also involved in the diplomatic side of U.S. international nuclear efforts, and he was president of the Federal Employees Union at the Department of Energy headquarters.

Upon his retirement, Bastin was recognized by the DOE in a Distinguished Career Service Award, as the U.S. authority on reprocessing and initiator of total quality management and partnering agreements.

Bastin served as a Marine in World War II and was an instructor in chemistry for the Marine Corps Institute.

He was interviewed on Nov. 18, 2011, by Marjorie Mazel Hecht, Managing Editor of 21st Century Science& Technology magazine.

Here is an edited transcript.

21st Century:

As a nuclear scientist and chemical engineer, who for decades directed U.S. programs for production and processing of nuclear materials and components for weapons, you have asserted that there is no weapons threat from Iran.

What is your assessment of Iran’s nuclear program?

Bastin: It’s a nuclear power program. Iran made a commitment to full use of nuclear power in 1970, ordered five nuclear plants from the United States, which promised, but later denied, reprocessing technology. This resulted in Iran’s cancelling the U.S. plants and ordering them from others, which were cancelled during the revolution.

But Iran has stayed committed to nuclear power. Russia is building Iran’s nuclear plant, which is ready tostart operation.

Because of the denial of reprocessing, Iran is reluctant to rely on others, so they wanted to enrich their own uranium, which is essential for nuclear power. That’s what they’re doing. Their reactor is a U.S.-type light water reactor. The Russians started building them successfully,and I think it’s fine.

I believe Pakistan provided the gas centrifuges, which have had problems. I was a member of the Atomic Energy Commission’s steering committee for gas centrifuge development, and I know that they are very sensitive, run at high power, and often crash. I suspect problems are related to that, and not computer hacking.

Iran also has a research reactor, Osiris, which was built by the French and uses 20% enriched uranium,

which they’ve been getting from others and would like to make themselves. Twenty percent is not weapons material. Weapons material is about 90%.David Albright has been claiming that you can make a weapon with it, but it would be incredibly difficult, and it’s not a rational thing to try.

Iran Cannot Make a Nuclear Weapon

21st Century: You mean he’s claiming that you can make a weapon with 20% enriched uranium?

Bastin: He said theoretically you could—but you could not. A gun-type weapon would require several tons of highly enriched uranium, and wouldn’t make sense. Anyway, that’s not a real concern under these circumstances.


http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03...apons-program/

[Cjay]

Posted by Solstyse (here)
Has anyone here gone to the website, and seen the Birth Certificate? Downloaded it and checked?

Yes, it's obviously a bad forgery - a layered composite, NOT a scan.

[Unified Serenity]

I posted a whole thread dealing with those who within the black community who acknowledged later that the civil rights movement was a planned Marxist agenda to overthrow the country and continue to pave the way to make America into a socialist country. I could dig up the thread on that. This all plays into the Illuminati plan to destabilize the west to make us ready for the next stage of their plan to implement their New World Order which is nothing more than Babylon the great headed by their beloved prince who wants to be God, Lucifer.

This video deals with the way to affect a society and is instructive in understanding how we are being played by the right and the left who are both controlled by their overseers, the Illuminati.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=MGfZZRAtC7E

https://youtube.com/watch?v=MGfZZRAtC7E

[Unified Serenity]

You can catch up on some good stuff regarding what's coming in this thread as well:

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...her-as-planned

I can't help but wonder how much we are being herded towards a planned goal. Yes, prove Breitbart is murdered, Obama is a liar, the bankers have destroyed us (Of course they've all run from the sinking ship as the rats they are), TSA is groping our mothers, aged parents, children, and young adults all while we get more and more angry, and now they will botch a false flag event I bet so we finally stand up to them? They must be amazed at how well their pacification system has worked and wonder where the soul of America is, I know the rest of the world wonders where our great spirit has gone to that stood and dumped tea into the water in Boston over unfair taxation. We are greedy, lazy cowards who feel isolated, hated, and unsupported. We are being told our Military is waiting for us to rise up, and yet I wonder how many are wondering if that is true. We cannot win by violent revolution, but we cannot win this if we continue doing what we have done. We will go silently into the control of the Illuminati or we will have to oppose them peacefully but forcefully by getting out there and demanding our rights, our money, and our minding our own business around the world. Dismantle the FED, CIA, EPA, AMA, FBI, and clean house from the top down through Independent council investigations, but we cannot allow the foxes to guard the hen house.

Is this whole Breitbart / Obama affair just one big psy op to play into their Hegelian dialectic?

[scotusa]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)
I have to say this again guys...

I can´t believe this is true. I mean, the USA Gov has all kind of top notch high technology equipment! Why would someone make such amateurish mistakes while falsifying a document; a document for the current president of the USA!

I'm pretty sure it's true.

They are not trying to mislead all of us.

They are trying to mislead half of us, so the two halves can fight.

Given how dumbed down they've gotten us, the deceptions have to be pretty crude, to get some reasonable percentage to actually see through it, and thereby create a division amongst the people with substantial energy.

Hello, I think Paul is on it. Hasn't anyone been paying attention to the real "fake" gold certificates or is it the fake "real" gold certificates? Divide and conquer.

[GlassSteagallfan]

Former IAEA Inspector Sees 'Deja Vu' in Developing Case Against Iran Nuclear Program

March 5, 2012 • 10:47AM

In an exclusive interview scheduled to appear in the March 9 edition of Executive Intelligence Review, former Chief Inspector the the International Atomic Energy Association in Iraq, during the 2002-2003 period, Robert Kelley recounted the scandalous way in which incompetent accusations by on single low level analyst were used to provoke the war against Iraq, and argued that the exact same method was being used today to justify war against the nation of Iran.

"When a country goes to war as the U.S. did in 2003 with disastrous results, there should be some lessons-learned on the table," Kelley told EIR's Michele Steinberg. "It would appear there are no lessons-learned being used in the current hysteria. The most important is peer review. The accusations leveled against Iraq in the nuclear area in 2003 were largely from the mouth of one single low level analyst in the U.S. He got far outside his competence and made accusations that were shredded in peer reviews by far more competent people, yet his veiw bubbled to the top because the peers were muzzled and his scary message was more welcome in high circles. The November 2012 IAEA Board Report [on Iran] looks like deja vu."

"....I think the Board of Governors should demand an investigation of the report and an independent review, line by line, of where that information was coming from, and why it was spun so heavily to one side."

Kelley has spoken out consistently against the current campaign, which is using the IAEA reports as evidence, against Iran. On Feb. 21, he joined with Dr. Hans Blix, the former Director General of the IAEA, and former chief of United Nations inspection commission, UNMOVIC, at the invitation of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). Speaking to the standing room only audience of Congressional staffers, diplomats, political officials, journalists, and activists, the two experts made clear that there is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon, or a nuclear weapons program, and that war against Iran is unnecessary and will be a disaster for the region and the world. Both support the immediate return to diplomatic talks between Iran and concerned parties, especially, the United States.

Earlier, in a January 11, 2012 Bloomberg article entitled, "Nuclear Arms Charge Against Iran Is No Slam Dunk," Kelley, a nuclear engineer with over 30 years of experience in the field questioned the evidence presented in the November 2011 IAEA report on Iran.

In the EIR interview, Kelley provides an inside view of how the fraud of 2003 was conducted, and how this process is being replicated today. His evaluation is must reading for those who wish to avoid the danger of a thermonuclear world war III, which Lyndon LaRouche has warned is the intention of the British Empire.

A prepublication copy of the interview will be made available in the coming days.

source: larouchepac.com