The Rumor Mill News Reading Room
Obama's Tipping Point and Implosion
Posted By: SARTRE
Date: Tuesday, 17-Sep-2013 07:13:41
Date: Tuesday, 17-Sep-2013 07:13:41
|
New 0 0 0 0
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Obama's Tipping Point and Implosion
Monday, September 16, 2013
WAS JFK 1ST VICTIM OF NEW WORLD ORDER?
WND EXCLUSIVE
WAS JFK 1ST VICTIM OF NEW WORLD ORDER?
Kennedy possibly target of those seeking change in geopolitics
- "Do You Hate Obama?"Find out what the republicans don't want you to know. Read this now.OnePoliticalPlaza.com
- Text smaller
- Text bigger
John F. Kennedy
NEW YORK – Was John F. Kennedy assassinated as the first presidential victim of the emerging “New World Order” championed by former CIA directors Allen Dulles and George H. W. Bush?
Armed with recently declassified documents, New York Times bestselling author Jerome Corsi tackles that question in “Who Really Killed Kennedy” as the 50th anniversary of the assassination approaches.
Corsi points out Kennedy had refused to authorize the Navy to launch a military strike from an aircraft carrier to save the faltering U.S.-backed invasion of Cuba known as the Bay of Pigs attack.
Kennedy also refused to authorize the use of U.S. military force in Laos and, just before he was assassinated, he had decided to pull out of Vietnam.
Hot war in Vietnam
On Sept. 2, 1963, Labor Day, at Hyannisport, Mass., JFK had a relaxed interview outdoors with CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite, who that sunny day was inaugurating a new television news program.
About midway into the interview, Cronkite asked about Vietnam: “Mr. President, the only hot war we’ve got running at the moment is of course the one in Vietnam, and we have our difficulties there, quite obviously.”
Kennedy answered directly, careful to set the stage for explaining why a military withdrawal from Vietnam was beginning to make sense to him.
“I don’t think that unless a greater effort is made by the government [of South Vietnam] to win popular support that the war can be won out there,” Kennedy explained.
“In the final analysis, it is their war. They are the ones who have to win it or lose it. We can’t help them, we can give them equipment, we can send our men out there as advisers, but they have to win it, the people of Vietnam, against the communists.”
In the interview, notes Corsi, Kennedy distanced himself from saying the U.S. should withdraw from Vietnam, insisting it would “be a great mistake.”
Corsi says Kennedy properly worried that no direct U.S. military intervention in a region like Southeast Asia could succeed, regardless of how many troops were sent or what type of arms were provided, unless the indigenous population was ready to fight and die for their own freedom.
JFK also worried, Corsi writes, that the type of corrupt regimes common in countries such as Laos and Vietnam almost certainly promised defeat, since any victories won on the battlefield would be compromised as corrupt elites in power oppressed the very people they were claiming to save from communism.
By offering military assistance, the president believed he could test the resolve and the ability of a nation such as Vietnam to win in a war against indigenous communists supported by China and Russia with a wide range of financial assistance, military training and sophisticated military equipment.
That policy, to withdraw the bulk of U.S. military personnel from Vietnam by the end of 1965, became official government policy on Oct. 11, 1963, when Kennedy signed National Security Action Memorandum No. 263.
The goal was to have the Defense Department announce the withdrawal of 1,000 military advisers from Vietnam by the end of 1963.
The speech JFK never gave
On Nov. 22, 1963, the day he was assassinated, JFK was on his way to the Dallas Trade Center to give a luncheon address.
This, the “Unspoken Speech,” contained a strong and clear statement of Kennedy’s determination to support U.S. allies and to fight back communism worldwide through a military and economic assistance program, not through the direct intervention of military forces.
“But American military might should not and need not stand alone against the ambitions of international communism,” JFK’s prepared remarks read.
“Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others, and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the communist world to maintain their independence of choice.”
The day he died in Dallas, Kennedy had intended to deliver a clear policy preference for providing military aid to nations such as Vietnam, rather than the alternative of committing U.S. military forces directly to the conflict.
Beginning with the first days of his administration, when confronted with Laos, to the last hours of his administration, concerning Vietnam, JFK was under constant pressure from the military to ramp up U.S. military presence in Southeast Asia.
White House historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., on page 338 of his 1965 book “A Thousand Days,” observed that starting with Laos, “the military left a predominant impression that they did not want ground troops at all unless they could send at least 140,000 men equipped with tactical nuclear weapons.”
The Pentagon was unrelenting in its position, calling for the possibility even of nuclear bombing of Hanoi and Beijing.
Kennedy was moving in a different direction, Cori writes.
The New World Order
In the final analysis, Corsi asserts, JFK was killed because he saw U.S. military action in shades of gray, whereas New World Order warriors such as the Dulles brothers, George H. W. Bush, and Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon saw only black and white.
Since the time Dulles headed the CIA in the 1950s, the CIA shared a belief with LBJ, Nixon and the military-industrial complex that even if U.S. military action failed in Cuba or in Laos and Vietnam, as it had in Korea, the military intervention would be good for business and the U.S. economy, according to Corsi.
The New World Order view pursued as U.S. foreign policy by Allen Dulles as head of the CIA and his brother John Foster Dulles, as secretary of state under Eisenhower, envisioned employing U.S. military action to preserve U.S. business interests, whether or not the wars were truly in U.S. national security interests.
George H. W. Bush did not blink to engage in the Gulf War, fully realizing U.S. oil interests in Kuwait were being preserved.
This was in sharp contrast to JFK. Under the ideologies of nationalism and self-determination that Kennedy used to analyze Cuba, Laos and Vietnam, it was clear JFK believed U.S. military involvement was ill-advised in each conflict, Corsi writes.
Kennedy cared about U.S. business interests, but not necessarily to the point of going to war in a conflict that was basically a civil war, incidental to U.S. national security interests, he says.
Had JFK lived, according to Corsi, the communist insurgency in Vietnam and the takeover of South Vietnam by North Vietnam would have been relegated to a footnote, the answer to an obscure question on a high school history test.
As it happened, there are over 58,200 names carved into black granite walls of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C.
Both Presidents Johnson and Nixon made the Vietnam War a centerpiece of their presidential administrations, says Corsi.
In retrospect, he contends, JFK was correct; the Vietnam War was not a war the U.S. could win, if fought the way the military-industrial complex wanted the conflict to be fought.
The classic declaration of a “New World Order” is properly attributed to President George H. W. Bush.
On Aug. 2, 1990, some 100,000 Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait, starting what became known as the Gulf War.
On Sept. 11, 1990 – the original 9/11 of the George H. W. Bush presidency – Bush addressed a joint session of Congress, proclaiming “a big idea” he characterized as the “New World Order.”
In the speech’s key passage, Bush said:
We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a new world order – can emerge: a new era – freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor.Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we’ve known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come.
What George H. W. Bush made clear with his “New World Order” speech to Congress on Sept. 11, 1990, was that the use of U.S. military power to protect U.S. business interests was especially justified when backed by an international coalition.
Today, WND reports that critics charge President Obama’s intention to launch a pre-emptive military strike on Syria has been motivated by New World Order instructions from Saudi Arabia, whose Sunni regime wants to eliminate the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria to weaken its Shiite arch-enemies in Iran.
That JFK would have gone to war to protect Kuwait’s petroleum interests in 1991 or Saudi Arabia’s petroleum interests today in Syria is a stretch to argue, especially when JFK backed off using U.S. military power to defeat communism in Cuba, Laos and Vietnam, despite the urging of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that intervention in these conflicts was vital to U.S. national security.
Note: Media wishing to interview Jerome Corsi, please contact us here.
- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/was-jfk-1st-victim-of-new-world-order/#Uz50R3fvhDeZaCfm.99
Look what the media purposely ignored
THE FOURTH ESTATE
Look what the media purposely
ignored
Exclusive: Mychal Massie hits press over coverage of 9/11,
Syria, racism at Fox
Published:
44 mins ago
Massie's website is mychal-massie.com.
You want to know just how biased and disreputable
the media are? Consider this past week.
Approximately 1.2 million, if not more, motorcyclists rode into Washington, D.C., to show respect and remembrance for those who were murdered by Muslim terrorists on Sept. 11, 2001. We’re talking a line of bikers 55 miles long and four bikes across. The deafening silence of the media pursuant to reporting on this epic show of determinism and patriotism is morally opprobrious even by the media’s own low standards.
Approximately 1.2 million, if not more, motorcyclists rode into Washington, D.C., to show respect and remembrance for those who were murdered by Muslim terrorists on Sept. 11, 2001. We’re talking a line of bikers 55 miles long and four bikes across. The deafening silence of the media pursuant to reporting on this epic show of determinism and patriotism is morally opprobrious even by the media’s own low standards.
- Iraqi Dinar NewsIs
the Iraqi Dinar a Currency Scam? Wall Street Daily Reveals the Truth www.wallstreetdaily.com/dinarnews
The over 1 million motorcyclists were, in effect, the
antimycin to the fungus of arrogance by Muslims who had planned to hold a march
on Washington to protest how unfairly they are being treated in America. And to
do so, they chose the day their own kind had murdered innocent Americans in
2001 and had murdered again in 2012.
Washington and the media did their best to discourage and minimize the stoicism of the bikers. They were denied permits and police escorts, and the media have refused to acknowledge their magnanimous display of American patriotism.
But it doesn’t stop there. The days following Obama’s specious soliloquy, which posed as a presidential address, to argue his reasons for an unwarranted attack on Syria, the media and the talking heads apparently chose to ignore what he had said in a speech delivered Oct. 2, 2002, emphatically arguing his opposition to the war in Iraq.
Obama said: “… I am opposed to a dumb war. … What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Hillary Clinton and other armchair weekend warriors in the [Bush] administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”
He continued: “I am opposed to … the attempt by the political hacks like John Kerry to distract us from … a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from … scandals. … That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but … not on principle but politics. … I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. … But I also know that Assad poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors.”
Apparently the media and talking heads don’t find it newsworthy that Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are the same two “politicians” he condemned as “political hacks” and “armchair weekend warriors” in 2002, who are today Obama’s most revered advisers. Nor apparently do they think it newsworthy that Obama savagely castigated Bush for seeking sanctions against Syria in 2007. Even as he is now begging Congress to grant him permission to attack the same Syrian leader he previously argued was in no way a threat to his neighbors or to the United States.
And, not to be left out, Fox News showed there was room at the bottom of the barrel labeled “duplicitous racial double standards” by continuing to showcase the smarmy, racist, ACORN member Jehmu Greene. Meanwhile, the sports side of Fox fired veteran former pro football player and current sports analyst Craig James for not being politically correct in response to a debate question on homosexual marriage he made during his unsuccessful Texas Senate run more than a year before he was hired by Fox.
Fox sees no harm in retaining Greene after she hurled racial insults at Tucker Carlson, calling him the equivalent of a white ni–er, during a live interview in which she was represented as a paid Fox News contributor. But James’ comment that homosexuals would “have to answer to the Lord for their actions,” made while he was wholly outside any association and/or representation of Fox, was deemed offensive. Fox brass said, “We just asked ourselves how Craig’s statements would play in our human resources department. He couldn’t say those things here.”
In other words, Fox sees nothing wrong with black racists calling white conservative guests scurrilous, racial epithets but a white Christian conservative answering a debate question truthfully renders him unemployable.
News Corp, the media megalith that owns Fox News and Fox Sports, poses as a bastion of conservative opinion, but according to Federal Election Commission data, its political donations favored Al Gore over George Bush by a 3-to-1 margin in 2000. In 2008 they donated to Obama over McCain, also by a 3-to-1 margin. It is also worthy of note that Fox’s parent company gave the lion’s share of their political contributions to Democrats nine of the last 13 election cycles going back to 1990. (“Fox News parent company funneling money … to Dems,” WND.com, July 23, 2013)
This is the duplicitous, two-faced dishonesty of the media that people are turning to for their news and information. This is the media that claim themselves worthy of our respect and trust.
Washington and the media did their best to discourage and minimize the stoicism of the bikers. They were denied permits and police escorts, and the media have refused to acknowledge their magnanimous display of American patriotism.
But it doesn’t stop there. The days following Obama’s specious soliloquy, which posed as a presidential address, to argue his reasons for an unwarranted attack on Syria, the media and the talking heads apparently chose to ignore what he had said in a speech delivered Oct. 2, 2002, emphatically arguing his opposition to the war in Iraq.
Obama said: “… I am opposed to a dumb war. … What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Hillary Clinton and other armchair weekend warriors in the [Bush] administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”
He continued: “I am opposed to … the attempt by the political hacks like John Kerry to distract us from … a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from … scandals. … That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but … not on principle but politics. … I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. … But I also know that Assad poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors.”
Apparently the media and talking heads don’t find it newsworthy that Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are the same two “politicians” he condemned as “political hacks” and “armchair weekend warriors” in 2002, who are today Obama’s most revered advisers. Nor apparently do they think it newsworthy that Obama savagely castigated Bush for seeking sanctions against Syria in 2007. Even as he is now begging Congress to grant him permission to attack the same Syrian leader he previously argued was in no way a threat to his neighbors or to the United States.
And, not to be left out, Fox News showed there was room at the bottom of the barrel labeled “duplicitous racial double standards” by continuing to showcase the smarmy, racist, ACORN member Jehmu Greene. Meanwhile, the sports side of Fox fired veteran former pro football player and current sports analyst Craig James for not being politically correct in response to a debate question on homosexual marriage he made during his unsuccessful Texas Senate run more than a year before he was hired by Fox.
Fox sees no harm in retaining Greene after she hurled racial insults at Tucker Carlson, calling him the equivalent of a white ni–er, during a live interview in which she was represented as a paid Fox News contributor. But James’ comment that homosexuals would “have to answer to the Lord for their actions,” made while he was wholly outside any association and/or representation of Fox, was deemed offensive. Fox brass said, “We just asked ourselves how Craig’s statements would play in our human resources department. He couldn’t say those things here.”
In other words, Fox sees nothing wrong with black racists calling white conservative guests scurrilous, racial epithets but a white Christian conservative answering a debate question truthfully renders him unemployable.
News Corp, the media megalith that owns Fox News and Fox Sports, poses as a bastion of conservative opinion, but according to Federal Election Commission data, its political donations favored Al Gore over George Bush by a 3-to-1 margin in 2000. In 2008 they donated to Obama over McCain, also by a 3-to-1 margin. It is also worthy of note that Fox’s parent company gave the lion’s share of their political contributions to Democrats nine of the last 13 election cycles going back to 1990. (“Fox News parent company funneling money … to Dems,” WND.com, July 23, 2013)
This is the duplicitous, two-faced dishonesty of the media that people are turning to for their news and information. This is the media that claim themselves worthy of our respect and trust.
senate-judiciary-committee-approves-media-shield-bill
The languishing legislation was given new life by the Obama
administration. Under fire for what many consider its overly zealous leak investigations, the
administration last spring asked Schumer to reintroduce the shield bill.
Adding to the momentum was a federal appeals court ruling in July concluding
that journalists had no right to keep their sources secret during
criminal prosecutions.
‘Disgusting’: Matt Drudge Blasts Senator Feinstein for ...
www.theblaze.com/ stories/ 2013/ 09/ 14/ disgusting-matt-drudge-blasts-senator-feinstein-for-trying-to-define- journalist/ - Proxy- HighlightInternet news pioneer Matt Drudge on Friday issued a scathing criticism of a Senate bill that will provide a narrow definition of the term journalist.
Media Shield
Law Heralds the Death of the 1st Amendment
By Onan Coca / 16 September 2013Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Senate Judiciary Committee just passed a new “media shield” bill, and will now ask the Senate to take the bill up for a vote. In the wake of the Justice Department’s recent attacks on the freedom of the press, many members of Congress seem ready to take up the cause and support the media shield law. At first glance a new media shield law would be a positive development, because it would imply that our Congress took our press freedom seriously. However, that is just not the case. This media shield law is not just a bad idea, but a dangerous one.
Let’s begin with the
most basic argument against the media shield law. It is unnecessary because the
Bill of Rights offers us complete coverage on freedom of the press. “Congress
shall make no law…abridging freedom of speech, or of the press.” It doesn’t get
much clearer than that. So the real issue here is not that we need a media
shield law (we already have the 1st Amendment), but that someone at
the Justice Department needs to go to prison for their roles in the AP scandal and in the Fox News
and James Rosen case. The likely jailbird should be Attorney General Eric
Holder, because he signed off on both investigations. In addition, the Justice
Department should have to pay hefty restitution to both organizations for their
heavy handed attack on free speech.
The first argument was easy – we already have a media shield in the First Amendment and
the real problem is that the Justice Department broke the law, so they should
be punished. But the next argument gets a little more nuanced.
The second argument
here is that by allowing Congress to pass a media shield law we are allowing
them to decide who is a journalist. Congress will not pass a bill that gives
blanket protection to any Tom, Dick, or Harry’s free speech or press freedom.
Their concern is that someone blogging out of their mom’s basement will get a
hold of classified information, publish it and then be covered by the media
shield law… and Congress just cannot risk any more Edward Snowdens. So in the
bill that has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee, they have drawn lines to show who is and isn’t a “real”
journalist. An example – an 80 year
old retired English teacher working for a small town newspaper (or newsletter)
is a journalist… but Matt Drudge who publishes the Drudge Report and is read by
millions may not be covered. A reporter with a college paper may be covered,
but one of the writers for this site might not be.
This begs the question…
where is Congress given the authority to decide who is and isn’t a journalist?
The answer is, that Congress has no say in that question whatsoever – because
the 1st Amendment says Congress shall make no law…abridging freedom
of speech, or of the press. It doesn’t get much clearer than that. In fact, the
1st Amendment strictly prohibits Congress doing anything to draw
lines on free speech or press freedom. The very notion of passing a media
shield law that applies only to some is Congress doing exactly what the First
Amendment says it CANNOT do.
Kissinger, Brzezinski: Obama's Syria Actions 'Misconceived, Badly Calculated'
2013-09-16
Kissinger, Brzezinski: Obama's Syria Actions 'Misconceived,
Badly Calculated'
Vatic Note: Hah, nothing has worked that these two top international
zionists have come up with and so now they are pointing the finger at Obama,
who has ZERO say in anything at all, just like Bush Jr. had no say
either. They are acting like they had nothing to do with any of it and
that is a giant laugh.
Rockefeller owns Kissinger, and Zbig, so that is who is running everything. Given that given Zbig is Obama's NSA advisor and runs foreign policy, then who else advised the President on the course of action he took, that has resulted in this blatant humiliation? I use the term "advised" with tongue in cheek, in fact, they "told" him what to do.
Right, and now I see this below as a blatant attempt to recover their own images at the expense of Obama. Remember, Zbig did this to Carter when he began to rebel against his handlers, so they set him up with that helicopter fiasco and the massive rise in interest rates so he would lose the election and he did.
There are no bigger traitors to this nation than Henry Kissinger and Zbig Brezsinzki, unless you include their boss, Rockefeller who is the grandaddy of them all. What a farce this is. I put this up just to show you how these so called high level policy men, can crawl when trying to recover from a major loss and blow to their agenda.
Now they will have to come up with something else to start WW III for their depopulation agenda. Like we could not figure this out ourselves? I think you will cackle as much as I did when I first read this.
Kissinger, Brzezinski: Obama's Syria Actions 'Misconceived, Badly Calculated'
http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/kissinger-brzezinski-obama-syria/2013/09/15/id/525767?
by Greg Richter,
Rockefeller owns Kissinger, and Zbig, so that is who is running everything. Given that given Zbig is Obama's NSA advisor and runs foreign policy, then who else advised the President on the course of action he took, that has resulted in this blatant humiliation? I use the term "advised" with tongue in cheek, in fact, they "told" him what to do.
Right, and now I see this below as a blatant attempt to recover their own images at the expense of Obama. Remember, Zbig did this to Carter when he began to rebel against his handlers, so they set him up with that helicopter fiasco and the massive rise in interest rates so he would lose the election and he did.
There are no bigger traitors to this nation than Henry Kissinger and Zbig Brezsinzki, unless you include their boss, Rockefeller who is the grandaddy of them all. What a farce this is. I put this up just to show you how these so called high level policy men, can crawl when trying to recover from a major loss and blow to their agenda.
Now they will have to come up with something else to start WW III for their depopulation agenda. Like we could not figure this out ourselves? I think you will cackle as much as I did when I first read this.
Kissinger, Brzezinski: Obama's Syria Actions 'Misconceived, Badly Calculated'
http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/kissinger-brzezinski-obama-syria/2013/09/15/id/525767?
by Greg Richter,
Calling President Barack Obama's actions against Syria "misconceived" and "badly calculated," President Jimmy Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski says the Russian proposal "gets us off the hook." (VN: that is how tightly these two men control the President. He can't even defend himself from their commentary. Lets remember Zbig is Obama's NSA advisor, so how come he didn't "advise" his client to do what he thought was right? Well, I think we all know the answer to that question, if not then read my vatic note above. I personally think these two men are under some delusion that they are respected out here. Well, the only place they are respected is by the criminal traitors trying to bring down our country and the rest of the nation is fully onto them now. Its almost slapstick to read this stuff since they are the ones controlling it all. Read the rest of this article and if you are still standing after rolling on the floor laughing, then please comment and tell us what you think. )
Appearing on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on Sunday Brzezinski and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger agreed that the United States and Russia share a common interest in avoiding American military action in the Syria. (VN: the only shared interest between the USA and their boy, Putin, is starting and executing WW III. Why do you think he sent Russian ships off the coast of Syria?)
Russian President Vladimir Putin saw a chance to "get into step with us by easing an immediate American difficulty, but solving a common problem," Kissinger said.
The Russians are avoiding something they would not like to see happen in the region, Brzezinski said. "We are prevented from doing something that would be equally damaging to the region, but worse, probably, for us." (VN: no doubt about it, your false flag got outted big time.)
Russia seized on an off-hand comment by Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday that Syria could avoid a U.S. missile attack by turning all its chemical weapons over to international authorities and has been trying to broker the deal.
Putin's biggest fear with Syria, Kissinger said, is that it would lead to a radicalization of the region. Putin worries about increasingly hostile radical Muslims in the Caucasus who resent Russian involvement in the region.
Putin also grabbed an opportunity to diminish America's standing as preeminent in the region, Brzezinski added. "Our hegemony in the region is declining," he said, "but we're still the main player."
"The president has said Assad must go without having a strategy to make him go," Brzezinski said. "And we have now seen the consequences of that." (VN: this is where the biggest laugh comes in. Zbig works every day "telling" Obama what to do as his zionist handler in the White House.....so the question is "who didn't have a strategy?" Zbig didn't and why did he drag fat Kissinger at 93 years old into this whole discussion? Alzheimers ring a bell? Sorry, but putting these two out to try and cover for the zionists screw ups, is insulting. No one I know believes a word either one of them says, not a single word. If I am wrong please comment on why we should even listen to them, much less take them seriously?)
http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2013/09/kissinger-brzezinski-obamas-syria.html
** Iraqi dinar, recently being said ** / TNT Tony
The Rumor Mill News Reading Room
** Iraqi dinar, recently being said ** / TNT Tony
Posted By: hobie [Send E-Mail]
Date: Monday, 16-Sep-2013 20:16:51
Date: Monday, 16-Sep-2013 20:16:51
|
Press release: A total nonsense response submitted by 2 attorneys from the Department of Justice and SSN
What does it take to get ride of this
phony criminal in the office of the presidency? Five years and
still nothing is done!
Obama's Fraudulent Use of H. Bounel's Soc. Security Number...
Obama's Fraudulent Use of H. Bounel's Soc. Security Number...
Press release: A total nonsense response submitted by 2
attorneys from the Department of Justice and SSN
From Orly Taitz
Posted on | September 16, 2013
Department of Justice and SSA provided a total nonsense
response to my motion for Summary Judgment
They are not denying that Social Security number 042-68-4425 was assigned to Bounel. They de facto admit it. If this number was not assigned to Bounel and he was born 123 years ago, they had to simply provide his SS-5 application, it would have shown a different number and it would be the end of it. If it will show that the number is indeed 042-68-4425, then Obama and all of his accomplices go to prison. Instead, they are violating their own 120 year rule and refusing to produce Bounel’s SS-5 because they admit that someone else is using this number today. Since Obama posted this number with his tax returns, we know that he is using it, so we know that he is using a stolen a number. Because Obama is using Bounel’s stolen number today, they refuse to release Bounel’s SS-5 application.
They are not denying that Social Security number 042-68-4425 was assigned to Bounel. They de facto admit it. If this number was not assigned to Bounel and he was born 123 years ago, they had to simply provide his SS-5 application, it would have shown a different number and it would be the end of it. If it will show that the number is indeed 042-68-4425, then Obama and all of his accomplices go to prison. Instead, they are violating their own 120 year rule and refusing to produce Bounel’s SS-5 because they admit that someone else is using this number today. Since Obama posted this number with his tax returns, we know that he is using it, so we know that he is using a stolen a number. Because Obama is using Bounel’s stolen number today, they refuse to release Bounel’s SS-5 application.
In my opinion this is pure and simple fraud and treason committed by the acting Commissioner of SSA Carolyn Colvin, her SSA attorney and US Attorneys. They are de facto admitting to being complicit in the cover up. Attorney Taitz is supposed to reply within 1 week. She will be compiling a list of cases, where people were prosecuted for using stolen Social Security numbers. If any of the supporters are aware of any such cases, please provide the information.
This whole situation would be akin to someone stealing your house, squatting in your house by using a fabricated deed and paying off a corrupt city clerk to keep your original deed sealed . You demand from the city hall a copy of the original deed to the house to prove to the court that this is your house. The city clerk responds by saying that he cannot release the original deed in your name because the thief is using your house now. This is a complete idiocy.
Thrive Update: Global Awakening Power of Love
Thrive Update: Global Awakening Power of Love
In this timely Thrive Update, Foster and Kimberly Gamble provide some heartening perspective on the global 'up-wising' -- the new 'Net reality' -- that has mobilized public opinion worldwide regarding the "serious" (Syria-US) showdown over expanded Mid-East destabilization.
There is a global awakening to the power of love that checks and balances the inordinate love of power. The former naturally makes the latter obsolete.
Planetary conscious evolution requires it. Fearless faith in our divine destiny demands it. And the holy spirit of Great Love-in-action empower "IT" (In Touch) with a higher power than that which wars with the angels of our better nature.
The BLESSING of Great Love is the JUDGMENT on all that is less than Great Love, so this is a time of Great Choice for all of "US" (United Sovereigns) in our new global village.
What we're seeing emerge in the Family of Man is a new unity consciousness that embraces cooperative caring virtues more than threats of violence for corporate profits without constitutional principles.
You might say that the nurturing energies of 'Loving Mother' -- for the Earth and all thereon -- is rising up to shame the insensate corruption of society by "unloving father figures" (sociopathic power elite potentates) who are ethical infants.
It is the principle and person of the 'Divine Feminine' that will begin healing this world's sick obsession with terror, war, disease and destruction of life support systems for our bodies, minds and the spirit of 'wholEness' and healing on Earth.
Seize the vision with important videos at this Thrive Update.
Linking the Light of Love for Upgrading Life on Earth,
~ Christopher
In this timely Thrive Update, Foster and Kimberly Gamble provide some heartening perspective on the global 'up-wising' -- the new 'Net reality' -- that has mobilized public opinion worldwide regarding the "serious" (Syria-US) showdown over expanded Mid-East destabilization.
There is a global awakening to the power of love that checks and balances the inordinate love of power. The former naturally makes the latter obsolete.
Planetary conscious evolution requires it. Fearless faith in our divine destiny demands it. And the holy spirit of Great Love-in-action empower "IT" (In Touch) with a higher power than that which wars with the angels of our better nature.
The BLESSING of Great Love is the JUDGMENT on all that is less than Great Love, so this is a time of Great Choice for all of "US" (United Sovereigns) in our new global village.
What we're seeing emerge in the Family of Man is a new unity consciousness that embraces cooperative caring virtues more than threats of violence for corporate profits without constitutional principles.
You might say that the nurturing energies of 'Loving Mother' -- for the Earth and all thereon -- is rising up to shame the insensate corruption of society by "unloving father figures" (sociopathic power elite potentates) who are ethical infants.
It is the principle and person of the 'Divine Feminine' that will begin healing this world's sick obsession with terror, war, disease and destruction of life support systems for our bodies, minds and the spirit of 'wholEness' and healing on Earth.
Seize the vision with important videos at this Thrive Update.
Linking the Light of Love for Upgrading Life on Earth,
~ Christopher
NATURAL DISASTER- Sep 25th thru Oct - Senator Warns America - YouTube Date: 9/14/2013 9:40:07 PM
NATURAL DISASTER- Sep
25th thru Oct - Senator Warns America - YouTube Date: 9/14/2013 9:40:07 PM
Investigate get the truth!!!
WTF!!
Alex Jones Predicts Nuclear False Flag 48 Hrs After His Death
-------Original
Message-------
From: Don
Date: 9/14/2013 9:40:07 PM
To: All
Subject: ▶ NATURAL DISASTER- Sep 25th thru Oct - Senator Warns America
- YouTube
This message is ominous and points to one conclusion, our
government is up to no good!
Subject: ▶ NATURAL DISASTER- Sep
25th thru Oct - Senator Warns America - YouTube
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
