Daily Archives: April 17, 2010

Hell Freezes Over

THEOLOGICAL FACT: For years pundits said the New Orleans Saints were so bad at football that Hell would freeze over before the Saints would ever win The Super Bowl. On Sunday, February 7, 2010, the New Orleans Saints won the Super Bowl. On that same day, Sunday, February 7, 2010, Washington D.C. was paralyzed under several feet of snow and the Government was totally and completely shut down.

This, my friend, firmly establishes the exact geographical position of Hell – Washington, DC.

The Federal Reserve Created This Financial Mess And Now They Expect Us To Pay Higher Taxes And Have A Lower Standard Of Living So We Can Pay Interest To Them

The Economic Collapse

When you watch the mainstream news, how often do you hear them identify the Federal Reserve as the ultimate source of all of our financial problems?  Never?  Well, there is a good reason.  The Federal Reserve was created and continues to benefit the elite international bankers that are raping the United States blind financially.  Many of the same financial powers own large interests in the 6 gigantic media companies that dominate U.S. mainstream media.  So you won’t hear the truth from them.  On this website we go on and on about how bad the U.S. national debt is.  And it is really, really, really bad.  But rarely do you hear from anyone who we owe all of this money to.  Yeah, we owe large amounts to Japan and China and a bunch of other nations, but the biggest holder of our debt by far is the Federal Reserve.  Just like the owner of your mortgage or your car loan, they expect to be paid back – with interest.

Now U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is warning that the U.S. national debt could balloon to more than 100% of GDP by the year 2020.  For those familiar with national debt statistics, that is a very, very dangerous threshold to cross.  Basically the United States is in debt up to its eyeballs and the debt continues to grow at an exponential rate.

So what is the solution?

Well, according to Bernanke, United States citizens will soon have to make difficult choices between higher taxes and reduced social spending.

Perhaps both.

The truth is that either alternative will slow down the U.S. economy and will reduce our standard of living, but this is the situation that we have gotten ourselves into.

And we have got to service that gigantic debt that we owe to the Federal Reserve (among others).

In fact, a whole lot of government officials are talking about taxes these days.

And not about lowering them.

Some administration officials are floating the idea of a national sales tax and others are openly discussing adopting a European-style “value-added” tax.

Any way that they can drain more money out of us sounds good to them.

In fact, members of Barack Obama’s “fiscal reform commission” say that higher taxes must be considered as a way to handle the U.S. government’s mounting debt problem.

Of course they could just stop wasting trillions of dollars, but apparently that is too hard.

And so where will all of these new taxes go?

To managing our colossal debt of course.

The truth is that we have locked generations of Americans into debt slavery.

We have piled up the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world, and our children and grandchildren will spend all of their lives trying to pay interest on it.

Haven’t we left them with such a wonderful legacy?

Source:

How the Media Lied about Obama’s Birth Records

Accuracy In The Media
By Margaret Calhoun Hemenway

Most people consider a birth certificate as a state or hospital document containing a statement by a hospital and physician, or midwife, with a footprint or other unique identifiers. But the Obama campaign and today, the White House, refuses to allow Hawaii’s Department of Health to release his original birth certificate.

Yet another military officer, Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin, has publicly questioned whether the Commander-in-Chief is legal or not, and faces imminent court-martial for refusing to obey military orders until assured of the President’s Constitutional eligibility.

During the 2008 Presidential campaign, “mainstream” media confused the public over whether Obama ever released any real proof of his claim to being born in Hawaii. The confusion continues. Jonathan Alter, senior editor at Newsweek magazine, told MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann on February 20, 2009 that “The Obama campaign actually posted his birth certificate from a Hawaii hospital online.”

But Alter lied, since “the Obama campaign” never “actually posted his birth certificate from a Hawaii hospital online.” Remarkably, no hospital in Hawaii yet lays definitive claim to be the birthplace of the sitting President.

On July 17, 2009 CNN’s Kitty Pilgrim dissembled when she stated that the Obama campaign had produced “the original birth certificate” on the internet and that FactCheck.org had examined the original birth certificate. The computer-generated Certification of Live Birth (COLB) posted by the campaign and FactCheck.org is not, and by definition, cannot be the original birth certificate or a copy of the original birth certificate. It contains no statement by a doctor or midwife and no reference to any hospital. There is no probative evidence on this Certification that can be verified to see whether it is valid. There were no computer-generated COLBs in 1961, Obama’s birth year.

Obama’s original birth certificate (whether filed in 1961 or later) was a very different document from this COLB on FactCheck.org. that Pilgrim, Chris Matthews, Alter, and Olbermann waved around to try to quash the discussion. On the FactCheck.org website, the claim is made that “FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate.” They only saw and touched the COLB. So FactCheck.org lied about this as well.

Why would Factcheck.org tell so obvious a lie and endanger the site’s reputation? In August 21, 2008, when questions about the COLB began to reach critical mass and threatened to enter the public discourse, the mostly pro-Obama TV and newspaper/magazine media needed cover for their collective decision to ignore questions about whether Obama met qualifications for the Presidency set forth in Article II Section I of the Constitution. After Labor Day, swing voters would begin to pay attention to the campaign. With its lie about “how it examined and photographed the original birth certificate,” FactCheck.org helped stifle the birth certificate debate.

Under Section 57 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii (in effect in 1961), a mailed-in form (without mention of a hospital, doctor, or midwife) signed by only one of Obama’s parents (who could have been out of the country or whose signature could have been forged by a grandparent) or grandparents, would be enough to set up a birth record at the Department of Vital Statistics. This meager birth record would then automatically generate newspaper announcements, and also, a computer-generated COLB in 2008. When juxtaposed with statements by Obama’s maternal grandmother, Kenya’s Ambassador to the U.S, and now a Kenyan cabinet minister and Parliamentarian, that Obama was born in Kenya, calls for Obama to release his original birth certificate are wholly justified.

If Obama continues to refuse to release his original birth certificate, a reasonable person might assume he was not born in a Hawaiian hospital or at home with assistance of a doctor or midwife. This is especially true because if Obama was born in a foreign land, his family had a compelling reason to lie about it, given the prestige and benefits of American citizenship.

In 1961, if a 17-year-old American female gave birth in a foreign country to a child whose father was not a U.S. citizen, that child had no right to any American citizenship, let alone the “natural born” citizenship that qualifies someone for the Presidency under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. In 1961, the year of Obama’s birth, under Sec. 301 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Ann Dunham could not transmit citizenship of any kind to her son.

If at birth, Obama was ineligible for American citizenship of any kind, he cannot be “natural-born.” If a person is not at the time of his birth an American citizen, he cannot be a natural-born citizen and is ineligible for the Presidency.

LTC Lakin and other patriotic military officers should not face punishment or retribution for adhering to their oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and for seeking the truth about the President’s Constitutional eligibility.

*Mrs. Hemenway is a friend of LTC Lakin. Her father-in-law filed one of the early eligibility lawsuits in federal court.

Source:

A Judge Rules Against Prayer, But Not Against An Imposter

Canada Free Press

How unGodly our country becomes with each passing day.  The ranks of those with the absence of God in them are growing larger and stronger in our population and concernedly in our judiciary.

How easy it must be for a U. S. District Judge to play the role of God and strike down any references to the real God.  But it must leave a bit of nagging doubt in their minds, even if they are of no special faith persuasion.  Any sane and reasonably intelligent person HAS to have some tinges of ‘is it’ or ‘isn’t it’ etched in their minds.

To a heartless and uncaring atheist who loves no one beyond him or herself it is probably easy and unfettering to their minds to blaspheme or outright deny any reference to anything higher in spiritual plane than themselves.

A higher authority will censure those non-feelers at an appropriate time.  But right now I would like to ask one U. S. District Judge Barbara Crabb why it is so simple to rule against a beautiful and absolutely harmless Day of Prayer that demands no special allegiance or actions save what is in one’s heart; a day that if left untouched and allowed to continue that would bring only goodness and love to all who participate.

I am sure that Madam Crabb would answer that the participants in the lawsuit brought by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a Madison-based group of atheists and agnostics, felt offended and damaged or some such rot.  I never will understand why such creatures have to lie to stop something that gives great pleasure to many others and at no cost or loss to the self-minded offendees.

This country was founded by Christians and peopled by good and caring Christians who opened their hearts and allowed others from all over the world of all faiths to come and live in the freedom and love as did they; only to have ingratitude and selfishness spring up from the newcomers.  And mostly, the ungraciousness of such people who were welcomed into the folds of Christians without question or rules, is now their unfounded hammer and nails of hate.

Judge Crabb says the day violates the separation of church and state.  HOW?  To me, the day brings together all those of faith for a moment to reflect and bathe in the goodness of that faith that keeps sanity among peoples of different faiths instead of bloodshed and battle.  No harm is done to anyone.  Our Constitution radiates with its goodness.

But if it is so simple for a jurist to so easily rule that a day of prayer that infringes on no one and harms no one is ANY kind of violation, why is it so hard for that same jurist or any of his or her peers to also follow the dictates of our Constitution and rule against a person who secretly and knowingly defrauded said Constitution by hiding his true identity and illegally filed an application for the Office of the Presidency?

That person who now holds that office is doing harm with each official action he takes in the guise of being legitimately qualified to hold office even though he violates one main requisite; that of being a natural born citizen.

Judge Crabb, I call on you to exercise your duty as a sworn defender of our Constitution to rule as firmly as you did in this case against a Day of Prayer, that the usurper in the Office of the President is also unconstitutional.

Do you have that kind of iron in your own constitution Judge?

Source:

Nuclear Summit Logo Is An Islamic-Shaped Crescent

Flopping Aces

World leader, known for reminding the Islamic world that his middle name is Hussein, hosts nuclear summit, presided over by large Islamic-shaped crescent:

Obama, Hu, et al with NSS10 logo, Ron Sachs photo
Photo by Ron Sachs.

It is hard to believe that the State Department could do this by accident:

NSS10-MAS-IranianSpaceAgency

An Islamic crescent is a very distinct and completely unnatural geometric shape, combining a circular outer arc with a non-concentric circular inner arc. The unnaturalness is an Islamic religious requirement. A lunar crescent has an elliptical inner arc. Using such a natural shape as a religious symbol would risk idolatry (the worship of any actual thing besides God). Thus Muslims use as their symbol the explicitly unnatural circle-in-circle crescent shape.

Sometimes the inner circle sits entirely inside the outer circle. This arrangement is typically used to symbolize Islamic world domination, as seen in the MAS logo. More often the inner circle extends beyond the outer circle, as seen on the last last Ottoman flags:

Turkish flag
Turkish flag. Crescent covers an unnatural 2/3rds of a circle of arc, give or take (in contrast to a lunar crescent, which always covers a half a circle of arc).

Obama’s circle-in-circle NSS logo uses a thin crescent to combine the world encompassing aspect of the MAS logo with the more familiar Ottoman crescent, covering less than a full circle of arc.

Obama has ordered his underlings not to notice Islamic connections

Given that the unnatural circle-in-circle crescent is the only widely recognized graphic symbol of Islam, it must have been recognized as such by at least a significant percentage of the State Department personnel who saw it prior to the summit. Why didn’t anyone object, forcefully and publicly if necessary?

It would seem to be the Fort Hood phenomenon, where witnesses to Nidal Hasan’s murderous ideology were afraid that making an issue of it would be career suicide, thereby enabling Hasan’s mass murder of American soldiers. Obama has now made the career suicide threat official, ordering all members of the executive branch to be as oblivious to Islam as possible. The more disturbing the Islamic connection, the more it is to be avoided, to the point where Muslim terrorists, whose reading of orthodox Islamic interpretation compels them to slaughter infidels, are no longer to be called “Muslim terrorists” or “Islamic extremists.” Everyone is just supposed to ignore their Islamic motivation.

Hydrogen atoms and Swastikas

Defenders of Obama’s nuclear crescent (trolls in the comments at Gateway) think that so long as the Islamic-shaped crescent can be interpreted in some non-Islamic way, there is nothing wrong with using an Islamic shaped crescent to represent American hospitality:

Oh please, folks, get a grip. It’s modeled after a hydrogen atom, you know, as in hydrogen bombs?

This issue came up when the Missile Defense Agency’s crescent shaped website logo became a news story in February.
Missile Defense Agency logo, from website, blowup

MDA website logo, uses the world-encompassing symbolism of a full circle-in-circle crescent favored by several Islamic terror groups:

Circle-in-circle jihadist crescents
Left: Islamic Palestine Block insignia. Center: Hamas insignia. Right: PLFP insignia (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine).

MDA spokesman Rich Lehner insists that the world-encompassing circle-in-circle crescent “symbolizes the worldwide protection of our homeland and deployed forces.” But do we get to redefine in this way the only symbol shape that our terror war enemies claim as their own?

By that logic, one could say that the swastika represents a helicopter rotor in motion, making a great logo for our Apache squadrons, but no such interpretation can obviate the established meaning of the symbol shape, and like the swastika, the full circle-in-circle crescent has its own established meaning (a meaning not so different from the swastika). It represents Islamic domination of the planet. For Lehner to protest that this isn’t what the full circle-in-circle crescent means to him is as ludicrous and irrelevant as saying that he sees the swastika as a spinning propeller.

Not that it matters, but the NSS logo fails as hydrogen atom

Most obviously, why the gap in the electron’s orbit? The only purpose of this gap would seem to be to turn the crescent into the familiar Islamic-shaped crescent.

Less obviously, notice that the fattening of the crescent at the lower left indicates visually that the electron is coming closer at that point. That would only be the case if the orbit were being observed somewhat edge-on, but that would make the orbit appear to the observer as an ellipse, not the circle seen in the NSS logo.

By the same token, since the orbit is seen as circular rather than elliptical, that means it is being observed from above (from one of the poles of the axis of rotation), which means the electron is not moving closer to and further from the observer, hence no crescent-like fattening of the arc would be observed.

The only purpose for the unnatural fattening of the circle on one side representation would again seem to be to create the familiar Islamic shaped crescent.

Frank Gaffney was pre-mature in walking back his concerns about the MDA crescent

Kudo’s to Frank Gaffney for forcing our Democrat dominated media to address the crescent shaped MDA logo two months ago. In addition to noting the Islamic shape, Gaffney also noted the likeness to Obama’s permanent campaign logo:

MDA and Obama Logos

When he discovered that the MDA logo predated the Obama administration, Frank began a walk-back, which he extended to the crescent shape:

It has also been observed that – rather than embracing the symbolic crescent and star, they could be interpreted as the targets of the intercepting swoosh in the MDA’s latest logo. If so, the 2009 design would presumably be offensive to Islamists, rather than evidence of submission to them.

No, the crescent cannot be interpreted as the target of the intercepting missile, because the target of the intercepting missile is explicit. It is shooting down another missile. The missile shot in the logo can be interpreted as defending the crescent, but it cannot be interpreted as attacking the crescent because the crescent is not a missile.

Ignorant coincidence, or stealth jihad?

The unanswered question is whether the Islamic-looking logos are the product of ignorant coincidence or Islamic supremacism. There are stealth jihadists who work in the field of Islamic symbolism, like the Los Angeles architect who designed the giant Mecca-oriented crescent that is now being built atop the Flight 93 crash site. A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a mihrab, and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. (Some mihrabs are pointed arch shaped, but the archetypical mihrab is crescent shaped.) The planned memorial will be the world’s largest mosque.

Like Gaffney (sorry Frank, but you really wimped out on this one), the defenders of the crescent mosque are willing to embrace untenable excuses for their Islamic symbol shape. Asked how he could abide the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent, Patrick White, Vice President of Families of Flight 93, argued that the almost-exact Mecca-orientation cannot be intended as a tribute to Islam because the in-exactness of it (within 2° of Mecca) would be “disrespectful” to Islam.

After the cartoon jihad, Gaffney and White might be excused for thinking that Muslims will take offense at just about anything, but the fact is, orthodox Islam cares very little about how exactly anyone faces Mecca for prayer. For most of Islam’s 1400 year history, far flung Muslims had no accurate way to determine the direction to Mecca. Thus it developed as a matter of religious principle that what matters is intent to face Mecca (and God).

So where did Patrick White get the idea that orientation on Mecca must be exact? From a Muslim scholar commissioned by the Park Service to answer just this question. His name is Nasser Rabbat, and he told the Park Service a flat out lie. Why? Rabbat is presumably a stealth jihadist, though he could have also been doing a personal favor for ex-classmate Paul Murdoch, the Los Angeles architect who designed the Crescent of Embrace.

This is why these possibly coincidental Islamic symbol shapes need to be properly investigated: because where there is smoke, there is sometimes fire.

Gaffney was also premature in dismissing the Obama-like character of the MDA logo

Just because the Obama-like logo was not a product of the Obama administration does not mean it was not the work of a freelance Obamaton, or even an Obama-connected logo designer.

Obama started using his logo in early 2007, when it made a huge splash in the logo-design community. The contract for the MDA logo was not let until September 2007 and the logo itself did not appear until October 2008. Thus the MDA logo was designed while Obama’s logo was all the rage, and given Obama’s connections in the advertising industry, his people could even have exercised some direct influence over the MDA logo.

The strong Obama likeness makes it almost certain that the MDA logo was created by an Obama partisan as a tribute to Obama. From that strong prior, the likelihood that the Islamic-shaped crescent was also intentional goes up dramatically. Our president does not emphasize the “Hussein” in “Barack Hussein Obama” for nothing

Source:

Kenyan Parliament restores March 25, 2010 Minutes declaring Obama born in Kenya

The Post & E-Mail

DOCUMENT CONTAINS BOLDEST STATEMENT YET CLAIMING THAT OBAMA IS KENYAN-BORN

by Sharon Rondeau

(Apr. 16, 2010) — The March 25, 2010 “Hansard,” or Minutes of the Kenyan Parliament, is again accessible through the Parliament’s website.  The document contains a clear and unequivocal statement that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya and is consequently not a “native American.”

The link to the document from Parliament’s website was dead for a time yesterday.  It is possible that the document was moved, as the link to the Minutes embedded in The Post & Email’s original article about it is now dead.

The text of the statement made by Kenya’s Minister of Lands, James Orengo,  appears in the middle of page 31 and reads as follows:

If America was living in a situation where they feared ethnicity and did not see itself as a multiparty state or nation, how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the President of America?” (emphasis added by The Post & Email)

The website was updated yesterday and all Hansards from 2008 were removed, which included the November 5, 2008 Hansard in which many statements referring to Obama’s purported Kenyan origins were recorded.

The Kenyan Parliament has announced that it has just adjourned for two months.

© 2010, The Post & Email, Inc. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.

Source: