I’m saying that when the President does it, that means it’s not illegal!
Richard Milhous Nixon
It has been said that a nation can be judged by the way it treats foreigners within its borders. But more importantly, a nation can and should be judged by its elected leaders and their actions. I intend to go through approximately fifty years of elected quasi-leaders known as President of the United States and examine their actions. The side of the aisle which they align themselves with is irrelevant. Partisan politics will take no part in this discussion. A simple evaluation of the conduct, policies and/or actions of these individuals should suffice. But I must state ahead of time, I will dwell on the bad and not the good; the good actions of a leader are by far outweighed by the bad. Our leaders, in this case the President of the United States, should be held to a higher standard than the rest of the population. If a leader acts in a corrupt or malevolent fashion, then this is where the focus will be directed. I believe this should actually prove to be quite interesting. Their leadership skills or lack thereof will be bared for all to see and I believe this will show what type of man each president was. Below is the list of these men starting with Johnson and ending with Obama and their dates of service. Please note: Ford was never elected President of the United States, so I will bypass the time between 9 August 1974 and 20 January 1977.
· Lyndon Baines Johnson, 36th President; 22 November 1963 to 20 January 1969. Elected to one term and assumed presidency after the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy on 22 November 1963.
· Richard Milhous Nixon, 37th President; 20 January 1969 to 8 August 1974. Elected to two terms and the only president to resign the office. On 27 July 1974 the House Judiciary Committee passed the first 3 articles of impeachment against Nixon and he faced almost certain impeachment by the Senate and removal from office. Nixon’s resignation speech was on 8 August 1974 and he vacated the Office of President on 9 August 1974. Nixon was later pardoned by President Ford on 8 September 1974.
· Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr. (born Leslie Lynch King, Jr.), 38th President; 9 August 1974 to 20 January 1977. Never elected President or Vice President of the United States. Nominated in October 1973 for the office of Vice President after the resignation of V.P. Spiro Agnew and was confirmed by the Senate 27 November and by the House on 6 December 1973 and took the Oath that day. Ford assumed the Presidency on 9 August 1974 after Nixon resigned.
· James Earl Carter, Jr., 39th President; 20 January 1977 to 20 January 1981. Elected to one term.
· Ronald Wilson Reagan, 40th President; 20 January 1981 to 20 January 1989. Elected to two terms and survived an assassination attempt on 30 March 1981.
· George Herbert Walker Bush, 41st President; 20 January 1989 to 20 January 1993. Elected to one term.
· William Jefferson Clinton (born William Jefferson Blythe III), 42nd President; 20 January 1993 to 20 January 2001. Elected to two terms and was impeached on 19 December 1998 by the House of Representatives for perjury and obstruction of justice, but acquitted by the Senate on 12 February 1999.
· George Walker Bush, 43rd President; 20 January 2001 to 20 January 2009. Elected to two terms.
· Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, 44th President; 20 January 2009 to present. Elected.
Politicians and diapers should be changed frequently, and all for the same reason.
José Maria de Eça de Queiroz
Let’s start with Johnson a Texas Democrat and his involvement in the Suite 8F Group; a right wing political activist group which was concerned with their ability to secure and maintain massive profits in the oil, reconstruction and armaments industries, amongst others. According to Spartacus Educational, “Several…Texas politicians became involved in the Suite 8F Group, a collection of right-wing businessmen.” A quick laundry list of the members of this group included Brown & Root, chairman of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, American General Insurance Company, Cameron Iron Works, Quintana Petroleum, the Governor of Texas (who was also the owner of the Houston Post), Great Southern Life Insurance, Pure Oil Pipe Line, Humble Oil, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Majority Leader of the Senate (Lyndon Johnson) and other Texas politicians and lawyers. “Suite 8F helped to coordinate the political activities of other right-wing politicians and businessmen based in the South.” This list included but is not limited to the Secretary of the Navy and Treasury, Bell Helicopters, chairman of the Committee of Manufacturers, Committee on Armed Forces and Committee on Appropriations, Chairman Judiciary Committee, Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, political lobbyists as well as Oil and Gas Companies. The report goes on to state, “The discovery of oil in Texas made a small group of men a great deal of money. They decided to join together to maintain profits. This included strategies for keeping the price of oil as high as possible.” These companies and men did indeed maintain profits. If you look at the companies themselves as well as the individuals involved, what you will find is an inappropriate relationship between government and private businesses in which contracts were awarded over a period of time spanning decades. This is a perfect example of cronyism designed to bilk the U.S. taxpayers out of money and transfer that money into the pockets of an incestuous cabal of criminals and criminal organizations who appearance seems to be above the law.
So it would appear that government officials and private businesses joined forces to form their own little monopoly, fix prices, secure contracts and amass great sums of wealth. This is a part of the U.S. Constitution I must have glazed over, because I don’t remember reading that anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. The report by Spartacus Educational goes on to name companies and individuals who decided where tax dollars were spent, who acquired contracts and how Johnson set up the committee to investigate lobbying in this area. Interestingly enough, not all politicians were in favor of this type of behavior. Dwight D. Eisenhower apparently wrote in his diary and called this immoral lobbying, “The most flagrant type of lobbying,” and called those involved “So arrogant and so much in defiance of acceptable standards of propriety as to risk creating doubt among the American people concerning the integrity of governmental processes.” Of course none of this actually ended even after the scandal with General Dynamics in 1963 over the $7 billion contract for a fighter jet, Johnson simply got in bed with a Standard Oil Company heiress by selecting her husband Paul Nitze as Navy Secretary. If you look at Johnson’s escalation of the Vietnam War, his cronies were beneficiaries of contracts and they did make huge sums of money. These companies included the newly formed “RMK-BRJ to obtain these contracts…RMK-BRJ did 97% of the construction work in Vietnam…Brown & Root (Halliburton) alone obtained revenues of $380 million from its work in Vietnam.” And of course let’s not forget about Bell Helicopter, “By 1969 Bell Helicopter Corporation was selling nearly $600 million worth of helicopters to the United States Military.”
By all appearances, Johnson’s involvement in the Viet Nam War cost over 58,000 men their lives and wounded another 153,000 plus men and all for the sole purpose of lining the coffers of certain companies which were involved with Suite 8F. Just how the American public allowed this is beyond me. I do realize there was a great deal of protesting against the war and the government for these shady dealings, but this type of governmental behavior has not been stopped. Johnson should have been in a prison cell long before he became president, he was one of the biggest crooks in the history of the United States government in general, not to mention in the White House.
I really don’t think I need to continue with President Lyndon Baines Johnson. The evidence clearly shows how President Johnson used his power from long before his presidency and during his administration to aggrandize his own wealth and the wealth of his accomplices. Johnson is a perfect example of abject greed and a self-serving political leader whose main concern was only to his bank account and to the bank accounts of his confederates, and not the people of the nation which he was supposed to serve. Johnson was the epitome of greed and cronyism, and a disgusting example of a politician and a president. What really strikes me as funny is, President Johnson actually stood to gain the most from the assassination of President Kennedy and he in fact did! But people just don’t want to talk about that. Conclusion: Johnson was an extremely self-serving, corrupt politician whose behavior was criminal.
We now move on to Nixon a California Republican and the only man to resign the presidency of the United States. The logical place to start would be with the Watergate scandal, but I believe we should start with the Huston Plan instead. While the Huston Plan was never actually initiated, it was implemented by government agencies. What the White House wanted was, “A thorough coordination of all American intelligence agencies; he [Nixon] wanted to know what the links were between foreign groups – al-Fatah; the Arab terrorists; the Algerian subsidy center – and domestic street turbulence.” The committee which was formed had J. Edgar Hoover, the Director of the FBI as the Chairman, “The committee report confronted the issue…and it laid out a number of other “further steps,” many of which were illegal. The report recommended increasing wiretapping, and microphone surveillance of radicals – relaxing restrictions on mail covers and mail intercepts; carrying out selective break-ins against domestic radicals and organizations; lifting age restrictions on FBI campus informants; and broadening NSA’s intercepts of the international communications of American citizens.” According to GlobalSecurity.org, “The president sent word back to Huston, through Haldeman, of his approval, but did not initiate any paperwork.” This could be one instance where Nixon lived up to his nickname ‘Tricky Dicky.’ Nixon did verbally implement the plan through Haldeman to Tom Huston who had the task of implementation, but Nixon didn’t leave a paper trail. Hoover wouldn’t act on this unless the A.G., Mitchell put the order in writing. The report went on to state, “Ultimately, the president voided the plan, but not before NSA had become directly involved in the seamier side of life.” While it is understandable the Nixon administration wanted information on terrorist groups such as ‘The Weathermen’ and ‘al Fatah,’ by not following the procedures for obtaining a court order for wiretaps or search warrants, and by attempting to have the NSA target and secure U.S. national’s communications and disseminate the intelligence to other agencies was a clear violation of the law. Even though the plan was scrapped, “Four days before it was due, plans had gone to the directors of the FBI, CIA, DIA and the NSA.” The Huston Plan was, “Placed in a White House safe…became public in 1973…and uncovered… evidence that Nixon had ordered the NSA to illegally monitor American citizens.” This obviously led to Nixon’s downfall. His statement, “I’m not a crook” is a perfect example of a political leader who was in denial and thinking he was above the law and not bound by any sense of moral decency.
Let’s move on the Watergate scandal. According to Wikipedia, “The Watergate burglaries, which took place on May 28 and June 17, 1972, were the focus of the Watergate scandal.” This scandal was the result of, “The arrest of five men for breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters at the Watergate complex.” The FBI was able to connect, “Cash found on the burglars to a slush fund used by the Committee for the Re-Election of the President.” An investigation by the Senate Watergate Committee later found Nixon had been recording conversations in the Oval Office, “Recordings from these tapes implicated the president, revealing he had attempted to cover up the break-in.” The report further states, “Liddy’s team placed wiretaps on the telephones on the DNC Chairman Lawrence O’Brien and Executive Director of Democratic States’ Chairman R. Spencer Oliver, Jr.” Subsequently, seven men were indicted, “For conspiracy, burglary, and violation of Federal wiretapping laws.” While there is much more to this scandal, Nixon was also recording conversations in the Cabinet Room as well as other offices, plus his own private office in the Old Executive Office Building. According to a Washington Post article, “Transcripts from a telephone conversation released show President Richard M. Nixon jokingly threatened to drop a nuclear bomb on Capitol Hill in March 1974 as Congress was moving to impeach him.” I can only imagine what would happen if a citizen of this nation ‘jokingly threatened to nuke Capitol Hill or any other location within the United States.’ Break-ins, pay-offs, recording private conversations and cover-ups are not the acts of an honest man and definitely not the acts of an honest President. There is no point continuing with Nixon. While his operatives called their spying on the Democrats Ratf_cking, I think we can all see who the real Ratf_ck was; Nixon.
Apparently, Nixon believed and acted as though he was above the law. Threatening the nation’s capitol with a nuclear device (whether jokingly or not) is treasonous behavior. Ordering the burglaries and illegal wiretaps of the Democrats offices was criminal, as was his involvement in the conspiracy as was his order to spy on sovereign U.S. citizens. All of this shows Nixon had a complete lack of moral fiber as well as a corrupt and paranoid mind. Nixon may have stated, “I am not a crook,” but his being a crook was Nixon’s legacy to himself and to the United States of America. Richard M. Nixon not only disgraced himself, but he disgraced the nation and the office of the President. Conclusion: Nixon was a deceptive manipulator whose criminal and corrupt behavior was a disgrace to the nation.
The word ‘politics’ is derived from the word ‘poly,’ meaning ‘many,’ and the word ‘ticks,’ meaning ‘blood sucking parasites.’
Next is Carter a Georgia Democrat who is considered to be the hero of the Camp David Accords, a so-called peace accord for the Middle East between Egypt and Israel in 1978. Carter is portrayed as the champion of the peace treaty in that region, but oddly enough, peace never really happened. Carter completely overlooked the al-Fatah massacre of 37 Israeli civilians, and allowed Arafat and his PLO to find safe-haven in northern Beirut. On the 29thof September 1977, Carter had a press conference where he spoke about the PLO, “It’s obvious to me that there can be no Middle Eastern peace settlement without adequate Palestinian representation…” A question later in the interview had to do with the assurances given to the PLO, Carter stated, “If they accept…the right of Israel to exist, then we will begin discussions with the leaders of the PLO.” Of course the ‘Coastal Road Massacre’ took place on 11 March 1978 after the press conference where Carter stated the PLO must accept the right of Israel to exist. So, on one hand, Carter the Nobel Peace Prize (2002) winning champion of peace, was the famed intermediary between Egypt and Israel, but he was willing to overlook the slaughter of Israeli civilians as long as the PLO recognized Israel’s right to exist. How disingenuous political leaders can be when they unequivocally state one thing and completely disregard that same thing at a later date, but later take credit for being a so-called champion of peace and détente.
On 4 November 1979, Iranian terrorists who called themselves ‘Imam’s Disciples’ raided sovereign U.S. territory known as the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran. After women, blacks and other individuals (due to illness) were released, 50 U.S. citizens and diplomats, “Remained imprisoned for 444 days.” (Note: there is some debate as to whether there were 50 or 52 hostages in the end, but for the purpose of this paper it is irrelevant). According to u-s-history.com, Carter’s original response was, “Economic sanctions…diplomatic pressure…cancelled oil imports…he expelled a number of Iranians…followed by freezing about $8 billion of Iranian assets in the U.S.” In late April, Carter’s failed plan dubbed “Eagle Claw” ended almost as soon as it began, “The aftermath, as Iranians eventually found and mockingly paraded the wreckage on worldwide television, was total humiliation for the United States.” While it would appear as though Jimmy Carter was the champion of Arabs, Palestinians and Iranians, he certainly wasn’t the champion of the Americans or Israelis. Neither President Carter nor the Congress acted in an honorable fashion with regard to this ‘Act of War.’ I personally believe Carter violated Article II, Section 1 by not defending and protecting the U.S. Constitution and I believe Congress violated Article I, Section 8 by not defending the United States against foreign aggression. I cannot understand why an individual with these lack-of credentials was ever awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, much less elected President of the United States.
I believe we cannot end our discussion of President Carter without mentioning the disaster at the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor. On March 28, 1979 a meltdown occurred at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania near Middletown. The official story was, “The most serious in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant operating history, even though it led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community.” Supposed studies from the NRC, EPA, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Department of Energy, the State of Pennsylvania and several independent sources stated, “Estimates are that the average dose…in the area was only about 1 millirem…exposure from a chest x-ray is about 6 millirem…the natural background dose of about 100-125 millirem per year for the area, the collective dose to the community from the accident was very small. The maximum dose…at the site boundary would have been less than 100 millirem.” This is according to the NRC. Their conclusion regarding the health effects was the meltdown had, “Negligible effects on the physical health of individuals or the environment.” This of course is the ‘Official’ story which the U.S. government stood by at the time and continues to stand by to this date.
According to The Institute for Southern Studies, Randall Thompson a health physics technician who was hired to monitor radiation releases (and did for 28 days at TMI) stated, “What happened at TMI was a whole lot worse than what has been reported…Hundreds of times worse.” Thompson and his wife, who both worked in the same capacity at TMI reported, “What they witnessed there was a public health tragedy. The Thompsons also warn that the government’s failure to acknowledge the full scope of the disaster is leading officials to underestimate the risks posed by a new generation of nuclear power plants.” These statements by the Thompsons are in direct contradiction to the official story from the Carter Administration, the U.S. government in general and the NRC. The report also gives Thompson’s background, “A veteran of the U.S. Navy’s nuclear submarine program, he is a self-described “nuclear geek.”” This doesn’t sound like the type of individual who has an axe to grind, as the United States has the finest nuclear Navy and the best sailors the world will ever know. This being said, Mr. Thompson doesn’t sound like the type of individual who would say, “Radiation releases from the plant were hundreds if not thousands of times higher than the government and industry have acknowledged — high enough to cause the acute health effects…that have been dismissed by the industry and the government as impossible.” The government’s failure in this case (and all other cases) leads directly to the so-called leader of the nation, the Commander in Chief, also known as the President of the United States. Clearly the President, in this case Carter, didn’t deem it necessary to protect the citizens of Pennsylvania or the surrounding areas, but found it more important to maintain a misguided government and business stratagem to promote and maintain the civilian nuclear industry at any cost.
A number of interviews were taken from people in the area who suffered and can be found in Three Mile Island Alert, Three Mile Island: The People’s Testament as well as other online reading material which can be found in PDF form at PDF Search Books.
I would also like to mention a notarized statement from Jane Rickover, Admiral Rickover’s daughter-in-law, which can be found at radical.org which states, “In May, 1983, my father-in-law, Admiral Hyman G. Rickover told me that at the time of the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor accident, a full report was commissioned by President Jimmy Carter. He [my father-in-law] said that the report, if published in its entirety, would have destroyed the civilian nuclear power industry because the accident at Three Mile Island was infinitely more dangerous than was ever made public. He told me that he had used his enormous personal influence with President Carter to persuade him to publish the report in a “highly” diluted form. The President himself had originally wished the full report to be made public. – In November, 1985, my father-in-law told me that he had come to deeply regret his action in persuading President Carter to suppress the most alarming aspects of that report.”
While President Carter’s conscience may have been urging him to fully disclose the information people needed, he allowed himself to do the wrong thing and keep vital information from the American public; that isn’t leadership, it is cowardice and incompetence. Personally speaking, this sounds like just one more example of a government cover-up aimed at protecting the politicians we call leaders and their pet projects. A compelling article about Jimmy Carter on Seeker Blog states 7 words which sum up Jimmy Carter, “President Carter’s exaggeration of his nuclear experience…” While I will admit President Carter is a good diplomat as far as bringing two disparate sides together for talks, President Carter’s actions as President of the United States was that of an utter incompetent. Carter persuaded Israel to make a pact with the Devil. Carter also cozied-up to Yasser Arafat; the little horn and he ignored the slaughter of Israeli citizens. By all appearances, I would state Carter is wholeheartedly anti-Semitic. He utterly botched the Iran hostage crisis; his cowardice allowed the United States to be attacked without reprisal. And Carter spinelessly covered-up the disastrous Three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania. Conclusion: Carter was an incompetent and cowardly example of a president. His inaction and deception reek of corruption and malfeasance.
We now move on to Reagan a California Republican. Unfortunately, I cannot and should not proceed with Reagan without including George H. W. Bush a Massachusetts born Texas Republican at the same time. Reagan was a great orator (and I would like to add, I met him, I spoke with him and I liked him), but he was really nothing more than a puppet for V.P. Bush, who was a former Director of the CIA, amongst his other accomplishments.
We’ll start with the 1980 campaign for the Presidency. According to a report by History Commons, “Robert Sensi, a young CIA agent with excellent contacts among prominent Arabs, the Republican National Committee opens what Sensi calls “a secret channel to Iran.” Sensi is not only alluding to the secret plans to sell arms to Iran…but to the “October Surprise” of the November 1980 US presidential elections.” Both of these events have Reagan’s Vice Presidential Candidates fingers all over them; George Herbert Walker Bush. So the CIA and the U.S. State Department, working with the Israelis tried to persuade Carter to sell arms to Iran for consideration (release of the hostages), but Carter wouldn’t sell Iran arms. Israel on the other hand, probably at the behest of the CIA and the U.S. State Department, did sell arms to Iran. The report further states, “Salem bin Laden, Osama’s eldest brother …is involved in secret Paris meetings between US and Iranian emissaries…and some have speculated that in these meetings, George H.W. Bush negotiated a delay to the release of the US hostages in Iran.” I’m obliged to note from the report, this “Points to a long-standing connection of highly improper behavior between the Bush and bin Laden families.” This connection becomes even more apparent when Bush 41’s son, “George W. Bush cleared the bin Laden’s to fly out of the United States” right after the September 11, 2001 attacks which were orchestrated by Osama bin Laden. The report further states, “Sensi will note that CIA Director William Casey has been involved in the US’s secret dealings with Iran since the outset, as has Robert Carter, the deputy director of Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign.” And to top all of this off, Sensi’s organization Republicans Abroad gave them access to U.S. Embassies and the CIA (not that Bush 41 didn’t have access) which was capable of “conducting espionage and sabotage for the Republican Party.” Where have we heard this before? This is Watergate part II, or “Ratf_cking as the Republican operatives call it.”
It would appear as though Reagan was led by Bush 41 into a depraved world from the beginning of his campaign and as we will see, right through his two terms as President, which continues into the one term of President Bush 41. An hour after Reagan was sworn into office, the hostages were freed. If the French secret intelligence report was correct, then Reagan and Bush 41 were as dirty as could be. This is not implausible, as George H.W. Bush was the Director of the CIA at one point and he knew exactly how to get things done, especially dirty business. But there is the possibility the Iranians simply didn’t want to get blown completely off the map, which is what Carter should have done in the first place, but was too spineless to do. Even though the hostages in Iran were released, there were subsequent hostages in Lebanon. According to a PBS report the arms-for-hostages proposal was somewhat divisive. But, “Reagan, McFarlane and CIA Director William Casey supported it. With the backing of the president, the plan progressed.” The report goes on to state some interesting facts, “More than 1,500 missiles had been shipped to Iran. Three hostages had been released; only to be replaced by three more, in what Secretary of State George Schultz called “a hostage bazaar.”” Knowing this, it cannot be difficult to assume there in fact was a shady deal to secure the release of the Iranian hostages, just not until after Reagan took office. Backroom deals which prolong the imprisonment of Americans, is highly distasteful to say the least. The illegal sale of arms to an enemy which has attacked our sovereign nation and its citizens is criminal. The pay-offs to the terrorists in Lebanon was not only unfathomable but unconscionable and disgraceful.
As we have already seen, the U.S. was supplying arms to Iran, but according to many different reports, this one from Wikipedia, “Starting in 1982…the United States made its backing with Iraq more pronounced…supplying it with economic aid, counter-insurgency training, operational intelligence on the battlefield, and weapons.” Now the United States was funding both sides during the Iran-Iraq War. Was this a highly honorable thing to do? I will agree it is quite a plan to clandestinely supply both sides of a war, especially when you have an antagonistic history with each side! But these actions only diminish the stature of the United States and sully the reputation of its people. The promotion of war between two nations as a result of a misguided government foreign policy agenda can only be described as subversive and malevolent.
We should at least mention the arming of rebel groups such as the Mujahedeen in the 1980’s. Regarding foreign policy blunders according to the blog, Ottomans and Zionists, “The most prominent one was the effort to arm the Afghani mujahideen in the 1980’s in a bid to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan.” The report goes on to state, “Arming the mujahideen caused enormous blowback for the U.S., since the weapons supplied by the U.S. were ultimately turned on U.S. and NATO troops years later and the arms and training indirectly benefited al-Qaida and the Taliban down the road.” I can’t help but think this did more than just indirectly benefit al Qaeda and the Taliban. Osama bin Laden was in some way a protégé of the CIA and the U.S. State Department. We also know bin Laden was the head of al Qaeda. Just as we know the Bush family and the bin Laden family have longstanding ties. So I would agree this was in the least a foreign policy blunder to put it mildly.
Let’s move to the Republican National Convention in 1988, we all remember George H.W. Bush’s presidential nomination acceptance speech. But let’s cite Time.com, “Read my lips: no new taxes.” Of course, this didn’t last. The University of Virginia’s Miller Center states, “In June 1990, Bush issued a written statement to the press, reneging on his “no taxes” pledge made during the campaign.” Well, it’s not unusual for a politician to say one thing and then turn around and do another. Perhaps a pledge made to the American people didn’t mean much to Bush 41. But raising taxes when he pledged not to raise them is really nothing compared to his bailout of the Savings and Loans industry. “In February 1989, with many S&Ls failing, Bush proposed a plan to bailout the industry…that ended up costing the taxpayers more than $100 billion.” The Miller Center did state the reasoning for the failures of the S&Ls, “The federal and state governments had deregulated the industry in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s…the industry ventured into riskier investments that destabilized it.” Basically, the Bush administration and the Congress rewarded the S&L industry for malfeasance and incompetence. The ‘more than $100 billion’ it cost the taxpayers didn’t belong to the federal government or the S&L industry; it belonged to the people of the United States and was misappropriated. A bailout and a tax hike really aren’t any different; both come directly out of the pockets of the people who make this nation what it is. A report in the Enquirer Daily News states, “It will cost at least $306 billion over the next 33 years, according to a June 28 analysis by the General Accounting Office. Taxpayers will pay 51 percent, or $157 billion.” Eight years of Bush as the Vice President and a little over one year with him as the President cost the American people a great deal of wealth and increased the deficit even higher than in the Reagan years.
According to Wikipedia, during the Bush administration in the 1990’s, they “Paid Halliburton subsidiary Brown & Root Services over $8.5 million to study the use of private military forces with American soldiers in combat zones. Halliburton crews also helped bring 725 burning oil wells under control in Kuwait.” Other information about Halliburton an its subsidiaries include, “In the early 1990s, Halliburton was found to be in violation of federal trade barriers in Iraq and Libya…After having pled guilty, the company was fined $1.2 million, with another 2.61 million in penalties.” But there’s more, “During the Balkans conflict in the 1990s, Kellogg-Brown Root (KBR) supported peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Hungary…In 1998, Halliburton merged with Dresser Industries, which included Kellogg. Prescott Bush was a director of Dresser Industries, which is now part of Halliburton; his son, former president George H.W. Bush, worked for Dresser Industries in several positions from 1948 to 1951, before he founded Zapata Corporation.” You will notice that some of the same company names re-appear from where this paper started with Lyndon Johnson. I find this to be very incestuous. I also believe this is another egregious example of a political leader, aka a government official, lining the pockets of their confederates. It seems very odd that politicians should be believed when their seemingly subversive cronyism is so wide out in the open. How do we know, Bush didn’t invade Kuwait to support companies with which he is aligned? Or possibly further a foreign policy agenda which lines the pockets of companies with which they are affiliated? By the way, Bush’s company Zapata was funded by the Brown brothers of Brown & Root. Are any of you starting to see the connection from one president to the next here?
So what do we have? Both Reagan and Bush 41 were involved in illegal arms sales. They both used the CIA to further a presidential bid. Both men had an affiliation with the bin Laden family and a secret deal to prolong the imprisonment of U.S. citizens held in Tehran. And then there was training of the Mujahedeen with bin Laden as their golden boy. There were botched arms sales or pay-offs to al Fatah terrorists for the release of hostages which didn’t work. There was the clandestine and disgusting arming of two nations (Iran and Iraq) to fight in a war against each other. There was espionage and sabotage without Congressional approval. And there was either lying or just simply going back on campaign promises. There were the unbelievable and ineffectual bailouts of S&Ls (who acted and operated as banks), plus a massive increase in the deficit. And there was the awarding of contracts to companies with which at least Bush 41 was affiliated as well as his father and that dated back to Suite 8F, which was actually before Lyndon Johnson’s presidency. And I didn’t even mention the U.S. Marines who were killed in Lebanon due to their lack of leadership skills. I should almost feel like laughing at this point, but this is just too sad for anything of that nature. Ronald Reagan conclusion: Reagan was a deceptive individual whose actions were corrupt. – George H.W. Bush conclusion: Bush was a deceptively malevolent and corrupt politician whose actions were criminal.
Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.
Now to Clinton a Democrat from Arkansas may be best known for his licentious sex acts with Monica Lewinsky, which is where I will start seeing as how I am already laughing. This information can be found at CNN Politics. In January of 1998, President Clinton denied having a sexual relationship (or any other type of affair or relationship for that matter) with Lewinsky, and in August of that same year, President Clinton did admit he had an inappropriate relationship with Lewinsky. On December 12 of 1998 the House impeached Clinton for lying under oath and obstruction of justice. On February 12 of 1999 the Senate acquitted Clinton. Another timeline of the Clinton impeachment can be found at the Brooklyn College website. I must note: I felt compelled to enter this because Clinton was impeached, but I personally found this entire incident to be uncalled for and quite an embarrassment to the nation. However, President Clinton should have just told everyone to mind their own business from the beginning, rather than lying about the affair; lying under oath and lying to the American people. Both Clinton and Lewinsky were of age and free to do as they pleased. If anything, this was a matter for Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary, not the entire world. Unfortunately, Clinton proved himself to be just a liar.
Now is a good time to talk about the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco Texas in 1993. According to the Free Dictionary by Farlex, “Approximately 80 Branch Davidians died, including their leader, 34-year old David Koresh. In all, 57 Davidians died in the fire, while 23 died from gunshot wounds. Of these dead, 17 were children, some of whom died from gunshot wounds and some in the fire. Eighteen children and 22 adults left the compound unharmed during the seven-week standoff.” A report from PBS stated, “On April 18, in a conversation with Reno, the President endorsed the gas plan. Although Clinton distanced himself from the matter after April 19…FRONTLINE has learned that Clinton apparently followed developments at Waco closely through some of his closest White House aides.” What we have is a President of the United States ordering a raid on a compound in the United States where 40 adults and 17 children were killed, and then the President had the audacity to try and distance himself the very next day. PBS FRONTLINE, which is not a partisan news organization, clearly stated they learned Clinton was closely kept abreast of the situation by his closest White House aides. Canada Free Press reports former advisor Dick Morris stated, “Bill Clinton orchestrated that takeover.” And then further reported, “Clinton in fact was so ashamed about what he did in Waco that he was not going to appoint Janet Reno to a second four year term.” Morris then gave information from a meeting with Reno before the inauguration day. Reno stated, “If you don’t appoint me I’m going to tell the truth about Waco.” Former Clinton advisor Dick Morris states on his web-site, “It was not anti-government rhetoric that inspired McVeigh…it was the action of the federal government during the Waco raid that incited him to violence…the attack on the Federal Office Building…on the anniversary of the Waco raid underscores the connection.” The only thing I didn’t find in the articles I read was the description of the entire incident described as a pathetic example of Clinton’s leadership. Of course there were the typical descriptions of Clinton as blameless and a mere by-stander plus the unfairness of the press. This is the second example I have given of why ‘Slick Willie’ got his nickname, but it’s a shame 80 American people, 17 which were children, had to be killed for no reason.
Clinton’s lies didn’t stop with Waco, according to Accuracy in Media, “President Clinton in his Chris Wallace interview…his claim that he was involved in “trying to stop genocide in Kosovo…” The report further states, “Clinton’s bombing…killed more people than died in this “genocide.” And his policy benefited Osama bin Laden and the global jihad.” And there is more, “The main beneficiary…a Muslim terrorist group, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), with links to bin Laden, who had declared war on America in 1996, bombed our embassies in Africa in 1998, and would later, of course, orchestrate 9/11.” Believe it or not, this actually gets even more interesting. Former CIA agent Michael Scheuer stated, “The Clinton Administration “had eight to ten chances” to kill bin Laden and “they refused to try…Clinton had a pro-Muslim foreign policy that actually benefited bin Laden and facilitated 9/11.” Now that’s what I call pathetic. And we haven’t even really touched on the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center or the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in east Africa, which were orchestrated by Osama bin Laden. While it is true the Mujahedeen was originally trained during the Reagan/Bush administration to fight the Soviets, it would seem blatantly obvious the Clinton administration was also quite fond of Osama bin Laden. Why else would Clinton support the KLA to kill Serb Christians, or refuse to kill bin Laden when he had 8 to 10 chances? Once again, I find myself writing the word pathetic with regard to Bill Clinton.
Mogadishu Somalia in 1993 was another one of Clinton’s low moments. “An American soldier’s bound corpse being dragged through the streets…and a videotape of a captured US pilot appeared to mark the turning point yesterday for the U.S. intervention in Somalia.” The Guardian went on to report, “The gruesome parade was a jolting reminder…of the public mangling of US soldiers’ bodies in Iran…it also recalled the…bomb which killed 241 Marines in Beirut.” The Guardian further reported, “President Bill Clinton said…any mistreatment of the captured Americans would be viewed ‘very gravely.’” How comforting Clinton can be issuing such a pathetic statement like that after the Soldier’s corpses had already been dragged through the streets by cheering crowds and videotaped. Of course, true to Slick Willie’s nature he later “Has attempted to keep the worsening Somali nightmare at arm’s length.” This is another sad example of Clinton’s so-called leadership of distancing himself and doing nothing. But this is not a surprise considering Clinton was nothing more than a draft dodging war protester who really hated honorable men.
Two U.S. embassies were attacked in Africa, Mr. Ben Snowdon and Mr. David Johnson reported, “In 1998, the Clinton Administration demonstrated an atypical aggressive response towards terrorism after the assault on…U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, were bombed by terrorists, leaving 258 people dead and more than 5,000 injured.” Both of these attacks were attacks on sovereign U.S. soil and both occurred during the Clinton Administration. Clinton’s response was, “The U.S. launched cruise missiles on Aug. 20, 1998, striking a terrorism training complex in Afghanistan and destroying a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility in Khartoum, Sudan, that reportedly produced nerve gas. Both targets were believed to have been financed by…Osama bin Laden.” According to a report in the National Security Archive, declassified documents, “Suggest the strikes not only failed to hurt Osama bin Laden but ultimately may have brought al-Qaeda and the Taliban closer politically and ideologically.” I can’t understand why such a sad little response was necessary. If military action was necessary, which I could have lived with, why not real targets? A so-called training facility and a drug factory (which was probably a milk factory) hardly seem like anything more than a waste of cruise missiles. But this is in keeping with Clinton’s façade. Slick Willie wasn’t trying to send a real message to the terrorists, he was attempting to make American’s believe he wasn’t limp wristed. A 400 page Sandia National Laboratories report stated, “In retrospect, it seems as if threat assessment personnel in Washington did not take the warning signs as seriously as did the embassy personnel in Nairobi.” Once again we see how the Clinton Administration fails to take threats to the security of the United States seriously. In fact, Clinton did more actual physical damage in Waco Texas than he did in Afghanistan or Sudan.
Let’s not forget about Clinton and the bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996. President Clinton stated, “We will pursue this. Those who did this must not go unpunished.” According to Crime Library, FBI Director Freeh stated, “Freeh expressed his frustrations and blamed President Clinton and his national security advisor Sandy Berger for having “no interest in confronting the fact that Iran had blown up the towers.” FBI Director Freeh stated later in the article, “The Clinton administration feared that “Congress, and ordinary Americans, would find out that Iran murdered our soldiers,” which would imperil their diplomatic initiatives… President Clinton “deserted” the 19 victims and their families.” Here is another example of Clinton’s policy of doing nothing but paying lip service to America. Of course I haven’t mentioned Osama bin Laden yet. In a 1997 interview with a London based Arabic-language newspaper, bin Laden stated, “We had thought that the Riyadh and Al Khobar blasts were a sufficient signal to sensible U.S. decision makers…but they did not understand the signal.” This is typical of the Clinton mentality. How many times did Osama bin Laden’s name need to come up with regard to Americans being killed? But each and every time, Clinton did basically nothing.
I cannot finish with Clinton without mentioning the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City in 1993. And of course, Osama bin Laden was behind the bombing. Larry Johnson a former CIA agent as well as having worked for the State Department stated, “Clinton’s weak response to the terrorist attacks that occurred during his presidency paved the way for the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.” The report goes on to state, “On Feb. 26, 1993, a car bomb was detonated at the World Trade Center in New York City…Osama bin Laden is suspected to have been behind the attack.” Clinton’s reaction and statement to the American people was, “I would plead with the American people and the good people of New York to keep your courage up and go on about your lives. I would discourage the American people from overreacting to this.” Overreacting? How can anyone believe a president who would say such a thing is anything other than a traitor and a coward? Bill Clinton really does have a long history with Osama bin Laden. Unfortunately, Osama bin Laden was always the one who was killing Americans and Slick Willie was always the one who was making excuses as to why he couldn’t or wouldn’t do anything. The exception, of course was when Clinton was ordering the deaths of American citizens. Remember Waco?
“Interestingly, Al-Jazeera celebrated the fifth anniversary of 9/11 by airing several al-Qaeda videos, one of which showed two of the 9/11 hijackers saying their actions were designed to avenge the suffering of Muslims in Bosnia and Chechnya. Nothing demonstrates the bankruptcy of the Clinton policy more than that.” Bill Clinton, aka Slick Willie, can only be summed up as a prevaricating fool who was impeached because he was a liar and an individual who obstructed justice. He was a murderer who ordered the deaths at Waco of approximately 80 Americans including 17 children and the inspiration of Timothy McVeigh. He was a friend of islamo-fascist terrorists who included al Fatah, Osama bin Laden and the KLA; the killers of Serb Christians. Clinton was the spineless excuse-maker for all of his failed foreign policy blunders which included Mogadishu, Kenya, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Iran and I didn’t even go into his shameful Haiti legacy, and of course, his complete and utter failure with regard to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City and the obvious connection through all of his blunders which eventually led up to the complete destruction of the twin towers on 9/11. Conclusion: Clinton was a deceptive, spineless, pathetic example of a president whose actions were not only criminal, but corrupt as well. He was a disgrace to the nation.
We now come to George W. Bush a Texas Republican whose very close family ties with the bin Laden family has already been clearly stated. I think the best place to start with Bush 43 is the USA PATRIOT Act which was signed into law by Bush on 26 October 2001, a whole 45 days after 9/11. The USA PATRIOT Act really only takes the rights away from Americans, it doesn’t do much to combat Muslim terrorists. I might have viewed it differently if all the provisions in the Act were aimed at Muslims, but they are equally if not overtly aimed at us, Americans. As previously stated in my treatise titled, “The Purpose of the U.S. State Department,” I clearly showed how the PATRIOT Act could easily label an American a ‘terrorist’ for protecting himself, just as an officer of the law or military personnel could be labeled as such. Section 411, Subparagraph B, Clause (iv) states, “Engage in terrorist activity means, in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization—“(I) to commit or incite to commit, under circumstances indicating and intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity.” When you consider all of the terrorists on 9/11 were Muslim and the majority of them were from Saudi Arabia, the fact that there is absolutely no reference to delineate and connect terrorist or terrorist activity to Muslims is absurd. No new law is necessary to act against American’s who engage in criminal activities, as there are already a multitude of laws on the books and procedures in place to deal with that problem. The USA PATRIOT Act was designed, with speedy intent, to take away the rights of Americans. Now an American cannot go to an airport and get on a plane without being probed and fondled by the TSA, of course if you walked up wearing a burqa, they wave you right through. How does this help to prevent terrorism?
Next I would like to talk about the failed reasoning for the invasion of Iraq. While I personally believe Bush 41 should have ordered troops to finish Saddam and his henchmen while they were there the 1st time, I cannot figure out why we were there the 2nd time. There were no WMD in Iraq and they all knew it. Please don’t believe me, go and purchase Charles Duelfers book, “Hide and Seek: The Search for Truth in Iraq.” Mr. Duelfer was the head of the U.S.-led ISG in Iraq after Dr. Kay resigned. Both stated there were no WMD in Iraq. An article on MSNBC stated, “In his final word, the CIA’s top weapons inspector in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction has “gone as far as feasible” and has found nothing.” In other words, there was no just cause for the invasion, unless you want to call getting Saddam for his daddy-Bush 41 ‘just cause.’ If you remember, CNN reported Bush’s reasoning for the invasion, “Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.” Personally, this sounds like a president lying to the American public. Maybe he should have listened to Dr. Kay and Mr. Duelfer. Many good men got killed and many wounded and maimed as a result of his vendetta with Saddam who was a former CIA protégé.
I should touch on the national debt; of course I will revisit this issue with Hussein Obama. CBS News reported, “The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight year presidency of George W. Bush.” This is a huge sum of taxpayer money. What I cannot figure out is why we didn’t take the Iraqi oil and force Afghanistan to pay for our troops in their respective countries. From 2003-2009 the Iraq War cost at least $684.8 billion according to the Congressional Research Service. They also state in another PDF on Pakistan foreign assistance, which gives the amount of a transfer of $600 million right after Sept. 2001, and beginning in 2005 for a 5 year, $600 million per year amount totaling $3.6 billion, and beginning in 2007 a 5 year $750 million deal for the tribal areas. Aid for Afghanistan from 2001-2009 was nearly $38 billion also according to Congressional Research Service. Of course this isn’t all the money that was spent in these three locations, but it gives an idea of what the Bush Administration was doing with our taxpayer dollars, which means ‘our money.’ Just the figures above total nearly $728 billion. It’s not hard to see how the deficit increased $4,900,000,000,000 in an eight year time frame.
The eight years of illegal immigration (or invasion) during the Bush Administration is a good topic. According to End Illegal Immigration, “Bush’s administration saw a marked increase in illegal immigration and a drop in immigration enforcement…illegal aliens arrested in workplace cases fell from nearly 3,000 in 1999 to 445 in 2003.” The report goes on to state, “Not surprisingly, by 2005, there were an estimated 10-20 million illegal aliens living in the United States.” I’ve touched on this issue before in another treatise, but I’ll briefly go at it again. The article by Dr. Corsi Ph.D. starts out, “Despite having no authorization from Congress, the Bush administration has launched extensive working-group activity to implement a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada.” So what exactly does that mean? What is a trilateral agreement with no Congressional oversight? It means, Bush and his cronies are secretly attempting to create a new nation; a North American Union. NAFTA negotiations began in 1986 during the Reagan-Bush Administration and it was signed and came into force in 1994 during the Clinton Administration. According to Dr. Corsi, “The Security and Prosperity Partnership…signed by President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005.” Dr. Corsi further states, the agreement was, “Not submitted to Congress for review, led to the creation of the SPP office within the Department of Commerce.” Apparently there has been absolutely no Congressional oversight, there has been no bill from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and there is nothing about this that isn’t a secret. And government wonders why we don’t trust them. Not that there is a connection, but a lot of ugly things seem to happen in Waco, Texas. If our so-called leaders are attempting to destroy the United States and form a North American Union, then these so-called leaders are guilty of treason. But I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what happens.
Before we sum this up, let’s talk about Tora Bora. As we all know Tora Bora was a CIA financed complex built in the White Mountains barely 20 miles from the Pakistan border. The CIA knew every trail which led through the area. During the early 1980’s (Reagan/Bush Administration), at least $3 billion was used to finance and arm the Mujahedeen to fight the Soviets. Osama bin Laden actually had the equipment flown in to the area from his father’s construction company, the Saudi Binladen Group. While the Bush Administration did order the bombardment of the area in December of 2001, what strikes me as most curious is the fact that the U.S. government actually knew a great deal about Tora Bora. After all, the CIA financed the entire operation and was more than just familiar with the area. If you consider these facts, why weren’t the U.S. troops given the information so they could go into each and every cave after the bombardment took place? Perhaps there were some changes made to the structure, but the general design was no different. According to a New York Times article, “A mile below, at the base of the caves, some three dozen U.S. Special Forces troops fanned out. They were the only ground forces that senior American military leaders had committed to the Tora Bora campaign.” If at least one of the objectives of the Afghanistan War was to kill Osama bin Laden, wouldn’t it have made more sense to pass on the intelligence from the CIA to maybe the Marine Corps or the Army and have an entire division go after bin Laden at Tora Bora? But it would seem as though the true purpose wasn’t to actually kill bin Laden or the Bush Administration would have made Tora Bora a much higher priority. Remember, not long before the Tora Bora campaign Bush 43 did make certain the bin Laden family in the United States was able to board an airplane and fly out of the United States safely while each and every American within the U.S. was not allowed to fly at all. There certainly is a very strange symbiosis between the Bush family and the bin Laden family that makes me uncomfortable.
I’m really not sure if I need to waste any more time with President Bush. As we have seen, the Bush family has a very close and inappropriate relationship with the bin Laden family. George W. Bush personally enabled the bin Laden family to fly out of the United States when all flights except military were grounded after 9/11. Why would he have done that? Was this to appease the Saudi terrorist friends of Bush’s family? I still cannot understand why they weren’t all hung from newly erected gallows outside the White House. There is the USA PATRIOT Act, which was done with such haste, it really only serves to strip the rights of U.S. citizens. Bush absolutely lied about the reasoning for invading Iraq; there were no WMD’s in Iraq and he knew this, but he invaded anyway. Bush also increased our national public debt by $4.9 trillion in eight years, but seemed to accomplish nothing of any real value that couldn’t have been accomplished with nuclear weapons at a much lower cost. Bush also failed to enforce existing immigration laws and refused to defend our southern border with Mexico, he set up secret trilateral agreements with Canada and Mexico without Congressional oversight or without any bill from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Once again furthering his father’s NAFTA agenda just as he furthered his father’s agenda with regard to the bin Laden family. And as we have just seen Bush’s utter failure at Tora Bora, unless what happened was just a show for the American people and not a campaign really designed to kill Osama bin Laden. Either way, it would appear Bush 43 was very successful at what he did, although I consider his legacy to be nothing more than a complete and utter failure. Conclusion: Bush was an arrogant, deceptive and corrupt president whose malfeasance can easily be considered as stupid, criminal behavior.
When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President; I’m beginning to believe it.
And last but not least is Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, a Kenyan born, Illinois Democrat who by far is the worst president in the history of the United States of America. I say Kenyan born for a couple of reasons. One reason is because his wife, Michelle Obama was speaking about her husband and was quoted saying “Visited his home country in Kenya.” There is very little chance a man’s wife doesn’t know where his home country is, in this case Michelle Obama knows exactly where her husband’s home country is, and she stated it correctly, Kenya. The second reason I say Obama is a Kenyan is his birth certificate from the Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya. According to the report on WND, “California attorney Orly Taitz…has released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth and has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court for its authentication.” The report continues, “The document lists Obama’s parents as Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Obama, formerly Stanley Ann Dunham, the birth date as Aug. 4, 1961, and the hospital of birth as Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.” Now I would consider both of these items to be extremely compelling. Obama’s wife says his home country is Kenya, and now a birth certificate from Kenya surfaces. What is most interesting is that it took nearly three (3) years for Obama to show his so-called birth certificate from Hawaii to the American people. Why the big deal?
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution makes Obama ineligible to even be President of the United States. Opponents of the idea that Obama is a foreigner, stated in claim, “The Feb. 17, 1964, date for the document, explaining that the “republic” of Kenya wasn’t assembled until December of that year. – Media Matters wrote, ‘Sorry, WorldNetDaily: Kenya wasn’t a republic until Dec. 1964.’” However, according to a number of different sources, that isn’t actually the entire truth.
According to WND, “At Ameriborn Constitution News, the researcher noted that the independence process for the nation actually started taking place as early as 1957, when there were the first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council.” The People Daily News Agency states, “Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki gives a speech during a celebration to mark the country’s 42nd independence anniversary in Nairobi, capital of Kenya Dec. 12, 2005. The country gained independence from Britain on Dec. 12, 1963.” According to BBC News Africa, “1963 – Kenya gains independence, with Kenyatta as Prime Minister. 1964 – Republic of Kenya formed. Kenyatta becomes president and Odinga vice-president.” According to mapsofworld.com, “The Constitution of Kenya was formed on 12th Dec. 1963.” While I could easily go on about the date, I think it is clear any official paperwork for and from the Republic of Kenya would be dated back at least as far as 1963.
We can’t talk about Hussein Obama without talking about Bill Ayers. As reported by David Horowitz in a piece entitled “Allies in War,” Mr. Horowitz states, “On the morning of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon…I opened its pages…showing a middle-aged couple holding hands and affecting a defiant look at the camera. The article was headlined…‘No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives.’” Of course the photograph was of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, both Ayers and Dohrn were members of the Weathermen, in other words, they were terrorists. Aside from being terrorists, both Ayers and Dohrn were and are partisans of Charles Manson, “Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!” That was a statement from Dohrn when she was referring to the Manson family murders of Sharon Tate and her guests.
All that being said, Hussein Obama and Bill Ayers seem to have some common connections. According to the Washington Post, both “were members of the board of…the Woods Fund of Chicago, between 1999 and 2002…Ayers contributed $200 to Obama’s re-election fund to the Illinois State Senate in April 2001…[and] they lived within a few blocks of each other…and moved in the same liberal-progressive circles.” While this could simply be a random connection between the two, I have to say I don’t believe a Senator or a President for that matter should allow themselves to be associated with terrorists in any way shape or form. In the least this is an example of Obama’s poor judgment, at most it’s a disgraceful example of the type of individual Obama really is. But as we have previously seen with the Bush and bin Laden families, this happens far too often. Of course according to The Obama File, “In 1989, Obama was a summer intern at Michelle Obama’s law firm. One of Michelle’s co-workers was Bernardine Dohrn.” That law firm was Sidley & Austin. The report goes on to tell a, “Couple hosted a “meet and greet” for Obama at Ayers house in Hyde Park…where Obama now lives as a neighbor of Louis Farrakhan.” Later, in 1995, “Obama was the first Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge,” Bill Ayers was the co-founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. And in 1997, “Ayers and Obama participated in a panel at the University of Chicago.” Lastly, according to the article, “Ayers, Dohrn and Obama …participated together at a conference entitled “Intellectuals: Who needs them?” Now what connections between Bill Ayers the terrorist and Hussein Obama do we have? We have the Woods Fund of Chicago, Ayers contribution to Obama’s re-election campaign for the Illinois State Senate, the close proximity with which they both lived, the liberal-progressive circles with which they both travelled, Obama’s working relationship at Sidley & Austin where Dohrn was a co-worker of Michelle Obama, the meet and greet at Ayers house, Obama’s chairmanship at Challenge where Ayers was a co-founder and their participation in the panel at the University of Chicago. It apparently is not coincidence that Ayers and Obama crossed paths. These two have had a longstanding relationship that dates back to at least 1989, that’s nearly a quarter of a century.
I’m not really certain there is a point to pointing out the multitudes of lies that have come out of Hussein Obama’s mouth, but I will point out at least a few. ABC news reported, “Sen. Barack Obama’s pastor says blacks should not sing “God Bless America” but “God damn America.” Those were the words from Jeremiah Wright, the pastor at Obama’s church, Trinity United Church of Christ. According to the article, Wright said “The United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own “terrorism.”” Of course, then Senator Obama stated, “I don’t think my church is actually particularly controversial.” That sounds like a very controversial statement to me. If you think about the statement, the person who said it and the people who listened, then you should understand what they want. While you could easily say we have a misguided foreign policy agenda which causes us endless problems (and it does), the bigger truth is, Hussein Obama is a Muslim or at least a Muslim sympathizer and he aligns himself with radicals and radicalism. The leadership of Islam not only appears to be, but is nothing more than a bunch of fanatics who want to kill the West and force their way of life and their religion on everyone of us. The unfortunate fact is, the U.S. government keeps kissing their behinds, and will continue their attempt to elevate Islam into something that they want to be considered mainstream. Until people realize this, the problem isn’t going to be solved. Even the founding fathers of this nation knew the Islamists wanted to kill anyone who didn’t conform to their belief system. In 1786, Adams and Jefferson met with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Dey of Algiers who stated, “Islam was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations that should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners.” This same belief is furthered by the motto of the Muslim Brotherhood, “Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” Obama and any other so-called leader in the U.S. who tells you that isn’t what Islam is about, obviously has a hidden agenda and objective. This is what the Muslim leadership says; we did not put these words into their mouths.
Let’s talk about Gitmo for a moment. On 22 January 2009, two days after Obama was sworn into office, “President Obama ordered the controversial prison camp at Guantanamo Bay closed within a year.” Today’s date is 21 August 2012 and according to a 17 August 2012 story on ABC News, “A federal judge voiced skepticism Friday about new government restrictions on lawyers’ access to detainees at Guantanamo Bay.” I cannot believe a federal judge would be skeptical about a new government restriction regarding a detainees bid to challenge their confinement with regard to the attorney’s access to their clients at Gitmo, if Gitmo were indeed closed. In fact it sounds like the prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba is still up and running strong! I guess Obama figured if he couldn’t get them all transferred to Illinois, then he might as well leave them in Cuba where they belong. This is an obvious example of Obama lies. The prison at Guantanamo Bay suits Obama or he would have shut it down by now, the undeniable fact is it in some way benefits Obama to keep it open, he only thought it was a bad idea when Bush was in office. Apparently, this was just another Obama lie.
Libya is a subject Obama would have you believe is one he can put in the win column. I disagree with that idea. The United States didn’t have any business bombing Libya. The only thing it did was get rid of a dictator so he could be replaced with another, this time, one who will make Libya an Islamic republic complete with sharia Law. Qaddafi was undoubtedly a loser, but he was a loser who wasn’t making problems anymore. Now Libya is a lawless nation of fiefdoms at best. As of the 20th of January, 2012, Libya still has a massive stockpile of mustard gas. When you stop to consider many of the fighters who called themselves ‘rebels’ had just left places like Iraq, where they were fighting U.S. forces, it’s not hard to make the connection that they were al Qaeda and the Taliban. According to UPI, “The country still has to destroy 11.25 tons of mustard gas.” In other words, there are approximately 22,500 lbs of this stuff in Libya and as you have already guessed, “A team of Americans and Libyans” are guarding the stockpile. What is actually interesting, didn’t Obama say there would be no American boots on the ground in Libya? Aside from the obvious spotters for the bombing, now Al Arabiya states there were others there as well. I only point this out, because it is another one of Obama’s lies.
Since I have already made the connection between Bill Ayers and Obama, I don’t really see any point in going over it again. But I will say this, Obama did claim Ayers was, “A guy who lives in my neighborhood…He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” This was an obvious lie. Obama and Ayers had a relationship that has lasted nearly 25 years. It isn’t possible to have so many connections to someone and simply refer to them casually as a guy in the neighborhood.
Why does Obama continually apologize for America? According to CNS News as well as Newsmax, Obama has apologized, “For America’s “arrogance” regarding countries Americans died to help free; To detainee terrorists interrogated by the CIA; For the accidental burning of the Korans; To Obamacare activist Sandra Fluke.” But the article also stated the apologies Obama didn’t make, “To Catholics forced by the government to violate their faith; To the family of border patrol agent Brian Terry murdered by Operation Fast and Furious guns; To families of American soldiers killed after Obama said he calmed things down in Afghanistan; To Israel, for saying it should return to its 1967 borders which would’ve subjected it to attacks; To American taxpayers forced to violate their religious beliefs and pay for abortion; For attending radical Rev. Wright’s church for years.” This all comes from a speech from Rep. Louis Gohmert of Texas in the House of Representatives. So what do we have? We have three apologies to Muslims and one to his own activist, but we have none to Americans or their families for governmental blunders (Fast & Furious) or to our closest ally in the Middle East, Israel. It’s one thing to apologize for something that we really screw-up, but it’s another thing to continually apologize for America like we’re some sort of idiots, which isn’t the case. If anything, the idiots are in the government; Obama should just start apologizing for himself. This isn’t humility on Obama’s part, it is utter weakness. Another thing Obama should remember is, when he apologizes, in effect he is apologizing for the people of this country. Personally, I don’t remember asking him to do that and I know a great deal of other Americans feel the same way. This is another example of a president thinking he is more than just a servant to the people. Both Obama and his wife have serious issues with the United States which the liberal media is more than willing to continually gloss over.
Maybe we should spend a moment talking about the national debt under Obama. While the national debt increased $4.9 trillion during eight (8) years of Bush, in just less than four (4) years of Obama the national debt has increased $5.4 trillion. In an article from CBS News on 22 August 2011 (today is 21 August 2012) the article states, “The national debt has now increased $4 trillion on President Obama’s watch…It’s the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president.” Of course, Obama can only blame this on Bush. While Bush did increase the debt dramatically, Obama has increased the debt astronomically. Oddly enough, Obama has maintained most of what Bush was doing, even though he stated he was going to do away with what he considered Bush’s failures when he got into office. What we have seen is the failure of Obama himself. He has accomplished nothing, but he has taken credit for things he had nothing to do with at all. But one thing we know he has done is increased the national debt more than any other president in the history of the United States and in a much shorter period of time.
I simply cannot finish with Hussein Obama until I talk about how he and his administration leak information and his bragging about how he killed Osama bin Laden. For starters, Obama didn’t kill anyone. He may have given the orders, but he never pulled a trigger. His boasting only puts men in harm’s way who fight for the United States. According to a report from Reuters which I found on Yahoo News, “A group of former U.S. intelligence and Special Forces operatives…scolds President Barack Obama for taking credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden and argues that high-level leaks are endangering American lives.” The report further states, “Mr. President, you did not kill Osama bin Laden, America did. The work that the American military has done killed Osama bin Laden. You did not.” The report stated the man who said that was Ben Smith, a U.S. Navy SEAL. I don’t know about you, but personally, I believe the SEAL. Mr. Smith goes on to say, “As a citizen, it is my civic duty to tell the president to stop leaking information to the enemy…It will get Americans killed.” You can believe whomever you wish, President Hussein Obama or a U.S. Navy SEAL, the choice is yours. However, Mr. Smith is obviously a selfless man amongst other selfless men whose service to the nation can only be described as more than exemplary. His humility in stating that America killed bin Laden is a credit to the finest warriors the world will ever know. I believe Obama is nothing more than a blowhard, a fraud and a liar.
Another example as noted by The Lonely Conservative is Obama originally saying the surge in Iraq wouldn’t work but create sectarian violence, “Tonight we heard President Bush say that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that’s just not true.” Of course the surge was working and it was what was probably needed from the beginning, enough troops to pound the enemy. That being said, Obama seems to take credit for any gains in Iraq, but Obama’s hasty withdrawal has only led to sectarian violence. In fact, Iraq is like a ticking time bomb that is ready to explode. Now Iran is able to influence the crazies who are there without fear of reprisal. Certainly, Obama has done nothing other than order the deaths of people around the globe. He has increased the number of countries the U.S. is operating in with regard to military operations. I can only imagine what his plan is, but I seriously doubt it will benefit the United States. One curious bit of information is, since Obama’s inauguration, in a report dated 4 April 2011, “Combat-related deaths that occurred since the Afghanistan war began in October 2001, about 64 percent happened in the two years since Obama took office.” That report was almost one year and 5 months ago. Obama’s leaking of information and bragging about exploits he didn’t do, plus lying about what is really happening as related to the surge in Iraq and the result of a hasty withdrawal is nothing but reckless.
There is no reason to continue with Hussein Obama. He has lied about where he was born, which was Kenya as shown on his Kenyan birth certificate and in his wife’s words. The part I didn’t mention was his Hawaii birth certificate, which must be a forgery, which is a crime. Arizona’s Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has investigated that document and states it is a forgery. Obama has lied about his close relationship with terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and has had a relationship with them for nearly 25 years. Another lie is Obama’s close association with the radical Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright is a man who hates the United States (probably as much as Ayers and Dohrn) and blames Americans for all the terrorism in the world, when the truth is the leadership of radical Islam promotes terrorism against everyone who isn’t Muslim. Which really makes Obama a Muslim sympathizer, but I believe he is a radical Muslim from the start. Obama lied again when he stated he was going to shut down the prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba, but it is still operational and he seems to be just fine with the prison still being open now that he’s in office. Libya is another one of Obama’s fiascos. Nothing more was accomplished than opening the door for another Islamic State ruled by sharia Law. Plus his lies about no American boots on the ground in Libya, when we know there were spotters for the bombing raids as well as men guarding mustard gas stockpiles. Then of course we have Obama the Apologist, embarrassing himself and the United States whenever he apologizes for America to the Muslims, but he refuses to take responsibility for the death of agent Brian Terry or his Fast and Furious gun smuggling debacle. Obama has increased the national debt faster than any president in the history of the United States, $5,400,000,000,000 and he still isn’t done with the 4 year term he was illegally elected to serve. Obama has also taken intelligence leaks to a new low, which endanger U.S. troops, not to mention his outlandish claims that he killed Osama bin Laden. Obama even lied about the surge that Bush did in Iraq and stated it wasn’t working, when in fact, it was working. But Obama hastily pulled out of Iraq and now Iraq is just a powder-keg ready to explode rife with Iranian influence and God knows what else. And lastly, at least 64% of combat-related deaths in the entire Afghanistan War can be attributed to the incompetence of Obama and his administration, and that figure is from about 17 months ago. What else can possibly be said about this man? He is by far the worst thing to ever happen to the United States of America and he will continue to happily destroy us if he is given the chance. Conclusion: Obama is the most self-serving example of a president the nation has ever had. His actions are that of a spineless incompetent whose malevolent nature can only be described as cowardly and pathetic. This man is the definition of a corrupt politician whose criminal behavior plunges the definition of disgraceful to new depths with each waking moment. He is an embarrassment to himself and to the nation. The word malfeasance doesn’t even come close to defining his acts of utter shame which have violated the public trust, and are only surpassed by his complete lack of moral fiber. Obama is a hypocrite and a prevaricator whose façade is a mere illusion, when in reality he is a nightmare.
What does all of this say about our elected leaders, in this case the Presidents of the United States, over the last fifty years? I can’t help but think that each and every president has forgotten they are merely servants of the people of this great nation. I also can’t help but think, We the People have allowed the mis-managers of governance to continue on their path of malfeasance and corruption. If we don’t force our so-called leaders to obey the supreme Law of the Land; the U.S. Constitution as well as the laws of the various States, then how can we actually expect such a self-serving bunch of miscreants to obey the law? The U.S. Constitution is an instrument for the people to restrain government, as eloquently stated by Patrick Henry. Until the sovereign people of this great nation are willing to step forward and demand lawful and moral actions from our elected leaders we will continue on the downward spiral which we are currently experiencing. At the end of the day, we should all ask ourselves some tough questions. Who are the real fools? Are the fools our so-called elected leaders or are we the fools for continuing to vote them into office ad nauseam? Or is the answer both. I’m not certain it is actually possible to conclude this paper. How does one conclude something which has been ongoing for at least the last fifty years, and appears to have no end in sight? I would argue the answer is in the U.S. Constitution. We need to make certain that those who wish to serve the people, are held accountable for their actions. We the People are not the servants; we are the Masters.
Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.
God Bless this Great Republic, the United States of America.
Brett L. Baker