Category Archives: Law enforcement

Zeituni Onyango, Obama’s aunt fights deportation to Kenya, Barack Obama aunt, Kenyan father’s side, Pleaded for political asylum, Boston court, Barack Obama fights deportation from White House

As Barack Obama continues to fight deportation from the White House and potentially the US, his aunt, Zeituni Onyango, is fighting deportation in a Boston court.

From The Examiner, February 4, 2010.

“Crime story: Obama’s aunt fights deportation to Kenya”

“Fifty-seven year old Zeituni Onyango, President Barack Obama’s aunt on his Kenyan father’s side, pleaded for political asylum before a Boston court today in a case that is being all but ignored by the mainstream news media in the U.S.

Onyango appeared in a Boston federal immigration court for a hearing regarding her plea for asylum in the U.S.  She’s been living in violation of the law after ignoring an order for deportation issued in 2004.

Onyanga’s defense attorney, Margaret Wong, is arguing that the President’s aunt should not be deported due to serious medical issues. However, Wong has also stated a backup argument will be the threat of  violence that exists in Kenya due to warring tribes.

The proceeding is being held before Judge Leonard Shapiro behind closed-doors. Wong said that Onyango would appeal if ordered deported. The U.S. government also has the right of appeal, but some observers believe such an appeal by prosecutors is unlikely.

Although living illegally in the U.S. for years, with the knowledge of the entire Obama family,  Onyango was discovered by investigative bloggers in 2008. Not surprising to media critics, the mainstream news organizations ignored the story or relegated it to newspapers’ back-pages as unsubstantiated allegations until after the election, according to political strategist Mike Baker.”

Read more:

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-2684-Law-Enforcement-Examiner~y2010m2d4-Crime-story-Obamas-aunt-fights-deportation-to-Kenya

ALIPAC Endorses Scott Brown for US Senate, Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, January 13, 2010,Illegal immigration, Martha Coakley supports for Amnesty for illegal aliens

From NewsWire.com, January 13, 2010.

“ALIPAC Endorses Scott Brown for US Senate”

“Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee (ALIPAC) is endorsing Scott Brown for US Senate today due to his campaign’s focus on the issue of the illegal immigration and his opponent Martha Coakley’s support for Amnesty for illegal aliens.
ALIPAC is one of the nation’s largest multi-ethnic and non-partisan grassroots organizations dedicated to opposing illegal immigration and amnesty for illegals, while supporting the enforcement of America’s existing immigration laws and borders.
“Scott Brown has publicly stated he opposes Amnesty for illegal aliens while Coakley has state she supports Amnesty,” said William Gheen President of ALIPAC. “His vote in opposition to Amnesty will be needed in a few weeks as President Obama, with Democrats in the Senate and House, and a handful of misguided Republicans attempt to pass new Amnesty legislation.”
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty legislation was defeated in 2006 and 2007 due to massive public opposition, which collapsed the Washington, DC phone systems connected to the offices of lawmakers. Certified scientific polls continue to show that 66-80% of Americans support immigration enforcement, instead of a “path to citizenship” for illegal aliens.
Amnesty legislation was filed in the US House on December 12, with 91 Democrat cosponsors lead by Congressman Luis Gutierrez supporting the bill. The legislation would legalize over 12 million illegal aliens currently in the US, increase current hyper legal immigration levels, and turn immigration regulating efforts over to big business. Democrats in the US Senate are working with a few Republicans in an attempt to file similar legislation in the Senate this month.
Scott Brown’s Democratic opponent, Martha Coakley, has clearly stated she supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty.”

Read more:

http://www.mmdnewswire.com/scott-brown-6679.html

Pastor James Manning accuses Columbia University of treason, Obama in Afghanistan, Obama hides college records, Manchurian candidate, Harvard paid from Middle East money, Obama Columbia Sundial article, 1983, Dr Manning finds no record, Why has Obama employed legions of private and government attorneys?

“Why has Obama employed a legion of private and Government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of Americans

Most of what we know about Barack Obama comes from Chicago corruption trial transcripts, Illinois records such as the IL bar and internet data that has not yet been scrubbed. Obama has kept hidden most of the records of his life.

Obama certainly has a connection to Columbia University. Obama was given a diploma and grades from Columbia sufficient to allow him to enter Harvard. Since Obama has employed many private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records, we have no proof of his grades or even his attendance and graduation. Also disturbing is the fact that a Middle Eastern source apparently paid for his Harvard education.
Middle East money pays for Obama Harvard education

And don’t forget, Obama first made contact with Tony Rezko, the convicted Chicago corruption figure with long time ties to Obama and many Middle East ties, while attending Harvard.
Pastor Dr. James Manning of Atlah Ministries in Harlem, New York City is accusing Columbia University of treason. Pastor Manning states that Obama was training in Afghanistan instead of attending Columbia. Dr. manning further states that Columbia University covered for Obama.

Watch the entire video here:

http://atlah.org/atlahworldwide/?p=3711

What do we know of Obama being enrolled in, graduating from or otherwise being associated with Columbia University?

Prescious little!

Here is an article that is credited to Obama from the Columbia University Sundial in 1983. 

“BREAKING THE WAR MENTALITY”

“Most students at Columbia do not have first hand knowledge of war.  Military violence has been a vicarious experience, channeled into our minds through television, film, and print. 

The more sensitive among us struggle to extrapolate experiences of war from our everyday experience, discussing the latest mortality statistics from Guatemala, sensitizing ourselves to our parents’ wartime memories, or incorporation into our framework of reality as depicted by a Mailer or a Coppola.  But the taste of war – the sounds and chill, the dead bodies – are remote and far removed.”

” This includes bringing speakers like Daniel Ellsberg to campus, publishing fact sheets compiled by interested faculty, and investigating the possible development of an interdisciplinary program in the Columbia curriculum dealing with peace, disarmament and world order.”

“This year, Mark Bigelow sees the checking of Pershing II and Cruise missile deployment as crucial.  “Because of their small size and mobility, their deployment will make possible arms control verification far more difficult, and will cut down warning time for the Soviets to less than ten minutes.”
“At this time, the current major issue is the Solomon Bill, the latest legislation from Congress to obtain compliance to registration.  The law requires that all male students applying for federal financial aid submit proof of registration, or else the government coffers will close.  Yale, Wesleyan, and Swathmore have refused to comply, and plan to offer non-registrants other forms of financial aid.  SAM hopes to press Columbia into following suit, though so far President Sovern and company seem prepared to acquiesce to the bill.

 
Robert believes students tacitly support non-registrants, though the majority did not comply.  “Several students have come up to our tables and said that had they known of the ineffectiveness of prosecution, they would not have registered.”  A measure of such underlying support is the 400 signatures, on a petition protesting the Solomon Bill, which SAM collected the first four hours it appeared.  Robert also points out that prior to registration, there were four separate bills circulation in the House proposing a return to the draft, but none ever got out of committees, and there have not been renewed efforts.  An estimated half-million registrants can definitely be a powerful signal.”
Alleged 1983 Obama Columbia article

Did Barack Obama write this article?

Was Obama influenced by someone or some government?

Was Obama attending Columbia University when this article was printed?

Why was the first sentence “Most students at Columbia do not have first hand knowledge of war.”?

 

There is very little else to indicate that Obama was actively enrolled as a student at Columbia University. This is supposedly a roommate, Sohale Siddiqi.

There are some references to an address on the East Side of New York, but no one living there has a remembrance of Obama.

So what else about Obama and his past looks suspicious in regard to Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Soviet Union, etc.

The Citizen Wells blog presented a four part series in May 2009, Obama, the Manchurian Candidate.

Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 1

“For over a year, many people have wondered about the puppeteers behind the scenes controlling Barack Obama and directing his socialist agenda. Many have used the description of Manchurian Candidate when referring to Obama and his dubious past and radical, socialist, leftist ties.

The best documented aspect of Obama’s past as it relates to possible ties with socialist and communist countries, is his strong, long time ties to socialists, leftists and radicals. Here are a few of the more blatant ones.”
Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 1

Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 2

“And as the Columbia News Service reported, the Young Communist League has mobilised to campaign for Obama: doubtless the Democratic Party is less than anxious to divulge to the nation this particular affiliation of these young activists who are helping it get out the Democratic vote.”

“In 1982 testimony, FBI assistant director for intelligence Edward J. O’Malley testified that the CPUSA has been ‘one of the most loyal and pro-Soviet Communist Parties in the world and has unfalteringly accepted Soviet direction and funding over the years.’ The recent book, Comrade J, based on interviews with a Russian spymaster at the United Nations, documents that Soviet intelligence operations against the U.S. continued even as the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia emerged in its place.”
Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 2

Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 3

“Communist Goals (1963)
 

Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35

January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, January 10, 1963″
Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 3
 

Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 4

“Was Barack Obama groomed by Soviet and Russian communists to be a Manchurian Candidate?

Did Tom Fife (or whatever name he has) relate a real tale of learning about Barack Obama from Russians during a vist to Russia in 1992?

Here is the essay by Tom Fife. Real or not it is completely believable based on what we know about the past and actions of Barack Hussein Obama.
Oct 14, 2008
The First Time I Heard of Barack      
Written by Thomas Fife   
by Tom Fife

During the period of roughly February 1992 to mid 1994, I was making frequent trips to Moscow, Russia, in the process of”
Obama, Manchurian Candidate Part 4

There are multiple reasons why Obama is not eligible to be president under the US Constitution. One is that his father was a British citizen. Without elaborating on the significance of this, if you are not well versed on this subject, start by reading the US Constituiton. The founding fathers used this wording for a reason:

“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;”

That had to be included to make the founding fathers eligible due to their ties to England.

That being said, we still do not know where Obama was born. His college records also will tell the tale. That is why Obama is keeping the tell tale documents hidden.

Obama should be arrested for treason.

Obama does not have to be impeached because per the 20th amendment to the US Constitution, he was not eligible.

We have a Usurper in the White House.

Does Paster James Manning ‘s allegation seem so far fetched now?

Pastor James Manning, Columbia University treason, Obama treason, Manning claims Obama did not attend, Alleged Columbia Obama article, 1983, Breaking the war mentality

Pastor James Manning of Atlah Ministries in Harlem, New York City, is charging Columbia University with treason. Pastor Manning alleges that Obama was in Afghanistan during the period of time from 1981 to 1983 when Obama was supposedly attending Columbia. The following document is allegedly an article written by Barack Obama in 1983 and published in the  Sundial . The Citizen Wells blog will be publishing an article soon that will shed light on why Dr. James Manning’s allegations may not be as far fetched as the casual observer may believe. It is believed at the Citizen Wells blog that Obama was probably enrolled and/or affiliated with Columbia University. The question is, what was that connection and did Obama, as Manning alleges, spend much time in Afghanistan.

Here is the text from the article, typed for clarity. Below is a link to a copy of the article. No claims are made here as to the authenticity of the article or as to whether Barack Obama is the author. Commentary about the content will be reserved for the following article.

“BREAKING THE WAR MENTALITY

By Barack Obama

Most students at Columbia do not have first hand knowledge of war.  Military violence has been a vicarious experience, channeled into our minds through television, film, and print. 

The more sensitive among us struggle to extrapolate experiences of war from our everyday experience, discussing the latest mortality statistics from Guatemala, sensitizing ourselves to our parents’ wartime memories, or incorporation into our framework of reality as depicted by a Mailer or a Coppola.  But the taste of war – the sounds and chill, the dead bodies – are remote and far removed.  We know that wars have occurred, will occur, are occurring, but bringing such experience down into our hearts, and taking continual, tangible steps to prevent war, becomes a difficult task.

Two groups on campus, Arms Race Alternatives (ARA) and Students Against Militarism (SAM), work within these mental limits to foster awareness and practical action necessary to counter the growing threat of war.  Though the emphasis of the two groups differ, they share an aversion to current government policy.  These groups, visualizing the possibilities of destruction and grasping the tendencies of distorted national priorities, are throwing their weight into shifting America off the dead-end track.

Most people my age remember well the air-raid drills in school, under the desk with our heads tucked between our legs.  Older people, they remember the Cuban Missile Crisis.  I think these kinds of things left an indelible mark on our souls, so we’re more apt to be concerned,” says Don Kent, assistant director of programs and student activities at Earl Hall Center.  Along with the community Volunteer Service Center, ARA has been Don’s primary concern, coordinating various working groups of faculty, students, and staff.  “Hot issues, particularly El Salvador, were occupying students at the time, consequently, we cosponsored a lot of activities with community organizations like SANE (Students Against Nuclear Energy).”

With the flowering of the nuclear Freeze movement, and particularly the June 12 rally in Central Park, however, student participation has expanded.  One wonders whether this upsurge stems from young people’s penchant for the latest “happenings”, or from growing awareness of the consequences of nuclear holocaust.  ARA maintains a mailing list of 500 persons and Don Kent estimates that approximately half of the active members are students.  Although he feels that continuity is provided by the faculty and staff members, student attendance at ARA sponsored events – in particular a November 11 convocation on the nuclear threat – reveals a deep reservoir of concern.  “I think students on this campus like to think of themselves as sophisticated, and don’t appreciate small vision.  So they tend to come out more for the events; they do not want to just fold leaflets.”

Mark Bigelow, a graduate intern from Union
Theological Seminary who works with Dan to keep ARA running smoothly, agrees.  “It seems that students here are fairly aware of the nuclear problem, and it makes for an underlying frustration.  We try to talk to that frustration.”  Consequently, the thrust of ARA is towards generating dialogue which will give people a rational handle on this controversial subject.  This includes bringing speakers like Daniel Ellsberg to campus, publishing fact sheets compiled by interested faculty, and investigating the possible development of an interdisciplinary program in the Columbia curriculum dealing with peace, disarmament and world order.

Tied in with such a thrust is the absence of what Don calls “a party line.”  By taking an almost apolitical approach to the problem, ARA hopes to get the university to take nuclear arms issues seriously.  “People don’t like having their intelligence insulted,” says Don. “so we try to disseminate information and allow the individual to make his or her own decision.”

Generally, the narrow focus of the Freeze movement as well as academic discussions of first versus second strike capabilities, suit the military-industrial interests, as they continue adding in their billion dollar erector sets.  When Peter Tosh sings that “everybody’s asking for peace, but nobody’s asking for justice,” one is forced to wonder whether disarmament or arms control issues, severed from economic and political issues, might be another instance of focusing on the symptoms of a problem instead of the disease itself.  Mark Bigelow does not think so.  “We do focus primarily on catastrophic weapons. 

Look, we say, here’s the worst part, let’s work on that.  You’re not going to get rid of the military in the near future, so let’s at least work on this.”

Mark Bigelow does feel that the links are there, and points to fruitful work being done by other organizations involved with disarmament.  “The Freeze is one part of a whole disarmament movement. The lowest common denominator, so to speak.  For instance, April 10-16 is Jobs For Peace week, with a bunch of things going on around the city.  Also, the New York City Council may pass a resolution in April calling for greater social as opposed to military spending.  Things like this may dispel the idea that disarmament is a white issue, because how the government spends its revenue affects everyone.”

The very real advantages of concentrating on a single issue is leading the National Freeze movement to challenge individual missile systems, while continuing the broader campaign.  This year, Mark Bigelow sees the checking of Pershing II and Cruise missile deployment as crucial.  “Because of their small size and mobility, their deployment will make possible arms control verification far more difficult, and will cut down warning time for the Soviets to less than ten minutes.  That can only be a destabilizing factor.  “Additionally, he sees the initiation by the U.S. of the Test Ban Treaty as a powerful first step towards a nuclear free world.

ARA encourages members to join buses to Washington and participate in a March 7-8 rally intended to push through the Freeze resolution which is making its seconds trip through the House.  ARA also will ask United Campuses to Prevent Nuclear War (UCAM), an information and lobbying network based in universities, nationwide, to serve as its advisory board in the near future.  Because of its autonomy from Columbia (which does not fund political organizations) UCAM could conceivably become a more active arm of disarmament campaigns on campus, though the ARA will continue to function solely as a vehicle for information and discussion.

Also operating out of Earl Hall Center, Students Against Militarism was formed in response to the passage of registration laws in 1980.  An entirely student-run organization, SAM casts a wider net than ARA, though for the purposes of effectiveness, they have tried to lock in on one issue at a time.

“At the heart of our organization is an anti-war focus”, says junior Robert Kahn, one of SAM’s fifteen or so active members.  “From there, a lot of issues shoot forth – nukes, racism, the draft, and South Africa.  “We have been better organized when taking one issue at a time, but we are always cognizant of other things going on, and collaborate frequently with other campus organizations like CISPES and REEL-POLITIK.”

At this time, the current major issue is the Solomon Bill, the latest legislation from Congress to obtain compliance to registration.  The law requires that all male students applying for federal financial aid submit proof of registration, or else the government coffers will close.  Yale, Wesleyan, and Swathmore have refused to comply, and plan to offer non-registrants other forms of financial aid.  SAM hopes to press Columbia into following suit, though so far President Sovern and company seem prepared to acquiesce to the bill.

Robert believes students tacitly support non-registrants, though the majority did not comply.  “Several students have come up to our tables and said that had they known of the ineffectiveness of prosecution, they would not have registered.”  A measure of such underlying support is the 400 signatures, on a petition protesting the Solomon Bill, which SAM collected the first four hours it appeared.  Robert also points out that prior to registration, there were four separate bills circulation in the House proposing a return to the draft, but none ever got out of committees, and there have not been renewed efforts.  An estimated half-million registrants can definitely be a powerful signal.

Prodding students into participating beyond name signing and attending events is tricky, but SAM members seem undaunted.  “A lot of the problem comes not from people’s ignorance of the facts, but because the news and statistics are lifeless.  That’s why we search for campus issues like the Solomon bill that have direct impact on the student body, and effectively link the campus to broader issues.”  By organizing and educating the Columbia community, such activities lay the foundation for future mobilization against the relentless, often silent spread of militarism in the county.  “The time is right to tie together social and military issues, “Robert continues, “and the more strident the Administration becomes, the more aware people are of their real interests.

The belief that moribund institutions, rather than individuals are at the root of the problem, keep SAM’s energies alive.  “A prerequisite for members of an organization like ours is the faith that people are fundamentally good, but you need to show them.  And when you look at the work people are doing across the county, it makes you optimistic.

Perhaps the essential goodness of humanity is an arguable proposition, but by observing the SAM meeting last Thursday night, with its solid turnout and enthusiasm, one might be persuaded that the manifestations of our better instincts can at least match the bad ones.   Regarding Columbia’s possible compliance, one comment in particular hit upon an important point with the Solomon bill, “The thing we need to do is expose how Columbia is talking out of two sides of its mouth.”

Indeed the most pervasive malady of the collegiate system specifically, and the American experience generally, in that elaborate patterns of knowledge and theory have been disembodied from individual choices and government policy.  What the members of ARA and SAM try to do is infuse what they have learned about the current situation, bring the words of that formidable roster on the face of Butler Library, names like Thoreau, Jefferson, and Whitman, to bear on the twisted logic of which we are today a part.  By adding their energy and effort in order to enhance the possibility of a decent world, they may help deprive us of a spectacular experience – that of war.  But then, there are some things we shouldn’t have to live through in order to want to avoid the experience.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/10978031/1983-article-by-Barack-Obama-Breaking-the-War-Mentality-in-Sundial-magazine-at-Columbia-University

Kurt Haskell, Christmas day terrorist, Abdulmutallab, Detroit flight, January 3, 2010, Underwear Bomber, Sharp dressed man, No passport, Visa, Michigan attorney Haskell YouTube video, Indian man, We do this all the time, Pete King, Pete Hoekstra

Attention Pete King and Pete Hoekstra.

What the hell is going on?

I was traveling over the holidays and flew out of the west coast a few days after the terrorist attack on Christmas Day. I heard a report of a passenger on the flight who heard a conversation between a sharp dressed “Indian” man and airport officials in the Netherlands. The “Indian” man was pleading on behalf of a young black man who apparently had no passport. Attorney Kurt Haskell, of Michigan, relates his story here.

“Kurt Haskell of Delta Flight 253 on Alex Jones Tv No Passport Underwear Bomber”

I received the following in an email yesterday, January 2, 2010.

“I certainly hope someone is getting the below eye witness account (and the fact that we are being lied to)  to Congs. Pete King (R-NY) and Hoekstra (R-MI).”

“I talked with both of their offices on Wed. and  sent (the below)  info on the 35 Terrorist Training Camps, the Islamic Terror Networks (cells) in the US and the new throat-slashing for Muslim women being taught at the Islamabad Hancock, New York Terror Training Camp this past week.”

Article

“Flight 253 passenger Kurt Haskell: ‘I was visited by the FBI'”

“By Aaron Foley | MLive.com
December 31, 2009, 9:41AM

Following up on a visit from FBI officials about an eyewitness account first described to MLive.com, Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell described the visit in comment sections across MLive on Wednesday.
Haskell and his wife, Lori, were aboard Flight 253 when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried to destroy the plane. They say another man tried to help Abdulmutallab board the plane in Amsterdam.
Haskell had two detailed posts in two different stories. Here is Part One, originally posted here:
http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/report_us_customs_says_second.html#comments
“Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.
Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253 stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period, all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called “Sharp Dressed” man. I will refer to this man as “The man in orange”. The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers and said the following (approximate quote) “You all are being moved to another area because this area is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out.” We were then marched out of the baggage claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that wasn’t a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has, since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be held indefinitely) since our flight landed for “immigration reasons.” Notice that this man was “being held” and not “arrested”, which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.
Just a question, could that mean that the man in orange had no passport?
However, a few hours later, Customs changed its story again. This time, Mr. Ron Smith of Customs, says the man that was detained “had been taken into custody, but today tells the news the person was a passenger on a different flight.” Mr. Ron Smith, you are playing the American public for a fool. Lets take a look at how plausible this story is (After you’ve already changed it twice). For the story to be true, you have to believe, that:

1. FBI/Customs let passengers from another flight co-mingle with the passengers of flight 253 while the most important investigation in 8 years was pending. I have already stated that not one person who wasn’t a passenger or law enforcement personnal was in our area the entire time we were detained by Customs.
2. FBI/Customs while detaining the flight 253 passengers in perhaps the most important investigation since the last terrorist attack, and despite not letting any flight 253 passenger drink, eat, make a call, or use the bathroom, let those of other flights trample through the area and possibly contaminate evidence.
3. You have to believe the above (1 and 2) despite the fact that no flights during this time allowed passengers to exit off of the planes at all and were detained on the runway during at least the first hour of our detention period.
4. You have to believe that the man that stood 20 feet from me since we entered customs came from a mysterious plane that never landed, let its passengers off the plane and let this man sneak into our passenger group despite having extremely tight security at this time (i.e. no drinking even).
5. FBI/Customs was hauling mysterious passengers from other flights through the area we were being held to possibly comtaminate evidence and allow discussions with suspects on Flight 253 or to possibly allow the exchange of bombs, weapons or other devices between the mysterious passengers from other flights and those on flight 253.
Seriously Mr. Ron Smith, how stupid do you think the American public is?
Mr. Ron Smith’s third version of the story is an absolute inplausible joke. I encourage you, Mr. Ron Smith, to debate me anytime, anywhere, and anyplace in public to let the American people see who is credible and who is not.
I ask, isn’t this the more plausible story:
1. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don’t want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers on a flight with a live bomb on the runway for 20 minutes.
2. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don’t want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers in customs for 1 hour with a live bomb in a carry on bag.
3. Customs/FBI realize that the man in orange points to a greater involvement then the lone wolf theory that they have been promoting.
Mr. Ron Smith I encourage you to come out of your cubicle and come up with a more plausible version number 4 of your story.”
Haskell continued his comment in a different post on MLive.
“For the last five days I have been reporting my story of the so called “sharp dressed man.” For those of you who haven’t read my account, it involves a sharp dressed “Indian man” attempting to talk a ticket agent into letting a supposed “Sudanese refugee” (The terrorist) onto flight 253 without a passport. I have never had any idea how it played out except to note that the so called “Sudanese reefugee” later boarded my flight and attempted to blow it up and kill me. At no time did my story involve, or even find important whether the terrorist actually had a passport. The importance of my story was and always will be, the attempt with an accomplice (apparently succesful) of a terrorist with all sorts of prior terrorist warning signs to skirt the normal passport boarding procedures in Amsterdam. By the way, Amsterdam security did come out the other day and admit that the terrorist did not have to “Go through normal passport checking procedures”.
Amsterdam security, please define to the American public “Normal passport boarding procedures”.
You see the FBI would have the American public believe that what was important was whether the terrorist in fact had a passport.
Seriously think about this people. You have a suicide bomber who had recently been to Yemen to but a bomb, whose father had reported him as a terrorist, who supposedly was on some kind of U.S. terror watchlist, and most likely knew the U.S. was aware of these red flags. Yet, he didn’t go through “Normal passport checking procedures.” What does that mean? Maybe that he flashed a passport to some sort of sympathetic security manager in a backroom to avoid a closer look at the terrorist’s “red flags”? What is important is that the terrorist avoided using normal passport checking procedures (apparently successfully) in order to avoid a closer look into his red flags. Who cares if he had a passport. The important thing is that he didn’t want to show it and somehow avoided a closer inspection and “normal passport checking procedures.” Each passport comes with a bar code on it that can be scanned to provide a wealth of information about the individual. I would bet that the passport checking procedures for the terrorist did not include a bar code scan of his passport (which could have revealed damning information about the terrorist).
Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the “sharp dressed man” that I referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not seen it. dutch authorities, “RELEASE THE VIDEO!” This is the most important video in 8 years and may be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and “DO NOT EDIT IT”! The American public deserves its own chance to attempt to identify the “sharp dressed man”. I have no doubt that if the video indicated that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.
Instead of the video, we get a statement that the video has been viewed and that the terrorist had a passport. Each of these statements made by the FBI is a self serving play on semantics and each misses the importance of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. The importance being that the man “Tried to board the plane with an accomplice and without a passort”. The other significance is that only the airport security video can verify my eyewitness account and that it is not being released.
Who has the agenda here and who doesn’t? Think about that for a minute.”

http://mlive.com

Citizen Wells

I intend to dig deeper into this controversy.

Obama, January 2, 2010, Obama guilty, High crimes and misdemeanors, Treason, Kirk Lippold, Corruption ties, Middle east ties, Muslim ties, Obama avoids birth certificate and college records issue

Watch the following video of retired Commander Kirk Lippold chastising Obama.

Now ask yourself, are you surprised that Obama is being criticized.

Straight from the US Constitution requirement that the president be a natural born citizen and per the 20th amendment, that the president be qualified at the time of inauguration, Obama is not president and therefore not Commander in Chief.

Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records.

Obama is embedded in Chicago and Illinois corruption just as deep as Rod Blagojevich. Furthermore, many of Obama’s business and political associates and donors come from or are strongly tied to the Middle East and even tied to Saddam Hussein.

Obama lived in Indonesia, became part of a Muslim family and studied Islam.

Obama has ignored much advice from his own hand picked general and has made the CIA his whipping boy.

Obama is giving constitutional rights, reserved for US Citizens to Muslim terrorists.

Obama is planning to close Gitmo and bring enemy combatant, Muslim terrorists to this country for trial.

Obama, by treating enemy terrorists as common criminals, is stripping our military and other protective agencies of the ability to interrogate our enemy and effectively empowering the enemy to continue with more plans to attack us.

Can any intelligent, informed, concerned, patriotic American explain to me why Barack Obama should not be immediately arrested for treason, high crimes and misdemeanors or one of many other applicable reasons ?

Kirk Lippold, Retired Commander USS Cole, Obama, Gitmo, Yemen, Glenn Beck Show Fox, December 30, 2009, CIA whipping boy, Enemy combatants, War on terror, Keep Guantanamo open

Kirk Lippold, retired Commander of the USS Cole and David Katz CEO of Global Security Group were interviewed on the Glenn Beck Show on Fox, yesterday, December 30, 2009. Commander Lippold is an American hero and tells it like it is. He  blasts the last three administrations. Kirk Lippold has been warning about closing Gitmo and threats from Yemen all year. This is another case of Obama not listening to military experts.

Some of the issues Commander Lippold addressed directly and succintly:

  • Keep Guantanamo open.
  • Military commissions process works.
  • Not criminal actions. Terrorists are enemy combatants.
  • This is a war on terror.
  • Quit making the CIA the whipping boy of this administration.

 

“Feb 6, 2009 – CMDR Lippold visited Fox and Friends to discuss the closure of GITMO and the decision to drop all charges on Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the terrorist responsible for the USS Cole bombing, which killed 17 American sailors. ”

Damage to the USS Cole

Our sincere thanks to Commander Kirk Lippold for his service and especially for speaking the truth boldly.

Napolitano must go, Citizens group, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, ALIPAC, Terrorist attack, Christmas day, Unlimited US visa to Detroit terrorism suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab

From The Examiner, December 30, 2009.

“”Napolitano must go!” says citizens group”

“A growing number of cops believe Napolitano is an empty-suit at best, a political hack at worst.”

“Americans who value their security, freedoms, and future prosperity are being encouraged to call the White House immediately to demand the resignation or termination of Janet Napolitano for overt and gross dereliction of duty after revelations her department issued an unlimited US visa to Detroit terrorism suspect “crotch bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC), one of the nation’s largest pro-border and immigration enforcement national organization, is asking citizens to call or e-mail the White House via this link http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/ to demand that President Obama terminate Janet Napolitano immediately.

“President Obama has a few days to fire Napolitano before the American public will place full blame for the grotesque failure by the Department of Homeland Security in his lap!” said William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. “If Obama fails to fire or demand the resignation of Napolitano, then he will indicate he is willing to support these kinds betrayals of government trust.”

Janet Napolitano is facing increasing criticism as more is learned about the attempted terrorist attack. Her comments claiming ”one thing I’d like to point out is that the system worked,” have set off a firestorm of public anger. In 2009 Napolitano has focused her department on supporting amnesty legislation for illegal aliens and casting terrorism suspicion on Americans opposed to the Obama administration instead of focusing on protecting the nation from terrorism attacks.

President Obama came to her defense on Monday claiming that the U.S. government is doing all it can to protect U.S. citizens.”

“ALIPAC is now launching a national campaign to demand that President Obama place Janet Napolitano on leave or accept her immediate resignation.

Current U.S. laws require all immigration applicants to be screened against terrorism watch lists. The Department of Homeland Security’s issuance of a visa to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, after he appeared on the watch lists, is a violation of US law.”

“Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a columnist for The Examiner (examiner.com) and New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he’s a blogger for the Cheyenne, Wyoming Fox News Radio affiliate KGAB (www.kgab.com). Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.”

Read more:

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-2684-Law-Enforcement-Examiner~y2009m12d30-Napolitano-must-go-says-citizens-group

Obama, Christmas day terrorist attack, Gitmo terrorists released, Michelle Malkin, CIA knew of The Nigerian, Obama opposition to Iraq war, Obama insults military, Obama Middle East money ties

In preparation for quoting another great article by Michelle Malkin, I wanted to point out that Malkin was in the forefront of researching and writing about Barack Obama before most people knew anything about him. I quickly assembled this search engine combination with this result.

2007 michelle malkin obama

Michelle Malkin » Obama: Soldier deaths = “Wasted” livesBy Michelle Malkin • February 12, 2007 04:39 PM. Sen. Barack Obama’s nutroots are showing. RedStateLady has the video of Obama arguing that each and every …
michellemalkin.com/2007/02/12/obama-soldier-deaths-wasted-lives/ –

This article is interesting because it reveals several important aspects about Obama’s motivation and attitude.

1. Disrespect for soldiers and the military.
2. Obama pandering to the far left, his core support.
3. The hidden motivation. Obama had monetary ties to many with deep, suspicious ties to the Middle East. This will be explored futher in an upcoming article.

From Michelle Malkin ,  February 12, 2007.

“Obama: Soldier deaths = “Wasted” lives”

“Sen. Barack Obama’s nutroots are showing. RedStateLady has the video of Obama arguing that each and every member of the military who volunteered to serve and died in Iraq wasted his/her life:”

“Of course he thinks their lives were wasted. Everyone on the anti-war side does; that’s one of the reasons they want to end the war. But they can’t say that because it dishonors the dead so they’re forced into rhetorical pretzels like the one Pelosi tied herself into a few weeks ago with Diane Sawyer. Army Lawyer summed up her position at the time thusly: “They didn’t die for nothing, they died for something stupid.””

“I could go on, but it would be a waste of breath trying to get Sen. Obama to acknowledge the existence of countless soldiers and their families who reject his patronizing, infantilizing, and insulting view of all American troops as dupes/victims who have squandered their lives.”

Read more:

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/02/12/obama-soldier-deaths-wasted-lives/

We were all warned, long before I and others opened our eyes to the background and agenda of Barack Obama, the handwriting was on the wall.

From Michelle Malkin,  December 30, 2009.

“Yemen, Gitmo, and jihadi revolving doors”

“My column today spotlights Yemen’s dangerous catch-and-release program for terrorists — and ours. But before you read it, please inform yourselves of this sad passing: American sailor/U.S.S. Cole bombing survivor Johan Gokool died in Florida yesterday. He lost a leg in the attack and suffered severe PTSD. Gokool was 31. R.I.P. and never forget.”

“Bleeding hearts and jihadi revolving doors”

“Sen. Joe Lieberman was right to sound the alarm about Yemen in the wake of the Undy-Bomber’s Christmas Day terror attack over American skies. But he was wrong to call it “tomorrow’s war.” The Yemen-based jihadist network has been at war with us for years – since before the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions, since before 9/11, and well before our current commander-in-chief had begun his vaunted work as a community organizer.
The bleeding-heart ostriches of the Left are blaming (who else?) cowboy George W. Bush for radicalizing poor, oppressed Yemenis. But the killer fruits of botched bomber Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab’s loom have nothing to do with poverty, social injustice, Western imperialism, or Bush Derangement Syndrome. The fundamentalist Muslim is the privileged son of a Nigerian public official. He lived a “gilded life,” as the Independent of London described it, studying engineering at one of Britain’s most prestigious universities before training for terror in Yemen.”

“America, unfortunately, is hardly in a position to criticize Yemen’s jihadi revolving door. ABC News reported this week that two of the four jihadi leaders behind the Christmas Day terror plot were released from Gitmo during the Bush administration in November 2007. (What a quandary for Bush-bashers who have stubbornly denied that Gitmo recidivism threatens our national security.) The freed detainees were shipped off to terror-friendly Saudi Arabia, where they underwent “art therapy rehabilitation” – the ultimate bloody brainchild of the jihadi-as-victim mindset.”

“Hundreds of Yemeni detainees at Gitmo abandoned the benefit of the doubt years ago. Yet, Attorney General Eric Holder’s law firm, Covington and Burling, has provided dozens of them pro bono legal representation and sob-story media relations campaigns. True to form, former Covington and Burling lawyer Mark Falkoff dedicated a book of Gitmo detainee poetry to his Yemeni suspected terrorist “friends inside the wire.” And the White House is rolling out the red carpet to bring them to U.S. soil for civilian trials.
At a time when we should be disabling the jihadi revolving door, its rotating shaft is spinning out of control.”

Read more:

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/12/30/yemen-gitmo-and-jihadi-revolving-doors/

I would like to personally thank Michelle Malkin for all of her hard work.

EPA armed, Homeland Security ammunition order, Martial law?, Winchester ammunition order, EPA Glock handguns, Protect human health and safeguard the natural environment?, 200 million rounds of ammunition?

Why does the Department of Homeland Security need up to 200 million, 40 calibur rounds of ammunition over the next five years? This is the same Department of Homeland Security, headed by Janet Napolitano, that has been under more scrutiny since the Christmas day terrorist attack.

From the Winchester Ammunition Co. website, August 20, 2009.

“Winchester Awarded Department of Homeland Security Contract”

“Winchester Ammunition was recently awarded a contract by the Immigration, Customs and Enforcement (ICE) division of the Department of Homeland Security to supply a maximum of 200 million, 40 cal. rounds over the next five years.

“Winchester has a proud tradition of providing high quality ammunition to our nation’s law enforcement agencies,” said Dick Hammett, president, Winchester Ammunition. “No matter if they’re protecting our block, our city or our borders, each special agent is an invaluable resource and we are committed to giving them the best products available.”

The load selected for this contract is a 135-grain, hollow point designed for the office of Field Operations of Customs and Border Protection. It will fall under the Winchester® Ranger® line of products.

For more information about Winchester Ammunition and its complete line of products visit www.winchester.com.

WINCHESTER BALLISTICS CALCULATOR
The new Winchester® Ammunition Ballistics Calculator is the most innovative program on the market, using cutting-edge technology to offer ballistics information for shooters and hunters.

The Winchester Ballistics Calculator allows users to choose their type of ammunition and compare up to five different Winchester products with easy-to-read, high-tech ballistic charts and graphs. You can customize shooting conditions by entering wind speed and outside temperature, adjust zero marks for sighting in—then print the ballistics for later reference on the range or in the field. The calculator is now live at www.winchester.com/ballistics.”

http://www.winchester.com/library/news/Pages/Winchester-Awarded-Contract.aspx
If the above does not pique your curiousty or concern you, perhaps the following will.

 
The EPA, long known for dictatorial, out of control powers, has ordered 40 Model G-19, 9mm frame handguns.
From the EPA mission statement:

Our Mission

The mission of EPA is to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment — air, water and land — upon which life depends.

EPA’s purpose is to ensure that:

all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn and work;

national efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information;

federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively;

environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;

all parts of society — communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments — have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;

environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse, sustainable and economically productive; and

the United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment.

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/aboutepa.htm

From the EPA Procurement Office, September 14, 2009:
Posted Date : September 14, 2009

Procurement Office : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Headquarters Procurement Operations Division, (3803R)

Response Date: September 23, 2009, 4:00 PM EDT

NAICS code 332994 – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Criminal Investigations Division intends to award a sole source firm-fixed-price Purchase Order to Glock, Inc. under the authority of FAR Part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures for 40 Model G-19, 9mm frame handguns with finger grove and rail frames, Tijico night sights, extended magazine catches and 3.5lb/NY1 Trigger magazines. The Glock model G-19 is the Agency standard firearm and is the only pistol that fits our training, certified repair technician contracts, and equipment capabilities without a major change to Agency operations. Our agents are trained with the Glock pistol, and changing to another manufacturer would require transition training for each agent that could range from 1 to 3 days depending on the manufacturer. Additionally, our Agents are outfitted with holsters and magazine clips that are fitted to the Glock model firearm. Furthermore, EPA-CID has a large amount of spare parts for the Glock weapons and to retool these parts would require substantial expenditure for the Government.

NO SOLICITATION OR REQUEST FOR QUOTE WILL BE MADE FOR THIS PROCUREMENT. No contract will be awarded on the basis of offers received in response to this notice. All comments and questions regarding this procurement shall be addressed in writing to the Contracting Officer, Cara Lynch by COB on Wednesday, September 23, 2009. Telephone inquiries will not be accepted. The decision not to compete this requirement is within the discretion of the Government. Any response to this notice shall show clear and convincing evidence that competition would be advantageous to the Government in future procurements

The point of contact for this procurement is Cara Lynch, Contracting Specialist, at lynch.cara@epa.gov

http://www.epa.gov/oamhpod1/admin_placement/0902080/index.htm

So now the EPA, an out of control government agency, with no apparent regard for the US Constitution is now going to be armed. No wonder many citizens are concerned about the spectre of martial law and NWO theories.

From the EPA on how they develop regulations:

Developing Regulations: From Start to Finish
When EPA identifies the potential need for a regulation, we form a workgroup to learn more. The workgroup is led by the EPA office that will be writing the regulation (i.e., the “lead office”) and includes members from other parts of the Agency with related interests or responsibilities. The workgroup may work for months – employing expert scientists, economists, and other analysts – before an appropriate course of action is decided upon. The process generally goes like this:

1. Commence Activity. EPA typically operates under statutory authority (Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, etc.) to create regulations. Additionally, we adhere to the Principles of Regulation described in Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.  When we have determined that an issue exists that cannot be addressed in the absence of regulatory activity, we commence a new regulatory action.

2. Analyze the Problem. The workgroup begins by developing a work plan that will guide the regulatory development process. This plan is called an Analytic Blueprint and outlines the major questions that must be answered, the data needed, the experts who should be consulted, the anticipated costs, and other rulemaking needs. EPA’s senior management provides guidance on the Analytic Blueprint early in the process at a meeting called Early Guidance. After the Early Guidance meeting, the workgroup uses its Analytic Blueprint to begin studying the problem. We may draw information from EPA’s research, scientific literature, other government agencies, or other researchers in the United States and abroad.

3. Identify Options. The workgroup then considers the available options for addressing the problem. This may require evaluating environmental technologies, changes in environmental management practices, and incentives that can motivate better environmental performance. The workgroup also takes related issues into account at this stage, such as the impact of various options on small businesses, on children’s health, or on state and local governments. Sometimes the workgroup might find there is no need for regulation.

4. Publish a Proposal & Request Public Comments. If the preliminary analysis recommends the need for regulation, the workgroup drafts a proposed regulation for publication in the Federal Register. Experts from EPA, other federal agencies, advisory groups, and more help inform the proposed regulation.

The draft publication is called a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). A law called the Administrative Procedure Act (5USC Ch. 5) generally requires EPA (and other federal regulatory agencies) to request comments from the public before finalizing the regulation. The public comment period typically lasts 60 to 90 days. Federal Register notices related to the environment are available online from many Web sites, including the Government Printing Office’s Federal Register site and Regulations.gov.

At the same time we publish an NPRM, EPA will sometimes publish an Information Collection Request (ICR). The Paperwork Reduction Act requires all agencies to ensure that their regulations do not impose an undue paperwork burden on individuals, businesses, and others. Therefore, we seek approval of an ICR when our proposed regulations might require more than 10 members of the public to report similar information back to us. The public can comment on these ICRs just as they can the NPRMs. See EPA’s ICR Web site for more information.

5. Review Public Comments. Next, the workgroup reviews and evaluates all the comments received. Depending on the regulation, these comments may range from recommendations for minimal change to extensive rewriting. The workgroup carefully weighs and evaluates the comments before developing a draft final regulation for review and approval by EPA senior management. All public comments and our responses are posted in the regulation’s docket. (Learn more about how to comment and how to access dockets.)

6. Issue Regulation. After approval by senior management, the EPA Administrator or his delegee reviews the final regulation and decides whether it should be issued. If the Administrator decides to issue the regulation, it is published in the Federal Register. Effective dates vary. A regulation may be effective on the day it is published, for example, or it may be effective a year later. These dates are specified in every regulation. Congress may decide to overturn a regulation after the Administrator has issued it, but it rarely does.

7. Analyze Our Regulations. When a final regulation is issued, our work has just begun. After promulgation, we work with regulated businesses, governments, and non-profits to help them comply with the requirements. In some cases, enforcement actions are necessary. And, we analyze our regulations to make sure they are effective.

Occasionally there are additional steps in this process. For instance, the workgroup might decide to draft a notice seeking public comment and information before the proposal is even developed. This pre-proposal is called an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and is also published in the Federal Register. Sometimes the workgroup receives new data from the public during a comment period, in which case we might publish in the Federal Register a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) so interested parties can learn more and submit additional comments. Finally, the workgroup might decide to take a new direction after receiving new data, which in some cases results in a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

EPA has a central staff within the Administrator’s Office to support all the regulations under development. The Office of Regulatory Policy and Management supports and monitors the status of regulatory workgroups, helps with Federal Register publication, and ensures that EPA is following the various laws and Executive Orders that govern how regulations are written.

Working with Other Federal Partners
Because EPA is part of the Executive Branch, we solicit the input of other federal departments and agencies when our regulations relate to their work. The White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) ensures rules are consistent with the Administration’s environmental priorities and policies, and coordinates review by other federal agencies that might have an interest in the issue.

Generally, OMB coordinates reviews of regulations that could impose more than $100 million in annual costs on society, present controversial legal or policy issues, or require multi-agency input. E.O. 12866 governs how the OMB review process operates. You may view the current and past regulations under E.O.12866 review at RegInfo.gov.

Where to Look for Regulations
We publish all of our proposed regulations, final regulations, and notices in the Federal Register. All general and permanent regulations are then codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which is maintained for all federal departments and agencies by the Government Printing Office (GPO). Known as the CFR, this compilation of government regulations is divided into 50 titles that represent topics of federal authority, such as education, transportation, and agriculture. Environmental regulations are mainly in Title 40: Protection of the Environment.

 
http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/brochure/developing.html