Obama visited Pakistan in 1981?
This is one response to one email floating around in 2008.
Yes he did. That was at a time when Pakistan was under martial law due to ongoing civil wars in Afghanistan, warlord-fighting-warlord, with the ordinary people caught in the middle and dying like flies, sponsored by the USA by the way.
This was at a time in 1981 when travel was restricted and NO AMERICAN had any business in Pakistan UNLESS they were working for the State Department or the CIA. It's pretty clear that's precisely how Obama worked his way into power.
Reporting that Obama is CIA is not me in any way defending Obama. I do not hold the CIA and it's covert operations to be in any way patriotic, although certainly some of it's officers are, for better or worse. Overall, it's Wall Street's very own paramilitary intelligence outfit, turned into a government agency. The same people that covertly financed Hitler started the CIA, with help from ex-Nazis, and for the Cold War.
President Harry S. Truman, who signed the National Security Act of 1947 creating the CIA out of the older OSS, remarked in 1969 that he never would have signed it if he had known the CIA was going to become the American Gestapo.
Obama's MOTHER Anne Dunham was also travelling around the world, working for USAID, a known front for or extension of the CIA. Ostensibly, she was an archeologist, studying culture. Typical CIA job. They write Doctoral Dissertations and report on the culture, mood, and perhaps on individual "leaders" for the CIA. Christian missionary groups have also been used for covert intelligence gathering and also "public relations".
Like mother, like son. (That history on Anne Durham and other tidbits are available on Wikipedia. No, it doesn't say she's CIA. But it describes her history. Google can find a lot of supporting articles, for which I did not place cites or links to websites. John Pilger is the historian who pointed out the next factoid.)
Obama had also been working for an investment company known to have been a CIA front. This could account for Obama's money for college, etc.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of Obama's allies and unofficial advisors, was the Statesman, Diplomat, National Security Advisor officially or unofficially to every President from Nixon through Bush.
Zbigniew Brzezinski embraced the strategy of financing, managing, and manipulating Islamic Radical Nutcases as a benchmark of US foreign policy. (might have to scroll down a page to see that link) Brzezinski and the CIA worked together to foment Islamic Radicalism in the Middle East, particularly Afghanistan. Hardcore religious ultra conservative violent nutcases won approval at the highest levels, no matter what atrocities they carried out on innocent civilians.
This is where Obama and his mother probably got connected to serious power, via Brzezinski and Rockefeller, i.e. the banking system and Intelligence, globalization.
The initial push to finance the Islamic Radicals to overthrow the moderate-Leftist government of Afghanistan occurred under Jimmy Carter, but then the Reagan administration continued and expanded what was initially a small covert operation, financed and funneled through Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, both Intelligence channels and criminals.
The point was not to STOP the Soviets, it was to PROVOKE the Soviet invasion, according to Brzezinski himself in an interview. Even after 9-11, most Washington politicians including Orrin Hatch approved of the policy of financing Islamic Radicals and said if they had to decide they would do it all over again the same way.
Tony Rezko DID support Obama --- he had also arranged a big fundraiser for George W. Bush with Karl Rove. He's a typical switch-hitter, just like the banks. They support both parties, or whoever they think will win, or whoever they think will be beneficial to them. (Obama did nothing to stop the bankers' looting. Obama did NOT nationalize the banks. He nationalized the banks' red ink from their self-created losses.)
Rezko was Syrian, and possibly has Syrian connections. So does the Pentagon and Bush --- remember, Syria was "assisting" the USA with torturing people we captured or kidnapped and flew there, during the time it was considered an "Axis of Evil". (If they are an Axis of Evil, why was the CIA sending people there and why were they cooperating? Aren't we supposed to be opposed to that?)
A lot of Arab-Muslims actually work FOR the USA, or rather FOR the CIA and the Pentagon --- Osama Bin Laden, for one example. Ditto for Gulbideen Hekmatyar, the Afghani warlord famous for having his henchmen throw acid in women's faces for being "immodest" in some way. CIA has a lot of "bought" or "bribed" or otherwise helpful Muslims in the Middle East.
Not only do we support Radical Muslims in Afghanistan, but William Engdahl published his book on oil which explained how we supported the Mullahs in Iran. British Middle East Expert, Bernand Lewis, who I saw speak at EJ Thomas, came up with the plan that it would be good to support Radical Islamic "factions" to split apart the Middle East, to prevent consolidation and democracy.
Statesman George Ball became committed to that plan, and at a Bilderberg meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany he introduced the plan to oust the Shah "for human rights violations" that we had secretly encouraged, and replace him with the Iranian Mullahs, who are really a set of financial mafia crime families than religious leaders, lest the opportunity open up for actual democracy.
Brzezinski's seminal book, The Grand Chessboard, lays out such a strategy, including "keeping the barbarians from coming together" and relying on a lot of subterfuge and manipulation, to control the vast wealth, energy, and the population of the Middle East. Really, to block them from becoming fully industrialized and self-sustaining.
So this is not some conspiracy theory about the Bilderberg Conference, or some fringe thing between Lewis and Ball or some, it's the centerpiece of US foreign policy.
Look at Iraq under Bush. Secular socialist dictator (who built Iraq into a most modern westernized society) kicked out and killed. Islamic theocratic radical Shiites, very close to Iran, is who now runs Iraq. The Badr Organization and the Dawa Party of Malaki were both once enemies of the Iraqi people, set off bombs at the University of Baghdad, and tried twice to kill Tariq Aziz the 2nd-in-command under Saddam Hussein. Aziz was Catholic.
Iran hated Saddam because he led a secular nation, not a religious theocracy. America accomplished what Iran set out to do in the 80s, when it was bombing in Iraqi cities and murdering the Sunni infidels. So at least America is consistent (in it's real policies).
This is the REAL core of Obama, and the reason he's following the blueprint of Brzezinski and of Pentagon analyst-promoter Thomas P.M. Barnett, in keeping the Middle East constantly at war and constantly destabilized.
This is why Obama sent 30,000 Americans, when experts say that it would take at least 600,000 to control all the towns and small villages, if we wanted to lock it down. It might seem crazy to you and me (it is), but it makes sense to them, for their interests. Some people call this the New World Order.
Here's a Christian site with a viewpoint on that:
This is one response to one email floating around in 2008.
Yes he did. That was at a time when Pakistan was under martial law due to ongoing civil wars in Afghanistan, warlord-fighting-warlord, with the ordinary people caught in the middle and dying like flies, sponsored by the USA by the way.
This was at a time in 1981 when travel was restricted and NO AMERICAN had any business in Pakistan UNLESS they were working for the State Department or the CIA. It's pretty clear that's precisely how Obama worked his way into power.
Reporting that Obama is CIA is not me in any way defending Obama. I do not hold the CIA and it's covert operations to be in any way patriotic, although certainly some of it's officers are, for better or worse. Overall, it's Wall Street's very own paramilitary intelligence outfit, turned into a government agency. The same people that covertly financed Hitler started the CIA, with help from ex-Nazis, and for the Cold War.
President Harry S. Truman, who signed the National Security Act of 1947 creating the CIA out of the older OSS, remarked in 1969 that he never would have signed it if he had known the CIA was going to become the American Gestapo.
Obama's MOTHER Anne Dunham was also travelling around the world, working for USAID, a known front for or extension of the CIA. Ostensibly, she was an archeologist, studying culture. Typical CIA job. They write Doctoral Dissertations and report on the culture, mood, and perhaps on individual "leaders" for the CIA. Christian missionary groups have also been used for covert intelligence gathering and also "public relations".
Like mother, like son. (That history on Anne Durham and other tidbits are available on Wikipedia. No, it doesn't say she's CIA. But it describes her history. Google can find a lot of supporting articles, for which I did not place cites or links to websites. John Pilger is the historian who pointed out the next factoid.)
Obama had also been working for an investment company known to have been a CIA front. This could account for Obama's money for college, etc.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of Obama's allies and unofficial advisors, was the Statesman, Diplomat, National Security Advisor officially or unofficially to every President from Nixon through Bush.
Zbigniew Brzezinski embraced the strategy of financing, managing, and manipulating Islamic Radical Nutcases as a benchmark of US foreign policy. (might have to scroll down a page to see that link) Brzezinski and the CIA worked together to foment Islamic Radicalism in the Middle East, particularly Afghanistan. Hardcore religious ultra conservative violent nutcases won approval at the highest levels, no matter what atrocities they carried out on innocent civilians.
This is where Obama and his mother probably got connected to serious power, via Brzezinski and Rockefeller, i.e. the banking system and Intelligence, globalization.
The initial push to finance the Islamic Radicals to overthrow the moderate-Leftist government of Afghanistan occurred under Jimmy Carter, but then the Reagan administration continued and expanded what was initially a small covert operation, financed and funneled through Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, both Intelligence channels and criminals.
The point was not to STOP the Soviets, it was to PROVOKE the Soviet invasion, according to Brzezinski himself in an interview. Even after 9-11, most Washington politicians including Orrin Hatch approved of the policy of financing Islamic Radicals and said if they had to decide they would do it all over again the same way.
Tony Rezko DID support Obama --- he had also arranged a big fundraiser for George W. Bush with Karl Rove. He's a typical switch-hitter, just like the banks. They support both parties, or whoever they think will win, or whoever they think will be beneficial to them. (Obama did nothing to stop the bankers' looting. Obama did NOT nationalize the banks. He nationalized the banks' red ink from their self-created losses.)
Rezko was Syrian, and possibly has Syrian connections. So does the Pentagon and Bush --- remember, Syria was "assisting" the USA with torturing people we captured or kidnapped and flew there, during the time it was considered an "Axis of Evil". (If they are an Axis of Evil, why was the CIA sending people there and why were they cooperating? Aren't we supposed to be opposed to that?)
A lot of Arab-Muslims actually work FOR the USA, or rather FOR the CIA and the Pentagon --- Osama Bin Laden, for one example. Ditto for Gulbideen Hekmatyar, the Afghani warlord famous for having his henchmen throw acid in women's faces for being "immodest" in some way. CIA has a lot of "bought" or "bribed" or otherwise helpful Muslims in the Middle East.
Not only do we support Radical Muslims in Afghanistan, but William Engdahl published his book on oil which explained how we supported the Mullahs in Iran. British Middle East Expert, Bernand Lewis, who I saw speak at EJ Thomas, came up with the plan that it would be good to support Radical Islamic "factions" to split apart the Middle East, to prevent consolidation and democracy.
Statesman George Ball became committed to that plan, and at a Bilderberg meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany he introduced the plan to oust the Shah "for human rights violations" that we had secretly encouraged, and replace him with the Iranian Mullahs, who are really a set of financial mafia crime families than religious leaders, lest the opportunity open up for actual democracy.
Brzezinski's seminal book, The Grand Chessboard, lays out such a strategy, including "keeping the barbarians from coming together" and relying on a lot of subterfuge and manipulation, to control the vast wealth, energy, and the population of the Middle East. Really, to block them from becoming fully industrialized and self-sustaining.
So this is not some conspiracy theory about the Bilderberg Conference, or some fringe thing between Lewis and Ball or some, it's the centerpiece of US foreign policy.
Look at Iraq under Bush. Secular socialist dictator (who built Iraq into a most modern westernized society) kicked out and killed. Islamic theocratic radical Shiites, very close to Iran, is who now runs Iraq. The Badr Organization and the Dawa Party of Malaki were both once enemies of the Iraqi people, set off bombs at the University of Baghdad, and tried twice to kill Tariq Aziz the 2nd-in-command under Saddam Hussein. Aziz was Catholic.
Iran hated Saddam because he led a secular nation, not a religious theocracy. America accomplished what Iran set out to do in the 80s, when it was bombing in Iraqi cities and murdering the Sunni infidels. So at least America is consistent (in it's real policies).
This is the REAL core of Obama, and the reason he's following the blueprint of Brzezinski and of Pentagon analyst-promoter Thomas P.M. Barnett, in keeping the Middle East constantly at war and constantly destabilized.
This is why Obama sent 30,000 Americans, when experts say that it would take at least 600,000 to control all the towns and small villages, if we wanted to lock it down. It might seem crazy to you and me (it is), but it makes sense to them, for their interests. Some people call this the New World Order.
Here's a Christian site with a viewpoint on that:
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 3:52 PM
| And this is the man that 49% of America want for their next President? Unreal! --- PLEASE READ....VERY ENLIGHTNING
------------ |
posted by dilbertgeg at 6:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home