"I have here in this bag..."
And incidentally, before getting deeper into this murky matter, let me amend my previous blog, of the 12th instant, wherein I made reference, IN my References, to "worldnetdaily, and their excellent series of articles on this subject, of Obama's ineligibility for the office". I should have said his "apparent" ineligibility; since we haven't actually seen the pig in the poke, and thus don't know whether it has lipstick on or not. In a manner of speaking.
A review of the bare facts.
Someone noted that the 'birth certificate' posted on the Obama camp's website, and another one of 'it' (with some variations; curious, that) posted 2 months later on a supposedly 'nonpartisan' website called FactCheck.org (which in very fact is sponsored by a group - Annenberg Political Fact Check (APFC) - which has a direct supporting link to Obama from his Chicago days of 'community building') was actually an electronic document called a Certification of Live Birth (COLB); not a Certificate of Live Birth per se, or true copy of his original, vault-copy BC, which would contain the name of the hospital of record and attending physician, etc etc. Moreover, it turned out that the state of Hawaii issued that sort of document for a child/family of a child even if he/she hadn't actually been born in the state.
The Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, in issuing a statement after the matter of Obama's true birthplace began to go viral on the 'net (there was some question of his actually having been born in Kenya, and his family gaining a COLB from the State of Hawaii so that they could claim US citizenship for him for his future aspirations in life), used strange language that seemed to some a little too 'lawerly' for comfort. She said that she and an associate had seen and verified that the state DoH had then-Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record "in accordance with state policies and procedures".
Come again? But those "policies and procedures" allowed for a COLB to be issued for a child even if...etc etc. To say: Not good enough.
And later, when the subject was visited again, the public again was sold - tried to be sold - a pig in a poke: a bill of sale, rather than the item itself. It's one thing to say such-and-such is so; it's another to prove it. So: "Let's see the merchandise", said a growing number of the US public, getting more and more disturbed by the curious, seeming shenanigans going on over the issue.
At this point there were two basic points of fact.
(1) The Hawaiian DoH said (the second time around) that they had Obama's original BC on record, AND said this time that it confirmed that he was born in Hawaii.
(2) The Hawaiian DoH did not confirm, nor has it to this day confirmed, that the COLB posted on the internet, in a couple of original places (with some variations between the two; go figure), was a true rendering of the information ON that original BC.
Curious, that.
And curious that, when Nancy Pelosi, for the Democratic National Convention, affirmed by signature that BHO was a natural born citizen - and thus qualified to be a candidate for the presidency of the US - and when asked for a report on the documentary information that led her to make that affirmation, has never replied. (jbjd.wordpress.com. State Attorneys General: Please take note.)
And when BHO has replied to various lawsuits trying to dislodge his original BC for verification of his NBC status, he has referred to documents posted on the internet. Presumably trying to say, in effect, that if it's good enough as evidence for them, it's good enough for him...
Is the picture beginning to get clearer here?
If Fight the Smears says 'X' is true because it has appeared on Annenberg Political Fact Check, and if APFC says 'X' is true because it has appeared on FTS; and if Obama refers to these sources as his footnoted response to various lawsuits on the matter...
Not good enough. Especially for something as important as the presidency of the United States of America.
Nor is it good enough that BHO has refused to release documentary information about any number of matters relevant to the questions regarding his passport information over the years, his school records, etc etc. Nor is it helpful to the matter of 'transparency' that he has issued an Executive Order putting the private information of himself and anybody in his administration off limits.
To sum up.
Something is wrong with this picture. There is something deceitful going on here. This is cheap sleight-of-hand stuff, that would never stand up in a court of law, where original materials would be demanded as evidence, and for investigation. This whole thing is a slur on the office of the presidency of the United States, and a threat to the rule of law. It must be cleared up.
Now.
Monday, 17 August 2009
Wednesday, 12 August 2009
Who's Guilty of the Trashing of the US Presidency - And What Can Be Done About It?
Now that it is clear, to all who have eyes to see - and have done their homework in the regard - that Barack Obama was not eligible to run for the presidency of the United States, what is to be done about this matter, of usurpation?
First, it's helpful to know how we got here in the first place, to learn any lessons therefrom, and thus to make sure this sort of thing never happens again. So: Who is/was at fault here?
First of all has to be Mr. Obama himself. He is a constitutional lawyer; has lectured on the constitution to college students; and thus presumably knows whereof he speaks. He HAS to have known of the eligibility requirements of the office, in order to consider himself eligible to run for it. He therefore would have known of the requirement - the select, special, specific requirement to that particular office - to be a 'natural born citizen'. Even if he felt that there was some ambiguity as to the precise meaning of the term, he - if he believed in the rule of law at all - would have checked the matter out with some constitutionally knowledgeable advisers. And that advice SHOULD have given him pause.
We know he gave the matter SOME thought, because we know he himself brought up the issue of his father being a Kenyan citizen. So - what happened at that checkpoint?
Next stop on this trail, of guilt. He must have been ill advised by person or persons unknown specifically in the Democratic Party camp, to have visited this constitutional crisis on the American people - that the matter could have gotten as far as it has, without serious addressing of it. To say: Who led him to believe that all would be fine and Yankee Doodle Dandy? And why did he, this constitutional expert, believe them?
So the Democratic Party itself has a role to play in this fiasco. Someone high up in that body must have known that there was a difference between him being eligible to run for the national Senate and the presidency itself. This was and is not rocket science. Nor was it above his pay grade. So both he and the Democratic Party have responsibility in creating the crisis.
Next stop: the Opposition; meaning, at the first point of call there, the Republicans, and their GOP. But they may have had their own reasons to tread lightly on this snake, of 'constitutional eligibility'; since the Republicans (and note the near-anachronistic title) were not standing in the way of their own party's playing fast and loose with the Constitution, in the creation of an imperial presidency - excuse me; a 'unitary executive', as it was called in polite company, when THEIR person was in that position of pivotal power. Or, they simply did not want to risk being smeared, by accusations of 'racism' and so forth. Whatever.
Next stop: Congress itself. Now really, ladies and gentlemen of that august assembly: Did NONE of you twig on this issue? And if you did, where did your concerns go?
They obviously didn't go far enough. So how much of that is your fault, and how much of that is the fault of, possibly, your superiors; whomsoever all they may be?
Next stop: The judicial system. But the judicial system can only deal with issues that are brought there. Which finally happened after the fact. And the lower courts have washed their hands of the matter, and said, 'Nothing to do with me'. And added, in some cases: 'You need to go higher up than this court.' Meaning, to (a) Congress, and/or (b) the Supreme Court. As for (a): been there, looked at that. So:
Next stop: the Supreme Court. Which did deal with the matter to some extent; ie, the issue got past the first judicial hurdle, in being entertained by a justice, to the point of being brought to the next hurdle, of a 'quorum' of sorts (four, as I understand it). Where it has apparently faltered, in not getting the required number of justices to take it to the next stage. So: Some fault there. Actually, a lot of fault there - since the Supreme Court is where the legal-issues buck stops. But that body is not alone in culpability in this matter.
Who else, then, is culpable?
Well, there's the mainstream media (MSM). But should we wonder about this source? With its corporate-owner shot-callers?
Anybody else?
Unfortunately, yes.
We are. We, the People.
For letting it go this long. 'It': the serious constitutional issue of someone being eligible or not to run for the presidency of the United States.
Simply put: We have been asleep at the switch, of the American Republic into something resembling an empire.
Forged on both sides of the political aisle.
But it's not too late, to rouse ourselves, and take back our country, from those who would sacrifice it to a larger vision. The vision of a New World Order, run by and for the corporate-government kleptocracy that has risen in our day and age; just about to go for its final stage of takeover.
Except for one little detail.
A citizenry, aroused. And saying, collectively: Not on my watch.
This isn't a matter, then, of being either a Democrat or a Republican.
It is a matter, now, of being an American. And standing for the principles of the American Republic. Against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
And speaking of: This brings up the role of the American military in all this. The military, who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution - "against all enemies, foreign and domestic" - not to any politician or set of politicians.
So: Where do we go from here.
Not an easy place. But it has been forced on us, by necessity. That We the People enlist the American military in applying pressure for Barack Obama to step down from the office that he has occupied under false pretences; and in dissolving the Congress of these United States, and arranging for elections within a set period of time, whatever is in harmony with the rule of law.
It's also a great Opportunity to clean house in more ways than one. But more on that, anon.
References:
* oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath
* worldnetdaily, and their excellent series of articles on this subject, of Obama's ineligibility for the office
* obamacitizenshipfacts.org
First, it's helpful to know how we got here in the first place, to learn any lessons therefrom, and thus to make sure this sort of thing never happens again. So: Who is/was at fault here?
First of all has to be Mr. Obama himself. He is a constitutional lawyer; has lectured on the constitution to college students; and thus presumably knows whereof he speaks. He HAS to have known of the eligibility requirements of the office, in order to consider himself eligible to run for it. He therefore would have known of the requirement - the select, special, specific requirement to that particular office - to be a 'natural born citizen'. Even if he felt that there was some ambiguity as to the precise meaning of the term, he - if he believed in the rule of law at all - would have checked the matter out with some constitutionally knowledgeable advisers. And that advice SHOULD have given him pause.
We know he gave the matter SOME thought, because we know he himself brought up the issue of his father being a Kenyan citizen. So - what happened at that checkpoint?
Next stop on this trail, of guilt. He must have been ill advised by person or persons unknown specifically in the Democratic Party camp, to have visited this constitutional crisis on the American people - that the matter could have gotten as far as it has, without serious addressing of it. To say: Who led him to believe that all would be fine and Yankee Doodle Dandy? And why did he, this constitutional expert, believe them?
So the Democratic Party itself has a role to play in this fiasco. Someone high up in that body must have known that there was a difference between him being eligible to run for the national Senate and the presidency itself. This was and is not rocket science. Nor was it above his pay grade. So both he and the Democratic Party have responsibility in creating the crisis.
Next stop: the Opposition; meaning, at the first point of call there, the Republicans, and their GOP. But they may have had their own reasons to tread lightly on this snake, of 'constitutional eligibility'; since the Republicans (and note the near-anachronistic title) were not standing in the way of their own party's playing fast and loose with the Constitution, in the creation of an imperial presidency - excuse me; a 'unitary executive', as it was called in polite company, when THEIR person was in that position of pivotal power. Or, they simply did not want to risk being smeared, by accusations of 'racism' and so forth. Whatever.
Next stop: Congress itself. Now really, ladies and gentlemen of that august assembly: Did NONE of you twig on this issue? And if you did, where did your concerns go?
They obviously didn't go far enough. So how much of that is your fault, and how much of that is the fault of, possibly, your superiors; whomsoever all they may be?
Next stop: The judicial system. But the judicial system can only deal with issues that are brought there. Which finally happened after the fact. And the lower courts have washed their hands of the matter, and said, 'Nothing to do with me'. And added, in some cases: 'You need to go higher up than this court.' Meaning, to (a) Congress, and/or (b) the Supreme Court. As for (a): been there, looked at that. So:
Next stop: the Supreme Court. Which did deal with the matter to some extent; ie, the issue got past the first judicial hurdle, in being entertained by a justice, to the point of being brought to the next hurdle, of a 'quorum' of sorts (four, as I understand it). Where it has apparently faltered, in not getting the required number of justices to take it to the next stage. So: Some fault there. Actually, a lot of fault there - since the Supreme Court is where the legal-issues buck stops. But that body is not alone in culpability in this matter.
Who else, then, is culpable?
Well, there's the mainstream media (MSM). But should we wonder about this source? With its corporate-owner shot-callers?
Anybody else?
Unfortunately, yes.
We are. We, the People.
For letting it go this long. 'It': the serious constitutional issue of someone being eligible or not to run for the presidency of the United States.
Simply put: We have been asleep at the switch, of the American Republic into something resembling an empire.
Forged on both sides of the political aisle.
But it's not too late, to rouse ourselves, and take back our country, from those who would sacrifice it to a larger vision. The vision of a New World Order, run by and for the corporate-government kleptocracy that has risen in our day and age; just about to go for its final stage of takeover.
Except for one little detail.
A citizenry, aroused. And saying, collectively: Not on my watch.
This isn't a matter, then, of being either a Democrat or a Republican.
It is a matter, now, of being an American. And standing for the principles of the American Republic. Against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
And speaking of: This brings up the role of the American military in all this. The military, who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution - "against all enemies, foreign and domestic" - not to any politician or set of politicians.
So: Where do we go from here.
Not an easy place. But it has been forced on us, by necessity. That We the People enlist the American military in applying pressure for Barack Obama to step down from the office that he has occupied under false pretences; and in dissolving the Congress of these United States, and arranging for elections within a set period of time, whatever is in harmony with the rule of law.
It's also a great Opportunity to clean house in more ways than one. But more on that, anon.
References:
* oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath
* worldnetdaily, and their excellent series of articles on this subject, of Obama's ineligibility for the office
* obamacitizenshipfacts.org
Tuesday, 11 August 2009
Usurpation Before Our Very Eyes
"If the truth be known..."
I have now done a little more researching into the matter of the legal definition of what it takes to be a 'natural born citizen' (NBC). And I am appalled. It is not such a legalistically arcane issue after all, that I was willing to leave to 'the experts' to deal with. Simply put: We have been had. Our attention has been drawn to the one hand, while the other holds the answer, to the trick being performed.
To say. I'm not totally sure why so much time and effort is being spent on debating Obama's true bc. His candidacy fell at the first hurdle - in fact, before he even launched himself from his blocks. He is not a NBC, according to the very straight-forward definition of the term, because both his parents were not US citizens (whether he was born on US soil or not). If his true, biological father was in very point of fact Barack Obama Sr (about which there is some question; but for that, another time), he was not eligible to run for the presidency in the first place.
If we're going to live by the rule of law - which we very much should; otherwise we open ourselves to the spectre of living by anarchy on the one hand or tyranny on the other - we need to get back to it. And, like, now. Before sinister powers take advantage of the chink in the armour of the US nation-state that has been occasioned by Obama's illegal installation in the presidency; that terribly important seat of power, to the nation and to the world.
He is a usurper, just as much as if he had claimed the position by force of arms.
But it is not just his fault. It is ours, for believing that the Republic could be maintained while we slept - ours, for not paying sufficient attention to matters of state, and just assuming that the MSM was keeping us informed of all that we needed to know, to make wise decisions.
It is also our fault, for letting there grow up in the country the idea, without sufficient challenge, that the Constitution of the US was amenable to change merely by the personal socio-political proclivities of a majority of the Supreme Court justices at any given time - ie, that for that majority, like Humpty Dumpty, words mean what they say they mean.
We have been seduced into believing that black can mean white, merely because five Supreme Court justices say it is so.
It is not.
The Constitution is a contract. And that is what the rule of law is all about: living our societal lives as if words mean what they were intended to mean.
It's time to get back to that standard. Or we are in deep, deep trouble.
As we are at this very moment.
References:
* therightwing.net/index.php/2008/12/09 (John Kaduk; 'The Natural Born Citizen Case Explanation')
references there to the likes of E. Vattel, 'The Law of Nations' (1758) for the original common law definition of a NBC; and to
John Bingham of Ohio, one of the framers of the 14th Amendment. Explanation of why the 14th Amendment did not preempt the definition of a NBC, only refers to US citizenship.
Some people think that the two are one and the same. They are not. Why? Because words mean what they say they mean; not what people decide they want them to mean, after the fact.
* citizenwells.wordpress.com
Enough for now. I need to get over from being stunned by the extent of the audacity of it all. Hiding one's original birth certificate is one thing. Standing there in plain sight, like an emperor, is another.
The Audacity of Hope indeed. Hope, that no one will notice - or have the intestinal fortitude to comment on - the barefaced fact that the emperor has on no clothes.
Obama needs to be called on it. Now.
I have now done a little more researching into the matter of the legal definition of what it takes to be a 'natural born citizen' (NBC). And I am appalled. It is not such a legalistically arcane issue after all, that I was willing to leave to 'the experts' to deal with. Simply put: We have been had. Our attention has been drawn to the one hand, while the other holds the answer, to the trick being performed.
To say. I'm not totally sure why so much time and effort is being spent on debating Obama's true bc. His candidacy fell at the first hurdle - in fact, before he even launched himself from his blocks. He is not a NBC, according to the very straight-forward definition of the term, because both his parents were not US citizens (whether he was born on US soil or not). If his true, biological father was in very point of fact Barack Obama Sr (about which there is some question; but for that, another time), he was not eligible to run for the presidency in the first place.
If we're going to live by the rule of law - which we very much should; otherwise we open ourselves to the spectre of living by anarchy on the one hand or tyranny on the other - we need to get back to it. And, like, now. Before sinister powers take advantage of the chink in the armour of the US nation-state that has been occasioned by Obama's illegal installation in the presidency; that terribly important seat of power, to the nation and to the world.
He is a usurper, just as much as if he had claimed the position by force of arms.
But it is not just his fault. It is ours, for believing that the Republic could be maintained while we slept - ours, for not paying sufficient attention to matters of state, and just assuming that the MSM was keeping us informed of all that we needed to know, to make wise decisions.
It is also our fault, for letting there grow up in the country the idea, without sufficient challenge, that the Constitution of the US was amenable to change merely by the personal socio-political proclivities of a majority of the Supreme Court justices at any given time - ie, that for that majority, like Humpty Dumpty, words mean what they say they mean.
We have been seduced into believing that black can mean white, merely because five Supreme Court justices say it is so.
It is not.
The Constitution is a contract. And that is what the rule of law is all about: living our societal lives as if words mean what they were intended to mean.
It's time to get back to that standard. Or we are in deep, deep trouble.
As we are at this very moment.
References:
* therightwing.net/index.php/2008/12/09 (John Kaduk; 'The Natural Born Citizen Case Explanation')
references there to the likes of E. Vattel, 'The Law of Nations' (1758) for the original common law definition of a NBC; and to
John Bingham of Ohio, one of the framers of the 14th Amendment. Explanation of why the 14th Amendment did not preempt the definition of a NBC, only refers to US citizenship.
Some people think that the two are one and the same. They are not. Why? Because words mean what they say they mean; not what people decide they want them to mean, after the fact.
* citizenwells.wordpress.com
Enough for now. I need to get over from being stunned by the extent of the audacity of it all. Hiding one's original birth certificate is one thing. Standing there in plain sight, like an emperor, is another.
The Audacity of Hope indeed. Hope, that no one will notice - or have the intestinal fortitude to comment on - the barefaced fact that the emperor has on no clothes.
Obama needs to be called on it. Now.
Wednesday, 5 August 2009
Response to Gary Younge on the Obama bc Affair
My email response to Gary Younge, columnist in/for the Guardian UK national newspaper, on the occasion of his column of 3 August:
Dear Gary,
Re your Comment of today:
You're not being fair in this matter, as I indicated in a letter (unprinted) to the Guardian on their article of 27 July on the issue (copy of which, see below). Granted, you are aware that to dismiss 'birthers' - and by implication, anybody who is curious and questioning about this - is being "reckless". But "when proof is provided..." -
Not so. You haven't done your homework sufficiently in this matter. Otherwise you would have known that the document on FactCheck and Obama's site is, in the circumstances, obfuscatory, to the issue at hand. It is not proof of anything but a bureaucratic response. (If it's even accurate. See http://bogusbirthcertificate.blogsot.com)
Please look into this matter further. You will apparently be surprised at ALL of the suspicious aspects of it. Including the shooting to death of a person who had illegally accessed the passport files of Obama at the State Department - "in order to 'cauterize' the records of potentially embarrassing information" - and was helping the authorities with their inquiries, as the expression has it.
The quote above is from an investigation into this whole matter, a copy of which is carried at:
www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=2697
I commend it to your attention. You need to know what sort of information is out there, to know the full extent of the case, and concern.
As for your put-down of the suspicion of the report of Obama's birth in a Honolulu newspaper - because his momma was anticipating he was going to run for president of the US someday, doncha know, hee hee, titter titter: please, Gary. Of COURSE his mother would do all she (and his maternal grandparents, living there in Hawaii) could to confer US citizenship on him, for his future's sake. This 'take' on the matter is, really, beneath you; although it is used by some to try to laugh this issue away.
As you indicate awareness of: It is not going to go away. He needs to face this music. Full stop.
FYI, I'm dealing with this issue on my blog - with a good dialogue with a responder - at:
kibitzer-truthseeker.blogspot.com. Our 'debate' covers most of the issues at hand.
I have basic respect for your perspectives, shared over the years in the pages of the Guardian. Please hold to the same high standards of journalism on this, far-from-laughable, matter.
Yours sincerely,
Stan Stanfield
P.S. And possibly - possibly - this whole aspect of the matter is moot anyway, if it turns out that the true and correct, fine-pointed, definitive definition of being a 'natural born citizen' requires both parents to have been US citizens. But I will leave that aspect of it to the legal experts.
P.P.S. And for the record: I may have been slightly in error in my letter, when I referred to the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) as having been available to any parents, even while living without the State of Hawaii, as long as they had had the State as their legal residence "for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child". That precise wording came into effect in 1982, as the investigation I have referred to herein attests to. But from other sources, I have read that that 'policy' applied at the time of Obama's birth as well, ie, that such a COLB could be issued for a child even if he/she were not actually born in the State. Interesting, that on such a fine line such a huge issue could hang...
******
And my letter to the Guardian followed; which I have previously posted on this blog.
A couple of further thoughts.
FactCheck: Hardly an independent, 'non-partisan' site. The Annenberg name & link goes back to Obama's time in Illinois, where they were associated on the board of at least one community-oriented association (Chicago Annenberg Challenge, of which Obama was Board Chairman and President). FactCheck.org killed the building issue around Obama's COLB in August of last year; just when - after Labor Day - "the swing voters would begin to pay attention to the presidential campaign". See the investigator's report referred to herein. (Also see: deathby1000papercuts.com, eg, on the Obama-Bill Ayers-Bernardine Dohrn-Michelle Obama links.) As to that report:
The Curious Case of Obama's Purloined Passport. Quote:
"It should be added that 'Obama's top terrorism and intelligence adviser, John O. Brennan, heads a firm that was cited in March ['08] for breaching sensitive files in the State Department's passport office, according to a State Department Inspector General's report released this past July [ie, '08].
'The security breach, first reported by the Washington Times and later confirmed by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, involved a contract employee of Brennan's firm, The Analysis Corp., which has earned millions of dollars providing intelligence-related consulting services to federal agencies and private companies.
'During a State Department briefing on March 21, 20008, McCormack confirmed that the contractor had accessed the passport files of presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain, and that the inspector general had launched an investigation.
'Sources who tracked the investigation tell Newsmax that the main target of the breach was the Obama passport file, and that the contractor accessed the file in order to "cauterize" the records of potentially embarrassing information.
'"They looked at the McCain and Clinton files as well to create confusion," one knowledgeable source told Newsmax. "But this was basically an attempt to cauterize the Obama file."
'At the time of the breach, Brennan was working as an unpaid adviser to the Obama campaign.
'"This individual's actions were taken without the knowledge or direction of anyone at The Analysis Corp. and are wholly inconsistent with our professional and ethical standards," Brennan's company said in a statement sent to reporters after the passport breach was made public.
'The passport files include "personally identifiable information such as the applicant's name, gender, social security number, date and place of birth, and passport number," according to the inspector general report.
'The files may contain additional information including "original copies of the associated documents," the report added. Such documents include birth certificates, naturalization certificates, or oaths of allegiance for U.S.-born persons who adopted the citizenship of a foreign country as minors.["]
'The State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a 104-page report on the breach last July [ie, '08]. Although it is stamped "Sensitive but Unclassified," the report was heavily redacted in the version released to the public with page after page blacked out entirely.'"
This investigator's report - titled 'Clearing the Smoke on Obama's Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigator's June 10 Report' - gives reference here for this quoted section to:
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/brennan_passport_breach/2009/01/12/170430.html
This is all very murky stuff. There's even more; but this should do, for now, to indicate that a major investigation into this whole matter is warranted.
The Untouchables - where are you when we need you?
As I said, in part, in a post on a thread on Politico.com (under blog titled 'Reid hits "artificial controversy" of birthers' by Martin Kady):
"Why does all of this matter? Among other reasons, I can think of one very good one: Because Obama himself ran on a platform of the US returning to the rule of law. Without which, the country could be taken over by tyrants. From either side of the political aisle...
"The further down the rabbit hole one goes in trying to trace down the truth of this matter, the murkier it gets. Obama needs to level with the American people. Period. End of story. Or he, and we, will never hear the last of it.
"Transparency. That's the key."
If Obama and his judicial appointees play as fast and loose with the law as this matter heralds, and has been handled, we are in for a very rocky road. And I for one will not stand for it.
America has a higher destiny than this, to fulfil.
It's time - obviously - to be about it.
Dear Gary,
Re your Comment of today:
You're not being fair in this matter, as I indicated in a letter (unprinted) to the Guardian on their article of 27 July on the issue (copy of which, see below). Granted, you are aware that to dismiss 'birthers' - and by implication, anybody who is curious and questioning about this - is being "reckless". But "when proof is provided..." -
Not so. You haven't done your homework sufficiently in this matter. Otherwise you would have known that the document on FactCheck and Obama's site is, in the circumstances, obfuscatory, to the issue at hand. It is not proof of anything but a bureaucratic response. (If it's even accurate. See http://bogusbirthcertificate.blogsot.com)
Please look into this matter further. You will apparently be surprised at ALL of the suspicious aspects of it. Including the shooting to death of a person who had illegally accessed the passport files of Obama at the State Department - "in order to 'cauterize' the records of potentially embarrassing information" - and was helping the authorities with their inquiries, as the expression has it.
The quote above is from an investigation into this whole matter, a copy of which is carried at:
www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=2697
I commend it to your attention. You need to know what sort of information is out there, to know the full extent of the case, and concern.
As for your put-down of the suspicion of the report of Obama's birth in a Honolulu newspaper - because his momma was anticipating he was going to run for president of the US someday, doncha know, hee hee, titter titter: please, Gary. Of COURSE his mother would do all she (and his maternal grandparents, living there in Hawaii) could to confer US citizenship on him, for his future's sake. This 'take' on the matter is, really, beneath you; although it is used by some to try to laugh this issue away.
As you indicate awareness of: It is not going to go away. He needs to face this music. Full stop.
FYI, I'm dealing with this issue on my blog - with a good dialogue with a responder - at:
kibitzer-truthseeker.blogspot.com. Our 'debate' covers most of the issues at hand.
I have basic respect for your perspectives, shared over the years in the pages of the Guardian. Please hold to the same high standards of journalism on this, far-from-laughable, matter.
Yours sincerely,
Stan Stanfield
P.S. And possibly - possibly - this whole aspect of the matter is moot anyway, if it turns out that the true and correct, fine-pointed, definitive definition of being a 'natural born citizen' requires both parents to have been US citizens. But I will leave that aspect of it to the legal experts.
P.P.S. And for the record: I may have been slightly in error in my letter, when I referred to the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) as having been available to any parents, even while living without the State of Hawaii, as long as they had had the State as their legal residence "for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child". That precise wording came into effect in 1982, as the investigation I have referred to herein attests to. But from other sources, I have read that that 'policy' applied at the time of Obama's birth as well, ie, that such a COLB could be issued for a child even if he/she were not actually born in the State. Interesting, that on such a fine line such a huge issue could hang...
******
And my letter to the Guardian followed; which I have previously posted on this blog.
A couple of further thoughts.
FactCheck: Hardly an independent, 'non-partisan' site. The Annenberg name & link goes back to Obama's time in Illinois, where they were associated on the board of at least one community-oriented association (Chicago Annenberg Challenge, of which Obama was Board Chairman and President). FactCheck.org killed the building issue around Obama's COLB in August of last year; just when - after Labor Day - "the swing voters would begin to pay attention to the presidential campaign". See the investigator's report referred to herein. (Also see: deathby1000papercuts.com, eg, on the Obama-Bill Ayers-Bernardine Dohrn-Michelle Obama links.) As to that report:
The Curious Case of Obama's Purloined Passport. Quote:
"It should be added that 'Obama's top terrorism and intelligence adviser, John O. Brennan, heads a firm that was cited in March ['08] for breaching sensitive files in the State Department's passport office, according to a State Department Inspector General's report released this past July [ie, '08].
'The security breach, first reported by the Washington Times and later confirmed by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, involved a contract employee of Brennan's firm, The Analysis Corp., which has earned millions of dollars providing intelligence-related consulting services to federal agencies and private companies.
'During a State Department briefing on March 21, 20008, McCormack confirmed that the contractor had accessed the passport files of presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain, and that the inspector general had launched an investigation.
'Sources who tracked the investigation tell Newsmax that the main target of the breach was the Obama passport file, and that the contractor accessed the file in order to "cauterize" the records of potentially embarrassing information.
'"They looked at the McCain and Clinton files as well to create confusion," one knowledgeable source told Newsmax. "But this was basically an attempt to cauterize the Obama file."
'At the time of the breach, Brennan was working as an unpaid adviser to the Obama campaign.
'"This individual's actions were taken without the knowledge or direction of anyone at The Analysis Corp. and are wholly inconsistent with our professional and ethical standards," Brennan's company said in a statement sent to reporters after the passport breach was made public.
'The passport files include "personally identifiable information such as the applicant's name, gender, social security number, date and place of birth, and passport number," according to the inspector general report.
'The files may contain additional information including "original copies of the associated documents," the report added. Such documents include birth certificates, naturalization certificates, or oaths of allegiance for U.S.-born persons who adopted the citizenship of a foreign country as minors.["]
'The State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a 104-page report on the breach last July [ie, '08]. Although it is stamped "Sensitive but Unclassified," the report was heavily redacted in the version released to the public with page after page blacked out entirely.'"
This investigator's report - titled 'Clearing the Smoke on Obama's Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigator's June 10 Report' - gives reference here for this quoted section to:
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/brennan_passport_breach/2009/01/12/170430.html
This is all very murky stuff. There's even more; but this should do, for now, to indicate that a major investigation into this whole matter is warranted.
The Untouchables - where are you when we need you?
As I said, in part, in a post on a thread on Politico.com (under blog titled 'Reid hits "artificial controversy" of birthers' by Martin Kady):
"Why does all of this matter? Among other reasons, I can think of one very good one: Because Obama himself ran on a platform of the US returning to the rule of law. Without which, the country could be taken over by tyrants. From either side of the political aisle...
"The further down the rabbit hole one goes in trying to trace down the truth of this matter, the murkier it gets. Obama needs to level with the American people. Period. End of story. Or he, and we, will never hear the last of it.
"Transparency. That's the key."
If Obama and his judicial appointees play as fast and loose with the law as this matter heralds, and has been handled, we are in for a very rocky road. And I for one will not stand for it.
America has a higher destiny than this, to fulfil.
It's time - obviously - to be about it.
Wednesday, 29 July 2009
The Obama Birth Certificate Brouhaha
The Guardian today had an article revealing the controversy in the States over Obama's birth certificate, conducted with typical liberal put-down tongue in cheek, and ending on the note that it has all been inspired by racism. Having done some investigation into this matter, I felt compelled to add my two cents' worth. Not that I hold out much hope that the Guardian will print my letter to their editor. So here it is.
"Dear Editor,
"The president of MSNBC is quoted as saying that the issue about Barack Obama's birth certificate is "racist" (Born-again right puts focus on Obama's birth certificate, 29 July). This is too facile a response. The matter is much more substantial than that.
"The matter first had to be addressed in more detail because it turned out that the document carried on the Obama camp's website was in point of fact not a copy of his original, vault-copy birth certificate - as the McCain camp provided for their candidate - but only a 'Certification of Live Birth' that the state of Hawaii issued for any child whose parents had been resident in the state for a year prior to the birth, regardless of where the child was actually born. This information coincided with reports on YouTube that his paternal grandmother said she was present at his birth in a hospital in Kenya. The Hawaiian state health director then issued a statement that, far from clearing the matter up, was ambiguous, further creating suspicion. This was exacerbated as well by the facts that Obama still refused (a) to let his original, vault-copy bc be released, and (b) to let his college application records be reviewed, as to how he presented himself for enrolment and financial support.
"Obama could have cleared this whole thing up long ago by authorizing release of his original bc. He refused to. This is not a witchhunt. This is a legitimate request for clarity on the matter.
"As for the Hawaiian state health director's recent statement: Many US citizens will no longer accept to buy a pig in a poke, with or without lipstick. It's time for Obama and his advisers to realise that the citizenry deserve total transparency in this matter. Or the poison will undermine his presidency, and his stated desire to bring about real change. Rather, it smacks of politics as usual. Not a good start.
"Yours sincerely," etc.
Perhaps the issue isn't clear enough to non-Americans. The Constitution of the US is very clear on it: that a candidate for the office of the president must be a natural born citizen, ie, of at least one US citizen on US soil. Indeed, Sen. McCain's candidacy was also up for question, because although he was born of two US parents, he was not born in the continental US, or on US soil. His case was that he was born in a US military base in the Panama Canal, and so that counted as at least de facto American soil. However, it turned out that he was not in fact born on the base - even if that argument could have passed constitutional muster - but in a hospital in Panama City. However as well, that issue became moot when he lost the election.
Back to Obama's case. It is a very murky matter. I didn't have space in my letter to mention other aspects: the age (read: underage) of his mother at his birth, with a British-Kenyan citizen for a father; his mother's subsequent marriage to an Indonesian citizen, where dual citizenship is not recognised, thus he must have become a citizen of that country and lost his purported US citizenship; what his passport gave as his citizenship when he traveled to Pakistan; and the fact that two different hospitals in Honolulu have been given as his place of birth, including by his half-sister from his mother's marriage to the Indonesian. What, in short, is going on here?
And incidentally, the first comment by the Hawaiian state health director, which I referred to as "ambiguous", was even more than that. With all the rumours and theories going around at the time, and total transparency being clearly called for, it was just plain outright slippery. She said that she and a colleague had looked at Obama's hospital record, and could verify that the Hawaii State Department of Health "has [his] original birth certificate on record, in accordance with state policies and procedures". Full stop.
Say what? And? And.......??
Outrageous.
And American citizens continue to be outraged by all this stonewalling. Citizens, who have to pony up certified copies of their true birth certificates to get a passport and so forth - what makes Obama think that he's any better than anybody else. Etc etc.
It's not only a major public relations disaster on his part. It's quite possibly a cover-up of the real facts. Which won't be known, until he consents to have his original, long-form bc released. If it still exists. Untouched.
There's more, than even most of those who have been following this saga closely know about. It turns out that his background in Illinois, before he started his political rise, has some murky aspects to it as well. To do with his time at a law firm called Sidley Austin. Where he met his subsequent wife. Who has some very murky aspects to her story as well. To do with things like the alternative picture for America of the Weather Underground, and computer technology gaining a cabal of people access to various secure sites, including airplanes engineered into flying bombs, and the capability to issue passports to selected people, like hired assassins, and to intriguing characters like one Barry Soetoro. Who needed help in cleaning up his US passport act....
What a tangled web people weave, when first they think to deceive. Or something like that.....
"Dear Editor,
"The president of MSNBC is quoted as saying that the issue about Barack Obama's birth certificate is "racist" (Born-again right puts focus on Obama's birth certificate, 29 July). This is too facile a response. The matter is much more substantial than that.
"The matter first had to be addressed in more detail because it turned out that the document carried on the Obama camp's website was in point of fact not a copy of his original, vault-copy birth certificate - as the McCain camp provided for their candidate - but only a 'Certification of Live Birth' that the state of Hawaii issued for any child whose parents had been resident in the state for a year prior to the birth, regardless of where the child was actually born. This information coincided with reports on YouTube that his paternal grandmother said she was present at his birth in a hospital in Kenya. The Hawaiian state health director then issued a statement that, far from clearing the matter up, was ambiguous, further creating suspicion. This was exacerbated as well by the facts that Obama still refused (a) to let his original, vault-copy bc be released, and (b) to let his college application records be reviewed, as to how he presented himself for enrolment and financial support.
"Obama could have cleared this whole thing up long ago by authorizing release of his original bc. He refused to. This is not a witchhunt. This is a legitimate request for clarity on the matter.
"As for the Hawaiian state health director's recent statement: Many US citizens will no longer accept to buy a pig in a poke, with or without lipstick. It's time for Obama and his advisers to realise that the citizenry deserve total transparency in this matter. Or the poison will undermine his presidency, and his stated desire to bring about real change. Rather, it smacks of politics as usual. Not a good start.
"Yours sincerely," etc.
Perhaps the issue isn't clear enough to non-Americans. The Constitution of the US is very clear on it: that a candidate for the office of the president must be a natural born citizen, ie, of at least one US citizen on US soil. Indeed, Sen. McCain's candidacy was also up for question, because although he was born of two US parents, he was not born in the continental US, or on US soil. His case was that he was born in a US military base in the Panama Canal, and so that counted as at least de facto American soil. However, it turned out that he was not in fact born on the base - even if that argument could have passed constitutional muster - but in a hospital in Panama City. However as well, that issue became moot when he lost the election.
Back to Obama's case. It is a very murky matter. I didn't have space in my letter to mention other aspects: the age (read: underage) of his mother at his birth, with a British-Kenyan citizen for a father; his mother's subsequent marriage to an Indonesian citizen, where dual citizenship is not recognised, thus he must have become a citizen of that country and lost his purported US citizenship; what his passport gave as his citizenship when he traveled to Pakistan; and the fact that two different hospitals in Honolulu have been given as his place of birth, including by his half-sister from his mother's marriage to the Indonesian. What, in short, is going on here?
And incidentally, the first comment by the Hawaiian state health director, which I referred to as "ambiguous", was even more than that. With all the rumours and theories going around at the time, and total transparency being clearly called for, it was just plain outright slippery. She said that she and a colleague had looked at Obama's hospital record, and could verify that the Hawaii State Department of Health "has [his] original birth certificate on record, in accordance with state policies and procedures". Full stop.
Say what? And? And.......??
Outrageous.
And American citizens continue to be outraged by all this stonewalling. Citizens, who have to pony up certified copies of their true birth certificates to get a passport and so forth - what makes Obama think that he's any better than anybody else. Etc etc.
It's not only a major public relations disaster on his part. It's quite possibly a cover-up of the real facts. Which won't be known, until he consents to have his original, long-form bc released. If it still exists. Untouched.
There's more, than even most of those who have been following this saga closely know about. It turns out that his background in Illinois, before he started his political rise, has some murky aspects to it as well. To do with his time at a law firm called Sidley Austin. Where he met his subsequent wife. Who has some very murky aspects to her story as well. To do with things like the alternative picture for America of the Weather Underground, and computer technology gaining a cabal of people access to various secure sites, including airplanes engineered into flying bombs, and the capability to issue passports to selected people, like hired assassins, and to intriguing characters like one Barry Soetoro. Who needed help in cleaning up his US passport act....
What a tangled web people weave, when first they think to deceive. Or something like that.....
Saturday, 4 July 2009
The Old and The New Paradigms
People have been seeing green shoots lately, here and there, of a return of economic activity in the current paradigm. (Though sometimes one has to look quickly, because they are often overwhelmed by new information and activity.) I have seen some interesting green shoots heralding the new - or at least, the willingness to look at something new.
Item. In the 27 June edition of the Scottish paper we take here at my home base in the international spiritual community where I live (the Findhorn Foundation), there was a Comment column entitled 'The sun is setting on our economic system'. The article, by two academics running a body called the Sustainable Development Commission, dealt insightfully with the idea that: "We need new solutions to the global crisis, ones that will not repeat the errors of the past. Scotland can still flourish," continued the sub-head, "but only if we build a sustainable future." The gist of the article was that there was a need now to redefine 'prosperity' - "in line with evidence about what contributes to people's wellbeing." The article concluded: "The possibility that Scotland can flourish, and at the same time consume less, is an intriguing one. It would be foolish to think that it will be easy to achieve. But it should not be given up lightly. It offers the best prospect we have for lasting prosperity."
Easy for academics to ponder and pontificate on, one might be tempted to respond. But it is very hard to deny their fundamental premise: that "this crisis is a symptom of a more fundamental problem" [than the blind pursuit of economic growth which "has been the single most important policy goal across the world"]. "The solution to the recession, we are told, is taking whatever action is required to get economic growth back into action. Today, however, we face different problems than in past recessions and we need a different solution." There are new things under the sun: "The current global recession, a widening gap between rich and poor, and a growing environmental crisis make this the time to forge a new economic system." Indeed, professors Tim Jackson and Jan Beggington; well articulated, and spotted, and amplified on in a new report from their 'commission' titled Prosperity Without Growth?
And the second green shoot in this direction sprouted right afterwards, in the national newspaper we take called the Guardian, in a Comment article on 29 June by one of their regular columnists, Madeleine Bunting; that green shoot headed 'Market dogma is exposed as myth. Where is the new vision to unite us?' The sub-head said it succinctly: "With religion outmoded and society fragmented, it will require a different kind of moral narrative to inspire change." I won't go into the article in detail; but I can, and do, recommend it highly. It is a reflection on a recent lecture in the UK by American political philosopher Michael Sandel, who posited that "It's the end of the era of market triumphalism." What is to take its place? Ah, that is the question, that Madeleine mulls magnificently. And to which I contributed a comment, on its online site thread. To wit:
"Interesting subject and thoughts on it, Madeleine; thanks.
"It feels to me as though great Crisis is bringing with it great Opportunity. And let's look at the timing of that latter. It has come at a time of nicely advanced technology, and a sense of our global interdepedence, with "affairs now soul size", as the playwright put it. So let's think big - and to say, global - to move on through this white water stage of those affairs.
"Some such thoughts. (1) The people - with their level of consciousness - who got us into this messy stage of our development on this planet are not the ones to get us out of it. (2) We are currently limited in our responses by our slavish regard for a particular social tool: interest-bearing money. It is not a necessary incentive to activity, when people have another incentive. Another I can think of can be described as 'doing not for the fruit but for the sake' - ie, out of an overriding belief in the communal value of such doing, and the value of living one's life from a place of service to others. Yes, things can be accomplished by a primary attitude of service to self; but that's not the high road on one's spiritual evolution.
"Which takes us to (3) the key to all this. Simply put: The universe has purpose, and that purpose is Good. And once we accept that reality, we can do magnificently, in harmony with our material wherewithal on this plane of existence.
"As to the first part of this proposition: I would consider such proofs as the well-investigated realities of reincarnation, precognition, and out-of-body experiences (OOBEs). All of which lends to the point of plan and purpose. As to the latter part: Not only have we confronted ourselves with ecological Crisis - and so the invocation of Necessity - but we have the technology to surmount the matter. In various forms, including what are called free energy devices, and robotics, and such.
"We have the means to move into the new. All we are lacking is the will. And the imagination, to see it, for what it is. And for what it is not: an Opportunity for a few to rule the many. Well; there is that opportunity. But I have faith in The People to carry this one off. Because we're not talking about human intervention. We're talking about that part of us that will, and is, responding to The Time.
"The People and The Time: a winning combination. And by living our lives from the inside out, we'll make it happen.
"Maybe just barely. But that's where faith comes into this picture, of our current reality on mother Earth."
In concluding her article, Madeleine referred to the "paralyzing" grand narrative facing humanity of environmental catastrophe, and named the "terrifying" spectre "of a world rapidly running out of the natural resources required to sustain extravagant lifestyles and [a] burgeoning population "; a prospect that "disables rather than empowers us to achieve political change". But a couple of points in that legitimate regard. (1) 'When the going gets tough, the tough get going' - a restatement of my point above, about how great Crisis presents great Opportunity. Things often have to get really bad before they can get better - and here we are. (2) And here we are with the technology to be able to handle the challenge, with alternatives to nonrenewable resources and such. And, with the basic ability to create enough for all - in a sustainable way, and mindset - the population factor can take care of itself. Families have many children primarily as a reflection of economic insufficiency, including unhealthy standards of living - to ensure enough of their offspring survive to support them in their old age. This is a symptom, that will disappear when the condition disappears. And yes, other families have large families for other reasons, particularly religious ones. But we are talking about, primarily, a post-religious age, and moving into a spiritual age: living our lives in harmony with nature and our essential Nature - in gratitude to our Creator FOR life, and meaningful purpose TO it; as I touched on in my post to Ms Bunting's article.
Which is why people will give of their best, in this post-kindergarten age aborning.
As for the sarcastic, and malcontent, and lazy; I have a message:
Sit back and watch, if you want. The rest of us have work to do. the Great Work, as it were. And is. Now upon us, TO do.
As to the inherent idea in my post to Ms Bunting's article that there is something more than Man and his brain at work - which we can call, for the lack of a better word, Mind - I would draw to the attention of skeptics the work of such as Dr. Harold S. Burr, of Yale Medical School, summarized in his book 'Blueprint for Immortality', wherein he makes an impressive case for an electrodynamic field surrounding all living things - which he called the L-field - and determining what takes place within it; not the other way around. So that we are talking about a case for the proposition that Essence comes before Existence.
But that can be the subject of another blog. For now, let me hark back to the two articles which occasioned this thread of thought of mine; to commend them to your attention, and leave you with an appreciation, hopefully enhanced, of the time in which we live. A First Time, for something new under the sun, of global proportions. Let's catch this wave at its peak. And enjoy the ride.
And I assure you, I'm not talking about the Novus Ordo Seclorum of the New World Order crowd. That is an attempt by Man to place Himself on the throne, of life on Earth. That vision is, simply, an inferior one to the one made in Heaven. For the lack of a better word for what I'm talking about.
It's close enough.
Item. In the 27 June edition of the Scottish paper we take here at my home base in the international spiritual community where I live (the Findhorn Foundation), there was a Comment column entitled 'The sun is setting on our economic system'. The article, by two academics running a body called the Sustainable Development Commission, dealt insightfully with the idea that: "We need new solutions to the global crisis, ones that will not repeat the errors of the past. Scotland can still flourish," continued the sub-head, "but only if we build a sustainable future." The gist of the article was that there was a need now to redefine 'prosperity' - "in line with evidence about what contributes to people's wellbeing." The article concluded: "The possibility that Scotland can flourish, and at the same time consume less, is an intriguing one. It would be foolish to think that it will be easy to achieve. But it should not be given up lightly. It offers the best prospect we have for lasting prosperity."
Easy for academics to ponder and pontificate on, one might be tempted to respond. But it is very hard to deny their fundamental premise: that "this crisis is a symptom of a more fundamental problem" [than the blind pursuit of economic growth which "has been the single most important policy goal across the world"]. "The solution to the recession, we are told, is taking whatever action is required to get economic growth back into action. Today, however, we face different problems than in past recessions and we need a different solution." There are new things under the sun: "The current global recession, a widening gap between rich and poor, and a growing environmental crisis make this the time to forge a new economic system." Indeed, professors Tim Jackson and Jan Beggington; well articulated, and spotted, and amplified on in a new report from their 'commission' titled Prosperity Without Growth?
And the second green shoot in this direction sprouted right afterwards, in the national newspaper we take called the Guardian, in a Comment article on 29 June by one of their regular columnists, Madeleine Bunting; that green shoot headed 'Market dogma is exposed as myth. Where is the new vision to unite us?' The sub-head said it succinctly: "With religion outmoded and society fragmented, it will require a different kind of moral narrative to inspire change." I won't go into the article in detail; but I can, and do, recommend it highly. It is a reflection on a recent lecture in the UK by American political philosopher Michael Sandel, who posited that "It's the end of the era of market triumphalism." What is to take its place? Ah, that is the question, that Madeleine mulls magnificently. And to which I contributed a comment, on its online site thread. To wit:
"Interesting subject and thoughts on it, Madeleine; thanks.
"It feels to me as though great Crisis is bringing with it great Opportunity. And let's look at the timing of that latter. It has come at a time of nicely advanced technology, and a sense of our global interdepedence, with "affairs now soul size", as the playwright put it. So let's think big - and to say, global - to move on through this white water stage of those affairs.
"Some such thoughts. (1) The people - with their level of consciousness - who got us into this messy stage of our development on this planet are not the ones to get us out of it. (2) We are currently limited in our responses by our slavish regard for a particular social tool: interest-bearing money. It is not a necessary incentive to activity, when people have another incentive. Another I can think of can be described as 'doing not for the fruit but for the sake' - ie, out of an overriding belief in the communal value of such doing, and the value of living one's life from a place of service to others. Yes, things can be accomplished by a primary attitude of service to self; but that's not the high road on one's spiritual evolution.
"Which takes us to (3) the key to all this. Simply put: The universe has purpose, and that purpose is Good. And once we accept that reality, we can do magnificently, in harmony with our material wherewithal on this plane of existence.
"As to the first part of this proposition: I would consider such proofs as the well-investigated realities of reincarnation, precognition, and out-of-body experiences (OOBEs). All of which lends to the point of plan and purpose. As to the latter part: Not only have we confronted ourselves with ecological Crisis - and so the invocation of Necessity - but we have the technology to surmount the matter. In various forms, including what are called free energy devices, and robotics, and such.
"We have the means to move into the new. All we are lacking is the will. And the imagination, to see it, for what it is. And for what it is not: an Opportunity for a few to rule the many. Well; there is that opportunity. But I have faith in The People to carry this one off. Because we're not talking about human intervention. We're talking about that part of us that will, and is, responding to The Time.
"The People and The Time: a winning combination. And by living our lives from the inside out, we'll make it happen.
"Maybe just barely. But that's where faith comes into this picture, of our current reality on mother Earth."
In concluding her article, Madeleine referred to the "paralyzing" grand narrative facing humanity of environmental catastrophe, and named the "terrifying" spectre "of a world rapidly running out of the natural resources required to sustain extravagant lifestyles and [a] burgeoning population "; a prospect that "disables rather than empowers us to achieve political change". But a couple of points in that legitimate regard. (1) 'When the going gets tough, the tough get going' - a restatement of my point above, about how great Crisis presents great Opportunity. Things often have to get really bad before they can get better - and here we are. (2) And here we are with the technology to be able to handle the challenge, with alternatives to nonrenewable resources and such. And, with the basic ability to create enough for all - in a sustainable way, and mindset - the population factor can take care of itself. Families have many children primarily as a reflection of economic insufficiency, including unhealthy standards of living - to ensure enough of their offspring survive to support them in their old age. This is a symptom, that will disappear when the condition disappears. And yes, other families have large families for other reasons, particularly religious ones. But we are talking about, primarily, a post-religious age, and moving into a spiritual age: living our lives in harmony with nature and our essential Nature - in gratitude to our Creator FOR life, and meaningful purpose TO it; as I touched on in my post to Ms Bunting's article.
Which is why people will give of their best, in this post-kindergarten age aborning.
As for the sarcastic, and malcontent, and lazy; I have a message:
Sit back and watch, if you want. The rest of us have work to do. the Great Work, as it were. And is. Now upon us, TO do.
As to the inherent idea in my post to Ms Bunting's article that there is something more than Man and his brain at work - which we can call, for the lack of a better word, Mind - I would draw to the attention of skeptics the work of such as Dr. Harold S. Burr, of Yale Medical School, summarized in his book 'Blueprint for Immortality', wherein he makes an impressive case for an electrodynamic field surrounding all living things - which he called the L-field - and determining what takes place within it; not the other way around. So that we are talking about a case for the proposition that Essence comes before Existence.
But that can be the subject of another blog. For now, let me hark back to the two articles which occasioned this thread of thought of mine; to commend them to your attention, and leave you with an appreciation, hopefully enhanced, of the time in which we live. A First Time, for something new under the sun, of global proportions. Let's catch this wave at its peak. And enjoy the ride.
And I assure you, I'm not talking about the Novus Ordo Seclorum of the New World Order crowd. That is an attempt by Man to place Himself on the throne, of life on Earth. That vision is, simply, an inferior one to the one made in Heaven. For the lack of a better word for what I'm talking about.
It's close enough.
Monday, 18 May 2009
Tamiflu-swine flu-the NWO
"If the truth be known..."
I'd like to make a comment on the current swine flu scare, and its ramifications.
As much as I can be as suspicious as the next skeptical person about its origin - with its makeup highly questionable, of viral strains from all over the place - I feel that the principle of Occam's Razor could simply be at work here. Namely, that it is all (well; mostly) about making money.
Consider. Tamiflu - the pharmaceutical flu antiviral that many countries bought huge stocks of, in the wake of the bird flu scare of yesteryear - has a shelf life (as I understand it, of 48 months). Meaning, that it has either to be used within that time period, or tossed out. Now, one could argue that it doesn't matter to the mfgr whether it is used or tossed, they still made money from its sale; but perhaps the matter is a little more complex than that. For example, those in govt who bought it may have to justify to the taxpayers its purchase; so voila - a flu scare. And thus the need for more sales - er, more medication, to take its place.
A by-the-way here: Tamiflu has already been shown to be not very effective against a number of strains of flu, and even dangerous, both for creating resistance and for creating illness and even deaths. So how do 'they' get away with the wondrous hype in the MSM for its use? Aye, there's the rub. Answer: the power of the corporate-government complex over our lives.
And that's the subject I really want to get to, in this analysis of Things In Our Time. And not to limit it just to the windfall profit to such as ex-Defense Secretary, and ex-Chairman of the (Tamiflu) Board, Donald Rumsfeld, who has done very well indeed from his foot in both of those worlds. I mean the in-built corruption that has taken over in the capitalist system; and is now threatening its very existence. And about time, say I...
Time. In the year of my birth - 1934 - a very powerful clique of businessmen and bankers attempted to stage a coup in America, to install a fascist government, to their ideological liking. Unfortunately for them, they came up against a military man - Gen. Smedley Butler by name - whom they had hoped would lead a supportive army in their putsch, but who by then had realized that War Is a Racket (the title of his subsequent book), and wouldn't play the game any longer; the game of capitalists fomenting wars in order to make a profit off of them. And now, in our time, we have the same sorts of circumstances having come around: a corporate hold on the MSM, and an agenda of takeover. In this case, of global takeover. No more small potatoes, of just a nation-state or two...
The stage, in short, has been set for takeover. And the ugliest piece of this picture, to my mind, is the sellout of the medical profession in the whole charade. The ugliest, for being such a mighty fall, from such a noble place, as the calling of being a healer.
Seeding chronic illness and disease into the body politic, under the cover of a wondrous medical modality - sold to the public as such - of vaccination...keeping cures for cancer from the public, in order to further their approach to medicine, of cut-burn-poison...
I could go on, but I'll cut to the conclusion: The allopathic medical profession has forfeited any deference that might have been its due, for the good work that it has done, because of its ignoble alliance with the pharmaceutical industry. That is, and has been, an unholy nexus every bit as toxic as that of the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower famously warned the American public about. Capitalism has used both of these focii of power to further its end, of creating debt - loaning money into being, at interest - in order to keep the system oiled and going. The agents of that system have much to answer for. Yes, it has been 'successful'. But at what cost?
That is the question, and obvious answer: At too high a price, in people's lives and wellbeing. It's fit for the favored few. All the rest are mere 'collateral damage' to persons with that arrogant sort of mentality. Like more and more kids with autism; cut off from their surroundings, eating & smearing their own faeces, driving their parents into temporary insanity, fit to be thrown on the scrap heap of an economic system and its society that has no place for them...
I say: No more. It's time for a change. REAL Change.
Capitalism created communism for financial reasons. It requires markets, to borrow money into being. Thus, eg, it requires ill health, which is costly, and so 'good', instead of good health, which is of no value to it. No value, that is to say, to a debt-based economic system. Which, in a time of advanced technology, and higher consciousness, is no longer needed, to provide enough for all, in a culture that understands its Oneness, where what affects one affects the whole.
And so it has to go.
And in our time. Because that's why we're here. 'We': this generation of souls. Incarnated to bring this change about. This change, into our fuller selves. Recognizing how far we have come. And how far we could fall. For having been part of it. All.
And as for this swine flu scare: besides its being about money, I don't mean it to be ONLY about that. I mean it to be looked at as well as a tool for control. THE tool by which to drive dissenters to the New World Order into (already established) quarantine camps; aka holding pens; aka concentration camps; aka, potentially, death camps?... - for not 'drinking the kool-aid', in the form of a vaccine for this flu strain, prophesied to come around again later in the year, with the chance of being mutatedly more virulent. And so holdouts will be demonized, as a threat to their neighbors. With the mainstream medical profession comfortably ensconced in seats of power, along with their compatriots in the corporate-government complex desirous of ruling the world.
This is what I mean by the terrible fall of those drawn to the healing profession. Who need to be resisted, in their preliminary moves now to create a more mandatory vaccine climate.
Don't buy into it. Buy instead into a better world, than the one they, along with their corporate crony cohorts, would try to corral us into, as serfs to their control.
It's time, in short, to wake up from the nightmare they are walking us into, step by stealthy step. And own our power. As spiritual beings having a human experience. And beginning to respond, now, to our inner alarm clock.
Time's up.
Partial bibliography:
Racketeering in Medicine: the Suppression of Alternatives. James P. Carter, M.D., Dr. P.H.
Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American Brain. Harris L. Coulter, Ph.D.
I'd like to make a comment on the current swine flu scare, and its ramifications.
As much as I can be as suspicious as the next skeptical person about its origin - with its makeup highly questionable, of viral strains from all over the place - I feel that the principle of Occam's Razor could simply be at work here. Namely, that it is all (well; mostly) about making money.
Consider. Tamiflu - the pharmaceutical flu antiviral that many countries bought huge stocks of, in the wake of the bird flu scare of yesteryear - has a shelf life (as I understand it, of 48 months). Meaning, that it has either to be used within that time period, or tossed out. Now, one could argue that it doesn't matter to the mfgr whether it is used or tossed, they still made money from its sale; but perhaps the matter is a little more complex than that. For example, those in govt who bought it may have to justify to the taxpayers its purchase; so voila - a flu scare. And thus the need for more sales - er, more medication, to take its place.
A by-the-way here: Tamiflu has already been shown to be not very effective against a number of strains of flu, and even dangerous, both for creating resistance and for creating illness and even deaths. So how do 'they' get away with the wondrous hype in the MSM for its use? Aye, there's the rub. Answer: the power of the corporate-government complex over our lives.
And that's the subject I really want to get to, in this analysis of Things In Our Time. And not to limit it just to the windfall profit to such as ex-Defense Secretary, and ex-Chairman of the (Tamiflu) Board, Donald Rumsfeld, who has done very well indeed from his foot in both of those worlds. I mean the in-built corruption that has taken over in the capitalist system; and is now threatening its very existence. And about time, say I...
Time. In the year of my birth - 1934 - a very powerful clique of businessmen and bankers attempted to stage a coup in America, to install a fascist government, to their ideological liking. Unfortunately for them, they came up against a military man - Gen. Smedley Butler by name - whom they had hoped would lead a supportive army in their putsch, but who by then had realized that War Is a Racket (the title of his subsequent book), and wouldn't play the game any longer; the game of capitalists fomenting wars in order to make a profit off of them. And now, in our time, we have the same sorts of circumstances having come around: a corporate hold on the MSM, and an agenda of takeover. In this case, of global takeover. No more small potatoes, of just a nation-state or two...
The stage, in short, has been set for takeover. And the ugliest piece of this picture, to my mind, is the sellout of the medical profession in the whole charade. The ugliest, for being such a mighty fall, from such a noble place, as the calling of being a healer.
Seeding chronic illness and disease into the body politic, under the cover of a wondrous medical modality - sold to the public as such - of vaccination...keeping cures for cancer from the public, in order to further their approach to medicine, of cut-burn-poison...
I could go on, but I'll cut to the conclusion: The allopathic medical profession has forfeited any deference that might have been its due, for the good work that it has done, because of its ignoble alliance with the pharmaceutical industry. That is, and has been, an unholy nexus every bit as toxic as that of the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower famously warned the American public about. Capitalism has used both of these focii of power to further its end, of creating debt - loaning money into being, at interest - in order to keep the system oiled and going. The agents of that system have much to answer for. Yes, it has been 'successful'. But at what cost?
That is the question, and obvious answer: At too high a price, in people's lives and wellbeing. It's fit for the favored few. All the rest are mere 'collateral damage' to persons with that arrogant sort of mentality. Like more and more kids with autism; cut off from their surroundings, eating & smearing their own faeces, driving their parents into temporary insanity, fit to be thrown on the scrap heap of an economic system and its society that has no place for them...
I say: No more. It's time for a change. REAL Change.
Capitalism created communism for financial reasons. It requires markets, to borrow money into being. Thus, eg, it requires ill health, which is costly, and so 'good', instead of good health, which is of no value to it. No value, that is to say, to a debt-based economic system. Which, in a time of advanced technology, and higher consciousness, is no longer needed, to provide enough for all, in a culture that understands its Oneness, where what affects one affects the whole.
And so it has to go.
And in our time. Because that's why we're here. 'We': this generation of souls. Incarnated to bring this change about. This change, into our fuller selves. Recognizing how far we have come. And how far we could fall. For having been part of it. All.
And as for this swine flu scare: besides its being about money, I don't mean it to be ONLY about that. I mean it to be looked at as well as a tool for control. THE tool by which to drive dissenters to the New World Order into (already established) quarantine camps; aka holding pens; aka concentration camps; aka, potentially, death camps?... - for not 'drinking the kool-aid', in the form of a vaccine for this flu strain, prophesied to come around again later in the year, with the chance of being mutatedly more virulent. And so holdouts will be demonized, as a threat to their neighbors. With the mainstream medical profession comfortably ensconced in seats of power, along with their compatriots in the corporate-government complex desirous of ruling the world.
This is what I mean by the terrible fall of those drawn to the healing profession. Who need to be resisted, in their preliminary moves now to create a more mandatory vaccine climate.
Don't buy into it. Buy instead into a better world, than the one they, along with their corporate crony cohorts, would try to corral us into, as serfs to their control.
It's time, in short, to wake up from the nightmare they are walking us into, step by stealthy step. And own our power. As spiritual beings having a human experience. And beginning to respond, now, to our inner alarm clock.
Time's up.
Partial bibliography:
Racketeering in Medicine: the Suppression of Alternatives. James P. Carter, M.D., Dr. P.H.
Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American Brain. Harris L. Coulter, Ph.D.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)