Infowars - GDP figures provided Obama with a convenient excuse to shovel a load of propaganda today. “In the Diplomatic Reception Room this afternoon, President Obama tried to put a positive spin on Gross Domestic Product numbers released this morning indicating that the economy contracted by -1% in the 2nd quarter of this year,” ABC News reports.
Obama said the GDP numbers are “an important sign that the economy is heading in the right direction and that business investment which had been plummeting in the last several months is showing signs of stabilizing.”
But here’s what Obama didn’t say — the GDP is highly prone to revisions. The numbers may change plus or negative 2% or more over the next few months. As The Moderate Voice notes, “Q1 was revised to -6.4% from -5.5% respectively. So even though Q2 beat the consensus of -1.5%, overall we are in worse shape than anticipated. Moreover, Q1-Q3 2008 were revised from 0.9% to -0.7%, 2.8% to 1.5% and -0.3% to -2.7% respectively. These are massive downwards revisions and total a bit over 1.0% more contraction than previously believed.”
But what’s really funny — or criminal rather — is that the GDP does not take into account government debt. Obama cited his massive and unprecedented debt program — the “recovery” (or is it destruction) act, otherwise known as the “stimulus” (Orwellian no matter how you slice it) — as the reason the economy has “turned around.”
If you believe saddling the country — and future generations — with unprecedented debt (to be paid to the banksters into perpetuity), you may also believe that I have a time machine for sale and it is posted on craigslist.
Thanks to websites like this one and many others, the new world order puppets popularity is plunging. This is a ripe time for the Obamanati to carry out a false flag attack, so beware. Make sure everyone you know has seen The Obama Deception to ensure that the approval rating keeps falling. Click the chart for an interactive graph:
Dr. Taitz brings forward allegations that Barrack Obama is unlawfully holding the position as President of the United States. She currently is representing approx. 170 military members including commissioned officers in a lawsuit to force Barrack Obama to produce his birth cirtificate, proving that he is eligible to hold the position of Presiden
Some of the biggest names in conservative news have weighed in on this topic, such as Michelle Malkin, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and numerous others have offered their opinions.
Thanks to the alertness of our great friend and loyal supporter Erica, who gave us the heads-up on this. it appears that the issue of Obama being forced to produce a copy of his birth certificate may prove to be extremely difficult, if not impossible.
On January 21st, 2009, his very first day in office, Barack Obama implemented and signed into law Executive Order 13489.
For those of you who can’t take the time to read it. here is the section that applies:
“Sec.2
Notice Of Intent To Disclose Presidential Records
When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines providied by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege.”
Now for all of you who commented on our previous articles that we were no more that right-wing nut jobs, that this thing about Obama’s birth certificate was a non-issue, and those of you who tried to shift the focus of the stories, doesn’t this strike you as just a little odd?
That the first order of business Obama took care of on day one of his Presidency was to sign off on an Executive Order that states that only the records he chooses to be made public will be released?
This is the subject that was at the absolute top of his agenda?
If this isn’t proof that Obama is hiding something, I don’t know what is.
Rothschild Bank Vice-Chairman: “Governments must be prepared to allow some subordination of national interests to this world initiative…”
“What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth [environment] comes from the actions of the rich countries?… So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about? This group of world leaders form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse.” - Maurice Strong, May, 1990 interview with West Magazine describing a “novel” that he would like to write
These candid comments from Maurice Strong, the first director of the United Nations Environmental Program, carry an especially eerie tone in the context of recent events.
Daniel Estulin, who has been chasing Bilderberg for many years, covered the 2006 meeting held in Ottawa Canada. Bilderberg attendees have included Heads of State, Mayors, business leaders, and members of the press. Investigative journalist Jim Tucker confirmed that Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner attended the 2009 meeting in Athens, Greece.
Estulin’s sources within Bilderberg 2006 told him that “…what they [Bilderberg] are going to do over the next year, year and a half is to bring the market back up to its 1998, 1999 levels, they’re going to get all the suckers to invest what little money they have left over, and that’s when they’re going to make the economy’s bottom drop out…” Indeed, this scenario did play out in the year that followed as Estulin’s Bilderberg sources told him.
Out of the economic and [supposed] environmental catastrophes that we face, global governance is being presented as a solution. Whether or not the global elite did in fact engineer the current economic crisis, which evidence does point toward, it is being used as a catalyst to launch a host of globalist initiatives. In March of 2007, Old-Thinker News reported on the desire of globalist foundations and interests to construct a system of global governance to fight global warming. Since then, the interests pushing the theory of man made global warming and the radical solutions that accompany it have provided more insight on exactly what is being planned.
In 2006 Richard Haass, the current president of the Council on Foreign Relations, stated in his article “State sovereignty must be altered in globalized era,” that a system of world government must be created and sovereignty eliminated in order to fight global warming. “Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function,” says Haass. “Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves…” Economic instability and terrorism are also cited by Haass as reasons for weakened national sovereignty.
Al Gore, who has been positioned as a main figurehead in the global warming movement, recently commented that the Waxman-Markey climate bill - which is set to dramatically increase consumer costs and taxes - is a positive step towards “global governance.”
Simon Linnett, Executive Vice-Chairman of Rothschild Bank, has also called for the creation of a “new international body” that would regulate and tax CO2. Linnett writes for the Telegraph, mirroring Richard Haass’s comments,
“A key implication of creating a legal yet global system of trading, is the loss of sovereignty it implies. Governments must be prepared to allow some subordination of national interests to this world initiative, on the issue of emissions. This need not mean a new system of government, above individual nations.
The European nations already do this, on certain issues, yielding sovereignty to the EU. And in time, the EU itself will eventually have to yield to a larger body - one which includes the economic powerhouses of India and China.”
As President Obama himself has admitted, cap and trade systems and carbon taxes will pass on costs to consumers. Linnet threatens that, “When an individual receives an electricity bill, they will come to know what the cost of turning on the gas or a light was to the environment.”
Linnet proposes that carbon trading could become the “…reserve currency of the world…”, and concludes by saying that “…emissions trading could establish a new world order for a sustainable planet…”
That a Rothschild Bank Vice-Chairman would be proposing such measures might be surprising to some, but could well meaning environmentalists be in for a shock to find that a seemingly “grass roots” movement has been initiated from the top down?
In early 2009, Exxon Mobil announced its support of carbon taxes. As the Calgary Herald reports, “Exxonmobil corp., the world’s largest crude oil refiner, supports taxing carbon dioxide as the most efficient way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, its chief executive said.” The announcement came from Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, speaking at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, which has served as a platform for discussing various globalist initiatives for many years.
A May 2008 article from the International Herald Tribune painted a glowing picture of the Rockefeller family - who built the Standard Oil empire, later to emerge as Exxon - in their quest to “press for change at Exxon”. As reported, “David Rockefeller, retired chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and patriarch of the family, issued a statement saying, “I support my family’s efforts to sharpen Exxon Mobil’s focus on the environmental crisis facing all of us.”
Ultimately, the world faces an unprecedented transfer of power and wealth to new global bodies. The economic destruction taking place in the United States is draining the wealth creating capacity that we once had. Political commentator Pat Buchanan recently stated on MSNBC,
“…more and more scientists are coming forward to say this [man-made global warming] is a hoax and a scam which is designed to transfer wealth and power from the private sector to the government sector and from the government of the United States to a world government.”
U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, set to deploy to Afghanistan, says he shouldn’t have to go.
His reason?
Barack Obama was never eligible to be president because he wasn’t born in the United States.
Cook’s lawyer, Orly Taitz, who has also challenged the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency in other courts, filed a request last week in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector for her client.
In the 20-page document — filed July 8 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia — the California-based Taitz asks the court to consider granting his client’s request based upon Cook’s belief that Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.
Cook further states he “would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President’s command. … simultaneously subjecting himself to possible prosecution as a war criminal by the faithful execution of these duties.”
Cook, a reservist, received the orders mobilizing him to active duty on June 9.
According to this document, which accompanies Cook’s July 8 application for a temporary restraining order, he has been ordered to report to MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla., on Wednesday. From there, the Florida resident would go to Fort Benning before deploying overseas.
Documents show Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, two years after it became a state.
A hearing to discuss Cook’s requests will take place in federal court here Thursday at 9:30 a.m.
