Tag Archives: SUPREME COURT

OBAMA’S TEAM TO PRESENT A NEW SET OF FORGED DOCS PROVING HE’S NOT A FAKE

The quest for the truth shouldn’t be this difficult.

I stopped asking … long ago… why doesn’t Team Obama release all the documents related to establishing beyond a question of doubt that Barack meets all the requirements to the hold office of POTUS.  In particular, that he is a natural born citizen as required in Article II Section 1.

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

Well, the answer of course, is that Obama couldn’t release the documents during the campaign because they would prove his ineligibility. So Team Obama did the next best thing, they put a copy of a forged COLB or Certificate of Live Birth on their website, crossed their fingers, and hoped it would be enough.

Oh, and for good measure they admitted that Barack Hussein Obama  held dual citizenship . . . his father (real father? not clear at all) was British.

The problem is neither the phony birth certificate or the admission of BHO’s dual citizenship did anything to quell the normal inquiries.   Team Obama either hoped or assumed that  the average voter had neither heard of the natural born citizen clause or would care . . .  after all BHO was the one, right?

They were wrong, particularly when people like myself began asking straight questions that should have been easy to answer.  The harder Team Obama balked at providing the documents the harder we pushed.  I am reminded of Nixon’s downfall, and the downfall of many others who have met a similar fate . . . its always the cover-up!

Which leads up to today.  It is being reported that a new and better forged set of documents is being prepared by Team Obama to show he was always eligible. (H/T to Oil for Immigration for bringing this to our attention)

This is from RepubX

Don’t know about 9/11 conspiracy, but do know from DC source that an Administration team is working on perfecting a forgery of the long-form birth certificate. They plan on presenting it in a a month or so. The source is FBI agent who has drinking buddy from University of Illinois now in the Administration. Its second hand, but the source is supposed to be solid.

They have already prepared the forgery with special paper and ink. The document was printed on a fully functional 1960 Heidelberger printing press located at a print museum in Toronto. Access was arranged by a trustee of the museum who is connected to a large Canadian banking/investment firm with major US interests.

If this story is true, here’s the problem with this tactic.

Why should anyone believe that  Team Obama would suddenly want to show his long-form birth certificate?  Are we supposed to believe that it isn’t another fake.

Oh, please, the government makes up phony documents for the witness protection programs  all the time.  Go ask someone in the antiquities market how many “really good” forgeries are out there.

If Obama had the documents that proved his eligibility, he’d have had them posted months ago and the speculation and lawsuits would be over. Anyone who doesn’t recognize that fact, should stop mainlining the Kool-Aid.  He’s a phony . . . a fake.

The time passed long ago for openness and honesty  . . . for  . . . ahem . . . transparency.  Unless, Team Obama opens up all of his records . . . all of them  . . . for inspection . . . he will forever remain a phony, faux president; and history will record him as such! HISTORY WILL RECORD HIM AS SUCH!

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

PRESIDENT OBAMA DECLARES MARTIAL LAW – UPDATED

We are only 60 plus days into the faux president’s term and I am wondering how much more can this country take.  He is even worse than I anticipated  . . . a mix of Carter’s incompetence with a dash of Bush’s arrogance! God, help us!

Worse still, those of us who warned Obama could never be trusted to defend the Constitution, those of us who warned Obama cares not a whit about anyone but himself, are not surprised by the mysterious appearance of “22 military police and an Army officer into the tiny Alabama town of Samson last week ” as reported by USA Today on March 18th.   “No one” seems to know who authorized this incursion.

Another in a series of unexplained mysteries, like how Supreme Court Justice Scalia and Roberts appear to be unaware of the law suits brought before the Court.  These “mysteries” are so believable, right? The U.S. Army would like to know who sent the military police into Samson.  Here’s what I’d like to know.  How can any Army spokesperson ask that question with a straight face!

The Associated Press reports that an Army spokesman says the military has launched an inquiry to find out what happened, why the troops were sent from nearby Fort Rucker, what they did while there and whether any federal laws were broken.  Hmm, were any federal laws broken like the Posse Comitatus Act, perhaps?

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Army, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.

The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act.

I wrote the following on November 2, 2008.

Anyone remember Biden’s warning that in 6 months there would be a crisis facing the country and many people would not support Obama’s actions even though the new Administration felt they were right? What’s to prevent a faux President Obama from declaring martial law? Thanks to Bush 43’s signing NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51, a faux President Obama could do this at will, in the name of national security!

In another barely reported story, powerful generals from the most powerful nations in the world recently held a meeting in tiny town in upstate New York. The Army has also stationed an infantry unit inside the United States. It is the first time a dedicated unit has been given an assignment as a response force for “crowd control” and other sorts of internal tasks.

Above all, let us not forget about Blackwater.  Candidate Obama was unwilling to say he would suspend their operation in Iraq (and elsewhere)  if elected President.  This is one of the few times that our faux President has kept his word.  Blackwater is still on the government payroll, as it were.

And if you are still not convinced that the use of Blackwater Worldwide by President Obama is far fetched, listen to this October 2007 Bill Moyers interview with investigative journalist  Jeremy Scahill.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, YOU HAVE BEEN DULY WARNED!

2 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Congress, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, SARCASM & SNARKINESS, Uncategorized

OBAMA – TRUTH & TRANSPARENCY FOR EVERYONE BUT HIMSELF


Truth and transparency . . . the words continually roll off of Obama’s lips day in and day out. T & T . . . is the new mantra of his administration.  Here’s another one, Obama’s “no earmarks” dictum.  It  turned out to be just another campaign slogan ringing hollow and never meant to be honored.   The “no earmarks” pledge was spoken of adoringly and honored . . . drum roll please . . . not!

The Omnibus bill, Obama termed it an imperfect bill (do ya think?) passed with 9,000 earmarks. So much for T & T in the Obama administration. Seems to me the operative question should be, “how many pledges did Obama make during the campaign for POTUS has he actually kept?”

Poor boy, he had no way of controlling those earmarks, don’t ya know, despite his pledge to “go line by line” in every bill and pull out the pork. Of course, constitutionally he has no power or authority to do that . . . never had that authority. One would never know that, of course, because the MSM was too busy genuflecting in adoration to point that out. But hey, what’s the Constitution, right? Right? RIGHT?

The truth is, why shouldn’t Obama think he can bend the Constitution anyway he wants to? He has gone out of his way to ignore the “natural born citizen” clause of the Constitution. In fact, Obama and his teams of enablers and lawyers have gone to extraordinary lengths to hide the truth about his place of birth, his biological father, and citizenship, etc. Here’s another truth. Obama may have taught Constitutional law, but he continues to demonstrate undisguised contempt for the document he has sworn to “uphold and protect”. Author, Joan Swirsky has termed Obama a Trojan Horse and has written about his contempt for the Constitution, here:

Barack Obama was an anti-constitutionalist professor. He studied the Constitution and he flatly rejected it. He doesn’t like the Constitution. He thinks it is flawed. Now I understand why he was so reluctant to wear the American flag lapel pin….he says that the Constitution ‘is a charter of negative liberties. This is nothing short of a condemnation of the Constitution, and he calls himself a professor. The greatest government, the freest society in the history of the world, and Professor Obama calls it a charter of negative liberties!

Ironically, there is no hiding the truth when it comes to providing basic information validating one’s eligibility to hold the office of POTUS. In many ways, it’s a lot like being pregnant. Either you are or you aren’t pregnant.  There’s nothing in-between.  Either the  documents required by all seeking the office of president, those which validate (unequivocally) the status of “natural born citizen”  have been provided or they haven’t.  No equivocations, no half truths, no half being pregnant.

Mr. Obama, either you can produce the myriad of records demonstrating your eligibility to be President of the United States or you can’t. It is clear after all these stall laden months, you cannot. There is ( never has been)  no other explanation.

Why do I continue to write about this? Why are thousands and thousands of people across the country pursuing this, spending time and money seeking the truth? Because this remains a legitimate issue that must be resolved.

This is not going away!

1 Comment

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

TO THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA – A PRETEND PRESIDENT OBAMA PLACES THE CITIZENS OF THE WORLD IN PERIL

Memo: To the International Media

Re: Constitutional Crisis/President Elect Obama not Eligible to Serve as United States President

Date: January 14, 2009

In one week, Barack Obama will place his hand on the Lincoln bible to be sworn in as the 44th President of the United States (POTUS). When he places his hand on the Lincoln bible and swears to uphold the Constitution of the United States he may knowingly be committing fraud and usurping the most powerful office in the world.

The United States of America is faced with a Constitutional crisis of gigantic proportions; one that remains avoidable if Obama would simply release the growing list of documents that would verify that he indeed is a natural born citizen, a requirement for office of POTUS under the U.S. Constitution. Most of the people in our country and the world do not know what is happening because the mainstream media in our country has failed to do their jobs. The MSM have steadfastly refused to investigate any story that possibly reflects in a negative manner on Obama’s candidacy and his eligibility under the Constitution.

Outlets one would think would at least give the story a cursory glance like FOX News and the Drudge Report have remained conspicuously silent. The cable networks, venerable institutions like the New York Times and the Washington Post having been playing a game of “if we don’t report it, it doesn’t exist!”

obamacolblockkey3Our Constitution requires that any person running for the office of president meet three qualifications; he/she must be at least 35 years of age, must live in the United States for at least 14 years and be a natural-born citizen. Mr. Obama has refused to provide any information that verifies he meets this requirement. In fact, it has been reported that Obama and his legal teams have spent close to one million dollars to keep his birth certificate and the truth hidden. A partial list of hidden Obama documents include; a vault copy of his birth certificate (under seal in Hawaii), college records, copy of his college thesis, records of his clients when practicing law in Illinois, explanation of his travel to Indonesia when Americans were not allowed to travel there, etc.

Mr. Obama’s own website states he was born with dual citizenship. That is an automatic disqualification. Actually, his citizenship was determined by his father who was Kenyon and a British citizen, since his mother was 17 (and under age) her citizenship was moot. Further complicating the situation is Obama’s step-father was Indonesian. The evidence (that hasn’t been scrubbed from the Internet) shows that Obama went to school in Indonesia at a time when only Indonesian citizens were allowed this privilege and further that Obama traveled to Indonesia in the 80’s when American citizens were not allowed to travel to this country. What this means is that under this story of who Obama’s birth father was, he is not a “natural born citizen” as defined by our Constitution (born on U.S. soil of two parents both of whom are U.S. citizens) and therefore ineligible to hold the office of POTUS.

The reason why you should care should be self-evident. It has been said that when American catches a cold the rest of the world should watch out for pneumonia. The world wide financial recession is a case in point. If it is discovered that Mr. Obama was never eligible to run and hold the office of POTUS we, our country and the interconnected world, will be thrown in a state of disorder and turmoil. That is because any law, any treaty, any action taken under the Obama administration would be illegal. For a further explanation see Dr. Edwin Vieira detailed analysis.

There are (over 17) lawsuits that have already been brought across the country including several before the Supreme Court . . . all dismissed thus far on legal issues of “standing” and the like, but not on the merits of the lawsuits! See Donofrio v Wells, Berg v Obama for the most prominent lawsuits.

Let me point out that while the MSM in this country have abdicated its responsibility to voters here and Obama supporters abroad, the blogs on the Internet have been tracking this for months. Those blogging are not on the fringes or carry any animus towards Obama. There are thousands and thousands of us who love our country and are simply asking for the truth. We are moderates, former Obama supporters, conservatives, independents, Democrats, Republicans, and persons of every stripe who believe in placing our country before any individual man or party.

Finally, it should be noted that there have been a few stories written by sources outside the U.S. in Canada and elsewhere asking about Obama’s eligibility. The most disturbing is a recent article that appeared in Pravda RU which detailed Obama’s problems and which called him an outright fraud and which leads me to the most serious consideration. It is an embarrassment that Pravda is covering what our own media has purposely ignored.

Quoting from Dr. Vieira:

Fifth, as nothing but an usurper (if he becomes one), Obama will have no conceivable authority “to make Treaties”, or to “nominate, and * * * appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not * * * otherwise provided for [in the Constitution]” (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). And therefore any “Treaties” or “nominat[ions], and * * * appoint[ments]” he purports to “make” will be void ab initio, no matter what the Senate does, because the Senate can neither authorize an usurper to take such actions in the first place, nor thereafter ratify them.

Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, Congress can pass no law while an usurper pretends to occupy “the Office of President.” The Constitution provides that “[e]very Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States” (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to an usurper posturing as “the President of the United States,” but to the true and rightful President. If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no “Bill” will or can, “before it become a Law, be presented to [him].” If no “Bill” is so presented, no “Bill” will or can become a “Law.” And any purported “Law” that the usurper “approve[s]” and “sign[s],” or that Congress passes over the usurper’s “Objections,” will be a nullity. Thus, if Obama deceitfully “enters office” as an usurper, Congress will be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his pretenses as “President.”

If Pravda RU is calling Obama a fraud before his inauguration, how long before enemies of this country figure out this can be used as a reason not to cooperate with the U.S. or sign a treaty, or do anything that moves negotiations forward on any front because an illegally elected/ineligible Obama’s actions would be null and void . . . unenforceable . . . worthless. How long before Iran, or Hamas, or Russia, for that matter, figures this out and refuses to deal with the U.S.because of the Pretend President?

All of our institutions, have let us down. We are all in peril until this has been straightened out!

19 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

WILL THE MILITARY SERVE OBAMA IF HE CANNOT PROVE HIS ELIGBILITY FOR POTUS?

Both Oil for Immigration & Citizen Wells are reporting the following contact to the Joint Chiefs of Staff written by Dr. Douglas W. Schell.

Dr. Schell was a commissioned officer in the USAF and is speaking from that perspective. His email to the JCS details the Constitutional crisis that will ensue if an ineligible Obama takes office. He states:obamaistoast

[...] could well split the military between those who will stand by the Constitution vs. those who stand by traitors in order to keep their military offices.

[…] A RECENT SURVEY TAKEN BY THE ARMY TIMES INDICATED THAT OVER 60% OF ACTIVE MILITARY ARE NOT SURE WHETHER THEY CAN FOLLOW THE ORDERS OF MR. OBAMA. THIS IS UNHEARD OF.

Here’s my question.

What happens if you serve in the military and believe that Obama is not legitimately POTUS . . . that he is a usurper or worse? You are sworn to uphold the Constitution of our Republic. Your obligation & loyalty is to the country and not to any individual man or woman.

Further, is there any possibility that the military would consider/or act on removing a person that has fraudulently obtained the office and is ineligible? I would not want to be faced with this dilemma.

29 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, Uncategorized

THE SUPREME COURT GETS IT WRONG TWO ELECTIONS IN A ROW

I voted for Gore in 2000 and watched with disbelief when the Supreme Court decided to take on Bush v Gore . . . disbelief because the method Florida decided to use to count the 2000 election votes should have remained with Florida. Federal intervention was not necessary, period.

It was an unprincipled decision that the Supremes in their “infinite wisdom” decided should apply solely to this case … that it could not be used as precedent for future cases. Cute, right? The majority of the court acted improperly (States rights, anyone?) and politically (5 Republican Justices) and some would say corruptly.

I still remember the number of people who questioned whether Scalia’s vote was because he wanted to position himself to be the next choice as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

What was shattered, along with the Constitution, was our belief in the incorruptibility of the Supreme Court justices. We witnessed, first hand, that the Supremes are as political as the rest of the hacks in this country that pretend to be fair and impartial and whose actions show the opposite reality. Legions of Americans have hoped that the Supremes would, once again behave with honor and dignity . . . alas as Donofrio,Berg, etal have witnessed, that will not take place.

The following is from an excellent article in Salon (written in 2000) . . . back when Salon was a source one could trust. It is a superior article that reviews several books written by legal authorities, including Alan Dershowitz, Vincent Bugliosi, Richard H. Pildes, and Cass R. Sunstein and Richard A. Epstein.

I urge anyone that has been fighting the good fight, trying to get our legislators, elected officials, and the courts to take an intellectually honest look at Obama and the Constitutional crisis brought on because Obama will not (cannot) present any documentation (exception the forged COLB on the Internet) proving he meets the eligibility requirements for POTUS as a natural born citizen to read the article. It may give you additional insight as to how to proceed. The article begins:

Supreme Court to democracy: Drop dead

With a single rash, partisan act, the high court has tainted the Bush presidency, besmirched its own reputation and soiled our nation’s proudest legacy.

By Gary Kamiya

Dec. 14, 2001 | Tuesday, Dec. 12, is a day that will live in American infamy long after the tainted election of George W. Bush has faded from memory. With their rash, divisive decision to dispense with the risky and inconvenient workings of democracy and simply award the presidency to their fellow Republican, five right-wing justices dragged the Supreme Court down to perhaps its most ignominious point since the Dred Scott decision.

supreme-idiots1

With this as a back drop, should anyone really be surprised that the Supremes are, again, turning backs on the Constitution? Are we really so surprised that there isn’t a single backbone among them? Is it really so surprising ?

Why, when we have legitimate Constitutional questions will the Supremes not act? Self interest, perhaps? Lack of integrity, courage, intellectual honesty, impartiality? Some of these . . . all of these?

The far reaching impact of the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the cases brought thus far on technical issues (standing, wrong format, didn’t cross a “t” or an “i” was missing) is monumental. We have witnessed numerous people run for the office of POTUS we know are ineligible because they are not “natural born citizens” Obama (until he proves he is), Bill Richardson, Roger Calero and still the Supremes remain silent on an issue that effects every citizen of this country!

obamacolblockkey2

There is an element of power and, perhaps inevitably, self-interest in all judicial decisions. As Sunstein remarked, “We’ve tended to have too idealized a view of the court.” But the idea that justice must be blind, that the most powerful court in the world — and arguably the most powerful institution in the country — must not sink into brazen partisanship, is a bedrock principle . . . ( change & emphasis mine )that they have failed to live up to!

We must stand by it, and those justices who violate it must be held accountable. By failing to live up to their judicial oath, by allowing political motivations to sway them, by besmirching democracy itself, the five members of the (change and emphasis mine) 2009 Supreme Court majority will have disgraced themselves forever.

From history’s judgment, there will be no appeal.



5 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

OBAMA, MALCOLM X, and MICHELLE’S RED & BLACK DRESS

I continue to be surprised by what fires people’s imaginations and passions. I have blogged about a wide variety of issues and topics, some serious, some not so much. The post that continues to draw the most interest is the one on Michelle Obama’s decision to wear that red & black dress with the X in the front … the decision to dress her entire family in those colors the night Barack won the 2008 election for president. You can read about it here.

My visceral reaction to the pictures each and every time I view them has not abated when seen through the prism of rebellion or defiance. But what if there was another way of viewing these pictures of the Obama’s all dressed up in red and black? What if the garb worn by the Obama’s was a silent tribute to Barack’s real father, Malcolm X?

I know anyone that has followed this blog and my positions on BHO’s ineligibility to hold the office of POTUS will find the following to be surprising. If the truth be known, I would be relieved to find out Obama’s real father is Malcolm X. Why? Because the alternative is many times worse.

Having a fraud become president is unthinkable. Having a man who is knowingly ineligible to hold the office because he never met the eligibility requirements as detailed in the Constitution will harm this country in ways that cannot tolerated. The consequences are far reaching and potentially devastating.

The evidence against his being eligible to hold the office of POTUS continues to accumulate on a daily basis. Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Dunham is not a “natural born citizen” regardless if he was born in Hawaii (as he alleges) or he was born in Kenya which multiple lawsuits contend and which his paternal grandmother say is the truth.

The story Team Obama continues to foist on the world is that his father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was a Kenyan. His father was also British citizen thus making Barry a British citizen as well, because his citizenship would have been determined by the father’s nationality. Since Barack’s mother was 17 and underage at the time of his birth, her nationality was moot. Like it or not, that was the law of the land in 1961. Even if his mother’s age could be discounted, because Barack would have held a dual citizenship at the time of birth, he would still be ineligible. Complicating all of this, is his mother’s second marriage to Lolo Soetoro and Barack’s adoption by his step-father. Lolo was Indonesian; now we’ve got yet a third country that impacts on Barry’s citizenship.

What if this entire story isn’t true and what does this have to do with Michelle Obama’s red & black dress, the one she worn in Grant Park the night Barack became the President Elect? Well, plenty if I’m right.

The supreme irony is that if Malcolm X is Obama’s father then Obama meets the eligibility requirements of the Constitution! Malcolm X was a natural born citizen thus making Barack (Barry?) a natural born citizen. The worst case scenario is that if Barack were born in Kenya he would face (essentially) the same issues that John McCain faced! But back to Michelle’s red & black dress.

red-black


I know I am not the first to suggest that Obama’s father may be Malcolm X. This connection has been brought up before at Atlas Shrugs, Oil for Immigration, and on Polarik’s site using (as best I can determine) information that originated with Israel Insider. Other than idle curiosity, there hasn’t been much else to tie Obama to Malcolm. But then we’ve got that image of Obama’s in Grant Park, the red and black dress and that X that hits you between the eyes . . . an insult to the senses because the dress is so entirely out of place. It hard not to shout, “America’s next First Family shouldn’t be dressed these colors of defiance! Where are the various shades of red, white, and blue?”

Then suddenly it smacks you in the face . . . that X is for Malcolm. That X on the front of Michelle’s dress and those colors are for Malcolm. What other reason can there be? Sudden bad taste or a horrendous lack of sensitivity to the historical significance of the colors chosen for the very first photos of the Obama’s? In a campaign this carefully orchestrated and staged with the deliberate associations to the Kennedy’s how does it suddenly become feasible that a faux pas of this magnitude would be allowed?

shapeimage_1

Let’s cobble a few more interesting notes about Malcolm’s name.

In 1952, after he was released from prison, Malcolm changed his last name from Little toX, a designation that denotes “a certain mystery, a certain possibility of power in the eyes of one’s peers and one’s enemies …The ‘X’; announced what you had been and what you had become: Ex-smoker, Ex-drinker, Ex-Christian, Ex-slave.” and is also intended as a rejection of slave names.


X is also a brand that many slaves received on their upper arms. Though likely the most famous Black Muslim to change his name to X, Malcolm was one of many who eventually adopted this practice.

He was tall and handsome and when he walked into a room, he took it over. These things were important. And when he spoke, he could talk our talk in a way that made people understand right off.” Remind you of anyone? Barack, perhaps?

_obamax-763738

obamax_5-785893obamax_1-771789


If you are under 30 you probably have very little idea who Malcolm X was. For more complete understanding of his life see additional video here.

Make no mistake the 60’s were a violent time. The black revolution was beginning . . . this was a time of conflict where most black leaders were looked at in a negative manner. Malcolm X, although very controversial, was not an extremist like Farrakhan was and remains to this day. Malcolm could rightly be called an extremist initially, but he came to believe that the races could live and work together.

Malcolm left the Nation of Islam as a matter of principle. It cost him his life.

Like many of us who change and grow into maturity, Malcolm at the end of his life was much different than the Malcolm of his youth. During this time, Malcolm became a guest of Muhammed Faisal (son of then Prince Faisal), and Malcolm made a pilgrimage to Mecca, an event that changed his life. He believed, through Muslim teachings, that all racial barriers could be overcome.

Malcolm returned from Mecca a Sunni Muslim, a changed man. He also bore a new name, El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. This is from Lessons from Malcolm X

Below is an excerpt of a powerful speech Malcolm gave upon his return:

“Human rights are something you were born with?.In the past, yes I have made sweeping indictments of all white people. I will never be guilty of that again (emphasis mine) as I know now that some white people are truly sincere, that some truly are capable of being brotherly toward a black man…Since I learned the truth in Mecca, my dearest friends have come to include all kinds, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Agnostics, even Atheists My friends today are black, brown, red, yellow and white While in Mecca, for the first time in my life, I could call a man with blond hair and blue eyes my brother.”

Ok, so what’s the truth? Is Malcolm X or Barack Hussein Obama Sr. BHO’s father? I don’t know. Is Barack really a Muslim . . . the Freudian slip with George Stephanopoulos indicates he is. I really don’t know. There is a mountain of compelling evidence that supports several positions on Barack’s birth father and his religion.

Here’s what I do know. Stanley Ann Dunham was a complicated woman, a woman with a past more interesting than what we’ve been led to believe, regardless who Barack’s father really is. This is a family whose lives are clothed in secrets.

Something else I know is that this is a tragedy of epic proportions if Malcolm X really was BHO’s father. Imagine having to deny your real identity on a daily basis because somewhere along a line a decision was made that it was better to be known as the “son” of Barack Obama Sr. than to acknowledge that you are the son of Malcolm X.

In the desire to become president, was this denial born out of expediency because Malcolm X was a Muslim. America might tolerate a multi-cultural man as president . . . but after 9/11 does anyone think a Muslim would have any chance at the office? Again, I don’t know. I do know that the truth has a way of always coming out . . . that secrets kept in the dark have a way of finding the light of day.




13 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, John McCain, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized