Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

"Sandy Hook and Obama's Connecticut Social Security number Posted on December 27, 2014 by Dr. Eowyn | 18 Comments One of the many curiosities about the sitting President of the United States is the fact that, unlike us, he has not one, but multiple Social Security numbers (SSN). In 2010, two licensed private investigators, Susan Daniels and Neal Sankey, found that multiple SS numbers are associated with Barack Obama's name. Daniels and Sankey put their findings in sworn affidavits. Dr. Orly Taitz further verified their information with a third source, a retired Department of Homeland Security senior investigator named John Sampson. In May 2010, the mystery deepened when it was determined that the SSN Obama is currently using (042-68-4425) has a Connecticut prefix, 042, but Obama had never lived in nor had associations with the state of Connecticut. Obama has been using that 042 SS number since 1979 when he was 18 years old. In an article for Western Journalism, Stephen Baldwin writes: All told, there are 49 addresses and 16 different Social Security numbers listed for a person whose name is spelled "Barack Obama." […] the one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time. In late February 2011, the mystery further deepened when retired US Air Force Col. Gregory Hollister, the litigant in an Obama eligibility lawsuit, conducted a search for Obama's Connecticut SSN in the Social Security Number Verification System used by small businesses to verify employment eligibility. The results came back as: Failed: SSN not in file (never issued) To the question of why Obama obtained a Connecticut-issued SSN instead of one by Hawaii, Joel Gilbert, maker of the documentary Dreams from

"It was August 2, 1990, and Saddam Hussein, formerly Washington's man in Baghdad and its ally against fundamentalist Iran, had just sent his troops across the border into oil-rich Kuwait.  It would prove a turning point in American Middle East policy. Six days later, a brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division was dispatched to Saudi Arabia as the vanguard of what the U.S. Army termed "the largest deployment of American troops since Vietnam." The rest of the division would soon follow as part of Operation Desert Storm, which was supposed to drive Saddam's troops from Kuwait and fell the Iraqi autocrat.  The division's battle cry: "The road home... is through Baghdad!" In fact, while paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne penetrated deep into Iraq in the 100-day campaign that followed, no American soldier would make it to the Iraqi capital -- not that time around, anyway.  After the quick triumph of the Gulf War, the Airborne's paratroops instead returned to Ft. Bragg, North Carolina.  And that, it seemed, was the end of the matter, victory parades and all.  Naturally, the soldiers using that battle cry did not have the advantage of history.  They had no way of knowing that it would have been more accurate to chant something like: "The road home always leads back to Baghdad!"  After all, when the First Gulf War ended in the crushing defeat of Saddam's forces and he nonetheless remained in power, the stage was set for the invasion that began Iraq War 2.0 a dozen years later.  Perhaps you still remember that particular "mission accomplished" moment. In the course of that invasion, the 82nd Airborne would conduct "sustained combat operations throughout Iraq."  Once the occupation of the country began, paratroopers from the division would return to Iraq in August 2003 to, as an Army website puts it, "continue command and control over combat operations in and around Baghdad."  In other words, they were tasked with repressing the insurgen

I watched that hearing last night on CSPAN. It was surreal. We are led by idiots or liars; let them take their pick of the two possibilities. The neocons were all pushing for regime change, blissfully unaware that the U.S. legal excuse for bombing in Syria is less than tenuous but extends only to fighting ISIL on grounds of protecting Iraq from that group. Bombing Syrian government targets would be an act of war, a war of aggression. 

This is troubling news. Saudi Arabia has been supplying weapons to the Jihadi Syrian "rebels", i.e., al-Nusra/al-Qaeda, who are the most potent fighting anti-Syrian government forces. The particular class of anti-aircraft missiles to be provided are equivalent to the currently-deployed American Stinger B. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-portable_air-defense_systems#Third_generation The missiles will not stay in Syria, of course. As soon as al-Qaeda is ready to use them elsewhere, they will be.  Look for Russia to respond by announcing the addition of shoulder-fired missiles to the anti-aircraft missiles already to aid in containing the squadron of U.S. F16s now stationed on the Jordan\Syria border. 

"Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi told the press that his government would not hesitate to grant Russia access to Iraqi territory if Moscow wanted to expand its campaign in cooperation with Iraqi forces. Other developments suggest that Egypt shows interest in joining the intelligence center in Baghdad." Russia indicated a couple of days ago that it would probably expand operations into Iraq if requested to do so by that nation. The bit about Egypt climbing aboard is also interesting.  Egypt has not forgiven the U.S. for the Arab Spring and has been experiencing some ISIL wannabe groups beginning to raise hell.  The U.S. is losing allies right and left in the Mideast. Meanwhile, Russia delivers what the U.S. has been promising but never delivered.

There's a bit of comedy beneath the surface here. When Edward Snowden was in Hong Kong and news of the NSA leak hit, the U.S. Dept. of Justice promptly filed a criminal espionage charge against Snowden and attempted to extradite him from Hong Kong. Snowden left Hong Kong before the extradition paperwork was processed enough to result in his arrest.  Now with a pending criminal investigation of the NSA's espionage activities aimed at Germany's chancellor, the Obama White House says it wants dialog, not a criminal investigation. Would the U.S. honor its extradition treaty with Germany if NSA officials or the Director of Intelligence were charged with espionage in Germany? One might suspect that a dual-standard would be deployed, in effect saying that only espionage charges that the U.S. lodges can justify extradition. Or at least that's the way it worked when Italy tried and convicted in absentia several CIA officials and an Air Force officer of espionage activities, relating to the kidnapping and "extraordinary rendition" of a gentleman in Italy.       But this incident serves as a reminder that when the NSA officials conduct foreign intelligence activities, they will in most cases be deliberately violating the criminal laws of other nations. And the same activity aimed at U.S. citizens is also criminal, which is undoubtedly why Sen. Ron Wyden asked Director of Intelligence Clapper if the NSA had taken account of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in its processing of domestic digital communications. Clapper said he would get back to Wyden on that in writing. So far as I'm aware, Wyden is still waiting for that answer. There are lots of comedians in Washington, D.C. Most of them have no idea that they are comedians.   

Pat Buchanan wants to hear from Congress before Obama starts another war. 

Israel and the U.S. have been loudly protesting Russian sale of advanced anti-aircraft (ground-to-air) missiles to Syria, labeling them as an "ostacle to peace." Well, maybe, an obstacle to kind of peace the U.S. and Israeli governments want. Such missiles are purely defensive, i.e., have no offensive purpose. They are only an obstacle to invasion of Syria's sovereign airspace by foreign air forces. So yes, a "status quo changer," a Syrian capability to knock all but the stealthiest of U.S. aircraft out of the Syrian sky. No replay of the Lybia "no fly zone" game in Syria.

The U.S. agreeing to go after al-Nusrah is a 180-degree turn. To date, the U.S. has pushed to exempt al-Nusrah from air strikes, despite a U.N. Security Council resolution that the U.S. voted in favor that instructs all nations to go after that organization. The Syrian War appears to be moving toward an end. E.g., Turkey has just announced that it wants to negotiate an end to that war with Syria, another about-face. Let's see how Saudi Arabia reacts after the notorious 26 pages are released later today in a massively orchestrated mainstream media event. Look for it just before office closing time in D.C. on this Friday afternoon.