Previous Update: July 23 - 29

Updates Index

(if there are any to speak of)
July 30 - August 5, 2013

The peace talks that John Kerry announced to the world last week were dead already over the weekend. Period. Kerry got no out-of-the-gate glory. Will he give up at his first few steps? Or will he do something different? Obama must be prepared by now to do something different. He too seeks glory.

Here's a July 30 article reflecting the anti-Christ's call for fighters from all over the map:

Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi -- one of the most influential Islamic clerics in the world [and an old man], author of over 100 books on Muslim doctrine, head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood -- has just posted a new video where he calls on all the Muslims of the world to come and wage jihad with their lives in Egypt on behalf of "what's right" -- that is, the return to power of the Muslim Brotherhood. He called on everyone and anyone -- the "sons of Al Azhar," businessmen, journalists -- and from all around the world, specifically mentioning Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Senegal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan.

Hmm. Qaradawi, who has said that he wants all Zionist Jews murdered by Muslims, could become successful in setting a jihadist trend that the anti-Christ will adopt. Qaradawi is a lunatic, with tens of million of radio listeners who must be evolving into lunatics too. "He supports suicide attacks on all Israelis, including [on Israeli] women since he views the Israeli society as a "completely military" society that did not include any civilians. He also considers pregnant women and their unborn babies to be valid targets on the ground that the babies could grow up to join the Israeli Army." Qaradawi is in for a rude awakening in the second resurrection.

Basically, the Jews have been guilty only of wanting to live in their ancient homeland, but the Muslims are guilty of murder, and before that of confusing the God of Israel with Allah, their invention. There is no Allah, explaining why Arabs are always the losers. There can be no worse way to show what losers they are than encouraging fellow Muslims to blow themselves up. If Allah existed for the Muslims, then the Israeli's should have failed in 1948, in 1956, in 1967, in 1973, in 1982, and ever since then, yet, the Israelis have won all the wars against all the Muslims. Hello? Is there any sign of intelligent life in the skulls of Muslims?

What about peaceful, Western Muslims? Are they stupids too? Of course. There was no concept of one God alone that Arabs in general worshiped prior to the false prophet, Mohammed. The stupids had to think that their monotheistic God had been silent toward Arabs until the 7th century AD, when suddenly He popped out of nowhere to inform the Arabs that the God of Israel -- the God of Israeli Scripture -- was really the God of Arabs instead. And that's why Muslims are stupid, because they believed that rubbish, and on behalf of that rubbish the ones today who aspire to be like Mohammed, the blood-letting fool, are not only murdering others, but urging their women and children to blow themselves up. A more desperately insane peoples there cannot be. And to expose what unreasoning animals they are, they are using suicide bombings to kill other Muslims, as if Allah would bless such a thing. If this is their only hope of gaining "respect" from the world, shudder, they are indeed lunatics.

I don't care if you're an offended Muslim reading this. Please, I use "stupids" as a good descriptive term for people who can think better but choose to employ ignorance for one reason or another. The jihadists are working hard to keep anyone from speaking the truth about Mohammed, but the best thing I can do to help you is to tell it like it is. You're a fellow stupid, a stupid of the stupids, if you think God is the God of Arabs and Muslims from the beginning. Period. You need to get smart before it's too late. The God of Abraham was the God of Israel, and Arabs never figured into the people of this God in so far as historical documents that I've heard of prior to the Mohammed era.

If Mohammed was not a fool, then let Allah deal with me for claiming that he was. Why do Muslims do Allah's dirty work? Is it because Allah is too weak to act for himself? No, it's because Allah does not exist, and so unreasoning Muslims of the violent kind take up his cause and kill anyone who calls Mohammed a fool. And before long, they see this "crusade" as a means to win political power and even entire nations...which converts their religious zeal into worldly greed. Here's some news for jihadists: the virgins waiting in paradise reject you as mean, ugly gruffs. They're looking for gentle men.

My sentiments are exactly those of the one true God. He too views radical Muslims as beasts, and He too views peaceful Muslims as false teachers leading their own children astray. You have every right to join the church of God, to become truly wise, if only you would also accept Jesus. But alas, Jesus throws the sand off from his sandals against you, because you are incapable of doing the right thing. Aside from a small minority, Arabs are incapable of choosing Jesus. Therefore, into a screeching insanity they will go with the satanic liberals of America. It is not just Muslim on Muslim, Egyptian on Egyptian, but Western liberals will also fight one another until all have gone mad, until their hands hang limp, like zombies, at what they see come over "their" world.

None of this is to say that there are not people in Islam with the ability to be good and loving, though many of these have become secularized, which is identical to having one's religious zeal vaporized into impotency. Do-nothings can be nice people, and secularism has the effect of creating nice, do-nothings. Secularism wants you to keep your religion to yourself, and to fade away into some dark corner of society, and in the meantime go to work, be lawful, and pay your taxes. The way to handle this abuse is to give it into God's hand, not to fight with bloodshed as though we live in ancient Israel...where killing enemies of God was commendable even by God Himself. Those days have passed, and God did not ever decree Islamics to be the new Israel. The new way now, as of the destruction of sinful Israel in 70 AD, is to let God judge and pass sentence on His enemies.

The apostles learned an early lesson on how to treat those who reject Jesus. He did not instruct them to be ever-patient with non-believers, to return to every house regularly, like the Jehovah's Witnesses do. If they reject Jesus, shake the sand off your shoes against them -- insulting them, that is -- and move on. We are not required to be constantly and carefully nice with our spiritual enemies. If they change their minds, let them come after you. They know where you can be found.

God is not so weak that he might fail to save someone just because you don't go door-to-door constantly. Not one will be missing, said Jesus. Not one that God has chosen will be missing from the first Resurrection. We don't need to tread on egg shells seeking the lost. We don't need to be extra careful in sending them niceties, because, when God calls them, the draw will be irresistible, like one who finds a treasure in a field and then purchases the entire field to own the treasure. If a person does not view Jesus as a treasure, the Father does not want that person. God can be, and has been, very offensive against those who reject Him. Jesus went about offending his enemies; he wasn't going to be lulled into a mild respect for them for any cause. A wart is a wart is a wart, nothing better.

The apostles were very mild. I'm not comparable. I am coarse by comparison, more like the apostle John when, as a youth following Jesus, wanted to call lightning down on Jesus' enemies. Jesus objected in going that far. Recall Peter and his sword strike, which Jesus rejected also. Peter and John were ultimately made into fine, mild gentlemen, however, and they urged their fellow believers to become likewise...because Jesus was mild with them when he discipled them. And they had to be mild to survive the hot-tempered caesars. However, I view end-time Jesus as a "tough guy" (ask his iron rod), and it's no wonder, because the world has become brutal. End-time Jesus is not the Jesus who came to save. End-time Jesus has had the Judgment of God transferred to Him. He's coming with no mercy to share with those who reject Him. Time's up. Mr. Obama, what was that you said about Me and my followers? Here, take this: Kapow! Kaboom! Kasmash!

I'm not prepared to love my enemies as I love the people of God. When Jesus said that we should love our enemies, he was trying to curb the animosity that Jews traditionally practiced against Gentiles. He didn't mean that we should treat our spiritual enemies in the very same way we treat the respecters of Jesus, but that, rather than to do them harm or snub them off completely with snobbery, we should greet them, speak with them, supply their needs if they request it, walk an extra mile if they ask for it, but we are NOT to befriend them or celebrate good times with them. We are NOT to become stained by them.

Yes, Jesus ate with sinners for the purpose of sharing the Message with them, but he did not return to eat with or enjoy friendship when they rejected the Message. Our spiritual enemies are not to be our friends. We are instead to act superficially as friends, for the sake of "loving" them, because God does not want us to practice hatred. It's ugly to practice hatred in certain ways that might overtake some of us as we see the changes for the worst in our society. Liberals are wanting to see our ugliness, to embarrass us with it. We are in a difficult place if we want to scream but cannot, but Jesus did say it's dandy to shout from the housetops, which is fine by me because I'm often very straight-shooting and forward with certain people.

You may think it ugly of me to call our spiritual enemies "stupids," but when it comes to our Muslim enemies, "stupid" is a nice term by comparison to what they really are. They have hijacked Jesus and lowered the Treasure of God into a mere commonality. They have accused the apostles of being liars who fabricated the Resurrection and the Godhood of Jesus, while totally blind to the fabrication that was Mohammed. The latter had no prior scriptures to appeal to, no previous prophets that came with his message, and so the early Muslims appealed to the Israeli Scripture as their own, but in the meantime they hijacked the Israeli Scripture, wiping out a great part of them, even the core, in order to twist it for the sake of their new Islam. This is more than stupid, it's treacherous, the attempt to kick God out of Reality, replacing Him with Mohammed, the fool, and Allah the nothingness who can't win a war against Israel.

So devoid of morality are the anti-Israeli Arabs all around that, when they lose a war against Israel, they claim victory, and they all like stupids believe they won the war thanks to Allah. It's incredible, offensive like a sick joke, and worst of all, it blatantly downgrades the intelligence level of all Muslims as perceived by others.

Jesus clearly did not want us to kill our enemies, but to "love" them. That is one basic difference between the True Prophet of God and the false Mohammed. I urge all Muslims who might venture here to exit the Stupid Zone, resist your Muslim parents if necessary, and get a New Life in the Smart Zone.

I have got to admit that I wish anti-Christian liberals to be "dead." When I hear what they are teaching, and how they celebrate the twisting of good into evil, I wish them to be "dead." It doesn't need to be by cruel death, but just gone. I want them gone. If we could just lock them in prison, that would be well enough for me. They need to be taken off the streets, out of the workplace, and out of politics. But God is far more ruthless than I in this matter, and will award them cruel deaths. The more they laugh at these such warnings, the worse their deaths will be. In the meantime, I "love" local liberals superficially, which doesn't mean I won't bark at them if they get into my face in certain ways. I'll swat a wasp that hangs around by head too long, and I'll tell-off a liberal goon. It's okay to do that; just don't make it the norm if you don't want to become ugly.

We can ignore them while "loving our enemies." The Bible clearly tells us that, if even our own brothers do not stop sinning against us, we can ignore them, have nothing to do with them. Loving our enemies means to treat all people well when we rub shoulders with them out of necessity of sharing the same world; it doesn't mean to enter their spheres to celebrate friendship / neighborliness with them. They will betray that friendship, anyway, when they discover that you take Jesus seriously enough to offer Him. My method of loving non-believers can be to treat them with utmost respect to begin with, giving them the benefit of the doubt, but they will usually corrode by respect for them by what they say and do. When they disrespect me because they discover I'm for the good guys, it's out-of-there time. The more that I sense the toxicity of the person toward God, the more I might turn on my respect of Godliness. If I eventually mention Jesus and they refuse Him, offended, I know that friendship is impossible.

However, if I feel that a non-believer can be converted over time, or if the person does not seem to be rabid against Christ, I will enter their home, if invited, and eat with them, but may not indicate my Christianity to them until I feel they can handle it without bitterness (don't throw pearls to the swine). We can be a salt even without revealing our faith, though there is certain language that we use that informs them of our Christianity even if we prefer to hide it. I will befriend them in sincerity if they do not seem toxic toward my faith, but will be mindful of opportunities to curb their thinking, and will seek to take stabs in his/her presence at current evil trends and conditions. There comes a point where God does not want us to enter the home anymore of a non-believer or false-Christian, sometimes for the sake of our own spiritual health, and sometimes because He simply deplores that person. Loving neighbors as ourselves does not mean that we must be on speaking terms, but speaks to the ideal that God wishes to see planet-wide in his Kingdom. In other words, that ideal cannot exist now, where more than half our neighbors have turned from God. The apostle Paul rejected many enemies, and the Great Rejection is almost here.

Muslims are not our "brothers" in that they believe in the same God. They do not believe in the same God. There is a lovey-dovey stream in modern Christianity that would embrace Muslims as fellow believers in God, in spite of the animosity that Muslims have at their inception against the God of Israel.

I have much in common with Muslims; we both agree that the Zionist vein in Israel is an ungodly snake. But Muslims in the news go much further, desiring the destruction of Israel, and the taking of Jerusalem as their own holy place. They even stole the Temple Mount chosen by Solomon, and they refuse to give it back to religious Israelis to this day. Let's just wait to see who wins this war, Allah versus Yahweh.

The Lake of Fire, mentioned in Revelation but apparently also by Isaiah as a place in Edom, may be explained as a huge chasm opened upon the land at the earthquake that also opens a crevice at the Mount of Olives a couple of miles east of Old Jerusalem. The crevice from Jerusalem will go east to an unidentified Azel location, says Zechariah, but Edom is likewise east of Jerusalem, wherefore this crevice may be an extension of a big hole in Edom (or series of holes) that, according to Isaiah 34, burns as pitch forever, until the end of generations, that is.

Banning foul language in a public forum by law is over the top to many Western secularists, but it shows a heart going in the right direction:

State Duma Deputy Yelena Mizulina intends to make further amendments to the Law "On the Protection of Children." The chairwoman of the Committee on Family, Women and Children put forward a suggestion to punish people for using dirty language in social networks.

According to politician, the pages full of posts and messages containing swear words, will have to be blocked within 24 hours, if harmful information is not deleted. This should apply to pages on social networks, websites, and various forums. According to Mizulina, children can begin to see profanity as a norm. It is assumed that possible innovations will be discussed on July 30th.

The logic is the same wherein people in a restaurant shouldn't be forced to inhale the cigarette smoke of others. They can smoke, but not in the restaurant. They can use vulgar language, but not on social networks. I agree. Russia is going in a moralistic direction more than liberals in America. Mark that.

American social media is rife with disgusting language and porn from so many that, where the world is frowning on America, this has got to be one of the major reasons. America the good??? Where? Where are the Republican Christians -- or any decent people -- who as yet haven't curbed the obscenities online? Have they at least tried? And if they have failed while trying because satan's sons demand the right to obscenities, have the lawmakers told their political foes that God will punish them for it? How can God act for the politicians if the politicians are afraid to mention that they are acting in His name??? Act in His name, and God will support you! Do not be afraid of worldly fools in this regard. Hello? God is aching to punish these types, and seeks the Elijah's of the end times who challenge the Baals of the end times. Just do it!

When do the lawmakers expect to get around to cleaning up the Internet? The nasties are teaching their wares to as many as possible, hoping to make the entire world jump into their own brand of dissipation. The New Testament predicted this, actually, for the last days. 2 Peter 4:4: "They [the worldly, pagans] think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you." Jesus said in Luke 21.34: "Watch yourselves [in the last days] lest your hearts be weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and the concerns of this world."

The chief religious figure in Russia has denounced "gays" (I would rather call them disgusting pigs, but Christians are not supposed to speak this way), but Fuller Seminary, and the new Pope, accept them even as ministers. The pope just said this past week that he won't judge gay Catholic priests. Is he kidding? How can any Christian be afraid to say something like, "If the apostles are against it, then I have no choice but to be against it, and in fact I am against it because I agree with the apostles that it's wrong, that it angers God, and that it de-values men / women." Instead, the one who thinks he leads Christianity on behalf of Christ has given in to a brutal part of the dissipation that has taken over the world. But pagan Russia is resisting this tide, as is communist China. Shame on liberal America; shame on the new pope. Shame on Fuller Seminary.

Here is from a Pravda article that claims imminent American weapons shipments into Syria in this month of August:

...The question arises - why would these [Arabian] countries finance the [Syrian] rebels? The answer is obvious. The Assad regime is not beneficial to anyone, it has to be removed by any means and resources to divide Syria. In addition, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have always wanted to become key players in the region. With a strong Syria this would not work. But it should be remembered that behind all these players there is a more influential figure, a country that seeks to conquer the entire world. Of course, we are talking about the United States, the main sponsor of the Syrian rebels [said just as one would expect from Pravda, but my views have been identical].

The CIA has been repeatedly smuggling weapons to the Syrian rebels. This operation is part of a secret plan approved personally by Barack Obama. In Jordan, secret U.S. warehouses are located from which weapons are sent off to their destination. Then they are distributed to small groups of Syrian rebels, The Wall Street Journal reported.

The CIA placed advisers in southern Turkey who make decisions on which group of rebels is given weapons [this evokes the weapons shipments from Benghazi under Christopher Stevens]. The United States also supplies the rebels with communication devices that allow avoiding tracking by the Syrian security services. Saudi Arabia always coordinates its activities with the United States [mere anti-American propaganda, or is it true?].

Referring to anonymous government and diplomatic sources, the newspaper reported that the weapons supplies were made to enable coordinated attacks of the rebels at the government troops in early August.

The CIA would take three weeks to deliver light weapons and anti-tank missiles to Jordan. Intelligence experts will then train the Syrian soldiers to handle these weapons. The United States is also are in talks with France on the placement of its weapons in Jordan. Saudi Arabia will give MANPADS (man-portable air-defense systems) to a small group of specially selected militants.

Starting August, hundreds of armed fighters will continuously penetrate Syria under this program. The U.S. and Saudi officials believe that in 4-5 months a sufficient number of trained and re-equipped soldiers will be concentrated in Syria to resist the forces of Assad.

August, hum? A new cause for concern as August gets under way: the O-dministration has ordered closed certain Middle East embassies as if to give the impression that there is a known attack upon one or more of them, but I say that anything exploded in Obama's face would look good on him. The additional reports (leaked, of course, from top-secret information, as it serves Obama's interests) are suggesting that al-Qaeda in the Arabian peninsula (the worst enemy of all, we are told repeatedly) is preparing something big. CBS has a story on this, reading much like a script, and all the reader-comments after the article are, thus far, from those expecting this to be a false-flag event from Obama. Still, false-flag events can kill people.

Egged on by a new-found victory in Egypt, Israel can now concentrate better on the Syria front. Ironically, Israel's victory in Egypt is Obama's loss so far, yet Israel's partner in Syria is Obama. The latter will not likely win Egypt back for the Brotherhood -- not soon anyway -- because the Egyptian military caught him by surprise. It must have taken a drawn-out effort by American craftiness to over-throw Mubarak, but now, I don't think the internal American machine inside Egypt is a prepared to combat the military government. This time, the latter would be well-prepared to disallow Morsi supporters the use of the Internet...which allowed them to organize (or divide and conquer) in throwing out Mubarak. The Russians this past week (as per the Pravda article above) accused Obama of "divide and conquer" as per the Arab Spring.

The paragraph above was written before I opened an email about Obama taking some north African nations using "community organizing" skills adopted from Saul Alinsky, a lover of satan. The email went on to share the idea that the organizing methods -- divide by creating chaos, then conquer by installing new people -- is a thing to be used against Israel. Therefore, my point is, watch for the Israeli media to cover and fuel a schism between those wanting a Palestinian state and those who do not. The political machine in Israel that opposes Netanyahu to the point of facilitating a Palestinian state has been in place since before Obama. It's there to be used by an American president, and no doubt Obama and Hillary Clinton have played off of it to the best of their ability. Kerry has yet to work that machine, however, except perhaps for a first crack this past week or two.

The Alinsky model is also one of "conquer and divide (the wealth)." Create chaos for the big corporates, re-distribute their wealth in the meantime, and then have the nation's poor peoples pick up the coins as they fall out of the bags. Of course, all the lowly of the land would love such a thing, and it's even the way that God will create the situation when Jesus returns. The problem is, Alinsky's liberalism opposed God's community standards so that, while the peoples are picking up the coins and getting into powerful positions, they are also becoming sinfully corrupt. Alinsky was therefore a fool, as are his followers.

I did not believe the O-merican military when it claimed to be in Jordan last month merely for some temporary boot camp. Likely, it's training Syrian fighters to kill other Syrians. In the meantime, while Obama has an agreement with the Jordan king, the latter, like Obama, opposes Israel's right (and God's right) to Old Jerusalem (in East Jerusalem):

Jordanian King Abdullah II added fuel to the ongoing debate over Jerusalem and the Temple Mount [July 28], when he told visiting Muslim and Christian dignitaries from Jerusalem that he will continue his efforts to "safeguard" Islamic and Christian sites in the holy city of Jerusalem from what he termed "Judaization."

...The Jordanian king also emphasized his country's cooperation with the Palestinian Authority, in working to assert "Jordan's role as custodian of the holy sites of Jerusalem and Palestinian sovereignty over all of Palestine, including East Jerusalem."

Palestinian Minister of Jerusalem Affairs Adnan Husseini reiterated the importance of an agreement to this effect signed by Abdullah and Abbas in March [were Americans involved here?]...

Husseini said the agreement had boosted Jordanian-PA coordination at local and international levels.

...The Jordanian government is responsible for the Waqf - an Islamic trust which oversees religious sites, including the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which is Judaism's holiest place and also the site of a large Islamic complex [it's also the place that the One Creator swore to give to Abraham's descendants, a wee oversight by the Jordanian king].

Jordan is at peace with Israel, yet it has bias for Palestinians. If I read Isaiah prophecy correctly, Jordan (Amman and Moab) will escape the wrath of the anti-Christ and yet will suffer from the effects of war in Israel, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

To the disappointment of Israeli's, the Netanyahu government not only agreed to release over 100 Palestinian prisoners (though it was merely a gesture to the peace process), but the government is not admitting why it closed the Temple Mount to Israeli's:

Israelis who believe the Temple Mount should remain in Israeli hands must take urgent action, Likud MK Moshe Feiglin warned [August 1].

Feiglin, who heads the Jewish Leadership faction of the Likud party, visited the Temple Mount on Thursday despite knowing he would find it locked to Jews, as a display of protest.

In an "unprecedented" move, police on Wednesday informed Jewish groups that the Temple Mount will be closed to all non-Muslims until at least the end of Ramadan, on 11th August. The announcement has provoked renewed anger over anti-Jewish discrimination on the Temple Mount, and sparked calls by activists for a mass-protest on 7th August, at the start of the Hebrew month of Elul.

...The only "explanation" offered was a bland sign which simply read "Today the Temple Mount will be closed to visitors." Those restrictions did not, however, apply to Muslim visitors, who continue to receive unrestricted access.

There you have it: the government was not willing to admit to the people that the Temple site was closed to Jews because they offend Muslims. That is a sign that Pretzel-yahu is pretending to bend over backward for the peace process so that the world will have no choice but to blame the failure of the process on Palestinians. I think Israeli leaders know that the world will come down very hard on Israel if Israel is seen as the roadblock to peace. As it has gone thus far in Kerry's new round of peace talks (that didn't happen), the Palestinians indeed appeared as the roadblock. Plan Pretzel is working like a charm, at least for now. Way to go, Netanyahu. We await the nacho crunch.

Benghazi Update

Obama is threatening the lives of relatives of CIA workers in order to keep the lid on his Benghazi scandal:

CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.

...Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths [on behalf of Obama] to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.

...Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency's missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency's workings.

The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career.

In exclusive communications obtained by CNN, one insider writes, "You don't jeopardize yourself, you jeopardize your family as well."

Another says, "You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation."

..."CIA employees are always free to speak to Congress if they want," the [CIA] statement continued...

...[However,] In the aftermath of the attack, Wolf [a Republican] said he was contacted by people closely tied with CIA operatives and contractors who wanted to talk.

Then suddenly, there was silence.

It is clear that two U.S. agencies were operating in Benghazi, one was the State Department, and the other was the CIA.

Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.

...The State Department told CNN in an e-mail that it was only helping the new Libyan government destroy weapons deemed "damaged, aged or too unsafe retain," and that it was not involved in any transfer of weapons to other countries.

But the State Department also clearly told CNN, they "can't speak for any other agencies."

The CIA would not comment on whether it was involved in the transfer of any weapons.

No comment is an admission of guilt. It looks like the CIA has been nabbed. If CNN comes out with a story like this, it must be all over but the crying for the CIA, and for the president who hears everything on what the CIA is doing. The Weekly Standard reports that, in May of this year, the new CIA chief (Brennan) sent a letter to all CIA operatives who had been in Benghazi, giving them the green light, we are to assume, to share with Congress what they know about the attack. But, says the article, none have responded. Why not? For fear, obviously. When the FBI teamed up with Obama to humiliate and ruin the CIA director (Petraeus) at the time of the attack, it was a message well sent to all CIA operatives at Benghazi. I would add that, since Brennan's classified letter is not available to us, there is a chance that Brennan himself, in the letter itself, subtly cautioned the CIA operatives not to speak before Congress.

Lookie here:

USA TODAY exclusive:..The FBI gave its informants permission to break the law at least 5,658 times in a single year, according to newly disclosed documents that show just how often the nation's top law enforcement agency enlists criminals to help it battle crime.

The U.S. Justice Department ordered the FBI to begin tracking crimes by its informants more than a decade ago, after the agency admitted that its agents had allowed Boston mobster James "Whitey" Bulger to operate a brutal crime ring in exchange for information about the Mafia. The FBI submits that tally to top Justice Department officials each year, but has never before made it public.

And that's why Eric Holder at the justice department is a mafiosa-like character himself, because the way in which the justice department goes about finding criminals is itself criminal. To boot, the justice department of Eric Holder goes about finding "crime" within the sphere's of it political enemies, the Republicans, and no doubt Holder lets many organized-crime leaders off the hook if they support Democrat causes. If the FBI allows an informant to bribe an officer of the law, that officer, especially if he's a Republican, can be arrested while the criminal gets off the hook with Holder's blessing. The article goes on to say that local and state police departments can also practice this method of catching that, in total, the number of state-sponsored crimes is more vast than minimal.

Jay Carney (the paid liar for to give media false impressions of Obama's agendas) offended the Russians openly, as did Obama when he publicly called for the release of Snowden. It was done publicly to embarrass Russia. This past week, Russia handed Snowden asylum, and Carney is complaining that the Russians didn't first notify Obama before making that drastic decision, as if the Russians should, by common courtesy, first allow themselves to be manipulated by Obama when protecting Snowden from Obama. Carney is, once again, trying to embarrass Russia by making that public statement. When asked by a reporter on the condition of the reset button: "He defended Obama's Russia policy and the U.S.'s reset with Russia, saying its produced "positive benefits," including cooperation from Russia on the transit of supplies to US troops in Afghanistan and efforts to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions." In other words, the reset button was not for forming a sincere friendship with Russia, but was for the purpose of using Russia to further the Afghan war, and to jab Iran in the eye if possible. That's how the Russians would read Carney's response, and that means he pushed the reset button deeper into oblivion.

Lookie here:

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) was on with Greta Van Susteren tonight to discuss the Obama scandals.

This came after Jake Tapper at CNN broke the news today that there were "dozens" of CIA operatives on the ground in Benghazi on 9-11 when the consulate came under attack and the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

Gowdy told Greta the Obama Administration is hiding the survivors, dispersing them around the country, AND changing their names.

"Including changing names, creating aliases. Stop and think what things are most calculated to get at the truth? Talk to people with first-hand knowledge. What creates the appearance and perhaps the reality of a cover-up? Not letting us talk with people who have the most amount of information, dispersing them around the country and changing their names."

And, at the same time Obama is hiding the survivors around the country he's calling Benghazi a "phony" scandal.

Everyone is prone to being on this story that wants Obama punished. I'm wonder how Gowdy knew. Is it reliable news? Would a lawmaker (he represents S. Carolina) make a false claim like this a Fox program? I don't think so. There are subtle lies that lawmakers can make in the name of ongoing political warfare, but this is a very serious charge against Obama, and Gowdy, previously an attorney, knows it. It's first-degree criminality on Obama's part if the story is true. It's criminal on Gowdy's part if the story is fabricated. I therefore give this story merit. It's being carried by some, but, so far (some days after the show), not by the big media. Are they investigating the merit behind the claim before mentioning the story, or is there some universal hot button that the government can press to instantly make it unlawful for media to carry a certain story until the media heads hash out the controversies involved? In such cases, but where some minor groups report the story, the man on the street generally gets the impression that there's no credibility / merit to the story. You need to be wiser than that.

Last I heard, the O-dministration did not release the names of some 33 CIA people who were at Benghazi the night of the attack. Therefore, how would Gowdy know that Obama changed their names? There are certain things discussed by Congress that are top secret, and perhaps the entire Congress knows of some of the CIA operatives whose names have been changed, while only Gowdy amongst them decided to start blowing the whistle on that topic. If it's a special top secret case in Congress, we could imagine that the media would be alerted to that fact, and directed by law not to report on the issue.

The Shoebat Claims

Recently, a story came out wherein a Libyan official(s) claimed that Morsi was behind the Benghazi-consulate attack. World Net Daily carried (and maybe broke) the story that didn't seem to make the big media:

A letter from a high ranking officer assigned as the chief of the Libyan government's Department of Security has reportedly placed the blame for the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the American compound in Benghazi squarely at the feet of the deposed Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi, as reported by the right-of-center news portal World Net Daily (WND) on July 10, 2013.

WND claims they have verified the legitimacy of the letter, as well as having it independently translated by ex-Muslim Brotherhood member Walid Shoebat.

The letter in its original Arabic can be seen here.

...WND cited a Youtube video with reportedly shows amateur cellphone video of the attack in which Jihadists joining on on the attack of the U.S. Consulate were pleading in an Egyptian dialect of Arabic, "Don't shoot, don't shoot. Dr. Morsi sent us."

The WND video link account has since been "terminated" by Youtube.

However, Front Page Magazine published a separate Youtube video (left) on May 31, 2013 in which a large group was seen approaching the embattled American consulate, clearly telling the attackers in the dialect of Upper Egypt: "Mahadesh, mahadesh yermi, Dr. Morsi ba`atna"...

...The words "Mahadesh yermi" for "don't shoot" are characteristically spoken in Egyptian Arabic, while Libyans from Benghazi would say, "Matermey"; for "don't shoot."

Here's WND's exclusive article:

WND has verified the authenticity of the letter by Col. Mahmoud al-Sharif, the chief of the Department of Security of the Libyan government in Tripoli, written four days after the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.

The letter mentions Morsi as being implicated in the planning that led to the Benghazi attack and identifies the Egyptian jihadist group Ansar Sharia as the group responsible.

The letter discloses that the bodies of three Americans killed in the attack along with Ambassador Stevens were desecrated in revenge for the production of an anti-Islam film, assumed to be "Innocence of the Muslims." The film was produced by the imprisoned Mark Basseley Yousef, the person the Obama administration erroneously claimed was responsible for triggering for attack itself.

There are at least three different facets to this story: 1) the Libyan letter above, four days after the attack; 2) an Arabic news story two days after the attack; 3) the video showing the armed bands of men with one Egyptian saying, "don't shoot." The Libyan letter seems not to have merit because Obama would have appealed to it when he badly needed to make his case that the consulate was attacked by those angered about the anti-Mohammed video. Therefore, the Libyan letter could be a fabrication at the request of an Obama operative.

As to why Obama would ask for such a fabrication and then not appeal to it, one answer could be: the ones responsible for the fabrication blew it because they also pegged Morsi as one of the culprits, which Obama had no intention of doing...because Obama secretly (i.e. the Libyans didn't know it) loved Morsi and the Brotherhood. On the other hand, the Libyans responsible for the fabrication knew full well that Obama loved Morsi, which is exactly why they gave Obama the screws by lumping Morsi into the fabricated story. A third possibility is that the letter was correct in all points but that Obama did not appeal to it because it tarnished his role in empowering the Brotherhood in Egypt.

When the O-dministration jailed the maker of the anti-Mohammed video (last I heard he's still locked up), it must have been to keep him from talking, for there is simply no justifiable reason, in view of law, for jailing a man who makes an anti-Mohammed video. The likelihood is that the man was jailed on a trumped charge.

Below is Walid Shoebat's story, where he quotes from Libyan-Intelligence letter(s) translated to English, speaking on the confessions of Egyptian prisoners reportedly of Ansar al-Sharia. It would take superhuman insights (that I don't have) at this point to fish for the realities in this letter while isolating any fabrications, and, besides, how did this letter(s) get out in the first place so that Shoebat was able to bring it to the world? Here is one bit that I'd like to highlight, written by the Shoebat people:

At this point, let's introduce the YouTube channel of Sam Bacile. It is later learned that Bacile is actually Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man behind the Innocence of Muslims video. At one time, two videos appeared on the Feed tab of Bacile's channel...

About one week earlier, Bacile identified the other video that appeared on his channel as one of his favorites; it is a video of Nader Bakkar, the official spokesman of the Salafist Nour Party. Bakkar and Waris joined forces in the effort expressed by Waris on September 7th...

...You see, our own Walid Shoebat is the first cousin of Nakoulas longtime partner in crime...

Whose reports can we trust? Shoebat, the article says, grew up near Bethlehem in the Palestinian zone of Jerusalem. That's the area beloved by Obama. But Shoebat, no longer a Muslim, may be a bona fide whistle blower on the Obama agenda, as he seems to be.

There are some suspecting that even the Nakoulas video itself was an Obama-circle production to give "just cause" to the attack on the consulate. If that's true, then it would appear (from the claim in the quote above) that the makers of the video were in partnership with the Salafist Nour Party...which group, late in the last update, I tied tentatively to Obama; the suspicion was that Obama specifically wants to empower the Salafists in Egypt on behalf of a Senussi element within them.

I did not know this WND story (discovered on August 2) when writing in the last update ending on July 29. I did not know until now that the Salafists were, according to Shoebat, connected to the video that Obama blamed the Benghazi attack on. That video started riots in Cairo, and so we may now indeed suspect that Obama paws and pawns in Cairo are facilitated by political Salafists.

Shoebat is highly convinced that Ansar al-Sharia attacked Benghazi. If Obama favored that group, then it would explain why he tried to pin the blame on Libyans in the streets, i.e. to shift attention away from Ansar al-Sharia.

Let's repeat here that Obama has been too nice -- nicer than expected -- toward the Morsi-trampling Egyptian military. Moreover, the EU foreign affairs chief, Ashton, as reported by the Morsi people, asked Morsi, when visiting him this past week in his place of custody, to accept the coup and the new elections in Egypt. The Morsi people of course rejected the EU advice. Finally, the latest has John Kerry taking a position that is obviously pro-coup, coming off as something Obama thinks:

During his visit to Pakistan on [August 1], Secretary of State John Kerry gave several TV interviews including one to Hamid Mir of Geo TV. Mir's first question for Kerry concerned Egypt. The Obama administration has resisted referring to the military action in Egypt as a coup, but in this interview, Kerry went even further, asserting that "the military did not take over, to the best of our judgment so -- so far," and that its intervention was at the request of "millions and millions of people" concerned about the increasing chaos in the country...

What floppy clown would say that the Egyptian military has not yet taken over? Answer: Obama, with his foot in Kerry's mouth. The latter goes on to say, "in effect, they were restoring democracy," a clear signal that he favors the coup. I doubt very much that he spoke this in opposition to Obama's position, and yet the words (above) he chose to justify his blunder are an obvious affront to the Brotherhood government, portraying it as a non-democratic.

What pressure from the Egyptian military could explain these things? What has the Egyptian military got on Obama and the EU to force their arms like this? Imagine if the Egyptian military now knows who really was behind the Benghazi attack, with evidence to prove it like a nuclear explosion in Obama's face. The American president would need to be on his best behavior to luck out of this one. And Obama knows how to behave well for to get through scandalous conditions.

The very next day:

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry backed away Friday from his candid comments that seemed to signal American support for the Egyptian military coup and the ouster of President Mohammed Morsi.

The U.S. has tried hard not to appear as if it is taking sides in the crisis. But when Kerry said Thursday in Pakistan that the Egyptian military was "restoring democracy" in leading the July 3 coup, it left the impression that the U.S. backed the military action. Kerry moved quickly to defuse the flap [after being chastised by the O-people for letting the cat out of the bag]...

Ha Ha! If Kerry doesn't truly understand the O-genda, he's going to screw up still more in the future. As his closest operators echo the will of Obama to us, listen carefully for clues to what Obama is really thinking. Obama is the sort of president requiring all of his operators to exactly echo policies as he himself has tailored them, but even then he's got to hide some parts of his agendas because he cannot fully trust any of his operators. His policy on Egypt has clearly been that we should not be able to tell whose side he's on, but Kerry just spilled the beans. Yet, I do not think that Obama is for the military government or the associated secularists, but rather for the fundamentalist Salafists who are in some alliance with the military coup.

Even the military leader of the coup admits that it was a coup: "Gen Sisi demanded that the US recognise that his actions as those of 'a free people who rebelled against an unjust political rule.' I don't care how one phrases it, but the ousting of a political rule by a fellow military establishment is the very definition of a coup. In the world of Obama's brain, where anything will be twisted that can be twisted, this particular coup is a step toward democracy.

The article goes on to tell that the State Department is in Egypt pulling strings to get the next government off the ground, you see, fully content to see the military carry on as it's doing: "The flap over Kerry's remarks came at a bad time. Just as Kerry was in London trying to clarify his statement from the day before, [U.S.] Deputy Secretary of State William Burns was landing in Cairo to urge Egyptian leaders to avoid violence and help facilitate a political exit strategy to end the stalemate..." It is hardly time to call this a stalemate (it's more like a match to a powder keg), but, the point is well taken that Obama has his foreign-policy people in Egypt trying to make things happen. I think it's important that Burns first met with the Morsi people before meeting with the military, according to the BBC. It can serve to show that Obama's favoritism is with the Brotherhood.

The BBC adds that the military government has met with "a prominent group of Islamic clerics" but did not disclose which group(s) they represent. The story is expounded upon in the Teelgraph:

...But two of the clerics who took part in the meeting confirmed that they were taking messages between the two sides.

Sheikh Mohammed Hassan said...

...Mahmoud Mokhtar El-Mahdi, a prominent leader of the purist Salafi Muslim movement, said...

It sounds like the Salafists were part of the two clerics. The article goes on to point out that Obama is putting the coup leader under some pressure, and that the coup leader is openly railing against Obama for abandoning the Egyptian secularists during the Brotherhood tidal wave a couple of years ago: "In an interview with the Washington Post Gen Sisi expressed frustration at the pressure from the United States. 'You left the Egyptians, you turned your back on the Egyptians and they won't forget that,' he said." One can imagine that this message to anti-Obama America was pre-planned, before the interview. Sisi shot a torpedo across Obama's hull, and does not sound afraid of Obama (who at this time could be afraid of a band of rats?). The Washington-Post article reveals what looks like an accusation of dividing Egypt, i.e. the divide and conquer scheme. "Sissi spoke on the same day that Secretary of State John F. Kerry made the administration's most supportive comments to date, saying that Egypt's army was "restoring democracy.'" My interpretation: Kerry was kissing up to Sisi, trying to pacify him before he says more.

While Ashton may have discovered where the Egyptians are keeping Morsi in prison, Burns may now know where the number-two Brotherhood man is kept in prison, which is good data to pass on to the Brotherhood in order to spark a jail break: "The officials say U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns met in prison early [July 5] with Khairat el-Shater, the deputy head of the Brotherhood...He was accompanied by the foreign ministers of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates as well as an EU envoy. Mosri and others are set to face murder charges in three weeks.

Simultaneous with Kerry's floppy words, an al-Qaeda leader has come out to accuse Obama of betrayal: "Al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri has accused the United States of 'plotting' [treason] with Egypt's military, secularists and Christians to overthrow Islamist president Mohammed Morsi, AFP reported on Saturday...In the 15-minute recording, Zawahiri also accused Egypt's Coptic Christian minority of supporting the Islamist president's ouster to attain 'a Coptic state stripped from Egypt's south.' My hope is that the military government exposes the Benghazi truth due to the failure of the O-people to come off clean with the new Egypt.

The Shoebat article continues:

**UPDATE at 9:47pm EST on 7/24/13**

Thanks to multiple sources, it has been reported that a Libyan Intelligence envoy traveled to Cairo on July 21st [a couple of weeks ago] to meet with Egyptian officials from the new government. Reports are that documents transferred from Libya to Egypt show the involvement of Mohammed Mursi in the Benghazi attacks on 9/11. Our report on these sources comprises Addendum B.

That's cause for an O-Shock. If true, the O-people should be seeking to win the absolute love of the new Egypt. The O-people may need to offer half of the United States to keep this one quiet. But why has Congress seemingly ignored this Morsi-did-it story? Is there nothing to it? Keeping in mind that Morsi has been a devout supporter of the Blind Shiekh, actively seeking (from Obama) his freedom from prison, here's another update from the article:

**UPDATE at 7:32pm EST on 7/30/13**

A wonderful tip was sent to us by Rho and it made perfect sense to turn it into EXHIBIT Z (with Z1, Z2, and Z3). Essentially, CNN's Nic Robertson did a report from outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on 9/11/12 [the date of the Benghazi attack]. The reason he was there had to do with protests that were going on there. Those protests were demanding the release of Omar Abdel Rahman (the "Blind Sheikh"). Shockingly, Robertson was present with Mohammed al-Zawahiri, the brother of Al-Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri and the son of the Blind Sheikh. Mohammed is a prominent figure with Ansar al-Sharia Egypt.

My computer gets repeatedly timed out by Google when trying to access some of Shoebat's pages. I can't get either the addendums or the exhibit above. I then get a 502 error when trying to load, "Obama's Brother In Bed With Terrorists," from the website; but here's a youtube video (which I haven't seen) on the same subject:

We might want to investigate this other lead which I've not known before:

The video also exposes President Obama's half-brother -- Malik H. Obama -- as a senior leader in terror organizations that supply funding and comfort to Al Qaeda. Malik Obama is also a close associate of Omar al-Bashir, the president of Sudan who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity. After watching the short video below, you may wish to review this comprehensive article which also includes a link to a comprehensive 22-page report that provides substantial evidence to support these alarming allegations. Video

It's a complete sham when Obama supporters come out with vile disgust against those who believe this story on the O-brother. There seems to be some very good reason for tracking the O-brother to Sudan-related terror groups, but, once again, the big media do not want to entangle their readers into this controversy...because, obviously, the media will lose the "privilege" of front-row seats at White House commentaries, the bread-and-butter of their daily news stories.

Below is the gist of the Shoebat story, keeping in mind that Obama's brother owns an American foundation (winked at by the IRS, takes funds from Americans) named after Barack H. Obama otherwise known as president Obama's "father":

...Omar Al-Bashir [president of Sudan] is a controversial figure both in Sudan and worldwide. In July 2008, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), accused al-Bashir of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur. The court issued an arrest warrant for al-Bashir on counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Al-Bashir and top Sudanese officials are pictured with Malik Obama on the front page of the Barack H. Obama website [this was after Bashir was put on the Western black list]. And, the IRS gave this group preferential treatment over American conservative and pro-Constitutional groups [in the Tea-party scandal].

That is no small point. It's no wonder Obama lovers are fuming over those who carry this story, as it has the stuff for yet another Obama scandal. Furthermore, as Shoebat points out, "Malik [Obama] is the Executive Secretary [controls the money] of the Islamic Da'wa Organization (IDO) as reported by all major Saudi press, including Okaz." What? Obama's brother is suddenly a leader in a religious organization??? Can this be proven? Do the Arab media have their facts straight? Can the idea be substantiated by finding a soft spot in Obama's heart for the Sudanese president?

Yes, Sudan, for Shoebat continues to point out that "The IDO has been created by the Sudanese Government, which is considered by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist state. This places Malik Obama in bed with terrorists and working as an official with a terrorist state." That could be considered a jump to conclusions on Shoebat's part, though it's not necessarily false. I would say that anyone who balks at Shoebat's accusation is doing so too early, and does so merely in trust of Obama. The subject needs further investigation, in other words...which is the job of the media, is it not? The potential here is for the American president to be an ally of the criminal, the Sudanese president. [I had not yet discovered what's to come below on Bashir's religious intentions when writing this paragraph].

Shoebat may be in the midst of becoming Obama's worst whistle-blower nightmare. He may have more on the Obama brother than meets the eye above, but I cannot (as I write) find much online in adding to it. I am finding many webpages quoting the Shoebat page on this story, but cannot find a page that copies the Shoebat article in full. Is Google disallowing those pages from coming up in the search? It could be arranged, easily, and Obama could, imaginably, request it from Google.

If anyone argues that what Obama's brother does in Africa is irrelevant to president Obama's agenda, ask: how could the Obama brother in Kenya -- a nobody if not for the president Obama -- get an audience, and a special role, with a connection to the Sudanese government? It makes better sense that the nobody-brother is doing the agenda of the president Obama. Some are going so far as to accuse Lois Lerner of the IRS of funding Sudan on behalf of Obama:

Mark Steyn was the guest host on the Rush Limbaugh show today and led off the second hour of the program by devoting nearly the entire first segment to the Uber-Scandal involving Malik Obama, the IRS, Lois Lerner, and Omar al-Bashir. Steyn brought it up a couple more times during the show (all included below).

If we had one critique, it's that callers didn't seem to grasp the gravity of this and discussed other things, perhaps because it's just so difficult to wrap your head around just how big this Uber-Scandal is (even if you don't factor the president into the equation). [go HERE to listen to this 15 minute clip on what is going on!]

The idea is that president Obama is behind the formation of the Obama foundation, yet another thing that needs investigation by the media. If the brother of George Bush formed a foundation sending American money to his family in Africa, you can be sure that CNN would have it as a primary story lickety-split.

There is another headline, "Obama's Brother Works With Man Who Attacked US Embassy," though this is referring to the U.S. embassy in Sudan, attacked by Omar al-Bashir. And so when we look afresh at the attack on the Benghazi "embassy" with these things in mind, we could imagine Obama attacking in the same spirit / agenda possessed by Bashir when he attacked Sudan's embassy on September 14, ALMOST ON THE SAME DAY as the Benghazi attack. The article below is by Theodore Shoebat, a Christian Palestinian, Walid Shoebat's son:

Obama's brother is working with an enemy to the United States. Is it any wonder, then, as to why he has been so pompous toward American liberty, and yet so helpful to Bashir?

In 2012 I wrote an article showing how while Obama has supported the Islamic uprisings in the Middle East, he has in fact stopped a revolution against the Hitler of Africa, Omar al-Bashir, who has been responsible for the deaths of over three million people. I wrote:

The support of the rebels in Syria, and the condemnation of Assad, by the Obama administration can only make one question as to why he is against this particular regimen, but not that of Omar al-Bashir, the tyrant who has been responsible for the deaths of millions through the Jihad that he has commenced against Christians and the non-Arab Muslims of Darfur.

In fact, Obama had at one point in time prevented Salva Kiir, {the Christian president} president of South Sudan, from aiding rebels who wanted to topple al-Bashir's regimen, and replace it with a secular government [this is suggesting a Muslim-Christian civil war in Sudan].

Malik is the Executive Secretary for the Islamic Da'wa Organization (IDO), which is stationed in Khartoum, Sudan, and which has its primary focus in expanding Wahhabist Islam [= Sunni sect] in the African subcontinent...

This is all in accordance with the anti-Christian goals and policies which Bashir is pursuing orchestrating, and which Malik Obama upholds and supports...

This anti-Christian sentiment which Malik Obama upholds and instills is exactly what is fueling the violence against Christians in Africa [a interesting point as per anti-Christ / False Prophet prophecy].

The fatwa which Mustafa affirmed gave the leeway to a number of Bashir's thugs to slaughter and attack Christians celebrating in front of Kambouni playground with sticks and machetes.

Right now, Bashir's government is executing the dechristianization of and the systematic holocaust of Christians in his country. He is violently enforcing that Arabic, the language of Islam, be the dominant tongue; foreign missionaries have been forcibly deported, and churches have been bulldozed. In 2012, Bashir gave Christians till March 1 to leave North Sudan, but half a million of them were stranded, leaving them open targets for Muslims thirsty for Christian blood [I now wish I had followed this story, but I did not].

Malik Obama is not only working with a terrorist who attacked the United States, but also a mass murderer.

That's beginning to open my eyes. I'm beginning to see how the Shoebats perceive the Obama situation as an anti-Christian crusade. Obama, the anti-Christian...why, of course. Although he's not yet targeting Christians with cruelty inside the U.S., he may be well on his way into the thick of Christian persecution in Africa, thus building an integral aspect of the anti-Christianity that will possess the anti-Christ also. Ezekiel 38 lumps Cush -- today within the Sudanese sphere -- with end-time Gog.

Why should the Obama brother stop at the doorstep of Sudan? He won't, because he's in charge of pan-African Islam, to make Muslims respect the brand of religion as pushed by the Sudanese government. I wonder if that brand is respected by the Egyptian Salafists. This is a major story that I did not know until now.

I haven't known the details of the foundation started by the O-brother, but here's someone's take: "When the Barack H. Obama Foundation sought tax-exempt status to raise money for good works in Kenya, the Internal Revenue Service provided quick help." We have all heard of Muslim charities raising money for jihad. The article continues:

There is no evidence to suggest that Malik is building any houses in Kogelo for widows and orphans as claimed," Shoebat said.

Neither is there evidence that the Mama Sarah Foundation [belongs to another Obama in Kenya] has built any homes for widows, orphans and HIV/AIDS victims.

"The only evidence where monies were spent involves the Barack H. Obama Recreation and Rest Center in Kenya, which housed Malik's 12 wives [no guff] in a facility that includes a restaurant and a mosque with a madrassa," he said.

If I'm not mistaken, this news on Malik came out as a by-product of the IRS scandal, and yet the Malik scandal ties right into the Benghazi scandal, in my suspicions. There ought to be a group of Muslims that Obama favors in his restructuring of the African continent. Within that group, there must be a favored leadership with a favored leader at the top of the pyramid. The Obama brother can act as a convenient fill-me-in agent, one that the American president can trust.

The "beyond" term (see below) in the description of the Obama foundation allows funds beyond Kenya, we may presume. "The foundation's mission statement is 'to provide people everywhere with resources to uplift their welfare and living standards in memory of dad---Barack H. Obama: in the region of his birth, Kenya, and beyond.'" It's an assumption, of course, until proven, that funds into this foundation were meant to be funnelled into the Da'wa effort, but the possibility is obviously there.

It's to be expected that some registered foundations have a wrong address listed due to a clerical error, but the Obama foundation's false address is not to be chalked up to a clerical error because it is half expected already to be a phony foundation:

Now, there is another layer of stench added to Malik Obama's tax-exempt foundation: It's a fraud!

Charles C. Johnson reports for The Daily Caller, May 20, 2013, that on its website, the Barack H. Obama Foundation lists its address as 107 S. West St. #401, Alexandria, Va.

Here's a pic of 107 S. West St., #401, Alexandria, VA: [shows a UPS store with mailboxes within, including box 401]

...To add to the mystery and confusion fraud, the Barack H. Obama Foundation's IRS filings list another Virginia address: 4201 Wilson Blvd. Ste 110-152, Arlington, Va. 22030.

But that address is a marketing center for a drug-alcohol rehab center called A Better Today Recovery Services. A receptionist who answered the phone at A Better Today said neither she nor anybody in the office had heard of the Barack H. Obama Foundation...

Alton Ray Baysden, a former Department of State employee and registered Republican who helped to start the Barack H. Obama Foundation, declined to comment [he would have known the correct address]. Repeated phone calls by The Daily Caller to the Barack H. Foundation went to the organization's voicemail and were not returned.

There is apparently no typical foundation office for the Obama foundation; it's likely a home project at this point. Funds possibly come from illegal avenues driven by Obama vehicles in the dark of night, so to speak. The O-brother simply takes the funds without writing them in the books. What IRS agent in Africa is there to discover monkey business there? We know that Lois Lerner wasn't prepared to expose any O-monkey business.

The article below verifies that the foundation was formed in the home of the Republican above:

When the Daily Caller's Charles Johnson wrote about the expedited service the Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF) received by IRS official Lois Lerner, we [at] began digging into the background of the man who heads the BHOF -- Malik Obama [this shows that the Shoebat investigations are yet young, hoping for more to come shortly; watch your backs]. Malik, President Obama's half-brother has been accused of polygamy, statutory rape, wife-beating...[it's not a wonder the media won't cover this story]

When we submitted a press release (posted below) to PRWeb, it was essentially rejected in total, for the following reasons:

...3.) Johnson's article "reads like an opinion piece". We explained that Johnson's facts are indisputable; he even linked to the form signed by Lerner on June 26, 2011. That document was in response to an application by BHOF submitted one month earlier, in May.

... Alton Ray Baysden, a former State Department employee at whose Virginia home the charity was founded in 2008, admitted the organization has not even applied for tax-exempt status.

"We haven't been able to find someone with the expertise to do this," he told The Post. "We are informally scouting for an executive director, someone who knows how to register the charity."

To be sure, the article is a scathing assessment of the Lerner role, but such were the facts, and therefore not to be shunned by any media claiming to have the task of assessing an American president's deeds on behalf of the people. Instead, the media is clearly in bed with the American president. To make matters more pressing for the media, the article speaks on "Mama Sarah Obama Foundation (MSOF), founded and led by President Obama's step-grandmother, Mama Sarah... Then it says that Musa Ismail Obama "boasted that most of the funds from MSOF goes to fund Wahhabist Madrassa Scholarships and not the orphans. He also admitted that 90% of the Foundation's funds come from America. Funds to MSOF go through a tax-exempt, U.S. Charitable conduit identified as the California Community Foundation (CCF). Entities that have contributed to MSOF through CCF include major charities like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The Carnegie Foundation and Catholic Relief Charities, as reported by the American Spectator's Jeffrey Lord."

Unbelievable. If this were George Bush, you know. It's a legitimate story that CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and the rest, have no articles on, so far as I can see in this investigation. The above suggests that the funds were first going to the California Community Foundation before being plopped into the O-brother's bank account. The California organization must therefore be suspect as a corrupt foundation, for, likely, the Obama's chose to work with that California organization:

CCF is public, charitable organization dedicated to strengthening [or organizing?] COMMUNITIES [caps mine] of Los Angeles County through effective philanthropy and civic engagement [i.e. gets involved with the people too]. It fulfills its mission through fundraising, charitable fund management, grantmaking, and convenings with donors [i.e. forms schemes / conspiracies], financial advisors, local nonprofits and foundation partners. It also serves as an advocate for the vulnerable and poor.

I'll admit that my square brackets above are on the pessimistic side, but it sounds as though the organization could be on the Alinsky model. How many charitable foundations exist in LiberalLand that are in reality political-action "community organizers," and doesn't Lois Lerner know that Republicans can counter by doing the same? She sure does.

We read above that the Gates foundation gave the O-foundation money via the California Community Foundation, and so look at this giant "coincidence": All three surnames, Gates, Stone and Hernandez, use a Shield split vertically, red on the left half, blue on the right half, and all three use gold symbols to boot. In 2004, Antonia Hernandez, a former member of the board of directors, becomes the California Community Foundation's President and CEO. But a Sheldon M. Stone is noted at the Wikipedia article as the foundation's "Chair." We also read: "With an initial gift from the J. Paul Getty Trust, CCF establishes an annual fellowship program for emerging and mid-career visual artists who live and work in L.A." "Getty" may be a "Gate" variation.

As Obama is a Rockefeller puppet, though by now some Rockefellers could be his puppet, it's interesting that the Sartori surname (looks like it used the Falcon / Conte crescent), as per Joseph Sartori, founder of California Community Foundation, was first found in Languedoc, the location of Roquefeuil, and where the Roquefeuil family married the Rodes family almost a thousand years ago.

Until Jay Rockefeller of the Democratic senate, the big-name corporate Rockefellers were Republicans, which may explain why the Obama foundation was founded in the home of a Republican. Also, it should be added that the mainly-Republican Bohemian Grove (where big-corporate and big-political figures have an annual bash) is in California. Also, California is home to Stanford University (Republican-founded), founded in large part by British Illuminatists involved in secret societies to which Cecil Rhodes likely belonged. In 1976, a Hess surname became the foundations CEO.

The Wikipedia page tells that the California foundation engages Mexican immigrants, and that it also engages with the Packard Foundation. Then, the Packard/Pickard/Picardy surname uses the winged-lion design of the Holder Crest.

It's feasible that the reported $250,000 collected by the Obama foundation was greatly reduced deliberately to hide the magnitude of the operation. When we read above that Musa Obama "boasted that most of the funds from MSOF goes to fund Wahhabist Madrassa Scholarships and not the orphans," it strongly tends to verify what was suspect: that the foundation's funds are funneled to the Da'wa operation of the Sudan government.

WND reported that the tax-exempt standing of the O-foundation was granted in mid 2011, three years after the foundation was formed at Lerner's feet. If I understand it correctly, the foundation was illegally claiming tax-exempt status in all of those three years, but then the IRS arranged a retroactive solution: "This week [mid July, 2011], the IRS confirmed to WND that the Barack H. Obama Foundation received a determination letter in June, awarding the group tax-exempt 501(c)3 status, retroactively to 2008." The fingers of president Obama would seem to be all over that situation, fingers that he applied to Lois Lerner. I'm not sure what the law states, but common sense suggests that a foundation cannot claim tax-exemption while a foundation-wannabe is still under consideration. The New York Post decided to run this story in an exclusive:

President Obama's half-brother runs an off-the-books American charity that claims to support poor Kenyans -- but it lies about its federal status and no one knows how it spends its money.

...A group of Missouri State college students [Democrats, by-and-large, I assume] who visited the Obama family village of Kogelo in 2009, and who met the president's half-brother, felt something was amiss. They sensed he was an "operator" [i.e. a con] and decided to give their donation of 400 pounds of medical supplies directly to a local clinic.

...Rutherford said the Obamas' relatives are the only Muslims in a village of 4,000 Christians and that Malik has a private mosque on his property [how strange, and begging for an explanation. Is he a spy on the Christians?].

The foundation claims to be a tax-exempt, federally recognized nonprofit. It is not.

Nor are there any filings of its expenditures, which the IRS requires of larger charities.

...The foundation's Web site includes a donation form that says it has nonprofit [i.e. tax-exempt] status. Charity expert Marcus Owens said knowingly telling donors contributions are tax-deductible if they are not could amount to fraud. "If they haven't applied for exemption, they can't promise their donors that contributions are deductible," said Owens, a lawyer and former IRS official.

Ho-hum, it doesn't look good on president Obama, so the major television media will pass on "glorifying" Obama's brother for now. The media ignores this even though "The National Legal and Policy Center, a Washington, DC, watchdog group, made a formal complaint to the IRS and US Post Office last week alleging fraud. Malik Obama, reached in Kenya, said the foundation has a budget of $250,000. When asked about why it wasn't a registered charity, Malik, an accountant by trade, said that he was 'in process' of changing that. The White House did not return a message seeking comment."

Here's the claim to tax-exemption from the foundation's webpage itself, which can be assumed to be legit by now:

Investigating the Obama-Connect to Sudan

While the Sudanese organization that the Obama brother leads is written online as "Islamic Da'wa Organization," Wikipedia has an article on an Islamic Dawah Organization in Afghanistan. Therefore, is Obama secretly assuring the transfer of American military money to that latter organization for unofficial purposes? "The [Islamic Dawah Organization] was part of the 'Peshawar Seven', the coalition of mujahedin forces supported by the United States, Pakistan and various Arab states of the Persian Gulf in the war against the PDPA government and Soviet forces." That period would fall under the Brzezinski period of Afghanistan, i.e. when Brzezinski founded a pro-American al-Qaeda group that I think Obama supported throughout eight years of the Bush presidency.

My recent suspicions (late last update) that Obama is using / supporting Salafists in Egypt may now be brought to bear, for while the Da'wa organization spreads Wahhabi Islam, "The terms Wahhabi and Salafi and ahl al-hadith (people of hadith) are often used interchangeably, but Wahhabism has also been called "a particular orientation within Salafism."

Tolerating the Wikipedia article through all the Islamic mush, we come to this next point: that Wahhabi Islam came to Osama-bin-Laden in his later years, when I and others say he had already died and was replaced by a phony Osama who was used by America to further its Middle-East inroads:

What connection, if any, there is between Wahhabism and Jihadi Salafis is disputed [i.e. the emphasis is on "Jihadi"]. Natana De Long-Bas, senior research assistant at the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, argues:
The militant Islam of Osama bin Laden did not have its origins in the teachings of Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab and was not representative of Wahhabi Islam as it is practiced in contemporary Saudi Arabia, yet for the media it came to define Wahhabi Islam during the later years of bin Laden's lifetime. However "unrepresentative" bin Laden's global jihad was of Islam in general and Wahhabi Islam in particular, its prominence in headline news took Wahhabi Islam across the spectrum from revival and reform to global jihad.

If I'm reading that correctly, Osama, the real one, was not a Wahhabi, and yet, the media labeled Osama's group with a radical Wahhabi stripe later on, and made that stripe stick to al-Qaeda globally because Wahabi Islam was the favorite of certain terrorists who took the headlines. It would suggest to me here on the spot that the American providers of the phony Osama had been working secretly with a Wahhabi group of "terrorists" (who conducted terror acts as directed by the CIA / American military / other globe-trodders), and this in itself can explain why Obama should still be working with Wahhabi Muslims, even as the Obama brother seeks to spread that sect throughout Africa.

It's time now to look into possible U.S. ties with the Sudanese president. We wouldn't expect a smoking banana, but the Obama jungle bunny might be stupid enough to leave one around. I use "jungle bunny" wisely, because we have rabbit trails to all over when seeking an Obama fix to the Bashir snake. The following statement from the New York Times is in the context of a Western world condemning Bashir, but then going soft on him, allowing him to continue ruling Sudan. Why? How could merely a Sudanese leader escape American plots if those plots were implemented? "But, while the world is willing to spend more than $1 billion annually assisting survivors of attacks in Darfur, it seems unwilling to stand up to President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan or even speak out very forcefully."

When the New York Times goes against Obama, there's a reason for it. In this case, the New York Times editorial writer is sickened by the Darfur genocide, and is asking why Obama isn't speaking out. '"In the mid-2000s [under Bush], an ambitious senator from Illinois complained eloquently that the White House was too silent in the face of evil in Darfur. Is it too much to ask that President Obama recall his own words -- and speak out again?"

Warning: the article below is extremely shocking as per the demons of Bashir who attacked Sudan's Darfur location for to exterminate black Muslims. Bashir is the chief demon, and Obama's brother doesn't seem to mind, which is perplexing where the Sudanese tried to exterminate blacks, Obama's fellow kind.

The following tells that Arab nations by-and-large opposed the Western arrest warrant on Bashir, and effectively denied that he was involved in the Darfur massacres. One could conclude that Obama went soft of Bashir so as not to offend some Arab allies, but the Shoebat story would seem to imply a direct Obama affair with Bashir.

When the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for Mr. Bashir's arrest, it charged that he played an "essential role" in the murder, rape, torture, pillage and displacement of large numbers of civilians in Darfur. The only Arab states to participate in the court are Jordan, Djibouti and the Comoros. The United States has also rejected participating in the court.

The timing of the arrest warrant, March of 2009, was under president Obama. It is too hard to believe that the Darfur atrocities, one after the other, took place in opposition to Bashir's will. The Arab nations in support of Bashir are, in reality, opposed to the globe-trodding of the West, which is why Obama must appear uninvolved as best he can in the changing of the Egyptian and Syrian regimes:

The War in Darfur is a major armed-conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan. It began in February 2003 when the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A) and Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) rebel groups took up arms against the Government of Sudan which they accused of marginalizing Darfur's non-Arab population.

Obama was willing to support rebels in Libya, Egypt and Syria, as they attempted to overthrow Muslim dictators, and yet not in the Sudan where the rebels suffered massively by comparison. How suspicious now that the Obama brother's alliance with Bashir seems to be clinched.

If the New York Times is not expected to put the Sudan fire to Obama's feet, others are:

With the news that President Omar al-Bashir plans to travel to Turkey and Egypt [the first two countries that president Obama visited] in the coming days, President Obama faces the first test of his recently announced Sudan policy.

The Enough Project at the Center for American Progress, the Save Darfur Coalition, and the Genocide Intervention Network jointly released the following statement in reaction:

If President Obama and Secretary Clinton are unwilling to engage in personal diplomacy at the highest level to ensure that a wanted war criminal does not continue to travel with impunity to the capitals of key U.S. allies, it will send a powerful message that the administration isn't serious about implementing the Sudan strategy it just announced.

John Norris, Executive Director of the Enough Project, noted, "For Turkey, a member of NATO and an aspiring member of the European Union, to welcome President Bashir is frankly baffling. If Turkey is truly committed to the values that would make membership of the European Union possible, it should quickly make clear that President Bashir is absolutely unwelcome."

Jerry Fowler, President of the Save Darfur Coalition, added, "President Bashir's travel is a test of the administration's resolve on Sudan. If the President and Secretary of State let it happen without objection, Khartoum will get the message that the newly stated commitment to multilateral leadership is hollow..."

Sam Bell, Executive Director of Genocide Intervention Network, added, "Given the depth and breadth of U.S. engagement with Egypt, it is striking that the situation in Sudan - and Bashir's status as a war criminal -- don't appear to be part of the recent conversation among senior officials. How can the administration expect to effectively implement its new plan if it doesn't make Sudan a top priority?"

The Sudanese rebels have been Muslim groups of blacks, but the war spread to Christians too:

American University economist George Ayittey accuses the Arab government of Sudan of practicing racist acts against black citizens...

Boston Globe columnist Fred Jacoby has accused Sudan of practicing apartheid against Christians in what is now South Sudan "where tens of thousands of black Africans in the country's southern region, most of them Christians or animists, have been abducted and sold into slavery by Arab militias backed by the Islamist regime in Khartoum"(Wikipedia article above).

The problem here for the Shoebat theory is that Sudanese atrocities against Christians may be more against black skin than against religious type. In any case, it's not a wonder the media don't want to touch the photo of Bashir with Obama's brother, as that would give African Americans a national stroke, leaving them paralyzed from their dim-witted heads to their voting fingers.

In June not many weeks ago, Bashir ordered South Sudan to stop oil shipments again, claiming that South Sudan (a country recently created to separate blacks / Christians from Arabs) is using oil money to foment more uprisings. Bashir called for a "holy war", according to a June-8-2013 article by Reuters, and this may be a call to fight Christians in South Sudan. Late in 2012, Fox put it this way:

Sudanese strongman Omar al-Bashir has launched aerial bombardments with increased frequency in the oil-rich Nuba Mountains [30-40 percent Christian], where Muslims and Christians alike are being targeted with "tremendous" force, experts told

Although, at face value, there is no reason to argue that this oil war was ordered against Christians in particular, yet one can see how a Muslim whip against Christians of the region could become the new game. I will henceforth keep eyes peeled for Sudanese news as it might involve a Bashir whip against Christians. I am open to the Shoebat theory wherein Bashir has recently started a Muslim holy war against black Christians. The following (dated this past April) doesn't come from Shoebat, but corroborates Shoebat's article:

4/4/2013 Washington, D.C. (International Christian Concern) -- After months being largely ignored by the international community, Sudan has finally been called out for its repeated human rights abuses against Christians. The Canadian federal government condemned Sudan for continuing to ignore international human rights standards, specifically highlighted the Khartoum government's treatment of Christian communities.

After South Sudan split away from Sudan in 2011, Sudan's leader President Al-Bashir promised to make what is left of Sudan "100 percent" Islamic. Unfortunately, for Christians still living in Sudan, this was not an empty promise. Since Al-Bashir’s declaration, the Sudanese government has ratcheted up its enforcement of Sharia law and has started attacking the Christian community on multiple fronts.

On February 18, Sudanese security officials raided the Evangelical Literature Center located in Khartoum. According to reports, officials seized Christian books, movies and other media from the center. "They took everything -- not a single sheet of paper was left on the shelves" [doesn't look like a war on blacks or oil flow], a church leader told Morning Star News..

When Christians at the Center demanded an explanation, officials said they were following orders to confiscate all Christian literature.

...On another front, the Sudanese government has deported scores of Christian foreigners. Among these foreigners was an American mission worker named Christine.

In 1990, Christine helped found a Bible school that helped gather and care for street children. On April 21 last year, the school was attacked and damaged by Muslim radicals...

...After several days of investigation, Christine was called into the security agency's headquarters. Following a lengthy interrogation, the security officials confiscated five cars that were under Christine's care, an unknown amount of money and thereafter forcibly deported her on February 5.

...To round out Sudan's newest assault on Christianity, the government has been attacking the symbolic center of Christianity: the church building itself. Claiming churches were built illegally, the government has closed down and destroyed several churches to start out 2013.

...This situation was made more problematic when South Sudan broke away from Sudan. People from South Sudanese ethnic groups, who make up the majority of Christians in Sudan, are now considered foreigners and are required to get new permits for existing churches. The government has been just as unwilling to grant these permits.

...The government of Sudan denies discriminating against Christians...

It's not dire persecution, yet. The explosion of a powder keg happens a second after calm. First the noise of the fuse, then the violence. Sudan is a state-sponsored persecution. South Sudan (has a Christian majority) was formed while Obama was president, and for all I know at this time, he opposed its formation (this could be true even though his administration as a whole supported it, of course). Bashir was livid at the formation of South Sudan, especially as it reduced his revenue substantially, and bombings of the Nuba mountains followed.

If Muslims wish to rule by the terror of a knife at the throat, let them be damned. This was never the will of God. But if Muslims wish to rule because everyone loves them, let them be blessed. The problem is, jihadist hogs are not lovable, and they know it. How religiously Muslim are Bashir's fighters? Ask their gang rapes. Demons, without concern for the punishment they level upon the defenseless female soul. The fires of Hell burn hot for these types. First the noise of the fuse -- the signs of the end times -- then the Armageddon violence. It will come. History goes toward it just as it was predicted thousands of years ago.

Bashir represents a Sunni nation with close and vital ties to Iran. That too jibes with the Gog prophecy. Sudan has obviously been helping Iran's shipments of weapons to Hamas through the Red-sea route, which can take weapons easily into the Sinai with a Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt. This situation is at stake under the recent coup in Egypt. God, in his wisdom, will take these spiritually-retarded beasts to Jerusalem, giving them harsh military victory over His enemies in Israel, but ultimately for the purpose of condemning and annihilating them, the Muslim hogs of war, that is.

The successful resistance of Sudan's Christians against Bashir could be the fuse to ignite Christian persecution from the anti-Christ. Revelation 13 may be suggesting that the anti-Christ's war against Christians begins only at the midway point of the final seven years. Prior to the midway point, he is concerned only for a takeover of the Middle East by the help of jihadists, as well as taking Jerusalem. But it may not be until he invades Egypt for the second or third time that he picks up his cause against Christians too. And his crusade may be adopted from Christian persecution now underway in Africa, including recent reports at the hands of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood.

In the same way that the Obama administration attempted to paint typical American Christians as terrorists / militia groups, so we find this: "William Stark, an Africa specialist for International Christian Concern (ICC), told WND that Ba[s]hir has attempted to paint the [armed] rebels as Christian troublemakers." Let's not forget the claim of the Shoebats: "Barack [Obama] worked to prevent Salva Kiir, the Christian president of South Sudan from aiding rebels..."

Recall the current news in wherein the O-dministration is closing various U.S. embassies this month without much explanation; one of them is the one in Sudan, according to NBC news. The implication from the O-dministration is a global-jihadist conspiracy about to let loose. After Bashir (as the Shoebat accusation goes) laid siege to the Khartoum embassy, it was re-opened in March of this year, with Joseph D. Stafford III continuing on as the head (not officially an "ambassador") of that place; he got the job in June of 2012, just a few months before the attack.

Obama's first man in Khartoum/Sudan was an air force Major General, Scott Gration. He had previously been the Khartoum envoy for a couple of years under Bush. In February of 2009, just as Obama took over the American throne room, he nominated Gration as the ambassador to Kenya, which for me underscores how important this man was to Obama, and to the Obama brother who would later merge projects with...Sudan. Fancy that, a man from the Bashir realm ending up, hopefully, in Kenya!!! The article below implies that Gration had somewhat opposed South Sudan, though at this time I don't know the details, and he comes out looking pro-Bashir as a result, which could explain why Obama chose him for Kenya:

The choice of Gration [for Kenya] would be a major error in conducting foreign policy in this critical East African nation, and in Africa as a whole. Gration's only significant diplomatic experience is his present tenure as President Obama's special envoy to Sudan, a position he has held for almost two years. During that time General Gration has made numerous serious errors of judgment, has spoken dishonestly about a range of issues -- most conspicuously about the humanitarian situation in Darfur -- and has managed to alienate the political leadership in South Sudan, along with civil society and rebel leaders and virtually the entire humanitarian community working in Darfur. Journalists and researchers working in the region find him bizarrely ill-informed

Try to imagine an Obama who is truly anti-American but always trying to look pro-American, coming up with off-the-wall, poor excuses for certain decisions that seem to betray logic. Then read below (wherein Obama chose Gration for his own Sudan team as soon as he started his presidency in 2009):
"Trouble began for Gration as soon as he took office [as Obama's envoy to Sudan] in March 2009, shortly after Khartoum had expelled from Darfur thirteen of the world's most important humanitarian organizations, including the International Rescue Committee, Save the Children U.S., and Doctors Without Borders. These expulsions, along with the shutdown of three key national humanitarian organizations, cut humanitarian capacity in Darfur roughly in half. Under Gration's inexperienced leadership, there was no meaningful pushback in U.S. policy, but rather claims that humanitarian capacity had recovered, which simply did not square with facts on the ground."

The writer is chalking up Gration's illogical conduct to inexperience as an envoy, but wait. If Obama was pro-Bashir, then Gration's conduct is alternatively explained as an Obama-manipulated one. I get it. I'm starting to believe. I'm starting to see that Shoebat has been correct. Gration, by the way, got the Kenya job afterward. His parents, of missionary background (doesn't necessarily make him a Christian), had lived in Kenya at one point, at about the time of Obama's birth/childhood (how old is Obama, anyway? Where's the certificate?). Then, wowwie:

Gration voted for George W. Bush in 2000. In 2006, he traveled to Africa on a five-nation, fifteen-day, fact-finding tour, accompanying Senator Barack Obama as an "African expert". He later endorsed Obama's presidential campaign, citing that Obama had the "judgment, wisdom, courage, experience, and leadership capability that we desperately need."

In 2007, the Obama campaign "beg[a]n sending Gration out on the stump . . . in an effort to improve the inexperienced senator's image on national security." According to Obama foreign policy advisor Denis McDonough, Gration was "considered one of Obama's three top military advisers, along with Richard Danzig, the former secretary of the Navy during the Clinton administration, and Gen. Merrill McPeak, former Air Force chief of staff."

...On March 17, 2009, Gration was named U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan. He took a conciliatory approach to the regime of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir [this nails it!], and downplayed reports of ongoing genocide in the Darfur conflict. Gration's comments that the International Criminal Court's indictment of al-Bashir made his mission "more difficult and challenging" drew criticism. He clashed with United States Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice over his approach.

Is that toot-toot much? Is this some sort of a trumpet? Have we really found the Obama-Bashir connection? I think so. But that little bit on Gration's parents being in Kenya about the time that Barack Obama Sr. got involved with the birth of president Obama, that still hangs off of me like the drool of a ghost.

Clearly, Obama had the problem of rowing against the political currents of his own advisors when desirous of supporting Bashir, but this was done nonetheless in the earliest parts of his dictatorship:

April 26, 2009 (WASHINGTON) -- The United States of America is positioning itself to become "friends" with the Government of Sudan, seeing this approach as the best way to improve [blah blah cowpatties] the situation in Darfur and reach a political settlement, according to a closed briefing given by Special Envoy Scott Gration at the US State Department on April 20, 2009.

According to someone who attended the briefing, which Gration gave to representatives of several non-governmental organizations, the envoy discussed rolling back sanctions imposed on the Khartoum government."

[Here's the fine-sounding excuse] "The US doesn't have a lot of political leverage with the Government of Sudan. The best lever he {Gration} sees is that they want to be our friends," stated the attendee of the meeting.

Ahh, this reminds me of how Obama wanted to be a friend of Iran too at that very time, in hopes of supposedly changing Iran's tune. But, now, I realize that Obama had to be nice to Iran because Bashir was one of it special allies in anti-Israeli terror. It continues: "During Gration's recent visit to Khartoum, one US official disclosed that some in the State Department had not been aware that he would adopt such conciliatory language." His attitude popped up out of nowhere, in other words, illogically. "It is also unclear whether higher-level US administration officials would approve actual normalization, given that Barack Obama last year called the Bush administration's own normalization talks with Sudan a 'reckless and cynical initiative.' Yes, but Obama was merely echoing the divisive strategies of Democrats generally, and, as always, opposing Bush in everything he did...only to do the Bush-thing when he got elected.

I do not know why Bush decided on a friendship pact with terrorist-leaning Sudan, but then perhaps his closet-Nazi father could answer that. Bush Jr. was the one who pushed the Palestinian state, as did Obama after him.

Obama's Randolph bloodline traces to the Randolphs at Moray. One Moray Coat no longer shown at once showed so-called "fetterlocks" (Fetters use the Hess sun), and this is the very lock design used by the Scottish Gration/Grayson Coat. I can tell you right away that the Gration surname goes to the Rome's/Rooms (first found in the same place as Grations/Graysons) and to the Cravens, the line that traces with Gore's to Croatia's Gorski area. The Gration/Grayson Shield is the Gore Shield, which I have claimed to be a colors-reversed version of the Alan Coat, important because Gration is thus revealed as yet another Alan-Stewart product in the U.S. military brass.

I am confident that Grations/Graysons use the Gore Coat because English Grations (first found in the same place as Cravens) show a GRAVEson variation, no doubt a version of "CRAVEn." As Bush's were likewise first found in Yorkshire, the Gration lion should prove to be the Dutch Bush lion. The Gration/Graveson write-up has code for the Stewarts: "This name however, refers to the father's occupation, coming from the old Norse word 'greifi,' meaning 'steward.'" A likely story (sarcasm).

The Rome's/Rooms and Cravens share a red-on-white fesse bar (Alans use a red fesse too), but then the same-colored bar is used by Lymans (first found in the same place as Gore's), important because the envoy to Sudan after Gration was a Lymon surname (Princeton Lyman was head of U.S. negotiations in the Sudanese referendum/schism by late summer of 2010). I suggest that Staffords (as per the next chief of the embassy in Sudan) are using a version of the Alan Shield.

The Gration variation of Gravesons looks to be from the Rome-related Cree's/Craiths/Creights (use the Craven fesse and probably the Kyle / Glass stars) i.e. a Creight-like surname merged with Cravens.

Immediately before Pontius Pilate, there was a Roman governor of Judea by the name of Valerius Gratus whose surname can trace to the Rome's/Rooms and Creights / Grations because Rome's/Room's (in Annan(dale) colors) were first found in the same place (Dumfries) as Annan(dale)s...who I trace to "Annas/Ananias," the chief priest of Israel who killed Jesus in Pontius Pilate's term.

Nazi's Allowed to Remain in the United States

Nazi elements in the United States were supported secretly by the U.S. government. As only one example, "Operation Paperclip." But it just came out recently that JF Kennedy was a lover of Adolf Hitler. Soon after Kennedy, George HW Bush (ex-president) brought Nazi elements to the CIA, if those elements hadn't been there already. Bush was made the director of the CIA by Gerald Ford, and the latter, born Leslie Lynch King, Made Nelson Rockefeller his vice-president: "Gerald Rudolph "Jerry" Ford, Jr. (born Leslie Lynch King, Jr.;...On August 20, Ford nominated former New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller to fill the vice presidency he had vacated. Rockefeller's top competitor had been George H. W. Bush. Rockefeller underwent extended hearings before Congress, which caused embarrassment when it was revealed he made large gifts to senior aides, such as Henry Kissinger."

The Lynch middle name, I assume, is from a surname in Ford's immediate ancestry. It is therefore very notable, as per bloodline lust in high political office, that the Lynch Coat is a near replica of the Feller Coat. That is, Ford chose heraldic kin to act as his vice-president. The Rockefellers go back to the Roquefeuil family that married Henri IV of Rodes/Rodez (Roussillon), thus explaining why Rockefellers are suspect in the Illuminati globalism of Cecil Rhodes, or why Russells are thought to be one of the 13 Illuminati families.

The Russell motto term, "sara," must therefore be code for the Sarah/Saire bloodline sharing the leopard in Crest with the Rhodes surname, and besides, both Russells and Rhodes' use red-on-white upright lions. To this, on account of Ford having been chosen as Richard Nixon's vice-president, it should be added that English Nixons use leopards in both Crest and Coat while Irish Nixons share gold roundels with the Rhodes'. The Shield-and-Chief color combination of the latter Nixons is colors reversed to the Shield-and-Chief color combination of Russells. English Nixons even use suns, an heraldic symbol often of Helios, god of ancient Rhodes.

Long before I knew that Gore's/Core's and Cole's traced to proto-Romans in what is now Croatia, the Sarah's/Saire's were traced with the Sauers/Saiers to the Sau/Sava river in Croatia: "The [Sauer] family, which originated from the Sau river region, became prominent in local affairs in the Krain..." The discovery of this family on the Sava led me to realize that a major vein of the Illuminati had been on the Sava, though at the time (about 2009) I had no idea what the details might be. The mottoes of both Gore's and Cole's have codes for Servitium on the Sava river.

The Sauer/Saire Coat uses the Russell lion (it's used on gold by Dutch Bush's), assuring that Russells had merged with Sava-river peoples of the Saire / Saier kind. The location of SARAjevo off the Bosnia river, not far east of the proto-Mason Maezaei, is suggested by the Sarah variation of Saire's, and "Bosnia" may even explain an old haunt of the Bush bloodline. The Sarah's/Saire's were first found in the same place (Essex) as Gore's/Core's and Vere's, suggesting that the Sarah/Saier Coat is a version of the Varn Coat, important because I traced Walkers and Roquefeuils to the Varni pagans in the Rostock theater. I eventually realized that the Sinclair rooster (gold) was code for Rostock, and so note the gold rooster in the Nixon Crest.

I have been developing an American-Nazi story for a couple of years that can be enlarged upon as per this article now out:

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - At least 10 suspected Nazi war criminals ordered deported by the United States never left the country, according to an Associated Press review of Justice Department data - and four are living in the U.S. today. All remained eligible for public benefits such as Social Security until they exhausted appeals, and in one case even beyond.

Quiet American legal limbo was the fate of all 10 men uncovered in the AP review. The reason: While the U.S. wanted them out, no other country was willing to take them in.

That's currently the case of Vladas Zajanckauskas in Sutton, Massachusetts. It's the case of Theodor Szehinskyj in West Chester, Pennsylvania. Of Jakiw Palij in New York City. And of John Kalymon in Troy, Michigan.

In pointing out some coincidences that bear noting, let's begin with Theodor Szehinskyj in West Chester, Pennsylvania. West Chester (Chester county) is in the south-east area of Pennsylvania, the area to which I had traced certain perpetrators of 9-11 (2001). After I became convinced that 9-11 was an insider job, my eyes were opened to similar events faked by insiders, and I became sure that the Underwear Bomber was a faked job under Obama. The latter's mother with Dunham surname was traced to a location of Dunham Masci (or Dunham Massey) in Cheshire, where the capital is Chester. Then, from Wikipedia's article on Chester county, Pennsylvania, we find that it was named after Chester in Cheshire, wherefore we can expect fundamental Masonic elements from Cheshire in that part of Pennsylvania.

To this it needs to be added that I traced Hitler's mother (with Polzl surname) to the Maschi's, first found in Rimini, the location where I say proto-Romans (i.e. as per the naming of Rimini) lived. Hitler wanted a new Roman empire, and I think Rimini tells us why.

There is plenty to repeat, bear with me. I traced the Pollocks to Pula and to Rijeka in the Croatia theater, where the proto-Roman Japodes and Maezaei lived. It's an area around the Veneti corner of Italy from Rimini. I traced the Cole's, Coles' and Kyles to the Mieszko Poles who are identifiable as a branch in Poland of the Maezaei. It seems certain that "Cole" should trace to "Colapis," the river of the Japodes (one can assume that some Maezaei lived on that river). But before that, I traced the Weather Underground terrorist organization, homegrown inside the United States, to the Ayrshire area, where there is a Kyle location named by the Kyle's. Then, the Kelly surname shares a so-called "Enfield" griffin with the Hiedler/Hitler surname, suggesting that Hitlers are roughly as close to the Kyle bloodline as they are to the Kellys. The Hitler bloodline is tracing very well to the Maschi bloodline, you see, and by some coincidence or not, Benito MUSSolini, Adolf Hitler' partner in the quest to rule the world, was from the Rimini theater.

There are a few points to be made here in regards to Kyle's of Ayrshire. One, the Kennedys were first found in Ayrshire, begging the question of whether JF Kennedy was a Hitler product of the Ayrshire area. A second point is that one of the four Nazi's mentioned in the article above was a KALYmon surname (i.e. like "Kyle / Kelly"), and he lived in New York, where Adolf Hitler's nephew came to live. That nephew took on a fake Stuart-Houston surname (why that name?), and then the Houstons and Stuarts were both from Renfrew, where Polzl-suspect Pollocks were first found, beside Ayrshire. Independent of all this, I traced Vere-beloved Stuarts to the Doly area around the Polish-Ukraine theater, and to L'viv of that area (Varni-suspect Varangian Rus operated here), and here we find that in the article above: "Kalymon, who was born in Poland, was a member of the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian Auxiliary Police in Lviv..." The Varn surname was itself first found in Ayrshire.

Years before my recent claims as per my discussion here, I insisted that Stewarts/Stuarts traced to Nazi / Thule-Society circles (it's all recorded in my updates), but recently it was realized (by me) that Stewarts-and-various-kin are in the highest positions of the American military by design of Stewart / Vere powers.

In other words, expect Stewarts in the military to be Aryan devotees even of the Hitler kind, and expect the American military and the Washington-founding Masons to be from the Roman elements out of the Japodes / Maezaei theater. It became one of my strongest claims that proto-Romans were from the 600 Benjamites at ancient Rimmon (Israel), who merged with JABESH Gilead, the proto-Japodes (it's all in the book of Judges). The Washington Masons had BENJAMIN Franklin, of Pennsylvania, as a partner, and then William Penn (namer of Pennsylvania) was himself stationed in the south-east part of the state. It all begs the question of whether "Penn" was named after a line of BENjamites; note BENito Mussolini too, born in Forli, beside Rimmon-like Rimini. Totally independent of all this, I traced the Jefferson/Jephson surname exactly to the Jabesh > Maschi elements of the Rimini theater. I never force a trace, but simply allow heraldry to make it for me.

The ROCKefellers traced with the two-headed, black eagle of ROXburgh's Maxwells to the ROCK in the Arms of Rijeka/Reka (this Arms uses a two-headed black eagle too). The Varni-related Roquefeuils are thus suspect from a variation of "Reka." The Arms of Forli use a black-on-gold eagle, the Roman eagle most likely, but for this paragraph I'd like to remind of my trace of the Varni pagans to Ferrara (near Forli), for that place had been FORum Allieni, a term like "Forli." It just so happens that while the Varn Coat is a black-on-gold (Forli colors) bend, the Mussolini Coat is, in the same colors, a string of lozenges in the fashion of an heraldic bend (= diagonal bar) while the Italian Rocco Coat is itself a bend in the very same colors.

The Rocco bend has the design feature (a little like the one used by English Stewarts) of the bend used by Tragers/Trogens, and then the Fellers show a FellTRAGER variation to prove that Fellers trace to Rocco's and Tragers. If that's not enough, Dutch Falls should be using the Trager bend while Scottish Falls are using Varn / Rocco colors. (For the record: aside from the red color, the Trager/Trogen bend (on gold too) is showing identical to that of Rocco's, and neither surname show any symbols aside from their bends.)

Back for a moment to the California Community Foundation, suspect with Rockefellers and Obama. The Druckers are suspect with the Drake bloodline that I see in Tragers. "1997 - Peter Drucker, the father of modern management and a mentor of CCF executive vice president Joe Lumarda, names CCF one of the 10 best-managed nonprofits in the U.S." The Drucker Coat uses a bull's scalp, a symbol also of Cheneys. Druckers are said to be from Polesie, Poland, and then it's known by me that the red Drake wyvern was used by Poland's dukes of Masovia. The Cheneys were traced by me independent of these matters to the Masci-related Sales / Salyes who lived at/beside Draguignan (southern France).

One can see that Washington Masons were in fact Romans by bloodline, and I traced the Masci's / Meschins to the Roman general, Scipio, whose surname named the Meschin-related Skiptons of Craven, an area in Yorkshire that I traced years earlier to Croatians. I stress the Craven trace to the Maezaei / Croatia in a new page on heraldry changes. Last week, that page was updated, where I learned that the Mission/Muston/Musson surname, first found in Yorkshire, uses a version of the Craven Coat, a clear sign that Missions/Mussons trace to the Maezaei. I can now add that the Kennedy Coat is a cross between the Craven and the Mission/Musson Coat, which effectively ties Kennedys to the Maezaei elements suspect at the naming of "Mason." In fact, while Rimini is in the greater-Veneti theater, I had for years previous traced "Kennedy" to the HENETI > Veneti line.

I traced the ancient Heneti to an Eneti location ruled by mythical Pelops, but my investigations into the meaning of Pelops was years before my claim that God gave me a special dream clinching a trace of the 600 Benjamites to Pelops' Amazon wife in Pisa (I trace Mason liners to Amazons, another name of Mysians to whom "Mission" should trace). I can understand readers shunning all that I'm saying, but I'm convinced.

Years before my research into Hitler's nephew on Long Island, I traced Clintons to Nazi circles, and so see that the Clinton Coat shares the crosslets of Cravens and Kennedys. The Hillary Coat is coincidentally (or not) a version of the Clinton Coat. It just so happens that the Hillary surname was first found in the same place (Norfolk) as Dunhams and Kalys, the latter using stars in colors reversed to Kyle's (if you've forgotten, Kalymon lived in Michigan). And here I find that the Nazi article above (by AP) speaks on a Nazi war criminal, Johann Leprich of Clinton Township, Michigan. It may not be a small point at all because Michigan is Nazi-suspect for other reasons.

Unfortunately, there are three Clinton townships in Michigan, but one of them is in Detroit, where we also find Romulus, where the Detroit airport is located that involved the Underwear Bomber. You can imagine that, where the Underwear Bomber was an insider plot, the insiders wanted him to fly to a place where they themselves could take care of him, as planned. That is, there were insiders at/near Romulus.

As Romulus was the ancient name of the founder of Romans, one can expect that the Hitler / Masci elements out of Rimini named Romulus in Michigan. An online article (Wikipedia, I think) on Wayne county (where Romulus is located) states that the county was co-founded by men with Pullen and Pulcipher (with a 'c') surnames, and then it just so happens that PulSiphers/Polesdons were first found in Cheshire (i.e. location of Dunham Masci, and of the Skipton-related Meschins).

Mitt Romney was born in Detroit, and then the Pullen Coat is a version of the Romney Coat, suggesting strongly that the namers of Romulus were of the Romney bloodline. Mitt Romney is a Mormon (founded by Freemasons), whom I trace to Moray elements along with "Moray / Moravia." The south-east area of Pennsylvania was settled largely by members of the Moravian church, and then the article on Clinton township says: "Moravian Drive is the township's oldest road dating back to the days when the Moravian Missionaries settled to attempt to convert the local Native Americans.",_Macomb_County,_Michigan

Mitt Romney was a governor of MASSAchusetts, and the late Ted Kennedy (preceded by BEN SMITH) was a senator in Massachusetts, important because native elements in America routinely trace to European elements of the Massey / Meshech / Amazon / Mysian kind. In fact, Mormons claimed that American natives were holy to God and to Israel, but I have seen through that fake job to understand that natives trace in large part to Massey liners. In the article mentioning the four Nazi's, one of which is Polish-born John Kalymon still living in MICHIGan (i.e. a Meshech-like term), another one of them is Vladas Zajanckauskas living in Sutton, Massachusetts. There seems to be a pattern here.

Another one of the four is Jakiw Palij in the Queens area of Long Island, suspicious where Adolf Hitler's nephew settled West Islip on Long Island. The TWA disaster (thought to be due to a missile from the ground) occurred exactly at that part of Long Island where the nephew settled and had sons, and for this reason I suspected some of the Hitler circle on Long Island as the people who blew up the TWA plane. The article reads: "Palij - born in a part of Poland that is now part of Ukraine..."

The PALij surname may apply to "Polzl" round-about. Interesting here is that while French Palleys use black boar heads, a Bush symbol too, English Palleys (same lion as Dutch Bush's) were first found in the same place (Yorkshire) as Bush's and Walkers (and WAGERs). I had traced Walkers to a kinship with WAGRians in POLabia (home of Trips that trace to Trypillians of the Ukraine). I also traced Walkers to Kamenets in the Ukraine, near/amongst the Neuri-branch Nahorites, and then I traced Kemuel-branch Nahorites to mythical Camulos of Camelot / Camulodunum (where the Cole's / Kyle's trace as per king Cole of Camulodunum), important because English Palleys use a camel in Crest. Thus, Bush's ought to have a strong ancestral element in the entity represented by king Cole of York.

As I definitely think that Bush's trace to "Bozrah," it suggests that Esau elements out of Bozrah were in cahoots with proto-Romans, but then why not also suspect Esau's Hebrew line amongst Romans proper? Esau's son, Eliphas, married the nobles of Seir, and from this picture one may trace Sara(jevo) to Greek entities named from "Seir" while tracing "BOSnia" to Greek entities named from "Bosrah."

One of Joseph Smith's many wives was a Lucy Walker, age 17. Joseph, the disgusting snake, told her that God commanded the marriage to be. Mormons are completely demented to think that God started a new Christian religion through Joseph Smith. Joseph also married a Hiedler-suspect Hyde surname.

At roughly the time when Mitt Romney was running against Obama, there had been similar surnames in the Republican camp all seeking the White House...Palin, Paul, and Pawlenty included. Palins/Pawleys (use a version of the Power Coat) are of a PAWLenty-suspect Pavelli bloodline, and the Palin/Pawley Coat shares white-on-black stars with the Pulsipher/Polesdon Coat. One could get the impression that Polzl-kin ducks were all lined up by the Bush-circle Nazis to win the White House for themselves, and then the two Bush presidents openly supported Mitt Romney for president. It's a little interesting that Pricks/Pritchards use the same lion as Palins/Pawleys because the Nazi article also mentions Johann Leprich (possible LePrich entity) of Clinton Township, Michigan.

See Bush links to the original Mormons in my work here, which includes a treatment on the Obama bloodline too. In that work, it was discovered that the presidential Bush's had ancestry in the same city (Rochester, New York) as the co-founder and overseer of the Mormons, Joseph Smith. The latter was from Palmyra, NY, said to be named after ancient Palmyra (Syria), which recalls the trace of Palmers/Parmers to the Craven bloodline, as added days ago to my work on heraldry changes. It dawned on me that the Amorites of ancient PALMyra trace to PLUMstead (south-east Pennsylvania), where George Bush was slated to honor Mitt Romney when he won the Republican nomination for president of the United States.

It was also found that Bush ancestry in Rochester involved a Smith surname, and so let's add to this picture that "Four years later [two after the founding of Troy], Ira Smith built the first house at Big Beaver Corners [in Troy], and the first public school opened at Troy Corners." John Kalymon still lives in Troy now, and then the German Troy surname uses the Fire/Feuerer unicorn design (see significance below). It was understood from way back in Virgil's time that proto-Romans were from Trojans. The Tragers/Trogens were first found in beaver-like Bavaria.

I'll come back to the beaver symbol. At this point, it is necessary to mention Obama's links to Bill AYERs, a leader of an American-insider group of homegrown terrorists who can be expected to join radical elements of the AYRshire Nazi circles. Ayers led the group, Weather Underground, which I realized to be part code for the Weather/Wither surname, using a BLUE hare (see link below) in Crest that is code for the Ayer / Hare / Here bloodline. The Here's (first found in the same place as English Hayers/Ayers) and HERZOGs (Bavaria) both use blue wings in Crest, and Jeffersons/Jephsons, first found in HEREfordshire, which place I traced to HERZOGovina i.e. Croatia theater, use a BLUE leopard face as well as a BLUE griffin, the design of which is used also by English Troys. Scottish Hayers use a "serva" motto term jibing with the motto terms of Cole's and Gore's/Core's that traces to "Servitium" (of the Japodes / Maezaei theater i.e. in ancient Croatia). That's just one good reason for tracing the Jephson variation of Jeffersons to "Jabesh / Japodes."

The symbol of Troy, Michigan, is said to be a beaver, but I've traced the heraldic beaver to "Bavaria," and to the Beaver/Beiber surname (first found in Bavaria), which may be using a colors-reversed version of the Hiedler/Hitler Coat. The latter surname was first found in Munich, the Bavarian capital, and then English Beavers (look by their Coat to be kin of Palleys) were first found in the same place (Berkshire) as Enfields who are obviously the representation of the Enfield griffin used by Hiedlers/Hitlers.

Enter "Kelly" at this page and read, "griffin Enfield" (it's a griffin species with a fox's head). The Hitler description at the same website calls it a "black griffin," but I've known that Hitlers use an Enfield ever since the last update in February, 2012. In that update, the Enfield griffin in the Irish Gaine/Keaveny Crest was found where the Gaine/Keaveny Coat is an obvious version of the Kelly Coat, but then the Gaine griffin design is not the Kelly Enfield design, but rather is identical to the Hiedler/Hitler griffin. I am comparing the Gaine Enfield to the Hiedler griffin again as I write here, and can verify (in case the designs are changed by that the designs are identical.

Then, the Gaines/Engaine Coat uses the Gore/Core crosslets, which are the crosslets also of Windsors, who have a Windsor castle in the same place (Berkshire) as same-colored Enfields. It became clear to me that the Gore's/Core's traced via their kinship with Trips (same crosslets) to the Trypillians of the Ukraine / Moldavia theater. As Cole's / Kyle's trace to the Neuri there, Gore's (and Kellys) ought to trace to Neuri as well, who I think named Nerthus, the goddess of the pagan Varni.

I have in the past insisted on tracing the Hiedler/Hitler Coat to that of the Scottish Ectors/Hectors (BLUE lion in Crest), and then I trace all of Masonry to the mythical Trojan king, Hector, the one to whom Virgil traced the proto-Romans. With all of this BLUE showing up in the Crests of surnames under discussion, what about the blue lynx in the Lynch Crest? On Gerald Ford, we read further: "His mother was Dorothy AYER Gardner [caps mine], and his father was Leslie Lynch King, Sr., a wool trader and son of prominent banker Charles Henry King and Martha Alicia King (née Porter)...she moved to the home of her parents, Levi Addison Gardner and Adele Augusta Ayer in Grand Rapids, MICHIGAN [caps mine]." One could get the impression of a Leslie-surname bloodline here, important where I traced Leslie's to the Save's, assumed to be from the Sava river because it was also the Save river.

The Weather/Wither Coat is likely a version of the Kennedy / Craven Coat, you see (I had a childhood friend with Witherspoon surname from Michigan, by the way). The Weather/Wither write-up traces to a codeword, "MESSENger," which must be part of the Mason / Mission/Musson bloodline, especially as Missions/Mussons use the Craven / Kennedy Coat! Moreover, there is a Messenger surname using a flying horse (pegasus) in Crest, the Massey-Crest symbol too.

As the Freie/Frey and Mason surnames both use a blue-on-gold upright lion, I realized that "Freemason" was code for those two surnames. The point here is that English Freys/Free's use the same white horse design as per the white Messenger pegasus, thus tending to clinch the Freie-Mason merger. The Frey/Free Coat is used by the Frese/Phreeze/Frees surname, first found in the same place (Essex) as the Gore's/Cores that trace with Cravens to Croatia.

I view this Free bloodline as part of the Vere's, likewise first found in Essex, and using the Massey Shield (there is a Ver(e) location in Manche, where Masseys came from). I traced this Free bloodline to "Pharisees" that merged with proto-Alans in Forum Allieni (went by that name in 70 AD, afterward it was Ferrara). One can glean here that the proto-Masseys (i.e. Maezaei) were in that Ferrara circle, and besides all this, I now claim that Pharisees, an offshoot of Maccabees, trace to the merger (near or even in Forum Allieni) of a king Massena (Numidia) with general Scipio, the merger that actually founded the Maccabee priesthood in Israel. I concluded that the Jonathan/Jonash surname (roosters in Varn colors), first found in FREIENwald, was in honor of Jonathan Maccabee.

Obama in Chicago was a pupil of a pastor with Wright surname that uses a version of the Stewart Coat, which is itself used by Houstons. We are once again led here to the Ayrshire / Renfrew theater's Hitler-kin circles, and then the article above that features John Kalyman also speaks on Osyp Firishchak, 93, of Chicago, a member, reportedly, of the Ukrainian Auxiliary Police, where Kalyman was a member also, keeping in mind that Stewarts trace from Dol of Brittany to Doly (Poland, near the Ukraine), while the Boyd branch of Stewarts traces to the Budini of the Ukraine. Note the similarity between FIRISchak" and "Frese." Or see the variations of this Fire/Feuerer surname (part white horse, the Free / Frese symbol) and compare with the title used of Adolf Hitler.

The FBI can turn on your computer parts as Hitler could not dream of:

The FBI develops some hacking tools internally and purchases others from the private sector. With such technology, the bureau can remotely activate the microphones in phones running Google Inc.'s Android software to record conversations, one former U.S. official said. It can do the same to microphones in laptops without the user knowing, the person said. Google declined to comment.

If the FBI can turn on the microphone of a computer, why not also its camera? That's why I put a piece of tape over both. Police in my own neighborhood are predicted to snoop on everyone in the community, one at a time, if possible. The article goes on: "Since at least 2005, the FBI has been using 'web bugs' that can gather a computer's Internet address, lists of programs running and other data, according to documents disclosed in 2011. The FBI used that type of tool in 2007 to trace a person who was eventually convicted of emailing bomb threats in Washington state, for example." It also goes on to say that the FBI uses hacking tools as a last resort, which is a large pile of horse manure for the naive to swallow happily. "'People should understand that local cops are going to be hacking into surveillance targets,' said Christopher Soghoian, principal technologist at the American Civil Liberties Union. 'We should have a debate about that.'"

You shouldn't be lulled into the claim that court orders are needed before they snoop on you, when they get around to you. In the same way that very fast computer programs break passwords, so beastly computers can skim the entire internet of computers for certain topics and words, like, "I hate Obama," or, "I voted for the Tea party," or, "George Bush was born to a secret Nazi family," or, "Jesus forgives sins."

I tend not to load attachments anymore, or to visit webpages to which I'm invited by strangers, because "Officers often install surveillance tools on computers remotely, using a document or link that loads software when the person clicks or views it." I'm not worried about the police finding me for breaking any law, but am always concerned that dangerous Masonic types might like to know where I live, for to come have me a "visit." You can bet that FBI agents are more interested in snooping the naked pictures of teenage girls than they are catching terror suspects inside the United States. That's not due only to the small number of potential terror suspects, but because FBI leadership has been corrupt, along with many police officers. It's fashionable now for law officers to be a lot like the bad guys. Ask the cameras that have snooped on their brutalities. Soon, we hope, someone will hack the hacking machines of the FBI and tell us exactly what they are doing to abuse them.

The "Obamaphone" program -- the giving away of free cellphones to welfare recipients so that tax payers pay their phone bills -- is an obvious spy tool. The more people using more phones, the more data that can be recorded on each individual. Stay home, use the computer keypad / microphone / camera, that's what the FBI / CIA wants.

The following doesn't allow us to trust the authorities more:

A secretive U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration unit is funneling information from intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records to authorities across the nation to help them launch criminal investigations of Americans.

Although these cases rarely involve national security issues, documents reviewed by Reuters show that law enforcement agents have been directed to conceal how such investigations truly begin - not only from defense lawyers but also sometimes from prosecutors and judges.

The undated documents show that federal agents are trained to "recreate" the investigative trail to effectively cover up where the information originated, a practice that some experts say violates a defendant's Constitutional right to a fair trial. If defendants don't know how an investigation began, they cannot know to ask to review potential sources of exculpatory evidence - information that could reveal entrapment, mistakes or biased witnesses.

In other words, the crime fighters disobey law by first snooping without a warrant, and then make it appear that they caught the criminal with methods other than warrantless snooping. Ignoring the judicial ramifications, you can understand that a government agency covering up its snooping tracks is already a corrupt practice, which is why courts throw out cases if warrantless snooping has been involved.

It is not news that government snoops without warrants. We fully expect government snoops to cover their tracks. It's common sense. Yet, "'I have never heard of anything like this at all,' said Nancy Gertner, a Harvard Law School professor who served as a federal judge from 1994 to 2011. Gertner and other legal experts said the program sounds more troubling than recent disclosures that the National Security Agency has been collecting domestic phone records. The NSA effort is geared toward stopping terrorists; the DEA program targets common criminals, primarily drug dealers. 'It is one thing to create special rules for national security,' Gertner said. 'Ordinary crime is entirely different. It sounds like they are phonying up investigations.'" The shock is only to those who until now trusted liberal governments.

Here is a letter from the attorney of Edward Snowden's father to Obama:

July 26, 2013
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Re: Civil Disobedience, Edward J. Snowden, and the ConstitutionM

Dear Mr. President:

You are acutely aware that the history of liberty is a history of civil disobedience to unjust laws or practices. As Edmund Burke sermonized, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

Civil disobedience is not the first, but the last option. Henry David Thoreau wrote with profound restraint in Civil Disobedience: “If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine.”

Thoreau’s moral philosophy found expression during the Nuremburg trials in which “following orders” was rejected as a defense. Indeed, military law requires disobedience to clearly illegal orders.

A dark chapter in America’s World War II history would not have been written if the then United States Attorney General had resigned rather than participate in racist concentration camps imprisoning 120,000 Japanese American citizens and resident aliens.

Civil disobedience to the Fugitive Slave Act and Jim Crow laws provoked the end of slavery and the modern civil rights revolution.

We submit that Edward J. Snowden’s disclosures of dragnet surveillance of Americans under § 215 of the Patriot Act, § 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments, or otherwise were sanctioned by Thoreau’s time-honored moral philosophy and justifications for civil disobedience. Since 2005, Mr. Snowden had been employed by the intelligence community. He found himself complicit in secret, indiscriminate spying on millions of innocent citizens contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the First and Fourth Amendments and the transparency indispensable to self-government. Members of Congress entrusted with oversight remained silent or Delphic. Mr. Snowden confronted a choice between civic duty and passivity. He may have recalled the injunction of Martin Luther King, Jr.: “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.” Mr. Snowden chose duty. Your administration vindictively responded with a criminal complaint alleging violations of the Espionage Act.

From the commencement of your administration, your secrecy of the National Security Agency’s Orwellian surveillance programs had frustrated a national conversation over their legality, necessity, or morality. That secrecy (combined with congressional nonfeasance) provoked Edward’s disclosures, which sparked a national conversation which you have belatedly and cynically embraced. Legislation has been introduced in both the House of Representatives and Senate to curtail or terminate the NSA’s programs, and the American people are being educated to the public policy choices at hand. A commanding majority now voice concerns over the dragnet surveillance of Americans that Edward exposed and you concealed. It seems mystifying to us that you are prosecuting Edward for accomplishing what you have said urgently needed to be done!

The right to be left alone from government snooping–the most cherished right among civilized people—is the cornerstone of liberty. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson served as Chief Prosecutor at Nuremburg. He came to learn of the dynamics of the Third Reich that crushed a free society, and which have lessons for the United States today.

Writing in Brinegar v. United States, Justice Jackson elaborated:

The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

These, I protest, are not mere second-class rights but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. And one need only briefly to have dwelt and worked among a people possessed of many admirable qualities but deprived of these rights to know that the human personality deteriorates and dignity and self-reliance disappear where homes, persons and possessions are subject at any hour to unheralded search and seizure by the police.

We thus find your administration’s zeal to punish Mr. Snowden’s discharge of civic duty to protect democratic processes and to safeguard liberty to be unconscionable and indefensible.

We are also appalled at your administration’s scorn for due process, the rule of law, fairness, and the presumption of innocence as regards Edward.

On June 27, 2013, Mr. Fein wrote a letter to the Attorney General stating that Edward’s father was substantially convinced that he would return to the United States to confront the charges that have been lodged against him if three cornerstones of due process were guaranteed. The letter was not an ultimatum, but an invitation to discuss fair trial imperatives. The Attorney General has sneered at the overture with studied silence.

We thus suspect your administration wishes to avoid a trial because of constitutional doubts about application of the Espionage Act in these circumstances, and obligations to disclose to the public potentially embarrassing classified information under the Classified Information Procedures Act.

Your decision to force down a civilian airliner carrying Bolivian President Eva Morales in hopes of kidnapping Edward also does not inspire confidence that you are committed to providing him a fair trial. Neither does your refusal to remind the American people and prominent Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate like House Speaker John Boehner, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann,and Senator Dianne Feinstein that Edward enjoys a presumption of innocence. He should not be convicted before trial. Yet Speaker Boehner has denounced Edward as a “traitor.”

Ms. Pelosi has pontificated that Edward “did violate the law in terms of releasing those documents.” Ms. Bachmann has pronounced that, “This was not the act of a patriot; this was an act of a traitor.” And Ms. Feinstein has decreed that Edward was guilty of “treason,” which is defined in Article III of the Constitution as “levying war” against the United States, “or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

You have let those quadruple affronts to due process pass unrebuked, while you have disparaged Edward as a “hacker” to cast aspersion on his motivations and talents. Have you forgotten the Supreme Court’s gospel in Berger v. United States that the interests of the government “in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done?”

We also find reprehensible your administration’s Espionage Act prosecution of Edward for disclosures indistinguishable from those which routinely find their way into the public domain via your high level appointees for partisan political advantage. Classified details of your predator drone protocols, for instance, were shared with the New York Times with impunity to bolster your national security credentials. Justice Jackson observed in Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York: “The framers of the Constitution knew, and we should not forget today, that there is no more effective practical guaranty against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority must be imposed generally.”

In light of the circumstances amplified above, we urge you to order the Attorney General to move to dismiss the outstanding criminal complaint against Edward, and to support legislation to remedy the NSA surveillance abuses he revealed. Such presidential directives would mark your finest constitutional and moral hour.

Bruce Fein
Counsel for Lon Snowden
Lon Snowden

I saw a slew of good points.

The Nazi's are alive and well in Los Angeles:

..."The doors [of the police car] flew open, and the lights were on me. They drew their guns down, and they just attacked me. And they threw me on the floor, and they started stomping my face in" [Brian Cisneros] said.

Cisneros added, "They choked me out and all that, and then they threw me on their hood."

The alleged victim said he never resisted the officers.

"(I thought) I'm gonna die, I'm never going to see my kids again," he said.

At the end of the ordeal, Cisneros said the officers cited him "for no lights [on his bicycle] after hours of darkness." Cisneros said he went to the hospital the next morning, where he was treated for a dislocated shoulder and a fractured elbow, among other injuries.

The police are becoming lunatics because no one likes them anymore. Is it any wonder?


Especially for new or confused readers
shows where I'm coming from.

For serious investigators:
How to Work with Bloodline Topics

Here's what I did when I had spare time on my hands:
Ladon Gog and the Hebrew Rose

On this page, you will find evidence enough that NASA did not put men on the moon.
Starting at this paragraph, there is a single piece of evidence -- the almost-invisible dot that no one on the outside was supposed to find -- that is enough in itself to prove the hoax.
End-times false signs and wonders may have to do with staged productions like the lunar landing.

The rest of the Gog-in-Iraq story is in PART 2 of the
Table of Contents

web site analytic