Previous Update: May 28 - June 3

Updates Index

(if there are any to speak of)
June 4 - 10, 2013

Obama's Spy World
When Will He Step Down?

Is the following legitimate:

The Obama administration is secretly carrying out a domestic surveillance program under which it is collecting business communications records involving Americans under a hotly debated section of the Patriot Act, according to a highly classified court order disclosed on Wednesday [June 6] night. The order, signed by Judge Roger VINSon [caps mine] of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in April, directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, Verizon Business Network Services, to turn over "on an ongoing daily basis" to the National Security Agency all call logs...

The order does not apply to the content of the communications.

...The order prohibits its recipient from discussing its existence, and representatives of both Verizon and AT&T declined to comment Wednesday evening.

If it was legitimate, why is it a secret? Why didn't Obama say, "that's not right. You're not going to do that under my watch"? "Obama administration officials at the F.B.I. and the White House also declined to comment on it Wednesday evening, but did not deny the report, and a person familiar with the order confirmed its authenticity. "We will respond as soon as we can," said Marci Green Miller, a National Security Agency spokeswoman, in an e-mail." And look at who was officially behind it, the very organization that cannot be trusted, in bed with the O-mafia: "The order was sought by the Federal Bureau of Investigation..." Even the New York Times and some liberal legislators are opposed to this. Previously, such information could be obtained only with case-by-case court orders if the search was deemed relevant of a security threat. Now, the way it is, Obama himself can have business information that he can use for his political machine, including data useful as political benefits of other Democrats.

Obama has the sort of African-American aloofness caring nothing for law or for the white-man's world; ask his youth. He has never repented since then. To this day, he twists the words of Jesus. To this day, he empowers enemies of God.

It would be interesting to know who leaked this information. It wasn't necessarily a conservative group. The story originates with Britain's Guardian news organization. "The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk -- regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing." Yes, the FBI just wants to have the information on file in case it's needed, and Obama, by having certain friends at the FBI, can call up at any time and tap into any part of that information. Did a certain journalist call a certain journalist on the week of such-and-such? We just saw Eric Holder, before a judge, calling a Fox news reporter a potential criminal in order to get his phone records. Holder does not now stand behind that accusation, of course. The judge who gave the order should be ashamed for requiring Verizon not to disclose this "deal." The FBI should have said, "this is not right." This is the sort of information needed to see if further action might be needed, by which I mean acquiring a copy of the phone conversations themselves. But why is the order limited to businesses while not including private people? Were not the accused Boston bombers private people without businesses? Yes. Are not potential bombers inside the U.S. expected to be non-business people at times?

"The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19." That's 10 days after the marathon bombing, wherefore It could be construed that the O-dministration was enabled to have this data due exactly to that fake attack...the aftermath of which was definitely conducted by the FBI.

Obama made the country believe that he was not like George Bush, but: "Under the Bush administration, officials in security agencies had disclosed to reporters the large-scale collection of call records data by the NSA, but this is the first time significant and top-secret documents have revealed the continuation of the practice on a massive scale under President Obama." Potentially, every domestic attack, faked or otherwise, can allow data collecting of this type, which underscores one of the government "benefits" to faking attacks. "It is also unclear from the leaked document whether the three-month order was a one-off, or the latest in a series of similar orders." In other words, how long has this been going on? The article gives a reason to suspect it was taking place before the marathon as well. The marathon attack allowed a judge to "justify" permitting what he knew was wrong under traditional law. Someone should check for bribery of the judge.

By the end of the week, the New York Times was thumbs down on Obama, over his spying techniques, as further revelations unleashed. However, the Times may have been put over the top only because much of the spying is suspect against journalism. We discover that the Bush>Obama transition used secret courts to accomplish what they knew the people would frown on, and in the case of the following article, you know that, because it involves foreign correspondence coming into the country, the international media are not going to feel comfortable:

The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post.

The program, code-named PRISM, has not been made public until now...

...PRISM was launched from the ashes of President George W. Bush's secret program of warrantless domestic surveillance in 2007...

...PRISM recruited its first partner, Microsoft [not surprising], and began six years of rapidly growing data collection...the only lawmakers who knew about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues.

...Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said: "I would just push back on the idea that the court has signed off on it, so why worry? This is a court that meets in secret, allows only the government to appear before it, and publishes almost none of its opinions. It has never been an effective check on government."

..."98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google and Microsoft; we [the spies] need to make sure we don't harm these sources [by having them exposed as out partners]," the briefing's author wrote in his speaker's notes.

..."Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple."...

..."As it is written, there is nothing to prohibit the intelligence community from searching through a pile of communications, which may have been incidentally or accidentally been collected without a warrant, to deliberately search for the phone calls or e-mails of specific Americans," Udall said.

...In exchange for immunity from lawsuits, companies such as Yahoo and AOL are obliged to accept a "directive" from the attorney general [Eric Mafia Holder] and the director of national intelligence to open their servers to the FBI's Data Intercept Technology Unit...

...The engineering problems are so immense, in systems of such complexity and frequent change, that the FBI and NSA would be hard pressed to build in back doors without active help from each company.

...Firsthand experience with these systems, and horror at their capabilities, is what drove a career intelligence officer [i.e. a good leaker with a whistle] to provide PowerPoint slides about PRISM and supporting materials to The Washington Post in order to expose what he believes to be a gross intrusion on privacy. "They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type," the officer said.

You can either believe the Internet companies and the government spies who are now coming out to do damage control, or you can use your brain to realize that they give not a hoot for public privacy, and read whatever they wish without scruples. The following article is enlightening:

...Although the [top secret] presentation claims the [PRISM] program is run with the assistance of the [Internet] companies, all those who responded to a Guardian request for comment on Thursday denied knowledge of any such program [that's how you can know that this is bad, and that the companies knew that what they were doing was bad].

In a statement, Google said: "Google cares deeply about the security of our users' data [blah, blah, puke]..."

...Companies are legally obliged to comply with requests for users' communications under US law [wherefore, how can they not know about it???], but the PRISM program allows the intelligence services direct access to the companies' servers [without case-by-case or day-by-day permission]. The NSA document notes the operations have "assistance of communications providers in the US".

...The act also gives the director of national intelligence [James Clapper] and the attorney general power to permit obtaining intelligence information, and indemnifies internet companies against any actions arising as a result of co-operating with authorities' requests [= nice, warm, happy, exciting partnership].

...The document also shows the FBI acts as an intermediary between other agencies [sounds like it has the first fruits of data and may or may not share it with CIA] and the tech companies, and stresses its reliance on the participation of US internet firms, claiming "access is 100% dependent on ISP provisioning"...

You may have noted that the PRISM logo is shaped like a short key. How smug. You understand that foreign surveillance includes calls from Britain to the U.S so that FBI eaves-dropping on British politicians / journalists can be included by providing some cover for such activity. The FBI can also spy on CIA phone (etc.) calls since much CIA communication is to foreign lands. The FBI is in the driver's seat of the undercover taxi, which is why Obama would want to be in the passenger seat smoking a cigar to hide what's going on through the thick smoke. In the back seat, there is an orgy piled to the ceiling; the driver doesn't mind at all. We may ask how much payment the Internet studs are asking to allow such information to pass so massively to the O-government. See also:

For a little entertainment, see Rush Limbaugh tell it like it is; he predicted before the PRISM leak was published that Google had been doing it too: "The Google guys are in the business of doing what Obama's doing with Verizon. They're in the business of scanning your e-mails. They're in the business of collecting and harvesting data on everybody." :

The White House is emphasizing that congressional Republicans are in full agreement with this spy effort, and then hinting that Obama wants to put his own spin on this "news" to convince the masses that's it's all for their own good. See New York Times editorial:

Prism is being used by Britain, perfectly legal, apparently, regardless of British laws on the matter, because it's simply borrowing (or purchasing) material from the US data-gathering people:

The UK's electronic eavesdropping and security agency, GCHQ, has been secretly gathering intelligence from the world's biggest internet companies through a covertly run operation set up by America's top spy agency, documents obtained by the Guardian reveal.

It is ridiculous when Republicans are assuring that this snoop job is minor, no need to worry. Apparently, these Republicans had agreed to this form of data collecting under Bush and cannot now criticize it lest they criticize their own position at that time. Hypocrites. I personally do not give any Internet company the right to share my information with the any government, period. My will in this must be respected. The government has violated me if it has stored Google data about me. I do not give Internet companies permission to disclose the times of my chats, nor the people with whom I have chatted. Nothing. I give no permission whatsoever for the sharing of one byte of data coming from my computer, and any judge violating my will in this is a violator of my private information. Period. This privacy must be protected by law, without loopholes whatsoever, but when it's the government itself that does the snooping, without shame, without apologies, it's my enemy at work. The government has made itself my enemy by insisting that it should have the right to view my personal data. It is not right for a judge to order Microsoft not to inform me that the government is snooping on details of my chats. Shame.

Those who say that it's legitimized for the purpose of combating terrorism are wrong on at least two counts. One, it is not argued as a legitimate practice based on fighting domestic crime, which is far-more dangerous at this time to the well-being of people than terrorism. Secondly, terrorism inside the U.S. is mainly a phantom produced by faked terror events starting from the Bush-era New York attack:

The National Security Agency's collection of phone data from all of Verizon's U.S. customers is just the "tip of the iceberg," says a former NSA official...

William Binney, an award-winning mathematician and noted NSA whistleblower, says the collection dates back to when the super-secret agency began domestic surveillance after the Sept. 11 attacks.

"I believe they've been collecting data about all domestic calls since October 2001," said Mr. Binney, who worked at NSA for more than 30 years...

...Mr. Binney, who left the agency in October 2001, said the data were collected under a highly classified NSA program code-named "Stellar Wind," which was part of the warrantless domestic wiretapping effort -- the Terrorist Surveillance Program -- launched on orders from President George W. Bush.

Can you see it? President Bush Sr. was himself a spy in America who called for the new world order. But if terror attacks needed to be faked in order to "justify" warrantless wire-tapping, then you realize that there is another reason for the spy program. You realize that Obama is lying when he says that these programs are to combat terror. You realize that the spying is necessary to set up the new world order. It's purpose is to draw a list of political enemies and to deal with them. "New world order" is a phrase used to empower a certain group. It has nothing to do with a desire to create a better society, and everything to do with a world "throne" operated by the same Masonic entity that created the wording and designs on the American one-dollar bill and the "Great Seal of the United States."

"New world order" is by nature undemocratic. They chose a very bad phrase if they think we will fall in love with it. The phrase implies something "new" to be "ordered" throughout the world. It is not "new country order," but goes beyond the borders with the aim of pulling the entire world into it's "order." It doesn't respect the will of the world, but aims to dictate upon the world. "Order" has not to do with order versus chaos, but is like the typical "order" used by Masons for their various "societies," such as the "Order of the Rosy Cross," etc. In this context, it means "devised system." A system is not necessarily democratic just because it elects its officials. Once elected, the officials can act dictatorially, ignoring the will of the people. That is not a democracy except by shallow imagery. Obama operates on this very sort of "democracy." A dictator in a communist country who refuses to give up power can actually be carrying out the will of his people more than an American president. And the dictator has likely abused the tax dollars less than an American president like Obama. The dictator may have his own country at heart but not other countries, but Revelation speaks on a "prostitute" who fornicates will all nations, and Washington definitely takes pride in being an extension of that Roman empire.

But God calls the world to Godliness. It never entered God's mind to put a little picture of a pyramid on the one-dollar bill. Make a distinction between God and Masonry. Godliness is to do the right thing. There is no good order that doesn't teach and practice, or strive after, doing the right thing. Doing the right thing can be very debatable, and in fact God calls us to consider / contemplate what the right things are. But one's "animalistic" tendencies (otherwise known as sin, selfishness) may debate wrongly in arguing for the "right" thing.

Is it right to have someone's eye on everything that another person does? In the workplace, to a point, especially when training someone, yes, it is right and common. When it comes to your private life, it doesn't matter what you think, because the eye on the American dollar has been there a long time, from way before George Bush's spy programs; it indicates that Masons have spied on society, from the start, as their choice method to build their "order." But if it makes them happy and not the rest, or if they exploit others when building their society, then it is wrong. If you are simply a tool for THEIR society, to be shaped and used as they see fit in building a Workplace-Society, then it's wrong...simply because they are fellow men and not God. Society is not a factory or manufacturing plant. They should lay their hands off of society and not order it at all. They should do the right things, be examples of doing the right, extol doing the right things, and all else will tend to follow suit.

The motto Annuit Coeptis was suggested by Charles Thomson in June 1782. He adapted it from the renowned Roman writer Virgil's evocative instruction manual for farmers, The Georgics, written in the first century B.C.: "Da facilem cursum, atque audacibus annue coeptis." This sentence (Book I, line 40) has been translated as: "Give me an easy course, and favor my daring undertakings."

It is part of Virgil's appeal to the godlike Augustus Caesar for success in his poetic efforts to effectively convey crucial information to farmers...

I think there are secret reasons for choosing "Annuit Coeptis" on the Great Seal, but even on it's face value (it means "the favored project") it has a Communist feel. The rulers are building something, like with a hammer and sickle for example, and you are "something" (of value) only if you help build it. But I ask you, if a society builds an empire for the god, Augustus Caesar, is it right? The very first wrong is that it forsakes the true God, and the second wrong is that it goes beyond the home front, to the world, seeking by force the inclusion of other nations as instruments of the growing EMPIRE. It not only seeks to subject nations to it's exploitations, but seeks to conform them to the "model society." It is an impossibility. It is a twisting of the world into a gross shape simply because a model society can never be ordered by those who force others to conform at the threat of the sword. It is not leading by example. Martial law can never create a model society. Ask Communist Russia.

Virgil wrote the phrase in his myth called, "Aeneid," concerning Roman origins by Aeneas. Compare "Annuit" to "Aeneid." In my opinion, the Egypt connection to the founding of the Romans goes back to the proto-Danaans out of Tanis who moved to Greece and Rome through Israel. They had a false godhood with a fallacious righteousness, the purpose of which was to mock and grieve the Creator.

Jesus came to tell us that a New World must operate very differently from the Roman empire. A new world must be in contradistinction to the Roman empire, not a revival of it. Foolish Masons. In the New World of Jesus, no one gets to be a leader for the benefits of being the leader. Hillary is one seeking to be the president for the benefits thereof, but also for the building of her "global village." There is no doubt in my mind that she would rule with a whip. She is driven by a force to accomplish, and her subjects must accomplish for her. She wants to make a name for herself far higher than her support groups have done thus far. There are willing human tools in support of her global designs.

Joe Biden may not enjoy the presidency in 2016 due to Hillary, and she, losing the election, may be the reason that the next president is a Republican. And that's why some leading Republicans want to protect Obama on this scandal, because they want to use this method of spying when they are back in charge of the war on terror.

The most-dangerous enemy that the Obama administration has, or the most-dangerous enemy that the Bush administration had, is, not terrorrism abroad or within, but American citizens who don't believe their stated agendas. Terrorists are not in any way dangerous to the political elite; American citizens online who see a different world coming than the rosy one offered by Obama's "hope and change" are having too much influence on the thinking patterns of Internet users. They are the ones who can do severe damage. Amongst them are high-level people hoping to expose, while the FBI seeks to discover them before it's too late. The true war is against the citizenry that spouts off, and you must know that the spies have lists of people who are "dangerous" in that regard.

The stacked information is now stored legally in government data files for any future use. As American gun-toting groups are fast becoming the new terrorists, the government must be tapping into their emails / chats / etc. As soon as rejectors of the Biblical beast become targets, all the stacked data can be "justified" for use against them. On the flip side, there is such a vast amount of data that the government doesn't have the manpower to read it all. However, for purposes of controlling the masses during a government-fabricated crisis, it's beneficial to simply have the people know that everything they say can be used against them. In this way, the people will be less likely to send one another messages for to combat a bad government agenda. For example, at this time, news organizations are hesitant to email a leaker of top-secret information regardless of any assurances that Holder or Obama are curbing their snooping programs.

The way that individuals speak to one another will be altered by the very fact that everything they say is being stored by government. It's like the intimidation used by Communists to have the people behave "better." We are to become more government-friendly, or else...maybe we will have some bad notes written on our government files. Did you speak rudely to that rude police officer? He can write a note for your file making himself sound righteous while making you look more like a criminal rather than one concerned about poor police attitudes. Here is what looks like an American version of a beastly computer system:

...According to a report in the The Salt Lake Tribune, the Utah Data Center [what? what's that?] "is expected to cull billions of bytes of information for the nation's intelligence community." Even though NSA officials have not revealed specific details, "the Utah Data Center will be part of NSA’s interconnected network that includes sites in Colorado, Georgia and Maryland." The Tribune reports the Utah facility "will be the largest," so "there is a good chance Americans' phone call data could land" at the Utah Data Center.

The center was described by Wired magazine in 2012:

Under construction by contractors with top-secret clearances, the blandly named Utah Data Center is being built for the National Security Agency. A project of immense secrecy, it is the final piece in a complex puzzle assembled over the past decade. Its purpose: to intercept, decipher, analyze, and store vast swaths of the world's communications...The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013 [you mean, like, gulp, this year?]. Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails...

It's wrong. It doesn't have the look of helping the country. Why Utah and Colorado? Why the Mormon state, and the state that just legalized pot smoking? Why is the data base in the interior of the country? Is it due to making Bible-belt America the target of societal engineering?

The following article tends to prove once again that the Boston-marathon bombing was a faked event, and moreover the article has the potential to identify which "al-Qaeda" parties are working with the globalists to take credit for this and other hoaxes...that enable government goons to acquire court permissions for to keep records of our thinking, desires, goals, and political / religious activities. Tyrants usually have a program of elimination for "problematic" citizens.

Al Qaeda's most dangerous [scared?] franchise is threatening the U.S. with renewed attempts at homeland terror attacks, while urging radicalized Americans to launch strikes like the Boston bombings and poison mail cases on their own.

The dual-pronged "Message to the American Nation" comes from a top militant in Yemen's al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and was both warning to the U.S. and call to arms for homegrown jihadis [this development was totally expected from the marathon event].

The twin explosions near the finish line of the marathon on April 15 killed three people -- including an 8-year-old boy -- and injured more than 260 others, and was blamed on two young Muslim immigrants from Dagestan.

I spent three updates detailing the marathon hoax; if you studied the things that were shown, you know that there were NOT 260 injuries at the marathon's injury sites. I guarantee you that the major media in the United States, including Fox, is an accessory to this crime, for it would be an easy thing for news people to tackle the claims of the event to prove inconsistency after inconsistency. From Fox comes a story possibly serving to reveal (though not Fox's apparent intention) that the Boston fire chief has become a conspiracy believer:

Boston's fire chief [Steve Abraira] announced his resignation Monday, saying public criticism from his deputies for the way he responded to the marathon bombings has made it impossible for him to do his job.

...Thirteen deputies complained [very unexpected] to Mayor Tom Menino in a letter in April [just days after the marathon] that Abraira's failure to take command of the bombing scene [like what sort of command was he expected of?] was indefensible [wow, strong word] and part of a pattern of shirking leadership [I wouldn't want these 13 to be my "friends"].

"You can unequivocally consider this letter a vote of no confidence in Chief Abraira," said the letter, which was first reported by The Boston Globe.

Abraira has said his command staff had the bombing scene under control and he acted according to national standards, which dictate the chief takes charge only if something's going wrong.

I don't think the fire chief is telling the whole story, but in those words alone -- "only if something's going wrong" -- one get's the impression that the fire chief saw no threat. Besides, what would a fire chief be expected to do where there is no fire? But the heavy hand laid against this chief causes is suspicious. My bet is that the 13 deputies were whipped up into a gang by some higher figure amongst the insider fakes, who saw caught wind of the chief asking "the wrong questions," causing others to think that, maybe, there was no real bombing. I would like to hear the specific charges laid by the deputies, but the article doesn't mention them. "In his resignation letter, he wrote, 'The baseless attacks by the Deputy Chiefs, especially their actions of making this a matter of public debate by leaking their letter of April 26th to the press, has made it impossible for me to continue to do my job.'"

The ABC article goes on: "Referencing 'the Boston events' and 'poisoned letters,' AQAP military commander Qassim ar-Reimy claimed in the new video those attacks 'indicate that the control of your security has broken away.' " We now have reason to suspect that Qassim ar-Reimy is a globalist tool willingly. How easy would it be for the West to purchase a few terrorists?

Who is this imposter, then? He is better known as "Rimi / Raimi / Raymi." He supposedly escaped from a Yemini prison in 2006. He then appeared in a Youtube video allegedly with three men released from Guantanamo, but the underlying message in this aspect of the story seems to be an admonishment: the need of perpetual imprisonment of Guantanamo prisoners. Why perpetual? Whose afraid of their going to trial? If these men in Guantanamo, falsely accused, go to court, they will tend to blow the lid on the insiders.

If it's true that Raymi appeared with three Guantanamo ex-prisoners, we'd want to ask Guantanamo itself whether the men had been there, but, says the article: "Guantanamo spokesman Commander Jeffrey Gordon declined [strong word] to confirm SITE's identifications [of the three men]." That refusal to verify is to be expected where the claim in the Raymi video was a fabrication.

The article goes on to say that Raymi was supposedly behind the underwear-bomber plot. At this point in the article, Raymi had been dead a few times, but somehow he kept resurrecting himself...unless someone created him as an imposter. Yes, that makes sense; use an actor with a dead man's name and raise him up as a Western agent faking a terrorist role.

Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is based in Yemen because, according to reports, the wider al-Qaeda body has found sanctuary there. From Wikipedia:

...The Saudi group had been effectively suppressed by the Saudi government, forcing its members to seek sanctuary in Yemen...

According to U.S. counter-terrorism officials, Anwar al-Awlaki was the main force behind AQAP's decision to transform itself from a regional threat into al-Qaeda's most active affiliate outside Pakistan and Afghanistan.{citation needed}

The percentage of terrorist plots in the West that originated from Pakistan declined al-Qaeda shifted to Somalia and Yemen.

Awlaki was an American. Isn't that suspicious? Wasn't he a paid American, therefore, to act the part of the new al-Qaeda leadership after bin-Laden disappeared? It's not necessarily true that Awlaki was killed by an American strike. It's not necessarily true that he's even dead. He may be working still as an American spy in a suit and tie.

Obama was himself in Pakistan many years ago, though he claims to have been there a very short time. There have been articles claiming that Obama had been in Pakistan for a year or more during the recruitment of Osama bin Laden by Brzezinski and others. This cardboard president had been a young tool in Pakistan that year when claiming to be in an American university. (No one at that Columbia university ever saw him there except for the people that the O-people conjured up for to make false claims:
"Swirling amid the black hole of information are a host of theories about Obama's whereabouts -- particularly during the 1981-1982 school year -- including speculation he was working for the CIA in Pakistan.

...“I have no recollection of Barack Obama at Columbia, and I am sure he never attended any of my classes,” Graff told WND in a telephone interview.

“For 46 years, I taught political history, diplomatic history and one of the pioneering courses on presidential history, and every future politician of note who went through Columbia in those years took one or more of my classes – every one, that is, except Barack Obama.”

Graff further told WND no professor he knew could remember having Obama as a student at Columbia.

“Nobody I knew at Columbia ever remembers Obama being there,” Graff insisted."

...New York Times reporter Janny Scott, who later wrote a favorable biography of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, wrote in an Oct. 30, 2007, story that Obama "declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."

...An Associated Press story May 16, 2008, also stated the Obama campaign declined to discuss Obama’s “time at Columbia and his friendships in general.”

Imagine, Obama, a mole in Pakistan. What kind of mole would he have been? Was he given Obama Sr. as a fake father so that he could pose as a Muslim? Why did Obama, as president, choose to make Afghanistan (part of the relevant Pakistan theater) his war-theater of choice? Why did we hear that Osama was hiding out in Pakistan during the Bush years? Just what American plot was really going on in Pakistan, anyway?

If Obama had been a CIA agent with much faked history for the purpose, it explains why several courts have refused to entertain cases that seek to resolve his birth-record / identity details. There were some arguments made a couple of years ago half-convincing me that the fake photos / videos of Osama bin Laden were of Obama himself. These faked bin-Laden images were, it has been argued, used by the West to justify the war in Afghanistan. I showed that the bin-Laden images were not those of the true bin-Laden, who looked much different. By that time, I had realized that bin-Laden was never dangerous to the United States, and that he did NOT plan the September-11 attacks on the New York towers. It seems undeniable that globalists who controlled Bush raised Obama to High Office for to continue using the American tax payer to fund and conduct globe-trodding agendas.

Continuing with the AQAP article:

In the wake of the 2011 Yemeni revolution, an Islamist insurgent organisation called Ansar al-Sharia (Yemen) (supporters of Islamic Law), emerged in Yemen and began to seize control of areas in the Abyan Governorate and surrounding governorates and declaring them an Islamic emirate. There was heavy fighting with the Yemeni security forces over the control of these territories, with Ansar al-Sharia driven out of most of their territory over 2012.

Ansar al-Sharia appeared in the last update in what looked to be an alliance with the Senussi Libyans around Benghazi, both groups appearing to be in cahoots with Obama.

We were told that 33 people escaped unharmed from the Benghazi attack that killed Christopher Stevens, and yet we have yet to see the list of people. We were told that some 150 attackers were involved, which was an inconsistency, for it seems unbelievable that only two people would get killed out of 35 under that scenario, and moreover the chances of killing the top two men of the consulate was highly unlikely since neither of them, we were told, were killed directly from the gun of any attacker. Out of 35 people, wouldn't it be expected that others should die by smoke inhalation besides, or along with, the top two men?

Yes, the two were escorted by at least one American to a location in the consulate that was set on fire. Coincidence, or was the escort a murderer? No one in the media that I read discussed the unreasonable aspects in the report of the two men somehow straying from their escort as he found a window to fresh air to save himself. We were left to believe that the two men simply vanished in the smoke. Impossible. The escort, if he was not the murderer, would have called out to the two, "over here, a window." The ambassador himself would have known where the window was located. Some goonish event, therefore, took place at the hand of the escort(s) to assure the deaths of the two men.

It became my belief that Obama tried to kill Hillary Clinton in an airplane "accident" during the time that she had a "concussion" that kept her from appearing before the Benghazi hearings. The story was out there outside of American media, advanced by Russian Intelligence. I think I understand Putin's approach to the West enough to know that he would not allow his Intelligence people to advance that story if it were untrue. The relationship between Putin and Obama must have broken down completely at that point (mid December 2012), and in fact it shows broken at this time. The point here is that one would expect the tones of Hillary's composure to show some deep animosity toward Obama if indeed she realized that he tried to kill her. I haven't seen such animosity, albeit she has been mainly out of view since the plane crash (on a runway in Iran). I wasn't able to explain previously why the expected animosity wasn't showing, but now the article below can explain it. However, all the scandals that Obama is facing at this time could in large part be due to the vengeful leakings of the Clinton people. Here's the article:

President Obama made a secret deal to support Hillary Clinton when she runs for president in 2016, campaign sources say, payback for the [phony] support her husband gave him in 2012.

Bill Clinton's animosity toward Obama is legendary. A year before the last election, he was urging Hillary to challenge the sitting president for the nomination -- a move she rejected.

According to two people who attended that meeting in Chappaqua, Bill Clinton then went on a rant against Obama.

"I've heard more from Bush, asking for my advice, than I've heard from Obama," my sources quoted Clinton as saying. "I have no relationship with the president -- none whatsoever. Obama doesn't know how to be president [and Hillary does???]. He doesn't know how the world works. He's incompetent. He's an amateur!"...

...But as last summer wore on, and Democrat enthusiasm waned, chief political strategist David Axelrod convinced the president that he needed Bill Clinton's mojo.

A deal was struck: Clinton would give the key nominating speech at the convention, and a full-throated endorsement of Obama. In exchange, Obama would endorse Hillary Clinton as his successor.

Clinton's speech was as promised; columnists pointed out the surprising enthusiasm in which he described the president...

But after his re-election, Obama began to have second thoughts. He would prefer to stay neutral in the next election, as is traditional of outgoing presidents.

Bill Clinton went ballistic and threatened retaliation. Obama backed down...

...He may yet try to back out of his promise to Hillary Clinton. But as Obama's presidency sinks deeper into scandal and inaction, the question is -- will Clinton even still want his endorsement?

It's one loser to another loser to another loser. If Hillary becomes the president, it will only be to expose her shame. The Democrats will never escape their shame until they change their "progress" course toward God. It's God who calls us to progress toward Him. The evolution of man must be toward God, or it will be devolution. There is no one more interested than God in exposing the shame of liberals. The exposure is 100% Guaranteed.

Why, while Obama is praising the accumulation of Internet data, are some Democrats (especially Mark Udell and Ron Wyden) standing openly opposed? Are these of the pro-Hillary camp? Is there a conspiracy in the inner Hillary circle to undo Obama, to pay him back for something? What fun. Guaranteed, that if this was George Bush doing it, Obama would be criticizing harshly. It can be concluded that Obama is in strong cahoots with CBS news, and so here is what could be construed as an anti-Hillary scandal fresh off the CBS presses:

Here is the "honesty" by which one can trust James Clapper:

At a hearing of the Senate intelligence committee In March this year, Democratic senator Ron Wyden asked James Clapper, the director of national intelligence: "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"

"No sir," replied Clapper.

Here's Obama in all of his cocky self: "These are the folks you all vote for as your representatives in Congress and they are being fully briefed on these [snooping] programs." FULLY? How would Obama know since he usually knows nothing, sees nothing, hears nothing? He's lying to say that everything that NSA has on file is being made known to Congress, because it's a simple fact that the NSA over-reach is not being reported to Congress; it's a simple fact that the only things reported to Congress include such things as terror / crime suspects that have been discovered. It should be true that NSA reports to Congress only those things that give the appearance of a job well done. Of course.

The time has now come for Congress to start pulling some teeth. And that's exactly when NSA no longer seems transparent: "Senators have expressed their frustration at the NSA's refusal to supply statistics." Ahh, yes, NSA shows freely what if chooses to show, but when someone asks for a particular thing, NSA pulls off an Eric-Holder refusal, false humility and all. In the same way, Obama picks and chooses what or what not to reveal in efforts to squelch this latest scandal:

Facing a firestorm from liberals and conservatives over controversial counterterrorism surveillance programs, the Obama administration moved Saturday [June 8] to declassify some details about a program to monitor foreign Internet traffic.

Well done, Mr. Obama, on a Saturday even. But, Mr. amabO, lets turn things around to do the other thing too, like giving up information happily that is requested of you. Do you think you can act both ways? Actually, we all know the answer by now. To make us all feel better, the O-dministration said that big corporations data-mine our personal information regularly, and at a deeper level than the government. Ah, yes, but big corporations have merely a marketing motive, and they don't get to read our private words or hear our private conversations. However, some big corporations can data-mine on behalf of globalist purposes. It must be true that NSA data-mining can be used as a dredging tool to bring up political data usable for attacks against Tea party-ers and other Republicans. It's only a matter of time before this becomes a scandal all its own.

It's interesting that while the anti-Christ will be a neo-Seleucid, I recently traced Masonic Seleucids to the Alexander surname, which happens to be the surname of Keith Alexander, the director general of NSA. In fact, I felt that I discovered Masonry as a whole to be rooted in a king Massena (see last update), whose line was the makings of the Maccabees proper who in-turn formed an alliance with the Seleucid king, Alexander Balas. It was at that point that the Seleucid-ized Maccabees took on the Alexander name.

It doesn't matter what PRISM was created for officially, or how it's officially defined by law. What matters is how the operators of Prism handle their jobs, for they can, at any time while working in secret, deviate from the spirit of the law. It does no good for James Clapper to assure the world by simply handing us a copy of the legal description of Prism. What matters is that you lie, and the world cannot therefore trust you. If anyone should ask you for information that condemns the operation, you say that it's too classified to release. You hide behind your duplicity, and don't mind at all acting the hypocrite. For James Clapper to suggest that Prism is not data mining is in itself one reason not to take him seriously. It is the very nature of spy organizations to mine for data.

Therefore, when a James Clapper tells us that "The Government cannot target anyone...unless there is an appropriate, and documented, foreign intelligence purpose for the acquisition," he's only stating what the legislation reads, not how the employees practice their daily routine. Obama is by law required to serve the people, yet he serves Bilderberg-ers. Obama is by law required to tell the truth and to be fully transparent, yet he lies and hides in real practice. If Clapper thinks that the people are naive, he should continue to sound like a gong, but if he's smart, he'll shut-up already about the "honesty" by which his spies conduct themselves. It won't be long before his fine words are turned into fine rubbish.

Clapper hijacks the issue by concentrating on how terror targets are to be treated in due process, but the real issue is how the data is treated of non-targeted or non-terrorist individuals. Clapper should admit, on penalty of losing his job, that he knows of no government worker abusing the private data of non-targeted, ordinary citizens known not to be terrorists. The fact must be that, under Obama, the data is being used for political gain, advancing legislative agendas, and for aiding additional data collection on non-terrorist individuals. yes, the targets can be whomever Eric Holder or James Clapper deem them to be. One could be an AP reporter, another could be a Fox reporter, or any number of "co-conspirators." Once the data is in government data banks, it can be used for assorted purposes. For further reading:

Below is a case that may be hint of deliberate abuse:

The National Security Agency has at times mistakenly intercepted the private email messages and phone calls of Americans who had no link to terrorism, requiring Justice Department officials to report the errors to a secret national security court and destroy the data, according to two former U.S. intelligence officials.

There you go. Holder's department sees the emails / phone calls, and may therefore record them in their own secret computers for further use. The article continues: "The judges 'were really upset about this,'..." Why were the judges upset if it was just an honest mistake of typing in the wrong digit to a phone number? I'd say that they did not type in the wrong phone number, and that the judges were upset for something in the way NSA / Holder dealt with this particular account. I'd say that the courts discovered a spy program on a non-terrorist target, and that NSA had to feign as though it didn't realize initially that it had been studying the account of someone else. I'd say the file was ordered destroyed because it belonged to an important person...that the judge(s) may have known previously by name.

The article goes on: "The Justice Department publicly confirmed to the New York Times in April 2009 that Holder had taken “comprehensive steps” to correct a problem in NSA collection...But department officials declined to discuss details about what was described at the time as the 'over-collection' of information." It doesn't sound like a mere typo mistake, does it?

If you were reading on Glapyhra in the last update, I think that "Clapper" could apply to her line. The Clapper Coat uses what I think is a Hohen / Cohen Shield akin to the Illuminati checks used by both surnames.

Someone at the page above writes: "In the long run, I suspect that disengagement from the Middle East will do a lot more to reduce that particular brand of insecurity than big government surveillance." Well said. Another has the following that could point the finger directly at Obama in regards to the National Guard appearing at the Boston marathon PRIOR to the "bombs" going off:

In 2007 the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act" was passed (HR5122) to rectify the situation caused by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which imposed restrictions on the domestic use of military forces for law enforcement purposes. The new law has allowed the federal government to unilaterally take control of each state's National Guard and federal troops to place anywhere in the country during "emergencies in the community." In essence...the U.S. National Guard moved to a position of direct subordination to the President (formerly being subordinate to each state separately). This decision, in fact, marked a loss of sovereignty of each individual state.

There is a silver lining to the forceful take-over of the United States by the Illuminati, or call it what you will. In my view, the more forceful the take-over, the greater and speedier its failure. In my view, they won't try it because even satanic morons aren't that stupidly self-inflicting...unless they go be "S.S." They are too rich at this time to rock the boat, to high on the dollar cloud to threaten their corporate bliss. On the other hand, I may be giving their level of intelligence too much credit. There is a good class of men who can run this country like a fine clock on minimal power, but, the strategy seems to be, such men will be advanced by neither party to a position of candidacy.

The NSA whistleblower speaks while on the run for his life. He is one man who has sacrificed all to get this message out. Here is his story:

The crux of what he (Edward Snowden) has taught us is that there are secret courts which have ORDERED Internet companies to give up our private data, and ORDERED not to tell us. Who chooses these secret judges? Can they be manipulated easily by Bilderberg types? Or are they pro-Bilderberg to begin with? What would they have ordered ten years from now? Suddenly, Republicans who were not privy to the program are wondering: "Amid the revelations...Congress is concerned that the NSA's actions may have also captured phone calls of lawmakers and their staffers. It should be noted that Verizon is one of the main service providers to government issued Blackberries members and their staff use to communicate with one another." And doesn't Obama know it? Nixon could only dream of this potential that shifts the blame to the secret courts. The same sorts that attacked the Tea Party could easily get the data on Republican law makers now that it's all in a government data bank. Obama needs to step down from Office because he pretended to be opposed to things like this. The man hiding out in Hong Kong needs to be welcomed home as a hero.

When Holder was asked whether the NSA program was spying on Republicans, he didn't say the expected, such as, "I don't know," but seemed to be reserved to admitting the truth if only it could be done in a closed setting...but perhaps I'm reading this wrongly: "Holder responded, "With all due respect, Senator, I don't think this is an appropriate setting for me to discuss that issue. I'd be more than glad to come back in a __ in an appropriate setting to discuss the issues that you have raised." The only reason I can think of for Holder making this nuclear confession is that he knows of a whistleblower who will prove what's all been going on. If the Hillary people want to bring Obama down, they could pull this off easily with Hillary being privy to the O-programs.

When the questioner remarked about his unexpected answer, Holder had to be blunt: "There has been no intention to do anything of that nature -- that is, to spy on members of Congress, to spy on members of the Supreme Court." "No intention" may refer truthfully to some of his people, but not all, or it may mean that the spying on Republicans took place by force at Obama's "request." Perhaps Holder is about to crack for not getting sleep these days. As he deserves. Imagine putting 200 rifles (or more) into the hands of Mexican criminals. What was the lunatic thinking? Who "requested" him to go along with that? It's obvious. The same one desiring to disarm Republicans gave Mexican criminals guns, and Holder, unlike the good man now in China, didn't jump ship but instead complied with the request.

Obama is threatening his people not to become whistleblowers, or else. Obama is like the nice guy who turns out to be the rapist. Obama is drawing himself close to his own assassination. Unlike other presidents, Obama loves to make enemies, and to toy with others as he plays the political game. He has made many enemies, and has kept his promise for change.

It's not easy to form a dictatorship, and they always fail due to better people standing opposed:

The accusation that US authorities routinely snoop on the online activity of non-Americans has drawn strong condemnation from Microsoft's former chief privacy adviser. Caspar Bowden, who advised the software company on privacy until 2011 and is now a privacy campaigner, warned that the US's access to global personal data consigned the rest of the world's cloud data to a "privacy Guantanamo Bay."

There comes to mind the idea that because terrorism is initiated abroad, it makes for a "great" excuse to monitor global correspondence. Caspar Bowden, "a specialist in data protection policy, EU and US surveillance law, PET research, identity management, and information ethics and philosophy," is an example of one soldier in a vast army opposing dictatorships. The only way for a dictator to succeed in America is to remain concealed as such, but, for poor Obama, the cat is well out of the bag now. Bowden is an anti-snoop soldier with a good knowledge of how Microsoft runs its organization in this regard. Here's from a January 31 article of this year:

Leading privacy expert Caspar Bowden has warned Europeans using US cloud services that their data could be snooped on. In a report, he highlights how the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendment Act (FISAAA) allows US authorities to spy on cloud data.

...Mr Bowden, former chief privacy adviser to Microsoft Europe, made a name for himself as a privacy advocate when the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) came into force in the UK in 2000.

Parliament accepted some of the amendments proposed by Mr Bowden as the then director of the Foundation for Information Policy Research.

Now he has turned his attention to US legislation and has co-authored the Fighting Cyber Crime and Protecting Privacy in the Cloud report which was recently presented to the European Parliament.

In it he said that FISAAA "expressly permits purely political surveillance", so that anyone with stored information relating to US foreign policy could find themselves of interest to the US authorities.

"Anyone who, for example, belongs to a campaign group which may oppose some aspect of US foreign policy, whether it be the Iraq war or climate change," he said.

..."What's amazing is that nobody really spotted it for four years," said Mr Bowden.

...Under the FISAAA, US cloud providers can be compelled to release data from any citizen living outside of the US.

"The fibre-optic cable that carries the data is split and a miniature supercomputer scans all the data in real-time with any material of possible interest being instantly copied to the NSA [National Security Agency]," said Mr Bowden.

The court order is made in secret and remains secret - meaning it would not show up in things such as Google's transparency reports, which aim to document data requests from governments around the world.

"We have long known that the Americans can spy on foreign data but FISAAA extends this to reach inside the data centre. It allows the authorities to enact surveillance on a mass scale because it is wired into the infrastructure," Mr Bowden said.

Bowden beat Snowden to this punch. What you can clearly see is that Google is permitted to lie by court order. Is it right for a court to order a massive communications company to lie? Is that where governments of the "free world" wish to go? The fact is, there hasn't been a terrorist attack on the U.S. land mass...unless we include the attacks by Weather Underground; the sooner the world learns this, the better. Obama is the chief terrorist, the twister of reality, a master of deception. And all the African Americans, over 90 percent of them, will follow Obama in loyalty to Hell just for sharing his skin color.

The question is, will the Internet companies now move away from government control freaks, or get into bed with them? Was Bowden released from Microsoft in 2011 because Microsoft was moving toward the freaks? Was it always the intention of Microsoft's founder to play ball with Obama if only Microsoft could be released from guilt should it get caught?

In the article above, a certain group tries to do damage control against the accusations of Bowden: "Adam Mitton, a partner at law firm Harbottle & Lewis, agreed that the FISAAA could be a threat to privacy but questioned how much it was used...'the threat isn't as great as it might be perceived,' he said." What's interesting here is that I've recently traced "Lewis" to the Obama surname while I've repeated many times that the Dunham Coat is a version of the Buttler Coats, the latter surname probably a version of the Bottle surname that possibly created the Harbottle's (icicles). Then, while the Mitton's (Maxwell double-headed eagle design) use a Shield split vertically in blue and red, the Gates' use a Shield split vertically in colors reversed.

The Gates' could be a branch of Geddys/Gettys'. The latter, who share a pike fish with the Claps/Clapper Crest (enter "Clap" here to see the "pike"), were first found in the same place (Lancashire) as the Bottles. The Harbottle Crest is "A right arm holding a club," and then the Clubs (in Getty colors), who I tend to see as a branch of Clappers, use three fish, symbol of the Geddys/Gettys. The Bottle's and the Butlers use a crown of five points -- the symbol in honor of Arthur's / MacArthurs. Arthurs trace to "Herod" and to "Aretas," the latter being the names of rulers in Petra (Edom) that gave birth to the father of Herod "the great." Then, Harbottle's are also HARDbottle, important because Arthur's use "HURTs" (blue roundels).

The idea here is that Clappers and Clubs are variations from a long line named after "Glaphyra," wife of Herod Archelaus. Irish Arthurs/HARTHawrs (the ones using the hurts) share a white-on-red chevron with the Clubs, and then I know for a fact that Arthurs of CLAPton (Somerset) married a Hicks surname, wherefore compare the Club Coat to this Hykes/Hake Coat. The Cecil-Rhodes Illuminati that Obama serves used a "round table" in honor of the king-Arthur line.

Why should Bottle's use a RIGHT arm holding a club? The Rights/Wrights, the surname of Obama's Chicago pastor, was first found in the same place (Berwickshire) as the Scottish Arthurs who share the pelican with Butlers and Stewarts. Wrights are an obvious Stewart branch. Simply put, these lines are of the control-freaking and very-derogatory Illuminati. This arrogant group thinks it has the illumination to light the path for the world's evolution.

Ask yourself whether the following webpage is correct in presenting evidence for proving that Clapper and the Internet companies lied to us. The page shows a slide that is apparently from Snowden's cache of slides.

Here is the Prism slide from my files in case it disappears from the website above. It says: "[Data] Collection directly from servers of these U.S. service providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple."

Here's more from Snowden:

He warned that even journalists who pursued his story were at risk until they published.

The U.S. intelligence community, he wrote, "will most certainly kill you if they think you are the single point of failure that could stop this disclosure and make them the sole owner of this information."

Snowden cannot then turn around and say that the spies are good-willed and sincere in seeking to combat terrorism, yet it's exactly what he goes on to say in the article. Think about it. The people who supposedly fight terror will kill you/him to protect their methods of operation, not because they wish to protect the strengths of their methods to capture criminals, but because they don't want to reveal the immorality of their methods, nor the real, political purposes behind them. These are not good-willed people, but thugs in government, trained to be thugs by high-level men of demonic mentality.

Snowden said he did not vote for Obama, but instead voted for a third party. That means he didn't vote Republican, which in-turn may reveal that he was a Hillary supporter who turned sour on Obama for beating her.

What we now know is that certain elite are recording as much as they can on everyone in the world in case it can be used when needed in the future. One person's dirty laundry can be used to blackmail, to silence, to punish or ruin, get the picture. It is unlawful for the government to have this data in its own computer systems. It is unlawful even if a secret court allows it because the court is in violation of law. The court's directive is trumped by the Constitution and by common sense. The secret court should be held accountable, and the will of the people should replace it.

The Democrat conspiracy-theory bashers would be out in full force except that some of them are starting to see, as through a prism, that something's not quite right. It looks like Obama is involved in a heap of conspiracies which in his administration is "business as usual."

As expected, there has been another major mass-murder at a school (Santa Monica), this time by a man heavily armed with guns and a rifle. He was reportedly killed at the scene and therefore cannot speak. One suspicious thing is that he reportedly killed his father and brother before shooting up other scenes unrelated to his family. It's strange and unlikely, in other words. One can imagine that it's advantageous to recruit entire families because they are more likely to keep their secret than unrelated actors. Another suspicious thing is that, of all the places Obama could have been at the time of the shooting, he was at a fundraiser just ten minutes away.

Moreover, the story that's been floating in the news concerning ricin letters sent to Obama -- the story which broke exactly at the time of the marathon bombing -- has reportedly been solved in a Texas woman accused of trying to set up her husband for the crime. This story is, once again, unlikely. The highly-suspicious part is that she reportedly sent a letter (with the ricin) saying that the husband would shoot someone in the face if they attempted to take away his guns. It's exactly what the conspiracy groups expected at any time to come from Obama's false-flag events. CNN fails to mention how the woman may have obtained the ricin, a blatant omission. The FBI claim is that she alerted the FBI in an effort to frame her husband...but what really happened? Is the purpose to scan all mail for various poisons, and in the meantime to open mail where it's deemed suspect? I can imagine abuse here by government spies.

The following headline was out at the same time: "4-year-old boy accidentally shoots, kills Iraq War veteran dad in Arizona" The timing is suspicious. The location is suspicious.

An interesting statement was found below that may highlight the Revelation prophecy in which "kings of the east" march into Iraq's Euphrates theater:

Since the American-led invasion of 2003, Iraq has become one of the world's top oil producers, and China is now its biggest customer.

China already buys nearly half the oil that Iraq produces, nearly 1.5 million barrels a day, and is angling for an even bigger share, bidding for a stake now owned by Exxon Mobil in one of Iraq's largest oil fields.

In other words, Exxon may, in the spirit of big-time competition, ruin China's main hold on Iraqi oil so that China decides to invade the western powers in Iraq, thus causing the Last Day. It can be fully expected for the anti-Christ system to take the Iraqi oil industry to its own causes.


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