Archive for the ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Category

Nathan Leal on the Illuminati symbolism behind current events

by Douglas J. Hagmann on Friday, October 17th, 2014

This is article 466 of 469 in the topic Government Corruption

Remember the 2012 Olympic ceremonies? No? Well, there were numerous vigenettes that did not quite fit the theme of the Olympics, but they certainly seemed to offer an insider’s glimpse into the plans of the power elite, including pandemics and mass death.

How about the 2014 Super Bowl halftime commercials? Did you notice anything odd about some of the promotions? Perhaps you might recall the commercial for Mercedes Benz, where a static screen with the statement “This year we guarantee a thrilling fourth quarter.” The game was a blow out, of course, and the fourth quarter of that game was anything but thrilling. Was this, perhaps, a reference to the actual fourth quarter of the year? We’re certainly seeing a “thrilling” start of the fourth quarter of 2014…how might it end?

Join Nathan Leal, founder and operator of The Watchman’s Cry tonight as we explore, in depth, current events against the backdrop of Illuminati symbolism.

Go straight to Post

9/11 Truth Movement making big comeback this year, says media watchdog

by Jim Kouri on Sunday, August 24th, 2014

This is article 8 of 8 in the topic Conspiracy Theories

As the United States government ponders its response to the global jihad, especially with the likes of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) now tearing through Iraq, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) squeezing the life out of Yemen, Al Shabaab terrorizing both Somalia and Kenya, Boko Haram is Nigeria, Al Nusra Front leading the charge in Syria and other Islamist groups, the news media are focusing attention on what’s commonly referred to as the 9/11 Truth Movement.

During the days following the devastating destruction and death that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, there were a number of Americans who questioned the media’s coverage of what actually happened to the World Trade Center and the U.S. Pentagon.

While in the midst the President George W. Bush administration there were several media outlets that gave credence to the voices from the 9/11 Truth Movement — of Truthers, for short — but when President Barack Obama took office, those same news media voices were no longer interested in pursuing the story and theories put forward by the so-called Truthers.

However, on April 3, 2014 the well-respected and relatively unbiased C-Span cable television show “Washington Journal” invited the usually bombastic Democratic congressman, Representative Jim McDermott who appeared to have opened up the 9/11 controversy once again.

McDermott (D-WA), while a guest on “Washington Journal” took a question via telephone from a member of the television audience about the destruction of New York City’s World Trade Center’s Building 7 on 9/11. The caller addressed the evidence by several architects and structural engineers who believe that explosives of some kind brought it down. The Congressman McDermott surprised many when he said that after seeing videos covering the issue and “the questions surrounding it are legitimate, meriting further investigation.”

“…one day we will have further examination of that issue…I think the sooner the better, but that’s just my personal view.” said McDermott during his C-Span interview.

With that, a few months later, the host of “Washington Journal,” Peter Slen invited the leader of a group of engineers, architects and building construction experts onto his show to discuss the allegations that, in essence, the 9/11 tragedy that destroyed an entire Manhattan building complex and killed close to 3,000 innocent people, was in fact an inside job.

Slen’s guest, Richard Gage, explained that his group of experts, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, believes that the World Trade Center was brought down by explosive demolition on September 11, 2001 and not because of aircraft flying into the Twin Towers. Gage founded his group of highly credentialed experts in 2006 and said its mission was to “expose the official lies and cover-up surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 in a way that inspires the people to overcome denial and understand the truth.” Mr. Gage spoke via video link from San Francisco, California.

According to Gage, AE911Truth has studied the available information regarding the destruction of World Trade Center’s Buildings 1, 2, and 7. He stated that the evidence gathered includes video and audio recordings, photographs, eyewitness accounts, and physical evidence.

Click to continue reading “9/11 Truth Movement making big comeback this year, says media watchdog”
Go straight to Post

Lies of the 9/11 “Truth” Movement

by Cliff Kincaid on Friday, May 23rd, 2014

This is article 757 of 802 in the topic Terrorism

With the official opening of the 9/11 Memorial Museum, media attention is being focused once again on the so-called 9/11 “truth” movement, the political agitators and publicity-seekers who insist that Muslim terrorists flying planes were not responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001. A group called Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is distributing 9/11 “truth” propaganda at the museum this week, insisting the attacks were an “inside job” by various forces.

Emily Bazelon of Slate was on Jake Tapper’s CNN show referring to the “fringe right wing” and “anti-government” forces allegedly behind these kooky claims. Tapper did not dispute her characterization of the movement somehow being on the conservative side. He neglected to point out that Van Jones, the “former” communist who is now a co-host of CNN’s “Crossfire” show, had signed a 9/11 “truth” petition suggesting that the Bush administration deliberately allowed the terrorist attacks to happen so the U.S. could go to war against Muslims in the Middle East. This, and stories about Jones’ communist background, forced him out of his White House job.

David Corn of Mother Jones magazine had noted the 9/11 conspiracy theories “emerging on the left,” and he had written several pieces decrying them. He added, “The 9/11 conspiracy theory was just too tempting for many Bush critics. Van Jones says he was not fully aware of what he was signing when he put his John Hancock on that 9/11 petition. This might be true. But I can see how Jones and others on the left—without thinking too much—might have easily said, sure, sign my name to any call for any investigation of Bush and Cheney. And that sloppiness—if that’s what it was—has cost him his job.”

Tapper said on his show that people have a “capacity for believing crazy things,” but that the 9/11 “truth” movement demonstrates “insensitivity” to the families of the 9/11 victims.

What the families want are answers. The 9/11 attacks were entirely foreseeable and preventable, and legitimate questions remain. The record shows that the Bush administration ignored warnings that an attack like 9/11 might occur. Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden had already declared war on America, and the Able Danger military intelligence unit had identified al-Qaeda terrorist cells in America before the attacks. But this information wasn’t investigated thoroughly enough by appropriate officials in our intelligence agencies. It is truly mind-boggling that President Bush gave George Tenet, CIA director at the time of 9/11, a presidential Medal of Freedom.

To make matters worse, this intelligence failure was followed by another, when the post 9/11 anthrax attacks were falsely blamed on various U.S. scientists and not on members of al Qaeda, the likely culprits. One of those falsely blamed, Steven Hatfill, collected millions of dollars in damages from the U.S. government when the FBI tried to ruin his reputation and frame him.

This intelligence debacle is another reason why the 9/11 “truth” movement has completely lost sight of the truth.

As we said in a 2006 column, “If the Bush Administration carried out 9/11, a monumental undertaking of planning and coordination, why couldn’t it have blamed the post-9/11 anthrax attacks on Muslim Arabs as well, thus giving greater impetus to the alleged desire to go to war in the Middle East?

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The Paranoid Party

by Daniel Greenfield on Sunday, April 13th, 2014

This is article 7 of 8 in the topic Conspiracy Theories

The Democrat may no longer believe in God, the Constitution or even motherhood and apple pie, but he devoutly believes with all the faith of a 9/11 Truther in the impermeability of steel and of a Neo-Nazi in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion that somewhere out there Republicans are sitting in a sealed room and plotting to bring back the 50s.

And if not the 50s, then at least the early 60s.

The left accuses the right of being deeply paranoid. Meanwhile the left is convinced that every Republican sneeze is a racial putdown of America’s first black president since Bill Clinton.

Forget about looking for Communists under every bed. The proper progressive never lies down with his or her partner of choice and their government mandated birth control from the Catholic institution with no choice in the matter without first checking their privilege and checking for conservative bigotry.

Sometimes, somewhere in Kentucky or Alaska, a minor Republican functionary forwards an email depicting ObamaCare as the work of a voodoo witch doctor and the first lefty to discover it dines out on that triumphant accomplishment for a year before writing a book about it. The rest of the time, the McCarthyists of the left have to work hard to unpack the subtext of the overlay of the puzzle box of a random remark.

When Mitch McConnell complained that Obama plays too much golf, MSNBC’s chief late night lunatic, Lawrence O’Donnell, barked that “Well, we know exactly what he’s trying to do there. He is trying to align to Tiger Woods and surely, the lifestyle of Tiger Woods with Barack Obama.”

The famously Calibnasian Woods didn’t actually identify as black, but that was probably because of the way Republican racism stigmatizes black people. Will the right-wing bigotry never stop?

After its collapse under Reagan, the reinvented Democratic Party runs entirely on outdated conspiracy theories about Republican bigotry. It complains that Republicans secretly believe that they’re a secret Communist conspiracy to destroy America, while their entire platform is an accusation that the Republican Party is a secret conspiracy to enslave black people.

Or as the famous admirer of articulate, bright and clean-looking African-Americans, Joe Biden said,  “He is going to put y’all back in chains.”

The chains would be redundant considering that he and his boss have run up the national debt to $17.6 trillion or a post-racial slavery of $55,234 by every American, regardless of race or creed, owed to China, Japan, Brazil and the Muslim world. And it’s easier to accuse Mitt Romney of wanting to bring back the 1850s (when Mormons were persecuted) than to have an honest discussion about the chains of debt already there.

The Democratic Party now runs on racial paranoia, on class paranoia, on gender paranoia; on an endless McCarthyism in which the Republican Party is savaged as a phantom Nazi cult dedicated to serving Southern racists, the Koch Brothers and Israel.

The sanest liberal of the 21st century makes the looniest member of the Birch Society in the 60s seem positively grounded in reality. Conspiracy theories aren’t a fringe element in the Democratic Party now; they’re the entire ticket.

1 2 3 4 5
Go straight to Post

Why the Communists Killed Kennedy

by Cliff Kincaid on Thursday, November 21st, 2013

This is article 117 of 145 in the topic History

The media’s love affair with Fidel Castro apparently outweighs their love for President John F. Kennedy and his Camelot era. Otherwise, the communist role in the Kennedy assassination would be prominently noted during the 50th anniversary coverage of the JFK assassination.

Assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist member of the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee and, after his arrest, tried to reach Communist Party USA attorney John Abt to act as his counsel. “Before Mr. Abt could accept or reject the bid, Mr. Oswald was shot and killed by Jack Ruby,” The New York Times noted.

William J. Murray writes in his book, My Life Without God, that his mother, atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair, was a communist who was ordered to report to an office of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and destroy any references in the files to Oswald’s involvement with the group.

Oswald’s Russian connections are sometimes noted in the anniversary coverage, but treated as inconclusive, or even as evidence that the Soviets could not possibly have killed Kennedy because their connection to Oswald was too well-known and too many fingers would point to Moscow as the culprit!

“Oswald was a supporter of Soviet-backed Cuba,” CNN reports. But it then quotes an amateur researcher named Dave Perry as saying, “We know Oswald was in the Russian embassy in Mexico City. We even know who he talked to. But we don’t know what was said. Then a few weeks later, he shoots Kennedy.”

In fact, as noted by former FBI agent Herman Bly in his book, Communism, the Cold War, and the FBI Connection, Oswald met with a Soviet KGB espionage agent connected with KGB Department Thirteen, which was in charge of assassinations. Bly had gone to the U.S. Embassy in 1965, on assignment for the CIA, and reviewed its files on Soviet personnel in Mexico City.

Yet, Perry assures CNN that the Soviets were not involved. “The Russians would never have ordered Oswald to kill Kennedy because of his well-known links to Russia and his pro-Cuban sympathies,” Perry says. “Russia’s leaders knew they would have been the first suspects if they’d engineered an assassination by Oswald. It would have been an act of war, which could have triggered a nuclear attack.”

On the contrary, the possibility of a nuclear war, coming so soon after the Cuban missile crisis, is why the communist connection to Russia and Cuba would be played down. Bly writes, “…I believe the heads of the FBI, CIA, and President Johnson wanted the Oswald case brought to a conclusion as fast as possible as they did not want another crisis with the Soviet Union so soon after the Cuban missile crisis.”

Oswald’s well-known communist connections help explain the plot and the communist cover-up.

The Soviets tried to mask their connection to Oswald by publishing through a KGB front company, Marzani and Munsell, the book, Oswald, Assassin or Fall Guy. The book was dedicated to Mark Lane, whose book, Rush to Judgment, blamed right-wingers for the Kennedy assassination.

This KGB disinformation campaign was called “Dragon Operation,” an effort to shift blame for Kennedy’s murder away from the communists.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The Conspiracy Theory is the Conspiracy

by Daniel Greenfield on Tuesday, November 19th, 2013

This is article 6 of 8 in the topic Conspiracy Theories

Sometimes a conspiracy theory exposes a conspiracy. Sometimes the conspiracy theory is the conspiracy.

JFK assassination plots are the only conspiracy theories to be widely accepted by the general public. The moon landing filmed in a studio, the Lincoln conspiracy or the World Trade Center being blown up by lasers from outer space never gained much credence because they lacked mainstream backing. Conspiracy theories ordinarily remain on the margins. The JFK theories were too important to the liberals who were really running things to allow them to die out.

There are probably more Americans who could tell you the ins and outs of the “magic bullet” than can recite the Bill of Rights from memory. More books have been sold about the Kennedy assassination than about any of the real government abuses taking place today.

The 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination brings with it the usual weighty tomes, speculative articles and nostalgic reminiscing by liberal baby boomers about the utopia that might have been.

John F. Kennedy long ago stopped being a politician and became the collective egotism of a certain type of liberal of a certain age. He had become an unreal figure long before he died, composed of  wishes and progressive fantasies, photos with cool celebrities and generational gloating. His death made that unreality permanent, relegating the real man to a Camelot of collective liberal fantasies.

The JFK assassination became a liberal martyrdom in search of a conservative inquisitioner. Oliver Stone’s JFK was a laborious effort to connect the martyrdom of a liberal icon to the despicable conservative villains that the narrative of this political theology demanded.

The gnostic elements of martyrdom usually involve the revelation of spirituality in the mortal flesh. But JFK, like Obama, had always been more than mortal, a creature of flashbulbs and film, a messiah of a new generation and a new age. It was his opponents who represented the prosaic materialism of money and steel, three-piece suits and conservatism, who had to be exposed and outed.

For the Kennedy martyrdom to have deep spiritual meaning, it had to have come at the hands of those who represented everything that opposed the values of the Cult of Camelot. And so a vital element of JFK worship, like O.J. Simpsonism had to be the search for the real killers. And like O. J. Simpsonism, the real killer had to be searched for because everyone knew who the real killer was.

Camelot was a messianic age of political transcendence that had been aborted forcing us to live through more cycles of materialistic history. The political messianism of JFK was as doomed as that of Obama or any other liberal savior. Unlike Obama, it conveniently ended in a martyrdom which excused a generation of liberal failures.

The revolution didn’t fail. It was murdered. The endless search for the real killers was not done to find them, but to perpetuate the martyrdom myth. The search could never be complete, the conspiracy theories could provide no closure, though the lynching of Nixon, for daring to try and make JFK’s liberal legacy work helped put to rest the ghosts of Camelot for many angry liberals.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

What If? A Guide to Conspiracy Theories

by Alan Caruba on Tuesday, October 8th, 2013

This is article 377 of 469 in the topic Government Corruption

When I was a rookie reporter, an editor said, “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.” It captures the spirit of skepticism that journalists need if they are to decipher all the things politicians and others in positions of power claim as the truth.

Journalists have to be more than stenographers taking down quotes. They need to connect the dots between what is being said and what is being done with what may or may not have occurred earlier. Do they match up? Do they make sense?

In normal times, there are always a bunch of conspiracy theories floating around, but in times such as we are living through, they multiply like mushrooms in dark, fecund places. They feed on fear.

Who are we to believe? Well, start by applying as much logic as possible. Too much of what the Obama administration has been doing lacks a logical explanation.

Why would the ATF sanction a program of gun-running to Mexican cartels? Why would anyone believe that “a video” was the reason a covert operation in Benghazi, Libya, was attacked? Why would the White House back the Muslim Brotherhood and shut off funds to the Egyptian military when countless Egyptians were in the streets demanding the overthrow of the MB regime?

Why would any President, in the face of overwhelming evidence, believe anything the Iranians told them about their nuclear weapons program? Why has the National Security Agency ramped up its surveillance and capture of every American’s phone calls and emails? If it is so effective, why didn’t the FBI put a phone tap on the Tsarnev brothers after receiving a tip from the Russians that they were potential terrorists?

Why? Why? Why?

Part of the problem is the fact that the President blatantly lies about everything. It is no longer possible to know if he is telling the truth and the odds are very high that he is not. Those around him also put their spin on events. When caught, Lois Lerner, formerly of the Internal Revenue Service, took the Fifth Amendment refusing to testify about a program to deliberately deny tax exempt status to groups that might affect the outcome of an election or question the legitimacy of the Obama regime.

Recall that James Clapper, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, knowingly lied to a congressional committee and, when caught, explained that he gave “the least untruthful” answer to a question that he had previously been informed would be asked. And, of course, the former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, went along with the “video” cover story regarding the Benghazi attack.

The Obama administration is a virtual hornet’s nest of deception that generates conspiracy theories.

The voters were promised that the Obama administration would be the “most transparent” administration. Instead, New York Times reporter, David E. Sanger who broke the story about the US-Israeli cyber-attacks on the Iranian nuclear program, found that twenty years of contacts within the government would no longer talk to him after his phone, text, and emails were examined. “This is the most closed, control-freak administration I’ve ever covered,” said Sanger.

Click to continue reading “What If? A Guide to Conspiracy Theories”
Go straight to Post

British Man Wins Small Victory For 9/11 Truthers

by Bob Livingston on Friday, April 5th, 2013

This is article 5 of 8 in the topic Conspiracy Theories
British Man Wins Small Victory For 9/11 Truthers

UPI FILE
World Trade Center 7 collapsed into its own footprint.

A British 9/11 truther is claiming victory following a court ruling that said he did not have to pay a fine over his refusal to pay his annual £130 TV license fee.

Tony Rooke claimed the BBC intentionally misrepresented facts about the 9/11 attacks when it reported that World Trade Center 7 collapsed “due to an office fire, which, even the NIST report says, fell at free-fall speed for eight floors in 2.5 seconds. That is absolutely impossible without a controlled demolition being involved.” The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is the U.S. government agency charged with investigating collapses.

In an act of civil disobedience, Rooke refused to support the BBC and pay the license fee because he believed the BBC has covered up the events of that day. To pay the license fee, he said, would be tantamount to supporting the terrorists responsible for the controlled demolition. He also argued that supporting terrorists would violate the UK’s Terrorism Act, which states: “It is an offence for someone to invite another to provide money, intending that it should be used, or having reasonable cause to suspect that it may be used, for terrorism purposes.”

Rooke was charged with not paying the license fee. Prior to his hearing, Rooke provided the court with evidence that both WTC towers and WTC 7 were destroyed by controlled demolition rather than by the airliner impacts and subsequent fires. The judge gave Rooke an unconditional discharge, which in British legal parlance means he was convicted but he does not suffer the consequences of a conviction and the conviction will be erased if he is not brought before the court for six months. He was not required to pay the fee and non-payment fine but had to pay court costs of £200.

Peter Drew, an AE911Truth UK action group facilitator, told Digital Journal he is organizing a campaign against the BBC because its royal charter requires it to present evidence that is impartial and accurate. Drew claims the BBC ignored reports from investigators who in 2008 claimed WTC 7 did indeed fall at freefall speed.

“Today was an historic day for the 9/11 truth movement,” Drew told Digital Journal, “with over 100 members of the public attending, including numerous journalists from around the UK as well as from across other parts of Europe.”

The BBC first reported the collapse of WTC 7 about 20 minutes before it occurred. The “official line” from the U.S. government is the building fell due to fire damage. But it collapsed into its own footprint and was the first steel-reinforced high-rise to ever collapse due to an uncontrolled fire. Explosions were heard and reported prior to the collapse.

Go straight to Post

A “Conspiracy Theory” Based at The New York Times

by Cliff Kincaid on Thursday, January 24th, 2013

This is article 4 of 8 in the topic Conspiracy Theories

The Obama Administration is facilitating the activities of foreign jihadists and al Qaeda throughout the Middle East, while claiming that it is fighting al Qaeda and that the organization has been “decimated.” This monumental deception is being carried out not only by the administration but its supporters. It is a crime that has cost four American lives in Benghazi and three in the kidnapping and hostage crisis in Algeria.

The George Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP) is running interference for the Obama Administration by attacking those, like Senator Rand Paul, who are trying to expose the suicidal policy.

In an item headlined, “Senator questions Secretary of State about right-wing conspiracy theory,” CAP says Paul used Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee “to advance a bizarre right-wing conspiracy theory involving alleged gun-running from Libya to Syria, via Turkey.” The basic facts about the so-called “right-wing conspiracy theory” have been reported by The New York Times, hardly a right-wing propaganda organ. And the “conspiracy” also involves Qatar, the host and sponsor of Osama bin Laden’s favorite television channel, Al Jazeera, now poised to get into 40-50 million American homes through the purchase of Al Gore’s Current TV.

The New York Times reported that the Obama Administration “secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar” in 2011 and that “Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants.” These rebels stormed the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, killing four Americans, in a major foreign policy scandal that continues to this day. It was the reason for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing featuring the Rand Paul-Hillary Clinton exchange.

It’s true that the paper claimed the U.S. was somewhat caught off-guard by the arms going into the hands of anti-American jihadists. But that is hard to believe, considering that Qatar, the sponsor of “Terror TV” Channel Al Jazeera, is a close ally of the Obama Administration. The administration has approved the entry of “Al Jazeera America” into the U.S. media market, even though Qatar evaded the law requiring federal approval of a foreign acquisition of a U.S. company that has national security implications. Obama’s Department of Justice refuses to enforce the law that requires Al Jazeera programs to be labeled as foreign propaganda when aired in the U.S.

Any notion that all of this is happening by accident has been undermined by an additional report from the Times that the CIA was using Turkey and “a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood” to send weapons to Islamists fighting the regime in Syria. The weapons were being “paid for by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar,” the paper reported.

By ignoring these facts, which have not been disputed, the Center for American Progress (CAP) is playing a role in the current controversy and scandal which is comparable to what the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) did in regard to U.S. policy toward China in the 1940s. The IPR was an unofficial arm of the State Department which facilitated the Communist takeover of China in 1949.

Click to continue reading “A “Conspiracy Theory” Based at The New York Times”
Go straight to Post

The Pelican Brief with a twist?

by Douglas J. Hagmann on Friday, June 29th, 2012

This is article 3 of 8 in the topic Conspiracy Theories

I’m about to take you on a brief but uncomfortable journey into the land of tin foil hat wearing conspiracies. I’m not going to ask you to believe it, just consider it. Think about it. Think outside the box, and as you do, consider all that has taken place over the last few decades, with particular emphasis on the last five years.

Listeners to The Hagmann & Hagmann Report and my appearances on other radio programs might recall my source within the Department of Homeland Security making vague references on at least two occasions to the fictional novel written by John Grisham titled The Pelican Brief. The book came out in 1992 and was made into a movie in 1993 starring Julia Roberts and Denzel Washington. There was no clarification and no clarity offered by my source in terms of the reference he made. I was just told to keep that book/movie in mind in the coming weeks and months.

Given the passage of the Affordable Care Act with Supreme Court Justice John Roberts as the deciding vote, the reference to The Pelican Brief might be making more sense now. Did Roberts appear comfortable in his public pronouncement with regard to “Obamacare?” Did you look into his eyes, the window of one’s soul when he made his announcement? To those with discernment, what did you see?

Remember, this is the same Supreme Court Justice who “flubbed” the swearing-in of Barack Hussein Obama, requiring a do-over behind the scenes. No video, no audio, no exposure of the “legitimate” oath given to Obama by Roberts. Does anyone outside of that room know what was really said at that private, unprecedented swearing-in ceremony? Like I said, folks, it’s full blown tin-foil hat territory in which we are now treading. But just hang in there with me for a bit longer, and maintain your ability to think outside of the box.

Communist & Islamic goals

It is the stated goal of both the communists and the Islamic terrorists to destroy the free, representative republic known as the United States of America. Perhaps more appropriate, to turn the nation into a communist country or see the flag of Islam flying over the White House and all of America, a step toward the oppression of global governance. Read the Communist goals that were read into the Congressional Record in 1963, and look how many of those objectives have already been accomplished and implemented. Is that a conspiracy theory? I contend that anyone with reasonable sensibilities would agree that the objectives and their implementation is based in fact.

With regard to Islam, look at the charter of the Muslim Brotherhood, and note that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the U.S. State Department much like the Communists in the McCarthy era. Ten years after 9/11, we now have Islamic representatives influencing and dictating security to the Department of Homeland Security. Could this be purely oversight? I don’t think so.

Note that the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) is fully backing a second term of Barack Obama, further calling it “imperative” that he is reelected. During Obama’s first term, we’ve seen some of the most overt Marxist and Communist leaning initiatives launched by Obama, with nary a peep from our elected officials on either side of the aisle.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin