The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues

Western Center for Journalism ^ | 9/8/09 | Steve Baldwin

[pissant]

Most Americans don’t realize we have elected a president whom we know very little about.

Researchers have discovered that Obama’s autobiographical books are little more than PR stunts, as they have little to do with the actual events of his life. The fact is we know less about President Obama than perhaps any other president in American history and much of this is due to actual efforts to hide his record. This should concern all Americans.

A nation-wide network of researchers has sprung up to attempt to fill in the blanks, but at every opportunity Obama’s high-priced lawyers have built walls around various records or simply made them disappear. It is estimated that Obama’s legal team has now spent well over $1.4 million dollars blocking access to documents every American should have access to. The question is why would he spend so much money to do this?

The president who campaigned for a more “open government” and “full disclosure” will not unseal his medical records, his school records, his birth records or his passport records. He will not release his Harvard records, his Columbia College records, or his Occidental College records—he will not even release his Columbia College thesis. All his legislative records from the Illinois State Senate are missing and he claims his scheduling records during those State Senate years are lost as well. In addition, no one can find his school records for the elite K-12 college prep school, Punahou School, he attended in Hawaii.

What is he hiding? Well, for starters, some of these records will shed light on his citizenship and birth.

[1066AD]

Fox News identified 400 people who would have likely known (of) him at Occidental college. Not one remembered him.

Remember his movie at the Denver convention ? No “old friends” in it or on the podium. Movie went from HS basketball pics to Chicago. Great big gap but no one in MSM noticed or commented.

[FreeReign]

He’s a PUPPET. Who is really pulling the strings? Any guesses?

You bet your booties granny.

A conglomeration of global tyrants.

[Texas Fossil]

The most complete and detailed short treatment of his hidden past I have seen in an article. There are some points left out, but nothing essential.

Good post. Thanks

[FreeAtlanta]

Do you remember the discussion on how fake this Harvard Law review picture looked?

It would be interesting to locate all the people in the photo and get them to comment about it.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

I wonder sometimes if he isn’t even Barry Soetero. He seems to have dropped out of nowhere.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Reminds me of the picture at the end of The Shining of the parties at the Overlook Hotel.

[Achilles Heel]

His mom worked with Tim the tax cheat’s dad from some Ford foundation group in Indonesia.. He sure has ties. Then Valerie Jarrett’s FIl is a Communist with ties to a friend of Zero’s granddad—I believe Frank Marshall. More ties.
Then he gets in with Bill Ayers and is a member of the Communist grp in Hawaii and Ill. How does Soros fit in?

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Soros has aided and abetted Communism throughout the world. Google it. He’s been busy.

[crazydad]

Alex I will take COMMUNIST RACIST FOR 1000 Dollars!

[BlessingsofLiberty]

“Do you remember the discussion on how fake this Harvard Law review picture looked?”
This is the first time I have seen these photos.
I am no expert...that is for sure...but...

I use to do some photography and I can say without much doubt that Barry certainly stands out in those pics.

He is actually larger than the surrounding students. Bad doctoring of a photo for sure.

[BlessingsofLiberty]

Also, the focus is different with the students vs Obama.

[Cheetahcat]

WE ELECTED NO HELL NO!

[B-Cause]

Speak for yourself. I knew a great deal about this mulatto, communist half-wit years ago! Everyone is just catching up!

---

Hey Doc Savage - See what Obama Reads

The name of the book Obama is reading is called "The Post-American World" written by Obama's fellow Muslim Fareed Zakaria.


Fareed Zakaria

---

One commentator has said this about the book:

"The author is one of the legion of foreigners who have come to the US for various reasons since WWII (George Soros comes to mind) and are working to move the US into globalism and their concept of a one world order. Having gained that intelligence, there was no reason to subject myself further to propaganda of this type."

---

FAREED ZAKARIA, APPEASER AND MUSLIM APOLOGIST from an earlier post by Lawrence Auster

If Fareed Zakaria could ever have been thought of as a conservative or a neoconservative (perhaps because he was once associated with the National Interest), those days are long past. His July 10th article for the leftist publication Newsweek, where he is the international editor, is must reading, a stunning example of how the mainstream media seeks to manipulate Americans into a supine posture toward Islam and Islamic terrorists.

To begin with, Zakaria excitedly claims that, unlike after the 9/11 attack, Muslims after the London attack are strongly condemning terrorism. Yet he gives virtually no quotes to back up this statement. He even says, without a single quote in support, that hard-line Muslim terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah have condemned the attack. Further, the quotes that he does provide employ the classic Muslim weasel language. For example, he says that Sheik Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi rejected "the argument that this attack could be justified as an attempt to force Britain out of Iraq. 'This is illogical and cannot be the motive for killing innocent civilians,' he said." But as anyone who didn't land on planet earth yesterday knows, "innocent" doesn't mean the same thing to Muslims that it means to the rest of us. When Muslims say that "innocent" people shouldn't be murdered, they're speaking of people who have not offended Islam, i.e. Muslims and dhimmis and people living in countries such as France which have "understandings" with Islam. Second, Tantawi does not even denounce the killings of innocents. He says that forcing the British out of Iraq cannot be a justifiable motive for killing innocent civilians. The plain implication is that there are justifiable motives for murdering innocent civilians. In presenting such weasel language as though it were legitimate, Zakaria, who is no fool, becomes an accomplice in the age-old Muslim tactic of lying to outsiders.

But then, after all his re-assuring folderol about how Muslims are forthrightly condemning terrorism and how great this is, Zakaria says, "There should be much, much greater condemnation from mainstream Islam." Excuse me, but if there has to be "much, much greater" condemnation than there now is, then obviously the amount of condemnation supposedly occurring now is not remotely sufficient, is it? So why does Fareed act as if it's such a great breakthrough? Clearly this is not a truth-seeking writer but a spinmeister for Islam.

But it gets worse. Zakaria tells us that President Bush has been missing the boat in the war on terror because he hasn't focused on what victory in the war would really mean. After a lot of hemming and hawing, Fareed tells us what he means by victory: (1) being able to prevent the worst terrorist attacks (i.e., preventing a 9/11, but not a 7/07); and (2) improving our response capabilities to terrorist attacks after they occur (a favorite campaign plank of John Kerry's, by the way). Thus Zakaria wants us not only to accept domestic suicide bombings as a regular, unavoidable fact of existence, but to see their regular occurence (in the absence of a 9/11 scale attack) as a sign that we have "won" the war on terror. Meanwhile, naturally, he suggests doing absolutely nothing about the vast Muslim populations within the West and the ongoing mass immigration of Muslims into the West. In fact, in an article for Newsweek following the rejection of the EU constitution by France and Netherlands, he urged an increase of Muslim immigration into Europe, plus the accession of the entire population of Turkey:

[W]hat Europe desperately needs is more of all the trends that are producing populist paranoia. It needs ... more young immigrants to sustain its social market and a more strategic relationship with the Muslim world, which would be dramatically enhanced by Turkish membership in the EU. Of course, Europe already has a disastrously close strategic relationship with the Muslim world, involving, on the European side, total European support for the Palestinian cause, unstinting European hostility to Israel, and the redefinition of European identity as equal parts European and Islamic, an arrangement Bat Ye'or has called "Eurabia," and Zakaria wants this "strategic relationship," which in fact represents the dhimmitude of the entire European continent, to get even stronger than it now is.

In sum, Fareed Zakaria, once a member of the neocon camp and now a star of the liberal mainstream media, is an apologist for Islam and for Muslim extremists (assuming there is any difference between the two), as well as an advocate for the demographic and cultural Islamization of Europe. These things should never be forgotten.

[The Comedian]

[The FIGHTIN Illini]

First time I’ve ever seen this photo. Interesting how all students around him are in the shadows (shade) while he is in full light.

Looks phoney to my unprofessional photo eye.

Another one of those things that make you go HMMMMMMMM.

We REALLY are screwed!

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

We have known him since well before the election. I knew he was a radical communist. I wasn’t POSITIVE he was a Muslim until he bowed to the Saudi King.

Obama is a radical communist muslim.

[Humal]

Soros; Emanuel; Axelrod; the guy who was the Weatherman (it's late and I can't think of his name); the Saudis; ???