OBAMA SOLVES -- NOTHING!

The Obama Administration has taken sufficient shape to say authoritatively that its going to boil down to more of the same. He has appointed some individuals possessed of mighty high opinions of themselves. Hence, the most interesting thing about the Obama presidency may be the personality clashes as the "same old-same old" gives birth to a gridlock of unsolvable problems. [It's not that findamental problems can't be solved, or at least lessened; the effort is doomed here by the certain application of variations of fixed ideas which are founded on occult speculation and which have never worked well--and never will.] These people are going to toward their beloved New World Order, but will become bogged down within a year and a half, Look then for the feuding and fussing to rear like a Hydra.

What the nation really needs is a Beowulf to take out a sword and inflict some mighty wounds on the complete monster of "New-World-Orderers" Then, maybe the problems of the nation can be addressed.

If Mr. Obama is to be believed, his thrust in the area of Levantine diplomacy will be to expand the war in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is absolutely the worst place on earth, other than the north and South Poles, for any outside military expedition to take place. With the possible exception of Genghis Khan and his horde, no outsider has ever been able to conquer and subdue these people and the terrain they call home. This will require the redeployment of U.S. military from Iraq to Afghanistan. That will allow a not-so-clandestine takeover by Shiite partisans, their struggle to produce the necessary strongman, and a bogus "republic" (usually incorrectly described as a "democracy") whose "president" is for life. The U.S. will end up borrowing money from the Chinese to support their Iraqi "democratic leader."

Since the "military - industrial complex" has been partners with the leaders of the Democrat - Republican Socialist International in perfecting the martial art of bankrupting its host country, the only country we are likely to have defeated after the conclusion of the Iraqi-Afghanistani conflicts is --- The United States of America. Personally, I hate to see Uncle Sam standing at a street corner holding a sign saying, "Will work for food," but, then again, folks say I'm just a clown.

As far as the economy is concerned, there is no solving of the periodic major economic dislocations, so long as the Jewish System is maintained. the nation's "wise men" could learn a little about good government if they considered Abraham Lincoln's "greenback" initiative. [see downnlaced's blog on subject at WordPress.com] As a matter of speculation, Lincoln's program is a major potential reason for his assassination. The "Moderns" however wish to pursue the Jewish System, aka, the Babylonian Woe. In this system usury is king - not cash. In this system there is never enough cash to cover the outstanding debt. Even a Harvard University PhD. out to be able to figure out the potential for disaster.

Human greed is a noteworthy source of trouble. When those suffering from this personalty defect are also leaders in the banking/financial community, then the condition is ripe for recessions and depressions. The Federal Reserve Act, which is U.S. legislation that will live in infamy, was enacted, it set up a system whereby U.S. currency enters the political economy through private banks (creating a money trust), rather than paid into the economy by enactment of needful laws funded through the Department of the Treasury and utilizing, or based upon, legal tender.

The beneficiaries of the Jewish System have hired an army of economist and lawyers to opine that the Jewish System is not flawless, but it is the best system that mankind has ever devised. All concepts inimical to the Jewish System of debt-mongering is dismissed as "simplistic." The major media invite the hireling economists and lawyer/politicians to "face the nation and explain the matter." See above for their opinion.

These people are likely to pull Uncle Sam out of the pit one last time before they introduce a recovery which will end the U.S government, as was understood by the old constitution. This doesn't represent an Obama triumph of change. It represents the utter Third-Worldization of America. The population of the U.S. may be 600 million by Obama's last year, if he gets two terms. Those bodies may be needed to shoulder the debt load, as well as to reliquify the U.S. monetary system through the issuance of credit to them to spend the needed money into the economy, which can then be greatly expanded by the "miracle" of fractional banking. Here comes the next "boom."

IRAN MON AMOUR?

Today, I was "clowning around" while listening to the "traffic" radio station for a little forecast of what lay ahead, when I cranked up my act and rolled out of my #1 tent. Now, it so happens that they provide "breaking news and analysis" as well. My timing was such that I "got in" at the beginning of an international intelligence analysis of the Iranians firing off a missile in a test.

This station's lead reporter ( named "J.J.") was giving a typically slanted report, utilizing insider information gleaned undoubtedly from three sources: the Israelis, the Arbusto (Spanish for "bush") Likudites, and that modern new and most dangerous hybrid, the "military-industrial-think tank-academic complex." The latter are comprised of "straw men" searching for a brain, and the Israelis are playing the "Wizard of Oz" to give them needed reassurances.

There is an immense "beating of the war-drums" in regard to Iran, orchestrated by the Israelis-World Jewry interests. Iran is relentlessly pictured as an "aggressor nation," as a "terrorist threat," as the "premier destabilizing element in Iraq," as a "threat to our troops," and, most important of all, a "threat to the very existence of Israel." Get real!

Israel is about the fourth most powerful nation in the world, considered strictly by itself. When you throw in its colony of U.S. Federal America, which controls the U.S.A., then you have the far and away most powerful force on earth. Add in the controlled or heavily- influenced Great Britain and its Commonwealth, the power gets even greater. The ruling circles of France are completely intertwined with Jewry, and France is competitive with the U.S. in "electing" Jewish leaders, partially Jewish leaders, and men whose hands have long been under the dominant Jewish "loincloth."

Germany is still an occupied country. Reparations to the Israeli state and Jews individually (paid in German money) have allowed "successful" reinvestment in the most pivotable business groups: media, entertainment, finance/real estate among others. This does bring influence, which can be brought to bear on German politicians, so much so, that only a few years back, The Washington Post broke away from "drum-beating" for unlawful entry by the "world community" into America (typically on "humane" grounds) to joyfully salute the 100,000 ,or so, Jews who have moved back into Germany, opening synagogues and making themselves "comfy."

The Russian Republic under Vladimir Putin did try to improve its relationship with Muslim nations in the Levant, which has been loudly bruited about (so there can hardly be a secret) that Russia might be a threat to the Israeli state, too. If not directly, then certainly indirectly. What is not stated is that about 25% of the population of the Israeli state is comprised of Jews from Russia, who are still Russian-speaking, culturally-influenced, have relatives living in Russia, and who are the primary forces behind the Marxist aspects of the Israeli state, including its atheism. The whole Zionist movement was composed of people who were as comfortable with Marxism as with Judaism. The former arose from concepts in the latter. In short, Vladimir Putin and the Israelis have had comfortable dialog from almost the "getgo," and these two nations eagerly seek trade relationships between one another. The Israelis have long had a very close working relationship with the Peoples Republic of China, regularly selling to the Chinese classified U.S. industrial and hightech information and hardware. Recently, the Israelis have developed a close relationship with the Indians. Both the rapid industrial-hightech development in India and China and the rise of the price of oil per barrel are unthinkable without American, European and Israeli Jews working to make it happen.

Given this sort of diplomatic power, why would anyone think that the relatively small and surrounded nation of Iran would, apparently for religio-ideological reasons--and welcoming its suicidal consequence, launch a nuclear genocide against the Israeli state? If you listen to Washington, D.C., news reports (or read them), you would suppose that it is a high probability event. Because this sort of assertion is "nuts," the Washington "newshounds, pundits, and eggheads" must assert that it is precisely because the Iranian leaders are "insane," that this threat is credible. Folks, they are the crazy ones. And possibly downright evil in the bargain. I'm not "clowning!"

The Israeli state possesses something in excess of 200 hundred nuclear devices. They may have twice that many. They have them in all sizes, as the Jews are very good at "tweaking" weapons, once they get their paws on them. This nation undoubtedly has an array of defensive missiles also. In so much as the U.S. produces such missiles, it is an "odds on bet" that the Israelis have gotten them, although it may have been given to them sub rosa. They may have obtained them from other countries as well. By now, they are in a strong position. Still, they do want to extend their property lines into Eretz Israel--the massive chunk of the Levant that allegedly was controlled by King David. Usefully, this turf contains quite a lot of oil. It is also a key strategic location between East and West.

Both the U.S. and the Israeli state have repeatedly bombed and invaded other countries. The U.S. has the world's most dubious record of having dropped atom bombs on two Japanese cities--Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The U.S. sees its "interests" all over the world, sees "madmen" everywhere, and attacks them everywhere. This allows its "control" to be a bit more discreet, attacking mostly neighbors, including Africans, which have had numerous destabling "events" over the last forty years. Of course, the Israelis aren't the only ones playing the African game of "Who's the strong man?" Both the U.S. and Israelis have a long record of fomenting a problem and then denouncing the surprised adversary. Clean hands? Get real!

When I was much younger, the U.S. began to "seep" vital military information to the U.S.S.R. The Soviets began to explode nuclear weapons. Alien intellectuals such as Henry Kissinger and ZBigBrother began to preach that the only safe course to take under these dangerous circumstances was "Mutually Assured Destruction." The U.S. and the Soviet Union should seek "parity" in nuclear weapons, so as to make an attack by either "suicidal." Peaceful coexistence could then follow. Hopefully, in time, the two nations would find their economic systems merging. Friendship would follow. This was the theoretical model bandied about.

Rather than seeing the U.S. and the Israelis bombing and invading other countries of the Levant on an never-ending basis (or until sufficient "puppets" can be installed and provided with secret police to enforce "democracy"), I'd like to see a certain "coolness" exhibited. Let Iran become the "designated opposition" (correlative of the U.S.S.R.), whose nuclear weapons force it and the Israelis into "peaceful coexistence."

There is one thing that I've learned in life: bullies like to bully folks much smaller and weaker than they. Equality of size usually causes bullies to "chill out." However, there is the possibility that the real problem is that the "forces of democracy" just can't tolerate diversity.

STEP RIGHT UP, FOLKS! GENUINE H2O ON SELL!

It seems to me that as long as I can remember I've been drinking water for free. My Mom was pretty tight with the coins, and it would take a pretty good struggle to wring a coin from her paw. Now, don't get me wrong! My Mom wasn't a beast or anything. It's just that what she put away in the "cookie jar," she defended fiercely. You had to have a good reason to get any of it. Real good!.

Yet, my Mom never charged us kids any money for food, or for a place to sleep for the night, nor for water, whether utilized for bath or to drink. Mom understood that there were things that you just didn't have a right to charge for.

There was a time that this was a common belief. I speak here of the 1950s. Virtually everyone thought that water provision was a governmental function, and city waterworks were the norm. The idea that someone might try to create a scarcity of water so as to make a big profit entered no one's head.

Apparently, that's not the case anymore. How do I know? Well, sir, several years ago I read an article in the Wall Street Journal which described how "mergers and acquisitions" mogul, T. Boone Pickens of Texas, was investing in water rights in the great central aquafer that rests beneath the Plains States. I believe it has a fancy name, whether of palaeontology, geography, or marine science, I cannot recall. At any rate Mr. Pickens expected that water would be a commodity whose price was certain to rise. He planned on making a bundle of loot, as water scarcity and human demand compelled an upward trajectory for a "gallon of water."

Parenthetically, I'm not certain whether Mr. Pickens plans to sell water by the gallon, or, as with oil (of which he knows a lot), he plans to sell by the barrel.

I did receive in the mail an unsolicited stock "tout sheet" from a Mr. Jarret Wollstein, who seems to believe that "the biggest commodity boom in history is building steam as I write...That commodity is clean fresh water, and I can assure you, the smart money is getting in now..."

Now, Mr. Wollstein is a convincing, enthusiastic salesman. He cites logically that there are no new sources of fresh water. The world population is increasing, and as many of them as possible will try to come here. That means greater pressure on a limited resource. He also points out ecological considerations and water pollution with toxic chemicals. Science, he seems to feel, cannot rescue the situation in the limited time before the onset of the "Great Water Famine." He offers other reasons but lets stop here.

Who is "the smart money?" Well, of course, I've mentioned Mr. Pickens. One assumes he has some sharp associates in the project as well. Who else? According to Mr. Wollstein's tout sheet, the Queen of England warned in March about the "competition for fresh water by a growing population is itself becoming a source of potential conflict." Further, former Federal Reserve chairman, Allen Greenspan, according to this tout sheet, believes that a bad economic turndown is certain, but that the potential for water price increase makes it the new road to riches. Well, I paraphrase the sense of the quoted chairman.

If Greenspan were interested, its a good bet that the Rockefeller condominum of rich and savvy investors have already taken substantial stakes in water. As with the "art" purchased by the Rockefellers at a cheap price and later unloaded at stupendous profits and/or tax write-offs, so it may be with water. This would also explain the enthusiastic support of Latin peon migration into America by the Rockefeller crowd. This migration would generate a quantum leap in American water usage, starting the pressure upward for the water commodity. But Latins are not the only people pouring into America.

Now, if the Queen of England can perceive water shortages causing conflicts, do not suppose for a moment that the ruling circles in America don't understand that as well. So, why do they do all that they can to ease the travail of invading hordes of people? Why have they NEVER made any semi-serious effort to control our borders and regulate rationally (or at least according to the legislation of record) migration? Why have they always used rhetoric to stall any effective action? They wanted to create a fait accompli.

Since water shortages in America can only be hastened by unrestricted invasion whereby scores of millions of people clandestinely take their refuge in America, awaiting Jorge W. Arbusto's amnesty and "instant citizenship" proclamation. In gratitude they can only respond: "Hail, Caesar!"

Things at the highest levels of government operate with knowledge, purpose and vision. What is the vision of those who "pull the strings" of the Democrat-Republican Socialist Party? It is one of global order, created out of chaos. They are the ones who create the chaos. When the old structures lie in ruin, they will gather together like Nehemiah, Ezra, and the remnant of Israel to rebuild the world ("tikkun olam") They imagine this, as they have a zany understanding of the pertinent relationships.

It is difficult to know how to halt their madness. I recall seeing a roughly formed phalanx of "Weathermen" (or a similar Marxist group) walking down 15th street in Washington, D.C., about 1970 or '71, heading for The Mall area. Their phalanx was perhaps five across and twenty-five deep (as I now recall). Maybe more. I supposed them to be mostly Jewish. They got my attention, and I watched as they "marched," thrusting their fists into the air and chanting: "One more war! Revolution! One more war! Revolution!" I watched them turn the corner, marching toward Fourteenth Street, NW.

When I think back upon those Jewish lads, I believe that they offered an answer to America's looming problems. When leaders are deranged, corrupt, martial, dictatorial, and insatiably greedy, maybe it is time for a "Tea Party." If anyone can afford the water, that is!

AUTHORITIES SUSPECT SUICIDE

Now, dodging bullets ain't no fun, but it beats getting hit. I believe that I'm on the same page with most people on this issue. It is with great reluctance (hey! I'm a clown!) that I bring up the subject of "politics and foul play" again. Still, with Hillary Clinton running for the Democrat nomination for President of the United States, and with her husband--so to speak--lurking in the shadows, one must expect bodies, some how or other, to start surfacing, "bobbing on the sea of political change." This couple has a track record which includes in its wake enough bodies to make a respectable professional football team. Well, I exaggerate a tad.

The recent news which has come to my attention of "nightriders" stiking the celebrated church of Barack Obama has caused much misgivings as to its source. I personally rule out the Ku Klux Klan. Yet, within the African-American community--even today--resides a residual fear of the Klan. Hence, for many African-Americans upon hearing that "death" stalked the congregation of Trinity United Church of Christ, an instant image of white-sheeted Klansmen, dragging an innocent member of the congregation to his doom entered their collective consciousness.

Part of a tragedy can be its generation of involuntary misgivings and suspicions. This is especially so when the tragedy involves a murder. Hence, three murders over a brief period of time has people looking over their collective shoulders. Any odd fellow immediately draws suspicious glances, as people are always certain that "evil" doesn't look like them.

Some readers may be scratching their heads and asking: What is he talking about? Let me give the basic data by means of a citation from a usually reliable source. Consider:

"The bombshell may involve the murder of Donald Young, a 47-year-old choir master at former Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ--the same congregation that Obama has attended for the past 20 years. Two other young black men that attended the same church--Larry Bland and Nate Spencer--were also murdered execution style with bullets to the backs of their heads--all within 40 days of each other, beginning in November 2007. All three were openly homosexual.

"What links this story to Barack Obama is that, according to an acquaintance of Obama, Larry Sinclair, Obama is a closet bisexual with whom he had sexual and drug-related encounters in November 1990. Further, Sinclair claims that Obama was friendly with at least two of these deceased parishioners, and that choir director Donald had contacted him shortly before being murdered from multiple gunshot wounds on December 23, 2007....

"An even more sinister aspect of this case is being investigated. According to Sinclair in an affidavit to the Chicago Police Department, Donald Young had informed him that he and Barack Obama were 'intimate' with each other....

"Another questionable Obama associate is openly homosexual. That person is Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig, who was listed during the 2008 campaign as being part of Obama's 'technology initiative.' " [AMERICAN FREE PRESS, June 2, 2008, p.13, Article by Victor Thorn, a well-known author]

The allegations against Barack Obama seem to depend heavily at this time on one man, Mr. Sinclair. The whole story calls to mind the fine political novel by Allen Drury entitled, ADVISE AND CONSENT, wherein a similar problem lurked. Is life imitating Art?

Regardless of the issue of sex--and Washington politicians are beyond blushing at any sexual act done by them or anyone else, the inconvenient fact of at least two homosexual members of Obama's congregation getting bullets to the back of the head must lead to undesirable questions, from the point of view of the Democrat's leading candidate for office.

For the American public--what with "surf's up!" and all--there may be minimal heed paid to the matter. It would tend to be "rolled up" in the issue: "Isn't that the strangest church? I'm so glad that Obama decided to leave it." No one will wonder if he took a smoking gun with him.

Did Obama's rather steely wife get rid of her husband's potential problems? Were these C.I.A. "hits" ordered by a) Billy Jeff Clinton or b) Daddy Bush? If Bush, the reason is obvious: help Sen. John McCain get elected, so he can continue "W's" war--maybe even let him carry the burden of "dropping the bomb" on Iran, so that history books can later make "W" into a lonely, courageous President standing tall against an implacable, evil foe, at a time when others were calling for "cut and run" policies. "W" --basically a man of peace--refused to use the bomb.

John McCain may be a "patsy." If he's wise, he won't select Jeb Bush to be his vice presidential running mate. "Patsies" die promptly, as if on cue.

EXPENDABLE POLITICIAN?

There have been a number of "trial ballons" released by Democrat "movers & shakers" in regard to a Democrat "Dream Ticket." According to these political thinkers, a Presidential/Vice-Presidential ticket comprised of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., would be unbeatable. All the weaknesses of Hillary in the perceptions of voters are more than covered by Barack Obama.

These political thinkers believe that, if Obama were to head the ticket, rather than Hillary, then Obama's weaknesses in terms of experience would be successfully exploited by the McCain team. Whoever joins McCain is likely to be a "meat ax" pro. (He may choose a Black to off-set charges of racism.) Therefore, a ticket headed by Obama (with Hillary in the Vice Presidential slot) would be more vulnerable. Even the "Junior" at the end of Obama's name suggests that maybe Obama has not really "grown" enough to be President of the United States.

More ominously, according to political realists, is the fact that a Presidential ticket headed by Obama invites assassination. Given the heavy support among the Black population of America for Barack Obama, such an assassination would result in social strife.

According to this line of thought, Hillary Clinton might be willing to play "second fiddle" for a while for the sake of William Clinton's candidacy, but would she be willing to wait out Barack Obama?

The long string of suspicious deaths in the wake of the Clintons' political rise cannot be a source of comfort to Obama supporters. The fact that Gerald Ford was shot at, while Nelson Rockefeller was Vice President, and the fact that Ronald Reagan was shot at, while George H.W. Bush was Vice President, point to the inherent danger to the President and to the care that must be taken in choosing a Vice Presidential running-mate.

FISH? OR ABOMINATIONS?

I had reason to glance at the Metropolitan section of The Washington Times today (03/06/08), as I planned a short break from toil. I headed for a small "library" nearby, where I hoped to get myself grounded in local doings. Immediately, I was struck by a color picture of various fish (sole on ice?), lined enticingly at a counter display at some seafood vendors or other.

The article which accompanied the photograph (by Joseph Silverman) was entitled: "SEAFOOD: HOW SAFE?" It was the project of one Karen Goldberg Goff, and was a consumer-oriented piece. The specific area of concern was mercury contamination of seafood. It began: "Information in the seafood world has become as muddy as the water during a thunderstorm..."

I thought that this was an inauspicious beginning, as it seemed to suggest that the writer was not going to be too plain herself, regarding the warning which presumably was to follow. However, I'm all in favor of public information being presented on issues affecting health. The article proceeded forward, touching on consumers, science, law and public policy. Hence, one does not feel "cheated," having spent a bit of time glancing through it.

The article does not offend me so much as a sort of statistical chart that adjoined it. This chart is fairly large (almost as large as the photograph, previously cited, under which it rested). The title of this chart was: "FISH FACTS." This seemed to me to be perfectly straight-forward and germane. In fact it even seemed to be a tad more specific than Ms. Goff's "seafood world."

Bitter was my disappointment! Under the title for the chart were three subtitles: "HIGH MERCURY," "MODERATE MERCURY," and "LOW MERCURY." Beneath the "MODERATE MERCURY" subtitle, one spies the caveat: "These fish contain moderate amounts of mercury:". Thereafter, one observes among the list of "fish" such specimens as: "Lobster" (crustacean) and "Mahi-mahi" (dolphin: mammal). Under the subtitle of "LOW MERCURY" one finds the caveat: "These types of fish contain the lowest amounts of mercury:". Beneath it are listed such "fish" specimen, as: "Clams," "Crawfish," Oyster," "Shrimp," and "Squid."

Really? Although few people today pay heed to ANYTHING Biblical, and, therefore, the fact that most of these singled out items are, in fact, dubbed "abominations" by Holy Scripture eludes the typical newspaper reader. Nevertheless, has zoology changed that much since I was a young student? Do modern teachers (or textbook writers) view inequality with such abhorence that they cannot teach any form of observable categorical distinction? Will some form of marine life be "offended" if excluded from the category of "fish?" Indeed! (Some modern "dictionaries" even list as secondary definitions of "fish" nearly anything one could "bring in" in a net (plastic bottles included).

Although, no doubt, the pedagogery has evolved from distinctions among observable life-forms to "almost sameness" in life-forms, this is not based on Charles Darwin's observations and theory of a natural selection at work, but rather a fine madness, which replaces materialism with abstractionism. This abstractionism is proclaimed "more essential" by these "con men" than the old observable criteria for establishing categories. One example of this that comes to mind, being the proclamation, ipse dixit, that we are all emanations from the "sea of being." In such a "sea" there cannot be any distinction between fish and crustacean, nor, indeed, fish and fowl. And so it goes with modern "schooling."

Folks, we've encountered this before. Hans Christian Anderson's tale of the "King Who Wore No Clothes" touches upon the ongoing duping of the world by these "tailors."

Well, if they win, and we are all eventually proclaimed to be fish, my only advice is: Stay low and keep your fins moving.

DODGING BULLETS: WHO'S IN DANGER?

The election year 2008 is one that may be looked at from many points of view. There are many ways to build statistical curiosities in regard to the electoral process and in regard to individual candidates for President. I thought that it might be interesting, given the track record in the United States, to consider the candidates most likely to be shot at and possibly killed.

The odds on favorite, if he had any chance at all of getting the nomination, would be Mr. Ron Paul.

Huge amounts of money have been spent to "shape" America, so that it will fit comfortably into the Pan American Super State, or Region. Judges and Legislators have been bought. Preachers and pedagogs have been enlisted. Big Business has its eyes "whirling and leaping" at the thought of "economy of scale" achieved by the Pan American Union (proposed currency: the "Pani").

With the Rockefeller condominium fully behind the "PAU" there seemed to be no reason to suppose that this union would not occur reasonably soon. Sure, there may be a few "rogue" leaders--such as Chavez--to "rub out" first. But the Bilderberger-Panglossian dream seemed at hand.

Then came Ron. Ron Paul. He comes talking about the Constitution, talking about eliminating the IRS, talking about defending OUR borders , rather than other countries' borders half a globe away from us, and talking about limited government. He warns of debt and the flaws in our money-creation system. This guy is clearly a danger to megalomania in our time! All debtmongerers are implacable foes. What does Ron Paul know about The New World Order? What does he know about The Global Syndicate? What does he know about Tikkun Olam? NOTHING!

He doesn't understand the "big picture" (the masses of people are incapable of ruling themselves and, hence, must be ruled with an iron hand). It is the burden of the rich and brainy murderers to save the world from itself. The tribute the people will pay for this service is a modest infinity of servitude.

Therefore, all talk about limited government is treason. The wage of treason is death. Therefore the rich and brainy murderers have a perfect right to kill Ron Paul. It's the only responsible thing to do. He has already earned it.

It is predicted, here, that if Ron Paul were able to mount a campaign as successful and threatening as Gov. George Wallace's campaign was, he would be gunned down.

Now, another potential presidential contender who might be gunned down is Barack Obama. The problem with him is that he may actually have some ideals hidden within that no one noticed. If he seemed to be a threat to the State of Israel, due to an even-handed approach to all countries (forgeting that some countries are more equal than others), then the wheels of change (assassination) may be set in motion. What if he tried to cut funds to the wealthy Israeli State, so as to have more money available to assist the pitifully poor nations in Africa? Such actions would immediately gain him the title of "rogue head of state," and he might well be assassinated by the Secret Service itself.

Parenthetically, rumor has it that the Rockefeller family security apparatus is staffed by the cream of the Secret Service. Once a Secret Service agent has proven that he is skillful in protecting the President, then he is ready to move up to the "big time" position of protectiing the Rockefellers.

Now, certainly no one expects Obama to be much more than an "absentee President," enjoying trips and fun. The inside view is that Obama will be somewhat like former mayor of Washington, D.C., Mr. Anthony Williams. Therefore, it is expected that he'll probably attend a lot of Nats games and catch some Wizard b-ball, visit brother masons in lodges around the world, while leaving the boring day-to-day White House work to his Vice President and White House staff.

These latter will most likely be selected by a Rockefeller "think tank" for their solid credentials, experience, global respect, etc. They will be good, patriotic men who can be trusted to fulfill the Bilderberger vision of a world community, controlled by people who had "the right stuff" (vast sums of money, tolerance toward the Enlightened, and an understanding that the world had limited resources, which could not be wasted on "idiotic useless eaters").

Naturally, then, if Obama proved to be Lincolnesque, his fate would likely be the same.

Now, there is one other caveat for Obama's candidacy. The long list of untimely dead that bob in the aether of the Clinton duo's political wake. For the Clintons "problems" often "go away" forever.