Thread: 'Manchurian president' ushering in Islamic caliphate?

WND EXCLUSIVE

'Manchurian president' ushering in Islamic caliphate?

'A tidal wave of change already reaping disastrous results'

Published: 2 days ago


Since assuming office, President Obama has weakened America both domestically and abroad by emboldening U.S. enemies and tacitly supporting Muslim Brotherhood revolutions that have empowered Islamic radicals, charges a new book.

In “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office,”New York Times bestselling authors Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott demonstrate that Obama’s policies have been helping to install Muslim Brotherhood-friendly regimes to the detriment of U.S. national security and world stability.


“Obama’s policies are installing political Islam throughout the Middle East and North Africa in a tidal wave of change already reaping disastrous results for those regions as well as for U.S. interests there,” write Klein and Elliott.
The authors compare Obama’s actions to the policies of Jimmy Carter, which weakened the secular Shah’s regime in Iran, arguably ushering in a Shiite Islamic revolution that continues to this day to support and carry out acts of terrorism worldwide.
Aaron Klein’s “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office” is available now, autographed, at WND’s Superstore
Klein and Elliott spotlight the central role Obama played in the downfall of U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak, citing information that indicates elements of the anti-Mubarak uprising in 2011, particularly political aspects, were being coordinated with the U.S.
“Impeachable Offenses”presents new information the Obama administration worked behind the scenes with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to facilitate a transfer of power after Mubarak’s resignation.
Islamic caliphate?
Mubarak was only the beginning, write Klein and Elliott. Obama’s support for a U.S. ally’s ouster and replacement with radical Islamic elements would be repeated numerous times in the Middle East and North Africa, to the great detriment of the American war on terror, the authors write.
“Impeachable Offenses” spotlights Obama’s role in the downfall of Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, who fled Tunisia Jan. 14, 2011. Ben Ali largely was seen as an ally of the West, even working behind the scenes with Israel on occasion.
Another U.S. ally forced to step down after mass protests was Yemen’s president Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was considered a crucial ally in the U.S. fight against al-Qaida in his country and throughout the Middle East.
Klein and Elliott present evidence Obama was involved in Saleh’s ouster, which brought the Muslim Brotherhood-founded Islah party to rule.
The U.S. similarly has called for the king of Morocco, Mohammed VI, one of the most Western-oriented leaders in North Africa, to open his monarchy to a power-sharing agreement with a new parliament to be voted on by the people.
While the king still retains vast powers, he now shares in a coalition government with the Justice and Development Party, which won a plurality of the vote, the first under the country’s new constitution. The party advocates a society governed by Islam and has been described as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Book makes impeachment case
Klein and Elliott bill their book as a well-documented indictment of Obama based on major alleged violations.
Among the alleged offenses enumerated in the book:

• Obamacare not only is unconstitutional but illegally bypasses Congress, infringes on states’ rights and marking an unprecedented and unauthorized expansion of IRS power.
• Sidestepping Congress, Obama already has granted largely unreported de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens using illicit interagency directives and executive orders.
• The Obama administration recklessly endangered the public by releasing from prison criminal illegal aliens at a rate far beyond what is publicly known.
• The president’s personal role in the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attack, with new evidence regarding what was transpiring at the U.S. mission prior to the assault – arguably impeachable activities in and of themselves.
• Illicit edicts on gun control in addition to the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running operation intended, the book shows, to collect fraudulent gun data.
• From “fusion centers” to data mining to drones to alarming Department of Homeland Security power grabs, how U.S. citizens are fast arriving at the stage of living under a virtual surveillance regime.
• New evidence of rank corruption, cronyism and impeachable offenses related to Obama’s first-term “green” funding adventures.
• The illegality of leading a U.S.-NATO military campaign without congressional approval.
• Obama has weakened America both domestically and abroad by emboldening enemies, tacitly supporting a Muslim Brotherhood revolution, spurning allies and minimizing the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.

This is Klein and Elliott’s fourth book investigating the Obama administration. The other titles are “Fool Me Twice,” “Red Army” and “The Manchurian President.”

Does America have the leaders it deserves?

• No, our leaders are better than we deserve
• No, we deserve better than these clowns. Washington is a three-ring circus
• No, we definitely deserve better than the likes of Obama, Kerry, Hagel and McCain
• No, nobody deserves this kind of punishment
• No, we have America haters pretending to be patriots
• No, we deserve better, but elections are rigged and media are corrupt
• I don't know. It's a good question though
• Yes, America has lost its moral bearings and this is a judgment
• Yes, this is what happens when you lose the culture war
• Yes, we deserve it for electing them
• Yes, we should be able to have better leaders by picking names randomly out of the phonebook
• Yes, especially after re-electing Obama, it is clear that America is lost
• Yes, since we removed the omnipotent leader, God Himself, from our culture
• Other

View Results


http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/manchuria...mic-caliphate/

THE OTHER RUSH

Obama guilty of treason?

Exclusive: Erik Rush connects Benghazi cover-up to Syria situation

Published: 2 days ago

Providing aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime, whomever commits such an act, is a treasonable offense. When one gets past the nuances of what constitutes aid, wartime and who qualifies as the enemy, having established that such an act has been perpetrated, the individual or individuals so accused will find themselves in a whole lot of trouble. In most countries, including the United States of America, there remain provisions for the execution of those convicted of treason.
On Sept. 10, President Obama addressed the nation on the subject of executing a military strike against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The pretext for this is the administration’s contention that Assad employed the chemical gas sarin in an attack near Damascus on Aug. 21. The attack allegedly killed over 1,400 people.

The most ironic, audacious and disgusting aspect of Obama’s proposal is that it would directly benefit the terrorist organizations that attacked America on Sept. 11, 2001, and that he made this televised appeal on the eve of the 12th anniversary of those attacks. It is also the first anniversary of the attack on the American mission in Benghazi, Libya, which killed four Americans and which has Obama’s bloody fingerprints all over it.
Last week in this space, I analyzed Obama’s haste in this desire to go into Syria. Against the will and advice of our closest allies, the will of the American people and with the risk of unduly agitating Syria’s allies (most notably China and Russia), the president has displayed an almost obsessive eagerness in executing this attack.
As we know, due to an almost amusing turn of events, the Assad regime abruptly acceded to a Russian-brokered deal to place its chemical weapons under international control, presumably as a prelude to their destruction. We also know that despite the loss of face and credibility suffered by the U.S. and Obama himself attendant to this fiasco, the White House is already framing this development as a diplomatic coup for the president, a narrative that will no doubt be carried to some extent by the American press.
Many such as myself have argued that diminishing America’s influence and standing in the world was in fact part of his plan in “fundamentally transforming” America, so one would think that Obama simply has one more item to cross off his list. I do not believe, however, that he intended to manifest this by diminishing his own influence and standing. He may be able to manipulate the message told to the American people, but the world has come to see him as a rash, self-serving, diplomatically un-savvy opportunist. Even his relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood appears to have soured.
Most observers have settled on the likelihood that it is his desire to redirect attention from his many scandals, Obamacare and immigration reform legislation that impels the president toward carrying out this attack. There is also a distinct possibility that the Muslim Brotherhood (whom he has supported worldwide and who have fighters among the rebels in Syria) is putting pressure on him to deliver after his failure to resist the ouster of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.
Q: How does Obama know what kind of weapons the rebels in Syria have?
A: He has the receipts …
I propose another scenario: It has been well-established that the Obama administration clandestinely provided arms to the rebels in Syria. (I say “rebels in Syria” rather than “Syrian rebels” because many of them are jihadis from other nations.) It is a pretty safe bet that this operation was at least part of the reason for the 9/11/12 attack on the American facility in Benghazi. I have contended for some time that President Obama himself either orchestrated the attack or was party to it. His motivation, I have asserted, would have been in perceiving a need to erase the evidence of the Benghazi operation – and perhaps even some of the personnel involved.
A subsequent revelation that Morsi provided military assets for the attack on the Benghazi compound does tend to lend credence to the notion that Obama was involved. After all, Obama was Morsi’s benefactor; indeed, there would have been no Arab Spring and no Muslim Brotherhood ascendancy in Egypt had it not been for Obama’s destabilization of the region.
Since it has been established that the Obama administration provided weapons to the rebels in Syria, and nearly a certainty these factions came to possess chemical weapons, is it then possible that Obama’s desire to strike Syria with all due speed stems from a need to erase the evidence of having provided them, and perhaps even other treasonous actions? It would certainly make the truth getting out with regard to Benghazi much more of a threat to Obama if evidence speaking to this being factual exists.
If this is factual, Barack Obama might ultimately be looking at occupying a noted place in history quite different from the one he currently occupies.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/obama-guilty-of-treason/

Providing aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime.

Plain as the nose on your face!!!!!

9-11, 2013: Treason and Betrayal in the White House Written on Wednesday, September 11, 2013 by Tad Cronn

Twelve years ago today, Muslim terrorists linked to al-Qaeda hijacked four jetliners and flew them into the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That the fourth did not hit its target is a lasting testimony to the courage of a few Americans on board Flight 93.

Still, the attacks killed thousands of people who had done nothing to deserve being burned alive, hurled to their deaths or crushed into dust.

It was one of the most horrific mass murders in history, and the Bush Administration rightly dedicated itself to hunting down and killing as many members of al-Qaeda as it could lay its hands on.

Whatever else you think of the Iraq war or President Bush, the War on Terror was about seeking justice.

The definition of treason, according to the Legal Dictionary, is “the betrayal of one’s own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies.” Al-Qaeda is our enemy.

It has always considered itself such, and on 9-11, we finally realized it too.

Why then is President Obama siding with the al-Qaeda-led “rebels” in Syria?

Why did Obama in June approve open military aid to the rebels that included rifles, ammunition, grenades and rockets?

Why was the Obama Administration just a year ago smuggling arms and personnel into Syria through Turkey, by way of Benghazi, Libya? Why would an American Administration have anything to do with an organization whose members have been reported to commit atrocities such as killing Christians, engaging in cannibalism, even dismembering a little girl with a saw while she was still alive?

Obama has forgotten, or possibly never cared, about the victims of 9-11. In May of this year he declared the War on Terror was over and al-Qaeda was “on a path” to defeat.

Yet, here we are, providing aid and comfort to our sworn enemies and standing on the verge of doing their dirty work by getting rid of Syria’s current government.

It’s a betrayal of the memories of those murdered on 9-11, and it meets the definition of treason by aiding our enemies. Yet Obama remains in office. His flunkies, too, remain in office.

The War on Terror was about seeking justice. Where’s the justice now?


Read more at http://patriotupdate.com/articles/9-11-2013-treason-betrayal-white-house/#Ztz0Dg4ZkCRldKjZ.99


Sorry I like the article but I don;t believe Bush was on our side either, justice really that is why we invaded Iraq????