The federal government claimed Cliven Bundy’s cattle was a threat to the desert tortoise, after the federal government destroyed about 700 desert tortoises on their own, while re-locating others.
Many left-wingers claimed, as did the left-leaning media, that Bundy refused to pay the grazing fees owed…but we know that isn’t true either.
Maybe the federal and state government wanted the land to develop a waterway system after local and state Nevada government failed to adequately provide a waterway system in the area where the Bundy Ranch was located.
Maybe the government wanted the land for future oil and gas leases…fracking.
Click here for more outside links.
Maybe the fifteen year government silence over the “alleged” failed fee payment by Cliven Bundy was stirred by Harry Reid himself
While it strongly appears to the outside world this was government testing the will of Americans, I do think government got a wake-up call that Americans will no longer be pushed around. I don’t believe Harry Reid & friends expected to see the resistance they faced as they tried their land-grabbing tyrannical intent, and it may have shocked the powers-that-be and would explain their sudden withdrawal.
Moving forward, I do believe we may see more Executive Orders, and very different tactics used by government to impose their will.
Date: Saturday, 12 April 2014
Time: 1840 ET
To: Steve Quayle
From Doug Hagmann
At 1750 hours ET, I was contacted by my source within the Department of Homeland Security regarding the current situation at the Bundy Ranch. To put it bluntly, the people are being hoodwinked into believing that the situation is being resolved. It is not. It is a strategic de-escalation to fool the public. This sourcestated that the retreat of the BLM agents and the release of the cattle was actually crafted as a potential plan yesterday (Friday, 11 April 2014) based on the following:
1. A military assessment of satellite and drone surveillance imagery of the “patriot resistance. Drones under the control of the U.S. military were in use, taking real-time photographic images of not just the activity at the ranch, but “identifying the protesters, any arms and any supplies they might have or be carrying. “Mission accomplished.”
2. Real-time communication intercepts between patriots on-site and their off-site support;
3. Active monitoring of internet traffic regarding the coverage of events at ranch;
4. The monitoring of real-time video from the scene.
This source stated that a response by the patriot movement was anticipated, although exceeded their expectations. Although this was a real operation, they also ran this as a test case for future government operations once they saw the response. They were also actively managing the media, in some cases threatening to cut off White House access to anyone covering the event.
Despite this, the coverage by the alternative media began to create a public relations problem that was not easily managed. Note the lack of acknowledgment by the White House regarding this event. They are intentionally framing it as a state issue, despite the fact that all federal response has been and continues to be from the White House. There is a reason for this – a reason that has not been identified in any of the public reports to date. I will explain in further detail in a follow-up report on Sunday, after this source attends [redacted] to obtain more specific information about future federal operations. Regardless, according to this source, the government will take back ‘their land’ as they must to fulfill international obligations. It was never about grazing rights or anything other than (1) “securing clear title” to the land, and (2) further demonizing any patriotic resistance. It is my understanding, based on the information from this source, that it is a critical task to create a situation that will also advance their agenda of gun control and confiscation.
A more detailed report will follow on Sunday, 13 April 2014, with additional and much more specific information about their inside plans and future operations.
PLEASE MAKE THIS VIRAL!
Mention Barack Hussein Obama and his family being Muslim, and his constituents attack with the ferocity of a lion’s kill. It has become taboo in America to even think it. President Obama certainly has tried to cover up his Islamic faith; he perpetually sends the Muslim Brotherhood billions of US dollars yearly, while providing US military weapons to carry out their causes. Nothing hides in plain sight, it is there for all to see, you only have to look.
I will cover only three of the closest Kenyan relatives to president Obama:
- Sarah, Barack’s beloved and benevolent grandmother.
- Sayid Obama, his closest favorite uncle.
- Musa Ismail Obama, his first cousin and Sayid’s main sidekick.
After President Obama was inaugurated, the Muslim side of the Obama family in Kenya boomed, and it went from rags to riches overnight. They became one of the most influential families in western Kenya and even extended their sphere of influence to Saudi Arabia. When Sarah, president Obama’s grandmother, decided to go to the Hajj, an obligatory pilgrimage to Mecca with Musa, president Obama’s first cousin, they were welcomed with open arms and were provided a special escort with full security detail and first-class treatment at the Saudi royal court:
“His Royal Highness Prince Mamdouh bin Abdul Aziz accompanied the family of U.S. President Barack Obama in his palace in Jeddah after the performance of the Hajj this year. The event was attended by His Royal Highness Prince Faisal bin Thamer bin Abdul Aziz, and His Royal Highness Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Mamdouh Bin Abdul Aziz, and his HRH Prince Abdullah bin Nayef bin Abdul Aziz, and a number of other princes and officials.”
The reason for such treatment, as explained in an exclusive interview with Musa Ismail Obama on Al-Jazeera, is that a close relationship was built between the Saudi royals, and like president Obama’s call for education in the United States, the Kenyan Obamas embarked on a similar project.
Thus, president Obama’s grandmother, Sarah Obama, started the Sarah Obama Benevolent Fund Institute, otherwise known as the Mama Sarah Obama Children Foundation, which raises 90% of its monies primarily from donors in the United States and some from Europe, solicited as humanitarian aid — as the promotional website advertised: “to make a lasting impact on the lives of the orphans and underprivileged children by improving their housing, their education, their upbringing,” which “continued to weigh heavily on Mama Sarah.” All this and “to help the neglected HIV/AIDS infected and affected in Kogelo village by linking them to care-givers and professional health services providers.”
Musa Ismail Obama, the president’s cousin, in an exclusive interview with Al-Jazeera TV, explained all the troublesome detail, which does not bode well when translated into English: the bulk of the Sarah Fund as it turns out sends little to widows and orphans while the rest goes towards giving free scholarships to studying Sharia at the most influential Wahhabist centers in Saudi Arabia. [Note: When I first ventured down this road of connecting Barack Obama and his family to Wahhabi, I had videos of the interview, however, those videos have since been taken down. I apologize for not providing that.]
Musa, Sayid’s sidekick and the public promoter of Mama Sarah’s non-profit, became the family’s key advertiser to the social efforts in Kenya. He selects specific Arab media asking wealthy audiences for help, but mandates as a prerequisite that no questions are asked regarding any details of such communications with president Obama or the delving into any political views. Yet, he tells just enough to connect the dots to the wealthy Arab audience of Al-Jazeera. He relays the message to raise all necessary funds since his mission is to transform Kenya to an Islamic majority by using the Obama household name and his grandmother’s non-profit organization.
The fund has little to do with secular education or the care for widows and orphans and never even once mentions anything in any Arabic media in regards to helping the HIV infected. The bulk of Sarah’s Benevolence Fund, as Musa explained, goes to sending scholarships destined to Saudi Arabia’s most virulent Wahhabi Sharia centers: the Islamic University in Medina, Umm Al-Qura University in Makkah and the University of Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University in Riyadh. These are, as the Gulf Issues Centre For Strategic Studies describes, “Salafi schools, which imbibed radical ideas” and are “the spring of Wahhabism”:
[W]ahhabists grew up in the Wahhabi and Salafi schools which imbibed radical ideas in the Islamic University in Medina, Umm Al-Qura University in Makkah, and the University of Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University in Riyadh. (See essay, The Role of Wahhbist Movements, under a section entitled The Circle of Violence.)
Another little-known fact about Obama’s life and family history has become starkly relevant, given the current developments in North Africa: Covered in the Egyptian and Saudi press, as well as CNN’s Arab-language division, but ignored by the mainstream media in the US, are the activities of the President’s half-brother. Malik Obama is the executive secretary of the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO). This entity was founded by Hassan al-Turabi, longtime leader of the Sudanese political party, the National Islamic Front – itself an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. For many years, al-Turabi was seen as the power behind the Sudanese government and permitted safe harbor for Osama Bin Laden, during the latter’s years in Sudan. In this capacity, it is claimed, Malik overseas the Muslim Brotherhood’s international investments. This claim has been made by Tahani Al-Jebali, former Chancellor of the Constitutional Court of Egypt. Al-Jebali proposes that the Obama administration has been overtly sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood precisely because of these family ties. (Click here to read Obama’s secret foundation.)
Another – and perhaps even more disturbing – association is that of Malik Obama and Omar al-Bashir, Sudan’s former President, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide and other crimes against humanity. Although Malik Obama and al-Bashir seem to have been careful not to be photographed together, they were both speakers at a 2010 IDO conference in Khartoum. Also in attendance at this conference was Hassan al-Turabi and Suar Al Dahab, Malik’s boss at the IDO. Al Dahab, for his part, is a known associate of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas Prime Minister, and Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader.
One should consider that family connections to terrorist organizations would not only render any private American citizen ineligible to serve in the US armed forces, or be hired for any number of government jobs, but would also make them subject to surveillance and, quite possibly, investigation. The fact that such well-documented ties can be traced to no less a person than the President of the United States makes one wonder how Barack Hussein Obama was obviously able to completely evade any vetting process. Whilst, in a free society, there should be few barriers to running for public office, the position of Commander-in-Chief is far too sensitive and important to expose to someone with such dubious links as our current leader.
[Click here for part one]
October 16, 2013 – The Syrian News reported: SAA Killed A Large Number of Obama Thugs Today.
Who is the SAA? The Syrian Arab Army. Who are the Obama Thugs? Wahhabi, a terrorist group fighting in against the Assad regime under the guise of “Syrian Rebels”. If you want to know what is reality outside the US borders, you must go outside American media to know what’s out there.
Syrian News reported:
“Today wasn’t a good day for Obama and his evil team self-proclaimed the ‘international community’, the community sponsoring the Wahhabi terrorist thugs in Syria were served multiple blows by the Syrians, and the following is just a brief of the operations and the tolls.”
So just how does Barack Obama become synonymous with terrorist? Let’s take a step back in time…
The contemporary Wahhabi movement is the modern outgrowth of a 250-year-old schism within Islam that was sparked by a radical evangelist named Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab (1703-1792). Ibn Abdul Wahhab believed that Islam had been corrupted by countless errors and innovations, which he set out to purge with puritanical zeal. He and his followers denounced intellectualism, mysticism and traditional Islamic spirituality.
Contemporary Muslim jurists immediately branded Ibn Abdul Wahhab and his followers heretics. The group was outlawed. Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s father – a respected, mainstream Muslim scholar – denounced him, and his own brother wrote a book refuting his doctrine. But Ibn Abdul Wahhab soon found other allies. In 1744, he forged an alliance with Muhammad ibn Saud, a powerful tribal chief in what is now Saudi Arabia. It was a “merger of religious legitimacy and military might” that helped both men realize their dreams of power. Together, they launched a bloody rebellion against the Ottoman Empire, then the central authority in the Islamic world. The initial revolt ultimately failed, but the alliance between the two families continued. As the twentieth century dawned, the Wahhabis, still led by the descendants of Ibn Abdul Wahhab and the al-Saud family, launched a new insurrection against Ottoman rule. With British backing, they ultimately won control of the region now known as Saudi Arabia, establishing theocratic monarchy there that persists to this day – a nation that has used its vast oil wealth to export this extremist ideology around the globe.
As the traditional institutions of Islam collapsed with the last Islamic empire, a dangerous void was created that the Wahhabis quickly moved to fill. Donning the mantle of Salafism, the modern Wahhabis were soon transforming their radical religious reform movement into a powerful political force. Having rejected classical Islamic jurisprudence, most of the traditional institutions of authority in Islamic society and most of Muslim history, they began building a new socio-political paradigm – one that drew heavily on modernist notions of nationalism and Marxist conceptions of class struggle and world revolution.
Note: There are several names that are deeply tied to Barack Obama – who had a big impact on him and his ideologies. Frank Marshall Davis, Bill Ayers, John C. Drew, Jeremiah Wright…
John C. Drew, Ph.D., is a former Marxist-Leninist who met Barack Obama when he was a sophomore at Occidental College in California. Drew spent an evening with Obama and a group of Marxist-Leninist friends at a restaurant where they discussed politics and Communist revolution. Drew had graduated from Occidental and was doing graduate work at Cornell University when he returned to visit friends at Occidental. Dr. Drew was still a Marxist-Leninist at the time he debated Communism with Obama and his friends. Drew had grown disillusioned with the idea that violent revolution could come to industrialized societies, but Obama disagreed. According to Drew, “He [Obama] was arguing a straightforward Marxist-Leninist class-struggle point of view, which anticipated that there would be a revolution of the working class, led by revolutionaries, who would overthrow the capitalist system and institute a new socialist government that would redistribute the wealth.” Drew notes that Obama arrived at the dinner party with his patron, a wealthy Pakistani Muslim named Mohammed Hasan Chandoo. They roomed together in Chandoo’s house and arrived in a BMW. Obama rejected Drew’s analysis of a Marxist revolution in America: “He was pretty persistent, that I didn’t know what I was talking about Drew saw Obama once again at a party that Obama and Chandoo gave at their house in June 1981. (Drew has long since rejected Marxism.) In his autobiography, “Dreams From My Father,” Obama says this: “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.” Drew points out that “What he’s not saying is that he was in 100 percent total agreement with those Marxist professors. When you understand that, Obama’s later associations and policies make more sense, including why he was taken in by Rev. Wright’s ideology.” Dr.Drew was interviewed on a radio talk show recently and spent an hour describing Obama’s Marxist-Leninist beliefs and his career path that was helped by known Marxists in Chicago. One of Obama’s college professors at Occidental was a socialist and they remain good friends to this day. Groomed To Serve Marx/Lenin. As more and more information is uncovered about Obama’s childhood and his path into politics and power, it is evident that he was mentored and helped along the way by Islamists and by hard-core Marxists.
His own mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, had embraced Marxist ideology as a high school student in Washington state. She had been taught by Marxist teachers and was a proud atheist.
In Hawaii, he lived with his grandfather and grandmother while his mother stayed in Indonesia doing anthropological work. His grandfather introduced teenage Obama to Frank Marshall Davis, a black Communist, as a mentor. Davis had come out of the radical black Marxist movement in Chicago, which began flourishing during the 1930s. According to John Drew, the Marxist-Leninists he attended school with at Occidental all either went into college professorships or became community organizers. Drew became a college professor; Obama became a community organizer and later a college professor.
Obama’s entrance into Harvard Law School was aided by two radical Marxist-Black Muslims. One of these men was Khalid al-Mansour, who has served as an advisor to a Saudi billionaire. (Mansour’s real name is Don Warden.) Al-Mansour was a mentor of Black Panther Party members Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, both criminals. The other man who helped Obama get into Harvard was Percy Sutton, who was a lawyer for Black Muslim Malcolm X. Obama’s spiritual advisor for 20 years was Pastor Jeremiah Wright, a Black Liberation theology advocate. Black Liberation theology is based on the Marxist ideology proposed by black racist Professor James Cone. Obama’s political career was launched in Chicago with the help of Alice Palmer, a state senator who was also known to be a hard-core Communist.
Obama’s campaign for the U.S. Senate was started in the home of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, both violent founders of the Weather Underground. Ayers had been involved in bombing a New York City police department, Capitol Building and the Pentagon in the 1970’s. In summary, from the very beginning of his life, Barack Obama has been imbued with Marxist thinking – from his mother, Frank Marshall Davis, his college professor at Occidental, and his Pastor Jeremiah Wright.
In addition, his path to political power was greased by black and white Communists and anti-white Black Muslims.
All along the way, Barack Obama’s career has been on a trajectory to political power – aided by the sworn enemies of the United States. He owes his existence to his Marxist-Leninist patrons and he is paying them back as President of the United States. Every policy he is pursuing is designed to destroy capitalism, undermine traditional morality, and weaken the United States militarily and diplomatically.
While Islamic law categorically forbids uprisings against Muslim rulers, the Wahhabi doctrine allowed Salafi “scholars” to declare the leaders of countries like Egypt and Algeria “unbelievers,” thereby providing a religious pretext for popular revolt against them. This has led to Salafi-inspired opposition movements or outright insurrections in Algeria, Yemen, Libya, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and elsewhere. It has also led to something of a split in the movement, with some Salafi leaders urging immediate rebellion and others calling for a more evolutionary approach to societal change. This clearly demonstrates why Barack Obama played a key role in the regime changes in those Middle Eastern nations [Algeria, Yemen, Libya, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt.]
Contemporary Salafism has spawned a dizzying array of political groups and revolutionary organizations. It provides the theological justification for terrorist armies such as HAMAS, with its legions of suicide bombers, and Algeria’s Armed Islamic Movement, which has a penchant for wiping out whole villages with machetes. At the same time, Salafism is the motive force behind groups like Algeria’s Islamic Salvation Front, which tried to take power through polls, and the Jamaat-e-Islami, one of the most powerful popular political forces in Pakistan. While these groups may use different methods and tactics, they share a common aim: They want to establish an Islamic theocracy based on their own narrow, puritanical interpretation of the Muslim faith.
(click here for part two)