Source: Senate panel probing ‎possible Obama administration ties to anti-Netanyahu effort –Surprised? Shouldn’t Be.

Of course, most do not have the time in their busy lives to read the following snippets from a few relevant books to the topic in the heading, but if you do it bears to remember that these quotes are from books written a number of years ago by now, as we have been unfortunate to have Obama for over six years and counting doing all he and the government can do to destroy any semblance of peace in the Middle East, there is even more compelling evidence of the entire administrations disturbing stance in regards to the sovereign state of Israel .

It is important to know, when looking at what on the surface seems simply to be the actions of an anti-Semitic, pro-Muslim and anti-American racist President, that there are no allies in the civilizational wars we are only now in the early innings of conducting–except those that benefit the Empire at any one point in time. The playbook is, not too surprisingly, right out of the pages of 1984.

Power, profits, dominance and the constant migration towards a world governed by one amorphous ideology-that which benefits the global power elites under the strict guidance of the fascist American Empire. American “establishment” elites have never truly been pro-Israel. In fact, it is more than reasonable to say that, in the privacy of their private clubs and golf courses, the hidden state that guides America’s foreign policy has been anti-Semitic as well, despite all of the Jewish intellectual sycophants of government and the powerful that have been so prominent on the American foreign affairs stage over the past many decades.  

We are simply spectators at a extraordinary Kabuki dance, nothing is at seems, particularly the well acted faux wrestling matches between the various “competing” power bases in our nation’s Capital. The President has far less power than we are led to believe, far less, particularly in foreign affairs. Whatever the apparent intent of current policies in the Middle East, Ukraine of anywhere else in the world it is, unfortunately, unlikely to be the reality. 

However, there can be little doubt that Obama is also all of the above–the evidence is overwhelming. 

The Israeli pundit Caroline Glick described Obama’s hostility toward Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu in November 2009 as “breathtaking.” Glick noted that “it isn’t every day that you can see an American President leaving the Prime Minister of an allied government twisting in the wind for weeks before deciding to grant him an audience at the White House.” But it wasn’t just the wait. Glick reported that Netanyahu was “brought into the White House in an unmarked van in the middle of the night rather than greeted like a friend at the front door”; was “forbidden to have his picture taken with the President”; was “forced to leave the White House alone, through a side exit”; and finally, was “ordered to keep the contents of his meeting with the President secret.”

March 2007 account by the pro-Palestinian blogger Ali Abunimah at a Web site called The Electronic Intifada. Abunimah alleged that Obama adopted a pro-Israel position as a matter of political expediency as his national aspirations developed. “The last time I spoke to Obama,” Abunimah recalled, “was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. But at that time polls showed him trailing.” When Abunimah greeted him, Obama “responded warmly,” and volunteered an apology for not being more outspoken against Israel: “Hey,” said the candidate to Abunimah, “I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.” Abunimah added: “He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy, ‘Keep up the good work!’”

During the campaign, when unwelcome attention began to focus on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his anti-American and anti-Semitic statements at the Trinity United Church of Christ, a church Obama faithfully attended for twenty years, the candidate claimed not to have heard or approved of the offending statements. That’s hard to believe. Twenty years is a long time to sit regularly in a pew, listening to a man preach, and never hear anything he says. Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama and baptized his children. Obama’s children attended school in Wright’s church of hate.

The church’s Trumpet Newsmagazine said that Farrakhan “truly epitomized greatness.”7 In an infamous March 1984 radio broadcast, Farrakhan said: “Hitler was a very great man. He wasn’t great for me as a black person but he was a very great German.… He rose Germany up from nothing. Well, in a sense you could say there’s a similarity in that we are raising our people up from nothing.” Three months after that he embroidered on this, saying that “Hitler was great, but wickedly great,” and that he had made a deal with Zionist Jews that allowed them to “take the land away from the Palestinian people.”

In September 2008, the eighty-seven-year-old Percy Sutton, former Manhattan borough president and lawyer for Malcolm X, reminisced in a New York 1 television interview about when he first met Barack Obama: “I was introduced to (Obama) by a friend who was raising money for him,” he recalled. “The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas. He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.” Al-Mansour, said Sutton, wanted a favor from him—he wanted Sutton to write young Obama a letter of recommendation for Harvard Law School. “He wrote to me about him. And his introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?” Sutton complied: “I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him.

During the campaign, when unwelcome attention began to focus on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his anti-American and anti-Semitic statements at the Trinity United Church of Christ, a church Obama faithfully attended for twenty years, the candidate claimed not to have heard or approved of the offending statements. That’s hard to believe. Twenty years is a long time to sit regularly in a pew, listening to a man preach, and never hear anything he says. Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama and baptized his children. Obama’s children attended school in Wright’s church of hate.

The church’s Trumpet Newsmagazine said that Farrakhan “truly epitomized greatness.”7 In an infamous March 1984 radio broadcast, Farrakhan said: “Hitler was a very great man. He wasn’t great for me as a black person but he was a very great German.… He rose Germany up from nothing. Well, in a sense you could say there’s a similarity in that we are raising our people up from nothing.” Three months after that he embroidered on this, saying that “Hitler was great, but wickedly great,” and that he had made a deal with Zionist Jews that allowed them to “take the land away from the Palestinian people.”

In September 2008, the eighty-seven-year-old Percy Sutton, former Manhattan borough president and lawyer for Malcolm X, reminisced in a New York 1 television interview about when he first met Barack Obama: “I was introduced to (Obama) by a friend who was raising money for him,” he recalled. “The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas. He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.” Al-Mansour, said Sutton, wanted a favor from him—he wanted Sutton to write young Obama a letter of recommendation for Harvard Law School. “He wrote to me about him. And his introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?” Sutton complied: “I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him

But why was Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour, who was already winning renown as a lawyer and black nationalist and would later become notorious as an associate of Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and unabashed anti-Semite, taking such a keen interest in a promising but anonymous law school aspirant?

In 2001 and 2002, the fiercely anti-Israeli Arab American Action Network (AAAN), headed by Khalidi’s wife, Mona, received $110,000 in grants from the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit organization.23 One of the members of the Woods Fund board of directors at that time was Barack Obama, Khalidi’s former colleague back in the 1990s, when they both taught at the University of Chicago. Like Ayers, Khalidi also took a financial interest in Obama’s political career: in 2000, he held a fund-raiser for Obama’s unsuccessful run for a seat in the House of Representatives.24 In October 2008, the Los Angeles Times obtained a video of a 2003 AAAN dinner attended by Obama, Ayers, Dohrn, and Khalidi. The Times refused to release the video, leading to angry accusations of journalistic bias from the McCain campaign, since it was widely rumored that the video showed Obama making or at very least assenting to anti-Israel statements.25

Obama’s 2008 campaign finance records are full of riddles, mysteries, and unanswered questions. Contributing nearly $25,000 to the Obama campaign was Monir Edwan, who was listed on FEC documents as contributing from the city of Rafah in the state “GA.” Georgia? No—there is no Rafah in the Peach State. Monir Edwan sent money to Obama from Rafah, Gaza. Rafah is a Gaza refugee camp. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) “prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.”28 Yet no one has found it noteworthy that Barack Hussein Obama himself appears to be in violation of this statute. According to the FEC, contributions to the Obama campaign from three brothers, Osama, Monir, and Hosam Edwan, all from Rafah, totaled $33,000.29 And they weren’t alone. Al-Jazeera reported on March 31, 2008, that Gazans were manning phone banks for the Obama campaign.

The Obama campaign contended in the summer of 2008 that they had returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza—despite the fact that records do not show that it was returned, and the brothers said they did not receive any money. And indeed, Obama’s refunds and redesignations on file with the FEC show no refund to Osama, Hosam, or Monir Edwan in the Rafah refugee camp.

On Watchdog.net, a site that monitors campaign contributions, Monir Edwan is listed as Barack Obama’s Top Contributor, giving $24,313 between October 27, 2007, and November 11, 2007.31

From President Barack Obama’s intense desire to appease Iran’s mullahs in open discussions; to his stated commitment to establish a Palestinian state as quickly as possible despite the Palestinians’ open rejection of Israel’s right to exist and support for terrorism; to his expressed support for the so-called Saudi peace plan, which would require Israel to commit national suicide by contracting to within indefensible borders and accepting millions of hostile, foreign-born Arabs as citizens and residents of the rump Jewish state; to his decision to end US sanctions against Syria and return the US ambassador to Damascus; to his plan to withdraw US forces from Iraq and so give Iran an arc of uninterrupted control extending from Iran to Lebanon, every single concrete policy Obama has enunciated harms Israel.1 Glick could have added the 900 million dollars that the Obama administration announced in February 2009 that it would be giving to the Palestinians in Gaza in order to help them rebuild after the Israeli action in Gaza that winter. “None of the money will go to Hamas, it will be funneled through NGOs and U.N. groups,” an administration official insisted.2 Reality was not so easy.

And even in the midst of all his pro-Israel statements of 2008, there were warning signs. The Rev. Jesse Jackson (who described his relationship with Obama as that of “a neighbor or, better still, a member of the family”) said forthrightly in October 2008, as Obama appeared poised for victory, that the “Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades” would find that control loosening. “Obama is about change,” Jackson asserted. “And the change that Obama promises is not limited to what we do in America itself. It is a change of the way America looks at the world and its place in it.”

For all the Jews who voted for him, Barack Hussein Obama had an inauguration present: he selected the leader of a group that had been named an unindicted coconspirator in a Hamas terror funding case to present a prayer during his inauguration festivities. Ingrid Mattson, president of ISNA, offered a prayer at the National Cathedral during inaugural festivities on January 20, 2009.

ISNA has even admitted prior ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.17 The Muslim Brotherhood is an international Islamic organization dedicated to establishing the rule of Islamic law everywhere on earth. Hamas identified itself in its charter as “one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine.” The charter also quotes the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan Al-Banna: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”

Ten days after Obama met with Netanyahu, he welcomed Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas to the White House. The contrast with the chilly atmosphere of the Netanyahu meeting couldn’t have been more stark. Obama met Abbas bearing a gift: a firm U.S. demand that Israel stop the settlements in what it called Palestinian territories.35 He had met Netanyahu with no corresponding gift: no call to the Palestinians to stop the rocket attacks into Israel, or to tone down the genocidal and hate-filled anti-Semitic rhetoric that filled their airwaves even on children’s programs, or to recognize Israel in a definitive and honest

In May 2009 came the revelation that the United States and allied military, under the command of Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, was training 1,500 Palestinian troops. “We also have something in our pocket,” Dayton explained, “called the West Bank Training Initiative where we have plans to continue a series of courses in the West Bank on logistics, leadership, first aid, maintenance, English language, battalion staff training and driver education. These are led by our British and Turkish officers with an eye to eventually turning this over to the Palestinians themselves.”36

In October 2009, national security adviser Gen. James Jones declared that nothing was going to stand in the way of the creation of a Palestinian state. Speaking of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the Fourth Annual Gala of the American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP), Jones said, “The time has come to relaunch negotiations without preconditions to reach a final status agreement on two states.”

As we have seen, the promise of Israel’s destruction is in the first paragraph of the Hamas charter. This is no secret. And Hamas refuses to alter it or change its mission. “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”

His eye—as always—on outreach to Muslims, Barack Obama on July 3, 2009, sent Valerie Jarrett, his senior advisor and assistant to President Obama for public engagement and intergovernmental affairs, to speak at the 46th Annual Convention of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

Jarrett ended up addressing a racist hate-fest. At the ISNA conference, pure hate speech and Islamic anti-Semitism were promoted—and the Obama administration was there.

That’s not all. In July 2009, Obama invited the propaganda television station of Hamas, Al-Quds TV, to film propaganda in the United States—on the American taxpayer’s dime.

The proposal came from the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem: Al-Quds TV, the mouthpiece for Hamas, would film “several documentaries on the life of Muslims in America.

Why did the State Department think it necessary to appeal to the Palestinians in this way? Why wasn’t it calling upon them to improve their own human-rights situation, and to end the endless vilification of Israel on the same TV stations that were slated to run these documentaries? Why was it trying to improve the image of the United States, as if we were the guilty party, instead of challenging the oppressive and bloody rule of Hamas in Gaza?

In fact, this attempt to “improve the image of the United States” became official policy of the U.S. government. The State Department commissioned a confidential survey of Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. The Department of State’s Office of Opinion Research, the official pollster for the U.S. government outside the United States, is designed to gauge foreign public opinion so as to help diplomats in their missions. This office commissioned a “reputable local research firm” that conducted “face-to-face interviews” with “a representative sample of 2,000 adult Palestinians, age 18” to ascertain what could be done to “improve the image of the U.S.” in the minds of jihadist barbarians who celebrate the murders of people going about their business in buses and restaurants. The results of the poll were hardly surprising. The respondents demanded more money (in line with the Qur’an’s demand that non-Muslims pay tribute to Islamic rulers), more respect for Islam, and more pressure on Israel.

During Obama’s first six months in office, his administration appointed upward of forty “czars.” But there was one czar appointment on which Obama dragged his feet for months—and it was an omission that spoke volumes. While he worked with relentless energy to create and fill new positions by the dozens, he suddenly seemed overcome with lassitude when it came to appointing an Anti-Semitism Czar—and this was one appointment that was actually called for by law. The Jerusalem Post reported on July 30, 2009, that ‘the Obama administration has failed to name an envoy for monitoring and combating anti-Semitism around the world, as mandated by US law, since the previous ambassador was relieved of his duties at the start of the president’s term more than six months ago.’ Rafael Medoff, director of the Washington D.C.–based David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, explained: ‘Foot-dragging on the selection sends a message that anti-Semitism is not of great importance to the United States.’”55 Obama finally filled the position in mid-November 2009, but his choice was hardly comforting. For Obama’s new anti-Semitism czar was Hannah Rosenthal, former chief of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) and a current board member of none other than J Street.

While extremely slow to appoint an envoy to monitor anti-Semitism, Obama swiftly instructed the State Department to create a Muslim outreach czar—a U.S. special representative for Muslim (Ummah) outreach, who reports directly to the secretary of state. This was at the urging of the head of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu.

Obama’s policies toward Israel began to bear poisonous fruit around the same time that Jones declared that the United States wanted to give the Palestinians a state “without preconditions.”

After all this it came as no surprise in November 2009 when William J. Burns, the State Department’s undersecretary for political affairs, announced: “Our goal in the region is clear: two states living side by side in peace and security; a Jewish state of Israel, with which America retains unbreakable bonds, and with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, that ends the daily humiliations of Palestinians under occupation, and that realizes the full and remarkable potential of the Palestinian people.”

“We do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,” declared Burns. “We consider the Israeli offer to restrain settlement activity to be a potentially important step, but it obviously falls short of the continuing Roadmap obligation for a full settlement freeze.”70

Significantly, in September 2009 on the Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashana, Obama sent greetings—to Muslims on the occasion of the Eid al-Fitr holiday marking the end of Ramadan. He sent Jews Rosh Hashana greetings also, including a veiled jab reflecting his acceptance of Palestinian propaganda: “Let’s reject the impulse to harden ourselves to others’ suffering.”

Instead of helping those Iranians who loved freedom, Obama reached out personally to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei—several times. Khamenei described the messages he was getting from the president: “The new U.S. president has said nice things,” Khamenei recounted amid celebrations in Tehran of the embassy takeover. “He has given us many spoken and written messages and said: ‘Let’s turn the page and create a new situation. Let’s cooperate with each other in resolving world problems.’”

Obama was undaunted. Late in March 2009, he stretched out his hand to Tehran again, issuing a videotaped greeting to “people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” on the occasion of Nowruz, the Iranian New Year. He praised Iranian culture: “Over many centuries your art, your music, literature and innovation have made the world a better and more beautiful place.” He praised Iranian immigrants: “Here in the United States our own communities have been enhanced by the contributions of Iranian Americans.” He praised Iranian civilization: “We know that you are a great civilization, and your accomplishments have earned the respect of the United States and the world.”

===The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America (Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller)

It has been estimated that a thousand years passed before the standard of living in Europe rose again to the level it had achieved in Roman times. The collapse of a civilization is not just the replacement of rulers or institutions with new rulers and new institutions. It is the destruction of a whole way of life and the painful, and sometimes pathetic, attempts to begin rebuilding amid the ruins.

While the Obama administration in Washington is not the root cause of the ominous dangers that face this country, at home and abroad, it is the embodiment, the personification and the culmination of dangerous trends that began decades ago. Moreover, it has escalated those dangers to what may be a point of no return.

That such an administration could be elected in the first place, headed by a man whose only qualifications to be President of the United States at a dangerous time in the history of the world were rhetoric, style and symbolism—and whose animus against the values and institutions of America had been demonstrated repeatedly over a period of decades beforehand—speaks volumes about the inadequacies of our educational system and the degeneration of our culture.

When we look back at the decades-long erosions and distortions of our educational system, our legal system and our political system, we must acknowledge the chilling fact that the kinds of dangers we face now were always inherent in these degenerating trends.

Jeremiah Wright said it with words: “God damn America!” Bill Ayers said it with the bombs that he planted. Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.

==Dismantling America (Thomas Sowell)

When the Iranian government-owned English-language global TV news channel Press-TV asked me to appear in 2008 to discuss the controversy over John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s 2006 book The Israel Lobby, I researched the subject and made a discovery that stunned me. The Israel lobby spends a penny per year for every man, woman, and child in America. That’s a lot of pennies. How much does the Islam lobby spend? $13.13 for every American man, woman, and child. Walk into your corner candy store with a penny and how much can you buy? Now walk in with $13.13 and see what you can buy. Washington is a candy store. So is the press.   The Islam lobby is supported by the budgets of 57 Islamic nations with a total population of roughly 1.5 billion. The Israel lobby is supported by a total world population of 13 million Jews. Yes, there are 1,200 Muslims for every Jew on this planet. From the propaganda, you’d imagine it’s the other way around.

In addition, the Arabs pull strings in Washington through top-ranking firms like Bechtel and Aramco. Bechtel, in fact, used its military contacts to obtain top-secret US surveillance photos of Israel’s border deployments before the 1948 war of liberation and passed them to the Saudis. In addition, companies like Ford, General Electric, and numerous other lobbies woo the press actively on behalf of the Arabs under the umbrella of the Arab American Chamber of Commerce.

The treasuries of many of the Islamic nations funding the Islam lobby are pumped by oil money. And it shows. Just one of the nations supporting the Islam lobby, Saudi Arabia, has spent close to $80 billion since 1970 to bring its extremist form of Islam—Wahabism—to the world. A lot of this money has been spent to deceive the West with what Hussein lbish, former PR Director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and Senior Fellow at another organization supported by the Islam lobby—the American Task Force on Palestine—calls “sophistry”—arguments that cloak extremist Islam in the Western vocabulary of human rights. Has this PR onslaught worked? The result is stunning.

Until 1948, more Jews than Arabs lived in Baghdad, yet no reporter champions the rights of Baghdad’s Jewish refugees. 800,000 Jews fled Arab countries in which their families had lived for centuries—sometimes for millennia—with only the clothing on their backs, yet the press never writes about them. And many of the Palestinian refugees the media are so concerned for are not Palestinians at all. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East was long ago pressured into defining as “Palestinian” any Arab who had lived in Palestine for a minimum of two years.

Yet the press has adopted the slogan, “Land for peace.” Israel has given up the land of Gaza. But no Arab country has offered genuine peace. For decades, none talked seriously about stopping the boycott of Israel, which in terms of international law constituted an act of war. Few have offered to drop their official state of war against Israel. And none has ceased the rhetoric in its official newspapers, calling for or implying the need for the annihilation of Israel, the genocidal destruction of Israel’s citizens, and, in some cases, the elimination of worldwide Jewry.  

Just as in the case of Stalin’s Soviet Union and Mao’s China, the media has chosen sides. And the side it likes the best is that of the mass murderers.

Writers respond to the world with a kind of herd instinct. They see which direction the animals on either side of them are rushing, and don’t bother to notice the real world through which the pack is moving. Yet they pretend to report on the real world. What’s worse, they often fool their readers into believing that this is true.

Back in 1938, as fascism was sweeping across Europe, George Seldes presciently observed: “It is possible to fool all the people all the time—when government and press cooperate.”

==You Are STILL Being Lied To: The NEW Disinformation Guide to Media Distortion, Historical Whitewashes and Cultural Myths (Disinformation Guides) (Russ Kick)

A powerful U.S. Senate investigatory committee has launched a bipartisan probe into an American nonprofit’s funding of efforts to oust Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after the Obama administration’s State Department gave the nonprofit taxpayer-funded grants, a source with knowledge of the panel’s activities told FoxNews.com.

The fact that both Democratic and Republican sides of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations have signed off on the probe could be seen as a rebuke to President Obama, who has had a well-documented adversarial relationship with the Israeli leader.

The development comes as Netanyahu told Israel’s Channel Two television station this week that there were “governments” that wanted to help with the “Just Not Bibi” campaigning — Bibi being the Israeli leader’s nickname.

It also follows a FoxNews.com report on claims the Obama administration has been meddling in the Israeli election on behalf of groups hostile to Netanyahu. A spokesperson for Sen. Rob Portman, Ohio Republican and chairman of the committee, declined comment, and aides to ranking Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, of Missouri, did not immediately return calls.

[gview file=”https://troutinmilk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Source-Senate-panel-probing-possible-Obama-administration-ties-to-anti-Netanyahu-effort.pdf”]

[gview file=”https://troutinmilk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Inside-HQ-of-Obama-army-opposing-Netanyahu.pdf”]

via Source: Senate panel probing ‎possible Obama administration ties to anti-Netanyahu effort | Fox News.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

We Have No Idea What The Underlying Reality IS. However, I assure you it is more evil than anything you can imagine.

The Facts:There appears to be attempts from several sides of the spectrum to normalize pedophilia and bring social acceptance to pedophiles. Reflect On:Are the efforts to humanize pedophiles and bring

June 27, 2019
The Story of Q and the Second American Revolution

I have been following Q since it’s earliest appearance and have mentioned the phenomenon on this blog shortly thereafter. I must admit, primarily due to a natural impatience, that there have bee

June 27, 2019
Skip to toolbar