Senator Obama: Are These Some of Our Enemies You Want To “Talk To”?

So we don`t have time to debate McCain about the economy and jobs, but we DO have time for shooting hoops.

Not sure why you’re critisizing the photographer. He’s just the messanger. Shouldn’t we know the kind of things we’re up against in that area of the world?

OB’s internal civilian security program….

In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles and procedures of international law would proceed to a point where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force ….

Freedom From War
September 1961

When they first hear about the disarmament program our nation has been implementing for over 30 years, many Americans are incredulous that officials in the highest offices of our government would commit such a blatant act of treason. Yet, such a plan exists and is unfolding at an alarming pace. It calls for the United States to disarm itself and simultaneously build the military capability of the United Nations.

It all began in September 1961, when President Kennedy formally presented the official U.S. disarmament program described in State Department Publication 7277. Entitled Freedom From War: The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, the program calls for the nations of the world — including the U.S. — to disarm, turn over their military might to the UN, and make the world body an unchallengeable military power.

Disarmament enthusiasts have long called upon world leaders to scrap all weapons and eliminate the potential for war. But this program is not about the elimination of weapons, but about placing all military power in the hands of one global power.

For several decades, pro-UN propaganda has held that furnishing the world body with enough power to “enforce peace” would benefit mankind and forestall the possibility of future wars. But there are some crucial questions that few consider: If the UN should become all-powerful, who would be left to prevent it from establishing its own brand of tyranny? If the UN were powerful enough to enforce peace, would it not also be powerful enough to enforce the will of its leaders on all mankind?

America’s national sovereignty is directly threatened by this program, because, in effect, it cedes U.S, independence to the world body — in order, as most people have been led to believe, to prevent war. But the proper steps the U.S. should take to avoid war are to: 1) be strong enough to discourage attack; 2) stay out of the affairs of other nations; and 3) keep out of entangling alliances.

The Kennedy Plan

On September 25, 1961, President Kennedy addressed the UN General Assembly, declaring: “The program to be presented to this Assembly for general and complete disarmament under effective international control … would achieve, under the eyes of an international disarmament organization, a steady reduction in force, both nuclear and conventional, until it has abolished all weapons except those needed for internal order and a new United Nations Peace Force.”

As unbelievable as it may seem, our national leaders have been implementing this very same treasonous disarmament program for the past three decades. The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is part of it; the treaty banning America’s use of outer space for defense is part of it; the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is also part of it.

Following JFK’s address at the UN, this program was rewritten in greater detail. Retitled Blueprint for the Peace Race: Outline of Basic Provisions of a Treaty on General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, it was presented by President Kennedy to an 18-nation disarmament conference in Geneva, Switzerland on April 18, 1962. The Blueprint didn’t cancel any portion of its predecessor document. As stated in its foreword, it merely “elaborates and extends the proposals of September 25, 1961.”

When questioned about the Blueprint, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency General Council A. Richard Richstein confirmed in a May 11, 1982 letter that “the United States has never formally withdrawn this proposal.”

When questioned by this author in late 1993 about the continuation of this disarmament program, Dr. William Nary, chief historian for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, confirmed: “The program has not been withdrawn and some of its steps have been implemented.”

Rendering Nations Powerless

The Freedom From War program lists four overall disarmament “objectives,” the first of which reads:

The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force.

This means no more U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps controlled by this nation for the purpose of defending our vital interests. All of our fighting men would be conscripted into a global “Peace Force” — save for those who would be assigned to a national police force designed to maintain internal order.

The second objective of this incredible program is:

The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order.

Not only would nations be required to disband their defense forces, but they would also be forced to divest themselves of all armaments. The UN will take no chances that weapons — especially those of “mass destruction” — might fall into the hands of UN opponents.

Toward the end of this document, its text states: “The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order.” This means disarmament of civilians as well — under international control. (More about UN designs to restrict private firearms ownership appears on page 23.) The United Nations wants no one to have the capability to defend his nation, himself, or his family from its designs.

The third objective addresses the need for compliance with UN-imposed obligations. It calls for:

The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to ensure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.

The UN doesn’t intend to take any chances. Therefore, this program calls for an “international” snooping agency empowered to “ensure compliance” with each of the above “obligations.”

Several existing UN creations have the potential of becoming exactly what this portion of the overall plan calls for — including the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN Disarmament Commission, and the peacekeeping arm of the Military Staff Committee.

Whatever this supranational agency is called, it would, of necessity, operate with powers that supersede the laws and prerogatives of any government — including the government of this nation. It would assist the UN in the enforcement of the UN’s “international law.”

UN-Defined “Peace”

The final objective of the 1961 plan calls for:

The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.

The peace being maintained would be in accord with the principles of the United Nations. As to what those principles might include, a quick look at Chapter VII of the UN Charter reveals that the “peace” organization retains for itself the power to determine what might constitute: 1) a threat to peace; 2) a breach of peace; or 3) an act of aggression.

Whenever the UN decrees that “peace” is not being adhered to, it could then turn to Article 42 of the UN Charter to “take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary” to restore its idea of peace. Such a “peace” could be very costly in lives.

The UN is not interested in the kind of peace normal individuals seek and desire. Its very Charter empowers it to enforce and maintain its unimpeded global rule with military action.

Moreover, the UN has called for the very powers the U.S. has proposed for it. In 1978, the UN General Assembly adopted a Final Document that called for reducing national armed forces to a level “necessary to maintain internal order and protect the personal security of citizens and in order that States shall support and provide agreed manpower for a United Nations peace force.” That “peace force” would have sufficient clout to “effectively deter or suppress any threat or use of arms in violation of the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

As noted earlier, the disarmament plan described in Freedom From War, and repeated in Blueprint for the Peace Race, continues as the official policy of the U.S. government. It is the clear intention of our leaders to implement every portion of this treasonous plan.

Years ago, a Dallas-based editorialist referred to the three stages of this subversive plan and concluded, “One, two, three, and America’s out!” This scheme must be exposed and our leaders must be stopped before it is fully implemented and U.S. sovereignty becomes a bitter memory.

Remember why GWB ran for president in 2000? Because the baseball commisioner position was taken. Obama’s brother-in-law coaches bball at Brown. I’m not sure but I think he played at Princeton. Don’t know if that was after his sis crafted her racial divide senior thesis there. Have heard Obama was a benchwarmer on the bball team at Occidental.I thought his coach said his problem always was he thought he was better than he was. So now on the zillions raised for him he gets to pretend he’s a bball player while folks back home work on staying afloat.Election day will tell if the American people have allowed themselves to be “played” again.

“B-Ball Barry”. Enough with the basketball photo-ops. I think we all know the black basketball player stereotype by now. We don’t need to see Barry shootin’ hoops everywhere he goes. If he keeps this shit up, for the love of God, at least put someone like Shaq against him to slap that basketball down his f’n throat.

Mr. Basketball wouldn’t be very consistent if he were to actually engage in speaking about supporting a new government in Iraq when he has so willingly CONTRIBUTED to the SELLING OUT of America, would he?

For example, tactics you might expect to find only in non-democracies like Iraq, not in presidential primaries in the US.

He has a pretty slim chance of convincing anybody after what he did.

Guess what HRocks? The convention could send him packing yet.

We’re supposed to trust those governments, forget oil and automobiles, ride a bike and DIE because we caused polar bears to die.

This past week, in a group discussion on CSpan, Obama has Jeff Liebman speak in a debate with a campaign advisor.

Jeffrey B. Liebman Malcolm Wiener Professor of Public Policy John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University.

The guy says we have two choices in balancing the budget.

Schools or infrastructure.

We can’t fix both.

The bus to school or the roads and bridges they ride on, one or the other.

Barack Obama’s vision for America’s overhaul, a Bridge too Far….

Another reason for his trip to Afghanistan, the money he’ll transfer by scrapping public works and privatising them entirely will go to Afghanistan’s infrastructure.

He’s on a quid pro right now.

I have to seriously question the mentality of millions of people in our society supporting Barack Obama who thought a PR move of him shooting basketball was appropriate when two women were being executed. This is not just stupid it shows a lack of compassion and is just plain inhumane.

People want to call us whiny, we should stop complaining. I wonder, at what point would our distractors think it is ok to voice concern and fight for what we belive in. To them nothing is too dishonest, underhanded, vulgar, threatening, violent, criminal, insulting, sexist and manipulative. A college education may get you a good job with a nice salary. But what good is it if you have lost your soul? I think there just must be an awful lot of people who don’t believe in God because if they did they wouldn’t be acting this way-as if there is no tomorrow, no repurcusssions or accountability for their actions. I believe alot of this is because we have become a society that has become so politically correct children have not been taught right from wrong. Shame on these parents.

But there are also an awful lot of us who do know right from wrong and we’re called PUMA.

I thought I would check into what the foreign press is saying about the O; as it seems our own press has a problem with getting actual “news”. I found this very interesting article from a British News/Blog
From Telegraph.co.uk

US Election: Senior aide to Barack Obama says Obamamaniacs’ hopes unrealistic
By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 10:59AM BST 20/07/2008
Barack Obama feels like he is carrying the hopes and dreams of people around the world on his shoulders –a burden his aides believe has created unrealistic expectations of what he can achieve if he becomes the first black president.
Greg Craig, one Mr Obama’s inner circle of foreign policy advisers travelling with him, described the scale of infatuation for Mr Obama in Europe, which has seen him compared to John F. Kennedy, as “amazing”.
But he added: “He is very conscious of it. He knows he has become a vehicle for peoples’ hopes and dreams and expectations and we all fear that such expectations tend to be unrealistic.”

Not that this image came from the public, I think we saw it’s creation from his own campaign, now it’s time to throw more supporters, under the bus

Also From a German Newspaper: Speigel

The Berlin speech, Obama campaign sources told SPIEGEL ONLINE on Tuesday, is intended as a far-reaching talk on trans-Atlantic relations. Obama has been criticized during his campaign for not showing enough interest in America’s European partners, an impression he would like to counter. At the same time, those sources said, he will likely take a tough line (more…), demanding more assistance from Europeans in hot spots around the world.
“Obama wants to signal to the Europeans that he will reach out much more to the trans-Atlantic partners than George W. Bush did. You will hear the words ‘I can listen’ frequently in his speech,” said the advisor.
The message will also be

directed at voters back home because it will signal that America’s reputation in Europe would improve drastically under a President Obama, the advisor said. “TV pictures of 100,000 cheering people in Berlin can drive home that point.”

Because we are that stupid? A photo Op now = Policy? Sorry been there, done that.

and….

Barack Obama will give his much talked about Berlin speech at the city’s monumental victory column, not at historic Brandenburg Gate. Berlin dailies Berliner Zeitung and Berliner Morgenpost both report that a stage will be set up at the victory column so that Brandenburg Gate will be visible in the background.

It is and always has been about image for the big O, and just how stupid politicians see us the voting public in the United States as; show them a pretty picture and it will win them over.

Not Now not Ever
Clinton/McCain 08

PUMA

I really do believe that it will be a Hillary Clinton presidency that would be revolutionary based on her “life’s work”, not her political career.

Obama has no “life’s work” beyond his little stint as a community organizer as a stepping stone to bigger things. He has never, to my knowledge, ever put in place anything he has “learned” from his “community organizing”.

Cindy McCain has “life’s work” regarding children born with congenital defects. Even though Senator McCain supports these activities, his ideology will not permit him to do anything beyond the current limited scope of intervention.

I do not believe that either Obama or McCain will do anything more than the status quo regarding the plight of women internationally.

Many sit around and complain about “taxes” as the most pressing problem in this country as well as the world. Bush has spent us into the abyss. Whether we agree with that or not, we have to pay for it and the sooner the better.

Thanks Uppity for this excellent post.
As someone stated above, it is a powerful message.

The only thing is, what could the photographer have done against those men? They would have shot him too and we would never have had those pictures.
It’s a real dilemma when you think about it.

When the trolls post here it encourages me to fight even more for Hillary in Denver. It shows and reminds me of what they have done the past 6 months and what we are in for if Obama becomes nominee.

So, thanks for the encouragement.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/20/iran.nuclear

Talks with Iran end. Iran given 2-week ultimatum.

Things that make you go hmmm…

good morning PUMA’S hey if you haven’t listen to this please do, my gawd I couldn’t stop laughing hahahaha
http://tinyurl.com/69r7st

Has anyone noticed that Obama keeps changing the date of eventual withdrawal?

In a speech in Washington on Wednesday, Obama said he would withdraw most US forces from Iraq within 16 months starting in January, 2009.

“We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began,” he said.

Or the “end of 2009″ one that was on his website? Remember this from the Nevada debate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcbqG_1EIbg

(In that one, by the way, he says the Iraqi minister talked about withdrawal in 2018 — so much for Maliki’s stable thinking)

Or was it this one?

http://obama.senate.gov/press/070130-obama_offers_pl_1/index.php

Obama Offers Plan to Stop Escalation of Iraq War, Begin Phased Redeployment of Troops
Tuesday, January 30, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Tommy Vietor or Robert Gibbs, 202-228-5511
Date: January 30, 2007

Obama Offers Plan to Stop Escalation of Iraq War, Begin Phased Redeployment of Troops
Goal to Redeploy All Combat Brigades out of Iraq by March 31, 2008

Notice that it’s always roughly 16 months from the time he speaks?

It keeps moving.

If elected, it’ll keep moving too.

I wonder how many baskets he missed before the press made it look like he only had to throw once to make it.

Will he acknowledge and address the innocent slaughter of women, or will he just do some “cute” photo ops.

Uppity, thanks for tackling this. It is unbearable that acts of violence against woman garner so little attention and outrage. Maybe if we were to replace the basketball in Obama’s hands with a severed head he would pay attention.

I’m sick. But I am madder than sick.
Basketball.
These women.
Ulp…

Did any of you hear of this one yet?

Please check out the first article … “American Gorbachev”:

http://formerobamasupporters.com/