last dance

On November 6, 2010, Wayne Madsen reported on the Obama White House.

White House: Obama conducting reign of terror.

Terror? Yes. On the American people? Pakistan? Afghanistan? Via the CIA and corrupt military and intelligence operatives?

No. Not that kind of terror.

Suspected White House leakers are on the run.

So the story goes, according to anonymous but brave sources still trusted by Obama, that:

1) Obama has become detached from reality; and
2) this created a political disaster for the Democratics; so
3) Obama's trusted advisers urged him to take a long trip to India; while
4) Democrats can sort through their power issues.

President Obama was urged by the few White House insiders from whom he still takes advice to leave the country on his ten-day Asian trip, his longest trip abroad since becoming president, in order to not inflict any more damage to the Democratic Party in the wake of one of the worst electoral defeats for the party of an incumbent president in recent history. According to sources close to the White House, who put themselves in great danger by even talking to members of the media, the plans to have Obama leave for a visit to India, Pakistan, Indonesia, South Korea, and Japan are an attempt to get Obama out of the country while top Democrats can sort through the political disaster created for the party by Obama's increasingly detached-from-reality presidency. (Obama conducting reign of terror)

But aren't these trips planned long in advance....?

We note that Obama's enemies have also used the extreme security measures and undisclosed cost of the advised trip as an additional point of criticism. The Daily Mail very helpfully outlined the "pomp and expansive grandeur" of Obama's security arrangements, including:

  • a bomb-proof tunnel with air conditioning
  • warships patrolling off Mumbai
  • coconuts removed from trees
  • 250 US business executives accompany Obama
  • the entire Taj Mahal booked by Obama's entourage
  • 30 elite sniffer dogs
The Daily Mail even points out that "The red carpet was literally rolled out for the President and First Lady when their jumbo jet landed." That particular criticism seems a bit shrill.

What's the big deal? Red carpets for dignitaries are not unusual. The big deal seems to be to pile on Obama. To highlight Obama's narcissistic tendencies, his poor judgment, his paranoia?

We don't know who made all these decisions about security, but we tend to think that is not Obama's job.

Meanwhile, this India trip seems to have a large business component:

The White House will be hoping to secure more than $10 billion in new business for American firms in what is the biggest trade mission in US history.

Mr Obama is bringing 250 U.S. executives including GE chief Jeffrey Immelt and Honeywell's David Cote, which the U.S. India Business Council says is the largest such delegation to ever accompany a president on a foreign visit.

The presidents of six universities, including Georgetown and Duke, are also set to come.

That seems very generous of Obama to take all these executives along. These business ventures are very unlikely to provide jobs for Americans. But we do anticipate that they will provide plenty of jobs for Indians. We do expect that these executives will continue to make enormous salaries and bonuses with the extra money they save by hiring cheap Indian labor instead of providing jobs for Americans. But at the same time as Obama hosts all these executives on his India trip, he is also blamed for being anti-business. GOP's wins bring relief for many in business.

But the forced march toward a health care bill, other proposed legislation and the congressional show trials of bank executives, health care executives, oil company executives and others eroded whatever goodwill existed between Obama and Corporate America. A poll by Bloomberg found that 77 percent of the people who subscribe to its financial news service terminals considered Obama "too anti-business."
Absolutely laughable. Obama is a puppet. He does what he's told. We are still waiting for anyone of any importance to be held accountable for anything, including most especially bank executives, health care executives, and oil company executives. So we fail to see how the goodwill evaporated.

But getting back to Wayne Madsen's article, does Obama have any reason to be paranoid? It seems like he does.

Virtual political guerrilla warfare has broken out between Obama's inner circle on one hand and senior Democratic officials, including outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Party strategist James Carville, former Demcratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, and, behind-the-scenes, Vice President Joe Biden and former President Bill Clinton, on the other.

So we have Obama's inner circle, undefined, VS Nancy Pelosi, James Carville, Howard Dean, Joe Biden, and Bill (& Hillary) Clinton. And Obama's inner circle allegedly advised him to take this trip to India, accompanied by 250 US executive (is anyone talking about that?), which has conveniently opened Obama up to heavy criticism of the security measures. Do the corporate executives accompanying Obama also benefit from these security measures?

Madsen relates a couple of incidents where Obama behaved strangely, in one case failing to endorse a democratic candidate over a republican, and later in the day telling people who paid $7,500 a plate to hear him speak that he had to leave to scoop dog poop.

White House leaks about the ineffectiveness of Obama's presidency are expanding beyond the revelations attributed to a former high-level Obama administration insider and which have been reported by a blogger named "Ulsterman." Some White House staffers have described a "reign of terror" in the White House over continued leaks and a troika of leadership that is making decisions without any input from the president. The troika reportedly consists of First Lady Michelle Obama, presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett, and the president's mother-in-law, Marian Robinson, who resides in the White House.
Not to be deterred, some White House staffers have sought out journalists and have arranged to meet them at nearby Starbuck's cafes to discretely convey to them inside information about the current disarray within the Obama administration. Some staffers have personally born the brunt of Obama's temper and witnessed his extreme narcissistic behavior. WMR has also learned from White House sources that Obama is taking presciption anxiety medication.
Why, if this is so dangerous, would these staffers meet journalists at "nearby Starbuck's cafes?" Isn't there a library with deep stacks around in DC, or a parking garage, or at least something more distant? Are these leakers really "in terror" of Obama? Obama who no longer knows who to trust?

So all this stuff is going on, and yet Obama is paranoid....? We think he is justified in being paranoid. Clearly people are running around making decisions and leaking information and forming secret alliances. He seems to be in a "fuck it" state of mind.

In fact, when people are fucked with constantly, they tend to develop an attitude. So we don't see what the big surprise is all about. Obama's response is HIGHLY PREDICTABLE.

Madsen continues to report that some people are actually HOPING to destabilize Obama and precipitate an outburst or something that will JUSTIFY invoking Article 25, Section 4 of the Constitution.
Vice President Biden, under intense pressure from some Democratic Party officials and Cabinet members to invoke Article 25, Section 4 of the Constitution and have Obama temporarily or permanently removed as president because of his mental incapacity to fulfill his constitutional oath as president is reluctant to take such drastic action. Biden feels that the country would "become unglued" after such action and he doesn't want to be the one who would be responsible for "picking up the pieces," according to a source who works within Biden's office.

Poor Joe doesn't want to be left holding the bag.

Some staffers have said on deep background that the revelations by the ex-White House official to "Ulsterman" are not even half of the story about what is actually occurring in the White House.
However, Biden and other Democratic and adminstration do believe that if Obama were to  display some of the same reckless behavior publicly as many White House personnel have witnessed privately, there may be wide support for enactment of the provisions of the 25th Amendment.
Such a public display by Obama that could trigger succession action might involve a public outburst, including the use of foul language or a statement that Obama believes there is a conspiracy against him.

Would it be a conspiracy if people around him fucked with him constantly, destabilized his personality, and then provoked him into an outburst? Does that qualify as an actual conspiracy?
Meanwhile, a team of ex-CIA officers are traveling the globe assembling a dossier of documents on Obama's past, including his education, passport, travel, and residency records. The team has scoured Kenya, Indonesia, Pakistan, and other countries collecting documents that are not already mantained in the CIA's own files on Obama's past. There is a possibility, according to WMR's sources, that any "smoking gun" documents may be released while Obama is in Asia in order to elicit a public and, perhaps, irrational enough response from the president to prompt the public to begin raising questions about Obama's suitability for office. Such an incident would make it easier for Biden to begin  the succession process that was previously considered when President Richard Nixon was drinking heavily and taking prescription medication during the final days of his administration, twice during the Ronald Reagan administration — after the attempted assassination and in 1987 when he demonstrated early stages of Alzheimer's Disease, and during the Bill Clinton administration, when Clinton's self-destructive sexual antics had Vice President Al Gore considering taking similar steps.
All this is also known as TARGETING.

Perhaps we should think of Obama as the victim of organized stalking?

  • The tactics used against targets are specifically designed to discredit them;
  • Bystanders who observe what’s going on find it is to their advantage to be willfully ignorant;
  • Most people who participate don’t know the full extent of what a campaign entails, and those who do know are afraid of having this machinery turned against them;
  • The most mentally unbalanced targets are assisted in publicizing their experiences; 
  • There is widespread corruption and subversion of the agencies entrusted to maintain law and order, and of the mainstream media, which is supposed to uncover programs like these.  

While these political weapons have been used against government officials and employees to keep them “in line” since the 1990′s or before, reports about this type of covert activity have been flooding in since 2001. It seems that there is now a global, and currently invisible, purge of undesirables underway. Interestingly, people who were illegally experimented on in previous government programs (such as MKULTRA), or targeted decades ago by governmental organizations like the East German Stasi, appear to be the highest value targets.
As we might expect from studying the mass purges of the 20th century, this pogrom has the implied support of the majority of the population. There is a societal dance of denial in progress, and it takes the willful ignorance of the general public to keep the dance going.

We think that is the most important point. We are not here to defend Obama as a leader. We think he has been a horrible president. We think he is probably severely narcissistic at a minimum, and he loved all the attention that he received so he allowed himself to be used, to become the president, and he enjoyed the benefits of that. But it appears that he has almost outlived his usefulness, and some powerful people now want to discredit him and have him carry the blame for as many things as possible, now that these things have been accomplished at their behest. But Obama is really not the only person responsible for all the things he will be blamed for, because Obama has always been a puppet doing the bidding of his masters. He is just a SCAPEGOAT at this point.

We hope that people can see that he is being SCAPEGOATED, and this is handled a certain way. HE is being handled a certain way. Or, to be shorter, HE IS BEING HANDLED.

Rather than focusing on Obama, and whatever dramas come out about Obama's behavior, we think the focus should be on the people who benefit from Obama's deterioration and expected downfall.


Strawman said...

Very interesting. I thought a couple of years ago that O was elected just so he could be blamed when it all comes unraveled.

A. Peasant said...

that's exactly what it looks like to me too.

Anon said...

Who might be destabilising Obama?

"Benjamin Netanyahu was left to stew in a White House meeting room for over an hour after President Barack Obama abruptly walked out of tense talks to have supper with his family, it emerged on Thursday. The snub marked a fresh low in US-Israeli relations and appeared designed to show Mr Netanyahu how low his stock had fallen in Washington after he refused to back down in a row over Jewish construction in east Jerusalem." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100031523/barack-obama%E2%80%99s-humiliation-of-israel-is-a-disgrace/

- Aangirfan

malcontent said...

Many of my more authoritarian friends are focused and supremely irked by "Obama's narcissistic tendencies" while I find his actions in office to be more accurately characterized as the acts of a man suffering from low self esteem. He has narcissistic tendencies, no doubt, but he is also obviously exploited through this weakness which leads me to believe that this WMR article is not intended for thinking people so much as it is intended for the zombie hordes who just voted.

It's red meat to satiate the hunger of the zombies and keep them rapt for their next assignment.

With that said, The O-man seemed to be cool and functional to me on 60 minutes last night despite the antagonistic and petulant tone of questioning. If I were a betting man I would lean toward O-man realizing just how well he's being played and looking for opportunities to wrap this political noose around a few more necks before the floor drops.

A. Peasant said...

the whole thing reeks. who is this ulsterman, wouldn't we love to know. is he a jew? he says the most naive things, like they had no idea how useless obama was. oh really? in fact i'm sure that was precisely why obama was selected and elevated to his position by the people who made him president. so i agree with both of you, Aan and malc, that this is all scripted drama to further divide and conquer americans and provide a nice opening for some person or group of people to emerge from the smoke and ashes and take control.

nobody said...

Hey AP, well I always had him pegged as mind-control. He ain't the scion of any family worth anything, he's got the perfect spooked up background for MK zombie, he has no powerbase ...I mean honestly! Mind Control or not, his utility is very very limited.

It's not a certainty that they'll whack him but he'll have to do precisely what he's told to stay alive. As for people shaking their fist at him for what he has or hasn't done, what a waste of time. Like he's got any say in the matter.

A. Peasant said...

completely agreed nobs. well said.

Dublin Mick said...

A certain banker new over 20 years ago that the big O was going to be our first black president. He predicted it. Nobie I disagree, the O is well connected as he is the queen's cousin. He may well have been mind controlled however. It seems to be a family trait.

nobody said...

Hey Mick, it's pretty distant mate - sixteenth cousin. Between the skin colour and the Irish blood somehow I suspect the Queen wouldn't want to know about him. Keep in mind that these bloodline obsessed freaks are into purity.

Between Obama as untouchable blood relative and disposable mind-control fodder, I'd put my money on the latter. Will we bet a beer mate? If we ever find out an answer one has to shout the other.

(um... in Australian English shout=treat)

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.