Sir Trump, we are behind you.
Signed: The World
Sir Trump, we are behind you.
Signed: The World
Like wow, brilliant.
“Today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another – but we are transferring power from Washington, DC, to you the American people,” said President Donald Trump in his inaugural speech on Friday, as it started to rain.
“Washington flourished but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered but the jobs left and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs, and while they celebrated in our nation’s Capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land,” said Trump.
“That all changes – starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment, it belongs to you!” added Trump to applause. “The United States of America is your country.”
“January 20th, 2017 will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.”
A statement met with loud applause and cheering.
“For many decades we have enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military. We have defended other nation’s border while refusing to defend our own,” Trump proffered while whistles and cheers erupted from the crowd.
“We made other countries rich while the confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon. One by one the factories shuttered and left our shores without a thought for millions of millions of American workers left behind. The wealth of middle class Americans has been ripped from their homes and redistributed across the world. But that is the past but now we are only looking to the future.”
The remarks, which Trump previously said he wrote himself, reiterated many of his campaign promises.
“We are going to issue a new decree…from this day forward it is going to be only American first,” emphasized Trump.
There should be no fear, we are protected and we will always be protected by our military and our law enforcement, and most importantly we will be protected by God.”
We must think big and dream even bigger.
We will no longer politicians who are all talk and no action.
The time for empty talk is over, and now arrives the hour of action.
Do not allow anyone to tell you it can’t be done. Our country will thrive and prosper again.
That whether we are black or brown or white we all bleed the same blood of patriotism. …We all salute the same American flga.
You will never be ignored again.
Your voice, your hope, your dreams will define our American destiny.
Together we will make America strong again, we will make it wealthy again, we will make America strong again, we will make America safe again, and yes we will make America great again.
“America will start winning again, like never before. We will bring back our jobs, we will bring back our border, we will bring our wealth, we will bring back our dreams,” said Trump.
“We do not seek to impose our way on life on anyone but as an example,” Trump said.
He then promised to unite the civilized world against radical terrorism, which we will eradicate.
We will rediscover our loyalty to each other.
” When America is united, America is totally unstoppable,” he said.
The speech lasted 16 minutes, about half as long as the average inaugural address.
Oh yeah baby, the Alex takes no prisoners.
Hate him love him, I don’t care, but he is an important icon of American culture today.
He is brash, incisive, loud, probably farts a lot, but at least he is REAL!
Jan 19, 2017
1. These Selk’Nam natives were exhibited in human zoos while being taken to Europe.
Carl Hagenbeck is often credited as being the man who made the zoo what it is today, creating enclosures without bars, and closer to the animal’s natural habitat. However, a lesser known fact is that he was also the first person to exhibit humans and create a “human zoo”; in 1889, he captured – with the permission of the Chilean government – 11 people of the Selk’Nam tribe, who were enclosed behind bars and exhibited across Europe. Several related, “purely natural” tribes were also soon subjected to the same fate.(source)
Africans and Native Americans were often kept in zoos as exhibits – a practice that ran well into the late 1950s. In Europe, this was evident even as recently as the early 2000s. In Germany, Africans were brought in as exhibits for zoos and carnivals throughout the 20th century – something that was called a “People’s Show”. The Cincinnati Zoo kept 100 Native Americans in a village setting for approximately three months. This practice continued for several years, and across several places, causing widespread fury and outrage.(source)
“Age, 23 years. Height, 4 feet 11 inches. Weight, 103 pounds. Brought from the Kasai River, Congo Free State, South Central Africa, by Dr. Samuel P. Verner. Exhibited each afternoon during September.”
Thus read the sign outside the enclosure in which Ota Benga- a Congolese pygmy – was exhibited at the Monkey House in the Bronx Zoo in New York in 1906, where he entertained onlookers by shooting at targets with a bow and arrow and making amusing faces. He also did “tricks” with orangutans and other apes to entertain the large number of people who were drawn to this unusual, yet highly interesting specimen in the zoo. This incident, however, drew criticism from several corners, leading to the “exhibit” being withdrawn.(source)
In a grand, albeit twisted display of power, the French, in a bid to promote their colonizing power, built six villages in the Jardin d’Agronomie Tropicale, each representative of the Madagascar, Indochine, Sudan, Congo, Tunisia and Morocco – French colonies at the time, for an exhibition which lasted from May through October 1907.
Built to showcase France’s colonial power, this attracted over a million people in the six months that the “exhibition” lasted.
The villages were made to reflect life in the colonies, from the architecture to the agricultural practices.
Above is the picture of a Congolese “factory” built in Marseille, in an attempt to imitate life. To this extent, several Congolese people were brought to the site to “work” in this factory.
What attracted over a million people then, now lies abandoned and ignored – a spot of history that France would only too hastily forget. In 2006, despite the public being granted access to the gardens, few actually visited it.(source)
In 1810, 20-year-old Sarah “Saartjie” Baartman was recruited by an exotic animal-dealer to be “exhibited”. With the promise and expectation of wealth and fame, Sarah travelled to London with him, where what followed was far from promised; having a genetic condition that led to Sarah possessing protruding buttocks and an elongated labia, she was the topic of much speculation and attraction. She was dressed in tight-fitting clothes and exhibited at sideshow attractions; she was exhibited as being a “novelty” – something “exotic”. She died, steeped in poverty, only to have her skeleton, brain, and sexual organs displayed in the Museum of Mankind in Paris till 1974. In 2002, following then-President Nelson Mandela’s request, her remains were repatriated.(source)
This exhibit was among the most popular there, and was even visited by Otto von Bismarck.
These human displays were incredibly popular and were shown at world fairs across the world, from Paris to New York.
The 1931 exhibition in Paris was so successful that 34 million people attended it in six months; a smaller counter-exhibition – “The Truth on the Colonies”, organized by the Communist Party, attracted very few visitors.(source)
All of them died within a year.
Organised by the white Americans, The Savages’ Olympics consisted of Native Americans and other tribesmen from several corners of the world, such as Africa, South America, The Middle East, and Japan. The idea for an Olympics featuring these “savages” sprung from games director James Edward Sullen’s suggestion to implement this in order to prove that the “savages” were less athletic in comparison to “civilised”, white Americans.(source)
Ouch! the truth hurts, doesn’t it Uncle Sam?
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland on Wednesday, Chinese billionaire Jack Ma accused the United States of spending too much money on foreign wars and risky financial speculation and not enough money “on your own people.”The founder of the world’s largest retailer, Alibaba, was addressing a question posed by CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin about the U.S. economy in relation to China.
“In the past 30 years, America had 13 wars spending $2 trillion,” said Alibaba founder Jack Ma. “What if the money was spent on the Midwest of the United States?”
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland on Wednesday, Chinese billionaire Jack Ma accused the United States of spending too much money on foreign wars and risky financial speculation and not enough money “on your own people.”
The founder of the world’s largest retailer, Alibaba, was addressing a question posed by CNBC‘s Andrew Ross Sorkin about the U.S. economy in relation to China.
In response, Ma said the U.S. should stop blaming other countries and look at its own spending priorities:
“It’s not that other countries steal jobs from you guys,” Ma said. “It’s your strategy. You did not distribute the money and things in a proper way.”
“It’s not that other countries steal jobs from you guys. It’s your strategy. You did not distribute the money and things in a proper way.”He said the U.S. has wasted over $14 trillion in fighting wars over the past 30 years rather than investing in infrastructure at home.
Ma said that when Thomas Friedman published the 2005 pro-globalization tribute The World is Flat, taking advantage of the world economy seemed like “a perfect strategy” for the U.S.
“We just want the technology, and the IP, and the brand, and we’ll leave the other jobs” to other countries like Mexico and China, he said, according to Business Insider. “American international companies made millions and millions of dollars from globalization.”
“The past 30 years, IBM, Cisco, Microsoft, they’ve made tens of millions—the profits they’ve made are much more than the four Chinese banks put together,” he continued. “But where did the money go?”
“The money goes to Wall Street. Then what happened? Year 2008 wiped out $19.2 trillion in U.S. income,” he said. What’s more, he added, “In the past 30 years, America had 13 wars spending $14.2 trillion…no matter how good your strategy is you’re supposed to spend money on your own people.”
“What if the money was spent on the Midwest of the United States?” he asked. “What if they had spent part of that money on building up their infrastructure, helping white-collar and blue-collar workers? You’re supposed to spend money on your own people.”
While he did emphasize that globalization is a good thing, according to CNBC, Ma reportedly noted that it “‘should be inclusive,’ with the spoils not just going to the wealthy few.”
Ma’s critique came weeks after he attended a meeting in New York City with President-elect Donald Trump, who has threatened to impose punitive tariffs against the Asian superpower.
When asked about that conversation, the internet tycoon “said the consequences of a trade war between the world’s biggest and second-largest economies would be too grave for both countries to bear and they should do everything to avoid it,” reported the South China Morning Post, which Ma owns.
“It’s so easy to launch a war. It’s so difficult, almost impossible sometimes, to terminate that war,” he said. “The Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, are those finished?”
Jan 19, 2017
It cannot be merely coincidental that the incomes and wealth of the top 5% have pulled away from the stagnating 95% in the 25 years dominated by neocon-neoliberalism.
One unexamined narrative I keep hearing is: “OK, so neocon-neoliberalism was less than ideal, but Trump could be much worse.” Let’s start by asking: would Syrian civilians agree with this assessment? The basic idea in the “OK, so neocon-neoliberalism was less than ideal, but Trump could be much worse” narrative is that the modest problems created by neocon-neoliberalism will pale next to what Trump will do, implying jackbooted Waffen SS troops will soon be marching through America on Trump’s orders.
This narrative is yet another example of American parochialism: since neocon-neoliberalism didn’t cause American cities to be bombed and its institutions demolished, it’s really not that bad.
Try telling that to the Iraqis, Libyans and Syrians who have been on the receiving end of neocon-neoliberalism policies. The reality is very unpleasant: for those targeted by America’s neocon-neoliberalism, nothing worse is imaginable, because the worst has already happened.
The cold reality is America’s 25 years of neocon-neoliberalism has been great for the top 5% and an unmitigated disaster for everyone else in the U.S. and the nations it has targeted for intervention.
Those defending the Democratic Party’s 16 years of neocon-neoliberalism (Clinton and Obama) and the Republican Party’s 8 years of neocon-neoliberalism (Bush) are defending a system that benefited the few at the expense of the many.
Rather than admit the past 25 years have been catastrophic for the bottom 95%, the apologists speak darkly of fantastical visions of a Nazi America as a diversion to the grim truth that they have blindly supported an evil Empire that has stripmined the bottom 95% in America and laid waste to entire nations abroad.
Neoconservatism’s malignant spores hatched in the Reagan years, and spread quickly after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Stripped to its essence, Neoconservatism is American Exceptionalism turned into a global entitlement: it’s our right to intervene anywhere in the world we choose to defend what we perceive as our interests, and it’s our right to impose our version of democracy and a market economy on other peoples.
Self-interest melds seamlessly with moral superiority in neocon-neoliberalism. The moral justification is: since ours is the best possible system, we’re doing you a favor by tearing down your institutions and imposing our system on you. The self-interest is: garsh, the “market” we imposed extracts your resources and benefits our banks and corporations. Amazing, isn’t it, how “free markets” benefit everyone?
But not equally. The claim of neoliberalism is: everything is transformed for the better when it is turned into a market. Once buyers and sellers can meet in a transparent marketplace, everybody prospers and everything becomes more efficient.
Stripped to its essence, neoliberalism is: the markets we set up are rigged to favor those at the top. All that talk about free markets is just public-relations cover to mask an intrinsically rigged quasi-market that has features of “real” markets while beneath the surface, it’s rigged to the advantage of big players at the top of the wealth-power pyramid.
Neoconservatism and neoliberalism are both inherently global, and so globalization is the necessary outcome. There is no market that cannot be skimmed for outsized profits once it has been globalized, and so once bat guano becomes a global tradeable commodity, Goldman Sachs establishes a bat guano trading desk. (This is a spoof, but you get the point.)
Neoconservatism entitles the U.S. to have an “interest” (as in profitable interest) in every nook and cranny of the planet. Policy changes in Lower Slobovia? It’s in our “interest” to monitor those changes and intervene if the policies are “not in our interests.”
Neocon-neoliberalism is brilliantly evil because it masks its true objectives behind such warm and fuzzy PR. Those looking for enemies of the people will find them not on the streets of America in cartoonish display but in the corridors of financial and policy power.
Dear apologists of the status quo: do you understand you’re defending this?
Notice how the wealth of the bottom 90% nosedived once neocon-neoliberalism became the de facto policy of Democrats and Republicans alike. No wonder Obama’s two terms seemed like Bush terms 3 and 4–in terms of a continuation of neocon-neoliberalism, they were.
Yes, profound changes in technology, automation, and geopolitics have influenced finance and wealth, but it cannot be merely coincidental that the incomes and wealth of the top 5% have pulled away from the stagnating 95% in the 25 years dominated by neocon-neoliberalism:
If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.
Check out both of my new books, Inequality and the Collapse of Privilege ($3.95 Kindle, $8.95 print) and Why Our Status Quo Failed and Is Beyond Reform ($3.95 Kindle, $8.95 print). For more, please visit the OTM essentials website.
Great, we are going to need major wars to “occupy” the millions of people who will lose their jobs to robots.
What does it mean for human workers?
The Changying Precision Technology Company focuses on the production of mobile phones and uses automated production lines. The robotic arms produce certain parts of the mobile phones at each station and the factory even makes use of autonomous transport trucks.
Though 60 is a shocking amount of people to be running and monitoring a whole factory, the trial for the robots is going so well that the general manager, Luo Weiqiang, said that the number of human employees may even drop to 20 someday.
Since the shift to robots, pieces per person per month has risen from 8,000 to 21,000—a whopping 250% increase. While some may argue that quality of the product will decrease with the use of robots, this doesn’t appear to be the case either. The number of product defects has decreased from 25% to just 5%.
This company isn’t the only one to make the change from humans to robots, especially not in China where the Made In China 2025 initiative aims to apply technological advances to production, which includes using robotics.
It’s unclear what this shift means for factory workers in the nation, but it’s not looking positive for those demanding fair working conditions and wages. The change to robotics comes at a time when the climate around factory workers is becoming volatile, even inciting strikes in several different areas. While quality and production are great for those purchasing the products, humans need jobs and they deserve to work in a humane environment. As more robots take the place of human factory workers, one can only hope that those workers turn to a more stable job where they can’t be replaced and they aren’t mistreated.
Why isn’t anybody talking about this?
Jan 19, 2017
President Barack Obama’s last press conference was a success, but only if you consider journalistic incompetence worthy of praise.
During the one-hour affair, Obama answered questions ranging from the commutation of whistleblower Chelsea Manning’s sentence to personal queries concerning his and First Lady Michelle Obama’s approach when talking to their daughters about the 2016 election — not quite a hard-hitting last inquiry for an outgoing president who, as the Los Angeles Times recently noted, managed to keep U.S. military forces “at war for all eight years of [his] tenure.”
But despite the media’s toothless strategy — showing the established press doesn’t understand its own role in a free society — the outgoing president made at least one admission most of the media has also ignored.
Around the eight-minute mark of the press conference, Obama says he hasn’t “commented on WikiLeaks generally,” and that the “conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the [Democratic National Committee] DNC e-mails that were leaked.”
Obama’s statement is important, Murray continues, because it “undermines the stream of completely evidence-free nonsense that has been emerging from the [U.S.] intelligence services this last two months, in which a series of suppositions have been strung together to make unfounded assertions that have been repeated again and again in the mainstream media.”
Referring to the emails “that were leaked” and not the servers that were hacked, Murray adds, Obama appears to agree with several experts on this subject, making it clear the entire ordeal revolving around the alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is but a smokescreen.
“I have been repeating that this was a leak, not a hack, until I am blue in the face,” Murray added. But he isn’t the only one. William Binney, a whistleblower who previously worked as Technical Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), has also stated this incident wasn’t a hack. It was a leak.
If it had been a hack, Binney said, the NSA would be able to provide the public with details regarding the actual attack. But from the reports presented so far, that’s clearly not the case.
Adding that Obama’s reference to the leaked material “appears very natural, fluent and unforced,” Murray celebrates, saying that it “is good to have the truth finally told.”
The Catholic Church got the emphatic message on Wednesday, the same day the Philippines was blessed by Pope Francis. In a speech marking the 20th anniversary of the Premiere Medical Center in Cabanatuan City, Duterte slammed the Church for its opposition to his hardline war on drugs, AFP reported.
“The church really doesn’t understand. They know [the drug problem], they know that it is worst, and yet, they said that extrajudicial killing is not good,” the president said, according to Sun Star Manila newspaper. “So other priests should use shabu so they would understand [that the drug problem worsens]. I recommend one or two of the bishops take it also.”
Shabu is the Philippines slang term for the highly addictive crystal methamphetamine which is the most popular illegal drug in the country.
Since Duterte assumed office in June 2016, the President’s war on drugs has claimed 6,000 lives. While police reported to have killed 2,250 suspected drug dealers, nearly 4,000 people were murdered by unknown assailants, according to Reuters.
Duterte recently stated he could even impose martial law if the situation deteriorates.
The Catholic church has been in Duterte’s firing line since it launched a campaign to stop the killings, a move Duterte describes as “all the hypocrisy” of the religion. In his speech broadcast on TV, the 71-year-old president also touched on controversial issues such as as celibacy and homosexuality of priests.
Although Duterte is quite popular with Filipinos, about 80 percent of his countrymen are Catholic, so the Church is not only an important social agent, but also vocal in the political affairs of the country.
It’s not the first time Duterte has criticized the Church. He reportedly cursed Pope Francis for causing heavy traffic during his visit in January 2015, but later wrote a letter of apology for the ‘misunderstanding’, as he blamed inefficient traffic management.
On Wednesday, the Pope blessed the Philippines and their president. According to Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Jesus Dureza, Duterte asked the Pope to bless the Philippines, and the pontiff replied that the president will also get his blessing.
Dead white men are revered by many as responsible for the advancement of civilisation, says sociology professor Kehinde Andrews.
Self-determination, freedom of thought, choice of risk arguably have freed society, but then there’s inequality, ill-health and narcissism.
“Our choices are free only if our thought is free, and our thought is free only if it is properly informed.”
Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, University of Central Lancashire
Jan 19, 2017
In the early 21st century, Western-style freedoms are often presented as an ideal template for the rest of the world. Yet supposedly free democracies are also marked by substantial and growing disparities of wealth, power and status. Fellow citizens seem to be increasingly socially-disengaged, individualistic and narcissistic, and suffer record levels of psychological ill-health, reflected in (among other things) high suicide rates. So is this vaunted freedom simply an illusion?
Many would argue that the gross inequalities characteristic of Western societies compromise its freedom. Upbringing, education and family background still dramatically affect the opportunities available to citizens, and it may seem that the underprivileged are inevitably less free. But tempting though it may be to equate freedom with opportunity, and desirable though equality of opportunity may be as a general political goal, freedom and opportunity are not the same.
My freedom is not measured by the breadth of the options available to me, but by how I am equipped to choose between those options: am I in reality the author of my own choices? Hence Sartre’s initially paradoxical-sounding remark: “Never were we freer than under the German occupation.” Liberté and égalité are both worth fighting for, but they are not the same.
Philosophers have long questioned whether freedom, thus understood, is even possible. Human acts are events in the physical world and all such events are held to have determining physical causes. Every natural event follows from other precursor events, such that if the precursors occur the event must follow. Modern physicists have complicated this debate by arguing that nature is ruled by chance rather than causal necessity. But neither the advocates of chance nor the advocates of necessity have so far succeeded in persuading us that we are not really the authors of our own actions.
In recent decades, philosophers have sidestepped these somewhat sterile debates by asking a more subtle question: freedom is something we say we want, but what sort of freedom would be worth wanting?
Take freedom of movement for instance. Whether or not I might end up living in another country is of relatively little interest to me if that outcome can only come about through some deterministic (or alternatively random) process that I am powerless to influence. The freedom I want is the freedom to make my own thought-through decisions about where I live; and these decisions must make sense from my own particular standpoint. To generalise, then, the type of freedom worth wanting appears to be self-determination or “autonomy”.
Construing freedom as autonomy seems to chime with the way we understand our freedoms in practice. I am free to give money to charity, or withhold it, in line with what I consider to be important. My list of favoured charities may have nothing in common with yours, but neither of us gives or withholds our contributions randomly. Equally, I am free to engage in extreme sports, to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, despite the serious attendant risks and the possible disapproval of others, if doing so makes sense from my standpoint.
The philosopher who provided the main theoretical foundations for modern liberalism – John Stuart Mill – famously argued in On Liberty (1859) that it is the mark of a civilised society that it only seeks to actively curtail the options available to people where taking up those options would risk significant harm to others. Are societies that succeed, as far as possible, in abiding by Mill’s principle, consequently free?
There is an important further factor we need to consider. As Mill recognised, the “liberty of thought and discussion” has a vital role to play in any free society. If my freedom consists of being able to select those options that make most sense from my standpoint, I will be free only insofar as my choices are properly informed.
Mill championed freedom of speech on the basis that the airing of unpopular and controversial views will ultimately enhance freedom. He reasoned that the critical public discussion that follows will lead us all closer to the truth and equip us to make better-informed choices. Here Mill seems to have been dangerously overoptimistic.
In this era of “post-truth” – and more recently the proliferation of “fake news” – reliable information on the issues that matter most (for example, climate change) seems harder and harder to come by. Many of our most important choices seem to be made on the basis of more or less deliberate misinformation.
Bizarrely, such misinformed choices are sometimes themselves defended in the name of freedom. But there is a world of difference between a well-informed choice that we happen not to agree with and a choice that is significantly misinformed. I may (conceivably) respect your choice to smoke 40 cigarettes and drink a bottle of whisky every day if I am persuaded that you understand the risks involved, but I cannot respect your choice if I know that you have been seriously misinformed about those risks.
Our choices are free only if our thought is free, and our thought is free only if it is properly informed.
Freedom of thought does not, it seems, arise naturally from freedom of discussion. The idea that it does may stem from confusing the freedom of thought (which consists in making good sense of the world) with freedom of speech (which seems to be interpreted as an entitlement to say whatever we want, within the limits of legality, however misleading it may be).
We cannot properly assess the quality of our freedom until we have established whether and to what extent the choices we make are based on adequate understanding. Perhaps, then, the roots of the apparent two-facedness of Western-style freedoms lie in this: that while the majority of people in those societies have access to a wider range of choices than their grandparents could have imagined, this development has been accompanied by a growing disregard for individual and collective abilities to properly understand those choices and their broader context.
Ben Swann, anchor of the CBS Nightly News in Atlanta, devoted a “Reality Check” segment to the now infamous Pizzagate. As you may know, this explosive story came out in November and was followed by an intense mass media campaign to discredit it.
Ben Swann revisited some aspects of the story and asked “why hasn’t it been officially investigated”?
As expected, backlash against Swann soon followed. Here are some of the headlines that popped up around the web.
Other publications such as the Washington Post published strong worded articles taking aim at Swann’s segment while making sure to never go too deeply into the subject.
“And there’s even more in this gem of video slime, including references to Dennis Hastert and certain photographs, though we won’t dive into those details here.”
– Washington Post, CBS affiliate’s ‘big question’: Why no law enforcement investigation of ‘Pizzagate’ allegations?
The video has been removed from the CBS 46 website but can still be viewed on Ben Swann’s YouTube channel.
Jan 20, 2017
officially exist as a phenomenon after noon today, Friday January 20th 2017, when Donald Trump assumes office as the new president of the United States. Assuming there are no unexpected surprises at the inauguration, Obama will leave office and become an ex-president or former president. Naturally, it is a time when people both look to the future and begin to reflect on the past, specifically on what constitutes the Obama Legacy. What kind of president was Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro? What will history remember him for? Although Obama was the first black president and it’s great to see some diversity at the top, there was not much else to celebrate in his tenure, which is teeming with examples of the expansion and abuse of executive power. He promised peace and delivered war; he promised the most transparent administration in history and gave us the most secretive and surveilling administration in history. He became the first US president to completely rely upon the teleprompter, thus earning himself the nickname of Teleprompter-in-Chief and showing everyone what a puppet he was. He presided over the disastrous selling out the general public to the banksters in the form of the Bailout and Stimulus mass cash giveaways to the banking class.
Below is a list of the top 10 highlights (or more aptly named lowlights) of the Obama presidency.
In so many ways, Obama was a remarkable fraud. Let’s go back to the beginning and look at how he got into power. His whole campaign was based around “hope and change“. The trick – which worked very well – was to fool people into projecting their own impressions and ideas of what Obama was, what he stood for and what he would do. That way, people could think anything they wanted to about him, regardless of whether their perceptions matched up to reality. It was a slick psychological con-game. Obama offered vague and empty promises with nice-sounding keywords like hope and change, and people desperately wanted to believe it, because their lives are already so hard due to the rigid and greedy control of money and power held by the New World Order criminals. People were swept up in Obamamania almost like Beatlemania 45+ years before it. Some, such as David Icke, Alex Jones and others, warned that Obama was a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but not many listened. John Pilger gave a great speech (embedded above) in which he called Obama a “brand”. Then Obama was President, and not much changed. Meet the new boss – same as the old boss.
(As an aside, the same cycle happened with Trump. People got swept up in Trumpmania, and although Trump is a very different character to Obama and more of an outsider, the signs are there that he will also abuse executive privilege and do whatever Israel and Goldman Sachs want him to do. We shall see. Now I am left wondering, given the Alex Jones’ shameless Trumpmania, whether Alex only attacked Obama because Obama was leftist/Democractic. The only way to progress is to learn the lessons of history. There are still far too many people, including broad swathes of the Alternative Media, who are hopelessly caught up in the fake left-right paradigm which never leads to real change.)
Obama was such a phony that the fraud even goes right down his identity – his name, his place of birth, his SSN and his citizenship. A huge part of the Obama legacy is that, for the first known time in history, a non-US natural born person ascended to the presidency. What’s his real name? Is it Barack or Barry? Obama or Soetoro? Was he born in Kenya or the US? Why did he have the SSN of a dead man? Amidst all the layers of deception and fraud, one thing we can say for sure is this: the purported long form Hawaii birth certificate of Obama (as displayed on WhiteHouse.gov at one time) is a forged document. See the latest evidence (presented in December 2016) from Mike Zullo (investigator for Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio) who investigated the affair for 5 years and consulted many experts from different fields in the course of his inquiries.
Were they alive today, the ancient Greek playwrights may have perhaps considered it both a tragedy and a comedy simultaneously that Obama was – somehow – given a Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples“. Obama himself stated that he doesn’t feel as if he deserved the award. As Commander-in-chief of the US military, Obama subsequently went on to send US troops all over the world to the killing fields of such places as Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya and Syria. Obama dropped more bombs (26,171 along in 2016) and started more wars that his predecessor George W. Bush, yet because he is supposedly “progressive” (another label which means different things to different people), he copped way less criticism from the media. Obama is a warmonger; he has been at war longer than any other president in US history!
Obama dutifully pushed the now widely detested idea of American exceptionalism, which has become just a pretext for American imperialism. This kind of propaganda may still work on some Americans, but many have awoken to the fact it’s used to make Americans feel good about themselves while their leaders commit all sorts of horrible atrocities in their name. American exceptionalism is an inherently arrogant and exclusionary idea that somehow implies the US is superior to all other nations, and perhaps on a subconscious level also implies that the US should be excepted (from exceptionalism) from international norms, rules and laws – just because it’s the boss. The US is the superpower, its kind of democracy is the best, it’s never wrong, it can attack sovereign nations all over the planet with impunity and if you don’t like it then prepared to get punished with sanctions and maybe even an invasion.
Many presidents (and even vice-presidents like Dick Cheney) have had their own version of an SS, hit squad, extrajudicial killing group or assassination group. Obama started out with his Kill List, which contained people he labeled as enemy combatants. These people (mostly from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen, but also including at least 3 US citizens) were summarily killed by UAVs or drones. Later on, when the Kill List became an unpalatable moniker, the name was switched to the Orwellian Disposition Matrix – but the killing continued. Obama will be remembered for pioneering a new, cold and calculatedly way of killing people via drones. He was the first President to start the drone war.
One of the most shocking expansions ever of US executive/presidential power occurred midway during Obama’s time as president. On Dec. 31st, 2012, Obama signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) which gave him the power to indefinitely detain US citizens without charge or trial. These new powers were completely illegal, tyrannical and unconstitutional. They broke at least 2 amendments from the Bill of Rights. The 4th Amendment states that people have the right to be secure and not be arbitrarily arrested unless there is a warrant based on probable cause, while the 6th Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy trial. Weren’t we told that Obama was a constitutional lawyer? This was another example of a soft coup whereby the laws of the nation changed to become more in alignment with military justice rather than common law.
Many people will remember Obama for the famous piece of legislation he pushed through that took his name: Obamacare. The real name was the ACA (Affordable Cart Act). Although Obamacare has helped some people, it was sold with lies, such as the infamous “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor!” Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber admitted on camera that the bill’s backers relied on deception and an assumption of voter stupidity in order to pass it. He said that the “lack of transparency” provided “a huge political advantage”. Premiums have been going through the roof and many are no longer able to afford them. Obamacare introduced the highly dubious idea that the government can force you to pay for a product (healthcare) and fine you if you don’t! For a deeper analysis of Obamacare and the socialist/collectivist ideas behind it, see Obamacare: Collectivist Medicine at the Point of a Gun.
In the Operation Fast and Furious scandal, which Obama oversaw with the help of Attorney General Eric Holder, the US Government allowed weapons to be trafficked without monitoring them (or even having any plan to regain control of them) over the southern border to Mexico. Predictably, the weapons found their way into the possession of Mexican drug cartels. As many as 2,000 high-powered rifles were brought into Mexico under Fast and Furious. Many of these guns were used to shoot and kill Mexican citizens and even US Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
The invasion of sovereign nation Libya in 2011 by the US, NATO, UK, France, etc. is a horrendous and digesting example of the philosophy of might is right. The attack was carried out under the pretext of fighting international terrorism and protecting innocent citizens from an evil dictator. Where have we heard those ones before? Specifically, the US claimed it was merely carrying out a “humanitarian intervention” (read military invasion) under the new UN doctrine of R2P (Responsibility to Protect). These are examples of deceptive propaganda which trick ordinary people and prevent from clearly seeing an invasion as an invasion. Much has been said about the gun-running schemes that culminated in the tragedy at Benghazi where US Ambassador Chris Stevens and others lost their lives. You can thank Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama for that one. The lies that they peddled afterwards to cover it up (e.g. Benghazi was caused by a YouTube video) were laughable.
The Ukraine Coup of 2014 was another horrific event carried out by US forces under Obama – with the help of nefarious NWO insider George Soros and his slew of subversive NGOs. Obama also had the help of Vicky “Fuck the EU” Nuland, wife of arch-neocon and Zionist Robert Kagan. Nuland admitted that the US has spend $5 billion undermining Ukraine and attempting to implement regime change. The result was a civil war with Ukrainians killing each other, destroying the center of their city (which looked like a war zone afterwards) and the Berkut (police) set against the citizenry in bloody battle. After all the fighting, the US-installed puppet regime was composed of Neo-Nazis who have been doing their best to distance Ukraine from Russia, despite the strong historical ties between the 2 nations.
Without doubt the most horrendous and infamous “achievement” of Obama was the invasion of Syria that started in 2013, and which still holds a potential to trigger World War 3. The Syrian War has involved numerous countries up to this point (including all of the world’s heavyweights), has exacerbated the split between Sunni and Shia Muslims, is being fought for many reasons including geopipelines and geopolitics, and has been the arena in which a new Frankenstein terrorist mercenary group has emerged – ISIS/IS/ISIL – which is obviously being funded by Obama’s USA and Israel. Unfortunately for puppet Obama and his NWO masters, Syria did not roll over and die easily, having been helped by Iran, China and Russia. Obama as Commander-in-Chief oversaw all the fake bombings of ISIS by the USAF which conveniently missed the target …
In a nutshell, the Obama Legacy is filled with numerous examples of fakery, fraud, coercion, deceit and executive overreach. The above 10 lowlights don’t even touch upon all the scandals that took place during his 8 year tenure, such as his use of the IRS to target political opponents (Tea Party and conservative groups), the utterly fake killing (and re-killing, and re-killing, and re-killing) of Osama Bin Laden who apparently had 9 lives, and the targeted spying of Americans and foreign allies by the NSA (remember Angela Merkel’s tapped cell phone).
Obama was lined up in 2004 to become president in 2008. He was in all likelihood officially “chosen” at the 2008 Bilderberg meeting in Chantilly over Hillary Clinton. Like any US president, Obama was selected, not elected; his family tree shows that he’s part of the ruling bloodlines, being a 9th or 10th cousin of Dick Cheney and George Bush. About the only good thing that Obama did was push back against Zionist Israeli influence and push through the peaceful Iran deal. The Obama legacy is not a pretty or happy one, but unfortunately, there hasn’t been a US president with a moral compass and much intestinal fortitude to speak of since JFK. Let’s see what Trump does.
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.