Showing posts with label Bill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill. Show all posts

Monday, November 17, 2008

Obama Selective Service Registration: Another Record, Another Question



Your Ad Here


Barack Obama, Selective Service Registration:
Questions, More Questions, Still More Questions




No Curiosity Excited in the Mainstream Media
About Obama's Selective Service Registration





Say what you will, Debbie Schlussel is interesting.

Last week, the motor behind debbieschlussel.com posted an interesting article about the Selective Service registration of Barack Obama. Multiple screenshots--complete with letters A-H highlighting areas that raised questions--make the provocative post must-reading for anyone who has wondered about the squeaky-clean, scrubbed Obama narrative.

In our opinion, Schlussel gets some things right, while other items are a bit less clear. One claim Schlussel makes that falls into the "dubious" category: Obama signed his name with a peace sign. Our view is that this is an overly-dramatic interpretation; interested readers can visit Schlussel's site, examine the BHO signature and make their own judgment.

DBKP attempted to contact Schlussel, but got no response.

From EXCLUSIVE: Did Next Commander-in-Chief Falsify Selective Service Registration? Never Actually Register? Obama's Draft Registration Raises Serious Questions:

Did President-elect Barack Hussein Obama commit a federal crime in September of this year? Or did he never actually register and, instead, did friends of his in the Chicago federal records center, which maintains the official copy of his alleged Selective Service registration commit the crime for him?

It's either one or the other, as indicated by the release of Barack Obama's official Selective Service registration for the draft. A friend of mine, who is a retired federal agent, spent almost a year trying to obtain this document through a Freedom of Information Act request, and, after much stonewalling, finally received it and released it to me.


Breitbart TV's B-Cast did an informative show on the subject, interviewing Schussel, who walked viewers through the document and the questions about its authenticity.

Though the video is 30 minutes, it's well worth watching for those who are interested in our next Commander-in-Chief's past. Many pieces of the Obama puzzle are, and have been, hidden from public view--including birth, medical, college and university records.

During the campaign, the Mainstream Media exhibited a singular lack of curiosity about their Fab Fave candidate and his past, preferring instead to quote from Obama's two memoirs or the campaign's canned answers.

Inquires about actual records--which would've helped shed light on Obama's background--was a subject that, like the John Edwards' Scandal--remained off-limits in the polite MSM conversations that passed for election news.




ALSO at DBKP: The Missing Records of Barack Obama

* Unreleased Obama Records: Did Obama Attend Columbia?
* Obama Records: Obama Medical, College, University, Other Records Still Hidden
* Obama College, Medical, Birth Records: Who is Barack Obama?
* Obama Medical Records: MSM’s Don’t Ask, Obama’s Don’t Tell Policy
* Obama Records: Obama Campaign Still Refuses to Release Medical, Other Records


Medical Records
Occidental College Records
Columbia University Records
Harvard University Records
Birth Records
University of Chicago Records
Khalidi Video







QUESTIONS:
Barack Obama's Selective Service Registration

The Video



Schlussel's document source--a retired federal employee--does enough detective work to excite interest in normally-inquisitive reporters. Normally-inquisitive reporters are in short supply in the MSM, however, when the subject turns to favored presidential candidates.

In a later update to Schlussel's original post, she provides some information on her source. Schlussel's source is no pajamas-clad basement dweller:

The recently retired federal agent has requested that I disclose his identity so that there is no question as to the source of the information.

His name is Stephen Coffman. He retired last year from the position of the Resident Agent in Charge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Galveston, Texas office. He has over 32 years of government service and has held a Secret or higher security clearance for the majority of those years.

He filed the FOIA with Selective Service and has the original letter and the attachments. He first notified the Selective Service of his findings and they ignored the questions.


About the image at Schlussel's site: it was noted that the date stamped on the form provided by Selective Service and the date on the signature line were different. The differing dates between when the SSR form was signed and the date stamped on the form?

It could be just an honest mistake.

Several other parts of the document are not so easily explained away, particularly the Document Location Number (DLN) on the form.

Obama supporters have claimed that the documents are fake--what else would they say?--but Schlussel has updated her post today with a copy of the letter that Coffman received from the Selective Service Administration, along with the document.






Another Honest Mistake?

Back in September 2007, Newsbusters' Tom Blumer made a quick fact check on another of Obama's Selective Service registration claims. From O-Busted: Selective Service Requirement Did Not Exist When Obama Says He Registered:

In his hilariously titled post ("Mighta Joined If He Coulda Capped Some Cong") on Barack Obama's interview in a barn this morning (not kidding) on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, fellow NewsBuster Mark Finkelstein reported on Obama's answer to a viewer's question about whether he ever considered military service. You can read Mark's post for his overall thoughts, but I want to focus on something the Illinois senator said that several commenters at the post took exception to:

You know, I had to sign up for Selective Service when I graduated from high school. .... But keep in mind: I graduated in 1979.

There are only two "little" problems:

  1. Selective Service Registration was not possible in 1979.
  2. Bob Owens at Pajamas Media noted that Obama registered with the Selective Service with an effective date of September 4, 1980.


Could be another example of another honest mistake.




At least Selective Service has provided some documentation. Previously--at least in February 2008--there was no Selective Service number for Barack Obama at the Selective Service website.

President Bush released his Selective Service Registration Number, why won't Senator Obama?

His campaign just sidesteps the issues as to whether he did register.

The Selective Service, while not releasing his number, claim that the reason you get "No Record Found" when you check for his registation on their website (www.sss.gov ) is because of a dataprocessing error. It seems out of the millions and millions of records, Senator Obama's is the only one that does not show up!


Perhaps, it was just another honest mistake.




One More Honest Mistake?

Bob Owens at Pajamas Media addressed Internet chatter about the Obama Selective Service issue in August 2008, "Did Obama Actually Register for Selective Service?". It should be noted that Owens wrote his piece without benefit of the document provided by Schlussel's source.

It is a rumor that the Obama campaign has chosen to ignore despite numerous requests, and it is a rumor that even Snopes couldn’t seem to confirm or deny definitively.

After contacting the Selective Service System for an answer several times since late June, Pajamas Media obtained official confirmation from the Selective Service System via email that Barack Obama did indeed register for the Selective Service as required by law, and is eligible to run for the presidency.

Mr. Owens,

Barack Hussein Obama registered at a post office in Hawaii. The effective registration date was September 4, 1980.

His registration number is 61-1125539-1.

Daniel Amon
Public Affairs Specialist



While we agree with most of what Owens usually writes, he seems to belong to a subset of bloggers who ascribe all questions concerning the murkiness surrounding Obama's documentation as "rumor-mongers" or "conspiracy theorists".



Prior to September 2008, we included ourselves in this subset. However, the increasing questions about most things in the past of Barack Obama have moved us into another group: the "Missouri-minded".

As in, "Show me".

It seems to us that one, two, possibly three questions concerning Obama records and documents might be given a pass.

But, everything?

When dealing with Obama's background, an incredible pattern of coincidences--which we don't believe--occurs. Whatever the document, whatever the question: the Obama campaign ignored it--until the issue became troublesome.

Then, they would release only enough of an answer to satisfy the very few in the MSM who'd had the brass to ask. Supporters and apologists would then rush in to condemn anyone who wanted a follow-up answer.

Obama's campaign started a website to combat rumors: fightthesmears.com. The only problem, it didn't. Picking and choosing mostly straw-men, the website was a brilliant concept: label inconvenient information that didn't fit the campaign/media narrative about the candidate as "smears".

The Obama campaign used its Internet site to discredit other Internet sites with which it disagreed. Any story that threatened to gain traction was branded a "smear" and relegated to fightthesmears.com, where Obama's thin resume/record was repackaged as Internet fact, wrapped with a bow of indignation.

Harkening back to the 1990s, it's remembered that "conspiracy theorist" was applied to those publications (notably American Spectator) which uncovered uncomfortable questions concerning Bill and Hillary Clinton's past.

When Hillary Clinton ran for the Democratic nomination for presidency, a now pro-Obama MSM--which derided those with questions over Hillary's cattle futures and other bits and pieces from Arkansas when they mattered--suddenly ran many of those stories 10-15 years after the fact.

Barack Obama and his apologists apparently remember that particular lesson very well: like the 1990s Clintons, persistent questions about the sanitized version of Obama only come from "conspiracy theorists".


by Mondo Frazier
images: dbkp file; wikimedia




Thursday, October 23, 2008

Bill Ayers: We'll Have to Kill 25 Million Die-Hard Capitalists



Your Ad Here


"Well, what is going to happen to those people that we can't re‑educate, that are die-hard capitalists?" And the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated and when I pursued this further, they estimated that they'd have to eliminate 25 million people in these re‑education centers."
--Bill Ayers, in Prairie Fire

Dr Sanity and Zombie Tackle The Troublesome Baby Sitter: Little Billy Ayers










Dr Sanity, a practicing psychologist , presents a wonderful essay on the narcissism of the sociopathic William Ayers. (http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2008/10/ayers-is-dead-serious-about-his-social.html). The casual evilness of this loon is best expressed in this contemporary account.

"The only thing that I could get was that they expected that the Cubans, the North Vietnamese, the Chinese and the Russians would all want to occupy different portions of the United States. They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter-revolution. And they felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education in the Southwest where we would take all of the people who needed to be re‑educated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be. I asked, "Well, what is going to happen to those people that we can't re‑educate, that are die-hard capitalists?" And the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated and when I pursued this further, they estimated that they'd have to eliminate 25 million people in these re‑education centers. And when I say eliminate, I mean kill 25 million people. I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of whom have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people and they were dead serious. (emphasis mine...and Beverly's)"




Dr Sanity notes:
"We are always warned about the individual narcissitic sociopaths; but most people don't appreciate the sociopathic qualities of groups, religions, nations, and ideologies that demand all individuals sacrifice themselves for the good of the latest utopian ideal or some blood-thirsty god."

Meanwhile Zombie continued his sleuthing into Ayers past. The Zombie dug up Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism,, William Ayers manifesto to the USA. (http://www.zombietime.com/prairie_fire/)
Now there is an entertaining read. The true lunacy of this murderous creep, the citizen of the year in Chicago, the USA flag stomping hypocrite, who has learned to turn his hatred of the country onto dollars, is exposed. Zombie says:
" • Ayers was not simply protesting "against" the Vietnam War. Firstly, he wasn't against war in principle, he was agitating for the victory of the communist forces in Vietnam. In other words: He wasn't against the war, he was against our side in the war. This is spelled out in great detail in Prairie Fire. Secondly, and more significantly, the Vietnam War was only one of many issues cited by the Weather Undergound as the justifications for their violent acts. As you will see below, in various quotes from Prairie Fire and in their own list of their violent actions (and in additional impartial documentary links), Ayers and the Weather Underground enumerated dozens of different grievances as the rationales for their bombings -- their overarching goal being to inspire a violent mass uprising against the United States government in order to establish a communist "dictatorship of the proletariat," in Ayers' own words."

Read them all.



by pat
images:
* zombietime
* Little Green Footballs
* wikimedia



Thursday, September 25, 2008

Bills in Congress Want to "E-Fence" the Internet



Your Ad Here

Congress to Make Ebay a Rat
Jason Lee Miller
WebPro News





Edward Feulner of the Cato Institute has said that Bills in Congress would turn Ebay and any website that conducts e-commerce into snitches for the government. The bills would force websites to conduct investigations into their customers that come under suspicion.

Jason Lee Miller, WebPro News, has the scoop.

None of the bills, two in the House of Representatives and one in the Senate, is expected to come to a vote before the Congressional recess—they’ve got bigger fish to fry in Bailout Brand oil at the moment—but the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held a hearing on the subject recently.

The purpose of the legislation is to target organized retail crime, or bands of shoplifters and hustlers hocking ill-gotten goods online, where the National Retail Federation, which has come out aggressively in favor of the legislation, says thieves can sell goods at 70 percent value. Street corners typically only bring 30 percent of the retail value.

The problem was highlighted recently when a New York vendor was busted selling Victoria Secret brassieres on eBay for $25 a pop. They typically sold for between $40 and $80. If you’re wondering why Homeland Security is being dragged in to this, it’s likely because of alleged past connections between organized retail crime syndicates traced to Hezbollah and Hamas.

Naturally, the Internet is to blame.

Though, NetChoice’s Steve DelBianco colorfully compared this logic to blaming the back seats of cars for teenage sex, the NRF’s vice president for loss prevention, Joseph LaRocca, has elevated the problem to the level of addiction to Class A narcotics. At the aforementioned hearing, LaRocca said:

"The Internet seems to be contributing to the creation of a brand new type of retail thief – people who have never stolen before but are lured in by the convenience and anonymity of the Internet. Thieves often tell the same disturbing story: they begin legitimately selling product on eBay and then become hooked by its addictive qualities, the anonymity it provides and the ease with which they gain exposure to millions of customers. When they run out of legitimate merchandise, they begin to steal intermittently, many times for the first time in their life, so they can continue selling online. The thefts then begin to spiral out of control and before they know it they quit their jobs, are recruiting accomplices and are crossing states lines to steal, all so they can support and perpetuate their online selling habit."

Soon you’re likely to see them on A&E’s “Intervention.” Though evidence of the above scenario is lacking, it sounds like Congress is taking this just as seriously as the NRF.

Individually, the bills are: H.R. 6713, the E-Fencing Enforcement Act of 2008, sponsored by subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott, D-Va.; H.R. 6491, the Organized Retail Crime Act of 2008, sponsored by Representative Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind.; and S. 3434, the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2008, sponsored by Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill.

Congressman Scott’s E-Fencing Enforcement Act mandates that online stores and resellers disclose contact information for high-volume sellers—with sales of $12,000 or more per year or sales of $5,000 or more in any single offering—“to any inquirer with standing under this section.” An “inquirer with standing” is defined as anybody who sends a copy of a signed report made to or received from law enforcement in the past year involving goods matching the description of those offered online after a theft.


Continue reading: Congress to Make Ebay a Rat

The Internet--and Alaska--represent the last frontiers in America. These bills, if passed, would leave Alaska, where the federal government already owns over 60% of Alaska.


by Mondo
image: dbkp
Source: Congress to Make Ebay a Rat



Wednesday, June 11, 2008

"As the Obama bandwagon has swelled, so have the lists of people Clinton loyalists regard as some variation of “ingrate,” “traitor” or “enemy,” according to the associates and campaign officials, who would speak only on condition of anonymity."
-- MARK LEIBOVICH, New York Times




Those wondering what Hillary Clinton is going to do with herself, now that she's no longer campaigning for the first time since January 2007, would do well to check out today's New York Times. Those Loyal to the Clintons Take Note of Who Was Not addresses both the Clintons and Enemy List v7.0.

Mark Leibovich notes the Clintons have long memories when it comes to remembering those who turned on them. He starts with Doug Band, chief gatekeeper to former President Bill Clinton.

Mr. Band keeps close track of the past allies and beneficiaries of the Clintons who supported Mr. Obama’s campaign, three Clinton associates and campaign officials said. Indeed, he is widely known as a member of the Clinton inner circle whose memory is particularly acute on the matter of who has been there for the couple — and who has not.

“The Clintons get hundreds of requests for favors every week,” said Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. “Clearly, the people you’re going to do stuff for in the future are the people who have been there for you.”

Clearly.

Who is on the latest version of the Clinton Enemies List?

Several names and entities are common among various list makers. The lineup invariably begins with A-list members like Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico; Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the House Democratic whip; Gregory B. Craig, Mr. Clinton’s lawyer in his impeachment and trial; David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s chief strategist; Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri; and several Kennedys. Some members of the Democratic Party’s rules committee, the state of Iowa and the caucus system in general are also near the top.




P.J. O'Rourke wrote about a possible Clinton's "Enemies List" in American Spectator's Enemies List: A Vigilant Journalist's Plea for a Renewed Red Scare. The American Spectator was certainly on the first national Clinton's Enemy List.

Reminding readers that the NY Times considers the matter an in-house affair, Leibovich slips in a catty observation about Matt Drudge, "who had the nerve to show up at Mrs. Clinton’s departure speech on Saturday"--as if Clinton naysayers had to get Hillary or Bill's permission to cover her press conference (speech).

Leibovich quotes Susie Tompkins Buell, a co-founder of the Esprit clothing company and a longtime friend of the Clintons who describes herself as “a soul sister” to Mrs. Clinton.

“I won’t forget these people.”

When asked to name “these people,” Ms. Buell specifies “all the women who sold out Hillary.”


The Democrat electorate turned to Hillary Clinton--a woman who over 50% of Americans say they would never vote for--after becoming acquainted with Barack Obama's past and present friends, advisers and history. Clinton is at this moment campaigning for the 2012 and 2016 Democrat presidential nomination--maybe even the 2020 one.

Expect to see more people turn on the Clintons, the further we get from Bill Clinton's administration.

Also expect that the Clinton's Enemy List will undergo many more future revisions.


by Mondoreb

images: Amazon; dbkp
Source:
* Those Loyal to the Clintons Take Note of Who Was Not
DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page