OBAMNEY 2012: Avoid the Puppet Show & Use Critical Thinking to Expose Two Identical Candidates. Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney Mud-slinging, Their Mossad & CIA Connections, Both Support Drone Killings, NDAA, The Patriot Act, Unconstitutional Surveillance, Wiretapping, Banking Bailouts, Israel’s Oppression of Palestine, War by Design Against Iran, Torture in Guantanamo and that’s just the beginning!
Show Transcript
The Puppet Show: Obama and Romney Are the Same Candidate
Tonight it’s Obamney 2012. I’m excited about this one. These two are funded by the same banks, same connections to Israel and the CIA. Same team. Don’t be fooled. Tonight we are decrypting the matrix of Romney and Obama being the same candidates, and I have over forty points that prove it. Pick this one up or drop it on its head completely, because this is a puppet show. It’s a distraction. It’s completely for entertainment. They want you to pay attention and think that you have a voice, that you’ve chosen, and that America’s got a say.
People are being presented with the busiest election in our history. We desperately need a change of direction, but it is never what is good for the people. If you’re a Decrypted Matrix listener, you’re gonna know that some of these things are just how it is, how the game is played. For others, this might be news. Keep an open mind and sit back and really try to absorb some of the stuff, and dig into it yourself. I can show you the tip of the iceberg, but in most cases with these one-hour segments we fly through a lot of stuff.
We’ve got the NDAA, a lot of authorization cheating Americans, and we’re definitely not where we need to be. Drone strikes are happening as per usual. Drone strikes are happening on American citizens on foreign territory. The USA right now is drone-striking countries that it is not at war with. God forbid anybody ask either of these candidates one of those questions — you’d be quickly ushered out or silenced or cut off if you bring up drone strikes, extraordinary renditions, or anything regarding the Federal Reserve.
Tonight’s gonna be pretty interesting for me because I love ripping things like this to shreds. The public version is just such a farce. I want to go one by one through the facts so you can understand why these are the most empty, hollow, broken promises — promises yet to be broken. It’s that “my candidate beats up your candidate” type of attitude. People are really getting heated and emotional about this one. It’s a complete distraction. Both are on the same team. They are meant to be presented like fighters, meant to be scrapped and then disposed of.
Super PACs and How Corporations Buy Candidates
There are so many things here having to do with Super PACs. This might be news to some people. In 2010, a few weeks after the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United, the DC Circuit Court ruled in SpeechNow.org v. FEC that PACs that did not make contributions to candidates, parties, or other PACs could accept unlimited contributions from individuals, unions, and corporations, both for-profit and not-for-profit, for the purpose of making independent expenditures. The result of that decision was a rise in 2010 of a new type of political action committee popularly dubbed the “Super PAC,” officially known as independent expenditure-only committees. Super PACs may not make contributions directly to campaigns or parties, but can spend independently of the campaigns. Also unlike traditional PACs, they can raise funds from corporations, unions, and other groups and from individuals without legal limits.
So we know the Super PACs were made possible by two judicial decisions. In 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled that the government may not prevent a corporation from making independent political expenditures. Two months later, in SpeechNow.org v. FEC, the DC Circuit held that contributions to groups that only made independent expenditures could not be limited in size or source. What does that mean? That means unlimited donations from new donors, from anyone, anytime, without having to disclose it.
It was already extremely easy for corporations to buy candidates — we know that’s been happening for a long time, that’s not news — but now they’ve made it even easier. The Supreme Court has somehow figured out a way to make it even easier for corporations and private interests to fund candidates. So the only candidates you hear about are the ones that get the biggest bankroll to push their marketing. You won’t know anything about these guys unless you’re sitting down and listening to a show like this that is willing to dig deep and tell you things about these candidates that you will not hear elsewhere. I guarantee you that you can count the other outlets where you’ll hear some of this stuff on one hand.
The Israel and CIA Connection
There is a real connection between both candidates. Both have significant, powerful figures in their cabinets. With Obama it’s Rahm Emanuel. With Romney it’s Michael Chertoff, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Orit Gadiesh, who is affiliated with Romney through Bain Capital.
We’ve talked about the Israel connection and the CIA connection. Both candidates are standing together on a leading foreign policy, especially the drum-beating and saber-rattling towards Iran and Syria. Iran is doing what any other country is really doing — trying to generate power and move away from oil and fossil-based fuels. There is really no reason that a country like Iran should not be able to run nuclear reactors. They need them for power. Running a nuclear reactor is not weaponizing, and there’s no evidence whatsoever. No one can prove they are trying to make weapons. Yet it’s the perfect excuse for the US and Israel to use to go in, reorganize things, put in their own cronies, their own contractors, their own privatized interests to go make more money and establish a base of expanded control.
There is evidence of Obama’s CIA connection — that he took a leave of absence during his Columbia years to work for the CIA in Pakistan. There is apparently a discrepancy in Columbia University’s records which casts doubt on Obama’s well-documented two-year tenure at the New York school. He was also involved legally with a company that worked as a CIA front company, which almost certainly means he probably worked for the CIA in some respect. That could explain the supposedly missing couple of years.
When we look deeper into Rahm Emanuel from the Obama camp, he is the son of an Irgun fighter, a member of the group that blew up the King David Hotel in a terrorist bombing that killed British soldiers. They are classified as terrorists by the British, though from the Israeli perspective they are looked upon as freedom fighters. When Rahm turned eighteen, he was in the Israeli Defense Forces. He is known as “Rahm-bo” for his pit-bull posture.
Romney’s brother is an intelligence chief and campaign adviser. Romney named Michael Chertoff, who supervised the destruction of crucial evidence from 9/11. Romney also attended the Herzliya Conference on Israeli security in 2007. Romney and current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu worked together as consultants at the Boston Consulting Group early in their careers. Orit Gadiesh, a former Israeli military intelligence officer with a Ukrainian-born background, is chairman and management consultant for Bain and Company, the parent company of Bain Capital, and was the company’s managing director under Mitt Romney in 1982. Her Jewish mother, as Dan Senor told Fortune magazine in 2006, is a real connection. Romney’s close relationship with Israeli intelligence is the real reason that interests me.
The relationship between Israeli military intelligence and a presidential candidate should be of great concern to all Americans, because this is how the Israeli military plans to drag the United States into war with Iran. That has been a top priority for a long time. I first started hearing about a potential invasion of Iran in 2006.
Bank Donations and Following the Money
The two-party system is obviously a joke. It’s a delusion of democracy, the illusion that you have a choice. They’re funded by the same sources. Look at these big banks: Goldman Sachs gave Romney $352,000 and Obama around $184,000. Morgan Stanley gave Romney $128,000 and Obama $49,000. Bank of America gave Romney $112,000 and Obama $46,000. JP Morgan gave Romney $107,000 and Obama $38,000. They gave Ron Paul $5,000. Citigroup gave Romney $50,000, Obama $36,000, and Ron Paul $702.
The numbers are ridiculous. And remember, that’s what they’re willing to tell you publicly. The banks are obviously buying the candidates. With the Super PACs, you better believe they are dumping massive amounts of money into making sure there are Romney signs and Obama signs everywhere. The decisions have all been made, and it’s made extremely difficult to challenge.
Romney’s connection to Bain Capital also connects to Chinese surveillance — a huge explosion of surveillance technology being pushed on the Chinese people. Bain Capital, Romney’s company, has enabled that and profited off of it immensely. Both Obama and Romney have money in the Caymans, hundreds of millions filtering through offshore accounts.
Forty Points: Obamney on the Economy, the Fed, and Healthcare
I have an awesome list of forty points sourced from an article by Michael Snyder at The American Dream blog, with my own added commentary. Number one: they both supported bailing out the banks. TARP — the Troubled Asset Relief Program — was designed to purchase assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen the financial sector. It was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008, to address the subprime mortgage crisis. Basically, it was bailing out banks and the mortgage industry that knew exactly what they were doing packaging these risky loans.
Number two: Romney supported Obama’s economic stimulus packages. Number three: Romney says that Obama’s bailout of the auto industry was actually his idea. Number four: neither candidate supports immediately balancing the federal budget. Number five: they both believe in bigger government and they both have a track record of being big spenders while in office.
Number six: both fully support the Federal Reserve. Number seven: both are on the record saying that no one should even question the independence of the Federal Reserve. Number eight: both have praised Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and said he did a good job during the financial crisis — the crowd that gave away trillions and hollowed out the United States from the inside, which was sold to the American people as a good idea. Number nine: both believe Bernanke deserves to be re-nominated. Number ten: both candidates are on record saying the US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has done a good job.
Number twelve: both have been big promoters of universal healthcare. Number thirteen: Mitt Romney was the one who developed the plan that Obamacare was later based on. Number fourteen: both candidates receive their campaign contributions from Wall Street.
Number fifteen: neither candidate wants to eliminate the income tax or the IRS. Number sixteen: both candidates want to keep personal income tax rates at the exact same levels for the vast majority of Americans, while these guys pay ridiculously low single-digit percentages themselves. Number seventeen: both candidates are open to the idea of imposing a value-added tax on working people.
The TSA, the NDAA, and the Patriot Act
Number eighteen: both believe the TSA is doing a great job — patting down old women, terrorizing and molesting little kids, caught abusing people. You’ve got the body scanners, they’re testing drinks now. The invasion of your personal space is absolutely insane and this is allowed to continue. Number nineteen: don’t dare ask them about this in public — you will be ushered out or silenced.
Number twenty: both support the NDAA — the National Defense Authorization Act — basically an executive order signed by Obama that is said to be absolutely unconstitutional. It turns the United States into a battleground where anyone, if labeled a threat, has no rights. You can end up dead, detained, and thrown in a cell with no right to a trial. We get celebrities out there at the RNC and DNC conventions talking about how great these candidates are. Will.i” target=”_blank”>Will.i.am apparently didn’t even know what the NDAA is but supported his candidate. These guys don’t even know what they’re promoting.
Both support the renewal of the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was already drafted and ready to go before 9/11 — they just needed the public to react. It is an obvious result of problem-reaction-solution: you want to have the solution implemented, so you need the public to react. You bring in the problem, people react, and you present the solution that you already had ready to go.
Drone Strikes, Guantanamo, and Extraordinary Rendition
Number twenty-one: Obama and Romney both believe the federal government should be able to indefinitely detain American citizens that are considered to be terrorists. Their definition of “terrorist” is actually a very broad definition. If you are listening to this program right now, you are someone the system considers a critical thinker willing to consider things outside the box and decide for yourself. You are a threat to the system.
Number twenty-two: both believe that US citizens suspected of being terrorists can be killed by the president without trial. This is already happening in Yemen and Pakistan. Military-age males are being hit in coffee shops and internet cafes. Then a few minutes later, people recovering bodies and sifting through the rubble to find survivors get blasted again by the drone coming around for another sweep. Apple just banned a drone awareness application that allowed real-time updates of where drone strikes are happening.
There’s a witness who talks about his time in the Navy SEALs. He quit because he was the missile controller — the man on-site directing the missile to its target in the final mile. He was being told to hit buildings again minutes later after they had already been destroyed, when first responders were on the scene. His thinking is that the system is bombing these people on purpose to create terrorists. If you kill somebody’s child with a hunter-killer drone connected to a screen at a desk where the president is responsible, you have just created a terrorist for life — somebody who will give his life to kill Americans because a drone killed his family. This is happening every day and journalists are not allowed to ask about it.
Both support the idea of extrajudicial killings, like Anwar al-Awlaki, who simply held beliefs the US considered alternative to its interests but caused no physical harm or threat, yet was killed with a drone strike. His sixteen-year-old son, an American-born citizen, was also killed. Number twenty-three: Obama promised but has not closed Guantanamo Bay. Romney actually wants to double the number of prisoners. Number twenty-four: both candidates support the practice of extraordinary rendition — when black-ops operatives go into another country and snatch somebody from a moving vehicle, a high-rise building, or out of their beds. These people end up in CIA black sites. Both candidates support this practice.
Trade, Immigration, Global Warming, Gun Control, and More
Number twenty-five: both support job-killing free trade and globalism. They’re both globalists connected to international banking with no allegiance to the United States, hollowing it out from the inside. Number twenty-six: each accuses the other of shipping jobs out of the country, and both of them are right. Number twenty-seven: both candidates are extremely soft on illegal immigration because it drives down labor costs. They act like they hate the problem, spending nonstop money to stop it, yet they love it because it drives down labor costs.
Number twenty-eight: neither candidate has any military experience — the first time that’s happened since 1944. Number twenty-nine: both graduated from Harvard University. Number thirty: both promote the theory of man-made global warming. That train is a farce. Maybe climate change is happening — there’s speculation as to whether it’s warming or cooling — but there are no valid reasons for imposing new taxes and protocols. They’re just more control products.
Number thirty-one: Romney would support a cap-and-trade carbon tax scheme like the one Obama wants, as long as the entire globe goes along with it. Same page on this. Number thirty-two: both candidates have a long history of supporting gun control measures. The system does not want you to have guns. The US has the highest gun ownership per capita. That’s the only thing left that scares them, and they absolutely want to take your guns. Obama’s already been involved in those discussions, and you can certainly expect Mitt Romney to continue pushing strict gun control measures.
Number thirty-three: Mitt Romney’s conversion to the pro-life cause is questioned by many. In fact, Romney’s Bain Capital made millions investing in Stericycle, a company that incinerates aborted fetuses collected from family planning clinics. Number thirty-four: both believe that the Boy Scouts banning openly gay troop leaders is wrong. Number thirty-five: both believe the two-state solution will bring lasting peace between the Palestinians and Israel. What that really means is continued allowance and promotion of the ongoing oppression of Palestine by Israel.
Number thirty-six: both candidates have a history of nominating extremely liberal judges — meaning judges that will go the way the agenda needs them to go. Number thirty-seven: both Obama and Romney plan on using signing statements on bills they sign. Number thirty-eight: both have a horrible record when it comes to job creation. They say they’re capitalists, but capitalism only works when you play fair, and no one is playing fair. Number thirty-nine: both believe the president has the power to take the country to war without the approval of Congress. Number forty: both candidates plan to continue running up more government debt even though the US government is already sixteen trillion dollars in debt.
So there it is. Forty reasons why this is just a dog and pony show. Don’t be fooled.
