Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Decoding Obama's 2012 Ad / Obama administration and NATO should be classified as associated forces according to NDAA

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 31, 2012, 4:33 a.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic (5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

NATO commander admits that "flickers" of Al Qaeda and Hezbollah terrorists among the Libyan rebels - 2011. According to the NDAA maybe the Obama administration and NATO should be imprisoned by the military without trial. For assisting "Associated forces"

Below is a video of a NATO commander answering questions from the Armed Services Committee. Also there is pretty much a media black out on this subject. At least in America. England's CNN has talked about it as well as many foreign media outlets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtGe6zk52Cw

Here's a video of Obama 2012 ad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=R3F18zVblJ8#!

The parts in (parenthesis) are the decoded addition

"We've heard a lot of talk about change these past years." (I was the one talking about it, remember? A lot of the same shit is still happening.) "The question is, change to what? I believe change is not letting banks and oil companies rip off the American people." (Even though I supported bailing out the fraudulent banks and institutions that stole your homes and pensions and I'm currently working on a settlement plan that would essentially grant them criminal immunity. Also gas prices are higher than ever and a bunch of oil companies are still making huge beneficial adjustments from the wars, and so is Halliburton and KBR.) "Change is when we finally fix healthcare instead of just talking about it." (Even though I have said nothing about a bill which would actually get the American people real Universal healthcare, it's called the NEED Act, HR 2990.) "Changes giving tax breaks to middle class families instead of to companies that send jobs overseas." (Once again I never put in an effort to support HR 2990, which would have also given the government the ability to cut taxes, and I mainly didn't support it because it wasn't lobbyist approved.) "Change is a president who brings people together." (Even though the country is drastically divided and even the super liberal OWS doesn't support me. I also appointed a Monsanto vice president to the FDA. You're welcome.) "I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message because this year change has to be more than a slogan." (In my first term I didn't really accomplish what I told you I would. 4 more years of Bush's war legacy, vote for me again.)

8 Comments

8 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

More info on Libya

Hour long presentation in congress about Al Qaeda members being involved with the Libyan rebels, as well as extremists, rapists, and murderers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-G0pUEU603Q&list=FLEwSllwonAZBCc7W3e27_dQ&index=42&feature=plpp_video

In case any of you don't like the first video because it's a republican here is super Liberal Dennis Kucinich railing against Al Qaeda ties with the Libyan rebels as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSUnluGSOdM&list=FLEwSllwonAZBCc7W3e27_dQ&index=43&feature=plpp_video

And here is an article on the Libyan rebel leader admitting to having a bunch of Al Qaeda members in his "rebellion."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

NATO commander questioned about Al Qaeda in Libya

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtGe6zk52Cw

Here's an article with Ralph Nader on the unconstitutional actions by Obama and his administration against Libya,

"Why don’t we say what’s on the minds of many legal experts; that the Obama administration is committing war crimes and if Bush should have been impeached, Obama should be impeached."

http://www.salon.com/2011/03/21/ralph_nader_obama_impeachment/ Another good article on the topic.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51595.html

Essentially the Obama administration along with NATO replaced Gaddafi with another form of Gaddafi. They took out a murderer extremist and replaced him with murderer extremists. Very reminiscent of when the US and CIA helped out the Afghan Arabs and the Mujahideen in the 80's.

[-] 0 points by GypsyKing (9727) 2 years ago

Yeah, Romeny will put a stop to all this! He's a man of the People!

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Lulz yeah because that's an intelligent response to these problems we're seeing from the Obama administration. Last time I check, Romney isn't president right now.

It's really sad that the only response I get from most people when criticizing Obama is how much the republicans suck. I know the republicans suck. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. That has nothing to do with Obama being a fucking fraud just like the republicans.

All the facts how Obama is a fraud and so can you

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-obama-has-completely-alienated-his-liberal-bas/

I'm a die hard liberal. I'm also anti war and anti frauds.

Kucinich should have been president in 2008

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9727) 2 years ago

I agree that he's a fraud, but all the Obama bashing, given the fact that the two party system is VERY unlikely to change between now and November is, in effect, just aiding the Romney Campaign.

The fact remains that Obama is fenced in by corporate control of the election process, by a hostile Supreme Court, by a hostile House of Rrepresentitives, and by a rule in the Senate that ties that hands of the slight Democratic majority - namely, a rediculour rule requiring a 60 vote plurality to pass legislation.

Under such circumstances it would be practically impossible for him to put forward a progressive agenda on his own.

I am not defending many of his positions. He is definately beholding to the 1%, but given the reality of the expense of financing elections today, how could that be otherwise?

You will say I am a Democratic shill, of course, but after the next election I think we need to immediately form a third party, to end the stranglehold the two party system has on the political process, but if the Republicans win, we will be lucky to emerge with a democracy at all.

People just don't get it. The oligarchs are tired of democracy. If every institution of power falls into Republican hands again, they will be able to "fix" democracy for good.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

If he can't do it, which he can't, he should not be running for president again. He should stand down and he should have a while ago. Since he is running for re-election he closed the doors to REAL options.

At least you admit he's a fraud. I just want people to know the truth. I was an Obama supporter for 2 years until all this kind of BS kept piling up. My anger towards him is huge because he betrayed the people who voted for him in many ways.

I just want these wars to end. I guess I also want the fraud to end too.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9727) 2 years ago

You and I are really on the same page, so it seems a shame to argue. I too have been painfully disappointed in this administration. Maybe more so than by anything since the defeat of George McGovern.

Believe me, the ONLY thing that makes me advocate voting for Obama is a real and genuine FEAR of another Republican Administration. It is my honest belief that the Bush Administration came a hair's breadth from full out dictatorship.

Please, review the history of that administration, and if you don't feel a genuine horror, than I can't imagine why.

Ted Kennedy was actually put on a "no fly" list - tantamount to an accusation of terrorism - a sitting US Senator! If that doesn't raise the hair on your head I don't know what would.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Yeah but if Newt becomes president then I will finally have an excuse to move to Canada and talk to people about hockey and George St Pierre.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9727) 2 years ago

Well, I won't vote for anything that isn't warm blooded, and if we actually elect a reptile I guess I'll have to renounce my membership in the human race.