Unanswered Mystery of the Century: Barack Hussein Obama

Is he or isn’t he an American?  What did he do in Indonesia during his youth from two through 12 years?  What did he become?  Where did he attend college in America?  With whose money? Who were his girlfriends?  Why doesn’t anyone remember him in high school or college?



Why are all his school, work, travel, law and college records sealed against and away from the American people?  Why no pictures of his marriage?



A reader prompted me to repeat these question about Barack Obama. His eight years in the White House accomplished little. He violated the U.S. Constitution with his DACA executive order and many more.



A union man from Chicago asked these questions:          


          


In a country where we take notice of many, many facets of our public figures’ lives, doesn’t it seem odd that there’s so little we know about Barack Obama, also known as Barry Soetoro?



For example, we know that Andrew Jackson’s wife smoked a corn cob pipe and faced adultery accusations; Abe Lincoln never attended school; Jack Kennedy commenced an affair with Marilyn Monroe and a 19-year-old intern. Harry Truman played the piano.



We enjoy knowing details about our news makers, but none of us know one single humanizing fact about the history of Obama.



We know about the lack of incontestable birth records for Obama; that document managing:


spectacularly successful. And yes, no record of his Selective Service registration.  Additionally, we know his Social Security Card remains a total fraud.  We know he smoked pot and snorted cocaine. 



Several additional oddities in Obama’s history appear to be as well managed as the birthing issue.


One other interesting thing: no birth certificates of his daughters can be found.



No one who ever dated him ever speaks up.  The charisma that caused women to be drawn to him so strongly during his campaign, certainly would in the normal course of events, lead some lady to come forward, if only to garner some attention for herself.  We all know about JFK’s magnetism, that McCain was no monk and quite a few details about Palin’s courtship, Joe Biden’s aneurysms; look at Cheney and Clinton, we all know about their heart problems. Wild Bill Clinton’s sexual exploits before and during his White House years: well known.  That’s why it’s so odd that not one lady steps forward with, “Barry was so shy…” or “What a great dancer…”



It’s virtually impossible to know anything about Obama.  Best man at his wedding? Start there. Then check groomsmen. Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony. Has anyone talked to the professors?  Odd that no one brags that they knew him or taught him or lived with him!



When did he meet Michelle? Any photos? Every president gives the public all his photos for his library.  None released for Obama. And who voted for him to be the most popular man in 2010?  Do you wonder?



Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from Obama’s past saying they knew him, attended school with him or smoked dope with him. 



Very, Very Strange



To those who voted for him, you elected an unqualified, inexperienced, shadow man.  Some evidence shows he applied to Columbia under a foreign student visa.  Have you watched a movie titled, “The Manchurian Candidate?”



As insignificant as each of us might be, someone with whom we attended school will remember our name or face; someone will remember we were the clown or the dork or the brain or the quiet one or the bully or something about us.



George Stephanopoulos of ABC News said the same thing during the 2008 campaign.  



He questions why no one acknowledged Obama attending their classrooms or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches on campus.  Stephanopoulos maintained his status as a classmate of Obama at Columbia — the class of 1984.  Stephanopoulos never shared a single class with him.  


   


Since Obama gave soaring oratory, why doesn’t anyone in Obama’s college classes remember him? Why won’t he allow Columbia to release his records?    Nobody remembers Obama at Columbia University. Or Harvard for that matter!  He pretended to be a Christian, but admitted to being a Moslem in later years on video record.



Looking for evidence of Obama’s past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there… but none remembered him.    



Wayne Allyn Root, like Obama, became a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, “I don’t know a single person at Columbia who knew him, and they all know me. I don’t have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia, ever.”



Nobody recalls him. Root added that he, like Obama, became the Class of ’83 in Political Science, and says, “You don’t get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him.    At class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago. No one ever heard of Barack!”  



Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbooks and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia. Nothing about his Harvard years!



Some other interesting questions:



1.Why was Obama’s law license inactivated in 2002?   No record of him ever taking the Bar exam!


2.Why was Michelle’s law license inactivated by court order? We understand that it was forced to avoid fraud charges.



The Social Security number he uses now originated in Connecticut where he never lived. And Obama’s SS Card originally registered to another man (Thomas Louis Wood) from Connecticut, died in Hawaii while on vacation.



Social Security Numbers issue only once and never reused.  No wonder all his records are sealed.


Somewhere, someone has to know SOMETHING, before he reorganized Chicago?… SOMETHING!!!   He just seemed to burst upon the scene at the 2004 Democratic Convention.  ANYONE? ANYWHERE? ANYTHING?



At some point, much will come to light about this highly unqualified person who defrauded his way into the presidency of the United States by the color of his skin, but not the content of his character or his qualifications.  History will show us how badly Obama duped us with much help from his minions and nearly brought this greatest nation in history to its knees.



Obama’s legacy:  a man who accomplished little to nothing before reaching the White House; very little during the White House years other than creating an enormous racial divide among Americans, getting good men killed at Benghazi, bowing to Moslem kings, employing Moslems in the White House, giving Iran $150 billion to fund Iran’s nuclear bomb abilities, jumping the national debt from $13 trillion to $20 trillion, nothing for employing Black Americans, food stamp recipients from 38 million to 48 million, (among a dozen other consequences), and next to nothing beyond that time for the rest of his life.



What do you think as an American citizen?


##





— Frosty Wooldridge


Golden, CO 


Population-Immigration-Environmental specialist: speaker at colleges, civic clubs, high schools and conferences


Facebook: Frosty Wooldridge


Facebook Adventure Page: How to Live a Life of Adventure: The Art of Exploring the World


Www.HowToLiveALifeOfAdventure.com


Www.frostywooldridge.com 


Six continent world bicycle traveler


Speaker/writer/adventurer


Adventure book: How to Live a Life of Adventure: The Art of Exploring the World


Frosty Wooldridge, six continent world bicycle traveler, Astoria, Oregon to Bar Harbor, Maine, 4,100 miles, 13 states, Canada, summer 2017, 100,000 feet of climbing:



ature_760254810


Source Article from https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Opinion/235234-2018-02-22-unanswered-mystery-of-the-century-barack-hussein-obama.htm?EdNo=001&From=RSS

The 21st century plague: Deceit and complicity

hear see speak no evil

    

The Black Death was a medieval pandemic which swept through the ‘old world’ in the 14th Century. It arrived in Europe from Asia in the 1340s and killed an estimated 25 million people, about 50% of the population. The social and economic consequences of this were ‘permanent’: it created a labour shortage which ended the medieval institution of serfdom.

In short: Increased demand for labour + reduced supply of labour + chaos = collapse of status quo.

What emerged from the chaos was a rudimentary ‘free market’ in labour and goods. The age of capitalism had begun…the unforeseen consequence of a plague, borne on a creature that looked like this:

plague carrying flea

    

The pandemic we face in the 21st Century is a psychological phenomenon rather than a biological one, but in my view, it is equally parasitic. Its name is ‘deceit’, and our political & economic institutions are riddled with it.

The majority of people I speak to know that something is badly wrong with our societies and our economies – they feel it when they pick up a newspaper, turn on the TV or engage with the internet. Some of us try to disconnect from the drama and the constant stream of claim and counterclaim, in order to try to ‘get on with normal lives’ – but we feel something is badly wrong nevertheless.

Some of us gather ourselves into political parties, protest movements, and/or intellectual cliques in order to discuss how to ‘fix’ what ails us. And every 4 or 5 years, the majority of us go out and vote for an individual or a group of people that we hope will bring change…and then…we get more of the same. We just got, for example, the 3rd president in a row who ran on a promise of peace, and then immediately went looking for war.

What the majority of people have not yet realised is that the politician’s ‘promise’ is part of the deceit – it’s what keeps you coming back for more, hoping this time will be different. It never is – it’s just a new coat of paint on a crumbling wall.

It matters little whether you believe an individual candidate is a ‘good’ person, or a ‘bad’ person. Once in office he or she becomes a tool for the maintenance of the status quo – evidently. Why is this? Because the system is not run for your benefit. Its primary function is the concentration of power and wealth within the system itself, to serve the vested interests of a relatively tiny group of people.

These are the manifestations of the 21st-century plague – the institutions of deceit:

  1. A monetary system rigged for the banks and globalised corporations
  2. A military-industrial complex that requires endless war
  3. Politicians that are controlled by 1 & 2
  4. A mainstream media that is complicit with 1 to 3

The rest of our problems are ‘symptoms’, and some are deliberate distractions from that quartet. The prime example of this is ‘Russiagate’. What started as a ‘shoot the messenger’ attack on Wikileaks for revealing Democratic Party corruption, is now a daily farce that distracts people from the real villains. Who cares about our own warmongering? Let’s all fetishize about how Vladimir Putin spent at least five bucks telling Facebook users that black people get a raw deal in America. Wow, who knew? Meanwhile, the banks and the war machine go quietly about their business, undisturbed by any meaningful oversight or opposition.

At the root of each of the items in that quartet is a LIE. Nothing fundamental will change so long as those lies are allowed to stand. Those of you that have read my stuff before will know that I bang on about this a lot. Well…if the problem is deceit…and if you really want things to change…then get used to repeating yourself. Let’s look at it again:



1. A Monetary System rigged for the banks & global corporations

Banks create credit out of ‘thin air’; what we think of as ‘bank deposits’ are nothing more than bookkeeping entries. The credit thus created is then lent to borrowers at compound interest, effectively providing the banks with a constant return on the productive, non-productive & speculative activities of the entire system. Over time, and as the leverage in the system has expanded, the % of credit issued for productive activity has diminished, the % issued for non-productive & speculative activity has expanded. The result is a financialised economy, controlled by the banks – the book-keeping tail is wagging the productive dog. This is, in effect, usury…or if you prefer…theft by sleight of mind.

So, whenever you hear an economist talking about ‘trickle down’ or the ‘wealth effect’ – you are being lied to – wealth trickles up, not down. Believe it or not, many economists are still ignorant of how the system works. On the other hand, some are simply lying: Paul Krugman ignores the banking system in order to protect his career; Larry Summers panders to the bankers in order to further his. In both cases, they are apologists for a corrupt system.

By contrast there is one economist whose work reveals how the banking system really works. He is a scientist and a true man of ‘character’, which simply means he tells the truth. His name is Professor Richard Werner of Southampton University, UK; and he puts men like Krugman and Summers to shame. If you want to learn about the corruption at the core of our banking system, and ideas on how to fix it, find out what this man has to say. You can start here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521914001070

Prof. Richard Werner

    



2. A Military-Industrial Complex that requires endless war

The US allocates $700 billion a year to ‘defence’. Much of this expenditure is actually on ‘offence’ – tools for the maintenance of a global empire. You don’t need 700 military bases around the world for ‘defence’. You need 700 military bases around the world for this:

  1. To control and intimidate smaller nations, slapping down any that refuse to pay homage to King Dollar. E.g. Iraq and Libya
  2. To prevent the development of a ‘multi-polar’ world by hampering the development of Russia & China and their plans for new trade routes, E.g. continued US presence in Afghanistan & Syria
  3. To feed the balance sheets of corporations like Lockheed and Raytheon that are dependent on the government maintaining constant war and/or the threat of war

Washington’s wars are not about liberty, or human rights, or democracy. They are about putting anyone who threatens their hegemony under the imperial jackboot – yes ‘jackboot’. Washington has no problem making alliances with terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda. It has no problem outsourcing ‘dirty work’ to mercenaries like Blackwater. All that gut-wrenching stuff about human rights? It’s bullshit. Neoconservatives care nothing for human rights – they have objectives that they lie about, using morality as the decoy.

So…the next time you hear John McCain’s cant about some brave ‘freedom fighters’, take a look at who he’s rubbing shoulders with. See this photo of him in Ukraine?

John McCain and Oleh Tyahnybok

    

The guy standing next to him is the same guy as the chap on the far right (pun intended).

His name is Oleh Tyahnybok and he has absolutely no more interest in democracy than John McCain has in telling the truth.



3. Politicians that are controlled by 1 & 2

I’ll keep this short. The next time a politician tells you exactly what you want to hear, please do three things:

  1. Look at his or her voting record
  2. Find out where they get their campaign finance
  3. Make their lives excruciatingly embarrassing if you don’t like what you find at a) or b)

If you discover, as you almost certainly will, that they support regime change operations and take money from corporations and lobbyists that profit from war, ask yourself this: Why on earth would they care about what you want? If it comes to a choice between you and Raytheon, who do you think a Congressman is going to serve? Raytheon will get what it wants, and you’ll get screwed. You’ll also get lied to about why you’re getting screwed.



4. A mainstream media that is complicit with 1 to 3

I believe that the primary duty of the 4th estate is to speak truth to power. Not to promote an ideology or to sell copy, not to support your pals or to maintain access, and not to get the KBE, the Légion d’Honneur or any other award for being the most reliable ‘brown-noser’ on the think-tank circuit.

That isn’t journalism. None of that crap requires courage or integrity. None of it requires you to tell the truth, or to expose corruption and duplicity on your own side.

We don’t have many real journalists – we have hacks, sell-outs, bull-shitters, and people who lie through omission. We have people who lie in short sentences and people who omit to tell the truth in long ones. We have stenographers posing as commentators and idiots posing as analysts – our media is a melange of mediocrity, complicit with the corruption that is rotting our society from the inside out…and it is in total denial.

I recommend that you take the time to listen to the following interview with a real journalist – a great one in fact – John Pilger, on why his written work is now unwelcome at the Guardian, on Julian Assange, and on the death of truth-telling in the mainstream media: https://kpfa.org/player/?audio=277808



Conclusion

When writing a conclusion, I find it useful to remember why I started the piece in the first place. In this case it’s simple – I can’t stand the lies:

  • I can’t stand watching any more politicians lying about their motives for war. I can’t stand the sight of Tony Blair’s self-obsessed face still trying to wheedle his way back into public life. I can’t stomach the sight of Theresa May posing with the Saudi Arabian royal mafia to celebrate an arms trade that facilitates the murder of children in Yemen
  • I can’t stand listening to politicians and hacks demonising Russia, Syria and Iran, when they refuse to condemn the brutal apartheid regime in Tel Aviv or the medieval clown show in Riyadh. I can’t stomach the fact that ‘the west’ turns a blind eye to every atrocity against Palestinians but howls with rage when a 16-year old girl slaps an Israeli soldier a couple of days after her cousin got shot in the face with a rubber bullet
  • Most of all, I can’t stand the philosophy of ‘ends justify means’ – they don’t, not even close. Means create ends; actions have consequences -always. If war was ever going to create peace, don’t you think we’d have cracked it by now?

What do I suggest? I suggest that I keep my own side of the street clean; that I tell the truth in all my personal dealings; that I ensure that my own integrity is intact; that I keep my agreements; that ‘yes’ means ‘yes’ and ‘no’ means ‘no’; that you can take my word to the bank, preferably a local bank…that I speak out when I see injustice or hear lies; that when I go to bed at night, I am at peace with the voice that matters most – my own conscience.

This system will not stand, it is already collapsing. I do not know if what replaces it will be better or worse; whether the same collection of criminals and sociopaths will remain in charge, or if we can create something honest and decent. But I do know one thing for sure – the cure for deceit is telling the truth.

“We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men” George Orwell

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/376842-The-21st-century-plague-Deceit-and-complicity

PC OVERDRIVE: Art gallery removes 19th century painting over NAKED women

Political correctness has claimed another victim, this time in the art world.

According to an RT report, a U.K. art gallery has removed a 19th-century painting depicting a naked woman. The gallery claims they did this to spark debate amid the #meToo movement, but we all know this is the start of blatant censorship.

My spidey senses are telling me that book burning is right around the corner.

Source Article from http://www.thomasdishaw.com/pc-overdrive-art-gallery-removes-19th-century-painting-naked-women/

The Project for the New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses Through False Flag Terrorist Operations

Download RebuildingAmericasDefenses (PDF)

Sacred Owls mentions this document from The Project for the New American Century think tank led by William “Bill” Kristol, an American neo-conservative political analyst and commentator in our song “Inside Job“. He is the founder and editor-at-large of the political magazine The Weekly Standard and a political commentator on several networks.

I met his pal (co-conspirator) Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama while he visited Florida International University during a geo-political conference along with Fareed Rafiq Zakaria (author of The Post American World), Marco Rubio, and other neo-conservatives. He is a key Reagan Administration contributor to the formulation of the Reagan Doctrine, Fukuyama is an important figure in the rise of neoconservatism, although his works came out years after Irving Kristol‘s 1972 book crystallized neoconservatism.

Fukuyama was active in the Project for the New American Century think tank starting in 1997, and as a member co-signed the organization’s 1998 letter recommending that President Bill Clinton support Iraqi insurgencies in the overthrow of then-President of Iraq Saddam Hussein.

He was also among forty co-signers of William Kristol’s September 20, 2001 letter to President George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks that suggested the U.S. not only “capture or kill Osama bin Laden” (US State Dept. asset code name “Tim Osman” AKA “USOSAMA”), but also embark upon “a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq”.

He referred to this think tank and series of documents signed by and with contributions from Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, & many others as “Bill with a fax machine” dismissing it as something harmless. Read it for yourself. Keep in mind that it was published September 2000, one year before 9/11/01, which was the catalyst for the Iraq war, the founding of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which all laid the ground work for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and the list continues to grow.

This is a prime example of the thought process of the pawns of the ruling class. The use of problem, reaction, solution strategies to work on the emotions of their subjects to limit resistance and manufacture consent.

Source Article from http://www.federaljack.com/the-project-for-the-new-american-century-rebuilding-americas-defenses-through-false-flag-terrorist-operations/

Palestine: Abbas slams Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ as a ‘slap in the face’, Israel’s ‘killing’ of Oslo Accords

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas speaks during the meeting of the Palestinian Central Council in the West Bank city of Ramallah January 14, 2018

    

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has stated he will never agree to the US-championed peace plan in which Jerusalem is “taken off the table.” He accused Israel of “killing” the historic Oslo Accords on mutual recognition.

Speaking at the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s (PLO) Central Council meeting on Sunday, Abbas lashed out at US President Donald Trump, denouncing his decision to recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and a reported proposal by Washington to make a tiny West Bank village a future Palestinian capital.

“We told Trump we will never accept his [peace] plan. His ‘deal of the century’ is the slap in the face of the century, and we will not accept it,” Abbas said, vowing to “slap back,” as cited by Arutz Sheva.

The Palestine Authority (PA) will reject any further peace talks if they are spearheaded by the US, Abbas stressed, branding David Friedman, the US ambassador to Israel, “a settler” and “an offensive human being” with whom he has refused to meet.

“Any future negotiations will take place only within the context of the international community, by an international committee created in the framework of an international conference,” he stressed, according to Haaretz.

A former Hamas official revealed back in December that the US administration had proposed making the 12,000-dweller West Bank village of Abu Dis, which borders Jerusalem, a future Palestinian capital instead of East Jerusalem. The same proposal was reportedly voiced by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman during his meeting with Abbas in November, sparking anger among Palestinians.

Abbas has also slammed Trump for threatening to halt aid to the Palestinians in a recent tweet, in which the US leader claimed he took the issue of Jerusalem “off the table” and accused Palestinians of “no longer willing to talk peace.”

Noting that “nothing is more important than Jerusalem” Abbas stated that he was stunned by the remark claiming that the negotiations have never got going.

“I saw his tweet which said that ‘We will not give aid to the Palestinians because they refuse to relaunch negotiations… When did you offer me this? On the phone? On television? When the hell did negotiations start?!” he wondered.

Trump is slated to follow through on his threats by drastically cutting the US contribution to the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, AP reported on Sunday, citing unnamed US officials. According to the report, the US is set to channel just $60 million instead of the planned $125 million to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). Washington could potentially scrap funding entirely, the officials said, if preconditions set by the US for further transfers are not met. Among the demands, that might be put forward by Washington, is the revival of Palestinian-Israeli talks. The US State Department has neither confirmed or denied the move, saying “there are still deliberations taking place.”

Since the 1993 Oslo Accords, the US has been among the major donors to the PA, created to manage limited self-governance in parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The milestone agreement included Israel and PLO letters of mutual recognition.

Arguing that Israel has been undermining the agreement, Abbas signaled the Palestinians might quit the Accords, while declaring its effectively null and void during his fiery speech.

“Today is the day that the Oslo Accords end,” he said. “Israel killed them.”

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/374140-Palestine-Abbas-slams-Trumps-deal-of-the-century-as-a-slap-in-the-face-Israels-killing-of-Oslo-Accords

Does Life In 2018 Live Up To What We Predicted A Century Ago?

By Claudia Geib ,Futurism

People in the early 20th century were hopeful about the future innovation might bring. The technology that came out of World War I, and the growing potential brought by electricity (half of all U.S. homes had electric power by 1925) had many looking ahead to the coming century. Futurists of the early 1900s predicted an incredible boom in technology that would transform human lives for the better.

In fact, many of those predictions for the future in which we live weren’t far off, from the proliferation of automobiles and airplanes to the widespread transmission of information. Of course, the specifics of how those devices would work sometimes fell broad of the mark. Yet these predictions show us just how much our technology has progressed in just a century — and just how much further more innovation could take us.

Calling the Future

On a cool February day in 1917, storied inventor Alexander Graham Bell gave the graduating class of McKinley Manual Training School a rousing speech that would later sound a bit like prophecy.

“Now, it is very interesting and instructive to look back over the various changes that have occurred and trace the evolution of the present from the past,” Bell said, after recalling the incredible transformation wrought by electricity and automobiles alone. “By projecting these lines of advance into the future, you can forecast the future, to a certain extent, and recognize some of the fields of usefulness that are opening up for you.”

In 1876, Bell himself had patented the device known as the telephone, which used wires to transmit the sound of human speech. As this device spread, its capabilities allowed voices to cross enormous distances. In 1915, one such “wireless telephony” system had allowed a Virginia man to speak to another in Paris while a man in Honolulu listened in — a distance of 4,900 miles (about 7,886 kilometers), setting the record for the longest distance communication at that time.

Bell placing the first New York to Chicago telephone call in 1892. Image Credit: Gilbert H. Grosvenor Collection, Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress

Bell marveled at this achievement and the change it had already created, predicting that “this achievement surely foreshadows the time when we may be able to talk with a man in any part of the world by telephone and without wires.” At the time of Bell’s speech, the U.S. had an estimated 11.7 million working telephones; by the year 2000, that number had risen to nearly 103 million.

Extrapolating forward, Bell predicted a future in which this technology allowed people to pretty much anything remotely: “We shall probably be able to perform at a distance by wireless almost any mechanical operation that can be done at hand,” he said. And he wasn’t wrong.

Transportation of the Future

People a century ago were obsessed with the travel of the future. By 1914, the Ford Motor Company had developed the first moving assembly line, allowing the company to produce 300,000 cars in a single year. With transit beginning to transform society, futurists began imagining a world in which every person from Miami to Moscow could own their very own automobile. In that regard, they weren’t too far off — 95 percent of American households own cars, according to a 2016 government report. But those imagined automobiles looked a bit different from the ones we know today.

An illustration from the 1918 Scientific American article “The Motor Car of the Future.” Image Credit: Scientific American

On January 6, 1918, the headline of an article in The Washington Times announced that the “Automobile of Tomorrow Will Be Constructed Like a Moving Drawing Room.” The author was writing about prediction in Scientific American that described the car of the future. It would be water-tight and weather-proof, with sides made entirely of glass, and seats that could be moved anywhere in the vehicle. It would be decked out with power steering, brakes, heating, and a small control board for navigation. A finger lever would replace the steering wheel. Other designs imagined that cars would roll around on just three wheels, or on air-filled spheres to remove the need for shocks.

Future-forecasters of the early 1900s were enthralled by the idea that our everyday travel would not be confined to land. Take, for example, the series of postcards produced between 1899 and 1910 by French artist Jean-Marc Côté and his collaborators, who seemed confident that by the year 2000, we would have already colonized both sky and sea — and recruited some of their residents for our transit purposes.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Air travel was foremost in people’s minds: The Wright brothers made their first successful flight of a powered airplane in 1903, spurring other inventors and engineers to test innumerable aircraft designs before World War I. As such, it’s not surprising that Côté’s minute works imagined that, by the year 2000, nearly every form of transportation would be via air. Aerial taxi servicesfloating dirigible battleshipsa flying postman, and air-based public transportation all appear in the whimsical depictions of our predicted current day.

Some craft, like an aerial rescue service or planes outfitted for warfare, are now an everyday part of military forces (though we don’t yet have the “French invisible aeroplane” that Scientific American promised was forthcoming in 1915).

Other predicted technologies, like personal flight devices that allow humans to huntor play tennis aloft, may become features of our near future once jet packs become available.

Artist Albert Robida imagines (circa 1882) a night at the opera in the year 2000, by which time we would all have personal flying cars. Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Indeed, personal flying machines are a prominent feature of the 21st century as envisioned from the 19th and 20th — particularly the concept that personal flying cars would become commonplace. Forward-looking Victorians, such as artist Albert Robida in 1882, assumed the skies would be thick with flying cars by 2018.

In the May 1923 issue of Science and Invention, science fiction writer Hugo Gernsback described his vision for these flying cars, which he dubbed the “helicar,” as a solution to the automobile traffic he already saw jamming the streets of New York City:

The only practical solution is to combine the automobile with an airplane and this no doubt will happen during the next few decades. The Helicopter Automobile or, for short, the helicar, will not take up very much more room than the present large 7-passenger automobile, nor will it weigh much more than our present-day car, but instead of rolling down the avenue, you will go straight up in the air, and follow the air traffic lines, then descend at any place you wish.

We might not yet have a flying machine parked in every garage, but organizations such as Uber and NASA, the Russian defense company KalashnikovToyota for the 2020 Olympics, and numerous smaller companies are developing personal flying cars, so this too may not be far off.

Alexander Graham Bell addressed the possibility of transportation by air, noting that travel by boat was cheaper than travel by rail, because no tracks had to be laid. Bell suggested that a “possible solution of the problem over land may lie in the development of aerial locomotion.” He continued: “However much money we may invest in the construction of huge aerial machines carrying many passengers, we don’t have to build a road,” — a sentiment echoed by one of his fictional successors.

Technology Gets Personal

In 1900, Smithsonian curator and writer John Elfrith Watkins, Jr., penned an article titled “What May Happen in the Next Hundred Years” for The Ladies’ Home Journal. Looking forward at the fresh new century, Watkins imagined a world in which technology wasn’t left in the hands of industry or the military — instead, it would be redirected to entertain and convenience everyday people.

Though he didn’t foresee television in its current form, Watkins predicted that technology would one day bring distant concerts and operas to private homes, sounding “as harmonious as though enjoyed from a theatre box,” and that “persons and things of all kinds will be brought within focus of cameras connected electrically with screens at opposite ends of circuits, thousands of miles at a span.” He also predicted that color photographs would one day be quickly transmitted around the world, and that “if there be a battle in China a hundred years hence snapshots of its most striking events will be published in the newspapers an hour later.” One can only guess what he would have thought of the selfie.

Jean-Marc Côté’s 1910 imaginings of the “correspondence cinema” of the 21st century aren’t too far from today’s Skype or FaceTime. Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Watkins imagined that technology would transform our homes and diets. Though the mechanically-cooled refrigerator wasn’t invented until 1925, and wouldn’t become widely used until the 1940s, Watkins correctly predicted that “refrigerators will keep great quantities of food fresh for long intervals,” and that “fast-flying refrigerators on land and sea” would deliver fruits and vegetables from around the world to provide produce out-of-season. He even called the development of fast-food delivery, anticipating “ready-cooked meals… served hot or cold to private houses.” He believed these meal deliveries would replace home-cooking entirely (for some city-dwellers with Seamless accounts, that’s not too far off), and might arrive by pneumatic tubes as well as by “automobile wagons.”

Some of Watkins’ predictions might have been close to reality, but he was pretty far off about other aspects of life in the 21st century. He thought that man would have exterminated pests like roaches, mice, and mosquitoes, as well as all wild animals, which would “exist only in menageries.” This prediction was surprisingly common in the early 1900s, and might have been a reaction to then-recent extinctions like that of the quagga (1883), the passenger pigeon (1914), and the thylacine (1934). Though we are now going through another global extinction caused by human activity, we can be grateful that we haven’t quite reached the level of extinction most Victorian futurists expected.

Watkins also thought that we would have eliminated the letters C, X or Q in the everyday alphabet, as they were “unnecessary;” that humans would essentially make ourselves a into super-species, with physical education starting in the nursery, until “a man or woman unable to walk ten miles at a stretch will be regarded as a weakling.” Unfortunately, our global obesity problem shows the reality was, in fact, quite the opposite.

Thematically, though, these predictions are sound: As the use of electricity spread, and technology like automobiles and telephones became more affordable to use, Watkins could envision an age in which technology was entirely integrated into our lives. To futurists of the early 1900s, it seemed obvious that robots and automation would be essential to 21st century people, serving as our chauffeurscleaning the housescheduling the laundry, and even electrically transmitting handshakes.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Alexander Graham Bell also predicted this trend, and he thought it heralded something particularly promising for the McKinley graduates he addressed in 1918. Foreseeing the rise of an industry centered around technology and an exploding need for scientists and engineers, he told them: “It is safe to say that scientific men and technical experts are destined in the future to occupy distinguished and honorable positions in all the countries of the world. Your future is assured.”

A Future of Clean Energy

Perhaps the most surprising predictions from the past century regard fossil fuels and the environment. Yes, today some people still resist transitioning away from fossil fuels and ignore the scientific consensus on climate change. But bright minds of the early 20th century were already theorizing that we would one day have to quit our fossil fuel habit.

The city of the future, as illustrated in a 1928 edition of Popular Mechanics, would see traffic re-routed below ground to avoid congestion. Image Credit: Popular Mechanics

As early as 1896, scientist Svante Arrhenius calculated that doubling the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would raise Earth’s temperature between 8 and 9 degrees Celsius. Arrhenius was inspired by the startling discovery of his friend Arvid Högbom, who realized that human activities were releasing carbon dioxide at roughly the same rate as natural processes. Because of the rate at which industrial countries burned coal in 1896, Arrhenius believed human-caused warming wouldn’t reach problematic levels for thousands of years. But by the time he published his 1908 book Worlds in the Makingan attempt to explain the evolution of the universe to a popular audience, that rate had increased so much that Arrhenius was convinced that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could double within a few centuries.

Scientists as a whole wouldn’t come around to Arrhenius’ ideas, or recognize that burning carbon-based fuels had an adverse effect on our planet, for at least a century. Yet even before scientists understood the climate effects of fossil fuels, futurists were predicting that we would have to drop our use of coal and oil before long. “Coal and oil are going up [in usage] and are strictly limited in quantity,” Alexander Graham Bell said in his February 1917 speech. He continued:

We can take coal out of a mine, but we can never put it back. We can draw oil from subterranean reservoirs, but we can never refill them again. We are spendthrifts in the matter of fuel and are using our capital for our running expenses. In relation to coal and oil, the world’s annual consumption has become so enormous that we are now actually within measurable distance of the end of the supply. What shall we do when we have no more coal or oil!

He went on to note that hydropower was, at the time, limited, and implied that one day it might be possible to generate energy from the tides or waves, or “the employment of the sun’s rays directly as a source of power.”

Bell wasn’t the only one who was sure we would have to find a new source of energy in the next century. In 1917, when a severe coal shortage in the U.S. caused people to call for the resource’s conservation, one writer for the Chicago News asserted that stockpiling coal would ultimately be foolish. He insisted that worrying about the supply of coal would soon be like fretting over the supply of tallow candles: pointless.

“These gifted lunatics who are worrying about the coal supply are in the same class,” the Chicago News writer insisted. “It doesn’t occur to them that in a hundred years people will be saying, ‘Our grandfathers, the poor boobs, actually used coal for heating purposes!’”

We’re not laughing quite yet. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. still gets 17 percent of its energy from coal. Another 28 percent comes from petroleum products, and 33 percent from natural gas; we get only 12 percent of our electricity from the renewable sources that the Chicago News writer — who was sure we’d find a way “to put the sun’s energy in storage, and pump it into people’s houses thru pipes” — predicted by now. Globally, coal makes up about 27 percent of the world’s energy production, and renewable energy about 24 percent.

The good news is that this distribution is changing as renewable energy becomes cheaper than fossil fuels, edging us ever closer to the bright future that 20th century minds thought we’d be living in. Fingers crossed the whale-bus will be next.

Source Article from https://truththeory.com/2018/01/10/life-2018-live-predicted-century-ago/

Apocalyptic numbers of “migrants” will overwhelm Europe this century, driven by global warming, say ‘experts’

Now that the general public is sick of the refugee crisis created by Middle East wars, watch for ‘Climate refugees’ as the fashionable reason for mass migration in 2018!

Before I get to the climate refugee portion of the story, see that the UN says there are 258 million migrants on the move around the world.   (The total population of the US is around 326 million and at present we gain one international migrant every 33 seconds!)

boat_people from Libya

Migrants headed to Europe!

According the UN there are 50 million “migrants” in the United States now making it the top destination for people on the move.

I’m going to emphasize for the umpteenth time that migrants do not equal refugees.  Even if the Left would love for you to get it into your head that every person on the move is a refugee of one sort or another, they are not.

The 1951 UN Refugee Convention  (still in effect) defined a refugee as follows:

“A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it..”[11]

 

Do you see anything in there about a refugee being someone running from a war zone, anything about needing a job, anything about being poor, anything about leaving a natural disaster area, anything about fearing gang violence, anything about the weather changing at home? NO!

So the vast majority of people on the move are NOT refugees, they are simply migrants.

But, watch for the on-going efforts of the borderless world pushers to try to claim they all are refugees.

So here is what the UN reported this week about migrants of all stripes.

The US has the highest number of migrants of any country in the world!

From Reuters:

NEW YORK (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – An estimated 258 million people are international migrants, a figure that has surged by a half since the turn of the century, the United Nations said on Monday.

One in ten of those people is a refugee or asylum seeker, the U.N. said in a report on migration trends and developments released to coincide with International Migrants Day.

Globally, 3.4 percent of the population consists of international migrants, meaning someone who lives in a country other than the country where they were born, it said.

[….]

The rights of migrants and the need for safe, well-managed migration policies are included in the set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted unanimously by the U.N. member nations in 2015, and the U.N is planning an international conference on migration late next year.

Other figures showed that migration contributed 42 percent of the population growth in Northern America between 2000 and 2015, and that the population in Europe would have declined during that time period without migration.

The biggest number of international migrants, nearly 50 million, live in the United States. Saudi Arabia, Germany and Russia have about 12 million international migrants each, followed by the UK with almost nine million, it said. [S.A. does permit large numbers of foreign workers, but they are not voting citizens.—ed]

The greatest number of migrants, 106 million, came from Asia, it said.

More here.

Beware the CLIMATE REFUGEE ruse!

climate-refugee-2-728

Off and on over the years I’ve followed the growth of the climate refugee movement. (See my archive on the topic by clicking here.)

I believe it will be taking off big time in 2018. (It’s a twofer: They will be able to whack the President on two things at once—refugees and global warming!)

The ‘climate refugee’ activists have been somewhat held back because so many thinking people question the validity of the global warming issue in the first place, and they have been stymied by internal political arguments about the word ‘refugee.’

Longtime promoters of the humanitarian ‘refugee’ redistribution of people, don’t want the word ‘refugee’ sullied or otherwise messed with.  But, those pushing redistribution of people and wealth using the climate argument want to latch on to the sexy word—refugees—that they know the media loves. And also because the word implies that we have some responsibility for them.

It’s just a guess, but I think that the glow is off that word for many people after more than a decade of being lectured and told that western countries must absorb the Muslim world’s problems by moving massive numbers of mostly illegitimate ‘refugees’ (migrants!) to the West.

The one-worlders need a new excuse, so here comes global warming creating ‘climate refugees.’ 

As you might guess, I set alerts to receive certain types of news from around the world every day.  One of those alerts is for ‘climate refugees,’ another is for ‘Syria refugees.’

The Syria alert has been packed with at least two dozen daily stories for the last few years, but I noticed lately that the ‘climate refugees’ stories are becoming almost as numerous!  What the heck!

Here is one (PBS News Hour) that is being blasted everywhere this week.

Global warming could drive 660,000 more people per year to Europe

The number of asylum seekers fleeing their home countries to the European Union will increase 188 percent — to 660,000 applications per year — by 2100 if carbon emissions and global warming continue on their current path, according to new estimates published Thursday in Science Magazine.

But, do you see what they have done here?

“Asylum seekers,” after going through a legal process and being granted asylum, are REFUGEES.  They are once again making the leap—making you think that those moving because of changing weather at home are legitimate refugees!  It follows that if they are refugees, you are primed to think that you must care for them, invite them to your town or some such nonsense.

There is a rebuttal of Science mag here.

And, here is another story, this one from Reuters, which rightly refers to the people moving due to changing weather as ‘migrants.’

To wrap up with some holiday cheer! There is even a story this week about Santa moving to the South Pole because of global warming.  Trying to be cute(?) as they plant the R-word here:

 

Screenshot (105)_LI

 

 

Source Article from https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/2017/12/24/apocalyptic-numbers-of-migrants-will-overwhelm-europe-this-century-driven-by-global-warming-say-experts/

Re: The deal of the century: Greater Israel

The year 2017 refused to end before the 100th anniversary of the cursed Balfour Declaration was crowned with Trump’s cursed declaration, recognising Jerusalem as the unified capital of Israel and promising to move the American embassy to the city. This decision is no less of a disaster than the Balfour Declaration. It is a cursed day in the history of the Arab and Muslim nations, just like 2 November 1917, the day that Arthur James Balfour sent a letter to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild, a leader of the international Zionist Movement, expressing the British government’s support of the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

This is a promise made by those who do not have the right to make this promise to those who do not deserve it. The Jewish population in Palestine at the time was no more than 50,000, while the total Jewish population in the world was 12 million at the time. They only represented five per cent of the total indigenous Palestinian people, who have lived in the land for thousands of years, with a population of 650,000. However, this promise neglected them and only recognised a fraction of their political, economic and administrative rights.

US embassy might be moved to Jerusalem – Cartoon [Sabaaneh/MiddleEastMonitor]

While the Balfour Declaration recognised the right of the Jewish people to establish a national homeland in Palestine, more dangerous and more important is the Versailles Peace Conference held in 1919, which resulted in an agreement between Prince Faisal, representing the Kingdom of Hijaz, and Dr Chaim Weizmann, representing the Zionist Organisation. This agreement included clauses that disregard Palestinian rights and reinforce the Jewish presence in Palestine, such as the following article: “All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.”

Read: Israel is afraid of our memories

The agreement acted opened the door to Palestine to Jews all across the world to gather, and they accepted the invitation and we witnessed Jewish immigrants from all across the world to flock to Palestine. Over 70 nationalities poured into the Jewish melting pot, and this was the first step to establishing a Jewish entity. The Balfour Declaration was the legal document the international Zionist Movement referred to in order to back its demand for a Jewish state in Palestine and the realisation of the Jewish dream, and indeed their dream did come true with the establishment of Israel on 15 May 1948. This state was granted UN membership by means of pressure from the global superpowers, making Israel the first country in the history of the international political system to be established on stolen land after its indigenous people were expelled from their country. The state also receives international backing and unprecedented support from the largest country in the world, the US, which has allowed Israel to act arrogantly in the region, wage wars, expand and seize more Palestinian and Arab land. The state also tortures the Palestinians remaining in Palestine mercilessly and inhumanely.

I will not go too far into history or into the reasons that led Great Britain to establish Israel, as well as the reasons behind the unlimited Western support for the state, as whatever humanitarian or religious justifications that have been given are all false and misleading, aiming to whitewash the Western imperialist project called Israel. It was planted in the region in order to serve the Western colonial interests, and at the time, Israel was called the watchdog in the area.

Shortly before the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, the region’s watchdog bombed one of the resistance’s tunnels in Gaza, leading to the death of 12 mujahedeen. It was as if it was trying to provoke the Palestinian resistance and see its reaction, putting it under a difficult test amid the atmosphere of the painful anniversary.

People gather to celebrate the signing of the reconciliation agreement between Hamas and Fatah on 12 October 2017 [Mohammed Asad/Middle East Monitor]

This provoked the pains and sparked the flames of anger within the souls of the people. It stirred the dream of liberation, which was never abandoned by Hamas since the moment it was established. However, now, it is restricted by a cursed agreement, no less cursed than the Balfour Declaration, known as the Palestinian reconciliation agreement, in which Hamas conceded its authority over Gaza and handed over control of the crossings to the PA president, whose term was over years ago. He, like his friend Netanyahu, chose the atmosphere surrounding the Balfour Declaration anniversary to take over control of Gaza, in a shameful celebration in which his pictures and the pictures of Al-Sisi were hung, portraying him as the victor who has regained control of the crossings from occupying invaders, and not taking over from fellow Palestinians whom he signed a national reconciliation agreement with based on partnership. This caused shock in the ranks of Hamas and complete silence on the part of the movement’s leaders.

This indicates the truth behind this ominous reconciliation, which was clearly manufactured inside the Israeli intelligence agencies to serve Israel, not the interests of the national Palestinian unity, as they claim. After eliminating Hamas from the political scene, they now want to declaw the movement and strip it of all its sources of power. The true purpose of the reconciliation is to disarm Hamas and for it to be under the control of the PA. Abu Mazen explicitly stated this on several occasions, and it aligns with the Israeli desire voiced by Netanyahu, making it easier to integrate the movement with the PA, on the settlement path imposed by the US administration, and adopted by several Arab parties. This settlement path includes normalisation with Israel as part of the deal of the century scenario, which began with the declaration of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

This is the true dilemma that Hamas put itself in by means of the suspicious reconciliation agreement, full of traps that were clear to everyone. I do not think that Hamas couldn’t see them, but I believe that Yahya Sinwar, head of Hamas in Gaza, who has made many concessions to Fatah, more than it was demanding, thanks to which it received many gains that tempted it to impose its own conditions and adopt a stubborn position, sees a way out of this dilemma, which we believe will be very difficult. The first option is Hamas remains a resistance movement and stands against the Oslo trend with all its might, as well as rectify the strategic mistake it made, which has become a very difficult task given the fact that it is under the control of the Egyptian intelligence. This will also be difficult given Al-Sisi’s openly hostile position towards the movement, as he will not allow Hamas to repeat the 2007 scenario. The second option is that Hamas becomes a chapter in the history of the Palestinian resistance, which began in the 1920’s, and a new resistance is born, carrying the torch of resistance in order to liberate Palestine from the river to the sea.

While the Balfour Declaration of 1917 granted the Jewish people a national homeland in Palestine, the Trump declaration of 2017 granted Israel the entire Arab nation and achieved the dream of Greater Israel, from the Nile to the Euphrates, by means of the deal of the century.



Source Article from https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20171211-the-deal-of-the-century-greater-israel/#comment-3658524005

Re: Will those supporting Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ reconsider?

Leaked information about Donald Trump’s “deal of the century” varies in some details, but the one thing that is consistent is that there will be no more on offer than autonomy for parts of the West Bank, without Jerusalem. There will be no Palestinian sovereignty and no return of the refugees, not even compensation for them, although there will be talk about linking autonomous areas with Jordan in a federal arrangement8. In the meantime, relations between Israel and Arab states will be formalised.

What will be discussed when marketing the “deal”, of course, is that this solution is not the end product, and that the so-called “final status” issues, especially Jerusalem, will be left for another time after the neighbours are more reassured about each other’s intentions. Meanwhile, everyone knows that the plan is based on making the status quo permanent in due course, because no one in Israel wants to give up Jerusalem, nor allow the return of any Palestinian refugees.

This reminds me of the paradox of former minister Tzipi Livni’s response to Saeb Erekat mentioned in the well-known negotiation leaks, when the Palestinian official told Livni that the then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had agreed to the return of 10,000 refugees in what were called, rather euphemistically, “reunions”. She insisted that this was Olmert’s personal opinion and that the number of people who will return to Israel is nil.

Read: Abbas ready for ‘historic’ peace deal under Trump

The details of the deal are of no concern, but what is, is that those involved in marketing and supporting such a proposal — and pressing for its acceptance by Palestinians and Arabs — are in more need of advice than the others for two reasons. The first is that such an agreement will be practically impossible to pass, even though it might seem possible to get through some of its early stages; and second, their position will be harmful to them.

In the first context, keep in mind what Netanyahu said a few days ago about it being the Arab people who reject normalisation of relations with Israel, not the regimes; this is true to a large extent. The people generally do not approve of Israel’s existence in principle, even if they accept the Arab Initiative, which proposed giving the Israelis 78 per cent of historic Palestine. Things will get more difficult when discussing a much worse proposal which involves the effective abandonment of Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The people’s position on normalisation means that the new game will not pass. The stance of the Egyptian people after nearly four decades of the Camp David Treaty is the best evidence of this; there is also the position of the Jordanians 25 years after signing the Wadi Araba peace deal with Israel.

Read: Israel’s normalisation efforts soar against the public’s wishes

That is not all. The Palestinian people will not be silent about eradicating their cause in such a miserable way, and they will rise again, and the Jordanians will not accept the federalism being spoken of. It all, in any case, assumes that the Palestinian resistance forces will agree to the new proposal, which they won’t, or at least the majority of them won’t. Those in the Arab world who try to market the Trump deal will clash with their people if they go ahead and back a proposal to wipe out the Palestinian cause.

As a backdrop to all of this, it is clear that America and Israel will continue to be keen on keeping the regional conflicts going so that only Israel will remain as a strong and cohesive state, which everyone then seeks to befriend. Will those involved in supporting the Trump plan reconsider their positions? I hope so.

Translated from Thenewkhalij, 27 November 2017



Source Article from https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20171129-will-those-supporting-trumps-deal-of-the-century-reconsider/#comment-3637945464

Apple has used the church’s century-long experience for app icons – Russian bishop

The metropolitan Hilarion had a chance to witness the computer industry revolutionizing “virtually from the very beginning,” he said in a TV interview. And while the first computers were dealing exclusively with text, Apple products went further. “Instead of a text, they had what they called an ‘icon’ – an image, each leading somewhere,” the bishop went on.

“I think the creators of the [Apple] system had used what the church had known for centuries for a reason,” Hilarion said. “Those who worship have icons in their homes and pray with them, since each in a way represents a window to another world,” he said, adding that thanks are due to this fact for Apple’s popularity.

While the bishop admitted it makes no difference where prayers are read from, be it a book or a mobile phone, he said he is not particularly fond of priests holding their Apple devices in front of the altar. “It looks as if [a priest] is checking his email instead of reading a prayer.”

Source Article from https://www.rt.com/news/410987-apple-app-icons-priest/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS