<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>I personally think this description borders on
paranoia -- which does NOT come from a condition of mental
health.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>When I met Obama a couple of times in 2002 in the
little rooms of small-town IL politics, <EM>I'd like to know where those
auto-cue cards were</EM> -- as he engaged in totally at-ease, spontaneous
conversations, which are the very same as his expressions now in front of
millions of people. Blair's obvious fakery and Clinton's obvious
manipulations are nowhere to be seen in Obama's deeply natural
behavior.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>And he risked his entire political career by
rallying Illinoisans in Chicago in 2003 along with the millions of others of us
OUTSIDERS, against any invasion of Iraq. THEY would've had to "start
training him" after that, because his speech on the outright stupidity of an
invasion blistered their behinds and was intended to stop it from
happening.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>I'm pretty sure the extraordinary two
humanitarian women who raised him immunized him against the attempts there
no doubt have been to own him. As he rose to national prominence, he did
strategically engage the powers-that-be in order to not be killed. But I
think in time, because of his nature, we'll see just how much he's using them
instead of them using him.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>I think we'll be pleased at the counter-coup to the
long takeover of our nation that Obama will pull off in time.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>Connie</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=aroyboy44@hotmail.com href="mailto:aroyboy44@hotmail.com">andrew
ritter</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=citizenstruth@six.pairlist.net
href="mailto:citizenstruth@six.pairlist.net">truth seekers</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 16, 2009 12:44
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [CitizensTruth] Icke on
Obama</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt" size=3>I'm sure there are a variety of opinions on
David Icke, but I think he has some pretty solid arguments against
Obama. I have included some highlights below. Full posting is very
long and sometimes wanders, but also has a lot of indisputable facts &
worth a read here:<BR></FONT></FONT><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
face=Verdana size=4>Barack Obama: The Naked Emperor</FONT><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4><A
href="http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/18281">http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/18281</A></FONT><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4><BR></FONT><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>I studied the military/government mind-control<BR>programmes and
techniques in great detail for many years during the<BR>late-1990s and across
2000, and the Obama 'phenomenon' is the most<BR>blatant mass-mind control
operation you could wish to see.</FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>At its core the plan has been to make Obama the focus<BR>of everything
you hope for, believe in and want to change. This is why<BR>it has been
crucial for him not to specify and detail what is meant by<BR>his 'hope,
'change' and 'believe'. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>However, I can tell you what those words mean in the context of the
Obama mind-game. They mean whatever <I>you </I>decide they mean or <I>want
</I>them<BR>to mean. The idea is for you to project all that you stand for
onto him<BR>and so he becomes the symbol of you and how you see the
world.<BR>Specifics would destroy that 'I am whatever you want me to be'
scenario<BR>and so you don't get any detail, just 'hope', 'change', and
'believe'. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>They don't want
him to be seen only as 'the Messiah';<BR>they also want him to be Abraham
Lincoln, JFK, or Buddha - anyone you<BR>choose to project on him, for he is a
blank page, blank screen and<BR>empty suit. Obama is a make-your-own,
do-it-yourself leader, a<BR>projection of your own mind. (If you are still
asleep, that is. If you<BR>are in any way awake, he's an open
book.)</FONT><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>There is no more
powerful way of manipulating people<BR>than to tell them what they want to
hear and to keep shtum about<BR>anything they wouldn't like. Double-glazing
salesmen are trained to<BR>pick up in general conversation what their target
likes and dislikes<BR>and to respond accordingly in the way the product is
sold. The<BR>technique is simply to tell the potential buyer what you have
gleaned<BR>they want to be told. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>Obama comes from the same stable, but on a massively<BR>bigger scale
and with a whole network of advisors and controllers<BR>steeped in the art of
manipulating minds, opinions and actions. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>Obama's written-for-him speeches are not from
the<BR>heart, but from the autocue. The 'heart' bit comes from
extensive<BR>training and his Bill Clintonesque ability to 'mean it when he
says<BR>it', a state of delivery that goes beyond mere acting. Tony Blair
was<BR>trained in the same way. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>But if you take a step back and look at these people<BR>dispassionately
you can clearly see the techniques they consciously<BR>employ. Blair is the
most blatant fraud in the way he delivers a line,<BR>stops in mid-sentence for
emphasis and looks down for fake emotional<BR>effect. Obama is a little more
slick, but, from where I have been<BR>looking this past year, not much. And
how have people not seen those<BR>cold eyes just above the painted
smile?</FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>You can watch his
mind working, turning between<BR>autocue screens to his left and right, then
straight down the camera<BR>for his key messages. From-the-heart orators don't
do that; they are<BR>too immersed in what they are feeling and saying to give
even a passing<BR>thought to where they are looking or how the line is
delivered. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>I worked in
television for more than a decade, often<BR>reading autocue while a director
spoke in my ear telling me what<BR>cameras to look at. I have, since the early
1990s, spoken my truth on<BR>public stages across the world. I know,
therefore, the difference<BR>between artificial autocue delivery and body
language and talking from<BR>the heart without a script. Obama, I repeat, is
coming from the<BR>autocue, not the heart. </FONT><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>As I keep emphasising, the whole Obama circus
is an<BR>exercise in mass mind control and it has been so successful because
so<BR>many people live their lives in a permanent state of trance. All
of<BR>which brings me to the parallels with Nazi Germany, fascist Italy
and<BR>similar regimes throughout history. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>Obama may not look like Hitler, nor sound
like<BR>Hitler, but the themes are just the same. Germany was in a
terrible<BR>state economically and militarily in the 1930s in the aftermath of
the<BR>First World War and the reparations inflicted on the country by
the<BR>Rothschild/Illuminati-controlled Versailles 'Peace' Conference in
1919.<BR></FONT><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>As the writer Webster
Tarpley points out, fascism in its<BR>true sense is not just a Police State
imposed by a tiny hierarchy. <BR></FONT><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>It<BR>might end up like that, but first it is brought to power by a
mass<BR>movement from within the people who have no understanding of what
the<BR>'change', hope' and 'believe' they are being offered really means.
They<BR>just know that they want some because, as with Obama, they make it
mean<BR>what they want it to mean. Only later do they see, to their
horror,<BR>what they have signed up for. </FONT><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>Much the same thing is happening with regard to
Bush<BR>and Obama. The Neoconservative 'Republican' wing of the
Illuminati<BR>controlled Bush for eight years and led the country into foreign
wars<BR>and financial chaos (bad guy/problem); now the 'Democratic' wing,
led<BR>by the infamous Zbigniew Brzezinski, has brought forth the
'saviour',<BR>Barack Obama, to lead us into the sunshine with 'hope' and
'change'<BR>(good guy/solution). </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>Hence even some more aware people say: 'At least he's not
Bush'.</FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>Apart from the
unspecified 'hope, 'change' and<BR>'believe', few have any idea what Obama's
policies will be. Public<BR>perception comes from having an 'image' of him, or
a self-projection,<BR>not the fine print because Obama doesn't do fine print
until the votes<BR>are cast and even then he will hide it in his windbag
words. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4>There is an 'image'
that Obama is against war, but <I>no he's not</I>.<BR>He says he's against the
invasion of Iraq, though we'll see what he<BR>does about that in office. How
can a man calling for more troops,<BR>including European troops, to be sent to
Afghanistan be against war? He<BR>has also said he is prepared to bomb
Pakistan and use military force to<BR>stop Iran building nuclear weapons and
he has appointed Hillary 'Let's<BR>bomb 'em' Clinton (Bilderberg Group,
Trilateral Commission, Council on<BR>Foreign Relations) as Secretary of State
and re-appointed Bush's 'Let's<BR>bomb 'em' Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates
(Bilderberg Group, Council<BR>on Foreign Relations). So that's the 'change we
can believe in', then. </FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>Obama isn't against war at all and, if his<BR>controllers have their
way, he will engage the US in even more foreign<BR>conflicts with the troops
sent to their deaths, and the deaths of their<BR>targets, on a wave of oratory
from the dark suit with the black face<BR>who would never go where he's
sending <I>them</I>.</FONT><BR><BR>
<HR>
Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. <A
href="http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_022009"
target=_new>See how it works.</A>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>CitizensTruth
mailing
list<BR>CitizensTruth@six.pairlist.net<BR>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/citizenstruth<BR>website:
http://citizenstruth.info<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>