NOW THAT OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN PROVEN FALSIFIED, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO HIM? Everything Was Done To Cover Up The Truth, But Justice Still Needs To Be Served. Proof that Obama has been used to deceive the world and everyone who accepts deception will go on to be deceived again.

From QuoraNow that Obama's birth certificate has been proven to be falsified, what will happen to him?

The evidence is Obama’s certificate has been falsified. But most people have their own belief systems so they do not want to believe evidence or accept too much
responsibility other than what keeps them in their conditioned comfort zone (cocoon).

The significance of Obama’s birth certificate being falsified is Americans are willing to believe anything and everything they are fed. Those who deny this fact demonstrate that they are not critical thinkers, as many like to claim. The truth is these individuals are programmed via the indoctrination system they mistakenly call education.

Trump will do nothing about Obama’s birth certificate—even if he is around for eight years. Congress might conduct an inquiry so that they can say they have been productive and produced some words to be recorded. The game will just go on.

Nevertheless, Obama should be taken to Saudi Arabia and taught what it means not to tell the truth—but the problem with that is he only does what is required of him: taqiyyah. Progressives see nothing wrong with taqiyyah, for they too are itching to embrace the Saudi Arabian system, which they see as the cream on top of their waffle.

Why did Obama have to falsify his birth certificate?

People only falsify things when they have something to hide. Morons are morons, idiots are idiots and imbeciles are imbeciles, yet they are all innocent. It is a different matter when a person asserts adulthood: innocence ends!

There are other things that cannot be hidden, besides the forgery of the birth certificate. Obama’s children looking the spitting images of their god-parents (who visit them regularly). The fact there are no legitimate records of Michelle Obama giving birth to children or ever being pregnant; the fact the Barry (Barak) often refers to Michelle as “Michael”; the fact homosexuals who said that they knew Barry intimately, suddenly died; and the list goes on. But believe what you want, we all know what the evidence suggests, especially when it is hanging in a conspicuous place. Although, some times, some things are a little too conspicuous.

Politicians are used like prostitutes to do the beckoning of their pimps. The day is coming when both the politicians and their masters and those who are blindly caught up in the system of right and left are going to be cursing their own existence.

Without A Standard That Is Eternal How Can A Person Measure True Wealth

WHAT THE KORAN (QURAN) SAYS ABOUT VIOLENCE OR HOW TO SPREAD THE WORD OF ISLAM. The Quran (Koran) And The Hadith And Sira All Form Islam. Interpretations are very important when it comes to understanding the way of Islam.

Violence Does the Quran really contain over a hundred verses promoting violence?  The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter. Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran. The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Their apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology. Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.

Quran Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to claim that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families.  The historical context of this passage isnot defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries.  In fact, the verses urge offensivewarfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did).  Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous - the actual Arabic words for persecution (idtihad) - and oppression (a variation of "z-l-m") do not appear in the verse.  The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation.  This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief. Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."  Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help." Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah'). Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers. Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…" Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle). Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense? Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement" Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.  The targets of violence are "those who disbelieve" - further defined in the next verse (13) as "defy and disobey Allah." Nothing is said about self-defense.  In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people.   Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."  Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals." Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."  Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..." Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy." Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..." Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence at the time of Muhammad was to convert to Islam: prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars. The popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.   [Note: The verse says to fight unbelievers "wherever you find them". Even if the context is in a time of battle (which it was not) the reading appears to sanction attacks against those "unbelievers" who are not on the battlefield.  In 2016, the Islamic State referred to this verse in urging the faithful to commit terror attacks: Allah did not only command the 'fighting' of disbelievers, as if to say He only wants us to conduct frontline operations against them. Rather, He has also ordered that they be slain wherever they may be – on or off the battlefield. (source)] Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "healing" the hearts of Muslims. Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war. Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has charted them to make Islam "superior over all religions." This chapter was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.  Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"  Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell. Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).  Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith. Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."  Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer? Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).  Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. [Note: This parable along with verse58:22 is a major reason that honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.12).] Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"  Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse. Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations. Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.  Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost(Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"  Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell. Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. This verse tells Muslims that there are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' to describe Hell in over 25 other verses including65:10, 40:46 and 50:26.. Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His cause" Religion of Peace, indeed!  The verse explicitly refers to "rows" or "battle array," meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9), which defines the "cause": "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought. Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of'Adn- Eternity ['Adn(Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see verse 9). It uses the Arabic root for the word Jihad. Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such. Other verses calling Muslims to Jihad can be found here at AnsweringIslam.org

Hadith and Sira Sahih Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."  Sahih Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings. Sahih Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today. (See also Sahih Bukhari 3:125) Sahih Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror' Sahih Bukhari (52:44) - A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed." Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist) Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious Sahih Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah Sahih Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally." Sahih Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah." Sahih Bukhari (52:73) - "Allah's Apostle said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords'."  Sahih Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes." Sahih Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..." Sahih Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!" Sahih Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'" Sahih Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)." Sahih Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them." Sahih Muslim (31:5917) - "Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: 'Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?' Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: 'Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger'." The pretext for attacking the peaceful farming community of Khaibar was not obvious to the Muslims. Muhammad's son-in-law Ali asked the prophet of Islam to clarify the reason for their mission to kill, loot and enslave. Muhammad's reply was straightforward. The people should be fought because they are not Muslim. Sahih Muslim (31:5918) - "I will fight them until they are like us." Ali's reply to Muhammad, after receiving clarification that the pretext for attack Khaibar was to convert the people (see above verse). Sahih Bukhari 2:35 "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed)."  Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim. Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam. Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.  Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’” Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: Cutting off someone's head while shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is not a 'perverison of Islam', but a tradition of Islam that began with Muhammad.  In this passage, a companion recounts an episode in which he staged a surprise ambush on a settlement: "I leapt upon him and cut off his head and ran in the direction of the camp shouting 'Allah akbar' and my two companions did likewise". Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah."Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid. Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 - "Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship." One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries. The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims. Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad's armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.

Notes Other than the fact that Muslims haven't killed every non-Muslim under their domain, there is very little else that they can point to as proof that theirs is a peaceful, tolerant religion. Where Islam is dominant (as in the Middle East and Pakistan) religious minorities suffer brutal persecution with little resistance. Where Islam is in the minority (as in Thailand, the Philippines and Europe) there is the threat of violence if Muslim demands are not met. Either situation seems to provide a justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to Islamic fundamentalism. The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran. Few verses of Islam's most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. Those that do are earlier "Meccan" verses which are obviously abrogated by later ones. The example of Muhammad is that Islam is a religion of peace when Muslims do not have the power and numbers on their side. Once they do, things change. Many Muslims are peaceful and do not want to believe what the Quran really says. They prefer a more narrow interpretation that is closer to the Judeo-Christian ethic. Some just ignore harsher passages. Others reach for "textual context" across different suras to subjectively mitigate these verses with others so that the message fits their personal moral preference. Although the Quran itself claims to be clear and complete, these apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret verses without their "assistance."  The violent verses of the Quran have played a key role in very real massacre and genocide. This includes the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of Hindus for five centuries beginning around 1000 AD with Mahmud of Ghazni's bloody conquest. Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islam's Genghis Khan) slaughtered an untold number merely for defending their temples from destruction. Buddhism was very nearly wiped off the Indian subcontinent. Judaism and Christianity met the same fate (albeit more slowly) in areas conquered by Muslim armies, including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe, including today's Turkey. Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian people is despised by Muslims and barely survives in modern Iran. Violence is so ingrained in Islam that it has never really stopped being at war, either with other religions or with itself.  Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns, massacring the men, raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking the property of others as his own. On several occasions he rejected offers of surrender from the besieged inhabitants and even butcheredcaptives. He inspired his followers to battle when they did not feel it was right to fight, promising them slaves and booty if they did and threatening them with Hell if they did not. Muhammad allowed his men to rape traumatized women captured in battle, usually on the very day their husbands and family members were slaughtered.  It is important to emphasize that, for the most part, Muslim armies waged aggressive campaigns, and the religion's most dramatic military conquests were made by the actual companions of Muhammad in the decades following his death.  The early Islamic principle of warfare was that the civilian population of a town was to be destroyed (ie. men executed, women and children taken as slaves) if they defended themselves and resisted Islamic hegemony. Although modern apologists often claim that Muslims are only supposed to "attack in self-defense", this oxymoron is flatly contradicted by the accounts of Islamic historians and others that go back to the time of Muhammad. Some modern-day scholars are more candid than others. One of the most respected Sunni theologians is al-Qaradawi, who justifies terror attacks against Western targets by noting that there is no such thing as a civilian population in a time of war: "It has been determined by Islamic law that the blood and property of people of Dar al-Harb [ie. non-Muslim people who resist Islamic conquest] is not protected... In modern war, all of society, with all its classes and ethnic groups, is mobilized to participate in the war, to aid its continuation, and to provide it with the material and human fuel required for it to assure the victory of the state fighting its enemies. Every citizen in society must take upon himself a role in the effort to provide for the battle. The entire domestic front, including professionals, laborers, and industrialists, stands behind the fighting army, even if it does not bear arms." Consider the example of the Qurayza Jews, who were completely obliterated only five years after Muhammad arrived in Medina. Their leader opted to stay neutral when their town was besieged by a Meccan army that was sent to take revenge for Muhammad's deadly caravan raids. The tribe killed no one from either side and even surrendered peacefully to Muhammad after the Meccans had been turned back. Yet the prophet of Islam had every male member of the Qurayza beheaded, and every woman and child enslaved, even raping one of the captives himself (what Muslim apologists might refer to as "same day marriage").  One of Islam's most revered modern scholars, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, openly sanctions offensive Jihad: "In the Jihad which you are seeking, you look for the enemy and invade him. This type of Jihad takes place only when the Islamic state is invading other [countries] in order to spread the word of Islam and to remove obstacles standing in its way." Elsewhere, he notes:"Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and traditions to release human beings from their poisonous influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom. Those who say that Islamic Jihad was merely for the defense of the 'homeland of Islam' diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life."  The widely respected Dictionary of Islam defines Jihad as "A religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of Muhammad. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Quran and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims…[Quoting from the Hanafi school, Hedaya, 2:140, 141.], "The destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the traditions which are generally received to this effect." Dr. Salah al-Sawy, the chief member of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America, stated in 2009 that "the Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time," tacitly affirming the legitimacy of violence for the cause of Islamic rule - bound only by the capacity for success. (source) Muhammad's failure to leave a clear line of succession resulted in perpetual internal war following his death. Those who knew him best first fought afterwards to keep remote tribes from leaving Islam and reverting to their preferred religion (the Ridda or 'Apostasy wars'). Then the violence turned within. Early Meccan converts battled later ones as hostility developed between those immigrants who had traveled with Muhammad to Mecca and the Ansar at Medina who had helped them settle in. Finally there was a violent struggle within Muhammad's own family between his favorite wife and favorite daughter - a jagged schism that has left Shias and Sunnis at each others' throats to this day.  The strangest and most untrue thing that can be said about Islam is that it is a religion of peace. If every standard by which the West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny, sexual repression, warfare...) were applied equally to Islam, the verdict would be devastating. Islam never gives up what it conquers, be it religion, culture, language or life. Neither does it make apologies or any real effort at moral progress. It is the least open to dialogue and the most self-absorbed. It is convinced of its own perfection, yet brutally shuns self-examination and represses criticism. This is what makes the Quran's verses of violence so dangerous. They are given the weight of divine command. While Muslim terrorists take them literally, and understand that Islam is incomplete without Jihad, moderates offer little to contradict them - outside of personal opinion. Indeed, what do they have? Speaking of peace and love may win over the ignorant, but when every twelfth verse of Islam's holiest book either speaks to Allah's hatred for non-Muslims or calls for their death, forced conversion, or subjugation, it's little wonder that sympathy for terrorism runs as deeply as it does in the broader community - even if most Muslims prefer not to interpret their personal viewpoint of Islam in this way. Although scholars like Ibn Khaldun, one of Islam's most respected philosophers, understood that"the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force", many other Muslims are either unaware or willfully ignorant of the Quran's near absence of verses that preach universal non-violence. Their understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others. Believers in the West are often led to think that their religion is like Christianity - preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love, and tolerance. They are somewhat surprised and embarrassed to find that the Quran and the bloody history of Islam's genesis say otherwise. Others simply accept the violence. In 1991, a Palestinian couple in America was convicted of stabbing their daughter to death for being too Westernized. A family friend came to their defense, excoriating the jury for not understanding the "culture", claiming that the father was merely following "the religion" and saying that the couple had to "discipline their daughter or lose respect." (source). In 2011, unrepentant Palestinian terrorists, responsible for the brutalmurders of civilians, women and children explicitly in the name of Allah were treated to a luxurious "holy pilgrimage" to Mecca by the Saudi king - without a single Muslim voice raised in protest. The most prestigious Islamic university in the world today is Cairo's al-Azhar.  While the university is very quick to condemn secular Muslims who critique the religion, it has never condemned ISIS as a group of infidels despite horrific carnage in the name of Allah.  When asked why, the university's Grand Imam, Ahmed al-Tayeb explained: " Al Azhar cannot accuse any [Muslim] of being a kafir [infidel], as long as he believes in Allah and the Last Day—even if he commits every atrocity." For their part, Western liberals would do well not to sacrifice critical thinking to the god of political correctness, or look for reasons to bring other religion down to the level of Islam merely to avoid the existential truth that this it is both different and dangerous. There are just too many Muslims who take the Quran literally... and too many others who couldn't care less about the violence done in the name of Islam. Obtained from http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx

UNBELIEVABLE STATISTIC DEMONSTRATING THE LEVEL OF HILLARY CLINTON'S POPULARITY THROUGHOUT AMERICA. Every Person Who Voted Should See How The Majority Of Americans Voted. This is phenomenally unbelievable, because people claim Hillary Clinton cheated to get this result.

There are 3141 counties in America's heartland and Hillary Clinton won just over 1% of the county vote.

Donald Trump won an overwhelming 7.5 million popular vote victory in 3,084 of the country’s 3,141 counties or county equivalents in America’s heartland.

Fifty-five point seven million out of the 109.3 million Americans who cast their ballots in those counties voted for Trump, while only 48.1 million voted for Hillary Clinton, according to the latest county by county election results reported at Politico. The remaining 5.4 million voted for other candidates.

Red area represents the counties that voted for Trump. Hillary's blue.

Full story at http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/15/donald-trump-won-7-5-million-popular-vote-landslide-mainstream-america/

HILLARY CLINTON'S SUPPORTERS OUGHT TO DEMAND THAT THE VOTES BE COUNTED AGAIN TO PROVE THAT SHE WAS THE MOST POPULAR PERSON AND SHOULD BE THE PRESIDENT. Those Who Claim That Donald Trump Is Not Their President Have To Ask Hillary Clinton To Seek A Recount. Surely it is only right that if Hillary Clinton won the popular vote that she demand a recount.

Hillary Clinton should challenge the authenticity of the elections. Her supporters should demand that all the votes should be counted again with scrutineers overseeing the votes. Obviously, if she won the popular vote Donald Trump must have rigged the media and the voting system to win the electoral vote. Watch this stunning video:

JUDGEMENT DAY FOR THE CLINTONS. SHAME IS WRITTEN ON THEIR FACES

The Hill: ‘Shattered Dreams in Clintonworld’ 

as Longtime Aides Left Jobless

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/11/11/hill-shattered-dreams-clintonworld-longtime-aides-left-jobless/

THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA AS YOU REALLY WOULD NOT BELIEVE. Pictures Cannot Lie If They Have Not Be Doctored. The following photos are all available and reveal what people seem to be missing.

Women having the bodily characteristics of men is common. Men having the bodily characteristics of women is also not unusual. What is unusual is a man having breasts and a woman having a penis and testicles.

According to some researchers, Michael LaVaughn Robinson had a sex change and became Michelle Laverne Robinson. She married Barak Obama, with whom Larry Sinclair testified to having had homosexual experiences.  Larry Sinclair was killed.

Caster Semenya won gold in the women's 800 meters at the Rio Olympics. Caster has been subjected to much humiliation and testing to see whether she is a woman and not a man. Below is a photo of Caster. Her build is very much like that of a male except she is missing the obvious tell tale sign for a man, just as she is missing the telltale sign that is associated with a woman. Neither has Caster any sign of male genitals, even though she suffers from a condition known as hyperandrogenism.




Michelle Obama looks very much like Caster Semenya when it comes to the shoulders and arms. Although her shoulders and arms are covered up in the pick below, what we notice is a significant difference when it comes to the pelvic region. You can make up your own decision whether Michelle has male genitals or whether that is just an illusion.



<iframe width="640" height="384" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tVGxq61McCQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


We see Obama's shoulders in the pictures below.




Michael LaVaughn Robinson has a birth certificate. 

Michael LaVaughn Robinson born , Chicago, Illinois, January 17th,
1964.






Michael Lavaughn Robinson (No.18). Compare: Nose? Mouth? Smile? Lips? Teeth? Cheeks? cheek on the right more pronounced than on the left? Jaw?

THE CASE FOR HILLARY CLINTON. How Could She Possibly Lose After All She Has Done? Surely she deserves what history has for her.

Breitbart News

by LINDA TRIPP2 Nov 2016

She’s finally done it. The country faces a possible constitutional crisis should Hillary win the election. With a federal criminal investigation of the possible president-elect underway, President Obama might well issue a preemptive presidential pardon on his way out the door. Imagine that. Pardoned before inaugurated. Or she will find a way to pardon herself for “the good of the country.” It will simply never end.

I'm struck by the “none so blind as those who will not see” syndrome. The Clintons live and breathe and count on those who choose to ignore that which they already know to be true. It has worked for over thirty years and it is working now. She is under federal investigation and blames the investigators. It is reminiscent of her evisceration of Ken Starr, the Independent Counsel appointed by Bill Clinton’s Attorney General who ultimately became the scapegoat for virtually all their momentous scandals. It worked then and it may work now.If the past portends the future, we should ponder that which came before. The tale of four partners of the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas is a good place to start. They came to Washington, DC with Bill Clinton in 1993. You couldn’t turn a corner in the West Wing without bumping into one or all of them. Webster Hubbell became Associate Attorney General of the United States. He ended up in a federal pen. Vince Foster became Deputy Counsel to the President and he was found dead by gunshot in Fort Marcy Park. Bill Kennedy became an Associate White House Counsel and was neck deep in Filegate and Travelgate. He also oversaw the ubiquitous Craig Livingstone, the former bar bouncer personally chosen by the First Lady to head the Office of White House Security. Together, Bill Kennedy and Craig Livingstone were the ones to officially identify the body of Vince Foster. I knew them all. Of the four partners, only one is left standing. She is currently running for president of the United States.

Hillary’s incessant scandals over decades have morphed into an odd sort of national vaccination, immunizing her from accountability while hypnotizing much of the nation. In the face of pervasive corruption, it has been reduced to so much white noise. With much of the country asleep at the wheel, she is days away from likely becoming our 45th President. The colossal Clinton con will have achieved riches, greatness and immortality and that is unthinkable to those of us who knew them both.

Few noticed when we learned that Bill Clinton accepted a million-dollar birthday gift from Qatar, a major Islamic state and world terrorism sponsor. Or the countless other questionable mega donations from sketchy countries. Or the backroom deals guaranteeing him personally many millions of dollars over time from dubious sources. It’s all emblematic of the Clintons’ unbridled quest for power and vast wealth. At any cost. That few care is the power of the Clintons in a nutshell. It’s just a peek at the thick thread of self-enrichment artfully woven through everything they do and it is one that will become more obvious over time.

The Clintons have become enormously enriched through their own unique form of philanthropy. Money is their very own personal Holy Grail. For sale to the highest bidder, they care little about the source and much more about the cash. When questions of impropriety arise, they simply mop up the brief political fallout and move on “for the good of the country.” And we allow them to do so. It is why, as the election nears, those of us who know how deeply corrupt the Clintons are can only shake our heads in despair.

These Masters of the Universe parading as elder statesmen are painfully close to retaking the White House. The People’s House.

And speaking of that venerated house, one of the more enduring symbols of our democracy: It is an alternative universe when the Clintons can claim the moral high ground on virtually anything. So, the mesmerizing inscription carved into the mantle of the fireplace in the State Dining Room takes on new significance. The words are from a letter John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail in 1800: “I pray to heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house, and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men rule under this roof.” Over two hundred years later, this prayer now seems uncannily prophetic. As the nation prepares to place an individual so absolutely corrupt in a position of such absolute power, these words should give us all pause.

Behind closed doors, it was not just the constant vulgarity, the obscenities, or the alarming denigration of vast groups of their own supporters. It was not just the Hillary scandals from Filegate to Travelgate, to Whitewater and Vince Foster, to massive illegal campaign contributions, to the selling of anything that wasn’t nailed down. It wasn’t even their unbridled greed or their politics of personal destruction. That was where any perceived enemy or opponent found themselves treated to a uniquely chilling kind of Clinton retaliation. All courtesy of her bona fide secret police. That was just part of it.

Equally egregious was her vocal disdain for vast groups of people of faith and her utter contempt for the members of all the armed services. There were too many examples to cite, but my introduction to Hillary occurred in the Oval Office corridor as she headed back upstairs to her own West Wing office. An army officer dressed in Class A uniform had made the mistake of being seen in her presence. Her loud, “Get these f–king uniforms the f–k out of my sight!” floored just about everyone.

Over time the staggering profanity coming from both Bill and Hillary became expected. As the wife of an army officer for twenty years with a career at the Department of Defense spanning that long, this particular outburst offended me the most. The language coming from a First Lady was deplorable enough, but it was the harsh sentiment that was stunning. This from one who believes she is fit to be Commander-in-Chief. In any case, that was only part of it.

It was also the smoke and mirrors that meant virtually everything they said publicly bore no resemblance to what was said privately. She and her closest aides share a contempt for most of the electorate. This has been true since I knew them in the first Clinton administration. Her pathological secrecy arose from a need to conceal not only this but also the money trail. The country has had a glimpse through leaked information of the person behind the mask. The Oscar worthy public candidate who appears quite fit to be president bears no resemblance to the actual person seeking the job. Hillary Clinton is incapable of telling the truth. The truth would not get her elected. In the face of years of documented corruption, that she is on the brink of becoming President defies any logic at all.

This past year highlighted the Hillary I know in action. The private server. The classified emails on the unprotected server. The destruction of laptops and phones with a hammer. The actual risk to our national security and the lives of many, all for personal gain. Many involved with this server holding not a whisper of a security clearance. The bizarre immunity deals granted to just about everyone in her periphery when a grand jury had not even been impaneled. The manipulation and the destruction of the emails while under a congressional subpoena. The secret tarmac meeting between the Attorney General and Bill Clinton just before the FBI’s curiously tortured findings were unveiled.

Then came a charade of enormous proportion. The startling split-screen image of FBI Director Comey, flanked by flags and the power of his office, announcing his peculiar non-indictment indictment alongside arguably the most powerful symbol of the presidency, Air Force One. So, as Director Comey circuitously announced his conclusion, Air Force One sat in all its iconic glory waiting to whisk the president and his president-in-waiting off to a campaign event. Pure political theater. And a not so subliminal message signaling not only the strength and might of the presidency but also their defiant solidarity. It flaunted their triumph over those who had believed justice might actually be served. This symbolic joint jaunt to a Hillary campaign event on this particular day would never have been allowed to occur had there been any doubt of the outcome. He knew. She knew. They knew. That this is not chilling to much of the nation is the most chilling of all.

Hillary spent a year firmly assuring the country that nothing would come from of the FBI investigation. During this active and ongoing investigation, she spoke with confidence and conviction. She answered in the affirmative when asked by a television host whether she thinks there is “zero chance” she would be indicted.  “Absolutely. That’s what I’m saying. That happens to be the truth,” Clinton said. This authority came from a knowledge only she had. In the end, a cabal of political players ostensibly working for 370 million people served just one. This is corruption. Half the country is ok with it.

I believe the Clinton Foundation’s pay-for-play was the sole reason for having a private server in the first place. A “mistake” is a mismatched pair of socks. Make no mistake, the server was no “mistake.” The server was the “intent.” That it was discovered at all was the goof. Hillary risked it all solely to shield from public view that which was most important to her. The sensational amounts of money pouring into the foundation and her involvement in all of it had to be hidden from view. The server was her personal guarantee that none of this would ever see the light of day. Nothing was more important. Nothing will ever be more important.

In the wake of all of this, thanks to the president, his Justice Department and a helpful FBI director, Hillary suffered no consequences. There was no accountability for deeds that would have had monumental and life changing consequences for virtually anyone else. These are acts punishable by law and include the real possibility of prison. We will see as more is leaked that the behemoth that is the Clinton Foundation dwarfs even the White House, and the Clintons will protect it at all costs. It represents serious cash, one which has taken in over two billion dollars since it began. It served as their calling card for multi-million dollar speeches, earning the two of them in excess of $230 million since they left the White House. Primarily for selling the promise of access and favor. But the pattern began many years ago.

Compared to today, the Hillary Clinton I knew dealt in small potato corruption. She thinks bigger these days. It was unsurprising to me when they exited the White House years ago the very same way they entered, mired in scandal and corruption. And consumed by money.

Few remember the looting of the White House, but it was a fitting end to their scandal plagued reign. Hillary exited the White House with furnishings that had already been designated official White House property. When caught red handed, they begrudgingly returned just some of it, admitting no culpability of course, but saying the return was in an abundance of caution. This garnered short lived attention in the press. I could only shake my head as I recalled her graphic objection to protocol concerning official gifts from around the world. In her uniquely expletive-deleted way, the First Lady made her position known to anyone within shouting distance. What she ultimately did with, as she said in my presense, “our f–king sh-t not the f–king country’s f–king sh-t,” is beyond me.

But as Hillary was loading the moving trucks and making history while doing it, she was busy on another front. That was when she distinguished herself as the only First Lady in history to actively solicit high ticket “gifts” from her legion of wealthy mega donors on her way out the door. Of the many luxurious gifts this not so blushing bride asked for and received, most remarkable was the modest cigar humidor from of all people, Walter Kaye.

He is best remembered as the wealthy donor who had the dubious distinction of placing a young girl named Monica Lewinsky as an intern in the White House years before. Not the most extravagant donation but the tasteless cigar commemoration was meaningful nonetheless.

The Bonnie and Clyde of politics never miss a payday and it didn’t start with the foundation. They had years of peddling access and influence and it paid well. They discovered their own personal gravy train as they blurred the lines between public service and public opportunism. A loss in this election would mean the end of the Clinton foundation. There would literally be nothing left to sell.

As we face the real possibility of an unprecedented pardon should Hillary win the election, it reminds us of how little was made of Bill Clinton’s own pardon business during his last days in office. And a gainful business it was. It was textbook Clinton. In fact, it was a real family affair with his shady brother and even shadier brother-in-law in on the lucrative action. These two shifty characters generally flew below the radar but they were an embarrassing presence in the Clinton White House and their hands were always in the till. They are found in other questionable but highly lucrative activities as they gleefully traded on their powerful siblings. These siblings condoned it all privately but condemned some of it publicly when these things surfaced.

By now we’ve forgotten the most infamous pardon of them all. That was bestowed on Marc Rich, the notorious perpetrator of the greatest tax fraud against the United States in history. Among other things. As a permanent resident on the FBI’s Most Wanted List, fugitive from justice Rich was probably the least likely person on the planet one might expect to receive a presidential pardon. Unless you knew the Clintons. So, let’s review. Denise Rich paid close to half a million dollars to the Clinton Library.

She paid at least $70,000 to Hillary’s senate campaign and even donated $10,000 to Bill Clinton’s Legal Defense Fund as he futilely fought the Paula Jones lawsuit. And that is all we know about. All in a day’s work for the Clintons. Few paid attention. Sure, short lived outrage ensued, but our Pravda-esque media ensured the pardon coverage was brief. Most importantly, the Clintons’ paydays were never in any jeopardy.

There are potential whistleblowers today in the State Department, the Justice Department, and the FBI. They know they have an obligation to expose corruption at the highest levels of our government. They are aware they could expose not only Hillary Clinton but also those she has corrupted in her wake. Their silence is testimony to the real fear of Clinton retaliation. That this may sound melodramatic or suggestive of the KGB of old does not make it less true. Few dare cross the Clintons and those who do are never completely whole again. And this is happening not in Venezuela, but in America.

In the end, unethical behavior hung over the Clintons like a noxious cloud, permeating their reign from day one. The scandals were of their own making, each borne of an arrogance, an inordinate greed, and a deep-seated contempt for the rule of law. It continues today. It is what we have to look forward to in a second Clinton presidency. God help us.

To many who knew the Clintons behind closed doors, it is unimaginable that she may be elected to the highest office in the land. There is a good chance she will actually become the most powerful person on the planet. John Adams must be spinning in his grave at the mere thought. One thing is true: Many have tried to hold them accountable. All have been thwarted at every turn.

It would be easier to catch a cloud than to stop the Clintons. It should scare us all. In the end, it is impossible to make people pay attention to that which they refuse to see. The Clinton con works. Spectacularly. And as with any good con, the hapless mark is left holding the bag. That would be us. With the election mere days away, those who know the Clintons are left with the feeble hope that divine intervention will miraculously lift the electorate’s blinders in time.