HERE'S MEDIA BLATHERING NONSENSE WHILE WE AWAIT HEARINGS ABOUT THE BENGHAZI

Loading...

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

IS THE "BENGHAZI SURVIVOR BOOK" ANOTHER PHONY OBAMA COVER-UP?

BENGHAZI-TRUTH DAILY MEMO
Filed for Tuesday, July 2, 2013

This blog and the now-very-large Tea Party group called the Tea Party Fire Ants are essentially known for grassroots activism, and mostly focused on getting the right-wing and those who sell their services to the right to do their job in holding the left accountable. But we have something different here. In my humble opinion (we are still entitled to them, so far, cross your fingers), we are seeing the birth of an extension of the Benghazi cover-up on a massive scale and it needs to be reported, advertised and brought into the larger criminal cover-up investigation as soon as possible, so please link this everywhere you know and get the word out on these facts and opinion/analysis.

Before I go any further I want to acknowledge that left activists will call what follows to be another "right wing conspiracy theory". That, despite the fact that the most famous time that phrase was used, it was when Hillary Clinton claimed that rumors of President/husband Bill Clinton having sex with a young girl were exactly such a thing - "a vast right-wing conspiracy" - until the young girl showed up with Clinton's baby-maker seed all over her dress. For those too young to remember, Bill Clinton went on TV and humiliated the nation by admitting he had lied, was impeached but not removed from office, and his evasive answers before a Grand Jury cost him his law license forever. You didn't know that but are still hearing about "Watergate"? That's our left-wing media for you, and it is an illustration of why we should be concerned about the facts in this article.

Still, the phrase "Conspiracy theory" has worked for the left very well in recent years, so for a moment let's address that phrase by turning it around for a moment. 

Left-activists say those who feel Obama's birth certificate is a fake are "loony, right wing conspiracy theorists". Okay, who says Barack Obama's birth certificate is a fake? Just about everyone with any graphics knowledge who looked at it. Mara Zebest, technical editor on 100 books published by major outfits and a lifelong democrat insists in no uncertain terms, "It's a very poor fake". E-Comp Consultants, a huge Tampa-based firm with a Fortune 500 list of clients for whom they provide expert courtroom testimony in document fraud cases, say, "Fake". Joseph Newcomer, whose analysis of the Bush National Guard forgeries as forgeries got Dan Rather fired from CBS News after 28 years as its lead anchor - Newcomer says Obama's birth certificate is an obvious forgery, too. "Sheriff" (more than that in most states) Joe Arpaio who has 3rd largest constituency of any duly elected law enforcement official in the United States goes further: Arpaio's team investigation has concluded that Obama's birth certificate is a "criminal forgery". 

Who defends it? Nobody of whom I am aware, anyway. By the way, I have some experience in such things and for the record, I, too, am certain that it's a fake because: A. It defies physics by being entirely apart from all 50-year-old birth certificates by looking brand-new while all others look old and B. the Adobe program commands used to assemble the pieces of the 'artwork" can still be accessed in the history drop-downs of certain layers: Program commands on individual layers which read things like "rotation -90 degrees/scale 120%" do not create themselves. It was assembled from pieces scaled, rotated and otherwise modified. It's a fake. Clearly.

So, then, for claims that the birth certificate is fake to be a 'conspiracy theory", it means the most learned people in graphics analysis and creation either A. don't actually know what they are doing (while no one defends the document) or B. are "lying to hurt America's first black president" (while no one defends the document). Now it becomes quite clear who the real conspiracy theorists are: it's the left-wing Obama defenders calling the birth certificate analysts 'conspiracy theorists'. Those dishonest, left-wing propagandists should be called out as such loudly until all of America gets the picture. Obama's birth certificate is a fake and apparently a criminal forgery for which someone needs to be arrested, taken to trial and presumably go to prison as soon as possible. There's no "conspiracy theory" about it.

Neither, in my opinion, is there any about this:


You probably read this 2 days ago:



We can learn a little more about how this book will handle the events of Benghazi from publishing House 12 Book's own statement (click on image for larger version to read)



Now right away the media specialist in me is suspicious of the intent of the press release for these reasons:

EDIT: Huge, huge Thank you to Judy G. on Twitter for this one; no idea how I missed something so obvious: "The elite team who were the first responders to the Annex during the attack?!" Hicks, etc all testified that Obama gave a stand down order! There were no "first responders' during the attack outside of the two killed! Has always been understood for 10 months and confirmed in Congressional testimony that only two people broke ranks - Woods and Doherty - who saved the Consulate people and were eventually killed by mortar rounds on the Annex roof. Even lame/RINO FOX has reported that much. So who the hell are these nameless "heroes", suddenly, who even Congress, the military, people taking calls in real time during the attack at the White House and Pentagon, know nothing about?! Insane.

1. In paragraph 1 it says this will be the "definitive account", which is pretty remarkable considering not a single eyewitness has testified before congress. The impression seems to be "Don't listen to anyone else, this is all there is to it."


2. The authors, who in my opinion should have volunteered to testify before congress and in my opinion did not and could therefore in my opinion be seen as obstructing justice for the material gain of selling a book, are this far into the process but their names have not been released? Really? That's not how people work in the New York media I know.


3. Publisher Deborah Futter says, "The tragic events of that evening have been increasingly politicized and misunderstood." Now this should make anyone suspicious. Benghazi has only been politicized in one way - as a condemnation of President Obama and Hillary Clinton, based on damning congressional testimony. Futter's implication is that that should not be the case. We're starting to see a clear direction, but trust me, it gets better.


4. The book won;t be released until 2014?! What?! To hear the statements from 12 Books, people, it sounds like they already read the manuscript. At at the very least 12 Books, an imprint of Hatchett, one of the largest publishing houses in the world, won;t allow anyone to know who the authors are and won't release the book for another 7 months minimum or approximately 1 year and 4 months after the attack on Benghazi  That would be January of 2014. that is the earliest in 2014 we can get. Yes, it can take many months to get a book on the shelf, but as any reader knows, when a book is topical or timely in nature, they rush it through. How long did it takes biographies, both in book and video, about Michael Jackson to hit the shelves after he died? About 30 seconds.


With only this from which to go, we need to look at the players and see if they have any connection to Obama or any overt left-wing political biases. Oh golly me, in my opinion, yes. Bear in mind, also, if you are a military person or know one, is this the crowd you would trust with a story which thus far in testimony has painted a positively damning picture of Obama? Try to keep, "Is this the crowd I would trust with this story?" uppermost in your mind, knowing the whole world would pay well for this story. If you want to see this the way I see it, from a professional media perspective, keep that in mind.


Who is Deborah Futter? A nice enough person, I suppose, about whom I was able to find nothing politically. But her husband is a different story - on my opinion (you'll see that term - "in my opinion" used often for obvious reasons).


In 1991 Futter married William David Cohen:




You can see that Cohan was an associate at Lazard Freres & Company. You can also see that the current L,F&C Chairman, Ron Bloom, was assistant to Obama for Manufacturing Policy and helped create the situation by which GM has been essentially taken over by the U.S. Government under Obama.


Well, what the hell, right? It's not like Futter is married to Bloom, she is/was (don't know current status) married to Cohan, right? And Cohan just worked for the place. Sure there is a connection, but it isn't like Futter's husband is a rabidly anti-Republican, far-left, populist, anti-rich, Obama-supporting ideologue editorial writer whose words in editorials at the New York Times drip anti-conservative venom, is it? You decide:


Okay, so far what we have is an announcement by a book publisher - of all in the world who would pay handsomely for this story - about an upcoming book which apparently takes the heat off Obama, written by people whose names congress has been demanding and does not yet have, by a place whose publisher is married to a guy who writes far-left editorials for the NY Times and the Huffington post, himself whose work history includes a place right in the thick of the connections to the Obama administration.

But wait, how did Futter/12 Books find these brave military heroes whose story, it appears to be suggested, will exonerate Obama from wrongdoing? Unless Congress is lying, even Congress does not know who they are! Okay, then, where did 12 Books get the story? They say it, and so does the NY Post. They got it from an agent named Richard Abate at 3 Arts Entertainment.

Now Abate, even though he is is hugely enthusiastic about clients such as far-left smarmocrat Tina Fey, isn't himself a far-left, Obama supporting ideologue, is he? Maybe what he tweets and retweets can give us some insight:



Recapping so far: the "definitive" book about what happened in Benghazi which 'de-politicizes' the events is being handled, it would seem, anyway, by hard-left ideologues with a penchant for smarmy, anti-republican wisecracks. If you were a military person who went through that hell, knew that Hicks and others who were in-the-know in DC testified that Obama would not allow you to get help on the ground, is this the crowd - out of all the publishers in the world - that you want to edit and market - exclusively under contract, presumably, to advertise, edit or silence at will - your story?

If you read this blog regularly you know my "right wing conspiracy" opinion about Benghazi: With all the resources at his disposal, considering the testimony of Hicks and others, and the fact that Obama has hidden - or at best threatened, according to Senator Lindsey Graham - at least a few of however many of the witnesses are still alive, the only only way those people who died in Benghazi could be dead is if Obama wanted them dead. These liberals publishing this supposed book may wish to remember all those killed in Benghazi were liberals, too, and Obama supporters as well, and at the very, very least, Obama turned his back and let them die.


There is a theory that Obama was gunrunning in Libya through Stevens, something happened  and it was decided to shut up all the gunrunning witness in Benghazi for good. This makes the most sense to me because it also explains why the on-the-ground eyewitnesses, who were only saved because two now-dead SEALS disobeyed Obama's orders and saved them -  whose names in such matters are usually provided to Congress in 48 hours according to Congressional House Representative Jason Chaffetz, have been hidden by the administration for now closing in on a year.

So I have an opinion about this "book". Just a theory. An opinion. In my opinion it appears clear the intent of the book announcement is to provide public relations cover for Obama in what happened in Benghazi - they nearly say it in their press release by condemning the "politicization" of Benghazi, as though Presidents must not be held accountable for deaths in Benghazi and the silencing and hiding of witnesses from congress but Presidents should be impeached for second-rate burglaries in 1972, and that impeachment celebrated decades later. You know, that kind of politicization.  


In my opinion it's possible and even likely that this book announcement is just an excuse to run out the clock on public awareness about Benghazi until public anger and interest fade. No authors names, an unspecified publishing date long into the future, by a crowd of people at the very least connected to some truly, in my opinion, highly extremist left-wing ideologues. In a word, this whole thing stinks, and it stinks obviously.


Therefore, also an opinion, Rep Frank Wolf and others who are determined to get to the bottom of Benghazi need to interview Futter, Abate and the rest, demand the names of the authors and move with haste in whatever avenues are available to subpoena them to force them to testify about what they know of Benghazi and the four 'authors" so this country can move beyond press releases and get to the facts of a criminal investigation which trumps pop culture, history and casual curiosity many time over, and this must be done immediately.


Another "right wing conspiracy theory"? If it's like this one, which was correct when it accused President Clinton of cheating on Hillary, lying to the American people, being untruthful before a Grand jury and dragging his lover's name through the mud leading to president Clinton's impeachment and the loss of Clinton's law license, then I won't ague the use of the term:





We must know who the Benghazi survivor witnesses are and they must testify before congress and the obvious stalling from Obama and the media must be dealt with by congress and the American people and it must be done today.


***********





11 comments:

  1. Only birther “experts” have called Obama’s birth certificate forged, and they have not shown that they are even experts, much less fair and impartial. Those are two reasons why they are not believed by Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck or the National Review (or by Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or Gingrich or Santorum or Huckabee).

    One proof that Obama’s birth certificate is not forged is Obama’s short-form birth certificate.

    Short-form birth certificates are created by a clerk reading the information from the document in the file, and filling out the computer form that generates the printed short-form birth certificate. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a short-form to Obama. So, unless they are lying—and they were Republican officials–the only way that Obama’s birth certificate could have been forged was that it was forged in 2007 and slipped into the file just before the clerk looked at the file. That is not very likely, is it? And it is especially unlikely since at the time Obama was not even the candidate of the Democrats. He was still in the primaries at the time, and he was only a junior senator from Illinois.

    And birther sites have not shown you these real experts.

    Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

    Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

    John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

    Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

    Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

    Birthers’ claim that Obama’s birth certificate is false is well understood to be caused by their own motives—they hate Obama and would like to harm him.

    And it is irrational (to say the least) to think that Obama’s relatives had enough money (Obama’s grandfather was just a furniture salesman and his grandmother a low-level employee in a bank at the time; and his father came to Hawaii on a free flight) or crazy enough to spend LOTS of money on a long and expensive and risky (incidents of stillbirths were high at the time) overseas trip for their pregnant daughter—–when there were perfectly good hospitals in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    (Oh, and the government of Kenya has said that it investigated the “born in Kenya” claim, and that it did not happen.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, Strauss, I see the Obama defenders are still, IMO, terrified of this subject. I shall debunk you easily. To begin with, go to www.evidencevault.blogspot.com which is one of my sister site blogs and see the overwhelming evidence. Now for your BS:

      1. you fail to mention Joe Arpaio, a "sheriff" with a constituency of 5 million people - the 3rd largest of any duly-elected law enforcement officer in the US who also has 30 years fed experience and 20 as a sheriff. He has more law enforcement officers under his authority to cover those 5 million people than most large news organizations have employees, and he says "criminal forgery". If it's between him or some liberal named Struass who fills his posts with insults, I will go with Arpaio and IMO so will anyone else. By the way, Rep Stockman has agreed to see the evidence from Arpaio and Zullo. Obama is, IMO, politically cooked when that happens.

      2.Dr. Neil Krawetz is not an imagining software specialist as you claim. He appears to be a computer security specialist who also is interested in other sciences but nowhere do I see where he has any credentials in graphics analysis. If he said it isn't a fake, IMO he should stick to what he knows.

      3. Nathan Goulding is not a digital forensics expert to my knowledge, he's a graphic layout guy at National Review. By comparison, Mara Zebest is the technical editor - meaning she corrects author's mistakes - on over 100 top-tier books on computer graphics published by the top names - she sits at the pinnacle of graphics analysis - and she says Obama's birth certificate a "pathetic fake".

      4. As I recall Woodman calls himself a "local computer guy" who fixes viruses and such on computers and has no graphics expertise of which I am aware.

      5. You are taking Zatkovich out of context. Evidencevault gives his whole analysis: "fake".

      6. Jean-Claude Trembly, who you seem to cite with enthusiasm, was misquoted by FOX and he says so himself - strongly - claims he has no authority to judge the validity of the document one way or the other. HERE: http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/314041/

      7. You never cite why all those other experts - who you ignore - might be wrong, including Newcomer whose analysis of the Killian documents got Dan Rather fired. They say it's a fake, you rely on Trembly who says he was misquoted and Woodman "the computer guy" .

      8. I also repeat: By the way, I have some experience in such things and for the record, I, too, am certain that it's a fake because: A. It defies physics by being entirely apart from all 50-year-old birth certificates by looking brand-new while all others look old and B. the Adobe program commands used to assemble the pieces of the 'artwork" can still be accessed in the history drop-downs of certain layers: Program commands on individual layers which read things like "rotation -90 degrees/scale 120%" do not create themselves. It was assembled from pieces scaled, rotated and otherwise modified. It's a fake. Clearly.

      Your "experts" are plainly either misquoted manifestly and even by their own admission, out of their field of expertise or entirely out of their depth compared to people like Zebest, Newcomer and a whole host on evidencevault, including one of the co-creators of Photoshop itself for Adobe and who also says Obama's birth certificate a fake.

      It's a fake, get it? It's a fake.

      Now move along little fellow, and take your "graphics experts" with you. We have work to do.


      Delete
    2. Yes Strauss, we do have much work ahead of us. We, as genuine Americans need to be diligent in our efforts to be 100% certain that a Muslim fundamentalist is not running or even more important, not ruining America. Which by the way, your buddy MR Obama is doing both. Your arguments, as rediculous as they are, have been published here and also debunked here by an expert. You of course are not an expert in this matter. I believe you are just a yes man for Obama. Be gone with you now.

      Delete
  2. Strauss, my response to you was not an invitation for you to post lunatic left-wing conspiracy theory websites posting hateful conspiracy theories about "birthers", nor an invitation for your smarmy and demeaning insults about them. Deleted, little fellow. Have a great day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nobody 'says' it better... lol 'little fellow'? :p

      Delete
    2. Thanks Kathy, but it's true. With all the experts - who really are VERY significant experts - plus 1,000's of people on Photoshop blogs saying for a year that Obama's birth certificate is fake, and the very, very *few* - less than 4! - entirely debunked non-experts of graphic analysis saying it's genuine, only the leftist Obama-protecting loons are the "conspiracy theorists". For anyone to say that all those people of the highest graphic renown plus the 1,000's of graphics users online who also shout "fake", to be "conspiring because of racial hate against the first black president" - who is half white anyway - is the ultimate conspiracy theory imaginable. The birth certificate is a fake. Sorry, leftists, it just is. Fake fake fake, and Obama has put himself into the chain of evidence by calling it genuine and congressmen are now saying they are willing to look at the evidence. It's been a tough battle, but we're about to see a vast reversal of fortune leading to a win on the truth of this issue, left-wing 'conspiracy theorists" notwithstanding.

      Delete
  3. Nobody believes a site that cuts off people when they respond. Nobody believes a site that does not allow people of both sides to post the FACTS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Both sides have been presented here. You just don't like the FACT you are WRONG OR LEFT.

      Delete
  4. Stauss,

    - "Nobody believes a site that does not allow people of both sides to post the FACTS." - Welcome to the problem Conservatives have had with the mainstream media for decades. Doesn't feel very good does it? Except I did what the mainstream media would never do and never did do for birthers: I allowed you to voice you view uncensored, with only a debate response for balance. If you wish to debate my specifics as I did did yours that's fine, but you keep trying to post a left-wing conspiracy theory website about the birth certificate which is ridiculous we're done; IMO that site is a mindlessly malicious place which concludes that every expert who is reliable and says Obama's birth certificate is fake must be a crazy racist. That's insane. That's the biggest "conspiracy theory" imaginable: expert Zebest who is very strong in her opinion about the fake is a lifelong democrat. Newcomer and most others have never displayed any political activism ever. The desperate left has resorted to calling every graphics person of esteem a crazy lunatic and tries to elevate unqualified computer specialists with no graphics or forensics backgrounds - or just plain nobodies - some with anti-right prejudice - as grand authorities on graphics forensics, which is like saying a forensic pathologist and a pediatrician are the same because both are doctors.

    Once again, those experts who say Obama's birth certificate is fake have more authority than you do. So do I, too, clearly, because I have made my own case against the birth certificate based on solid and truly 100% inarguable evidence: the program history log displaying in the layer>history dropdown of the birth certificate denotes specific actions in the creation of the forgery and did not magically write themselves, or are we supposed to believe that the Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator programs are themselves sentient and therefore racist against America's first half-black President? Guys like you and your website are, IMO, absolute, panic-stricken idiots.

    I am giving you a much bigger opportunity than any ACORN-ass or mainstream media would ever give a Conservative, and am being gracious in giving it, since no right-wing news organization, website or blog should feel any need to be "fair and balanced" as long as 90% of the media is overtly and un-apologetically pro-democrat and anti-Republican. Tell CNN to be fair and balanced. Tell MSNBC. Or ABC or CBS (whose news anchor rather was fired for pitching a forged national guard record about Bush, a forgery identified by one of many people who has identified Obama's birth certificate as fake)

    Now. Make your case and be grateful for the opportunity. With the media so disgracefully and maliciously one-sided, right-wingers owe left-wingers absolutely nothing when it comes to equal time. Period. Make your case - on the merits. on your own, and debate my specifics about the experts - and be done. or get lost.

    IMO you are a liberal jerk, and IMO liberal jerks like you give liberal jerks a worse name than they already have. Now make your case and stay on-topic and debate the specifics in my initial response to your first post - don't go meandering off. I enjoy demanding that as a prerequisite for allowing your post to remain because I know you can't. Obama's birth certificate is a pathetic fake and everyone who knows what to look for in a fake knows it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Strauss' post was deleted. Strauss, you just called birthers racists and did not address my points as you were instructed to do if you wanted you post to remain. It's clear you have no case and cannot keep hate and insults out of your posts. Sorry, but the rules were clear. Deleted.

    ReplyDelete
  6. There is no argument here. Obama's birth certificate is fake and phony just like himself. The argument regarding race always comes into play when these left wing nuts have nowhere else to turn. I'm 50 YO & my birth certificate has turned a yellowish type of color, mixed in with gray colors.
    The argument re Obama's family not having the money nor foresight to have a new one manufactured is also not based on ffact. The fact is, Obama was/is a member of a Socialist group which raised more than enough money for the fake B.C. and for his entire campaign.
    In addition, he was hand picked for this job by very wealthy and powerful people, foreign and domestic. The same people who want to murder all who dare speak the truth. We have seen so much evidence of that. But still we have idiotic people like Strauss who try to and often succeed in brainwashing other idiots.
    Thank you Proe Graphique for allowing such people to post here, since inevitably, they end up looking foolish. More please....

    ReplyDelete