4um: As Obama's star rises, fears for his safety Memories of 1968 assassinations evoked

Title: As Obama's star rises, fears for his safety Memories of 1968 assassinations evoked
Source: International Herald Tribune
URL Source: [None]
Published: Feb 26, 2008
Author: International Herald Tribune
Post Date: 2008-05-09 15:09:50 by Jethro Tull
Keywords: None
Views: 2581
Comments: 208

As Obama's star rises, fears for his safety Memories of 1968 assassinations evoked

International Herald Tribune

02-26-2008

As Obama's star rises, fears for his safety Memories of 1968 assassinations evoked
Byline: Jeff Zeleny The New York Times Media Group
Edition: 1
Section: NEWS

DALLAS --

There is a hushed worry on the minds of many supporters of Senator Barack Obama, echoing in conversations from state to state, rally to rally: Will he be safe?

In Colorado, two sisters say they pray daily for his safety. In New Mexico, a daughter says she persuaded her mother to still vote for Obama, even though the mother feared that winning would put him in danger. And at a rally here, a woman expressed worries that a message of hope and change, in addition to his race, made him more vulnerable to violence.
"I've got the best protection in the world," Obama, of Illinois, said in an interview, reprising a line he tells supporters who raise the issue with him. "So stop worrying."

Yet worry they do, with the spring of 1968 seared into their memories, when the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. and Senator Robert Kennedy were assassinated in a span of two months.

Obama was 6 at the time, and like many of his admirers, he has only read about the violence that traumatized and polarized the nation. But those recollections and images are often invoked by older voters, who watch his candidacy with fascination, as well as an uneasy air of apprehension, as Democrats inch closer to selecting their nominee.

Obama has had Secret Service agents surrounding him since May 3, the earliest a candidate has ever been provided protection. (He reluctantly gave in to the insistent urging of Senator Richard Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, and others in Congress.) As his rallies have swelled in size, his security has increased, close to rivaling that given to a sitting president.

His wife, Michelle Obama, voiced concerns about his safety before he was elected to the Senate. Three years ago, she said she dreaded the day her husband received Secret Service protection, because it would mean serious threats had been made against him.

Among friends and advisers, danger is something Obama rarely mentions.

"It's not something that I'm spending time thinking about day to day," said Obama, who has been given the Secret Service nickname Renegade, a way for agents to quickly identify him. "I made a decision to get into this race. I think anybody who decides to run for president recognizes that there are some risks involved, just like there are risks in anything."

Not long ago, his advisers worried that some black voters might not support his candidacy out of a fierce desire to protect him. It was a particular concern in South Carolina, but Obama said he believed the worry was also rooted in "a fear of failure."

Now that he has won a string of primaries and caucuses in all corners of the country and built a coalition of black and white voters, failure would seem to be less of an issue. The fears, however, remain.

Representative Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, raised concerns in a letter in January to officials who oversee the Secret Service. Obama was already receiving protection, but Thompson said the intense interest in the election had prompted him to make sure that Obama and the other candidates were offered adequate security.

"The national and international profile of Sen. Barack Obama gives rise to unique challenges that merit special concern," Thompson wrote. "As an African-American who was witness to some of this nation's most shameful days during the civil rights movement, I know personally that the hatred of some of our fellow citizens can lead to heinous acts of violence. We need only to look to the assassinations of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and 1968 presidential candidate Robert Kennedy as examples."

In an interview, Thompson declined to elaborate on any specific threats that had come to the attention of his committee or the authorities. He said he wrote the letter to the Homeland Security Department without discussing it with Obama, whom he has endorsed.

"His candidacy is so unique to this country and so important that the last thing you would want is for him not to have the opportunity to fulfill the role of a potential presidential nominee," Thompson said. "It's out of an abundance of caution that I wrote the letter, rather than keep our fingers crossed and pray."

Before Obama decided to run for president, he discussed his safety with his family. His campaign employed a team of private security guards before he was placed under Secret Service protection. Since then, he has grown fond of the agents who surround him, inviting them to watch the Super Bowl at his home in Chicago and playing basketball with them on the days he awaits the results of an election.

Obama was reluctant to speak about his security or the period in American history that is often raised, without prompting, by voters who are interviewed at his campaign events. Mentions of the fate that befell President John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy only increased after Obama was joined on the campaign trail by Caroline Kennedy and Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts.

"I'm pretty familiar with the history," Obama said. "Obviously, it was an incredible national trauma, but neither Bobby Kennedy nor Martin Luther King had Secret Service protection."

Indeed, the assassination of Kennedy in 1968 prompted Congress to pass a law authorizing protection of major presidential and vice presidential candidates. In this campaign, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has had Secret Service protection from the beginning because she is a former first lady. None of the other candidates accepted it during their primary campaigns.

Gerald Posner, author of books on the assassinations of John Kennedy and King, said he did not believe that Obama was under a significantly higher risk than President George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton. The fears are more openly discussed, he said, because he is the first black candidate to come this close to winning a major party's presidential nomination.

"Barack scares those of us who think of the possibility of an assassination in a different way," Posner said. "He represents so much hope and change. That is exactly what was taken away from us in the 1960s."

Do your badeye impersonation again. Tell us how you gave yourself three hummers without taking yoga lessons.

You're going to wake up soon to an INVOLUNTARY concept that I've described (tongue in cheek admittedly, but accurate nonetheless) and then what choice will you make?

Fight, flee or surrender (just as though you fell for it like the Ophiles have...)?

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

"Hi, I'm Chuckie the Cheese Baldwhine, and FOH is especially gentle shaving the hair that grows on my palms because of the intensity of the circle jerks us Cuntstitutional Party studs have together. So I let him post my picture. Cheers, babies."

Reply "I believe the reason US americans are unable to find maps and as such as, is because osama of them don't have maps and as such as south africa and the iraq"..yikes, she was talking about the obama family.

He did clarify and include Alaska and Hawai'i at the end of that, he covered all 50 states.

I say him last night on the University of Oregon campus. He sounded tired and corrected another minor momentary mis-spoken comment about al Qaeda and Afghanistan. He apologized noting he was "on East Coast time."

I was impressed with him none the less and look forward to seeing him finally getting the nomination. It certainly was a huge and enthusiastic crowd, and he connected with it extremely well.

It's called the "Final Phase" theory. I was a proponent of the theory for many years. Those who still believe in the theory have a web site and forum called The Final Phase. You would not like the place or the people as it makes Freik Repugnant look like a free love hippy commune. They are extreme government supremists who worship at the foot of the military and Republican Party. You are not allowed to say anything negative about the government or the Republican Party UNLESS it's about their refusal to buy in to the Final Phase. Ron Paul is an anti-Christ to these people and most, if not all were Duncan Hunter fans.

While JR claims to be a Libertarian (I've never seen his Libertarian side), his followers are authoritarian neocons who literally think everything that happens in the world is a Soviet/Chinese plot to overthrow the United States. They are ate up with this fear to the point that just about anything that happens in the world somehow fits in to this plot. I finally woke up to the fact that these guys are a bunch of scared girlie-men who are using the Final Phase as an excuse to turn the US into an authoritarian mecca in order to reduce their fear of life. They literally long for the strong-armed dictator JR talks about in his book Origins of the Fourth World War. It got to the point that I could no longer abide by their insane conspiracy theories, nor did my vision of American match their own. In the end, I was no longer welcome at the site. I wasn't booted off but it was only a matter of time before the self-appointed head fascist, Belmont Mark, booted me off for not towing the "worship government" line.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

G. Edward Griffin's 1984 interview with former KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov reveals the same dichotomy: Bezmenov suggests that American dissidents are tools of foreign efforts at "demoralization."

But what happens when power corrupts America? Initially I had a positive reaction to Bezmenov. I still believe his intentions are good. However, during this 1984 interview it is clear that he did not appear to recognize the subtle but iron-fisted controls that dictate content to our news media, entertainment, and educational programs. By 1984, he could have had a conversation with Charlotte Iserbyt, who was already beginning to be disillusioned with Ronald Reagan's presidency. He could have met Eustace Mullins and discussed the Wall Street financing of the communist revolution in Russia as well as the Japanese naval buildup before the Russo-Japanese war, which helped to destroy the Czar's empire.

People who internalized the Cold War appear to find comfort in painting an communist/western battle to the death for liberty. This is a retreat from the stark indications that the international bankers, some working for their own profit, others working for Zionism, and others working for ideals to salve their painful consciences, have been fomenting global tyranny for more than 200 years.

That would be one of the best things that could happen to/for America. So it probably will never happen but I would give a pay per view price to see that one and I bet a lot of other folks would too.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

Absolutely FALSE. Political murder is actually a potential tool of our oppressors. I think the JFK killing was used as such a tool. Remember, these people are puppets. We can't liberate ourselves by removing a puppet; thousands are waiting to take their place. The death of a well-known personality is a painful shock that would immediately be used to manipulate Americans to accept much more oppression.

Only 6 more months of this charade, but I bet it'll be the best theater in a LONG time...

Yes, but see, in my fantasy it isn't just the willing puppets like Clinton, Obama and McCain who do the rope dance. If we are going to dream why not dream big and hoist up the puppeteers along with them?

As for accepting much more oppression I hope you are wrong because the founders of this country would have revolted (again) YEARS AGO. I hope the people in this country have about had a gut full but then maybe they haven't had enough yet.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

It already seems like it has been going on for four years. And after all that look at what the sheeple have been given to choose from. A socialist in a crusty pants suit who wants to give us the same wonderful health care system they have in England, a nut who is probably itching to start World War III, and a commie clown who would never have been given a second look if not for his color. America is soooooooooo screwed.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

Who are the puppeteers? It seems that through mass media and centralized education, many of us have become our own slavers, willingly oppressing ourselves, and others.

I think if you want to find the puppeteers you need look no further than the owners of the Federal Reserve. The powers behind the scenes who control what the politicians do.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

They have a panoply of interfacing, intertwined defenders and supporters. Not to mention the fact that we support them every time we borrow money. Puppets are lined up, waiting to participate.

"Relax," said the night man: "we are programmed to receive. You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave."

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

1968 was a disaster for this country. The spooks shot all of the most powerful anti-war leaders, the people's will was thwarted and the war continued for five more bloody years as a result. The coup of 1963 was continued and our government has been hijacked by the assassins ever since.

We don't need another 1968. Actually, check that. We need another 1968, only this time, the anti-war leaders live, win, take power and reverse course.

And it's not just that one quote. Read the whole thread, and there's a lot to make you queasy.

Yes, my opinion is that America is better off w/o socialists and socialism. Will I do anything, no? Will I cheer when the last one takes a dirt nap, yes. What's the problem with that sentiment?

You are dealing with imperfect and biased human judgment who and what a 'socialist' is.

I am against abortion and capital punishment because some things should be left up to the creator, and untimely death is a big one humans need not dabble in.

I have been called a socialist, and I want private property protected and free enterprise to remain a keystone aspect of life in the United States. The first one to my door wanting to take me out as one will suffer severe lead poisoning for their troubles.

You have problems with 'socialists,' I have problems with who does the witch hunt and how the hysteria and high emotions of said hunt and lynchings of the targets chosen wold hurt and kill allot of people who are simply exercising their Constitutional rights and freedoms.

Resolving political disagreements via death squads and/or assassinations and/or systematic liquidations is right out of the CIA/Soviet/Nazi playbook. It is about as unAmerican as one can get. In a free society, people have every right to be socialist. In criminal plutocracies, where the wealthy and well-connected have systematically plundered the populous causing the distribution of a nation's wealth to become grossly askew, socialism is the natural political response. If you dislike socialism and socialists, then protect the people from being systematically plundered and economically debased by well-connected corporate pirates. That will right the economic balance and make property (and life) secure for ALL (not just a few).

On the contrary, it's what America does best. Has been for ages. However it is that socialists meet their end is fine with me. I assume you agree that collectivism-redistribution is something we should all strive to eliminate, no?

Every lover of freedom should. Where on the planet has the confiscation of wealth, followed by it's redistribution, worked?

I am not interested in a reiteration of your statement, I am however interested in you addressing the witch hunt aspect I talked about.

Often the cure is worse then the disease with a right arm removed because of a benign tumor on the ring finger.

Care to comment on the main point of my post? I didn't just make it to reinforce your previous post.

By unAmerican, I of course meant against the ideals of the original Republic, not the debasements of the malignant fascist empire that we have devolved into - an empire of which you appear to be a model subject, since you personally embrace and advocate some of its most loathesome and immoral "ends justify the means" methods.

Things like the new Eminent Domain standard of removal of real estate because someone else can make more profit on it for the economy and government are real dangerous moves and not to be tolerated.

At the rate America's wealth is being stolen by the Halliburtons and Exxons of this world, redistributionism (meaning a recovery of property stolen by criminal cartels aided and abetted by criminal government) may be the only recourse left to us to recover the economic means to live.

How could you believe that the Socialist/Communist/Progressive Wing of the National CFR Party is one iota different, let along better, than the other Socialist/Communist/Progressive/"Compassionate Konservative" Wing of the National CFR Party ?

The alternative is you guys see personal benefit from buying into this world class joke.

Any idea how much your beloved "D" Wing pretenders have profited from all this ?

Why did your beloved "D"s not get us out of Iraq after it was their turn to be elevated in '06 ?

They did purges of 'leftists' in places like Argentina and other South American countries where right wingers did hit squad murders and ran clandestine prisons.

We also are guilty of sponsoring the removal of Salvador Allende from office by assassination despite the legal and democratic means used by him to reach high office.

Augusto José Ramón Pinochet who we helped put into power put into effect harsh measures against his political opponents and systematic violations of civil liberties and human rights and for which he faced several criminal processes until his death.

Many innocent people vanished never to be heard from again in the bloody purge following the United States should how hypocritical the call to respect and work for democracy can oft time be.

I would think hard and long about what purges and bloody measures like you call for actually do and stand for before calling for them.

Indeed, many of the players in this current administration presided over plunging Chile into fascist hell and liquidating the "leftists" (who were really just economic nationalists who objected to American companies ripping off their chief national resource, copper).

That should give one pause. Any call to unleash the fascist hellhounds of death in this country could help to provide eager killers at the top encouragement to do just that.

As Obama's star rises, fears for his safety Memories of 1968 assassinations evoked

Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press - 1984