THAT COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF MOMENT

The Bilderberg Washington Post is calling the aftermath of Sandy a "Commander-in-Chief moment", stating

For a day at least, Hurricane Sandy appears to have done for President Obama what he has not been able to do for himself.

In a campaign notable mostly for its negativity, the historic storm provided Obama with a commander-in-chief moment a week before Election Day. The president gained a rare moment of bipartisan praise, with Democratic and Republican governors alike commending the performance of the federal government. And the storm put on pause, for now, the sense that rival Mitt Romney had all the momentum in the home stretch.

[source : Storm provides Obama with a commander-in-chief moment, WP, http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/storm-provides-obama-with-a-commander-in-chief-moment/2012/10/30/5e645952-22c2-11e2-ac85-e669876c6a24_story.html?hpid=z2, 31/10/2012

The WP appears to me to favour Obama, with more comments in favour of Obama and against Romney than t'other way around.

Romney does appear to have pulled ahead slightly. The Drudge Report showed some polls putting Romney approaching 10 points ahead. But there are now whispers of postponing the election; it is possible but unlikely...for now. Initial estimates of getting New York's transport and comms networks dried out and running again were initially set for the weekend. Obama has released government funds to several states affected by Sandy.

So I return to this report in Press TV about Obama and Dempsey and a few others threatening to go public on 9/11.

Some of the same high-level sources who point to Richard Clarke as the US boss of the Israeli-instigated 9/11 false flag operation also claim that President Obama, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dempsey, and other powerful Americans are considering exposing the truth about 9/11 during a second Obama term. In other words, Obama's re-election could put Israel out of business, and get Netanyahu hanged from the nearest lamp-post.

[source : Israel seeks war on Iran to keep lid on 9/11, PressTV, http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/20/262683/israel-seeks-iran-war-to-keep-lid-on-911/, 21/09/2012]

This report was published AFTER the incident in Benghazi. I have noticed that nearly all articles I have read about that incident accusing Obama have not mentioned the film that caused outrage across the Arab world, as if it had never happened. Several have stated that Ambassador Stevens had written on the growth of al Qaeda and affiliates in Libya. Perhaps he was threatening to go public on this and was silenced but a smokescreen was required hence the film to provoke riots and an attack that killed Stevens. The Press TV report was published AFTER Benghazi. But when was the author of the report told about the threat of Obama etc going public on 9/11? Before or after Benghazi? In other words, did Obama say he was 'considering' going public on 9/11 only AFTER Benghazi?

Maybe Sandy was designed to cause much more devastation and make Obama look incompetent, but the technology available is not yet powerful enough to create such storms, in North East USA anyway.

But at the moment, Sandy is proving useful to Obama.