Dirty
Tricks 101 Obama - The Sinclair Tapes Part
3
Returning to the scurrilous Globe tabloid story,
Larry Sinclair was originally adamant about taking a lie detector
(polygraph) test - but when he did, and failed it, he claimed the
test was rigged - by the Obama campaign of course. The only thing, it
seems that maybe there was something untoward about the
circumstances of that test.
"I'm not going away!" Sinclair retorts
indignantly and with somewhat of a limp-wristed lisp. "They can
threaten me with anything they want - but I'm not going to stop until
Obama tells the truth!"
According to the Globe report:
"He says Obama arranged to get them cocaine [NOTE:
I recall on one of his videos, he claims Obama asked him to get
the cocaine.], and that he witnessed the charismatic elected official
smoke crack.
"Sinclair also says he performed oral sex on Obama
in the limo and in his hotel room in Gurnee, Ill. two nights later. [The
last incident seems to be an addition to Sinclair's original story.]
"He [Sinclair] even filed a lawsuit against the
candidate, Democratic National committee chairman Howard Dean, and
Obama's aide [David] Axelrod for conspiracy to violate his freedom of
speech.
"Now, fueling further controversy in the ugly
scandal is a disputed polygraph test that was set up and administered by
an Internet website. Sinclair took up an offer from WhiteHouse.com,
which is not connected to the government, to take a lie-detector test
about his Obama charges. He was paid $10,000 for taking it and promised
$100,000 if he passed.
"He flew to Los Angeles and took the test
administered by former American Polygraph Association president Dr. Ed
Gelb on Feb. 22."
Here, I need to interject and provide a little more
details about WhiteHouse.com.
First, it was originally a porn site to lure kids doing
their homework (thinking they were actually at the official White House
website) to a hard-core collection of porn. This fraud even resulted in
a letter of protest from the real White House.
WhiteHouse.com was a porn site until 2004. Mr. Parisi
used the name WhiteHouse.com to lure unsuspecting visitors into a porn
site. It got so bad that in 1997 he was sent a letter from the real
White House.
The White House
Washington
December 8, 1997
Mr. Dan Parisi
Secaucus, New Jersey
Dear Mr. Parisi:
It will come as no surprise to you that the White House Counsel's Office
is aware of your Internet Web site, "www.whitehouse.com," and
that we object to your use of the names and images of the White House,
the President, and the First Lady on that Web site to sell memberships
in an adult video club. We also recognize that you undoubtedly will use
this letter as an object of humor and as an invitation to advance the
claim that you are merely exercising your rights under the First
Amendment.
We too believe in the First Amendment--and in humor, although we see
nothing humorous in your use of the White House domain name to draw
children and other unwitting Internet users to your Web site. However
distasteful your business may be, we do not challenge your right to
pursue it or to exercise your First Amendment rights, but we do
challenge your right to use the White House, the President, and the
First Lady as a marketing device. For adult internet users, that device
is, at the least, part of a deceptive scheme. For younger Internet
users, it has more disturbing consequences. As your own online
disclaimer implicitly acknowledges, the foreseeable result of your use
of the White House domain name is that children will access your Web
site inadvertently. Your customers will understand that such a result is
unconscionable, and so, we submit, should you.
Sincerely,
Charles F.C. Ruff
Counsel to the President
http://www.news.com/2009-1023-207800.html?legacy=cnet
Mr. Parisi the owner decided to make a change with the
site when his son started kindergarten in 2004. He initally decided to
sell it then changed his mind and kept it with a different theme. In
November 2005 it became a real estate site. In March 2006 it became a
"Free Speech Forum". July 2006 saw it go back to a real estate
site. Novemeber 2006 it became a search engine for people. Only in June
of 2007 did they start covering politics. It even says on the
"About Us" section (pictured below)that "We are
rebranding and relaunching as a Political/News/ Entertainment site in
January 2008."
Now this same man and site is coming under fire for not
being forthright with the way they handled Larry Sinclair. They offered
him a challenge to take a polygraph and release all the findings on the
site. They did release some of the "findings" but not after
stringing everyone along for a few days. Mr. Sinclair claims that Dr.
Gelb, who isn't even a doctor walked away from him several times and
talked to Mr. Parisi in private. Mr. Sinclair was kept out of the loop
for days and now there are allegations that Mr. Parisi took money from
Senator Obama's campaign to get the desired results.
Readers of this blog had some information of their own
to contribute, as this anonymous comment illustrates:
You should also know that Parisi bought many internet
site names such as "Madonna.com" which my 12 year old went to
look at and found porn. Madonna later (I've read) had rights to the name
and was granted the site. It's well known on the internet that Mr.
Parisi "tricked" people to lure them to his porn sites by
buying up common names. Enter "Dan Parisi" on Google
[NOTE: over 500,000 results] and
you'll find his history of porn. I wouldn't buy anything the man has to
say.
Having gay friends of my own and being a mother, I can honestly say that
if Larry Sinclair is willing to put his face and history on the internet
for scrutiny under a microscope, I doubt he's lying. Most gay men DO NOT
want this kind of publicity but I'll agree with Sinclair that I WANT TO
KNOW if Obama smoked crack in 1999.
The fact that Obama is a switch-hitter should also be considered and I
would not put it past Parisi to lie. It's not as if his own past is
beyond reproach. Unlocked porn sites drawing kids is much worse than a
gay man stating he gave head to a state senator.
Wikipedia.org has a petty comprehensive account of who Parisi is and
what he's been up to. The man hasmade millions off porn, but
"claims" to have changed his mind because his son was just
entering kinderdarten and he didn't want him exposed to same stuff it was
okay to expose all the other kids to. (The links below are included in the
original Wikipedia article).
Part of the controversy about whitehouse.com was that users wishing
to visit the website of the White House (www.whitehouse.gov)
could easily go to the adult website instead. Although .gov
as a top-level
domain is available only to official government sites in the United
States, .com is a much more common ending on the web, and is frequently
entered by mistake. In addition, many web browsers add ".com"
to the end of an address if no suffix is entered, so simply typing
"whitehouse" into the address bar would lead one to
whitehouse.com. Because of the explicit and commercial content of the
site, it was frequently cited as one of the most egregious examples of domain
name misuse, up until the domain was sold.
The website whitehouse.org,
a humor site that satirizes
the U.S.
president, remains controversial for similar reasons, although less
so because its content is usually much less controversial.
In 1997, the Clinton
administration sent Dan Parisi a cease
and desist letter stating, "... we do not challenge your
right to pursue it or to exercise your First Amendment rights, but we do
challenge your right to use the White House, the President, and the
First Lady as a marketing device. For adult internet users, that device
is, at the least, part of a deceptive scheme. For younger Internet
users, it has more disturbing consequences." The letter had no
effect and the site stayed up.
In 1998
Jim Salmon was so appalled by the idea of how many kids get tricked into
going to this site that he personally pointed all of his domains to that
site, hoping to generate enough controversy to get people to shut the
site down. He owned 60 domain
names, many of which were domains for popular country music artists
such as leannrimes.com and shaniatwain.org. His plan backfired, and
instead he started to get heat from country singers who were angry at
what he had done. Dan Parisi put a disclaimer at the top of his site
denying any responsibility for all the celebrity domains being pointed
at his site. Eventually Salmon conceded and pointed all of his domains
back to where they used to be.
In 2004
Parisi decided to sell the domain, mainly because of his son who would
be in kindergarten
the next year. At this point he was making US$1
million annually from the site alone. Parisi had said he did not want to
sell the domain name to anyone in the adult entertainment industry, and
even claimed to have turned down what was essentially a blank check from
a buyer hiding his identity behind his broker.
In November 2005, the domain appeared to be used for a real
estate site. In December 2005 it contained only Google
ads, with a notice that a site for investigating people by checking
their public records would be coming.
In March 2006, whitehouse.com called itself "America's Free
Speech Forum". It advertised a cartoon contest and presented links
to Associated
Press political news stories.
In July 2006, the site was a real estate site again, and forwarded to
www.house.com.
As of November 2006, was a search engine for people, which searched
over 90 million White
Pages listings and 14 million Yellow
Pages listings.
As of June-October 2007, the site has once again changed and now
claims to be "your source for up-to-date information to help you
keep track of the major party candidates for President."
This type of behavior with trademarks
led the United
States government to the passage of the Anticybersquatting
Consumer Protection Act. The ACPA, however, only protects the
registration of trademarks as domain names and would not help the U.S.
government with the registration of the names of its offices or
agencies.
This somewhat underscores the dilemma for Obama - even
people who think "Dan Parisi" is full of crap want to know if
the stories are true.
Adding to the doubt about Obama is the amount of
receipts Sinclair has published showing he, at least, was where he said
he was when he said was. But it does not show the presence of
Barack Obama.
There's still another factor - Sinclair has brain
disease. No, I'm serious!
It had been my intent and desire to not bring my health
into this story because it has no bearing on the FACTS. However,
several Youtube claims along with Globe Magazines claims that I am
mentally ill and that my health is playing a part in this story have
made it necessary for me to set the record straight.
Yes, I have been diagnosed with a Brain Tumor. NO,
I am not on my death bed. In fact I never stated to the Globe or
anyone else that I had less than a year to live. The funny thing
about all these claims of my impending demise is that no one can make
such a claim, not even me. The reason being is simple, when I was
diagnosed I made the decision not to treat and to allow nature to take
its course. I believe we all are going to die, and when it is our
time there is nothing any of us or any Dr. can do. So my decision
was mine and I have not allowed any Dr. to tell me what they believe is
my expiration date.
I suffer from severe nerve damage in the hands, arms,
legs and spine. My right leg is numb all the time and there are
times when I cannot move either of my legs. In addition to this my
C-T-L spine has severe disc herniation. I have Fibromyalgia,
asthma, severe allergies, heart problems, bleeding ulcers and I eat
maybe once every two or three days.
I maintain body weight by drinking an average of 36
Pepsi’s per day.
The repeated claims of mental illness are nothing more
than attempts by the Obama camp and his supporters to take the focus off
of the issue of his drug use and dismiss them as coming from a nut case.
I have repeatedly asked anyone posting such claims of mental illness
and/or stays in mental institutions to gives names of said institutions
and dates of my stays which they have not and cannot do. Why you
ask? Because the claims are outright false.
Let us all remember that it was and is Barack Obama who
says he wants a new kind of politics, a politics of openness and
accountability. Only it appears he wants a politics of
accountability as long as he is not the one being held accountable.
I submit to all of you that the attacks against me based
on my past are attempts by the Obama camp to take the focus off the
issue as I AM THE ONE WHO DISCLOSED THE FACTS OF MY PAST, and I find it
more of the Obama double standard. Why? Because everyone is
saying what Obama did in 1999 is not important today, maybe he changed
his ways. Yet my past dates back to the 1980’s but I am
portrayed as what I did in my 20’s.
Obama and his supporters cannot have it both ways.
Lets be honest and simply face the truth and admit your encounters with
me in 1999 and move on. But as one Youtube email stated bluntly,
“if you think Obama, a candidate for President of the U.S. is ever
going to admit to this you truly are crazy.”
So even the Obama supporters have made it clear that the
truth is not important, the only thing that is important is to continue
to spread false statements about me so the public thinks this is nothing
more than a smear so Obama can avoid having to face the truth.
For all of our best interests I hope that there are
citizens out there that refuse to allow this to be swept under the rug.
