Professor From Columbia Comes Forward Saying Obama Never Attended the University

My life has crossed paths with President Obama on multiple occasions. According to Obama, we were Columbia University classmates, both Pre Law and Political Science majors in the Class of ’83. I also ran against Obama in 2008 on the Libertarian Party Presidential ticket. What are the odds?

But something about “the Obama at Columbia story” has always bothered me. Earlier in the week right here at The Blaze I wrote about having just returned from New York, where I attended my 30th Columbia University reunion. I celebrated with my esteemed classmates. Everyone except Barack Obama. As usual- he wasn’t there. Not a trace. Not a video greeting. Not a letter. I could not find any classmates who knew him.

I called Obama “the Ghost of Columbia University.” I pointed out (as I’ve said in the media for many years now) that Obama may have been registered at Columbia, may have graduated from Columbia, but he was rarely (if ever) seen for the two years in-between. It’s a strange, mysterious and frightening story.

Is he the real-life “Manchurian Candidate?” What explains Obama having just enough skeletal proof that he was there (one photo, one roommate, one professor, one friend)…but never seen in a class, never on anyone’s radar screen, almost invisible. A total 2-year blackout. It’s like a story straight out of a novel about the CIA or KGB. He graduated Columbia, but it’s almost as if he never went there.

To make matters more mysterious, Obama’s college records are sealed. He’s had plenty of opportunities to authorize the release, to clear the air. He has never chosen to do so. But why? What has he got to hide? Funny enough Obama has never had a problem ripping open the sealed records of his political opponents. Every step of his career Obama has beaten his opponents by having sealed documents just happen to be publicly exposed by anonymous sources. But not Obama. His records are always unavailable (and never leaked). Obama always seems to have powerful forces on his side.

Did he attend Columbia as a foreign student? That was the educated guess I made in my appearance on “Hannity” on Fox News a year ago. The only photo of Obama from his Columbia days was in his off-campus apartment with a roommate described by USA Today as a Pakistani national, pot smoker, and cocaine abuser. If you’re a foreign student, you live in housing off-campus with other foreign students.

That would also explain how he transferred to Columbia. Transferring into an Ivy League school is all but impossible. I did a little digging and found out only 3 transfer students in all of America were accepted into Columbia in the past academic year. Three students out of 315 million Americans. Yet those who knew Obama at Occidental called him a pot smoker and partier who rarely attended class. You’re telling me that a poor student, with that record, at an average college, was accepted for transfer into prestigious Columbia University? Only if he was an exotic Indonesian foreign student transferring into a college that desperately wanted to claim an ethnically and globally diverse student body.

Still that might explain how Obama got into Columbia. But where was he for those two years? My gut instincts say something is wrong with “the Obama at Columbia story.” Very wrong. Rancid.

But until now, I was the only one publicly voicing my suspicions. That just changed in a big way. Meet Professor Henry Graff, perhaps the most legendary and honored professor ever at Columbia University. He was THE American History and Diplomatic History professor at Columbia for 46 years. And he is more emphatic than yours truly that there are no Obama footprints at Columbia.

I was put on Professor Graff’s trail by another Columbia classmate, skeptical about Obama’s story. He told me that Professor Graff had been the speaker for the Class of ’53 last weekend at Columbia. My friend was watching Graff answer questions from the crowd when he was asked about Obama at Columbia. Graff said, “I have my doubts he ever went here.”

I did some digging and located Graff’s home phone number. I called him yesterday. Now retired, he was delighted to hear from me. He agreed to go on the record about Obama. Unlike Obama, Professor Graff clearly remembered me. He was thrilled to hear from his former student. I was in several of Graff’s classes and he remembered me like it was yesterday. He sounded great- like he hasn’t lost any of his trademark sharpness in 30 years since we last met.

I was honored to learn that this legendary historian has been following my political career for many years. But he had no such cheery things to say about the President. Graff said, “I taught at Columbia for 46 years. I taught every significant American politician that ever studied at Columbia. I know them all. I’m proud of them all. Between American History and Diplomatic History, one way or another, they all had to come through my classes. Not Obama. I never had a student with that name in any of my classes. I never met him, never saw him, never heard of him.”

Even more importantly, Professor Graff knew the other history and political science professors. “None of the other Columbia professors knew him either” said Graff.

Graff concluded our interview by saying, “I’m very upset by the whole story. I am angry when I hear Obama called ‘the first President of the United States from Columbia University.’ I don’t consider him a Columbia student. I have no idea what he did on the Columbia campus. No one knows him.”

There is something wrong with Obama’s story- I know that. Many of my classmates at last weekend’s 30th reunion knew that. Now the most beloved Professor ever at Columbia joins us in publicly questioning the story. Obama is either the ghost of Columbia, or the perfect Manchurian candidate. But something smells rotten at Columbia.

Let’s take Snope’s debunking evidence item by item”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1.
The first interview with his Pakastani roomate Sohale Siddiqui

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-05-15-3144401415_x.htm

discusses his time in NY but NOT ONE WORD by any of his ‘friends’ mentions his time at Columbia University.

The only reference to Obama at Columbia in this article was made before a statement by his press secretary at the time of the 2008 article when Obama was running for President.

Snopes should not have included this to counter the claim that Obama never attended Columbia.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2.
The second reference of Snopes seems at first more persuasive

http://www.scribd.com/doc/10978031/1983-article-by-Barack-Obama-Breaking-the-War-Mentality-in-Columbia-Universitys-Sundial-magazine

but still it offers no proof that Obama was at Columbia.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3.
The last reference promises to be a clincher because it purports to be direct by a Columbia Professor of American Foreign Policy. But it merely redirects to another Snopes link

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/columbiathesis.asp

whereby it states that no formal thesis was presented by Obama and then tries to whitewash this lack of academic rigor with a reference to a year-long in the making paper that no one can find a copy of!

So this last reference is a joke at best. As for the statements of the professor that were heard direct by Snopes or radioed by another of Obama’s spokespeople, this is all hearsay. There is no proof of any kind that Obama was a fully matriculated student at Columbia.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

THE LIKELY SCENARIO:

Given Obama’s background at Oxy and the difficulty in getting into a school like Columbia, a much more plausible account would be that Obama was an affirmative action (AA) student who was treated in a way that he could not fail.

Obama’s AA status would explain why the venerable Professor Graff did not remember him. Obama was likely granted an exemption from taking courses from the Professor.

My own experience with tenured ivy league professors and their reputation for challenging students and grinding them to dust if need be, is that they would at best accept begrudgingly the existence of AA as a political reality and console themselves that such ‘graduates’ would never see a position of real responsibility.

For example, one ivy league medical school established a ‘Bridges Program’ whereby AA students would be admitted into medical school in additional to the normal complement of admitted medical students. These Bridges students would have their own student office spaces with their own tutors. Whatever political power was behind this program, it was evident that the students would not be allowed to fail.

Failure was not an option for Bridges students. But at the same time the regular students knew these Bridges students were deficient and were given passes on qualifying exams. In other words there were two tiers of grading performance, one for the regularly admitted students and one for the Bridges students. Professors and regular students were concerned that these Bridges students could somehow be licensed Physicians and they were assured that only administrative jobs would await these deficient students.

The evidence points to Obama as an AA student who was perhaps matriculated as an extension student of sorts. In any event he needed a bachelors degree to get into Harvard Law and likely he was admitted there as some sort of ‘Bridges’ student based on his race and background.

As for my own opinion of AA, I understand its premises but it gives rise to putting people in influential positions of power where they can be dangerous. Some beneficiaries of AA policy are grateful, others see it as the game they needed to play to get power, money and influence. There’s a lot we can do to improve opportunity for persons of underprivileged background but there is much we must do to ensure the process is honorable.

MY SUMMATION:

The account given by Sohale Siddiqui is moving in the sense of the struggle that the young Obama had to endure to realize a higher ambition. I think most of us can empathize with such struggles.

But to get to high political office takes a network of wealthy or poweful contacts and lower level influences. It is these contacts and influences that should be the target of our investigation, not the young struggling Obama. He is merely their puppet to affect the agenda of the hard left. I saw this clearly in the campaign of 2008, that Obama was controlled. We all know that now.

Lower level influences could be a Director inside the Hawaii Health Department and the people associated in such offices. They need to be prosecuted. An atmosphere of severe consequences for fraud or gaming that smells of fraud needs to be created in such bureaucracies so that the game is effectively gummed up as no one will be so willing to risk incarceration and a loss of career. Of course if the gamers get to such influencers and offer them protection or their own brand of severe consequences, then we have a bureaucrat finding themselves between a rock and a hard place. This is where strengthening whistle-blower laws can keep people honest.

The life of Obama is a fraud unfortunately for him and conservatives. His birth certificate is a fraud, his selective service registration is a fraud, his entire life is built on fraud.

Who would push for all these frauds and be able to do it?

When someone is a useful puppet to their agenda, there are people in academia, in government and in financial positions that can “make things happen” especially is there is legislation and policy to support cutting corners or gaming a background.

Communist party members want the finer things of life and the access to privilege for themselves. They may not have individually a billion dollars in their bank accounts but they control such wealth and they control key people in key offices.

The process of admission to Columbia, admission to Harvard followed on the process of admission to Punahou in Hawaii. Communist parents and sympathizers know how to game the system. They are deceptive, they are intelligent and they are united in their belief that the deck is stacked against them from accessing the upper strata of society. Lie, cheat, and steal is their modus operandi but more importantly the process of ‘cover up’ is the cinching of their takings.

Personally I sense Obama is an arrogant person. I don’t think he worked or earned anything that would enable him to be admitted to Punahou, Columbia or Harvard. I think others in his society behind the scenes facilitated his rise, especially Affirmative Action policies.

His past is simply not honorable. But a less than honorable past seems to be the rule in high circles these days. As they say in Hollywood, as long as you have money or money behind you, you will be accepted and no one cares where the money came from.

But Obama is not the issue here. It is the movers and shakers behind him. These people would be the hardcore Left.

People in high places know that to rule over the lower classes one need only a scary enforcer, someone so nasty and criminal that no one dare make a move against him or her. With this in mind it is easy to understand how the media is controlled to a large extent and how the rank and file are kept in place. These nasties are the people we need to out and turn. We could do that for example by taking them on a helicopter ride and opening the cargo door where they see the ground below. They would understand our tactics because that’s the only thing such nasties understand, raw fear.

Another method to get at the Obama criminal network, or Hillary’s or Gore’s or anyone that the network puts in place as their puppet is to use RICO Statutes against them and haul them into court. But this is the political arena and RICO investigations would be tainted as partisan.

The answer is to get at the kingpins behind the fraud and to get the goods on them. They will turn evidence if we have the power to disconnect them from the gaming elements. But we unfortunately don’t have that power to disconnect. Look at the story of the Mirandizing of the Boston Bomber. He is still connected to the game controllers, thus we can bet we won’t see him talk.

Short of becoming dirty ourselves I unfortunately see no solution except to suffer until we have the power to reform. Suffering is then what most of us will have to do.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.