Posts Tagged ‘obama’

http://youtu.be/Han5fgzy4KU

All of us are indebted to George Galloway, whose powerful anti-war speech in the British Parliament put a stopper in the rush to War with Syria. Later that day, the British Parliament handed Prime Minister David Cameron a humiliating defeat, and put President Obama on notice that he’s flying solo, in his bloody quest for World War III.

http://youtu.be/eEIM-3GNGag

By Susan Lindauer When FederalJack.com & I teamed together to expose video evidence of Libyan Rebels cannibalizing, castrating and decapitating Gadhaffi soldiers, some of you protested that such things must be video inventions. Horribly, they are not. Gruesome videos are surfacing out of Syria, depicting identical crimes by Islamic fighters.

Imagine if Vietnam War protesters had financed the Khmer Rouge bloodbath in Cambodia. That’s exactly what Pro-War Progressives are doing now.

On this, I agree with Glenn Beck. Americans must demand that Progressive Democrats and Republicans in Congress cut off supplies to Syrian rebels immediately. We are being dragged into World War III. For myself, I will go kicking and screaming.

http://youtu.be/ZqJfFrkzf8I

This blog opposes any U.S. or Israeli War with Iran. We are sharing this blog entry because of the significance of what it details regarding Israeli troop movement. Most emphatically, we urge President Obama to refuse to go to Israel, as commanded by Netanyahu. Obama is not Netanyahu’s dog. This geopolitical climate requires anyone seeking the Presidency to choose between service to America’s Middle Class— which is already bankrupt and threadbare after two failed Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan— and service to foreign powers. The answer is self evident: Any White House official or member of Congress who puts foreign interests above our own has betrayed the Middle Class, and should be forced out of office as a traitor.
INTEL FROM ISRAEL: WHAT”S GETTING READY TO HAPPEN??

Steve Quayle Alerts  My brother and his family live in Jerusalem – he is a minister – his office is close to one of Israel ‘s largest underground military bases.

He called me last night which is very unusual – usually it is email.

He called to tell me that he is sending his family back to the US immediately due to what he is seeing happen within the last week and what he is being told by his military contacts in both the Israel and US military.

He said he is seeing with his own eyes military movements the likes of which he has never seen in his 20+ years in Israel .

What he called a massive redeployment and protective tactics of forces is underway.

Over the last two days he has seen anti-aircraft missile deployments throughout the Jerusalem area including 3 mobile units that he can see from his office windows.

In addition, he has seen very large Israeli armored columns moving fast toward the Sinia where Egypt has now moved in Armor.

There are reports of the top military leaders meeting with Israel’s Sr. Rabbi which is something that has happened preceding every prior military campaign.

He is convinced that barring something extraordinary Israel will attack Iran – with or without the US – and very soon.

It is the belief in Israel that Obama does not stand with Israel but with the Arab countries.

He has told me before that Israel will saber rattle from time to time but that this time is very different from what he is seeing and hearing.

He was at the Wailing Wall 2 days ago and there were hundreds of IDF soldiers there. As he was leaving he passed at least 20 military buses full of soldiers in route to the wall.

He has never seen this before either.

Just thought I would pass this along.

My brother is not an alarmist by any means.

When he talks like this it gets my attention for sure and usually I find he knows more than he shares.

There are reports that Israel is asking Obama to come to Israel immediately but they are being answered with silence.

My opinion is that I see the making of the perfect storm.

Sep 11, 2012

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Four separate eyewitnesses inside the Westfields Marriott hotel in Chantilly Virginia told London Guardian writer Charlie Skelton that Mitt Romney was in attendance at Bilderberg 2012, suggesting the Republican candidate could be the elite’s pick for the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

“Four eyewitnesses on the hotel staff told me Willard Mitt Romney was here at Bilderberg 2012. My four eyewitnesses place him inside. That’s one more than Woodward and Bernstein used. Romney’s office initially refused to confirm or deny his attendance as Bilderberg is “not public”. They later said it was not him,” writes Skelton.

The London Guardian writer adds that the fact Romney’s name did not appear on the official list of attendees is meaningless. Numerous power brokers, including Bill Gates, were photographed arriving at the event yet were not included on the list of participants, as is routinely the case.

With speculation already raging that Romney’s potential VP – Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels – was already being groomed by Bilderberg cronies, Romney’s appearance at the secretive confab of global power brokers suggests that he is being favored by the elite, who have seemingly lost faith in Barack Obama.

As Skelton noted in a separate report, on Saturday afternoon a limousine arrived at the hotel surrounded by a police motorcade, signaling the arrival of a “heavyweight politician”. Could this have been Mitt Romney? It’s unlikely given the fact that he was appearing at fundraisers on the west coast all weekend, but Romney’s schedule for Thursday, the first day of the Bilderberg meeting, was clear.

An invite to the Bilderberg conference has routinely proven beneficial to future Presidents and Prime Ministers.

Four years ago during a heated battle on the campaign trail, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton gave reporters the slip to attend the 2008 Bilderberg meeting at the same hotel. On precisely the same weekend as the confab was taking place, the Washington Post announced that Hillary was withdrawing from the presidential race and would support Obama.

Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were both groomed by the secretive organization in the early 1990′s before rising to prominence. Portugal’s Pedro Santana Lopes and Jose Socrates attended the 2004 meeting in Stresa, Italy before both going on to become Prime Minster of Portugal.

Bilderberg also played a key role in selecting John Edwards and John Kerry’s running mate in 2004 and Bilderberg luminary James A. Johnson also hand-picked Joe Biden as VP in 2008.

Confirmation that Romney attended Bilderberg 2012 may be hard to come by, but news that the former Governor of Minnesota’s email account was compromised by a hacker could offer proof, although no emails have been leaked thus far.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.

Published: 17 May, 2012, 08:30

The port side damage to the guided missile destroyer USS Cole is pictured after a bomb attack during a refueling operation in the port of Aden on October 12, 2000 (Reuters / Aladin Abdel Naby / Files)
(27.9Mb) embed video
XEMBED
http://rt.com/s/swf/player5.4.swf?file=http://rt.com/files/news/al-qaeda-usa-sanctions-yemen-443/i9123f945ebc7552d5fb0fb4752c9a67c_00ac3551.flv&image=http://rt.com/files/news/al-qaeda-usa-sanctions-yemen-443/ic5d99c31bcbd9b94181ce896a0170782_uss-cole.n.jpg&skin=http://rt.com/s/css/player_skin.zip&provider=http&abouttext=Russia%20Today&aboutlink=http://rt.com&autostart=false

The US is moving to place sanctions on anyone who opposes what Washington calls a democratic process in Yemen. Anti-war activist Susan Lindauer says this brings the US right into Al-Qaeda’s trap.

­Yemen is fighting an alleged Al-Qaeda insurgency with military support from the United States. On top of this, the Arab state continues to suffer from months of political unrest, with anti-government protesters demanding more reforms.

RT: Do members of the peaceful opposition in Yemen fall under these new US sanctions?

Susan Lindauer: Bad news for Barack Obama – the United States has played right into the hands of Al-Qaeda. It’s been a long-term ambition of Al-Qaeda to manipulate the United States into putting sanctions on Yemen, so that they can alienate the very impoverished Yemeni people from the central government. Yemen is a scrabble poor country, desperately poor. They are running out of water, they have no food, they have limited hospitals, limited educational opportunities.

Yemen sits right next toward Saudi Arabia. Ever since the bombing of the USS Cole, Al-Qaeda has made it clear that it wants to establish a base inside Yemen to attack the Saudi oil fields right next door. And anything that they can do to alienate the Yemeni people from the central authority and the West, the United States’ cause [would be] a great victory for them. It’s a very bad decision by the United States.

RT: The United States has significantly stepped up its involvement in Yemen’s fight against Al-Qaeda. Is it a part of Washington’s “war on terror” or, perhaps, there may be some ulterior geopolitical motives behind it?

SL: The US only sees the world in black and white. They see terrorism and the outcome of violence, but not the root causes of poverty and hopelessness, or jealousy of the gross economic inequities between Yemen and its extravagantly wealthy neighbors in the Gulf Region and Saudi Arabia. Those Gulf countries should immediately pump economic aid for education, hospitals, water facilities, and food. Washington would not have to spend a dollar. Arab countries should be capable of doing this on their own.

RT: Yemen is in a key position in the region, but the US does not have a military base there. Will it be having one?

SL: I would say they have secret military bases all over the place, don’t they? They have drone capacity, and they first tested the drones in Yemen. Over the past few years Yemen was the first target of the drones. The US has a very strong secret military capacity in this country.

RT: Drone attacks, inflated military presence – the US claims this would help make Yemen more stable and secure. And yet, could that be more about beginning another covert war in the region, rather than promoting a democracy?

SL: Drones never build democracy anywhere. Drone attacks feed chaos and destabilize the civilian population. Yemen has never been more insecure. Economic aid must start flowing into the country, or it will be lost for good.

AlterNet / By Steven Rosenfeld

Obama has expanded and fortified many of the Bush administration’s worst policies.

April 18, 2012 |

When Barack Obama took office, he was the civil liberties communities’ great hope. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, pledged to shutter the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and run a transparent and open government. But he has become a civil libertarian’s nightmare: a supposedly liberal president who instead has expanded and fortified many of the Bush administration’s worst policies, lending bipartisan support for a more intrusive and authoritarian federal government.

It started with the 9/11 attacks. Within a week, Congress, including many liberals, gave the White House blanket authority to wage a war on the terrorists. A month after that, Congress passed the USA Patriot Act, authorizing many anti-terrorism measure including expanded surveillance. By mid-November, the White House ordered creation of military tribunals to try terrorists who were not U.S. citizens.

Bush quickly expanded covert operations, creating a shadow arrest, interrogation and detention system based at Guantanamo that violated international law and evaded domestic oversight. While the Supreme Court eventually ruled that detainees have some rights, the precedent that the Constitution does not restrict how a president conducts an endless war against a stateless enemy was firmly planted. In response, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union proposed reforms the newly elected president could make. What few anticipated was how he would embrace, expand and institutionalize many of Bush’s war on terror excesses.

President Obama now has power that Bush never had. Foremost is he can (and has) order the killing of U.S. citizens abroad who are deemed terrorists. Like Bush, he has asked the Justice Department to draft secret memos authorizing his actions without going before a federal court or disclosing them. Obama has continued indefinite detentions at Gitmo, but also brought the policy ashore by signing the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which authorizes the military to arrest and indefinitely detain anyone suspected of assisting terrorists, even citizens. That policy, codifying how the Bush treated Jose Padilla, a citizen who was arrested in a bomb plot after landing at a Chicago airport in 2002 and was transferred from civil to military custody, upends the 1878’s Posse Comitatus Act’s ban on domestic military deployment.

Meanwhile, more than a decade after the 9/11 attacks, Washington’s wartime posture has trickled down into many areas of domestic activity—even as some foreign policy experts say the world is a much safer place than it was 20 years ago, as measured by the growth in free-market economies and democratic governments. Domestic law enforcement has been militarized—as most visibly seen by the tactics used against the Occupy protests and also against suspected illegal immigrants, who are treated with brute force and have limited access to judicial review before being deported.

One of Bush’s biggest civil liberties breaches, spying on virtually all Americans via their telecommunications starting in 2003, also has been expanded. Congress authorized the effort in 2006. Two years later, it granted legal immunity to the telecom firms helping Bush—a bill Obama voted for. The National Security Agency is now building its largest data processing center ever, which Wired.com’s James Bamforth reports will go beyond the public Internet to grab data but also reach password-protected networks. The federal government continues to require that computer makers and big Web sites provide access for domestic surveillance purposes. More crucially, the NSA is increasingly relying on private firms to mine data, because, unlike the government, it does not need a search warrant. The Constitution only limits the government searches and seizures.

The government’s endless wartime footing is also seen in its war on whistleblowers. Obama has continued cases brought by Bush, such as going after the “leaker” in the warrantless wiretapping story broken by the New York Times in 2005, as well as the WikiLeaks case, prosecution of Bradley Manning, and others for allegedly mishandling classified materials related to the war on terrorism. Its suppression of war-related information given to journalists extends overseas, where the State Department this month has blocked a visa for a Pakistani critic from speaking in the U.S. The White House also recently pressured Yemen’s leader to jail the reporter who exposed U.S. drone strikes. Meanwhile, the administration has stonewalled Freedom of Information Act requests, particularly the Justice Department, which has issued the secret wartime memos.

How bad is it? Anthony Romero, the ACLU executive director, exclaimed in June 2010 that Obama “disgusted” him. Meanwhile, the most hawkish Bush administration officials have defended and praised Obama.

Last summer, liberal lawyer-journalist Glenn Greenwald tallied a list of Bush warrior endorsements. Jack Goldsmith, the former DOJ officials who approved the torture and domestic spying efforts, wrote in The New Republic in May 2009 that Obama actually was waging a more effective war on terror than Bush.

“The new administration has copied most of the Bush program, has expended some of it, and has narrowed only a bit,” Goldsmith wrote. “Almost all of the Obama changes have been at the level of packaging, argumentation, symbol and rhetoric.” Bush’s final CIA director, General Michael Hayden—whose confirmation Obama opposed as a senator—told CNN there was a “powerful continuity between the 43rd and 44th presidents.” And in early 2011 Vice-President Dick Cheney told NBC News, “He’s learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate.”

(more…)

The Intel Hub
February 13, 2012

Join our exclusive mailing list for breaking news updates straight to your email!

In the last few weeks the FBI, in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice, have sent out 25 flyers that label normal everyday activities as possible terrorist indicators.

These flyers also specifically target political speech and the belief that the CIA and others had a part in 9/11 in order to justify, among other things, multiple foreign wars.

That’s right, our government is teaching state and local law enforcement nationwide that 9/11 truthers should be immediately looked at as possible terrorists.

In an FBI, Bureau of Justice document on spotting potential sleeper cells within the United States it specifically states that someone may be a terrorist sleeper agent if they believe that the CIA had a hand in 9/11. (A fact that has been heavily documented by thousands of experts. Rogue elements does not mean the entire CIA)

Late last week Intel Hub contributing writer Madison Ruppert wrote an extensive article that highlighted the details of all the 25 flyers that were sent out.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has routinely released their “Communities Against Terrorism” advisories in the form of fliers which encourage the public to report suspicious activity, something which the DHS has heavily promoted under their “See Something, Say Something” citizen spying program.
 

Through releasing these fliers, the FBI has effectively made most activities possible indicators of terrorism. Many of these are so innocuous it is almost laughable to think of them as hints of terrorist activity.

These are intended to make the people of the United States live in a constant state of fear, constantly on the lookout for non-existent terrorists lurking behind every corner.

This also helps create a culture of citizen spying in which neighbors are reporting each other for what would otherwise never be considered noteworthy activities.

Thus, it makes it much easier for the government to track down supposed dissidents since just about everything they do is likely to be considered suspicious when applying all of the absurd guidelines promoted by the FBI.

Although all the supposed possible terrorists indicators are absolutely absurd, the fact that the FBI choose to specifically target 9/11 truthers shows how important, even after ten years, covering up the truth of the horrendous 9/11 attacks is to the powers that be.

In August 2011 a video report from media outlet Russia Today highlighted a bill introduced in Congress that would allow indefinite detention of any American that the government declares a terrorist or terrorists sympathizer. (which we now have with NDAA)

The report specifically spoke about the possibility of 9/11 truthers being locked up throughout the country and now, with an FBI flyer specifically stating this very thing, questioning 9/11 is becoming an increasingly dangerous use of free speech.

Meanwhile, the fact that the United States and Israel openly support and fund an al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group in Iran (MEK) is in the public domain yet everyday Americans are being labeled terrorists by the very officials who either indirectly or directly support terrorists themselves.

(more…)

By Pepe Escobar

January 06, 2011 “

Asia Times” — NEW YORK – Here’s a crash course on how to further wreck the global economy.

A key amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act signed by United States President Barack Obama on the last day of 2011 – when no one was paying attention – imposes sanctions on any countries or companies that buy Iranian oil and pay for it through Iran’s central bank. Starting this summer, anybody who does it is prevented from doing business with the US.

This amendment – for all practical purposes a declaration of economic war – was brought to you by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), on direct orders of the Israeli Torrents of spin have tried to rationalize it as the Obama administration‘s plan B as opposed to letting the Israeli dogs of war conduct an unilateral attack on Iran over its supposed nuclear weapons program.

Yet the original Israeli strategy was in fact even more hysterical – as in effectively preventing any country or company from paying for imported Iranian oil, with the possible exceptions of China and India. On top of it, American Israel-firsters were trying to convince anyone this would not result in relentless oil price hikes.

Once again displaying a matchless capacity to shoot themselves in their Ferragamo-clad feet, governments in the European Union (EU) are debating whether or not to buy oil from Iran anymore. The existential doubt is should we start now or wait for a few months. Inevitably, like death and taxes, the result has been – what else – oil prices soaring. Brent crude is now hovering around $114, and the only way is up.

Get me to the crude on time

Iran is the second-largest Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) producer, exporting up to 2.5 million barrels of oil a day. Around 450,000 of these barrels go to the European Union – the second-largest market for Iran after China.

The requisite faceless bureaucrat, EU Energy Commissioner Gunther Ottinger, has been spinning that the EU can count on Saudi Arabia to make up the shortfall from Iran.

Any self-respecting oil analyst knows Saudi Arabia does not have all the necessary extra spare capacity. Moreover, and crucially, Saudi Arabia needs to make a lot of money out of expensive oil. After all, the counter-revolutionary House of Saud badly needs these funds to bribe its subjects into dismissing any possibility of an indigenous Arab Spring.

Add to it Tehran’s threat to block the Strait of Hormuz, thus preventing one-sixth of the world’s oil and 70% of OPEC’s exports from reaching the market; no wonder oil traders are falling over themselves to lock up as much crude as they can.

Forget about oil at an accessible $50 or even $75 a barrel. The price of oil may be destined to soon reach $120 a barrel and even $150 a barrel by summer, just as in crisis-hit 2008. OPEC, by the way, is pumping more oil than at any time since late 2008.

So what started as an Israeli-concocted roadside improvised explosive device has now developed into a multiple economic suicide bombing targeting whole sections of the global economy.

No wonder the chairman of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign policy commission, Ala’eddin Broujerdi, has warned that the West may be committing a “strategic blunder” with these oil sanctions.

Translation: as it goes, the name of the game for 2012 is deep global recession.

(more…)

Alexander Cockburn, 23 December 2011, Nation of Change

Too bad Kim Jong-il kicked the bucket last weekend. If the divine hand that laid low the North Korean leader had held off for a week or so, Kim would have been sustained by the news that President Obama had signed into law a bill that puts the United States not immeasurably far from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in contempt of constitutional protections for its citizens or constitutional restraints upon criminal behavior sanctioned by the state.

At least the DPRK doesn’t trumpet its status as the least-best sanctuary of liberty. American politicians, starting with the president, do little else.

A couple of months ago, came a mile-marker in America’s steady slide downhill towards the status of a Banana Republic with Obama’s assertion that he has the right as president to secretly order the assassination, without trial, of a U.S. citizen he deems to be working with terrorists. This followed his 2009 betrayal of his pledge to end the indefinite imprisonment without charges or trial of prisoners in Guantanamo.

After months of declaring that he would veto such legislation, Obama has now crumbled and will soon sign a monstrosity called the Levin/McCain detention bill, named for its two senatorial sponsors, Carl Levin and John McCain. It’s snuggled into the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

The detention bill mandates — don’t glide too easily past that word — that all accused terrorists be indefinitely imprisoned by the military rather than in the civilian court system; this includes U.S. citizens within the borders of the United States.

All onslaughts on potential sedition like to cast as wide a net as possible, so the detention act authorizes use of military force against anyone who “substantially supports” al-Qaida, the Taliban or “associated forces.” Of course, “associated forces” can mean anything. The bill’s language mentions, “associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or who has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”

That’s language that can be bent, at will, by any prosecutor. Protest too vigorously the assassination of U.S. citizen Anwar al Awlaki by American forces in Yemen in October and one day it’s not fanciful to expect the thump of the military jackboot on your front step, or on that of any anti-war organizer, or any journalist whom some zealous military intelligence officer deems to be giving objective support to the forces of evil and darkness.

Since 1878, here in the U.S., the Posse Comitatus Act has limited the powers of local governments and law enforcement agencies from using federal military personnel to enforce the laws of the land. The detention bill renders the Posse Comitatus Act a dead letter.
Governments, particularly those engaged in a Great War on Terror, like to make long lists of troublesome people to be sent to internment camps or dungeons in case of national emergency. Back in Reagan’s time, in the 1980s, Lt. Col. Oliver North, working out of the White House, was caught preparing just such a list. Reagan speedily distanced himself from North. Obama, the former lecturer on the U.S. Constitution, is brazenly signing this authorization for military internment camps.

There’s been quite a commotion over the detention bill.

Civil liberties groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union have raised a stink. The New York Times denounced it editorially as “a complete political cave-in.” Mindful that the votes of liberals can be useful, even vital in presidential elections, pro-Obama supporters of the bill claim that it doesn’t codify “indefinite detention.” But indeed it does. The bill explicitly authorizes “detention under the law of war until the end of hostilities.”

Will the bill hurt Obama? Probably not too much, if at all. Contrary to widespread belief, liberals are never very energetic in protecting constitutional rights. That’s more the province of libertarians and other wackos actually prepared to draw lines in the sand for matters of principle.

(more…)