Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Is Nobel Peace Prize Winner Obama More Brutal than Bush?

A fantastic analysis from the March 31, 2001 Washington's Blog, followed by more thoughts and links from your truly. - D.W.


(George W.) Bush is correctly regarded as a lying, war-mongering, torturing tyrant.

Is Nobel peace prize winner Obama even worse?

Many governments, U.S. congressmen and other individuals have demanded that Obama return his Nobel peace prize for bombing Libya without congressional approval.

Bush got us into 2 wars to protect our strategic national interests in ... er ... broccoli. Obama just got us into a third war for the same reason. Bush's decision to invade Iraq was met with large protests. Similarly, most Americans didn't want Obama to get involved in Libya.

The Bush administration funded terrorist groups (and see confirming articles here and here). Obama is allegedly funding terrorist groups in Iran, and is now aiding the Libyan "rebels", even though there are allegations that 1,000 of them are Al Qaeda radicals (and there are some indications that their leader is a CIA asset).

Obama has increased the number of drone attacks in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere. Indeed, most people who have looked at the numbers believe that Obama has killed many more civilians with drone attacks than Bush did using the same method.

The Brookings Institution noted in 2009:

"Critics correctly find many problems with this program, most of all the number of civilian casualties the strikes have incurred. Sourcing on civilian deaths is weak and the numbers are often exaggerated, but more than 600 civilians are likely to have died from the attacks. That number suggests that for every militant killed, 10 or so civilians also died."

Read More @ Washington's Blog

With the recent brown-people-bombing-brigades over Libya and the ongoing torture of the 'guilty until proven innocent' Bradley Manning, among other examples, it should be clear to anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature that America's current Bootlicker-in-Chief loves gang-raping the Constitution as much or more so than his predecessor.

From ProPublica (via Raw Story):
. . . the order establishes indefinite detention as a long-term Obama administration policy and makes clear that the White House alone will manage a review process for those it chooses to hold without charge or trial.

Nearly two years after Obama's pledge to close the prison at Guantanamo, more inmates there are formally facing the prospect of lifelong detention and fewer are facing charges than the day Obama was elected.

That is in part because Congress has made it difficult to move detainees to the United States for trial. But it also stems from the president's embrace of indefinite detention and his assertion that the congressional authorization for military force, passed after the 2001 terrorist attacks, allows for such detention.

Don't for a minute you believe that this order will be to fight our government's favorite bogeymen, al-CIA-da. It is going to be used against We the People, as this excerpt from the Military Commissions Act of 2006 shows.

How can someone who is not already a citizen of the United States have an "allegiance or duty" to "breach" to the United States?

This creeping "National Security State" is coming directly for the American people. And it is being done to squash us on behalf of the International Banking Cartel and the Military Industrial Complex - who own Congress and the Executive Branch - and will soon attempt to foreclose on the rest of America when the dollar collapses and those fancy new FEMA Detention Centers are rolled out to "accommodate" those of us who refuse to submit in the Land of the Sheep and the Home of the Slaves.

No comments: