In the telecast March 31 Bill O Reilly revealed that he is fulfilling a question he asked when he interviewed President Obama. In that Interview he asked the President, “What can I do to help you, Mr. President?” Since that time O Reilly has done a good job of covering up his new-found admiration for the President. Mostly, O Reilly acts as though he is being fair and balanced, but the nuance of his comments is decidedly pro Obama. Tonight with the use of one word, O Reilly revealed his inner convictions. In discussing the difference between Obama and Bush as regards the Mid East, O Reilly said that Bush was a “cowboy” in Iraq while Obama revealed a deliberate cautious and careful approach to Libya. He said that Bush was a cowboy in his go it alone approach to leadership while Obama’s broad coalition with NATO is proof of Obama’s leadership. The use of the negative word “cowboy” as regards President Bush shows that O Reilly is no longer even pretending to be fair and balanced and has become a Obama defender, just like MSNBC and CNN and the other media sycophants. Too bad, because now there is only Mark Levin and Sean Hannity to trust for fair and balanced and Glenn Beck for thorough investigative reporting. O Reilly is really a democrat advocate and it would be better for him to admit his true Pro Obama position rather than to continue to pretend otherwise.
Does the Court In Wisconsin Believe It is Superior to the Legislature?
Yesterday a Court Judge ruled that the Wisconsin Labor law cannot be enforced. Amazing how a single Judge sets herself up against the Governor and the legislature of a sovereign State. It is disheartening for average citizens to watch such judicial legislation. The Judges are supposed to rule on the legality of the law under the constitution. So what is the Judge doing here? Is it judicial politics or does she have legitimate reason to tell the legislature, in due order assembled, that it is not allowed to pass laws? I understand this may seem simplistic but the people do elect legislators and Governors and they expect their decision to be respected unless the legislature does something egregiously harmful to the citizens of the State. Do we really think that limiting government employees collective bargaining rights, and telling them to pay 8% of their pension of 12 5 of their health insurance is harmful to the State. I am sure that the majority citizens of that State pay as much or more into their plans. So what’s the problem?
Libyans Have the Right of Free Speech.
The rebels are in retreat again. Take away foreign intervention and the so-called popular uprising is easily defeated. Where are the five million civilians who are supposed to be rebels? Obviously, if even a majority of the people wanted Gaddafi out, they would shelter, feed, fund and join the rebels. But the people do not! Is it possible that this is actually a minor rebellion of radical former military people who are themselves, like Gaddafi , seeking to seize control of Libya? And the so-called leadership of the rebellion. USA acknowledges it knows next to nothing about them, and our Sec. State has meetings with well dressed, expatriats who fled to France and lived in luxury while ordinary Libyans slogged through their daily life under the regime. Do we remember Chalabi in Iraq? He was a cheat and a phony expatriate who we thought was the answer to Iraq’s problems. Yesterday I read news that the people in Gaddafi’s hometown were bombed, strafed and obviously, killed. They are civilians but of his tribe. So, it seems that the people who are civilians but who support Gaddafi are not allowed have free speech, free politics and freedom of assembly. Why? because a foreign President of the USA ( The land of the free and the home of the brave) tells them they are not allowed that freedom. The need to believe as he does and as do French and British colonial imperialists. I really do not agree with most of what Louis Farrakhan says, but he is right to ask President Obama who the hell he thinks he is? Indeed as President of the USA he is one of the most important world leaders. But he is not President of the world? And Lindsey Graham made the association of the Minutemen with the Libyan rebels. Please Senator, do not liken the Libyan rebels to the citizen soldiers of Bunker hill and Concord, and Valley Forge. Last word for this post. Did any of us realize that we had such war mongers in the Congress. Amazing to hear Senator Mc Cain and Liebermann endorse foreign interventionism. America is not the policeman nor the savior of the world. And for those who will quote Gaddafi about “…showing no mercy..” Arabs are noted for exaggeration. Remember Saddam with his Mother of all Battles speech?
Hannity and the Right are Wrong.
For several days now Sean Hannity has been proposing that although there are serious questions whether we should have gotten involved in Libya, yet since we have started therefore we must continue and oust the government and its leader. There is an old moral principle which says that two wrongs do not make a right. The escalation of the American military involvement from a no fly zone into attacking the buildings, administration, military and security forces of libya is simply criminal aggression. The United Nations does not have the legal authority to state that 28 nations can use all means necessary in order to protect civilians, and then be silent as the Obama Administration takes the side of the rag tag rebels forces against the constituted forces of the Libyan government. The blatant immorality of the idea that the United Nations and NATO can suddenly and without provocation gang up upon a member state is obvious, although ignored by all the allied leaders. Why do Senate leaders like Mc Cain and Libermann ignore the genocide in Dafur and Congo and the Ivory Coast while warmongering in Libya. Fearfully, the US is showing itself morally bankrupt in this so called humanitarian war. So since when are 212 missiles and A-10 gunships taking the side of a motley rag tag rebel force against Gadhadfi a humanitarian effort?
Levin has a point.
Mark Levin on Monday, March 28th, stated the proposition that President Obama is using the Libyan situation as a catalyst to advance his idea of one world government. Levin highlighted the factors to include President Obama seeking UN, Arab League, and NATO approval for our actions in place of seeking the support of the US Congress. The writer of this blog feels that Levin is hitting a central point in this whole affair. It is amazing that US battle ship groups, Air force elements, and 212 missiles should be launched against Libya without any congressional approval at all. What should the congress do? Because the military is totally disregarding the authority of Congress, and because aggression against the sovereign state of Libya is criminal, then the Congress should tell the military that they will not approve the defense budget because it is not defense but aggression. The Congress should also close down any negotiations with the Dept. of Defense relative to any new weapons funding. Additionally, the Congress should tell the military that because they had a wanton disregard for precious weapons resources, therefore the Congress will not fund the replacement of the 212 illegally launched missiles. And for my readers who scoff at this idea, please remember that it is the DEFENSE budget and not the aggression budget and that even Secretary Gates was candid enough to admit on March 27th Meet the Press that Libya was not and is not a threat to the security of the USA.
Mc Cain Libermann Warmongering?
The drums of war beat loud and fast for some leaders. It is amazing to hear Senators Libermann and Mc Cain in full support of the illegal bombing of Libya. Today I read that Nato, ( that means American) fighters bombs Gadhafi’s home town. Now aren’t these people innocent of any crime? The article said that the bombs were dropped on his home town because the people there supported him. That is just plain immoral. The people there are free to have their political opinions. If they want to back Gadhafi that is their “constitutional” right. I mean, let’s be honest, we say we are for freedom of speech and freedom of political opinion but we bomb Libyan people BECAUSE they exercise their freedom to support whomever political leader they want to support. But it is not the leader that Obama says they are allowed to support. So, we are bombing them. Likewise, I read that we strafed and bombed Gadhafi’s troops, tanks and armored personnel for the purpose of allowing the rebels to gain control of a city and to regain control of another. A few days ago the President and his spokespeople said that it was unfair for Gadhafi to have tanks and troops and armored personnel carriers and we were going to ” level the playing field.” But now the rebels have our planes and bombs in limitless supply while we force Gadhafi forces to have no planes and we wantonly destroy his tanks and helicopters. So now, I ask, who has the unfair advantage and that unfair advantage is not even Libyan it is foreign. And even worse, it is the colonialist imperialist forces of France and England and shamefully, American. Now, on Meet the Press we even hear a Senator say that we should support the internal unrest in Syria, seek to over throw the Syrian government and if needed bomb Syria and put boots on the ground in both Syria and Libya. This writer wants to know if the good Senator thinks we should pour down bombs upon Mecca in Saudi Arabia, a tyranical monarchy and and should we also bomb Palestine a home to Hamas and while we are at it, maybe a few cruise missiles should be shot at Lebanon and Hezbollah? The warmongering of President Obama is amazingly brazen. These are American planes paid for with American dollars and American pilots on the US military payroll and Congress which is the ONLY part of the US government under the Constitution which is allowed to declare war is not even consulted!! Instead the warmongers consult NATO in Brussels, (the new world order headquarters) and the Arab league, (who the hell are they?) and the United Nations, (the historic new world order headquarters.) And what did we seek from them? We asked their permission. And once the US President got their permission our overly aggressive President told us lie and lie as he pursued a bellicose war path of wanton destruction upon the five million people of Libya, all the while denying an attempt to kill Gadahfi and declaring that our effort is humanitarian. Well, what is humanitarian about a war waged against the sovereign state of Libya? Should the USA be cavorting with the ugly colonialist imperialist regimes of England and France against an Arab nation? Well, enough said on that. Now to the outflanking of the Congress as the President takes to the public broadcasting system to force the Congress to approve his constitutionally illegal action by appealing directly to the public. I hope the people will reject the President’s facile manipulation of his power to dictate another war and one which is plainly raw aggression.
Libya really is our third war.
Today’s news reported on TV that the new estimate for the war in Libya is three months. Wow what happened to the Presidents idea of narrow objective, limited in scope and of short duration. General Franks told President Bush that the Shock and Awe campaign would be so effective that we would be out of Iraq in three months. Well, we are still there. It really stretches one’s belief to think that we are in Libya, supporting a very small group of former Libyan soldiers in an armed rebellion against the central government for what the administration calls humanitarian reasons. Let me ask you a simple question, especially all of you in support of this new aggression. If the President asked you for one thousand dollars to be sent voluntarily to support this war, would you send it or would you rather send your thousand to Japan in support of humanitarian relief to the Tsunami victims? Be honest.
American Agression in Libya
American is an aggressor nation which has attacked another country . The President hooked up with two colonial powers to attack the sovereign state of Libya. All of this is illegal, no matter what the United Nations says and it indicates that the United States is now willing to invade and continue to invade another nation in order to destroy the forty-year old functional government and replace it with something else. The United States is the aggressor because Libya did not attack the USA nor did Libya attack citizens of the USA , nor the embassy of the USA. Instead, the USA bombed Libya with aircraft bombs and missiles. This unprovoked attack of three nations of advanced military power against one small Arab nation is an action of aggression pure and simple. Libya was not and is not a threat to the peace, stability or sovereignty of the USA or its citizens. Yet, the USA attacks not only the army, but the nation of Libya itself. What else do you call bombing airfields, attacking administration building, destroying government centers and political party buildings, the compound of the dictatorial ruler and strafing tanks, shooting down heliocopters and preventing its government from quelling an armed rebellion. Last time I thought of it, I remember that armed rebellion against the USA is illegal and considered an act of treason punishable by death. Now some would argue that he is a dictator and therefore not worthy of respect. Did he not address the UN in the USA a few years ago? Did we arrest this man and throw him into prison? Did he not sign legally binding contracts with international companies and a PR firm in the USA? How did he get the weapons that he has? He bought them and the vendors, including many national governments, accepted his money as being the legal tender of the ruler of Libya. The position of many commentators in the USA is to be rejected. Sean Hannity, Bill O Reilly and the boys at CNN and MSNBC are cheering this new WAR. If it is a righteous war, where is the declaration of war from the Congress of the USA? No, this is unprovoked aggression and the criminal is the USA and stop harping that the UN said it was okay to bomb Libya in order to destroy the Libyan government, kill that government’s soldiers and the like…I cannot list all the crimes because it is sickening. And let’s not be two faced about our intentions. We say we want to defend the people but on the news we see that the rebels are not the people but a small band of former libyan soldiers and political activists and organizers who themselves say that they do not have enough fighers to defeat the government of Libya. And the spokeman for the USA State Deptment said Thursday March 24 that our government is in constant daily contact with the rebels for the purpose of finding out who they are, what they stand for, and what they intend to do if we help them to win. So we are fighting a war of aggression against the internationally recognized dictatorship of Libya in favor of a group of somebodies about whom we know nothing. Imagine that our CIA and military intelligence knows nothing about the leaders of this rebel group nor about its goals and aims! ABSURD. We should get out of Libya immediately and unilaterally. Forget this Coalition bull. The nations attacking are merely former imperialist colonial tyrants who seem to want to reclaim some kind of lost military glory. Shame.
Is Syria Next to Fall?
The Obama administration is either oblivious to the north Africia revolution’s potential to create a Muslim Arab Caliphate or it is assisting in the creation of such a thing! Granted, the area could use new leadership but the destruction of Libya and the destabilization of all of North Africa is not the way to do it. Rather, this observer is amazed at the organized consistency of the so call spontaneous uprising of the peoples. There is just too much sameness and too much regularity in the process, which is consistently starting with peaceful citizen protests and rallies, then followed by shooting and then a regularly correographed progression of increasingly radicalized demonstrations. All of them are aimed at overthrowing the regimes of each of the countries. None of them seeks reform or renewal and none is open compromise and negotiation. They want power. They want control of each national government. They want legitimacy so that each new revolutionary government will have access to all the resources, money and power of each nation. They want to immediately be recognized as the legal government of that nation, so as to enjoy the sovereign rights and protections that they deny to the present governments. It is not beyond this writers sense of the possible to see in this amazingly well organized and in the amazing sameness of each nations revolutions- it is possible to see a pattern that tells us that someone else or some other group is calling the shots and pulling the strings. Al Qaida? The muslim brotherhood? Some othr nefarious group of “New World Order” zealots? Is the liberal Western Press and media being “played the fool?” by a cynical and vicious group of international corporate criminals? Are the Western governments and especially President Obama being duped by terrorist groups that play to his ideological zealotry? Fearfully, our war planes and bombs may be aiding our ideological enemies and paving the way for them to seize control over the assets that they need to carry out a program of destabilization in Europe with the goal of weakening and eventually, (say twenty five years from now. (Hey they think long term!) of eventually defeating the USA?
Stop the Libya War.
The rebels state that they will be a nation of law and respect all
international agreements, treaties and commitments made by Libya, heretofore. Well that is really amazing! It shows the falseness of the rebel position that they state that the government of Libya is a tyrany and therefore worthy of being overthrown by force. Yet, they promise to honor all contracts, business deals, and international agreements of the former(so called illegal) government. Why? Because they state that these agreements were signed by the soveriegn State of Libya! By the way, is it legal to attempt to overthrow the US government by force? Is it legal to conspire to overthrown the French or British governments? Is it legal to fire upon German government troops or to attack Italian police forces? If a group of persons in the USA, France, England, Germany or Italy attacked those governments with guns and bombs, then those sovereign governments would put down those rebels with immediate force. Yes, even to the point of firing upon civilians! Are there two systems here? Did Gadalhfi randomly torture his citizens, did his secret police operate a Dachau, or a Secret Siberian prison camp system? Did the Law in Libya state that being a Christian was a crime? If a Muslin in Libya converted to Christianity was he or she liable to beheading? I understand Lockerbie and the tragedy of those innocent people. But do we overthrow a national government after accepting the “blood” money. By the way in the Arab World and among Muslims the payment of the “blood” money is itself the punishment. So, according to their own rules, he who did the crime already “paid” the time. Now I don’t agree with that idea, but that’s the way they see it. So, What are we doing there, other than destroying the army, navy and police forces of a sovereign State, and laying waste a nation so that unknown and inexperienced “rebels” whose allegience may be to Al Qaida, gain control of the largest known oil reserves in North Africa? Could that rebel government use the revenue of that oil to fund an Islamic revolution against all “Western” interests in the area, maybe the world? Our government is acting naively in creating in Libya, chaos, havoc and a fertile ground for a terrorist government. By the way, Afghanistan has no oil, and we overthrew the Taliban because we thought of them as our enemy. Well, if Al Qaida controls Libya, then will we need to commit ground troops to oust them a decade from
now?
Progressive Politics 