Category Archives: Peace

Peace

Obama guilty of treason?, Stall Iraq withdrawal, Logan Act, Another illegal act, Kenya 2006, Obama demand, NY Post, September 15, 2008, OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS’ IRAQ WITHDRAWAL

Obama was criticized by the Kenyan Government for his 2006 visit
to Kenya when he campaigned for his cousin Raila Odinga and
insulted the government. Now we learn that when Obama met with
Iraqi leaders “He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,“, stated Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. The NY Post has a breaking news article on Obama’s meeting. Here are some exerpts from the article dated Monday, September 15, 2008:

OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS’ IRAQ WITHDRAWAL

“WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview”

“Though Obama claims the US presence is “illegal,” he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the “weakened Bush administration,” Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined.”

Read the rest of the article here:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm?page=0

If you believe Obama is unfit for office, visit:

http://obamaimpeachment.org

Truth Fights Back, John Kerry, Obama, communist visits, Aiding and abetting the enemy, Abuse of power, Logan Act

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”

REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

Commander of the Swift Boats in Vietnam, 1968-1969

John Kerry meddling in foreign affairs (from “Unfit for Command):
“About one year earlier, two young Americans had also come to
Paris, presumably for their honeymoon: John Kerry, a young, clean
shaven Navy war veteran, accompanied by his new wife, the former
Julia Thorne, who could trace her lineage back to George Washington.
But honeymooning was not John Kerry’s only reason for traveling to
Paris. Kerry’s presidential campaign has now acknowledged that he
“talked privately with a leading Communist representative” there.

For decades, this meeting had been only a rumor. The rumor
stemmed from a comment Kerry made in the less publicized question
and answer segment of his April 22, 1971, testimony before the
Fulbright Committee: “I have been to Paris. I have talked with both
delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic
of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government.””

From the Petition to Impeach Senator Obama. Meddling in the affairs of Kenya and abuse of power:

Whereas: As a US Senator, Barack Obama violated the stated intention of
his 2006 Official Government Visa to Africa by publicly propagandizing
for his cousin, Railla Odinga against the US democratic ally of Kenya.
Whereas the stated “mission” of Senator Obama’s Official Visa, according
to the Kenya Office of Public Communications, was to “nurture relations
between the Continent and the United States” he, instead, made public
protest before Kenya citizens to rally against their leadership,
invoking a need for “Change!” and accusing this US allied nation of
“corruption.” In Official Protest of Mr. Obama’s passport abuse and
misconduct, Kenya’s government cited his “extremely disturbing
statements on issues which it is clear, he was very poorly informed, and
on which he chose to lecture the Government and the people of Kenya on
how to manage our country.” Whereas, furthermore, there is no public
record of any sanctions or reprimand by the US Congress of Senator
Obama’s passport violation or campaigning on foreign soil against a US
ally, history has since recorded the broadspread destruction of Kenya’s
economy and large scale loss of life as a result of the violence
instigated by Odinga’s ODM campaign there.”

View the complaint from the Kenyan Government here:

 http://www.communication.go.ke/media.asp?id=284

Note that what was once considered to be a rumor about Kerry’s trip turned out to be true.

To John Kerry and the Truth Fights Back site.

The response from the Kenyan Government to Obama’s 2006 visit is not a rumor or a smear. It is what we commonly refer to as a fact.

John Kerry, do you have a response to these facts?

View and sign the petition to Impeach Senator Obama:

http://obamaimpeachment.org

Obama Iraq trip, Obama Afghanistan trip, foreign press, Larry Sinclair allegations, Obama and Sinclair, November 1999, Obama comment on Sinclair

Barack Obama is on a fact finding trip to Iraq and Afghanistan. The MSM is the US has been giving Obama a free ride. No one in the US press wants to touch the Larry Sinclair allegations. The MSM media in the US prefers to swoon over Obama and refer to biased blogs for their information.

The press in foreign countries has been more open to hearing the allegations from Larry Sinclair of a drug and sex encounter with Obama in November 1999. I know first hand that the Sinclair allegations are being reported in Australia.

So, for the big question:

Will the press ask Obama to comment on the Larry Sinclair allegations during his trip?

Does anyone in the press have the guts to ask Obama?

Obama AIPAC speech, Obama lies, Obama hypocrisy,Zbigniew Brzezinski, Farrakhan, Wright, anti semitism

Obama gave a speech at the AIPAC, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, today, Wednesday, June 4, 2008. Here are some of the comments Obama made to the AIPAC:

 “As president, I will work to help Israel achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security. And I won’t wait until the waning days of my presidency. I will take an active role, and make a personal commitment to do all I can to advance the cause of peace from the start of my administration,”

“I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat — from Gaza to Tehran. … Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and it must be deepened,”

“true friend of Israel”

“I want to mention that that I know some have been receiving provocative emails that have been circulating throughout Jewish communities across the country. And a few of you may have gotten them. They’re filled with tall tales and dire warnings about a certain candidate for president. And all I want to say is, let me know if you see this guy named Barack Obama, because he sounds pretty scary,”

We already know about Obama’s connections to Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan as well as William Ayers. We already know of Obama’s ties to Auchi (Iraq) and Rezko (Syria). We know that Jeremiah Wright and Farrakahn went to Libya. Many people are not aware of the ties between Obama and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former national security adviser. The Telegraph, a British news source, presented an article on May 27, 2008 about Obama, Mr. Brzezinski and AIPAC. Here are some exerpts:

“Although Mr Brzezinski is not a formal day-to-day adviser and stressed he doesn’t speak for the campaign, he said that he “talks to” Mr Obama.”

“He endorsed the Illinois senator, lauding him as “head and shoulders” above his opponents. He said that he was the only candidate who understood “what is new and distinctive about our age”.”

“In turn, Mr Obama has praised Mr Brzezinski as “someone I have learned an immense amount from” and “one of our most outstanding scholars and thinkers”.”

“In Mr Brzezinski’s view, whoever is the next US leader must persuasively propose the following dramatic steps to peace: a) Palestinians give up the right of return from Jordan b) demilitarise of the Palestinian state c) Israel share Jerusalem d) Israel return to its pre-1967 war borders with “equitable adjustments”.”

 

“An active author and analyst at 80, he is close enough to Mr Obama that his remarks may feed fears in the American-Jewish community that the senator would soften America’s traditional strong pro-Israeli stance if he became president.”

Read more of the article here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/2033694/Barack-Obama’s-consultant-accuses-Jewish-lobby-members-of-McCarthyism.html 

 

Obama smoking gun, Jeremiah Wright, NY Times, 2007, Barack Obama knew racist, anti semitic position

Barack Obama has denied attending sermons of pastor Jeremiah Wright that spoke of hating America and God damn America. Obama has distanced himself from Jeremiah Wright, even though he has had a close association with Wright for 20 years. Jeremiah Wright has been consistently referred to as Barack Obama’s mentor. So, Obama is giving high ideal speeches about racism and proposing that he will help heal the country and is suddenly denouncing pastor Wright. Obama’s innocence of Wright’s sermons is insincere if not an outright lie. Below are references to 2 NY times articles from 2007. They show Obama distancing himself from Wright early in 2007. Obama and his staff knew then that Jeremiah Wright and his anti America, racist and anti semitic statements would pose a problem.

The following is from a NY Times article of March 6 2007:

““Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Mr. Wright said in an interview on Monday, recalling that he was at an interfaith conference at the time. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me,” Mr. Wright said, referring to Mr. Obama’s campaign advisers.”

“In Monday’s interview, Mr. Wright expressed disappointment but no surprise that Mr. Obama might try to play down their connection.”

““When his enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli” to visit Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, Mr. Wright recalled, “with Farrakhan, a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.” Mr. Wright added that his trip implied no endorsement of either Louis Farrakhan’s views or Qaddafi’s.”

“According to the pastor, Mr. Obama then told him, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.””

Read the full article here:

The following is from a NY Times article of April 30 2007:

“Few of those at Mr. Wright’s tribute in March knew of the pressures that Mr. Obama’s presidential run was placing on the relationship between the pastor and his star congregant. “Mr. Wright’s assertions of widespread white racism and his scorching remarks about American government have drawn criticism, and prompted the senator to cancel his delivery of the invocation when he formally announced his candidacy in February.””

“It is difficult to tell whether Mr. Obama’s religious and political beliefs are fused or simply run parallel. The junior senator from Illinois often talks of faith as a moral force essential for solving America’s vexing problems. Like Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and John Edwards, his fellow Democratic candidates, he expresses both a political and a religious obligation to help the downtrodden. Like conservative Christians, he speaks of AIDS as a moral crisis. And like his pastor, Mr. Obama opposes the Iraq war.”

“It also helped give him spiritual bona fides and a new assurance. Services at Trinity were a weekly master class in how to move an audience. When Mr. Obama arrived at Harvard Law School later that year, where he fortified himself with recordings of Mr. Wright’s sermons, he was delivering stirring speeches as a student leader in the classic oratorical style of the black church.”

 “He has said that he relies on Mr. Wright to ensure “that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible.” He tends to turn to his minister at moments of frustration, Mr. Wright said, such as when Mr. Obama felt a Congressional Black Caucus meeting was heavier on entertainment than substance.”

““If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.””

Read the full article here:

Iraq war, history 101, United Nations, US role, facts, revisionist history

There are 1 or more people commenting on this blog that are purportedly University of Western Florida students. Responding with comments to my posts is ok. Disagreeing with me is ok. Trying to take over this blog is not. If you need a platform for your agenda, start your own blog.

History 101 and the Iraq War

Prerequisites: some fundamental knowledge of 20th century history. Closest analogy to Iraq war in past 100 years, World War II.

Topic 1 – The Iraq war is costing a lot of money. There is a cost of action and a cost of inaction. Assignment: calculate the cost of World War II in today’s dollars. Cost in human lives. What would the dollar cost and human cost have been if we had not entered the war? What would the dollar cost and human cost have been if we had gotten involved 1 year earlier? 2 years earlier?

Now, suppose we had not stopped the Iraq invasion of Kuwait. Now suppose we had left Saddam Hussein unchecked. Now factor in Iran and their desire for a nuclear capabability. Don’t believe for 1 minute that Iran has not been pursueing a nuclear program. A friend of mine 25 years ago was married to an Iranian nuclear physicist.

Lesson: there is always a cost for action and a cost for inaction.

Topic 2 – Does the US have a desire to police the world? The answer is no. The United Nations had a clear purpose to prevent Saddam Hussein from getting out of control. The United Nations failed to perform it’s duty. Why? Key members, France, Germany and Russia were “in bed” financially with Saddam Hussein. If my memory is correct, our so called policing was welcome in World War II when the world was going down the toilet and close to Nazi domination.

Lesson: The US is forced into action by the irresponsibility of other nations. Fortunately, the Iraq war was a coalition of many countries including Great Britain and Australia.

Myth: The US is the cause of death and injuries to the Iraqi People. This is an outright lie. The people saying this are liars. Saddam Hussein, remnants of his regime, factional frictions and outside radical Islamic cowards are the cause. And yes, anyone that would attack innocent women and children or ask them to become a weapon, that person is the lowest level of coward. Radical Islamists, if you were real men, you would face American men face to face and not send women and children to do your evil killing.

Any questions, class?

Iraq War justification, Iraq War reasons, can we justify, George W Bush or Bill Clinton, media lies, political lies, truth

On February 23, 2008 I posted the following:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/iraq-war-justification-iraq-war-reasons-can-we-justify-hillary-clinton-john-mccain-barrack-obama/

This post was a list of 10 quotes regarding Saddam Hussein. I did not provide the source of the quotes at that time. Many people, for whatever reason, believe only George W Bush took the posture indicated in the quotes, when in reality, the entire Clinton administration believed that Saddam Hussein had WMD, had used them on his own people, posed a real threat and that the US was ready to stop him. All of the quotes from the original post came from the Clinton Administration. Below are the original quotes, followed by the source and the dates. Also, below, I have supplied the links to the CNN articles that contain the quotes. Interesting, isn’t it? Think of all the lies that have been told about George W Bush and the acceptance of revisionist history.

” We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the
stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass
destruction.”  “The chemical weapons Saddam has used and the biological weapons we know he has tested pay no attention to borders and nationalities.”   Madeleine Albright, February 1, 1998

2.  “If diplomacy runs out, we have reserved the right to use
force and if we do so it will be substantial.”   Madeleine Albright, February 1, 1998

3.  “No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing.  He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.”   Madeleine Albright, February 18, 1998

4.  “What we are doing is so that you all can sleep at night.  I am very proud of what we are doing.  We are the greatest nation in the world and what we are doing is being the indispensable nation, willing to make the world safe for our children and grandchildren, and for nations who follow the rules.”    Madeleine Albright, February 18, 1998

5.  “Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”   Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998

6.  “If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections sytem and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will.  He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction.”   Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998

7.  “Earlier today I ordered America’s armed forces to strike
military and security targets in Iraq.  They are joined by British forces.  Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.  While other countires also had weapons of mass desctuction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons
against his own people and against his neighbors.   Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998

8.  “Along with Prime minister (Tony)Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.”   Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998

9.  “The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi goverment — a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people.”   Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998

10.  “But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America’s vital interests, we will do so.”   Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/01/iraq/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/18/town.meeting.folo/

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

Liberal lies, media lies, Iraq war reasons, students misled, George W Bush, Clinton administration

I just received 2 comments from what appears to be a sincere college student. I am assuming this student wants to hear the truth. I will present the truth here. The 2 comments are below, just as submitted:

Comment on #4: this argument is thought provoking, however, I disagree with the assumption that the U.S is the world police. The U.S is not the world police. The UN was created specifically to take the position of being the world police, and to form stability among nations. The U.S needs to let the UN do its job.
Mar 9, 2:59 AM —  View post “Iraq War justification, Iraq War reasons, can we justify, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Barack Obama”

Comment on #3 : I think this argument is right about Saddam Hussein being a bad man , but I respectfully disagree with the assumption that Saddam Hussein’s evilness was the only reason the U.S took it upon itself to invade Iraq. There is also an assumption that the Iraq war had nothing to do with oil, when it is painfully obvious that it did have a lot to do with oil and the power to dominate. The Bush Administration drove us to believe that the war effort was promoting humanitarianism and was to remove threats, “WMD”, but the truth is Iraq pose no threat to the U.S because there was no WMD, and the attack was obviously for personal reasons hold by the Bush Administration. The U.S is not a world police. It is not our job to attack every country that has bad leadership, if that’s the case we need to be attacking our self for our bad leadership.
Mar 9, 4:17 AM —  View post “Iraq War justification, Iraq War reasons, can we justify, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Barack Obama”

First of all, all of the quotes of my original post were made by the Clinton Administration and not President George W Bush. I will respond with another post and provide the source and date of each quote.

Regarding the United Nations and the US playing the role of police: Just as in World War II, the US has had to come to the rescue of the world. The United Nations failed to perform it’s duty to deal with Saddam Hussein. Why did this occur? Fundamentally because France, Germany and Russia were “in bed” with him financially. As you now know, the Clinton Administration considered Saddam Hussein a serious threat and were prepared to take action against him.

Here is my answer to the second comment. Once again, you responded to comment #3 of my post which also was a Clinton Administration quote. Saddam Hussein used WMD on multiple occasions against Iran and his own people. There is absolutely no proof that he did not have them when we invaded or that he was not producing them. Saddam Hussein was a very evil man who was capable of doing anything that he was not stopped from doing. He murdred hundreds of his own people, invaded Kuwait, destroyed the habitat of people in the southern part of Iraq and raped and tortured many others.

I would like to know where you got your informatiom. Was it the media, your teachers, your friends? I hope that you will follow up on this and seek the facts and the truth. Also, read 1984 by George Orwell or reread it. Pay particular attention to doublespeak. If you have any questions or comments, please respond.

Sincerely,

Citizen Wells

John Stuart Mill, War, Good cause, Liberal Parliament member, War quote

John Stuart Mill was a British philosopher, political economist, civil servant and liberal Member of Parliament. He was also a  influential liberal thinker of the 19th century and a teacher of utilitarianism, an ethical theory developed by Jeremy Bentham. Mill was an advocate for Ireland, and the first Parliament member to propose that women be given the right to vote. Mill was a strong advocate of women’s rights. He believed that in some cases, war is the lesser of evils. Here is John Stuart Mill’s  famous quote concerning war:
“But war, in a good cause, is not the greatest evil which a nation can suffer. War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice – a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice – is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”

Douglas Kinnard, UVM professor of political science, The War managers, University of Vermont, Vietnam vs Iraq, Question for professor, General Kinnard

First of all, I believed that we should not be in Vietnam when the war was going on and I believe that even more so now. I also respect Americans that served in Vietnam and followed their conscience. Dwight D Eisenhower, in a 1961 speech, warned of the military industrial complex. Here is the quote:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

The rest of the speech can be viewed here:

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

I believe we must be on guard against the undue influence of armaments manufacturers. I also believe these financial gain sources played too big a role in our involvement in Vietnam. Of course, we still need to employ our checks and balances to guard against any undue influence.

Many have tried to connect imaginary dots to form an analogy between the Vietnam War and the Iraq War. The only strong analogy I can discern is that both were unpopular wars. I hope that all wars are unpopular wars. However, many choices in life are choosing the lesser of evils. Some wars such as The American Revolution, World War II and the Iraq War are the lesser of evils. If we had entered World War II earlier, I am certain that millions of lives could have been saved.
I am also convinced that if the United Nations had performed as it was chartered, our involvement in Iraq would have been radically different. Of course that was not possible with France, Germany and Russia being “in bed” with Saddam Hussein financially.

Douglas Kinnard, UVM professor of political science, former general in Vietnam and author of “The War Managers”, was interviewed in The Vermont Quarterly in the Fall 2007 issue. He speaks of his involvement with Vietnam as a general, in the military, and his opinion of the Vietnam War. At the end of the interview, he states, “Those who fail to learn from history are forced to repeat it.” I wholeheartedly agree with that statement, but would add that as long as the learning takes place from a broad based factual account of history and not revisionist history.

Professor Kinnard adds this statement at the end: “If Bush knew the real lessons of Vietnam, he would get out sooner than stay.” I would like a clarification of that statement. Was the statement made to appease the ultra liberal folks at The University Of Vermont, or was it a general (no pun intended) statement about lingering past our eminent usefulness? 

Dr. Douglas Kinnard, I respectfully request your response. I do not want to misrepresent your statement.