And you thought you voted for change!
“On first trip to Mideast, Obama has delicate task; Seeks to open dialogue, avoid democracy lecture” by Farah Stockman, Globe Staff | June 3, 2009
WASHINGTON – Behind the scenes, however, Obama has opted to continue signature Bush-era democracy programs and is on track to greatly increase their funding.
Related: PNAC
Yup, they are still running the show, Americans.
And the same MSM that lied you into these wars of conquest for Israel still has the chutzpah to call these mass-murdering aggressions “democracy programs?”
“They want to be less vocal on their democracy efforts,” said Kent Patton, deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs under Bush. “They believe the Bush administration was too vocal, that was coun terproductive. . . . But I do believe that they see the value in these programs and in the broader effort. Right now, they are just shifting the means to achieve the same ends that President Bush was trying to achieve.”
Obama’s 2010 budget proposal seeks $86 million for the Middle East Partnership Initiative, a program developed in 2002 by Elizabeth Cheney, daughter of the former vice president, and that promotes training of government officials, entrepreneurs, and activists, up from $50 million in 2009.
So all that bric-a-brac flak betweeen the two is really a load of crap, isn’rt it?
Obama’s budget also seeks to nearly double, to $1.4 billion, funding for the Millennium Challenge Corporation, a program started in 2004 that uses aid as an incentive for government reform in the developing world. He also wants an increase in US contributions, from $3 million to $14 million, to a United Nations fund aimed at strengthening civil society and democratic governance around the world.
Yeah, we really have money to throw around here in America:
“the deficit for this year will soar to an astronomical $1.84 trillion“
Obama’s budget request tracks closely with Bush’s requests last year, but analysts say the Democratic-controlled Congress is poised to grant more of Obama’s requests….
Just like they funded all the wars, those antiwar Democrats!
So politics is nothing but s*** fooleys for the s***-chomping AmeriKan citizen, ‘eh?
Obama defended his low-key approach in a series of interviews on the eve of his trip, even as he said he wanted to promote human rights as a universal value and American values of “democracy, rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of religion.”
This kind of talk is just offensive coming from a nation and its leaders that have launched mass-murdering wars of aggression on lies and runs black-site torture chambers all over the globe.
“We’re not going to get countries to embrace our values simply by lecturing or through military means,” Obama said on National Public Radio on Monday. “The danger I think is when the United States or any country thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture,” he told the BBC.
Just hot fart mist, that’s all it is.
Many presidents have had to walk the line between supporting allies that are powerful, autocratic regimes, or advocating for their oppressed people.
Yeah, leave the U.S. hypocrisy for an uninvestigated, uncontextualized sentence.
For decades, the US government has given military protection and economic aid to autocratic governments, believing that the stability they bring is in US interests, particularly in the turmoil-prone Middle East.
And NO PROBLEM, ‘eh, AmeriKan jewsmedia?
But after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the Bush administration saw democracy as the best antidote to Islamic radicalism.
When they PEDDLE SUCH OBFUSCATING RUBBISH, who can blame me for getting angry?
In 2005, Bush delivered a message that year at the National Endowment for Democracy, declaring that “Islamic radicalism” will be defeated by freedom, because “free peoples will own the future.”
Bush’s message, coupled with his new programs, met with some initial success, as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak held the country’s first multiparty elections and other countries allowed unprecedented political participation.
But Bush’s democracy push – never popular with Middle Eastern governments – eventually alienated ordinary people, as he used it to justify the war in Iraq, and lost steam during his final years in office as Islamists began winning elections.
After the Muslim Brotherhood won seats in the Egyptian Parliament, the White House stopped pressuring Egypt to reform. When the anti-Israeli militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah won elections in Gaza and the West Bank, and Lebanon, respectively, the Bush administration actively undermined them.
Well, HOW DID THEY DO THAT, MSM? Yeah, just leave it there!
I can’t tell you how unhappy I am about the AmeriKan jewsmedia and their garbage. I think I’m going to stop reading them altogether now.
By the time Bush left office, many Arabs saw US democracy promotion as a code word for imperialism. The approval rating for US leaders last year was just 6 percent in Egypt and 12 percent in Saudi Arabia, according to a Gallup poll released yesterday. Under Obama, US leaders already have higher ratings, with 25 percent and 29 percent, respectively, the poll said….
I no longer believe MSM polls — or anything else they claim. Too many lies for too long.
J. Scott Carpenter, a fellow at the conservative-leaning Washington Institute who headed the Middle East democracy promotion effort under Bush, said: “…. Obama doesn’t talk about human rights. He doesn’t talk about democracy, as if those are Bush words. But they are not. They are American words.”
Placed in their mouths by Zionist Jews.
–more–”
“Obama to restart military tribunals, with more rights” by Lara Jakes, Associated Press | May 15, 2009
WASHINGTON – President Obama will restart Bush-era military tribunals, reviving a fiercely disputed trial system he once denounced.
Obama’s decision to resume the tribunals is certain to face criticism from liberal groups, already stung by his decision Wednesday to block the court-ordered release of photos showing US troops abusing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan – a reversal of his earlier stand on making the photos public.
Yeah, we are getting used to the broken promises.
It’s also possible that some could continue to be held indefinitely as prisoners of war with full Geneva Conventions protections, according to another senior official.
–more–”
“Obama keeps tribunals, draws ire; Reversal angers some backers” by Joseph Williams, Globe Staff | May 16, 2009
WASHINGTON – President Obama’s decision to overhaul and restart the Bush administration’s military tribunals for Guantanamo Bay terrorism detainees won support from congressional Republicans yesterday, but deepened his estrangement from the liberal activists who helped sweep him into office.
He could care less about you.
In a statement yesterday, Obama said he was reviving the tribunals for a small number of the 241 Guantanamo inmates because the commissions “are appropriate for trying enemies who violate the laws of war, provided that they are properly structured and administered.”
The White House asserted that Obama was not embracing the Bush system because he was adding significant legal protections for detainees, such as not allowing statements obtained through waterboarding and other extreme interrogation tactics. Like Bush, Obama is trying to walk a fine line between adhering to the rule of law and ensuring that dangerous, avowed enemies of the United States remain behind bars.
“This is the best way to protect our country, while upholding our deeply held values,” said Obama, a former constitutional law professor.
As he violates the hell out of ‘em!
But civil liberties groups, among his staunchest allies on the political left, vowed to fight the move and lashed out at the president, accusing him of turning his back on his own ideals and reneging on another campaign promise. They also questioned whether, after just four months in office, Obama is caving in to Republicans who have openly challenged him on the issue of national security.
“It’s disturbing,” said Tom Andrews of Win Without War, a coalition of groups opposed to the US troop presence in Iraq. “It’s not just one episode, it’s a clear trend that’s emerging.”
Andrews said he and other liberal activists are dismayed and angered by Obama’s reluctance to investigate what they consider the use of torture during interrogations of detainees, his decision to retain the power to place terrorist suspects in secret overseas prisons, and his reversal earlier this week in which he announced he would fight the release of a new batch of photos showing US personnel abusing detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq.
“Now, he’s going to revive a [tribunal] system that has no credibility at all in the world,” said Andrews, a former member of Congress….
Whatever, liberals; I’m still waiting for you guys to smell the 9/11 Truth.
The rest of the 241 Guantanamo detainees will, potentially, held indefinitely as prisoners of war. A Guantanamo inmate, who helped establish detainees’ rights to challenge their detention in a case that went to the US Supreme Court, was freed and arrived yesterday in France, which agreed to take him in a gesture to the Obama administration, the Associated Press reported. Lakhdar Boumediene, suspected in a bomb plot against the US embassy in Sarajevo, was arrested along with five other Algerians in 2001 in Bosnia, but was later cleared of any terrorist activity and is expected to live with family.
That’s because TERRORISM is GOVERNMENT-CREATED, -FUNDED, and DIRECTED!
Though it was a major policy decision, Obama did not announce it in person. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the president will give a speech about the tribunals and other related issues on Thursday.
Gibbs told reporters yesterday that the tribunals will ensure “certain justice” for the detainees as well as “live up to our values.” Asked about alienating the administration’s core supporters, he said that national security was “first and foremost” on Obama’s mind.
As civil liberties groups blasted Obama for the decision to build on what they called Bush’s flawed, hastily constructed system, Republicans praised him for recognizing reality, saying that becoming commander in chief has forced Obama to set aside campaign positions….
One top Democrat, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also supported Obama. “I objected to the military commissions that were created by the Bush-Cheney administration because they stripped away critical protections in our laws,” Leahy said in a statement yesterday. “People in American custody must be treated fairly, humanely and in accordance with our laws. I look forward to reviewing the Obama administration’s proposals for providing a fair system of military commissions.”
The tribunal system was designed to deal with enemy combatants captured by the US military on the battlefields of Afghanistan starting in late 2001. But human rights and legal organizations repeatedly challenged the system because it denied defendants most of the basic rights they would have been granted in a civilian courtroom or a traditional military court martial.
Civil libertarians have argued that the detainees’ cases belong in US federal court, where the government has won dozens of cases against suspected terrorists – including Zacharias Moussaoui, the so-called “20th hijacker,” now serving a life sentence in prison.
Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University, said yesterday that Obama’s decision to revive the military tribunals completes “a perfect mosaic of hypocrisy” that began with his decision to accept the Bush administration’s position on a lawsuit filed by five men who claim they were kidnapped and tortured by the CIA. Obama’s lawyers are seeking to dismiss the suit, arguing that it would reveal government secrets and threaten national security.
“The Obama administration is morphing into the Bush administration on these important issues,” Turley said.
Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said his agency intends to fight the decision in court, which could take years. “Ultimately, this is very likely to be found to be another illegal scheme,” he said.
Andrews said he believes Obama’s decision is an overreaction to Republican criticism that Democrats’ antiterror policies would bring Guantanamo detainees to US prisons, and to former vice president Dick Cheney, who has taken to the airwaves to argue that Obama has made the nation less safe. “It’s about whether terrorists are going to show up in your neighborhood, and see a terrorist mowing the lawn next door. It’s outrageous,” Andrews said of Cheney.
What, Bush out mowing his yard again?
Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political analyst, said that politically, Obama seems to have taken a calculated risk: make national-security decisions that will mollify Republicans, even if it means taking intense heat from liberal Democrats in the short term.
“His gamble is that the left will stay with him. I think that gamble will pay off,” Sabato said.
Sadly, so do I.
–more–”
And seeing as Obama is moving the same aganda forward as Bush, this stinks of fooleys, doesn’t it?
“Obama and Cheney clash on fight against terror” by Joseph Williams and Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | May 22, 2009
WASHINGTON – Meanwhile, Obama also drew fire from some civil liberties groups by suggesting yesterday that he would continue to hold some terrorism suspects indefinitely….
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat, praised Obama for “being honest with the American people” while avoiding fear-mongering, while her Republican counterpart, John Boehner, said that the president dismissed the concerns of the American people and a strong bipartisan majority that does not want Guantanamo detainees brought to their communities.
On the Senate side, Senator Patrick Leahy – a Vermont Democrat who has proposed a truth commission to get to the bottom of controversial Bush administration decisions on handling terrorists – agreed with Obama, saying, “It’s time to act on our principles and our constitutional system.”
This type of talk is disgusting when you consider that EVERYTHING THEY ARE APPROVING is CONTRADICTORY to OUR VALUES!! OUR VALUES, not GOVERNMENT’S VALUES!!!!
But Senator John Cornyn, an influential Texas Republican, asked:
“Are we really going to insist that the jihadist with a suitcase nuke captured in Times Square be read his Miranda rights, potentially closing off the chance to garner valuable intelligence that might save hundreds or thousands of American lives?” he asked.
Oh, ANOTHER FALSE FLAG in the works, ‘eh?
Is it going to be something like this, to be blamed on them?
Civil libertarians, who have sued the government on behalf of detainees held for years without charges or trial, embraced Obama’s dedication to constitutional principles but were dismayed by his plans to create a version of indefinite detention for some terrorist suspects.
“The president wrapped himself in the Constitution and then proceeded to violate it,” said Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a human rights group….
–more–”
Of course, IT ALL STINKS like S*** because 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB performed primarily by the CIA, MOSSAD and America’s DUAL NATIONAL ZIONIST TRAITORS in GOVERNMENT!
