"The White House is enlisting virtually every senior official from the president on down. In addition to members of Congress, it is reaching out to Jewish groups, Arab-Americans, left-leaning think tanks, and even officials from the George W. Bush administration, some of whom are acting as surrogates. It is also getting help from the nation’s most powerful pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is mounting its own campaign for military action."
Ah, the the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
You guys want to fight them? Do it yourselves. I'm tired of WARS BASED on LIES for IZ-RAY-HELL!
"Obama fights for votes to back plan for Syria; Due to address nation Tuesday; aides make calls" by Mark Landler and Jonathan Weisman | New York Times, September 08, 2013
WASHINGTON — Each morning for the past week, at 7:45, more than a dozen White House aides have mustered in the corner office of President Obama’s chief of staff, Denis R. McDonough, to get marching orders for what has become the most intense, uphill lobbying campaign of the Obama presidency.
How disappointing hope and change turned out to be.
The White House’s goal is to persuade Congress to authorize a limited military strike against Syria to punish it for a deadly chemical weapons attack.
Except that is a LIE!
See: Obomber Expanding Syrian Strike
Then again, I expect nothing less from my jewspaper.
But after a frenetic week of wall-to-wall intelligence briefings, dozens of phone calls and hours of hearings with senior members of Obama’s war council, more and more lawmakers, Republican and Democrat, are lining up to vote against the president.
God Bless them all and protect them from the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
Officials were guardedly optimistic about the Senate, but the blows kept coming. On Saturday, Senator Mark Pryor, Democrat of Arkansas, perhaps the most endangered incumbent up for reelection, came out against the authorization to use force.
You vote for it and YOU ARE OUT NEXT YEAR!
In the House, the number of rank-and-file members who have declared that they will oppose or are leaning against military action is approaching 218, the point of no return for the White House. Getting them to reverse their positions will be extremely difficult.
Administration officials say publicly that they are not rattled by such grim vote counts. The debate, they say, will only be fully engaged this week, when Congress returns from recess and Obama is back from his trip to Sweden and Russia.
Meaning AIPAC and Obomber will be flooding the zone.
On Tuesday night, he will lay out his case for a military strike to the nation in a speech from the White House.
I think I will make it a point to miss that.
“It’s too early to jump to any conclusions on where the House or Senate is,” McDonough said in an interview Friday. “The effort will only intensify next week.”
To improve its odds, the White House is enlisting virtually every senior official from the president on down. In addition to members of Congress, it is reaching out to Jewish groups, Arab-Americans, left-leaning think tanks, and even officials from the George W. Bush administration, some of whom are acting as surrogates.
How is that for hope and change, huh? I thought we got rid of those f***s!
It is also getting help from the nation’s most powerful pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is mounting its own campaign for military action.
The 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
The White House and its allies in Congress differ on how the administration handled the first week of the campaign. Administration officials said they succeeded in dispelling doubts about whether the forces of the Syrian president, Bashar Assad, carried out the chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of Syria’s capital, Damascus, on Aug. 21 that they say left more than 1,400 people dead.
They MOST CERTAINLY HAVE NOT!
“We set a goal this week of making sure people understood the facts of the case,” McDonough said Friday. “No one with whom I’ve spoken doubts the intelligence. We’re not really debating the veracity of the central charge.”
So ONCE AGAIN we are GOING to WAR over a LIE because IT WAS the U.S.-BACKED AL-CIA-Duh INSURGENTS that were the ones that carried out the chemical attacks -- and Congress knows it.
Also see: High-Level U.S. Intelligence Officers: Syrian Government Didn’t Launch Chemical Weapons
But Obomber and Killer Kerry aren't listening.
But people on Capitol Hill said the White House’s initial case for action proved unpersuasive, particularly in the hearings with Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin E. Dempsey.
Lawmakers came away believing that Dempsey projected an image of military reluctance, that Hagel seemed occasionally unsure of himself, and that Kerry exuded an air of confidence that some members appreciated and others chafed at.
Dempsey worried about his legacy, and Kerry was simply his arrogant self.
The next phase of the campaign will be more individualized, and more from Obama himself. Democrats who balk are being asked at least to vote against Republican procedural moves meant to delay or derail an up-or-down vote. After all the arguments are exhausted, aides said, it will come down to a personal pitch: The president needs you to save him from a debilitating public defeat.
And what a REAL SHITTY REASON to START a WAR!!!!
But first, advisers said, the president needs to explain to the public in his speech Tuesday why Syria is not another Iraq.
“Right now, to most of the country, this seems like a simple question of, ‘Is Congress going to vote to start another war?’” said David Plouffe, a former senior adviser to Obama who, like other veterans of his 2008 campaign, was back in the West Wing last week. “Tuesday night and other opportunities can help fill in the picture for people about both the rationale and limited nature of the response.”
That's a LIE!
See: Obomber Expanding Syrian Strike
LIMITED MY A$$!
Among the most visible surrogates could be Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama’s former secretary of state, who aides say is likely to address Syria at one or both of two events this week: a previously scheduled visit to the White House on Monday to promote wildlife conservation, and a speech the next day in Philadelphia.
Then she can SAY GOODBYE to the DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION!
The White House is also putting officials, including the president, before audiences and TV cameras. Obama will tape interviews Monday with the three broadcast networks, as well as PBS, CNN and Fox.
As if that will help.
McDonough will appear on all five Sunday news programs, and Monday the national security adviser, Susan E. Rice, will address the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan public policy institute.
Related: Sunday Globe Special: Making You Think
Flying home from St. Petersburg, Russia, Obama called half a dozen Democratic senators, including Tom Udall of New Mexico, who voted against authorizing force in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, who voted present.
So what does the NSA SPYING PROGRAM have on them?
Leaders in both parties say that there is a narrow window to win or change enough votes to secure passage of the authorization, but that window may close before Obama’s speech.
The last time the White House lobbied this intensively on a single issue was the 2009 health care law.
Yeah, and he ABANDONED the PUBLIC OPTION!
But unlike that battle, which was largely pitched to the Democratic ranks, the White House this time is also appealing to Republicans. Administration officials note that in private conversations, lawmakers repeatedly asked to have their voices heard on Syria.
--more--"
Yeah, he is not abandoning the rush to bomb.
I don't think he will have to fight for this vote; I think young Joe is under the thumb of AIPAC.
"Syria foremost on Kennedy constituents’ minds" by Andrea Estes | Globe Staff, September 08, 2013
SOMERSET — Jean Dias had one thing on her mind when she showed up at the local police headquarters Saturday to meet US Representative Joseph P. Kennedy — whether the freshman legislator will support or oppose military action in Syria.
Related: Slow Saturday Special: Finally, a Hawkish Kennedy
Uncles are twirling in their tombs.
“I want you to vote no,” said Dias, urging the congressman take care of problems at home, like unemployment and the languishing economy. “Do I have a solution? That’s why we voted for you and Barack Obama.”
Do you want to be a single-term congressman?
Only nine months into his term, Kennedy is facing tough issues and having to learn the ways of Washington quickly.
Like wrestling with the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
He is moving around his district — in what he calls the Tour 34, referring to the number of communities he serves — in an effort to hear voters’ concerns and talk about the things that bother people here, not necessarily big policy issues that dominate Washington debate.
But Saturday, several voters were focusing on the major policy question of the day — whether to launch air strikes in Syria. Most who questioned Kennedy were opposed, especially to any proposal that could drag US soldiers into a protracted civil war.
“My personal feeling is we should not use bombs because we wouldn’t get [President Bashar] Assad, we’d be causing collateral damage,” said Peter Denison. “Random bombing would accomplish nothing. I think the negatives way outweigh the positive.”
Kennedy, who is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he has not made up his mind, but would not support anything that was “open-ended” or allowed for the use of US ground troops.
“I have very strong concerns about any possibility of putting American troops into a civil war,” he said. “Injecting US troops into that — I’m not sure it is productive. I would have a hard time supporting anything that would allow for the possibility of putting US troops in harm’s way.”
One voter asked whether he would vote “present,” a reference to freshman US Senator Edward Markey’s vote on the Senate authorization measure. Markey, a liberal who was sworn into office in July after winning a special election, voted “present” in a committee on a resolution giving President Obama limited authority to use force against Syria.
Kennedy laughed, but later said he will vote on any measure that comes before him.
He said that although Obama has yet to forge an international consensus behind military action, he was making progress persuading some allies to blame Syria for a chemical weapons attack and endorsing some, as yet unspecified, action.
He is as big a liar as John Kerry.
Some of those who showed up to meet Kennedy at noon in Somerset on Saturday and earlier that morning in Swansea had more personal matters on their mind — like how to get a visa, or flood insurance, or how to get into a military academy.
One voter wanted to gripe about the “dysfunction” in Washington and the apparent power of the politicians on the far left and the far right.
We need dysfunction and gridlock on this vote.
Kennedy, 32, listened patiently to people’s concerns and let them know he believes most members of Congress are decent people who vote their conscience. “The media portrays Washington as a place where there is a knock-down bloody brawl every day — that’s not accurate,” he said.
Great, I'm being lied to by my media again.
Others wanted to shake hands with the newest politician member of the Kennedy clan or pose for photos. Or reminisce about other family members, like matriarch Rose.
“Can I adopt you?” said Carmen Plante, who also asked him to autograph a few books.
Wow, this article really turned into a piece of shit.
--more--"
He didn't do so well elsewhere:
"Obama fails to get wide support for Syria strikes; After meeting with world leaders in Russia, he now turns to Congress" by Peter Baker and Steven Lee Myers | New York Times, September 07, 2013
STRELNA, Russia — President Obama raced home Friday to confront one of the biggest tests of his presidency as he ramped up a campaign to persuade Congress to support air strikes against Syria that many world leaders he had consulted declined to back.
Why is this all of a sudden the "biggest test of his presidency," and who (rhymes with) is telling you that?
After two days of lobbying that included a vigorous dinner debate that went into the early morning hours, Obama failed to forge an international consensus behind military action as other leaders urged him not to attack without UN permission. But he won agreement from some allies blaming Syria’s government for a chemical weapons attack and endorsing unspecified actions.
The deep divisions on display here at the Group of 20 summit meeting raised the stakes even further for Obama as he seeks authorization from Congress for a “limited, proportionate” attack.
That is a LIE!
He hoped to use the statement from allies condemning Syria to leverage more domestic support, but he acknowledged that he had a “hard sell” and might fail to win over an American public that polls show still oppose a strike.
Please keep that in mind, world.
Btw, I love the "leveraging" of domestic support that he does not have. What s***!
Obama ordered aides to fan out in coming days with a series of speeches, briefings, phone calls, and TV appearances to sway both Democrats and Republicans reluctant to get involved in yet another Middle East war. He also announced that he would address the nation from the White House on Tuesday evening to lay out his case before Congress votes.
“Failing to respond to this breach of this international norm would send a signal to rogue nations, authoritarian regimes, and terrorist organizations that they can use WMD and not pay a consequence,” he said at a news conference, using the acronym for weapons of mass destruction. “And that’s not a world we want to live in.”
Sit and spin on this, s***ter.
Related: 10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About
That's the kind of world OBOMBER WANTS TO LIVE IN!
The return to the Washington fray came after a tense overseas trip punctuated by an extraordinary showdown with the meeting’s host, President Vladimir Putin, who not only opposes a strike, but also dismisses the notion that Syria’s government gassed its own people.
Which the crap corporate war press won't look into.
During a long, late-night discussion about Syria, the two presidents effectively competed for the support of the other leaders, each man arguing his position and soliciting peers as if they were voters.
Oh, Obomber was soliciting his peers as voters, but he doesn't give a shit about American opinion. What an A$$HOLE!
At the end, Putin said a majority of the leaders joined him in opposing a military strike independent of the United Nations, including the leaders of China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, Italy, Germany, and South Africa.
That's not what the liar John Kerry claimed.
“We hear each other and understand the arguments,” Putin said. “We simply don’t agree with them. I don’t agree with his arguments and he doesn’t agree with mine, but we hear and try to analyze.”
The only members of the Group of 20 nations that supported Obama’s plan, the Russian leader said, were Canada, France, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, all countries that were already on Obama’s side when he arrived here Thursday.
Then yes, John Kerry is a liar.
Trying to counter the impression of isolation, the White House arranged for a joint statement — including those allies as well as Australia, Britain, Italy, Japan, Spain, and South Korea — condemning the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of the Syrian capital, Damascus. According to US intelligence agencies, the attack killed at least 1,400 people....
That inflated number is now no longer challenged by my mouthpiece media, and NEVER MIND the REALITY that Obomber is ALL ALONE!
Let the imagery and illusion of impression take over!
The statement did not explicitly endorse military action, and some of the signatories, like Italy, have warned against a US strike. But Obama administration officials argued that those that signed understood they were backing the United States as it was preparing for military retaliation, and therefore effectively embracing it.
I suppose there is NO LEVEL they will not stoop to TWIST the CASE for WAR, WAR, WAR!!
Speaking with reporters before returning to Washington, Obama repeatedly declined to say whether he would abide by the congressional vote if lawmakers say no to his request to authorize the use of force against Syria. He admitted facing a hard task in Congress.
If he does not it is an IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE -- and you can add using the IRS to SPY on POLITICAL ENEMIES as an article, too!
“I knew this was going to be a heavy lift,” he said. “I was under no illusions when I embarked on this path. But I think it’s the right thing to do. I think it’s good for our democracy. We will be more effective if we are unified going forward.”
We are a Republic, Mr. Constitutional law professor. If we were a democracy you would be listening to us!
The Syria dispute came to dominate the G-20 meeting, often focused mainly on economic matters, and underscored the difficulty Obama has faced with Putin in recent months.
Related:
"It’s time to make Google, Apple, and other multinational companies pay more taxes. That’s the message President Obama and the heads of the world’s leading economies sent to cross-border giants at a summit ending Friday."
After Russia gave temporary asylum to Edward J. Snowden, the National Security Agency contractor who disclosed secret US surveillance programs, Obama canceled a separate one-on-one meeting with Putin in Moscow.
But the two ended up talking on the sideline of the group session Friday, mainly about their disagreement about Syria. Obama said Snowden’s case did not come up.
Turns out Snowden may be nothing more than a s*** psyop.
--more--"
The votes are coming in:
"Response is fundamental to a world of civility and justice" by Nicholas Burns | Globe Columnist, September 07, 2013
From a foreign policy perspective, the decision isn’t even close — the United States must act by attacking President Bashar Assad’s air force, artillery, and command and control assets within Syria.
Crazy.
Related: Obama's Syrian Shift
Yeah, Nick says we will just have to clean it up.
The goal is to intimidate him, degrade his military capacity, and deter him from ever using these weapons again. There are risks, to be sure, in any use of force. But this will not be another Iraq — the United States will not put ground troops into Syria. And the risks are even greater if we do nothing.
Insane.
Syria isn’t a sideshow.
This is: Kenny's Sideshow
Given its location in the heart of the Arab world, next to US friends Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, and Iraq, what happens in Syria matters deeply to the United States.
Friend Iraq? What has Burns been smoking?
We have another important interest. That is to back up the commitment President Obama made more than a year ago — that if Assad used chemical weapons, there would be a price to pay. He has done so twice. We now need to act.
Here are five reasons why Congress should authorize the use of force.
First, the global ban on chemical weapons needs to be enforced. The names of some of the leaders who have ordered their use are telling — Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and now Assad....
Nothing about the 10 not talked about above. And Hitler didn't use them, but that is an argument for another time.
Second, Iran is watching....
'nuff said.
American resolve on Syria makes it more likely Iran will negotiate seriously on nukes rather than risk a US strike down the line. A cardinal rule in international politics is that force often aids diplomacy.
They were willing to do that back in 2003 when you were in the Bush administration, and you all said no, Nick!
Besides, Libya shows what happens when you negotiate.
We may have a much better chance of negotiating a deal with Iran on nukes if we are tough now on Syria. And the air strikes may also give Obama leverage over Assad to insist on negotiations for a cease-fire. In this way, the United States would combine force and diplomacy to try to end the fighting.
As they train and arm Al-CIA-Duh mercenaries even more.
Third, striking Assad may also weaken the Iran/Hezbollah/Russia axis that forms Syria’s international lifeline.
Then again, it may not.
This axis is a strategic challenge to every important American interest in the region. If we can weaken its position in the region, we should do so. This is why Senator John McCain is right to argue for a strike strong enough to make a strategic difference.
Fourth, America’s credibility is at stake.
How can something it does not have be at stake?
Opponents of a strike question whether America’s reputation will really suffer if we fail to act.
Our reputation is already s***, but it will be even worse if he does this.
But nations, like individuals, are judged by whether they honor their promises.
After AmeriKa has broken so many?
Credibility is a tangible commodity in international politics. It takes decades to acquire a good reputation but only a short time to see it evaporate.
As we have seen the last dozen years or so, thanks to torture.
McCain is right again to warn that congressional failure to authorize force in Syria would be a “catastrophe” for America’s credibility.
At least it will not be for the Syrian people and the region.
Fifth, there is a larger issue at stake: Syria is also a test of our global leadership. The United States is, in the words of Princeton’s John Ikenberry, the “system operator” of the international order. Without American energy and attention, the world order cannot function well.
That is so f***ing conceited and arrogant it is impossible to comment.
This is not a message the growing number of neo-isolationists in both political parties in Congress want to hear. But it is fundamental to our wish to live in a world that has rules, order, civility, and justice.
Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
Without constant, effective, and smart US leadership, the global order will break down. Ronald Reagan, the two Bushes, and Bill Clinton all understood this. President Obama does too. The isolationists would have us retreat from leadership — a recipe for failure in the globalized 21st century.
I'm tired of war-promoting empire builders hurling insults to justify continued oppression of the planet, how about you?
This is one of those moments. The United States has to act in Syria.
Nicholas Burns is a professor of the practice of diplomacy and international politics at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.
And former State Department official in the George W. Bush Administration. They always leave that out.
--more--"
"Forays into the Islamic world have had bad consequences" by Andrew J. Bacevich | September 07, 2013
Our friend Saddam. During the 1980s, the United States aligned itself with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, which had launched an unprovoked war of aggression against Iran. Fearful that Iran might prevail in that war, the Reagan administration intervened indirectly on Saddam’s behalf, providing him with commercial credits, “dual use” technologies, and, most importantly, intelligence. That intelligence proved invaluable in enabling Saddam to target Iranian forces with chemical agents, including the sarin gas allegedly employed by the Syrians against their own people. Saddam too used sarin gas against his own people, most notoriously at Halabja in 1988, killing many hundreds of women and children. At the time, no one in the United States government argued for the need to punish Saddam for violating the “norm” prohibiting the use of such weapons. Expedience dictated that Washington should look the other way.
Our friends the KLA. Present-day promoters of an attack against Syria cite NATO’s 1999 air campaign against Serbia as a model of what they have in mind. Yet the all-but-forgotten Operation Allied Force was not neat and not without unintended consequences.
Related: Obama to Use Serbian Template in Syria
Amerika was backing Al-CIA-Duh even then!
Begun with the expectation that a mere three or four days of bombing would suffice to bring Slobodan Milosevic to heel, the campaign ended up requiring 78 days of ever-intensifying assault.
I think that is what they are planning, yeah.
Before it was over, NATO forces had subjected downtown Belgrade to sustained bombing that killed an estimated 500 civilians. Milosevic did eventually throw in the towel, thereby enabling the Kosovar Liberation Army — a terrorist organization known to engage in narco-trafficking — to prevail.
They also engaged in another kind of trafficking.
Our friends the Libyan resistance. In the summer of 2011, concerns that megalomaniacal Libyan dictator Moammar Khadafy was hell-bent on committing genocide prompted the United States and its allies to launch Operation Odyssey Dawn.
More lies.
Advertised as an effort to protect civilians, the air campaign soon morphed into an effort to eliminate Khadafy — regime change to fertilize the Arab Spring and allow democracy to blossom.
Related:
"General Wesley Clark, who commanded the North Atlantic Treaty Organization bombing campaign in the Kosovo war, recalls in his 2003 book Winning Modern Wars being told by a friend in the Pentagon in November 2001 that the list of states that Rumsfeld and deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz wanted to take down included Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan and Somalia [and Lebanon]."
And look where we are now.
The operation did lead to Khadafy’s ouster (and murder). The Tuareg mercenaries hired to protect the dictator headed home to Mali, which they proceeded to dismember by carving an Islamist republic out of the northern half of that country. A civil war ensued. Meanwhile, instead of democracy, Libya got something more akin to chaos.
That is what the Globe-kicking war-makers want!
The Independent reported just this week that “governing authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country” with Libyans “increasingly at the mercy of militias which operate outside the law.”
Think an intervention in Syria is going to be simple? Think it will be over in just a couple of days? Think again.
Andrew J. Bacevich is a professor of history and international relations at Boston University. His new book “Breach of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country’’ will be published next week.
DON'T BLAME ME!
--more--"
His son died in Iraq. Globe doesn't mention that.
At least my congressman is listening:
"Rep. McGovern says president should rethink vote by Congress" by Tracy Jan | Globe Staff, September 08, 2013
WASHINGTON — US Representative James P. McGovern, a Worcester Democrat, called on President Obama on Sunday to withdraw his request for congressional authorization for military strikes against Syria before this week’s votes, even as the White House pushes its uphill campaign for supporters.
He said he would do it anyway, with or without approval.
“If I were the president, I would withdraw my request for authorization of this particular point. I don’t believe the support is there in Congress,” McGovern, who opposes the current resolution for military strikes, said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “People view war as a last resort. And I don’t think people think that we’re at that point. So I would step back .”
Congress is scheduled to begin voting Wednesday whether to authorize limited strikes on Syria to punish President Bashar Assad for alleged chemical arms use. The prospects for approval are uncertain.
Overall, 111 members have publicly declared opposition to the Syria resolution, and 115 are leaning against it, according to a Washington Post count.
Keep calling though.
Many lawmakers who oppose attacking Syria believe that the Assad regime used chemical weapons. But they have voiced wariness about US involvement, notwithstanding Obama’s promise that there will be no “boots on the ground.”
Like we would believe him as there already are boots on the ground.
McGovern made his comments as part of a congressional roundtable, appearing on CNN with Buck McKeon, a Republican from California and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee. McKeon and Blackburn said they are also against military strikes in the face of defense cuts and opposition from the American people.
I love it when Republicans and Democrats can come together.
A McGovern spokesman said Sunday that the congressman opposed the current resolution for military strikes. While McGovern has left open the possibility of considering a different measure, he said on CNN that Obama “has to convince me that this is effective and this is the right thing to do. I’m not there.”
We STILL SAY NO! NO, NO, NO!
Meanwhile, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough projected confidence during appearances on five Sunday news shows that the administration would gain congressional approval.
“This resolution is going to pass after we work this, this week,” McDonough told George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week.”
With help from the the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room, and thus the U.S. CONGRESS will be OUTED as a SLAVE of ISRAEL!!
Obama is slated to conduct six national television interviews Monday, in advance of a Tuesday evening address to the nation.
He has NEVER WORKED SO HARD for something in his whole life!
--more--"
Also see: The strength not to react with force
He's not listening, Jim.
And neither is the pos mouthpiece Globe:
"Boston Common rally backs strike vs. Syria" by Todd Feathers | Globe Correspondent, September 09, 2013
About 50 demonstrators gathered on Boston Common Sunday, saying the size of their group should not belie its sentiment: The US military must strike against Syria’s regime in response to widespread reports of a devastating chemical weapons attack.
Even if the U.S.-supported Al-CIA-Duh insurgents did it.
Carrying Syrian and American flags, the group hoped to rally support for its cause, which stood in stark opposition to a separate protest held in Boston the day before. There is a burgeoning wave of national activism against a US-led intervention in the conflict, with other groups attempting to persuade President Obama and Congress not to get involved.
Gee, that was NOT REPORTED in my Sunday Globe -- and all it gets here is one sentence!
Many of those gathered Sunday near the Park Street MBTA station were of Syrian descent. Several said they had immigrated to the United States within the past two years, fleeing the violence that has engulfed their country.
More immigrants we had to absorb because of the f***ing wars!
With handmade signs and a megaphone, they argued that the proposal to launch strikes against Syria is necessary to prevent the use of more chemical weapons and other alleged human rights violations.
Related: 10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About
Nor do the protesters.
“Since the US is a country of democracy and human rights we should take a stand,” said Lubna Moheddin, 24, who left Syria after completing high school. She said her 19-year-old cousin was kidnapped and killed because he posted antigovernment rhetoric on Facebook.
“Think of the children who are dying,” Moheddin said. “People should not be scared that it will be another war like Iraq. It’s a different story.”
Stop waving dead kids at us!
Several people carried signs showing pictures of Syrians, many of them children, who appeared to have been killed in an alleged sarin gas attack.
That's if it happened at all, or was the TV lying to me once again?
“You can’t just sit back and let a madman, an evil person, do that to his people,” said Thomas Moore, a Korean War veteran. Moore said he had not known about the rally until he walked past. Having experienced war firsthand, he decided to join because he sympathized with the Syrian people.
“I’m not a warmonger, but you need to protect people,” he said.
I can't take anymore of this one-sided, agenda-pushing, war-promoting propaganda.
The rally grew steadily after starting off as a smattering of people around 3 p.m. Nadia Alawa, the event organizer, said many Syrian Americans were on their way to Washington, D.C., for a large rally scheduled for Monday.
I'm sure tomorrow's Globe will make mention of it.
“This doesn’t reflect the sentiment of the people,” Alawa said of the rally’s size. “People are just really tired.”
But she was enthusiastic about the response of passersby strolling the along Common on a sunny afternoon.
“I was afraid maybe there would be a lot of hostility, but people are very curious,” she said, while handing out fliers. “The American people still want to know what is going on.”
They SURE DO! That is why MY HITS are SKYROCKETING to RECORD LEVELS!
On Saturday, at least 100 people had gathered in the same area, but they voiced opposition to US intervention in Syria. Many of them argued that launching missiles would draw the country into another long war.
But NEVER MIND!
There is MIND MANIPULATION and SHOVELFULS of PROPAGANDA to serve!
But those rallying on Sunday sought to counter that perception. “Look, we don’t want another Iraq,” said Magdalena Ayed, 42.
She said those fighting against Syria’s regime need time to organize themselves into a more coherent movement.
They have had three years, and have been defeated!
“That is what democracy is built on,” Ayed said, “people organizing themselves.”
Oh, is it? I thought it had something to do with voting.
