Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

Re: Breaking News

BREAKING NEWS: This just in!!!
Obama wins the Heisman Trophy
after watching a college football
game!!!
He should also get an Emmy for all of the shows he's appeared on; an Oscar for any movie he's gone to; a Tony since he went to a Broadway show with Michelle; a Grammy since he gave the Queen of England an IPOD; a Marconi since he does a weekly radio address, and a Razzie to keep it fair and balanced! :D
 
President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. I still think that's a good thing. I also see that the Nobel Committee members have defended themselves against all sorts of outside attacks. That's okay too. When one of our Presidents win an award, I'm always supportive.

Well, let's see: I express myself in some way that goes "against the grain". I'm not really sure why expressing an opinion that many others don't agree with would cause such consternation, and result in personal attacks.

I'm glad to provide some entertainment, but everything I've said has been true. The problem may be that this truth doesn't fit in with the general views that many people may have. I'm really okay with their views. I never make personal attacks. That would be weak.

I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about, but you're welcome to continue. All opinions are welcome. However, I never make it personal, just factual. I guess that's like waving a red flag here. It reminds me of the Soviet state. If you'd like to start a thread on the former Soviets, go ahead. It doesn't bother me.

Tell you what, just ignore the facts. Instead of arguing, just change the subject.....to me. That way, you won't be required to do anything too difficult. That seems to be popular here. I've been a target before. It's not too hard for me.

As far as other people who expressed their opinions that go against the grain, I can probably tell you why many of them left. It just becomes tiresome. Particularly the passive aggressive behavior.

I'll leave you with General Marshall's sentiments:On 10 December in the university Aula, just as Marshall was accepting the prize from Dr. Hambro, vice-chairman of the committee, some communist journalists interrupted the ceremony, dropping leaflets from the balcony and shouting, "We protest!" King Haakon VII indignantly rose to his feet and led the audience in applause for Marshall. The general turned to Hambro and commented drily that in his own country he was more accustomed to such treatment from the anticommunists.




You attack the general MB almost everytime you make a post because you say many things in a way that strikes against the grain. For instance your comment about the Bay of Pigs...



Then we should start another Tread -- worshipping the Soviets and showing everyone how vastly superior they are.

Humm -- again 'No Emotions' ... and 'No Attack'

Keep it comming my friend .... I find you entertaining.
 
I'm not really sure why expressing an opinion that many others don't agree with would cause such consternation,

Who knows my friend ..... lots of strange people in this world

and result in personal attacks.

Well given the fact I (and others) can't get ya in a headlock and give ya a dutch rub ... we're simply reduced to talking crap..

I'm glad to provide some entertainment,

Thanks man --- then please try to come by more often! :)

but everything I've said has been true.
I know it's crazy man .... how come everyone can't see that

The problem may be that this truth doesn't fit in with the general views that many people may have.
The problem is the 'general views' that many have are FOS.

I'm really okay with their views.
How can you be.. when they're so 'out of wack' ?
I mean seriously don't ya just want to say -- wake up idiot and look at the facts ... stop hiding behind delusions....

I never make personal attacks.
And that's the way it should be --- you, me and Birch should stick together.

That would be weak.
And there's enough weakness without 'us' getting involved.

I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about, but you're welcome to continue.
Thanks man --- you're cool :cool: and I'm enjoying ya.

All opinions are welcome.

Well I think we should pick a few at random and say -- hey man your opinions are NOT welcome... I mean somewhere we should draw the line and say 'THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE'

However, I never make it personal, just factual.

Well when facts come from the Internet Dictionary ... that is wholly open to anyone saying whatever.... or possible questionable sources.... don't know we can really call that FACT .... but it's cool

I guess that's like waving a red flag here.

Man you're not kidding .... was a hard lesson for me to learn too.. it's like 'Ahh say what ya want but just make sure it's what we want to hear .... even if there is no shread of truth...'

It reminds me of the Soviet state.

So how long did you live there. Are the girls sexey?

If you'd like to start a thread on the former Soviets, go ahead. It doesn't bother me.

No -- I don't sqat about that stuff..

Tell you what, just ignore the facts.

You - the man of truth --- are telling me to ignore the facts ???

Instead of arguing, just change the subject.....to me.

Ahh .. I'm not arguing..... I'm just throwing out some alternate views.... trying to have some fun and take things lightly...

That way, you won't be required to do anything too difficult.

Actually being 'spontaneous' is a lot harder than you realize

That seems to be popular here.

Don't worry --- eventually they'll come to realize YOU don't fit in the same mold others mindlessly fall into

I've been a target before. It's not too hard for me.

It's because you stand out ... like a Giant among a bunch of ants..

like a genius among the mentally challenged... like a Lion among the lambs...

As far as other people who expressed their opinions that go against the grain, I can probably tell you why many of them left.

It's because they couldn't handle it ... but we're different

It just becomes tiresome. Particularly the passive aggressive behavior.

But what do we do ??? How do we change them ??
It's like they live in the DARK and refuse to acknowledge the light.

I'll leave you with General Marshall's sentiments:On 10 December in the university Aula, just as Marshall was accepting the prize from Dr. Hambro, vice-chairman of the committee, some communist journalists interrupted the ceremony, dropping leaflets from the balcony and shouting, "We protest!" King Haakon VII indignantly rose to his feet and led the audience in applause for Marshall. The general turned to Hambro and commented drily that in his own country he was more accustomed to such treatment from the anticommunists.

Sniff ... sniff.... oh Phil ... you should have told me I'd need some kleenex

MAN - I'm glad you're back.... it's kind of boring without you

It's like TSP and money stuff and whatever.. but you are a ray of sunshine .. :nuts:
 
Last edited:
Thanks Steadygain. It's not personal, not even business.

Sniff ... sniff.... oh Phil ... you should have told me I'd need some kleenex

MAN - I'm glad you're back.... it's kind of boring without you

It's like TSP and money stuff and whatever.. but you are a ray of sunshine .. :nuts:
 
Thanks Steadygain.

No Problem my friend

I do enjoy you --- seriously --- I really do

It's not personal, not even business.

Exactly !! Don't let anything get 'too deep' -- 'too serious' -- or come across 'too strongly' ...

take life and all things in stride ---- and let the others get boggled down in garbage if that's their thing.....

but we need to stick togther ... and just have some fun

Later Dude.... it is good to have ya back


Good Night All
 
...An Ex Marine Officer..hmmmm, Impressive..... oooorah!

And thank you Phil for your dedicated service to our Country..
In my book, you are a ZERO that counts.







Note: Back in my day (when ships were made of wood and had sails) we the enlisted called Officers Zeros.
 
I haven't read this, but thought it might help you B. :D

How to Talk...

(this is a joke folks. I'm not promoting it. ;) )

Well here's my 2 cents:

Ann Coulter offers a wonderfully huge perspective simply from a 'woman's point of view' --- helps us guys see stuff we usually overlook.

She is highly 'recognized' as an Intellectual

Her book was an instant New York Times bestseller

She is 'conservative' in the things that count -- those things that should seperate the moral and decent from the immoral and indecent. (Politics just happens to be a part of this)

Controversial -- because she's not afraid to tell it like it is.

What comments I did read --- I'm with her !!
 
And what sort of results did we have from the previous administration, pray tell? From any of these issues?

Let's review: North Korea had nukes during the Bush admininistration, and has them now. The Iran issue is hardly new.

You need to do a fact check on the Honduras situation. It's a little complicated, particularly on the rule of law category.

I think most Americans took a good look around, and realized that we had engaged in far too many foreign adventures (sort of like the former Soviet Union), and had succeeded only in losing trillions of dollars, with little security to show, and an enormous foreign debt. In the end, the Soviets came apart from putting too much money in one basket, it seems.

As for Castro and Hugo: I believe that making faces at them just didn't seem to work well, did it? I mean, we've been doing that for over 50 years now to Cuba. We even tried to INVADE once, which failed horribly.

Taking the time to analyze Afghanistan is really necessary. Look how we all REALLY got snookered into the Iraq war. I'd take some time too. Tell you what, just read the 9/11 report, it's all there. Any idea how much money it cost? Did it hurt, or help, Al-Qaeda?

On Iran: we have intervened inside their country before, in 1953. I think talking about it is probably a good thing. Just like now....

Talking with Russia probably is much better than other options. We've always talked with them. Well and good to rattle sabers, but in the end we always talk and work out some agreement. Trust me, it's probably a better thing.

Protecting US interests: what US interests are we protecting exactly? I probably need to be educated on that. After all, after our invasion of Iraq, oil prices started to go way up, not down. There seemed to be a correlation there between our political willingness to believe anything, and our ability to pay at the pump. Were we really that gullible?

As far as the UN's credibility: I think that after the presentation on WMD in Iraq, I really think that's exactly what they say about us.

I always admired George C. Marshall. He also won the Nobel Prize. You should read his acceptance speech. He was a great General, and a great diplomat.

My apologies in advance - I don't have the skill at inserting and changing the colors of my reply within your original quotes, a la Steadygain.

To borrow your terminology, “let’s review:” “North Korea had nukes during the Bush administration,” and the “Iran issue is hardly new.” Thanks for giving us all some excellent insight into how President Obama’s penchant for “talking” has mitigated the threats posed by both North Korea and Iran. Thank you, that was very enlightening. I understand now.

Regarding Honduras – yes, I agree, let us do “fact check.” FACT: Honduran President Zelaya was legally removed from office after he attempted a coup earlier this summer. The manner of coup was via a referendum or direct vote (also known as a plebiscite), which is forbidden by the Honduran constitution. The Honduran constitution further states that any elected official who attempts such is to be automatically removed from office. The Honduran congress and the Honduran supreme court removed Zelaya – legally. He was replaced by another member of Zelaya’s political party, and Zelaya was ultimately exiled in an attempt to avoid any violence. Hugo Chavez and his good-time-buddy Fidel Castro to the north, and Senor Morales in Bolivia, were all bent-outta-shape about the ouster of Zelaya. They were upset because they wanted Zelaya to follow their lead and turn Honduras into a Marxist regime. And who did President Obama take sides with? Well, he certainly didn’t take sides with the legal, democratic institutions within Honduras. No, in grand fashion he pined for the return of Zelaya to rule Honduras. But, I suppose my facts don’t mesh with your “facts.” Funny how that works.

I love your repetitive allusions to the Soviet Union; so appropriate considering some of your comments. The semi-analogies you keep making, as if you want to say the U.S. is on the same trajectory as the former USSR, yet you really can’t bring yourself to say it. What exactly are you saying?

If by “making faces” at Castro and Hugo, you mean how successive administrations, of both parties, have correctly called communist thugs just that – communist thugs, I do think that worked well. While the fall of communism in Cuba cannot come a day too soon, the United States and friends of freedom around the world should be proud that we don’t have more commies running around to the south of us. The fact that Russian isn’t a second language just a few hours flying time from our borders is no small miracle, thanks to those administrations that knew full well the cancer that communism is. Whispering sweet nothings into the ears of tyrants, accepting Marxist tomes from dictators whom you’ve called “mi amigo,” and apologizing for American “sins,” real and imagined, will not stop those that wish to enslave their people, nor will it appease their desires to turn back the tide of freedom.

“Snookered” into Iraq. Really, Phil? I thought you were better than that. Cheap, throw-way lines like that, championed by all the Michael Moore’s of the world, add nothing to the discussion. I’ve read the 9/11 Report. Quite frankly, I’m still trying to make sense of your comments from that paragraph.

Regarding Iran – I’m interesting in why you think talking about the 1953 coup is such a good thing. How does that benefit the U.S.?

Great – talk with Russia. Just don’t sell our friends down the river because you want to make nice with Russia. I have nothing against talking – but don’t talk just to talk, and certainly never talk while compromising American interests, principles and values. When you compromise those things, it whittles away at American credibility.

Not sure your intent on the next paragraph, and I certainly don’t understand your oft-repeated quip about oil prices. Remember, those on the left invented the whole “war for oil” charade. If you want to keep playing that game, go right ahead.

Ah, the WMD presentation at the United Nations! I knew it wouldn’t take long to come out. That’s right, how could I forget. All the principals in the Bush administration conspired and created their own intelligence to hoodwink the entire world, all on live television, at the U.N. no less! Did some of the intelligence eventually prove unreliable and worthless in some cases? You bet it did. But let’s not forget that the vast majority of the U.S. intelligence community agreed with the intelligence presented by the Bush administration. Intelligence first developed and used by the previous administration. Let’s also not forget that every major and reputable intelligence agency around the world agreed with our assessments of Iraq’s WMD – the only differing points were not on the intelligence, but on the way to deal with Iraq (i.e., to invade or not to invade). As much as the left would love to blame the Bush administration for every problem in the world, the facts just don’t support it.

General Marshall was a great American and an appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. The reference to him speaks directly to the heart of this particular thread, in that the vast majority of the poster do not believe President Obama deserved to be honored. The juxtaposition of the president and the general is outstanding, and I’m surprised you missed what is so obvious to the rest of us.

That’s all I have time for tonight – my twenty-minute daily allotment to TSP Talk has expired. I saw you posted some other replies in the thread. I’ll try to get to those this weekend when I have some more time.
 
My apologies in advance - I don't have the skill at inserting and changing the colors of my reply within your original quotes, a la Steadygain.

Wow --- thanks for the recognition !!


That’s all I have time for tonight – my twenty-minute daily allotment to TSP Talk has expired. I saw you posted some other replies in the thread. I’ll try to get to those this weekend when I have some more time.

Whew !! Looks like you're one of the many he stirred up.

My posts were simply to 'confront him' on a different level and I seriously don't think he had a clue the way he was comming across.

Relax man -- be cool and let it slide.... ;):cool::cool:
 
My apologies in advance - I don't have the skill at inserting and changing the colors of my reply within your original quotes, a la Steadygain.

To borrow your terminology, “let’s review:” “North Korea had nukes during the Bush administration,” and the “Iran issue is hardly new.” Thanks for giving us all some excellent insight into how President Obama’s penchant for “talking” has mitigated the threats posed by both North Korea and Iran. Thank you, that was very enlightening. I understand now.

Regarding Honduras – yes, I agree, let us do “fact check.” FACT: Honduran President Zelaya was legally removed from office after he attempted a coup earlier this summer. The manner of coup was via a referendum or direct vote (also known as a plebiscite), which is forbidden by the Honduran constitution. The Honduran constitution further states that any elected official who attempts such is to be automatically removed from office. The Honduran congress and the Honduran supreme court removed Zelaya – legally. He was replaced by another member of Zelaya’s political party, and Zelaya was ultimately exiled in an attempt to avoid any violence. Hugo Chavez and his good-time-buddy Fidel Castro to the north, and Senor Morales in Bolivia, were all bent-outta-shape about the ouster of Zelaya. They were upset because they wanted Zelaya to follow their lead and turn Honduras into a Marxist regime. And who did President Obama take sides with? Well, he certainly didn’t take sides with the legal, democratic institutions within Honduras. No, in grand fashion he pined for the return of Zelaya to rule Honduras. But, I suppose my facts don’t mesh with your “facts.” Funny how that works.

I love your repetitive allusions to the Soviet Union; so appropriate considering some of your comments. The semi-analogies you keep making, as if you want to say the U.S. is on the same trajectory as the former USSR, yet you really can’t bring yourself to say it. What exactly are you saying?

If by “making faces” at Castro and Hugo, you mean how successive administrations, of both parties, have correctly called communist thugs just that – communist thugs, I do think that worked well. While the fall of communism in Cuba cannot come a day too soon, the United States and friends of freedom around the world should be proud that we don’t have more commies running around to the south of us. The fact that Russian isn’t a second language just a few hours flying time from our borders is no small miracle, thanks to those administrations that knew full well the cancer that communism is. Whispering sweet nothings into the ears of tyrants, accepting Marxist tomes from dictators whom you’ve called “mi amigo,” and apologizing for American “sins,” real and imagined, will not stop those that wish to enslave their people, nor will it appease their desires to turn back the tide of freedom.

“Snookered” into Iraq. Really, Phil? I thought you were better than that. Cheap, throw-way lines like that, championed by all the Michael Moore’s of the world, add nothing to the discussion. I’ve read the 9/11 Report. Quite frankly, I’m still trying to make sense of your comments from that paragraph.

Regarding Iran – I’m interesting in why you think talking about the 1953 coup is such a good thing. How does that benefit the U.S.?

Great – talk with Russia. Just don’t sell our friends down the river because you want to make nice with Russia. I have nothing against talking – but don’t talk just to talk, and certainly never talk while compromising American interests, principles and values. When you compromise those things, it whittles away at American credibility.

Not sure your intent on the next paragraph, and I certainly don’t understand your oft-repeated quip about oil prices. Remember, those on the left invented the whole “war for oil” charade. If you want to keep playing that game, go right ahead.

Ah, the WMD presentation at the United Nations! I knew it wouldn’t take long to come out. That’s right, how could I forget. All the principals in the Bush administration conspired and created their own intelligence to hoodwink the entire world, all on live television, at the U.N. no less! Did some of the intelligence eventually prove unreliable and worthless in some cases? You bet it did. But let’s not forget that the vast majority of the U.S. intelligence community agreed with the intelligence presented by the Bush administration. Intelligence first developed and used by the previous administration. Let’s also not forget that every major and reputable intelligence agency around the world agreed with our assessments of Iraq’s WMD – the only differing points were not on the intelligence, but on the way to deal with Iraq (i.e., to invade or not to invade). As much as the left would love to blame the Bush administration for every problem in the world, the facts just don’t support it.

General Marshall was a great American and an appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. The reference to him speaks directly to the heart of this particular thread, in that the vast majority of the poster do not believe President Obama deserved to be honored. The juxtaposition of the president and the general is outstanding, and I’m surprised you missed what is so obvious to the rest of us.

That’s all I have time for tonight – my twenty-minute daily allotment to TSP Talk has expired. I saw you posted some other replies in the thread. I’ll try to get to those this weekend when I have some more time.

A big Standing O! Well said.

CB
 
I don't have a lot of time, but I'll respond.

So...on the Iran and Korean issues, nothing to offer?

Honduran President Zelaya was legally removed from office after he attempted a coup earlier this summer.

Wow, I never knew of any sitting President to have a coup by plebescite. That's really unique. Then, the Honduran military removed him . Otherwise, democracy would break out, no doubt.
I don't think we can avoid the similarities to the former Soviet Union. Nor, obviously, can you.
On Iraq: Read the reports coming from our own Congress, you don't have to listen to me. Nor should you.

I’m interesting in why you think talking about the 1953 coup is such a good thing. How does that benefit the U.S.?

Whether you're interesting or not, talking to the Iranians is better than not, particularly now. It benefits us in that we bring a balance in engaging Iran. All the Iranians know what we did then, and it still bothers them.


Ah, the WMD presentation at the United Nations! I knew it wouldn’t take long to come out. That’s right, how could I forget. All the principals in the Bush administration conspired and created their own intelligence to hoodwink the entire world, all on live television, at the U.N. no less! Did some of the intelligence eventually prove unreliable and worthless in some cases? You bet it did. But let’s not forget that the vast majority of the U.S. intelligence community agreed with the intelligence presented by the Bush administration.


We Americans still have to carry the fact that we misled the UN. What will the world think next time we have to go there?
Actually, no, the vast majority of the US intelligence community didn't agree. Yes, I do believe that some intelligence was created. People just didn't take a look at the facts of the case, particularly with regard to Iraq and Al-Qaeda. So, why not give the current administration time to examine the facts. The facts seemed to be a bit murky, don't you think? There are groups that seem to have an interest in keeping us engaged in behavior that we shouldn't be in, quite frankly.

Let’s also not forget that every major and reputable intelligence agency around the world agreed with our assessments of Iraq’s WMD.

Again, no, read prior answer. By the way, check the Plame incident during the former administration.

General Marshall was a great American and an appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. The reference to him speaks directly to the heart of this particular thread, in that the vast majority of the poster do not believe President Obama deserved to be honored.

I guess we can agree on something.


Solving problems by force hasn't really worked well. After spending about a trillion dollars in Iraq, we're finally leaving. Let's give our President a chance to carry out his agenda. I congratulate him on his award.
 
I don't have a lot of time, but I'll respond.

And THIS was one of YOUR BEST !! :D

So...on the Iran and Korean issues, nothing to offer?

Honduran President Zelaya was legally removed from office after he attempted a coup earlier this summer.

Wow, I never knew of any sitting President to have a coup by plebescite. That's really unique. Then, the Honduran military removed him . Otherwise, democracy would break out, no doubt.
I don't think we can avoid the similarities to the former Soviet Union. Nor, obviously, can you.
On Iraq: Read the reports coming from our own Congress, you don't have to listen to me. Nor should you.

Good Points -- Damn good points !!

I’m interesting in why you think talking about the 1953 coup is such a good thing. How does that benefit the U.S.?

Whether you're interesting or not, talking to the Iranians is better than not, particularly now. It benefits us in that we bring a balance in engaging Iran. All the Iranians know what we did then, and it still bothers them.

AMEN Brother --- Seriously THIS IS GOOD !!


Ah, the WMD presentation at the United Nations! I knew it wouldn’t take long to come out. That’s right, how could I forget. All the principals in the Bush administration conspired and created their own intelligence to hoodwink the entire world, all on live television, at the U.N. no less! Did some of the intelligence eventually prove unreliable and worthless in some cases? You bet it did. But let’s not forget that the vast majority of the U.S. intelligence community agreed with the intelligence presented by the Bush administration.


We Americans (don't include me in that BS but I hear what you're saying)still have to carry the fact that we misled the UN. What will the world think next time we have to go there?

They will think how the hell can any Nation over $11 Trillion in Debt afford another war :confused:
Actually, no, the vast majority of the US intelligence community didn't agree. Yes, I do believe that some intelligence was created. People just didn't take a look at the facts of the case, particularly with regard to Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
Right On !! Wow -- this is very good :)
So, why not give the current administration time to examine the facts. The facts seemed to be a bit murky, don't you think? There are groups that seem to have an interest in keeping us engaged in behavior that we shouldn't be in, quite frankly.

Let’s also not forget that every major and reputable intelligence agency around the world agreed with our assessments of Iraq’s WMD.

Again, no, read prior answer. By the way, check the Plame incident during the former administration.

General Marshall was a great American and an appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. The reference to him speaks directly to the heart of this particular thread, in that the vast majority of the poster do not believe President Obama deserved to be honored.

I guess we can agree on something.


Solving problems by force hasn't really worked well. After spending about a trillion dollars in Iraq, we're finally leaving. Let's give our President a chance to carry out his agenda. I congratulate him on his award.

WOOO Phil !!!

I think this one was EXCELLENT !!!!

Way to Go --- very well put !!! and I sincerely mean that

Steady
 
War Is Peace. Ignorance Is Strength
by John Pilger

Barack Obama, winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, is planning another war to add to his impressive record. In Afghanistan, his agents routinely extinguish wedding parties, farmers and construction workers with weapons such as the innovative Hellfire missile, which sucks the air out of your lungs. According to the UN, 338,000 Afghan infants are dying under the Obama-led alliance, which permits only $29 per head annually to be spent on medical care.

Within weeks of his inauguration, Obama started a new war in Pakistan, causing more than a million people to flee their homes. In threatening Iran – which his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said she was prepared to "obliterate" – Obama lied that the Iranians were covering up a "secret nuclear facility," knowing that it had already been reported to the International Atomic Energy Authority. In colluding with the only nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, he bribed the Palestinian Authority to suppress a UN judgment that Israel had committed crimes against humanity in its assault on Gaza – crimes made possible with US weapons whose shipment Obama secretly approved before his inauguration.

At home, the man of peace has approved a military budget exceeding that of any year since the end of the Second World War while presiding over a new kind of domestic repression. During the recent G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, hosted by Obama, militarized police attacked peaceful protesters with something called the Long-Range Acoustic Device, not seen before on US streets. Mounted in the turret of a small tank, it blasted a piercing noise as tear gas and pepper gas were fired indiscriminately. It is part of a new arsenal of "crowd-control munitions" supplied by military contractors such as Raytheon. In Obama’s Pentagon-controlled "national security state," the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay, which he promised to close, remains open, and "rendition," secret assassinations and torture continue.

The Nobel Peace Prize–winner’s latest war is largely secret. On 15 July, Washington finalized a deal with Colombia that gives the US seven giant military bases. "The idea," reported the Associated Press, "is to make Colombia a regional hub for Pentagon operations . . . nearly half the continent can be covered by a C-17 [military transport] without refueling," which "helps achieve the regional engagement strategy."

Translated, this means Obama is planning a "rollback" of the independence and democracy that the people of Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador and Paraguay have achieved against the odds, along with a historic regional cooperation that rejects the notion of a US "sphere of influence." The Colombian regime, which backs death squads and has the continent’s worst human rights record, has received US military support second in scale only to Israel. Britain provides military training. Guided by US military satellites, Colombian paramilitaries now infiltrate Venezuela with the goal of overthrowing the democratic government of Hugo Chávez, which George W Bush failed to do in 2002.

Obama’s war on peace and democracy in Latin America follows a style he has demonstrated since the coup against the democratic president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, in June. Zelaya had increased the minimum wage, granted subsidies to small farmers, cut back interest rates and reduced poverty. He planned to break a US pharmaceutical monopoly and manufacture cheap generic drugs. Although Obama has called for Zelaya’s reinstatement, he refuses to condemn the coup-makers and to recall the US ambassador or the US troops who train the Honduran forces determined to crush a popular resistance. Zelaya has been repeatedly refused a meeting with Obama, who has approved an IMF loan of $164m to the illegal regime. The message is clear and familiar: thugs can act with impunity on behalf of the US.

Obama, the smooth operator from Chicago via Harvard, was enlisted to restore what he calls "leadership" throughout the world. The Nobel Prize committee’s decision is the kind of cloying reverse racism that has beatified the man for no reason other than he is a member of a minority and attractive to liberal sensibilities, if not to the Afghan children he kills. This is the Call of Obama. It is not unlike a dog whistle: inaudible to most, irresistible to the besotted and boneheaded. "When Obama walks into a room," gushed George Clooney, "you want to follow him somewhere, anywhere."

The great voice of black liberation Frantz Fanon understood this. In The Wretched of the Earth, he described the "intermediary [whose] mission has nothing to do with transforming the nation: it consists, prosaically, of being the transmission line between the nation and a capitalism, rampant though camouflaged." Because political debate has become so debased in our media monoculture – Blair or Brown; Brown or Cameron – race, gender and class can be used as seductive tools of propaganda and diversion. In Obama’s case, what matters, as Fanon pointed out in an earlier era, is not the intermediary’s "historic" elevation, but the class he serves. After all, Bush’s inner circle was probably the most multiracial in presidential history. There was Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, all dutifully serving an extreme and dangerous power.

Britain has seen its own Obama-like mysticism. The day after Blair was elected in 1997, the Observer predicted that he would create "new worldwide rules on human rights" while the Guardian rejoiced at the "breathless pace [as] the floodgates of change burst open." When Obama was elected last November, Denis MacShane MP, a devotee of Blair’s bloodbaths, unwittingly warned us: "I shut my eyes when I listen to this guy and it could be Tony. He is doing the same thing that we did in 1997."

October 16, 2009

Courtesy

www.lewrockwell.com
 
War Is Peace. Ignorance Is Strength
by John Pilger

Barack Obama, winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, is planning another war to add to his impressive record. In Afghanistan, his agents routinely extinguish wedding parties, farmers and construction workers with weapons such as the innovative Hellfire missile, which sucks the air out of your lungs. According to the UN, 338,000 Afghan infants are dying under the Obama-led alliance, which permits only $29 per head annually to be spent on medical care.

Well it's really too bad that I do not have the opportunity to directly address John Pilger...:mad:

But allow me to start by saying Barrack Obama winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was a decision wholly - and completey - removed from anyone connected to this MB
1.(from any person who by virtue of being a Rep --- honestly believes that nothing good can possibly come from a Dem;
2. from any person who by virtue of their Race honestly believes a Black ... or whatever... can not possibly serve as a worthy leader....
3. from anyone who by virtue of their Nationality honestly believes that because the President of the United States may have been born on this spot of the EARTH -- that in itself fully disqualifies him from being worthy...)

If we as a collective group OBJECTIVELY and Honestly look at what happened throughout the WORLD -- The Entire PLANET

Obama was widely 'Supported' by all the Nations throughout the World -- and in fact most of the Nations supported him over the USA.

When he rightfully got elected as the NEW President of the USA the peoples around the entire PLANET -- Celebrated his Victory and the HOPE of better Relationships and Better Understanding....

He offered the HOPE of something FAR SUPERIOR than what the world had known so far --- in it's relation to the USA.

Keeping all these things in mind --- acknowledging the facts as represented throughout the world (and by election results)

HE FULLY DESERVED 'THE 2009 NOBEL PEACE PRIZE'

So let's seperate that from everything else and stick with only that in this post.
 
Well it's really too bad that I do not have the opportunity to directly address John Pilger...:mad:

But allow me to start by saying Barrack Obama winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was a decision wholly - and completey - removed from anyone connected to this MB
1.(from any person who by virtue of being a Rep --- honestly believes that nothing good can possibly come from a Dem;
2. from any person who by virtue of their Race honestly believes a Black ... or whatever... can not possibly serve as a worthy leader....
3. from anyone who by virtue of their Nationality honestly believes that because the President of the United States may have been born on this spot of the EARTH -- that in itself fully disqualifies him from being worthy...)

If we as a collective group OBJECTIVELY and Honestly look at what happened throughout the WORLD -- The Entire PLANET

Obama was widely 'Supported' by all the Nations throughout the World -- and in fact most of the Nations supported him over the USA.

When he rightfully got elected as the NEW President of the USA the peoples around the entire PLANET -- Celebrated his Victory and the HOPE of better Relationships and Better Understanding....

He offered the HOPE of something FAR SUPERIOR than what the world had known so far --- in it's relation to the USA.

Keeping all these things in mind --- acknowledging the facts as represented throughout the world (and by election results)

HE FULLY DESERVED 'THE 2009 NOBEL PEACE PRIZE'

So let's seperate that from everything else and stick with only that in this post.

Let me just say that I do not necessarily agree with the writer's interpretation of events. I do think it's a lesson in how anyone, and I mean anyone, can twist global events into their own worldview. I find it interesting that while Mr. Pilger wants nothing to do with our involvement overseas, his view is that the Pres is supporting it, while many others (especially liberals) see something else entirely. In this case the writer is agrees with libs that the war is wrong, but in contrast to the left, does not see bho has the answer to our problems.
 
Let me just say that I do not necessarily agree with the writer's interpretation of events. I do think it's a lesson in how anyone, and I mean anyone, can twist global events into their own worldview. I find it interesting that while Mr. Pilger wants nothing to do with our involvement overseas, his view is that the Pres is supporting it, while many others (especially liberals) see something else entirely. In this case the writer is agrees with libs that the war is wrong, but in contrast to the left, does not see bho has the answer to our problems.

Thanks CH !!

Honestly I appreciate your direct input :)

But the whole intention of this individual --- and his endless and wonderful extensive protrayal of ... many notable facts...

his whole endeavor was to TRASH -- his 'Nobel Peace Prize' and that is entirely seperate from the other stuff..

which BTW ... I'll get to later
 
Back
Top