Thursday, January 31, 2013

Calling Out The Hypocritical, War-Loving Left

James Corbett, Contributor
Activist Post

Whatever one thinks of the George W. Bush administration and its historical legacy, there is one fact that is beyond dispute: the war in Iraq galvanized the left in a manner that had not been seen in the streets of America since the era of the Vietnam war. Leading up to the Democrats regaining of the House in the 2006 midterm elections, the calls for Bush’s (and, perhaps even more importantly, Cheney’s) impeachment were echoed across the left-wing blogosphere and spilled out onto the streets. This crusade was led by organizations like Veterans For Peace, Code Pink, and The World Can’t Wait, who used a combination of rallies, resolutions and headline-grabbing photo ops to make the point, sometimes quite literally, that the Bush administration had blood on its hands and must be removed from office.

One would have thought, given this fervent anti-war sentiment, that these same groups would be overjoyed that Republican congressmen would be willing to reach across the aisle and submit a resolution to impeach the Commander-in-Chief should he wage another unconstitutional war by committing American forces to the destruction of Syria without so much as authorization from Congress. In fact, just such a move did take place last year, but rather than applaud it, the very same supposedly “anti-war” left that was so active against Bush has done its level best to ignore the very existence of the resolution and silence its advocates.

Full transcript and key article links added below...

The resolution, known as House Concurrent Resolution 107 or HCR 107, was submitted to the House Judiciary Committee last March by North Carolina Republican Congressman Walter Jones, the same Congressman who sued President Obama for violating the War Powers Act by committing American forces to Libya without congressional approval.

HCR 107 states:
It is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Last year I had the chance to talk to Congressman Walter Jones about the resolution, its origins, and its importance.

Such a resolution, if it had been introduced just a few years ago, would have seemed like manna from heaven for the left. Coming from a Republican, no less, it would have been the focal point for political action in the American anti-war movement. Coming as it did in 2012, however, few have even heard of the resolution.

You see, a funny thing happened four years ago. The letter following the President’s name switched from an “R” to a “D” and just like that, the energies and activism of the self-styled “anti-war” left evaporated overnight.

Under a Democrat, America could expand the so-called war on terror into Pakistan with impunity, because, after all, Obama is a Democrat and “doing what he must” to protect America from the threat of terror.

Under a Democrat, America could develop its drone strike program into a concerted warfare strategy, expanding it into Yemen, Somalia, and doubtless other countries not yet disclosed, and the “anti-war” advocates would fail to denounce it because, after all, he’s the President, and privy to information that we don’t have about emerging threats and hotspots.

Under a Democrat, the left is only too happy to look the other way while the President signs into law bills to detain Americans indefinitely without so much as a trial or develops a Presidential kill list that supposedly gives the commander-in-chief the authority to kill anyone, anywhere in the world, at any time, including American citizens, without even having to explain that decision, a power that he has in fact already invoked.

To be fair, no one is more baffled or frustrated by this turn of events than those members of the anti-war left who are genuinely anti-war. The ones who do not care what party the president is associated with or what colour his skin is. To these anti-war protesters, the ones who were inspired by the depravity of the Bush-era atrocities to join the activist organizations years ago, Obama is every bit as much a war criminal as Bush was, and every bit as deserving of impeachment.

This was expressed most visibly by the membership of Veterans For Peace, a non-profit organization of American veterans dedicated to abolishing war as an instrument of national policy. Last September at their national convention in Portland, the VFP membership passed a resolution by majority vote calling for the organization to officially call for the impeachment of Obama for war crimes. The resolution was closely modeled on a previous VFP call for the impeachment of Bush, outlining the case against Obama from his unconstitutional unauthorized war in Libya to the ongoing war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, concluding:
Therefore Be It Resolved that Veterans For Peace call on the U.S. House of Representatives to immediately begin impeachment proceedings against President Barack H. Obama for failure to uphold his sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic, and for his commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity, obstruction of justice and the violation of numerous national and international laws, treaties and conventions.
Amazingly, however, even after having been passed by a majority of its membership, the leadership of Veterans For Peace has, according to its own rank-and-file, done its level best to conceal the resolution and downplay the call for impeachment. In an article that has been widely circulated online, Phil Restino, the resolution’s chief proponent and a member of the Central Florida chapter of VFP, outlines how, exactly contrary to the Bush impeachment resolution has failed to promote the resolution or even make copies of it available to the public, and was pestered for over a year to make available a copy of the letter to Congress that they were required to send as a result of the resolution calling for Obama’s impeachment.

Last week, Phil Restino joined me on The Corbett Report to talk about Veterans For Peace and its leadership’s total unwillingness to pursue the impeachment of Obama.

When all of the facts are weighed, there is simply no other conclusion possible: the liberal “anti-war” left during the Bush years was never “anti-war” at all. They were anti-Republican. Unjust wars, after all, can only ever really be waged by Republican presidents, and the bombs and drones and instruments of warfare acquire magical properties under Democratic administrations where they only fall on the deserving and take the lives of the guilty.

The saddest part of all of this, of course, is that the prospect of impeachment and the chance for repudiation of the bloodthirsty American government is even further from the realm of political reality than it was under Bush. But another sad truth to fall out from this whole affair is that the left’s harshest critics were completely correct, after all: the anti-war movement was never about war after all. In the end, it turns out, the left now has the blood of Obama’s wars on their own hands.

The silver lining, if ever there was one, is that as a result of all of this there will be more and more waking up to the complete charade of party politics and realizing that a true, honest anti-war movement will have to be built from scratch, completely outside of the two-party duopoly.

Original article link here:

The Corbett Report is an independent, listener-supported alternative news source. It operates on the principle of open source intelligence and provides podcasts, interviews, articles and videos about breaking news and important issues from 9/11 Truth and false flag terror to the Big Brother police state, eugenics, geopolitics, the central banking fraud and more. The Corbett Report is edited, webmastered, written, produced and hosted by James Corbett. James Corbett has been living and working in Japan since 2004. He started The Corbett Report website in 2007 as an outlet for independent critical analysis of politics, society, history, and economics.


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

Life is more than a sliding scale that slides from left to right. By definition, people on the left want change. People on the right don't. Elitists are on the right. People who have want to keep their status are right wing. People who have little and want change are left wing.

Use of the left/right label is just a prejudicial stereotype and should not be used.

Anonymous said...

There are two lefts, just like there are two rights.

The brain dead cowardly fools who still support Democrats or Republicans make up one left and one right.

The awake honest courageous citizens that reject both parties and understand fully how they cooperate and work together to divide people.........they also make up one left and one right depending on which pack of lying snakes they supported before they woke up.

The efforts of greasy NWO swine to keep the awake honest people divided into their previous left/right camps are neverending. Inflammatory language and key phrases to incite hatred of the other side are used by the sneaky writers tasked with keeping us divided.

Inspiring articles about awake lefties and righties coming together in an understanding that 'we the people' have more in common with each other than with the 1% never seem to get written. Articles that pit one side against the other seem all too frequent........

To anger and insult an awake rightie, just lump him in with the greasy corrupt rich Republican hypocrites.
To anger and insult an awake leftie, just lump him in with elite hypocritical war loving Democrats.

Just what was the purpose of this article?

Anonymous said...

Please do not tar all liberals with the same brush; many of us DO NOT like Obama. I didn't like his endorsement of the NDAA, nor do I endorse this administration's wanting to take away our guns. Many liberals voted for Obama only because they liked Romney even less. When it comes down to it, there aren't many differences among the candidates, though and haven't been for a long time. If nothing else, Obama should be impeached for signing the NDAA, but then you'd have to throw out most of Congress as well - which would be the only way we're ever going to get any substantial change so maybe that's a good idea, not a bad one.

Anonymous said...

God Damn. Great piece.

Corp-Gov is here to stay, until it is overthrown, period.
No corrupted, authoritarian, for profit government has ever voluntarily ceded power back to the people, ever. It has to be made to happen, so until people really start standing up, armed by the 100's of thousands, zero will change. It's an awful thought, but it's fact.

Americans are being spied upon, jailed and even killed without trial, or ever being charged with a crime, while the wealthy elite are granted immunity from all laws, we are held to more of them, and in a more strict manner. No, America is doomed, until Americans decide to make things a lot worse, because insurrection will make things a lot worse, at first.

A corrupted, completely ineffectual system must be torn down first, it can't just be repaired, it goes too deep and covers all segments, government, banking, et cetera. You can't just build a decent house on top of a rotten old worm infested barn, you have to tear the barn down first.

Because of this, America will eventually collapse under the weight of its own debt, hypocrisy and hubris, never to be exposed, denounced or held accountable, because Americans will never act....... never.

Anonymous said...

What is the exit strategy to the WAR ON TERROR again? What is the time schedule again? I seemed to have missed this critical information on the main stream government media (MSGM).

Schiz-Flux said...

Using the knee-jerk reaction inducing "left/right" paradigm should be permanently dispensed with in favor of actual thinking.

Hide Behind said...

The Elitist,who are they and how many of them are there?
Where are they at today, tomorrow or the day after, and how mant stand beyween we commoners and the Elite?
How many bricks tanks and soldiers must one send back to dust even before one can attack their Estate?
Once we breach their home gates how many commoners will they employ to throw us out of there?
When one elite falls what must then be done to undo the harm they done?
What was the harm they were engaged in and to whom will we find to hell we can' t replace an Elite By putting a commoner in their place. The damn commoner will then be an elite and we will in turn guard his gate.
Isn't that what we elect. And then they appoint others to become elite.
I know; tear down all gates divide the estates give everything to 50 statesand let each become what they want and people move to the place they fit in.
Trouble is within a few years we would be attacking those elites in the next state and our own capitals.
Americans believe we are the Elites of the world so where does elitism end; Or begin for that matter?
Could it be; In the hearts of man?

Anonymous said...

Yeah---the disgusting invasion of Libya did it for me. I found most "on the left" were celebrating or didn't care too, too much. They were broadcasting an execution, children were watching, and they just sat there and made no difference. Then when I saw them trying the same thing in Syria I realized many of these people "on the left" are evil. Anyone that goes about justifying mass murder is evil.

Post a Comment