Saturday, August 31, 2013

Obama Reveals His Dictatorship

image source
Paul Craig Roberts
Activist Post

Washington preens itself on being “the world’s greatest democracy.” Washington uses the claim that it is spreading democracy as a justification for its naked aggression–a clear and unambiguous war crime–against other countries. Washington cloaks its illegality in democratic rhetoric despite the obvious fact that its wars are not a consequence of democratic decision.

Washington has used deception and lies to gain acceptance of its extra-constitutional and extra-legal wars, but Washington’s wars have all been launched outside the constitutional/democratic framework of the United States.

Obama’s war against Libya occurred without the participation of Congress. And now Obama is again revealing that the US is so far removed from democracy that he plans to attack Syria without a vote by Congress. Where is the democracy when a Caesar makes the decisions that the Constitution reserves to Congress?

Polls indicate that 80 percent of US citizens believe that a US military attack on Syria requires approval by the House and Senate. Yet, the Obama regime is purposely avoiding any such vote. The Obama regime has also ignored the letter signed by 162 members of the House of Representatives demanding to see evidence, debate it, and vote prior to any US military strike.

It is an act of treason for the US military to carry out any war orders without congressional authorization. Any military commander who violates his oath to defend the Constitution of the United States has committed high treason against the United States. If the US were truly a lawful democracy, such commanders would be subject to arrest and trial.

The fact that the executive branch and the military operate outside the Constitution and democratic process is proof that the US is not a democracy.


In yesterday’s columns I noted that Obama, his media whores, and worshiping Obamabots are overlooking considerations of critical importance. One is that military aggression is a war crime. In the past, Bush and Obama had cloaks for their war crimes, such as a “coalition of the willing,” NATO, some limited “congressional consultation” or vague resolution, or a UN resolution that is then stretched to cover the regime’s actions.

None of these things are adequate legal cover. Their worth comes from the fact that other countries and institutions besides the US executive branch is involved in the war crime. There is safety in the numbers. Charging the entire Western world with war crimes means only that the entire Western world will defend the validity of their excuse.

But this time the regime has no cover. There is no “coalition of the willing,” no UN resolution, no NATO support, and Obama has ignored both Congress and the American people. For Obama to proceed with his attack on Syria would be the action of an unaccountable dictator. He would have no cover for his war crime.

Obama’s effort to rush to war with Syria has already destroyed the credibility of the US government as a truthful, honest government. The entire world, even Washington’s most subservient puppet states, have recognized that Washington has no evidence to back its accusations. No one believes Obama or Kerry. Both have revealed themselves to the entire world as brazen liars.

This has destroyed all trust in the US government. And now Obama seems determined to prove that America has a dictator, not a democracy.

It is difficult to image a more serious blow to the US than the one Obama has delivered.
All of the important props for Washington’s propaganda, such as “the world’s greatest democracy,” have been kicked out from under what now stands revealed as a criminal enterprise.

Russia’s President Putin has openly expressed his contempt for the lies that are flowing nonstop from the mouths of Obama and Kerry. Putin called Obama’s claims “utter nonsense.” Putin said that if the Americans have any proof, “let them show it to the United Nations inspectors and the Security Council.”

In fact, the evidence that exists indicates that the chemical attack originated with the rebels and may have been an accident caused by “rebels” transporting chemical weapons given to them by the Saudis but without instruction to correct handling. The reporter, Dale Gavlak, who spoke with the rebels, who were themselves harmed by the weapons, is a Middle East expert from the University of Chicago who has reported for the Associated Press, National Public Radio, and the BBC. (Source)

For another perspective unreported by the US media, see Ambrose Evans-Pritchard’s report in the UK Telegraph that Saudi Prince Bandar, head of Saudi intelligence, attempted to bribe and intimidate Putin into abandoning Syria to the Americans. Reportedly, Bandar offered Putin a Saudi-Russian oil cartel and offered Putin protection against Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics.(Source)

As far fetched as all of this sounds to Americans, it is more plausible than anything Washington says.

Washington’s claim that the Syrian “rebels” have no access to chemical weapons is obviously false. On May 30, an Istanbul newspaper reported that Turkish police apprehended al-Nusra “rebels” with sarin gas that al-Nusra planed to use in an attack
on Adana. (Source)

Having repeatedly declared that the use of chemical weapons requires a military response from the US, what will Obama and Kerry do when it comes clear that the “rebels,” not Assad, are responsible for the chemical weapons? Will Obama and Kerry attack the “rebels”? Will Obama and Kerry attack Saudi Arabia for giving the chemical weapons to the “rebels”? Don’t hold your breath.

My Ph.D. dissertation supervisor, G. Warren Nutter, was brought into the Pentagon by Melvin Laird as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs and given the task of winding down the Vietnam War. Nutter opposed US foreign policy based on secrecy and deception. He was convinced that US foreign policy had to be transparent, consistent with the country’s principles, and carry public support. A policy based on secrecy and deception would undermine democracy and the trust of the public and foreigners in the US government.

Today there are no Warren Nutters in Washington, and there have not been such people in government for many years. As Nutter foresaw, the consequences are the lost of public confidence in government and the isolation of the US in world affairs.

Obama now stands on the verge of military aggression as isolated as Adolf Hitler when Germany attacked Poland.

This article first appeared at Paul Craig Roberts' new website Institute For Political Economy.  Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His Internet columns have attracted a worldwide following.




BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


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

11 comments:

Ed Butt said...

Obama has been pushing for US military against Assad for two years. It was always clear he would not settle for anything less that war against Syria in support of his terrorist friends in Al Qaeda.
Why is anyone surprised? In his 2008 campaign he announced that in civil conflicts he would take the side of terrorists and insurgents against legitimate governments.

Lone Ranger said...

Does any one here realize the only two countries not hooked up with the World Bank and the banking Elites is Iran... and you guessed it... Syria.

Libya was their latest acquisition after they knocked off gadaffi.

Sure, he was no saint, but he sure gave a lot of freebies and money to his people and Lybia had money in "their" bank and NO Debt. Check it out...

Take away the elites money and you take away their wars and suffering.

You have get the root to kill the weed...

Learn some real truths you would expect to find here. Check out the latest interview with Karen Hudes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Anonymous said...

I did hear him say that he "May" and "Will probably" act without congress' approval.

Anonymous said...

The war was to stop Obama's latest scandal. Wait till Egypt exposes Obama's secret $8 billion dollar deal w terrorists. Thats why Egypt arrested their own president Morsi.

1. Obama's brother Malik is the Muslim Brotherhoods money man: http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/obamas-brother-linked-to-muslim-brotherhood/

2. Obama's secret $8 billion deal using American taxpayer money: http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas-secret-8-billion-bribe-to-the-muslim-brotherhood/

3. Obama tried bribing Egypts General El-Sisi to shut him up: http://www.prisonplanet.com/report-egypts-el-sisi-refuses-to-accept-obamas-phone-call.html

4. Empire minions McCain n Graham met w the Muslim Brotherhood to make sure none of this got exposed: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raghida-dergham/mc-cain-and-grahams-visit_b_3732507.html

5. Obama fast-tracked his brother Malik's tax free foundation thru the IRS. Only took a month n made it retro for a couple yrs back. All done while the IRS is bullying teaparty applications n delaying theirs for yrs. Malik's foundation is created to funnel cash to the Obamas: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/

Debbie Hogan said...

Can the joint chief of staffs, or any part of the military, remove him?

Anonymous said...

I have noticed in the British press that a lot of people are saying "Don't get involved in a war in a foreign country that is being waged between mediaeval religious savages".
By the grace of God, the British parliament voted to not attack Assad, at least, before definitive evidence is provided for his use of chemical weapons. For that, they will need to wait a very long time. And also for that, I am eternally grateful.
But, I watched a 38-minute video interview between Assad and two Turkish journalists recently.
Assad spoke, but only in response to the questions, freely, in a measured and considered way, and without any recourse to a teleprompter. He is clearly a highly intelligent and moral man, and has a view of realpolitik which is very similar, probably, to most of those people who visit this website. He would, I assure you, be an infinitely better President of the United States than your own man, and obviously, his nationality would be no bar to him assuming that office.
I support him, and his nation, wholeheartedly. I also support the ordinary people of the US too, and pray that they can shake this wickedness off their shoulders. It has been going on now for far too long. Perhaps this is the moment of truth, and the military will realise what they are doing by obeying the orders of a criminal psychopath and his controllers, who are dual-passport holders from another nation entirely from your own.

Anonymous said...

The United States is not a democracy. It is a republic. The founders considered democracy "The most vile form of government."

Gary orGibby said...

Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack --

http://therebel.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=685264:rebels-admit-responsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack&catid=108:liberty&Itemid=1220&acm=1478_678&hitcount=0

Cal said...

"Washington preens itself on being “the world’s greatest democracy.”

First, get it right, America is not now, nor has she EVER been a "democracy". That is progressive programming.

The USA is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. (If I could bold, and underline it I would).

There is a very good reason that our Pledge of Allegiance refers to our country as a Republic, and there is a very good reason that our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution do not even mentioned the word "democracy". Daneen Peterson

In a Republic, the sovereignty resides with the people of the nation themselves. One may act on his own or through his representatives when he chooses to solve a problem.

The Constitution DEFINES the federal government, assigns duties to the three branches, LIMITS what the federal government is allowed to do, lists the natural Rights of the people that the federal government nor the state governmentss are allowed to touch. The difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government, that is the government while people are elected to carry out tghe duties assigned to each branch - serve within the fed gov. It also spells out how the government is structured, creating checks on its power and balancing that LIMITED power between the different branches.

EACH branch of the fed gov is limited to dealing mostly with foreign affairs and seeing to it that the states trade equally and fairly with each other - that was a problem back then. It leaves the rest of governing to the states republican form of gov created by the people of each state, and to the people themselves to handle.

Anonymous said...

Government is the most vile form of governmnt.

Anonymous said...

Obama is a Muslim extremist and part of the Muslim Brotherhood, willing to lie, hate and murder because nonMuslims are expendable heretics. Obama is committed to Sharia law, with him at its helm. Obama and his ilk will stop at nothing to destroy any social order not under the absurd control of religious extremists. S0, in this way, the Central Bankers have found their man. Once Obama has handed them the Middle East on a silver platter at thye expense of American soldiers and innocent civilians, they will simply take Obama out. Who in their right mind would fund and provide unlimited weapons to terrorists groups? The answer is Obama, and now Kerry. Get the US out of Syria. Americans oppose these murderous plans. For two years, innocent Syrians have died at the hands of US led, funded and trained terrorist groups. Impeach Obama now.

Post a Comment