One Helluva Choice

[Flanders]

Let me first dispose of one piece of good news coming out of Syria:

. . . U.N. weapon inspectors in Syria were fired upon by snipers as they attempted to investigate the site of the Aug. 21 attack.

When it comes to the problem of the United Nations I’m partial to the sniper solution.

Next, let me remind everyone that it is a CIVIL WAR in Syria. The question Americans should be asking is this: Why are Democrats so quick to interfere in a civil war when they never showed any desire to defend this country against Islamic fundamentalists, or Communist expansion by military force? Please don’t answer with the Administration’s current line of media horse manure “Bashar Assad gassed his own people.” Even if it’s true, so did the late Saddam Hussein. Put it in perspective this way: If the Democrats had their druthers Saddam would still be in power.

I said “Even if it’s true. . . ” for a reason. Some doubt is emerging that Assad did the gassing:

. . . reliable Middle Eastern sources say they have evidence the culprits actually were the rebel forces trying to take over the government.

Evidence: Syria gas attack work of U.S. allies
Contrary evidence arises as U.S. considers punishing Assad regime
Published: 7 hours ago
JEROME R. CORSI

Evidence: Syria gas attack work of U.S. allies

Assuming Assad is the villain there is no justification for Americans choosing sides in a civil war. Anybody saying otherwise should tell us what Democrats would be saying if all of the European powers entered the American Civil War on the side of the Confederacy? That’s not an unfair comparison because the basic prohibition against interfering in a civil war is timeless.

NOTE: America chose sides in WWI when it was not threatened and look how that turned out. The world got the Soviet Union and WWII.

Where is Hillary Clinton when you need her?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka0_nz53CcM&feature=player_embedded]Hillary Clinton at Benghazi Hearing: 'What Difference, Does It Make?' - YouTube[/ame]​

Americans were killed by enemy troops in Benghazi. Clinton said it must never happen again. Let’s put that one aside since the first step should have been punishing the enemy. That did not happen. So what is it Democrats do not want to happen again in Syria? No more gas attacks? No more civil war. No more killing? If it’s the latter then Democrats better start working on changing human nature. Failing at that, it always comes down to the question of how many Muslims are you willing to kill in Damascus to help the Muslims you’re for? It’s the same in the Sudan. How many Muslims are you willing to kill in Khartoum in order to help Muslims in Darfur?

Or is choosing sides in a civil war nothing more than empowering the United Nations? At least that one makes sense even if it is a long-term disaster.

Hatred of the UN aside, here’s the choice I hope Congress debates. Believe an administration that never told the truth about anything, or believe Bashar Assad whose military, and his style of governing, are not threats to Americans. I’ll go with Assad for the time being. More so when moral obscenities like John Kerry speak for the Administration.

Finally, the Clintons chose sides in the Balkans by killing Serbian Christians. I’m not sure how that relates to Syria or Coptic Christians being killed in the Muslim world. My best guess tells me if Coptic Christians want immediate help they’ll have to gas a few hundred volunteers. If Coptic Christians are not in a hurry they could get in line behind the victims that survive whenever America interferes in a civil war —— think Serbian Christians:

U.S. offers token protection for Serbian Christians
Plan suggests more public spaces for inter-ethnic mingling
Published: 2 days ago
STEVE PEACOCK

U.S. offers token protection for Serbian Christians

 

[Flanders]

I’ve listened to the talking heads and read dozens of articles about Syria. The most important factor is missing in everything I’ve heard and read. That factor is the United Nations. Two journalists I always find to be right on the money offer interpretations about Syria. Everything they say is insightful —— except for one thing. Both omit the evil hand of the United Nations. James Lewis does not mention the UN:

August 27, 2013
Is Iran behind the Syria gas atrocity?
By James Lewis

Articles: Is Iran behind the Syria gas atrocity?

Doug Hagmann approaches the Syrian Affair from a different direction; nevertheless, he only mentions the UN in passing:

As I wrote in that article published on October 8, 2012, “All that is needed now is for a dutiful media to present one image, a video, or some other proof that Assad or someone else is using, or has their hands on, unconventional weapons. This will provide the necessary pretext for the U.S. and NATO, to intervene and ramp up the war against Assad. The UN will assist, and the red line will then have been crossed.” That will be the trigger event for U.S. involvement, and the escalation into a global conflict.

Hagmann is close to the truth but he does not get a cigar:

“. . . some of the proceeds from the lucrative opium trade will find its way back to US banks which will launder the money in order to help fund Unocal in the purposed pipe building project. Win Win.”

Intelligence insider: Syria, World War III & the hidden objective
By Doug Hagmann (Bio and Archives) Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Intelligence insider: Syria, World War III & the hidden objective

I don’t dispute the connection between the opium trade and bankers, but funding a pipeline is not the objective. This must be the starting point for understanding every decision the federal government makes:

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”

“It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries." David Rockefeller, Bilderberg meeting 1991

BBC's Disinfo Piece: "Bilderberg mystery: Why do people believe in cabals?" - The Vigilant Citizen

Here’s an interesting question. Why are the people who are marching Americans towards a world government the very same people who are behind the democracy movement? Marx and Lenin said this:

Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx (1818 - 1883)

The goal of socialism is communism. Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924)

Agreeing with Marx and Lenin is a bummer; so I better add this: The democracy movement tells us that the people getting the shaft are not as sophisticated as David Rockefeller would have everyone believe.

The second front

Unratified UN treaties sitting on the shelf, Agenda 21, the global warming hoax enforced by the EPA, and so on have been preparing Americans for UN control on the domestic front.

One major foreign policy coup on behalf of the UN will bring a “. . . supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers. . .” a giant step closer to achieving complete domination.

Paralysis by incomplete analysis

No analysis of Syria, or any aspect of American foreign policy, can get to the truth unless the United Nations plays the starring role. To be more precise no analysis can be accurate unless the powerful elitists driving America toward a one government world are placed in the driver’s seat. Assigning a minor role to the UN is where the best political minds go astray —— some deliberately, some unintentionally.

Parenthetically, one common theme is emerging among the Administration’s critics: Barack Taqiyya is being blamed for a failed foreign policy. Quite the opposite is true. From a global government perspective Barack Taqiyya is a howling success. He got to implement a large slice of his hatred for America, for Christians, and for the white race at the same time he gave the global government crowd what they want.
The only way you can call Taqiyya’s foreign policy a failure is to deny this: It’s the federal government against the American people not the federal government defending Americans against foreign enemies. Everything the federal government does is an attack on the American people. Greaseproof: Congress confirming Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Samantha Power, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, and Suzy Five Shows —— UN-lovers all —— is a success story with a happy ending in Syria. I cannot cite a previous president who put so many overtly UN traitors in key positions. Clinton probably came the closest, but his UN-loving traitors at least tried to maintain the illusion of loyalty to their country. Taqiyya’s bunch, including Hillary Clinton, make no effort to hide their disloyalty.

One point to remember if you believe Syria needs a comeuppance. America’s independence is gone along with the lost sovereignty of every other nation.

Let me close with the definitions of elite and elitist. You decide which one applies to bankers and their Socialist professors.

elite or élite (noun)
plural elite or elites

1. a. A group or class of persons or a member of such a group or class, enjoying superior intellectual, social, or economic status: “In addition to notions of social equality there was much emphasis on the role of elites and of heroes within them” (Times Literary Supplement). b. The best or most skilled members of a group: the football team's elite.

2. A size of type on a typewriter, equal to 12 characters per linear inch.

elite (adjective)

XXXXX​

elitist (adjective & noun)

1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.

2. a. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. b. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

 

[Flanders]

Now I know America should NOT get involved in Syria’s civil war:

Biden: No doubt Syrian regime used chem weapons

Biden has never been right about anything. In addition, he’s the guy who originally took credit for Clinton’s Balkan Adventures; that is killing Christians in the former Yugoslavia. Now, he wants to kill Muslims in Syria. Maybe that lying piece of garbage should take at look his own bloodlust before calling for more killing.

Incidentally, nuclear weapons proliferation was not nipped in the bud when America had a monopoly on WMD and the technology because American traitors said if everybody had atomic bombs nobody would use them. Saying nobody should have chemical weapons is 68 years too late. After all, it is absurd to say that everybody should have chemical weapons but nobody should use them —— which is exactly what the Administration is saying.

 

[Flanders]

Best political cartoon so far:

 

[Flanders]

Why would anybody believe this guy or his boss:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZzXzoZYen8&feature=player_embedded]Syria: US Secretary of State makes case for limited military action in Syria - YouTube[/ame]​

There is so much irony in John Kerry being secretary of state you have to believe the gods are having some fun with Americans. First there was traitor Kerry condemning traitor Edward Snowden. See this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/300584-will-the-real-edward-snowden-please-drop-dead.html

Now, Kerry is advocating killing Syrians in their civil war. The worst of that bum is his concern for Syrian children. He even has an exact number: 426. I guess he doesn’t know how many children his Communist pals killed in SE Asia because it was impossible to arrive at a total. No matter. He never shed a tear for the victims of Communism.

Let’s look at four of the bizarre comments he made earlier today:

. . . to talk with the citizens who have entrusted all of us in the administration and the Congress with responsibility for their security.

Were it up to me, I would not entrust this nation’s security to that piece of garbage under any circumstance. Ditto everybody in this administration.

. . . this morning's release of our government's unclassified estimate of what took place in Syria is so important. Its findings are as clear as they are compelling.

No they aren’t. Your emotional horror stories are not proof. With the exception of chemical WMD your “proof” is a duplicate of the lies you told about American soldiers committing atrocities in Vietnam.

I'm not asking you to take my word for it.

Don’t sweat it, John. Most Americans won’t take your word for anything.

So now that we know what we know, the question we must all be asking is what we will do. Let me emphasize President Obama, we in the United States, we believe in the United Nations.

That the biggest lie of all. Scum like Barack Taqiyya and John Kerry do not speak for the American people. They speak for the government. The only Americans who believe in the United Nations are traitors. If you doubt it ask everyone you know if they want to surrender America’s independence to the UN. Don’t be misled by the phoney compassion scum like Kerry attach to the United Nations.

NOTE: The United Nations that traitors love so much is responsible for tens of millions of deaths caused by malaria since the unnecessary ban on DDT went into effect.

There is only one question each American must ask of themselves. Do I want to give any part of my country’s sovereignty to the United Nations?

Finally, Kerry made it obvious that Syria is another attempt to turn the US military into a universal police force. Most of the people that ordered Christians killed in Serbia and Kosova have their filthy hands all over Syria. Those who were not around for Clinton’s Balkan Adventure believe in the concept of turning the US military into the UN’s goon squad. Make a list of the decision makers and advisors in Barack Taqiyya’s administration and you can easily separate them into 2 groups —— there before Serbia —— got there after Serbia. That’s the only difference between them.

Here’s the link to a complete transcript of Kerry’s misdirection:

Read Secretary of State Kerry's full speech condemning Syria attack - World News

 

[Flanders]

From #2 permalink

Parenthetically, one common theme is emerging among the Administration’s critics: Barack Taqiyya is being blamed for a failed foreign policy. Quite the opposite is true. From a global government perspective Barack Taqiyya is a howling success. He got to implement a large slice of his hatred for America, for Christians, and for the white race at the same time he gave the global government crowd what they want.

The only way you can call Taqiyya’s foreign policy a failure is to deny this: It’s the federal government against the American people not the federal government defending Americans against foreign enemies. Everything the federal government does is an attack on the American people. Greaseproof: Congress confirming Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Samantha Power, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, and Suzy Five Shows —— UN-lovers all —— is a success story with a happy ending in Syria. I cannot cite a previous president who put so many overtly UN traitors in key positions. Clinton probably came the closest, but his UN-loving traitors at least tried to maintain the illusion of loyalty to their country. Taqiyya’s bunch, including Hillary Clinton, make no effort to hide their disloyalty.

Kelly Oconnell over at Canada Free Press gives a much more detailed analysis of Taqiyya’s “successes”:

Obama has now been officially categorized as a failed president of foreign policy. Perhaps it’s now only a matter of time before his transparent ineptness is blamed for America’s domestic debacle of the last 5 years. But what if there were a different interpretation of Barack, his values and decision making?

Consider an entirely contrary scenario—that Obama is using his power and influence to repeatedly create confusion, chaos and decline—all the while playing himself off as progressively—either a stunningly astute political magi, an idealistic genius of a professor, or now a bumbling nincompoop of a leader approximating Barney Fife in the Oval Office. Yet, all the while underneath a glowering and highly committed Marxist revolutionary. Solipsism is, by the way, the sense that only one person’s opinion exists, that only one way of seeing things matters. It is malignant monomania—the default worldview of the tyrant.

XXXXX​

What if Barrack does not care about public opinion regarding his actions? That would help explain his hapless downsizing of America’s reputation and influence in the world. Such obvious and public buffoonery begs the question—What if Obama has different goals and values than most Americans would assume about a sitting president?

We assume that any US president would profoundly value his reputation, both domestic and abroad. But what if Barack values neither when placed next to his goals? For in dithering over the US position on Syria, after badly damaging American and global interests in his hare-brained Muslim Spring support of Islamic religious radicals, Obama has greatly aided world chaos. In adding to global unrest, Barack can only help assemble the argument for creating the bulwark of a coming world-order to help tamp down wars and rumors of wars.

The Dark Solipsism of Barack: Why a “Leadership” Vacuum May Not Bother Him at All
By Kelly OConnell Sunday, September 15, 2013

The Dark Solipsism of Barack: Why a ?Leadership? Vacuum May Not Bother Him at All

There’s a lot more in the article warning that Barack Taqiyya must be judged for what he is rather than judged for those attributes Americans take for granted in their presidents.