Obama v Khadafi: If you see a difference, You lost the battle of the hypocrites.

Obama spoke to the UN yesterday calling for a ‘new era of engagement.’ Like all Obama speeches, it sounds good but means little. Here’s what the ‘New Era’ has meant in America, the country he has the power to change.

-excused CIA operatives from prosecution for violations of the torture conventions signed by the US. Went even further by offering the torturers legal support in case of international prosecution.
-refused to prosecute those higher up the chain of command for drafting illegal interrogation methods.
-refused to prosecute or even investigate constitutional violations such as illegal wiretapping, falsification of evidence and obstruction of justice in Department of Justice or CIA
-continues to violate habeus corpus, holding prisoners without charges.
-continued illegal Iraq war
-escalated Afghan War
-when Pakistan refused US troops movements, Obama authorizes illegal predator drone attacks within Pakistan. Since Jan 2009, 152 civilians in Pakistan have been killed. Western press remains mute.
-funnels hundreds of millions of dollars to Honduran coup while State Department claims to have suspended minor funding. American pattern of supporting non-left coups in Latin American continues while it uses democracy as a justification for invading other countries.

Obama may not speak like the condescending retard George Bush, but actions speak louder than words. Claiming you want to “look forward not backwards” as Obama says, is a sugar coated way of consenting to injustice. George Bush acted as though the application of law was discretionary. It appears that Obama is of the same mind. So much for the New Era.

In a classic case of ‘feel fair and talk foul’ and ‘talk fair and feel fouler’ as Tolkein wrote, I actually found it interesting comparing the speeches of Obama and Khadafi. Khadafi was universally ridiculed in the press for his rambling 90 minute oration. Laughing at him though, made it easier not to answer some of his angry questions. Why if the UN is always talking of democracy, is the UN itself not a democracy? He refers of course to the only limb of the UN with power, the security council which excludes 185 of the 192 member nations! He also questioned Western characterization of Islam as being anti semitic when it was Western Europe that tried to exterminate the Jews. When Europe was cleansing itself of Jews, Arab nations were providing them with refuge. Khadafi went on to champion the causes of the developing world.
This may seem hypocritical considering Khadafi was responsible for state sponsored terror. I just don’t see a difference between the Lybian version and the American version. Compared to his own actions, Obama’s speech was just as hypocritical.

“Handsome is as handsome does” says the Gaffer.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Obama v Khadafi: If you see a difference, You lost the battle of the hypocrites.

  1. rainswept says:

    I don't even care for his speaking… as your post outlines, his complete lack of moral authority is mingling nicely with his lack of experience (on and off paper) to produce a steaming void of credibility.

  2. Much as I detest Harper, he had the air of a Quester on this one. Hanging out at the coffee shop instead of attending class. Nice.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s