printable version PDF version

Elites Ready to Sacrifice Obama to International Justice [UPDATE]
by sam Saturday, Aug 31 2013, 12:23pm
international / prose / post

The first thing puppet politicians should learn is that they are entirely EXPENDABLE -- they are bought and owned commodities of the ruling Plutocracy, fact. So it is with a sense of great joy that we/the world now witness criminal, mass murdering Plutocrats, which own the USA, offering one of their expendable political puppets for sacrifice. 'Go it alone,' we can almost hear them ORDER, 'we will ensure that nobody gets you in the USA;' well, no-one can ensure any such thing as a bullet easily proves -- and we may well wonder who is pulling the trigger this time!

Expendable Lackey

Yep, it's almost certain that 'second choice,' black puppet Obama will ignore International law and convention, NATO and his own Congress and go it alone in Syria.

This is a precedent, as the entire illegality of an attack on Syria could now be blamed on one man -- and what makes it particularly excruciating for Obama is that he's a trained lawyer and cannot ignore the 'pain!

If nothing else, forcing Obama to go it alone indicates a new level of desperation the ruling plutocracy has reached.

It's also ironic that Obama is about to grant complete immunity from prosecution to war criminals Bush and Co., while presenting himself as a very vulnerable target for future war crimes prosecutions, how sweet it is!

Obama's act of granting immunity to known war criminals also constitutes a crime -- Obama will soon discover that no-one is really above the LAW, though his masters are assuring him that he is. Obama should simply invite ruling plutocrats to show their faces and take DIRECT responsibility for their actions, policies and CRIMES -- hiding behind lackeys and puppet politicians befits the COWARDLY vile scum that minority ruling elites really are!

However, gutless lackeys are kept in tight control by the ruling plutocracy with threats to family and personal safety. Comedian Bill Hicks once explained how new presidents are briefed (see video below).

The real news is that ALL unrepresentative, lackey politicians could now be sacrificed in the interests of the elite agenda and its timetable.

Imagine though, Obama delivering one of his press releases and dropping the approved script and (as president) exposing the vile plutocrats he serves.

Report from the SMH follows:

Strike on Syria: Obama willing to go it alone
by Mark Landler

US President Barack Obama is prepared to move ahead with a limited military strike on Syria, administration officials have said, despite a stinging rejection of such action on Thursday by America's stalwart ally Britain and mounting questions from Congress.

The rejection by Britain's Parliament was a heavy blow to Prime Minister David Cameron, who had pledged his support to Mr Obama and called on MPs to endorse Britain's involvement in a brief operation to punish the government of President Bashar al-Assad for apparently launching a deadly chemical weapons attack last week that killed hundreds.

The vote was also a setback for Mr Obama, who, having given up hope of getting UN Security Council authorisation for the strike, is struggling to assemble a coalition of allies against Syria.

But administration officials made clear that the eroding support would not deter Mr Obama in deciding to go ahead.

Pentagon officials said the US Navy had moved a fifth destroyer into the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Each ship carries dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles that would probably be the centrepiece of any attack on Syria.

Syria's most powerful ally, Russia, was reported to be sending its own warships into the eastern Mediterranean in coming days. However, Reuters reported Russia denied it was strengthening its naval presence in the region because of preparations by Western governments for military action against Syria.

White House officials said, even before the British parliamentary vote, Mr Obama decided there was no way he could overcome objections by Russia to any resolution in the Security Council.

Although administration officials cautioned that Mr Obama had not made a final decision, all indications suggest that a strike could occur soon after UN investigators charged with scrutinising the August 21 attack leave the country. They are scheduled to depart Damascus on Saturday.

Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary-General, cut short a European trip and rushed home on Thursday to prepare for a briefing by his team of chemical weapons inspectors. He implored Mr Obama to refrain from the threatened strike and to allow UN procedures to take their course, seemingly to little effect.

The White House presented its case for military action to congressional leaders on Thursday evening, trying to head off growing pressure from Democrats and Republicans to provide more information about the administration's military planning and seeking congressional approval for any action.

In a conference call with Republicans and Democrats, top officials from the State Department, the Pentagon and the nation's intelligence agencies asserted that the evidence was clear that Mr Assad's forces had carried out the attack, according to officials who were briefed.

While the intelligence does not tie Mr Assad directly to the attack, these officials said, the administration said the United States had both the evidence and legal justification to carry out a strike aimed at deterring the Syrian leader from using such weapons again.

A critical piece of the intelligence, officials said, is an intercepted telephone call between Syrian military officials, one of whom seems to suggest that the chemical weapons attack was more devastating than was intended. ''It sounds like he thinks this was a small operation that got out of control,'' one intelligence official said.

But Republican politicians said White House officials dismissed suggestions that the scale of the attack was a miscalculation, indicating that the officials believe Syria intended to inflict the widespread damage.

''I'm comfortable that the things the president told Assad not to do, he did,'' said Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who took part with seven other Republican senators in a separate briefing by the White House chief of staff, Denis McDonough.

Before the conference call, however, some prominent politicians expressed anger that the White House was planning a strike without significant consultations with Congress.

''When we take what is a very difficult decision, you have to have buy-in by members and buy-in by the public,'' Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Thursday on MSNBC. ''I think both of those are critically important and, right now, none of that has happened.''

Congressman Eliot Engel of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, said after the telephone briefing that administration officials ''had no doubt that chemical weapons were used by Assad and his people''.

After the 90-minute conference call, some senior politicians were not persuaded that the Obama administration had made its case for military action in Syria. Republican Congressman Howard ''Buck'' McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said Obama needed to make a forceful case to convince both Congress and a ''war weary'' country. ''If he doesn't, I think he could have a real problem with the Congress and the American public,'' he said. ''He's got a big sell.''

Several officials said the intelligence dossier about the attack also includes evidence of Syrian military units moving chemical munitions into place before the attack was carried out.

Mr Obama, officials said, is basing his case for action both on safeguarding international standards against the use of chemical weapons and on the threat to America's national interest. That threat, they said, is both to allies in the region, like Turkey, Jordan and Israel, and to the United States itself, if Syria's weapons were to fall into the wrong hands or if other leaders were to take US inaction as an invitation to use unconventional weapons.

Mr Obama's rationale for a strike creates a parallel dilemma to the one that President George W. Bush confronted 10 years ago, when he decided to enter into a far broader war with nearly 150,000 US troops in Iraq without seeking an authorising resolution in the United Nations.

The Obama administration says that case differs sharply from its objectives in Syria. In Iraq, Mr Bush was explicitly seeking regime change. In this case, White House officials argue, Mr Obama is trying to enforce an international ban on chemical weapons and seeking to prevent their use in Syria, or against US allies.

''We have been trying to get the UN Security Council to be more assertive on Syria even before this incident,'' said Benjamin Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications.

''The problem is that the Russians won't vote for any accountability.''

© 2013 Fairfax Media

http://tinyurl.com/koaxbep