The Old Oak.Info's Blogsite: Libya

Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts

Thursday, June 16, 2011

WTF: Rep. Pelosi Says Obama Doesn't Need Congress' Authority To Attack Libya

Friday, April 15, 2011

Video- Ex-CIA officer: Obama fools himself, Muslims see US bombing Libya

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Video- 'Depleted uranium's toxic legacy to poison Libya for 40 years'

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Video- NATO Offers No Apology for Airstrike on Rebel Tanks

C. J. CHIVERS and KAREEM FAHIM
NY Times
April 8, 2011

ZUEITINA, Libya — NATO said on Friday that it would not apologize for the killing of at least four people in what Libyan rebels said was “likely” a mistaken attack on them by allied warplanes in the east of the country — the second case of friendly-fire deaths in a week.

The commander of the rebel army fighting to oust Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi said on Thursday that the target of what he called “a fierce attack” from the air was a column of tanks deployed to the front lines by the insurgents for the first time.

“It is likely it is NATO by mistake,” the commander, Gen. Abdul Fattah Younes, said, adding that the rebels had notified NATO well in advance that the tanks were headed to the battlefield.

But, at a news conference in Naples, where the alliance has its operational headquarters, Rear Adm. Russell Harding, the deputy commander of the NATO operation, said the alliance had not been informed that the rebels were using tanks at the time the attack took place. The military movements in the area where the attack took place were “very fluid” at the time, he said, according to news reports, with vehicles going backward and forward.

Full article here

Videos- Obama Successfully Demobilized the Anti-war Movement

Kurt Nimmo
Prisonplanet.com
April 8, 2011

It is more evidence the antiwar movement is largely a left-vs-right distraction. A new studyby U-M’s Michael Heaney and colleague Fabio Rojas of Indiana University shows that the antiwar movement in the United States demobilized as Democrats took over Congress and the White House.

A small, dedicated core of people protest against Obama’s third war.

“As president, Obama has maintained the occupation of Iraq and escalated the war in Afghanistan,” said Heaney. “The antiwar movement should have been furious at Obama’s ‘betrayal’ and reinvigorated its protest activity.”

“Instead, attendance at antiwar rallies declined precipitously and financial resources available to the movement have dissipated. The election of Obama appeared to be a demobilizing force on the antiwar movement, even in the face of his pro-war decisions.”

“Since Democrats are more numerous in the population at large than are members of third parties, the withdrawal of Democrats from the movement in 2009 appears to be a significant explanation for the falling size of antiwar protests,” Heaney said. “Thus, we have identified the kernel of the linkage between Democratic partisanship and the demobilization of the antiwar movement.”

“Overall, our results convincingly demonstrate a strong relationship between partisanship and the dynamics of the antiwar movement. While Obama’s election was heralded as a victory for the antiwar movement, Obama’s election, in fact, thwarted the ability of the movement to achieve critical mass.”

Democrats and other liberal supporters of the establishment are not opposed to mass murder and wanton slaughter by the state – they merely oppose it when Republicans do it. Opposition is a partisan formality.

A corporate media poll conducted in late March on Obama’s handling of the unconstitutional attack on Libya shows that two-thirds of Democrat respondents support violating international law and pummeling the oil-rich north African country with Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Congress Democrats often howled about “Bush’s Wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan, but supported them – including the mass murder of 1.5 million Iraqis, a war criminal of immense proportion – by continuing to fund them. The number of anti-war Democrats in Congress who worked to defund the illegal occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq was miniscule.

Obama duped the so-called anti-war faction of his party during the election. He said he’d bring home the troops and close down Gitmo. During the primaries, he tried to make Hillary Clinton look like the war candidate.

Once elected as savior, Obama not only continued Bush’s war policies – in fact the war policies of the global elite – but expanded them. Troops remain in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Pentagon and the CIA stepped up the terror campaign in Pakistan. Gitmo remains open.

History repeats itself. In 1999, then president Clinton attacked Yugoslavia. Democrats and liberals cheered him on. Congress was silent. Only four Democrats objected. In the House, there was only one, Barbara Lee of California. In the Senate, just three – Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Fritz Hollings of South Carolina, and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico.

Both Republicans and Democrats love mass murder and military conquest. War is the health of the state, declared Randolph Bourne as the First World War unfolded. The Great War extracted a great toll – 37 million casualties. London and Wall Street bankers cooked up that devastating war and every one since, including the one now expanding in Libya as a U.S. general hints the government will soon send in ground troops and thus initiate a third war in the Arab and Muslim Middle East.

Democrats are so enthusiastic about the murder campaign in Libya, they didn’t even bother to vote on it, not that Obama gave them a chance – like Bush before him, he used the unchecked power of a unitary presidency to attack the African country. “He has proceeded in a way that is cautions and thoughtful,” said a proud Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat. “He has put the ducks in a row before he decided the United States should take the lead for a short period of time to do what only we could do.”

Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich is alone in the wilderness. He said Obama’s unconstitutional attack “is an act of war” and an impeachable offense. “The president made statements which attempt to minimize U.S. action, but U.S. planes may drop U.S. bombs and U.S. missiles may be involved in striking another sovereign nation. War from the air is still war,” he said in a lengthy speech on the House floor, a speech mostly ignored by fellow Democrats.

“It is hard to imagine that Congress, during the current contentious debate over deficits and budget cutting, would agree to plunge America into still another war, especially since America will spend trillions in total for the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and incursions into Pakistan,” he said.

Really, it is not hard to imagine at all. Democrats and Republicans do the bidding of the global elite and the global bankster elite not only want war in the Middle East, they want the enslaving debt that invariably comes with it.

In 2003, as he prepared to attack Iraq, Bush dismissed the antiwar movement as a focus group. Democrats are not so crude. Instead, they deem their war “humanitarian,” as a previous war criminal, Bill Clinton, did as he bombed the former Yugoslavia with depleted uranium, in effect launching a nuclear war against that small country.

Friday, April 8, 2011

Video- Why Is NATO Really In Libya?

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Rand Paul criticizes Senate for not debating Libyan action

James R. Carroll
Courier-Journal.com
April 6, 2011

After scolding the Senate for failing to debate U.S. military action in Libya, Sen. Rand Paul was rebuffed Tuesday in challenging the president’s authority to act unilaterally on war matters.

“There is no excuse for the Senate not to vote on going to war before we go to war,” the Kentucky freshman Republican said in remarks on the Senate floor.
Paul has been highly critical of President Barack Obama’s decision last month to use U.S. warplanes as part of an allied operation enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya and assisting Libyan rebels.

Read entire article

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Video- Rangel Knocks Obama Over Libya Policy on Freedom Watch

Videos- Former CIA officer blows lid off libya fraud live on CNN

This Is What Happens When Establishment Control Of The Media Cracks For A Moment

The American Dream
April 4, 2011

Every once in a while, establishment control of the mainstream media cracks for a moment. In an effort to achieve higher ratings, mainstream news programs will invite guests on that promise to be “interesting”, but then they will say something that is not part of the script and the entire system will go into a state of chaos for a moment. One example of this happened recently when two CNN “infobabes” interviewed former CIA officer Michael Scheuer about the situation on the ground in Libya. They asked Scheuer some questions regarding the role of the CIA in Libya, but the interview rapidly moved in some directions that the “infobabes” were not anticipating. Instead of sticking to the “Republican” or the “Democrat” script, Scheuer ripped both parties and he detailed many of the reasons why we should have never gone into Libya at all.

The “infobabes” grew increasingly uncomfortable as Scheuer described how large numbers of the resistance fighters in Libya have fought against U.S. troops in the Balkans, in Afghanistan and in Iraq. They did not seem pleased at all when Scheuer declared that the civil war in Libya is “none of our business” and that to the rest of the world this conflict looks like “Americans killing Muslims for oil” all over again.

The funniest part of the interview was when Scheuer accused one of the “infobabes” of “carrying the water for Mr. Obama”. After that statement, the female anchor that Scheuer was addressing was visibly flustered and quickly went to a commercial.

Video of this CNN interview with Michael Scheuer is posted below. This is a video that should be shared with everyone you know….

Wasn’t that hilarious?

When a big time establishment news network such as CNN goes “off script” it can be a beautiful thing to watch.

Of course Scheuer was exactly right. We never should have gotten involved in the civil war in Libya. It was none of our business. When the rebels picked up arms and started shooting at government forces, they should not have been surprised when Gadhafi’s forces started shooting back.

Over the past few decades, there have been some very real genocides happening all over Africa, but the U.S. never seemed to care about any of those.

But now the mainstream media has been trying really hard to spin the civil war in Libya into a “great humanitarian crisis”.

Well, that might fool some of the American people, but as Scheuer aptly pointed out, the rest of the world sees this as just another U.S. war in the Middle East for oil (and banking).

But instead of getting a balanced view of the war in Libya, most of the time the corporate media has focused on an endless parade of establishment Republicans and establishment Democrats that fully endorse the war. Of course the Republicans all try to score some political points by questioning how Obama is going about doing things, but in the end most Republicans and most Democrats are fully on board with what is going on in Libya.

Nearly everyone in the mainstream media seems to be fully on board with this war as well.

Why?

Well, because virtually all of the major media outlets are owned by the establishment, and the establishment wants this war.

Have you ever noticed that the news seems to have the same “flavor” no matter what channel you turn to?

There is a very good reason for that.

In an article that I previously authoried entitled “Who Owns The Media?“, I explained that six incredibly dominant corporations control most of the news that we see today….

Back in 1983, approximately 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the United States. Today, ownership of the news media has been concentrated in the hands of just six incredibly powerful media corporations. These corporate behemoths control most of what we watch, hear and read every single day. They own television networks, cable channels, movie studios, newspapers, magazines, publishing houses, music labels and even many of our favorite websites. Sadly, most Americans don’t even stop to think about who is feeding them the endless hours of news and entertainment that they constantly ingest. Most Americans don’t really seem to care about who owns the media. But they should. The truth is that each of us isdeeply influenced by the messages that are constantly being pounded into our heads by the mainstream media. The average American watches 153 hours of television a month. In fact, most Americans begin to feel physically uncomfortable if they go too long without watching or listening to something. Sadly, most Americans have become absolutely addicted to news and entertainment and the ownership of all that news and entertainment that we crave is being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands each year.
The six corporations that collectively control U.S. media today are Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., CBS Corporation and NBC Universal. Together, the “big six” absolutely dominate news and entertainment in the United States.

Yes, there are always some minor differences in news broadcasts, and in recent years we have seen outlets such as Fox News attempt to become “the establishment Republican news” and outlets such as MSNBC attempt to become “the establishment Democrat news”, but at the end of the day the kind of news that we get from all of them is pretty much the same.

But sometimes there are moments when establishment control of the news crumbles for just a moment.

Another example of this happened recently when Donald Trump made an appearance on The View. Not that Donald Trump is a huge “rebel”, but apparently he has not gotten the message that you are not supposed to question Barack Obama’s birth certificate on television.

The following is video footage of Trump’s absolutely chaotic recent appearance on The View….

In the United States today, if you want to get into college or if you want to apply for a good job usually you have to give a great deal of information about your background and produce a whole host of documentation about your past.

For many jobs, applicants actually must be willing to submit to a very thorough formal background check.

Whatever you may think about Obama, you have to admit that what he has been able to accomplish is rather extraordinary. He applied for the most important job in the world, and yet he kept vast sections of his background a complete and total secret. He did not produce his birth certificate, he did not produce his Columbia University transcript (or much information at all regarding his educational background), there are quite a few years of his life that really can’t be accounted for at all and there are very serious questions about his Social Security number.

Yet in spite of all that he convinced the American people to make him the president of the United States.
That has got to make Barack Obama one of the greatest con men in U.S. history.

Hopefully in the future a law will be passed or the American people will demand that all politicians disclose at least the most basic information about their backgrounds.

For Obama to be able to get this far while keeping vast portions of his background a complete and total secret is absolutely mind blowing.

In any event, it has been refreshing to see some “cracks” appear in the control of the mainstream news lately.

Whether it is the war in Libya or whether it is Barack Obama’s background, the truth is that we should all be free to ask the important questions.

Our founding fathers believed very strongly in freedom of speech for a reason. Free speech shines light in dark places and it holds people accountable. Free speech protects our freedoms and it keeps tyranny at bay.

Free speech is very precious and it is easily lost. Once free speech is gone it is incredibly difficult to get back. Let us cling to free speech and cherish it deeply, because it is absolutely central to who we are as a nation.