The Real Reasons Behind Libya Attack: Petrobras, Soros, 3 Women, “New” U.N. Agenda
- The Real Reasons Behind Libya Attack: Petrobras, Soros, 3 Women, “New” U.N. Agenda (Read WP posts from Jane Jamison) | (Read MT posts from Jane Jamison) | rssWill Liberal Democrats Help Impeach Obama?Obama Agreed to Strike Based on Arab League “Support”
Arab League Now Denounces Loss of Civilian Life in Military Attack
Is Obama’s trip to Brazil connected to the Libya attack?
The decision by the United States to undertake a military strike in Libya was made in haste, under duress, under a false presumption of Arab support, and with the undue influence of radical pro-Islamists in the Obama administration. The decision for action on “humanitarian grounds” sets a new and dangerous precedent with implications for Israel. This war needs to stop now.
Several writers are now documenting how the sudden decision to take military action against Muammar Gaddafi as a “humanitarian” gesture was made.
Three women in the Obama administration lobbied the President hard, over the span of a few hours, to approve the strike in Libya over the advice of his military and defense leaders. (Josh Rogin at the Cable has a full report on the meeting.)
“The change became possible, though, only after [Secretary of State] Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action, according to senior administration officials speaking only on condition of anonymity. Ms. Power is a former journalist and human rights advocate; Ms. Rice was an Africa adviser to President Clinton when the United States failed to intervene to stop the Rwanda genocide, which Mr. Clinton has called his biggest regret.
Now, the three women were pushing for American intervention to stop a looming humanitarian catastrophe in Libya.[…]
In joining Ms. Rice and Ms. Power, Mrs. Clinton made an unusual break with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, who, along with the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and the counterterrorism chief, John O. Brennan, had urged caution. Libya was not vital to American national security interests, the men argued, and Mr. Brennan worried that the Libyan rebels remained largely unknown to American officials, and could have ties to Al Qaeda.”
Who are the half-hawk vipers in this pit with Hillary Clinton, and why did they/do they wield such power over Obama to change his mind from no military action to a major invention in a few hours’ time? There is the very simplistic reason that he is “disassociated” from White House governing, (evidenced by his dedication of hours of time to researching and videotaping his NCAA Final 4 basketball picks for the men and women’s teams) was going on vacation to Rio, and really didn’t want to get his fingernails dirty on this one. Can it possibly be just that simple?
Our husbands, sons, and brothers are being put in harm’s way to help Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood overthrow Muammar Gaddafi under the guise of a one-worldy, do-goody premise that has never been legally allowed as cause for war? STOP THIS. Congress MUST act to STOP THIS.
One thing is clear: The sudden emergence of Obama’s National Security Council Advisor, Samantha Power, and the “new theory” she is using as justification for action in Libya, has very serious implications for future military action against Israel. As John Podhoretz explains in the New York Post, the “reason” behind the Libyan military strike is not the traditional justification of “protecting the national interest.” It is a “new” standard called “R2P” or “right to protect.” This concept is being promulgated by the “one-world” order activists at the United Nations, like Samantha Power.
“R2P is an effort to create a new international moral standard to prevent violence against civilians.
In her career as a genocide expert, Power was an indefatigable proponent of R2P, and now on the National Security Council has been “trying to figure out how the administration could implement R2P and what doing so would require of the White House going forward.” Hillary is her ally in this effort, it appears.”
Who is Samantha Power, Irish Pro-Palestinian Activist (see also Ed Lasky, American Thinker)
Samantha Power, Irish activist, Nat’l Security Council advisor to Obama
Samantha Power is virulently anti-Semitic, (here and here) ( having once labeled the Israelis “bastards” in a “scholarly papers) and has years of writings in major publications to show that she is devotedly anti-Israel, pro-Iran, and opposed to any supporter of Israel– (See Richard Baehr and Ed Lasky’s article for American Thinker in 2008 on Ms. Power’s background. Please read the entire disturbing documentation.)
A review of her philosophy about when military intervention is or is not needed should cause the allies and the Arab League, and certainly the American public, to question why she is advocating for an attack on Muammar Gaddafi. One must ask, what master is Ms. Power serving and why do we want our military personnel in harm’s way for ANYTHING THAT SHE ADVOCATES?
“Power also advocates that America send armed military forces, “a mammoth protection force” and an “external intervention”, to impose a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. This directly contradicts her criticism of the invasion and “occupation” of Iraq and her call for the removal of American forces from that nation. On the one hand, Power abhors American efforts to remake an Arab nation, but takes the contrary view when it comes to inserting American forces in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to impose a settlement. These troops, if sent, would be seen as occupiers and be sitting targets for Arab extremists. The colonial image of America and charges of imperial overstretch would echo throughout the Arab world.”
“And now she is a senior foreign policy adviser to Presidential candidate Barack Obama, as well as occupying the Anna Lindh Professorship of Practice of Global Leadership and Public Policy How appropriate: Anna Lindh, the late Swedish Foreign Minister, was a dedicated opponent of Israel.”
An interesting side-note about the apparent “fence-mending” between Power and Hillary Clinton: Power was fired by the Obama campaign in 2008 for vicious bad-mouthing of Clinton, calling her a “monster.”
Susan Rice—U.N. Ambassador, African hand-wringer, anti-Semite
Susan Rice, U.N. Ambassador
This shameful United Nations ambassador, with her most recent anti-Israel tirade, gashed open an already-raw-wound in Obama administration U.S. – Israeli relations. Rice, who now purports to be so concerned about the “human rights violations” committed by Muammar Gaddafi in putting down a revolution, is behind the horrific appointment of Iran to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. This despite such facts as Iran is a country whose prison guards rape female inmates before executing them because it is illegal under shariah law to kill a virgin.
Ms. Rice supposedly is very concerned about the Libyan “revolutionaries” being killed because of the Rwandan genocide which took place on her watch during the Clinton administration. It apparently doesn’t matter to her that security and military advisors believe that Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood are leading the revolt using, in part, former Guantanamo Bay terrorism suspects who have been released by….. the Obama administration.
Why is Ms. Rice not so concerned about the thousands of Iranian freedom protesters who have been jailed, tortured and executed by Iran? How about the violent government retaliations against the “revolutions” in Bahrain and Yemen?
Most of all, America can directly blame the scary-stupid Ms. Rice for the tragedy of 9/11: It was Susan Rice of the Bill Clinton administration who counseled AGAINST accepting Osama bin Laden from the government of Sudan. (read the whole article at Newsmax, there is much more she has in her history.)
The telling point here is the final element that supposedly “pushed” Obama to agree to a military attack: Secretary of State Clinton assured him that the Arab League was in full support of such a strike.
Of course, what has Gaddafi done? He has shielded himself and his installations with lots of soft-bodied civilians, who are now being killed by the allied action which was supposed to save them.
The Arab League was in jeopardy of seeming to side with the “imperialists” of the West, a precarious line to walk for the Islamic members.
What America and the allies need to realize is, three radical pro-Islamic, pro-Palestinian hate-baiting women have somehow overruled all the brighter military and security minds in the United States and have initiated an ill-fated military mission that had every earmark of failure before it began.
The extreme “right to protect” agenda of Samantha Power now has a “legal precedent” because she was able to convince a spineless, party-boy president with no foreign policy experience to accept it. This “R2P” is exactly what pro-Palestinian interests in the United Nations and Arab world want to use to accuse Israel of “war crimes” against Gaza…to justify a military strike against Israel.
Omni Ceren in Commentary explains that “R2P” is not a new concept to the United Nations, but its use for Libya action is a first and its application to Israel could be next:
“This is part and parcel of the statements that the ICRtoP (International Council on Right to Protect) has been publishing since it was established in the immediate aftermath of Cast Lead. They published a petition absurdly insisting that “the rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not… amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence.” They passed along Richard Falk’s “Israelis could be charged with war crimes” lawfare spin on the Goldstone Report. They reprinted other articles accusing Israelis of war crimes here and here and here and here and here. All of this was under the umbrella of “evaluating” whether R2P should be brought to bear against Israel’s self-defense campaigns.”
We are halfway down that slippery slope by attacking Libya under the guise of R2P. Israel needs to make plans for the worst.
The “oil” connection inspired by Victor Shanti at Facebook: Obama has already signed an executive order authorizing [at least] two billion dollars in loans to Petrobras in Brazil for offshore drilling. (the same kind of drilling that Obama has banned in the Gulf of Mexico for American companies due to safety concerns, despite a federal court order to resume drilling.) Billionaire financier George Soros repositioned himself just a few days before the loans were announced to take a major position in Petrobras.
Just before he flew to Brazil for his “vacation,” Obama had given permission for Brazil and Petrobras to install a first-ever large, underwater oil storage container in the Gulf of Mexico. Obama is in Brazil now attempting to curry favor for us to buy oil from Brazil. Is bombing Libya and interrupting oil drilling operations there going to improve George Soros’ investment in Petrobras? Is this what this is all about?
Doug Powers writes at Michelle Malkin about liberal Democrats who are incensed by Obama’s entry into another war. Between what has to be a distasteful new aggression for liberals, combined with the equally tacky “blood for oil” aspect, Is a vote for impeachment finally possible?
Cross-posted on UNCOVERAGE.net