Obama give back your Nobel Peace Prize

How does a Nobel Peace Prize winner justify launching missile strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Middle East? He can’t. 

Military action is, of course, sometimes necessary to maintain peace. But President Obama has not demonstrated that missile attacks in Syria would do anything to achieve peace.

Worse, by all accounts, Obama’s “red line” threat was an off-the-cuff remark, not a well thought-out strategy. The U.S. should not attack another country because the president was careless with his words and now wants to protect his personal credibility.

But we don’t even need to look at Syria to conclude that the decent thing would be for Obama to return the prize that he never deserved in the first place.

There’s the obvious problem of Obama escalating a pointless and failing war in Afghanistan. From 2001 to the end of the Bush presidency in 2009, 625 American troops died because of the war. Under Obama’s watch, more than twice that many, some 1,500 soldiers, have died. Tens of thousands of civilians have been killed as well.

But nothing undermines the notion of Obama as a leader for peace more than his five-year Middle East drone war. According to the New America Foundation, since 2004, there have been 361 American drone strikes in Pakistan. Of those, only 48 occurred during the Bush administration.

During a January 2012 online forum, Obama said, "I want to make sure that people understand actually drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties. For the most part, they have been very precise, precision strikes against al Qaeda and their affiliates."

The London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates roughly 500 to 800 innocents have been blown up by our drones in the Middle East. If this happened on U.S. soil, it would certainly be considered a “huge number” by any reasonable person. No one would be calmed by the fact that the intent was to be “precise.” Obama’s statement also ignores the psychological impact of living in constant fear of being killed because you might happen to be standing near a suspected terrorist. This fear is certainly exacerbated by the fact that the Obama administration incredibly told The New York Times that it “in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants.”

What makes these civilian deaths even more tragic is the fact that the drone war isn’t even making America safer. Dennis C. Blair, Obama's former director of national intelligence, wrote in 2011, “Qaeda officials who are killed by drones will be replaced. The group’s structure will survive and it will still be able to inspire, finance and train individuals and teams to kill Americans. Drone strikes hinder Qaeda fighters while they move and hide, but they can endure the attacks and continue to function.”

Blair echoed a widely held belief by foreign-policy experts that “as the drone campaign wears on, hatred of America is increasing in Pakistan.” It shouldn’t be that hard to figure out that killing civilians and writing them off as “collateral damage” just creates more terrorists. This is Psychology 101. In a 2012 New York Times op-ed, “How Drones Help al-Qaeda,” 24-yeard old Yemeni Ibrahim Mothana wrote, “Drone strikes are causing more and more Yemenis to hate America and join radical militants; they are not driven by ideology but rather by a sense of revenge and despair.”

Retired general Stanley McChrystal told Reuters earlier this year, "The resentment created by American use of unmanned strikes ... is much greater than the average American appreciates” because they create a "perception of American arrogance that says, 'Well we can fly where we want, we can shoot where we want, because we can.'" Following a drone strike in Yemen that killed civilians, a local man who had lost two brothers told the Washington Post, “These attacks are making people say, ‘We believe now that al-Qaeda is on the right side.’” Following extensive interviews in the region, the Post concluded that, “[A]n unintended consequence of the attacks has been a marked radicalization of the local population.”

It shouldn’t be that hard to figure out that killing civilians and writing them off as ‘collateral damage’ just creates more terrorists.

The president has also misled the public on who the drone campaign targets. His administration long maintained that it was only targeting senior leaders of al Qaeda and allied groups. But leaked intelligence documents show that it “targeted and killed hundreds of suspected lower-level Afghan, Pakistani and unidentified ‘other’ militants” including people who weren’t even suspected of being affiliated with terrorist groups. Worse, the documents revealed that the U.S. actually doesn’t know who it is killing, despite Obama’s claims to the contrary. McClatchy reported, “The CIA killed people who only were suspected, associated with, or who probably belonged to militant groups.”

“Probably” is a pretty weak standard.

Two weeks after a drone attack killed Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S. blew up his 16-year-old American son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, in a separate attack. Eric Holder said that he was "not specifically targeted." What does this mean? Was he “un-specifically” targeted?  When asked about the killing of this innocent 16-year-old, Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibbs quipped that the boy should have had a “more responsible father.”

Carelessly killing innocents, creating more hatred against America, and glib statements by your key aides about blowing up children do not add up to a peaceful agenda. If Obama won’t return the peace prize, then the Nobel Committee should revoke it.

I guess there isn't much peace in the Peace Prize, after all both Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin were nominated for this worthless Prize. It would literally be more accurately called the Nobel War Prize!

By Tom Retterbush 

You can also comment on this article on it's Conspiracy Watch Facebook Post, here.

NOTE: Most of the above was taken from an article by Kirsten Powers, which first appeared as, "Dear Obama, It’s Time to Return Your Nobel Peace Prize. Here’s Why.", in the Daily Beast.

RESOURCES

College students mindlessly defend Obama's Nobel Peace Prize
http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/09/20/college-students-mindlessly-defend-obamas-nobel-peace-prize/

Russia, China and Iran warn U.S. strike against Syria may have Severe Repercussions

A U.S. strike in Syria may have severe repercussions. It may get the United States enmeshed in an inter-ethnic Syrian conflict. It might spark an international crisis with anti-American superpowers Russia and China. It could cause Bashar Assad to act in an irrational manner against his pro-American neighbors. 

When one chooses a violent course of action in a region full of nitroglycerin, one can never anticipate the outcome. One must be prepared for the unexpected, even the catastrophic.

Russia and China have stepped up their warnings against military intervention in Syria, with Moscow saying any such action would have "catastrophic consequences" for the region.

A senior Iranian lawmaker said Israel would be the first casualty of any U.S.-led strike on Syria, according to regional media reports.

Hossein Sheikholeslam, the director general of the Iranian parliament’s International Affairs bureau, claimed the United States would not dare attack Syria but said that if it does, “the Zionist regime will be the first victim.”

 

Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei: An Attack On Syria Will Be A Disaster For The Region

On August 28, 2013, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei himself said that a U.S. attack on Syria would be a "disaster for the region," adding that with such an attack, the U.S. would not only set the entire region on fire but would itself be harmed: "Intervention and warmongering [in Syria] will no doubt harm those who fan the flames. If this intervention happens, the Americans will no doubt be harmed, as they were harmed in Iraq and Afghanistan. An intervention in [Syria] by powers from outside the region will only ignite the flames [of war] and increase the nations' hatred towards [these powers]. Such warmongering is like a spark in a gunpowder depot, and its dimensions and consequences cannot be estimated."

As United Nations inspectors assess whether either side used chemical weapons in an attack that killed hundreds of people in Syria’s civil war, there is a heated debate in this country over President Barack Obama’s authority to use military force. Well over 100 House members signed a letter saying Obama must have congressional approval.

"Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution," the letter said.

The latest poll suggests the public leans heavily the same way. According to NBC polling, nearly 80 percent of Americans think Obama should get the go-ahead from Congress before launching any attack.

The question of whether the country faces an immediate threat is the big question. In the case of Libya, Obama argued, "Left unaddressed, the growing instability in Libya could ignite wider instability in the Middle East, with dangerous consequences to the national security interests of the United States."

Invoking the idea of indirect threats has always been open to strong disagreement. The House members who warned against an attack on Syria without congressional approval stated explicitly, that "no direct threat to the United States exists".

Accountability

In the most forceful US reaction yet, US Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday described the recent attacks in the Damascus area as a "moral obscenity". 

He said Washington had additional information about the attacks that it would make public in the days ahead.

"What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. It defies any code of morality," Mr Kerry said at a news conference on Monday.

Well Mr. Kerry, what about a code of morality when the U.S. used chemical weapons in Vietnam? What about morality when Obama's drones kill innocent women and children? How are these deaths any different?

Kerry continued: "Make no mistake, President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the world's most vulnerable people."

 "The world's most heinous weapons"? Dead is dead. Do you think the families of the dead care which weapons were used? They only care that their loved ones were killed. Period.

And for every Iraqi, Pakistani, Afghan, or other innocent woman and child killed by a U.S. strike, we create terrorists who want to kill Americans and destroy the United States. Every innocent woman and child killed by a U.S. strike has a mother, father, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, cousin or friend who will devote his or her life to our destruction.

Lets quit making enemies all over the world. Don't we already have enough people who hate us?

The American people don't want war! So isn't it our government's duty to respect We The People's wishes and stay the hell out of Syria? Shouldn't it be our government responsibility to its citizens to avoid war with Syria, Iran or any other country not attacking us?

Tell Washington, "Mo More War!"

By: Tom Retterbush

tomretterbush@gmail.com

SOURCES & RESOURCES

Russia and Iran Warn Against Intervention in Syria
http://world.time.com/2013/08/27/russia-and-iran-warn-against-intervention-in-syria/#ixzz2dmGVnEOl

Syria crisis: Russia and China step up warning over strike

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23845800

Iranian Official: Israel to Be ‘First Victim’ of U.S. Attack on Syria

http://freebeacon.com/iranian-official-israel-to-be-first-victim-of-u-s-attack-on-syria/

Iran: If Syria Is Attacked Israel Will Be Destroyed

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2013090133136/world/terrorism/iran-if-syria-is-attacked-israel-will-be-destroyed.html

What the law and the past say about attacking Syria

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/aug/30/what-law-and-past-say-about-attacking-syria/

Document Report : U.S. Framed Syria in Chemical Weapons Attack

http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2013/08/27/stormcloudsgathering-reports-leaked-documents-u-s-framed-syria-in-chemical-weapons-attack/

  

The Fuse to Armageddon?

http://defendproclaimthefaith.org/blog/?tag=russia-china-iran

Obama: Cool, Charismatic and Likable, but the most Corrupt and Power-Hungry President in U.S. History

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
- Lord Acton

When Obama first appeared on the national stage, I liked him. He was cool, likeable and a good speaker. However, just like I would any candidate running for major political office, I investigated him extensively. Even when my research turned up a troubling background, I still gave Obama the benefit of the doubt.

However, after ever more troubling info turned up about our President, I found myself obligated to share my findings about our President's involvement with members of the Bilderberg Group and the New World Order, by writing the article, The Corruption of Barack Obama, an unbiased and comprehensive report about Barack Obama. 

When ever more disturbing info turned up about Barack Obama, I found myself obligated to share my findings about our President's involvement with members of the Bilderberg Group and the New World Order, by writing a few articles, the most damning and comprehensive of which was The Corruption of Barack Obama, which I published over a year ago, Sunday, January 1, 2012.

Still I gave Barack Obama a chance to do the right thing, also realizing that there really were no better alternatives. There are no real options for President Obama at this stage of the game. If Obama were impeached, Biden would become President!

Obviously, most people are now aware of the Bengazi, IRS and NSA scandals. Many may believe the President when he says "he knows nothing", but if that were the only suspicious incidents he may have been involved in, I might even give him the benefit of the doubt. I'll give everybody a fair chance to prove themselves. But then I came across some damaging evidence about our President that made me wonder how this man could stoop so low. How he could even be walking around free, much less be the President of the United States? Are Americans really that blind?

These findings prompting me to launch yet another investigation into the life of Barack Obama. 

Obama's Lying  
 
Barbara Walters during her painfully fawning interview with Barack and Michelle Obama last Dec. 23, asked Obama “Mr. President, on what occasion do you lie?”

“Usually, the only time I lie,” responded Obama, “is very personal interactions with family members..."

Welcome to The Matrix – where the elite media specialize in creating virtual reality scenes like this one, which are so pleasant and seem so real … except that they bear virtually no resemblance to reality.

Barack Obama, the man whose entire presidency has been a seamless fabric of deception and duplicity, tells Barbara Walters and the American people that the only time he lies is to protect a family member?

The correct answer to Walters’ question is obvious. When does Obama lie? Every single time he speaks to the American people.

The level of corporate media dishonesty in covering Barack Obama is unbelievable.

It is no longer the question if the Obama Administration has influence over the networks, but merely how much influence the Obama Administration has influence over the networks.

But let us now again focus our attention on the man who will undoubtedly go down in history as the most dishonest person ever to occupy the White House.

Obama is a Narcissist and Sociopath 

Obama delayed the fifth game of the 2008 World Series, so he could broadcast a 30-minute infomercial for his campaign. He threw out the first pitch at the Major League Baseball All-Star Game in 2009. He did a 10-minute interview with Katie Couric during the 2010 Super Bowl broadcast. In both 2009 and 2010, he did interviews with ESPN to tell the world about his NCAA tournament brackets. In 2010, Obama showed up on "American Idol." As commander-in-chief, he's hit "The View," "The Tonight Show," "The Late Show" and "Jersey Shore." OK, he hasn't hit "Jersey Shore" ... yet.

Obama doesn't just crash other parties -- he spends hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to throw parties of his own. Not that Obama cares; as he put it, "This is a pretty big house so we get lonely. It's hard for me to move around out there sometimes, so I got to bring the world to me."

But Obama's desperate need for attention is clearly a psychological condition. He drinks in applause like a washed-up movie star. It is usual for neglected children to develop narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), typically characterized by an inflated sense of self-importance, a strong sense of entitlement, preoccupations with utopian fantasies, elitism, manipulative tendencies and pathological need for praise.

The narcissistic personality is defined by characteristics such as an inflated sense of one’s importance, unrealistic fantasies of power and success, the need for constant approval and acceptance, and difficulty handling criticism from others. Narcissism is different from healthy self-esteem; people who simply have strong self-esteem can realistically evaluate their shortcomings as well as their strengths. Such people are not likely to describe their impact upon the world in messianic terms, as Obama did during the 2008 campaign when he prophesied that his election would be remembered by future generations as “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.

Obama's excessive self-regard was shown in his speech at the funeral for the late Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, where President Obama mentioned himself approximately 63 times. Watch "Obama's Speech at the Funeral Service for Senator Daniel Ken Inouye", here: http://bit.ly/18D6Oqq

Obama is an elitist through and through, disdaining ordinary Americans as "bitter [people who] cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them." He is manipulative in the extreme, seeing every crisis as an opportunity to magnify his personal power.

Most dangerous, he requires a constant stream of paeans to his persona. He resembles a once-abused puppy; he doesn't care who pets him, so long as he receives the petting.

Pulitzer prize-winning columnist George Will, pointed out recently in the Washington Post: “Barack Obama’s intellectual sociopathy – his often breezy and sometimes loutish indifference to truth – should no longer startle.”

“Sociopaths are often well-liked because of their charm and high charisma, but they do not usually care about other people. They think mainly of themselves and often blame others for the things that they do. They have a complete disregard for rules and lie constantly. They seldom feel guilt or learn from punishments.”

Remind you of anyone?

Obama's Solyndra Scandal 

When talking about Obama corruption, it doesn't get any more embarrassing than Solyndra. Solyndra, once the Obama administration's massive "green energy" initiative, has become the poster child for the corruption occurring when the government interferes in the private sector. Thanks to an Obama administration's stimulus loan guarantee, 1,100 workers were left without jobs, while American taxpayers were left holding the bag for $535 million dollars when Solyndra filed for bankruptcy in September 2011.

Regardless of the Obama administration's reserve to release details of the scandal, a lot is known about the scam. Even though White House officials warned the president of the dangerously short due diligence of the Department of Energy's loan guarantee program, Obama officials rushed the Solyndra loan through the approval process to make a splash with the scheduled press. As it turns out, a major Obama campaign donor named George Kaiser was the company's main financial backer who discussed the loan with White House officials against regulation.

The White House tried to cover this up, demonstrating the political nature of the Obama administration's activities, while the Energy Department pressured Solyndra to delay the layoffs  announcement until after the 2010 elections. Despite public outcry at this scandalous waste of public tax dollars, President Obama continues to defend the scam, refusing to fire or even blame anyone over the Solyndra swindle.

But the Solyndra con was just one of the many con-jobs President Obama continues to pull off. Digging ever deeper into our Presidents dealings, I find ever more damning evidence of fraud and swindle committed by Barack Obama. 

Lets take a closer look at some of the actions of our President, his appointees and associates and how they undermine the rule of law and constitutional government:

ACORN Obama caricature joke

Despite a funding ban that Obama himself signed into law, his administration continued to fund the crooked, obsolete and non-operational organization, ACORN. Still, a $79,819 grant to AHCOA (Affordable Housing Centers of America) which is nothing more than the new name for ACORN, was uncovered by Judicial Watch in July 2011. ACORN which has a long history of corrupt activity only changed its name to AHCOA so it could continue its crooked business dealings. Judicial Watch has since confirmed that the Obama administration has funneled $730,000 to the ACORN network, in violation of the funding ban.

Check out the free 28 page PDF report, "The Rebranding of ACORN," which shows how the ACORN network is alive and well under the AHCOA name. You can download it as a pdf file, here.

Continuing with my investigation of Barack Obama, it is evident that our President believes it is his "right" to ignore the Constitution when appointing Czars. Politico states, "President Barack Obama is planning to ignore language in the 2011 spending package that would ban several top White House advisory posts." 

Obama responded that this ban on "czars" would undermine "the President's ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Indeed, President Obama refused to eliminate several "czars" who were cut in the fiscal 2011 spending bill, calling the provision a violation of the separation of powers. This implies that Barack Obama believes he must ignore the Constitution to protect the Constitution!

So Obama administration czars have not been subject to confirmation by the Senate as required by the Constitution. Last count, Obama had 45 czars in his regime, accountable to nobody but him.

Check out this free, 42 page Judicial Watch Special Report called, "President Obama's Czars," detailing Obama's Czar Scandal. You can download it as a PDF file, here.

Thanks again to Judicial Watch, a federal court ruled on August 17, 2011 that Secret Service White House visitor logs are subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. The Obama administration will now have to release all records of all visitors to the White House. Yet the White House continues to fight full disclosure, stalling the release of records by appealing the lower court decision. What visitors or dealings does our President not want us to know about? What is he trying to hide?

The National Labor Relations Board sought to prevent Seattle-based Boeing from opening a $750 million dollar non-union assembly line in South Carolina, to manufacture its Dreamliner plane in 2011. Obama bypassed Congress and appointing his buddy, Craig Becker, who is connected to the AFL-CIO, SEIU and NRLB.

This lawsuit was politically motivated according to uncovered documents showing NLRB staff cheerleading for Big Labor, mouthing Marxist, anti-American slurs, attacking members of Congress and showing contempt for congressional relations to the agency's lawsuit against Boeing.

Obama Chicago roots

Obama's corrupt, scandalous ways go back all the way to his Chicago roots. Fortunately for America, Obama's real estate partner, campaign fundraiser and Obama pork receiver Antoin "Tony" Rezko was finally sentenced to jail this year along with former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, who is to serve 14 years for  trying to sell Obama's former Senate seat to the highest bidder.

Barack Obama as President of the Harvard Law Review

Then there is the alleged relationship between Barack Obama and dangerous militants, particularly the infamous extremist, Derrick Bell. Although Bell was a respected academic and an influential figure in the Civil Rights movement, there are those who would label him a dangerous frothing radical and racial instigator.

BuzzFeed published an article with the title, At Harvard, Obama Dived Into Diversity Fight, that includes a video which was not previously available online, showing a speech made by Barack Obama in 1991, at a campus protest organized to demand tenure for minority and female law professors. 

As President of the Harvard Law Review, it was perhaps Barack Obama's most intense politics of the late 80s and early 90s, as  he aligned himself with Professor Derrick Bell's dramatic protest for diversity on the faculty of Harvard Law School.

Bell was a pioneer of "critical race theory," which controversially focus on issues of race and power into legal scholarship. He protested Harvard's denial of tenure to a black woman professor, Regina Austin, telling Harvard he would "strike" by taking a take a leave of absence "until a woman of color is offered and accepted a tenured position on this faculty," launching a hunger strike to drive home his point.

There is still a lot of dirt to be uncovered about our President, with many believing there is more to Barck Obama than meets the eye. It is just a matter of time before the rest of America sees him for what he is: a lying cheating, scandalous crook.

Obama makes "Ten Most (Corrupt) Wanted" list 

To top it all off, President Obama has made Judicial Watch's "Ten Most Wanted" list... again. In fact, the former Illinois Senator has made Judicial Watch's "Ten Most Wanted" list for a fifth consecutive year!

The Judicial Watch's "Ten Most Wanted" list, which is widely distributed in the press, puts the spotlight on some of DC's most immoral politicians who undercut the rule of law and abused the public trust. The list is a powerful tool to educate Americans about the bipartisan problem of corruption, fraud and lies in Washington,l as well as Judicial Watch's critical work in holding these crooked politicians accountable.

Judicial Watch also gave Obama a "failing grade" on transparency. You can watch the archived webcast, White House Transparency, Visitor Logs and Lobbyists, here.

If you want to learn the truth about Barack Obama, I suggest you watch the Obama Conspiracy video bellow, following up with any one of the other 5 videos on the Conspiracy Watch video tab, starting with the Obama Deception, then make up your own mind as to what you want to believe. 

Unfortunately for me (and probably you), my investigation and the findings of Judicial Watch have soured me to politics. My trust and respect for politicians has been shattered perhaps beyond repair. I will never look at politicians the same way again. The only politician I still trust and respect is Ron Paul.

Unfortunately for America, I am not alone disgusted with US politicians. I would not at all be surprised if sometime soon a total non-politician gets elected President. Preferably, someone with no prior dealings with any politics whatsoever, period. Maybe a businessman, preferably a small business owner.

This article is meant as a call to action. Maybe its time we put a small business owner, doctor or professor into office. If you are ready to fight for America, I strongly suggest you sign-up for the Free Conspiracy Watch Newsletter to get more free ebook offers and important updates.

What do you think, America? Should we fire everyone in Washington and start over?

Written By: Tom Retterbush
Email: tomretterbush@gmail.com

Culture of Corruption
Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies
Never have a media-anointed American President fallen so fast and hard. Weary of the corruption that gushes from the White House faster than a Gulf Coast oil spill, voters are tired of the schemes. In her latest investigative tour de force, New York Times bestselling author Michelle Malkin delivers a powerful, damning, and comprehensive indictment of the culture of corruption that surrounds Team Obama's brazen tax evaders, Wall Street cronies, petty crooks, slum lords, and business-as-usual influence peddlers.

Get Culture of Corruption directly from Amazon, HERE

Please help promote Conspiracy Watch... by clicking the ff  Like and .+1. bellow!