Under Colossal Global Backlash, Obama Holds Off on Syria Strike

[poncho]

Obama decides to follow the Constitution and seek Congressional approval for military strike

< snip >

Just as Dr. Paul Craig Roberts wrote today in a piece entitled America Totally Discredited, he assesses this is the greatest diplomatic meltdown in US history.

In his report he acknowledges that the greatest danger now is that the White House may attempt to stage something else in order to persuade the unconvinced public into a war with Syria.



“The rest of the world has learned to avoid Washington’s rush to war when there is no evidence,” writes Roberts.


CONTINUE . . .

Let's hope any new "evidence" comes in the form of another staged false flag event where thousands have to die to give Obama the "moral authority" to rush in to aid his Al Qaeda buddies.

 

[poncho]

Let's hope any new "evidence" comes in the form of another staged false flag event where thousands have to die to give Obama the "moral authority" to rush in to aid his Al Qaeda buddies.

Change that to . . . Let's hope any new evidence does not come in the form of another staged false flag event where thousands have to die to give Obama the "moral authority" to rush in to aid his Al Qaeda buddies.

For some reason the edit feature isn't working.

 

[Inspector Javert]

Congress passed numerous "Neutrallity" Bills which Roosevelt patently ignored by intentionally shipping arms and aid to Britain prior to WWII (which liberals like you hold to be the last "legitimate" war).

The Constitution does NOT REQUIRE a "Declaration of War" before military force can be used.

You, Poncho...should simply cease your treasonous lies. It's NEVER been that way. John Adams wrote in the Federalist Papers this:

"The King of England holds the sword...the Parliament the purse...so it is with us."

If you and your libertarian ilk have so ignored the Constitution so as to not get that...then I defy you......here is (for the thousandth time) a FULL COPY of the U.S. Constitution...

Please quote for us where the U.S. Constitution demands Congressional approval before the executive may utilize military force: (Seriously...it's not that big. You can read through it in less than an hour).....Here's the WHOLE Document, all 21 pages of it. That's it...21 pages.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.pdf

Quote that demand in the U.S. Constitution or stop your deceit and lies. Your are becoming a traitor to everything our Constitution stands for. You want a "Democracy" of the opinion of the plebian stupid.....

That's NOT what made our Country Great. We are a Republic (not a Democracy)....and the President absolutely DOES NOT need Congressional approval PRIOR to using military force. You will address this, according to the Constitution (which you obviously don't care a fig about) or stop your lies from now on. You are NOT getting away with this any more.

 

[InTheLight]

Along with the Inspectors question about the Constitution I'd like to ask Poncho if there has ever been a terrorist attack, an instance of chemical weapons used, or an arrest of a suspected terrorist that was NOT a false flag set up?

 

[poncho]

Congress passed numerous "Neutrallity" Bills which Roosevelt patently ignored by intentionally shipping arms and aid to Britain prior to WWII (which liberals like you hold to be the last "legitimate" war).

The Constitution does NOT REQUIRE a "Declaration of War" before military force can be used.

You, Poncho...should simply cease your treasonous lies. It's NEVER been that way. John Adams wrote in the Federalist Papers this:

"The King of England holds the sword...the Parliament the purse...so it is with us."

If you and your libertarian ilk have so ignored the Constitution so as to not get that...then I defy you......here is (for the thousandth time) a FULL COPY of the U.S. Constitution...

Please quote for us where the U.S. Constitution demands Congressional approval before the executive may utilize military force: (Seriously...it's not that big. You can read through it in less than an hour).....Here's the WHOLE Document, all 21 pages of it. That's it...21 pages.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.pdf

Quote that demand in the U.S. Constitution or stop your deceit and lies. Your are becoming a traitor to everything our Constitution stands for. You want a "Democracy" of the opinion of the plebian stupid.....

That's NOT what made our Country Great. We are a Republic (not a Democracy)....and the President absolutely DOES NOT need Congressional approval PRIOR to using military force. You will address this, according to the Constitution (which you obviously don't care a fig about) or stop your lies from now on. You are NOT getting away with this any more.

Gee seeing as how you challenged me to a debate so nicely what can I do but graciously accept?

I do however reserve the right to use the founder's words and documents, court decisions and historical examples.

If you find that acceptable I would be happy to debate you on this subject, and I don't even mind if you keep using your gutter talk. I find it kind of, amusing.

Shall we start a new thread then?

Nice guy that I am I'll even let you start it. PM me whenever you are ready. :smilewinkgrin:

BYW . . .

We are a Republic (not a Democracy)....

That's not true anymore. The United States started out as a republic sure enough but has rapidly devolved into a corporatist kleptocracy ruled over by an transnational financier oligarchy in the last oh 80 or 90 years or so. It started downhill in 1913 but it took a few more years to really get rolling.

 

[poncho]

Along with the Inspectors question about the Constitution I'd like to ask Poncho if there has ever been a terrorist attack, an instance of chemical weapons used, or an arrest of a suspected terrorist that was NOT a false flag set up?

I'm sure there was but not recently.

 

[InTheLight]

I'm sure there was but not recently.

What is your definition of recently?

 

[poncho]

What is your definition of recently?

Since the phoney "global war on terror" started.

Actually you know what I like the way Zbigniew Brzezinski words it.

A mythical historical narrative to jus
tify the case for such a protracted and
potentially expanding war is already being articulated. Initially justified by
false claims about WMD’s in Iraq, th
e war is now being redefined as the
“decisive ideological struggle” of our
time, reminiscent of the earlier
collisions with Nazism and Stalinism.
In that context, Islamist extremism
and al Qaeda are presented as the equi
valents of the threat posed by Nazi
Germany and then Soviet Russia, and
9/11 as the equivalent of the Pearl
Harbor attack which precipitated Americ
a’s involvement in World War II.

SOURCE

"A mythical historical narrative" yeah that's much descriptive than "phoney". Wouldn't you agree?

 

[poncho]

But then "simplistic and demagogic narrative" ain't to bad either.

Of course lately we've been finding out Washington has always played a supporting role to Al Qaeda. "Lately" is defined as since the alternative media has been forcing the corporate controlled media to do some actual reporting it or lose what little credibility it still has which ain't much.

 

[Crabtownboy]

This was a stroke of genius by Obama. Now the Republicans will have to take a stance by voting and will have to live with their decision. Obama can blame them for anything that goes wrong as a result of the vote. I am sure there are a number of GOP leaders who are gnashing their teeth today.

I find it most amusing. :laugh:

 

[poncho]

This was a stroke of genius by Obama. Now the Republicans will have to take a stance by voting and will have to live with their decision. Obama can blame them for anything that goes wrong as a result of the vote. I am sure there are a number of GOP leaders who are gnashing their teeth today.

I find it most amusing. :laugh:

I think it has less to do with Obama's genius (that is funny) and more to do with the fact that the alternative media now has the power to smash through the lies and disinformation and destroy Washington and the corporate media's "simplistic and demagogic narratives" as soon as they start to form.

I find that to be amusing, refreshing and very very dangerous. Beasts that find themselves trapped in a corner tend to get quite violent.

 

[Bro. James]

The U.S. of A. has a tough choice to make: pacify the doves or cave in to the hawks. We drew the line, it has been crossed. Now what?

Do a Kadafy harem scenario on Assad's closest possessions and get out of Dodge. We have to use a big stick on occasion, anything less is an empty threat. Taking out Saddam Hussein was right WMDs or not.

The Middle East is getting ready for Armageddon. We will help Israel--probably to the end.

Who was Jesus talking to when He said: "Father, forgive them, they know not what they do?"

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

[poncho]

Would have been better if Washington had never helped Saddam to power and built up his military then they wouldn't have had to lie to the rest of us when it came time to crush their own creation. But looking on the bright side of it the banks and corporations or what Washington and the corporation's own media outlets call "American interests" would never have been able to grab up Iraq's banks and natural resourxes.

Imho nothing based on lies can ever be a good thing.

 

[InTheLight]

Since the phoney "global war on terror" started.

OK, so the airplane shoe bomber, the LA airport shooting on July 4, 2002, the sniper attacks in DC, the Muslim that drove an SUV on the U of NC campus, the guy that was going to cut the support cables on the Brooklyn bridge, the failed IMF bombing by Al Queda, the Pakistani-American that shot at Jews in Seattle (2006), the airplane underwear bomber, the plot to bomb the Sears Tower, the attempted car bombing in NY Times Square, the plot to kill soldiers at Ft. Dix, the plot to blow up fuel tanks at JFK airport, the Ft. Hood shootings, the plot to blow up the NY subway , the plot to bomb the Saudi and Israeli embassies in DC, the Wisconsin Sikh temple shootings, the Boston Marathon bombings, and finally (only because the list could go on for pages) the plot to blow up the Manhattan office of the Federal Reserve Bank.

All of these were false flag attacks?

 

[poncho]

OK, so the airplane shoe bomber, the LA airport shooting on July 4, 2002, the sniper attacks in DC, the Muslim that drove an SUV on the U of NC campus, the guy that was going to cut the support cables on the Brooklyn bridge, the failed IMF bombing by Al Queda, the Pakistani-American that shot at Jews in Seattle (2006), the airplane underwear bomber, the plot to bomb the Sears Tower, the attempted car bombing in NY Times Square, the plot to kill soldiers at Ft. Dix, the plot to blow up fuel tanks at JFK airport, the Ft. Hood shootings, the plot to blow up the NY subway , the plot to bomb the Saudi and Israeli embassies in DC, the Wisconsin Sikh temple shootings, the Boston Marathon bombings, and finally (only because the list could go on for pages) the plot to blow up the Manhattan office of the Federal Reserve Bank.

All of these were false flag attacks?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/o...ped-along-by-the-fbi.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

False flags have certain elements such as big media build ups before hand, military and or police drills that mirror the event going on at the same time, naming the "guilty parties" before an investigation can take place, investigations thwarted by "authorites", the suspects being tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion instead of a court of law, narratives that change faster than Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab can change his underwear, suspects gunned down or run over to silence them, then the investigators falling from helicopters to their deaths, etc., etc.

The London Tube bombing is a perfect example of a false flag event. It has most all of these elements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwyzpzEgUWE

 

[InTheLight]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/o...ped-along-by-the-fbi.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

So every terrorist attack, successful or not were false flag attacks?

 

[poncho]

So every terrorist attack, successful or not were false flag attacks?

No not every one but sometimes because there so many it just seems that way ITL. There are a lot of stupid people out there who do stupid things all on their own.

False flags are typically used as justifications for social engineering and pretexts for military actions.

Think Problem Reaction Solution.