Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Case Against Obama / The Hypocrite

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The Case Against Obama / The Hypocrite

    Part one, I got to go to fucking work (as a millionaire, I thot I'd retire, [well over $1m in paid for, mortgage free rental properties] but the joke is on me as I've face almost $40,000 in roof and construction repairs and am totally wiped out! Fuck, guess I'll go do landscape construction and garden work, forever). There is way too much to write and this is too long already.

    “The dominant purpose of the First Amendment was to prohibit the widespread practice of government suppression of embarrassing information.” - Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

    Should disclosure of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison have been a felony just because the information was classified at the time?

    Should have Daniel Ellsberg, charged with violation of the Espionage Act of 1917, been sentenced to life in prison? For those who are a little young to know about a man who is one of my personal heroes, check Wiki and elsewhere, the man has balls. Elslberg was a Rand employee, working for the Pentagon, who released to the NY Times and 16 other papers, information that (from Wiki) revealed that the government had knowledge, early on, that the war could most likely not be won, and that continuing the war would lead to many times more casualties than was ever admitted publicly... the papers showed the government had systematically lied to Congress and the public. And secretly bombed Cambia and Laos, and had made secret military landings in North Vietnam etc etc. The release of the Pentagon Papers (actually a study done by order of Mcnamara) helped lead to the impeachment of Nixon - his wire tapping of Ellsberg was illegal.

    Obama, who when an Illinois senator helped pass legislation to protect government whistleblowers, has effectively criminalized public servants who risk their jobs to speak out and expose waste, corruption and unethical behavior among their colleagues.

    When campaigning in 2008, Obama promised to protect whistleblowers, saying their “acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled,” (ABC News’ Megan Chuchmach and Rhonda Schwartz Aug. 4, 2009).

    In a manner that closely resembles the way he, as soon as he took office, got rid of his "liberal" economic advisers and hired Wall Street Bankers and Corporate Inside Men, Obama has consistently screwed whistleblowers.

    “When President Barack Obama took office, in 2009, he championed the cause of government transparency and spoke admiringly of whistle-blowers, whom he described as ‘often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government, but the Obama Administration has pursued leak prosecutions with a surprising relentlessness.” Jane Mayer, New Yorker, 4/23/11. http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz1ckKKa3c7

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/...174113732.html

    Daniel Ellsberg, “The campaign here against whistleblowers is actually unprecedented in legal terms.” "What we need released this month are the Pentagon Papers of Iraq and Afghanistan (and Pakistan, Yemen and Libya). . . .

    Yes, the languages and ethnicities that we don’t understand are different in the Middle East from those in Vietnam; the climate, terrain and types of ambushes are very different. But as the accounts in the Pentagon Papers explain, we face the same futile effort in Afghanistan to find and destroy nationalist guerrillas or to get them to quit fighting foreign invaders (now us) and the corrupt, ill-motivated, dope-dealing despots we support. As in Vietnam, the more troops we deploy and the more adversaries we kill (along with civilians), the quicker their losses are made good and the more their ranks grow, since it’s our very presence, our operations and our support of a regime without legitimacy that is the prime basis for their recruiting. . . ."


    Obama is very concerned with secrecy and we can assesg the value because some of the numbers (are still) available. from Mother Jones, 5/4/11.
    "Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO)—the federal agency that provides oversight of the government's security classification system—puts the cost of classification for 2010 at over $10.17 billion. That's a 15 percent jump from the previous year, and the first time ever that secrecy costs have surpassed $10 billion. Last month, ISOO reported that the number of original classification decisions generated by the Obama administration in 2010 was 224,734—a 22.6 percent jump from the previous year.

    The price tag of government secrecy is actually higher than the ISOO report suggests. The agency reviews the classification of 41 agencies—but not the CIA or the National Security Agency, among other agencies, whose classification is itself classified. The Federation of American Scientists' Steve Aftergood asked two security officials what damage to national security would result from releasing security cost estimates for the agencies in question. Their answer: that classifying that information "was consistent with intelligence community guidance." In other words: because we said so."
    "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

    #2
    A good story from the Founding Fathers





    In the winter of 1777, months after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the American warship Warren was anchored outside of Providence, R.I. On board, 10 revolutionary sailors and marines met in secret — not to plot against the king’s armies, but to discuss their concerns about the commander of the Continental Navy, Commodore Esek Hopkins. They knew the risks: Hopkins came from a powerful family; his brother was a former governor of Rhode Island and a signer of the declaration.

    Hopkins had participated in the torture of captured British sailors; he “treated prisoners in the most inhuman and barbarous manner,” his subordinates wrote in a petition.

    One whistle-blower, a Marine captain named John Grannis, was selected to present the petition to the Continental Congress, which voted on March 26, 1777, to suspend Hopkins from his post.

    The case did not end there. Hopkins, infuriated, immediately retaliated. He filed a criminal libel suit in Rhode Island against the whistle-blowers. Two of them who happened to be in Rhode Island — Samuel Shaw, a midshipman, and Richard Marven, a third lieutenant — were jailed. In a petition read to Congress on July 23, 1778, they pleaded that they had been “arrested for doing what they then believed and still believe was nothing but their duty.”

    Later that month, without any recorded dissent, Congress enacted America’s first whistle-blower-protection law: “That it is the duty of all persons in the service of the United States, as well as all other inhabitants thereof, to give the earliest information to Congress or any other proper authority of any misconduct, frauds or misdemeanors committed by any officers or persons in the service of these states, which may come to their knowledge.”

    Congress did not stop there. It wanted to ensure that the whistle-blowers would have excellent legal counsel to fight against the libel charges, and despite the financial hardships of the new republic, it authorized payment for the legal fees of Marven and Shaw.

    Congress did not hide behind government secrecy edicts, even though the nation was at war. Instead, it authorized the full release of all records related to the removal of Hopkins. No “state secret” privilege was invoked. The whistle-blowers did not need to use a Freedom of Information Act to obtain documents to vindicate themselves. There was no attempt to hide the fact that whistle-blowers had accused a Navy commander of mistreating prisoners.

    Armed with Congress’s support, the whistle-blowers put on a strong defense, and won their case in court. And true to its word, Congress on May 22, 1779, provided $1,418 to cover costs associated with the whistle-blowers’ defense. One “Sam. Adams” was directed to ensure that their Rhode Island lawyer, William Channing, was paid.

    Obama would have locked them up with Manning.
    "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

    Comment


      #3
      Good posts Pat.

      Sadly, far too many (most) of our politicians and the real people/corporations who pay them are wiping their collective asses on our Constitution.

      Transparency? Smoke and mirrors.
      Carter Hargrave's Jeet Can't Do

      http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=31636

      Comment


        #4
        Thanks to the well known radical rag, Newsweek (9/4/11), it's now clear, Obama has become Dick Cheney (the dark, blood soaked, stain on the soul of America): "President Obama has largely adopted the Cheney playbook on combating terrorism, from keeping Gitmo open to trying suspected enemies of the state in military tribunals. Obama's drone war, which has quadrupled the number of attacks in the past two years, reflects Cheney's whatever-it-takes approach."

        There has been an expansion of executive mischief under Obama. Cheney (Bush the Tool I dismiss) never claimed the right to summarily assassinate an American citizen abroad, as Obama has done. And Obama has ended torture? Wrong. He outsourced torture, it continues (http://www.thenation.com/article/161...-sites-somalia
        "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

        Comment


          #5
          Gabriel Schoenfeld of the Hudson Institute said, “Ironically, Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history—even more so than Nixon.

          Whistleblowers: Thomas Drake

          I have already paid a frightfully high price for being a whistleblower. But worse still lies ahead of me. Although I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and faithfully upheld the law of the land over a public service career spanning more than 20 years, I now stand before you as a criminal defendant, with my own life and liberty very much at stake, in a public trial set to begin on 13 June in Baltimore, Maryland.

          My case is centered on a government prosecution bent not on serving justice, but on meting out retaliation, reprisal and retribution for the purpose of relentlessly punishing a whistleblower. Furthermore, my case is one that sends a most chilling message to other would-be whistleblowers: not only can you lose your job, but also your very freedom.http://theoldspeakjournal.wordpress....-thomas-drake/

          Drake is being prosecuted not for sharing classified information with the media, but instead is being charged with having information—including UNclassified materials—in his possession that he used in cooperation with a Defense Department Inspector General audit of a program that wasted hundreds of millions of dollars and may have put your civil liberties at risk. As Danielle told the President, "Drake was exactly the kind of whistleblower who deserved protection." http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/201...rotection.htmlhttp://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...#ixzz1cr72dFce

          Bradley Manning
          President Barack Obama made stunning accusations about accused Wikileaks whistleblower PFC Bradley Manning, directly asserting that Manning “broke the law.” Apparently the President of the United States of America and a self-described Constitutional scholar does not care that Manning has yet to be tried or convicted for any crime.
          Manning, held in solitary confinement, describes the experience of being stripped naked at night and made to stand for parade in the nude, a condition that continues to this day. “The guard told me to stand at parade rest, with my hands behind my back and my legs spaced shoulder-width apart."
          http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/201...or-that-trial/
          Manning’s reported treatment is a violation of the US constitution, specifically the Eighth Amendment forbidding cruel and unusual punishment and the Fifth Amendment that prevents punishment without trial,” and, “in a stinging rebuke to Obama,” state that “he was once a professor of constitutional law, and entered the national stage as an eloquent moral leader. The question now, however, is whether his conduct as commander in chief meets fundamental standards of decency. http://www.eurasiareview.com/1304201...-criticism-by-http://www.americablog.com/2011/03/o...tleblower.html
          "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

          Comment


            #6
            William Kuttner of The American Prospect says, “Let’s stop pretending. Barack Obama is a disaster as a crisis president. He has taken an economic collapse that was the result of Republican ideology and Republican policies, and made it the Democrats’ fault. And the more that he is pummeled, the more he bends over. “

            In Obama’s “bad negotiating” is actually shrewd negotiating, Glenn Greenwald writes, “Whether in economic policy, national security, civil liberties, or the permanent consortium of corporate power that runs Washington, Obama, above all else, is content to be (one could even say eager to be) guardian of the status quo. And the forces of the status quo want tax cuts for the rich, serious cuts in government spending that don’t benefit them (social programs and progressive regulatory schemes), and entitlement ‘reform’ — so that’s what Obama will do.”
            "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

            Comment


              #7
              Well I hope you intend to at least vote , even given the fact that the
              popular vote means relatively speaking ..nothing.

              It's a very bleak picture , we can't have another 4 years of O'Bummer
              but the alternatives aren't really much better.

              Leemmmme see here

              RipEmOffAndHoweCorporate Raider Romney.......

              Pandering Putrid Porcine Perry ( is there a SINGLE citizen of Austin
              who *doesn't* have a Perry " Hookers-n-blow" story? just ONE?)

              Michelle " BallsyBiblicalBalrog" Bachmann .....every that one opens her
              mouth I swear to God I hear the theme from the twilight zone.

              Herman " My Wife is ____this---- tall I grope you now" Cain. That was
              an implosion.

              Newt Gingrich.............most newts and salamanders are benign , that one
              is both slimy AND poisonous.

              Chris Christie....yeahright with HIS stand on firearms...sure thing.

              Santorum...common sense....too many troubling religious connections.

              Ron Paul..........uh HUH , sure thing he'll win it this time. Mostly supported
              by the ' New Libertarian" types who've journeyed no farther than Rothbard if
              even that far.

              Gary Johnson..................maybe the best of the bunch , and not a snowballs
              chance in Hell of getting elected.

              And frankly I wish to hell the fringe players such as Donald " I'm A Billionaire
              and STILL Can't Afford A Decent Toupee" Trump and Sarah " I'mSo Milfy and Bimborific
              Palin would shit the hell up and go away.

              Oh and to add fuel to the fire just when you thought we were rid of the demon
              seed of Preston Bush we've got Jeb BushLeague making noise.

              We're freaking doomed.

              Comment


                #8
                What about this guy?

                go to http://www.bullshido.net/forums/prof...do=editoptions > under Thread Display Options > Number of Posts to Show Per Page: 40

                Comment


                  #9
                  His facial hair makes him unelectable.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by indy007 View Post
                    His facial hair makes him a god amongst insects.
                    FTFY.
                    Train hard, fight easy.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by indy007 View Post
                      His facial hair makes him unelectable.


                      Oh I don't know , give him a clerical collar and a frock coat and he'd get some votes.

                      " I say brothers , i I I i i I SAY brothers , I say BROTHERS THE RENTS TOO DAMN HIGH!

                      Can I get an Amen brothers"

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by patfromlogan View Post
                        it's now clear, Obama has become Dick Cheney
                        Thank you!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          fuck obama

                          "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Tranquil Suit View Post
                            What about this guy?

                            My first thought was - the guy from Godfather's Pizza went into politics,
                            and the guy from KFC follows him.
                            www.childsplaycharity.org

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Jazzman View Post
                              Ron Paul..........uh HUH , sure thing he'll win it this time. Mostly supported
                              by the ' New Libertarian" types who've journeyed no farther than Rothbard if
                              even that far.
                              I don't know why we keep hearing this when he's done so well in the polls and is the only candidate who's numbers have stayed consistent (not to mention the only candidate who has BEEN consistent in both word and action). He's surging in popularity DESPITE the entire media ignoring him since 2008 and has been breaking all sorts of donation records. Yet, the media keeps propping up some new GOP candidate (until everyone realizes they're complete morons), and will continue doing so, as long as it's not Ron Paul.

                              Seriously, first the media propped up Tim Pawlenty. After the first straw poll he drops out, Michelle Bachman (who barely beats RP by a fraction of a percent) is now tied for front-runner with Rick Perry, who no one even heard of until AFTER the straw poll he wasn't even a part of. Since Bachman's batshit insane, they stop focusing on her and turn to Perry. Then when people see Perry speak for the first time they realize he's a moron too. He's out. Next is Herman "I don't have answer cuz I'm not prezident yet" Cain, the dumbest POS since Bush Jr. and a possible sex offender. His numbers drop. Oh shit we're running out of candidates! Quick! Throw Newt up there! Same thing couldn't possibly happen with him! (Meanwhile pay absolutely no attention to Ron Paul).

                              Thanks for letting me rant. I now patiently await comments about how Ron Paul is senile and insane, and how his insane policies (such as getting out of the Middle East, paying down the debt, ending the Federal Reserve, reversing the Patriot Act, cuts in military spending, ending corporate welfare, etc.) will completely destroy our country and all of civilization.

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X