Comedy Gold Power

Did she really say this [expletive deleted] with a straight face?

Clinton: US using “smart power” for Libya, Syria

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton defended the U.S. response to crises in Libya and Syria on Tuesday, saying the Obama administration is projecting “smart power” by refusing to act alone or with brute force to stop autocratic repression in the two countries.

. . .

Clinton said Libya was a study in the use of “strategic patience,” whereby the United States resisted the impulse for immediate intervention and instead helped to build support for the country’s nascent opposition, which the U.S. now recognizes as Libya’s legitimate government. She said the unprecedented NATO-Arab alliance protecting civilians on the ground was a key result of the tactics of smart power.

“This is exactly the kind of world that I want to see, where it’s not just the United States and everybody is standing on the sidelines while we bear the costs,” she said.

In Syria, Clinton said Washington had adopted a similar stance. The administration has imposed sanctions to protest a ruthless crackdown on reformers but has thus far resisted calls to make an explicit demand for President Bashar Assad to step down, something it did with Qaddafi.

Clinton said it would be a mistake for the administration to demand Assad’s ouster on its own because it wouldn’t be effective given Washington’s long-strained ties with Damascus and limited U.S. influence and trade with Syria.

See also:
U.S. taking “smart power” approach to Libya, Syria
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
‘Smart power’ at work, says Hillary Clinton
Clinton defends U.S. response on Syria
Clinton Passes Up Chance to Call on Assad to Step Down as Obama Remains Silent
A Conversation with Secretaries Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta

Let’s recap: for months now, we’ve been bombing the [expletive deleted] out of Libya, a country that isn’t a direct threat to U.S. national security, killing civilians, destroying infrastructure, and backing a “rebel” movement containing elements of al Qaeda. That’s “smart power” and “strategic patience”, check. Meanwhile, Bashar Assad in Syria, a dictator in a country with plenty of American blood on its hands and a huge threat to U.S. national security, is killing civilians on a daily basis, with a death toll totaling in the thousands, and we’re doing nothing, because our relationship with Syria is “strained”. That’s also “smart power”, as well as “protecting civilians”, check.

What manner of counterproductive, nonsensical bull[expletive deleted] foreign policy is that? Smart Power my ass!

/are you seriously telling me that we have to put up with these moronic clowns for another year and a half?

Taking Questionable Sides In A Foreign Civil War

It’s official, we’re no longer hiding behind the fictitious fig leaf of “responsibility to protect” civilians (R2P), we’re now showing our true colors. We’re in Libya for regime change. I’m not quite sure when the United Nations approved that?

US, allies formally recognize Libya rebels

The United States granted Libyan rebel leaders full diplomatic recognition as the governing authority of Libya yesterday, after five months of fighting to oust longtime ruler Moammar Khadafy.

The decision at a meeting here of more than 30 Western and Arab nations is the first step in giving the rebels access to Libya’s frozen US assets, worth more than $30 billion.

“I am announcing today that, until an interim authority is in place, the United States will recognize the TNC as the legitimate governing authority for Libya,’’ Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said, referring to the rebels’ Transitional National Council, prompting other ministers to break out in applause.

Who, exactly, are we now in bed with?

Rights group: Libyan rebels looted and beat civilians

Libyan rebels have looted and burned homes and abused civilians, a human rights group said Wednesday.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said that, in “four towns captured by rebels in the Nafusa Mountains over the past month, rebel fighters and supporters have damaged property, burned some homes, looted from hospitals, homes, and shops, and beaten some individuals alleged to have supported government forces.”

See also:
U.S. recognition of the Libyan rebel government leaves many questions unanswered
US Formally Recognizes Libyan Rebels
United States recognizes Libyan rebels as legitimate government
U.S. recognizes Libyan rebels as ruling authority
Libyan Rebels Get U.S. Recognition, Await Cash
Libyan rebels win recognition and promise of financial support
Libyan Rebels Get U.S. Recognition Yet Must Wait for Cash
Mary E. Stonaker: What formal recognition given to Libyan rebels means for the oil markets
Rights Group: Libyan Rebels Loot Seized Towns
Rights group accuses Libyan rebels of abuse
Libya rebels loot seized towns, says rights group
Human Rights Watch criticizes Libyan rebels
Rights group exposes Libyan rebel abuses

Lets recap: The United States has now formally aligned itself with accused war criminals we hardly know, in a foreign civil war that we have absolutely no business being militarily involved with in the first place, and our mission creep to regime change isn’t even authorized or approved under international law. Is that about it?

/well played Obama administration, what are we now, a rogue nation?

Why Aren’t We Stomping Syria’s Guts Out?

Obama couldn’t wait to bomb Libya using the flimsy excuse of “protecting civilians”. Well, Bashar al-Assad has killed at least as many civilians as Moammar Gadhafi ever did and today Assad backed mobs attacked the U.S. embassy in Damascus, arguably an act of war. Why aren’t we bombing Syria and demanding that Assad leave the country? What’s Obama waiting for, another Iranian hostage situation?

Demonstrators storm U.S. embassy in Damascus

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has lost the legitimacy to rule after pro-government demonstrators stormed the U.S. Embassy in Damascus on Monday in what U.S. officials described as an orchestrated attack.

Regime supporters hurled rocks, smashed windows and tore down the American flag at the embassy, triggering the strongest U.S. condemnation yet of the Syrian government. Clinton suggested that the United States is contemplating the prospect of a post-Assad future in Syria nearly four months into a brutal government crackdown on pro-democracy activists inspired by the revolts in Egypt and Tunisia.

See also:
U.S. accuses Syria of unleashing mob attacks on U.S., French embassies
Syrian protesters attack U.S., French embassies
Syrian protesters attack U.S. Embassy in Damascus
Syrian protesters attack US, French embassies
US Embassy In Syria Attacked
Assad’s Embassy Raid
Deeply disappointed by the attack on American soil?
Clinton condemns US and French embassy attacks in Syria
U.S. Official: Syria’s Failure To Protect U.S. Embassy Is ‘Outrageous’
Assad Has ‘Lost Legitimacy,’ Clinton Says After Embassy Attacked
U.S. says Assad “not indispensable” to Syria

Is this what passes for consistent foreign policy in the Obama administration? The leaders of both Libya and Syria have killed thousands of civilians. Syria is infinitely more of a threat to U.S. national security than Libya is. Yet we’re bombing the [expletive deleted] out of Libya and trying to kill Gadhafi or drive him out of Libya at the same time we’re politely, diplomatically “condemning” Syria and giving Assad a total free pass. WTF?

/if we have a legitimate reason to be doing what we’re doing in Libya, we have even more of a legitimate reason to be doing even more of it in Syria and, by corollary, if we’re going to do nothing concrete about Syria’s brutal crackdown on civilians, we have absolutely no business whatsoever bombing Libya and we should get the hell out immediately, we’ve already done enough human and infrastructure damage there without any tangible results

From Mubarak To The Muslim Brotherhood

The Muslim Brotherhood motto:

Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

Sure, let’s talk to them, great idea, what could possibly go wrong? At least with Mubarak, we had someone committed to peace in the region and peace with Israel.

U.S. to expand contacts with Muslim Brotherhood

The U.S. government has decided to expand contacts with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, officials said Thursday, a shift that reflects the Islamist group’s growing role since the pro-democracy uprising in the key Arab country.

“We believe, given the changing political landscape in Egypt, that it is in the interests of the United States to engage with all parties that are peaceful and committed to nonviolence, that intend to compete for the parliament and the presidency,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in Budapest. “And we welcome, therefore, dialogue with those Muslim Brotherhood members who wish to talk with us.”

See also:
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood welcomes US talks
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood welcomes US talks
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood welcomes U.S. talks
Wiesenthal Center angry over US, Brotherhood talks
Wiesenthal Center slams US position on Muslim Brotherhood
Key US lawmaker condemns Muslim Brotherhood talks
Muslim Brotherhood to U.S.: Stop Backing Israel and We’ll Talk
Will Hamas be the next extremist group to be engaged by the U.S.?
The U.S. may be heading toward talks with Hamas

So now the United States is going to enter into formal diplomatic relations with Israel’s sworn enemies, how cool is that? Whoever in the Obama administration thinks this is a good idea is high on drugs or clearly on the wrong side of Middle East peace.

/one thing they surely are not is a friend of Israel

Have We Attacked China Yet?

No sooner was it publicly revealed that the United States would now treat damaging cyberattacks by other nations as an act of war, threatening retaliation with conventional weapons, the new, bold, some say foolish, policy, was immediately put to the test.

China Google hackers’ goal: Spying on U.S. Govt.

It’s the second time Google has blamed a major computer hacking scheme on China, reports CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews.

This time Google says unknown hackers from Jinan, China, a city with a military command center, stole the personal Gmail passwords of hundreds of senior U.S .government officials.

Google said the hackers’ “goal” was to eavesdrop on the officials — “to monitor the content of the users’ emails.”

That suggestion — of spying — rang alarm bells in the Administration.

“These allegations are very serious,” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “We take them seriously. We’re looking into them.”

See also:
Clinton: Google’s China Hacking Claims ‘Very Serious’
Hillary Clinton says FBI will probe Gmail hacker attack
US Investigating Google Claim of China Hacking
FBI Investigating Google Claim that China Hacked Them
Google breach gives way to diplomatic, high-tech tensions
China Denies Accessing High Profile Gmail Accounts
Google’s groundless accuses hurt global trust on Internet
The Google-China Saga Continues
Admin: Gmail phishers stalked victims for months
Gmail Hack Targeted White House
Cyber war: Google, China in fresh spat over email hacking
Google, what exactly is the China connection for the phishing scare?
Is Google an agent of the US Government? It certainly gives that impression

So far, the U.S. has uncovered a successful espionage phishing expedition, against top level U.S. Government officials, tracked back to a specific Chinese city. Why aren’t we bombing China, isn’t this a perfect situation to show how our new military policy will treat hacking intrusions like this as acts of war? Unfortunately for us, China denies the attack and, as I pointed out yesterday, it’s extremely difficult to be absolutely sure as to the origins of cyberattacks like this, so we do nothing and our brand new policy looks foolish and radiates national weakness.

/instead of making toothless threats to send missile strikes in response to hack attacks, why don’t we just send the Chinese back a nice Stuxnet worm or take down Baidu with a complimentary DoS attack

Proof Of Life

Well, this is certainly good news after four years without the slightest clue as to his whereabouts. That said, he’s not home until he’s home.

Years After Vanishing in Iran, US Man Proven Alive

Four years after a retired FBI agent mysteriously vanished inside Iran, U.S. officials have received irrefutable proof he is alive, a dramatic development that has sharply intensified diplomatic efforts to bring him home, The Associated Press has learned.

The U.S. had lacked reliable information about whether Robert Levinson was alive or dead since he disappeared in March 2007 from the Iranian island of Kish. It remains unclear who exactly is holding Levinson or where he is, but the proof that he is alive is a hopeful sign in a case that had seemingly gone cold.

The State Department issued a three-sentence statement by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton Thursday saying there were indications Levinson was in southwest Asia and asking Iran for help. The AP has learned fuller details after a lengthy investigation into Levinson’s disappearance and the effort to get him back to the U.S.

See also:
US Cites Possible Break in Levinson Case
Retired FBI agent missing in Iran ‘alive’
Robert Levinson, former agent who vanished in Iran, is “alive”
U.S. says it has proof U.S. man who vanished in Iran in 2007 is still alive
U.S. Says Missing Former FBI Agent Is Alive
Clinton asks Iran to help find missing FBI agent
Who is missing American Robert Levinson?
Family of Ex-FBI Agent Missing in Iran Gets Evidence He Is Alive
Missing FBI retiree may be captive in southwest Asia
US believes missing ex-FBI Levinson agent alive
U.S. has signs ex-FBI agent held in southwest Asia
U.S. says vanished agent alive
Family of American missing in Iran asks for prayer
Robert Levinson
Help Bob Levinson

It’s a tough enough situation that Levinson is being held somewhere in southwest Asia, just about the last place on Earth that you’d want to be a prisoner, or that Iran is probably involved in his disappearance and is being asked to help secure his release, but what makes it tougher is that Obama and Hillary are apparently spearheading the effort to get Levinson back. Pardon me, but judging by their foreign policy performance over the last two years, their leadership doesn’t inspire a whole lot of confidence that they can pull off this repatriation without screwing it up. If I were the family, I’d rather be using a professional hostage negotiator to get Levinson back.

/anyway, despite the involvement of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy clown posse, as they say, even a blind squirrel gets a nut every now and then, let’s all hope and pray that Robert Levinson is safely returned to his family soon

Obama’s Continuing War On Arizona

This is the most despicable and ridiculous salvo yet in Obama’s all out assault on Arizona. Ratting out Arizona’s attempt to enforce existing Federal immigration law as a violation of human rights, to the U.N. Human Rights Commission, an unfunny joke of a U.N. panel packed with some of the planet’s worst human rights violators, who’s insane, crazy, warped idea was this travesty? It’s just stunningly, mind boggling, staggeringly, jaw dropping bizarre and stupid. Forget about Arizona’s state sovereignty, what the hell happened to the United States’ national sovereignty? What the [expletive deleted] is wrong with the Obama administration?

Brewer demands Clinton remove Arizona from human rights report

Arizona GOP Gov. Jan Brewer is demanding that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remove an Arizona passage from the State Department’s report on human rights in America.

The State Department said in its report (PDF) that Arizona’s immigration law “has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world” and that the federal government was taking action in court against it.

In a letter to Clinton (PDF), Brewer called the inclusion “downright offensive.”

“The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a State of the United States to ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional,” she writes.

See also:
Clinton’s report to U.N. takes cheap shot at Arizona
Brewer rightly condemns report to U.N. as “Internationalism run amok”
Brewer Condemns Report to UN Mentioning Arizona Law
Gov. Jan Brewer condemns State Department report
Arizona’s Governor Brewer Blasts Obama-Clinton UN Report
Brewer fumes over U.S. report ripping AZ
Obama’s Human Rights Disgrace
State Department Stands By Decision to Include Arizona in U.N. Human Rights Report
Report of the United States of America
Submitted to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights
In Conjunction with the Universal Periodic Review

Protest of State Department Report to United Nations Human Rights Council
The Human Rights Council
United Nations Human Rights Council

So, to recap, the Obama administration submitted a report to the U.N. Human Rights Council, claiming that Arizona was committing human rights violations by enforcing U.S. immigration law.

/and, as if that isn’t bad enough, some of the members of the Human Rights Council, the entity to which the report was submitted and which will stand in judgment, are such noted world champions of human rights as China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, just utterly unbelievable and unconscionable

Obama Plans To Invade Pakistan

Mister Nobel Peace Prize winner is apparently preparing to keep one of his campaign promises and launch “overseas contingency operations” on Pakistani soil.

Options studied for a possible Pakistan strike

The U.S. military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan in the event that a successful attack on American soil is traced to the country’s tribal areas, according to senior military officials.

Ties between the alleged Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and elements of the Pakistani Taliban have sharpened the Obama administration’s need for retaliatory options, the officials said. They stressed that a U.S. reprisal would be contemplated only under extreme circumstances, such as a catastrophic attack that leaves President Obama convinced that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient.

“Planning has been reinvigorated in the wake of Times Square,” one of the officials said.

At the same time, the administration is trying to deepen ties to Pakistan’s intelligence officials in a bid to head off any attack by militant groups. The United States and Pakistan have recently established a joint military intelligence center on the outskirts of the northwestern city of Peshawar, and are in negotiations to set up another one near Quetta, the Pakistani city where the Afghan Taliban is based, according to the U.S. military officials. They and other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity surrounding U.S. military and intelligence activities in Pakistan.

The “fusion centers” are meant to bolster Pakistani military operations by providing direct access to U.S. intelligence, including real-time video surveillance from drones controlled by the U.S. Special Operations Command, the officials said. But in an acknowledgment of the continuing mistrust between the two governments, the officials added that both sides also see the centers as a way to keep a closer eye on one another, as well as to monitor military operations and intelligence activities in insurgent areas.

Obama said during his campaign for the presidency that he would be willing to order strikes in Pakistan, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in a television interview after the Times Square attempt that “if, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences.”

Obama dispatched his national security adviser, James L. Jones, and CIA Director Leon Panetta to Islamabad this month to deliver a similar message to Pakistani officials, including President Asif Ali Zardari and the military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani.

Jones and Panetta also presented evidence gathered by U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies that Shahzad received significant support from the Pakistani Taliban.

The U.S. options for potential retaliatory action rely mainly on air and missile strikes, but could also employ small teams of U.S. Special Operations troops already positioned along the border with Afghanistan. One of the senior military officials said plans for military strikes in Pakistan have been revised significantly over the past several years, moving away from a “large, punitive response” to more measured plans meant to deliver retaliatory blows against specific militant groups.

See also:
Report: US Preparing for Retaliatory Strike if Terror Attack Traced to Pakistan
US mulls unilateral Pakistan raids
U.S. studies options for possible Pakistan attack: report
US Army reviewing options for ‘unilateral’ strike on Pakistan
US develops plans for unilateral strike on Pakistan
US Preps a Retaliatory Hit on Pakistan
Airstrike on civilians blamed on mistakes…Pakistani Taliban could face retaliation if they strike the US

If you’re willing to put American boots on Pakistani ground in response to an attack on the United States you should also be willing to do the same as part of the war in Afghanistan.

/you can’t beat the Taliban unless you ultimately take the fight to where they live, in their Pakistani sanctuaries

Boring Iran Into Submission With Failed Empty Rhetoric

It’s deja vu over and over and over again, like approaching infifnity, we never seem to actually get there. Yawn, all the usual boring, milquetoast suspects.

US working on ‘tough’ Iran sanctions

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says Washington is holding talks with its partners to impose tough new sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program.

Clinton also accused Iran of defying the international community.

“Iran’s continued disregard for its international obligations underscores the importance of united international pressure to change its policies,” Reuters quoted Clinton as saying on Tuesday.

“The United States is working with our partners… on tough new sanctions that will further sharpen the choices that Iran’s leaders face,” she added.

On Monday, US State Department spokesman Philip Crowley confirmed that a flurry of telephone conversations on Iran between Clinton and world leaders, including her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, had taken place over the weekend.

The US is spearheading a campaign to impose a new round of sanctions on Iran, despite the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has never found a shred of evidence indicating that the Islamic Republic has had any diversion in its peaceful nuclear program.

Tehran has repeatedly declared that it will not relinquish the inalienable nuclear rights of the Iranian nation under Western pressure.

See also:
U.S. seeks tough sanctions on Iran: Clinton
Clinton: U.S. seeks new ‘tough’ Iran sanctions
Clinton: US seeks ‘tough’ Iran sanctions
Biden: China will agree to Iran sanctions
Biden Expects New UN Sanctions Against Iran
President Obama predicts ‘strong, tough’ Iran sanctions
Iran nuclear program: On sanctions, Congress ahead of Obama
Clinton: Iran Should Direct Concerns to IAEA
Iran hardliner issues Strait of Hormuz warning to U.S.
Iran FM hopeful for nuke fuel deal, no sanctions
Clinton Says Iran Still Hasn’t Accepted Fuel Swap Deal, Sanctions “Sometime in the Spring”
Even as momentum for Iran sanctions grows, containment seems only viable option

How’s that Obama “smart diplomacy” working out? One day China’s on board, next day Russia’s on board, but yet new sanctions on Iran never materialize. It’s a big international joke and China, Iran, and Russia are laughing their collective asses off at our expense.

/alright, back in the clown car all you Obama administration clowns, bad comedy is not foreign policy

The Most Mendacious Utterance Against Israel So Far

Emanuel: Thwarting Iran hinges on Israeli-Palestinian talks

Thwarting Iran’s nuclear program is conditional on progress in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, according to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

World Israeli TV reports said Monday that Emanuel made the comments in a closed-door meeting the previous day with 300 major AIPAC donors.

Really, what does that mean, exactly where’s the linkage? Is Rahn suggesting that Iran has agreed to give up it’s nuclear program if Israel agrees to a two state solution or is the United States threatening it won’t lift a finger to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons unless Israel agrees to a forced two state solution against her will?

The ground truth favors the latter explanation seeing as how Iran has no intention of giving up it’s nuclear weapons program. It’s disgusting and reprehensible that the United States would blackmail Israel with the Iranian nuclear threat to force Israel to accept, against her will, an agreement with those who still refuse to even recognize the right of Israel to exist.

Then again, the Obama administration already has an established ant-Israel track record.

See also:
More Israeli Concerns Over Changing U.S. Policy
White House gets tougher with Israel on two-state solution, Iran
White House links Iran nukes to Palestinian state
Gingrich: ‘Obama endangering Israel’
AIPAC
Meanwhile, Back In The Middle East
Israel Will Not Go Quietly Into The Night
Bad News For Israel

It’s a full court press against Israel.

Clinton: ‘Israel may lose Arab support on Iran’

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Israel on Thursday that it risks losing Arab support for combating threats from Iran if it rejects peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

“For Israel to get the kind of strong support it is looking for vis-a-vis Iran, it can’t stay on the sidelines with respect to the Palestinians and the peace efforts. They go hand in hand,” Clinton told the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee.

She added that Arab countries “believe that Israel’s willingness to re-enter into discussions with the Palestinian Authority strengthens them in being able to deal with Iran.”

See also:
Clinton: Israel risks losing support on Iran
Clinton: Israel at risk of losing support against Iran threat
Clinton says Israel risks losing support on Iran
Clinton: Progress on Palestinians, Iran go hand-in-hand

What manner of ungodly bull[expletive deleted] is this? Which mythical Arab countries are offering to pick up Israel’s banner in the struggle to prevent Iran from fielding a nuclear weapon? In fact, name one Arab country that has acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and/or disavowed a desire to wipe the Jewish state off the map? Name one! Who the [expletive deleted] do these Obama cronies think they’re bull[expletive deleted]?

Make no mistake, the phone will ring and ring and ring . . .

/Obama is no friend of Israel, he’s squarely on the other side, pray for Israel’s survival over the next four years and then lets do something about this travesty