Hillary Clinton Paves Way to Arm Libyan Rebels!

To tell you the truth, I never had a kind word for any of Hillary's self-promoting speeches. Now, she has told a London conference that the recent UN security council resolution relaxed an arms embargo on that country. As Libya's opposition leaders called for the "international community" to arm them. "Meanwhile, back at the ranch", she, and Obama would take any measures, except violence against the slackers who refuse to vote against "her majesty's visions of our world! On a brighter note, Clinton made clear that UN security council resolution 1973, which allowed military strikes against Muamar Gaddafi's regime, relaxed the embargo. Speaking after the conference on Libya in London, Clinton said: "It is our interpretation that resolution 1973 amended or overrode the absolute prohibition of arms to anyone in Libya, so that there could be "legitimate" transfer of arms if a country were to choose to do that. We have not made a decision at this time." Clinton's remarks came after the Libyan Transitional National Council used the London conference to issue a plea to be armed. Mahmoud Shammam, the council's head of media, told a press conference at the Foreign Office: "We asked everybody to help us in many ways. one of them is giving our youth some real weapons."

Are we Fighting a War for World Government in Libya: Are we really that stupid - Obama is

Are we, as a nation, really so stupid, that we are now eager to fight for "world government" Obama is! It is a test that the international community has to pass: While a parade of politicians and "pundits" cite the "international community", the UN, and the "Arab street" are supposedly given them the justification not only to wage an illegal war against Libya, but also to threaten an illegal war against Syria as well. It should be remembered that it was neither the UN nor the "inter - national" community that laid the ground work for this campaign. What started out, supposedly as spontaneous, simultaneous uprisings across the Middle East, has transformed clearly into an aggressive Western-backed blitzkrieg of destabilization and regime change. (Is that what Obama meant, when he constantly used the word "CHANGE" in his long, and boring speeches?) At the time, Wesley Clark, author of: "A Time to Lead: For Duty, Honor, and County (published in 2007) was popular, at least for those who love the concept of "whacking" the various non-militarized people on our planet - (Adolf Hitler would have been SO proud, but neither my mother, or my grandmother were very fond of him.)

Rick Rozoff: War on Libya, and Control of the Mediterranean.

A year after assuming the post of president of the French Republic in 2007, and while that nation held the rotating European Union presidency, Nicolas Sarkozy invited the heads of state of the EU's 27 members and those of 17 non-EU Mediterranean countries to attend a conference in Paris to launch a conference in Paris to launch a Mediterranean Union. In the words of Britain's Daily Telegraph regarding the subsequent summit held for that purpose on July 13, 2008, "Sarkozy's big idea is to use imperial Rome's center of the world as a unifying factor linking 44 countries that are home to 800 million people." Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, however, announced that his nation would boycott the gathering, denouncing the initiative as one aimed at dividing both Africa and the Arab world, and stating: "We shall have another Roman empire and imperialist design. There are imperialist maps and design. There are imperialist maps and designs that we have already rolled up. We should not have them again." The unprecedented summit was held with the intention of "shifting Europe's strategic focus towards the Middle East, North Africa and the Balkans."

Fidel Castro Ruz: Are We Truly Ready For a Partnership of Equals?

Are we our brother's keeper? Fidel Castro Ruz wants to know - he REALLY DOES! On Saturday evening, on the 19th of this month, after a sumptuous banquet, NATO leaders ordered their attack on Libya. Of course, NOTHING could occur without the United States claiming its irrefutable role as "supreme leader". From its command post of that institution in Europe, a senior official declared that "Odyssey Dawn" was about to begin. World public opinion was deeply touched by the tragedy in Japan - The number of victims of the earthquake, the tsunami and the nuclear accident has kept on growing. By now, there are thousands of dead, missing, and radiation contaminated. Resistance to the use of nuclear energy will also grow considerably. The world, in other words, is suffering. At the same time, the consequences of climatic changes, shortages and higher prices of food, military spending and the squandering of natural and human resources are increasing. Now, the people of our troubled planet are also faced with the turmoil of war. Enter Obama's trip through Latin America, for which, considering their many hardships, people were hardly paying attention. Obama had wanted to win the South American giant over to his way of thinking: He spoke of the extraordinary rise of Brazil, but no-one was really listening, though Obama was ready to support that country as a permanent member of the privileged Security Council.

Congressman Ron Paul: Constitutional Problems with the Libyan War

Last week the moronic Obama Administration took the United States to war against Libya, without bothering to notify Congress, much less obtain a Constitutionally-mandated declaration of war. In the midst of our severe economic downturn, this "misadventure" has already cost us hundreds of millions of dollars, and we can be sure that the final price tag will be several times higher. Why did the US intervene in a civil war in a country that has neither attacked us nor poses a threat? We are told this was another "humanitarian intervention, like Clinton's 1999 war against Serbia, but as civilian victims of the US-led coalition bombing continue to add up, it is getting difficult to determine whether the problem we are creating on the ground is worse than the one we are trying to solve. Though the administration seems to be playing with semantics, calling this a "kinetic military action", let's be clear: This is a US act of war against Libya. Imposing a no-fly zone over the air space of a sovereign nation is an act of war, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates pointed out before the bombing began. That the administration hesitates to call this war, probably due to the troubling Constitutional implications, does not mean that it is one. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution could not be clearer: "The power and obligation to declare war resides solely in the US Congress."

Pravda Comment: Obama Is a Barefaced Lier!

Let us call a spade, a spade: Armed marauding thugs, committing acts of terrorism and arson, and who manipulate the words of others to justify their actions, are merely barefaced liars. President Obama is one of these, and how wrong were we to believe that he represented a new America? Russia once praised the American people for playing "the race card" in the last election, because they were not racists. Let us call a spade a spade. The fact is, the west got the entire Libya story wrong. Fact: There is a tremendous amount of support for Colonel Muammar Al-Qathafi in Libya. Fact: Libyans enjoy the highest human development indices in Africa. Fact: In 1951, Libya was the poorest country in the world. Fact: The rebellion in Benghazi began with armed groups of thugs perpetrating massacres and acts of terrorism, against unarmed civilians. Fact: The author of this article once praised President Barack Obama for his new and welcome stance on international relations, but now admits that he was entirely wrong. Let us call a spade a spade. Call him a lawyer? He is a liar, a cheap, unadulterated, disgusting, barefaced liar. He purposely misinterpreted the words of Muammar Al-Qathafi, claiming that he had threatened his people with violence. HE DID NOT!

Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio, is about to Impeach Obama!

Yes! Dennis J. Kucinich has raised the possibility of impeaching President Barack Obama for ordering aggressive air strikes against Libya, while Mitt Romney, a potential Republican presidential candidate, has said the policy shows the commander in chief to be "tentative, indecisive, timid and nuanced." What the "president" cannot brush aside is Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, who Mr. Obama has declared must leave power. If a year from now the dictator still rules Libya, thumbing his nose at the West and plotting revenge, Mr. Obama's political prospects will suffer, and Mr. Romney's critique will resonate. Though Libya may me of marginal strategic interests to the United States, its huge oil deposits must be considered, in view of our own dwindling oil resources. Libya may be of marginal interest to the United States, especially compared with Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran, yet in the short run, symbolically and politically, Mr. Obama may have more at stake. The analogy that might give the president comfort would be President George W. Bush's boast that the United States would "get Osama Bin Laden dead or alive." Foreign policy, except in times of unpopular and high-casualty wars, rarely drives US elections.