Tag: Obama

Obama Pledges To Destroy Country At Least Five More Times Before Leaving Office

hellscape

 

CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA – (CT&P) – While campaigning for Hillary Clinton in Forlorn Hope, West Virginia over the weekend, President Obama pledged that he would do his very best to destroy America at least five more times before he leaves office in January.

‘It has been by privilege as the first black man in the White House to destroy America as many  times as I possibly could in the last seven years, and I’m looking forward to finishing with a flourish,” said Obama.

“It’s hard for me to overstate just how much I hate this country and everything it stands for. Freedom, liberty, equal treatment under the law, I just hate that shit, and always have. I’m looking forward to seeking out the last standing buildings and institutions across America and laying waste to them like I have the vast majority of our once great country.”

obama444

Republican politicians and pundits have responded with outrage over the President’s comments, calling him a destructive maniac who just wants to destroy everything.

Representative and respected racist Steve King of Iowa told Fox News that if we don’t do something quick, every contribution to western civilization made by white folks will be erased in an orgy of destruction.

“We downtrodden white people have to once and for all stand up and be counted,” said King.

“America has been destroyed so many times by this man that it’s hard to find anything that has escaped being destroyed in all the destruction that surrounds us,” said King, who then stared off into space and started mumbling something about grapefruit.

White House Press Secretary Josh Ernest is expected to detail the President’s plans for the complete annihilation of America and our way of life during a press conference Monday morning.

Obama May Be Preaching ‘Tough Love’ to Saudi – But Arms Sales Tell Another Story | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

When President Barack Obama arrived in Saudi Arabia on Wednesday for a meeting of Gulf leaders, he was greeted at the airport by the governor of Riyadh, instead of the Saudi king. Unlike his previous visits, Obama’s arrival was not broadcast on Saudi state television with its usual pomp and circumstance.

Source: Obama May Be Preaching ‘Tough Love’ to Saudi – But Arms Sales Tell Another Story | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

The Guardian view on a key week in the EU debate: Obama sends the right message | Editorial | Opinion | The Guardian

Editorial: The remain campaign has played two big cards this week. Britain’s debate about Europe is now much more serious than before

Source: The Guardian view on a key week in the EU debate: Obama sends the right message | Editorial | Opinion | The Guardian

Obama Demands Trump Release Certificate Proving He Was Born With A Frontal Lobe

trump obama

Saying the American people deserved to know the truth, US President Barack Obama made calls today for Republican frontrunner Donald Trump to release proof that he was born with the front part of his brain.

“It’s really quite simple,” Obama said at the White House today. “If you have a frontal lobe, just release the documentation to prove it”.

The frontal lobe is the part of the brain that gives humans the ability to project the consequences of actions, determine between good and bad, and to suppress socially offensive behaviour.

Obama said the whole matter could be put to rest in a matter of minutes. “Let’s just get this out in the open and move on. I produced the certificate showing I was born in America. Mr Trump should release the certificate that shows he was born with a conscience”.

Mr Trump responded to the claims by saying, “Well I think what’s important here is that if you go to Qatar you see airports the likes of which you have never seen before. Dubai, different places in China. You see infrastructure, you see airports, other things, the likes of which you have never seen here”.

Obama Destroys Cuba In Less Than 24 Hours

obama444

 

HAVANA – (CT&P) – A distraught President Raul Castro of Cuba appeared on Radio Havana today and announced that after less than 24 hours since setting foot in Havana, the President of the United States had managed to completely destroy the entire country.

“Our beautiful nation now lays in ruins,” said an emotional Castro. “This monster, this Antichrist, was not satisfied destroying his own country dozens of times during his presidency; he had to haul his black ass down here and destroy ours as well, the bastard!”

“Cuba was once a glittering jewel of the Caribbean, now it nothing more than a heap of smoldering ashes. I had heard rumors from Republicans and other poorly educated Americans about how Obama had repeatedly ‘destroyed America’ but I chose to ignore the warnings and let him visit our idyllic land.

“Now I must take full responsibility for the disaster that has occurred. We have a long and hard rebuilding process ahead of us, but with the help of God and western European tourists we will prevail. God help us all.”

Mr. Obama offered no response to the radio address as he drank beer and toured a sugar cane plantation in the hills outside a burning garbage dump that only the day before was the thriving city of Cardenas.

He is expected to leave Havana tomorrow and destroy three countries in Central America before returning home to destroy America several more times before leaving office.

Barack Obama says US gun laws must be changed, praises Australia again

US President Barack Obama on Thursday angrily called for stricter gun laws after the latest mass murder in Oregon and took aim at the powerful National Rifle Association gun lobby for blocking reform.

Source: Barack Obama says US gun laws must be changed, praises Australia again

Syria crisis: Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin spar over fate of Bashar al-Assad in duelling UN speeches – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

US President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin share a toast at a luncheon at the UN.

Russian president Putin and his US counterpart spar over the crisis in Syria in duelling UN speeches.

Source: Syria crisis: Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin spar over fate of Bashar al-Assad in duelling UN speeches – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Mean what you say: The current cold war developing is far more serious than the Middle East

Mean what you say. 54000.jpeg

Earlier this past summer, when he found the time and managed to tear himself away from another arduous day on the links, U.S. President Barack Obama said this about the deepening Ukraine crisis: ‘All options are on the table’. Ostensibly that cryptic line was Obama’s response to Crimea’s unanimous vote for secession from Ukraine and to join the Russian Federation. Obama went further. Before stepping on the gas pedal aboard Golf Cart One, Obama added the foreboding sentence: ‘We’ve already ‘teed-up’ those options’. Whatever that is supposed to mean in presidential golf parlance!

Anyone one with a little imagination would surmise Obama meant in addition to enacting punitive economic (though illegal) sanctions against Russia, the U.S. President also consulted with the Pentagon to do what they do worst: spread their incessant wars, through regime change. More likely the scenario: the ‘chicken hawks’ in his State Department and the Pentagon already had those plans at the ready, decades ago. Now all that is required was to pull those DOD top secret files from the dusty shelves, dip in the slush jar and the U.S. military-industrial machismo democracy spreading machine was ‘good to go’. Congress need not apply. Neither would they be apprised. Go it alone; business as usual.

Absent from my missive’s title is the usual preface to that old but meaningful adage: ‘Say what you mean’. Well, one could say that Obama fulfilled the first premise. Not so sure that he succeeded with the second part though. The problem lies with the operative word: ‘All’. And given President Obama’s status as Commander-in-Chief of the armed services as well the informal title of ‘Leader of the Free World’ by extension it seems right and just if any one private citizen or Member of Congress would hold Obama’s ‘feet to the fire’ so to speak over that all inclusive ‘All’ word.

So far, that litmus test has not happened; not by the Congress; nor from the mainstream media; neither by the business and financial communities. Suffice it to say, that I’ve not read or heard everything reported in re Obama’s rendering of that all important ‘All’ word. Moreover, in a democracy like the U.S. paradigm somewhere in that presidential ‘all’ litany you would expect to find at least one diplomatic option. One would also hope that ‘diplomacy’ sat atop the hierarchy of presidential priorities regarding solving the worsening crisis in Ukraine as well as those in other ‘hot spots’ around the globe.

 

And there is much historical precedent to embrace the diplomatic option, first and foremost. All one needs to do is re-visit the 1960’s. During October of 1962 the young Kennedy Administration was in a similar position as Obama is today but much closer to home. The ‘Cuban Missile Crisis’ had the world on the brink of disaster, at the point of staring into the abyss. With both the U.S.S.R.’s and America’s nuclear weapons already proliferating, the whole world was held hostage as the potentially deadly crisis ‘played’ out.

At the crisis’ height, the two sides were well past the breaking point. Critical mass had already been reached when President John Kennedy authorized a naval blockade around Cuba. This high seas American maneuver, to many experts and scholars alike, was in fact a declaration of war on the Soviets. Their flotilla of navy war and supply ships was denied access to Cuba and forced to turn away. The Americans claimed that their enemy, Communist Cuba was building missile launch sites with hardware supplied by the Soviets. U.S. spy satellite imagery confirmed America’s and Kennedy’s worst fears.

Each passing day, for most people, meant that mankind was one step closer to a catastrophic nuclear conflagration. The world press feared that if indeed ‘push came to shove’ then for certain we all, would

Earlier this past summer, when he found the time and managed to tear himself away from another arduous day on the links, U.S. President Barack Obama said this about the deepening Ukraine crisis: ‘All options are on the table’. Ostensibly that cryptic line was Obama’s response to Crimea’s unanimous vote for secession from Ukraine and to join the Russian Federation. Obama went further. Before stepping on the gas pedal aboard Golf Cart One, Obama added the foreboding sentence: ‘We’ve already ‘teed-up’ those options’. Whatever that is supposed to mean in presidential golf parlance!

Anyone one with a little imagination would surmise Obama meant in addition to enacting punitive economic (though illegal) sanctions against Russia, the U.S. President also consulted with the Pentagon to do what they do worst: spread their incessant wars, through regime change. More likely the scenario: the ‘chicken hawks’ in his State Department and the Pentagon already had those plans at the ready, decades ago. Now all that is required was to pull those DOD top secret files from the dusty shelves, dip in the slush jar and the U.S. military-industrial machismo democracy spreading machine was ‘good to go’. Congress need not apply. Neither would they be apprised. Go it alone; business as usual.

Absent from my missive’s title is the usual preface to that old but meaningful adage: ‘Say what you mean’. Well, one could say that Obama fulfilled the first premise. Not so sure that he succeeded with the second part though. The problem lies with the operative word: ‘All’. And given President Obama’s status as Commander-in-Chief of the armed services as well the informal title of ‘Leader of the Free World’ by extension it seems right and just if any one private citizen or Member of Congress would hold Obama’s ‘feet to the fire’ so to speak over that all inclusive ‘All’ word.

So far, that litmus test has not happened; not by the Congress; nor from the mainstream media; neither by the business and financial communities. Suffice it to say, that I’ve not read or heard everything reported in re Obama’s rendering of that all important ‘All’ word. Moreover, in a democracy like the U.S. paradigm somewhere in that presidential ‘all’ litany you would expect to find at least one diplomatic option. One would also hope that ‘diplomacy’ sat atop the hierarchy of presidential priorities regarding solving the worsening crisis in Ukraine as well as those in other ‘hot spots’ around the globe.

And there is much historical precedent to embrace the diplomatic option, first and foremost. All one needs to do is re-visit the 1960’s. During October of 1962 the young Kennedy Administration was in a similar position as Obama is today but much closer to home. The ‘Cuban Missile Crisis’ had the world on the brink of disaster, at the point of staring into the abyss. With both the U.S.S.R.’s and America’s nuclear weapons already proliferating, the whole world was held hostage as the potentially deadly crisis ‘played’ out.

At the crisis’ height, the two sides were well past the breaking point. Critical mass had already been reached when President John Kennedy authorized a naval blockade around Cuba. This high seas American maneuver, to many experts and scholars alike, was in fact a declaration of war on the Soviets. Their flotilla of navy war and supply ships was denied access to Cuba and forced to turn away. The Americans claimed that their enemy, Communist Cuba was building missile launch sites with hardware supplied by the Soviets. U.S. spy satellite imagery confirmed America’s and Kennedy’s worst fears.

Each passing day, for most people, meant that mankind was one step closer to a catastrophic nuclear conflagration. The world press feared that if indeed ‘push came to shove’ then for certain we all, wouldMean what you say

fall over the cliff into extinction; winners and losers included. Soon many media sources abandoned all hope for a solution. Some key players in the Administration were of the same persuasion; they urged American citizens to build ‘fallout shelters’ wherever they could afford to: basements, backyard, underground tunnels, etc.

The Kennedys (John and Attorney General Bobby) though eschewed the pessimists. Instead, they worked the problem. The Oval Office candles now burnt well past the midnight hour. Working tirelessly, the brothers pulled ‘all nighters’; one time for a week straight. Their adversary, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev was a formidable foe; a feisty, desk pounding character and one not to be trifled with. No surprise; the always effusive Khrushchev in the past vowed to America, ‘We will bury you’. However, under the present circumstances, he could not ‘stand down’, faced with the prospect, make that a certainty, the hardliners at the Kremlin would plot Khrushchev’s immediate ouster if he capitulated to the young American President.

With that knowledge the Kennedys’ discerned a novel strategy. Using a pragmatic ‘lettered’ approach they responded to Khrushchev’s earlier conciliatory communiqué while ignoring the latter missive which was an ultimatum. Even though the Kennedy’s were in a ‘defensive mode’, they took the moral high ground and conceded to Khrushchev’s demand s to remove American missiles in Turkey. The Soviet leader sensed ‘an out’. He agreed. Straight away Khrushchev ordered the dismantling of all Cuban missile installations.

There is a poignant message to be learned here. President Obama has made his intentions clear: he wants a positive legacy for his Presidency. And now that the GOP controls Congress after the mid-term elections, the prospects look dim for a good result from his domestic policies. Moreover, it is almost a certainty that the Affordable Care Act and his Immigration Amnesty Bill will wind up as dead ducks.

What better way is there to cement Obama’s legacy than to invoke the ‘Kennedy Option’? Doing so would bring his counterpart, Russian President Vladimir Putin back to the Minsk table for honest and productive discussions. More important, the world would breathe a sigh of relief and a major, protracted global recession could be avoided or at least shortened. So what if Putin keeps Crimea? It was Russia’s all along.

And who knows? Maybe next year those good housekeeping folks over at Forbes Magazine may even bestow on him the honor of ‘the world’s most influential person’. And that achievement comes with a silver lining: President Putin would be denied the ‘three-peat’.

Not holding my breath…

Montresor

“Ignorance is associated with exaggerated confidence in one’s abilities, whereas experts are unduly tentative about their performance.”

The  Dunning-Kruger effectpublished in 1999.Appliesdirectly to the Andrew Bolt’s of this world when it comes to the denial of Climate change in particular those employed by Fox News and News Corp.

“Ignorance is associated with exaggerated confidence in one’s abilities, whereas experts are unduly tentative about their performance.”
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wvVPdyYeaQU

Confidence and credibility

Unfortunately projected confidence as the most important determinant in judged credibility.

Does this mean that the poorest-performing — and hence most over-confident — expert is believed more than the top performer whose displayed confidence may be a little more tentative?

In contested arenas, such as climate change, the Dunning-Kruger effect and its flow-on consequences can distort public perceptions of the true scientific state of affairs, yes.

To illustrate, there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that greenhouse gas emissions. This consensus is expressed in more than 95% of the scientific literature and it is shared by a similar fraction — 97-98% – of publishing experts in the area.  Research has found that the “relative climate expertise and scientific prominence” of the few dissenting researchers “are substantially below that of the convinced researchers”. In other words Bolt and his denier sources are not only a minority but are below par when it comes to research. Those ‘for’ are counted in the 1000’s whereas those against wouldn’t fill  a small room. What News Corp and Bolt fail to recognize is the false balance they present is actually bias.

recognise (false) balance as (actual) bias?

‘I’m not an expert, but…’

How should actual experts  deal with the problems that arise from Dunning-Kruger, the media’s failure to recognise Bolt’s lack of “balance” as bias, and the fact that the public uses projected confidence  of commentators as a cue for credibility?

1 The pervasive scientific consensus on climate change IPCC report based on 100’s of the top climate scientists  In the same way as there is a consensus that smoking causes cancerThe public has a right to know that there is a scientific consensus on climate change.

2That the public wants scientists to work closely with managers and others to integrate scientific results into management decisions. This opinion appears to be equally shared by all stakeholders, from scientists to managers and interest groups. That decisions aren’t made on Bolt’s notion that “I’m not an expert but think of the economic harm therefore…..”

Advocacy or understanding?

Given the consensus “the only unequivocal tool for minimising climate change uncertainty is to decrease our greenhouse gas emissions”. In the same way that given the consensus on smoking and cancer quitting will minimise the risk of cancer.It is not advocacy.

Both statements are true. Both identify a link between a scientific consensus and a personal or political action.Neither  advocates any specific response or non response.— but both require an informed decision based on the scientific consensus.

Spurious accusations of advocacy which Bolt uses is merely a ploy to marginalise the voices of experts.removing their opinion from public debate. The consequence is that scientific evidence is lost to the public and is lost to the democratic process.Sober policy decisions on climate change cannot be made when politicians claim that they are not scientists while also erroneously claiming that there is no scientific consensus which immediately shows their advocacy and conservative bias.

Climate change denier Jim Inhofe in line for Senate’s top environmental job

Climate skeptic nad Republican Senator Jim Inhofe

Obama faces a fight to protect his climate change agenda after midterm results suggest Senate’s top environmental post will fall to Republican stalwart of climate denial

The Senate’s top environmental job is set to fall to Jim Inhofe, one of the biggest names in US climate denial, but campaigners say Barack Obama will fight to protect his global warming agenda.

Oklahoma Republican Inhofe has been denying the science behind climate change for 20 years – long before it became a cause for the conservative tea party wing. Following midterm elections which saw the Republicans take control of the senate, he is now expected to become the chairman of the senate environment and public works committee.

However, advocates believe Obama will work to protect his signature power plant rules from Republican attacks, and to live up to his earlier commitments to a global deal on fight climate change.

“We think he sees this as a critically important part of his second term legacy and there is no reason why he should not continue to go forward on this… both domestically and around the world,” Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, told a press briefing.

The campaigners were less clear, however, how far Obama would be willing to fight to block the Keystone XL pipeline project.

Obama will get a chance to show he is still committed to fighting climate change during a trip to Beijing next week, where the US and Chinese are expected to announce new energy co-operation.

Extracting a pledge from China to cut emissions is hugely important now for Obama, who faces growing pressure from Republicans to demonstrate that other countries beyond the US – especially the high-emissions, rising economies – are acting on climate change.

“It is a domestic political imperative for the president to gain emissions reductions from China and other major emitters as much as it is an international policy goal,” said Paul Bledsoe, a climate change official in the Clinton White House.

“The president is under increasing pressure to gain emissions reductions from China and other major emitters in order to justify US domestic mitigation policy. That is going to be the spin Republicans put on it – that we are wasting our time with domestic emissions reductions because they will be swamped by developing countries’ pollution.”

Obama is going to feel that pressure the most from Congress. With his opponents now in control of both houses, the top slot on the Senate’s environment and public works committee passes from a climate defender, the California Democrat, Barbara Boxer, to Inhofe.

He published a book in 2012 calling global warming a hoax, and has compared the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Gestapo.

A spokeswoman for Inhofe said his first concern was passing the defence budget, and that he would make no comment on his leadership roles until next week.

But if, as expected, Inhofe becomes the new committee chair next January, he will probably try to dismantle the EPA rules cutting greenhouse gas emissions from power plants – the centrepiece of Obama’s environmental agenda.

Industry lobbyists and campaigners said Inhofe lacked the votes to throw out the power plant rules entirely.

Obama would also veto any such move, said Scott Segal, an energy and coal lobbyist with Bracewell & Giuliani.

“I’m not sure we have the votes to advance those across the finish line particularly if they are vetoed,” Segal told a conference call with reporters. Instead, he said he expected “tailored changes”, which could weaken the rules.

Bledsoe did expect, however, that Obama will sign off on the controversial Keystone XL project early next year.

Republicans have said approving the pipeline, built to pump tar sands crude to Texas Gulf Coast refineries, would be an early order of business.

Obama in his post-election press conference gave no indication what he would decide. But Bledsoe said: “I actually believe the president is likely to approve the piepline and in the process deny Republicans a politically potent issue.”

From his perch in the Senate, Inhofe is expected to launch multiple investigations into the EPA – including Republican charges that the agency leaned heavily on a campaign group in drafting the proposed new rules.

But as committee chair, Inhofe is unlikely to indulge in quite the same level of theatrics on climate denial, said RL Miller, a California lawyer and founder of the grassroots organising group, Climate Hawks Vote.

“I expect we are going to see less headline-grabbing efforts on the EPA and more of simply throttling their budget,” Miller said. “If he touches climate denial at all he is going to be ridiculed in public and in the media. If he is smart, he is going to be very quiet publicly, and it will be death by a thousand cuts in the kind of budget battles that people like Jon Stewart don’t pay attention to.”

Despite their upbeat postures, Tuesday’s results were a big setback for campaign groups which had invested an unprecedented amount in trying to elect pro-climate candidates to Congress.

The former hedge fund billionaire, Tom Steyer, spent nearly $75m on advertising and organising in only seven races, making him the biggest known single spender in these elections. Only three of his candidates won.

“There is no way to dance around the issue that in too many races we lost good allies,” Michael Brune, the director of the Sierra Club, told a briefing. “We see those people being replaced by people that are against our values.”

But the environmental leaders blamed the poor showing on low turnout in an off election year – and continued to insist that climate change was becoming a top-tier issue.

They insisted their effort had put climate change on the electoral map – a big shift from 2012 when virtually no candidates would even utter the words climate change.

This time around, Republican candidates were forced to back away from outright climate denial, the campaigners said.

They noted Cory Gardner, the newly elected Republican Senator from Colorado, had appeared in campaign ads with wind turbines, after earlier disparaging climate science. “Climate denial is an endangered species,” Brune said.

We are further away but even there before the UK. We are the first to Jump and ask “How High”

Fools rush in: Tony Abbott joins a war without definition

Date
September 15, 2014

Committing of forces gathers pace

US Secretary of State John Kerry says countries inside and outside the Middle East have pledged military support against IS militants with some nations offering ground troops

The smart thing for Western leaders in the wake of John Kerry’s session with Arab leaders in Jeddah on Thursday last, would have been to bide their time. But Tony Abbott leapt straight in – committing 600 Australian military personnel and more aircraft to the conflict, thereby giving the Arab leaders good reason to believe that if they sit on their hands for long enough, the West will fight their war for them.
Either collectively in Jeddah or in one-on-one meetings with Kerry as in Cairo, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman and Lebanon all have baulked at making explicit military commitments to confront a force that they all see as a direct threat to their thrones, bunkers and, in one or two cases, tissue-thin democracies. With the exception of Iraq, which has no option because it is under attack at home, none has publicly committed military support.

Conversely, Abbott was coy in claiming that this new deployment did not mean that Australia was at war??? Australia has been at war since its first airlift of weapons and ammunition to the Kurdish Peshmerga in the north of Iraq last week.
Because they are on the ground in the UAE doing logistics and maintenance or in Baghdad and Irbil as military advisers certainly would not absolve any of them from being a target if IS fighters contrived to get access to them. It’s also a dramatic instance of mission-creep in a conflict bedevilled by uncertainty and missing any clear sense of a timeline or even the vague contours of what “victory” might look like.

US President Barack Obama demanded that Iraq form an inclusive, representative government before he would commit. But just three days after the new prime minister said he would behave himself, Obama had aircraft over Iraq, and we still know nothing about how different this Iraqi leadership will be from the last. There is no certainty that it will win the confidence of the Iraqi Sunni tribes.
An air war cannot succeed without a substantial boots-on-the-ground accompaniment – and that part of what Obama calls a strategy is very much on a wing and a prayer.

The Kurdish Peshmerga can fight, but they can’t defend all of Iraq. The Iraqi army, trained and equipped by Washington at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, is erratic and more likely to cut and run than to stand and fight. Next door in Syria, Obama is banking of the ranks of the Free Syrian Army – which for years he has complained could not be counted on, and which Washington now tries to convince us can be taken to Saudi Arabia, retrained and sent home to win the war.

Abbott must have had his hands over his ears last week as Obama spoke to the US nation and analysts around the globe distilled his words to mean a conflict that will last for years.Oddly, the Prime Minister warned Australians to prepare for a fight that might last “months rather than weeks, perhaps many, many months indeed…” Seems he’s in as much of a hurry to get into this war, as he seemingly thinks he will get out of it. He’s simply hides from the truth.

It’s not clear why. This “we must do something right now” response is likely to create a bigger mess than already exists in the region. Consider: the death of 200,000 locals in Syria failed to rouse much of a reaction in the West; but the deaths of two Americans – and now a Briton – has raised a crescendo for international war when it might have made more sense to tackle regional politicking and feuding first.

 

Abbott Makes Out It’s SOOOO Simple. As He Intends Supply Weapons & Advisers to Ukraine Against Putin….Fuck the UN

USA & Australia sit on the UN Security Council and have no mandate to take action in Syrian Territory. The UN is committed to assisting the Syrian government. So Australia is about to commit an illegal raid in Syrian sovereign territory. Doesn’t that give Putin a green flag to do what it wants in the Ukraine? Isn’t Australia complicit in terrorist action? While Abbott proudly swans on the international stage as a member of UNSC and wants to be a member on the UNHRC he has no regard for the united Nations whatsoever. Will Tony Abbott start WW3

Washington and its Western allies have supported the insurgency against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and have ruled out cooperating with him to fight Islamic State, which seeks to create a cross-border caliphate.

  However any foreign intervention in Syria would be an act of aggression unless it is approved by Damascus, a Syrian government minister said on Thursday, after the United States said it was prepared to strike against Islamic State militants in the country.”There must be cooperation with Syria and coordination with Syria and there must be a Syrian approval of any action whether it is military or not.”

Syria’s Western-backed National Coalition opposition has said it is ready to work with the United States against Islamic State, saying it had long called action and had repeatedly warned about the threat of radical Islamists.

Speaking in Damascus after meeting with Assad and other senior Syrian officials, U.N.-appointed mediator Mistura said it was important for the international community to tackle radical militant groups in Syria.

“The terrorist threat has become an international concern shared by everyone,” he told a news conference, adding that the international community was getting closer to taking action.

He said he had a “very long and useful meeting” with Assad, but declined to give details, saying only that the United Nations would work with Syria to help tackle the violence, provide humanitarian aid and work on a solution to the crisis.

“Syrians, wherever they are, and the government should be helped by the United Nations and the international community to find a Syrian-owned all-inclusive, positive, political process,” he said. However President Barack Obama “has emphasized repeatedly that Assad had lost all legitimacy and must go, but the President has also been clear and his first priority is the safety of the American people.

Syria has said it is willing to work with Mistura and has called on him to be fair and respect the wishes of the Syrian people.

 

Pushed or Jumped? Who is this moderate coalition of rebels? Who is the coalition of ME states? If I donate money to our allies will I be arrested?

Responding to Syrian objections over the Administration’s plans to fly combat missions against ISIS in Syrian territory, President Obama told journalists at the White House that as far as he was concerned, Bashar Assad could “Fuck off and die.”

obama_wut_AP

In a speech to the nation last night, Mr. Obama said the United States was recruiting a global coalition to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the militants, known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. He warned that “eradicating a cancer” like ISIS was a long-term challenge that would put some American troops at risk.

“We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are,” Mr. Obama declared in a 14-minute address. “That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq,” he added, using an alternative name for ISIS. “This is a core principle of my presidency: If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.”

Mr. Obama specifically stated that he would not place U.S. “boots on the ground” in Iraq or Syria, which most intelligent pundits interpreted as meaning that we will have no large ground units in the Middle East like we did in the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but did not preclude the use of special forces units and forward air observers.

Obama-Angry

Although Mr. Obama has received political support from both parties on his policy statement, some pundits on the far right, particularly those who depend on Fox News for their income, have criticized the President for not going far enough. In addition, several members of the wing nut radio talk show crowd, along with former members of the Bush Administration, continue to blame Obama for the whole situation.

“The Bush Administration and its cheerleaders caused this clusterfuck by invading Iraq in the first place,” said White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest. “Anyone who listens to Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity on this subject needs his head examined anyway. They’re best bet is to shut the fuck up, that way they won’t sound so ignorant.”

He couldn’t get the Job in Australia because of..Abbott

Smith was forced to leave Australia but hopes to be back

agentsmith

Disgusted with the glacial pace of environmental reform and the gas coal and oil industry’s stubborn refusal to admit culpability for the world’s ongoing climate crisis, President Obama has announced sweeping changes at the EPA including the appointment of a new administrator, Agent Smith.

Agent_Smith_Clone

“Smith knows how to get things done,” said the President, at a brief White House press conference this morning. “We believe that Smith’s ability to replicate himself and seemingly be everywhere at once will save us money on inspectors and help cut through bureaucratic red tape. After all, nearly everyone is terrified of the man, and all those who have taken him on in the past have ended up dead.”

Smith told reporters that he was honored to be taking over the leadership role at EPA, as  he had long wanted to do something about the plague of humans destroying what was once a pristine planet.

agentsmith4

“I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had during my time here,” said Smith. “It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you’re not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You’re a plague and I am the cure.”

The appointment of Smith was made over protests from nearly every industry leader in the United States, who have had free rein to run roughshod over environmental rules and regulations up to this point.

Do the Pictures of Putin remind you of anyone?

Obama Holds Urgent Talks With Leaders Of Countries Under No Threat Whatsoever

obama7

THE CABIN ANTHRAX, MURPHY, N.C. (CT&P) – In response to the ongoing third-world crises in Iraq, Ukraine, and Ferguson, Missouri, President Obama flew to a region under no particular immediate threat whatsoever in an attempt to confuse our enemies into thinking we have no fucking idea what we are doing.

At a press conference in Estonia, Mr. Obama pledged unwavering support for Poland and the Baltic countries in the event that Russian troops invaded and took over the region.

Vladimir-Putin-Daily-Kos-Credit.png

“I want the people of the Baltic Rim to know that if Russia ever poses a threat to their freedom, the full might of the U.S. military will hovering somewhere in the general vicinity, ready to look mean and issue dire threats to the invading Cossacks,” said the President.

“The people of Estonia will never stand alone against the Russian threat,” said Obama, “the people of the United States will stand firmly behind you and think pleasant thoughts as you are enslaved once again by oppressors from the East.”

PutinRidingCrane

The President also outlined his plan for defeating the savage religious zealots of ISIS, currently running amok in Syria and parts of Iraq.

putin5

“We have initiated an emergency war plan called ‘Operation Dropkick,’ which calls for the redeployment of a crack unit of shock troops to Iraq in order to fight the terrorists of ISIS,” said Obama.

Obama told journalists that the shock troops, known for their brutality and lack of compassion, consist of the combined police forces of Ferguson and St. Louis County Missouri. They will be airlifted along with all their military equipment to Baghdad next week and transported (via forced busing) to the front lines, where they will be turned loose on the vile and evil terrorists.

“This combined force, known as the ‘Devil’s Brigade,’ will be the spearhead of our effort to wipe ISIS off the map,” said the President.

The President told members of the press that the “Devil’s Brigade” was originally slated to fight in eastern Ukraine, but it was thought that the unit would not be able to work up enough hatred to fight members of its own race, so it was redirected to Iraq.

“As long as the Kurds keep those bigots pointed in the right direction, I have confidence that our problems with ISIS will soon be over,” said Mr. Obama.

While Obama was talking tough in Estonia, leader of the Russian hordes Vladimir Putin was conducting solo reconnaissance missions of the Ukrainian front lines along the Kalmius River. He still assures the world that Russian intentions are completely peaceful and he has no plans for invasion within the next 8 to 24 hours.