Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 11, 2013 in Uncategorized | 42 comments

The Cowardice of Barack Obama

For some time now I’ve considered Barack Obama to be a disgrace on representing the free world.

His opposition to legalising drugs,  his moves to appease muslims (going as far as telling the hideous Terry Jones what to do or not to do with his own private property), his overruling of contraception access and his grievous track record on civil liberties, among others, account him to be an enemy of freedom.

And now, he’s at it again – he won’t show Osama bin Laden corpse’s pictures just so Muslims won’t get mad:

Twenty months after U.S. special forces killed Osama bin Laden, the United States told a court on Thursday it is not ready to release images taken after the al Qaeda leader’s death because they still might lead to violence.

President Barack Obama’s administration points to an exception in the law that covers documents classified in the interest of national defense.

“They’ll be used to inflame tensions. They’ll be used to inspire retaliatory attacks,” Justice Department lawyer Robert Loeb told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

So what? It’s not your job to take care of muslims’ feelings (or any other group’s for that matter). We’re entitled to see those pictures and Barack Obama should grow a thicker skin.

If I was the most powerful man on Earth, I wouldn’t kill innocent civilians with drone air-strikes nor would I give into threats! It’d be the other way around: rewarding civility and not being afraid of -hypothetical!- threats.

  • ArizonaAtheist

    I couldn’t agree more with this. I’d also like to point out that I believe it’s an idiotic response to say that showing a picture of a dead man will inflame Muslims and create violence. Hello! The drone strikes are a large reason for the hostility targeting the U.S. goverment by Muslims and the countries in which they live. If they’re so concerned about “retaliatory attacks” the common sense thing to do is to stop these illegal assassinations and get out of those countries.

    • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

      And I agree with you!

    • Ingemar Oseth

      “I couldn’t agree more with this. I’d also like to point out that I
      believe it’s an idiotic response to say that showing a picture of a dead
      man will inflame Muslims and create violence.”

      What an odd thing to say. There is far too much evidence to the contrary. In fact, Muslims seem to be offended by just about everything. Besides, Muslims were delivering terrorist attacks against their perceived enemies long before the drone strikes began. Read History.

      • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

        “Muslims were delivering terrorist attacks against their perceived enemies long before the drone strikes began.”

        Exactly my point!

      • ArizonaAtheist

        “Muslims were delivering terrorist attacks against their
        perceived enemies long before the drone strikes began.”

        That’s true, however, my point was that these drone attacks are simply the latest invasion of sovereignty against Muslim countries, which are the main source of anger right now. Also, I’m assuming you’re referring to the Danish cartoon incident? My exasperation was the U.S.’s refusal to acknowledge their alleged solution to the problem of terrorism was actually creating more terrorism and more hatred towards the U.S. Instead of admitting the obvious, they make some lame excuse about them being mad that the U.S. killed Bin Laden. No, they’re pissed because the U.S. has invaded several Muslim
        countries and kill their loved ones.

        • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

          I’m sorry, but on this

          “they make some lame excuse about them being mad that the U.S. killed Bin
          Laden. No, they’re pissed because the U.S. has invaded several Muslim
          countries and kill their loved ones.”

          I cannot agree with you.

          Terrorists are not making any excuse; they hold to whatever they can to justify their hate for freedom – and even if the US didn’t give them any motive, they’d be resourceful enough to come up with one of their own.

          • ArizonaAtheist

            Thanks for your views. Here’s why I don’t buy into the “Muslims hate our freedoms” banter.I haven’t found any evidence this is true. The only people I’ve heard this from is the U.S. government itself. As I said before, it’s simply propaganda for the American public to disguise the fact that the U.S. forcefully invades countries and tries to force capitalism and the “American way of life” on those who don’t want it (among other reasons). Jessica Stern, an expert on terrorism, spoke with many terrorists, including Christians and Muslims, in her book Terror in the Name of God. Here is what one Muslim said about why he fights. He was a member of a group called Lashkar e Taiba. He told her, “The sword is not the only weapon. The pen, ideology, financial systems – these are the weapons used against Islam. It is important to realize that capitalism is also an ideology just like Islam. The West is trying to force its capitalist ideology onto
            Islamic states.”

            Another factor is the spread of Islam: “Our mission is to invite all of humanity to Islam, to persuade the whole world to worship only Allah. […] Islam is not just a religion. It regulates every aspect of life, including politics. We would like to see implementation of divine law here [in Pakistan].”

            It’s also the occupation of what are considered holy sites by “the infidel” (Americans) that inflame hatred. And currently the murdering of their families by drones as the latest complaint. Here are the words of Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square car bomber, during his trial:

            “I want to plead guilty and I’m going to plead guilty a hundred times
            forward because until the hour the US pulls it forces from Iraq and
            Afghanistan and stops the drone strikes in Somalia and Yemen and in
            Pakistan and stops the occupation of Muslim lands and stops killing
            the Muslims and stops reporting the Muslims to its government, we
            will be attacking US, and I plead guilty to that. Well, I am part of
            that. I am part of the answer to the US terrorizing the Muslim
            nations and the Muslim people, and on behalf of that, I’m avenging
            the attacks, because only – like living in US, the Americans only
            care about their people, but they don’t care about the people
            elsewhere in the world when they die.” (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,34v. 10-CR-541 (MGC) 45 FAISAL SHAHZAD,56 Defendant.Plea)

            Finally, here is a good article by a
            Muslim-American explaining why a minority of Muslims hate America.
            I’m sorry I don’t see anything about hating freedom anywhere. The
            author gives some very good historical examples about why some of
            them hate the U.S. The reasons deal with the U.S.’s foreign policy
            decisions, not anything about freedom.

          • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

            Well, Islam claims men are more valuable than women. If Islam is a political ideology, you see where this is going, right? To have women rights revoked!

          • ArizonaAtheist

            I’m sorry, I’m not sure what many Muslims’ religious views on women have to do with why they are angry at the US. Did you mean to reply to someone else? Have a good day!

          • NEIL C. REINHARDT

            THIS GUY HAS A DRONE PHOBIA!

    • NEIL C. REINHARDT

      WHAT BULL;SHIT, THE MOSLEM FANATICS WERE ATTACKING & KILLING US FOR MANY YEARS BEFORE DRONES WERE EVEN INVENTED, MUCH LESS USED AGAINST THEM.

  • Copyleft

    Obama is basically a Republican from back when the Republican Party still had some sane members among its leadership. He’s no friend to liberals, skeptics, atheists, gays, or many, many other minority groups in America, but we’re stuck with him because the alternative was worse (both times).

    • Vic

      From my limited, outside-US perspective, I agree wholeheartily with this comment.

      • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

        It makes two of us!

        • NEIL C. REINHARDT

          MORE BULL SHIT!

    • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

      Yeah! He’s a mid-90’s Republican!

      • NEIL C. REINHARDT

        TRIPLE BULL SHIT!

        • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Ðavid A. Osorio S

          (?)

    • NEIL C. REINHARDT

      BULL SHIT!

  • ThePrussian

    When I was watching the 2008 US election – there is a lot of mordant humor for us overseas fellows – I remembered thinking “If he’s this put out by the R party and FOX, how on earth will he be able to stand up to an out-of-town team?”

    • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

      Now we know how – he wouldn’t!

  • Ingemar Oseth

    Regrettably, there does not seem to be a lot of deep thinking going on here. Just a lot of bitching and moaning because the president is not following a liberal agenda to the extent that you might wish.

    Why, Avant Garde do you want to see photos of Osama bin Laden’s body? Seriously, is releasing the photo so important to you that it is worth the life a a single American serving overseas who might become the target of retaliation? How would you sleep at night if this happened as a direct result of you releasing the photo?

    Drone Strikes. Apparently you guys know little about military history or warfare otherwise you would understand that civilians always – repeat – always suffer the most when trapped between waring armies. It is no different in asymmetrical warfare with the single exception that the USA uses targeted strikes with minimum munitions in order to get to the enemy who is hiding among civilians.

    Appeasement. We are at war. We have more than enough enemies, regardless of their religion, race, etc., without giving incentives to others who might decide to fight us.

    Gays. You may not know it, but Obama’s executive order allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the US military is an important step towards equality. The roots of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s erupted, in part, from Roosevelt’s decision to allow African American combat units to be trained and committed to action. An important subset of this bit of history is the decision to allow African American soldiers to volunteer as infantry riflemen in the ETO. Serving within previously segregated white units (Of course the men in these units were Hispanic, Asian and so on, just not Black.) created a cadre of battle tested African American men who almost universally earned the respect of their white comrades during the heat of battle. These men returned home to fuel the Movement, and it was their conduct on the field of battle that allowed President Truman to integrate the US military. This last action was the tipping point of the Civil Rights Movement. It is not difficult to see that allowing gays to serve in the US military may eventually serve the same purpose.

    OK I’m tired and will quit here. Read History.

    • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

      “do you want to see photos of Osama bin Laden’s body?”

      No, I don’t, but even if I did, it wouldn’t matter. It’s our right!

      “is releasing the photo so important to you that it is worth the life a a single American serving overseas who might become the target of retaliation?”

      First, no, I didn’t say that. Don’t put words in my mouth!

      Second, Obama is in no way responsible for that retaliation! It’s about time each one of us start taking responsability for our own doings!

      Third, retaliation it’s on its way, photos or no photos!

      I don’t recall saying anything about gays. WTF?

      “We have more than enough enemies, regardless of their religion, race, etc., without giving incentives to others who might decide to fight us.”

      That’s a coward move! You’re letting your fear interferes with the civil liberties they’re supposedly fighting for! And that’s really my point: you should not let terror guide your actions – that’s a victory for terrorism!

      So, do you think Government should tell people what to do with their money on their spare time like, let’s say, not burning Qurans? Yeah, we’re winning the war!

      • Ingemar Oseth

        “No, I don’t, but even if I did, it wouldn’t matter. It’s our right!”

        Interesting. Why do you think it’s our right? Can you provide a specific source that gives us the right you claim?

        “First no, I didn’t say that. Don’t put words in my mouth!”

        Among other things, you said Obama is a coward for not releasing the photo.

        “Third, retaliation it’s on its way, photos or no photos!”

        If you have information regarding a retaliatory terrorist strike you should contact Homeland Security. Otherwise, I have to assume your comment is not evidence based. No doubt there will be additional terrorists acts against Americans in some part of the world, but it is quite a different matter to say it is retaliation for the killing of bin Laden, or deny one will not be provoked by releasing the photos in question.

        “I don’t recall saying anything about gays. WTF?”

        I was responding to Copyleft’s comment. In reality I was responding to the earlier “group think,” poorly thought out comments as a whole. My apologies for not making this clear.

        “That’s a coward move! You’re letting your fear interferes with the civil
        liberties they’re supposedly fighting for! And that’s really my point:
        you should not let terror guide your actions – that’s a victory for
        terrorism!”

        No, it is a strategic decision designed, in part at least, to avoid provoking terrorist acts in retaliation for showing photos of bin Laden’s body. One of my long-term areas of study is military strategy. The application of strategy in warfare requires the framers to avoid the pitfall of taking counsel of their fears. General Karl von Clausewitz, the great military theorist, would undoubtedly see this as an unnecessary provocation which would garner no real advantages on the field of battle. I can see no way in which American’s Civil Liberties have been violated by the decision not to make public the photos. Can you be more specific in this regard? How have our Civil Liberties been violated? Regardless, there is no meaningful victory for the terrorism.

        “So, do you think Government should tell people what to do with their
        money on their spare time like, let’s say, not burning Qurans? Yeah,
        we’re winning the war!”

        What????????????????

        Read history.

        • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

          “Why do you think it’s our right?”

          Government shouldn’t withold information that is important and of public interest from their citizens! Information freedom, maybe?

          “you said Obama is a coward for not releasing the photo”

          He IS a coward, not for not releasing the pictures, but the excuse he’s using. Being afraid of what other people will do and taking responsability for their actions is cowardice!

          “it is quite a different matter to say it is retaliation for the killing
          of bin Laden, or deny one will not be provoked by releasing the photos
          in question.”

          I’m not denying it. I’m saying, precisely, that Muslims should take responsability for their actions – not Westerners!

          “it is a strategic decision designed, in part at least, to avoid
          provoking terrorist acts in retaliation for showing photos of bin
          Laden’s body”

          It’s a crappy strategy! If any retaliation is “provoked”, Al-Qaida and it’s members are to be hold responsible for their actions – they let themselves be provoked (and they are provoked quite easily, if I may say).

          Their fight is, amongst other things, against freedom! And freedom comes with responsabilites attached to it, so the so-called free world -that’s us- should be cristal clear about this: you answer for your own actions and if you can’t stand a picture, that’s your godamned problem!

          ” I can see no way in which American’s Civil Liberties have been violated by the decision not to make public the photos.”

          The Government making choices based on fear and not allowing us access to information.

          • Ingemar Oseth

            Your irrationality appears to arise from a deep seated fear and distrust of the federal government. Perhaps it is a result of living most (all?) of your life in Colombia?

            This latter question brings to mind another. Are you an American citizen?

            If not,…… your jumping up and down about American civil liberties is at best a moot point.

            Finally, it is clear that you have no understanding of strategy or warfare.
            Read History!

          • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

            Ad hominem attacks!

            Yes, I have lived most of my life in Colombia, but the thing is I care about what US President does because HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA and whatever he does or quits doing affects everyone, inside and outside America.

            I’d think it is shortsighted to ask me why do I care, me being Colombian. The most obvious example of all: not one Latin American politician is willing to legalize drugs unless America changes it’s federal policy about it – and guess where all the people are being killed by druglords and mafias? Yes, in Colombia and producer countries!

            So there you go – it doesn’t matter where I am from. I care, and reasonably so, about US politics and government.

            You’re right: I don’t get a strategy based on fear; I especially don’t get it when the enemy aims to monger fear! In other words: they’re winning even though the USA has a better army and the best weapons!

          • Ingemar Oseth

            I better appreciate your frame of reference now. And realize that you look to the USA and its president to carry the global war on terror to the enemy.

            The basic strategy of terrorism is to obtain its territorial and political goals through asymmetric warfare. This allows terrorist organizations to act without openly engaging the core strengths of vastly superior military forces. It is a highly effective form of warfare that is extremely difficult to counter by conventional means.

            I urge you in the strongest possible terms to bolster your understanding of how such wars are fought and won. You will find the effort both enlightening and useful as your perspective on the subject will surly change and grow.

            You have every right to express your opinion about American policies, including the decision to withhold photos of bin Laden’s body. But you have no say in the matter unless you can vote in this country.

          • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

            Thank you! I think the war should be won military and ideologically as well. We’re on the side of freedoms, right?

          • Ingemar Oseth

            Daosorios

            We might not always agree on how far “Rights” might be stretched, but we are united in the fight to preserve liberty and freedom against those who would take it from us.

          • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

            You betcha!

          • ArizonaAtheist

            The only people I see taking “freedoms” away is the U.S. government, all under the guise of making us “safer.” All these issues of “terrorist” attacks have been caused by the U.S.’s imperialistic military conquests for oil and strategic military positioning. I’d like to hear some examples of Muslims trying to take away American freedoms. This will be interesting….

          • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

            I don’t condone those takeaways of freedoms, but the US government isn’t the only one. At least, in the US, women can still go out without a male tutor, right?

    • NEIL C. REINHARDT

      I LIKE YOUR THINKING. YOU KNOW HISTORY AND YOU USE BOTH COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC.

      • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Ðavid A. Osorio S

        Please, when commenting on my blog, drop the capitals.

  • True Liberal Nexus

    obama the Deceiver is a trojan horse. Progs who continue to make excuses for him suffer from battered obot syndrome.

    • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

      The problem with progressiveness is people who take it as a dogma, instead of being the applying of critical thinking.

      • NEIL C. REINHARDT

        IF THEY APPLIED CRITICAL THINKING, THEN IT WOULD NOT TAKE SO MANY OF THEM SO MANY YEARS TO COME TO THEIR SENSES AND BECOME FORMER LIBERALS!

        THE FACTS ARE,, OVER FORTY YEARS OF AGE, WHILE THERE ARE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF FORMER LIBERALS, THERE ARE VERY , VERY FEW FORMER CONSERVATIVES! AND FYI, THIS IS PROVEN BY THE MANY BOOKS AND BLOGS WRITTEN BY FORMER LIBERALS AND THE DEARTH OF THEM WRITTEN BY ANY FORMER CONSERVATIVES.

        IN FACT ONE FORMER LIBERAL (AND ATHEIST) ANDREW BRITBART WAS THE CO-FOUNDER OF THE HUFFINGTON POST BEFORE HE CANE TO HIS SENSES..(ANOTHER ATHEIST / FORMER LIBERAL WAS CHRIS HITCHENS.)

        WHILE I KNOW OF MANY MANY FORMER LIBERALS OVER 40, I ONLY KNOW OF TWO, OVER 40,, FORMER CONSERvATIVES!

        OF COURSE THIS 79 YEAR OLD AGNOSTIC ATHEIST WHO HAS BEEN AN ATHEIST FOR 70 YEARS AND AN ATHEIST ACTIVIST FOR OVER FIFTY YEARS WAS TOO INFORMED AND TOO INTELLIGENT TO HAVE EVER HAVE BEEN A LIBERAL IN THE FIRST PLACE! (FYI, I AM,ONE OF THOSE WHO FOUNDED “ATHEISTS UNITED” IN 1983.)

        • NEIL C. REINHARDT

          TO ADD TO THE ABOVE:

          WHY I AM NEITHER A CONSERVATIVE OR A LIBERAL

          While Illogical, Irrational and Non-Critical Thinkers may label their own and others views as being either ‘Conservative’ or ‘Liberal’, I submit those who are actually Intelligent “Critical Thinkers” do not.

          This as we know our views are logically, factually and reality based without care as to what they are considered to be by the intellectually inferior. We look at what has been prov en to work without care were they have been proven as long as they have been proven. We do not let childish myths like religion, racism or sexism or whatever interfere with our thought processes.

          Thus, some to many would label some of my views to be “Liberal” while other of my views would be labeled as being “Conservative”. the truth is they are factually neither, they are in fact, “REALISTIC VIEWS”

          Some examples

          Non Critical Thinkers say having SEX education in both grade and high school is a “Liberal” idea a when it is not, Rather doing so is a PROVEN method of not only LOWERING both unwanted pregnancies and Sexually Transmitted Diseases Rates, it also lowers both Sex Crime and Overall Crime rates!

          THEREFORE, IT IS THE MOST LOGICAL RATIONAL AND INTELLIGENT THING TO DO

          Non Critical Thinkers say paying for birth control and abortions is a “Liberal” idea when it is not,

          Rather paying for them are the most Rational Logical and Intelligent ways to LOWER Health Care, Welfare, Food Stamp, Education and Law Enforcement Costs!!!

          This also lowers the number of crimes and thus, the number of crime victims. And it helps control the worlds over population.

          (As they do not exist, no one can give me anon-emotional, non- religious, rational intelligent and logical reason just why humans have any more right to life than any other living thing has! OR, Why abortions are wrong!

          THEREFORE, TAX PAID FOR BIRTH CONTROL AND ABORTIONS ARE THE INTELLIGENT, LOGICAL AND RATIONAL WAY TO GO!

          The Illogical, Irrational and Non-Critical Thinkers say NOT having strict Gun Control Laws is a “Conservative idea when it is not, Rather it is a PROVEN FACT those Cities and States which have the Most Strict “Gun Control” Laws, have the MOST Gun, Overall Crime and Murder Rates! DUH!

          And it is a PROVEN FACT there are over one hundred countries in which the private ownership of gulls are Banned! It is Illegal for them to own guns and yet the MURDER RATES IN ALL THOSE COUNTRIES ARE HIGHER THAN THE MURDER RATE IN THE US.

          THUS PROVING MOST GUN CONTROL LAWS ARE NOT ONLY COUNTER PRODUCTIVE, THEY ARE STUPID!

          AS STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES AND AS DENYING FACTS IS STUPID, THEN ONLY STUPID PEOPLE SUPPORT STRICT GUN LAWS!

          LAST

          While I do not like to be wrong, I not only have no problem in stating I am wrong when shown why I am. As I WANT to be proven wrong I continually ask others who may think I am wrong to please provide the evidence proving I am in error.

          WHY would I want to be proven wrong?Because IF I am wrong and do not know I am, I just continue on being wrong. (And I HATE being wrong.)

  • NEIL C. REINHARDT

    WHILE “ODUMA” (AS I CALL HIM” AS DONE A FEW THINGS RIGHT, LIKE LETTING GAYS SERVE OPENLY AND THE SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE, HE IS THE WORST PRESIDENT THE USA HAS EVER HAD!. HIE IS NOT ONLY CLOSE FRIENDS WITH THE DOMESTIC TERRORISTS AYERS AND DORN, HE IS A PROLIFIC, PATHETIC LAIR AND A RACIST!

    HE HAS SPENT MORE MONEY IN LESS THAN SIX YEARS THAN HAD ALL OF OUR PRESIDENTS, COMBINED, SPENT BEFORE HIM.

    THE REASON OUR ECONOMY STILL SUCKS (AND NOT IN A GOOD WAY) IIS DUE TO ALL HIS ANTI -BUSINESS SPEECH AND HIS ANTI-BUSINESS ACTS -AS WELL AS HIS HAVING MANY TIMES LESS SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS PEOPLE IN HIS ADMINISTRATION THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN HUNDRED PLUS YEARS.

    THE REASON FREDDIE MAC & FANNIE MAY HOUSING MESS HAPPENED (CAUSING ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE TO LOSE THEIR HOMES. AND MANY ENDED UP ON THE STREET) WAS BECAUSE ODUMA & BARNEY FRANK,, ON SEVENTEEN DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, STOPPED GEORGE BUSH (AND TWICE STOPPING JOHN MCCAIN) FROM GETTING THE CONGRESS TO PASS LAWS TO PREVENT IT

    THE REASON THE WALL STREET CRAP HAPPENED WAS THAT DURING CLINTON’S ADMINISTRATION. THE DUMOCRATS AND A FEW REPUBLICANS GOT THE RULES GOVERNING WALL STREET TO PREVENT WHAT HAPPENED FROM HAPPENING CHANGED SO IT COULD! .

    THE ONLY REASONS HE WAS ELECTED WAS HE WAS BLACK AND THE ALL THE LAME STREAM LYING LEFTEST MEDIA. (OTHER THAN FOX NEWS) WOULD NOT REPORT THE TRUE FACTS ABOUT HIM

  • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Ðavid A. Osorio S

    Keep telling yourself that

  • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Ðavid A. Osorio S

    Ohh, you got an IQ test high score? Good for you. You must be feeling special!

    IQ tests don’t measure intelligence (whatever that is) and being intelligent doesn’t make you right.

    I hope you enjoy commenting on other Skeptic Ink blogs, but this is as far as you’re getting here.

    For a very intelligent person, you sure as hell can use ad hominem fallacies ad náuseam. You must be proud of yourself ;)

    Goodbye