Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

The Doo-Doo Chasers


Now I may not be able to tell you what happened on some cable television program or pontificate of what I think may happen on some contrived artificial reality show, but I am in a position to conjure and offer perspectives on other contrived non-events such as what is frequently called politics. More specifically issues of somewhat basic precepts of democratic centralism and constitutional republics.
 
I have been told by the brain trust in the vicinity of the Beltway that self-determination means nothing anymore, unless it is decided upon by individuals who have no stake on such self-determination. I say this because from the President down, seems that the SEO meter is running on a simple phrase that the referendum in Crimea is illegitimate and illegal, and even that as such, the United States will not (never ever ever ever even) recognize its right to self-determination.

This is not only sociopathic but also inconsistent with the plurality evinced in our own constitution, but even more so in the articles of confederation, the bill of rights as ascribed via the Treaty of Paris.  It is as if just by saying such, it makes it a fact or truism.

Since the PEOPLE of Crimea voted over-whelming for their independence from the Ukraine, every nut and bolt politician in the United States has been saying the same thing, which can be summed up by the statement made by Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney, who openly informed the world that the Obama Administration would not recognize the results of the referendum in Crimea calling what Russia did as being “dangerous and destabilizing”. Thus by fiat extending the assertion that the population of Crimea has no right to conduct a democratic referendum via the ballot, to decide if it wants to remain with the Ukraine or join Russia.

Fascinating, I mean a constitutional scholar (in theory) asserting anti-constitutional beliefs. This when, if it wasn’t for Washington, and even the EU helping to overthrow a democratically elected leader of another sovereign nation (Ukraine), we wouldn’t even be in this mess. Moreover, what makes even more absurd in the logic offered for this position by the Obama administration, which for the record asserts that the referendum cannot be valid unless the entire population of Ukraine votes and agrees with the decision by Crimean’s. A funny and strange position to take when you study past U.S. history with respect to the South Sudan (all of Sudan didn’t vote) and Kosovo from Serbia (no Serbians were allowed to vote via U.S. dictate). 

Then we have the audacity (like hope) to ridicule Putin for what Bill Clinton did in in Serbia, Bush in Iraq, and by Obama in Afghanistan, Libya, and trying to do currently in Syria. Were we this up set in 1967 when Israel committed a real act of war when it took Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, the Syrian Golan Heights and the Jordanian-administered West Bank, or in 1981 when the same nation, Israel took the Golan Heights.  

The simple fact of the matter is that we, America, should mind our own business and tend to the home front where we have real interest and not just the plutocratic interest of the ultra-wealthy. From a historical perspective WE KNOW that the two elephants in the room that no one is really discussing are: (1) the historical US/NATO desire to be able to surround Russia militarily and (2) access to the Artic, in particular since all these international bodies being so concerned with ‘global warming”, have green lighted more drilling there. These folks have to contain the Russian military because it will be the only way they can try and get all of the natural gas it has as well as access the infinite northern border Russia has with the Arctic.
Again, the United States has no interest that is national in the Ukraine when compared to Russia. Not only do the Russians have a large naval facility in Crimea, the folk there do speak Russian and it was conquered originally by Catherine the Great. Moreover, Moscow is not about to invade Ukraine and we all know this, it just sounds good to make folk believe that should be a reason for us to be upset. Outside of that, what is our national interest in the Ukraine? Is it to spread democracy like we did in Libya and Somalia? I mean fact is where ever we try to spread democracy all we get is a lot of dead Americans, a destabilized nation, and large Blackwater contracts.

We should just stay out of this and admit our only goal is really western control of oil and gas in the region. The Crimean Supreme Council is already on record saying Crimea wants Gazprom to develop the peninsula's oil and natural gas deposits and not any western (US company).

This time we have messed with the wrong cat, a cat from a nation with conviction, who has very strong leadership skills, and even more than this REAL national interest in the region.  This is aint no doo doo chaser, this is Putin.


Friday, August 17, 2012

Can I Bring My Gat

Since I got rid of cable and Internet at my home in 2006, I have had even more time to read, even read what many would call non-essential, although I believe as long as one is reading, each time they read they will learn something and improve both their problem solving and critical thinking skills. I have become particularly fond of the defense department and federal Business Opportunities Websites whenever I am around an internet connection, as well as my usual slew of daily foreign newspapers.

Consequently, in light of several recent events, I have come to the conclusion that the majority of the general US citizenry lacks common sense, has little if any knowledge of the constitution and will do anything to perceive that they can be safer than they already are, whether by man-made law or statue. With media and government focused on several mass shootings over the past few weeks starting with Aurora, Colorado, then detouring to Wisconsin, via Chicago and ending up in College Station, Texas, seems all folk are talking about is gun control. Personally outside of the previous reasons, I think that another distinction concerns the manner in which city folk and we country folk view hand guns and rifles. But more troubling, is that without out question, folks speak about gun control as if they are battling an invasive species of locus or the Ebola virus.

The gun control mantra always pops up and like terrorism it is just a scare tactic. It is as played out as the hook “who let the dogs out.” First, there more people are killed in auto accidents than by guns and frankly, automobiles are probably the biggest killer in our nation , but you won’t hear anyone claim that cars should be controlled in any form or fashion claiming they are a need, when there once was a time they did not exist. Might I add guns did exist then?

My fear is the position that many take regarding gun control: that only the government and police should have guns, in particular automatic weapons. With this I vehemently disagree. First, saying this is like saying only the government should have the internet and the rest of us citizens should be limited to paper and pencil. Not to mention I completely agree with Thomas Jefferson, who in a letter to his nephew, suggested in so many words that when only the police and government has guns, such is a police state. This is the common sense I am referring too. I can’t comprehend why folk would want only the police and government to have guns. On the local level from what we have seen in Jonesboro, Arkansas regarding 21-year-old Chavis Carter, of Southaven, Miss., who was handcuffed behind his back and died from a gunshot wound to the right temple July 28 despite being left handed, frisked twice by Jonesboro police officers and in the back of the police car at the time.

Then there was what happened last week in Chicago, when an off-duty Chicago police officer while heading home through the town of Maywood, bike hit 4-year old Taniyah Middleton. When the girl’s father Christopher, 26, confronted the officer over the incident, the officer shot and killed him. Or what also recently happened in Miami, when police officers broke a man's arm and falsely prosecuted him after he refused an undercover officer's offer of prostitution. Guillermo Cuadra said he had just $3 on him when an apparent prostitute asked him, "Do you want a fuck?" as he was stopped at a traffic light. The cops held him for 4 hours in a squad car, rather than taking him to a hospital, and when he complained of the excruciating pain.

I’m not even finished, for then there is what happened on Friday August 10, 2012 around 11:30 pm, when off-duty Rochester, NY Police officer Francisco Santiago, a 6 year veteran, was rear-ended, doesn’t call 911, pulls his personal firearm and shoots two unarmed African-American men several times, injuring both with multiple bullet wounds to their torsos and lower extremities.

So if you asked me, it would be a major threat if only the police had guns, given that they think they are the law or even above it when in fact they represent the law. If they did the latter, I still wouldn’t support the contention they should be the only ones with guns – automatic weapons. This is the police argument. Although I live in the country, I also know that according to the Bureau of Justice data, that African Americans, especially if they have annual household incomes of around $15,000, are more likely to be the victims and targets of violent crimes. Yet this is not the real fear I have, it is the aforementioned pertaining to the police and the federal government.

Reading the web sites I mentioned earlier, I saw a solicitation originally issued by the Department of Homeland Security in April for 450 million rounds of hollow point bullets which was just updated on Friday requesting an additional 750 million rounds of ammunition, including 357 mag rounds that are able to penetrate walls. This I accepted at first, but was wondering about the additional request, but they are DHS.

But in addition to that, there has been a rash of strange solicitations I have noticed for federal government agencies. Solicitations for large amounts of ammunition and weapons just since July. For example, Solicitation Number DG-1330-12-RQ-1028 (a request by The DOC NOAA National Weather Service - Western Acquisition Division in Boulder) for the following: “16,000 rounds of ammunition for semiautomatic pistols to be factory-loaded .40 S&W caliber, 180-grain jacketed hollow point.” Specific deliveries and amounts include to be delivered include 8,000 rounds to: Ross Lane DOC, NOAA, NMFS, OLE, NED 130 Oak Street, Suite 5, Ellsworth, ME, 04605; 8,000 rounds to: Troy Audyatis, DOC, NOAA, NMFS, OLE, NED 53 North 6th Street, Room 214 New Bedford, MA, 02740., 16, Cases. The solicitation also includes and order for 24,000 rounds of ammunition for semiautomatic pistols to be factory-loaded .40 S&W caliber, 180-grain jacketed hollow point (JHP)to be delivered to Jeff Radonski, A/DSAC DOC, NOAA, NMFS, OLE, SED 263 13th Avenue South, Suite 109, St. Petersburg, FL, 33701., 24, Cases. The last request pertains to 6,000 rounds of frangible, 125-grain CFRHT .40 caliber. These are to be delivered to James Cassin DOC, NOAA, NMFS, OLE, NED 3350 Highway 138, Suite 218, Wall, NJ, 07719, 6, Cases."

Another strange request similar to the aforementioned was made last Aug 22, 2011 by The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Acquisition Management. This request was for a large allotment of “SIG Sauer Model P229 Semi-Automatic Pistol (P229); E29R-357-BSS-G; Caliber .357 SIG; DA/SA old style Alloy Frame; Stainless Slide; Black Nitron Finish; DA/SA Trigger; Supplied with three MecGar twelve (12)-round magazines and Trijicon three (3) Dot (White ? Glow Green) Night Sights; Milled locking inserts; and, Manufacturer carry case.”

This past June, Solicitation Number: HSSS01-12-Q-0118 reveals a request for .300 Winchester Magnum, as described in ANSI/SAAMI Z299.4, small arms ammunition. The purchased quantity will be 40,000 rounds, with two options for 20,000 rounds, which may be exercised by the Government, based upon the need to maintain an on-hand supply, at minimum essential quantities.

Now I am not finished. A few weeks ago, on Aug 01, 2012 Solicitation Number TSBQ201200002 was made on behalf of The United States Capitol Police, Training Services Bureau to 600 cases of “165 Grain Gold Dot Hollow Point, 40 S & amp;W, 1,000/Case in 2 equal shipments of 300,000 rds. each. The first delivery no later than September 30, 2012 and second delivery no later than December 30, 2012.” In addition they ordered 200 cases of LE132, 12 ga, 00 Buck, 2 ¾", 9 pellets (250/case) and several other munitions batches for delivery no later than December 30, 2012.

The above information is public domain and doesn’t include the recent request by the Social Security Administration for 174,000 rounds of ammunition. Don’t know why NOAA, Social Security Administration or EPA need all of these bullets, but they want to stop me from buying in bulk. Seems that all of these are indefinite delivery and indefinite quantity (IDIQ) firm fixed price (FFP) contracts (meaning the Feds can activate the order at any time during the 5 year contract period). Most of the ammunition (.40 cal and .357 magnum rounds) are primarily handgun ammunition. Handgun is used for close combat situations and urban warfare operations where engagement of 40 feet or less is expected.

I firmly believe that all should have top shelf technology including me and that means automatic assault rifles. My uncle used to tell me if I had to use a handgun I was too close. The Batman and Sikh shootings with all the alleged home-made bombs and white supremacist connection just shows me the mainsteam media is involved in all of this too and trying to use Orwellian newspeak and propaganda to boogyman folks to give up the second amendment. Not me, I’d rather if I had to defend my self out here in the country miles away from police and people, open a clip instead of a one-shot at a time pistol or rifle. Both Franklin and Gandi were correct. Franklin when he said: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” And Mahatma Gandhiwho wrote: Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

Me, I will always ask If I can bring my gat accepting completely that what ever answer one provides, I will have already made my mind up.

Friday, April 13, 2012

sUdan comes before sYria

First I want to give a shout out to all the African Americans out on the front line protesting against the horrible atrocities in the Sudan, especially those who have written diligently and criticized the President for his lack of attention toward that war torn nation. Not to pat myself on the back for writing about Obama and his lack of attention toward Africa, not to mention its descendents who helped him get in office, I have pressed the issue vehemently but only have received comments suggesting I stop “finding” stuff to complain about regarding our current commander in chief by his coterie of folk who protect him simple because of the color of his skin.
Last month, it took a wealthy White man to bring attention to what was occurring in Sudan. I was glad of the attention but was hurt at the same time that no one that looked like me was on the front row of this issue. I’m sure there will be many now, since the uncle tom gene that many of us possess is not a recessive gene and always stands out when Master does something to say it’s ok for us to follow masters lead.

This week, Sudan on Tuesday carried out new airstrikes inside South Sudan in around the village of Tashwin. This after Khartoum vowed that it would use "all means" against a three-pronged attack it said South Sudanese forces had launched against South Kordofan state, including its key oil-producing region of Heglig. These are a continuation of skirmishes that happened last month along the undemarcated and disputed frontier in the Heglig area, with each side blaming the other for starting the fighting.

The last time I heard the President even speak of the problems in Sudan was June of 2011. He was at the United Nations as his top envoy prepared to travel to the region to address the political and military crisis concerning the peaceful division of Sudan into two states. It was right after he had met with his top Sudan envoy, Princeton Lyman as representatives from northern and southern Sudan continued talks in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. All he did was talk and give some warning and photo ops.

It is clear the focus and interest for the present administration is Syria for they turn a blind eye toward Sudan and Africa in general. I am certain that they are aware that Khartoum fought one of Africa’s bloodiest and longest civil wars against the south - a 22-year conflict, which began in 1983 and left more than 2 million people dead.

This is what is so troubling, the visible inconsistency of Obama’s foreign policy. He says nothing for example about Omar Al Bashir, the dictator of Sudan and one of the worst mass murderers of our time who has committed genocide for longer than any political leader living currently. Obama is either hiding or intentionally avoiding this. On the one hand, it is easy for him to state that Hosni Mubarak , Muammar Qaddafi and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad must go but not Al Bashir, the tyrannt right next door to a ruler who was way less dangerous to his people comparatively speaking and way less monstrous -Qaddafi. When reality in the form of displacement, deaths and rapes supports that chasing Qaddafi and not Al Bashir is like “going after Mussolini instead of Hitler. “
Last March I wrote, “Not to beat a dead horse, but this Libya example is almost comical. The reasons proffered for intervention are even more fanatical, when we look at and examine the desire to protect the innocent. Maybe the innocent dwellers of lands endeared with oil reserves, but not solely the innocent. By that logic, worthy locations would have our attention. The Sudan where millions are having been displaced and tens of thousands butchered. The Ivory Coast, where more than 500,000 have been displaced and a civil war looms.”

Just last October, the President issued a series of waivers for the Child Soldiers Protection Act (a 2008 law that is meant to stop the United States from giving military aid to countries that recruit soldiers under the age of 15 and use them to fight wars) for Yemen, South Sudan, Chad, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Not forgetting that as of 2010 the allocation of U.S. foreign aid from USAID to Sudan was in excess of $420 million. A continuance in the pattern of continuous involvement with foreign aid to Sudan for many years in which more than $250 million was given to the nation between 1977–1981.

But for the Obama administration, the fledgling democratic movement of the Sudan must be defended and preserved even at the cost of millions lives of innocent and defenseless civilians—children, women, and men. When he was a senator, in 2007 and 2008, Obama, was extremely critical of George W. Bush's administration for engaging with Khartoum. Obama even advocated for a no-fly zone for Darfur. Even his current U.N. ambassador, Susan Rice advocated military intervention with personnel on the ground. Also in 2008, then candidate Obama joined in a statement in which he demanded "that the genocide and violence in Darfur be brought to an end and that he would "pursue these goals with unstinting resolve." Not to mention a year later it was Mr. Obama, in a statement released by the White House who said “As the United States and our international partners meet our responsibility to act; the government of Sudan must meet its responsibilities to take concrete steps in a new direction.”

The Whitehouse lacks an official policy toward the Sudan and to this date has not keeping his campaign promises, although Obama once said, "Sudan is a priority for this Administration" and "There must be real pressure placed on the Sudanese government." Barack Obama says that the US will apply more pressure on Sudan but his administration has caved to a flawed election. I guess assuming that such is better than no election at all. The fact is that the present administration ignorance and inaction most likely end in a new civil war. The last north-south civil war in Sudan ended with a fragile peace in 2005, after some two million deaths.
What is our administration’s foreign policy when it comes to dictators, tyrants, Africa and democracy? Obama claims he went to war in Libya because NATO was afraid of the threat of government genocide, while we see such real time in the Sudan. Now the Administration is turning its attention and rhetoric towards Syria; which I am certain is for the benefit of Israel.

I just want the president to come correct and say openly that he has no interest in addressing what is going on in Africa with the Sudan. That he and his administration has a lack of interest in the slaughters of Africans whenever it involve people with darker skin. The numbers reported that I have seen pertaining to Sudan is greater than those in Libya or Syria, yet the White House seems not to notice. Even in the dictionary, Sudan would come before Syria.

Wednesday, February 02, 2011

Obama Backsteps Made in USA Foreign Policy for Egypt

As the Egyptian people take to the streets of its cities against decades of repression, increasing poverty and unbearable food prices, the Obama administration is in an admitted quandary of either supporting the requested demand for democratic reform of the people or the stable support of a corrupt dictator. The longer he waits to decide in pursuit of his request for an “orderly transition” to democratic reform as stated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the more his hopes of modeling changes as those that occurred in Turkey, the more likely what happened in Iran in 1979 will come to fruition. The conundrum is that he as president in the past has been in bed with Mubarak and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia too long to adapt or alter American political policy in the region. This in fact is worse than the BP oil spill or the mid-term election losses the democrats suffered this past November.

The citizenry of Egypt know more of the US support of Mubarak’s three decades than the average American and of the $1.5 billion annually gives to his totalitarian regime. This is an overshadowing sticking point since cutting off this aid would likely make the Israeli government uneasy. But being on the wrong side of the history could proffer even more hazardous for President Obama: for again it may result in leadership similar to that in Iran after the overthrow of the shah via popular revolt – but I seriously doubt it.

Yet it could. We have already lost face validity for even asking a man who has ruled for nearly 30 years to be in charge of the democratic conversion of an autocratic state. I would be more fearful of an anti American state more so than an Islamic fundamentalist state that hates the West. I remember seeing the murder of Anwar Sadat on television and remember it was not by Islamic fundamentalist but rather folk who hated the fact that he dealt with the west, particularly the United States and Israel. I also recall that our most hated enemy, Al Zawahiri was forced to leave his home of Egypt because of Mubarak’s preventing such men from being a part of the political process. Thus it is not unlikely that these young secular democracy seeking, twitter and facebook users may be pushed by Obama inaction to hate the US as much or as equal as Mubarak.

Obama seems to need to brush up on his history or risk another Khomeini. The truth is we back step when folk desire liberty and democracy after we talk it up as did the President in his address at the American University in Cairo in 2009. We go after the Saddam Hussein’s of the world while kicking it with the Mubarak’s and King Abdullah’s of the world. This is what creates Islamic fundamental extremist that desire to fly planes into our architecture. Seeing we have not learned anything after support Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Chiang Kaishek in Tiawan or Mobutu Seko in Zaire. Obama needs to face the fact that we support such openly, especially in the case of Mubarak and the sad thing is that we do so for Israel (who just sent three Israeli planes landed at Cairo's Mina International Airport on Saturday carrying hazardous equipment for use in dispersing and suppressing large crowds)not America. I mean we seem to speak more of the Suez canal and what Egypt thinks and feel that the people of Egypt.

Obama has a tough task ahead. He holds the baggage of American foreign policy. This will make it complicated for him to urge a transition from a US supported government that has abrogated any and all other organized political alternatives and elides political freedom. Maybe we should rethink Afghanistan for what we see in Tunisia and Egypt tells us that it does not require a bloody and bellicose illegal invasion and occupation to overthrow a dictator. So get your practice on Mr President, Jordan is likely to be next - so don't blow it.

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

draconian jones

Last week I referred to senator John McCain a few times. Namely because I wrote about him and his over zealous overview of economics and economic reform. Moreover because his depiction doesn't match my understanding of mathematics, as limited as it is. Also, because I could not post such given the incessant tags I was getting. Truth be told I have a major disdain for this thing they call “tagging” and don’t like math. either – I just know how to do it proficiently.

But before I go any further, I would like to say (1) Reverend Wright put it down in Detroit at the NAACP dinner, (2) George W. Bush is a funny cat at least what I can suppurate from his speech he gave at this years annual White House Corespondents Association dinner and (3) I love the LSU new baseball uniforms, throwback, Negro League style.

But Back to McCain, I have a basic difference with his math and fundamental approach to economics. I mean, I finally got a look at some semi-specifics regarding his pompous assertion that he will be able to end the budget deficit by the end of his first term as president - like he gone get in office and have a second term at that. LMBAO.

I feel that getting in office is going to be hard. First he has basically a financial vote of no confidence from the GOP seeing he has only raised about 3 million dollars for the general election. Meaning to me he will likely have to give all that loot back and accept federal funding to compete with Hillary (who has raised about 21 million) or Obama (who has raised about 8 million) for the general election slated for this November. As it stands now, Obama has 42 million available for the remanding primaries and Hillary has about 8 million. However she has debts accrued during the primaries of about 10 million dollars. Rule of thumb, if a candidate for the presidency is in debt during the primaries, how can one take their economic plan for the country serious?

But McCain, in one word is scary. He in his economic proposal is proposing a spending cut that will amount to about one third of the annual domestic budget. The package asserts about 600 billion dollars in cuts, however most of the compensation will be directed toward corporations and upper income earning households. Thus programs like education, student loans, social security and medicare will have to loose a lot of loot if what he has proposed is to take place. My problem is that Jones aint even said what he will cut - and it would be wise for him to tell me before the elections if he is going to be “straight talking” to the general electorate. Not to mention, folk say he gone do all of this while at the same time increasing the size of the military. This tells me that more money will be required for his 100 year war and more money will be needed to increase the military with respect to service personnel, support staff and equipment.

McCain is giving a new meaning to Draconian if you asked me. In fact I think from now on, in concert with his Mcainanomics and 100 years in Iraq, he has given a new epitaph to laws that can be considered exceedingly harsh; very severe - Draconian. But then again I’m a poor black man with a feeble vocabulary, so what would I know?