On Monday March 28, 2011 President Obama addressed the Nation on Primetime television on his Libya involvement. This comes nine days after the missile attacks on Col Muammar al-Gaddafi’s regime by the U.S. Military, France and the UK.
President Obama’s speech, presented as compassionate, left many questions, concerns, and contradictions.
Many key issues the President addressed are not fully answered; contradict the ‘UN Security Council resolution 1973’ (1) published by the United Nations Press center under: ‘SC/10200’ (2), as well as the ‘Geneva Convention from 1949’ (3).
Questions, such as the exegesis of the UN Resolution, continued involvement of the United States, the actual “American Interests” in that region, and the role of Al Qaeda in that conflict.
Not to forget the Constitutional Aspect of divided power and when the President is authorized to interfere in an armed conflict.
There is one thing I agree with the president on and that is that Muammar al-Gaddafi is a dictator, a terrorist, and needs to be removed. But let’s not forget who made Col. Gaddafi respectable in the world.
It was not the United States, but rather the European Union and the United Nations who actually lobbied to provide the very same dictator a seat on the UN Humans rights council.
The very same EU and UN who made Billions of Dollars profit from doing business with this dictator, while the pre-Obama U.S.A. had a ban on this country. And these countries now want Gaddafi to be removed and the United States should do the dirty work.
So the key question to be answered is who is President Obama really serving in this conflict?
The Key issues in a nutshell:
- President Obama declared that he has deployed American Forces after consulting the bipartisan Leadership of Congress.
But the truth of the Matter is that Congressman Boehner, speaker of the House, said on Sunday March 20, 2011 the President better explain what America’s role” is in the Libya offensive before further military action is taken, Politico.com reports (4).
Even his own partisan friends in the House were so surprised that the word impeachment was mentioned by VP Joe Biden and 8 other Democrats (5).
If Obama had really consulted bipartisan Leadership as he claimed in his speech, would the Speaker of the house and the Vice President not have been fully informed and why did the VP talk about impeachment over this action?
- President Obama points out over and over that the American involvement was to protect innocent Civilians, and painted a horrific picture of massacres and genocide.
But here is the thing. The Geneva Convention from 1949 (3) specifically spells out who is protected under their Charta and considered a “Civilian” (Part I, Article 3, (1) In case of conflict of not of an international character…persons taking NO active part in hostilities).
Therefore, armed Rebels fighting the current government in hostile actions are not to be considered Innocent Civilians and Obama’s proud announcement of destroying Tanks moving towards the rebels is NOT protecting civilians under the Geneva Convention, but rather supporting rebel forces.
And what about the civilians still committed to Gaddafi? Think about the Dictator what you want – the women and children still believing in him are still Civilians, are they not protected by the Geneva Convention?
- President Obama mentions several times how he is determined to fight Al Qaeda and he keeps mentioning Iraq.
Either the President is so badly informed or he purposely withholds vital information from the American people.
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the leader of the Libyan rebels has confirmed and admitted in an interview with the UK Telegraph (6) on March 25, 2011 that jihadists who fought allied troops in Iraq are now on the front against Gaddafi. Mr. Hasidi himself is a member of Al Qaeda and fought against the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Washington Times on March 30, 2011 confirms that Jihadists join Libyan Rebel Forces (9).
Al Qaeda in Maghreb, the African side arm of Al Qaeda, has always been a strong force in that area. They usually move in the no-man’s land between Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt.
To finance their Terror attacks, primarily against the United States, they kidnap preferred European Tourists during a desert trip and demand ransom which is usually paid through Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s Charity foundation. Another financial source for Al Qaeda in Maghreb is providing Terror camps (7).
- If President Obama is so determined to fight Al Qaeda “wherever they are found”, as he claimed in his speech on Monday why did he announce on Tuesday March 29, 2011 that he does not rule out arming Libyan Rebels (8)?
President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not ruled out supporting Rebels with arms.
NATO General Secretary ‘Anders Fogh Rasmussen’ already rejected the idea with good reason.
Not only would this practically arm Al Qaeda Terrorists, but in fact this would violate the ‘UN Security Council resolution 1973’ (1).
Chapter 13 “Enforcement of Arms Embargo” does not specify between Rebel forces and Regular Government Forces. The mandate say’s clear to enforce an Arms embargo against the country.
Even if rebel forces prevail and overthrow Gaddafi, it is up to the United Nations first to remove the Arms embargo before any country can provide lethal weapons.
In addition, arming Rebels against the Government would provide a clear advantage over the Government forces and therefore be a direct interference in an inner conflict of a sovereign state, also known as civil War. And let’s be honest this conflict already is a civil war. And this is clearly not in the UN Mandate.
The mandate speaks exclusively about “providing a No-Fly Zone in order to protect Civilians” and rules out a direct interference.
- President Obama did not point out clearly the involvement of ground troops.
As a matter of fact, in several parts of his speech, the president mentioned so called “Search and seizure” as well as “Search and Rescue” operations.
Rescue who, who does the president want to rescue; all Americans are out of the country. Or does the president actually mean “Search and Destroy” missions?
This would make a lot more sense since the President has signed a “secret presidential finding authorizing covert operations in Libya” as U.S. officials confirmed to Fox News on March 31st 2011, only three days after the president announced there will be no ground troops in Libya (10).
There are only two facts that are undisputable and that is 1) Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi needs to go and 2) the conflict in Libya is a internal domestic Conflict also called ‘Civil War”.
No matter how compassionate or whiningly Obama presents the situation a military support is a clear interference in a inner conflict, arming rebels is a dangerous adventure because it also means for a fact arming Al Qaeda.
Again Gaddafi needs to go, but the way to get there is diplomacy and not military action.
If military action is really the answer why don’t we get involved against Ahmedinejad, who poses a way larger threat to the United States and our ally, Israel?
6) UK Telegraph
10) Fox News
The United States is at War again.
On March 7, 2011 – The French and the United Kingdom first pressured for the establishment of a No-Fly Zone over Libya, but backed down. As of this moment the military interference in an internal Conflict, commonly known as Civil War, was on the table.
The Arab league supported this Idea, but never intended to get involved by themselves just in case something went terribly wrong, and in a military conflict there is always a possibility to blame others.
On March 17, 2011 – the Unites Nations Security Council approved, from pressure of the French President Sarkozy, a military intervention in Libya.
“SC/10200 United Nations security council approves a ‘No-Fly Zone’ over Libya’ (1), authorizing ‘All measures’ to protect civilians.
This fungous declaration leaves a lot of room for interpretation and even more questions.
On March 19, 2011 – the First Air Strikes began in cooperation with Missile attacks from U.S. Battle ships.
President Obama has, illegally and without consent, sent U.S. Armed Forces into a conflict. Though he had plenty of time to consult with the Congress and call for an urgent emergency meeting getting Congressional Approval, President Obama decided to play Golf, pick his favorite NCAA team and travel to South America.
This action is not only highly illegal but also endangers American soldiers. Illegal because we have a constitution and the constitution is clear on when, where and how the president is authorized to engage the Armed Forces in a conflict without Congressional Approval.
The War Power Act from 1973 (2), established by the 93rd Congress after the Vietnam conflict was put in place exactly to prevent any U.S. President to engage the U.S. in a War without approval again.
More important than the Power Act is the United States constitution. Article I – Section VIII (3) rests the power to declare War solely to the United States Congress, and requires both the Commander-in-Chief AND the Congress to commit U.S. Troops; otherwise any Action would be unconstitutional.
Article II – Section II (3) of the U.S. Constitution sure identifies the U.S. President as the civilian oversight of the U.S. Military and Commander in chief, but does not allow him to use the Armed Forces to enforce its political will on foreign Nations.
March 22, 2011 – the first American Airplane, an F-15 Strike Eagle, crashes over Libya (4). And despite the statements from the Pentagon that this Jet was ‘Not’ shot down, but crashed due to technical failure the situation remains the same. According to UK Guardian the Pilots could not have known if the people who found them were friendly or non-friendly since they all were heavily armed.
Praise the Lord the Fighter Pilots are safe and well, but it could have been the other way around.
There are many questions that now rise from this situation. Speaker of the House John Boehner sent a few questions to President Obama concerning the American involvement in this “Action” I think he asked the wrong questions. So let me as ask a few here:
My first question concerns the UN Resolution – Gaddafi, Libya and the rebels
The UN Resolution declares “All necessary Measures to protect Civilians”. But what does that mean, who is a civilian in this case and who is a participant in an armed internal conflict.
In my understanding of the Geneva Convention (5) a person that is armed and participates in a violent action is not to be considered an unarmed unprotected Civilian and falls under the rules of Engagement.
Muammar al-Gaddafi should have been taken out 30 years ago. But it was the European Countries, especially France, Germany, Austria, Russia and so on who protected him and made him diplomatically eligible (6).
No matter what one thinks about Gaddafi he is the legal Head of Libya, his citizens have supported him for the past 30 years. Now the very same Citizens rebel against him.
I definitely agree and support the revolution, but this is an internal conflict and when the UN claims falsely that the western alliance is to protect “Civilians” this is a fraudulent inflammatory statement because as I mentioned above armed Civilians participating in a violent conflict are not protected under the Geneva Convention.
So here is my first question – why is the United Nations so eager to get involved in that conflict?
In my opinion the United Nations together with the French and the UK in cooperation with the European Union uses the U.S. Armed Forces to interfere illegally to overthrow a uncomfortable Dictator for economical (in favor of the European Union and NOT the U.S.) and political reasons (to strengthen Muslim radical groupings).
My next Questions go straight to the Situation of the American Soldiers.
The fact that we have never officially declared war on Libya raises many questions concerning the legal status of our Armed Forces.
Many Military experts and the NATO command already warn that, should the rebels not prevail, a Ground Force operation would be the next logical step. Taking a closer look at the fuzzy UN declaration the application of Ground Forces is not being ruled out. And that brings me to the point.
Since when – does the United Nations run our Armed Forces for their advantage? Since when is the UN in charge of our Soldiers? Ok you might say – sure since the UN puppet Obama is president – but where is the Congress on this?
What is the benefit – does that mean we now get access to the oil and gas of Libya or does that mean we spend American Tax Dollars (over 70 Million Dollars in the past 3 days in Tomahawk Missiles) to make sure the Arab league and the European Union gets the financial benefit?
What if – the fighter Jet Pilots would have been shot down, not in friendly but enemy territory? Since Gaddafi already declared that he does not accept the UN resolution, he could have considered the Pilots terrorists, spies, or God knows what and punished them at will, even execution.
What if – we send ground forces into Libya? What is the status of the conflict? Is this a Police Action, a war, an expedition – what?
And the question is not so far off because this question involves the treatment of the soldiers and their families when they come home according to the U.S. Veterans Affairs regulations.
Only Combat Veterans participating in an official declared War are eligible for the “War-veteran-Benefits” (7). Every military person knows that the benefits, retirement, and other social assistance for homecoming soldiers have a specific distinction – Soldiers in times of peace and soldiers in combat.
What happens – to the families of the fallen? Do they receive surviving dependents benefits of a soldier at war or the smaller benefits for a soldier in peace?
Remember we have never declared war officially on Libya.
Remember how long it took to accept the Vietnam Veterans legally as War Veterans? It took until 2003, under the Bush Administration to recognize veterans’ benefits for Soldiers exposed to Agent Orange (7). Or the legal battles on legally accepting the fact that Operation Desert Storm participants had been exposed to Chemical Weapons and grant the benefits for this. And it is confirmed that Gaddafi holds Mustard gas weapons.
What if – those F-15 Pilots would have been killed – what regulation would apply to them and their families left behind, since we are not at War with Libya?
Despite the legal constitutional aspect of Obama’s narcissist lone-ranger actions, where he thinks he can do whatever he feels like, once again I think he has confused his job description with that of a dictator. Here in America we have a democracy, a system with “Checks and Balances” a House body and a Senate body it is not a 1 man show; Apparently Harvard Law School no longer teaches the rules of our three branches of government.
I am sure there are tons of questions that can be asked but those are the ones that burn on my heart right now.
As far as I am concerned – all we can do is pray for our men and women in the Armed Forces for their safe return as they follow their loyal calling as Service members. God bless you and thank you for your service.
Pray that they all return home safe because our President in my opinion has not given any serious thought to this unauthorized action and its consequences.
Mr. President, Mr. Speaker of the House Boehner:
Would anybody please explain this to me or answer my questions? Since I am a citizen and a Taxpayer I am entitled to the answers.
1) United Nations.org Press Release
2) Almanac of Policy Issues
3) Cornell University Law School
4) L.A. Times
6) (The Hypocrisy of Europe…) tclehner.wordpress.com
7) United States Veterans Affairs Department
THE PRIVATE SECTOR
There are many possibilities for the private citizen to add and support this cause. From healthcare providers and Insurance companies to the millionaires and billionaires along with private donators.
(1) Health and Insurance providers.
Healthcare and Insurance providers would be well advised to come up with special plans for unwed single moms and children, including dental. In some extreme hardship cases even down to almost zero. Making plans equated based on income, life situation, and amount of children.
They should consider those in need now and their children as future paying customers in the long run.
I cannot speak for all church congregations when it comes to helping the poor, but most churches regardless of their denominational affiliation do set aside funds for those in need. However, most of this help is only for the short term.
Of course I understand that resources are limited and not every church is in the lucky situation to have a lot wealthy members and/or members that give. Here is where again the State or government could step in and support those efforts with financial aid. That way churches can provide more and better services.
(3) Millionaires and Billionaires
Those are my real favorite people. And I don’t mean that in a complimentary way. Just as churches I cannot speak for others and for everybody.
While conservative Billionaires usually follow the rule: Do good and don’t brag about it; there is not much known about their spending habits.
The Koch brothers for example, better known in coherence with the “Tea Party” are big time donators but the media is a lot more interested in their political activities and recently slammed by The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer in her article “Covert Operations,” (14) where she accused the brothers of “waging war against Obama”.
Truth and publically known is that the Koch brothers spent more than 100 Million Dollars on right wing political Causes, but what is not publically known is more than 600 Million Dollars in Pledged or donated money (15) went to arts, education, and medical research.
Another example is Linda McMahon (R – Politician and CEO of the WWE Entertainment) and her Husband Vincent Kennedy McMahon (Chairman of the WWE) and their entire family. Linda McMahon spent alone in 2008 over 8 Million Dollars to charity (16) causes (WWE company donations and support not included).
The McMahons are well recognized on their social welfare spending. Linda McMahon (if not running for office as a republican) is the CEO of the World Wrestling Entertainment and Vincent K. McMahon is the Chairman. The WWE is one of the biggest contributors to the “Make a wish foundation” (16), Children’s Education foundations, and many more, sending their poster Wrestlers John Cena, Big show, Kelly Kelly, John Morrison, and others permanently on fundraisers. But they are the only conservatives with public recognition on their Donations and only because they promote this through their weekly televised shows “Raw” and “Smackdown”.
The same counts for all sports events. Except the WWE who takes pride in their social engagement, major sports events like NFL Super bowl and others don’t seem to be interested in supporting this social cause. What they fail to see is that the ignored hardships of today are the fans and ticket buyers of tomorrow.
It would be a signal in the right direction if major Sports presenters, leagues, and broadcasters would make a public stand for Pro-Life, families, and children and not always duck before special interest lobbyists and lawyers in order not to offend somebody.
For example, remember the “scandal” of Tim Tebow with his 2010 Pro Life Super bowl commercial. While conservatives praised that young and brave man liberals went furious demanding this be removed (19). Thanks to CBS the commercial was aired, but what I missed was the NFL making a stand for this cause, a clear statement of their support.
My belief is that, millionaires and billionaires (especially liberals) only spend money when the Media is nearby, using their Donations as a promotion for themselves. And since the Media is a short-term-story-headline media they are not interested to continue promoting family support issues. But immediate headline producing catastrophes such as tsunamis are always good for headlines and for those billionaires to promote themselves.
PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS
(4) Non Profit Organizations
A great way for WE THE PEOPLE as society to support this cause is to get involved in so called NPO’s (Non Profit Organizations (20)). Nonprofit organizations are tax exempt and can provide a wide variety of direct support. There are way over 1.4 Million NPO’s registered in the United States and the location of one of them is easy (20).
One of the best NPO’s supporting the Pro-Life cause is Steven Ertelt’s LifeNews (21). Working tirelessly on the cause his Website provides valuable information about every aspect from healthcare to financial support.
Personal responsibilities of each and every one of us
The issue of single parents in poverty, orphans in America, or the problems with adoption, should not exist in the richest nation on earth.
There is a lot we can do:
- First of all, on Christmas, Easter and all the other Holliday’s when our hearts are usually wide open, we can ignore the media coverage of foreign country begging, and start looking at how we can support the unwed mothers and children in our own country first.
- Don’t throw away your clothes and/or household items, but instead drop them off at churches, women centers and local children abuse centers.
- Lobby to Media, Sports entertainment, Health Companies and other services making your voice heard and tell them you won’t support them unless they make a stand for life, family, and children.
- Call your congressmanall the time and let him/her know you want him/her to make a stand for family values, women and children, and not just in “word,” but in “deed,” even if it is against the party line. It does not matter as long as it helps.
- Volunteer 1 hour at your local women’s shelter
- Get involved with state officials to change laws and policies that do not benefit women and children.
- Donate $5, $10 or $20 a month to your favorite local charity.
- Volunteer 4 hours a month at your favorite local charity.
And always remember Mother Teresa when she said:
“Never worry about numbers.
Help one person at a time,
and always start with
the person nearest you.”
~~ Mother Teresa ~~
Thank you to Jacqueline B. Lang (12), who worked together with me on this issue, providing valuable information and great insight.
Jacqueline is a devoted mother, business and academic professional. Jacqueline has worked for many years in many different roles including 18 years in leadership roles in management; she has also worked as a Congressional Campaign Manager, taught at the college level and served 8 years in the United States Army Reserves. Her education includes a PhD Business (c), specializing in Organizational Development and Women Leadership, MBA and BA in Communication, along with course work in environmental & safety training and executive coaching. She is currently co-authoring ‘The Power of a Women’ and ‘Breaking the Glass Ceiling without a Hammer: Career Strategies for Women’ both will be published in August of 2011
3) Associated Content
8) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
9) Texas Adoption Regulations
10) SOS Children’s Village
14) The New Yorker
15) Politics Daily
16) Paul Levesque Network
17) American Charities.com
19) New York Daily News
20) Charity Love to know.com
The nine most terrifying words in the English Language are: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”
The government can step in here in many ways without taking direct control, assist and support the mothers financially and through power. And that does not even require new laws, only innovation and the willingness to put the interest of children and parents first.
I. Tax Cut
President G.W. Bush Family-Tax-Cut plan (5) from January 2003, based on a year’s income was a step in the right direction; giving parents a minimum of $ 1,000 annually back in their pocket and financially assist in college refunds. This Federal Tax Deduction for children plan (6) provides a great amount of help to lower income parents in order to support their children. But this is only one step in the right direction and it is up to us to lobby politicians to take many more. This plan needs to continue indefinitely.
II. Defund Special interest groups such CAIR, NAACP, ACLU (Planned Parenthood) and others.
Those institutions cash hundreds of millions of dollars every year from the federal funds, but instead of supporting the needs of those they are supposed to represent, they would rather pay their high profile special interest lawyers, newspaper ads, TV commercials, and lobbyists, leaving the support additionally to the taxpayer.
The NAACP is the best example of that. While States struggle financially they still build so called housing properties for low income people. If they are not given primarily to NAACP represented minorities the word racism goes through the media like there is no tomorrow leaving White, Hispanic, and Native American women behind.
The money wasted on those institutions could be used more wisely in support of women who decide to keep their babies, e.g., medical aid, housing, food stamps, and legal and psychological support for those women whodecide to give their child up for adoption, and many other issues. And make this money accessible to all races banning special interest lawyers and lobbyists from constantly playing the race card.
III. Tighter regulations on Election Campaign contributions for federal funded institution such as Unions, and other special interest groups
What really makes me mad is that Federal Institutions and Organizations such as Unions spent Millions of Dollars on campaign contributions to politicians (13). Though this is money that belongs to all tax payers those Organizations support exclusively left wing radical politicians for their own benefit.
The use of OUR TAX DOLLARS by those Organizations should be under tight rules and regulations. Every Dollar spent on Campaign contributions should be equally donated to family programs, regardless of the political affiliation. And provide proof that both sides of the isle (pro-choice AND Pro-Life Organizations) get their equal share.
This way the spending to politicians will be cut in half, the future of our children secured, and the money stays where it belongs, with the people who need it.
Those Organizations need to be defunded period and so bring the money into family matters. Let’s face it – AFTERALL, THIS IS OUR MONEY.
IV. Confiscated money.
Pimps, weapon traffickers, prostitutes, drug smugglers… All of those are illegal and build a multibillion Dollar Industry in our country. Alone, human trafficking (7) has an estimation of 45 Billion Dollars per year. And all those “businesses” involve the hardship of families. The money confiscated from these industries can be returned to Human services in order to support families and their financial struggle of parenting. We are talking about billions of Dollars that is not used from tax payer’s money, but from Criminals.
Alone the Porn industry is a multi-billion Dollar industry. And despite what liberals say, fact is: A large portion of those Actresses are women who are victims of Human sex trafficking sold as slaves to the producers.
Of course, they would rather support Planned Parenthood. Having access to a quick abortion for one of their “actresses” is easier than dealing with raising children in the long run. So why not put an extra tax on porn movies, money that could exclusively be used to support young families and single parents.
Everybody viewingthose videos and movies supports those illegal actions, and therefore should do his share to society and pay the extra dollar on tax that supports children.
This is one of the main reasons why politicians and Government would rather support Planned Parenthood (Abortion) than family values; it is the easy way out.
All of that money, we are talking about several billions of Dollars here, that does NOT come out of tax Payers money, in the chapter I – IV saved and confiscated is now in the hands of the Federal Government. Here is a major problem that starts again with special interest and that is the distribution of those funds to the proper authorities in order to get the money to where it belongs – the families and children in opposition to abortion.
It would take innovation and a radical step to distribute the money back to the families and encourage them to actually have babies. Here is one idea:
V. Child Protective Services – This is a big Issue and goes hand in hand with many topics and solutions that could help and support single parents, support adoption and help through financial support.
Taking CPS out of State responsibility, adding it into HHS (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (8)) and fund it with the money saved and confiscated above, this has many positive advantages. Right now, in order to get access to all the social support, partially from States and partially from the Federal Government, is more like running the gauntlet than help. And information is not really provided anywhere. And since the laws, rules, and regulations vary between the States up to the point that nobody really has any idea as of what to get and where, this system has become a Legal Jungle. And this would be the advantage of CPS becoming a federal Institution:
- Support in collecting Child support from dead beat fathers.
Right now the collection of child support is a state case. All it takes for a dead beat father is to leave the state and while he can demand visitation, the enforcement of unpaid child support falls on the different independent State laws which make the collection an extremely expensive lawyer’s battle for most single moms.
Making CPS a federal institution could put an end to this. The moment the father does not pay his CS he can be put on Federal Warrant and through the Federal power the money can be collected anytime and anywhere in the United States. And CPS being a federal Agency would have access to IRS, Social Security, and other Federal Financial Institutions to get a grip on that individual.
And then of course a harsher punishment for non paying fathers making “fleeing or neglecting Child payments” equal to Tax fraud.
- Split of power
Split of Power means, giving single moms the opportunity to split the power of attorney with CPS. While the mother keeps the custodial and parental guardianship and power, CPS is provided with the Administrative Guardianship. This means the mother as of now gets her child support from the Feds and the feds collect it from the fathers. Sounds complicated but it isn’t. The mother never has to worry about the money for the child coming late this way.
- Welfare and support
Food stamps, housing, clothing, etc. now comes out of the same pot and the women only have to deal with one agent in order to get all of their necessities. This lowers administrative costs and speeds up the processing.
Housing is currently federally financed, respectively financially supported. If CPS was a federal Institution they would have nationwide access to availability.
Federal Education Programs can provide the opportunity for the mothers to continue to go to school and get their education, or support mothers in home based businesses so they can take care of their children. Contracts with private and state childcare facilities, and schools as well as churches could be given financial incentives such as tax exemptions for providing assistance to single mothers.
CPS being a Federal Organization would put an end to the Adoption Jungle as it is right now. When conservatives claim “Less Government and more private” that is nonsense because Adoption is already in the hands of the State Government, so why not put this under one roof. Right now the Adoption Laws vary from State to State and while Texas is mostly low regulated (9) some States even have an age limit on adopters – age 40 -, or have insurmountable obstacles making the adoption a hassle. Not to forget that local CPS offices have only access to the children under their care. Making CPS Federal would give the local agent access to a nationwide database of adoptable children and increase the opportunity for children to actually be adopted.
While some states such as Texas reimburse adoption costs, some don’t. This opens the doors for private adoption agencies which makes adoption extremely costly.
Private adoption agencies are profit oriented businesses who, in their pricing, calculate all fees including State fees, administrative costs, their own lawyers, acquisition costs (children they buy from mothers mostly drug addicts who don’t want to give their kids up for adoption but rather sell them to agencies) and many more fees plus and additional profit, and don’t forget that parents need their own lawyer in order to double-check the paperwork.
Not to forget that State operated CPS Agencies and their complicated rules are very often difficult to deal with and the regulations complicated. In order to maximize their profit Private Agencies often look to third world countries where they can purchase babies often for a low price and mediate those into the U.S.
This makes adoption for regular middleclass families almost financially impossible. And the advantage of those agencies is that they DO HAVE access to a nationwide database.
CPS being federal puts an end to all this and makes adoption of American children more comfortable and more encouraging.
- Nationwide “Safe Haven Law”
I support the Idea that every Hospital, regardless of their political or religious affiliation should be forced to provide an “anonymous Baby hatch drop off Zone” where women can drop off their unwanted children without retribution or criminal prosecution for child abandonment.
Any hospital refusing this for religious or political reasons should be banned from public funding.
- Orphanage and Foster care
Before going any deeper, we have to determine what child actually ends up in Foster care or in an Orphanage. Orphanages are for children who lost their parents and don’t have any living relatives and Foster care is mostly for children that come from broken homes with parents unfit to provide for their children for whatever reason. And the latter is the main issue here. Those children are under Governmental care for a short period of time.
Orphanage and Foster care, is a difficult topic. Foster care has supporters and those who oppose it because many children placed into that system basically fall through the system and drop off the radar of overworked CPS workers, and let’s be honest, the reputation of State run homes for children is not very good.
But there is a pretty good private organization in Europe that provides a system I personally find suitable and worth promoting.
The system is called “SOS- Children’s Village” (10). A private, non-governmental, with Donation funded organization that focuses on family-based, long-term care of children who can no longer grow up with their biological family.
The main difference here to regular Orphanages and Foster homes is that the children are within a small group, living together as a sort of patchwork family with a “housemother” as their head of household/family. This organization buys some property and builds several homes, every home has a family where the kids have their private rooms, a play room, dining room, and a small kitchen area, as well as a social room and the mother has her own room.
As far as the governmental involvement is concerned this is only the tip of the iceberg, these are some basics to think about and start from for better ideas.
Don’t forget while government CAN BE forced to do the right thing through votes, and it is up to us to lobby our representatives to finally come up with proper projects and concepts, the private sector CAN NOT BE FORCED and everything they do has to be voluntary.
After my last column “How abortion can be avoided with common Sense” (1) I took a stand as of why I am against abortion and why I believe that abortion is not necessary.
In this column I want to give you some solutions as of what to do with all of the born babies, how we can support and provide encouragement for the unwed mothers so that they want to keep their babies instead of running to an abortion clinic.
And this is only the tip of the iceberg of possibilities and only a basic approach for many possibilities and opportunities. What it takes is men and women that will stand up and who are willing to fight for the right direction.
It is not enough to be against it – what we need is an Alternative to Abortion.
And this is one of the biggest issues we have today in the conservative movement, all the politicians, bloggers, columnists, and nationwide religious leaders speak out against abortion, but in their effort to fight this cause and their attempt to cut down on public funding for abortion they all fail to provide proper solutions. How can WE THE PEOPLE – WE THE SOCIETY step in and support young couples and single mothers to keep their babies.
As long as we do not provide these solutions, radical pro-Choice activists, lobbyists, and special interest lawyers will always have a head start over us.
Why is it so hard for conservatives to provide alternative solutions and support?
It all has to do with politics and political ideology. Fiscalconservatives have the problem that on one hand they vote for less government involvement and more personal responsibility, but on the other hand they know very well that when it comes to supporting young parents/families’/single parents some Governmental involvement is necessary in order to provide acceptable solutions.
The trick is to find a middle ground, a solution aside of political or lobbyist interests and to use common sense in order to accomplish both. The secret word is Assistance rather than control.
Though there ARE private organizations and Religious groups stepping in under certain circumstances, counting exclusively on private support through Charity foundations or private organizations does not work because this is not a headline producing issue such as a Tsunami, or Africa support.
Who are we talking about now?
We are talking about social hardships, such as:
- Women, who during pregnancy find out that their husband/boyfriend is a dead beat cheater and find themselves all of a sudden – against their original life plan – a single mom.
- We are talking about young couples who find themselves pregnant and don’t know how to deal with the situation
- Teenagers, who now made that mistake of having unprotected intercourse or the protection failed for some reason (that is always possible, there is no such thing as a 100% protection).
- Divorced women who face the challenge of a dead beat father who does not pay his child support.
There are many reasons for being a single parent, and many reasons for women to think about abortion. Bottom line we are talking about those who did not have being a single parent as a life plan but now are facing the challenge of being left behind, and children do cost money.
According to CNPP/USDA, published in 2010 under the title “Expenditures on Children by families, 2009” (2) that a child in the United States cost you, from birth to age 17, an average of $ 205,960 considering a 2.79 percent annual inflation rate Associated Content (3) reports in July 2010. Middle income families will spend $ 286,050 on child rearing while high income earners an average of $ 475,680.
Estimation, made on babyCenter.com (4), on my own son, based on my income and living in the Midwest, entering “public college” as a single parent came out with $ 446,720 from birth to age 22 when he is finishing college. And since my son is going to private college – do the math.
Cost for first Year excluding College: $ 20,696
Total Cost is: $ 446,720
With all love for our children and looking at those numbers that sure can be scary, especially when you are a single mom, or a fresh out of college young couple just entering the workforce, or when you are a teenager and your parents are struggling with the kids they already have, and now they are needed to help financially support a grandchild in order to allow you to get back to school.
Here is the major question:
How can we as a society step in and support women who keep their children, how can we support women who want to give their children up for adoption without putting a blemish on them?
How can we support young parents and unwed young mothers during and after pregnancy?
First, we have to divide between governmental involvements –
What can the government, respectively the politicians do?
What can be done by the private sector accomplish besides providing proper information.
As a fiscal conservative Republican I totally oppose governmental involvement in private enterprise, economy, and private issues. However, social issues and the support of our Citizens future is very well an issue where the government should get involved in order to provide the proper necessities and secure the future of families and our youth. This is called support, and not control. Part 2 continues our discussion.
I am a father and I remember it like it was yesterday when I first heard the heartbeat of my son. There has never been a more beautiful sound in the world. I remember the first sonogram when the doctor handed it over to me, I was overwhelmed with emotions like I have never ever experienced in my life before.
Anybody who has children and loves their children knows what I am talking about and will understand why this topic is so important to me.
Liberals are highly entertaining individuals. Their hypocrisy and double standards are sometimes really entertaining and always subject to a good joke. But when it comes to Abortion the fun ends right here and right now.
While on one hand using the modern times and 21st Century as an excuse, demanding that the “Death Penalty is cruel and unusual punishment”, claiming that every life is sacred and capital punishment is not only outdated but also inhumane, but on the other hand they use the same 21st century, as well as the “Woman’s rights to choose over her own body” and modern days as a rightful excuse to murder innocent babies.
Modern days, 21st Century, and women’s rights to choose are interesting arguments but easy to be rebutted arguments on Abortion and I will show you why.
I totally agree that a woman should be the master of her own being, welfare, and body. No man (male) should have the right to decide or rule over a woman’s body. And we have come a long way since the 18th and 19th century where “Martial Obligations” of a woman were still law.
It is up to the woman herself to choose if she wants to make a career rather than being a mother and wife, or if she wants both, if she wants to be intimate with a man or not, if she wants to get married or not, and so on.
As my mother always taught me: the rights of an individual end at the tip of the nose because that is where the rights of the opposite start.
And when it comes to abortion, the rights of a woman end at the obligation and responsibility for a defenseless innocent child that has not asked to be in the womb of that woman.
As a matter of fact, if women claim their individual rights, of which they are entitled to and I want to point out I am not questioning them at all, rights also always include responsibility.
And the responsibility starts before they get pregnant.
“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” (~~ Ronald Reagan, 1972 ~~)
Of course this quote by the greatest of all Presidents was meant for laws, but can easily be used also for this particular topic, and the words “law’s broken” be replaced with “physical actions taken”.
Since Row vs. Wade in 1973 over 46 Million Abortions have been conducted. That is more than 10% of the American population extinguished. This is the largest genocide since the mass murder of Jews by the Nazi’s during World War 2 (2).
Just to mention that “Roe”, who’s real name is Norma L. McCorvey, from Dallas, Texas, is now a Pro-Life activist.
An average of 1.8 Million Abortions take place every year, 1.21 Million Abortions in 2008, Twenty-Two percent of all pregnancies (excluding Miscarriages) end in Abortion (3). Those numbers could be reduced and almost cut down to zero if we as a society start taking responsibility for our actions.
1) Unwanted Pregnancy due to Rape and Incest.
Only 1% of all abortions are based on rape or incest. That makes in total numbers approximately 12,000 abortions per year due to this horribly violent and morally reprehensible crime.
Now, I am not so arrogant to say I, as a man, put myself in the shoes of a victim of such violence, nor do I pretend to know how such a woman feels. That would be arrogant and disrespectful.
But I do understand statistics and scientific research. And this shows clearly that the majority of violated woman do not abort because of the pregnancy or because they don’t want that child. Research proves that the majority of those victims abort to avoid continuing psychological terror from their tormentor.
Fact of the matter is that our liberal society allows a predator, like a rapist have almost more rights than the victim. Not only does the woman go through the trial because our constitution gives a rapist the right to face its accuser, she also can expect that liberals will have no problem letting a rapist back on the streets on probation stubbornly believing in re-socialization, knowing full well that over 90% of all sex offenders are repeat offenders.
And on top of that a rapist, once aware that he has fathered a child, can either by himself or through his parents call for visitation rights of that child, which victimizes the woman over and over when she has to see this perpetrator (6).
So here are some of the solutions to avoid that:
a) A rape victim does turn out to be pregnant and does not want to keep the child
Every Hospital should be required by law to council a rape victim on the possibility of pregnancy and offer her the so called Pill-After also commonly known as the Morning after Pill of ECP (Emergency Contraction Pill). Here is the religious character and proper counseling that is extremely important.
Though I am a pro-lifer, the ECP (Emergency Contraction Pill) is NOT ABORTION, but a pregnancy prevention initiating a contraction flow (7). This pill has to be taken within the first 72 hours of the act, the sooner the better.
As of here any woman can make her own choice whether she wants to take the risk of being pregnant or if she wants to take the safer step and prevent a possible pregnancy.
Now hospitals, especially Catholic Hospitals, sometimes refuse this pill based on their “Freedom of religion Act” and the offering possibility.
The constitutional right of Religion is an individual right. The religious refusal can only occur when the hospital remains an in-house facility for their members only.
The moment a hospital takes public funding and opens its door for economical profit to the public, the treatment should be based on worldly lawful measurements and not on the religious character of the owner.
b) More protection and rights for the victims and less for the perpetrator
Now, during a trial the constitutional rights of an accused cannot be taken away. In our country we still have the “Innocent until proven guilty” Rights. However, once a rapist is convicted, the victim (woman) can be protected by law in many ways.
- We don’t have a problem taking away fathers rights solely based on the unproven accusations of a woman – so why do we have such a problem to take away any fathers rights of a convicted rapist?
- Harsher punishment: I would go for a Nationwide minimum of 30 years by a first offender and life without the possibility of parole of a second offender (by child molesters or child rapists even the death penalty as a two strike rule)
- Providing legal assistance as well as psychological assistance to the victim and help her to start eventually, if requested, a new life with a new identity.
- A court ruling taking away fathers rights as well as grandmothers /fathers rights of the family of the rapist and making it a law that he is never allowed to approach or contact his victim and offspring again. Any violation would be considered a repeat offense and result in Life without possibility of parole, period.
I think that way women would feel protected and not feel violated over and over again and abortion could be almost extinguished in those instances.
2) Abortion based on potential health problems
6% of all abortions are based on Health problems regarding either the mother or the child. Now this is not rocket science here.
As far as the mother (adult) is concerned, well welcome to the 21st century and the personal physical responsibility that goes hand in hand with the third group the 93% of abortions for social reasons. We pride our superiority over the animals based on the ability of logical thinking and planning ahead, but when it comes to something as simple as reproduction humans intend to act like stone-age humans.
If a couple or a woman decides that she would love to have a baby, it is not rocket science to get a physical check up before pregnancy. And until that time there are at least two dozen forms of pregnancy prevention.
All it takes is to use a little bit of the muscle in the scull most people call a brain.
And when it comes to the unborn; liberals had the audacity to attack Sarah Palin for deciding to give birth to a child who had Down syndrome.
Who are we to decide what life is livable and what life is not…? The last society I remember that made this decision was the Nazi’s and the Chinese.
Every Child is a gift from God and deserves the maximum amount of love. And just because it has a mental or physical challenge does not make its life worthless.
So murdering the baby just because it is not convenient or perfect enough is sure disgusting and I am ashamed to be in the same society as those who always look for the easy way out instead of growing up and being responsible. Which brings me to the largest group of Abortionists……
1) 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. Unwanted or inconvenient).
This includes teenagers (18%), women who already have one or more children, career women who think a child is in the way of her career, women with a partnership that is not going well or they don’t have a partner/husband at all, women who have not used the Pill correctly, not at all, or had unexpected sex, or had concerns about contraceptive methods (they have concerns about the pill but not about a surgery that kills a baby – nice double standard).
So we are not talking about accidents here. We are talking about brainless “anything-goes-lets have fun-as long as we don’t have rules-let the others pay for our animalistic lifestyle”.
None of those reasons are a reason for abortion to me. As a matter of fact it sickens me to see how easy society dodges their way out of responsibility.
Fact of the matter is that we ALL have to take responsibility for our actions. But also the fact is that thanks to liberal thinking we don’t do that. Why take responsibility if we can have the easy way out.
Let’s start with the teenagers.
I don’t know if President George W. Bush “just say no abstinence policy” was a success or not. But the current Federal indoctrination of teaching youth and children’s Sexual practices and how to get the easiest abortion rather than pregnancy prevention and taking responsibility cannot be the answer (8).
Youth and children always follow an example and as long as liberal biased media promotes low-life lifestyle from the Hollywood stars and Pop stars as role models and parents don’t remember their duties as “parents,” talking to their children and teaching them right from wrong things won’t change.
It is time to rethink the entire procedure and where our society wants to go. And it is time to tell the Media with one voice to stop promoting drug infested, permanent drunk lowlife’s as role models. No, Charlie Sheen and Lindsey Lohan are not victims or misguided role models – they are simply disgusting.
Instead of letting the government do the educating parents need to set the example of traditional family values and teach their children that actions have consequences. I think talking to the youth and being a positive role model could reduce the current teenage pregnancy rate by more than half.
And as far as the remaining 75 % of abortion goes (the Adults):
I’ve said it before, all our actions have consequences, and we don’t live in the medieval times. There are at least two dozens types of pregnancy preventions available – Condoms, the Pill, IUD’, vasectomies, and these are just a few.
If a woman decides either she already has children and does not want anymore, a child would interfere with her career, she has a partner or husband and does not want a child right now, or if that woman decides she wants to be single and have one night stands, all of that does not matter. There are many opportunities to prevent a pregnancy in the first place and that leaves no justification for a later abortion.
Let’s be honest, if a woman is smart enough to prevail in the corporate world she can be expected to take proper caution not to become pregnant in the first place.
That is called one’s own responsibility. And when it comes to a man, she can not blame him only for her failure. If a woman has an unwanted pregnancy, of course, it is also the man’s fault because he could have used protection too –it takes two to enjoy the pleasure and both can say no.
Sure, some women now say: What about the men’s responsibilities?
And I agree with you. We guys have our share of responsibilities as well, and the irresponsible chauvinism of some representatives of the male population is disgusting. However, it takes two for the act and if the guy is not prepared the women can as well say NO.
Today we are talking about Abortion and not sexism, and the men’s responsibilities are subject to a whole different and new column (soon to be followed).
By using a little common sense combined with self-control and self-responsibility, behaving a little more like parents and less like friends, and taking care of victims of crimes rather than the perpetrators well, this reduces most of the legitimate arguments of pro-choice activists.
Sure, abortion will never be extinguished, but it can be reduced to a few thousand per year. Still too many but a few thousand sounds better than 1.21 Million, it’s a start and that little guy here has a chance and might become the President, a Nobel Prize winner or simply just a good person.
- Washington Times
- Allen Gutmacher Institute 2005
- Allen Gutmacher Institute 2005
- Bio Ethical reform
- Allen Gutmacher Institute
- Christian Answers.net
- Princeton University
- Atlas Shrug
Before I get started I want to point out that this Column is not about Austria as a Country or the Austrian People. Austria itself is a beautiful country. It has tremendous historical sites to see, and the Austrian Citizens are good, friendly, and amazing people.
What this column is all about is the hypocritical brainwashing European and Austrian Governments who, just like the Obama administration, does not give a darn about the wish and desires of their citizens, but stubbornly defend, promote and indoctrinate their socialist/Marxist/already dead multiculturalism/terrorist loving politics.
These are the facts of European Hypocrisy and their desperate attempt to downplay their own failure on the Arabian politics and their desperate attempt to cover their fawning-over of Dictators even against the wish and will of the United States.
When Listening to European News Networks over Satellite such as N-24, or Austrian ORF, it is unbelievable how desperately they live in denial of their own responsibilities.
Listening to those European politicians, these days they sure admit that they might have “misinterpreted” the one or the other situation “but not without pointing the finger at the United States on all their alleged failures” instead of accepting responsibility.
The finger pointing against the United States has already started in order to cover up that the United States did not have any economical businesses in those areas nor did we have strong diplomatic relations in that region.
The entire cover-up is of course properly transported through Government owned propaganda TV stations such as ORF as well as ultra liberal newspapers (real honest and independent Newspapers are anyway not to be found except the FAZ in Germany).
And now, especially the left wing radical Newspapers and magazines such as NEWS and Österreich under the left wing radical owner Wolfgang Fellner, don’t want to hear anything about that. Now that Media act puffed up how official Austria could have ever talked to those dictators.
This is hypocrisy all the way, knowing that Egypt was armed and equipped with American Military technology because they were the only Arab country holding a military alliance with the United States.
The rest of those radical Arab nations with ties to Terrorist Networks have been under a ban by the United States, which gave the irresponsible European Union an opportunity to sell their weapons to them. And now they try to cover that up by blaming the United States.
Let’s get a few facts straight:
1) Weapons in that area
The weapon ban against Libya was lifted by the United Nations in 2004 against the will of the United States by pressure from the European Union.
Latest news reports that European Union Companies sold alone in 2009 weapons and technology to Libya, Bahrain, Palestine, Lebanon, Tunisia, and other radical Islam countries in a net worth of at least $ 474 Million Dollars U.S. Spiegel online reports (1).
Helicopters from Italy, Fighter jets from France and Germany, Communications technology such as Internet and telephone kill switches from Germany, side arms, assault rifles and unmanned drones from Austria, Tanks from France and the UK, Crowd control weapons (used against demonstrations and to repress opposition) from the UK and Kalashnikovs from Russia just to name a few. Russia alone has an ongoing Arms deals with that region in an amount of 40 Billion Dollar, in Libya itself, 2 Billion Dollars AHN News.com (2) reports.
As a matter of fact the standard assault rifle of the Tunisian Military is the Steyr AUG 77, reported among the top ten Assault rifles, and also used by the Australian Army and many special Forces in the world made in Austria.
1) Social Acceptance of Gaddafi and his offspring
Less than a month ago they have cheered to Saiif al-Islam Gaddafi as a reformer, they have fawned over him whenever he was in Austria, his mother and sister have been well liked shopping customers in Vienna. Aisha Gaddafi was cheered in the Austrian left wing media as the “Claudia Schiffer of the middle east. Pointing out how beautiful and intelligent she was, showing strength against America when defending Saddam Hussein”.
Meanwhile, it was confirmed last week that while Gaddafi’s wife Saifya and his daughter Aisha were shopping in Vienna thousands of Libyan protesters were gunned down by Gaddafi.
Gaddafi’s son Saaif al-Islam Gaddafi studied in Vienna at the IMADEC University and in the UK, and was a well liked guest in Austrian Society, praised as a reformer. And though left wing liberals now mock against the diseased former leader of the freedom party Jörg Haider for his visits to Libya and his friendship to Saaif al-Islam Gaddafi, it was actually the former Chancellor of Austria Bruno Kreisky (3) that brought the known Terrorist back into the international community.
Saaif Gaddafi visited the Vienna Opera ball, an officiell Event hosted by the Austrian Federal Government, and holds extreme close ties to the SPOE and the Austrian Government as well as to the German Sister SPD.
Spiegel Magazine in Germany says in an article from 2004 on Gaddafi: “After a Libyan court sentenced 5 Bulgarian Nurses and a Palestinian Doctor to death in a case of contaminated Blood preservation’s Brussels pressures the from Terror pope to Lord of Peace transformed President to stop the execution of the Nurses” (From Spiegel Magazine (4): Nachdem ein libysches Gericht in einem Prozess um verseuchte Blutkonserven fünf bulgarische Krankenschwestern und einen palästinensischen Arzt zum Tode verurteilt hat, setzt Brüssel den zum Friedensfürsten gewendeten Terrorpaten unter Druck, eine Vollstreckung des Urteils zu verhindern.)
1) Political acceptance
It was Bruno Kreisky (1911 to 1990), chancellor of Austria from 1970 to 1983 that first made Muammar al-Gaddafi eligible in the international community and held close relations with him. Gaddafi himself calls him “My good friend Bruno”. The very same Bruno Kreisky that also made Yasser Arafat, leader of the Terror organization PLO, eligible and organized him to speak in front of the United Nations.
And let’s not forget Libya’s seat on the United Nations Humans rights council. Because of the acceptance of Terrorist Countries in that council, the United States boycotted them during the Bush administration, but rejoined them with Barrack Obama Fox News reports (5).
So why else do you think that Europe managed to give the slave to the UN and European Socialist/Marxist Puppet Obama the Nobel Peace Prize?
Libya got that seat, against the will of the United States, by a simple blackmail trade designed by the European Union… In order to get weapons and arms deals as well as oil and gas drilling rights for European Companies, especially Austria who was the one supporting Libya.
1) Business connections
It is also confirmed since 2011/03/01 that the Gaddafi Clan has 1.25 Billion U.S. dollars parked in cash in Austrian banks. It is also confirmed that the “Libyan Investment Authority” holds several shareholdings of Austrian Companies such as Wienerberger bricks and more.
The Libyan Central bank holds 5 % shares on the UNICREDIT Bank group, one of the largest banks in Europe with headquarters in Italy and banks throughout Europe, including the largest bank in Austria called “Bank Austria” (another socialist affiliated bank).
The largest Oil drilling company in Libya is OMV. OMV is a former government owned oil and Gas Company partially privatized in the late 90’s keeping the vast majority (25% + 1 share) in the hands of the Austrian Government. OMV is also known as being extremely affiliated with SPOE, the socialist Party of Austria. Two of the past three chancellors from the SPOE started their careers in the OMV.
Austria retains 25% of its Oil and Gas from Libya, and more than 50% of the remaining 75% is coming from Russia.
Austria was never shy to decry human’s rights violations when it came to protesting against the treatment of those “poor misunderstood” Terrorists at Gitmo. In Libya on the other hand Austria kept silent in order not to endanger its economical interests… The Gaddafi’s were well liked business partners.
So it is not a miracle that the current SPOE leadership around SPOE chancellor Faymann took their sweet time to freeze Gaddafi’s accounts and business connections calling on the European Union for guidance.
Or was it the hope of the European Union, as usual, that they would find a consensus on how to deal with Libya and still keep Austria’s business interests? Maybe the EU was hoping to reach some sort of agreement where Austria could “officially” avoid having to freeze the money and properties of the Gaddafi’s and then somehow return it to them when the dust settled.
No matter who will follow Gaddafi or any of the fallen dictators, it will be infiltrated by radical America hating Muslim groups. History has shown us that the naive hope things will turn to the better and democracy will be established is a misjudgment.
The countries are poor and the people are now expecting manna to fall from heaven and that the western world will flood them with money, but as soon as that does not happen radical Muslim Terror organizations like Al Qaeda and their pied-piper’s are going to have a feast.
We are talking about the European Union members here. Al Qaeda in Maghreb makes a living of kidnapping European Tourists and dragging them through the uncontrolled desert between Tunisia and Libya. From the ransom money they finance their Terror attacks on America.
The European Union knows about that and though, officially not negotiating with Terrorists, they had no shame in using Saaif al-Islam Gaddafi’s alleged charity foundation and Saaif himself to negotiate and pay the ransom. The fact is that the European Union finances Terrorism through the backdoor, which they apparently consider the lesser evil.
And the European Union has now the impertinence to put the blame of the northern Africa situation on us the United States. A situation they caused, it was the European opportunists who accepted and snuggled the past centuries with those Terrorists and now when it comes to taking responsibility for their idiotic politics they want to point the finger at us.
But that is normal for them: They want us THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA to solve their problems and once we solve them we should get the hell out of Dodge and leave those Europeans the field of business.
Sure, with Obama that might work, but not with the rest of America. And Obama with the help of God Almighty will soon be history and a one-term president.
Did Obama screw the situation: Definitely.
When I asked on Facebook: Is Obama 1) way over his head on that situation, or b) incompetent or c) too dumb to handle it, well he is none of that.
He knows what he is doing. He is playing that regions economy right into the hands of the European Union and the radical Muslim Terrorists (see my previous column) (7).
May God have Mercy
May God Bless America
1) Spiegel Magazine Online
2) AHN “All Headline News”
4) Spiegel Magazine Online
5) Middle East Online
6) The Guardian