Obama

You are currently browsing the archive for the Obama category.

Don’t Mess with Iran’s Evolutionary Process

2009/06/30 in Elections, Globalization, Government, Obama, Politics, Ron Paul by John Adlai | 3 comments

By Philip Giraldi | Published 06/26/09

Iran Protest

Everyone is looking for something to say about Iran. The neo-conservatives are predictably hailing the march of democracy on the streets of Tehran for reasons of their own, while hawks like Senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham are calling on the Obama Administration to do something to help anyone tagged as a reformer. More moderate voices are generally supporting President Barack Obama’s initial show of restraint — avoiding any open support of either side — and only condemning the violence because it is disproportionate due to the suffering it has caused. Still others are calling on the United States to avoid any interference of any kind. The non-interventionists themselves fall into two camps: the constitutionalists and libertarians believe that interfering in other people’s quarrels is intrinsically problematical because as John Quincy Adams said, “America does not need to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy.” Realists argue that interventions by the United States rarely turn out well, citing the cases of Vietnam, Bosnia, Lebanon, Iraq, Somalia, and more.

Having spent much of my working life as an intelligence officer on the street in places like Istanbul, I am astonished at what passes for expertise in the debate over what to do about Iran. It is clear that even the few genuine experts on Iran don’t really know what is going on there because they are slaves to their sources of information, which tend to reflect their own philosophical viewpoints and are, in any event, narrowly based. It is conventional wisdom in most of the US media that the Iranian election was stolen, the result of massive fraud. But was it? Opinion polls conducted by a US based organization several weeks before the polling predicted an Ahmadinejad victory. The president is hugely popular among poor rural Iranians and also enjoys overwhelming support for his defense of Iran’s right to develop nuclear energy. Elections are very complex affairs and how a talking head sitting in Washington, breathlessly interpreting grainy texting images, can even pretend to understand what is going on in Iran and why defies all logic, particularly if the expert in question speaks no Farsi and probably would have difficulty in locating Isfahan on a map.

Mir Hossein Mousavi is a reformer and modernist, isn’t he? Perhaps not. He has always been extremely conservative in his political alignments. As Prime Minister in 1981-9, he was regarded as a hardliner. He started Iran’s nuclear program, helped found Hezbollah and may have directed the attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut. He is, in reality, a defender of extremely corrupt vested interests. That he has attracted the support of the so-called “Gucci crowd” of twentyish twitterers does not mean that he has embraced western values. As president, he would not abandon nuclear energy and would not immediately begin to talk nice to Barack Obama. His reformer credentials are pretty much non-existent, the creation of a media and an engaged punditry that wants to explain the Iran crisis in terms that a European or American audience would find comfortable.

And then there is the corruption issue, Iran’s six hundred pound gorilla. Mousavi is heir to the corrupt Iran of the post-revolutionary period when the country was looted by the senior clerics cooperating with the business class, the bazaaris. Some intelligence sources believe that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has been demonized by the western media, is actually the reformer in that he has taken on the country’s pervasive corruption with the full support of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader. Massive corruption has been business as usual in Iran, frequently managed by politicians who have called themselves reformers. Another so-called reformer, who is the money man behind Mousavi, is former Iranian Majlis speaker Akhbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, nicknamed “the Shark.” Rafsanjani is a billionaire who controls large sectors of the country’s economy, to include a chain of private universities which became the source of the young organizers who brought the twitterers out on the street.

If there was one thing I learned from twenty years of experience as a military intelligence and CIA officer it is that nothing is ever what it seems. If a situation appears to be clear cut, with good guys and bad guys arrayed against each other it is probably anything but. So maybe black and white comes out gray. All the more reason to step back. The interventionists from both left and right do not make it clear what the United States should do to help the “reformers.” Perhaps that is just as well as the only options would be to hurl empty threats, start bombing, or initiate yet another CIA covert action to destabilize the regime, ignoring the lessons of the CIA’s 1953 debacle, and with the predictable and contrary result of actually strengthening the clerics and their rule.

Change by evolution is better than by revolution. Both metamorphoses are underway in Iran: one is immediate and reactionary and, perhaps necessarily, more graphic and even grim. The other suggests the possibility that long-lasting change might happen in Tehran — if outside influences do not upset the sensitive process of transformation. As is frequently the case, those who would do nothing probably have it right, whether arguing for constitutional reasons or as realists. Iran and its elections are issues that we do not and cannot understand and they are ultimately issues that have to be decided by the Iranian people. Rightly or wrongly, outside interference in what is taking place on the streets of Tehran will be exploited by the regime to deflect any legitimate criticism, making any change even less likely. The old Hippocratic advice to doctors to “do no harm” should perhaps be the best advice for the American political chattering classes and the media. Doing no harm regarding events in Iran is to stay out of it.

Source: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=121

Giraldi

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D. is the Francis Walsingham Fellow at The American Conservative Defense Alliance (www.ACDAlliance.org) and a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer.
Copyright © 2009 The American Conservative Defense Alliance

Tags: , , , , , ,

Is Swine Flu A Biological Weapon?

2009/04/30 in E.U., Globalization, Government, NWO, Obama, Politics, Tyranny, U.K., U.S. by John Adlai | Comments closed

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, April 27, 2009

270409top

 

There are some factors that suggest the swine flu killing people in Mexico may be a biological weapon, but obviously no such conclusion can be drawn at this time. The World Health Organization and the U.S. government have been quick to deny such claims.

The swine flu virus is described as a completely new strain, an intercontinental mixture of human, avian and swine viruses. Tellingly, there have been no reported A-H1N1 infections of pigs.

According to a source known to former NSA official Wayne Madsen, “A top scientist for the United Nations, who has examined the outbreak of the deadly Ebola virus in Africa, as well as HIV/AIDS victims, concluded that H1N1 possesses certain transmission “vectors” that suggest that the new flu strain has been genetically-manufactured as a military biological warfare weapon.

Madsen claims that his source, and another in Indonesia, “Are convinced that the current outbreak of a new strain of swine flu in Mexico and some parts of the United States is the result of the introduction of a human-engineered pathogen that could result in a widespread global pandemic, with potentially catastrophic consequences for domestic and international travel and commerce.”

However, it’s important to stress that it is far too early to make this assumption. We have to bear in mind that the number of victims has been comparatively low when one considers the fact that hundreds of thousands in Mexico contract infectious diseases every year related to poverty like tuberculosis and malaria.

 

Fort Detrick, the U.S. Army Medical Command installation that was the source of the 2001 anthrax attacks, is again attracting suspicion in light of the swine flu panic after it was revealed that criminal investigators are probing whether virus samples recently went missing from its biolabs.

“Chad Jones, spokesman for Fort Meade, said CID is investigating the possibility of missing virus samples from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases,” reports The Frederick News.

In February, USAMRIID halted their work when virus samples were discovered that were not listed in its inventory. Criminal investigators from the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division unit at Fort Meade are now probing whether virus samples are missing from the Army’s top biolab, which also studies pathogens including ebola, anthrax and plague.

Obviously, in light of the current swine flu scare, and the new strain’s possible synthetic origin, the fact that virus samples may have gone missing from the same Army research lab from which the 2001 anthrax strain was released is extremely disturbing.

A 2008 FBI and DOJ investigation concluded that Bruce Edwards Irvins, a microbiologist, vaccinologist, and senior biodefense researcher at the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) in Fort Detrick, Maryland, was responsible for mailing anthrax to members of Congress and the media in September and October 2001.

The fact that Irvins apparently committed suicide shortly before the announcement led many to suspect that he was a patsy in a wider plot. Despite the suspicious circumstances, no autopsy was carried out on Irvins’ body. His attorney was certain that Irvins, who had cooperated with the 6-year investigation, was innocent of the five anthrax deaths.

The Department of Justice initially considered Dr. Steven Jay Hatfill to be a strong suspect in the anthrax attacks, but he later sued the government and won $5.8 million in damages. A New York Times piece on Irvins’ suicide asked the hypothetical question: “What if Dr. Hatfill had committed suicide in 2002, as friends feared he might? Would the investigators have released their evidence and announced that the perpetrator was dead?”

Fears that a mass pandemic was being readied as a biological attack have rumbled on in the conspiracy community ever since 9/11. Investigators point to the highly unusual number of deaths of top microbiologists to suggest that people with knowledge of the program are being eliminated.

Source: http://www.infowars.com/is-swine-flu-a-biological-weapon/

Tags: , ,

I.O.U.S.A the movie

2009/04/05 in Documentary, Economy, Federal Reserve, Films, Finance, Globalization, Government, Obama, Politics, Ron Paul, U.S. by ciaccimon | Comments closed

ABOUT THE MOVIE

Wake up, United States! The federal government is on the brink of a financial meltdown. I.O.U.S.A. boldly examines the rapidly growing national debt and its consequences for the United States and its citizens. Burdened with an ever-expanding government and military, increased international competition, overextended entitlement programs, and debts to foreign countries that are becoming impossible to honor, the U.S. must mend its spendthrift ways or face an economic disaster of epic proportions.

I.O.U.S.A.

Throughout history, the U.S. government has found it nearly impossible to spend only what has been raised through taxes. Wielding candid interviews with both average U.S. taxpayers and government officials, Sundance veteran Patrick Creadon (Wordplay) helps demystify the nation’s financial practices and policies. The film follows former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker as he crisscrosses the country explaining U.S’ unsustainable fiscal policies to its citizens.

With surgical precision, Creadon interweaves archival footage and economic data to paint a vivid and alarming profile of U.S.’ current economic situation. The ultimate power of I.O.U.S.A. is that the film moves beyond doomsday rhetoric to proffer potential financial scenarios and propose solutions about how we can recreate a fiscally sound nation for future generations.

Creadon uses candid interviews and his featured subjects include Warren Buffett, Alan Greenspan, Paul O’Neill, Robert Rubin, and Paul Volcker, along with the Peter G. Peterson Foundation’s own David Walker and Bob Bixby of the Concord Coalition, a Foundation grantee.

Pointedly topical and consummately nonpartisan, I.O.U.S.A. drives home the message that the only time for U.S.’ financial future is now.

“To the U.S. economy what ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ was to the environment.” – Reuters

“Resolutely non-partisan… a documentary everyone should see.” – Jeannette Catsoulis, The New York Times

My favorite quotes from I.O.U.S.A. The Movie

Without savings, there is no future.  – Alan Greenspan (the father of cheap credit)

The concepts of sacrificing and building for a better tomorrow have been pushed aside by our live for today, easy credit, and consumption oriented society.  – Narrator

The only situation that is worse than this [i.e. our national debt], would be a terrorist getting their hands on a nuclear device and using it against us.  The national debt issue absolutely guarantees that our children will have less of a quality of life than we’ve had.  – Senator Judd Gregg, New Hampshire

Source: http://www.iousathemovie.com/

Links: http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Debt_Clock

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7660409.stm

Full Version Available Here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=270867650600562607&ei=znjYSYfMOsHB-AbPqbS9Bg&q=I.O.U.S.A.&hl=en

Tags: , , , , , , ,

G-20 Shapes New World Order With Lesser Role for U.S., Markets

2009/04/03 in E.U., Eurasia, Globalization, Government, NWO, Obama, Politics, Tyranny, U.K., U.S. by ciaccimon | 1 comment

April 3 (Bloomberg) — Global leaders took their biggest steps yet toward a new world order that’s less U.S.-centric with a more heavily regulated financial industry and a greater role for international institutions and emerging markets.

charles_xavier

At the end of a summit in London, policy makers from the Group of 20 yesterday delivered a regulatory blueprint that French President Nicholas Sarkozy said turned the page on the Anglo-Saxon model of free markets by placing stricter limits on hedge funds and other financiers. The leaders also pledged to triple the resources of the International Monetary Fund and to hand China and other developing economies a greater say in the management of the world economy.

“It’s the passing of an era,” said Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International, who helped prepare summits for presidents Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. “The U.S. is becoming less dominant while other nations are gaining influence.”

A lot was at stake. If the leaders had failed to forge a consensus — Sarkozy this week threatened to quit the talks if they didn’t back much tighter regulation — it might have set back the world’s economy and markets just as they’re showing signs of shaking off the worst financial crisis in six decades.

That’s what happened in 1933, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt torpedoed a similar conference in London by rejecting its plan to stabilize currency rates and in the process scotched international efforts to lift the world out of a depression.

More Conciliation

Seeking to avoid a repeat of that historic flop, President Barack Obama junked the at-times go-it-alone approach of his predecessor, George W. Bush, and adopted a more conciliatory stance toward his fellow leaders.

“In a world that is as complex as it is, it is very important for us to be able to forge partnerships as opposed to simply dictating solutions,” Obama told a press conference at the conclusion of the summit.

Stock markets rose in response to the steps taken by the G-20 leaders. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index climbed 2.9 percent to 834.38. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 216.48 points, or 2.8 percent, to 7,978.08. Both closed at their highest levels since the second week of February.

In an effort to promote harmony, Obama soft-pedaled earlier U.S. demands that the summit agree on a specific target for fiscal stimulus in the face of opposition from France and Germany. Instead, he settled for a vague pledge that the leaders would do whatever it takes to revive the global economy.

Repudiation of Past

The president also signed on to a communiqué that Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz said repudiated the previous U.S.-led push to free capitalism from the constraints of governments.

“This is a major step forward and a reversal of the ideology of the 1990s, and at a very official level, a rejection of the ideas pushed by the U.S. and others,” said Stiglitz, an economics professor at Columbia University. “It’s a historic moment when the world came together and said we were wrong to push deregulation.”

In bowing to that view, the leaders conceded in a statement that “major failures” in regulation had been “fundamental causes” of the market turmoil they are trying to tackle. To make amends and to try to avoid a repeat of the crisis, they pledged to impose stronger restraints on hedge funds, credit rating companies, risk-taking and executive pay.

“Countries that used to defend deregulation at any cost are recognizing that there needs to be a larger state presence so this crisis never happens again,” said Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.

Financial Stability Board

A new Financial Stability Board will be established to unite regulators and join the IMF in providing early warnings of potential threats. Once the economy recovers, work will begin on new rules aimed at avoiding excessive leverage and forcing banks to put more money aside during good times.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had unsuccessfully sought to convince the U.S. and Britain to sign on to similar steps before the crisis began in mid-2007, hailed the communiqué as a “victory for common sense.”

The U.S. did, though, take the lead in getting the summit to agree on an increase in IMF rescue funds to $750 billion from $250 billion now. Japan, the European Union and China will provide the first $250 billion of the increase, with the balance to come from as yet unidentified countries.

“This will provide the IMF with enough resources to meet the needs of East European nations and also provide back-up funding to a broader set of countries,” said Brad Setser, a former U.S. Treasury official who’s now at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

IMF Allocation

The G-20 also agreed to an allocation of $250 billion in Special Drawing Rights, the artificial currency that the IMF uses to settle accounts among its member nations. The move is akin to a central bank such as the Federal Reserve effectively creating money out of thin air, except it’s on a global scale.

The increase in Special Drawing Rights will allow countries to tap IMF money without having to accept changes to economic policies often demanded as a condition of aid. The cash is disbursed in proportion to the money each member-nation pays into the fund. Rich nations will be allowed to divert their allocations to countries in greater need.

The G-20 said they would couple the financing moves with steps to give emerging economic powerhouses such as China, India and Brazil a greater say in how the IMF is run.

Emerging Markets Benefit

Citigroup Inc. economists Don Hanna and Jurgen Michels called the summit agreement “a boon to emerging markets” in a note to clients yesterday.

Mexico said Wednesday it will seek $47 billion from the IMF under the Washington-based lender’s new Flexible Credit Line, which allows some countries to borrow money with no conditions.

Emerging-market stocks, bonds and currencies rallied yesterday on speculation other developing nations will follow Mexico’s lead. Gains in Polish, Czech and Brazilian stocks helped push the MSCI Emerging Markets Index up 5.6 percent to 613.07, the highest since Oct. 15.

In a bid to avoid another mistake of the depression era, G-20 leaders repeated an earlier pledge to avoid trade protectionism and beggar-thy-neighbor policies that could aggravate the decline in the global economy.

The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development predicted this week that global trade will shrink 13 percent this year as loss-ridden banks cut back on credit to exporters and importers.

Trade Finance

To help combat that, the G-20 said they will make at least $250 billion available in the next two years to support the finance of trade through export credit agencies and development banks such as the World Bank.

The summit took place amid speculation among investors that the deepest global recession in six decades may be abating. Data released yesterday showed orders placed with U.S. factories rose in February for the first time in seven months, U.K. house prices unexpectedly gained in March and Chinese manufacturing increased. Still, a report today is forecast to show U.S. unemployment at its highest in a quarter-century.

“If the economy turns more favorable, this meeting will probably be viewed as a milestone,” said C. Fred Bergsten, a former U.S. official and director of the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.

The G-20 members are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the U.S., the U.K. and the European Union. Officials from Spain and the Netherlands were also present.

To contact the reporters on this story: Rich Miller in Washington rmiller28@bloomberg.net; Simon Kennedy in Paris at Skennedy4@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: April 2, 2009 20:22 EDT

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axEnb_LXw5yc&refer=home

Tags: , ,

EU presidency: US economic plans ‘a way to hell’

2009/03/25 in E.U., Finance, Government, Obama, Politics, U.S. by John Adlai | Comments closed

(03-25) 06:10 PDT STRASBOURG, France (AP) –

A top European Union politician on Wednesday slammed U.S. plans to spend its way out of recession as “a way to hell.”

eu-hell

President of the United States of Europa (Czech State Governor) Mirek Topolanek, whose state currently holds the EU presidency, told the European Parliament that President Barack Obama’s massive stimulus package and banking bailout “will undermine the stability of the global financial market.”

A day after his government collapsed because of a parliamentary vote of no-confidence, Topolanek took the EU presidency on a collision course with Washington over how to deal with the global economic recession.

Most European leaders favor tighter financial regulation, while the U.S. has been pushing for larger economic stimulus plans.

Topolanek’s comments are the strongest criticism so far from a European leader as the 27-nation bloc bristles from recent U.S. criticism that it is not spending enough to stimulate demand.

They also pave the way for a stormy summit next week in London between leaders of the Group of 20 industrialized countries.

The host of the summit, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, praised Obama on Tuesday for his willingness to work with Europe on reforming the global economy in the run-up to the G-20 summit.

The United States plans to spend heavily to try and lift its economy out of recession with a $787 billion economic stimulus plan of tax rebates, health and welfare benefits, as well as extra energy and infrastructure spending.

To encourage banks to lend again, the government will also pump $1 trillion into the financial system by buying up treasury bonds and mortgage securities in an effort to clear some of the “toxic assets” — devalued and untradeable assets — from banks’ balance sheets.

Topolanek bluntly said that “the United States did not take the right path.”.

He slammed the U.S.’ widening budget deficit and protectionist trade measures — such as the “Buy America” — and said that “all of these steps, these combinations and permanency is the way to hell.”

“We need to read the history books and the lessons of history and the biggest success of the (EU) is the refusal to go this way,” he said.

“Americans will need liquidity to finance all their measures and they will balance this with the sale of their bonds but this will undermine the stability of the global financial market,” said Topolanek.

Obama insisted Tuesday that his massive budget proposal is moving the nation down the right path and will help the ailing economy grow again. “This budget is inseparable from this recovery,” he said, “because it is what lays the foundation for a secure and lasting prosperity.”

Obama also claimed early progress in his aggressive campaign to lead the United States out of its worst economic crisis in 70 years and declared that despite obstacles ahead, the U.S. is “moving in the right direction.”

Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/03/25/financial/f041709D32.DTL&feed=rss.business

Tags: , , , , ,

Stocks fall as Obama fails to deliver details

2009/02/25 in Finance, Government, Obama, Politics, U.S. by ciaccimon | Comments closed

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Stocks fell on Wednesday as President Barack Obama’s first address to Congress shed little new light on how he plans to stabilize the economy and shore up banks, and gloomy home sales data fed the negative sentiment.

Obama said in his speech on Tuesday night the United States would emerge stronger from the ongoing crisis, but investors found little in what he said to spur buying after the market’s rebound on Tuesday from 1997 lows.

Reuters“He gave a very good speech in terms of making the citizens feel better about some of the things going on, but there is still a lot of work to be done,” said Tim Smalls, head of U.S. stock trading at brokerage Execution LLC in Greenwich, Connecticut.

The housing data “is another dose of reality,” he added.

Sales of previously owned U.S. homes plunged by a greater than expected 5.3 percent in January, an industry group reported.

Shares of financial services companies and big manufacturers led the market lower. Boeing (NYSE:BA – News) and IBM (NYSE:IBM – News) were the top drags in the Dow, with declines of 6 percent and 2.5 percent respectively. The S&P financial index (^GSPF – News) fell 4.4 percent.

The Dow Jones industrial average (DJI:^DJI – News) dropped 152.77 points, or 2.08 percent, to 7,198.17. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (^SPX – News) slipped 15.98 points, or 2.07 percent, to 757.16. The Nasdaq Composite Index (Nasdaq:^IXIC – News) shrunk 32.24 points, or 2.24 percent, to 1,409.59.Google Finance

The slide marked a major setback after Tuesday’s attempted rebound from 12-year lows hit a day earlier.

On Nasdaq, shares of First Solar (NasdaqGS:FSLR – News) , a maker of thin-film solar modules, fell about 21 percent to $108.81 after the company gave a bleak short-term outlook for the industry.

Financial shares made a short comeback after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in his second day of congressional testimony that regulators were not planning to nationalize Citigroup.

Shares of Citigroup (NYSE:C – News), down more than 60 percent year-to-date, briefly turned positive but later dropped 5 percent. The KBW bank index (Philadelphia:^BKX – News) fell 4 percent.

Shares of Lincoln National Corp. (NYSE:LNC – News) fell more than 19 percent after the company slashed its dividend more than 95 percent. The S&P Life Insurance index (^GSPLIFE – News) dropped 9 percent.

U.S. regulators are due to begin tests on Wednesday to determine how much capital banks need. Even so, investors remain uncertain about how the government would relieve banks of money-losing assets and revive lending.

(Editing by Leslie Adler)

Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wall-St-falls-as-Obama-speech-rb-14464125.html

Tags: , , , ,

Lawyer says Guantanamo abuse worse since Obama

2009/02/25 in Government, Obama, Politics, Tyranny, U.S. by ciaccimon | Comments closed

By Luke Baker

LONDON (Reuters) – Abuse of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay has worsened sharply since President Barack Obama took office as prison guards “get their kicks in” before the camp is closed, according to a lawyer who represents detainees.

enter

Abuses began to pick up in December after Obama was elected, human rights lawyer Ahmed Ghappour told Reuters. He cited beatings, the dislocation of limbs, spraying of pepper spray into closed cells, applying pepper spray to toilet paper and over-forcefeeding detainees who are on hunger strike.

The Pentagon said on Monday that it had received renewed reports of prisoner abuse during a recent review of conditions at Guantanamo, but had concluded that all prisoners were being kept in accordance with the Geneva Conventions.

“According to my clients, there has been a ramping up in abuse since President Obama was inaugurated,” said Ghappour, a British-American lawyer with Reprieve, a legal charity that represents 31 detainees at Guantanamo.

“If one was to use one’s imagination, (one) could say that these traumatized, and for lack of a better word barbaric, guards were just basically trying to get their kicks in right now for fear that they won’t be able to later,” he said.

“Certainly in my experience there have been many, many more reported incidents of abuse since the inauguration,” added Ghappour, who has visited Guantanamo six times since late September and based his comments on his own observations and conversations with both prisoners and guards.

Tags: , , ,

Pages: 1 2 3

Obama upholds Bush faith policy

2009/02/06 in Government, Obama, Politics, Religion, U.S. by ciaccimon | Comments closed

Religious groups that discriminate in hiring may still receive federal funding, as Bush declared in 2002. Democrats and civil libertarians are dismayed.

By Peter Wallsten and Duke Helfand
February 6, 2009
President Obama, shown at the National Prayer Breakfast, let stand a Bush executive order that religious organizations may discriminate on the basis of faith and still receive federal funding.
—President Obama, shown at the National Prayer Breakfast, let stand a Bush executive order that religious organizations may discriminate on the basis of faith and still receive federal funding.

Reporting from Los Angeles and Washington — It seemed like a firm campaign promise. Barack Obama pledged to continue President Bush’s faith-based office in the White House, but with a key change: Groups receiving federal money would no longer be allowed to discriminate in hiring on the basis of religion.

On Thursday, however, as President Obama disclosed the details of his faith-based program, he left the controversial Bush policy in place.

The decision angered Democrats and civil libertarians who thought Obama had agreed with their view that Bush’s 2002 executive order went too far.

“Based on what he said, we thought the issue had been resolved,” said Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-Va.).

“You’ll have to ask them why they think it’s all right to discriminate,” Scott said. He added that administration officials are “either offended by the idea of discrimination, or they’re not.”

But Thursday’s announcement surprised and pleased some religious leaders, particularly religious conservatives, who had a strong ally in Bush and had been pressing the Democratic president to revoke his earlier promise.

“I’m very excited about this,” said Frank Page, past president of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of more than two dozen religious leaders named Thursday to a new White House council that will advise Obama on faith-based issues. “I know he was struggling with this particular issue. But this will allow religious groups to be true to themselves.”

Obama announced that White House officials might seek guidance from the Justice Department if questions arise about the legality of potential grant recipients.

In essence, the executive order, which did not specifically mention discrimination, gives the White House the option to review a specific grant for legal reasons but does not overturn Bush’s broader policy.

Administration officials rejected the notion that Obama was backtracking on a campaign promise.

Tags: , , , ,

Pages: 1 2