March 21, 2017
ISIS is Obama's Legacy: Strip Him of His Nobel
It's time for Barack Obama, the American President, January 20, 2009 - January 20, 2017, to return the Nobel Peace Prize because his support of ISIS has resulted in untold death and destruction - the opposite of peace.
Not even 12 months in office, on October 9, 2009, when The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced that it was awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to then U.S. President Barack Obama, for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” it did so with the full knowledge that he was Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars.
That alone would make the decision questionable – at best.
But now that the “poorly kept secret” that the Obama administration helped create and then support ISIS, is slowly leaking out, how can he, in good conscience, keep the award?
For years, Obama has misled the American people, while his misdeeds have led to massive loss of life and suffering for hundreds of thousands of people, who will continue to suffer – if they're lucky enough to survive – for years to come.
A Defense Intelligence Agency document, formerly classified “SECRET//NOFORN”, dated August 12, 2012, shows that as early as 2012, U.S. intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS). But the report envisions the terror group as a U.S. strategic asset.
The document - part of a selection of formerly classified documents obtained from the U.S. Department of Defense and State Department, through a federal lawsuit filed by the conservative government watchdog group Judicial Watch– is a confirmation that an “Islamic State” is desired in Eastern Syria to fulfil the West's policies in the region.
The document – by the highest level of internal U.S. Intelligence - states that the U.S. and its allies see ISIS as their tool for regime change in Syria.
This may explain why ISIS spiritual leader, the Egyptian-born Dr. Yousef Al-Qaradai, was able to issue fatwa after fatwa imploring Muslims to join ISIS in an Islamic jihad against the governments of Iraq and Syria, while living metres away from a U.S. Navy Base in Qatar, under the watchful eye of Obama's CIA.
On May 26, 2016, on his website www.chuckbaldwinlive.com, Chuck Baldwin, an American politician, radio host, and founder-former pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida asked why the mainstream media (MSM) in America isn't reporting the fact that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted in public that the U.S. government created Al Qaeda, ISIS, Al Nusra, etc.
“It is a sad reality that if one wants to get accurate news reporting, one must mostly bypass the U.S. propaganda media and look to sources outside the U.S.,” Mr. Baldwin said.
He then refereed to a Canadian publication that covered the Hillary Clinton admission: www.globalresearch.ca.
On www.globalresearch.ca, in an article entitled Twenty-Six-Things-About-The-Islamic-State-ISIS-that-Obama-does-not-want-you-to-know-about, first published on November 18. 2014, Michel Chossudovsky, an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, and Editor of Global Research, said that the Obama administration is not telling the public the truth about its policy toward ISIS.
He said that although America’s “anti-terrorist campaign’ consists in supporting a so-called “moderate” Al Qaeda entity (Al Nusra), which is supposed to be fighting ISIS – formerly designated as Al Qaeda in Iraq - with a view to going after another al Qaeda entity entitled The Islamic State, the facts on the ground indicate otherwise.
“Al Qaeda is going after Al Qaeda, and both wings of al Qaeda are supported covertly by US intelligence. Moreover, the Al Qaeda affiliated rebels responsible for countless atrocities are trained and financed by US-NATO and its allies including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Israel.”
In the above-mentioned article, Prof. Chossudovsky also said the Obama administration's air campaign against ISIS was really the US-led coalition protecting ISIS, while bombing the civilian infrastructure of Syria and Iraq, as part of the “counter-terrorism operation”.
And all the while, the mainstream media has been acting as cheerleaders for the slaughter.
Moreover, where does ISIS continue to get its funding, year-after-year – which amounts to tens of millions of dollars - to continue its campaigns in Syria and Iraq? Meanwhile, we're supposed to believe that year-in, year-out, tens of millions of dollars are passed through the international banking system without the knowledge of the U.S. and its allies.
Günter Meyer, Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at the University of Mainz, said he has no doubt about where ISIS gets its funding.
"The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of the Gulf States, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates," Mr. Meyer told Deutsche Welle.
He said that the Gulf States' motivation in financing groups like ISIS was to support their fight against the regime of President Bashar al Assad in Syria.
Three quarters of the Syrian population are Sunni Muslims, but Syria is ruled by an elite drawn mostly from the Alawite minority. The Alawites are an offshoot of Shiite Islam.
According to the U.S. Treasury Department, a number of terrorist financiers have been operating in Qatar.
In an interview broadcast on Guns and Butter, in February 2016, with Dr. Michael Hudson, President of the Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends, a Wall Street financial analyst, and Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, Dr. Hudson said the Obama Administration not only helped finance ISIS, it also supplied ISIS with weapons.
“ISIS and Al Nusra are acting as America’s Foreign Legion. When Hillary Clinton overthrew the Libyan government, the arms and military stockpiles were turned over to ISIS. Libya’s central bank resources were robbed and also turned over to ISIS. When America marched into Iraq, it turned the Sunni army and all those billions of dollars of shrink-wrapped hundred-dollar bills over ultimately to ISIS. So although America opposes ISIS when they kill Americans, ISIS is basically America’s way of breaking up countries that may threaten not to be part of the global dollar standard.”
It is difficult to get an accurate estimate for the cost of the war, in no small part because there are so many costs: people killed and injured, cost of caring for refugees, destruction of infrastructure and the environment and lost growth opportunities.
In September of 2016, The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that the death toll from Syria's then five-year civil war had past 300,000 victims – with 86,000 civilians among the 301,781 reported killed.
Moreover, destruction of Syrian villages and cities fuelled a refugee crisis that has confounded political leaders in Europe and the Middle East.
Subsequently, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights estimated that between March 15, 2011 and March 12, 2017, between 312,358 and 451,358 people had been killed.
There is no accurate estimate for the economic cost of the ongoing war.
A recent report by the charity group World Vision and the consultant group Frontier Economics estimated that the conflict has so far cost Syria $275 billion in lost growth opportunities.
If the conflict ends in 2020, the cost of the conflict will grow to $1.3 trillion, it estimated. A World Bank report estimates the damage to the capital stock in Syria as of mid-2014 to be $70-80 billion.
According to a U.N. Report in March 2017, about 11 million Syrians have been displaced from their homes.
This includes about 4.8 million refugees who have been forced to seek safety in neighbouring countries.
Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq have borne the brunt of the economic impact of the war. Already in fragile situations, many of them are facing tremendous budgetary pressure.
The World Bank estimates, for instance, that the influx of more than 630,000 Syrian refugees has cost Jordan over $2.5 billion a year. Cash-strapped Lebanon is also stretched to a breaking point and Turkey needs continuous financial assistance from EU countries, as it can no longer afford to take in refugees.
In response to this carnage, aided and abetted by the U.S. Government, at taxpayers' expense, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s Stop Arming Terrorists Act has been introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senator Rand Paul. The bipartisan legislation (H.R.608 and S.532) would prohibit any Federal agency from using taxpayer dollars to provide weapons, cash, intelligence, or any support to al-Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist groups; and it will prohibit the government from funnelling money and weapons through other countries who are directly or indirectly supporting terrorists.
The legislation is currently cosponsored by Reps. John Conyers (D-MI), Scott Perry (R-PA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Tom Garrett (R-VA), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Walter Jones (R-NC), Ted Yoho (R-FL), and Paul Gosar (R-AZ), and endorsed by Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), Veterans for Peace, and the U.S. Peace Council.
While this is a significant show of bipartisan support, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is calling for the support of all Americans, including every member of Congress.
“The fact that American taxpayer dollars are being used to strengthen the very terrorist groups we should be focused on defeating should alarm every Member of Congress and every American. We call on our colleagues and the Administration to join us in passing this legislation,” Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said.
Can American liberals sue their government for its share of responsibility for the Syrians and Iraqis killed, refugees, and the future they lost for generations?
Can the American courts give fair compensation to the families of victims of ISIS who were killed by ISIS's American arms?
Can American lawmakers investigate how Obama ordered hundreds of drones that killed and mutilated humans just like themselves?