Obama, Nobel Peace Prize, and Hypocrite

Now, I am not sure if some of you know, but President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize before he was really even President of the United States of America. It is interesting how someone can win the Nobel peace prize without doing one thing that actually deserves it besides words. But all this is fine and good, but the most interesting thing is what was said when giving that speech. In that speech he happened to bring up something interesting, which shows some hypocrisy on his part.

Barack Obama says, “I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.

First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior – for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure – and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.”
Now you might not be aware of this, but the US signed a treaty that was called the Geneva Convention. This prevents those nations who signed it from torturing others, besides basic human rights. But here is the kicker, President Obama, and Eric Holder, have said that water-boarding was torture. And yet the American government took part in it, and there are international laws against it. And yet President Obama did not send these people who broke the law to face an international trial like was done with the Nuremberg trials against the Nazi’s. Yet President Obama protected and forgave all those who performed the torture. They were protected from international law.
A foreign nation tried to have those who committed torture to face trial. But President Obama prevented these people from facing trial. So President Obama prevented the “regimes that break the rules” from being held accountable, and protecting them. What does that mean when a person says this at the Nobel Peace Prize is not being held to by his own administration. What makes it even worse is that President Obama is killing people in other nations without the permission of that nation. This is again a violation of international law, and Federal law. So where are the sanctions that was talked about in this peace prize speech? Nowhere. Where is the peace? Nowhere.
Can you honestly trust this person when he does not follow through in what he said during campaigns, let alone to the international community, and worse of all when said to defend the US Constitution and execute federal law?
Advertisements

2 responses to “Obama, Nobel Peace Prize, and Hypocrite

  1. Miller Cross

    I had not read the speech until today and became interested in what the President said after I saw General Michael Haden’s comments on CSPAN recently. Haden was running the National Security Administration in the first part of the Busch Administration when 9/11 happened and the CIA at the beginning of the Obama Administration. The point Haden made was that he was in the audience when the acceptance speech was given and he how was truly struck looking at a bunch of people, mostly European jackasses, who were drop jawed to be lectured by this president on the nature of just war theory. Don’t get me wrong, ex Marine that went through Paris Island boot camp in 1970 that I am, I’m no big fan of this President. But lets give the guy a little credit where it’s due. Haden also mentioned that working within just war theory we are fighting asymmetric forces that do not comply with any of the Geneva Convention requirements. He did feel that it was best that we capture these people for intelligence information reasons but rendition has become such a hot potato no no on the world stage it’s more acceptable to just kill them outright with a drone strike. Funny how that works within the minds of those on the left.

    • I know of the Haden comments on C-Span you are talking about. He was at a college and gave that speech. And if you listened to Hayden then you heard him bring up that giving you more security means that you have to give up freedoms. But we have a Bill of Rights that protects certain rights from government infringement, and it just happen that one of the security laws passed was the repeal of the 4th amendment with the Patriot Act. Violation of civil liberties. Protected torturers, after we signed an international treaty, which makes it federal law, i.e. supreme law of the land, that we would not protect torturers or accept the answer of “Just following orders”. Wanting, and appealing for, the right to indefinitely detain American citizens without going through due processes or have habous corpus observed. Can even kill a US citizen without court oversight, and kills innocent people on other places around the war. I am not giving anyone here much credit, except keeping up violation of civil liberties, especially after running that were going to change things from the way they were or the policies that we done. He even made a big deal about Bush on civil liberties, and yet Obama is worse. He takes more power for security which comes at the rights of peoples civil liberties. What did Benjamin Franklin say about people who give up a little bit of freedom for security?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: