Sunday, March 27, 2011

Obama's Unauthorized War in Libya

No Casualties?

How many casualties so far?

~ By: Larry Walker, Jr. ~

So just how many 18-20 year old Libyan soldiers has Obama killed? Or were those tanks, trucks and command centers just empty? Dropping bombs on 18-20 year old Libyan solders, killing them without warning and without a declaration of war is a crime. When our soldiers die in combat, we cringe. Yet when we see young Libyan soldiers die, at our hand, some cheer. CNN even cheered when a rebel suicide bomber drove a truck loaded with explosives into a Libyan army barracks and detonated it, killing hundreds. Libyan soldiers were under the impression that they were protecting their homeland against an internal assault by government protesters in conjunction with foreign terrorists. Libya never declared war on the United States, and no U.S. interests were at risk, so how can this action be justified?

Firing missiles, from miles away, at young Libyan soldiers, who were defending themselves against an internal uprising, killing untold thousands, without authorization, and without a formal declaration of war, is not only cowardly, but in my mind constitutes a war crime punishable by impeachment, if not death.


United States Code: Title 50, CHAPTER 33—(Reference)

§ 1541. Purpose and policy

(a) Congressional declaration

It is the purpose of this chapter to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.

(b) Congressional legislative power under necessary and proper clause

Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer hereof.

(c) Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to

(1) a declaration of war,

(2) specific statutory authorization, or

(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

Operation Odyssey Dawn is an unauthorized use of military force. There was no formal declaration of war. There is no specific statutory authorization. There was not a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces. Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or not, the use of military force was authorized by Congress - AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002.

No matter what justification you may wish to apply to this action, taken solely by the order of Barack Obama, it is a blatant abuse of power for which he should pay the ultimate price. How dare you even mention the words, "the American people". Neither the American people, nor their representatives have authorized any such involvement in Libya. Obama has murdered thousands of Libyan soldiers on the ground, without authorization from the American people, thus setting us all up for retaliation, by God knows who, at some future date. When it's all over, and the number of Libyan casualties have been tallied, somebody needs to be held to account by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Friday, March 25, 2011

Next Libya, then Kenya

Obama Cons Gaddafi

~ By: Larry Walker, Jr. ~

For God’s sake, what are we doing in Libya? In the broadest sense, we are helping a group of armed militia (i.e. unlawful combatants) in the overthrow of a sovereign government. More narrowly, we are destroying the defenses of the legitimate leader of Libya, instructing him that he is not allowed to defend himself, cutting off all of his escape routes, blocking all of his communications, and assisting a mob of criminals in his demise. When these violent protesters catch Gaddafi, they will surely decapitate him, and many Americans will cheer, but not me.

News networks like CNN are now praising the martyrdom of a rebel suicide bomber who drove a truck loaded with explosives into a Libyan army barracks and detonated it. But I ask you, “What’s heroic about that?” When a similar group of rebels drove two truck bombs into buildings housing United States and French military forces (October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon), were you cheering then? If you weren’t cheering then, why are you so giddy now? For the last three decades, terrorist acts were deemed to be the epitome of evil, but now terrorism seems to be in vogue, at least according to today’s hypocrites.

Madder Dogs

Obama has in essence sided with terrorists against an ally in the war on terror. When these terrorists take over and murder their former leader, with Obama’s help, what will become of the two million people who support Gaddafi until the end? Will they suddenly have a change of heart and conform to the will of Obama and his rebels? And if they don’t, will they be thrown into gulags, beheaded, or lined up before firing squads? And if this happens, will America come to their defense, thus starting the vicious cycle over again? Will America ever get it?

What we should have done.

We should have exhausted every means of diplomacy. Going to war should have been the last resort. We should not have responded to Gaddafi’s rhetoric. Just because someone says they’re going to do something, doesn’t mean they will. Surely if anyone understands this, it should be the mis-leader of the not so free world, Barack Gbagbo, oops, I mean Obama. After all, by now he’s made hundreds of statements which have turned out to be nothing more than blatant lies.

And speaking of Laurent Gbagbo, the incumbent president of the Ivory Coast was voted out of office in November of 2010, yet remains in power unto this day. Alassane Ouattara is widely recognized as the winner of the election, yet since his victory, the UN says that 462 people have been violently murdered, and about 500,000 forced from their homes in a post-election dispute. In the Ivory Coast you have a democracy which has been violently usurped by a despot whose original mandate expired on October 30, 2005. It’s ironic that when Gbagbo won his election in October of 2000, he faced the same situation, an incumbent who had to be forcibly removed from power. It seems there will be no end to this ongoing scenario in most of Africa, yet in Libya there was relative stability, until Obama.

If Obama, who has foolishly committed us into the disorder of his homeland, succeeds in ousting Gaddafi, he had better make sure that he kills all 2 million of Gaddafi’s supporters as well. Are you prepared to do that? Otherwise Libya will face the same future as the Ivory Coast, coup after coup, revolution after revolution, and murder after murder. The only thing Obama has accomplished by involving the USA in his God-forsaken homeland is to expose why he was unqualified to be president of the United States in the first place. Don’t talk to me about impeachment unless you fully intend to follow through. The sooner we get rid of Obama, the sooner the World will return to relative stability. The problem is Obama, not Gaddafi. Free Gaddafi! And as for Obama, "go back to Kenya".


Thousands flee Cote d'Ivoire violence (Video)

Ivorian women protesters killed (Video),0,1646566.story?page=1

Future of Libya's investments in Kenya in "doubt" following political unrest

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

PUBLIC-sector Union Fallacy II | Capitalizing on Ignorance

Union Lap Dogs

“Before making a donation to any organization, be sure to review how it spends its money.”

~ By: Larry Walker, Jr. ~

The American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO of Madison, Wisconsin (AFT-WISC) is a tax exempt organization which is primarily funded by union dues paid by its mostly state and local government employee members. In the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, AFT-WISC took in 91.5% of its revenue or a total of $3,358,143 from membership dues. On its latest Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, while all of the revenue reported was identified as having been related to its exempt purpose, none of its expenditures were reported as such. So just how much of this money was actually used to improve the lives of its members?

According to page 10 of its latest Form 990 tax return, none of the $3,808,451 of expenditures was related to its exempt purpose. In fact, AFT-WISC spent $2,369,114, or 70.5% of member’s dues, on salaries, pensions, other benefits and payroll taxes for its 44 employees. Furthermore, due to reckless management, AFT-WISC posted a net loss of $(137,113) for fiscal year 2009. Union dues will therefore most likely increase in the near future.

In fiscal year 2009, AFT-WISC paid its president, Bryan Kennedy, total compensation of $164,781. The only problem with this is that he was only paid $56,913 in fiscal year 2008, leaving some to wonder what would justify a 190% pay raise in a year when the organization suffered a net loss. While Mr. Kennedy celebrated a $107,868 pay hike, AFT-WISC members were left bloodied by a $(137,113) net loss.

Aside from compensating its own employees, AFT-WISC squandered a total of $535,021 on political campaigns and lobbying activities. Among these activities, $20,000 was contributed to Progressive Wisconsin; $237,021 was spent on mailings containing information about legislative and electoral issues, and get out the vote events such as town hall meetings and phone banks; and the remaining $278,000 was sent to other organizations.

It appears that the difference between this particular union and a political party is very slim. Other than communicating a tiny bit of information to the public about issues affecting its members, AFT-WISC’s main accomplishments appear to be: (1) an ability to collect money from its members, (2) to compensate its own employees, (3) to support progressive organizations, (4) and to persuade people to vote for the candidates of its choosing. AFT-WISC, like most other public-sector employee unions, functions more like a political party than an association dedicated to the needs and concerns of its members. Teachers and public employees are free to join the political party of their choosing, and to direct their money to whomever they choose. So why do they need a middle-man? Public employees should be ashamed. Substituting a middle-man to make political choices for them is the antithesis of freedom and democracy.

Perhaps instead of jumping through hoops whenever the union bell tolls, teachers and other public servants should pay more attention to where their union dues are going. Then and only then will the rest of society believe you are more than just feeble lap dogs. As for the American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO of Madison, Wisconsin... it’s "Not Just No, But HELL NO!"



PUBLIC-sector Union Fallacy I

Vaporizing PUBLIC Employee Unions

Public Union Membership in Numbers

Union Label Owned by China

Friday, March 11, 2011

PUBLIC-sector Union Fallacy I

Union Nazis

Where Solidarity Ends

~ By: Larry Walker, Jr. ~

Thank God for Governor Walker and the Wisconsin legislature. Clearly there is a line of demarcation between the rights of public-sector and private-sector workers. Patrick J. Wright, a director of the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, breaks it down in his latest post, "Public-Sector Bargaining Privileges Are Not Inalienable Rights".

Mr. Wright concludes with, “the power of government employee unions in collective bargaining necessarily amounts to power over the people themselves, therefore the people’s representatives must periodically scrutinize that power and curb excess. Why that's pure natural law, and if you stop to think about it, just plain old common sense. But perhaps public-sector union donors and their supporting dunderheads need a less sophisticated explanation. What follows is an uncomplicated lesson in fiscal logic, just for you:

Point #1 – If you work for a state, local or federal government agency, and your employer’s treasury is tapped, you are most likely a part of the problem. Job security eludes you.

Point #2 – If you’re going around spouting off that a certain governmental entity isn’t broke, and you’re not one of its top executives, then you might not know what in the hell you’re talking about. Your beliefs are based on conspiracy, not facts.

Point #3 – If you have a government job paying 40% more than the private sector, with Cadillac benefits, then you’re not likely one who’s losing their home and going through financial hell. You’ve been brainwashed.

Point #4 – If you’re having $1,000 per year in union dues deducted automatically from your paycheck and sent to your government masters (politicians), and now complain about having to pay more toward pension and health costs, you might be better off dumping that worthless union. Perhaps union dues are a luxury you can ill afford.

Point #5 – If you think that private citizens exercising their right to trim some of the liberties that government workers take with their money is a form of class warfare, then which class are you - government or the people? You’re confused.

Point #6 – If you think that the way to effectively engage in political debate is by marching in mobs and shouting in unison, “shame, shame, shame…,” you might be mentally ill. You need a check up from the neck up.

To summarize, if you are still offended by the law that was just passed in Wisconsin, then :

  • Job security eludes you,

  • Your beliefs are based on conspiracy rather than facts,

  • You’ve been brainwashed,

  • Union dues are a luxury you can ill afford,

  • You are confused, and

  • You need a mental health check up.

Well, if that's the case, then you better check yourself before you wreck yourself. If the glove fits, you must admit. My recommendation: Quit that cushy government gig and get a real job. And as far as private-sector unions supporting public-sector unions in so-called solidarity; can you say, "brainwashed". Sorry but I can’t ride with you on that bucket of bolts. Sometimes you just have to surrender and face reality. Public-sector unions are the enemy of both private-sector unions, and of we the people.

Public sector - The area of the nation's affairs under governmental rather than private control.

Private sector - The area of the nation's economy under private rather than governmental control.  



Vaporizing PUBLIC Employee Unions

Public Union Membership in Numbers

Union Label Owned by China

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Vaporizing PUBLIC Employee Unions


Hasta La Vista!!!

" Wisconsin is not broke. " ~ Some Rich Fat Guy ~

Whatever rich fat guy, but who asked you anyway. The election is over. You lose, we win.

~ By: Larry Walker, Jr. ~

While state and local government employee unions (aka. public unions) clutch desperately to what they falsely perceive to be a God-given right to organize, pro football players are planning to de-unionize. You see, the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) has legal options under federal law, while state and local government workers have none. Public workers exist to serve the public, and are compensated from tax dollars, not from profits earned in the private sector.

“The National Labor Relations Act or Wagner Act (P.L. 74-198, 49 Stat. 449, codified as amended at 29 U.S.C. § 151–169) is a 1935 United States federal law that limits the means with which employers may react to workers in the private sector who create labor unions, engage in collective bargaining, and take part in strikes and other forms of concerted activity in support of their demands. The Act does not apply to workers who are covered by the Railway Labor Act, agricultural employees, domestic employees, supervisors, federal, state or local government workers, independent contractors and some close relatives of individual employers.”

As for NFL players, decertifying the union means firing the NFLPA as their bargaining agent, which will prevent NFL owners from locking out the players when the existing collective bargaining agreement expires. Any lockout at that point would be a violation of federal antitrust law. Decertifying will also allow individual players to sue the NFL and their respective teams. The tactic has worked before, resulting in NFL players gaining free agent rights.

On the other hand, state and local government servants in Wisconsin and other states don't have this option or any others. You see, public servants are not covered by federal labor relations laws. They have only been allowed to unionize under state laws granting them make-believe rights. In reality, all it would take to completely do away with public employee unions is a determined state house majority, duly elected by a base of overburdened taxpayers. And that's where things stand. Hasta la vista!


BTW: The word fat was directed at Moore in the sense of his reasoning being "practically nonexistent" (i.e. a fat chance).


Union Label Owned by China

Public Union Membership in Numbers