Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 2 Share on Facebook 2 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit 1 Share on StumbleUpon 1 Tell A Friend 1 (7 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   24 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

President Obama's Conflicted, Indefensible Position On Human Rights

By       Message michael payne     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 3 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 2   Must Read 1   News 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 11/24/12

Author 23439
Become a Fan
  (84 fans)
- Advertisement -


Intent by relativityonline.com

 

We've often heard it said: "He says one thing and does another." Quite recently President Obama has made statements about human rights that raise very serious questions about their true meaning and intent. It's absolutely amazing how he is able to make such statements that clearly are a direct contradiction of his personal actions involving this very important moral issue. Just consider his words relative to human rights versus his specific actions.

"There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders." That's what President Obama said in an address in Thailand on November 19, 2012. He made that statement with reference to the Israeli/Gaza conflict and the fact that Hamas was launching rockets into cities in Israel. Of course, as expected, he didn't mention any actions on the part of the government of Israel that may have prompted the attacks by the Gaza militants.

On September 26, 2012 he told the UN General Assembly: "There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents." The majority of members of that international body must have been stunned at those words as most of them are, no doubt,   fully aware that Mr. Obama has been conducting a program in which drones have killed many innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.

This is simply astounding. By those explicit words in the two statements President Obama has just made the case for bringing a complete end to the drone programs that he has been directing; those programs in which drones have been continuously launched by the U.S. Air Force and the CIA and have been raining down hellfire missiles on nations, from outside their borders, upon both suspected enemies of the U.S. as well as innocent men, women and children.

Can it be that Mr. Obama has suddenly become very attentive to the mounting criticism that has been raining down on him by respected journalists and humanitarian organizations around the world, demanding that these drone attacks that are killing innocent civilians must, in the name of humanity, be brought to an end? Could it be that he has taken those harsh criticisms to heart and decided to either eliminate these programs entirely or to use them in only the most extremely necessary cases where civilians would not be subjected to attacks?

Or is it, rather, the same old message that he brings out each and every time to defend Israel's latest eruption of brutality against the city and people of Gaza? By now the world has heard enough of that biased, indefensible interpretation of human rights in which missiles raining down on civilians and the killing of innocents apply to Israel exclusively and not to other countries and people.

- Advertisement -

There is a way by which these questions about Mr. Obama's remarks and intent can be addressed and, perhaps, resolved. What we need is to have a world respected journalist with impeccable credentials come forward and request an interview with the president in order to clarify his remarks and their exact meaning.

While I could name several highly respected journalists that could conduct such an interview, let's leave that decision open for the time being. Right now let's set down the following specific questions that this journalist should put to the president. You will notice that I show no response from the president on any of the questions. That's because it's anyone's guess as to what he would say, in that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to defend an indefensible position.

Interviewer: Mr. President, recently, you have made this statement for all the world to hear: "There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders." Please tell the American people exactly what you mean by those remarks?

 

The President:

- Advertisement -

 

Interviewer: now when you use the words, "no country on earth" do you mean just that; that no country including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia should have to tolerate missiles raining down on them? And, if that is so, why is it that very thing happening even as we speak?

 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Michael Payne is an independent progressive activist. His writings deal with social, economic, political and foreign policy issues; and especially with the great dangers involved with the proliferation of perpetual war, the associated defense (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -
Google Content Matches:

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Orwell's "1984" becoming a reality in modern-day America

Heed the Warning Signs; America is Edging Ever Closer to a Societal Implosion

How Do You Spell Sociopath? G-O-P

Ethics and Morals in America; an Endangered Species

The Beginning of the End for the U.S. Dollar as the World Reserve Currency

A U.S. President Defies Congress, the Constitution and the Will of the People; Will Impeachment Follow?