Joseph Marohl

I appreciate the improvement in tone of the Obama administration over its immediate predecessor, for example, Obama’s statement in Turkey that America, though enriched by its Christian population, is “not a Christian nation”; even the President’s espousal of his personal faith has, so far, avoided the arrogant display of ignorance and bullying bluster of Bush.

Obama has lifted bans on stem-cell research and the abortion bans linked under Bush to international aid. On Friday, Obama condemned homophobia in particular no less than intolerance in general in a speech at Washington’s Holocaust Memorial Museum—an inclusiveness that is poignant in light of the surge in gay bashing in the past decade and the growth of hate groups in America since his election.

All these examples speak of a bright new spirit in the leadership and values of our nation.

But President Obama has everything to gain or lose over the issue of whether to investigate those in power who promoted or condoned the use of torture of terror suspects.  So far, he appears to be failing a crucial test of integrity.

Fox TV has repeatedly criticized the President’s release of formerly classified memos showing the government’s deliberate attempt to whitewash torture techniques and to approve specific techniques, namely waterboarding, that have been used as torture since at least the Spanish Inquisition and condemned by American military courts trying foreign war criminals for the past 65 years. Fox TV pundits say that the President’s act is politics, a threat to security, an aid to the nation’s enemies.

The White House has defended its action on the basis that the information had already appeared in the media—in the New York Review of Books and elsewhere. Besides, precautions were taken to blacken out names, supposedly to protect the innocent or the legally covert. And, unlike the Valerie Plame “outing” in 2003, the White House appears to have little to gain politically from the release of this information.

The burning question is—What does the President intend to do with this information?

In his original statement to the press, Obama exempted CIA operatives who participated in torture but did so with an understanding that they were acting within certain legal bounds. In World War II and other cases, soldiers were prosecuted only for exceeding the bounds of laws existing at the time—“following orders” was a legitimate defense that many Nazis who did not just follow orders tried illegitimately to use to save their necks at Nuremberg.

Obama can reasonably justify not prosecuting low-level personnel—unlike the 2004 attempt to quiet the Abu Ghraib scandal, where investigations and prosecutions did not rise higher than low-ranking GIs.

Then last Sunday, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel announced that the Bush policymakers, namely John Yoo and Jay Bybee, whose support of torture is documented in the released memos, would likewise be exempt from further investigation and prosecution. But then later White House aides intimated that the President did “not rule out legal sanctions for the Bush lawyers who developed the legal basis for the use of the techniques.”

Troublingly, in public addresses, Obama has echoed Republican speechwriter Peggy Noonan’s dribble that we should not waste time, money, and energy to “look back” to offenses in the past. (As one commenter to Noonan’s original statement put it: “Great news for hit-and-run drivers.”)

Obama told an enthusiastic crowd of CIA employees, “Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes. That’s how we learn.” But the government’s detailing of specific torture techniques and fostering an air of institutional and public acceptance of what it euphemistically called “enhanced interrogation techniques” can hardly be called a simple mistake.

On Tuesday, an internal memo by Dennis Blair, Obama’s national intelligence director, was publicized, stating, “High-value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country.” Blair seems to support at least the underpinning assumption that the Yoo-Bybee interrogation policy was effective.  Obama, in turn, has left the matter in the hands of Attorney General Eric Holder, who is less shy of the word “torture” and has called for the release of even more memos detailing the U.S. government’s support and defense of torture.

To my mind, torture is a bigger issue than the economy. The cost of investigating and prosecuting those of both political parties who were actively or tacitly behind the senseless, brutal, and unjustified beatings of detainees fraudulently in the name of the American way of life and at the expense of justice-loving American citizens is worth more than ten General Motors and fifty Bank of Americas.

And if we taxpayers could fork out $6.2 million to investigate a blowjob in the Oval Office, we owe at least as much to our sense of ourselves as a just, moral, tolerant, and humane people.

Government funds are at least as justly spent in supporting the rule of law as in supporting military actions abroad and sustaining economic growth.

One of the reasons we elect a President every four years is to permit the opportunity to investigate and legally address the flaws—both simple mistakes and flagrant illegalities—of the previous administration. If he or she does not do so, why bother with term limits or even elections?

Our nation’s much-praised propensity for “smooth transitions” distinctly implies that we transition to something new and different from its precedent—not continuation of the same, and not erasure of recent memories of injustice and lawlessness.

If Obama does not address the wrongs of the previous administration, he betrays the fundamental reason for his (or any new President’s) election: change.

If he does not push the investigation and prosecution of injustices committed in the name of America, he does nothing to build the nation’s reputation for democracy and rule of law.

If he does not look into charges of wrongdoing in the Bush administration, even if he  and (less likely) his political party could remain blameless of those wrongs, he furthers the erosion of American values and liberties and, in this case, leaves torture as a tool for future leaders with a bent towards tyranny and a cruel streak.

Allison Bricker

“Change” was the cornerstone of President-Elect Obama’s campaign. Often spoken and vaguely defined, his hypnotic lip service to a nation weary of the “Bush Years” was enough to sweep him from the well of the Senate straight into the White House. The problem here is that as the days since the election become weeks, the individuals President-Elect Obama is selecting to fill out his staff and cabinet are more of the same old career politicians who have spent their lives sucking from the public trough. As the chart below illustrates, these are the same scoundrels which through their love of central nanny state planning, helped ensure the current economic crisis and erosion of inherent liberties.

This list reads like a veritable “Who’s Who” of beltway Washington Aristocrats, and these are just the sourced appointments to the Obama White House. Unconfirmed reports are also circulating that James Steinberg former Clinton Administration deputy national security adviser is on the short list to be President-Elect Obama’s choice for National Security Adviser.¹ How is someone to believe that President Elect Obama will help fix an imploding economy and divided nation when the same people who helped cause the mess are elevated yet again to positions of power?

The answer of course is that they will not. Moreover, a closer inspection of these filthy power hungry individuals yields even less hope for rolling back the massive unconstitutional powers decreed to the Executive Branch under President Bush. The truth is, the face of the puppet may have changed from bumbling dote to articulate persuasive figurehead, but outside of that it is business as usual.

If we look at the public statements and actions of those listed above, we see that their motivation comes solely from attaining more for themselves while throwing scraps to “we the people”. Eric Holder, who is on pace to be the next Attorney General for example, said in a 1999 interview:

“The court has really struck down every government effort to try to regulate it. We tried with regard to pornography. It is gonna be a difficult thing, but it seems to me that if we can come up with reasonable restrictions, reasonable regulations in how people interact on the Internet, that is something that the Supreme Court and the courts ought to favorably look at.”²

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

As we reported weeks ago, it is almost a certainty that an Obama Administration will seek to end the free flow of ideas exchanged across the internet vis-a-vi the “Fairness Doctrine 2.0″. Do we as Americans need the government to tell us what is “reasonable” or”safe” to listen to, read, or view? The Founders knew that allowing government to dictate what was “reasonable” was guaranteed to lead to one thing and one thing only, censorship.

Further complimenting President-Elect Obama’s socialist plans for our healthcare industry, are his picks for Chief of Staff and Secretary of State, Rahm Emanuel and Hilary Clinton respectively. Both were lead architects of the failed “Hilary Care” during the Clinton Administration.³ Rahm Emanuel as we reported is also the architect and ferverent supporter of forced unpaid labor via his “Compulsory Civil Service” program. Between Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel they have received over $15.9 million in campaign contributions from healthcare industries, central bankers, criminal financiers, and bailout recipients.⁴ Care to guess which healthcare companies/individuals will receive government certification to administer and oversee the universal healthcare program?

Next, continuing President-Elect Obama’s perverse definition of “change” is his choice for Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner. Mr. Geithner is currently the President of the New York branch of the Federal Reserve. This guarantees that an Obama Administration will continue this debt based fiat currency system that is to the sole benefit of the private Central Bankers who own the Federal Reserve. The obvious conflict of interest in having a Federal Reserve branch President in charge of the U.S. Treasury, relying on his fellow Federal Reserve Central Bankers to loan the government money via Reserve Notes, should go without saying, and most likely will thanks to a mainstream media intoxicated by President-Elect Obama.

Additionally, many of us would love to be a fly on the wall during the times when Lawrence Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration and Hillary Clinton are in the same room. It would be most interesting to see how Hillary Clinton interacts with Mr. Summers, the former President of Harvard who resigned in disgrace in 2006 after remarking that “issues of intrinsic aptitude” could explain underrepresentation of women in the fields of science and engineering.⁵ Nice to know “Change” in Obama’s mind means appointing a misogynist who feels women are just too stupid in comparison to men.

In conclusion, during the next four years we will see campaign promises fall by the way side, massive government programs designed to fix the last batch of failed government programs, central planning and intervention into our economy which will exacerbate and prolong the coming depression; while benefiting central bankers, as well as a further shredding and trampling of our liberties and Constitution.

It is my opinion, President-Elect Obama’s definition of “Change” reeks of 1984 “doublespeak”.

Source(s): ¹Business Day – “Contenders for Key Posts in New Cabinet” • ² May 28, 1999 NPR Morning Edition • ³ Slate – “Obama’s Muscle” • ⁴ OpenSecrets.org – Hillary Clinton Record/Rahm Emanuel Record • ⁵ The Economic Times – “Lawrence Summer to become Obama’s Top Economic Adviser”

Allison Bricker

As our Republic continues to swerve recklessly away from its Constitutional founding, the opportunity for us to salvage what so many have died for, slides further away from our grasp. Just as Winter has begun to set in across the nation, our Liberties seem to have fallen away like leaves lost into the breeze. Whether it be legalized torture or the Department of Homeland Security suspending the Constitution along the border, the country I fell in love with as a child, looks less and less like the land of the free.

Many amongst us are pinning their hopes of a better tomorrow on yet another politician who promises “change” from the status-quo and business as usual in Washington. However, within hours of the election, his “transition” website, laid out his and his enforcer’s vision of mandatory unpaid servitude for the youth of our nation. Shortly thereafter upon echoing criticism ringing across the blogosphere, they whitewashed the website and scurried their indentured labor force back under the rug. The Obama transition team decided to replace the compulsory service text with toned down verbiage so as not to cause a scandal prior to his formal coronation.

In this Winter of our discontent, there are a few sparks which seek to reignite our lost sense of self. It has for a long time now been my opinion that the planets must have aligned to have allowed such an assembly of thinkers such a Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and the rest of the founding generation to have known to each other in order to be able to hammer out Independence and beat back tyranny. Perhaps, we may be so fortunate yet again, to recapture that spirit of ’76 with a new gathering of minds dedicated to reason and human liberty. One such intellect where parallels can be drawn is Naomi Wolf. Her latest works, “The End of America” and “Give Me Liberty” are written with such a dedication and sound resolve towards the virtues of freedom that the pages in her books seem to echo the spirit and tenacity of Thomas Paine.

In support of the ideas presented in, “The End of America”, and to help spread the word virally in the internet age, Ms. Wolf has released an online video where she covers the ten steps taken time and again, by all would-be tyrants in a closing society. The movie is available free for online viewing and is a must see for those in tune with our current state of affairs. Her content and tone is so well reasoned and articulated, even those who refuse to acknowledge the danger, must at least pause to question, what our Republic will resemble in two, five, or ten years from now.

The video can be viewed here, and please if you find her presentation to be a powerful arguement as to why we need to restore, preserve and defend our American Republic, please consider passing it along via DiGG, del.icio.us, StumbleUpon, etcetrera.

Allison Bricker

President-Elect Obama’s transition website “change.gov”¹ has now retracted and revised the page regarding mandatory civil service for American youth. The original page at the time of my initial post stated the following:

“Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year,”

However after quickly receiving mass criticism all over the blogosphere the website has altered the copy to read:

Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free.

Yes fellow readers, the Obama Administration is already trying to cover and spin their true intent by removing the word ‘require’ and thus replacing it with a $4,000.00 Dollar bribe. Regardless, we as Americans were given a brief insight to the true nature of this statist’s definition of “CHANGE”.

Mark my words fellow readers, neither King Obama, Rahm Emanuel, nor their “Civilian National Security Force” will get their hands on our two boys, so as to indoctrinate them into the centralized state’s definition of “community service”. Teaching our boys a sense of responsibility is our job, not the nanny state’s. The federal government has already demonstrated its inability to educate the public through their state run government schools; we will not be fooled again.

Finally, let us not forget the “Obama Youth – Junior Fraternity Regiment” video that made its way around YouTube featuring a group of brainwashed students conducted at the request of a Kansas City middle-school teacher. The students march in military garb chanting “Alpha-Omega” and “Yes we can”. History has shown that such blind allegiance is both dangerous and destructive to liberty.

Source(s):¹http://change.gov/americaserves/

Allison Bricker

Editor’s Note: This article has been linked to by a white supremacist website known as the “Vanguard News Network”. We the staff of “The Smoking Argus”, wish to ensure our readers that we in no way agree or support their collectivist philosophy based on uneducated fear. The Smoking Argus believes the only criteria worthy of judging an individual is the content of their character.

It is my hope that perhaps by reading our site, members of this group will see that Tyranny calls no one group of people home; that a loss of liberty for one individual, is a loss of liberty for all. All peoples on our little blue marble have been subject to the thumb of oppressive despotism at one time or another.

###

As previously reported, then Democratic Presidential candidate, Barack Obama while speaking in Colorado this past July, stated:

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objective that we’ve set. We’ve gotta have a “Civilian National Security Force” that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

Unfortunately, President-Elect Barack Obama has yet to expound upon exactly what he means by such a statement. However, even prior to this mock election, media reports began circulating that candidate Obama had already extended an invitation to Rahm Emanuel to be his White House Chief of Staff. Representative Emanual (D-IL) having served in the Clinton Administration, is well groomed to help speed up the new King’s transition to power.

Moreover, it appears that Representative Emanuel (D-IL) who is also head of the the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, may be the best person to shed some light on the aforementioned ominous sounding statements. In “The Plan: Big Ideas for America“, co-authored by Representative Emanuel and Bruce Reed, the two lay out their vision of the “Homeland’s” new compulsory civilian service, writing:

“It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal [mandatory] civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.”

If the arrogance alone in such sentiments bothers you not, the two “centralized planners” go on to say:

“Republicans will squeal about individual freedom,”

Such blatant disdain for individual liberty is a sentiment only of tyrants. We have seen this ruse perpetrated on us for the last eight years as it relates to the false justification for preemptive war. Let us not now be chastised away from our liberty based upon a centralized planner’s definition of patriotism. The definition of Patriotism to these scoundrels is loyalty to the power of the ‘state’, their false notions of nobility, their blood soaked seats of power, not to our Republic, not to our Constitution, not to humanity’s inherent liberties.

Fellow readers, my political philosophy is far from what is espoused by the “Republicrat Party Platform”, however the thought of our children being indoctrinated into a 3 month “boot camp” and “civil disaster preparedness” reeks of statism. A search of history will turn up various reincarnations of these types of “community service” programs. Regardless of the slick glossy packaging and repackaging, the motivation and end is always the same, oppresion, tyranny, and despotism.

For those of you whom support President-Elect Obama, consider that even if he were to be pure in his intent, would you have wanted your children to have been forced to work under a Bush Presidency?

We know not what type of President we may have in the future, and this my fellow readers is why we should not allow this current President to obtain mandatory legal guardianship over our youth now or ever. The temptation of power is inevitable.

Note: there is an update to this post