G20 Ends Abruptly as Obama Calls Putin a Jackass

When I first read this article, I thought it would end with the author clarifying that its content is just a produce of his imagination and that it just his synical interpretation of what happened in the G20 meeting. But no, he didn't do that. However, since the article is published in a renowned magazine such as the New Yorker, and since the content is really, really, very synical, I came to the conclusion that it is the author's caricaturial view on international politics! In all cases, I loved the article.

ST. PETERSBURG (The Borowitz Report) 

Hopes for a positive G20 summit crumbled today as President Obama blurted to Russia’s Vladimir Putin at a joint press appearance, “Everyone here thinks you’re a jackass.”

The press corps appeared stunned by the uncharacteristic outburst from Mr. Obama, who then unleashed a ten-minute tirade at the stone-faced Russian President.

“Look, I’m not just talking about Snowden and Syria,” Mr. Obama said. “What about Pussy Riot? What about your anti-gay laws? Total jackass moves, my friend.”

As Mr. Putin narrowed his eyes in frosty silence, Mr. Obama seemed to warm to his topic.
“If you think I’m the only one who feels this way, you’re kidding yourself,” Mr. Obama said, jabbing his finger in the direction of the Russian President’s face. “Ask Angela Merkel. Ask David Cameron. Ask the Turkish guy. Every last one of them thinks you’re a dick.”

Shortly after Mr. Obama’s volcanic performance, Mr. Putin released a terse official statement, reading, “I should be afraid of this skinny man? I wrestle bears.”

After one day of meetings, the G20 nations voted unanimously on a resolution that said maybe everyone should just go home.

Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP

The 5 Most Ludicrous War Claims in Obama’s Syria Speech

By Matthew Rothschild, September 10, 2013     

1. “I possess the authority to order military strikes.”

No you don’t, Mr. President. Only Congress has the authority to declare war, and ordering military strikes would be a clear act of war, thus violating the Constitution. It would also violate the War Powers Act, which says that the President can’t engage in hostilities without a declaration of war or specific Congressional authorization unless there is “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.” And Syria has done no such thing.

2. Syria’s use of chemical weapons is “a danger to our security.”

Note that four paragraphs later, he said it wasn’t “a direct or imminent threat to our security.” So what kind of a threat is it? Well, a rather tenuous one. “Other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas and using them. Over time, our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield.” Really? It is very unlikely that some dictator would do this because he would know that if he did, the U.S. would drop a nuke on his head. That was the warning that Saddam Hussein got from the U.S. in January of 1991, and he didn’t use his chemical weapons even as the U.S. was destroying most of his army. If that threat was enough to stop Saddam, it’s likely good enough to stop other dictators.

Obama also acknowledged that “the Assad regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military.”

3. “If fighting spills beyond Syria’s borders, these weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan, and Israel.”

Let’s just look at Israel. Obama contradicted himself just a few minutes later when he said, “Neither Assad nor his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his demise, and our ally, Israel, can defend itself with overwhelming force, as well as the unshakable support of the United States of America.”

4. “It’s true that some of Assad’s opponents are extremists. But Al Qaeda will only draw strength in a more chaotic Syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians from being gassed.”

Only? If U.S. missile strikes seriously degrade Assad’s military, they would certainly help the extremists who are allied with Al Qaeda in Syria.

5. “For nearly seven decades, the United States has been the anchor of global security. This has meant doing more than forging international agreements; it has meant enforcing them. The burdens of leadership are often heavy, but the world’s a better place because we have borne them.”

Was the U.S. an anchor of global security and an enforcer of international agreements when it overthrew the Mossadegh government in Iran in 1953, or the Arbenz government in Guatemala in 1954?

Is the world a better place because the U.S. helped overthrow Salvador Allende’s democratically elected government in Chile almost exactly 40 years ago?

Is the world a better place because the United States killed 3 million people in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia and because we dropped 20 million gallons of napalm (waging our own version of chemical warfare) on those countries?

Is the world a better place because the United States supported brutal governments in El Salvador and Guatemala in the 1980s, which killed tens of thousands of their own people?

Is the world a better place because George Bush waged an illegal war against Iraq and killed between 100,000 and a million civilians?

And what international agreements was the United States enforcing when it tortured people after 9/11?

Puccinin, the recently freed Belgian hostage, declares: "Al Assad is not behind the gas attacks!"

The Belgian teacher Pierre Piccinin da Prate and Domenico Quirico, a journalist at La Stampa, both kidnapped in Syria in April 2013 by the Syrian rebels (whose main military arm is Jabhat Al-nusra which closely linked to Al Qaeda), were released on Sunday (8/9/2013).

 

During his interview with RTL-TVI, Piccinin indicated that it is the Syrian rebels and not the Syrian regime who used the sarin gas (in Al Ghouta). Puccini held on strongly to his statement especially when told that Quirico denies being that certain of this fact. He then insisted that it would be suicidal for the West to support the extremists who now lead the so-called Syrian revolution.

 

Puccini, who was a strong supporter of the Syrian rebels at the beginning of the uprise in 2011, said that "it is a moral duty to relay such information. It is not the Government of Bashar Al-Assad which used sarin gas , or any other gas, in the outskirts of Damascus. We are certain of this fact since we overheard a shocking conversation between the Syrian rebels. My statement comes at a high personal cost since I used to support the Free Syrian Army in their just struggle for democracy."

 

On the other hand, Domenico Quirico said "One day, we overheard a conversation in English via Skype between three men through the door of the room in which we were imprisoned. In this conversation, the men said that the gas attacks in the two districts of Damascus were committed by the rebels as a provocation to push the West to launch an attack on Syria". He also said that he is not sure of "the reliability nor the identity of the persons involved in this conversation. "I cannot assert whether this conversation was based on real facts or on a rumor. It is folly to claim that I know that it is not Assad who used the gas."

 

Puccinin, in response to Quirico's suspicions, said: "I'm a little bit surprised because we were together when we heard this conversation. It involved the Free Syrian Army general who was holding prisoners and a militant from Al-Farouq brigade. It was clear that, according to this conversation, Al-Assad's regime is not responsible for the gas attacks gas based on which the world shall decide whether or not to attack the regime of Bashar Al-Assad."

 

Puccinin, and in response to questions from Michel De Maegd, reiterated that, according to the two men, no, it is not the regime "of Al-Assad who is behind this attack". The Belgian ex-hostage continued: "The regime could not have made a more precious beautiful gift to the rebels had it really used these chemical weapons." Mr. Piccinin completely opposes the idea of an international attack on Syria. "The Free Syrian Army is now controlled by extremists. It would be crazy and suicidal for the West to support these people."

 

Puccinin explained: "It wasn't always the same group that held us. We were detained by different, anti-Western, anti-Christian, violent extremists. At many times, we were subjected to extreme physical violence" humiliation, bullying, and mock executions. Domenico underwent two mock executions by the revolver. At one time, we were convinced that they were going to kill us since they told us that we became a burden on them and that they were going to get rid of us".

 

Consult the interview in French here

Who Are the Syrian Rebels Supported by the US and its Allies?

Here are a few videos revealing the nature of the Syrian Rebels (closely linked to Al Qaeda)Supported by the US and its Allies?

CAUTION: Graphic content!

1- A Syrian rebel kills a soldier and eats his heart! Glenn Beck:THIS is who the US is helping in Syria

2- Syrian Rebels Execute 7 Army Officers: Brutality of Syrian Rebels

3- Syrian rebels Execute 51 Soldiers

4- Free Syrian Army (FSA )War Crimes: Execution of captured soldiers

(...to be continued)