Where is the Outrage

[Walt]

Where is the out cry from the left and the media that Obamas facist military is targeting civillians? if this had happend under Bush it would be all that they would talk about.

Http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18567377/

AP
updated 5:12 a.m. CT, Wed., May 9, 2007
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Airstrikes called in by U.S. Special Forces soldiers fighting with insurgents in southern Afghanistan killed at least 21 civilians, officials said Wednesday. One coalition soldier was also killed.
Helmand provincial Gov. Assadullah Wafa said Taliban fighters sought shelter in villagers' homes during the fighting in the Sangin district Tuesday evening, and that subsequent airstrikes killed 21 civilians, including several women and children.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Pentagon spends billions to terrorize civilians

By Deirdre Griswold
Published Feb 17, 2010 5:12 PM
Feb. 16 — It is now four days since U.S. Marines stormed into the town of Marjah in Afghanistan, backed up by helicopter gunships, fighter jets and drones. Some 9,000 U.S. troops are taking part in Operation Moshtarak, which means “together” in the Dari dialect — a bright idea from some psyops genius meant to beguile the local population.

These U.S. troops, part of the Obama administration’s “surge” of 30,000 additional forces sent to Afghanistan, are supplemented by 4,000 British soldiers and a few thousand Afghans. So altogether you have some 15,000 troops, equipped with the most modern weapons, pitted against what the Pentagon estimated to be about 400 Taliban fighters with only handheld guns and mortars and dug-in improvised explosive devices to slow the advancing forces.

Pentagon spends billions to terrorize civilians

 

[hjmick]

Obama = murderer.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Anything the liberal Democrat leaders do is acceptable. This is not the case with Republican leaders. It's the usual old double standard at play.

 

[emilynghiem]

Where is the out cry from the left and the media that Obamas facist military is targeting civillians? if this had happend under Bush it would be all that they would talk about.

Http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18567377/

AP
updated 5:12 a.m. CT, Wed., May 9, 2007
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Airstrikes called in by U.S. Special Forces soldiers fighting with insurgents in southern Afghanistan killed at least 21 civilians, officials said Wednesday. One coalition soldier was also killed.
Helmand provincial Gov. Assadullah Wafa said Taliban fighters sought shelter in villagers' homes during the fighting in the Sangin district Tuesday evening, and that subsequent airstrikes killed 21 civilians, including several women and children.

Try looking at it this way. When Bush was in office, they had to be more restrained. So now with Obama, perhaps they can get the job done because there won't be as much criticism interfering.

Same with appointing a Latina as a Supreme Court Justice. Maybe now there is visible representation, if the rulings STILL come down enforcing immigration laws and holding violators to restitution, it won't be racist but will be clearly "enforcing the laws on the books." So now there is a chance to get back on track instead of being distracted by race.

It's not right to use offices this way as symbolic but it's our reality right now with dependence on media influence. People do relate to visible role models this way. So if it takes a Black President rebuking his own followers about father's responsibilities before they take it seriously to heart, so be it. If that is what people need to hear and who they need to hear it from to get it straight, go for it! I believe God helps orchestrate people into strategic positions to reach certain audiences and get certain things dones, so why not find the most effective useage or purpose and take full advantage of that for maximum benefit.

Once people "get over" the race issues and fighting over representation, eventually more people will focus on the real issues of law that exist regardless of appearance, party, and who's in office. Not everyone is evolved to that point, but still manipulated and dependent on media hype. As long as there is emotional reaction and division, this can be exploited to get votes and higher ratings by inciting conflicts instead of advertising common solutions. We would have to change the whole context to get away from this conditioning and bias.
In the meantime, that is the reality; every backlash begets an equal and opposite backlash.