Obama Called “War Criminal” and “Hypocrite of the Century” in The Irish Parliament

Clare Daly, TD Dublin North recently spoke clearly about how she views The United States President, Barack Obama.  via Global Research

Now, I ask you, is this person going for the hypocrite of the century award?  Because we have to call things by their right names, and the reality is that by any serious examination, this man is a war criminal.

He has just announced his decision to supply arms to the Syrian opposition, including the jihadists, fueling the destabilization of that region and continuing to undermine secularism and knock back conditions for women.”  (Clare Daly)


“It is important to take this opportunity to bring some balance into the discussion surrounding the visit of the U.S. president and his wife, given the almost unprecedented slobbering over them that the nation has been exposed to over the last number of days.

“It’s really hard to know which is worse, whether it’s the outpourings of the Obamas themselves or the sycophantic fawning over them by sections of the media and the political establishment.”

“We’ve had separate and special news bulletins by the State broadcaster to tell us what Michelle Obama and her daughters had for lunch in Dublin, but very little questioning of the fact that she was having lunch with Mr. Tax Exile himself,” …

“We had very little challenging of the fact that she’s ‘glad to be home’—home a country she’s been in less than a week and her husband has very tenuous links in.” President Obama’s great-great-great grandfather was born in the Irish village of Moneygall; an 8th cousin to the president lives there today. …

“Of course, the biggest irony of all, the protestations of Obama himself in his speech to children in Northern Ireland about peace, when he said, ‘those who choose the path of peace, I promise you, that the United States of America will support you every step of the way. We will always be the wind at your back.’

“Now, I ask you, is this person going for the hypocrite of the century award?” . Because we have to call things by their right names, and the reality is that by any serious examination, this man is a war criminal. He has just announced his decision to supply arms to the Syrian opposition, including the jihadists, fueling the destabilization of that region and continuing to undermine secularism and knock back conditions for women.”…

“And the last point I’ll make is people in this country are very fond of our American brothers and sisters, and I think we stand far more shoulder to shoulder with them by making valid criticisms of their president who has broken his election promises rather than just pimping this nation as a tax haven for their corporations. I’m sure the Americans would far prefer if their multinationals pay their taxes at home rather than offshore here – so they can develop their health care, so they wouldn’t be wasting money on arms being sent to slaughter people in other countries.”

  • echar

    Holy fuck, we need people like her in American politics. I am done with the forked tongues in the USA. Damnit Jessee the Mind!

  • sveltesvengali

    Unfortunately, you could apply this designation to many administration figures throughout the decades in a nation that was not even necessarily brought to heel by international law but by domestic law in a Lockean society, but the Obama and Bush administrations have certainly done their part in unprecedently justifying this much-deserved but utterly unapplied distinction. Also, I have to question whether many Nobel Peace Prize winners, not least Obama, truly deserved THAT distinction.

    In any event, whether or not the likes of Obama, Bush or any of their administration figures were brought to justice over these accusations, it would still be an inadequate response in and of itself, and quite possibly compose a distraction from the broader systemic ills pervading this nation for much of the public.

    In a situation wherein the presidency may increasingly be in the midst of reduction to a mere formality by the very forces that it helped to incept and in which the populace may well be utterly socially and economically dependent on the military-industrial complex and other shady, collusive interests, an overhaul of the executive branch or, worse yet, sacking only certain members of a given administration will do little to truly prevent further decay.

    • Juan

      I agree. The entire system is rotten, and needs to be completely restructured.
      Jailing a president and key people in his administration, as much as that needs to happen, still leaves the system intact and does not get at the core issues of what is causing all the madness and chaos.
      The monetary system, the military industrial complex, the corporate-state controlled media, the prison industry, the very concept of perpetual growth, and a military empire run amok, all of these systems, as they are currently structured need to be either scrapped, or totally restructured so they function in the interest of everyone and the planet, not just the class of oligarchs. But you know, we’re talking revolution here, and that doesn’t seem very likely given that huge chunks of this country are . . . well, you know.

  • DeepCough

    Clare Daly is way off fucking base here: because, for one, the century isn’t even over yet; and furthermore, the next general election is in 2016.

    • sveltesvengali

      I would agree that it’s beyond presumptuous to call anyone the “best” or “worst” figure of the twenty-first century at this very early stage, but the points that underlie that statement aren’t nearly so off base as Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize is.

    • echar

      True, it could get much worse. Frankly I expect it too. I doubt the next president will be African American, or democrat. Romeny still has money, hopefully he doesn’t get any bright ideas.

      • Juan

        You know, man, some sick part of me wants the worst fucking, fascist, ‘Merka, fuck yeah, cowboy, yahoo, kill-em-all-and-let-god-sort-em-out, jingo, troglodyte, corporate, Jesus bastard to get “elected.” My reasoning being, that it will speed the collapse of this monster.
        But, it looks to me, that the role of president is really symbolic. Whoever is in there is taking orders form the same people. So I really don’t think it makes all that much difference who happens to be occupying the white house. Whoever it is, they are just the figurehead/frontman for The Empire.

        • DeepCough

          Funny how you should mention that: Ted Nugent announced plans to run for president in 2016.

          • Juan

            Fuck it, I’m voting for Tar Pit Ted! Eeeeeeeeee haw, boy!

        • echar

          On your first point, part of me likes that idea… Another is freaked out by it all I can say is… I suggest reading The American Book of the Dead by Henry Baum


          On your second point, it appears so, sadly. I’d vote for Jessee Ventura. Mostly because he’s a badass, he’s above average honest, and he doesn’t want to run. That should be a prerequisite, like i don’t know. Maybe a president should be kidnapped into it or something.

          • Juan

            Thanks for the link. Looks interesting.

          • echar

            You can DL the PDF for free. I own the book, it’s very good.

          • Juan

            Thanks, I’ll check it out.

      • misinformation

        yea, because color of skin and party affiliation matter…

        • echar

          Skin color doesn’t matter to me, but party kind of does. Even though it appears the two parties serve the same masters.

  • cakey pig

    “Now, I ask you, is this person going for the hypocrite of the century award?”


  • bobbiethejean

    Our government is corrupt to the core and too many of our people are too scared, lazy, ignorant, or beaten down to do anything about it. THAT is the real problem. Yes, Obama is a zit but there’s an underlying infection of which Obama is just a symptom.

  • DrDavidKelly

    It’s undeniable that the US, Obama and Bush are guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity, perhaps even genocide but saying it doesn’t really amount to much. I mean what are you going to do? Prosecute one of the most powerful men on the planet. What a laugh … can’t even get a bunch of crooked bankers in court let alone the likes of a president. And as it has been said, it’s the system that is rotten. It seems blatantly obvious that the US is looking after the US – all the time. All this guff about peace and protecting civilians is just a prop for the real motivations – which is always self serving … the eternal clamber for resources.

    Thinking about Syria, I do wonder what what the CIA has panned. I guess they want Assad out and someone in that they manipulate to a greater degree? It is almost funny to see the Nobel Peace prize winner talking about delivering arms to rebels – especially when those rebels are on the US terrorism hot list. I have friends though, intelligent people, who whole heartily support the rebels, one of them going as far as to say that he thought their cause ‘brave and noble’. It’s been a media success story here in the West. My sympathies lie with the civilian populace – it looks as if their little uprising has been hijacked and will now play out (on an even killing field) in the hands of the superpowers.

    • Juan

      Damn, it’s the people of Syira, who have to go through a proxy war of empire who will be doing all the suffering. Cuz I don’t think Barry is gonna be too inconvenienced.

  • http://pneumerology.com/ pneumerology

    janice… you should watch the video about arseholes. it’s talking about you.

  • Noah_Nine

    wow… she certainly got her point across…. what a focused mind… very well done….

  • Lookinfor Buford

    Yo! All you who would like to see the system crumble, and be ‘restructured’. We’d love to hear your ingenious plans for replacing the U.S. with the next ‘most well fed and successful’ country to ever exist. You all seem very excited about the destruction phase, but I rarely hear you mention the blueprints for the new order.
    Is it because each page of your silly plan can be so easily shot down with rational reasoning, that you are hesitant to even display it?

    Is it because each time to scan the horizon for an example of a model country, you ultimately realize there are special circumstances that allow their (bogus) systems to work in a vacuum, and that their ‘solutions’ crumble when applied large scale?

    Or is it just because you are immature little brats?

    • satch

      ‘most well fed and successful country to ever exist’.

      who’s history reality tunnel are you referring too?

      • Lookinfor Buford

        The reality we live in today, and the history I’ve objectively studied my entire life, of course.

        • satch

          A history that starts with genocide, and slavery. both of which continue today. A whitewashed history.

          • Lookinfor Buford

            pfft.. genocide my ass.. our political system requires the acceptance of the concept of private property. Native Americans of the time refused to accept this, and therefore lost their war. You can’t claim they owned these lands, because they never claimed to themselves. Whether you are American or not, you have reaped the rewards of the outcome of that period in history. So, you can be the first to jump up from your comfy chair and give it all back whenever you are ready.

            Slavery? please.. The masses in this country are begging to be slaves, by putting their faith in an already massive and over-blown government as a solution to their problems.

            Just who do you think are the slaves in America today?

            Once again, the smug critic fails to direct the conversation to his wonderful blueprint of how things should look in the completely fair and just new order. No solutions, just pointing to the colonial days, when we were still GBR I might add, and crying about it.

          • misinformation

            You do realize that the paragraphs following this:

            ‘pfft.. genocide my ass’

            and this:

            ‘Slavery? please…’

            don’t actually negate the fact that there was a genocide and slavery did exist, right?

          • Lookinfor Buford

            I don’t need to negate it. There was no genocide. There were many atrocious conflicts, with both sides guilty of inhumane acts. It would be easy to justify killing savages savagely.. which both sides did. The stronger and more numerous side won. You can crow all day about how wrong it was, but I doubt you would have felt that way had you been a settler in that day and age.
            Yes there was slavery, the world over at that time, and many times before and after. Big deal, that ended long ago, and has no place in today’s conversation. The people being stolen from today are not guilty of these crimes. Nor can the success of our nation be attributed to slavery.

    • Juan

      I do not need to have, nor do I need to present you with some imagined, detailed plan that will meet with your approval. That is absurd in the extreme.
      Let me ask you this, are you happy with the status quo? A corrupt government, a controlled lying-ass media, a rigged monetary system, illiteracy and religious fanaticism, a brutal, mass murdering military empire, rampant environmental destruction, these things are perfectly acceptable to you? You don’t think that maybe we could do a bit better?
      Perhaps you know something the rest of don’t that would explain why this current system is ideal, or at least the best we can do and should not be criticized, much less changed in any significant ways. If so, please . . .

      • Lookinfor Buford

        Sure I have all kinds of suggestions to address those problems. But they mostly center around weakening government, reducing the amount of revenues the government extorts from the people, making it less profitable for the media to lie in order to dress up their favorite candidate, once again by weakening the government. In other words, getting back to the old ways of individual responsibility, and allowing people to be chained to their lazy fate, instead of pretending we can save everyone from themselves, or that we even want to. With the exception of religious fanaticism and the environment (minor problems indeed), those things you mention are a result of unchecked government, not despite the lack of it. Banking is out of control because government is out of control and far too powerful. Would the banks have been bailed out if the go

        Again, let’s hear your suggestions. If it’s anything to do with using the government as a vehicle for progress, you’ll end up with something worse than the status quo, not better, and enslave the people in the process.

        My rant is directed at those who think everything is so fubar that it should be reset, which in the absence of some new revelation, means we would end up as quasi-communists. Talk about absurd in the extreme. Capitalism is proven to be as good as it gets. So offer something better or shut up about it.

        • Juan

          Wow, great suggestions. I stand in awe. Teabagger much?
          I see you worship at the altar of capitalism; good luck with that.
          We saw how great deregulation has worked from Raygun to Bubba. Deregulation has been a huge giveaway to corporations while royally fucking the rest of us and the planet. Because in most cases, all it means is free reign for corporations with almost zero accountability. So corporations get to privatize their profits and socialize their losses. In other words, we pay.
          If all you got is capitalism is good leave it alone, I think it’s you who needs to shut the fuck up. And no, I am not offering any alternatives, because it would be a total waste of time.
          I’m done arguing with you, but if you would like the last word please . . .

          • misinformation

            Banking is actually quite regulated. This is a general misnomer. Heavy regulation is favored and actually written by the largest players in an industry – small competitors can’t afford regulation. People are conned into believing the opposite. ‘More regulation’ or ‘deregulation’ are words that require context. Not unlike ‘capitalism’.

            The first task of any conversation (and I use that word lightly with regard to internet forums) is to define terms. Capitalism is a dodgy word if it is being used to describe the U.S. economic system which would be just as accurately described as fascism as per Mussolini’s definition.

          • Juan

            Agreed. Mussolini defined fascism as the marriage of business and government; essentially the corporate-state. This is what we have in the US, the corporate-state.
            And yes, what passes for capitalism among many people, especially in the US, is really nothing more than “our way of doing things that must not be questioned because it is the best.”
            As far as the minutiae of banking regulation goes, I have to plead ignorance. But what I have seen is that deregulation gave us the recent financial crash, the 80s savings and loan crises, and before the Great Depression, a constant and very destructive boom/bust cycle. It was the New Deal (heavy regulation) that went a long way towards mitigating some of the more egregious effects of capitalism, as it was then structured.

          • Lookinfor Buford

            I don’t think my posts are dodging anything.. People like Juan like to plead ignorance when it comes to facts, then follow that up with suggestions like, “The entire system is rotten, and needs to be completely restructured”, and let’s “speed the collapse of this monster”. “Deregulation has been a huge giveaway to corporations while royally fucking the rest of us and the planet.” while admitting he doesn’t even understand deregulation. “It was the New Deal (heavy regulation) that went a long way towards mitigating some of the more egregious effects of capitalism” What do you bet ol Juan couldn’t tell us the first thing about the New Deal without first hitting up Wikipedia? Talk about dodgy.

          • Lookinfor Buford

            Of course you won’t offer suggestions, because you don’t have any that can’t be shot down by a third grader.
            Sure, chalk it all up to deregulation.. The creation of Freddie/Fannie had nothing to do with it right?