Though President Obama renewed his pledge to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay last week, many recognize this as his latest attempt to pretend to have a different foreign policy from his predecessor. Despite the president’s strong claims against Guantanamo Bay, there appears to be no indication that the Guantanamo Bay prisoners — a majority of whom are engaged in a hunger strike in opposition to their indefinite detention — are any closer to freedom, even the ones already formally cleared for release. Any discussions of closing the facility seem to be nothing more than attempts to assuage voters who are starting to ask questions about campaign promises that have yet to be fulfilled.

Without obtaining permission from Congress and despite repeatedly vowing not to put U.S. boots on the ground in Mali, the Obama administration has already deployed a small contingent of American troops to help international forces prop up the regime in the capital city of Bamako that seized power in a coup.

According to a report in the Washington Post, the president sent the U.S. soldiers to provide supposed “liaison support” to French and African troops battling separatist rebels in the north as part of a deeply controversial United Nations-backed operation. There are strong indications that American Special Forces are on the ground as well. 

The Pakistani doctor who reportedly helped the CIA locate Osama bin Laden is on a hunger strike.

The Council on Foreign Relations and the Brookings Institution are ecstatic that the Obama State Department is providing huge support to the UN-created, anti-American International Criminal Court (ICC).

Without a declaration of war from Congress or any constitutional authority whatsoever, the Obama administration is reportedly preparing to openly send lethal weapons to so-called “rebels” in Syria seeking to overthrow the regime. The president plans to start sending arms while simultaneously pursuing “political negotiation” in the operation to oust dictator Bashar al-Assad, according to news reports citing “senior administration officials.” The White House is also seeking to assert “more aggressive U.S. leadership” in the battle against Syrian authorities, potentially including overt military intervention.

Affiliates and Friends

Social Media