This issue has a great amount of data the Main Stream Media is it's continued support for War, any war, any where, doesn't want you to know. 80% of the people in the USA do NOT war to go to war with Syria. -Scott
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always to brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger. It works the same in any country." Field Marshal Herman Goering who served as Adolph Hitler's second in command and head of the Luftwaffe in World War II Germany, during a post war discussion. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- *INCHING CLOSER TO WAR * ** *"The U.N. special envoy for Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, will hold discussions on the sidelines of a Group of 20 summit to push for an international conference to be held on ending Syria's civil war," begins a piece in British news <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-syria-crisis-g20-un-idUSBRE9840CI20130905> this morning, offering an iota of hope for those opposed to more war. * *But it's difficult to see the USA accepting any attempt at diplomacy. Yesterday Speaker Boehner denied a request <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/05/john-boehner-russian-meeting_n_3870597.html> from Russian diplomats to meet with them and get a second opinion. Like others in our government's leadership, Boehner's mind is made up and he's not going to let facts get in the way. * *Yesterday, a Russian investigation <http://rt.com/news/chemical-aleppo-findings-russia-417/> showed that an earlier chemical attack likely did not come from the Syrian government, but our leaders don't want to see evidence that contradicts their flimsy case for attacking Syria. * *Meanwhile, President Obama's "coalition of the willing" is coming together, but it's the opposite of what he wanted. China gave a warning about attacking Syria <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-russia-g-idUSBRE98315S20130905> and appears to have moved closer to the Russian position. * *President Putin warned that he may be providing Syria with a missile shield <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/04/obama-putin-syria-g20-summit> if the attack takes place, and hinting that he may complete a suspended deal to do the same for Iran. * *Ellen Brown has a can't miss piece at /Truthout/ <http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18604-making-the-world-safe-for-banksters-syria-in-the-crosshairs> this morning indicating that part of the reason for attacking Syria (and Iran later) is their refusal to cave to international banksters.* ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ **It is difficult to imagine our nation going to war with so little support as exists today among its citizens. ** **In one report <http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/10712>, President Obama was ready to order the missiles fired into Syria when General Dempsey convinced him "If you do this, the plan will fail and you'll get in deeper. And without congressional approval, you'll be screwed," Dempsey told Obama. ** **So we have moved to alternate plan B-- seeking an okay from Congress to add a fig leaf. ** **Approval from Congress is better than no support at all, but Congress is a very small part of the nation's population, and the nation's population, as you will see in the following piece, is extremely opposed to starting a new war. ** **We have never impeached a president during time of war, but if it should happen in any war, this is likely the one. Anybody with an IQ above their shoe size knows that countless things can go wrong after one begins to attack a nation-- assumptions may scramble in the winds of war like dandelion seed in a hurricane, and it can all go bad. ** **The Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday voted for war with Syria 10-7, which makes it "the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria," expanding the war beyond the original "limited strike" rhetoric. The voteshows the Senate is as out of touch as the President and his national security team --Jack Balkwill** *Attack Syria? 'Nobody Wants This Except the Military-Industrial Complex' <http://www.thenation.com/blog/176017/nobody-wants-except-military-industrial-complex#axzz2drPeu7m4> * *by John Nichols * *House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, **backs <http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/03/20308438-boehner-says-hell-back-obama-on-syria-strikes?lite>**President Obama's request for authorization to intervene militarily in Syria, as does House Democratic Minority Nancy Pelosi, D-California.* *Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, is similarly **"in," <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/03/boehner-backs-obama-call-for-military-strike-on-syria/>**while Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, in **mum. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/03/why-mitch-mcconnell-%E2%89%A0-john-boehner-on-syria/>* *The president has done a pretty good job of selling his plan to congressional leaders.* *He has not, however, sold it to the American people.* *Thus, when members of Congress decide which side they're on in the Syrian intervention votes that are expected to take place next week, they will have to consider whether they want to respond to pro-war pressure from inside-the-Beltway -- as so many did when they authorized action against Iraq -- or to the anti-war sentiments of their constituents.* *Reflecting on the proposed intervention, Congressman Alan Grayson, D-Florida, allowed as how: **"Nobody wants this except the military-industrial complex." <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/alan-grayson-syria_n_3836276.html>* *The level of opposition might not be quite so overwhelming.* *But it is strikingly high.* *And, even as the president makes his case, skepticism about intervention appears to be growing.* *A Pew Research survey <http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/03/public-opinion-runs-against-syrian-airstrikes/>**released Tuesday found support for air strikes had collapsed from 45 percent to 29 percent, while opposition had spiked. "The public has long been skeptical of U.S. involvement in Syria, but **an April survey <http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/29/modest-support-for-military-force-if-syria-used-chemical-weapons/>**found more support than opposition to the idea of a U.S.-led military response if the use of chemical weapons was confirmed," Pew reported Tuesday. "The new survey finds both broad concern over the possible consequences of military action in Syria and little optimism it will be effective."* */The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/03/most-in-u-s-oppose-syria-strike-post-abc-poll-finds/>/**released after the president announced he would seek congressional authorization for an attack on Syria, and after several days of administration lobbying for that attack, found that voters are overwhelmingly opposed to intervention.* *"The United States says it has determined that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons in the civil war there," the **/Post/ABC/**poll asked. "Given this, do you support or oppose the United States launching missile strikes against the Syrian government?"* *Sixty percent of **registered voters <http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/09/03/National-Politics/Polling/question_11499.xml?uuid=sbcxaBTCEeOyICyVDH8yYw>**(59 percent of all respondents) express opposition. Just 36 percent support intervention.* *Self-identified Democrats are opposed 54-42 -- a 12 point gap.* *Republicans are opposed 55-43 -- a similar 12 point gap.* *The fiercest opposition is among independents, who disapprove of intervention by a 66-30 margin. That figure suggests that members of Congress who represent swing districts might actually be more vulnerable if they vote to authorize the attack.* *In addition to being broad-based, the opposition sentiment runs deep. Even if US allies such as Britain and France join in, a 51-46 majority is still opposed to missile strikes.* *The idea of going further and trying to topple the Syrian regime appears to be a political non-starter. Seventy percent of those surveyed oppose supplying weapons to the Syrian rebels, while just 30 percent support the proposal that has been floated by President Obama and Republican hawks such as **Arizona Senator John McCain. <http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/attention-as-performance-or-heres-a-photo-of-john-mccain-playing-poker-during-the-senates-syria-hearing/279320/>* *What is especially notable about the polling data is the intensity of opposition to any sort of intervention -- including missile strikes targeted at suspected chemical weapons sites -- among groups that lean Democratic at election time.* *Sixty-five percent of women surveyed for **/The Post/ABC /**poll**//**oppose missile strikes, while just 30 percent favor them. (**The Pew survey <http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/03/public-opinion-runs-against-syrian-airstrikes/>**found an even lower level of support among women: just 19 percent)* *Among Americans under age 40 who were surveyed for **the Post/ABC poll, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/03/most-in-u-s-oppose-syria-strike-post-abc-poll-finds/?tid=pm_politics_pop>**65 percent are opposed.* *Among Hispanics, 63 percent are opposed.* *Among African-Americans, 56 percent are opposed.* *On the question of arming the rebels, opposition numbers skyrocket.* *Seventy-six percent of women surveyed for **the Post/ABC poll <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/03/most-in-u-s-oppose-syria-strike-post-abc-poll-finds/?tid=pm_politics_pop>**are opposed.* *Seventy-four percent of those under age 40 are opposed.* *Seventy-three percent of African-Americans are opposed.* *Regionally, the Democratic-leaning states of the Midwest and the Northeast are more opposed than the Republican-leaning states of the South.* *It is true that foreign policy is not always made on the basis of polling data. It is true that patterns of war weariness and concern about how to address the use of chemical weapons makes the current circumstance volatile. And it is true that poll numbers can change. But it is worth noting that discomfort with launching air strikes -- let alone any other intervention -- is running strong among voters who have followed the story closely and among voters who have only recently begun to engage with it. **Pew reports that <http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/03/public-opinion-runs-against-syrian-airstrikes/>**"opposition to the idea is prevalent regardless of people's level of interest -- nearly half oppose airstrikes among the most and least attentive segments of the public."* *Or, as **/The Washington Post <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/03/most-in-u-s-oppose-syria-strike-post-abc-poll-finds/?tid=pm_politics_pop>/**analysis puts it: "there is deep opposition among every political and demographic group in the survey."* ** http://www.thenation.com/blog/176017/nobody-wants-except-military-industrial-complex#axzz2drPeu7m4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *If you wish to be removed from this list, please let us know* ** *To join the Liberty Underground news service go here: http://luvnews.info/Join.htm* ** *You may also join our talk group athttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/libertyundergroundtalk/ <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/libertyundergroundtalk/>if you would like to participate * **or join our Facebook group here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/461619557192964/ * email: libert...@hotmail.com* ** *Tell your friends about /LUV News/ because some people just don't get it* [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
