Okay, maybe it is just me, but for some reason I do not see why folk are allup in arms and extremely supportive of Susan Rice. Sometimes I think it is the 98percent of black folk syndrome that believes Obama or Rice can never bewrong, or make mistakes, intentionally misinform of even worse – never lie.Rice, I suspect is thought by many to be Obama'stop pick for secretary of state, if you asked me based on what Iunderstand, her statements and her policy, she is dangerously incompetent to beSOS. Now she is smart, but the only way I can support her selection is if allwe want is an incompetent war monger in the office. True, she is a Stanford University graduateand Rhodes Scholar who worked for the reknown McKinsey &Company before she joined the National Security Council under PresidentBill Clinton, and from there she became President Clinton’s assistant secretaryof state for African affairs, but job promotion has nothing to do with utilityof being a competent SOS.
The merit is there, no question, but when one looks at intent, and attributessiding with liberty, freedom and truth, Rice gets no points. Whether or not sheintentionally and willfully misled the American people on the Benghazi attacks,or ran misdirection for the Obama Administration in denying a terror attackprior to his re-election is not the point. The bottom line is that she is notthe best choice for the job if you look at the world from an African Americanwho takes prided in having the first African American President albeit I agreewith less than 10 percent of his policy – foreign, domestic and economic, Riceis a major point of consternation.
Starting with Africa and Rwanda specifically, Rice’s lack of actionpertaining to genocide in that nation shows that she has no backbone to assertdemocracy and liberty on behalf of America. Not to mention the manner in whichshe should have broken her neck on behalf of the Clinton Administration to denyassistance to the Tutsis. Yes, based on her recommendations as a part of BillClinton's National Security Team in 1994, her refusalto suggest action in the Rwanda genocide that left more than 800,000 men, women,and children to be hacked to death by machete in the fastest genocide ever recordedwill always be a scarlet letter on her dress and make her this generations Hester Pyrnne.
This was nothing, she even went farther by obstructing the efforts of othernations to stop the slaughter. Instead, although in April 1994 the CanadianUN commandeer in Rwanda, General Romeo Dallaire, declared that he requiredonly 5000 troops to stop the genocide, she advocated that the UN force underDallaire reduced by ninety percent to 270 troops.
SamanthaPower of the Atlantic said it best as the author of the Pulitzer-Prizewinning AProblem of Hell who referred to Ambassador Susan Rice and hercolleagues in the Clinton Administration as Bystanders to Genocide said it bestwhen she quoted Rice in her 2002 book "If we use the word 'genocide' andare seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the Novembercongressional election?" Meaning - Rice's saw genocide as being lessimportant than partisan politics interests. This is not partisan on Power’sbehalf, seeing that presently Power currently is a Special Assistant toPresident Barack Obama.
Rice also has a troubled past as it pertains to the Iraq war andinvasion by President Bush which she vehemently supported. In one instanceshe stated in 2003to NPR: “I think he has proved that Iraq has these weapons and is hidingthem, and I don’t think many informed people doubted that.” In another, shestated: “It’s clear that Iraq poses a major threat. It’s clear that its weaponsof mass destruction need to be dealt with forcefully, and that’s the path we’reon. I think the question becomes whether we can keep the diplomatic balls inthe air and not drop any, even as we move forward, as we must, on the militaryside.” I can also throw in Libya where she clearly was the main person to movethe President to take action against Gaddafiand Syria, where she promotes armed intervention against Syria. In general,Rice has a track record of doing all I hated that George Bush did or attemptedto do -- advocatenation-building in failed states. Add to this her support for more troopsin Afghanistan, she appears to be no different that Rumsfeld or Wolfowitz.
She supports Israelunconditionally, speaking of democracy in Egypt, Libya and Syria but notfor Palestinians. And she has not said one word on Israel roundingup African to intern and deportthousands deemed a threat to the Jewish character of the state. She issilent of rounding up members of a different racial group and holding them incamps for deportation and the overthostility towards blacks in general, where the nation or tax payers fund referto blacks and Africans as a cancer and an AIDs virus on the Israeli people.
Add to the aforementioned incompetencyand a policy that seems to support Israel no matter what and Africanneocolonialism, she has even more baggage. If she is selected by the Presidentto be SOS, she will have a major conflict of interest. Currently, Riceholds millions of dollars in investments in Canadian oil companies and banksthat have keen interest and investments in the $7 billion Keystone XL Pipeline.If she was to become the next Secretary of State, she would have the final sayin determining if the pipeline gets approved and built or not. According to theenvironmental advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council and financialdisclosure reports, Rice has MAJOR INVESTMENTS in more than a dozenCanadian oil companies and banks that would benefit from enhancement of theCanadian tar sands industry and the building of the KPL. Open record reportsindicate that approximately a third of Rice's personal net worth (stimated in2009 to be between$23.5 million and $43.5 million) is in Canadian oil production and otheroff shoot markets. Not to mention that Rice has between $300,000 and $600,000invested in TransCanada, the company trying to get permission from the StateDepartment to construct portions of the KPL from Oklahoma to Canada.
When we look at her investments in banks, the conflict of interest issuebecomes more lucid. She has “investments totaling at least $5 million and up to$11.25 million in Bank of Montreal, Bank of Nova Scotia, Canadian Imperial Bankof Commerce, Royal Bank of Canada, and Toronto Dominion.” A report by the Dutchconsulting firm Profundo Economic Research notes that some of thesebanks are largely responsible for underwriting the expansion of Canada’star sands industry.
And I will not mention that Rice and her husband own at least $1.25 millionworth of stock in four of Canada’s eight leading oil producers, as ranked byForbes magazine including Enbridge, (company responsible for spilling more thana million gallons of toxic bitumen into Michigan’sKalamazoo River in 2010 -- the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history).
Susan Rice is smart, that is not the point, and she just should not be theSOS. Now she may have another stage of genocide on her hands as she didwith the invasion of the Democratic Republic of Congo by U.S. allies Rwanda andUganda which left six million Congolese dead begining in 1996. Now with thecapture of Goma, an eastern Congolese city of one million, by “rebels” underRwandan and Ugandan control complete with the support of western nations theUnited States and the United Kingdom (whoare arming,training and equipping the Rwandan and Ugandan militaries).Afterall our U.S. ambassador to the UN Susan Rice is the main one responsiblefor keeping information on Rwandan and Ugandan role in the ongoing genocide outof international policy. It was Rice who blocked the UN Security Councilfrom demanding that Rwandaendsupport to M23 rebels.
The way I see it anyone who supports Susan Riceeither doesn't read, think for themself or is mentally retarded. The saddestthing about it for me is seeing black folk support her without question. Maybeidiots shouldn’t vote
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder