United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice should not be given any more promotions. In fact, maybe she should be removed. How could we possibly say something like this about a lady that our President so vehemently respects and defends? Well, maybe because we know that had Susan Rice not given the wrong advice to President Clinton in 1996, Osama Bin Laden would have been in jail and the twin towers may well still be seen today! It is so very sad that a person such as Susan Rice is given such high jobs while she has failed to do what should have been an easy chore, get Osama bin Laden!
“In 1996 Rice helped persuade President Clinton to rebuff Sudan’s offer to turn Osama bin Laden, who was then living there, over to U.S. authorities. Rice reasoned that because Sudan had a poor human-rights record, the U.S. should have no dealings with that nation's government -- not even to obtain custody of the al Qaeda leader or to receive intelligence information on terrorists from Sudanese authorities. Bin Laden subsequently moved his terrorist operations to Afghanistan, from where he would mastermind the 9/11 attacks.”
And now Obama wants to make her the Secretary of State? This is by far the most obnoxious thing that could happen! Susan Rice does not deserve the post she now has much less a promotion! Susan Rice became a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Foreign Policy and Global Economy & Development programs. Now here is a group to be with, they really have turned into a left wing group in recent years.
“Brookings has been involved with a variety of internationalist and state-sponsored programs, including the Global Governance Initiative, which aspires to facilitate the establishment of a U.N.-dominated world government, based in part on economic and Third World considerations. Brookings Fellows have also called for additional global collaboration on trade and banking; the expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and nationalized health insurance for children. Nine Brookings economists signed a petition opposing President Bush's tax cuts in 2003.”
Now how is that? Susan Rice is part of a group that wants to have the United nations “rule” over all governments. This includes our beloved United States. Now that just does not seem right to have a lady with ideology along those lines to be our next Secretary of State. She does not present herself as an individual whom would have the best interest of the United States at hand. But wait, this lady is a gem of an extreme lack of quality. She has proclaimed that terrorism was born from oppression and deprivation!
But Susan Rice does not hold just these strange ideologies. She also holds the most questionable of all ideology.
“Reasoning (contrary to much strong evidence) from the premise that poverty breeds terrorism, Rice believes that U.S. taxpayers should fund nearly $100 billion per year of new-development-aid programs under the auspices of the United Nations’ Millennium Development Project -- a massive wealth-redistribution initiative designed to transfer money from the world's developed states to its poor states, many of them in Africa.”
Susan Rice wants to take money from the United States, of which our nation is now becoming unable to give out, and just give it to “poor” states, mainly in Africa. These people have problems and no amount of money can ever make them disappear. But one has to wonder if this “redistribution” of wealth from the United States to Africa is just her idea or has Obama latched onto it also, even as Obama’s own brother sits in a 2 by 8 room made of used tin and scraps of wood.
Susan Rice also had a hand in the question of force by Israeli Commandos with the Gaza bound Pro-Palestinian ship.
“On June 11, 2010, it was reported that Rice played an important role in pushing the Obama administration to support a United Nations investigation of a deadly May 31 fight between Israeli commandos and a number of passengers aboard a Gaza-bound, pro-Palestinian ship. The ship was carrying humanitarian relief supplies to Gaza, but its crew refused to comply with Israeli requirements that all cargo be submitted for inspection, thereby igniting the trouble. According to Israel, approximately 40 of the 600-plus people aboard the vessel were Turkish jihadis who instigated the violence, and at least five were known to have ties to Islamic terrorism. For details of the incident, click here.”
Why would Susan Rice even consider this type of action if she is supposed to be representing the United States? The United States is supposed to support Israel not oppose it, but with Susan Rice, it is apparent that she does not like nor support Israel at all.
“In February 2011, Rice stated: “For more than four decades, [Israeli settlement activity] has undermined security … corroded hopes for peace and security … it violates international commitments and threatens prospects for peace.” During testimony she gave two months later, Rice reiterated that sentiment, asserting that “Israeli settlement activity is illegitimate.”
Now just how could a representative of the United States even consider what Susan Rice has stated many times over, especially about what is supposed to be our main ally in the Middle East? Why is it that Susan Rice even thinks like this? Well, let us look at the groups Susan Rice is affiliated with.
Rice serves as a board member of numerous organizations, including the National Democratic Institute, the U.S. Fund for UNICEF, the Atlantic Council, the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University, the Bureau of National Affairs, Partnership for Public Service, and the Beauvoir National Cathedral Elementary School. She is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Aspen Strategy Group.
Let us begin with the National Democratic institute. Here is what is going to open some eyes. This group is hard to nail down because it falls under many umbrellas and one of them belongs to what may well be a very lame group except for what they truly are, a group with socialist ideology. This falls under what some call “progressive” but this name is simply code for Socialist ideology and some times with the communist ideology. In either case, this does not make for a good policy to have Susan Rice as a Secretary of State while she is associated with groups that belong or have associations with socialists or communists.
The Democratic Grassroots Action Institute and Network (a.k.a. Democratic GAIN, or simply DG) describes itself as “a national membership association for Democratic and progressive political professionals and organizations.” Claiming to be “the fastest growing network in the nation,” DG seeks to build infrastructure for the progressive community by identifying work opportunities for people who are interested in helping to advance leftist causes and political candidates. Toward that end, DG conducts grassroots training workshops each month in Washington, DC, and occasionally elsewhere in the United States. Moreover, DG has worked closely with the New Organizing Institute and the Daily Kos on a project to create an online training manual for progressive activists.
In an effort to help propel large numbers of young leftists into careers as political activists, DG has created what it calls “the largest job and talent bank for the progressive community.” This is a place where progressives may scan 'help wanted' ads posted by leftwing activist groups, or post their own resumes on a jobs board – in hopes of finding employment with an organization that shares their leftwing views vis a vis feminism, environmentalism, civil rights, social justice, etc. DG also offers individual career counseling to its paid members, in the form of one-to-one weekly meetings with staff.
Now we could be wrong about this, but should we as citizens of the United States even have to consider this when this lady, Susan Rice, gave the wrong advice to President Clinton, which allowed Osama Bin Laden to continue with his ideas and finally destroy the twin towers and kill thousands of people? No matter what, Susan Rice could have instructed Bill Clinton to go ahead and get Osama bin Laden and she alone would have prevented that tragedy. We know that it was Susan Rice that allowed Osama Bin Laden to be free and that allowed the attack of September 11, 2001.
In an article by Rick Moran, titled, “The Misguided Tenure of Susan Rice”,he writes of Susan Rice:
“Time Magazine refers to this policy — without a hint of irony — as “leading from the back.” And while Washington was busy this past week exchanging blows over the budget deficit, Rice was testifying on Capitol Hill, imparting her vision of what the US’s role in the world should be and her belief in the vital importance of the United Nations to our national security. This includes an open hostility to the state of Israel, a dangerous reliance on the UN to keep Iran from going nuclear, as well as the world body’s inexplicable granting Tehran membership on the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women.
Ann Bayefsky wrote of Rice’s testimony that it “offers the most detailed defense yet of the central foreign-policy plank of the Obama administration, known as ‘engagement.’” Basically, the Obama doctrine has “outfitted American interests with U.N.-made cement shoes.”
This is especially true regarding US policy toward Israel at the UN. In one of the most extraordinary statements ever made by an American official about Israel, Rice bitterly complained last February about having to veto a Security Council resolution condemning Israel and its settlement policy. She deliberately undercut the impact of the veto by saying, “For more than four decades, [Israeli settlement activity] has undermined security … corroded hopes for peace and security … it violates international commitments and threatens prospects for peace.” During her testimony last week, Rice reiterated that sentiment, adding “Israeli settlement activity is illegitimate.”
This goes far beyond what most would advocate for when it comes to the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. But it is one more indication that Susan Rice casually sets aside the interests of her own country in order to cater to the whims and capricious agenda of a world body that has proven itself an enemy of the United States."
Now this is really interesting since it shows that this woman has no right being in the position she is in now, much less becoming the Secretary of State! For what reason would Obama want to give her the position of Secretary of State? Would it be so that she would sell the United States out and Obama could easily make the statement that he did not know she was going to do that? Would it be so that Obama could have her make deals with our enemies that would destroy our national sovereignty and our freedom? Just why does Obama want this lady to be our Secretary of State, especially when she does not harbor the best interest of the United States? Yet, we as a nation have once again elected Obama as President, but we do not have to allow him to just place these people where he wants. We as a people do have a way to stop this take over of our nation by these bunch of socialists that are now in and around the White House and Congress. If we as a people do nothing now, we will be doomed to complete failure and we will have to accept the coming Socialist/Communist ideology. It Is time to act or time to fail. It is up to us!