Saturday, September 7, 2013

Alan Grayson ~ Democrat or Anti-Obama Libertarian?

 photo GraysonLibertarian.png

Previous Related Posts:
Irony Takes a Holiday when Rumsfeld Slams Obama on Syria
Obama's Red Line in Syria Draws Criticism Left and Right
'Is This Live?' ~ Fox Snooze On Air for Tucker Carlson
MSNBC Ratings Fall as Hosts Go Emoprog - Now with Olbermann Tweets
Glenn Greenwald Threatens America
Chris Hayes Thinks Military Heroes Don't Exist
Sarah Palin Calls Nancy Pelosi a 'Dingbat' and Obama a 'Tool'


This Happened: "Let Allah Sort it Out"

"This is one of those rare occasions
in which I'm in agreement with Sarah Palin.
Let Allah Sort it Out."
~ Congressman Alan Grayson D-Florida


Defended By Libertarian Glenn Greenwald?

Quoting from Right-Wing Daily Caller

Note: The Daily Caller is a slanted online news website
founded by Conservatives:
Tucker Carlson, a Libertarian Fox News Host
Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney

From U.S. News Blog
The White House released its four-page public report Aug. 30, arguing that Assad's government killed 1,429 people on Aug. 21 with a planned chemical weapon attack. Evidence cited in that report included "intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used."

Grayson, however, says "the claim has been made that that information was completely mischaracterized."
He points to an article published by The Daily Caller that alleges the communications actually showed Syrian officers were surprised by the alleged chemical weapon attack.

. . . "What they say in The Daily Caller is that [intercepted communications] would lead one to the opposite conclusion," Grayson said. "I don't know if it's right or wrong, [but] there's a very simple way to find out, that's for the administration to show me and other members of Congress" translated transcripts of the intercepts, he said.


PBS Interview: Send Syria a Hallmark Card

Complete Interview Transcript Here
Tonight, the view of a House Democrat leading the charge against using force. Florida Representative Alan Grayson serves on the Foreign Affairs Committee. I spoke with him from Capitol Hill a short time ago. Well, thanks for joining us.

Let's just get right to it. Why would a limited strike against Syria be a mistake?

REP. ALAN GRAYSON, D-Fla.: Several reasons.
First, it's not our responsibility. It's not our responsibility to act unilaterally. Secondly, it's not going to do any good. It's not going to change the regime. It's not going to end the civil war. It's not even going prevent a new strike and use of chemical warfare.
Third, it's expensive, and, fourth, it's dangerous. It could easily spin out of control.

JEFFREY BROWN: A key argument from the president of course has been that chemical weapons are simply different, the use of them must be punished, it must be stopped, or what kind of message do you send to the Syrian government and to other governments, including Iran?

ALAN GRAYSON: As one of my colleagues said, if you want to send a message, use Hallmark, not missiles. I think that logic applies here.

. . . JEFFREY BROWN: But this is your -- many people in your own -- of course, this is a president in your own party. He's talked about -- he said: "My credibility is not on the line. The international community's credibility is on the line."

Is he wrong about that?

ALAN GRAYSON: Yes. The international community has spoken. We are the only ones who are contemplating anything like this.
If we don't do this attack, no one else will. The British, on exactly the same evidence, decided against doing exactly this specific thing. The international community has decided that, when it works, it works multilaterally, and not simply by lobbing missiles and bombs into a war zone, with effects we cannot even possibly anticipate.

JEFFREY BROWN: What about the international community long ago coming out against the use of chemical weapons, saying that they are somehow different?

ALAN GRAYSON: Honestly, I don't even know what that means. I mean, it sounds like many of the cliches that I hear coming out of the mouths of administration spokesmen.
The fact is this. People understand, it's not our problem, it's not going to do any good, it's expensive, and it's dangerous. If you want to get us into a third war in the Middle East, this is the way to do it.

No comments:

Post a Comment