Topic: My Return Email to My Congressman regarding the war in Libya (Read 765 times)
You won't be getting a reply, but, no, you didn't overdo it. It needed to be said.
I agree with BioMike that references would help, eps to the Al Qaeda thing. Otherwise I approve this message.
In your reply you make many statements, without providing any references. If you want to convince someone in such strong manner, I would suggest you to add those references (else it seems just a lot like a conspiracy theory in respect to his motivation).
Also don't attack them personally and directly if you have to, you'll loose credit with them.
Also don't attack them personally and directly if you have to, you'll loose credit with them.
With that response I'd bet you are now on watch list of some kind.
Anyways, I'm still pissed at Libya or Pan Am 103 so I personally hope we get that son of a bitch. But it is definitely a waste of scarce funds.
Anyways, I'm still pissed at Libya or Pan Am 103 so I personally hope we get that son of a bitch. But it is definitely a waste of scarce funds.
I sent an email to my congressman regarding stopping the war in Libya, it was scant and I just voiced my opposition in regards to any US involvement in Libya.
He returned with this canned turd of a response:
=============================================================================================================================================
Dear Mr. ******,
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate hearing from you.
I do not support an open-ended commitment in Libya and I am disappointed that the White House did not further consult Congress before committing resources to the NATO-led mission. Additionally, in my vote for the Conyers amendment and H.J. Res 68, which both bar all funds from being used to deploy, establish, or maintain a presence of Members of the Armed Services or private security contractors on the ground in Libya, makes clear I only support a limited U.S. role.
Too often the greatest powers, including the United States, have failed to act when they could have intervened in a responsible way to stop the slaughter of innocents. In Libya, it was clear that there was a crisis developing and America, with our NATO allies, the Arab League, and the UN Security Council, appropriately provided limited support to rebel forces. This assistance included a no-fly zone that has undoubtedly saved thousands of lives.
America's primary role in the NATO mission has been to provide operational and logistical support to other countries that have taken the lead on enforcing UN Security Resolution 1973 and I support that. It would have been an unfortunate precedent and undermined key global institutions if we failed to act with such a clear, unified call for intervention. Inaction would have endangered the recent display of democratic aspirations by so many in the region. Our failure to act would have emboldened the despots of Syria, Iran, Yemen and others, suggesting there were no consequences for murdering peaceful protesters.
What I would have liked to see offered in the House was a resolution similar to the one sponsored by Senators Kerry and McCain. The Kerry/McCain resolution goes further and clearly defines our interests and objectives in the region. It makes clear that it is the sense of this Congress that we will support the Libyan people and political reform in the country; it clearly defines our goal in Libya as the removal of Mummar Qaddafi and his family from power through the NATO mission outlined by U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, which includes diplomatic and economic pressures; and that we must support the Libyan people transition to a representational democracy.
As I have said from the start, I would support thoughtful legislation that acknowledges the U.S. has chosen to answer the cries of the innocent Libyan people, but makes clear that our commitment to their aspirations of self governance is not open-ended, and which clearly defines our goals and – more importantly – limits. That is why I voted for H.J. Res. 68 and look towards the Kerry/McCain Resolution to carry the day because it sets the right tone.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Please continue to be in touch.
Sincerely,
Earl Blumenauer
Member of Congress
==========================================================================================================================================================
So I responded with this:
The putsches in the North African region are not some 'Arab spring' of democracy. It's more geopolitical cynical overthrows by CIA and company against vassal nations seeking to escape from the Globalized Empire. What a coincidence that Russian and Chinese engineers where in the region building all manner of infrastructure (as Libya was 'siding' with them over the Empire powers embodied in NATO and the Globalized economic hegemony made most manifest in the World Bank and IMF) and that Dominique Strauss-Kahn was planing on meeting with Merkel and Quadaffi to establish an alternative to the dollar. If we can recall history we see that as soon as Saddam seriously considered getting out from under the dollar things conveniently turned against him, but these are more than a matter of coincidence, and to this much more could be said.
There should be no role of the USA whatsoever in regards to Libya. The 'slaughter of innocents' as you describe are another PR stunt by western backed media establishments that fly in the face of the reality of what is actually happening. The innocents you cite are literally Al Qaeda forces in eastern Libya, a typical counter-gang of Islamic extremists fully funded by the Empire to further balkanize the area in typical Brzezinskite fashion. You site the Green Revolution of Iran and 'other despots' as if those were in addition spontaneous events, which either shows how naive you are or how naive you think your average constituent is.
I study these things literally hours a day so sorry to disappoint you with my lack of swallowing the propaganda around said events. Now with the average person having means of choice regarding their selection of media don't be surprised if just repeating the talking points of the ideological bankrupt media cartels don't get you as far as they used to.
I just hope that you are promoting this cruel farce as a point of ignorance to what is actually occurring rather than an unwillingness or inability to discern the reality of the situation.
==========================================================================================================================================================
Does anyone think I overdid it?
He returned with this canned turd of a response:
=============================================================================================================================================
Dear Mr. ******,
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate hearing from you.
I do not support an open-ended commitment in Libya and I am disappointed that the White House did not further consult Congress before committing resources to the NATO-led mission. Additionally, in my vote for the Conyers amendment and H.J. Res 68, which both bar all funds from being used to deploy, establish, or maintain a presence of Members of the Armed Services or private security contractors on the ground in Libya, makes clear I only support a limited U.S. role.
Too often the greatest powers, including the United States, have failed to act when they could have intervened in a responsible way to stop the slaughter of innocents. In Libya, it was clear that there was a crisis developing and America, with our NATO allies, the Arab League, and the UN Security Council, appropriately provided limited support to rebel forces. This assistance included a no-fly zone that has undoubtedly saved thousands of lives.
America's primary role in the NATO mission has been to provide operational and logistical support to other countries that have taken the lead on enforcing UN Security Resolution 1973 and I support that. It would have been an unfortunate precedent and undermined key global institutions if we failed to act with such a clear, unified call for intervention. Inaction would have endangered the recent display of democratic aspirations by so many in the region. Our failure to act would have emboldened the despots of Syria, Iran, Yemen and others, suggesting there were no consequences for murdering peaceful protesters.
What I would have liked to see offered in the House was a resolution similar to the one sponsored by Senators Kerry and McCain. The Kerry/McCain resolution goes further and clearly defines our interests and objectives in the region. It makes clear that it is the sense of this Congress that we will support the Libyan people and political reform in the country; it clearly defines our goal in Libya as the removal of Mummar Qaddafi and his family from power through the NATO mission outlined by U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, which includes diplomatic and economic pressures; and that we must support the Libyan people transition to a representational democracy.
As I have said from the start, I would support thoughtful legislation that acknowledges the U.S. has chosen to answer the cries of the innocent Libyan people, but makes clear that our commitment to their aspirations of self governance is not open-ended, and which clearly defines our goals and – more importantly – limits. That is why I voted for H.J. Res. 68 and look towards the Kerry/McCain Resolution to carry the day because it sets the right tone.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Please continue to be in touch.
Sincerely,
Earl Blumenauer
Member of Congress
==========================================================================================================================================================
So I responded with this:
The putsches in the North African region are not some 'Arab spring' of democracy. It's more geopolitical cynical overthrows by CIA and company against vassal nations seeking to escape from the Globalized Empire. What a coincidence that Russian and Chinese engineers where in the region building all manner of infrastructure (as Libya was 'siding' with them over the Empire powers embodied in NATO and the Globalized economic hegemony made most manifest in the World Bank and IMF) and that Dominique Strauss-Kahn was planing on meeting with Merkel and Quadaffi to establish an alternative to the dollar. If we can recall history we see that as soon as Saddam seriously considered getting out from under the dollar things conveniently turned against him, but these are more than a matter of coincidence, and to this much more could be said.
There should be no role of the USA whatsoever in regards to Libya. The 'slaughter of innocents' as you describe are another PR stunt by western backed media establishments that fly in the face of the reality of what is actually happening. The innocents you cite are literally Al Qaeda forces in eastern Libya, a typical counter-gang of Islamic extremists fully funded by the Empire to further balkanize the area in typical Brzezinskite fashion. You site the Green Revolution of Iran and 'other despots' as if those were in addition spontaneous events, which either shows how naive you are or how naive you think your average constituent is.
I study these things literally hours a day so sorry to disappoint you with my lack of swallowing the propaganda around said events. Now with the average person having means of choice regarding their selection of media don't be surprised if just repeating the talking points of the ideological bankrupt media cartels don't get you as far as they used to.
I just hope that you are promoting this cruel farce as a point of ignorance to what is actually occurring rather than an unwillingness or inability to discern the reality of the situation.
==========================================================================================================================================================
Does anyone think I overdid it?
Jump to: