Obama and Kissinger

19 Comments

1. 

   Oui on May 10, 2016 at 12:59 pm

   Millions of innocents lived through hardship because of US filthy foreign policy during the Cold War. Obama is leaving his presidency with a legacy of Cold War 2.0 footing with Russia. Albright, Brzezinski and the Clintons will be proud of their man.

   October Surprise – sabotage of Paris Peace negotiations by Kissinger in 1968

   Claiming to be disillusioned with the Republicans, Kissinger went to Paris and hooked up with Daniel Davidson, a young acquaintance from Harvard.  Davidson was by then on the Harriman team that was negotiating peace terms with the North Vietnamese. Furthermore, no less an establishment figure than Richard Holbrooke, a member of the American team (then a senior LBJ negotiator), said that “Henry was the only person outside of the government we were authorized to discuss the negotiations with…. It is not stretching the truth to say the Nixon campaign had a secret source within the U.S. negotiating team.”

   Kissinger also got in touch with Dick Allen, who was Richard Nixon’s young foreign policy adviser during the 1968 campaign. Allen said that Kissinger always called him from pay phones to avoid any wiretaps that would reveal his duplicity.  
   The road map of Henry Kissinger’s famous journey to destabilizing the Paris Peace negotiations was very unique. Now, the more difficult task for him was to gather the information from the Communist North Vietnam.  

   HOW?  

   Kissinger had gone so far as to involve himself with an initiative that extended to direct personal contact with Hanoi. He became friendly with two Frenchmen who had a direct line to the Communist leadership in North Vietnam’s capital: Raymond Aubrac and Herbert Marcovich. The Pug wash, Code Name PENNSYLVANIA, was an international peace group of scientists which met regularly   to discuss world problems.  The group included Raymond Aubrac, Herbert Marcovich and Henry Kissinger. Raymond Aubrac, a French civil servant who had studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University in 1937, was a friend of Ho Chi Minh, and Herbert Marcovich, a French microbiologist, began a series of trips to North Vietnam.  

   Marcovich and Aubrac would take a message directly to Ho Chi Minh. This was possible because Ho Chi Minh was friends with Aubrac and godfather to Aubrac’s daughter. They spent four days in July 1968 in Hanoi and met with Ho Chi Minh and the Prime Minister Pham Van Dong and other officials. Upon their return, they were debriefed in Paris by Kissinger. Aubrac was to be used by Henry Kissinger as a secret intermediary between the Americans and the North Vietnamese at the height of the Vietnam war.  

   In a briefing in Paris with Henry Kissinger, the Frenchmen asked for a signal to be sent to the North Vietnamese of the serious intent of the U.S. for peace. On 19 August 1968 President Johnson agreed to suspend bombing within a 10-mile radius of Hanoi from 24 August to 4 September to ensure the safety of Aubrac and Marcovich when they were to go back to Hanoi and also to signal Kissinger’s validity as an intermediary.

2. 

   Marie3 on May 10, 2016 at 8:22 pm

   Giving HRC cover for bragging that Kissinger is one of her best buds?  Or merely Obama no longer needing to be shy about his stripes because his and HRC’s supporters don’t give a damn who they hobnob with?

   • 

     mino on May 11, 2016 at 2:24 am

     Don’t think Obama is particularly fond of his left wing, either.

     • 

       Quentin on May 11, 2016 at 3:02 am

       Does this mean that the US bombardment of Cambodia was an intelligent tactic, a good thing by the standards of genteel, civil, cool society people like Obama and Clinton (cool?, I’ve never heard her called that before, have you?).

       • 

         Marie3 on May 11, 2016 at 1:25 pm

         The elites are always cool with war.  Adds to or makes their fortunes and/or political careers.  

         Since winning election in ’08, Obama has revealed who he is wrt to war.  He Peace Prize acceptance speech was blatant, and still his fans can’t see it.

         • 

           karl pearson on May 11, 2016 at 8:10 pm

           Why did that happen so soon after his election? I missed hearing the acceptance speech. My bad.

         • 

           Marie3 on May 11, 2016 at 9:18 pm

           He wasn’t George W Bush, and the world thought that was a great.  He speech is easy enough to find.  The neo-cons loved it and the liberals swoon when Obama gives a speech (as mindful of the content as the Trumpsters are).

         • 

           Oui on May 12, 2016 at 1:52 am

           Controversy swirls in Norway as Nobel peace prize chair forced out | The Guardian |

           After the announcement Thorbjørn Jagland was quoted by Norwegian media as saying: “Those elected from the Conservative and Progress parties in parliament have chosen a new committee chairman and won a majority. I must relate to that.”

           The award also resulted in accusations of a conflict of interest between Jagland’s role as committee chair and his position as secretary general of the 47-nation Council of Europe, with speculation that the Nobel committee would find it hard to award the prize to a Russian opposition figure because of the potential for tensions with the Kremlin.

           Perhaps most controversially, however, in Jagland’s first year as chairman the committee awarded the peace prize to US president Barack Obama, who had been in post for barely nine months, and was about to preside over a major expansion of the US military effort in Afghanistan – and the use of drones in the war on terror.

           Morten Wetland, a former Norwegian ambassador to the UN, claimed last year the “most embarrassing day” in his job came when the prize was awarded to Obama, whose then-chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, accused Norway of “fawning” over the new president.

           Kaci Kullmann Five, the committee’s new chair, is a former leader of the Conservative party and previously Jagland’s deputy. Jagland himself will remain on the committee for a further six-year term.

           …
           The Nobel committee mirrors the political complexion of Norway’s parliament, with two members appointed by Labour, two by the Conservatives, and one from the Progress party, which since 2013 has governed in coalition with the conservatives. The committee chooses its own chairperson.

           Jagland’s demotion was greeted with jubilation by some rightwingers in Norway.

           Presentation 2009 | Nobelprize.org |

           ○ President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech from Oslo, Norway
         • 

           The Voice In The Wilderness on May 13, 2016 at 8:10 am

           Rahm Emanuel – a class act even then!  /sarcasm

     • 

       Marie3 on May 11, 2016 at 1:27 pm

       No more fond of it than HRC but has to remain mindful of the fact that it is what put him in the WH.    

       • 

         The Voice In The Wilderness on May 13, 2016 at 8:13 am

         Whereas she won’t because we didn’t and won’t this time.

         So, I predict she will be nice to people of color until January 2021 when she can spit in the eye of everyone except her Wall Street masters owners.

         • 

           The Voice In The Wilderness on May 13, 2016 at 8:16 am

           In fact, let me make that prediction December 2020.

3. 

   on May 11, 2016 at 1:48 pm

   A couple of interesting articles in the last 24 hours at DownWithTyranny.com about Clinton actually moving the Democratic Party farther to the right this year to merge with Republican money people, leaving a neoliberal Democratic Party in the center of the spectrum while cutting off nativists and religionists from the right and economic populists from the left. That is, Hillary isn’t going to bother with Sanders supporters. She plans, essentially, to lop them off in her grand scheme to control the center.

   I guess the way to test this theory is to see how the Clinton wing treats the Sanders wing in Philadelphia. If they isolate and ignore them, and we get lots of fluffing of the less belligerent Republicans and their money masters, then we know.

   • 

     GUBula on May 11, 2016 at 4:54 pm

     Things happen “according to plan” a lot less than people think. Clinton’s ears are up for grabs; progressives just need to be smart in getting her to listen to the left

     • 

       karl pearson on May 12, 2016 at 2:18 am

       HRC’s ears are not open to progressives. It’s not a matter of progressives needing to be smart. The PTB ensure that things happen according to a plan. It’s their sole business. The little people have to take advantage of accidents/random events. Sometimes when conditions get extreme, changes are made because they have to be. For example, there were many progressive policies adopted during Roosevelt’s presidency.

       • 

         GUBula on May 12, 2016 at 9:21 am

         Roosevelt is my point exactly: whatever his personal inclinations were, he had to  push the New Deal in order to prevent either fascism or communism

         • 

           karl pearson on May 12, 2016 at 12:24 pm

           Roosevelt was saving classical capitalism at that time, although  he was considered a traitor to his class. (I highly recommend H.W. Brands biography of Roosevelt, if you haven’t had a chance to read it.) However, we now have a “perverted” form of capitalism and so much $$ in campaigns. As drastic as this may be, some people are calling for a new Constitutional Convention. A book on my reading list is Lawrence Lessings’, “Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress–and a Plan to Stop It”. So much reading, and so little time it seems.

         • 

           The Voice In The Wilderness on May 13, 2016 at 8:19 am

           Yet that is the central issue of this primary campaign. Voter funding versus fat cat funding and fat cat funding is winning.

         • 

           karl pearson on May 13, 2016 at 10:00 pm

           It’s not over until it’s over.