Regime Change, Hillary’s Head Fake

It was just another day of duplicity in DC. If there was a Washington newspaper that honestly reported on American politics, it would have to be called The Daily Double Standard.

When the Tunisian and Egyptian rebellions began, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary “The Determinator” Clinton vacillated for weeks while hundreds of protesters were being slaughtered. It was only after it became clear that the autocratic leaders (that the US had supported for decades) would be overthrown that the US would champion the need for a transition to “democracy.”

Yet similar uprisings, destabilizing other Middle East and North Africa nations, were met only with earnest diplomatic calls for restraint and dialogue, never with demands for regime change… except when it came to Muammar Qaddafi.

On February 26th, just days after the first uprisings in Libya, President Obama boldly declared, “When a leader’s only means of staying in power is to use mass violence against his own people, he has lost the legitimacy to rule and needs to do what is right for his country by leaving now.”

Two days later Hillary Clinton threw her Secretarial weight into the fray, proclaiming, “It is time for Qaddafi to go, now, without further violence or delay. We want him to leave, we want him to end his regime.”

That these ludicrous ultimatums should have been uttered by people in responsible positions and then seriously reported by the world’s media (without editorial comment) was further proof of their arrogance and hubris. In the history of the world, what autocratic leader had ever packed up his bags, bowed down, bent over and gone into exile because a bunch of blowhards seven thousand miles away gave the order: “We want him to leave.”

On the other hand, perhaps the position wasn’t as foolish as it looked, but a calculated exercise in political cunning. Knowing full well that Qaddafi would never leave willingly and that plans were already in place to attack, when they attacked, their nonsensical ultimatum would serve as an effective excuse. Qaddafi had been given fair warning.

Three weeks before President Obama launched “Operation Odyssey Dawn” (a grotesque name to apply to a military exercise that would consist of launching missiles and dropping bombs without any fear of reprisal!), Hillary Clinton told reporters that the movement of US military forces off the coast of Libya was meant to position them to help with humanitarian efforts. And although there was discussion of a no-fly zone, “There is not any pending military action involving US naval vessels,” she said.

“We’ve been reaching out to many different Libyans who are attempting to organize in the east and, as the revolution moves westward, there as well,” she said, “… but we’re going to be ready and prepared to offer any kind of assistance that anyone wishes to have from the United States.”

[Editor’s Note: As discussed in the next portion of The Trends Journal, exactly who these “anyones” were, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was keen to “offer any kind of assistance,” was a matter left to be sorted out later…]


Gerald Celente
for The Daily Reckoning

[Editor’s Note: The above essay is excerpted from The Trends Journal, which is published by Gerald Celente. The Trends Journal distills the ongoing research of The Trends Research Institute into a concise, readily accessible form. Click here to get the full story in, learn more about, and subscribe to The Trends Journal.]