The Manchurian Approach to National Security

Hat Tip: Brian B.

Leon Panetta is a leftist radical who should never have headed the CIA, period, much less be confirmed as Secretary of Defense. He poses a massive security risk and he has never been vetted – at all. For background on Panetta’s radical communist ties, visit the following research by Trevor Loudon and Cliff Kincaid:

Panetta stands to be confirmed as Secretary of Defense soon if nothing is done. Just another brick in the Cloward and Piven strategy. Almost certainly Panetta will have two overriding objectives after being confirmed and both spell very bad news for the US, the Western world at large and our way of life.

First on his chopping block will be billions in defense budget cuts. In essence, emasculating our military and weakening our forces to the point of no return. Baring our throats to our enemies across the planet who are at this moment savoring the blood and death to come of the last superpower and freest country ever to grace the planet.

Second, Panetta is laying the foundation for further implementation of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine. And he has powerful friends indeed on both sides of the progressive aisle (at the forefront is John McCain) backing his move to grant President Obama powers that not only render Congress totally toothless and irrelevant, but also bestowing the powers of a dictator upon our Commander in Chief. Panetta stated that the president can unilaterally use military force, without congressional authorization to “protect our national interests.” Listen to his language concerning the War Powers Act and the right of the President to wage war:

John McCain: “Does it worry you if the Congress begins to tell the commander in chief as to exactly … what the president can or cannot do in any conflict?” asked McCain.

Leon Panetta: “Senator, I believe very strongly that the president has the constitutional power as commander in chief to take steps that he believes are necessary to protect this country and protect our national interests,” said Panetta. “And obviously, I think it’s important for presidents to consult, to have the advice of Congress. But in the end, I believe he has the constitutional power to do what he has to do to protect this country.”

Notice the careful language here. Let me translate… Panetta and Obama ‘hope’ that the Congress will back his military dictates. They ‘hope’ that our leaders will see things their way. But if not, tough cookies folks. If the President decrees, so shall it be. From Wikipedia, we see the definition of a dictator:

A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual, the dictator. It has three possible meanings:

  • A Roman dictator was the incumbent of a political office of the Roman Republic. Roman dictators were allocated absolute power during times of emergency. Their power was originally neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later dictators such as Sulla and the Roman Emperors exercised power much more personally and arbitrarily.
  • A government controlled by one person, or a small group of people. In this form of government the power rests entirely on the person or group of people, and can be obtained by force or by inheritance. The dictator(s) may also take away much of its peoples’ freedom.
  • In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.

I would say our government, with Panetta at the helm and Obama ruling over all, fits the bill quite nicely indeed.

From CNS News:

Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says Congress “shall have Power … to declare War, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” At the constitutional convention in 1787, James Madison of Virginia and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts proposed that the word “declare” war be inserted in place of “make” war in this passage so that it would leave the president the limited power to “repel sudden attacks.” Madison’s proposal was adopted.

Madison notes from the Constitutional Convention clearly indicate that the drafters of the Constitution meant to deny the president the power to initiate military action by the United States except when necessary for self-defense. “The Executive should be able to repel and not to commence war.”

President Barack Obama expressed this same interpretation when he was a presidential candidate. On Dec. 20, 2008, he told the Boston Globe: “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

When it suited Obama, he was against unilateral authorization of military attack. Not so any more. Now it suits his one world Marxist agenda and he is greedily digging in for a big helping of R2P. Witness the actions in Libya and now Yemen. On the chopping block: Syria and then for the coup de grâce – Israel. It’s barreling towards all of us with murderous, evil intent and Israel’s fate is not hard to discern in the military tea leaves. Obama just rendered a 30 day ultimatum to Israel demanding they return to the suicidal 1967 borders where they would be virtual lambs to the slaughter for the Islamists. If they don’t comply, well then, America will be forced to withdraw her support from her staunchest ally. UN sanctions will ensue and if financial extortion is not fruitful, well, military intervention will have its day.

Obama justifies the Libyan conflict by saying it threatens our interests in the region. But the Constitution is being flaunted and totally ignored here. Libya posed no military threat to us and did not wage war against us. Yemen – Obama is not even bothering to give an excuse on this incursion. It was a ‘covert’ operation until a few days ago. And if Americans don’t like it – too freaking bad.

Panetta sees it this way:

Panetta said it was “very important” for the president to consult with Congress after he takes military action, saying that “hopefully” Congress will agree that military action is necessary.

“[O]nce those [military] decisions are made, in order for those decisions to be sustained, that it’s very important to work with the Congress and seek the best advice and counsel of the Congress and hopefully get the Congress’ support for those actions,” said Panetta.

Panetta is a leftist radical who is very, very dangerous. If he becomes Secretary of Defense, Panetta and Obama will finish what Obama began – the dismantling of the strongest military the world has ever seen and the bankrupting of America to boot. Libya and Yeman, along with Afghanistan and Iraq have already broke the American bank. But wait, there’s more to come with Syria and the treacherous Judas treatment of Israel to come.

With Obama the anointed Manchurian President (whose Marxist strings are being pulled masterfully) and Panetta as his chief henchman, national defense will take on a whole new meaning to Americans. A very personal meaning.


Terresa Monroe-Hamilton administrates the Noisy Room blog, where she documents the influences of those politically off the American course, called progressives. She is also a contributor to and her articles are featured in the daily Web publication, The Globe & Malevolence.


  1. This is the most uninformed, alarmist, and hyperbolic drivel that’s even been written

Speak Your Mind