Why Does Obama Hate Britain?
By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media
Coming to the end of the Obama administration, with the wreckage of its foreign policy all around us, the naïve conservatives running the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal are begging President Obama to offer “A New American Deal for Europe.”
“It’s time for the U.S. to get back in the game because America needs a confident, prosperous Europe as a partner to defend the West against the rise of authoritarian regimes and global disorder,” the editorial writers say. In the case of Obama, however, this is like waiting for the tooth fairy or the Easter bunny.
Europe is already dominated by the Germany of Angela Merkel, an agent, or at least a stooge, of Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Her welcome mat to Syrian refugees has been disastrous for her own country, an unsurprising development considering the fact that Air Force General Philip M. Breedlove had described the exodus of refugees from the Middle East as a form of “weaponization” used by Russia and its ally Syria to destabilize Europe. Breedlove served as the Commander of U.S. European Command.
But rather than confront Russia, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier hasaccused NATO of “warmongering” because the alliance is conducting military exercises in order to repel a full-blown Russian invasion of Europe. This is a sure sign of the German government’s desire to accommodate Russian interests in Europe.
Christopher Story, a former economic adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, had always warned of Russian-German collaboration in wanting to dominate Europe. His massive volume, The European Union Collective: Enemy of Its Member States, was published in 2002.
Incredibly, Bloomberg reports that Obama is now proposing to use the Brexit as an excuse to replace Britain with Germany as America’s key ally in Europe.
Britain’s decision to leave the EU was a patriotic but dangerous move, not only because Obama is the U.S. President and he opposed Brexit, but because of the global forces now arrayed against it. Billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros, who argued for Britain to “remain” in the EU, now warns, “…the UK itself may not survive. Scotland, which voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU, can be expected to make another attempt to gain its independence, and some officials in Northern Ireland, where voters also backed Remain, have already called for unification with the Republic of Ireland.”
A major Democratic moneybags who backs such figures as current Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Soros is capable of destabilizing entire countries. In 1992 he engaged in a complex financial transaction that resulted in the Bank of England losing billions of dollars defending the British pound sterling, before having to devalue it.
This time around, his spokesman denies that Soros speculated against the pound, but admits that “because of his generally bearish outlook on world markets, Mr. Soros did profit from other investments.”
Trying to get Merkel off the hook for what has happened to Germany, Soros wrote that while her decision in welcoming the refugees “was an inspiring gesture,” it was “not properly thought out” because the “sudden influx of asylum-seekers disrupted people in their everyday lives across the EU.”
It’s hard to believe this was “not properly thought out,” and that Merkel didn’t know what she was doing. In any case, Soros says “the disintegration of the EU” is now “practically irreversible.” He stands ready to pick up the pieces, making tons of money, and then funneling a major portion of it into liberal coffers. Over the last 32 years,according to their own estimate, the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations had expenditures of more than $13 billion.
From their perspective, the British people were desperate to save what’s left of their nation, whose capital, London, recently elected a Muslim Mayor, Sadiq Khan, who has connections to radical Islam.
For his part, Obama said openly that he wanted the British to stay in the EU. Otherwise, he said they would end up at the back of the line for trade deals.
Nigel Farage, leader of the U.K. Independence Party, quite rightly blasted Obama for those remarks. But he said at the same time that Putin had behaved in a more “statesmanlike” manner. Putin had just returned from a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping and spoke of their growing strategic alliance against the West, consisting of expanding political, economic, and military operations.
Obama’s terrible treatment of an ally is not surprising. Obama views Britain as a white colonial power that oppressed his brothers and sisters of color, and Muslims around the world.
In 2012, it was reported that Obama had removed the bust of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who rallied the British people during WWII, from the Oval Office, and sent it back to the British Embassy. The White House scrambled to correct that, saying the bust had just been moved somewhere else in the White House complex.
Where does this hatred come from? All roads lead to Obama’s mentor, the Communist Frank Marshall Davis, the man the media haven’t wanted to talk about for seven years now.
Professor Paul Kengor, author of a book about Davis, notes that he “harbored a special hatred for Winston Churchill, who, like [Democratic President Harry S.] Truman, opposed Stalin’s Soviet Union—the country to which Davis dedicated his heart, his mind, his soul, and his pen.” Davis, a propagandist for the Communist Party in Hawaii, had written that “the only people Churchill gives a rap about are the white people of the British Empire,” and that Churchill wanted America to join him in bludgeoning “all other countries into submission.” He complained that Churchill favored a postwar U.S.-UK alliance that excluded the USSR.
Despite Obama’s anti-British mentality, the Journal’s recent editorial said, “An important first signal would be for the U.S. to invite the U.K. to begin bilateral free-trade talks that run alongside current talks with the EU.”
But the Journal editorial writers have to know that Obama has no intention of pursuing that idea. However, Art Harman, who was legislative director for former Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX), has proposed a bill to do just that. Harman tells AIM that “just introducing such a bill or resolution would send our great ally the message that they can vote according to their best interests without fear that the U.S. would cost them trade if they vote the ‘wrong’ way, and to reassure markets that Obama’s threat will not stand.”
Harman suggests that the bill should be called “The Winston Churchill Trade Continuation Act.”
Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected]View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.