Trickle Down Tyranny

by Michael Savage

  He was wanted by the International Criminal Court. Why wasn’t he arrested, arraigned, and sent to The Hague for trial?

  All of this leads me to believe that he was killed on purpose. Were there CIA operatives on the ground in Libya who were told to kill him if they got the chance?

  The rebels beat the CIA to the punch.

  Now we have to ask why they wanted Ghadafi dead.

  Why did they not want a trial?

  What did Ghadafi know about higher-ups in the U.S. government, the French government, the British government that they did not want to come out?

  How complicit were officials of the U.S. and Western European governments in the evil deeds of Ghadafi, including the downing in 1988 of Pan Am flight 103?

  Even more to the point: Where was the outcry in the United States against Ghadafi’s murder?

  Why didn’t we hear the peaceniks and the anti-death-penalty people shouting that Ghadafi was put to death without due process?

  I ask you this: Are we going to descend to the level of the junta in Argentina, where unmarked cars take Americans off the streets, throw black hoods over their heads, and “disappear” them?

  This deplorable event—the assassination of Ghadafi—gets right to the point of the fears that I express in the title of this book: Trickle Down Tyranny. The murder of Ghadafi should send chills of fear down the spine of every American, regardless of political affiliation or orientation.

  It forces us to ask, “Who’s next?”

  Yet few if any leftists said a single word about the execution-style killing of an unarmed Ghadafi while he was begging for his life. Certainly not the government mouthpieces on MSNBC—Mostly Snide Nonsense By Communists.

  As I said on my show after Ghadafi was killed, “Here we have the U.S. media—who, I think, to the last empty skirt, opposed the death penalty—yet they are feasting on Ghadafi’s corpse. . . . Every day they espouse sympathy for murderers and rapists on death row—no death penalty—and yet here they celebrate the execution of Ghadafi by the puppets of the U.S. government.”

  The assassination of Ghadafi without a single voice other than my own being raised in protest on that day had me so upset emotionally that I chose not to go on the air for my regular Friday broadcast the day after the event. I later found out that the UN actually raised some of the same questions, but I didn’t hear a peep out of any U.S. politicians, out of our president—nobody spoke out.

  Nobody but me was willing to stand up personally. Nobody took a moral stand on this.

  Why are anti-death-penalty liberals, of all people, supporting the execution of a head of state?

  What did our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, say?

  She gloated over his murder.

  Her words were, “We came, we saw, he died.”

  We now have Hillary Clinton acting out her violent, bloodthirsty inner self, modeled on the Charles Dickens character Madame Defarge from A Tale of Two Cities.

  Clinton celebrated the execution of a world leader—someone who begged to be spared—without a trial.

  To Clinton it’s one big Fort Marcy Park.

  Do you remember that one?

  The death of Vince Foster?

  Foster was a deputy White House counsel for Bill Clinton. He died under mysterious circumstances. His body was found in Fort Marcy Park, outside Washington, D.C., after he allegedly committed suicide.

  Like Ghadafi, Foster knew too much. He couldn’t be trusted to be left alive, so he had to be eliminated.

  Ghadafi could not be trusted to face trial.

  He knew too much.

  So he was eliminated.

  Did you hear a single American politician say, “He was unarmed. He was begging for his life?”

  It was a mob execution. Chicago justice. Al Capone would have been proud. The Chicago thugs who played such an important part in getting Obama nominated and elected and in determining the path of his presidency are no doubt in their glory.

  The $2 billion it cost us to eliminate Ghadafi must have been well worth it, but it brings up a larger, more important question: Why does Obama look the other way when despots like Ahmadinejad in Iran and Assad in Syria murder their own people, yet he brags and cheers when Ghadafi is taken out?

  Why, all of a sudden, are liberals so full of themselves?

  Why, when Obama invades a foreign country and assassinates leaders willy-nilly, is it OK all of a sudden? But when Bush tried to waterboard terrorists it was a violation of human rights?

  In June 2011, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for the Libyan dictator, his son Seif, and Ghadafi’s security chief for their alleged crimes against humanity. That should have protected Ghadafi when he was captured. He should have been detained for trial.

  Instead, he was a victim of the very war crime he himself was accused of.

  Do you know what the Geneva Convention says about war crimes?

  I’ll tell you.

  According to Marcel Ceccaldi, a French attorney who had worked for the Ghadafi regime, “The willful killing [of someone protected by the Geneva Convention] is defined as a war crime by Article 8 of the ICC’s Rome Statute. Kadafi’s homicide shows that the goal of [NATO] member states was not to protect civilians but to overthrow the regime.”31

  Ghadafi’s family is suing NATO based on its violation of Ghadafi’s rights.

  Should they also be suing Barack Hussein Obama as an accessory to murder?

  What is happening in the United States as atrocities are committed in the Middle East without our intervention is very disturbing to me.

  It leads me to ask this question: Are some dictators more equal than others?

  Why is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—the Hitler of Iran—invited to dinner at Columbia University, but Ghadafi gets a bullet to the head?

  I’ll tell you why.

  The bigger picture of Obama’s campaign of terror in the Middle East is this: It is Barack Obama’s lifetime anti-Zionism—his anti-Semitism—being played out on the world stage. He is imposing his personal hatred of Israel on the world order.

  The George Soros-Jimmy Carter-Zbigniew Brzezinski-Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton complex is out to neutralize any Arab leader who is no threat to Israel and to support those who with no hesitation are in favor of the demise of the Zionist state.

  Obama supported the arrest of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak—a friend of the United States, a friend of Israel for over 40 years. It was Mubarak who secured the border between Egypt and Israel during his time in office, who granted legitimacy to the state of Israel. Now Shariah law is being imposed in once-secular Egypt by the violent Muslim Brotherhood.

  Obama has taken credit for killing Ghadafi, who, evil as he was, was not an enemy of the Jewish state as far as I know.

  Notice who the U.S., under its anti-Zionist president Barack Obama, is not going after: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and Bashar al-Assad of Syria, a puppet of Iran’s Ahmadinejad, himself an anti-Israel despot who can be relied on to help carry out Ahmadinejad’s crusade against Israel.

  This is a massive anti-Zionist crusade. Obama is out to liberate Jerusalem for the Muslims.

  His personality is merging with that of George Soros into a new being, a two-headed monster.

  I call him Sorobama.

  George Soros’s fingerprints are all over Obama’s foreign policy. This policy, as I explain in this chapter and the next, is in the process of completely realigning the power structure in the Middle East, making way for the emergence of a new caliphate, a coalition of Islamist governments determined to destroy Israel.

  The Sorobama complex has targeted Israel, and the plan is being put in place stage by stage, killing or imprisoning leaders of countries that are neutral or friendly to Israel in the Middle East, and leaving Israel’s arch-enemies alone.

  Obama willfully delayed negotiations with Iraq on keeping our troops in that country and helping insure a necessary American presence in the Middle East. A
s a result of his intentional dithering, all American troops were to be withdrawn from Iraq at the end of 2011, ceding further power to Iran and other anti-American interests.

  But as if Obama’s withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in order to reduce our influence in the Middle East and hasten the rise of an Iran-led coalition of Islamist governments in that region wasn’t enough, he then bragged that the drawdown of troops in Iraq allowed the U.S. to kill Osama bin Laden.

  While taking credit for the bin Laden killing, Obama neglected to mention that the killing of the al Qaeda leader was another of the growing number of illegal assassinations he has committed.

  Like all leftist dictators, Obama is becoming a bloodthirsty monster.

  Obama’s greatest dream is to see Jerusalem divided. It would represent justification for his anti-Semitic Nobel Peace Prize, bestowed on him by the Jew-hating Norwegians.

  Trickle down tyranny doesn’t just mean guaranteeing loans to your political cronies at taxpayer expense.

  It doesn’t refer only to Obama’s practice of supporting public employee unions in their quest to eliminate the private sector and make every American worker a government employee.

  It doesn’t just mean sending machine guns to Mexico without any arrests.

  Do you realize that if a cop on the beat planted a weapon in a murder, that cop would go to jail as an accessory to murder? How are the president of the United States and his Attorney General any different from a cop who plants a weapon at a crime scene?

  We’re talking about the new world order of Sorobama, where George Soros is the puppetmaster and Obama is his puppet.

  George Soros, the most power-mad man on the planet, a man who has more power than most sovereign nations.

  Rothschild’s quote applies here: “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes its laws.”

  Soros has decimated the currencies of several nations—especially the British pound—and he’s expanding his assault on freedom and capitalism through his control, not only of U.S. fiscal and financial policy, but of the American presidency.

  The trickle down tyranny of the Obama administration is crippling our society and ushering in a new radical socialist era in which the rights of individuals disappear and the state assumes dominance over our lives.

  It’s the leftist dream becoming a reality.

  It’s America’s worst nightmare.

  Still have questions about Obama’s position on the Middle East uprisings?

  Let me make it clear: Obama paved the way for Islamist takeovers of the governments of former U.S. allies in the Middle East.

  Those takeovers are continuing to happen as events move forward.

  Bottom line: Ghadafi was a monster. But the Muslim Brotherhood is a more dangerous monster. Before they killed Ghadafi in cold blood, Libyan “revolutionaries” had repeatedly attacked Ghadafi’s tribal homeland of Sirte. They were taking revenge on Ghadafi loyalists, terrorizing them and killing more than a thousand inhabitants of the region. One rebel fighter explained what was going on: “The Misurate brigades are taking their revenge for what soldiers originally from this village did to them. They are burning houses, stealing gold, and shooting animals.”32

  The United States had no vital national interest in Libya, yet we were willing to spend upwards of $100 million a day to keep Ghadafi’s planes out of the air to help rebels who appear to be on the side of an Islamic government, many of whom are affiliated with Al Qaeda.

  And what the world sees is the U.S. intervening in another oil-rich Middle Eastern country. There was no chance that anything remotely resembling a democratic government would ever be formed in Libya. The innocents in the White House are projecting a cloistered, inexperienced view of the world onto a situation in Libya that promises only to move our country further toward bankruptcy and the Middle East further toward Islamist domination.

  There are no positives whatsoever in our intervention in Libya. We did the same thing in Egypt: We helped force out a U.S. ally and we made way for the Muslim Brotherhood to step in and take over the country.

  Obama and the Destruction of the U.S. Military

  Do you have any doubt that the Community Organizer-in-Chief is out to destroy the U.S. military?

  The president is subverting the values and principles on which our country was founded, on which we have risen to our position as the richest and most powerful nation in the world.

  Nowhere is this clearer than when I examine what Obama is doing to undermine our military.

  I’ve told you about how the administration conducted our involvement in the Libyan conflict and about how the Obama administration reacted to news of Ghadafi’s death. Here are a few more things you need to know:

  In August 2011, one of his staff sent more than 20 Navy SEALs to their deaths in Afghanistan on a slow-moving Chinook helicopter.

  The president has not ordered an investigation of the incident.

  As Commander-in-Chief, Barack Obama was responsible for the deaths of those Navy SEALs when they were sent to their death because they were put on a slow Chinook helicopter in order to transport them to a battle site! This was the single largest loss of SEALs in the history of this elite corps. Some in the military are whispering that this was an assassination of these fighting men.

  To date, no investigation, no blame, no culpability!

  Now, some would say, “What does this have to do with Obama?”

  I wouldn’t say that he had a direct hand in this, although some would say that as Commander-in-Chief he has direct responsibility.

  However, let’s ask this question: Why has there been no investigation? As a Commander-in-Chief who cared for his troops, he should be shouting every day for heads to roll in the military for the death of these SEALs, but we have not heard a peep out of the president about this so-called tragic accident.

  Why has Obama said nothing about it?

  Why has he buried this?

  Even if he addressed this only for political reasons, he would at least be addressing it.

  His silence on this matter shows his lack of integrity and morality. There should have been an immediate, full-scale, full-court press on the question of why these SEALs were put on that helicopter.

  Why were they not sent in on the same advanced helicopters that our military used when they killed Osama bin Laden?

  No one’s asking that question.

  They were sent in on a single transport helicopter that is known to be slow and vulnerable, a helicopter that was shot down by a single rocket-propelled grenade.

  Who authorized the mission? Was it a general who issued the order? Worse yet, was it a girl from Harvard University who was put into the White House, like an agent of the KGB, who said, “Go ahead and use that helicopter?”

  Or maybe it was just that the president couldn’t keep his mouth shut. He had to take credit for the successful raid, and he identified to the world Navy SEAL Team Six so the Taliban knew who did it.

  As I’ve explained to you, the president relies on three Ivy League-educated women to tell him how to run the military.

  Maybe they decided that it should be done to save fuel and promote green energy.

  We don’t know why it was done.

  The important thing is that Obama is Commander-in-Chief and he has not authorized an investigation, nor has he shown the correct moral outrage over the deaths of so many members of this elite fighting unit. This is one of the greatest travesties of his entire regime. That’s why the buck stops in the Oval Office. It goes right to the president.

  I believe that in the case of the deaths of the Navy SEALs Barack Obama may be guilty of undermining our military through his administration’s direct intervention on the battlefield to aid the enemy in one of the most devastating blows our military has ever suffered. I am convinced that the crash in Afghanistan of one of our Chinook helicopters that resulted in the loss of more than 20 members of Navy SEAL Team Six in early August 2011,33 was the work of an insi
der in the Obama administration who tipped off the Taliban on the path the flight would take.

  The killing of the Navy SEALs demonstrates what happens when you put a subversive community organizer in charge of the most powerful military force in history.

  The president’s undermining of the military didn’t stop there.

  Are you aware of this incident? Forty-seven of our soldiers suffered head, spine, and pelvic injuries when more than 1,000 were injured, some seriously, parachuting in a mock battle scenario during training in Germany.34

  Was Obama preparing us to fight World War II all over again?

  The president has not ordered an investigation of the incident.

  How about this one? The president managed to insure that nearly $600 billion will be automatically stripped from the U.S. defense budget when the “select committee” charged with finding $1.5 trillion in savings as part of the “debt ceiling” deal fails to do so.

  It was set up from the start. All the Democrats have to do is refuse to go along with the legitimate cuts needed in the debt ceiling compromise bill, and the military budget gets cut so far that we won’t be able to maintain our national defense.

  Am I the only one who understands this?

  Obama is using the debt ceiling “select committee”—which I call nothing more than a communist junta—to destroy the American military!

  He made it clear two weeks before the November 23, 2011, deadline for the committee to come up with $1.5 trillion in cuts or else the military budget would all but disappear: He told the committee that he would not countenance their trying to stop the automatic budget cuts that he snuck past Republican legislators in the debt ceiling deal.35

  In other words, our military is doomed.

  How did Republicans let the president get away with this stealth undermining of our military, of our national security?

  How is the most subversive president in American history still in office, despite the fact that he is clearly determined to reduce our military to second-class status?

  Obama didn’t stop there.

  He deliberately tried to make sure one of the companies that his crony capitalist confederates invested in got federal funding, despite the fact that the technology they were developing interfered with the Global Positioning System satellites our troops use on the battlefield, compromising their ability to conduct operations.