Home | About | Donate

Petition Demands Arrest of 'War Mastermind' Kissinger at Nobel Peace Prize Forum


Petition Demands Arrest of 'War Mastermind' Kissinger at Nobel Peace Prize Forum

Nika Knight, staff writer

The Nobel Peace Prize committee last month stunned many observers by choosing Henry Kissinger—the former secretary of state behind the secret American bombing of Cambodia and who supported Argentina's "dirty wars,"


The ultimate latter day war pig, with black lipstick. He will soon be gone and hopefully not forgotten for posterity's peace of mind.
Most if not all U.S., presidents have been or are, war pigs. That's why they are never going to be held to account, till...?


There seems to be something radically wrong with the Nobel Committee's Moral Compass when they honor war criminal Kissinger, and award a totally undeserved Peace Prize, before ANY justification for such, to the Great Black Hype, and progressive fraud, Barack Obama, who enlarged drone warfare and security state, as well as repression/prosecution/persecution of whistle-blowers, empowered insurance and pharmaceutical parasites, commanded Holder's do-nothing "Justice" department that served cooperate/banker piracy and brought ZERO financial thieves to justice, who also betrayed the Dem Party rank & file, progressives, workers, middle class, poor and minorities - bringing (in part) the even worse rule of Trump!
A grand con from giddyup to soon-coming whoa!
And STILL he does not act in the final months to do other than continue his corporate servitude and environmental failure!


This is another straw man argument.
No one is going to argue that indiscriminate bombing from 30,000 feet is more precise than drone strikes.
But drone strikes directed from halfway around the world are not the precision tools that the military propaganda experts would have you believe.
If drones are so precise, then why there are thousands of documented cases of innocent civilians being slaughtered by them?
Is it because we just don't care or is it because the military strategists love to wield the same or worse terror effects as the WWII V2 rockets?
Or maybe the US just knows that open wedding parties are probably really just covers for secret terrorist cell meetings.

Face it. Military drones are instruments of terror and and should be banned along with nuclear weapons, land mines, cluster bombs, and white phosphorous bombs.
But they tell us that drones keep us safe while we live in our nice insulated shell.

I have a news flash for you:
They don't hate us for our freedom.
They hate us for our indiscriminate killing.


Oh, the bitter irony (i.e. hypocrisy)... The Nobel Prize committee notably awarded the Peace Prize to Rigoberta Menchú and José Ramos-Horta, who were victims of the policies of another Peace Prize recipient: Henry Kissinger.


There is something very suspicious about the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.
I am beginning to wonder if there is corruption involved.
It used to be an honor to receive it, now it is more like a public shaming, if you get that thing


It simply hasn't been proven, nor is there is reasonable basis for, the assertion that the drone strikes are necessary. To the contrary, they are most likely counterproductive. Since 9/11, the chicken little theory of conducting a war on terror is more a function of the cowardice and silliness of our politicos than it is a rational, and proportionate response to the attacks on the US. True, nearly 3,000 lost their lives. But the response has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and has only increased, not decreased, the tensions between the West and Middle East.

Rational minds would apply their resources where they get greater returns on investment -- areas like health care, the environment and climate change; the latter being an existential threat to us all which is being ignored while spending our treasure on terrorism, which portends a threat which is minuscule by comparison,

The bottom line is we shouldn't be bombing anyone, whether from 30,000 feet, drones or otherwise. It offers no path to solving the problem. Does anyone really think we can bomb the enemy into liking us or playing by "our" rules? I certainly don't. Maybe we should spend a little energy understanding why they hate us and working on that problem

And the truth is that this nonsense is one of the long-term unintended consequences of Kissinger's war mentality.


I've noticed this since the beginning of his posts, sure doesn't feel like luv

And it doesn't feel like the Canadians I grew up with.

Also I'd have to agree with the creepy thing.


"We have a simple plan, Ziggy and I, to achieve this peace you speak of. Basically, when you're all eliminated, and the only ones left are us and our very rich, well-connected friends and select servants, then there will be much peace, ja?"- H Kissinger.

"What that musty old kraut said. Hey, you got any bourbon? I need bourbon."-Ziggy Brzezinski


Damn; I thought this fool was dead already.


According to Dr k.
War crimes are for losers
Only losers commit war crimes
Ergo losing is a war crime

"I ordered the bombing of a million hooks" and when I ordered it to stop I was naturally awarded the Nobel Peace Prize"
Dr. K.


Well, I'd agree that the Gulf war was one of the steps between, where shall we begin, let's see, maybe Western (or should I say, given your Canadian roots, British?) colonialism in the Middle East, to the current mess we're in.

As for the drone issue, just because one can reasonably observe, based on the facts and the current state of "results" that the drone attacks are unnecessary and counterproductive (not to mention of questionable legality), does not translate to, as you seem to be fixated upon, a "piece of negative propaganda being used to stain Obama's record." It's not about Obama, it's about the underlying policy and it's implications for all of us and its potential for undermining the limited protections afforded to humanity by international law..

By the way, one of the foundations of US society is the right to free speech, including the right, I would even say the obligation, to criticize government and it's leaders.

I was an early and continued supporter of Obama, so I take personally the implied assertion that I am being racist by challenging the drone policy. To the contrary, I think Obama has been overall a very good president, though a disappointment on many fronts. He's certainly one of the smartest and most graceful of our presidents.

And, frankly, when it comes to expressing opposition to drone killing (or any killing for that matter), I really don't care if you're sick of hearing about it, and I suspect many other readers feel the same. Whether you are sick of hearing about it does nothing to advance the discussion about the merits of the issue -- it's one of the classic logical fallacies, to wit, at least False Moral Equivalence, Ad Populum, Red Herring and, most prominently, Appeal to Emotion.


[asterisks supplied]

Guess I'm getting some of that creepy Canadian "luv."

As for your comment, it seems you're missing the point.


Don, none of the US killing of people was necessary before it came into existence: prior to that the First Nations people lived their lives as they had done before the Euro invasion and for thousands of years. Prior to its existence, the African was living his life in Africa as his ancestors did for untold generations. All the crimes after the genocide of the natives, among whom are my own relatives, and after the kidnapping and enslavement of the Africans have set the precedent for all the following crimes in the ME and beyond. Until as a nation we face the twin crimes of genocide and slavery and atone for them in a meaningful way, I am hard pressed to see a future.


The Nobel Peace Prize committee last month stunned many observers by choosing Henry Kissinger—the former secretary of state behind the secret American bombing of Cambodia and who supported Argentina's "dirty wars," among other things—to speak at a forum on "The United States and World Peace after the Presidential Election."

I read only that far before I ran to comments to let everyone know I had to jump up out of my seat with my head exploding. The whole idea of Henry Kissinger being invited by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to speak about world peace is jarring and Orwellian. Associating Henry Kissinger with peace is certainly a sort of coup d'etat of history reminiscent of these comments sometimes attributed to Karl Rove:

...guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

Creating their own reality would also include creating their own history, like associating Henry with peace. Not to mention the ongoing streams of real fake news that comes from the NYTimes, BBC, NPR, Washington Post which also "creates reality." We are living in bizarre and scary times.


I always thought he was being ironic, something I've noticed Americans often tend not to easily pick up on.


Or maybe just plain deceitful.


I hope this war criminal dog get's caught to stands trial before he dies and Israel/USA pronounce him hero


Not at all, 911 was launched so that the surveillance regime could commence. As Mr. Snowden has so eloquently stated, but the corporate media has so disgustingly distorted the the facts he has revealed to us that the information gathering has nothing at all to do with America's safety from some US sponsored ISIS or AL Qaeda but everything to do with CONTROL Ben Laden was/is a CIA asset research it on your own.


Don is too much of a racist to comprehend that.