Amid massive civil unrest in America, should Obama step down?

© Reuters / Jonathan Ernst

U.S. President Barack Obama

After the eruption of large-scale protests which subsequently devolved into chaotic riots in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri in response to the killing of Michael Brown by Ferguson police, protests began to spread outside of Ferguson to large cities all across the country. Fresh on the heels of the Michael Brown protests, reports of the Eric Garner murder by the NYPD and the non-indictment of the murderer, large-scale protests erupted in New York City and, like the Brown-inspired protests, all across the country as well.

In short, anger, protests, riots and other forms of violence have engulfed cities all across the United States. Years of authoritarianism, a stagnant economy, and police brutality among many other issues are coming to a head, regardless of what one thinks about the methods or even the merits of some of the protesters/rioters.

Flashback to 2011, shortly after death squad operations funded by NATO, the GCC and Israel began in earnest inside Syria. According to Western media, these operatives who were killing Syrians indiscriminately in the streets, implementing Sharia law, and beheading civilians were peaceful protesters. Such widespread chaos in the streets of Syrian cities was used as a justification by Western leaders such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and British Prime Minister David Cameron to call for Assad to step down.

According to these leaders, "peaceful protests" across Syria were enough to warrant calls for Assad to step down as President of the country. Such civil unrest was reason enough to demand that Assad "face the reality of the complete rejection of his regime by the Syrian people."

So with the massive civil unrest taking place all across the United States in 2014, one must ask the question, is the logical response to demand that U.S. President Barack Obama step down?

If mass "protests" in Syria are enough to demand that Assad has lost his legitimacy, then why are mass protests across the United States not enough to demand that Obama has lost his own legitimacy?

Indeed, while Assad was facing down terrorists funded by foreign powers for the purposes of destroying his country (slower and more tepid than many Syrians would have preferred), headlines accusing him of "brutality," "oppression," "killing his own people," and "crimes against humanity," abounded in the Western press.

Considering the history of police brutality in the United States, particularly the skyrocketing increase in police aggression and murder of American citizens, as well as the response to the subsequent protests, one can only imagine the headlines if the shoe was on the other foot.

While mainstream outlets in the United States were quick to call for Assad to step down, where are the headlines reading "Years of Human Rights Violations Reach Tipping Point In U.S.," "International Community: 'Obama Has Lost Legitimacy," "Obama Kills His Own," "Authoritarian U.S. Regime Faces American Spring?"

With the response of militarized police forces to the riots and even the legitimately peaceful demonstrations using "non-lethal weapons," rubber bullets, and tear gas, one wonders where the mainstream press' headlines of "U.S. Cracks Down On Peaceful Protesters," "Military Cracks Down On Civilians," and "Obama Uses Chemical Weapons on Civilians," might be.

In addition, such wide-scale protests come right as the U.S. Senate's torture report is released, a report that admits that not only was the CIA torturing on a massive scale but that it did so with the complicity and direction of the White House. Although the focus of the blame is placed on the shoulders of George Bush and Dick Cheney, only a fool would believe that the United States has not continued its practice of systematic torture under the Obama administration. In fact, while kept much more quiet in the mainstream news, Obama's administration has been implicated in the continuation of torture techniques on a number of occasions.

Needless to say, we will not hold our breath for such headlines as those mentioned above to appear in the mainstream press. At least not in terms of the police brutality epidemic in the United States and the legitimacy of an American president. Such statements are only reserved for the targets of American imperialism.

Want something else to read? How about 'Grievous Censorship' By The Guardian: Israel, Gaza And The Termination Of Nafeez Ahmed's Blog