Editor’s Note: People are waking up.
Congressman Trey Radel (R-FL) recently asked his Twitter followers to guess, out of the nearly 1,000 calls his office had received about military intervention in Syria, how many were for it.
A statement on the Congressman’s website confirms he will not support any military action in Syria:
After attending classified intelligence briefings, a Foreign Affairs hearing, consulting with friends, family, mentors and other members of Congress, I will NOT support the proposed military strike in Syria. I will vote NO.
The Syrian civil war – as it stands now – is not a direct or even indirect threat to the United States, our interests or our allies. Furthermore, I fear a strike could potentially destabilize the country and region even more. The results could be catastrophic.
Disapproval for any strike in Syria has been overwhelming, with the telephones of Senators and House reps blowing up across the country. Most polls show 90+% of Americans oppose any U.S. military involvement in Syria. This sentiment is mirrored in the United Kingdom, where polls about a potential second vote on a Syria intervention have shown that British voters do not support an attack on Assad targets no matter what. Last week Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) Tweeted any Congress member that votes for striking Syria might as well clean out his or her office because the level of public opposition was unprecedented.
Irony is not lost on the fact that the Senate vote is set for September 11. Freedom Outpost’s Pamela Geller wondered,
Are we so far gone that our elected officials would vote to authorize military action in support of al-Qaida on the 12th anniversary of the day that al-Qaida declared war on America and slaughtered 3,000 of our sisters and brothers?
Hopefully not. Keep calling.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by Melissa Melton of The Daily Sheeple.