Video: Syria's War

I stumbled across this video at Facebook. Accurate — or not?

Obama’s Surrender to Iran

The article below discusses the fact that it appears as if Obama is handing over Middle Eastern nations to the control of Islamists.

Towards the latter part of the article, it points out those who seem to oppose Obama's plans at this point.

It names three individuals/nations:

1) Putin

2) Iranian Islamic Republic

3) Old Guard Nations, specifically Saudi

Isn't it interesting that the King of Saudi Arabia died six weeks ago, and in the past two days, rumors are flying that both Khameini and Putin have died.

It's almost like that scene in the Godfather, where Michael Corleone settles all family business.

Obama’s Surrender to Iran

It is becoming increasingly clear that Obama’s agenda in the Middle East is to help the Islamists regain the land they once controlled but lost in 1924 with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

The Arab Spring was not a movement to replace ruthless dictators with democratic governments. It was an Islamic movement to replace secular governments with Islamic ones.

Step by step, this administration is helping to establish the Islamists’ dream of a revived caliphate, or “Pan Arabic Islamic Union” as it has been called by Islamist leaders recently. 

There is a mistaken school of thought that believes such an Islamic Union would function like an Arabic European Union, growing their economies and enabling them to take their place among the other nations of the world as equals. 

This school neglects to answer the most salient question: How do you contain a movement that recognizes no borders but its own and is compelled by dint of faith to dominate the rest of the world or die in the effort? 

Unfortunately, the primary opposition to this plan isn’t coming from the American people. Sadly, much of America is suffering from confusion, ignorance, self-loathing and a dedication to bending over backwards in an attempt to avoid the confrontation that looms ahead. 

Rather than marshaling a strong core of support for the hard choices that must be made, our administration is creating a huge chasm between citizens over trivialities and over-amplified slights. We are far weaker for it. 

One might ask then, who is opposing the mighty President of the United States? Who dares stand in the way of the Nobel Peace prize winner “Barack Obama?” 

The answer will be something of a shock to many. 

In no particular order, listed below are those who are arrayed against the designs of our “Dear Leader.” 

Putin 

Standing most prominently, is Vladimir Putin, the Russian bear. Putin has designs on the former Soviet satellite nations and he needs a strong economy and the leverage that an oil monopoly over the European market provides to fuel his aspirations. 

His Ukraine adventure is proving more troublesome than originally thought, and Obama’s push to topple Assad in Syria threatens Putin’s access to a warm water port for Russia’s oil exports to Europe. 

The Russian oligarchs are growing restive under the thumb of Putin, seeing his dreams of Sovietus revivivus as bad for business and potentially catastrophic. Putin’s leash is shortening, and his tenure is by no means a sure thing. 

While Putin remains in power, he will oppose Obama’s Ottoman revival. He has no choice. 

Old Guard and Monarchies of the Middle East 

Next are the old guard and monarchies of the Middle East. We like to call them “dictators” even though in reality, while they are all Sunni Muslims, they are more concerned with maintaining their own wealth and power than in recreating an Islamic caliphate. 

Among these were Gaddafi, Mubarak and the others deposed in the Arab Spring, but also numbered in this groups is the Hashemite kingdom of Jordan and both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.All are in danger of being ejected from this game. But just like Putin, they will not go bloodlessly. 

Islamic Republic 

The final player is also the strongest: Iran. 

Iran, a Shiite nation, is a natural enemy to any Sunni Islamic caliphate system. The Iranian rulers know from Islamic history (the same history we completely ignore here in the West) that any Sunni caliphate will soon swallow and erase the Shi’a, destroying all opponents to their well-established ideals of Islamic religious and political structure. 

Iran, therefore, needs nuclear weapons to protect itself should it fail to derail Obama’s ambitious plans. Should the Pan Arabic (Sunni) Islamic Union become a reality, the Iranian rulers believe that having the capability of ushering in Armageddon will keep the Sunni’s at bay. 

At the very least, the Mullahs in Iran rest better knowing, should they fall, that they can take everyone else down with them. Think “mutually-assured destruction.” A sort of “MAD” amongst madmen. 

Don’t let this apocalyptic scenario, however, lead you to think that Iran is going quietly into oblivion. On the contrary, it has tirelessly worked to thwart Obama’s plans. 

Iran’s use of terror and terror proxies is on the upswing. It will distract and misdirect, strike and cajole, but it will not permit a Sunni caliphate to appear on its border without a nuclear capability of its own to deter Sunni adventurism. 

Obama’s setbacks in Syria and Benghazi have forced him to negotiate with the Iranians. He wants to assure them that they have nothing to fear from a caliphate, while simultaneously keeping the American people from recognizing the monumentally stupid policy objective he is pursuing. 

To this end, he tells us he has gotten Iran to agree to postpone its nuclear work for ten years, under the ridiculously naive idea that the dynamics of the Middle East will have changed. 

Many believe Obama is in fact a Muslim. In reality, that really doesn’t matter.His administration believes that all conflict can be framed in Marxist terms. Empower those who have little and they will join the community with smiles and slaps on the back. 

The administration fundamentally misunderstands the problem and is applying a solution akin to gasoline on a grease fire.Economics are unimportant to the Islamists. Power is their currency and they spend all they have to purchase the world for Allah. The establishment of an Islamic caliphate will not calm the Arab street, it will invigorate it to greater conquests, as Islam demands. 

Of course, in the eyes of the neo-progressives in the White House, to speak truthfully about this “Islamophobia.” 

To Obama, a nuclear Iran is an acceptable trade-off for a revived caliphate, To Israel, however, both Iran and a caliphate are threats to their very existence. 

Iran with a nuclear weapon has no reason not to make good on its long-standing promise to “wipe Israel from the face of the earth.” A reconstituted caliphate modeled after the former Ottoman Empire has no room for Israel, indeed, on Iran’s maps, Israel doesn’t exist at all. 

America is negotiating nuclear policy with a terrorist state, and geopolitical hegemony with an ideology/religion that knows no borders but its own. 

In 2013, President Obama told us we can all take a deep breath, he was able to wring an invaluable concession out of the Iranians. He breathlessly announced that Iran had issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons. 

It appeared that we had been brought back from the brink by the president’s keen ability to negotiate. Notwithstanding the obvious (and wholly inappropriate) grandstanding by the POTUS, there are a few other issues that need to be addressed in relation to this irrelevant fatwa. 

Most Americans aren’t aware that the foundation of Iran’s nuclear program was laid on March 5th, 1957 by the United States, under an Eisenhower program called “Atoms for Peace.” Iran established the Tehran Nuclear Research Center (TNRC) in 1967, which was a 5 megawatt nuclear research reactor, fueled by enriched uranium. 

In 1968, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ratifying it in 1970, making Iran’s nuclear program subject to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verification and accountability. 

Following the 1979 Revolution, nearly all international nuclear cooperation with Iran was cut off. With little hope of regaining international cooperation, Iran elected to continue the program on their own, although they thought it best to save face and attempt to “shame” America (and by extension its advanced nuclear technology) by condemning all things nuclear. 

It was for this reason and this reason alone, that the fatwa was issued. It had nothing to do with any humanitarian interests held deeply in the hearts of Iranian leaders; they are certainly more than amenable to any method that allows them to more efficiently eliminate their enemies, most especially Israel. 

The anti-nuclear fatwa, is fully revealed to be a sham five years later, when we see the destruction of a reputedly “non-existent” Iranian nuclear program by Iraqi forces. 

All of this is still occurring under the reign of the same Ayatollah that issued the nuclear fatwa a brief five years previous. Clearly, the Iranians had continued their nuclear program, despite the fatwa.The next time we saw any reference to the 1979 “nuclear fatwa” was in 2003. The IAEA issued a report, condemning the Iranian nuclear program, accusing it of once again, trying to weaponize the technology. 

Still, Iran didn’t budge. It wasn’t until the U.S. threatened to get involved militarily (the full might and power of the U.S. military was on display right next door in Iraq under the leadership of President Bush) that the Iranians finally caved.What did this concession look like? Well, as you might have guessed, Iran simply reaffirmed the old stand-by fatwa from 1979, condemning nuclear weapons and promising to play nice. 

So, for the record, we have clear evidence that the Iranians consider their anti-nuclear fatwa to be toilet paper, so Obama’s “concession” is more enabling than disarming. Iran had cast the ‘79 fatwa out again in 2013, hoping we’ll bite on it one more time. Obama readily obliged. 

President Obama appears willing to do whatever it takes to build his legacy on reestablishing the Islamic state after an 80 year absence. He also appears willing to endanger both the United States and Israel to get it done.European colonization didn’t create terrorists; Islam and Mohammed birthed terrorism in order to spread a brutal and unforgiving ideology. 

Absent European intervention, Muslims might yet be centuries further behind than they already are. Islam is a crippling force. Science has never been particularly important to the Islamists.European contact brought Muslim countries out of the Stone Age; the same stone age to which the Islamic jihad intends to return us all. 

"Islamic State: Predictive Analysis"

By Tammy Swofford in the September 2014 edition of Economic Affairs

Excerpt:

...The Islamic State will continue to aggressively seek expansion of physical boundaries and acquisition of quality military hardware. The doctrine which is driving the foot soldiers is one of conquest and not of governance. Human beings are the pawns on the geopolitical chessboard, and as such, merely represent a “service industry” to meet the needs of the military men of the Islamic State. Professional standing armies provide needed goods and services of their military branches via the funds allocated from a national treasury. The Islamic State acquires fundamental goods and services through a doctrine of disciplined pillage and looting of the general population.

The expansionist vision of the leadership of the Islamic State seeks an endgame which completely changes the geopolitical chessboard of the Middle East and beyond. This vision requires state of the art military hardware. Recent acquisitions have come from existing stockpiles within Iraq....

[...]

We must get ahead of the inglorious bastards of the Islamic State. “The Untouchables” has a scene that drives what I write today. In the words of Sean Connery, “What are you prepared to do?”

Read the rest HERE.

"N" By Tammy Swofford

Commentary published on August 15, 2014, in reaction to this hideous information in Catholic Online:

“I believe in God the Father, Almighty Maker of Heaven and Maker of earth. And in Jesus Christ, His only Begotten Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary. Suffered under Pontius Pilate, he was crucified, and dead and buried. And I believe what I believe, is what makes me what I am. I did not make it; no it is making me. It is the very truth of God and not the invention of any man. I believe that He who suffered was crucified, buried and dead. He descended into hell and rose on the third day, rose again. He ascended into Heaven where he sits at God’s mighty right hand. I believe that He’s returning to judge the quick and the dead of the sons of men.”

Enter lyrics to Creed, a Christian declaration of faith, by musical artist Rich Mullins.

N. Just simply call me “N”. Nazarene. Follower of Jesus Christ. “N”. It is imprinted on my heart, my forehead and on my right hand. “N” is the pupil of my eye. It is also embedded in my spirit. “N”. I am marked for life, marked by His love for all mankind.

N. We are everywhere. We are along the banks of a river in Mongolia and in the heat of Africa dispensing free medical care. We are in Pakistan, sending our funds to assist widows and orphans, or to lighten the burden of an aspiring lawyer who comes from a family of 10 children. We are in the supermarkets performing random acts of kindness. We are everywhere. Quiet, gentle and almost invisible. But our works precede us and do not follow us. They run ahead and give testament of our lives on the Day of Requital. Holiness is a place of abiding with an understanding of God’s love. Faith is an action that moves forward with an understanding that we should be the most grateful people on the planet. And so we move through life both resting and acting, in the name of Jesus.

N. This mark means quite another thing for IS (Islamic State). It is the letter marked in Arabic on the doors of Christian homes in Mosul. This letter stands for one thing: annihilation of the disciples of Jesus Christ. Actually, annihilation is probably too soft a word. The word means complete obliteration or destruction. What IS is doing falls in the category of extermination. This word means “killing, especially of a whole group of people or animals” (Oxford dictionary).

[...]

N. We are bugs and our children are bugs. IS is beheading little children. One of the images shows a headless little girl in a simple little dress, stockings and shoes. What is the sin she has committed? What is her crime?

N. We are being hunted by sub-humans. The latest killing field is in Iraq and the cry reaches the heavens but it does not reach the White House....

N. The most vicious image thus far is that of a Christian woman with a large hole in her anterior neck. Her hair is being held back and her blood drained into a bowl. Are IS members drinking the blood of Christians? Now that, my friend, is Satanic ritual.
I am N. I am a disciple of Jesus Christ.

Read the rest HERE, in the Daily Times Pakistan.

Subhumans!

Sickening images!

Does the world know what's going on?

Where is the outrage?  The compassion?

All humanity owes a debt to this baby girl, to find her murderers and bring them to justice, dead or alive. That the nations of the world and its citizens sit complacent is the greatest embarrassment to civilization and should be the source of deep shame to all. Everything less that we do is pales by comparison. We have a moral imperative to act.

A distraught father in Syria holds the lifeless body of his decapitated daughter, executed by militants because she was of a Christian family. Allegedly, Christian children in Mosul are being systematically beheaded and their little heads placed on poles in a park as a warning to others who love their children.

Islamists killing a woman by slitting her throat and capturing her blood in a bowl, holding her firm as her life literally drains from her neck. Such forms of execution are intended to intimidate others.

More information at this link (dated August 8, 2014).

My stomach is churning.

The Irresponsible Obama Administration

The word "irresponsible" doesn't begin to describe the Obama regime.

From McClatchy Washington Bureau:

WASHINGTON — Like the rest of the world, the U.S. government appeared to have been taken aback last month when Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, fell to an offensive by jihadis of the Islamic State that triggered the collapse of five Iraqi army divisions and carried the extremists to the threshold of Baghdad.

A review of the record shows, however, that the Obama administration wasn’t surprised at all.

In congressional testimony as far back as November, U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials made clear that the United States had been closely tracking the al Qaida spinoff since 2012, when it enlarged its operations from Iraq to civil war-torn Syria, seized an oil-rich province there and signed up thousands of foreign fighters who’d infiltrated Syria through NATO ally Turkey.

The testimony, which received little news media attention at the time, also showed that Obama administration officials were well aware of the group’s declared intention to turn its Syrian sanctuary into a springboard from which it would send men and materiel back into Iraq and unleash waves of suicide bombings there. And they knew that the Iraqi security forces couldn’t handle it.

[...]

Defense Department officials say they might not complete work on proposed options for U.S. actions until the middle of August, a lifetime in a region where every day brings word of another town or village falling to the Islamic State. Some lawmakers and experts say the delay borders on diplomatic malpractice....

How can anyone say that Obama is a great President?

He's ruined America domestically for the foreseeable future.

His foreign policy is one of promoting the march of Islamomania.

What will it take to make the vast majority of Americans turn on him?

New Virus Originated In The Middle East

A bit of a medical mystery and a deadly one:

A mysterious new respiratory virus that originated in the Middle East spreads easily between people and appears more deadly than SARS, doctors reported Wednesday after investigating the biggest outbreak in Saudi Arabia.

[...]

...[Experts]couldn't nail down how it was spread in every case -- through droplets from sneezing or coughing, or a more indirect route. Some of the hospital patients weren't close to the infected person, but somehow picked up the virus....

[...]

Cases have continued to trickle in, and there appears to be an ongoing outbreak in Saudi Arabia. MERS cases have also been reported in Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Tunisia. Most have had a direct connection to the Middle East region.

In the Saudi cluster that was investigated, certain patients infected many more people than would be expected, Perl said. One patient who was receiving dialysis treatment spread MERS to seven others, including fellow dialysis patients at the same hospital. During SARS, such patients were known as "superspreaders" and effectively seeded outbreaks in numerous countries.

[...]

...Compared to SARS' 8 percent death rate, the fatality rate for MERS in the Saudi outbreak was about 65 percent, though the experts could be missing mild cases that might skew the figures....

More information HERE.

The CDC has information HERE.

Israel 2013 - Czechoslovakia 1938?

Is history repeating itself?  Please watch the video (hat tip to Will of MFS - The Other News):

Advice From Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Last night, I read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's recent essay in Newsweek not once but twice. What she has written bears consideration.

If you haven't read this essay, you must do so!

Excerpt to give you a taste of what the woman is saying:

Once again the streets of the Arab world are burning with false outrage. But we must hold our heads up high. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on how she survived Muslim rage—and how we can end it.

[...]

Utopian ideologies have a short lifespan. Some are bloodier than others. As long as Islamists were able to market their philosophy as the only alternative to dictatorship and foreign meddling, they were attractive to an oppressed polity. But with their election to office they will be subjected to the test of government. It is clear, as we saw in Iran in 2009 and elsewhere, that if the philosophy of the Islamists is fully and forcefully implemented, those who elected them will end up disillusioned. The governments will begin to fail as soon as they set about implementing their philosophy: strip women of their rights; murder homosexuals; constrain the freedoms of conscience and religion of non-Muslims; hunt down dissidents; persecute religious minorities; pick fights with foreign powers, even powers, such as the U.S., that offered them friendship. The Islamists will curtail the freedoms of those who elected them and fail to improve their economic conditions.

After the disillusion and bitterness will come a painful lesson: that it is foolish to derive laws for human affairs from gods and prophets. Just like the Iranian people have begun to, the Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, and perhaps Syrians and others will come to this realization. In one or two or three decades we will see the masses in these countries take to the streets—and perhaps call for American help—to liberate them from the governments they elected. This process will be faster in some places than others, but in all of them it will be bloody and painful. If we take the long view, America and other Western countries can help make this happen in the same way we helped bring about the demise of the former Soviet Union.

We must be patient. America needs to empower those individuals and groups who are already disenchanted with political Islam by helping find and develop an alternative. At the heart of that alternative are the ideals of the rule of law and freedom of thought, worship, and expression. For these values there can and should be no apologies, no groveling, no hesitation....

Read it all HERE.

Appeasement on the part of the West will only serve to prolong the power of the Muslim Brotherhood and like groups.  The same goes for foreign aid to the regimes of those same groups.  Let them fail miserably on their own, and the collapse will come a lot sooner that that of the USSR.

Obama Cancels Meeting with Morsi

Political expediency? The realization that the Obama administration's foreign policy has failed?  I doubt the latter because Barack Hussein Obama is a narcissist of the highest sort.  Or should that be "of the lowest sort"?  Whatever.

From the Daily Caller:

President Barack Obama has quietly cancelled a politically risky plan to meet this week with Egypt’s new Islamist president.

The plan was cancelled amid a wave of riots and attacks in Arab countries that have damaged Obama’s campaign-trail claim to foreign policy competence.

In 2011, Obama had “bilateral” meetings with 13 Arab and world leaders during the annual U.S. summit. This year, amid the foreign policy meltdown, his schedule shows no so-called “bilats” with any foreign leaders....

Live TV Debate In Jordan

So much for peace in our time in the Middle East.

Mohammed Shawabka, a Jordanian Member of Parliament. pulls a gun on his critic, Mansour Sayf al-Din Murad, during a live TV debate:



Article HERE.

"Reinvogorated Islam"

An essay by Amil Imani. Excerpt:

Before long, the fanatical Muslims running Iran aim to add a more deadly modern version of the sword: the Islamic bomb. With the bomb in one hand and the other hand on the oil spigot, the religion of peace and brotherhood will have the power to bring the non-Muslim world to its knees.

Read it all HERE. This essay is most disturbing in light of what is presently happening in Egypt.

Video: The Story of Obama and Israel

Hat tip to The Conservative Lady:


Benjamin Netanyahu will be visiting the White House this week. At least part of the two leaders' conversation will relate to Iran.

Muslim Brotherhood Demands Treaty Be Kept

From this source:

US aid to Egypt is guaranteed by the Camp David Accords, and stopping it would be a violation of that treaty, a high-ranking Muslim Brotherhood lawmaker said Sunday.

Essam El-Erian, who also serves as chairman of the Egyptian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, said that should aid from Washington be cut, the Brotherhood would consider changing the terms of Egypt’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel.

[...]

...Last month the US administration announced it would speed up aid to Egypt as the country copes with mounting economic problems during the transition from president Hosni Mubarak’s three-decade term in power.

Congress has already approved $1.3 billion in military aid and $250 million in civilian aid for the current fiscal year. That assistance, however, is conditioned upon Egypt meeting all of its obligations under its peace treaty with Israel....

My prediction: Obama will ignore that last sentence. After all, Obama is Carter on crack.

The Day Barack Obama Became Jimmy Carter X 2

Jimmy Carter looked the other way while the people threw the Shah out, opening up a power vacuum which led to the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeini, the Mullahs, and the radical Islamist Iranian regime which reigns to this day, destroying the lives of all the people who live in bondage to it's malevolent dictatorship.

That was Jimmy Carter's crowning achievement as President. His legacy is that he left us with one of the most evil regimes on the planet, a government which actively pays for terrorist enterprises like Hamas, Hizbollah, and the Syrian regime's violent repression of it's own people.

Great going, Jimmy? Impressive.

But today, Barack Obama has more than doubled the output of Jimmy Carter. In just 2 1/2 years as President, Barack Obama has now ordered the destruction of two Muslim leaders (Mubarak and Gaddafi), and, while neither was a Saint, in both cases we will be left with governments which are even more radical, governments which will enforce Sharia law, enslave their people, and destroy the lives of whole generations of human beings.

A big congratulations to Barack Obama.

What Obama Believes?

I was looking through some magazines that had piled up and found this essay by Fareed Zakaria in Time. From "When Terror Loses Its Grip":

...There are, of course, many differences between Hitler and bin Laden. But one great similarity holds. Hitler's death marked the end of the Nazi challenge from Germany. And bin Laden's death will mark the end of the global threat of al-Qaeda.

[...]

[Al Qaeda's] founding rationale has been shattered by the Arab Spring of this year. Al-Qaeda believed that the only way to topple the dictatorships of the Arab world was through violence, that participation in secular political processes was heretical and that people wanted and would cheer an Islamic regime. Over the past few months, millions in the Arab world have toppled regimes relatively peacefully, and what they have sought was not a caliphate, not a theocracy, but a modern democracy.

[...]

Along the way, the efforts at nation building have tarnished the image of the American military. The world's greatest fighting force was shown to be unable to deliver stability to Iraq and Afghanistan, had to deal with scandals like the mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and saw its soldiers losing their once high morale. May 1 changed all that. The image of a smart, wise and supremely competent U.S. has flashed across the globe. The lesson should be clear. An America that uses its military power less promiscuously, more intelligently and in a targeted and focused manner might once again gain the world's respect and fear, if not affection. And an America that can provide a compelling picture of a modern, open society will be a far more attractive model for Arabs than Osama bin Laden's vision of a backward medieval caliphate.

Apparently, Fareed Zakaria, to some extent, advises Obama with regard to foreign policy:


Newsbusters has more information, including a backpedaling statement from Zakaria.

But here's my point: If you read the article in Time Magazine, you will note similarities between what Zakaria has written and Obama's foreign policy.

Also note Zakaria's reaction to Obama's speech of May 19:

It was his role as educator in chief that came out today. He provided a kind of world view, almost a historical interpretation of the causes and consequences of the Arab Spring. He began in the beginning with Tunisia and moved forward. And he tried to present a way in which he saw America's interests and values as squarely aligned with this Arab revolution.

He touched on the places that we don't like - the regimes we don't like that are having trouble dealing with people, Tehran and Damascus. He also talked about Bahrain and Yemen. But you are right, of course, he didn't talk about the 800-pound gorilla that is Saudi Arabia.

But he also then went on to talk about ways to consolidate these revolutions; he talked about the Arab-Israeli peace process. He was tougher on Syria than he's been. He was more explicit in his - in his support for two states, Israel and Palestine on 1967 borders, plus mutually agreeable land swaps, so very comprehensive.

So, I thought he was quite even-handed while calling for a Palestinian state on '67 borders, plus or minor land swaps. He also recognized Israel's legitimate security needs, so I'd be surprised if there is too much criticism out of Tel Aviv tonight....

Please take time to watch the video of Zakaria's statement:


Ace of Spades on Zakaria and Obama:

Zakaria has the worst conflict of interest possible -- ego. If an egotistical, ambitious "reporter" thinks his opinions are being considered by the president (and no, I don't believe this was just the White House telling Zakaria stuff; I think they flattered him by asking advice), then he's flattered, and he thinks he's on the team, and therefore he is invested in His Team's success (or perception of such).

[...]

Gee, no wonder Zakaria thinks that every move of Obama's is brilliant. Obama's got him thinking he's implementing the Zakaria Agenda for Success. Of course Zakaria approves of Zakaria.

Should we care what Zakaria says? Yes, insofar as Zakaria is often read by those leaning left. After all, in many circles, Zakaria is a respected journalist and does exert at least some influence on the American electorate.

And if Zakaria is advising Obama to any extent whatsoever, we should care very much what Zakaria believes.

Iranians March In Support Of Arab Revolts

From this source:

Thousands of Iranians marched on Friday in Tehran in support of the revolts rocking Bahrain, Libya and Yemen, state television reported.

Chants backing the protests of majority Shiites in Bahrain, who are challenging the Sunni dynasty's 200-year-old grip on power, dominated the demonstration which unfolded in the capital after Muslim Friday prayers

"The Saudis are committing crimes and the US supports them," and "Death to America" chanted protesters.

"Death to Israel," cried others.

Slogans in support of the rebellion in Libya and protests in Yemen also rang out..

In my view, there is no "good side" to support right now as the Arab world continues to churn.

Also in my view, these revolts, a part of which is sectarian and tribal warfare between Sunnis and Shi'ites, are not about bringing democracy to the people of those nations. Rather, the protesters want a better life, but still a life submitting to Islam and shari'a.

Obama Is Enabling Jihad

See this recent editorial in the Washington Times. Brief excerpt:

...As Sunni Arab countries become less stable and weaker, the mullahs grow relatively stronger. Iranian agents of influence and proxy groups, particularly in Bahrain and Yemen, are fanning the flames of turmoil. That Saudi Arabia thought it necessary to send tanks to Shiite-majority Bahrain to help keep order shows the seriousness of the situation....

Read the rest HERE.

In my view, Obama is also trying to establish his legacy as THE ONE who brought about his Islamophilic version of the New World Order. Perhaps his version of immortality? The reality will be the reaping of the whirlwind.

Where Is The Outrage Now?

Obama and many others in the international community have been quicker in condemning settlement construction in Israel than atrocities by Arab dictators against innocent civilians.

Has retired South African judge Richard Goldstone considered the possibility of heading a special commission of inquiry to look into the war crimes that are being perpetrated against Libyans and other Arabs?
Settlements may be a problem, but they are not more dangerous than the massacres that are being perpetrated against Arabs.

It took President Barack Obama nine days to condemn Col. Muammar Gaddafi's massacres in Libya as "outrageous" and "unacceptable."

It took the UN Security Council more than a week to hold a closed-door meeting and issue a tempered statement condemning the violence in Libya and calling for its immediate end and for those responsible to be held accountable.

This is the same Security Council that one week earlier held a special and open session to condemn construction in Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Fourteen out of fifteen members of the council voted in support of the anti-settlement resolution, which was vetoed by the US.

The same members, however, saw no need to hold a vote on the slaughtering of thousands of Libyans by Gaddafi.

But both Obama and the Security Council stopped short of calling for Gaddafi's removal from power for perpetrating atrocities against his own people.

The Europeans have also been cautious in their response to the carnage in Libya. They too have refrained from calling for regime change in Libya.

One can understand why Americans and Europeans are worried about their economic interests in Libya, especially with regard to oil. It is also likely that the West is embarrassed about its relationship with the Libyan dictator who, despite his crimes, was welcomed back into the international community in 2003.

Then, Gaddafi was apparently forgiven for his role in the Lockerbie plane explosion and support for countless terror groups in the Arab and Islamic world. Gaddafi was forgiven because he had agreed to abandon his nuclear ambitions and promised to be good..

Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, on the other hand, who for over 30 years served Western interests in the Middle East and did his utmost to preserve the peace treaty with Israel and support moderate Arabs and Muslims, was thrown to the dogs by the Obama Administration as soon as his people started demanding regime change.

Obama and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seem to be more troubled by the death of 300 Egyptians than the brutal massacring of thousands of Libyans. Obama and Clinton seem to be more worried about construction in Jewish settlements than war crimes and serious human rights violations in the Arab world.

The US Administration and the rest of the international community have once again sent a message to the Arabs that they do not really care about human rights and democracy and that they are ready to sacrifice thousands of Arabs to keep the oil prices as low as ever. Mubarak was unfortunate because his country does not have oil.

Now at least the Arab people know that they can no longer rely on Obama and Clinton to support any of their pro-democracy movements.

Obama's Masters

Story HERE.

Hat tip to Randy's Roundtable for the graphic below: