Obamaville July 24, 2013 - Does the Term Molasses Mean Anything to You?

.

About the only time we hear from the president now is when he attends another fund raiser, has rock, pop and blues stars for personal concerts in the White House, or has to apologize for something someone in his vast administration did or said.

 

Why does the White House cost keep going up, now $1.4 billion a year, when very little is being done by our elected officials?  I bet things would happen a lot faster if we stopped Beyonce from playing for the first family in the White House or withheld checks to Congressmen until they passed a budget and some meaningful laws.

 

When it comes to the performance of our elected officials including the president, his cabinet, and both the House and Senate, molasses would be the odds on favorite to beat them all in a sprint to the finish line.  Nothing gets finished in Washington, D.C. and it doesn't matter if you are Democrat, Republican, Catholic or Prostitute or any other ingredient of our vast melting pot.

 

I, for one, favor turning over the government to different groups and give them a chance to mess it up for a while.  Could they do any worse than what we have?  Our new set of political standards in America have reached such a new low that it really should not matter what background our temporary government members bring to their office.

 

If we rotated our political leaders every six months or so they wouldn't have time to arrange for kickbacks, payoffs, and all the other forms of corruption and ethics violations currently found in government.

 

Since these temporary politicians did not come up through the election process but were appointed, then they haven't sold their souls to the financial demons that control the economy, government, wars, health care, energy, education and international relations, meaning international trade and the flow of cash it represents.

It would be the first government administration in a very long time that came with "no strings attached."  Campaign financing is one of the top three most corrupt of all ways to manipulate and leverage money, along with health care, wars, energy resources, frivolous lawsuits, alienation and discrimination.  Oh my, that is seven not three ways.

Obama Kills Osama declares Al-Qaeda on the run.

 

Too bad our president didn't get Man of the Year from the National Rifle Association after he led the Navy Seal raid in Pakistan that killed Osama Bin Laden, mastermind of the World Trade Center terrorist attack.

 

At the time the news media was aglow with praise for our commander-in-chief for dealing a devastating blow to Al Qaeda, the terrorist network founded by Osama.  It was only a matter of time before they would become extinct.

 

That NRA plaque would look great next to Obama's Nobel Peace prize awarded before he even had a chance to brush the confetti off his tux from his first inauguration.

 

Here is a timeline for the few things that actually happened since Barack Obama became president.

 Barack Obama Presidential Timetable

 

January 20, 2009 -  Obama first inauguration

 

January 20, 2009 - Beyonce performs at President's Inauguration

 

October 9, 2009 - Obama wins Nobel Peace prize

 

August 2010 - Obama completes troop buildup in Afghanistan

 

May 2, 2011 - Obama kills Osama

 

December 18, 2011 - Last US troops leave Iraq

 

September 11, 2012 - American diplomatic mission at Benghazi, Libya, attacked by Al Qaeda - US Ambassador one of four Americans murdered.

 

July 22, 2013 - Al Qaeda attacks Iraq prisons, frees 500 terrorists.

 

You get the idea.  Not much for prosperity or the history books.

 

Sunni and Shiite Islam Muslims continue their war of extermination against each other.  With the Shiite in control of Iraq and Iran while the Sunni and Al Qaeda represent most of the Arab world, there is no end in sight for the sectarian bloodshed.

 

The following is the NBC News report on the prison attack.

 

By Richard Engel, Chief Foreign Correspondent, NBC News

 

Al Qaeda-linked militants have claimed responsibility for Monday’s assault on Iraq’s Abu Ghraib jail, which freed some of the terror network's top leaders amid U.S. fears that the country is back in civil war.

 

Checkpoints were set up Tuesday as the search continued for up to 500 militants freed by the attack, which followed the deaths of 250 Iraqis in 10 days of violence. 

 

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which was formed earlier this year through a merger between al Qaeda's affiliates in Syria and Iraq, said in a statement that it was behind the storming of the jail late on Sunday night.

 

The attack began when suicide bombers smashed explosives-laden cars into the prison’s front gate, while gunmen attacked guards with rocket-propelled grenades.

 

As fighters held off reinforcements outside, other militants, some wearing suicide vests, stormed into the prison and freed the convicts.

 

“Most of them were convicted senior members of al Qaeda and had received death sentences," Hakim Al-Zamili, a senior member of the security and defense committee in parliament, told Reuters.

 

"The security forces arrested some of them, but the rest are still free," Hakim Al-Zamili said.

 

The group also said it was behind a second, almost simultaneous assault on Taji Jail, to the north of city. But Iraqi authorities said those attackers had been fought off with a couple of helicopters.

 

They added that checkpoints had been set up around Abu Ghraib, as the search for the escapees continued.

 

 Both attacks took place exactly a year after The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant's most senior leader, Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, launched a campaign dubbed "Breaking the Walls" to make freeing imprisoned members a top priority. 

 

“The mujahideen brigades set off after months of preparation and planning to target two of the biggest prisons of the Safavid government," the group said in the statement, Tuesday.

 

Safavid is used by hardline Sunnis as a derogatory term for Shiite Muslims and refers to the dynasty that ruled Iran from the 16th to 18th centuries.

 

Abu Ghraib gained notoriety because of abuses carried out by U.S. personnel while the country was under occupation following the removal of Saddam Hussein. 

 

The prison assaults followed a violent 10 days in the country, which has seen 250 killed by car bombs, ambushes and gun fights, according to violence monitoring group Iraq Body Count. 

 

The spiral of violence has led U.S. officials to warn that the country is sliding back into civil war, undoing the work achieved by the 'surge' of U.S. troops.

 

NBC News' Henry Austin and Reuters contributed to this report.

 

So what exactly is the difference between the Shiite and Sunni Moslems?  Here is what the staff at the History Channel had to say about the difference.

 

The Islam religion was founded by Mohammed in the seventh century. In 622 he founded the first Islamic state, a theocracy in Medina, a city in western Saudi Arabia located north of Mecca. There are two branches of the religion he founded.

 

The Sunni branch believes that the first four caliphs--Mohammed's successors--rightfully took his place as the leaders of Muslims. They recognize the heirs of the four caliphs as legitimate religious leaders. These heirs ruled continuously in the Arab world until the break-up of the Ottoman Empire following the end of the First World War.

 

Shiites, in contrast, believe that only the heirs of the fourth caliph, Ali, are the legitimate successors of Mohammed. In 931 the Twelfth Imam disappeared. This was a seminal event in the history of Shiite Muslims. According to R. Scott Appleby, a professor of history at the University of Notre Dame, "Shiite Muslims, who are concentrated in Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon, [believe they] had suffered the loss of divinely guided political leadership" at the time of the Imam's disappearance. Not "until the ascendancy of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1978" did they believe that they had once again begun to live under the authority of a legitimate religious figure.

 

 Another difference between Sunnis and Shiites has to do with the Mahdi, “the rightly-guided one” whose role is to bring a just global caliphate into being. As historian Timothy Furnish has written,  "The major difference is that for Shi`is he has already been here, and will return from hiding; for Sunnis he has yet to emerge into history: a comeback v. a coming out, if you will."

 

In a special 9-11 edition of the Journal of American History, Appleby explained that the Shiite outlook is far different from the Sunni's, a difference that is highly significant:

 

... for Sunni Muslims, approximately 90 percent of the Muslim world, the loss of the caliphate after World War I was devastating in light of the hitherto continuous historic presence of the caliph, the guardian of Islamic law and the Islamic state. Sunni fundamentalist leaders thereafter emerged in nations such as Egypt and India, where contact with Western political structures provided them with a model awkwardly to imitate ... as they struggled after 1924 to provide a viable alternative to the caliphate.

 

In 1928, four years after the abolishment of the caliphate, the Egyptian schoolteacher Hasan al-Banna founded the first Islamic fundamentalist movement in the Sunni world, the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun). Al-Banna was appalled by"the wave of atheism and lewdness [that] engulfed Egypt" following World War I. The victorious Europeans had "imported their half-naked women into these regions, together with their liquors, their theatres, their dance halls, their amusements, their stories, their newspapers, their novels, their whims, their silly games, and their vices." Suddenly the very heart of the Islamic world was penetrated by European"schools and scientific and cultural institutes" that" cast doubt and heresy into the souls of its sons and taught them how to demean themselves, disparage their religion and their fatherland, divest themselves of their traditions and beliefs, and to regard as sacred anything Western."14 Most distressing to al-Banna and his followers was what they saw as the rapid moral decline of the religious establishment, including the leading sheikhs, or religious scholars, at Al-Azhar, the grand mosque and center of Islamic learning in Cairo. The clerical leaders had become compromised and corrupted by their alliance with the indigenous ruling elites who had succeeded the European colonial masters.

Osama bin Laden is a Sunni Muslim. To him the end of the reign of the caliphs in the 1920s was catastrophic, as he made clear in a videotape made after 9-11. On the tape, broadcast by Al-Jazeera on October 7, 2001, he proclaimed: "What America is tasting now is only a copy of what we have tasted. ... Our Islamic nation has been tasting the same for more [than] eighty years, of humiliation and disgrace, its sons killed and their blood spilled, its sanctities desecrated."

.

The End of the Arab Spring - Dark Clouds over the Horizon

.

As the world stands helplessly by

What started over a year ago as an effort to overturn dictators and bring freedom to repressed Arab people has stalled recently and in spite of the success in Egypt and Libya in toppling the leaders, one gets the sense not a lot has really changed.

After successful revolutions in Egypt overthrew Muhammad Hosni El Sayed Mubarak and in Libya overthrew Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar Gaddafi it seemed like a ray of hope for the oppressed Arab people in those two neighboring countries.

Yet since the revolutions little in terms of freedom has come to the Arab nations.  In Egypt the military still rules, the same military that served Mubarak, while tribal infighting in Libya has kept any new government from taking control.

In fact, in terms of Middle East peace, the result might worse as Egypt has threatened to terminate their 1979  peace treaty with Israel while electing a majority of Muslim Brotherhood members.  Most recently they have arrested a number of foreign citizens including Americans for trying to undermine the new parliament.

As the Arab Spring moved to Iran and Syria it has met a far different fate.  Both Muslim nations have used violence, and excessive force, to put down the rebel insurgents in spite of threats and sanctions from around the world.  Today a bloodbath is underway in Syria by President Bashar al-Assad to exterminate the thousands of rebels while the world stands helplessly watching.

All of this is an outgrowth of the American invasions of Kuwait and Iraq to stop Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti from capturing the strategic Kuwait oil fields.  Then America invaded Iraq again and Afghanistan after the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center.

Ten years later we just left Iraq, which has moved ever closer to our bitter enemy Iran, and are trying to unwind the war in Afghanistan as that nation moves ever closer to Iran.

Iran is also backing Syria in denying freedom to the people.  Of all the Middle East nations Iran is the greatest threat to Israel because it is close to developing a nuclear capability, an advantage Israel now holds over all Arab and Muslim nations.

Yet of all the nations of the Middle East most likely to enter a war, Israel and Iran are at the top of the list.  Recently five leading Iranian nuclear scientists were assassinated in Iran, with most fingers pointing at Israel.  No other nation has the intelligence and will to undertake such a mission as the fearless Israelis and their Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In retaliation Israeli diplomats were bombed in several Arab nations though none have been killed yet.  So we have a powder keg ready to explode as time is running out for anyone to stop the nuclear ambitions of Iran, and that anyone is Israel and no one else.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made it quite clear that the consequences of such an action could result in counter attacks by Iran on Israel or a closing of the Straight of Hormuz, the strategic shipping lifeline for the world's oil supply.

Either action would cripple world economies and threaten to bring many nations into a war in the Middle East, something long feared by the End Times advocates of Armageddon.

At this moment, anything is possible.  Should Israel attack Iran the consequences do not bode well for the Middle East or America, as America is the sole protector of Israel and will be the only defender of that nation should military action result.

Something must happen to stop the escalation of tension in the Middle East between Israel and Iran.  We are helpless and the United Nations is more helpless to intervene.  Action is also desperately needed to stop the bloodbath in Syria.  Once again we are all helpless to stop it.

Is there any way out of this terrible dilemma?  Sometimes the most unexpected person or nation can suddenly be thrust onto the world stage and change the course of history when all else has failed.  Perhaps that time is now.  And perhaps that savior will be a total surprise.

See the next article for a possible peaceful solution.

.