Iran

Readers of this blog know that I believe Obama is a stealth Muslim. I still believe it to be true, even though some recent events such as the deaths of Osama bin Laden, Alawar al Alaki and many other top level terrorists would seem to contradict such an opinion. Later, I will propose a scenario where both truths could be possible.

There are also a growing number of people coming to at least suspect Obama to be a Manchurian President. Given his handling of Middle East policy of ignoring or actively supporting militant Islamic groups while simultaneously denigrating our Israeli allies, I must agree that the Manchurian President theory is not just possible, it is highly probable and as such, must be considered. My aim here is to take these possibilities to the ugliest possible conclusion, because if even remotely true, it would have catastrophic consequences for freedom loving peoples the world over. It would also be the Mother of All Conspiracies.

Liar!

It is known that Islam allows and in some cases encourages its followers to lie to unbelievers in order to achieve the goal of world dominance and submission to the faith. This is called Taqiyya – Saying something that isn’t true,” or another form which is Kitman – Lying by omission.” ~ This brings up a question in my mind secondary to the theory I am proposing: What kind of god allows and encourages his followers to engage in deceit? A false god, that’s who, one who is completely contrary to the one true God of the Jews and of the Christians, who encourages truth and calls lying a sin, but I digress.

The stated goal of Islam is to convert all non-believers to the faith or enslave them to their theocratic rule through Sharia law and ultimately establish a Caliphate with a Caliph, or single high priest, who will rule over the entire world under the authority of Allah and establish world domination of their religion.

Jihad is the Way [The 1995 book by Mustafa Mashhur, who headed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt from 1996-2002.] explicitly endorses the reinstatement of a worldwide Islamic regime.

It should be known that jihad and preparation towards jihad are not only for the purpose of fending off assaults and attacks of Allah’s enemies from Muslims, but are also for the purpose of realizing the great task of establishing an Islamic state and strengthening the religion and spreading it around the world.

The Theory:

Obama wants to be the Caliph

Usurper!

Regarding the Middle East and the Arab Uprisings, the Obama administration has done nothing to discourage, and everything to encourage unrest and in many cases helped promote anti-American interests to power in Tunisia, Egypt and Lebanon. At the same time, Yemin and many other Middle Eastern countries have seen bloody protests funded by and instigated by the Muslim Brotherhood while Obama ignores the uprising in Iran against the Ahmadinejad regime, a sworn enemy of the United States. Why would Obama promote unrest by his indecisive behavior or in some cases, support Muslim Brotherhood activity with US military forces in Libya while ignoring obvious pro-democratic uprisings in Iran? I think the answer is obvious. He wants to promote the Islamic religion and ultimately the worldwide Caliphate theocracy. Think that is an outrageous accusation? Tell it to the Pakistani government minister who called for Obama to claim the title of Caliph.

Assassin!

Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda’s second in command Atiyah Abd Al-Rahman and a host of top terrorists have been killed during Obama’s presidency, which prompted ABC’s Jake Tapper to remark:

Remember when Rudy Giuliani warned that electing Barack Obama would mean that the U.S. played defense, not offense, against the terrorists?

If this is defense, what does offense look like?

Just last week American born terrorist Alawar al Alaki is taken out by American forces under the command of Barack Hussein Obama. Taken at face value, one could assume that Obama ordered these killings; however, the opposite could be true. As in the case of bin Laden, our military was on target long before Obama was even aware of the fact and actually had no choice but to sign off on the killing lest he be painted as aiding and abetting the enemy. Speculatively, the same scenario could have transpired for Al Rahman, al Alaki and the others. Our forces could have been on target and it would just plain look bad if the president told them to stand down.

Traitor-in-Chief!

If Obama is in fact engaging in Taqiyya or Kitman, then he would betray his Muslim identity by expressing regret or remorse at the deaths of his allies. If we take it one step farther, (here comes the overactive imagination), Obama could, in fact, be engaging in a double-cross against his Muslim brothers; He could claim plausible deniability in these killings while deftly using his position as president to take out any candidates or would-be contenders to himself becoming the Caliph. He is in the perfect place from which to carry this out, probably the only place from which it can be done: The White House.

Going a bit farther still, the idea of using his position to eliminate his rivals may not have occurred to Obama until bin Laden was taken out or even later, but the possibility is still a viable one. Perhaps narcissist Obama is now recognizing other advantages to being leader of the country he despises.

Caliph?

If this theory is correct, I think Obama will eventually remove Ahmadinejad, who I believe sees himself as the rightful Caliph, but the timing is not right, especially since Ahmadinejad presents a threat to the US that he can use in the future to bolster Obama’s image as a decisive leader perhaps a war with Iran or another assassination in the days, weeks or months leading up to the 2012 election?

Outre’

Obviously, I’m not sure about any of this. Who could be except Obama himself? I’m just trying to make sense of what Obama is doing and increasingly, in my mind, the evidence points to Obama’s malicious destruction of America as a necessary step in a larger plan – and that should trouble us all.

For Liberty ~ ‘bot

UPDATE: Linked by Doug Ross –  Thanks!

Thanks to Zilla of the Resistance for her assistance in researching this piece.

References linked in this post: – Updated

The Terrorist Notches on Obama’s Belt

Egypt now fears Obama a ‘Manchurian President’ – ‘They are trying to understand why he is acting against U.S. interests’

Obama’s Pretend Counterterrorism Policy

Borderline Treachery – Obama proposes leaving Israel indefensible.

Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman)

Ex-Muslim reveals secret goal of Islam – Cites behavior of ‘moderate,’ ‘peaceful’ members of faith

Related – Updated

How many terrorists does Obama HAVE to Kill?

Obama, the Taliban, and the Muslim Brotherhood Vs. America, Israel, and Freedom

Radical Islam Infiltrates Federal Government

Anwar Al-Awlaki – ???

… on the cheap while giving our Navy and Coast Guard a little target practice. Not to mention saving the expense of towing some old scow out to sea for the same purpose and  (Hey, Bonus!) feeding a few sharks.

Perhaps Admiral Smitty would be interested in re-upping for a couple of days to command the mission. We could call it “Operation Fish in a Barrel” or something. Of course you are encouraged to offer your own names for the op in the comments.

From the Gateway Pundit:

Iranian Regime Says It Will Move Ships Into Atlantic Off US Coast

The commander of the Iranian navy announced the regime plans to move vessels into the Atlantic Ocean to start a naval buildup near the US border.

Image from AP via FOX News

Normally, I would counter with something like: “Oh yea? Let me know how that works out for ya.” But in light of the present commander-in-chief, I’m afraid his response will be quite underwhelming.

If only we had a president who projected strength toward our enemies instead of bowing to them and establishing a weak to non-existent foreign policy which invites these kinds of military threats.

*sigh*

If only…

I love the people who read and komment on this blog. You guys are some of the most intelligent and insightful out there. Hell, even the spam-bots know a good thing when they see it. For example, a recent “reader” who chose the klever moniker “baby gifts” kommands:

Buy Soft Toys & Childrens Toy online now!…
I just sent this post to a bunch of my friends as I agree with most of what you’re saying here and the way you’ve presented it is awesome….

Thanks so much for the kompliment, “baby gifts.” I do strive to present things in an awesome fashion. It’s nice that you noticed. Although, why a toy salesman is interested in bombing Iran is somewhat diskonserting. I hope we don’t see an influks of eksplosive toys in Amerika’s future. Iran should probably be on the lookout for incendiary playthings as well. I think I’ll kall Akmadinijad to warn him sometime nekst millennium.

Amazingly, within the hour of that komment, I received another komment by a different toy salesperson on an entirely unrelated post(!?), who kalls (her?)self “soft toy.” [~bot: I wonder if this kommenter is a female spam-bot? If so, she sounds kuddly. Perhaps she would like to be introduced to my imaginary pseudonym.]

Buy Soft Toys & Childrens Toy online now!…
Thanks-a-mundo for the article.Really thank you! Will read on……

No thanks necessary “softie.” No. Really. Just performing my pre-programmed blogging duties like any good Robot should, as you are doing. However, the kommandment line at the first of each of those komments is a little bit, shall we say, off-putting. You kould just politely tell me of the produkts availability and let me decide for myself if I want it, but alas, it’s the direktion of the kountry. Kommunism kills innovation, so we’re reduced to taking orders from spam-bots and robot bloggers babbling away on their keyboards.

Since we’re taking orders from robots today, I kould offer a suggestion. I found out this morning that The Observer is back with a new blog! It’s kalled Spellchek!

Be sure to pay him a visit! Tell him a Robot kommanded you.

Oh, and one other thing. In honor of the new Spellchek blog. All “k” sounds are to be spelled with a “k.” Remove all “c’s” or “x’s” that sound like “k’s” and replace them phonetically.

Or not.

Just a thought. Not a kommandment.

It’ll drive your spellchek krazy, komrade.

Kome to think of it. RightKlik has been on this kik for a while now. What a kouple of innovators, those two kards.

Kongratulations, you krazy, kool, konspirators!

Last Saturday, Iran was allowed to begin inserting fuel rods into their nuclear reactor without so much as a whimper from the international community. World leaders heaved a collective *sigh* and continued their golf games, vacations and parlor parties while the citizens of the world, the sane ones anyway, were forced yet again to wonder on the competence and/or contrivance of said “leaders.”

Ever wonder what would have happened if Kennedy hadn’t called Khrushchev’s bluff? We’re about to find out.

Just one day (1) uno, one singular day after the fueling announcement comes news of a new Iranian ambassador.

Really? What’s his name?

The Ambassador of Death.

Nice. Gotta hand it to those mullahs, they sure know how to name a weapon.

Hey, I’ve got a better idea. How about something more appropriate? (Warning: tell the children to leave the room.)

How about we call it the “Dildo of Doom?” It would go along with the douche-nozzle who’s running the country over there. Sorry to be so graphic. I’ll revise the name to shall we say, “Marital Aid of Mass Destruction?” Nah, just doesn’t have the same ring of truth.

OK, one more: “Suppository of Subjugation.”

Feel free to add your own suggestions in the comments.

It is also interesting to note that Wired.com is questioning the Ambassador’s size, wondering aloud if Iran is claiming it’s ambassador to be more “endowed” than it really is.

“Is that a WMD in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?”

Each day that passes without taking out Iran’s threat of nuclear armaments is another day closer to World War Three. I’m hoping against hope that a special forces or some other clandestine outfit is making plans to sabotage their facilities.

There is a glimmer of hope though. An unattributed editorial in the Washington Times reports that

… There are unconfirmed reports that Reza Baruni, the mastermind of Iran’s drone program, was assassinated earlier this month when his heavily guarded villa in southern Iran was bombed. On the same day, three unarmed drone aircraft reportedly crashed into the containment dome of the Bushehr reactor…

Still, I’d like to see more than unattributed reports claiming unconfirmed actions of unarmed aircraft causing unknown results.

It’s all a bit… unsettling.

H/T No Sheeples Here! for finding the Iranian bomb video.

Previously: Should Israel Bomb Iran?

George Will, in Jerusalem for the Washington Post, quotes Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu:

Today’s Middle East, he says, reflects two developments. One is the rise of Iran and militant Islam since the 1979 revolution, which led to al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah. The other development is the multiplying threat of missile warfare.

Now Israel faces a third threat, the campaign to delegitimize it in order to extinguish its capacity for self-defense. After two uniquely perilous millennia for Jews, the creation of Israel meant, Netanyahu says, “the capacity for self-defense restored to the Jewish people.” But note, he says, the reflexive worldwide chorus of condemnation when Israel responded with force to rocket barrages from Gaza and from southern Lebanon. There is, he believes, a crystallizing consensus that “Israel is not allowed to exercise self-defense.”

And yesterday, former US Envoy to the UN, John Bolton said Israel has just a few days to act before Iran begins inserting fuel rods into it’s newly built nuke-you-lar reactor.

Israel has only mere days to launch an attack on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor if Russia makes good on its plan to deliver fuel there this weekend, former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton warned Tuesday.

He said that once Russia has loaded the fuel into the reactor — slated for Saturday – Israel would no longer be willing to strike for fear of triggering widespread radiation in an attack.

Iran in effect is hiding behind human shields while it continues to arm itself with nuclear capabilities:

Iran, for its part, dismissed talk of a possible Israel strike.

On Tuesday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast was quoted as saying that “these threats of attacks had become repetitive and lost their meaning.” He also reportedly told correspondents in Tehran, “According to international law, installations which have real fuel cannot be attacked because of the humanitarian consequences.”

The rhetoric comes as the US increased sanctions on Iran as part of its ongoing efforts to ratchet up pressure on Tehran.

On Tuesday the US Treasury announced dozens of additional names of Iranian banks and individuals that fall under sanctions law.

So, while the Iranians continue to ratchet up their ability to attack our Israeli allies, our President and State department continue to run a racket of sanctions and weak diplomacy designed to look the other way while Israel is forced to defend itself alone.

Question:

Should we strike Iranian nuclear facilities before they load fuel into their reactor or complete their ability to enrich weapons grade plutonium?

Should Israel?

I believe we should and if we don’t strike first, we should at the very least provide backing forces to Israel when they do so. A nuclear Iran would be more emboldened to act out against our Israeli allies, just as any of the lesser factions surrounding them because of Iran’s implied nuclear umbrella of protection. We cannot allow this scenario to develop.

Will President Obama see the issue this way?

I’d doubt he has a pair. In fact, his previous actions suggest that he’ll use an Israeli strike as a reason to sanction or condemn Israel.

That would be a tragedy of unthinkable proportions.

Iranian Hostage Crisis – part deuce

Just across Robo-news desk comes a  story that three American hikers have been held by Iran for 11 months, and now their mothers are coming forward with the claim that the hikers were seized in Iraqi territory.

This brings to mind a multitude of questions, many of which I will forget by the time I finish writing this sentence.

1. They were hiking where? Even if they were hiking in Iraq, I still must ask this question.

2. Just where exactly are the best nature trails in Iraq? a) Apparently right next to the Iranian border!

3. Why am I just now hearing of these hostages eleven months later? – That’s some fine reporting there Lou.

What? – Oh.

4. Why are these guys not on the front page and leading every MSM outlet every day?

5. Where is the hew and cry for their release? I’d bet if they were Obama supporters they wouldn’t still be there eleven months later.

6. Where is my beer?  a) It’s too early for a beer on a weekday.

7. Where was I?

Oh yea,

8. You know who else had  incident involving hostages held by Iran in Tehran?

9. Why hasn’t our President, who has often expressed a desire for communication with President Ahmadinejad, been campaigning for the hikers’ release? – This would seem to be a good opportunity for a beer summit with the Iranian Prez.

10. How do you like the bold and italicized text?

11. They were hiking where?

12. Where were their mothers before they took off on the hiking expedition?

13. Where is my beer?

Texas Conservative News

Site Meter
Twitter
Categories
Larwyns Links
Bad Blue
Subscribe via email
September 2014
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930