Arab Spring in Libya Produces Mass Grave of Qaddafi Loyalists

Ahhh, don’t you just love democracy?  Winners live and losers get executed, right? Why?  Because the majority of the people wanted it so!  Isn’t that what Democracy is?  Thank GOD we don’t have it in this country.  Thank God above that the founding fathers had the wisdom to set up a Democratic Republic!   And that thing, that precious thing- that Constitution!  Honor it today, Americans, because it prevented this horror from happening on American soil.  Barbarism.  That is the Muslim way.  Apparently.

Is this what we get for the billions we spent in Libya?  A mass grave of over 300 people loyal to Gaddafi in Sirte?  Many with their hands bound behind their back & executed in the head from behind?  Aren’t you all so proud to be Americans today?  Even the fools who continue to pretend that the United States didn’t do this have to pay attention now.  Because they have to remember that England and France came begging us to ‘lend’ our ‘special assets’ to the Libyan effort or they would surely fail.  Remember?  “Special assets”, people, means our big, bad ass naval ships with big, bad ass guns.  It means special launch pads & control centers for the drone attacks.  It means our high tech air force planes & guided missles.  It means boots on the ground (you know, Seal Team 6 sorts?  The ones with the berets?) to gather intelligence on the whereabouts of Qadhafi.  And remember how Obama didn’t bother to show up during the victory laps of Sarkozy & Cameron?  Remember I was shocked that the United States did all the bombing & fighting, but England & France get all the credit from the new Libyan government?  And now, with this new mass grave (to lend even more credence to the apparent assassination of Gaddafi), we see how Obama’s ‘little war’ (which he never even asked Congress or the American people to conduct) has turned out.  The new Libyan government vows to make Sharia law the basis of all new laws in Libya, they publicly & brutally assassinated the old leader and proceeded to assassinate 300 political opponents in Sirte without any semblance of a trial.  Free speech in Libya anyone?  And we, the Great United States, have recognized them as ‘legitimate’ already, as have France & England.  Anyone up for a celebratory toast?

Obama sure gets a cheap, fast war for 2012 now, doesn’t he?  There will be no eight years of political infighting in Libya, will there?  Because every polical opponent is DEAD- and we all know that dead people can’t vote, “no,” on anything.  Obama has proven that he is no George Bush, that’s for sure!  Mr. Teleprompter does things fast.

And yet, we will still have our not-so-crafty-after-all progressive fools to somehow say that it WASN’T the United States who did any of this.  It was the International Community (does anyone know who the hell ‘they’ are?  The definition of this group seems to change rather conveniently) who did it!  It was the rebel soldiers who did it!  You  know, the ones who complained that Gaddafi was a cold-blooded murderer?  THEY did it!  We aren’t to blame!  And Gaddafi was bad anyway, right?  Right?

People.  Think about this for a moment.  All of Britain and all of France could not get rid of Gaddafi by themselves.   The rebels, even with our ‘special assets’ couldn’t pin Gaddafi down (at least, not quick enough for 2012).  And then the United States sent in our special ops team (mere weeks ago) and Wha-lah!  Gaddafi is spotted and killed by the once-so-incompetent Libyan rebels.  Such a coincidence!  Wow!  And THEN, when Gaddafi is found alive, but wounded and loaded into an ambulance, he somehow gets executed (again, behind the head) between the site and the hospital.  And none of our special ops were there to see it!  And then the rebels line up 300 people and murder them, dig a giant rectangular pit with bulldozers and there is not a special ops team member to see it.  Hmmm.  A mighty lapse for our incredibly well-trained strategic planners, politicians, military, intelligence officers & special ops teams?  Or did the big wigs at Obama central somehow fail to remember that transitions of power are often violent & full of political retribution?  Did they all just leave that part out when they met with the transitional council months ago?  Did Mr. Can’t-Ever-Make-A-Mistake just slip up?  Even when every other war-time president in U.S. history understood this? Incompetence?  Really?

There is only one way to see this, Americans.  Obama made a deal.  We would supply the money, ‘special assets’, and special ops to take Gaddafi out ‘quickly’.  Obama needed a stunning military ‘win’ for 2012, but also knew that ‘quick’ meant ‘illegal’.  The Progressives wanted the Muslim Brotherhood in power as well.  So, he allowed the French & British to ‘beg’ him to support this deal and he allowed them to take all public credit (ridiculous as it was) and then he allowed our soldiers & military to turn around and ‘let’ the rebel forces to do what they wanted to Gaddafi & his friends.  And Obama KNEW that this meant assassination.  And he knew that without those bothersome opponents around, a transitional government could be set up quickly.  And he knew he would claim shocked innocence (but not incompetence) and ignorance.  As we didn’t have boots on the ground, we didn’t ‘know’ this was going to happen!  A slap on the wrist for Libya (maybe they will drum up a lowly captain to blame), shocked surprise from Britain & France and wha-lah! a quick transition of power for everyone.  No hassles.

Cute, very cute.

Anyone who thinks our special ops just ‘ran away’ from the battle without orders to do so is a fool.  Obama is the most powerful, conceited, arrogant & ambition man this world has ever seen and he would want to know everything beforehand.  A man who needs a teleprompter in his irrational fear of making a mistake in public is not a man who fails to consider his self-interest at every angle.  Remember, it took this president fourteen hours to decide to strike bin Laden when he had rock solid evidence of his whereabouts!  He mulled every possible political outcome w/ his team of advisors before he gave the ‘go-ahead’.  Obama is not a careless man.  No.

In exchange, I have no doubt the new transitional government promised to be obedient to the United States (ha!).  I’ll even bet that Obama didn’t make it too hard.  He probably didn’t bother putting Israel on the table as part of the deal.  In fact, he probably signaled that hostility toward Israel (a liberal progressive favorite) was just fine with him.  He would stay neutral.  I’m sure that made the Muslims very happy.

And guess what?  Obama doesn’t even care if they ARE friendly to the United States.  Because for him, a bloody Middle East is a good Middle East.  This is what most Americans don’t realize- or refuse to consider.  Scuttle the oil supply (both domestic & foreign) and make buddies like Gore & Pelosi & T.Boon Pickens rich from green energy.  Everyone wins!  (I want to see Obama’s stock portfolio!)

And now the door is open to the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya.  As it is in Egypt.  Bye-Bye Israel!

Who are the big winners here?  Not the American people.  Not Israel.  Not the Libyans.  The Progressives are the winners.  As I have been writing about for months now, the Progressive agenda is nothing short of destroying the reliability of oil in the Middle East.  A choice is coming, America.  The new Arab Spring means one of two things:  1)  The Muslim Brotherhood is hostile toward the United States, which makes the oil unreliable and green energy is shoved down our throat.  Israel will be surrounded by a unified Muslim front who wants nothing more than their total destruction.  OR 2) The Muslim Brotherhood is friendly to the United States, but still intent on Israel’s destruction (that is their mission statement online) which puts the United States in the position of choosing between Israel or oil.  This leads to the exact same results as number 1).

Americans need to step back and see the bigger picture here.   None of this is coincidence.  There is a plan.  And Libya is a major step forward for Progressives.

11 comments

  1. Michael,

    If you want to comment on my site, you will do it nicely. As you decided not to read my posting rules and went ahead and posted two personal attacks on me, you are banned. Your freedom of speech ended at the public sidewalk. You are in MY house, now. Follow my rules or get the boot. See ya.

  2. Little Rebel,

    Your detailed insight into the elite progressive movement is not in the least exaggerated. This movement had been very carefully planned even before the very secretive Jekyll Island meeting that occurred in 1910. Keep up great work.

  3. Thanks for the quick reply and, please, don’t worry, I wasn’t offended.

    What I meant by the ‘lack of intervention’ was in regard to the physical/hands on approach that we have become so used to. I am aware that America was very vigilant to get economic sanctions etc. But this was as far as they were willing to go before we asked them. My point was that they had a somewhat ‘delayed’ physical reaction to the issue. In a conflict were innocent people were being mercilessly killed, economic intervention can only go so far. But you are right, we did need America’s guns.

    The 300 killed were only opponents of the new regime because they were part of the old one. If anything, the platform for free debate on the decision of what Libya will become safer since the old loyalists have been dealt with – but they should have been dealt with in a different way.

    I must concede on my previous comment on Arab countries becoming more partial to peace. My point was originally based out of the fact that the Israeli president offered for new peace talks after the debate over a Palestine state.

    Im not familiar with ‘the progressives’, can you please explain?

    • I am still convinced that Obama, Cameron & Sarkozy played a nice acting game for the world stage. Of course the USA was going to get involved. Why would anyone not think this? If one studies history, no country embarks on regime change in another country where war is involved without consulting deeply with their allies. How could the USA not be involved from the beginning? And if we were opposed to military intervention, do you really think Obama would change his mind based on simple prompting from England & France? Obama has been sticking his arrogant finger in every Arab Muslim pie since he came into office. Think about it:

      Obama said, “Mubarak has to go!” and Mubarak did go. Even though he has been a traditional ally to America- Egypt is the ONLY Arab muslim country to recognize Israel’s statehood! Why get rid of Mubarak?

      Then Obama said, “Gaddafi must go!” and then Gaddifi ‘went’. While Gaddafi was a one-time enemy of our nation, after we invaded Iraq, he surrendered and made peace. Why take him out now?
      Then Obama said, “Saleh must go!” and I am waiting for him to ‘go’ now. Saleh is also a USA ally- he has always been supported by America. Why now?
      By removing Mubarak & threatening Saleh, by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, we directly threaten other Western leaning Arab nations like Jordon & Saudi Arabia- both allies of the United States. It leaves them wondering if the USA will announce their need to ‘go’ if their people rise up in their own Arab Spring. See?

      Obama has also threatened Assad in Syria for his crackdown of protesting muslims. He has said that we ‘won’t tolerate’ it.
      Obama has also claimed that Iran has committed an open ‘act of war’ on the United States simply because two conspirators (one American and one who holds high political office in Iran) attempted to kill the Saudi ambassador. Please note that this aggravates tensions between the Saudis & Iranians- they are from different tribes and have always had tensions there. These two nations also do not see eye to eye about oil production. Iran is head of OPEC this year. The Saudi king stated that this year’s meeting was the lowest point in their history. Iran is pushing for higher prices & lower production to revive their local economy, but the Saudi king believes that higher prices will force the world into an earlier development of green energy. So they battle on that level as well.

      Obama has either directly or indirectly threatened SEVEN Muslim Arab nations since he has been in office. And why? Ask yourself how this could possibly benefit him. Never assume things just happen. People THINK about these things- 10 steps ahead of time. They bring these events about through cunning diplomacy and strategy. Every president before Obama knew that the United States is 100% dependent on Middle Eastern supplies of cheap oil. So why is Obama needlessly stirring the pot and causing additional tensions & uncertainty in the region?

      Could it be that Obama doesn’t WANT cheap oil? Well, stock market studies prove that his liberal progressive buddies all own stock in green companies. The last 800 BILLION dollar package was found to be funneled directly into Gore’s & Pelosi’s pockets- not to mention the pocket’s of Obama’s major campaign financiers. Oh, it’s a dirty business, this green energy move. People stand to be enriched beyond their wildest dreams if they can own the new energy source.

      As for Progressives. These people are not of any political party. They use/buy/seduce politicians, businessmen & media owners on all sides of the political spectrum. They have zero loyalty to any country. They believe themselves to be above national level. The progressives are already the wealthiest people in the world. They are people like the Rothschild’s, the Rockefellers, the J.P Morgan’s, the Aldrich’s, George Soros, the Johnson family, etc. As I said, read my article on Rupert Murdoch and you will see more names. These people have one goal: the dissolution of national boundaries in favor of a One World Government. It is often referred to as the new international order, the ‘international community’ and such. The implementation of the euro was a major first step. Remember the old promises of the euro? That it would not be able to govern any nation? That each nation’s government remained sovereign unto itself– that it was only going to affect monetary policies? Umm hmmm. See how Merkel & Sarkozy are now using Greece, Italy, Ireland, etc as an excuse to now govern as the United Nations? They claim that they now ‘need’ more control over these governments in order to ‘save the euro’.

      Didn’t you ever wonder (like I did at the time), why the heck they ever included these clearly weak economies in the first place? Well, now you know. They needed built-in failure in order to make new laws that will actually govern the nations. Europe is now the European Union. This is the role Mexico will play in the new American Union. Watch & see. I pray that England can keep far, far away from it. But you will see more and more pressure applied to the English people to fully join with the European Union. As soon as Germany gets the governmental control over EU nations, you will see the Central Bank release funds and see the euro rebound. And this, in turn, will start pressuring the United States to give up our dollar in favor of a new ‘united’ currency (the Amero), in order to compete.

      Consolidation of currencies precede consolidation of governmental power. The more centralized the world becomes, the more power the Progressives will have. They are using Muslim terrorism right now to weaken the USA’s constitution. Obama met with leaders in Brazil before he met with the Queen of England for an official state visit. Is it a coincidence that Petrobras, the Brazilian owned oil company, was the first company to be granted full drilling rights in American Gulf waters after the Horizon accident? Is it any coincidence that George Soros, a self declared progressive, co-owns Petrobras, along with Brazil? Hmmm.

      See, I think this is in preparation for the American Union, which will include Brazil and its natural oil supplies. Because even though Obama & his buddies stand to be filthy rich on green energy, they need transitional supplies of oil. But not Middle Eastern oil. No. The middle east has been given permission to attack Israel. Israel has traditionally been of strategic importance to the United States because it provides us with military access to those ever important oil supplies. If we no longer need the Middle Eastern oil (because we have it in our new Union w/ Brazil and with our new green energy industry), then we no longer need Israel. See? Then the only reason to intervene between Israel & the Arab nations around it will be for religious reasons. And we all know how the progressives love to mix religion and politics, don’t we?

      Alex, there is so much more going on than meets the eye. The very fact that the media is 100% owned by the very people who publically state they want centralized world government (look up George Soros’ lecture series on Open Societies on Youtube) should scare everyone. If anyone thinks FOX news or MSNBC or CNN is giving the full story, they are simply naive. The progressives use ‘liberal’ & ‘conservative’ news articles to create the illusion that there are only two ways to see world events. It is a complete distraction from reality- their reality. Which is the Truth. There is only one reason anyone wants to control the media- CONTROL. And people are buying it hook, line & sinker.

      Feel free to read my articles on these subjects. You will learn a lot. It affects England as much as every other country on earth. There are many angles. But the proof is there. Once you put this progressive context around world events today, it will all make perfect sense. Obama will make perfect sense. So will his supposed public reluctance to get involved in Libya…

      hope all this helps…looking forward to more conversation..

      • You do make some very good, eye opening points. This is why I like talking to random people on blogs. I’m still at school and only get the state approved education – which as you might suspect doesn’t always give every answer.

        I’ll be interested to know what you think we all should have done and should do in regard to the Arab spring. Should we not get involved in Syria?

        I dislike the EU and wrote a post about why Britain should leave on my blog ahead of the debate in parliament on whether there should be a referendum. As years pass the whole concept of Europe increasingly resembles that of the Nazi ideology of a unified European mainland, power stemming from one place.

        I will get on and read those recommended articles as soon as I can.

      • Hi Alex,

        The progressives have all but taken over public education. No one gets the truth anymore. Here in the USA, they are teaching our children to be ashamed of our history and country (I wrote an article about that too). They are attempting to kill the three things that will keep any nation strong: family, patriotism & Christianity. Take those out of a country and you have a fertile population for socialism. Read Saul Alinsky’s playbook for socialism. It is very much like multi-culturalism in Europe. The same goals exist. Social unrest is the goal. Rip the cohesion and encourage class warfare, kill the idea of morality & God, and rip the family asunder and you are sure to have an economic collapse. In today’s modern world of finance, the use of Central Banks (our is the Federal Reserve) to cause inflation, deflation & recessions are a favorite tool of the progressives. (see my ‘Federal Reserve for Dummies article). Socialists of every stripe have used this formula since modern society as ever existed. The protests on Wall Street were not spontaneous in the least. Our Unions (the SEIU) organized it. Americans are not really rioters. We are too fat & happy still. That is why it isn’t going anywhere yet. They are attempting to use entitled, ignorant young Americans to riot or to vote- either or both would suit them.

        In any case, Of Course we should not send a single troop to Syria! There is absolutely nothing for America to gain there. We don’t have the treasure and we don’t have the soldiers. I doubt there is anything for England to gain. Alex, each country’s people must self determine their own course. It is not up to the rest of the world to pick the winners & losers. Foreign policy for each & every country has only one aim (or should): to further the security, happiness & economy of their own country. We choose our allies on that basis. We also choose our enemies on this basis. Treaties are made on this basis. Deals are cut and broken- all depending on the winds of change. Sometimes wars are fought to gain these things. War is a LAST option because, by nature, is extremely unpredictable. Crafty statesmanship is better. This is reality. Nothing dictates war with Syria or Iran. They simply can’t hurt us. They have no missiles to hit us- they have no navy. Why go to war? One hopes that the people of a great nation are moral in nature and that this is reflected in their foreign policy. But this is only secondary. Self interest will usually dictate a peaceful existence as much as possible. All great leaders have known this- look at your own Queen Elizabeth. Countries thrive in peace. People thrive in peace. Economies thrive in peace.

        The problem with the Middle East is that it is tribal- as you so rightly point out. Many people fail to recognize this as an inherent weakness. A tribal system can only operate on a small scale- certainly not on a country scale. On a smaller scale, there can be family loyalty, trust in the tribal leader, etc. That is why they need to cut people’s hands & heads off- without brutality, control is not possible. Tribalism doesn’t work in the modern world- it can’t compete economically. Look at Africa. But if the Arabs don’t (or won’t) see that, then that is their problem. We have learned only too well that attempting to force a democracy on people who only believe in strong arm tactics of tribal control doesn’t work. What we have found is that the new leaders become tribal leaders and use the same old brutal tactics to control their people. They don’t WANT the people to vote! As crazy as that may seem, it is true. They just want to be king of the hill.

        I like to use the United States as an example. Our revolution was self determined. Did we ask for and receive funding from France? Yes. But they didn’t do it for any reason other than to weaken King George’s power- nothing less (and look- it was a disaster for them- King Louis got his head cut off!). We made no pledges of loyalty to them and vice versa. We bled & fought to create a new nation. England bled & fought to keep their country intact. This was between our two nations. It was right for us to fight and it was right for you to fight. We were both self determining our futures.

        Our country also got involved in a terrible civil war in which we lost more American life than in any other war before or after. This was something we needed to work out for ourselves. The south was not evil to wish to secede from the nation, nor was the north wrong to wish to keep it together. Both sides killed each other. Both sides believed passionately in their cause. Both sides considered each other’s leaders to be ‘evil’. Again, this was our own business and we needed to handle it ourselves. Who is another nation to say who was right or wrong or attempt to send their military on our shores to determine the outcome of our civil war?

        If the Muslim Arabs truly want democracy, then they will rise up against their oppressors and do it themselves.

        On a subtler note: do I think our nations should be helping the pro-democracy Arab Muslims in nations hostile to the United States like Iran? Do I believe we should continue supporting Arab muslim nations already friendly to us? Of course! But it needs to be done more quietly. Funneling money, arms, and organizational support makes more sense to me. But NO help should be given if there is not a guarantee of their support for creating a true, non violent capitalistic democracy. Not one penny. Look at these people in Libya. We ‘helped’ them oust a pro-Western leader (who had already given up his arms race with us) and are rewarded with the Muslim Brotherhood that wants Sharia law, murders the last leader without a trial (even though he was found alive) and murders 300 of their political opponents. THAT, my friend is bad statesmanship. Obama should have given the rebels a choice: support a pro-American, capitalistic democratic country with a constitution styled after ours or do it yourself. Period. Any ‘normal’ U.S. president would have done that. The fact that Obama neglected to protect US interests in this Arab Spring is very suspicious and needs to be looked at.

        In fact, I believe that this Arab spring was Bush’s true goal (actually an old goal and much discussed before he did it): plant a capitalistic, democracry in the Middle East in order to kill the main recruiting tool of al Qaida: the idea that jihad against America is holy- that capitalism, democracy & freedom is EVIL BY NATURE. He wanted to plant another, conflicting idea: Arab Muslims can still be good muslims and have a democratic, capitalistic, free society. And he was hoping to cause other Arab muslim states to see the Iraqis & Afghanistanis voting, creating a constitution & getting rich off their own oil. (the idea that Bush went for oil is just stupid- that would be the most expensive oil our country ever bought!). He, and others like him, hoped that al Qaida’s claim to be the ‘solution’ would be refuted by a concrete example. They hoped that other repressed Arabs would rise up (just as they HAVE done) and that the United States could step in and ‘guide’ the new revolutions toward our way of life. Everyone would win. We get new trading partners, new oil contracts, and no more terrorism. Nice, huh?

        Obama is 100% scuttling the great results from Bush’s Iraq campaign. It sickens me.

        If I can give one suggestion to you Alex: NEVER assume things ‘just happen’. Never assume world events are hodge podge. They are crafted. Each time you see an event, regardless of how the media spins it, ask yourself, “Who WINS because this has happened?” Find the answer to that and you will find the truth (and usually a rat.)

      • This administration has already said they want $10/gallon gas. You are correct, keep the mideast in turmoil, hamper domestic energy production and push the UN-driven, progressive-driven Green agenda. The hope is to lead us to a full-blown economic collapse where we will have to rely on the world bank (like every other failing nation). A big step towards One world government. Obama does not, and has never had the backs of Americans

      • Quite the opposite. He is aiming for our destruction. He HATES this nation. He is sympathetic to the Muslims (but unlike them, he has zero love of God). He only knows blind ambition & lust for money & power. He is evil. We will also see more of him in the near future…

  4. One could argue that Obama didn’t even need to get a ‘quick’ victory for 2012 in the first place, for his administration killed Bin Laden. Given the jubilation this brought to so many would potentially be enough to win him some votes. I must disagree with you on three accounts: Britain and France’s contribution to the effort in Libya was not as pathetic as you make it sound. As far as we’re concerned, we did not ‘beg’ for the USA to assist. Since they are often so fond of the notion of them being a ‘World Police’ it seemed strange to the rest of the world at their lack of intervention – especially seeing as human rights were being savagely violated. Also that you think that there will be no ‘infighting’ for all of the opponents are dead. The only opponents that have been killed are the Gaddafi-loyalists. Libya is largely tribal country, so as the decisions as to what Libya should be politically start to be debated, we can expect much ‘infighting’ to occur. Thirdly, that as a result of a unified muslim block doesn’t necessarily mean the destruction of Israel. As we have seen recently, the want for peace has become stronger in most of the arab countries. By the release of prisoners by both sides shows concessions in differences. Since such a democratic influence encouraged the revolutions in the first place, then whats to say that Muslim Brotherhood will gain power at all. With the new arab countries free from dictatorship, it would not be insane to assume that they will not rush to an oppressive regime. If a strong democratic policy does take a foothold in these new states, then surely room for debate and talks on peace will open. The fact that the West has already had such an intervening role in Libya suggests that they are going to have an equal amount of influence in encouraging what political system Libya will adopt. Who knows, maybe there could even be another revolution if America doesn’t like what it sees. Maybe America’s ‘special assets’ will never quite leave.

    • Alex,

      I’m sorry if I offended your sense of national pride! I love the Brits, so don’t get me wrong. I wrote with a good deal of sarcasm toward Obama. My point was to show that although Obama is playing the innocent coquette in this Libyan war, he, and he alone (he never asked Congress for permission as per our Constitution) did this thing in Libya. I didn’t say the response from Britain & France was pathetic. But it couldn’t have been done without our military. That is just a fact. It was our drones & air craft, our naval support ships and our missiles used to target Gaddafi’s military points. It was our special ops that went in a couple of weeks ago. These were the ‘special ops’ that I am referring to. I have no doubt that your soldiers fought bravely as well. So, please don’t be offended there. My entire article is to lay the blame firmly at Obama’s feet. I need to show that Obama, and the United States, are 100% accountable for these mass graves & the assassination of Gaddafi.

      You say that there was a ‘lack of intervention’ by the U.S. You could not be more wrong! The media is owned & operated by the Progressives. This is a big lie. How could we NOT be involved if it was our military, navy, air force & special forces that were primarily used? Obama is hiding behind the skirts of Cameron & Sarkozy on this one.

      While it is true that Libya is tribal in nature (as are all Arab countries) and that the potential is there for more in-fighting, might I point out that with these assassinations, ‘free political speech’ might be, um, ‘constrained’ somewhat now? Would YOU feel free to speak up after seeing the execution of 300 political opponents of this new regime?

      As for the Arabs showing a desire for peace with Israel, you shock me! Please provide examples. The so called trade of prisoners was a sham, pure and simple. The Israelis traded over 1000 bloody, convicted, remorseless terrorists who swore to continue their terrorist activities now that they are free for ONE Israeli soldier who had done no harm. Please read my article: Palestinians vs. Israelis- Israel wins the Morality Game Hands Down article.

      Alex, you will see our ‘assets’ leave immediately. I promise you. Obama is like no other president in USA history. Any other US president would keep troops & ‘advisors’ around until they were sure that the situation would work in America’s favor, right? Any country would. But not Obama. He does not want peace in the Middle East. No. His aim is to destroy America in favor of something much, much bigger- a new world order which will include a new American Union (modeled after the EU). And he wants to be the boss of that, I promise you. I invite you to read my article, “Is it Ineptitude? Or Is Obama Crazy Like a Fox?” to see where I am coming from. This man is in bed with Progressives. And these people have a plan, not just for the United States, but for England too. Their agenda is much bigger than most people realize. Their choke hold on all the press, all the magazines, all the t.v. shows, all the movie production studios is complete. Please read my article, “Who is Rupert Murdoch & Who Owns the News” for a real eye opener- I prove, through the stock market, that the same people own both the ‘conservative’ & ‘liberal’ press. We are being spoon fed, I promise you. People around the world better wake up- before it is too late.

    • Oh, concerning 2012. Obama absolutely would have been hurt in 2012 if there was still an ongoing war in Libya. You see, he is acting unconstitutionally in Libya. He never asked for the use of the military from our Congress. This loses him big points with the critical Independent vote. Also, Americans are SICK of war in general. Obama campaigned in 2008 as an anti-war candidate. He criticized Bush relentlessly for getting involved in Iraq. And here he is in Egypt, Libya & Yemen as well as making open threats agains Syria & Iran. Not very ‘anti-war’, I assure you. He has been losing significant support from the far left (his normally strongest supporters) over these conflicts involving the use of our military. Wrapping this up before the start of his campaign was crucial for him. A quick victory with a quick creation of a new government provides stark contrast to what most of America considers to be the failed, eight year wars in Afghanistan & Iraq. You just watch him brag about this on the campaign trail and see if you change your mind.

Please join the conversation! All comments are monitored, so if you have a private note you wish to leave, just say so. Also, all profane or unhelpful comments will be deleted. Thank you!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s