Paris and denial

An open letter to President Hollande, President Obama, Chancellor Merkel, Prime Minister David Cameron and other Western Leaders

Yesterday, I posted here on the threat posed by the fifth column within Western societies.  I had no idea that the (incomplete) list of atrocities, committed by Muslims in the name of the 'religion of peace' would have new attacks to be added, so soon.

Firstly, let's get Jihadi John out of the way.  These attacks in Paris required planning, coordination and materiel.  It beggars belief that these attacks were in any way a reaction to the killing of the Daesh executioner, Jihadi John.  No way!

Staying with Jihadi John, for a moment, it is shaming that the UK Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn bemoaned that it is a pity that Jihadi John wasn't brought before a court of law  rather than just being eliminated.  It is this kind of seriously muddled and plain wrong, thinking, that has brought us to where we are.  Didn't expect too much from Corbyn, who has 'form' in standing-up for terrorists but feel ashamed and embarrassed for all those decent Labour party supporters, who he claims to represent.

President Hollande, of France, has reacted by closing the border and declaring a state of emergency.  Monsieur Le President!  Too late.  The enemy is within!  For years you and your Socialist party and the Communists and other liberals have invited more and more potential terrorists into your country.  You have allowed 'no go' areas to develop.  You have allowed abominations like the 'jungle' camp at Calais, full of lawless illegal immigrants, to flourish.  You have failed to act, time and time again, when Muslims have committed attacks.

In reaction to this latest attack, President Hollande has stated that the reaction will be pitiless.  Why wasn't it so after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, in January, or any of the other attacks?

I will answer for you.  Indeed, for all of the Western leaders.

Simply put, it is because Hollande, Obama, Merkel, Cameron and all of the others are in denial.  You think that ignoring the issue of the Muslim fifth column, will somehow make it go away.  That appeasing Muslim groups, who label themselves as 'moderate' will somehow lead to those groups delivering-up the 'radicals' in their midst.  That by continually bowing down to the Wahabi fanatics of Saudi Arabia and the Ayatollahs in Tehran and Qom, they will become reasonable.  That ignoring the atrocities that are daily carried out, in the name of Islam - the stoning of women, the hanging of homosexuals and the persecution of Christians, for example - shouldn't stop us considering these people as the same as us.  That being kind and considerate and opening up your countries to an alien invasion, is somehow the right thing to do.

You political leaders have facilitated these atrocities.  Aided and abetted by your fellow-travellers in the media.

Europe, the USA and Canada are societies/civilisations that have been founded and developed on Judeo-Christian principles.  The tolerance found in the West is completely absent in Islam.  Not just overlooked or ignored but completely absent.  Tolerance in the West has been declining in recent years.  The cult of Political Correctness feeds an unhealthy intolerance and paradoxically, supports the most un-PC of groups - Muslims.  As a white, hetrosexual male, if I pass a derogatory comment or just any kind of comment about a homosexual, the PC brigade will attack me as being bigoted.  If the homosexual is black, I will also get the racist card, thrown at me.  If the homosexual is a lesbian, you can add in a sexist charge.  And yet, Daesh have been throwing homosexuals off of buildings (and filming the events) since last year,  Iran hangs homosexuals from crane jibs and Afghanistan and Pakistan stone to death, women who are accused of adultery and the PC crowd is silent.  Why?  Well mustn't offend the Muslims.

In a badly-timed TV interview, President Obama told Americans, yesterday, that ISIS was contained. Well the Paris killers schooled Obama on that!  The only way you can say they are 'contained' is when they are contained within a box or in an ash pile.

We shouldn't be surprised at Obama's latest failings.  This is the man who claims that so called Climate Change is the biggest threat to America's national security.  The same man who wants to bring in 100,000 Syrian 'refugees' and of course, there will be no radical Muslims in that lot.   The same man who has opened up the Southern border, such that you can't really say that America still has one!

My message to Western leaders, other than Obama is now is the time to abandon the US President.  He seems intent on destroying America and will drag others into his highly warped dystopia.

Second message is, end the immigration crisis now.  Close the borders, deploy naval forces to the Mediterranean Sea and send back all vessels containing refugees, from whence they came.  Deploy NATO troops to the southern European borders, build fences and keep the refugees out.  Those 'refugees' that have arrived.  Put them in buses and trains and send them back.  If you don't then prepare for more Paris-type attacks.  London, Berlin, Munich, Amsterdam, Vienna, Rome, the list will go on and on.  We are at war.

I remind you all of Pastor Niemoller's words

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

 
   The me could be you as a Christian, you as a homosexual, you as an atheist, you as woman.  Indeed the you could be anyone that isn't a Muslim.  In fact, the you could be a Shiite Muslim, if it is the Sunni's that are in the ascendancy!

Action is needed or the horrors of Hitler's holocaust will be as nothing compared to what is to come.
Daesh is a death cult that some call a cancer on the Muslim body.  In the world of medicine, cancer is often treated with radiation.  Maybe that is what is called for, in Raqqa for a start.  Then the appeasement of Saudi Arabia and Iran and Pakistan needs to be very forcefully addressed.

Fundamentally, the West needs to understand that playing by the rule book, to defeat someone who know no rule book other than the Quran, is a policy that is doomed to failure.  Ask yourself.  Would you really be concerned if Raqqu was carpet-bombed, or worse, if such action stopped more Paris-like attacks?

News update November 10

IAAF and Russia doping
Lord Sebastian Coe is either being excessively polite to the Russian athletics authorities or he is not yet entirely confident that he can persuade the organisation that he now leads, the IAAF, to do the right thing.

The World Anti-Doping Association - WADA - found widespread and state-sponsored support of a programme designed to thwart efforts to root out performance enhancing and other doping, from athletics.  The crystal clear recommendation is that Russia should be banned from international athletic meetings for a period of time.  Such time would include the 2016 Rio de Janiero Olympics.  Consider that there is none of the usual 'bureacratese' about the WADA report - nothing about 'appropriate disciplinary action' or 'measures should be taken'.  WADA are clear - a ban.

Come on Lord Coe!  Send the world of sport a very clear message that doping is unacceptable and will be punished.  This might be harsh on any 'clean' Russian athletes but that's just tough.  Russia needs to suffer for its sins and so that the world of athletics knows, that the IAAF has teeth.

Global Warming
I don't subscribe to the fad of changing a subject title simply because the facts stubbornly refuse to support it!  So I won't be discussing the faddish 'Climate Change'

The BBC and no doubt all of their fellow travellers in the environmental lobby are sounding the alarm bells because the temperature figures for 2015 through to the end of September are 1.02C above the average for the period 1850 to 1900.  They try to slide in a comment about 'confusion' relating to earlier periods but we have seen, time and time again, that the Global Warming scaremongers have consistently fudged and fixed the numbers to suit their pseudo-science.  Always, always remember, these folks have monetary and career based vested interests in pushing the warnings.

The latest data is a joint effort from the UK Meteorological Office and the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.  The latter were heavily discredited, and remain so in many people's opinions, by their highly questionable behaviour in the Climate Gate scandal.

The BBC do have the good grace to admit that the so called El Nino weather phenomenon is also a contributory factor in the temperature increase but don't say whether or not this was present during the earlier time period - so we don't know if the data sets are comparing apples with apples!  Nothing new for the Global Warming industry!  

Refugees
Prepare yourself for a shock!

Sitting comfortably?  Okay, I'll begin.

It seems that a leading member of Daesh/ISIS has been discovered among the so called Syrian 'refugees'.  I know, what a shock, almost floored me.  Then I remembered that sensible commentators - you know, those that point out that most of the 'refugees' are in fact young men of military age and these far outnumber the relatively few families - the commentators have consistently predicted that Daesh would use the situation to infiltrate battle-hardened terrorists into Europe.

Don't be surprised at this story, when or more accurately if, you hear about it but do consider how many we don't know about!  It would be naive in the extreme, to suppose that these murderous maniacs have only slipped one killer in among the 'refugees'.  Especially when the extremely foolish Merkel, threw open the German border, to them all.

Incidentally, it seems that the 'refugees' are very fast wearing out their welcome - or in many cases have already worn it out - in Sweden, Austria and Germany. If Twitter chatter is to be believed, these countries are seeing significantly increased instances of rape and child molestation as well has attacks on Christians.  And that is before Daesh get themselves properly situated!  

Yemen
Just thought I would mention it.  It seems to have fallen off of the news agenda in recent months but the few available reports suggest that this Saudi/Iran proxy war is particularly bloody and, as is so often the case, civilians are the largest victim group.

Don't hear too much wailing and gnashing of teeth from Obama's White House though.  One senses that this will run and run.

Israel
You likely won't hear too much about what is going on in Israel either.

Palestinians - remember those people that 'right-on' countries have been rushing to recognise as a state - are entering Israel and then seeking to stab and kill random innocent Israeli civilians.  Old lady on a bus - stab her - in the name of peace!  Group standing at a bus stop - drive a car into them and then jump out and stab them, just to make sure they die - for peace, of course.

You will though, hear the usual Leftist bleating if Israel reacts by sealing off Gaza and the West Bank.  I am kind of surprised that Netanyahu hasn't done this already!

More tomorrow....

America's next President

This is principally aimed at the candidates that are vying for the highest office in America.  In fact, it is directed towards those seeking the Republican nomination.  Maybe think of it as as kind of 'what's needed' list.

First and foremost - integrity.  Under the previous Clinton Administration, America and the world became accustomed to disingenuous and evasive answers to straight-forward questions.  Under the Obama regime, the spineless American media mostly hasn't even bothered to ask questions.  They have accepted the froth pushed out by the mendacious White House.  Given the close familial ties between senior White House staffers and media personnel, that is perhaps, not too surprising.  So the next President needs to be honest (examples are below) and to actually talk to the American people and those in the rest of the world - not read scripted lies and half-truths from an autocue.

Secondly, have a plan to tackle the deficit.  Here is where some of that honesty is required.  The next President needs to tell America that it has to stop living beyond its means.  Americans must be told that it is not acceptable to impoverish their children, grand-children and great-grandchildren.  They need to know and understand that America must not only eliminate its deficit but must also reduce its debt.  That means a budget that matches revenue from taxes, with expenditure.  On the expenditure side, some of that money must go towards paying down the US National Debt.

This is where a GOP led Congress comes in.  The House and Senate must put the national interests ahead of those of their own district's/State's.  Many of these Republicans have been elected - some repeatedly so - on a ticket of being 'fiscally prudent and responsible'.  Well there isn't much prudence or responsibility in stuffing the US Budget with your own pork-barrel wants.

Of course, any President or even any nominee, telling Americans that they need to tighten their belts will face strong, even rabid opposition.  The choice though is simple and stark - rein back spending now or sit back and watch America's continued decline, on all fronts.  Sit back, do nothing and see more and more Americans on food stamps - more than 49 million, at the moment (and climbing) and they are not all immigrants!

Part of this also requires addressing the immigration issue.  How, when America is broke - and believe me, a country with the debt levels that America has, is broke - how can America afford to bring in more and more immigrants? Legal or illegal is doesn't matter, America just doesn't have the resources to fund these people.  The biggest part of this problem lies with illegal immigration.  It sounds crazy to have to say this but the in-coming President must understand that when he or she swears the oath of office, part of protecting the US Constitution means upholding the laws of the United States.  So the southern border must be closed and such closure must be enforced by appropriate forces - military, Homeland Security and local law enforcement, until such time as primary security devices - otherwise known as a very high wall and such - are in place.   Allied to this must be the expulsion of illegal immigrants already in the USA.  Absolutely no amnesty.  Let me say that again, No Amnesty  - it is so very wrong to reward law-breaking.

Consider, for a moment.  The Department of Homeland Security has a budget in excess of US$38 billion.  A significant part of their brief is to 'secure and manage' the border.  Does anyone think that they have done a good job on that, in recent years?  They have effectively facilitated the invasion of illegal immigrants.  Does anyone really think that Daesh and Al Qaeda have not managed to slip terrorist murderers across the border, when it has been so porous?  As with politicians and the media in Europe, Obama and the press would have you ignore the evidence of your eyes and instead believe that all of the invading force are women and children!

Immigration brings thoughts of foreign relations.  I don't want to be too radical but America's next President needs to remember that the USA's allies are friends.  Ignoring them, bypassing them is not the way to treat them.  How did it come to pass that America finds itself allied itself with Iran?  A country that immediately after ending its dancing on the streets of Tehran, following the so called 'Iran Agreement' , then has its leader, the war-monger Khameni, calling for 'Death to America'.  How can America abandon Israel, simply because its Prime Minister doesn't suck-up or kow-tow to the narcissistic Obama?  Isn't it enough that Obama abases the USA with his bowing down to the terrorist supporting Saudis and Qataris?

In addition to remembering which countries are America's friends the next President should also bring basic negotiating skills to the table.  Giving nuclear weapons to Iran will surely be Obama's true legacy but so will abandoning millions of Cubans to continued servitude under the oppressive Castro regime.   The next President needs to remember that Iran's development of inter-continental missiles does not represent a threat to Israel.  They are aimed at the USA!

The next President will have a full domestic agenda, clearing-up the mess that is ObamaCare and the socialistic Common Core programme but he or she should not ignore foreign affairs.  North Korea, like Iran has become emboldened under Obama - indeed it is hard to think which enemy of the USA hasn't - but the next President cannot afford to further alienate ~America's traditional allies.

The next President needs to have a sense of proportion.  John Kerry and Obama might consider Climate Change, or whatever it is being called this week, to be the greatest threat to national security but the true greatest threat is terrorism in all its guises - the state-sponsored variety from Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar and the enemy within.  This fifth column, which seeks to impose shariah law in America, is led by the Council on American Islam Relations (CAIR).  These people are falsely recognised as 'moderates'.  The regularly cover-up for what the media then calls ' the excesses ' of Islamic behaviour.  The truth is that these are not 'excesses'.  They are the realities of Islam.  These media fools, and their fellow-travellers in Washington, think that one can coexist with Islam.  They ignore the plight of Christians in the Middle East, who, as I write  are being eliminated, every hour of every day (if that comes as a surprise to you, blame the media's blindness!)    Homosexuals are thrown off of buildings - the media and Obama says nothing.  Women are stoned to death for adultery because they 'allowed'  themselves to be raped and America's President says nothing.

I mentioned earlier, that the next President needs to restore integrity to the office.  Hand in hand with that is honesty and demanding that of others.  Liberals or Progressives, call them what you will, have mis-appropriated the English language and have, for too long, been allowed to get away with blatant hypocrisy.  The oppose the death penalty for convicted criminals, they oppose racism and then they support the murder of unborn children, which is the largest killer of America's blacks.  They don't just support abortion, they want the state to fund it.  They do this because they believe in it but they don't accept that others are very opposed to it and certainly are against paying for it.  That's the Liberal version of freedom of speech.  You can have freedom of speech, so long as you agree with their views.  If you don't, you are a racist, homophobe or right-wing or a fascist, etc..

To wrap-up, in the same vein, can anyone say what it is that homosexuals want?  By all studies, they represent a small percentage of the population - 3-5% in Western countries.  Initially they wanted to end discrimination that they were subjected to.  This they have largely achieved and yet now they want more.  Don't know what it is that they want  but they want more!  They want to not be persecuted for the sexual choices, that's fair enough, I guess.  Why then do they want to provoke and persecute people that have very deeply held religious beliefs in opposition to homosexuality?  Why is it okay to support homosexuality but not okay to oppose it.  And, fundamentally, why do these very same Liberals that are so pro-homosexuality,  also also silent on the atrocities that are perpetrated against homosexuals, by Muslims, around the world, not just in the Daesh areas of Syria and Iraq..  Hopefully, the next President will 'call-out' these hypocrites and bring honesty to the White House.

EU Immigration - The solution

The European Union is facing an unprecedented invasion, right now.

Hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East are swarming into the EU, or are poised to do so.  Germany is said to be facing an influx of more than 800,000, this year.

This solution might work for some of them.

Many of these migrants are Muslims, fleeing war in Syria and Iraq or in Somalia or Eritrea or Ethiopia or Afghanistan.

Surely it would be far, far better for these migrants to be re-housed in a culture that is more in keeping with their own?

So why don't the EU authorities turn these people around and send them to Saudi Arabia or Iran - depending upon which Islamic sect, they follow.

Both are rich countries, both are strongly religious and won't persecute the migrants for practicing their religion - so long as they chose the right country.  Both are large countries with plenty of room for settling large numbers.  Saudi Arabia has a large population of immigrants from the Indian sub-continent - mainly Pakistan, it could simply replace these with the immigrants that are most in need.

This solution would reduce the burden on European countries and stop the indigenous people from feeling swamped and for their ailing economies being even more strained.  Plus, it gives the Saudis and the Iranians the opportunity to show charity and compassion to their co-religionists.  Win/Win really!

This would also take away the opportunity of those in Europe to say that these are merely economic migrants - just looking for a better life in Europe, than they can achieve at home.

If this is successful and these masses of Muslims could be accommodated within these two stalwarts of the Muslim community, then perhaps those Muslims that have migrated to Europe, during previous upheavals, could also leave and settle there, as well.

Too simplistic?  Consider how many Greeks and Turks moved in opposite directions when those nations moved apart in the 1920's.  Consider how many Muslims moved from what was to become India to what was to become Pakistan, in 1947 (and Hindus in the opposite direction.)  Mass migration can work, indeed has worked but has been most successful, when the people moving, move to an area with which they are culturally familiar.

Maybe the Americans could try this with their non-Mexican immigrants?  Let them stay in Mexico rather than take them into the USA and put them, (in an effort to disperse the large numbers) into alien environments.

If something isn't done though, watch for the further rise of far Right parties in Europe.  The French National Front is already in the ascendancy and will only be stopped from taking the French presidency by a coalition of Socialists, Communists and Conservatives.  We see, in Spain, Greece and Germany, a backlash building.  Even in my beloved UK, the UK Independence Party garnered a lot of support, in the last General Election, because of it's anti-immigration policies.

Doing nothing, isn't really an option!

Obama's revenge

Say what you like about President Obama, no one can accuse him of letting the grass grow under his feet, when it comes to settling scores.

No sooner had Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, been re-elected (read more here ) than people from Obama's team have leaked highly classified information relating to Israel's nuclear capabilities.

Be very clear, this leak was directed against Israel.  The document also contained information on Britain's and France's capabilities but these were redacted and only that on Israel, remained.

Israel has incurred the wrath of Obama because they, and particularly Netanyahu, see the dangers in treating with Iran, as with nuclear deal and, very publicly, say so.

Maybe Israel should follow the example of Iran?

Here they are, going to get a sweetheart deal that will allow them to continue with their development of a nuclear capability and will see economic sanctions lifted and yet do the Iranians sit back and take it easy?  Heavens no (or in Iran's case, hell no.)

They haven't even signed the deal with America but that hasn't stopped them from fomenting trouble and seeking regime change in Yemen.  And this is where it starts to get really dangerous.

America has withdrawn troops from a base in Yemen because they feared it might be overrun by Al Qaeda terrorists.  No Alamo type defence for Obama's boys!  They ran for the hills.  Is it any wonder when America has a President that fetes the family of a deserter, like Bowe Bergdahl?  With all the money that is spent on America's military, you have to expect that the 'top brass' must know the consequences of this and previous capitulations and yet all of those 4 stars and admirals stay silent.  They shame the uniform they wear and the brave soldiers, sailors and airmen who serve under them.
Let's assume that the military plead ignorance, for a moment.  Let them take a look to the North, to a country called Iraq.  At Obama's bidding, America ran away from here before the job was complete.  America's military leaders knew and know that this was the wrong thing to do.    The result?  In the South of the country, Iran and its stooges allowed ISIS to advance far into the country and take over large swathes of central and Northern Iraq.   I suppose Iran and their local militias figured that ISIS would focus on the North of the country but the Kurdish Peshmerga proved a far more formidable force than the 'turn tail and run' Iraqi Army and so ISIS has sought to change direction, southwards, and so started to step on Iran's toes.    And now we have the position where Iran and its local militias have tried to take Tikrit but cannot do so and in steps the US air force to bomb a path for them.  Of course, good form requires that the Iranians step back while America bombs and are not seen on the scene but don't doubt who will take the credit for ISIS' defeat.

The consequences of Obama's actions are many-fold.

Saudi Arabia and other Arabian Gulf countries can clearly see that Obama is abandoning the Gulf and allowing Iran a free rein to become the regional super-power.  These other countries have intervened in Yemen, because America ran away and because they cannot allow Iran a foothold on the Arabian peninsula.  Saudi Arabia is not in a position to stop Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon - Obama has seen to that.  So we can now expect Saudi Arabia to get its own nuclear weapons.  Perhaps buying from Pakistan or even North Korea?  Saudi Arabia has plenty of what both of these countries need - money.

So courtesy of Obama, the Arabian Gulf will become a nuclear-armed region, in a short space of time.

Of course, will Israel sit tight and allow Iran to become a nuclear power?  Or will they bite the bullet and bomb the Iranian facilities out of existence?  Will Israel get its nuclear retaliation in, first?  Might Israel figure, that the usual opprobrium that is heaped upon them, from Arab nations, would be more than somewhat muted, given that both Israel and these Arab nations share a common enemy - their neighbor, Iran.  The Europeans would screech and moan but what else can they do?  The US?  What do Israel have to fear?  They will get no favours or benefits from America for the next two years, only more of the same from the Obama White House.  Russia will use any such event as an opportunity to expand in Ukraine and maybe even further westward.  China?  They could be bought off with Gulf oil.

Such is the crop from the seeds that Obama has sown!

Somebody on Twitter, suggested that Vice-President Joe Biden was Obama's impeachment insurance - people might consider impeaching Obama but then would look at the line of succession and abandon the notion, when they see that Biden is next in line!  Biden does have an almost perverted interest in fondling other men's wives, which would be interesting on State occasions but surely the time has come to consider him the far lesser of the two evils?

Think of the damage that Obama can do in another 20 months.  Move for articles of impeachment to be issued, now.

Well done Bibi

 The title says it all.  Well done to Benjamin Netanyahu on his success in the recent Israeli elections.

This victory was seemingly against the odds as domestic issues - the economy etc., - tended to predominate and the story was not good.  Also because, to America's shame, it seems that President Obama went out of his way to interfere in Israeli politics and to actively work against Netanyahu's re-election.

It must have really stuck in the craw, for Islam-loving Obama, to find his only non-Bibi choice was a party bearing the word Zionist in its name but he swallowed deep and followed his political teachings, where the end justifies the means.  Except that this time, his end wasn't met.  The people of Israel did not fear the wrath of Obama.  

I trust though, that they can now depend on the support of the US Congress, whom Bibi just recently addressed.  The rumour-mill has it that in retaliation or more accurately, in a fit of childish pique, Obama will now change the US' stance at the United Nations and withdraw the previously solid and constant support for Israel.  

And why is Obama doing this?  

Well it is of course because Obama is looking to seal an agreement with Iran.  He sees this as an opportunity for a legacy.  His flagship Affordable Care Act or Obamacare as it is better known, is a miserable failure.  This will end-up being repealed wholly or in part, in the next administration. The American people are seeing through the pack of lies on which it was passed.  Not least because the people that passed it and their union backers have claimed exemptions  for themselves.  It's funny how Americans whose ancestors threw off the 'yoke of a monarchy' now have to endure an elected monarchy that sets one rule for the people and then sets themselves above those same rules.  Not so much 'let them eat cake' as let them eat higher insurance premiums'!

Benjamin Netanyahu understands that the deal being mooted, is a bad deal.  In this he is supported by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, who recognise the threat posed by a nuclear armed Iran.  This isn't just an existential threat to Israel.  Iran is developing Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs).  The clue to their target is in the name - intercontinental.  The target is of course, the 'Great Satan' itself, the USA.  Once again, Obama is seen to be jeopardising the safety of America and Americans.  His swapping of the 5 Taliban terrorists for the deserter Bowe Bergdahl was another example. 

Obama has pussy-footed around on Syria and ISIS and in part has allowed ISIS its successes because it serves his anti-Israel and anti-America aims.  It has been left to the courageous Peshmerga forces of Kurdistan to offer any real opposition to the murderous Islamic State - which Obama still insists, isn't  Islamic!  The Peshmerga have been collecting arms from European countries but isn't being supported by the USA.  Obama prefers instead, to put minimal resources into training (again) the Iraqi army controlled by Baghdad.  This is the same army that is being supported by murderous Shia-Muslim militias.  These same militias, in recent activity, went into Sunni-Muslim tribal areas, previously controlled by ISIS and then started massacring local Sunnis.  Obama and the Baghdad government know, absolutely know, that the defeat and annihilation of ISIS in Southern Iraq, is very dependent  upon the support of Sunnis but that didn't stop them from letting the militias loose.  Is there any wonder that the Kurds want to take Mosul and Kirkuk themselves rather than leave it to the butchers from Baghdad?

It seems clear to this non-American observer, that Obama is working against the interest of the USA and its allies (sadly, a dwindling band) and it is now incumbent on the US Congress, in addition to providing support to Israel, to commence impeachment proceedings against Obama and should at the same time, use existing congressional mechanisms to de-fund Obamacare and other anti-American and anti-free enterprise legislation that has been recently passed.

Be clear, America and the World cannot successfully survive another two years of this very dangerous White House.

Do Americans still have courage? 

For Liberals and Socialists

Conservative readers might also find that this blog strikes a chord, so you too may want to read on.  The main thrust though is to pose questions for Liberals (in the American meaning) and Socialists - and all of their fellow travelers.

Listening to the TV news, this morning, I was struck by the time spent on news stories about the destruction of 3,500 year old Assyrian artefacts by ISIS.  Such destruction, by the mindless Muslim zealots who promote Islamic 'jihad' against all non-Muslims and all symbols of pre-Mohammaden era art, is not unprecedented.  The same happened in Taliban Afghanistan and in Mali.

However, my interest was more on what wasn't being reported.  There was a spokesman from UNESCO calling the destruction a war crime and then various other talking heads explaining the 'rationale' behind this.

What you didn't see though, was any linkage to the far more important destruction that is occurring, on a daily basis, in ISIS territories and also in other Muslim dominated countries.  While you will hear squeals of outrage about the destruction of these statues, you won't hear any such noise about the mass murder of Christians by ISIS.  Even the murder of homosexuals, usually such a sensitive touch-point for Liberals, evokes no outcry.  There are frequent reports of homosexual men being thrown alive from tall buildings and cliff-tops.  Where are the protests?  Christians and Yazidis are being lined-up and shot in the back of the head and their bodies pushed into mass graves, in scenes reminiscent of the atrocities committed by the Nazis, but there is only muted comment.

Thinking about this, I don't believe that this can be put down to post-Charlie Hebbdo fear.  This silence pre-dates these January attacks in Paris.  Homosexuals have been being hung from crane gibbets for years by the murderous Iranian regime but the LGBT community keeps quiet.  I wrote a blog-post on this site about the changes to the UK marriage laws and how they affect homosexuals and this piece received many comments from seemingly homosexuals, who called me homophobe and yet these same people seem to stay silent in the face of the far more important than marriage rites, state-sponsored persecution and murder of homosexuals.  I guess that is what it means to be a Liberal?

Attack a comedian, who makes a risque or slightly derogatory statement about homosexuals or 'trannies' or whatever, but say nothing about what is happening in ISIS Iraq and ISIS Syria and Iran and Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.  Let President Obama get away with denigrating Premier Netanyahu  when he questions the idiocy of allowing Iran to become a nuclear-armed state (and the betrayal of America's staunchest ally in the Middle East) but don't support Republicans who recognise the evil that is in power in these countries, because, 'Hey, they're republicans, right?'

I think I can kind of understand the deafening silence from Socialists.  It kind of fits with their overwhelming sense of guilt at the 'imperialist' past of the West.  Something along the lines of  'well it is a normal response because these countries have been so exploited by the West, why would we get upset when they finally throw off the imperialist yoke and hit back at us, their oppressors'  Or some such rubbish as that!  Then there is the belief that is deeply held by Socialists that all the ills of the world can be squarely laid at the feet of Capitalism and if Capitalism is destroyed and replaced with Socialism then there would be no need for religions (ref. Imagine by John Lennon) and all would live in peace (and prosperity, of course)!

What I find very puzzling and concerning though, is the silence from Christian church leaders and from Hindu leaders.  It is very disappointing that Pope Francis and Archbishop Welby have not publicly, and regularly so, denounced the persecution of Christians within the Muslim world.  To be clear, this is not a problem that is confined to ISIS areas.  Christians are being persecuted, and have been for many, many years, in Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia and in the countries where Arab oil money holds sway.  Egypt's Coptic community suffers daily attacks but the Liberals and Socialists and their fellow-travelers in the media, stay silent.

So I am calling for a sense of proportion.  I am upset about 3,500 year old stone statues and carvings being destroyed but I am outraged by Christians being killed because of their faith and by homosexuals being killed because of their sexual inclinations.  I am outraged that politicians and church leaders in the West do not speak out (make that scream out) more about these atrocities.  That these politicians  don't adopt a 'you've got more to lose policy' with Saudi Arabia and Iran and Egypt and Pakistan, by withholding aid, in the case of Egypt and Pakistan and perhaps more effectively by cutting off all diplomatic ties with those countries and imposing full trade sanctions, until the persecution ceases and until those countries adopt the same sort of freedom for an individual to freely practice their chosen religious faith or sexual inclination, that all people in the West enjoy - Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Taoists, Jedi, Buddhists, etc..

How long do you think that Egypt or Pakistan would survive without foreign aid?  Yes Pakistan would descend into chaos and, given its nuclear status, that is a concern but measures could be taken to mitigate that risk.  How long would Saudi Arabia survive if its 'princes' were denied access to the 'sinful' joys of the West?

Having read through the above, I realise that this is bordering on a rant.  No politician in the West has the courage to do the right thing and oppose militant Muslims.  They are too wrapped-up in preserving the comforts that they currently enjoy.  The media cannot be relied upon - they always look for equivalency - the CIA 'torture' terrorists with buckets of water and that is then 'matched' by ISIS burning people alive or beheading innocents, on video!  I am reminded of the quote attributed to Lenin, something along the lines of 'the capitalists will sell us the rope with which we shall hang them'.  The silence of the West in the face of the destruction of the values that have produced the greatest advances in humankind, will lead to a return to the barbarism from which Islam arose.

You should pity and weep for your children and grandchildren at the world that we bequeath to them!      

Answer to the ISIS dilemma

Western governments are in denial.

Right now they know that there is no appetite for any kind of 'boots on the ground' nor for any tie-up with the odious Assad regime. 

So what can they do to address this very significant threat? 

They are no doubt counting on ISIS' fifth columns within the USA, UK and France to commit bombing atrocities such that a groundswell of opinion for military intervention builds.  They must calculate how many bombings are needed.  Another Boston or maybe a spectacular like 9/11 or another Fusilier Lee Rigby or 7/7 in London?  Or maybe this time in Paris, which has a very special concern about its growing and self-alienated Muslim minority?

We should be alarmed because these atrocities will occur.  There is an inevitability about this that has escaped the media.

Islam is a religion of dominance.  Its adherents allow for no 'non-believers'.  You are either a Muslim and follower of Mohammed or you are an infidel.  Simply put, ones that doesn't follow Islam.  It will come as no comfort to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, Atheists or those that follow the Jedi tradition, that their long and  often deeply held beliefs, count for nothing.  They are infidels and they must either convert to Islam or be punished.

The punishment is now being meted out on a daily basis in Iraq, to Christians and to Yazidis.  Also now, we hear, to Shiite Muslims.  The punishment is death.  There is no concept of co-existence, no 'my way or the highway'.  It's the Muslim way or death! Nothing extreme about this Sunni Muslim religion!  Think about this when you next hear some liberal fool tell you that Islam is the religion of peace!   Look twice and listen thrice at the 'moderate' Islamist that says that these fanatics don't represent the true face of Islam.  Simply put, these fanatics do represent Islam.

Catholics and Protestants fought many wars and caused countless deaths in furtherance of the schism in Christianity but the numbers have the potential to fade into insignificance compared to the deaths that will flow from the conflict between the two strands of Islam.  The 8 year long Iraq/Iran war cost the lives of an estimated million souls but that can be viewed as an appetizer for the multi-course banquet of death that awaits.  The 200,000 deaths in the proxy war being fought in Syria is also barely a taste of things to come. 

Right now, Sunni Saudi Arabia, with its extreme (though that term is relative) Wahabi sect, is at war with Shiite Iran and, in Syria and Iraq, the Saudis are in the ascendancy.  I say this, not to seek support for Iran, who are as likely to be as murderous as are the Saudi and Qatari backed ISIS fanatics.   Rather, this is a statement of the current state of play, however, should as seems ever more likely, Iran complete its quest for nuclear weapons, then the whole dynamic changes. 

In this goal of achieving a nuclear capability,  the Iranians are being aided by the inept policies of the Obama administration and a resurgent Russia (also a beneficiary of Obama's failed policies) as well as a feeble European Union foreign affairs effort.

The civilised world faces an existential battle. 

Communist China is feeling the effects of this.  India has seen this in the recent past, so has , Argentina, France, Nigeria and the aforementioned USA and UK to name just some of the countries.  Even the peacefully neutral Swedes and Norwegians are experiencing the conflict between their open societies and those of their Islamic migrant communities.  Denmark too has seen the illiberal consequences of allowing a cartoonist to publish his works.  Indeed Russia too, has tragic experience of trying to co-exist with the 'religion of peace' but Putin, having, some in the West say 'brutally dealt' with Islamic dissidents and terrorists, is currently playing a different game to secure Russia's borders and to poke America and the EU, in the eye at every opportunity.

So the solution?

First some history. 

When the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, invaded Kuwait in 1990, Margaret Thatcher was reported as telling the American President, George H Bush, not to go 'wobbly' and to have 'stiffened his spine' on the issue of confronting Saddam.  She saw the threat posed by Saddam and so too did Bush #1 quickly come to this realisation.

With, ISIS, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the civilised world faces a similar choice - either we fight now, in the sands of Arabia and Persia or we fight soon on the streets of London, Paris, New York, Beijing and Dehli.

Make no mistake, this is a fight that isn't going to go away.  It takes a certain type of fanaticism to hack-off the heads of people that don't follow your brand of religion.  The same kind of fanaticism that causes people to fly planes into buildings or walk into a hotel and randomly shoot people or to strap on a suicide bomb vest and detonate the bomb in a crowded market place.  Does it sound like these are people that can be reasoned with?  The lure of the 72 virgins is just too great for these people.  So since death is what they most want, death should be visited upon them and their supporters.

The solutions are not pretty but there is nothing nice about the aftermath of a suicide bombing or the beheading of innocents.

The world needs to decide where it stands and then back-up their declared position.  Russia needs to say if they are with the West or against it.  There can be no fence-sitting or neutrality.  Why?  Well this is about all-out war.  And it will be bloody and terrible.  ISIS and similar intolerant organisations need to be destroyed, not neutered, annihilated completely. 

Similarly Saudi Arabia and Qatar need to be brought to heel.  They cannot enjoy the fruits of western civilisation and industry while at the same time seeking the destruction of those societies.  The leadership of these countries need to be changed to reflect the required new direction that these countries must take.

Iran must immediately cease funding its proxies in Lebanon and Palestine and completely destroy its nuclear programme.  Again, regime change is needed.

Pakistan must give-up its nuclear weapons.  At this time the state is too unstable to be trusted with such weapons.  Its security services operate as a 'state within a state' and must be brought under democratic control before they decide to pass on enriched uranium to Islamic terrorists.

In Iraq and Syria, the allies - those that are 'with us' - need to impose a very heavy and brutally ruthless, military solution.  Any opposition, any, must be crushed and crushed completely.  There can be no hand-wringing in the media or from liberals in the West.  The consequences of a softly-softly approach can already be seen on the streets of our cities where ISIS fellow-travelers become ever more bold in pushing their murderous ideologies.  Where Islamsists kill a British soldier , on the streets of the capital and try to hack-off his head.  Where Islamists explode bombs at the finish-line of a marathon race.  Unfeeling brutality and force must be met with the a multiplied version of the same.  Make no mistake though, this will mean bombs dropped by planes and so called civilian casualties but we will also require to put 'boots on the ground'.  We will also need to impose economic sanctions against these people - starve them of the goods and yes, foods,  that their people need.  Frankly faced with pictures of the victims of ISIS or the pictures of starving ISIS followers, I would always be moved by the former and never by the latter.

The approach to Iraq and Syria must also be applied in North Africa and Nigeria.

In the home countries, Islamists must also make a decision.  Are they with their home country, in the existential fight against radical Islam or are they with the enemy?  If the latter, then they must be imprisoned - yes whole families interred.  You, as an Islamist, cannot live in the USA, UK or France etc., and burn the flags of those countries or spit on its soldiers.  You cannot declare certain areas as alcohol-free or forbid people to have dogs or women to walk around without a hijab.  These home countries and their traditions existed ever before you did.

Immediately, the oxygen of publicity must be deprived to Islamic organisations, the Muslim Council in the UK and CAIR in the USA are at best, just apologists for their murderous co-religionists.  They place an equivalence on the actions of these barbarians with those of the West  They insist on applying the laws of the host countries when it suits them, while all the time trying to impose Sharia law.

Immediately, any of the ISIS fighters, from western countries, that return 'home', must be imprisoned.  They must be taken out of circulation.

Immediately, the 'hate' legislation that exists in so many countries must be applied against these people that would threaten our very existence.  They may not all be prepared to be front-line 'fighters' but they support, with their hate-filled words, the elimination of Western ways.    There is a 'hands-off' policy linked to the failed  multi-culturalist policies that the West has adopted, which exempts Muslims from the application of law.  This has to stop.

Immediately, the Palestinian boil needs to be lanced.  The Abbas regime in the West Bank must be issued with an ultimatum.  Either you accept the right of Israel to exist or we (the West) will immediately cease all aid and impose a blockade to starve you into submission and we will fund opposition to Fatah, that does want peace.

In respect of Gaza, a similar ultimatum.  Either give-up the ISIS like Hamas terrorists or face the brutal consequences of your continued intransigence.  You have to decide if you want war or peace but know that war will be total and Gaza flattened!

The UK Prime Minister, David Cameron has talked of a generational struggle against this poisonous ideology and other politicians are coming to realise the battles that must be fought.  As said earlier though, this isn't about the traditional 'West'  This struggle affects India, China, Latin America, Africa and indeed, all of the world.

Who are you with?

Obama's friends

If you are not a Ukranian, consider yourself very lucky, as you wake up, this morning. 

Ukranians have President Obama as a friend and ally.  They know how lucky that is, because you can always count on a friend, right?

Except........

When that friend is President Obama.

Germany counted the USA and most particularly President Obama, as a friend.  Remember that big Obama love-fest before he was elected as President?  The one where he had the rock-star stage?  That was in Germany. 

So how does Obama repay this adulation?  Well his security services, in the relentless pursuit of America's terrorist enemies, bug the phone of German Chancellor Merkel.  Now Merkel, having grown-up in the old East Germany, probably knows a thing or two about being bugged, so she is unlikely to have said too much that was incriminating, on any of the calls that Obama's spies listened-in to.  Or maybe she did.  Maybe she thought, friends don't spy on friends.  Hmm!

So to Ukraine.  President Obama and his ineffectual Secretary of State, John Kerry, are threatening all sorts of sanctions against Russia.  Now call me naive but what was the result of ever increasing sanctions against Iran?  Oh yes!  Iran is currently enjoying a sanctions vacation, courtesy of the Obama administration and still able to pursue its goal of obtaining a nuclear capability.  Iran's number one enemy after the USA?  Israel, another friend of the USA that is being treated to Obama's own, very special, interpretation of friendship.

President Hosni Mubarak also thought of America and Obama as a friend and then his friend 'threw him under a Muslim Brotherhood bus!

Take it closer to home.  Christopher Stevens was appointed US Ambassador to Libya by President Obama and the then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.  It would be wrong to question the naivete of a person that cannot defend themselves, but surely Stevens could have done some homework on Clinton.  She was thrown off of the Watergate inquiry because of her having a very loose affiliation with the truth - that should have made him wary.  However, in Stevens' defence he probably thought that he could rely on his friends in Washington and the White House.  That didn't work out so well though! 

The US consulate in Benghazi was attacked by well-armed militants and Stevens and three other  US personnel were brutally killed.  Even in death though, Obama and Clinton's special notion  of what friendship means, had to be played out.  So the airwaves rang-out with stories of a spontaneous mob that were protesting about a video.  This mob were so spontaneous, they came very well armed, including carrying Rocket Propelled Grenades because that's kind of spontaneous, right?  Then Obama and Clinton go through the public expressions of sympathy that is called for, when 'friends' are taken from us.  Except, we have since learned, this was for show.  As said this was no spontaneous demonstration.  This was a well-planned attack and it was sustained but in a stunning display of friendship, Obama ordered the military to stand down and not to go to the aid of the beleaguered consulate.  Indeed, if the twittersphere is to be believed, the US General in charge, in that theatre of operations, was relieved of his command when he indicated an intention to send military personnel to rescue Americans that were in danger. 

I don't know about you but Obama's idea of friendship doesn't match anything that I recognise.

So back to the poor Ukranians.  If you believe in karma and that sort of stuff, then Ukraine must have been really bad in a former life.  In addition to having the highly dubious honour of the friendship of Obama they also have the European Union as an ally.  Now if you want to know how the European Union treats its friends, consider how it treated Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Italy during the recent economic crisis.  Ask the people of Cyprus, that saw their life savings stolen at the whim of the EU, if they think this was the act of a friend. 

Say what you like about the United Kingdom but when Ireland needed help, the UK provided it - because that's how friends treat friends!  Of course there was likely some self-interest involved but still!

If I was a political leader in any of the current hot-spots, I would be seriously reconsidering my country's friendship with the USA.  If I was the president if the Philippines, would I really believe that my American 'friends' would come to my aid, if the Chinese continued their South China Sea expansionist activity?

In closing, I need to bring some balance to this piece.  Plainly the foregoing is somewhat slanted against Obama and just shows how he mis-treats his friends.  In truth though it isn't always that way.  The successful investor, Warren Buffet is a big supporter of Obama.  This is one friend that Obama does consider or so it would seem.  The Keystone Pipeline Phase 4 has been awaiting US government approval for all of Obama's presidency but this can has been repeatedly kicked down the road and no decision made.  One  has to wonder if the fact that Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway group owns the rail company called Burlington Northern, has anything to do with it.  Is it a coincidence that BN rail cars are currently transporting the oil that would otherwise flow through the pipeline?  If I was on 'Who wants to be a millionaire' I would have to 'ask a friend' but I would make sure that it wasn't America's president!

Yes, if I was a Ukranian, I would be seriously considering what friendship means!

 





   

America and the C word

Don't worry your grace (@His_Grace) I haven't gone all Channel 4 on everyone, read on.

If we are to believe Edward Snowden, any thoughts we commit to all kinds of electronic communication are being monitored and then read by the NSA in America.  I guess that one of the goals of a blogger is to get their message out to the widest possible audience, so that everyone can bask in their sagacity (haha!) so maybe because this has that edgy use of the C word (trust me, don't worry) in the title and mentions the NSA and America, perhaps this post won't bomb!

So, the C word.  The word that President Obama and his advisers have banished from their vocabulary.  The word of course is coup as in a military  coup d'état  and the Obama administration is tying itself into all sorts of knots because it doesn't want to be seen to be supporting a military C word but thinks that the military C word in Egypt is a good thing because it rid America of a fractious government in the Middle East.  The administration doesn't want to use the C word because to do so, would call into question the continued giving of aid to Egypt.  Heavens, it might even mean that those F-14 fighters may need to have their delivery delayed!

It is to America's shame that Obama and his administration are conniving in the deposing of a democratically elected leader.  Having touted the benefits of 'democracy' for so long, they support the overthrow of the democratic result, simply because the answer given by the Egyptian people, was not to America's liking.

This reminds me so much of how Europe and the EU operates.   Referendums are conducted and when the people vote the 'wrong way',then the relevant government is told to go away and ask again until they get the 'right' answer!  Incidentally it is  also to the shame of the EU for their tacit support of the C word but Europe is pretty much irrelevant on the World's stage, these days, so let's not make too big a thing of it.

What is happening in Egypt is a coup - there I said it!  Pure and simple.  My view of the initial uprising in Egypt was that this too was a coup but the military needed to mask their actions with the cloak of 'democracy'.  Well that cloak has well and truly slipped!

Make no mistake.  I am no fan of Morsi or the Muslim Brotherhood.  By all accounts he and  they have demonstrated economic incompetence on a grand scale (but then not many governments would be safe if that was a criteria for overthrow) and perhaps more worryingly, their is strong evidence that they have promoted anti-Christian activities against the Coptic Church and other Christians.

However, he was democratically elected.  He has now been deposed and replaced by a military-appointed puppet, who is promising new elections, 'soon'.  What happens if these elections again produce the 'wrong' result?

The 'problem' with Egypt and so many of these new 'democracies' isn't so much about representative participation or however you define democracy, it is about a lack of capitalism.  People really don't care too much about votes - it comes down to basics - food on the table and  a roof over the head.  Socialism in all its forms doesn't deliver that.  Democracy doesn't deliver that.  Capitalism is the only system that will deliver that.  Democracy is a 'nice to have' that comes afterwards. 

That said, if you push democracy, and America and the West does, then you have to stand by the outcomes.  However odious the new government may be, they shouldn't be overthrown by the military.  Yes, I know that Adolph Hitler was democratically elected and yes , I still wouldn't advocate overthrowing his regime.

And so to Syria.  Not a bastion of democracy but somewhere else where America and Europe believe that their own special brand of interference will produce positive results.  How are they going to interfere  Well the talk now is providing arms to the 'right' insurgent/rebel groups.  Who was it said that madness is doing the same thing and expecting different results.  The absolute last thing that the Middle East needs right now, is more weapons (indeed this is something that they haven't needed for a very long time).  The West's track record of picking 'winners' is very poor (can you think of a right choice?  Libya wouldn't be a good answer!), so why would anyone think that suddenly these governments are going to get it right.

Maybe America and Europe should consider that perhaps the reasons that they are so loathed in much of the Middle East is precisely because of their hypocrisy (democracy but only if it gives the  right type of government) and their trying to make countries in their own image (picking winners).  Maybe it is time for America and Europe to back-off and let the Middle East sort themselves out.  Yes it will be bloody and many people will die but having done such a great job in Iraq and Afghanistan does the West have any kind of template that they can hold up to show the success of 'democracy'?

Is the new policy on Syria some kind of surrogate for the abject failure of Obama's policy on Iran.  All that 'positive engagement' and 'open hand' doesn't seem to have slowed down their nuclear arms development, one bit.  So, try to put a 'friendly' in charge in Syria and take away an Iranian ally?  If that is the strategic aim it presupposes that the Syrian disaster will produce something that will be to the West's liking.  I have the strongest possible doubts, that it will.

What does the USA get out of Syria intervention

What does the USA get out of the escalation of its involvement in the Syrian conflict?

Okay, so the immediate effect is to distract Americans from the scandals that are swirling around the Obama administration - the IRS targeting of non-Left wing organizations, the Benghazi US consulate attack and the NSA domestic spying furore. - but what else?

Syria's Assad comes from a long line of unsavory, undemocratic and murderous dictators but does America really believe that providing arms to the 'rebels' will actually help?  These 'rebels' are not exactly stalwarts of the democratic school of government nor are they exactly upholders of other 'western' values.  Many of them are jihadists who want to promote a sharia based orthodoxy on Syria.  There are also Al Qaeda affiliated groups within their ranks.  These groups are already massacring Christians in the areas that they occupy.  The secular Syrian state is in danger of becoming a Middle Eastern Afghanistan, with these new groups being the Arab equivalent of the Taliban.  Is this really what America wants?

Think forward a little, because the 'wise heads' of the Obama administration seem to have failed to do so.  How will the toppling of Assad and his replacement by a fundamentalist government affect the regional geo-political balance?  Do we really think that Israel would be happy to have a terrorist government on its doorstep, because it worked out really well, with Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon, didn't it?  Could another Arab-Israeli war be far away?  How would Iran view this, given its prior support for the Assad's rule (as a tit for tat for allowing Iran to supply Hezbollah, via Syria)?

What is the end game here?  Other than the immediate media diversion tactic, that is.

The US withdrew support for Mubarak in Egypt and in the ensuing elections, Morsi from the Muslim Brotherhood was elected.  The MB is another radical and fundamentalist organization and they too are promoting a policy of 'relgious cleansing' with the repeated attacks on Coptic Christians.

In Libya, the US stood by and let it's UK and French proxies provide the support for the rebels.  The upshot?  The US consulate in Benghazi was attacked on September 11, 2012 (the date must have been a coincidence, surely??) and the US Ambassador to Libya and three others were killed.  Libya is now in real danger of fragmenting or falling into civil war as the Al Qaeda in the Maghreb groups foment dissent and promote attacks on the Libyan government and armed groups refuse to hand over arms and effectively control parts of the country. 

The Iranian nuclear threat grows every day and yet Obama's 'positive engagement' has produced nothing.  The Iranians (how long before they re-style themselves as Persians and seek to re-create the Persian Empire?) have used Obama's naivety to continue development of a nuclear military capability.  Does Obama hate Israel that much?

And then there is Turkey.  Strangely the protests against the police (and military?) suppression of the recent unrest, from both the EU and the US have been very muted.  Erdogan's regime remember is pushing a very fundamentalist doctrine in Turkey.

Oh, and those people who still blindly follow Obama ad believe he can do no wrong.  You will no doubt (rightly) say that the use of chemical weapons against a civilian population was a red line the crossing of which, could not be accepted.  Maybe that's so but , the line was crossed long before this week.  The French were saying these weeks ago.  OK, so Obama didn't have these other things (IRS and NSA) bubbling away at that time but ...   Or is that just me being cynical?
 

The US election - a foreigner's perspective

I can't vote in Tuesday's presidential election in the US but if I could, my vote would go to Mitt Romney.

Why?

Well, on the economy, I just think that Obama really doesn't understand America or Americans. All those Americans that I have ever met are aspirational.  They look at the (failed) European social model and say ' that's not for us, that's not the American way'.  This isn't restricted to WASPs or successful professionals, Americans want success and view it, not as something to be despised but to be admired.

On foreign affairs, what has Obama achieved?  Okay, so he got the Nobel Peace Prize.  Hmmm!  I can't help thinking that that was some kind of tokenism from the Norwegians!  Otherwise, what?  His softly softly approach with Iran?  How has that worked out?  All indications are, that Iran has used the last four years to advance its nuclear capabilities - and I mean its military capabilities.  Africa?  A much vaunted visit to Egypt and a big speech in Cairo, doesn't really cut it (especially since his Cairo speech seems to have fallen on deaf ears).  Asia Pacific?  Well he upset some Europeans when he told them that the future defence focus would be on the Pacific rather than Atlantic but then he proceeded to allow China to run rampant and bully its way through the South China Sea, with America abandoning its allies long the way.

Energy?  All that talk about 'alternative sources' and renewable energy'.  Net result?  Dubious dealings with companies that can only survive on US government backing.

Unemployment?  However you cut the numbers, employment is at the same level as when he took office.  How's that pump-priming working out?  What happened to all of those 'shovel-ready projects' that were just crying out for government (as in US taxpayer) money?

Deficit?  Need I say anything?

So that's Obama then.  What about Romney?

Well, firstly he offers a change and, something that Obama doesn't - a way forward that isn't another wasted four years.

On the economy - tax cuts - that is similar to Obama's quantitative easing but instead of just printing money and bailing out banks, puts the money into the pockets of the US taxpayer.  Or more accurately, doesn't take it out, in the first place!  It isn't just that 'trickle down' works, it's how do you get money being spent in local businesses -  by individuals or by federal or state governments?

Foreign Affairs?  Has a no nonsense approach to Iran.  Unequivocal.  Will not let Iran obtain a nuclear military capacity.  That clarity alone should win him the election!  His stance on China and their managed currency rates as well as their other trade policies are very encouraging. 

Healthcare - repeal of Obamacare will remove an additional tax from ordinary people and give people freedom.  Take a look at social healthcare systems like the failing British NHS - is that really what Americans want?  A vast beast with an insatiable hunger for more and more money?

Energy - Would promote an energy policy that realistically approaches energy independence.  So, doesn't exclude offshore continental shelf deposits and allows the Keystone pipeline from Canada.  Doesn't exclude 'alternative' energies but makes them compete, fairly.


So, Romney for change and hope, Obama for a slide towards the chaos and despair that is Greece.