Archive | March, 2014

US air defense to rebels in Syria, anther Obama reckless move in the Islamic World!

31 Mar

President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin who is President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebFrom the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?From the Fletcher security posts: Is President Obama’s proposal of giving sophisticated anti-aircraft system to the rebels is Syria just another case of poor judgement regarding Muslims?

Dan Goor
“Consultant-Extraordinaire”: PHYSICIST; World-Class INVENTOR of marketable concepts and products; Entrepreneur;
President Obama is planning to send state-of-the-art air defense systems to the rebels in Syria; since Assad is backed by Putin, President Obama’s nemesis, is this not like pouring fuel on a fire?

Hillary Clinton declared Bashar Assad “a true reformer,” and had the United States stand by when the present Syrian rebellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?ellion started.
Time proved Mrs. Clinton wrong, Assad caused well over 100,000 non-combatant deaths, well over five million civilian Syrians to become refugees, and he (Assad) also used chemical weapons on his own people.
The void caused by Secretary Clinton’s decision to keep the United States out of the rebellion, did not only allow Assad to re-group, it allowed the Shiite Iran (with Hezbollah,) and with Russia (their benefactor,) to compel Syria’s Sunni neighbors, the Saudis, to enter the fray in support of the rebels, with the Saudis, however, came al Qaeda.
President Obama is now suggesting to give the rebels, which among other things mean al Qaeda, sophisticated air defense weaponry; who will these weapons be used against?
Without any United States control of said systems, how likely is it that al Qaeda may target United States assets, as well as United States allies, allies such as Israel, and possibly Turkey?
Is United States foreign policy continues to unravel?
Is President Obama so bamboozled, and intimidated by anything Islam that his actions concerning Muslims are irrational? Did President Obama’s Cairo speech to the Islamic World signaled that such behavior should be expected?

Advertisements

Iran with Hezbollah, and others, Russia’s surrogates towards returning to super-power status:

9 Mar

In its march towards a return to super-power stays Russia is using a number of surrogates, or client states, with Iran being the most prominent. In the case of actual territory, the Russians are attempting to reclaim as much as was the Soviet Union as they can, Ukraine being one of the prime examples.
When President Barrack Hussein Obama of the United States relinquished his lead in dealing with Syria, when he capitulated on the red-line, Russia’s Putin stepped in, and using Iran, with Hezbollah is in process of bringing Syria into the fold.
Hezbollah is a part of the international struggle for ultimate power, it is in large part funded, and its activities directed, by Iran; it is part of Iran’s grand plan to increase its sphere of influence.
Suggesting, as many do, that Hezbollah is a Lebanese insurgency may reflect its early existence, it is now, however, a surrogate of Iran, which in turn is a client of Russia. The situation in the region is a complex puzzle with many players, some that can be easily identified, others hiding in the shadows.
There are at least two conflicts playing at the same time, one religious, and the other political. Since Iran’s first goal towards the Koranic edict for world domination is to dominate the Islamic World, it must start, as it did, with its part of Islam, the Shiite. The fist step in that direction was Iran’s taking advantage of the US early departure from Iraq, and then by putting Iraq it under its sphere of influence.
Following Iraq came Syria. The Syrian effort was enhanced by the US reluctance to support the rebels. Since Secretary Clinton considered Assad a “true reformer,” and kept the US on the sidelines, Iran ceased the opportunity, via Hezbollah, and with help from Russia (its own benefactor,) to enter the fray.
Russia desires a return to a super-power status that it essentially lost when the Soviet Union fell apart. To that end the Russian will continue to try to get back as much territory as it can, and to acquire other influences, such as that in the Middle East. Finding an easy foe in the United States while Barrack Hussein Obama is President, the Russians are making bold moves, including significant support of Hezbollah via Iran and Syria.
Hezbollah’s role is not that of a small insurgent in Lebanon but rather that of a Russian/ Iranian surrogate in the region, an entity, that with Hamas, will be charged with delivering Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine (should it ever become a state,) to the Russian/Iranian sphere. The most prominent opposition to Iran and the Shiite part of Islam is Saudi Arabia, the Sunni element with its al Qaeda equivalent (even though unofficial) of Hezbollah. The Saudi’s with reluctant support from the United States is supporting the rebels in Syria trying to keep Syria from being folded into the Iranian fold.
It is now time to bring up the most visible issue of the region, the Jewish State of Israel. One may ask: Why aren’t the Sunnis and Shiites simply fight outright for domination?
Answer: Providence! Through some Divine, or other power, the Jewish State of Israel was established, and the adage: “my enemy’s enemy is my friend,” became a reality.
Since the Koran is Gospel to both Sunni and Shiite, and the Koran calls for elimination of the Jews, and also for world domination, Sunni and Shiite have a common enemy, enough reason not to openly fight one another, but rather to fight what brought about the Jewish State: Zionism! Zionism thus became the rallying word for Islamic “unity.”
The Zionist target may be a convenient entity to help postpone an open inter Islam conflict, but Muslims’ concerns are much deeper. For example, the Sunnis as represented by the Saudis (with al Qaeda, in Syria) are openly fighting the Shiite represented by Iran (via Hezbollah.)
Islam having Israel as a common enemy notwithstanding, the Saudis are so concerned about Iran’s growing influence, for example, that it is generally accepted that the Saudis have tacitly given Israel the right to use its airspace should Israel decide to use it for taking out Iranians nuclear works.
Let me close by suggesting to those who think that Hezbollah was able to withstand the Israel Defense Force (IDF,) that the situation did not quite represent the facts on the ground. Israel attack on Hezbollah was a restraint strategic undertaking, not an overwhelming all out effort by Israel, and the effort did not even utilize one tactical nuclear device…