Archive | Uncategorized RSS feed for this section

“As long as the head of a snake is healthy, it will continue to do its harm.” As long as the US Government remain, the country will suffer!

17 Oct

ISIS (DASESH) is a symptom, not the disease, unless the root is eliminated, the head chopped off, the entity will remain a danger to the non-Islamic world for many, many years to come. President Obama spoke of a thirty year effort, realistically, the head of that snake can be chopped with an overwhelming commitment of [US] boots on the ground, in few short months. Surround the animal, and chop its head!
President Obama is not responsible for the existence of DAESH, but it is on his watch. President Obama did not create the Ebola crises, but its on his watch…The list goes on, including, but not limited to: Fast and Furious, the IRS issues, NSA snooping, Hamas attack on Israel, Assad’s slaughtering his people, and the general shoddy manner the United States is presently governed.
Appointing (late, I might add) a czar for Ebola, affecting [limited] air strikes on DAESH, and other measures for stopping the bleeding, but that leave the head of the snake intact, cannot, and will not stop America’s serious woes.
The 2014 Congressional election may bring in a new Senate, not one controlled by the “head;” perhaps that will bring about some relief. But the inept and irresponsible manner in which the United States conducts both its internal, and international business, may not stop until a new head is put on the failing snake who is now in charge.
Needless to say, the 2014 Congressional election is crucial, let us hope that with it the losing track that the United States is on can be altered, changed enough that the non-stop bleeding ceases to be.

Yesterday, April 12, 2014: Assada crossed Obama’s red-line; no US response!

13 Apr

Assad crossed President Obama’s “red-line,” and no word from Washington.
Yesterday stern warning from the White House to Vladimir Putin, should he be concerned?
Putin “relieved” Obama from the duty of disarming Assad off his chemicals, should President Obama call and challenge his Russian for yesterday usage of chemicals by Assad?
George W. Bush was disliked, but feared and respected internationally; it seems that Barack Obama overcame the dislike, but neither he, or the United States while he is President seems either feared, or respected, which one is better? NEITHER!

Shared with: http://www.zyonism.org

Isn’t Palestinians’ charter for “demolishing” Israel enough to abolish “peace-talks?”

4 Apr

The operational charter of the Palestinians (Fatah and Hamas):

“Our struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished, and Palestine is completely liberated.”

Should Israel comply with US wishes to seek peace with those who vow to destroy it?

Is President Obama legacy more important than the survival of the Jewish people in Israel?

Shared with: http://www.zionism.org

Present US foreign policy; an ongoing disaster!

3 Apr

The United States never did have a very enlightened policy in the Middle East, but the Barack Obama Administration treatment of the region is the epitome of failures.
The US under Obama encouraged and helped in ousting Mubarak, and then, perhaps unwittingly, supported the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood. The rest of the mess in Egypt is well known.
Under Hillary Clinton’s inept guidance, the United States “led from behind” at Arab Springs, a move towards enhancing Sharia law in North Africa, a move she mistook as on for democratization.
Then Mrs. Clinton declared Assad a “true reformer” and did not have the United States support a legitimate rebellion allowing it to turn into a real religious civil war in Syria. The war in Syria caused some 5,000,000 refugees to mostly enter Jordan and Lebanon, to never return to Syria, and to likely completely change the geo-politics of the region.
The war in Syria, as is the mess in Egypt, is very likely to reduce the minimal possibility of a “two-state” solution from faltering, to failing. The situation in the area would likely get the West Bank to be annexed to Jordan, Gaza to Egypt, while the Golan to remain, and the Bekaa Valley will become a part of Israel.
One should note that in the three years of the Syrian rebellion more than 100,000 Arab Syrians were killed, and Five million refugees were made to flee the country of Syria; in both areas the numbers are scored higher than the total deaths of Arabs in the one hundred year old Jewish Arab conflict is the area!
Yes, present day US foreign policy led by, Lady Hillary, Sir John, and King Barack did not make the United States proud with their actions regarding the Middle East.

Pollard should not be a hole-card in the Israeli-Palestinians poker game.

2 Apr

The Palestinian authority (PA) received billions for the United for “tourism,” or in reality, so that they will agree to participate in the “peace talks!” On the other side of the equation, the Israelis must commit to release some very violent prisoners which is an act not popular by the Israeli public. The Obama Administration seems to be considering the release of Jhonathan Pollard, as an incentive for the Prisoners release, and which would ease the pain with the Israel populous.
Each side is essentially being “bribed” by the Obama Administration to participate in the “peace talks,” an event that could add favorably to an otherwise lack luster legacy that the President is assembling.
A prisoners release, freeing Pollard, and other minor discussion, are not items that will bring an Israeli-Palestinian peace any closer.
In order to get any semblance of peace, the hard issue must be cleared up front since there are a number are irrevocable items. For example, Israel must keep Jerusalem as its capital, the Palestinians would not accept that notion without a serious fight. The Palestinian would like their refugees to return, not a notion that Israel will accept. Israel must have its Jewish identity while the Palestinians do not like the idea.
If anyone is serious about peace one must solve the hard issues upfront and leave the “window-dressing” of Pollard and some prisoners release for another time.The Palestinian authority (PA) received billions for the United for “tourism,” or in reality, so that they will agree to participate in the “peace talks!” On the other side of the equation, the Israelis must commit to release some very violent prisoners which is an act not popular by the Israeli public. The Obama Administration seems to be considering the release of Jhonathan Pollard, as an incentive for the Prisoners release, and which would ease the pain with the Israel populous.
Each side is essentially being “bribed” by the Obama Administration to participate in the “peace talks,” an event that could add favorably to an otherwise lack luster legacy that the President is assembling.
A prisoners release, freeing Pollard, and other minor discussion, are not items that will bring an Israeli-Palestinian peace any closer.
In order to get any semblance of peace, the hard issue must be cleared up front since there are a number are irrevocable items. For example, Israel must keep Jerusalem as its capital, the Palestinians would not accept that notion without a serious fight. The Palestinian would like their refugees to return, not a notion that Israel will accept. Israel must have its Jewish identity while the Palestinians do not like the idea.
If anyone is serious about peace one must solve the hard issues upfront and leave the “window-dressing” of Pollard and some prisoners release for another time.
Shared with: zyonism.org

Are the Iranians teaching the West how to “bargain” in a shuk? Or will Iran take the American led “Alliance” to the cleaners?

1 Apr

The American led alliance, with the typical American that Secretary of State Kerry is at the helm, is “negotiating” with the Iranians regarding Iran’s nuclear development. The West already gave sanctions relief worth billions to the Iranians who are yet to give anything in return, much like one would expect at the Shuk (oen top bazaar.)
In a Middle Eastern Shuk the buyer is king, providing said buyers knows what he wants, and in the present negotiation Iran is the buyer.
One may ask: What is Iran trying to buy?
Answer: Iran is trying to get the West to allow it to build up it economy.
Iran Supreme leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei already has a Fatwa (irrevocable religious edict) that will not allow the Iranian to build nuclear weapons. The Iranians will build on that edict while the West will allow it to sell more oil, and to start fixing its economy, without slowing down its Uranium enrichment program.
The West does not seem to comprehend that the Iranian Fatwa does not forbid it from enriching Uranium to weapons’ grade, a dangerous situation since it can then acquire weapons technology from the outside.
In the Shuk the buyer does not feel good he leaves something “on the table…” Iran will leave nothing on the table. it “will have its cake and eat eat it…”
While the Alliance, from all indication, will leave with nothing to show but a esson learned and humiliation.

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?