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

Cheney recent words in support of torture shore up his position as the US worst ever Vice President!

2 Apr

Not withstanding words by Dick Cheney that his actions as Vice President of the United States did not render him a criminal, a person who committed crimes against humanity, many people, actually most people, consider him a criminal for using inhumane methods of interrogation on prisoners.
Recently Vice President Cheney told an audience at the American University that he did not regret the Bush Administration interrogation techniques, and that he would do it again if he was in that same situation. Cheney insisted that the results justifies the techniques, and insisted that he would against resort to the use water-boarding without hesitation.
In spite of his actions, and his insistence that he would do it again, the ex Vice President claims that neither he, nor President George W. Bush, committed crimes against humanity, yet most rational people feel that they both did.
Mr. Chaney’s assertion that their cruel techniques brough results were again shot down in a most recent Congressional report which concludes that the bin Laden operation, unlike Cheney’s assertions, did not benefit from the aggressive interrogations that were performed by the Bush Administration.
As a practical matter one does not hear of either President George W. Bush, or Dick Cheney, visiting continental Europe, could it be that neither man eager to visit, or rather be dragged to, the Hague…
Continuing, as he is, to justify torture renders Dick Cheney the worst Vice President in United States history, and that in spite of the fact that the likes of Dan Quail and Spiro Agnew occupy that office.

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?

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

9 Mar

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