Is Obama a looter or a dictator or both?

There seems to be contempt growing against the President of the United States lately and there is a laundry list of reasons why many Americans are becoming angry.

While President Obama probably deserves an Academy Award for his performance, (since that is what politics are all about, performances) it is high time for this man to start accepting reality and get serious. People in this country are suffering horribly from just about everything. Tens of millions of people are out of work, while the Federal Government continues to throw out false numbers of unemployment and that the economy has been recovering. More recently, the record breaking flooding and tornadoes that have been sweeping throughout the South and Mid West has affected an estimated 80 million people.

The residents in Joplin, Missouri have spent this last week digging through wreckage for deceased loved ones. Meanwhile, President Obama has spent the week vacationing throughout Europe drinking beers in Ireland and dining with the Queen of England, and making a complete ass of himself in the process.

Remember President Bush’s disgraceful response to Hurricane Katrina? Obama already had that similar experience with the BP oil disaster in the Gulf Coast last year. The natural disasters that have occurred recently in the South and Mid West may come back to haunt him come the 2012 election. True, he will be visiting Missouri on Sunday, but if you ask me, Obama should have stopped his European tour for the sake of the nation.

On another note, the President has also violated Federal Law. Under the War Powers Resolution, it requires Congressional approval to continue any further attacks on a country. In this case, it involves the two month long NATO attacks on Moammar Gaddafi’s regime in Libya. Under the law, the operation should have already stopped, but due to Obama’s little excursion to Europe, no action has been taken.

This is because the plan in Libya was to seize oil and it was concocted by Obama and his instigating little shrewish adviser, Samantha Power.

However, some members of Congress are more than a little concerned and calling this as nothing more than ripping the Constitution apart. Remember when Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich questioned Obama’s actions as an impeachable offense? Well this certainly should sum it up now.

This is also the first time we’ve had a U.S. President engaged in an apparent “conflict of interest” because he is also serving as Chairman of the United Nations Security Council. In President Obama’s fantasy land, he believes that these powers under the UN allow him to do whatever he wants with regards to other nations, without Congressional approval.

It’s no wonder why so many Americans are becoming so fed up with this man.

Seems like we have a President acting both as a looter and a dictator.

The Hitler, Clinton, Obama, Libya and Kosovo connection

There is a saying “somehow everything is connected”. Well the current events in the Middle East and the wake of the death of Osama bin Laden, seem to have interconnections to prior historical events that everyone is more than likely familiar with.

A fact that is often overlooked during Nazi Germany in the 1940’s was that Adolf Hitler “secretly” had very close ties to Muslims, or more specifically, you could say the “early years” of what came to be radical Islam. Sounds bizarre. Especially when you consider that Hitler ordered the extermination of more than 6 million Jews. Hitler had a close relationship to Haj Amin al-Husseini, a Palestinian leader who supported Hitler’s reign to exterminate those Jews and asked Hitler to support Arab independence and oppose any establishment of what eventually became the Jewish State of Israel. al-Husseini also was an original member of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the same Muslim Brotherhood that is currently occupied in Egypt and Libya and its current clerical leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi has vowed to see the extermination of Israel.

On numerous occasions, Hitler consulted with al-Husseini on ways to strengthen the Nazi regime. One way they accomplished this occurred when the Nazis invaded Yugoslavia and utilized the 21^st Division of the SS Skanderbeg, to arm the Muslim dominated Yugoslav region of Kosovo, which in turn, the Muslims fought against Yugoslav forces.

The presence of Muslims in Kosovo has existed for centuries, many of them had come from neighboring Albania; and furthermore, Kosovo had been part of the Yugoslav state of Serbia. Eventually by the late 1980’s however, Yugoslavia began to fall apart primarily due to ethnic tensions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, which had been diversely dominated by Muslims, Croats and Serbs. During Slobodan Milosevic’s rise to power in Serbia, they had invaded Bosnia and carried out “ethic cleansing” and Yugoslavia continued to become divided. By the mid 1990’s, Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia had declared independence.

Another overlooked fact was in 1998, when the Kosovo War broke out; Milosevic was President of Yugoslavia and made unsuccessful attempts to solve the Kosovo problem peacefully. President Bill Clinton, looking at Milosevic as nothing more than a pure dictator, took action by commanding NATO to bomb Yugoslavia for three months, thus destroying the Serbian army and effectively arming Muslims in Kosovo. According to declassified CIA documents, many of these Muslims were either associated or were members of al-Qaeda who not only trained in bin Laden’s terrorist camps in Afghanistan, but also on camps in Bosnia.

Eventually, Milosevic was overthrown and turned over to the UN International Criminal Tribunal Court on war crimes charges while Kosovo continued to become a destabilized part of the former Yugoslavia, having declared its independence, but is still a disputed territory and seemingly infested with growing radical Islam.

Fast forward to Libya. President Obama made the same move that Clinton did with Kosovo. Ordering NATO strikes on Libya, and arming the so-called ‘rebels’ that we don’t even know who they are or where they’re really from. Moammar Gaddafi stated that these rebels were from al-Qaeda. Why does this sound difficult to understand? It is the same al-Qaeda group with close relations to the Muslim Brotherhood now occupied in Egypt and now occupying Libya.

In essence, the United States has not only on one occasion, but on two occasions, effectively armed the same terrorist group that orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. Yet neither Clinton nor Obama seem to realize that their decisions to arm al-Qaeda in Kosovo and Libya respectfully, is in essence, the same strategy that Hitler initiated by recruiting and arming Muslims in Nazi Germany so many decades ago.

A long commentary short, this began with Hitler’s Nazi Germany which is responsible for the extermination of 6 million Jews, utilizing Albanian Muslims from Kosovo and after World War II, the same dominated Muslims remained there. Hitler’s relationship with al-Husseini proves that the Nazi Holocaust never ended. It has continued under the direction of the Muslim Brotherhood and from its relationship with Hamas and Hezbollah, this organization’s goal is to ultimately see the destruction of Israel and Iran has the same goal as well. It should also be noted that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the new leader of al-Qaeda, is also a member of the Brotherhood. If the unrest continues throughout the Middle East, one place to watch very carefully is Kosovo.

The connection is fascinating, yet dangerous.

Target: Israel

 There seems to be a deep resentment against Israel lately at the height of the Middle East protests, and for a variety of reasons. Shiite Muslims want Israel gone so they can reclaim the 'promise land' and among the list of suspects include Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslm Brotherhood and yes even, Moammar Gaddafi.

You may be asking yourself why Muslims and al-Qaeda are currently allies right now with the United States to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya. Well, its very simple. If they can rat out the dictator, that means the people Gaddafi has controlled for over four decades will now come under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood, after all the clerical leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi called for an assassination on Gaddafi.

Isn't it also interesting that Egypt was the only country in the Middle East that helped keep the peace with Israel. After Hosni Mubarak's removal as President, Qaradawi, who was banned from Egypt for many years was seemingly allowed back into the country and he spoke in front of a crowd of the so called 'peaceful' protesters calling for the extermination of Jews.

You would think Adolph Hitler was resurrected. 

Switch back to September of 2010, when President Obama spoke at the United Nations calling for Palestine to become a State by 2011. See the trend?

I don't doubt for a moment that the early protests in Tunisia back in January were a result of people becoming fed up with dictatorial control, poverty, unemployment and shortages. However, there is seemingly an evil throughout the Middle East that have used these protests as a catalyst to do something far more worse.

Strangely, this President has not once called for unification with Israel during these times of crisis. He is a President that you simply cannot take seriously and he himself, seems to harbor some kind of resentment against Israel. If he does want a Palestine state to be established by the end of 2011, wouldn't that mean the removal of Israel? I can't see why a terrorist organization like Hamas would suddenly decide to surrender and become friends with Israel over night, since they are largely occupied in the Palestinian region.

But perhaps nobody is more anti-Israel than the Jew hater himself, George Soros, someone who actually participated in the extermination of Jews during Hitler's reign in Nazi Germany. He was quoted as saying"Israel is the major stumbling block for world peace."

Perhaps Soros and his puppet Obama actually want Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to throw a nuclear bomb in Israel's direction?

Yes, it is a serious question.

U.S. joins with al-Qaeda to topple Gaddafi?

When Moammar Gaddafi indicated that Libyan civilians were being 'drugged by members of al-Qaeda', my first impression was that his comments about a terrorist network presence in his country was a load of BS, and that he was just babbling like any other insane dictator. Well, take it with a grain of salt.

It turns out, seeing that the Muslim Brotherhood presence in Egypt escalated after Hosni Mubarak's resignation, Gaddafi's comments are turning out to be completely true.

Libyan rebel forces have recruited Muslims from the terrorist group al-Qaeda to combat Gaddafi's regime. This means, the U.S. has in an essence have become allies of al-Qaeda. This is breathtaking.

The same terrorist group that orchestrated the 9/11 attacks on American soil, is committed to bringing down Gaddafi, with the assistance of U.S. military and the so called 'international community'. Do you think anyone in this Administration is going to admit that we have officially aligned ourselves with a terrorist network? Not in a million years, the mainstream news media and the left-wing 'supposed' 501 c 3 non-profit Media Matters for America, (also known as Media Matters Hates America) would never touch base on something like this.

Now some Libyan rebels are already expressing the belief that "not all al-Qaeda members are bad Muslims."

I beg to differ. Anyone that has an association whether it is al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood poses as a danger to the world. To be frank, the people associated with these organizations have absolutely no remorse anything. These are the kinds of creatures that cherish their barbaric lifestyle by kidnapping, torturing and murdering people, whether its Americans or Israelis, or anyone else for that matter.

Yet in a situation like this, we have indirectly aligned ourselves with a terrorist group that is committed to destroying America, just because President Obama felt that it was necessary to impose a No-Fly Zone on Libya which had no immediate threat to our national security.

By the way Mr. President, I understand there is violence going on in Yemen, Syria, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. Will the UN decide to impose a No Fly Zone in those countries as well?

President Obama tonight

Tonight, President Obama will be speaking to the nation and offering some clarification as to why he sent troops into Libya, following the United Nations authorized "No-Fly Zone".

Since his decision to sent troops without the approval of Congress, the President has generated overwhelming heat from both Democrats and Republicans in Washington as to why he violated the U.S. Constitution.

This is the same President Obama who was quoted in the Boston Globe from December 2007 that "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

Apparently, then Senator Obama had knowledge about the Constitution. Obama as President? Not so much.

So tonight, the President should offer some answers to the American people as pertaining to his decision in doing so. Isn't it interesting that no U.S. military was needed in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and now Syria? Some of these countries have used force against their people as well, but a "No Fly Zone" was never called upon by the United Nations.

Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich made a valid point. We have spent far too much money in the Middle East with Afghanistan and Iraq. Now funding a war against another Middle East nation like Libya is something this country simply cannot afford. Kucinich is proposing a resolution to cease funding military action in Libya. Good!

But I'd take it that the real reason we're in Libya is to "protect European energy" since Italy and France want oil contracts. Interesting that President Obama's vacation in Brazil, he was promoting off shore oil drilling, but he won't promote that here in the United States.

While military action was taken on Libya, this President spent last week hopping all over South America for a pre-Spring Break vacation, and here at home we still have no federal budget because Republicans and Democrats have nothing to do and the country has for the most part, gone broke.

So tonight when the President speaks, you're going to hear a bunch of blathering as to the "real reasons" on Libya and it will not make any difference. From my viewpoint, whenever this President speaks, it is the equivalent of Charlie Brown's school teacher.

Contradictory issues on Libya

Well, so far, it looks like Libya has already been mismanaged from the top down. The United Nations imposed a "no fly zone" this weekend, and then backtracked saying air strikes were not necessary. President Obama, right before his vacation to South America, supported the air strikes and engaged military intervention without Congressional approval. Something that Congressman Dennis Kucinich calls an impeachable offense.

However, nothing is more mismanaged on Libya then this breathtaking contradictory statement from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. While President Obama was hoping all over South America, Secretary of State Clinton was in Tunis, Tunisia and told ABC News in an interview "The UN Security Council resolution was very broad but explicit about what was legally authorized by the international community. There is nothing in there about getting rid of anybody."

So why is Secretary Clinton and President Obama going on and on for the last week and a half that Moammar Gaddafi must leave immediately?

If the UN Security Council specifically says nothing about removing Gaddafi from power, then it seems necessary to perhaps call this action on Libya nothing more than a war crime. Wow! Obama and Clinton are war criminals, just like Bush and Cheney. I guess history does repeat itself.

Of course, Secretary Clinton calls this as nothing more than an act to protect civilians. Yet, the role of the so-called "Rebel allies" in Libya has not even been clearly identified. Gaddafi is no cake walk, everyone can attest to that. However one has to ask themselves about how democracy can be established in the Middle East. We already saw what happened in Iraq. Free the people. Well, Iraq is probably just as much of a disaster area now, as it was under the reign of Saddam Hussein.

If Gaddafi leaves power or is killed in the war, most likely the entire country will become more of a mess than it already is. Something I'm sure, the Muslim Brotherhood is waiting silently for.

Congressman Kucinich suggests impeachable offense?

If there are any two members of Congress that typically do not always side with their own party, it is Republican Congressman Ron Paul and Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich. You know, they actually do what they're elected to do and set policy for the American people, instead of acting like rubber-stamps for their own party.

At the height of the United States participating in the air assault on Libya following the United Nations resolution for a no-fly zone, Congressman Kucinich suggests President Obama's decision to go into Libya is an impeachable offense because the President did not get formal Congressional approval.

Kucinich also introduced impeachment proceedings against President Bush in 2007 after the mismanagement of the War in Iraq, but it was turned down by Speaker Pelosi. Now any impeachment against President Obama is probably unlikely, however there is admiration for the liberal Congressman Kucinich, because, unlike the rest of the left who keeps cheer leading the President on just about everything he does, this particular situation, Kucinich claims "He didn't have Congressional authorization, has gone against the Constitution, and involves putting America's service men and women into harm's way."

An argument could be made that President Obama as Commander in Chief does not need Congressional approval to take military action into another country if there is an immediate danger. Kucinich says otherwise. Libya simply does not pose as an immediate danger to the United States.

Insofar, Congressman Kucinich does point out the grave reality that the no-fly zone could cost U.S. tax payers between $400 to $800 million. Iraq and Afghanistan combined has cost trillions of dollars. Furthermore, Kucinich insists the United States does not have the time or the will to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in the Middle East for the third time, while the United States continues to go broke.

Now, Kucinich is anticipating on introducing a resolution to defunding military operations in Libya.

No question that Moammar Gaddafi is slaughtering his own people as we speak and a resolution by the United Nations to try and stop his despicable actions was necessary. However is it necessary for the United States to continue to take action in the Middle East every time there is an uproar? After all, other countries in the Middle East like Lebanon and countries in Africa including Liberia and the Ivory Coast have engaged themselves in civil wars and action from the United States was limited, if any.

I think the bigger problem is going to be the presence of the Muslim Brotherhood after the chaos in Libya is finally over... 

U.N. imposes no fly zone on Libya

Well, after weeks and weeks of talking, and talking, and talking, about imposing a no-fly zone on Libya, the United Nations finally decided to go ahead with it which they hope will prevent the Moammar Gaddafi regime from attacking its own people.

Meanwhile, Libya offered an immediate cease fire as a strategy to prevent international military intervention into the country. However that really doesn't seem to be the case. The kind of subterfuge that exists in any dictatorship, is to give the impression that you're going to stop attacking your people when its clearly the other way around.

Maybe he is standing by his promises? After all, Gaddafi said he would die fighting to the end and showing no signs of retreating.  As we speak, the regime is bombing Misurata and Adjadbiya.

The U.N. Security Resolution to call for the no-fly zone also included military action from Britain, France and Italy. The United States has not really identified its role, but it is more than likely that if anything goes wrong in Libya, the U.S. will be held responsible.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says that this is the first goal of international action to end the violence in Libya. Ever wonder that she acts more like the President of the United States than the puppet we have in there right now?

Of course, reading through the lines, this is exactly what the Muslim Brotherhood wants. Get international intervention in Libya, overthrow Gaddafi, once the intervention leaves, impose Shariah Law on the Libyan people.

Libya considering Chavez plan for resolving unrest

Hugo Chavez, the self important clown of Venezuela, says that he has proposed a plan to the Arab League which detailed "resolving the unrest" in Libya.

Just what we need in this world, another dictator reaching out to help another dictator.

Reuters reported today that Chavez's plan was to work with an international commission on working with Moammar Gaddafi on restoring Libya.  Like Iran, Libya has had a productive working relationship with Chavez. But the details of Chavez's so-called "turnaround plan" offered no precise details as to what would be proposed. It seems apparent that Chavez is wanting to work with Gaddafi perhaps due to oil. Anyone with a triple digit IQ knows that Chavez has no real commitment to restoring peace in any country, he is just about as brutal as Gaddafi.

Critics are already calling Chavez's plan as nothing more than offering Gaddafi "an easy way out of power". Meanwhile Chavez has been criticizing Washington as "exaggerating reports of repression" of his pal Gaddafi, simply as a way for the U.S. to possibly invade that country.

Noting Chavez's participation with Iran on uranium enrichment, it seems logical to conclude that Chavez probably wants some kind of consideration from Libya. Again, could it be oil? Working in the future to develop nuclear programs? Offering subsidies for terrorist groups?

At this point, Chavez's plan is simply under consideration, but at this point Gaddafi is in dire need of any support he can muster. Even if it is from another horrible individual. Sort of like evil meets evil.

Truth behind Gaddafi's claim that al-Qaeda is responsible for Libyan unrest?

The usual delusional world of Muammar Gaddafi continued today as he once again singled out the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, as the reason why the unrest in Libya is happening.

We could go one step further and blame Charlie Sheen for the unrest as well... but we won't. Charlie Sheen is not worth anyone's time.

Gaddafi however, is somewhat correct about al-Qaeda having a presence in his country which he is loosing control of. Recently, al-Qaeda set up an Islamic emirate in Libya near Tripoli. However there has been no evidence of al-Qaeda influencing the people of Libya to rise up against Gaddafi's reign. On another note, the Muslim Brotherhood has had an influence on the unrest across the Middle East. Deciphering some of Gaddafi's rather strange and bizarre comments, there are some credible ties between the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorist groups throughout the region including al-Qaeda and Hamas.

It wouldn't hurt to say that such terrorist related groups in general, particularly Hamas and Hezbollah are primary reasons as to why the region is collapsing. Hamas notably has participated with al-Qaeda on a number of occasions, and Hamas' own charter identifies itself as associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Really? You might ask.

You may recall just last month, the clerical leader of the Muslim Brotherhood issued a fatwa calling for the assassination of Gaddafi. So from the standpoint that Hamas has worked with al-Qaeda and is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, Gaddafi may have some legitimate points about al-Qaeda bearing some responsibility for the uprising in his country.

And Gaddafi is showing no signs of giving up power. While the United Nations imposed sanctions against Libya and declared a "no-fly" zone,  it is an estimated that at least a thousand or more people in Libya have been killed since the uprising, which Gaddafi is blamed for.

This is not to say that he is 100% correct with his allegations on al-Qaeda and there is no doubt that he is an insane and irrational individual, but the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood seemingly is committed to destabilizing the Middle East, one has to look at the frightening possibilities.  

Actually Gaddafi and Charlie Sheen, two insane individuals, may get along well...

Obama ignorance is shocking

As the United States and the rest of the world apparently continues to poor gasoline all over the place and set themselves on fire, President Obama has decided to celebrate by bringing Motown to the White House as a tribute to Black History Month. Simply unbelievable.

I honestly think Obama's ignorance and his contradictions are just about as worse as the Bush Administration, hence Obama's nickname "President Extension of George W. Bush".

Shortly after the upheaval began in the Middle East, particularly in Egypt, all President Obama did for an entire week and a half is demand that President Mubarak must resign, never mind the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood was helping provoke the unrest in the first place, and never mind the fact that Egypt helped keep the peace with Israel, something that the Muslim Brotherhood has wanted to destroy for quite some time.

Yet on Wednesday during his press conference, President Obama addressed the unrest in Libya for the first time in almost nine days since it began. In his speech, he refused to even ask for Gaddafi to resign, let alone even mention his name. He also seemed to completely ignore the fact that the spiritual cleric of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, called for the assassination of Gaddafi and acknowledged that it will be the primary focus of the Muslim Brotherhood to continue to destabilize the Middle East and whip out Israel.

Why is President Obama reluctant to acknowledge the Muslim Brotherhood's plans and why is he forgetting all about Gaddafi, when Gaddafi himself also has deep resentment against Israel and is an even worse dictator than Mubarak was?

In addition to completely ignoring the facts in the Middle East, President Obama is all about standing with the unions today, after the Wisconsin Assembly passed a bill that would break union rights, to help pass Wisconsin's budget. If anything, that should be a plus. It is about time that someone in the political spectrum finally woke up and realized that unions are one of the primary reasons why States all across America are in critical financial condition. Maybe if he actually understood facts, the President would call for union reform.

This President has not even made an effort to keep any of his so called campaign promises on "hope and change", its all about the status quo as far as he is concerned; continuously catering to the special interest groups and the far left socialist agenda.

Obviously we are living in a country that is no longer represented in a Democratic Republic and we probably don't even know what we stand for anymore in this country. When you have a President like this that is completely out of touch with reality, you have to question the motive.

Perhaps he really is just ignorant. Or perhaps, he, like the rest of the Arab World, doesn't like Israel either.

Ahmadinejad: Unrest will spread to Europe and America

Well the head of the circus in the Middle East came out yesterday and said that the "wave of unrest that is happening in the Middle East is certain to spread to Europe and America."

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the comments at the height of the protests in the entire region and has drawn criticism that his comments are derived from the belief that Shiite Muslims believe a ninth century hidden Imam will reappear.

Maybe 2012 really is the year the world will end, or maybe this really is the second coming of Christ, or some kind of rapture?

This is the same Ahmadinejad that spoke in front the United Nations assembly insisting that America was responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks and also that Iran is resisting a New World Order. Yet, in his comments, he is calling for a new system of world governance.

I guess he really has lost it.

Regardless, Ahmadinejad comments are unfortunately, somewhat correct. The protests that have been happening in the Middle East, are having impacts both in Europe and here in America. In Greece, Russia Today reported that over 60,000 people violently took to the streets attacking police officers. In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker is having a hell of a time balancing the budget and meeting the demands of greedy union workers, so much so that State Troopers are actually being dispatched to find missing State Representatives to return back to the capitol and put in their vote on balancing Wisconsin's budget.

To make matters worse, as the protests continue throughout the Middle East, it will unfortunately have dire consequences on the U.S. economy. Gas prices are starting to rise and when the cost of gas skyrockets, people seem to spend less, which means consumer products will most likely also start to rise, but the consumer demand for these products will start to decline, as they become too expensive for people to afford to purchase them.

There really is no way out of this mess we're in. Congress and State Legislatures will cut costs and raise taxes regardless, it will make no difference; the Muslim Brotherhood can continue to influence protesters and remove their sinister governments so they can establish a new order of government and remove Israel and finally, the United States, will probably, most likely, not be the United States anymore sometime down the road.

We only have the greedy self-serving international businessmen to thank for destroying our economic system

Misconceptions of the Middle East

Since the beginning of the upheaval in the Middle East, most of the world following the catastrophe has been manipulated by the news media into believing this is all about human rights and higher pay. Some of this is true. There is no question that dictators like Qaddafi, Mubarak, Ben Ali, among others, have ruled over their people with an iron fist.

However the situation is much more than that and there has been too many misconceptions about what is really going on in the Middle East. Isn't it interesting that you have a dictator like Qaddafi in Libya that is vowing to start a civil war against protesters, not to mention his country harbors a deep resentment against Israel, as it is with all the other Middle Eastern nations. Yet, the clerical leader of the Muslim Brotherhood Yusuf al-Qaradawi has called for Qaddafi's assassination. Qaradawi also wants Israel gone. He spoke in front of thousands of protesters calling for the eliminating of Jews and that they will be punished, much like how Hitler carried this act out in Nazi Germany.

So why would two people who hate Israel, want to kill one another?

Do you see what is happening here? You have dictators that run countries and now they face an even larger threat. If you can get rid of all of these governments, and if the Muslim Brotherhood can infiltrate and persuade their followers to establish a 'new Middle East', the world is going to have one huge problem, not to mention, the economic conditions, will be critical.

This appears to be the common misconception. Here in America, all you hear is this talk of "down with the dictators, let the Arab people have peace!" Yet, people don't realize the evil behind the evil.

Now, in addition to Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria and Libya; Yemen, Bahrain, Oman and Jordan have all began to experience major protests. The one country that is apparently surrounded by this fire is Saudi Arabia. If this country begins to feel the pressure, think of what kind of impact this is going to have on gas prices right here in the United States.

We're in for some tough seas.

Libyan unrest; Gaddafi wants civil war?

First it was Tunisia, then Egypt, followed by Algeria, Jordan, Yemen, Bahrain, Morocco and now Libya has finally been added to the growing list of nations throughout the Middle East and North Africa demanding removal of governments by its people.

Initially, Libya seemed to be able to block earlier protests last month, promising to provide housing to its people after minor protests began following the unrest in Tunisia. Seems like the Libyans want a little bit more than just free housing, or maybe the Muslim Brotherhood just wants all dictators removed so they can destroy Israel and take back "their" land and establish Shariah Law.

Well, Libya's people started protesting last week demanding change in government. However, Libya's Supreme Leader, Muammar Gaddafi who has been in control since 1969, is refusing to leave. It is basically the same situation as it was in Tunisia and Egypt. The difference is that Tunisian President Ben Ali dissolved the government and fled the country and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak tried to hold on to power attempting to keep the Muslim Brotherhood influence out of his country. So in Tunisia, you have a cowardly dictator who runs away and in Egypt, you have an equally vicious dictator but helped keep the peace with Israel and cooperated with the United States against many terrorist groups.

However in Libya, Gaddafi has ruled with an iron fist and the country has never been friendly, if ever, to the United States. Now Gaddafi, dressed in his trademark turban, robe and sun glasses that makes him look like a total idiotic version of a "hippie Hitler" is encouraging a Civil War in his country among the protesters and his supporters. In the week since the upheaval began, thousands of people have been injured, and over a thousand killed.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood has called for an assassination of Gaddafi just yesterday. Fine. But isn't it interesting that Gaddafi and the Muslim Brotherhood hate Israel with a dire passion, yet the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood doesn't seem to be bothered at all about someone putting a bullet in Gaddafi? True, a dictator like Gaddafi should probably be killed. The answer to this is because the Muslim Brotherhood wants all governments in the Middle East removed, so they can have complete and total control of the region and see it spread like wild fires.

This is the confusion in the mainstream news media. You see people that are protesting against a corrupt government, but they are not looking "behind the scenes" of the real threat.