Geller: Why Obama betrayed the Iranian people

Pax Obamana prevails again. Events create a desert called "peace"--Obaman constructive outreach at work.

Could it have anything to do with Iran being Shiite? Hmm...

No strike on Iran. No sanctions. Just diplomacy -- with a genocidally inclined and fanatically intransigent regime whose contempt for Obama's overtures made the president look increasingly beggarly as his presidency wore on.

In all fairness, overtures of 'diplomacy' were followed by new 'sanctions' imposed on Iran by UK, Canada, US and EU in last few days, months, years. But playing 'good cop/bad cop' with Iran may not be the real answer to the Mullahs's Regime oppressing their people with Sharia compliant tyranny. Can the West develop a more realistic strategy to counter these Sharia Caliphate dreaming mullahs in Iran and the Arab world? As I wrote on Iconoclast piece titled Libya's UN Ambassador Accuses Qatar

Hugh [Fitzgerald] wrote some years back [on JW]:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/10/fitzgerald-the-cultural-imperialism-of-the-arabs.html

The cultural imperialism of the Arabs

"As Infidels seek out ways to divide and weaken Islam, surely the exploitation of this linguistic, cultural, and political imperialism of the Arabs should be high on the list. Remember how the "Arabs" were hated even by some of their "Afghan" allies whom they treated with such cannon-fodder contempt --at least according to all the reports that have come out of Afghanistan. The resentment of non-Arabs, of Kurds, Berbers, blacks, Persians, Malays and so on, is perfectly understandable. It is not a Western invention. It has not in any way been fanned by the West. It need not be. It need only be pointed out. And even then, the Arabs themselves help this cause by continuing to show their contempt and indifference for non-Arabs, though they wish those non-Arabs to adopt whatever causes they, the Arabs, deem important."

This should be a lesson for today, six years later, that what we are seeing within Dar-al-Harb should be exploited. What Qatar is doing in Libya in supporting "Islamist parties", what we are seeing on the streets of Cairo where the Muslim Brotherhood is flexing its muscles against the military, Sharianism poking up its head in Tunisia, never ending warfare in Somalia, Yemen, and now in Syria, Algeria, Nigeria, south Sudan, and of course Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, all teeter tottering on the precipice of Islam, each vying for power within the Islamic factions, each faction calling itself the "true" Islam while killing the others. Same with Islamists in Gaza or south Lebanon. Let them. If the West is to offer "help" it is only to help them achieve their self-destructive goals, with whatever support they need to do so. History is being made here. NATO's help bringing down the Libyan regime was no historical accident. This is how it will look as Sharia vies to take over the Muslim lands. No matter what side we support, the end is the same.

Divide and weaken the House of Islam, and the pieces will start to fall into place. Islam is programmed for self-destruction, and except in the unique success it found in oppressing the Iranian people under the draconian regime of the Mullahs, the Arab world is far more contentious and fragile than the Shah's Iran ever was. There the Mullah theocracy put an iron clamp on the people, but they submitted, not the same will happen in Libya or Egypt. They may be calling for Sharia, but this is a recipe for never ending war and bloodshed. In the end, Islam will eat itself from the inside out. And we should not be shy of letting it do so. Let the Kurds destabilize Turkey and Syria, let the Berbers destabilize the Maghreb, and let the Malays or Persians or southern Blacks rock the boat of Islam. They may even do it in its name, but that's okay, let them. Islam is a self-destructive force, so the more they rock, the more the ship lists. If Qatar must provide weapons for fellow Islamic states, let them. This is good, as the fighting amongst Arabs intensifies with time. There is no victory, nor possibility of reconciliation and peace in the Arab worlds, nor in any of Dar-al-Islam. Islam is dying, and whatever is done to promote warfare is only helping it die, a death of a million cuts. And when they get the bomb, everything accelerates. Sure we of the West will have to deal with the fall out, especially the boat loads of refugees trying to flee their Sharia paradises, but they can be contained. Most important for us is to get off the Arab oil tit, and develop our own resources, including solar and other alternative energies, while Islam implodes. Let them. It is for the good.

This unravelling of events will happen again, and again, in the House of Islam as they vie for power over Sharia theocracy. The opportunity lost by Obama in the 2009 "Iranian Spring" uprising will be offered again. Perhaps next time the American president will be more cognizant of what is really happening in the world of the Mullahcracy, and give support to those in Iran and the Arab world who genuinely want freedom, rather than bowing and scraping to their mullahs. What has ben shown sadly lacking in all past strategies is an understanding of the motivations and goals of the Sharia agenda sought by the Caliphate dreaming House of Islam. I do not necessarily fault Obama, Hillary et al with duplicity, rather I think it is simple ignorance of what we are facing in Iran, and the whole Arabized world. They have a deep seated ignorance that stretches throughout the Free World from educators to media to policy makers, all like walking wounded in a state of shock over Iran getting the Bomb. Maybe they should read the book, and get a clue of what is their monstrous agenda for the free world. Surely Obama must know "Allah loveth not the disbelievers--" (Q 3:32) He has no friends in the Ayatollah's Mullahcracy… But this not over.... Not 'betrayal', just somnambulist stupidity.

And now we see that numerous CIA operatives have been compromised,arrested,and probably are being executed by Hezbollah and Iran. The question is, who are the real culprits that have lead to this disaster? The CIA claims that they could see this train coming and found it hard to stop it. Articles are put out in the public square saying it was the growing sophistication of Hezbollah's growing intelligence and technology tracking that identified these CIA assets. But was it,or are these stories misleading as to who the real culprits are?

The repeated line in dozens of articles buys into this released story as to how the CIA operations in Lebanon broke down. "U.S. officials said that as many as a half-dozen informants were captured after their identities apparently were betrayed by cellphone records and calling patterns, underscoring the sophistication of Hezbollah's counterintelligence efforts as well as the hazards of espionage in an age when even CIA assets can be tripped up by a data trail"

The standing question is,could there being another compromising trail of these CIA Assets other then the released opinion?

I am reminded of the actions of the ACLU who have already been implicated in compromising CIA agents at Gitmo.causg

Less we forget the aspirations of the founder of the ACLU Roger Baldwin below:

"I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself... I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal".

"Why did President Obama refuse to support the demonstrators in Iran in 2009, but supported the "Arab Spring" in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere more recently?"

Short answer the demonstrators in Iran were against the theocratic rulers and for a secular democratic society, whereas the demonstrators of the "Arab Spring" in the Sunni countries were led by the hegemonist Muslim Brotherhood.

In Bahrain notably he is not supporting the "Arab Spring" where the majority Shia population is demonstrating against their autocratic rulers.

Moral of the story - if you in the US want to survive, if you want democracy to survive, the world to survive - GET RID OF OBAMA

I love Pamela and the work she does. I agree with her that the US should always support freedom and those fighting for it. However there are certain inferences made by this article that are misleading.

First, the US was financially supporting NED and NIAC before Obama was President. see:
NIAC report to NED http://www.iranian-americans.com/2009/12/1663.html
Document: “FinalReportHGDF“

“May 2002: NIAC received its first NED grant to work with Iranian NGOs in Tehran ... During 2002 and 2003, NIAC established communications with Iranian NGOs and worked to lay the groundwork for partnership on this project. NIAC also met with Iranian government officials who provided information about official channels to carry out the project. In the Fall of 2003, NIAC met with the Executive Director of Hamyaran, Baquer Namazi, in Washington D.C. and agreed that the two organizations would begin collaboration on NGO capacity-building and human exchange, starting with the visual media workshop."

Furthermore, the Iranians were not attempting to bring down their government, just expressing their outrage over the fraud of the election. This was totally different from what occurred in Egypt where the purpose of the demonstrations was to remove Mubarak. Obama's administration saw the end of Mubarak's rule was imminent and decided to opportunistically choose the side of the regime changers.

While I think it rather questionable as to whether the protesters in Iran were really pushing for actual democracy, I still found it appalling that Obama would not so much as give a nod to the Iranian protesters against a full-blown Islamic theocracy.

What compounds this is the support he has given to the "Arab Spring" against at least semi-secular rulers. And while the support he gave the Tunisian and Egyptian rebels was mostly of the verbal variety, he actually ran NATO bombing cover for the rebels in Libya, and may well have enabled the rebels' victory.

Now, I was *no* fan of the appalling Muamar Gadaffi—who was himself a Jihadist—but the Libyans now seem poised to replace him with a full Shari'ah state. Remarkably, Obama—half sub-Saharan African himself—has said *nothing* about the ongoing Libyan slaughter of black Africans there.

And it goes without saying that he has been entirely quiet about the region's increasing Islamization.

Over all, very troubling. As an American, I like to believe that our nation—however imperfectly—backs the cause of human freedom whenever it can.

Under Barack Obama this premise has become more and more questionable—and his actions, and omissions, more profoundly disturbing all the time.

Please, someone who knows more about Iran, correct me if I'm wrong--

I also believe that Iran's internal conflicts are fights in which the USA doesn't have a stake; and keeping out of the Iranian election tiff was something that the Obama administration probably did right (and should have remembered when it came to the Springtime-for-al-Banna time in the Arab world; but didn't).

Iran's major oppositionists range from the unholy mix of Marx and Muhammad found in the Mojaheddin-e-Khalkh to mullah-ocracy lite. The former group, I understand, boast in their own circles about being the first "revolutionary fighters" into the "Nest of Spies" back in 1979, and hate the USA as fiercely as any Khomeini-ist. It's a national disgrace that a single Khalkhi member ever received asylum or other immigration benefits in the USA, since they, no less than Khomeini, made it clear that they think the only possible relationship between the USA and Iran is unrelenting hostility. As for the Khomeini-ist Lite folks, they also believe every word of _The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion_, that Christians are polytheists, and Jews the kin of apes and pigs.

Since, back in the Carter years, we officially apologized to Iran for having made it impossible for Mr. Mossadegh's Tudeh friends to hand over Iran's oil assets and Southern Azerbaijan to the "fraternal embrace of Soviet Peoples", we really ought to sit back and disengage from Iran's internal policies. Yes, if they go nuclear, we ought to subtly remind them that if they so-much as twitch towards any US allies (or if Hamas and Hizbollah associates, Iran's proxies, set off a device in the USA), Iran will lose its top 30 strategic, population, and economic sites within 24 hours. But, otherwise, Iran should be left to stew in its own juices.

If a future Iranian government decides to hold out an olive branch to the USA, well and good. I'll cheer on the dialogue. But I don't see anyone viable on the Iranian political horizon who might be expected to do such a thing.

PJTV recently started a series hosted by Dr. Michael Ledeen. The series is called Iranian Time Bomb.

In the latest talk, Ledeen deals with this issue and the information he provides is quite unsettling. It looks like Hillary Clinton may be even more nefarious than her 'slick Willey' husband.

Anyway, below is PJTV's blurb on this episode of Iranian Time Bomb. Below that is the link to the talk.

Iranian Time Bomb: Why Hillary Clinton Won't Help the Green Movement

Actual gunfights are breaking out between the supporters of Ahmadinejad and his opponents. The major GOP presidential candidates stand with the Iranian opposition. According to Dr. Ledeen, the Green Movement has given coded pleas for help that have been ignored by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Why? The answer might surprise you.

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=174&load=6308

O/T below is a link to another recent talk given by Ledeen on another show of his (Faster Please) regarding Haj Amin al-Husseini.

Specifically, it deals with the US Government being p**sed-off because the hotel that this monster once lived in is being demolished by the Israelis. In the view of some in the US Government, this constitutes a desecration of memory of this man.

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=123&series-id=56