The Terrorist Obama Admits … Our Goal Is To Limit the Shiites

Certainly there will be disagreement with my description of a Nobel Peace Prize laureate as a terrorist — some may even be astonished. I stress, though, that in fact we have a right to describe Obama in this way. He deserves this description since he acts exactly as a terrorist acts. If the shoe fits .…

U.S. President Obama's latest speech, made after the preliminary nuclear deal with Iran, cleared up many issues that we had sensed over the course of recent events as well as noted in past articles; most recently in "The Sectarian Idiocy of the Saud Family" and "Fighting the Arabs." We realize that the future will disclose many secrets.

Obama confirmed by his body language, and not just his rhetoric, the degree of his animosity with Iran. He will not trust them and will continue to monitor the country closely. One matter the speech divulged was that this nuclear deal will be more painful for Iran, setting its nuclear program back at least 10 years by some estimates. Meanwhile, there are few possibilities that lead to a strengthening of Iran, even if its reactors are struck and Iran returns to manufacturing a nuclear weapon. Lakhdar Brahimi made clear that the Shiites and Imam Sistani are feared, but we did not imagine that it would reach this degree.*

Obama's overarching claim is that this deal is in the name of fighting terror, but we ask him, does Iran do to their people what Israel does to the Palestinians? Does Iran bomb and kill hundreds of innocent people as Saudi Arabia has recently done in Yemen?

Obama, you are a hypocritical supporter of terrorism. Every word you say is laced with logic free of any principle of justice.

Unfortunately, there is no human rights organization, no Amnesty International, no United Nations, no other super power to guarantee a balance of power, like the Soviets, in this struggle on behalf of the weak. An observer is forced to describe our world these days as an unjust fraud, dominated by power, with a predominance of shiny, empty slogans, laughed at by the audacious and reckless.

The perpetually asked, obvious question is: Why are some countries, such as India and Pakistan, allowed the right to possess a nuclear weapon and Iran is not? We will not even mention Israel since the international powers that be insist that Israel has this right, making any further discussion pointless.

In Obama’s speech he stressed solidarity with the United States’ stepchild, Israel, the Gulf countries — Saudi Arabia in particular — and in his fear of Iran, invited the Gulf countries to a meeting at Camp David to discuss the future of security in the region. Through an analysis of the man’s words, we can say that Obama wants nothing but to minimize Iranian power.

To this point we add that America has formed and equipped the Islamic State with all it needs through an unprecedented, gruesome media machine. This is with complete cooperation from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and Jordan, all of whom account for millions of dollars used in the attack on Iraq, the goal of which is to oust the young, weak Shiite government. The full picture becomes clear. The depth to which the Shiites are targeted is revealed. All of this because the Shiites are the one power that does not acquiesce to Israel and as such, is feared by those who appease Israel such as Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries, which bow down to America and Israel.

Ensuring the loyalty of these countries to Israel, maintaining economic interests in these countries — most importantly oil — and dealing weapons to these countries are issues on which America will not compromise.

This brings us back to a formidable question: Why, during the U.S. intervention to oust Saddam Hussein, did the U.S. support the Shiite opposition’s coming to power? In examining the practical chain of political and military events, the answer is clear: America's measured plan was to deal cautiously with Shiite forces.

Did Bremer not intend to destroy everything and dissolve Iraqi institutions in order to make governing more difficult for the new officials?** Did he not introduce the malevolence of sectarian quotas and sectarian tension in one of the most complex, deceitful plans to divide and conquer in history?

These are the foundations of the American plan to put Shiites in a quandary and therefore control them, holding them tightly in the American clasp, just like the Gulf countries and other countries that bow down to America. With this plan, America kills two birds with one stone; acquiring the Iraqi Shiites on the one hand, and pushing aside any danger from Iran on the other. This is one of the greatest political gains for America and its stepchild Israel in history, especially when we take into consideration that Iran is surrounded on all sides by Pakistan, Turkey, the Gulf countries and the U.S. Navy in the Gulf and on the ocean.

Vice President Joseph Biden called for the division of Iraq into three parts: Kurdish, Sunni, and Shiite. When that deceitful plan failed, the U.S. went back to playing the card that continues to win whenever it is in the hand of this country’s enemies that lie in wait: inflaming sectarian war. This was the last of the cards; the Sunni incubators cooperating with the Islamic State group and the Baathists with historic support from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Jordan.

Now, after seeing their deceitful methods fail, nothing is left to them but to threaten Shiite forces, shaking the immense stick that is the support of America and the other countries of the region, among them Pakistan and Turkey, to the point that Gulf countries were publicly invited to Camp David.

Add to this list of deceitful methods one of the most painful, the economic war and the sharp reduction of oil prices which has depressed the Iranian economy and resulted in the Iranian currency dropping to its lowest values in the past three decades. We have brought this up in more than one of our past articles.

Iran does not wish to infringe on others, and Iran did not interfere in the policies of other countries, but, God help it, instead tried to aid the weak and targeted, those that had no power to prove their existence, seek justice and reclaim their rights. What Iran wants for its citizens is the progress and well-being enjoyed by the people of the developed West, but this does not appeal to Obama because it does not appeal to the Zionists and the Gulf countries that are ruled by their money.

Did they not supply the Islamic State group in Iraq with all it needed in terms of lethal aid, to the point that the Islamic State group has in its possession laser-improvised explosive devices that are deadly at a range of 300 meters? Like this, Obama has easily become a patron of terror.

From here, Shiite forces must be careful as they fight hard to expel the Islamic State group from Salah ad Din Province. They must protect their future from the dangers that threaten their vulnerable existence, an existence in which all they have is the self-reliance God blessed them with. God alone knows the intentions behind all actions.

*Editor’s note: Imam Sistani is also known as Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hussein Sistani.

**Editor’s note: Paul Bremer is an American diplomat who led the occupational authority of Iraq following the 2003 invasion by the United States.