Enjoy young boys in the absence of women

ISIS Twitter Screen ShotLive and direct from the pederastic mouths of ISIS.

From Trendolizer.com:

Report: ISIS leader encourages pedophilia

Tells jihadists to “enjoy young boys in the absence of women”

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Caliph Ibrahim of the Islamic State, reportedly tweeted that it is permissible for jihadists “to enjoy young boys in the absence of women,” another shocking insight into the warped beliefs of ISIS.

Let me provide you with a tad bit of insight into the Middle East, with regard to our soldiers who serve there.  They rapidly discover the ME philosophy for Muslim men is this: 1) women are for procreation, and 2) boys are for pleasure.

ISIS & WomenYou know, that nasty little hypocritical thingie where ISIS members kill people who do the same thing.  Or much less.

ISIS-Christian-Child-Beheaded-in-SyriaISIS doesn’t mind doing this to a little girl.  And pederasty with boys can’t be worse.

According to Jihad Watch, the translation of the Arabic reads, “It is permissible for the mujahid [jihadi] to enjoy young boys in the absence of women.”

The message is justified with reference to Koran 52:24, which states, “There will circulate among them [servant] boys [especially] for them, as if they were pearls well-protected.”

Verses 76:19 also read, “There will circulate among them young boys made eternal. When you see them, you would think them [as beautiful as] scattered pearls.”

But wait.  It gets even better:

A manual released by the publishing house of the Islamic State last year also includes graphic instructions on how to beat and sexually molest female slaves, including underage girls.

“It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse,” the guide states.

As Jamie Dettmer explains, ISIS also relies on techniques used by pedophiles to groom underage prey when recruiting young westerners.

Somehow that seems fitting, does it not?  Islam working hand-in-hand with NAMBLA?

And yes, even in 2015, Islam has slaves.  Hear of it?  Of course not.  That would be, well, “anti-Islam” — and we certainly can’t have that in any Western culture, can we?  Not when GOWPs rule the roost.

So when you hear or read of someone referring to — in a less-than-cheerful or perhaps even a pejorative manner as delineated above — now you have a bit of background.  Yes.  Some of them are.  Now comes the official condonation.

Ah, Islam.  Isn’t it a truly wonderful religion of peace, understanding and tolerance?

BZ

 

ISIS torches Iranian oil refinery

And, by doing that, effects Iranian oil supplies by one third, domestically.

ISIS is determined to impact world oil markets, and it certainly has the capability to do so.  It already set fire to the Baiji refinery north of Baghdad.

From PRI.org:

ISIS fighters and pro-goverment forces battled for a year over control of the oil refinery at Baiji, Iraq’s largest. The plant was crippled but intact, and would have been a key asset for whomever came to control all of the refinery and the pipelines in and out of it. This weekend, ISIS forces, which had controlled much of the facility since April, suddenly retreated. And torched the place on their way out.

This is but one refinery within influence of ISIS.

When the Baiji refinery was operational, it processed more than 200,000 barrels per day of crude, “which,” says van Heuvelen, “amounted to more than one-third of Iraq’s total domestic fuel production.” Iraqi authorities took the facility offline in June 2014 when ISIS forces first seized great swaths of northern Iraq, including oil fields and pipelines critical to the Baiji operation. With ISIS essentially surrounding the refinery, the pro-government forces had to struggle to keep fighters out.

“Now,” says van Heuvelen, “the refinery is probably unusable for several years, if ever again.” Iraqi officials might have seen this coming.

“Might have seen this coming.”  The telling paragraph, then:

“They definitely planned poorly,” van Heuvelen observes. “One problem is that they did not devote nearly enough troops to guarding one of the most critical pieces of infrastructure in the country. Another problem is when they realized that ISIS was launching this overwhelming attack on the refinery, they responded without any coherent strategy. So they sent in reinforcements without securing the supply routes between the refinery and the territory that the Iraqi government controlled. As a result, those reinforcements essentially walked into an ambush, and many of them got killed.”

“Without any coherent strategy.”  Correct.  I see no coherence (much less strategy) applied by Mr Obama to ISIS.  The Middle Eastern region, you see, holds sway to roughly 60% of the world’s working oil reserves — and therein lies the problem.

ISIS seems to be cutting a wide swath through much of the Middle East with some bit of impunity — despite their being the “jay-vee” team.  To refresh about Mr Obama’s quote:

“The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,” Obama told Remnick. “I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.”

Perchance Mr Obama will take ISIS seriously when it not just attacks but holds serious refinery capability, production and storage at not just one but a number of ME facilities.

For “sectarians” who are “engaged in various local power struggles,” ISIS doesn’t seem to be very local or very limited.  A reminder: ISIS is also using heavy American military equipment left behind and captured as it cuts its way through Syria and now Iraq.

I would remind Mr Obama of his phrase “energy independence.”  That would also include, sir, the untapped resources — which have been discovered to be quite vast — under the feet of Americans currently.

BZ

 

Obama: mixed up and muddled

And that quote is from his supporters regarding Iranian negotiations.

Imagine what his detractors are saying.  Like myself and others.

This president is having his house fall all about his shoulders, but few are noticing AMM-American-Media-Maggots-2because his water-carriers, the American Media Maggots, are shielding him continuously like the good lap doggies they promised to be at the outset.  GOWPs and the AMM, have shielded and protected Obama to the point where their credulity is now mostly lost.

Marie Harf Glittering JewelEven Marie Harf, the Department of State Flack, has to “explain” what Obaka really meant.  From CNSNews.com:

State Dep’t Clarifies Obama’s ‘Muddled’ Words on Iran Nuclear Breakout Time

by Patrick Goodenough

(CNSNews.com) – President Obama appeared to concede this week that under a final nuclear deal, Iran — after 13 or so years — would be able to build a nuclear bomb quickly if it chooses to do so. But State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf insisted later that the words had been misread.

Of course.  The words have been “misread.”

Harf told a daily briefing that Obama’s words “were a little mixed up” and “a little muddled,” saying they had referred to a hypothetical state of affairs in which an agreement had not been reached, rather than the situation as it will be in 13 years’ time under a negotiated agreement.

This is Marie Harf, the most ignorant glassesed bint on a current elevated government pedestal, quoting Barack Hussein Obama as “a little mixed up” and “a little muddled”?  And this is support?

Marie Harf did her level best to “walk back” Obama’s statements.  Please click the link.

Further, from Algemeiner.com:

“Open confusion” reigned today at the State Department after spokeswoman Marie Harf tried to withdraw a quote from President Barack Obama regarding Iran’s nuclear breakout time, advocacy group The Israel Project said.

In the interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep, the President acknowledged that, after year 13, the current deal being worked out with Iran would not provide the international community with the promised 1-year warning should Iran decide to violate the deal and go for a nuclear weapon.

Details details details.  And on whom do these details fall?  Who wins, who loses?

Check out this article written by Henry Kissinger and George Shultz at WSJ.com.

NewsMax.com provides the article as an alternate, because the WSJ mandates a subscription and I won’t pay for internet sources.  I may provide dead links to you, but never at my own choosing.  And if I find dead links, I do my best to provide alternatives.  As I do now:

Kissinger, Shultz: Iran Deal Likely to Deepen US Involvement

The recently announced framework agreement on Iran’s nuclear program is more likely to increase American involvement in the Middle East rather than decrease it, former Republican Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz write in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

In the 2,000-word piece posted on the Journal’s website on Tuesday night, Kissinger and Shultz wrote that “Rather than enabling American disengagement from the Middle East, the nuclear framework is more likely to necessitate deepening involvement there — on complex new terms.”

Meaning: in over six years, there is still no one sitting at the Adult’s Table in the Obama Administration.

Since the number of Iran’s centrifuges have jumped from 100 at the start of talks 12 years ago to almost 20,000 today, “The threat of war now constrains the West more than Iran,” the former secretaries wrote. “While Iran treated the mere fact of its willingness to negotiate as a concession, the West has felt compelled to break every deadlock with a new proposal.”

Now, Iran’s program is within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon.

“In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect,” they said. “Devising theoretical models of inspection is one thing. Enforcing compliance, week after week, despite competing international crises and domestic distractions, is another.”

Damn them for daring to speak and write the truth.  As Caucasoids, Kissinger and Schultz must be racists, not senior analysts.

Now, Iran’s program is within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon.

“In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect,” they said. “Devising theoretical models of inspection is one thing. Enforcing compliance, week after week, despite competing international crises and domestic distractions, is another.”

And Iran has been completely forthcoming with current and past IAEA demands?  Allowed inspectors in?

Uh.  No.  Not even remotely.

Past behavior is the best predictor of future performance or the lack thereof.

A wonderful “out”:

Another wrench thrown into the gears is the means of enforcement, “which provides Iran permanent relief from sanctions in exchange for temporary restraints on Iranian conduct,” Kissinger and Shultz said.

Further:

Kissinger and Shultz also attack the idea of a nuclear umbrella provided to Iran’s Arab neighbors by the United States.

“Are the guarantees extended against the use of nuclear weapons — or against any military attack, conventional or nuclear? Is it the domination by Iran that we oppose or the method for achieving it?” they say. “What if nuclear weapons are employed as psychological blackmail?”

The central argument and paragraph:

“If the world is to be spared even worse turmoil, the U.S. must develop a strategic doctrine for the region,” they argue. “Stability requires an active American role. For Iran to be a valuable member of the international community, the prerequisite is that it accepts restraint on its ability to destabilize the Middle East and challenge the broader international order.”

Let’s be frank: Barack Hussein Obama couldn’t negotiate himself or his loved ones out of a paper bag.

What makes anyone think BHO could make any cogent negotiation?

BZ

 

Obama gives away the store to Iran

From Breitbart.com:

Iran Triumphant: Nuclear Deal Capitulates To Nearly All Iranian Demands

by John Hayward

A beaming Iranian foreign minister emerged from the meeting rooms in Switzerland to announce that all of the theocracy’s major demands had been met. According to the new provisions released on the nuclear deal, Iran will get to both keep active its centrifuges and receive sanctions relief.

That Obama, what a hard-nosed negotiator by way of John Kerry!  And I’m sure the foreign minister was beaming because Iran bent the US over completely, insisting we grab our ankles and cough.

The State Department has released a “fact sheet” highlighting the various points of the deal. Sanctions against will be lifted immediately, and probably forever. Iran gets to keep a huge number of its nuclear centrifuges spinning, including a thousand of them at the previously hidden and illegal fortified bunker of Fordo, which is supposed to become a “peaceful” nuclear, physics, technology, and research center. There are sunset provisions on everything Iran has tentatively agreed to, although in his Rose Garden press conference announcing the deal, Obama claimed they would somehow be “permanently” blocked from various forms of weapons development.

If you want to have a little bit of throw-up in your mouth, finish the rest of the article.

Capitulation, thy name is Barack “Neville” Obamerlain.

BZ

 

OBAMA CAPITULATES TO IRAN

Neville ChamberlainChamberlain ObamaFrom the WashingtonFreeBeacon.com:

U.S. Caves to Key Iranian Demands as Nuke Deal Comes Together

by Adam Kredo

Limited options for Congress as Obama seeks to bypass lawmakers

LAUSSANE, Switzerland—The Obama administration is giving in to Iranian demands about the scope of its nuclear program as negotiators work to finalize a framework agreement in the coming days, according to sources familiar with the administration’s position in the negotiations.

U.S. negotiators are said to have given up ground on demands that Iran be forced to disclose the full range of its nuclear activities at the outset of a nuclear deal, a concession experts say would gut the verification the Obama administration has vowed would stand as the crux of a deal with Iran.

Furthermore, Iran is laughing:

Iranian Negotiator Stresses Withdrawal of Powers from Past Stances in N. Talks

TEHRAN (FNA)- Director General for Political Affairs at the Iranian Foreign Ministry and nuclear negotiator Hamid Baeidinejad said on Wednesday that the western powers have withdrawn from their previous positions in nuclear talks with Tehran.

“The other side has withdrawn from its positions compared with the past, otherwise we wouldn’t have stood at this point and stage in the talks at all,” Baeidinejad told reporters in Tehran on Wednesday.

Yet, the Iranian negotiator stressed that certain issues have still remained unresolved between the two sides, including the removal of sanctions.

Read that again: Iran wants no sanctions at all.  Any bets on Obama keeping the sanctions in place?

And again, Obama bones Israel:

US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel’s Nuclear Program

By Ari Yashar, Matt Wanderman

Obama revenge for Netanyahu’s Congress talk? 1987 report on Israel’s top secret nuclear program released in unprecedented move.

In a development that has largely been missed by mainstream media, the Pentagon early last month quietly declassified a Department of Defense top-secret document detailing Israel’s nuclear program, a highly covert topic that Israel has never formally announced to avoid a regional nuclear arms race, and which the US until now has respected by remaining silent.

But by publishing the declassified document from 1987, the US reportedly breached the silent agreement to keep quiet on Israel’s nuclear powers for the first time ever, detailing the nuclear program in great depth.

The timing of the revelation is highly suspect, given that it came as tensions spiraled out of control between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama ahead of Netanyahu’s March 3 address in Congress, in which he warned against the dangers of Iran’s nuclear program and how the deal being formed on that program leaves the Islamic regime with nuclear breakout capabilities.

Another highly suspicious aspect of the document is that while the Pentagon saw fit to declassify sections on Israel’s sensitive nuclear program, it kept sections on Italy, France, West Germany and other NATO countries classified, with those sections blocked out in the document.

“Suspect”?  Are you kidding?

I’m truly thinking that our very own president is an anti-Semite.  Why?  Because actions speak oh-so-much louder than words.

Barack “Neville” Obamalain.

BZ

Obama Successful In Uniform