When US President Barack Obama attempted for once to break his policy of giving conflicting and confusing statements on issues related to Muslims, he could not help but tell more of his big ‘lies' without showing even a flickering sign of shame. Obama said that the US was not at war with Islam. This is an undeniable fact, but only if the US President was speaking on behalf of the American people, and not on behalf of his administration and Western allies. Addressing the US Defence Department's National Defence University in Washington two days ago, Obama said: “Most, though not all, of the terrorism we faced is fuelled by a common ideology — a belief by some extremists that Islam is in conflict with the United States and the West." The US president added: “Violence against Western targets, including civilians, is justified in pursuit of a larger cause." His big lie landed squarely on the heads of traumatised Muslims when he said: “Of course, this ideology is based on a lie, for the United States is not at war with Islam. And this ideology is rejected by the vast majority of Muslims, who are the most frequent victims of terrorist attacks." Likewise, the vast majority of the American people are the victims of Obama's pro-extremism policy in the Middle East. Obama is not allowed to veer off the course that his predecessors had walked down vis-à-vis the Arab world and the security of the Jewish state. Although the rule of the game is rigorously the same, there is a slight difference between the task given to Obama and that which his predecessors were committing themselves to. It is the position of protagonists and antagonists, which has changed. On the one hand, Obama favoured ‘bearded' rulers in the ME, while his predecessors spent decades pampering and lending support to ‘beardless' dictators, who dedicated their power to oust, kill or detain Obama's new allies (Islamists and extremists). Obama is dedicating his administration to help Islamists kill, oust and detain his predecessors' great friends. While Obama was issuing more lies and most detestable abuses of the Muslim mind two days ago, the Syrian blood bath was further expanding. Not moved by the horrors of the brutalities of war in Syria, Obama confirmed to extremists and Islamists fighting in Syria that ‘Washington was looking at all options in Syria (to arm the extremists and radicals). Obama's Defence Secretary, Chuck Hagel, confessed that the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad was fighting ‘rebels', who are mostly armed extremists. Predictions over the escalation of violence in Syria ran higher when Hagel said that the US administration was reconsidering its opposition to arming ‘rebels' in Syria. On May 21, the Washington Times reported that President Obama was facing bipartisan pressure from the Senate to become more deeply involved in the Syrian civil war. The US newspaper indicated that the US administration was urged to find a way to supply rebel fighters [extremists] with weapons in Syria. The paper argued that Obama was reluctant because he was calculating that the risks would be too high that American military hardware would fall into the hands of radical Islamist terrorists among those fighting for the ouster of the Syrian President Bashar Assad. Obama's promise for more bloodbaths in Syria was made two weeks ago. In the meantime, the Syrian brutalities do not seem to be nearing an end. Obama's call for an international conference (2) in Geneva to examine a political solution for the Syrian crisis is misleading. No clear, specific basis for the proposed international conference has been declared. No one knows what Washington means by the political solution; or who will take the responsibility for the destruction of Syria during this war. More than 100, 000 civilians have been killed in the Syria since Islamists supported logistically and financially by Washington and Qatar sought to oust the Syrian President Bashar Assad two years ago. Millions of Syrian families are living miserably in humanitarian camps in neighbouring and far off countries. Obama deliberately increased the sufferings of Syrian people trapped in the war at home when he mobilised his European allies to impose economic sanctions on the Syrian regime. The Syrian tragedy had occurred-with less casualties nonetheless-in Libya and Mali. Sinai is being nominated for a tough confrontation between the Egyptian army and Islamists armed with heavy weapons and are having strongholds in the peninsula. Shifting his administration's anti-al-Qaeda war from central Asia to the ME, the administration of President Barack Obama groomed its new ‘bearded' allies to acknowledge Washington's support to them and, together with drones, take over from the US troops in the new anti-extremist battlefield. The departure of ‘beardless' rulers and the instalment of their former ‘bearded' victims should set the Arab world up to witness more of Obama's much-talked about violence to continue for no less than two decades-until Washington changes its mood and decides to handpick a new set of allies in the ME and the Islamic world. Salafis (the ultra-conservative Muslims) appeared to have been airbrushed to win the heart of Obama's administration. Leading figures from Salafis are now walking around in razor-sharp Western suits, gelled hair and elegantly trimmed beard, which would make them appealing in the presence of the Western community.
