Why Did Obama Trade 5 Terrorist Generals To Get Back An American Traitor And Then Leave Four Innocent Americans To Languish In Iran?

Barack Hussein Obama responded like the pissy, thin-skinned, malignant narcissist that he is when asked a question about why he abandoned four American hostages held in Iran so he could celebrate his horrible nuclear deal.

Remember that Bowe Bergdahl trade?  Remember all the lies that Obama told and told his thugs to go out and spread in his regime’s propaganda?

Remember Obama instructing Susan Rice – who is now using all the “integrity” she’s amassed to tell us the Iran deal is a very, very good deal for America – to tell the American people that a man that we now know was a deserter and a traitor “served the United States with honor and distinction.”

Do you remember the self-righteous, hoity-toity, how-dare-you-question-us, rationale Obama used to defend trading five terrorist generals with blood on their hands whom everyone knew would return to the battlefield for a traitor?  Obama said that we have:

“made an ironclad commitment to bring our prisoners of war home.”

Well, the United States has been at war with Iran since 1979, when they seized our embassy (otherwise known as an act of WAR) and seized all embassy staff and our Marines and held them hostage for 444 agonizing days.

For the record, that is why the United States seized all Iranian assets on November 14, 1979: because Iran committed an act of war against the United States.

Iran has engaged in the most vicious kind of war by proxy against the United States ever since.  Just recently, the blood of at least 500 American servicemen was DIRECTLY LINKED to the nation of Iran.

One of the PRISONERS OF WAR illegally held in Iran was a former FBI agent who was working for the CIA when Iran abducted him.

Another PRISONER OF WAR illegally held in Iran was a U.S. Marine who went back to visit his grandmother.

Obama also shows his utter disdain and contempt for America and for the American way of life in his refusal to lift a finger to help the other two PRISONERS OF WAR.  Because one is a Christian minister who represents freedom of religion that Obama rabidly despises and the other is a reporter who represents the freedom of an objective press.

These PRISONERS OF WAR – a war that Iran has waged against the United States of America without abatement for 36 years – have been abandoned by Barack Hussein Obama.

Apparently because they are not traitors to the United States of America, because were they such they would merit opening up all of our jails for terrorist to release the rest of the men who have murdered Americans.

Obama’s ridiculous claim is that he didn’t want to somehow conflate the nuclear deal with anything that wasn’t directly related to nuclear weapons.

You know, maybe that would be a valid approach – HAD OBAMA ACTUALLY DONE THAT.

But here’s my question: the United States released $150 billion that had been held since Iran’s act of war against the United States in 1979.  What the hell did releasing that money have to do with “nuclear weapons”???  The United States is allowing Iran to amass a giant conventional weapon arsenal, which includes ballistic missiles.  Since when were conventional weapons the same thing as nuclear weapons?  And most egregiously, Obama allowed a known terrorist – Qassem Suleimani – to get a sweetheart deal.  What the hell does THAT have to do with nuclear weapons?

I mean, seriously, given that Iran showed their trustworthiness by JUST HAVING ILLEGALLY PURSUED WEAPONS THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE, AND HAS REPEATEDLY DEMONSTRATED A PATTERN OF IGNORING THEIR AGREEMENTS AND U.N. SANCTIONS, maybe, just maybe Obama should have added a couple of conditions of his own.

So apparently, Obama would allow NOTHING in the discussion to interfere with nuclear weapons unless it actually hurt the United States.  Obama would allow NOTHING that would help the United States or allow the United States to have the honor of getting its people back.

There are two nations that have demonstrated their complete abandonment of trust: Iran, for breaking its agreements, and the United States of America under Barack Hussein Obama for ignoring the violations of those agreements that he had a legal obligation to enforce.

We got absolutely NOTHING from this deal.  The moment Iran has a ballistic missile – which they may very well not have been able to buy or develop had it not been for this damned deal of Obama’s – Iran will become a full-fledged nuclear-weaponized country.

And Obama has already started a nuclear arms race in the craziest part of the world through his “deal.”  Thanks to Obama’s insane and immoral deal, Israel and Saudi Arabia actually are eye to eye: BOTH believe it’s awful and gives the worst regime on earth more power than they have EVER had in history.  And like Israel, our former Arab Allies – allies since the 1930s, for the record – are now walking away from a United States that they can no longer trust and entering into nuclear contracts with our other worst enemy, Russia.  There are now TWELVE Arab countries looking into going nuclear thanks to Obama and his damned deal.

Obama’s logic is this: if a traitor removes his uniform, leaves his base and goes to seek out the enemy, Obama will move heaven and earth to get him back no matter how many terrorist generals with American blood on their hands he has to free to do so.  However, if a US Marine ACTUALLY “serves his country with honor and distinction” – the way Obama’s mouthpiece dishonestly testified that a TRAITOR had done – and legally leaves to visit his grandmother, well, no soup for him.  And no soup for a CIA agent, and no soup for a Christian pastor and no soup for an American journalist, either.

Death to America, after all.  That’s what the Ayatollah said while Obama was giving him concession after concession, to the tune of at least a DOZEN concessions where we said absolutely not until Obama said, “Death to America.”  And death to everything America stands for.

Barack Hussein Obama and the Ayatollah had at least that to agree on as the basis for their deal.  And so the two least trustworthy men on planet earth were able to shake hands.

 

Iran, Iraq, and the Future in Bible Prophecy

The huge demonstrations protesting the election issues in Iran put that country on the front pages of every newspaper.

For nearly two weeks, demonstrations have raged.  Early on, some said that they didn’t know what would happen as to whether the protests would succeed in overthrowing the regime, but most recognized that the endgame was a foregone conclusion: the regime has the tanks, the guns, and the military.  It was only a question as to whether how far things might get before they used them.

As it stands, they won’t have to, as an AP article entitled “Intensified crackdown mutes protests in Iran” indicates.  While the demonstrations might well briefly flare up again (presidential candidate Mousavi has said he would appear at a demonstration on the 24th), there has never been any serious question that the theocratic regime would stand.

The serious question that remains is, stand as what?  Will it become a more open society, more willing to seriously interact with the Western world, or will it become more hostile and more determined to pursue a violent agenda in the coming months?

Based on the prophecies in the Bible, and based on my own belief that we are entering the last days, my view is that Iran will become more hostile and violent as it is increasingly isolated in the Western world.  Furthermore, my view is that it will engage in an increasingly close alliance/partnership with Russia and with other Islamic Arab and African states.

It is important to realize that the Iranian Constitution (Article Five) is inherently apocalyptic in nature.  The still-revered Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979 proclaimed that the basis for Iran’s constitution and its government would be the authority of the Hidden (or Twelfth) Imam.  This apocalyptic figure has been called the ‘expected one,’ (al—Muntazar), the ‘promised one’ (al—Mahdi’), or the ‘hidden one,’ (al—Mustatir) in the Shi’a tradition.

The threats of impending destruction of Israel and even of war against the United States have been issued in the name of this Twelfth Imam who will (according to Iranian/Shi’a Islam) come in the last days.

According to the tradition, the Hidden Imam was taken into hiding by Allah and kept there until he reappears in the last days to purify the umma and take the world for Islam.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and many others in the Iranian leadership passionately hold to the coming of the Hidden Imam.  That in itself is not necessarily frightening: Shi’ite orthodoxy has it that humans are powerless to encourage the Twelfth Imam to return.  However, in Iran a group called the Hojjatieh believe that humans can stir up chaos and violence to encourage him – even force him – to return.  And Ahmadinejad is at least a former member, and quite likely a current member of this sect.  When Ahmadinejad became president, $17 million was spent on the Jamkaran mosque, which is central to the Hojjatieh movement.  And it is even more frightening when such a man sitting as President of Iran claims to have a direct link to God.

And Dr. Serge Trifkovic has said this regarding Ahmadinejad’s theology/eschatology:

Ahmadinejad, by contrast, shares with Trotsky an apocalyptic world outlook. He favors direct action in pursuit of a permanent Islamic revolution that will pave the way for the return of the Hidden Imam, pave it with blood, sweat and tears. Indeed he’d like to speed things up, as you point out, and implicitly he hopes to achieve this by twisting the arm of the Almighty – no less so than the cloners of red heifers and would-be re-builders of the Temple hope to do as a means of speeding up the Rupture. The fact that he is more sincere in his beliefs and more earnest in his endeavors than the kleptocrats of the House of Saud are in theirs, is alarming but unsurprising. He is a visionary; they are Machiavellian cynics.

A much-more detailed analysis that comes to much the same conclusion about Ahmadinejad’s apocalyptic vision is available via FrontPage Magazine.

Mind you, re-building the Temple or cloning a red heifer are scarcely the source of inherently cataclysmic activities that many too many Shiite Muslims are pursuing.

So when one considers Iran, under such leadership, to be dedicated to the acquisition of nuclear weapons after stating that Israel should be “wiped out from the map” – and with the current Ayatollah Khamenei stating that Israel is a “cancerous tumor” on the verge of collapse – well, one should be very worried.  Wiping out Israel in a fiery blaze of atomic glory would indeed be a way to create the holocaust that would prompt the return of the long-awaited Hidden Imam (if anything ever could).

Clearly Jews understand this, as 1 in 4 would seriously consider leaving the country if Iran succeeds in acquiring nuclear weapons.  Given that such an event would literally mean the end of the state of Israel even if Iran didn’t nuke them, Israel has little choice but to attack Iran’s nuclear capability (since – clearly – no one else will).

Would Israelis hold back from a planned attack of Iran if they believed the United States would prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons?  Probably.  But the problem is, they clearly don’t believe that any more.  And they certainly no longer believe that America under Barack Hussein Obama is on their side.  When George Bush was president, fully 88% of Israeli Jews believed the president was “pro-Israel”; today under Obama, only 31% of Israeli Jews think so.

Such an event, of hated Israel swooping into an Islamic country to destroy their Russian-built nuclear facilities, would itself be a likely cataclysmic event.  Do you even dare to imagine how the Islamic world would react?  And realize that just such an event is very likely coming – and coming all-too soon.

Now Vice President Joe Biden predicted that Barack Obama would be “tested” by an “international crisis” that would test his mettle.  He went on to say:

I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?’ We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us.”“There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, ‘Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don’t know about that decision’,” Biden continued. “Because if you think the decision is sound when they’re made, which I believe you will when they’re made, they’re not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they’re popular, they’re probably not sound.”

Joe Biden quickly turned his discussion of this international crisis and Barack Obama’s seeming poor handling of said crisis to politics and the hopes of Democrats.  But Iran obtaining nuclear weapons won’t be about politics; it will be about Armageddon.

Frighteningly, Barack Obama’s very own VP has said that Barack Obama is most certainly not ready for what may very well prove to be the most terrifying crisis in human history:

“There has been no harsher critic of Barack Obama’s lack of experience than Joe Biden,” McCain spokesman Ben Porritt said in a written statement, according to CNN. “Biden has denounced Barack Obama’s poor foreign policy judgment and has strongly argued in his own words what Americans are quickly realizing — that Barack Obama is not ready to be president.”

Biden frequently raised questions about Obama’s lack of foreign policy experience during the primaries. “I think he can be ready, but right now, I don’t believe he is,” Biden said during one debate. “The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.”

North Korea looms large, and may loom far larger in the days soon-to-come.  But a nuclear Iran is an even more terrifying prospect.  You’ll see.

As I turn to Iraq – and then to how Iraq relates to Iran in the context of Bible prophecy – allow me to first discuss Joel Rosenberg.

A Wikipedia article on Joel Rosenberg probably provides the most concise summary (accessed June 23, 2009):

Rosenberg’s novels have attracted those interested in Bible Prophecy, due to several of his fictional elements of his books that would occur after his writing of books. Nine months before the September 11th attacks, Rosenberg wrote a novel with a kamikaze plane attack on an American city. Five months before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, he wrote a novel about war with Saddam Hussein, the death of Yasser Arafat eight months before it occurred, a story with Russia, Iran, and Libya forming a military alliance against Israel occurring the date of publishing,^[7] the rebuilding of the city of Babylon,^[12] Iran vowing to have Israel “wiped off the face of the map forever” five months before Iranian President Ahmadinejad said the same,^[13] and the discovery of huge amounts of oil and natural gas in Israel (which happened in January 2009).^[14] The U.S. News & World Report have referred to him as a “Modern Nostradamus,”^[15] although Rosenberg tries to play down those proclamations, stating that “I am not a clairvoyant, a psychic, or a ‘Modern Nostradamus,’ as some have suggested.”^[16] He gives the credit for his accurate predictions to studying Biblical prophecy and applying to the modern world.^[16]

Why did Rosenberg predict that there would be a “kamikaze plane attack on an American city” by Islamic terrorists?  Because he accurately understood the evil at the heart of Islam.

Why did Rosenberg predict a war between Saddam Hussein and the United States resulting in the overthrow of Saddam and his brutal regime?  That’s where it gets interesting.

Joel Rosenberg had done a thorough study of the Book of Ezekiel and of the Bible (as a couple of overlapping articles summarize – Article 1; – Article 2).  He learned that one day, according to the Bible, a massive army under the leadership of Russia and many of its former republics (Magog) and Iran (Persia) and consisting of many countries that are today Islamic [e.g. “Cush” (modern-day Sudan and Ethiopia); “Put” (modern-day Libya); “Gomer” (modern-day Turkey); “Beth-togarmah” (modern-day Armenia); and many peoples “along the mountains of Israel” (modern-day Lebanon and possibly Syria)] would form an “exceedingly great army” that would one day attack Israel.

What Rosenberg noted was the absence of two countries: Egypt and Babylon (i.e. Iraq).  Egypt had been a perennial enemy of Israel until 1973, when Egypt alone in all the Arab/Muslim world forged a historic peace treaty with the state of Israel.  That left Iraq.  Rosenberg asked himself, “How could a nation like Iraq, under the leadership of someone like Saddam Hussein, NOT participate in this mega-colossal-last-days attack on Israel?

Rosenberg concluded that Saddam Hussein WOULDN’T refrain from such an attack.  And that meant that Saddam Hussein would have to go.

And so, NINE MONTHS before the 9/11 attack, Rosenberg in his “fiction” created a scenario in which terrorists flew a plane in a kamikaze attack, and the United States took out the Iraqi regime and replaced it with a stable Western-friendly government.

And because the Bible is the true Word of an all-knowing God who knows the end from the beginning as revealed through His prophets, the scenario laid out by Joel Rosenberg turned out to be eerily true.  It wasn’t a “lucky guess”; it was based upon the God who had revealed the last days to an inspired prophet named Ezekiel some 2,600 years ago.

Thus we have Iraq, its tyrant who had filled mass graves with the bodies of at least 400,000 of his own people, overthrown and a stable democracy growing in his place.  And we have Iran, a country strongly allied with Russia; a country bent on acquiring nuclear weapons; a country that has announced its intent on the destruction of Israel; a country under the leadership of men who in all likelihood believe in establishing a future by an act of violent apocalypse.  Two countries on two very different paths.  And both paths known to God 2,600 years ago.