re: That was the last coherent speech from a President we'll get for four years.

quote:

---

That was the last coherent speech from a President we'll get for four years.

---

Melt Day.....

What an outstanding man, and what an awful one to follow him.


You are a dusgrace

quote:

---

Toddy

---

quote:

---

Grace and class being replaced by mentally unstable trash.

---

Whatever it is that you are, you should never ever utter the words out of your pie hole about ANYONE being mentally unstable. Think real hard about that. You have absolutely ZERO credibility about being mentally stable.

Last coherent speech? Probably. But the speech was coherent in its consistent wrongheadedness. No doubt we will hear a lot of incoherence in speeches over the next four years, but sometimes it will be incoherent correct and others it will be incoherent incorrect. What is worse? Coherent but mostly wrong? Or incoherent but right some of the time?

Wasn't interested. Didn't watch it.

quote:

---

That was the last coherent speech from a President we'll get for four years.

---

Possibly but the tweets will be fabulous

quote:

---

What an outstanding man, and what an awful one to follow him.

---

I voted for Obama twice, but now I see that he was pretty feckless as president.

He didn't seem to care at all that the Dems lost control of the House in 2010. Since then he has been able to throw up his hands and say, "Well, foiled by the rethugs!"

That is a little too convenient. You know that the Dems lost over 1,000 seats in the House and in State legislatures across this broad land of ours since 2009, right?

Fumbled and stumbled across the world stage the whole time he was president. Either helped support ISIS or couldn't develop any policies that actually worked against them.

He couldn't decide if he was going to bend over for the Jews, or stand up to them.

I could go on and on.

quote:

---

Funded Iran Nuclear Program

---

Maybe.

Engaging Iran is one of the few things he did right.

How should it work over there? What is our best policy? Using History as our guide always, we can look at the Brits going back to the Golden Age under Elizabeth.

Spain ascendant? Support the Dutch. France Ascendant? Support the Spanish. Russia a problem? Ally with France and support Turkey. Germany ascendant? Support France. Germans at your throat again? Support France again. Unceremoniously ejected from the continent? Enlist the United States.

That policy works. It worked for the Brits for 300 years. We are doing exactly the opposite in our policy. The ally we need in that region is IRAN. We pretty much shanghaied them into being our ally in the 1950's. After their revolution we should have enlisted them as such again. The Irans have a large population they have a long and proud history and they are NOT Arab. They hate the Arabs. THEY could act as a foil to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is our number one enemy in the world. They fund the Madrassahs that teach that all infidels must die.

We don't enlist our best potential ally against SA - Iran - because the Jews don't like it.

Supporting the second strongest power in a region against the strongest is a proven policy.

"If you go to school in Saudi Arabia, what do you learn about people who are not followers of Wahhabi, of the prophet?

The religious curriculum in Saudi Arabia teaches you that people are basically two sides: Salafis [Wahhabis], who are the winners, the chosen ones, who will go to heaven, and the rest. The rest are Muslims and Christians and Jews and others.

They are either kafirs, who are deniers of God, or mushrak, putting gods next to God, or enervators, that's the lightest one. The enervators of religion who are they call the Sunni Muslims who ... for instance, celebrate Prophet Mohammed's birthday, and do some stuff that is not accepted by Salafis.

And all of these people are not accepted by Salafi as Muslims. As I said, "claimant to Islam." And all of these people are supposed to be hated, to be persecuted, even killed. And we have several clergy -- not one Salafi clergy -- who have said that against the Shi'a and against the other Muslims. And they have done it in Algeria, in Afghanistan. This is the same ideology. They just have the same opportunity. They did it in Algeria and Afghanistan, and now New York. ...


What do you mean, it reached New York?

Well, when it was a local problem, the American media did not really care much about it. But until September 11, you saw how this faith of hate, I call it, did to all of us, to New Yorkers and to the rest of the world, honestly. ...


But the Saudi government has condemned what happened on September 11....

... Yes, Prince Nayif condemned bin Laden, and other princes... Prince Turki condemned bin Laden. They did not condemn that message. They condemned bin Laden. ... Bin Laden learned this in Saudi Arabia. He didn't learn it in the moon. That message that Bin Laden received, it still is taught in Saudi Arabia. And if bin Laden dies, and this policy or curriculum stays, we will have other bin Ladens. ...


Can you show me an example of what the religious teaching is in the schools?

Well, here, this is a book, hadif, for ninth grade. Hadif is a statement of Prophet Mohammed. This is a book that start for ninth graders. This is talking about the victory of Muslims over Jews. This is a hadif that I truly believe it's not true, as a Muslim:

"The day of judgment will not arrive until Muslims fight Jews, and Muslim will kill Jews until the Jew hides behind a tree or a stone. Then the tree and the stone will say, 'Oh Muslim, oh, servant of God, this is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him.' Except one type of a tree, which is a Jew tree. That will not say that." This is taught for 14-year-old boys in Saudi Arabia."


LINK