Ayoon Wa Azan (Obama will have his revenge)

Does President Obama not read? Originally, Obama was a university professor whose job is to read. Is he without feeling? Well I believe that he is very sensitive. He is African-American, for one thing, and must have no doubt faced some racism, as a young man and later on. Is he a coward? Nothing in his past suggests so. I raise these questions because the neoconservative holdovers in the United States are attacking him day after day, making all kinds of accusations against him, and yet, he does not respond. The most logical explanation for this is that he does not want to enter into an endless debate with his foes that would benefit them and harm him. Indeed, if he responds, they would have succeeded in luring him into controversy. I believe that there is a more important reason, however, which is that the president wants to get through the mid-term elections in November next year with minimal political losses. After these elections, Obama will be free of all political shackles, and can finally act boldly and face his foes, to build that legacy that every politician seeks. President Obama’s neoconservative opponents, who had ruled behind the scenes when George W. Bush was in the White House, have tremendous chutzpah or even outright obscenity. For weeks now, I have been following a campaign they have waged against the president, on the back of the terror attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, which claimed the lives of four people including Ambassador Christopher Stevens in September 2012. It was a terror attack like a thousand before and after across the world. Yet I read the headline: Is Benghazi Becoming a Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or Both? Watergate entered the dictionary as a synonym for scandal, after workers in Richard Nixon’s election campaign broke into an office of the Democratic Party in the Watergate building. Iran-Contra was a scandal involving the neocons themselves, who sold weapons to Iran in secret while an official US embargo was in place, to finance the Contra in Nicaragua under Ronald Reagan. The scandal led to the conviction of 11 men, including Likudnik Elliott Abrams, who was pardoned by George Bush Sr. Abrams returned to the administration of George W. Bush as a National Security adviser on the Near East and North Africa, or in other words, the fox was put in charge of the chicken coop. The National Review is the Likudnik mouthpiece of the neocons. Its editor in chief is Bill Kristol, son of Irving Kristol. The Review endorsed the war on Iraq which was waged on falsified premises. This is not only a scandal, but a war crime and the crime of the 21st century. Yet despite its background in scandals, this extremist publication has equated an ordinary terror attack to Watergate or Iran-Contra. In another article, the same Likudnik rag claimed that Obama betrayed democracy, because he said that the film deemed offensive to the Muslim prophet was to blame for the incident in Benghazi, while the Libyan leader Mohammed Megaryef said it was a terrorist act. I do not understand how this constitutes betrayal. Other Likudnik sites took part in the campaign as well, and I read headlines like ‘Blood on Their Hands.’ But the only blood I see is on the hands of the neocons and the terrorists who carried out the attack in Benghazi, who are two sides of the same coin. I also read “What Did Obama Know and When Did He Know It?” The article with this headline, however, describes the neocons and not Obama, as the expression dates back to the demented Reagan and Iran-Contra. The usually liberal Washington Post ran an editorial by a Likud-leaning writer, Jonathan Bernstein, who wrote about Benghazi and other Obama scandals. They are a scandal and a crime against humanity, and I wait for Obama to take revenge against them all after 2014, to save his political legacy. The views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent or reflect the editorial policy of Arabstoday.