Thursday, January 5, 2023

FIFA World Cup Final: Coach Didier Deschamps and a Lesson in Authentic Leadership. (A Master Class)

I am not a Sportswriter, commentator, analyst, or enthusiast. I am a Lawyer by training, and I have a passion for crafting public policy statements.

I write this piece strictly influenced by both a theoretical and managerial perspective, based on what I observed a few days ago in the 2022 World Cup final match in Qatar between the France National Football Team and the Argentina National Football Team.

As human beings, we are bound to make mistakes or commit errors of judgment in whatever we do. Only God is infallible.

Objectively, most mistakes are excusable, while some are unpardonable, depending on their egregious nature or willfulness.

It is, however, the ability or inability of the leadership to react to a given situation, acknowledge the existence of shortcomings, identify the nature of the deficiencies, and develop appropriate and immediate remedial mechanisms that separate authentic leaders from neophytes and opportunists.

In the just concluded 2022 World Cup tournament, most of the France National Football Team's star players didn't make it to Qatar due to serious injuries.

The team, though plagued by unmitigated disasters pre the World Cup tournament, was still able to make it to the final round against the Argentina National Football Team.

Given the team's excellent performance in the preliminary stages, it was a dumbfounding spectacle when it conceded two goals in the first 35 minutes of play against Messi and his crew. The team was chaotic, lacking steam or cohesion, and appearing unmatched for the Argentine side.

And like a bolt from the blue, France's coach, Didier Deschamps, went into action, not waiting until the end of the First Half to make a change or replacements.

He dropped two players and brought in new faces. Marcus Thuram and Kolo Muani came on for Ousmane Dembele and Olivier Giroud respectively.

That decision in the last 5 minutes of the First Half was not just unusual, but unprecedented. He didn't prevaricate. He must have reasoned that waiting until the end of the First Half before initiating replacements is a deadly flighty purpose that must be overtaken and conquered.

He reacted fast and furiously with commensurate remediation when he discovered the leakages and deficiencies in his lineup. And the result was magical. That's the thesis of this essay.

As he must have anticipated, his team turns the heat on the Argentina team instantaneously. And the players maintain that vigorous standard of play until the blasting of the final whistle at the end of 120 minutes of real football.

He made other tactical changes in the early minutes of the Second Half - a decision that revolutionized his team.

Consequently, the French side, thanks to the electrifying Mbappe, scored two goals in quick succession, thus making the scores even for both teams before the end of the original 90 minutes of play.

The question now is, would France Nation Team have conceded those two goals in the First Half, if Marcus Thuram and Kolo Muani were parts of the initial eleven players on the field for France? We may never know.

What we do know, however, is that after those changes the French Team did not only stop Messi and his crew from terrorizing their 18 yards box or scoring, they went ahead and scored two goals before the full 90 minutes of play.

The regulatory 30 minutes of extra time brought out the best and a new surge of energy in the team. Thus, turning the 2022 World Cup final match into one of intense and monumental suspense.

And were it not for a miraculous save by the Argentina Goalkeeper, Emiliano Martinez, in the dying minutes of the second half of the extra 30 minutes, France striker, Randal Kolo Muani could have made it 4 - 3 in favor of France.

What the France National Football Team coach, Didier Deschamps, did in the first half of the game is a true definition of authentic leadership.


A Timid World: Confronting the Dogmas of ISIS and Religious Radicalism Around Us!  September 06, 2014

“The American people are so much stronger, so much more resolved than any enemy can fully understand. We don’t forget. We take care of those who are grieving and when that’s finished, they should know we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice because hell is where they will reside.” Vice President Joe Biden.

Introduction:

The much-orchestrated invincibility and financial muscle of the Islamic State Militants in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), if at all, are not insurmountable. They are overhyped. The world defeated Hitler and decimated Nazism. The problem is: those who are in a position to take action against ISIS are finding it difficult to absorb the trauma and overcome the feelings of hopelessness, defeat, and near capitulation accumulated from witnessing the gruesome beheading of freelance journalists - innocent journalists undeservedly wasted like a sacrificial lamb for an unfathomable cause. It took President Obama, yes, President Barack Obama who brought down Osama bin Laden, decimated al Awlaki, rescued the Horn of Africa from the grip of rampaging pirates (no mean achievements), three attempts to hit the right note on what to make of ISIS. So it was more of a relief, when Mr. President, earlier today, September 05, 2014, declared in no uncertain terms that “we are going to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL, the same way that we have gone after Al Qaeda.” How soon, and at what scale or magnitude are still being defined. Whatever the goals are, NATO and the international coalition must act swiftly and decisively, mindful of the fact that ISIS is an enemy of civilization - a bunch of barbarians, basking in bloodbaths to mask their vulnerability. And like the Nigerian Boko Haram, ISIS has no attributes of statehood that would require reconstruction after its annihilation. It is not Iraq, and it is not Afghanistan. Therefore, the attacks must be massive and all-encompassing, with extinction as the main goal. As long as the objectives are to decimate the group and rid the occupied territories of every remnant of Islamic fundamentalism, the exit strategy will be less arduous to execute.

The Concept of Faith.

Great Britain is the number one training ground for Islamic fundamentalists. On the eve of the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001, there was a video clip, if I remember correctly, broadcast by CNN or CNN International, involving about four or five members of an Islamic religious group in London, England that was more of a shock than educational. In the interview, one of the participants, clean-shaven, and arguably the youngest of the group, stated unequivocally, and with a sense of bravado, that America deserves what it gets - stating further that those who carried out the bombing acted in good faith. The interview was conducted inside a restaurant - their restaurant, more of a bakery.

For a British citizen or a Green Card holder for that matter, to be so adamant, so vociferous, and so prideful of his unrighteous endorsement - pervert and abhorrent as the endorsement may be to ordinary folks - of a crime that took the lives of thousands of innocent men and women, and to do so on camera, reflects the temple of the hate-filled and worthlessness of human-life kinds-of-teaching that permeates places of worship in the United Kingdom. In addition, it manifests the readiness of most UK-based immigrants of the Islamic faith to sacrifice their lives and the lives of others in the name of religion.

These radicalized adherents of the faith as well as their revered teachers live in their own “invented world” inside of Great Britain - perverting religious freedom, preaching hatred and destruction of America and everything Western, with unbridled arrogance and insensitivity.

About a year ago a British soldier, Lee Rigby, was viciously stabbed to death, almost beheaded in broad daylight by two members of this group in Woolwich, South East London. To be so brutish and unrepentantly heartless to take their disillusionment and hatred of governmental institutions and civil society straight to the streets of London, and in broad daylight, explains the extreme nature of the indoctrination and brainwashing they imbibed inside places of worship. It further explains the level of detachment between them (all the underwear and shoe bombers) and the civil society on the one hand, and the hatred they harbor against government and law enforcement agencies on the other.

The comatose state of the political system the world is witnessing in Iraq, Libya, and Syria today is an export of that "invented world" incubated and nurtured to full bloom inside of Great Britain – with followers now spanning the length and breadth of the globe. So, the earlier the whole world comes together with a concerted resolve to decapitate ISIS and everything that it represents, the better and safer for everyone.

To cut off the head of another healthy human being who did not commit any crime has no legitimacy in the Qur'an. It doesn't add value to a cause.

To invade a boarding school at night, tied up the hands and legs of innocent students behind their backs, and slits their throats, leaving them to bleed to death as Boko Haram did at a boarding school in Benue State, Nigeria is not an achievement that any Muslim would want to be proud of or be part of. As we write, more than 200 Chibok School Girls are under captivity somewhere in North Eastern Nigeria, held without their consent, and for cause or causes unfathomable to discerning minds. 

Also, I do not think that millions of peace-loving Muslims all over the world who watched the videos of the gruesome execution of Steven Sotloff and James Foley as well as videos of battered and bullets ridden bodies of fellow Middle-Eastern Muslims, Shiites, and Christians, victims of firing squad style of execution, would want to be seen or be celebrated as brethren or sympathizers of ISIS.

This piece is not just on how to rein in the instructors and teachers of hatred and Armageddon as the world has come to know them all over Great Britain, Middle-East, and Nigeria, but on how to, in line with what the world did to Hitler and Nazism, permanently decimate ISIS, their affiliates and those they have already recruited and indoctrinated in the act of jihad and martyrdom.

The Concept of Strength:

Thanks to the swift intervention of the United States of America, when Saddam Hussein of Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, under force-occupation, defying Kuwaiti sovereignty, the much-hyped ‘Mother of All War’ promised American forces by President Saddam Hussein, came to an abrupt end in less than a week into the escalation of the "Desert Storm.

What am I saying? ISIS, militarily, is not invincible; it has no standing army with the capacity to withstand sustained and well-coordinated air and ground attacks from international coalition forces. So the coalition should not waver in its resolve to take the fight to the ISIS stronghold.

In spite of the alleged vastness of its occupied territories as well as the alleged vastness of its volunteered fighters; we cannot deny the fact that a greater majority of the volunteered fighters are not your regular trained or seasoned army. Shooting POW from behind is not a show of strength.

The World cannot afford to watch another gruesome video of non-combatant journalists or of Shiites and moderates Muslims hacked to death in isolated locations where there are no friendly forces in sight to initiate rescue operations. That, unfortunately, was the plight of James and Steven. Even Prisoners of War and enemy combatants are protected under Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949. ISIS has no scruple shooting from behind captured members of the Syrian Armed Forces in their custody. 

ISIS is unlike Afghanistan or Iraq where the burden of building a brand new government in the form of a political system, Army, or statehood after the defeat and evacuation of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein by the US Armed Forces became daunting and protracted. Here, there is no new State to build.

ISIS, like Nigerian Boko Haram, is a product of a demented faculty. They are on a false mission - building an Islamic Caliphate that will not meet the test of time; killing and maiming in the process to strike fears around the world. They are manipulating social media and striking fears in the minds of world leaders, riding on their accessibility to the Internet to bamboozle gullible recruits. Above all, they have no territory vested by laws or a nation-state respected by any UN Article or Charter. Simply put, they have no subjects willingly paying allegiance in observance of real or perceived statehood.

The inability of ISIS to defeat the Syrian Armed Forces and compel Assad to relinquish his throne or kingship, tells on the weakness of ISIS in terms of military command structure, skills, and organization.

That it captured some Iraqi territories is understandable. It is not proof of military strength as most Security Experts and pundits are trumpeting on TV stations. Iraqi Armed Forces are in the formative stage, compounded by a weak President who did not enjoy the support of the overwhelming majority of his people and law enforcement agencies.

Beheading unarmed journalists, killing innocent civilians, and executing captured enemy combatants from behind in a most gruesome manner for propaganda and recruitment goals do not meet the definition of military strength or invincibility. Simply put, they don’t have it.

Yes, ISIS has succeeded in seizing and appropriating a sizable volume of captured weapons belonging to Syrian and Iraq as well as vast oil fields. The truth is they cannot acquire more than what they have at the moment. It is not enough to acquire an oil field in the absence of a ready market for the final products. Blocking existing markets or trading partners is a good start. In addition, they don't have the technological or military wherewithal to keep and maintain the seized weapons in a deployable state.

Assad is still standing; in spite of the much-orchestrated invincibility of ISIS. It is that frustration - their inability to conquer Syria and create an Islamic Caliphate - that is propelling the ongoing brutalities. Be that as it may, ISIS cannot withstand ground and air bombardments by the coalition forces. The time is now for that bombardment.

The World fought a brutal Second World War for the sake of humanity. If the rest of the world, specifically, if the United States of America, had intervened in the War earlier than it did, more lives would have been saved and Holocaust would have been averted to some degree.

Slavery, the worst form of man’s inhumanity to man lasted for as long as the Union delayed the declaration of war on the later-formed, Confederate States, which were not ready to jettison the slavery culture or relinquish their hold on freed Blacks. Eventually, the Emancipation Proclamation came, and the “world” of Blacks was made better.

And between 1992 and 1995, the whole world vacillated while the people of the former Yugoslavia endured a brutal and televised campaign of ethnic cleansing perpetrated on each other by tribes and clans that once paid allegiance to the same flag. In the end, thousands of lives were lost and a once beautiful multi-ethnic nation-state tumbled down into obscurity like a pack of cards in the name of religion.

On a similar note, in 1994, the Hutus and Tutsi genocidal conflict was first considered an internal affair, a tribal rivalry within a sovereign State (Rwanda) by the world, until a whole tribe (Tutsi) was almost wiped out from the face of the earth.

The world and the international coalition forces must unite, show strength and vanquish ISIS. We cannot afford to experience another Rwanda or another Holocaust. 

Of Compromises and Permanent Interests:

In the international diplomacy circle, there is a universally accepted belief that there are no permanent friends or allies, but permanent interests. There is no period, no circumstances more urgent than now for that principle to come to play given the facts on the ground in Syria and Iraq. When President Obama made the declaration in the past that there won't be American combat boots on the ground in Syria, there was no ISIS then. Also, there was no beheading of American freelance journalists. In other words, the interests of America or those of its allies were not at stake or threatened at that point in time.  Today, it is a different story - cannot, and must not downplay the need for more boots on the ground in Syria.

In light of the unchecked bombing, coupled with the inability of the governments in Syria, Libya, and Iraq to exercise absolute control over the civil society as well as ensure territorial sovereignty, put into question the feasibility of democratic dispensation indiscriminately pursued all over the Middle East by the West. Without any doubt, one can certainly declare that you don’t deal with these people with kid gloves.

Today, Iraq and Libya are worse off than they were under the alleged dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadhafi. Libya, like Syria and Iraq, is a geographical expression. They are not monolithic entities like Egypt or Morocco. Libyan, Syrian, and Iraqi people are more sympathetic to the concerns and safety of their respective ethnic groups or enclaves. Tribal loyalty trumps national pride. 

America and its allies must make a hard decision on how to end the civil war in Syria. According to a popular Nigerian saying, “the devil you know is better than the angel you don’t know.” Given ISIS antecedents, it is reasonable to argue for a political solution to the lingering civil war in Syria, while systematically providing some form of military support to President Assad and the new integrated forces, with a view to overwhelming ISIS from all fronts.

If I may add, President Assad, to a certain degree, is seemingly vindicated in much of his arguments in the past about the civil war in his country - the majority of the insurgents fighting to oust him from power are not the type America and the West would be willing to align with. In other words, they are remnants of radical elements and Islamic fundamentalists from all over the world with one goal only: kill Assad and turn Syria and part of Iraq into a radical Islamic Caliphate.

And if you don't know; these are the Islamic militants who took advantage of the protest in Benghazi on September 12, 2012, to invade the US Consulate and kill four US Diplomats, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Now it is becoming clearer why it has become of an enormous challenge to build a stable government in Iraq and Libya since the demise of their leaders. Therefore, it is a hard choice for America and the West to make: work with Syria to dismantle ISIS, or stay aside and watch ISIS turn the Iraqi desert into a slaughtering field for innocent journalists.

In sum, ISIS is vulnerable. It cannot acquire more than it has presently in terms of finances and weapons of war. A massively enforced military blockade from Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Jordan would make it practically impossible for them to engineer reinforcements in terms of weapons and volunteer fighters.

In a similar vein, military blockade from Cameroon, Niger, and Chad would, no doubt, incapacitates Boko Haram in the Northeastern part of Nigeria, making their defeat easier to execute, if only Nigerian politicians desist from funding the sect and frustrating the efforts of the military.

Conclusion:

Now is the time for the West to show strength, waging an all-out land and air bombardments of ISIS and Boko Haram-held territories. To put it in Nigerian Pidgin English “the pikin wey say 'im mama no go sleep, 'im too no go sleep. That has always been President Obama’s own military doctrine – overwhelming and disorganizing enemies of the United States, taking the fights into their bedrooms by any means necessary. Placing them under sustained harassment and on the defensive would irredeemably diminish their valor and appeals. An insurgent running for cover will not have the time to gyrate with captured military weapons or the time and space to record propaganda messages. The world has been deep down in sleep over ISIS's reign of terror. It is time to wake up and do what is right – match them towards the gate of hell where they rightly belong as Vice President Joe Biden declared yesterday.

NB:

What is so intriguing about Boko Haram and its reign of terror in Nigeria is that Bornu State, its proposed Caliphate,  is landlocked. It has no access to the sea or any known seaport. In addition, the neighboring countries, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger are supposedly hostile territories.

Yet, Boko Haram has an unhindered supply of arms, vehicles, fuel, foodstuffs, and clothing. How is that possible? That is a question for the present administration, under whose watch the insurgency escalates unabated. Not left out of the indictment are the northern political leaders and, specifically, the loquacious elders who, on record, opposed the proscription of Boko Haram by the Federal Government, and at the same time, were known to be consistently and openly sympathetic to the sect. In spite of everything, it is my fervent prayer that what I think of Boko Haram is not true.

 Confronting the Dogmas of ISIS and Religious Fundamentalism Around us. April 08, 2016

Preamble

The much-orchestrated financial muscles of the Islamic State Militants in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) are not insurmountable. Militarily, it is not invincible, either. It has no standing army with the capacity to withstand sustained and concerted air and ground bombardments from the US Armed Forces and forces of the international coalition. In spite of the alleged vastness of its occupied territories and the enormity of its volunteered fighters, the truth is, a greater majority of the volunteered fighters are not your regular trained or seasoned army. Besides, ISIS cannot acquire more than what it has at the moment in terms of finances and combat weapons. A massively enforced military blockade from Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Jordan, would make it practically impossible for ISIS to execute reinforcements in terms of weapons and volunteer fighters. Beheading unarmed journalists and shooting prisoners of war from behind is not a show of strength.

The world defeated Hitler and decimated Nazism. President Barack Obama brought down Osama bin Laden, vanquished al Awlaki and his networks of rebels, and rescued the Horn of Africa from the stranglehold of rampaging pirates. The more world leaders and Heads of State and Government vacillate on annihilating ISIS and religious-related extremism around us, the more vicious they turn and the more time they gain to perfect their barbaric exploits. And the consequence of that is obvious. The more glamorous and alluring a picture they paint of themselves and of ISIS in the heart and soul of gullible adherents of barbarism and their brand of faith.

On September 05, 2014, President Barack Obama declared in no uncertain terms that “we are going to degrade and ultimately defeat the ISIL, the same way that we have gone after Al Qaeda.” And on September 18, 2014, the US Senate reaches a bi-partisan deal to allow President Obama to fund and arm Syrian Moderate Rebel Forces in its quest to conquer and eliminate ISIS. That was twenty months ago. Today, ISIS is still standing, unruffled, and exporting mayhem and terrorism with relish around the world. In spite of the debilitating outcome of President Putin’s massive air bombardments of ISIS and the recent gain made by President Assad's forces; ISIS is still standing, undaunted and wrecking more havoc and shedding more blood with more daring and devastating take outside of it held enclaves than it has ever been.

In light of the not-so-surprising disappearing act of the Moderate Rebel Forces and the Free Syrian Army in vanquishing Assad or defeating ISIS, the need for direct involvement of American Combat Boots and the International Coalition forces on the ground in Syria cannot be overemphasized. The world cannot afford to grieve over another Brussels or watch helplessly as another Prisoner of War (Muath al-Kaseasbeh) suffered gruesome and hideous death. Now, it is no longer about President Assad and his alleged human rights abuses; it is about annihilating ISIS and vanquishing everything that it represents, and stemming the tide of global terrorism next door.

Defining and Deflating ISIS 

As the world watches, ISIS wasted no time perfecting the craft of projecting its occupied territory as an El Dorado. Sadly, up till this very moment, the global community has not been able to deflate that ego-tripping and has never given a thought about demystifying the bogus, but very successful marketing scheme and the subliminal messages most often embedded in all the video clips ISIS has been uploading on the World Wide Web.

So, the first approach to undoing those subliminal messages and claims of invincibility requires checkmating the over-hyped grandeur surrounding the ISIS brand. Because it is that audacity, the dramatized invincibility, and the daring attitude inherent in all the attacks, whether in Paris, Syria, Nairobi, Baghdad, Chibok, or Brussels that creates the allure in the minds of natural haters of everything west, which in turn, facilitates recruitment drive.

Therefore, the US Armed Forces and the International Coalition Forces must turn the table on ISIS by any means necessary and put a lie to that magnified strength, and of a Caliphate flowing ceaselessly with milk and honey. And until ISIS and the extremists become the victims - the conquered and the endangered species - thus, creating a chilling effect in the soul of potential recruits, they will continue to enjoy a steady membership boom and mushrooming global networks. That surge must be checkmated for obvious reasons. It is doom-laden. With it, the world will continue to experience escalations in bombing and destruction of lives. Because, with a membership surge, comes a willing suicide bomber.

ISIS, to the Islamic fundamentalist or innate jihadist, is like a Chemistry Lab in High School where science enthusiasts readily gravitate to experiment with known and imaginary noble concepts for intellectual enrichment. That is the fame that ISIS enjoys the most about its Caliphate. It has created a platform, an El Dorado for enemies of civilization to gravitate to an experiment, unlike Chemistry buds, with dangerous concepts and perfection of IED. Therefore, the earlier that El Dorado, imaginary or real, is stymied, the better it is for the human race.

A Timid World 

The spontaneous raids and arrests associated with every suicide attack are half-measures. Historically, they have not been known to compel any sense of deterrent on a mind already made up to inflict serious damage on perceived enemies.  In other words, raids and arrests, standing alone, cannot eliminate the scourge of terrorism. Because raids and arrests are perceived by the perpetrators of the acts as the natural consequences of their actions – the suicide bombing. Fruitful or not, they are wasted efforts, because the damage has been done - many innocent lives have already been wasted, and in most cases, public properties and infrastructural facilities worth millions of dollars ruined.

So, losing their lives, whether in the process of suicide attacks or afterward, makes no difference. To the adherents of the faith, it makes the bombing more appealing and the death that follows more fulfilling. It is about martyrdom and the infliction of maximum casualties on the target audience. From all indications, again, historically speaking, retaliatory measures, notwithstanding the number of arrests made in the process, do not have a lasting impact. Once again, the damage has been done.

Therefore, the best alternative is preemption - taking the fight into the adopted territories of ISIS and those of its affiliates and their economic/financial/business networks, unannounced. It is about strength, and placing them on perpetual retreat and on the defensive, with the intent to annihilate. There is no other way to debunk their bogus claim of invincibility than massive and consistent attacks and reinforcement, overwhelming them from all fronts possible – Colin Powell’s principle.

The Urgency of Combat Boots on the Ground in Syria.

In the international diplomatic circle, there is the well-known universally accepted maxim that there are no permanent friends or allies, but permanent interests. Given that as true, there is no period, no history, and no situation more urgent than now for that principle to be on display in Damascus at the instance of Washington, with a view to enabling unhindered channels for integrated military and logistics support for President Assad for the dismantling of ISIS and everything that it represents.

When President Obama made the declaration a few years ago that there won't be American combat boots on the ground in Syria, there was no ISIS, there was no beheading of American freelance journalists, or an American Aid Worker facing imminent death, and there was no suicidal match for experimentation with the idea of an Islamic Caliphate. And there was no bombing in Paris or Brussels and the burning to death of a POW, contrary to all the Geneva Convention respecting and protecting the rights of prisoners of war. In other words, the lives of innocent citizens, the interests of America, or those of its allies were not at stake or threatened, when President Obama made that declaration. Today, it is a different story. ISIS is on the loose.

In every respect imaginable, a war against ISIS is a just war, Godly, and morally defensible. Therefore, we cannot, and we must no longer downplay the efficacy of American combat boots on the ground in Syria.

Without mincing words, I want to maintain that arming the Free Syrian Army, without the direct involvement of the coalition forces in real combat side by side with Assad's forces, will not vanquish ISIS from the occupied territories as reasonably expected. In addition, the underlying grievances, mostly political, must be addressed simultaneously with the quest to annihilate ISIS; otherwise, Syria will remain a vast land of unequal rights and justice, and a testing ground for every form of Islamic fundamentalism.

Balancing Democratic Values with Strong Arm Tactics

In light of the unchecked suicide attacks and bombing, coupled with the inability of the governments in Syria, Libya, and Iraq to exercise real control over the civil society as well as ensuring territorial sovereignty, calls into question the feasibility of democratic dispensation indiscriminately pursued all over the Middle East by the West.

Today, Iraq and Libya are worse off than they were under the alleged dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadhafi. Syria, like Libya and Iraq, is a geographical expression. It is not a monolithic nation-state like Egypt or Morocco. Libyan, Syrian, and Iraqi people are more sympathetic to the concerns of their respective ethnic groups or enclaves. In other words, tribal loyalty trumps national pride, if at all there is national pride. The main reason it has been enormously challenging for the US Government to build a stable government in Iraq and Libya many years after the demise of their Presidents.

Given ISIS antecedents, it is reasonable to argue for a political solution to the lingering civil war in Syria, while systematically providing some form of military support to President Assad and the newly integrated forces, with a view to overwhelming ISIS from all fronts.

Without mincing words, President Assad, to a certain degree, is vindicated in much of his arguments in the past years about the civil war in his country, to wit, the majority of the insurgents fighting to oust him from power are not the so-called “freedom fighters” or democratic activists America and the West would be willing to align with. In other words, they are remnants of radical elements and Islamic fundamentalists from all over the world, with one goal in common: kill Assad and turn Syria and part of the Iraqi desert into an Islamic Caliphate. And these are the Islamic militants who, under the camouflage of a protest in Benghazi on September 12, 2012, invaded the US Consulate, killing Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other US Diplomats.

Therefore, it is a hard choice for America and the West to make: work with Syria to dismantle ISIS, or stay aside and watch ISIS turn the Iraqi desert into a haven for the concoction of global terrorism.

The Futility of Assad’s Exit.

Indeed the impulse to overthrow President Assad for all his past records of human rights abuse is high and compelling, but we should be mindful of the fact that a greater majority of his adversaries are unrepentant Islamic militants who, given the chance, will never and can never be salvaged, or expected to embrace the Western secular culture and democratic values.

More troubling is the question of managing the liberation process. Who will exercise jurisdiction over the ISIS-occupied territory, if eventually ISIS is defeated and evacuated? That is, assuming President Assad is still an enemy, hunted.

Will the coalition forces and the moderate rebels, after the expected defeat of ISIS, turn their weapons on Assad and his forces, with a view to forcing Assad out of power in Syria? That scenario is unlikely to play out now that Assad and his forces are getting the upper hand, overwhelming and subduing the ISIS forces.

Or will Syria degenerate into two mini-sovereign nations - one under the control and leadership of Assad, and the other under the control of the international coalition and the moderate Free Syrian Army? Again, that scenario is unlikely to evolve in light of the fact that Assad and his forces are gradually recovering much of the lost territories from ISIS.

Given the facts on the ground, it is not enough to defeat and vanquish ISIS, without first or simultaneously addressing the civil war in Syria that gave life to ISIS in the first case. Attention, therefore, should be extended to how to manage the intended defeat of ISIS.

From all indications, the so-called moderate rebels are not a formidable force, militarily. They couldn't withstand the military strength of Assad Forces and they have been similarly humbled by the more aggressive and brutal ISIS forces.

In other words, these are not the forces or a formidable group that, under the prevailing circumstances, you would expect to form a viable government in Syria after the defeat of ISIS or the unlikely capitulation of Assad. It won't work.

Therefore, the international coalition must strive to integrate the political solution with a military approach, without forcing President Assad out of power. The political turmoil and ethnic intolerance in Iraq in the past three years are crucial enough for a road map.

The Concept of Tribe

Syria is not Egypt. Egyptians rebelled against the Mubarak Administration collectively as a people. There was no tribal War Lord taking advantage of the pro-democracy protest to inflict maximum damage on President Mubarak and members of his administration. And there was no visible tribal or ethnic group fighting on the side of President Mubarak to frustrate the purpose of the pro-democracy movement.

With regards to the Muslim Brotherhood, it was a different story – they were neutral all through the nights and days that the protest lasted in Cairo, waiting patiently to occupy the vacuum expected to be created in the lead following the demise of Mubarak's Administration.

As expected, being the most viable and well-organized group existing then, the Muslim Brotherhood was able to mobilize its followers within a record time, cashing in on the anti-Mubarak sentiments to win the Presidential election that was called by the interim Military Government. But the newly elected President, Mohamed Morsi, got it all wrong. He did not let go of the Islamists in him, and he was vanquished by the people. And a new government came into being within a record time. That did not happen in Libya or Iraq. And it will not happen in Syria.

With respect to the Algerians, they simply had enough of corrupt political leaders – leadership of the Nigerian style that hadn’t any clue on how to manage its vast oil wealth and respond to the concerns of the vast and ever-restless proletarians.

In sum, the anger, the joblessness, or the feeling of anti-establishment in Tunisia, Algeria, and Egypt that led to the evolution of the “Arab Spring” was not motivated by tribal or ethnic, or religious factors as we saw in Syria and Libya.

Therefore, President Obama and the international coalition must tread softly in arming the so-called moderate rebels inside of Syria. Because when it is all over, you would still have a substantial member, if not a majority, of the Syrian people backing President Assad as one of their own.

To put it succinctly, a minority regime in Syria is not sustainable. President Obama or his successor cannot afford to 'babysit' another adolescent government - Islamic or secular - in another hostile territory.

It is now left to President Obama, his security team, and his Western allies to separate the wheat from the chaff with a view to avoiding creating another Afghanistan mujahidin funded by America in the 1980s during the Afghan war with the old Soviet Union.

Undermining the political angle of the civil war in Syria is not a smart move. The ISIS phenomenon, though overwhelming, is a collateral issue in the Syria saga. Ending it does not automatically eliminate the underlying grievances that compelled the civil war in Syria.  In addition, Syria is not Gadhafi’s Libya where the pro-government forces collapsed under intense pressure from the international community.

President Assad has real and highly motivated followers who are willing to sacrifice their lives for their President. The facts on the ground speak volumes about that. If President Assad is vulnerable he would have been ousted by now, given the multi-dimensional attacks his forces and administration have received from ISIS, the Free Syrian Army, the international community as well as other interested parties in the past three years.

In other words, the liberation of ISIS-held territories will not completely eliminate the political crisis in Syria. In the same way, the defeat of Assad forces, if ever it happens, will not enshrine the elusive peace in the polity. The situation requires concerted and well-coordinated military and political solutions – an inclusive government, imbued with democratic values and respect for the rule of law and the protection of human rights of the citizenry, without regard to race or religion.

The Concept of Strength

The inability of ISIS to defeat the Syrian Armed Forces and compel Assad to relinquish his throne or kingship, tells on the weakness of ISIS in terms of military command structure, skills, and organization.

That it captured some Iraqi territories in the past is understandable. It is not a show of military strength as most Security Experts and pundits alluded to on American TV Networks. Iraqi Armed Forces are in a formative stage, compounded by a weak President who did not enjoy the support of the overwhelming majority of his people or the law enforcement agencies.

Beheading unarmed journalists, killing innocent civilians, and executing captured enemy combatants in a most gruesome manner for propaganda objectives do not meet the definition of military strength or invincibility. Simply put, they don’t have it. Assad is still standing, in spite of the much-orchestrated invincibility of ISIS.

Yes, ISIS has succeeded in seizing and appropriating a sizable volume of captured weapons belonging to Syrian and Iraqi forces as well as a vast oil field. The truth is they cannot acquire more than what they have at the moment. It is not enough to acquire oil fields in the absence of a ready market for the final products. Blockading the existing markets or trading partners is a good start. In addition, they don't have the technological or military wherewithal to keep and maintain the seized weapons for easy deployment.

The World fought a brutal Second World War for the sake of humanity. If the rest of the world, specifically, if the United States of America, had intervened in the War earlier than it did, more lives would have been saved and Holocaust would have been averted to some degree.

Slavery, the worst form of man’s inhumanity to man lasted for as long as the Union delayed the declaration of war on the later-formed, Confederate States, which were not ready to jettison slavery culture and relinquish their hold on freed Blacks. Eventually, the Emancipation Proclamation came, and the “world” of Blacks was made better.

And between 1992 and 1995, the whole world vacillated while the people of the former Yugoslavia endured a brutal and televised campaign of ethnic cleansing perpetrated on each other by tribes and clans that once paid allegiance to the same flag. In the end, thousands of lives were lost and a once beautiful multi-ethnic nation-state tumbled down into obscurity in the name of religion or tribal superiority. The world and the international coalition forces must unite, show strength, and vanquish ISIS. We cannot afford to dilly-dally over another Rwanda or another Holocaust.

The Concept of Faith

A few years ago, a British soldier, Lee Rigby, was viciously stabbed to death, almost beheaded in broad daylight by two members of an Islamic sect in Woolwich, South East London. To be so brutish and unrepentantly heartless to the extent of taking your hatred, your intolerance, your disillusionment, and your resentment of governmental institutions straight into the streets of London, and in broad daylight, stabbing a uniformed officer to death explains the extreme nature of the indoctrination and brainwashing they suffered inside places of worship in Great Britain of all places. It further explains the level of detachment between them (all the underwear and shoe bombers) and the civil society on the one hand, and the hatred they harbor against government and law enforcement agencies on the other.

The comatose state of the political system the world is witnessing in Iraq, Libya, and Syria today is the offshoot of that extremism, of a polluted mindset and belief system, incubated and nurtured to full bloom inside of Great Britain and France, with followers now spanning the length and breadth of the globe.

This piece is not just on how to decimate ISIS and its affiliates in line with what the world did to Hitler and Nazism, but on how to rein in the instructors and teachers of hatred and Armageddon as the world has come to know them all over Great Britain, Europe, and part of the Middle East and Nigeria. It is also about the wisdom of the preemptive approach and permanently eliminated from the face of the earth all those they have already indoctrinated and imbued with jihadist philosophy. It is about preemption.

To invade a boarding school at night time, tied up the hands and legs of innocent school children behind their backs, affix them to a stake like animals and slit their throats, leaving them to bleed to death as Boko Haram did at a boarding school in Benue State, Nigeria a few years ago is not an achievement that any Muslim worldwide would want to be proud of or be part of. The world must not allow that to happen again. As we write, more than 200 Chibok School Girls are still under captivity somewhere in North Eastern Nigeria, held without their consent, and for cause or causes unfathomable to common sense. It is about preemption.

A Jordanian prisoner of war was caged by ISIS, laced with gasoline, set ablaze, dragged along on a chariot of fire, and filmed - filmed dying slowly in excruciating pain - decapitating pieces by pieces for the whole world to see. That was a horrible, powerful propaganda message - a message of we rule the world; targeting, no doubt, all the gullible adherents of Islamic fundamentalism. The world cannot and must not wait for a repeat of that heinous crime.

When Muath al-Kaseasbeh was set on fire inside the cage, it was not only ISIS that was on trial for his gruesome death but the entire human race, especially the leadership of the free world and of the Muslim world and everyone who did nothing to curb the excesses of a sect on a perverted mission.

It is mind-bugling and disturbingly stupefying how a sect within defined and ascertainable geographical boundaries, without a standing army, and even if it does have one, that is not up to half a percent of what Hitler had, is still standing, unruffled, wreaking havoc upon havoc around the world undaunted.

Yet the world vacillates in the face of clear and present danger. And Paris burn. Brussels burn. And Muath al-Kaseasbeh was caged and set on fire to burn to death.

A few days after that horrific episode, and as the culture is after such death or attack, Jordanian Fighter Jets were seen over the ISIS sky, dropping bombs on specific targets on the ground. And that was it. Today, ISIS is still standing. And it has unleashed more gruesome and more painful death on mankind ever since. That has to change.

Moving Forward

Now is the time for the West to show strength and take it from where President Putin left it, waging an all-out land and air bombardments of ISIS. President Obama’s own military doctrine has always been about “overwhelming and disorganizing your enemies, taking the fights into their bedrooms by any means necessary and placing them under sustained harassment and on the defensive.” But sad to say, President Obama has not or is yet to put his doctrine and war chests into force in Syria and the ISIS-held territories.

An insurgent running for cover will not have the time to gyrate with captured military weapons or the time and space to record propaganda messages. With the exception of Russia, the world has become too timid, deep down too timid over ISIS and its reign of terror. It is time to wake up and do what is right and match them towards the gate of hell where they rightly belong as Vice President Joe Biden once declared.

Like the Nigerian Boko Haram, ISIS has no attributes of statehood that would require reconstruction after its annihilation. It is not Iraq, and it is certainly not Afghanistan. Therefore, the attacks must be massive and all-encompassing, with extinction as the main goal. As long as the objective is to decimate the group - riding the occupied territories of every remnant of Islamic fundamentalism, the exit strategy is expected to be less arduous to execute, because you do not have another new nation-state to incubate and nurture to adulthood, with all the machinery of statehood at public expense.

President Obama: The Danger of Changing a Winning Formula. - October 10, 12

Undoing the Damage of the First Debate! 

"Taking a stand for President Barack Obama's re-election is a stand for what is right, just, and equitable because he wants the very best for every American family judging by what he has done so far and attempted to do.  I stand for the President because it is the right thing to do. Above all, a stand for President Barack Obama is a stand for the truth, audacity, creativity, and innovation. Republicans want him to fail, not necessarily on account of what he is doing wrong, but because of resentment rooted in hatred and unwillingness to embrace the likelihood of American history recording the first of his kind as a "Great President". Now that the political system is overwhelmed with corporate money, Americans should brace for surprises, lies, and misinformation from Karl Rove and his plethora of Super PACs." An excerpt from "OBAMA: Citizen United, Invisible Resistance, and the Hacking Of American Democracy", posted June 08, 2012.

Dear Mr. President, if you have forgotten, the above quote was the introduction to the article that changed the dynamics of the 2012 Presidential campaign towards the end of June 2012. Before its publication, most Democrats were tepid and lackadaisical identifying with their accomplishments in the past three years. In addition, the wisdom in town then was that Democrats and your campaign should not talk about Big Business, Wall Street, and Bain Capital. 

We disagreed vehemently and made a compelling case for their adoption as campaign headlines in the article, titled "OBAMA: Citizen United, Invisible Resistance, and the Hacking of American Democracy." To our greatest joy, your honorable self and your campaign listened and did the right thing. And then, there was a surge. As expected, a bandwagon effect developed, and the pundits followed suit. That was the beginning of the definition of Governor Mitt Romney.

What saddened me (though, I'm still very confident that you will make a good come-back in the next few days) during and after the debate was your seeming unwillingness to use one single punch line in that article throughout the debate. Despite everything, what saddened me the most is that Republicans and the Romney campaign team are presently regular visitors to this blog and have been flipping and using the information here to their advantage, especially Mr. Romney during the debate.

For instance, you did not talk about trickle-down economics, but Governor Romney did, using it indirectly to castigate the government. He opined that the government did not trickle down - a fabrication and outright misrepresentation of quality facts. The Auto industry has resurrected, and General Motors is once again, on top of the Auto World. 

Also, there is a boom in the ancillary sectors, resulting in improved job growth in and around the State of Ohio. There is improved healthcare coverage and a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell. Indeed, the government did trickle down. It was the tax break for those who do not need it that did not trickle down – they did not create jobs as expected. That, no doubt, was the underlying factor for the tax break initiative in the first case.

On the issue of healthcare Insurance, it is not just enough to say that Paul Ryan and Governor Romney want to transfer it to a voucher program and tell the American people what is at stake. In other words, let the American people know that there is a price tag or price limit on the voucher, and once the patient's healthcare cost exceeds the amount on the voucher, she is on her own. In a nutshell, that is not health insurance.

Finally, Mr. Romney wants to balloon the Defense Budget, but he wants to cut federal spending and services simultaneously. How he is going to do he can not explain. He wants to grow the economy, but he doesn't consider it conscientious to tax the Millionaires and the Billionaires who have no need for the tax break. 

Good Luck, Mr. President in the next two debates.

OBAMA: Citizen United, Invisible Resistance, and the Hacking of American Democracy. June 08, 2012

Standing up for President Barack Obama!  

Taking a stand for President Barack Obama's re-election is a stand for what is right, just, and equitable, because he wants the very best for every American family judging by what he has done so far and attempted to do.  I stand for the President because it is the right thing to do. Above all, a stand for President Barack Obama is a stand for the truth, audacity, creativity, and innovation. Republicans want him to fail, not necessarily on account of what he is doing wrong, but because of resentment rooted in hatred and unwillingness to embrace the likelihood of American history recording the first of his kind as a "Great President". Now that the political system is overwhelmed with corporate money, Americans should brace for surprises, lies, and misinformation from Karl Rove and his plethora of Super PACs. 

KARL ROVE AND SUPER PACs

The Crusade to buy President Obama out of Power with Super PACs and Corporate money made possible by the decision of the US Supreme Court in the Citizen United case is analogous to the politics of money in Nigeria that has eaten deep into the fabric of our political culture and made popular democracy a travesty. There is no difference between the reactionary elements within the Republican Party in the United States and the reactionary elements that dominate the political culture in Nigeria – trust deficit, greed, lies, bigotry, homophobia, hatred, hypocrisy, and misinformation; tell me more. They profess family values and moral purity, yet they see the less-privileged in society as another category of the human species, deserving nothing and worthy of nothing. They wear patriotism on their shoulders but exploit political power and governments as investment tools on behalf of a selected few at the expense of the generality of the governed.

If I may ask, what the heck is the connection between Campaign Finance (political speech) and First Amendment rights?  Where is the nexus between the right to talk and express oneself as defined by the US Constitution under the First Amendment and the right to fund an election with an undisclosed amount of money, without disclosing your identity or the amount of money contributed as the US Supreme Court ruled in the Citizen United case? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html?pagewanted=all.  

Mr. Karl Rove and his PAC American Crossroads and other Super PACs are raising millions of dollars from unknown sources every day and every night in preparation for war against change and civilization. When President Obama, on January 27, 2010, during his State of the Union Address, seemingly took exception to the decision of the Supreme Court in the Citizen United Case (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v-rJb8G15I)some people considered the President's remarks condescending. Now we know better. Governor Mitt Romney decimated Newt Gingrich politically in Iowa and Florida during the just-concluded Republican primaries, thanks to  PACs money. They've only just begun. And the whole world is watching! Watching what they would do against President Barack Obama with the Millions they are stockpiling presently.

In the words of Vice President Al Gore, "our democracy has been hijacked." See "View Point with Governor Elliot Spitzer" on Current TV, http://current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/al-gore-takes-on-scott-walker-romneys-health-care-record-voter-suppression-and-citizens-united/   

President Obama did more for this country in three years than Karl Rove and his administration did in eight years. President Obama revived a comatose economy and stabilized a dysfunctional financial industry, in spite of the filibuster ammunitions ceaselessly and shamelessly deployed by Republican members of Congress to frustrate his administration. In addition, thanks to the patriotic and unpretentious support of his Security team, President Obama decimates terrorism and terrorist cells all around the World, without risking the precious lives of our men and women in uniform. A development that's in sharp contrast with the enormous wastage and mass casualties incidents that characterized Karl Rove's incubated administration. 

Power is not only about winning an election, as Mr. Karl Rove is reputed of. It is more about purposeful governance - empowerment. It is about raising the standard of living of the middle class and support for the less privileged, which Karl Rove and his hawkish bedfellows do not know how to do. It calls for synergy realignment for growth, making capital available to entrepreneurs, and creating opportunities for businesses and economically dislocated/disadvantaged Americans. 

Mr. Karl Rove and his numerous Super PACs failed Americans abysmally when they were there for eight years. They squandered the surplus left behind by President Bill Clinton (a Democrat) and watched helplessly as Wall Street degenerated into a mob scene where inside trading and indiscriminate betting on taxpayers' money turned out to be the hallmarks.

Now, they are fighting to reinstate the inglorious past; hoping to buy out President Obama from power through corporate money and campaign finance loopholes by any mean possible.  That's what the election is about on the part of Republicans - resentment of change and sending President Obama back to Chicago as some of them boasted. It won't happen. Because Americans know better. 

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY, AUTO BAILOUT, AND BAIN CAPITAL

Governor Mitt Romney wants American voters to elect him President because he has a better grasp of Economics and Management than President Obama. That argument is anchored on his exploit at Bain Capital and as Governor of Massachusetts. Surprisingly, American pundits and TV anchors do not want the President and Democrats to talk about Bain Capital. Bain Capital is Governor Romney's bargaining chip. You cannot discuss Governor Romney's management credentials, without integrating a discussion of his years at Bain Capital as well as the pains and sufferings unleashed by Bain Capital on the management and employees of their affiliates.    

There is no denying the fact that Bain Capital is a very successful firm using "returns on investment" indices. They achieved that liquidity status through over-leveraged capitalism - borrow large, acquired companies, fire existing workers, cash-out big, and laugh their way to the banks, while the companies are left embroiled in massive debts, contending with bankruptcy as the last option. 

That of course is what most venture capital and private equity firms do: making money for themselves and their investors/shareholders. Which is cool. But that is not the same as governance or being the Governor of a State or President of a country. That explains the magnitude of the uninspiring performance that Governor Mitt Romney recorded as Governor of Massachusetts. Because he couldn't replicate Bain Capital's model in his management of the affairs of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

I want to reiterate, I do not nurse any grudge against Bain Capital or its business model. However, suffice it to say that managing a venture capital or private equity firm is not in any shape or form analogous to managing the affairs of a state - governance is about the people, rich or poor. Governor Romney's performance in Massachusetts lends credence to that assertion. Therefore, applying that standard, he lacks what it takes to be a successful President and cannot perform at the level of President Obama, despite GOP intransigence. 

President Obama did not aspire to the Oval Office/White House to enrich himself and his management staff. Governance is about the people, all the people, and not for a privileged few or shareholders. President Obama is on the side of the people. That includes the rich and the famous, the multinationals, the small business, as well as millionaires who do not have any economic need for a tax break. The programs and policies that he introduced and pursued since the beginning of his Presidency support those claims. And that, my friends, is the difference between being a President of a country and being a CEO of venture capital or private equity firms. 

A few days ago, Mr. Romney inadvertently revealed his true intent when he tried to make a pejorative remark about the recent statement credited to President Obama 'that the private sector is doing fine. Governor Romney declared: "Is he really out of touch? He wants to hire more government workers, he wants to hire more Teachers, more Policemen, and more Fire Fighters ..." In a quick rebuttal, when has it become sacrilegious or an aberration to hire Teachers, Fire Fighters, and Policemen! Are they not eligible for the American  Dream? 

The truth is, most Republicans never hide their disdain for Teachers and their plan to eliminate the Department of Education. For Mr. Romney, a Presidential candidate for that matter, to have a problem with hiring more Teachers, Fire Fighters, and Policemen is blatantly absurd. It shows how unconnected Governor Mitt Romney is from American realities.

By the way, the few Democrats who have expressed some reservations about the position of the President on Bain Capital and Wall Street are missing something. With due respect, I beg to disagree with them. It's all about interest; Obama's Campaign should know that. The fact that an argument is good for some guys - career-wise, business network, budding or future political career - doesn't mean it is good for the President's campaign. In addition, Governor Mitt Romney's claim to managerial superiority over his political opponents is his activities at Bain Capital and stewardship in Massachusetts as the Executive Governor. That's it. So why won't Democrats and President Obama's campaign team talk about Bain Capital?  

Yes, we must talk about Bain Capital and Massachusetts. We must talk about 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt' because it is vintage Mitt Romney. And it is his resume. See Governor Mitt Romney's op-ed article published in the New York Times  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=1.

Left for Mr. Romney, Detroit would have been history by now. 

Today, General Motors is back to business and it is once again on top of the Auto industry. In addition, there is a boom in the ancillary sectors all around Ohio, thousands of jobs saved, thousands of jobs created, and unquantifiable smiles in many American homes: thanks to President Obama's initiative and foresight. Mr. Romney cannot undo that. Republican and Karl Rove's Super PACs cannot rewrite credible history. 

Yes, we must talk about Bain Capital and General Motors. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was once a victim of the "I am a job creator" campaign and slogan; American voters shouldn't for fall that bait.

Given the emergence of bonanza madness on Wall Street once again, President Obama has proved that it is possible to regulate Wall Street and position it to make a profit, without undermining the interest and protection of the middle class and the less privileged in society. But Wall Street is not taking the regulation lightly, in spite of the huge bonuses they are enjoying presently. That is what this election is about: Standing for the truth. 

For Wall Street and Big Business to cast the Obama Administration as unfriendly is a mockery of objective judgment. We must set the record straight as plainly as we could.

PRESIDENT OBAMA, WALL STREET, AND BIG BUSINESS

President Barack Obama did more for Business and Wall Street than any President before him. He bailed out AIG, Bank of America, General Motors, Chrysler, and much more. Yet, American pundits will never stop deafening our ears with 'President Obama not being friendly with Business and Wall Street'. Which business? And which Wall Street? What we are witnessing is a blatant mischaracterization of the President and his true intent, and outright misrepresentation of facts. It is analogous to giving a dog a bad name in order to hang it. 

Establishing regulatory mechanisms in the financial sector with a view to eliminating inside trading and reckless betting with taxpayers’ money that almost paralyzes Wall Street on the eve of President Obama's inauguration is consistent with good governance and real leadership. We do not want a repeat of the uncontrollable state of affairs in the financial industry created by the disappearance of oversight that unavoidably culminated in the Wall Street meltdown a few years back.

This baloney about President Obama's animosity towards business, capitalism, and Wall Street, especially in the news media has racist undertones. It has no support in fact or reality. We do not want another Lehman Brothers fiasco. Wall Street has to be regulated, for the good of Wall Street, for the good of American Business, and for the good of the American people. Period.

Furthermore, President Obama and his administration create a favorable investment culture/climate and engineered numerous incentives that made it possible for Wall Street and the private sector to rake in much more profits unlike a few years back. What they did in return is provocative disbelief. Instead of spending, reinvesting, and hiring new workers as expected, they sat on their wealth and profits in order to stultify job growth, frustrate the President's economic expansion drive, and imperil his presidential campaign. 

The profit that Businesses are sitting on was accumulated under President Obama's administration and the bailout that he selflessly pumped into the Auto industry and into the financial sector. How then could pundits and politically biased TV anchors find grace in justifying the refusal of Businesses and Wall Street to reinvest their profits and escalate hiring on the pretext that President Obama is hostile to business? 

The much-hyped hostility or not-so-friendly relationship between President Obama and Business is unsubstantiated. How could you reasonably state that the President is hostile to Business when he is the one who made it possible for Business and Wall Street to be back to a profits-making position and bonus bonanza madness? 

The President's ideas on reviving Wall Street, the auto industry, Manufacturing, the development of Green Energy, Technological innovations, and infrastructural renewal are well-thought-out and well-embracing. Yet, Republicans, Christian Right, and Tea Party want to pigeonhole the President in an attempt to reinforce their "out of touch" and "want to redistribute wealth" vibes.  

Let the pundits or the tea party members name one policy or one program introduced by this administration that tends to favor some groups at the expense of others. From Health Care Reform to Student Loans, Mortgage Refinancing, Auto Bail-out, and Small Business Loans - they favor everyone across the board and equally, too. 

In addition, President Obama did allow Bush Tax cuts for Millionaires and the rich to continue, even when the facts on the ground do not support continuation. Without any Economic explanation, on Christmas Eve of 2010, Republican members of Congress shamelessly conditioned the extension of unemployment benefits for the poor and displaced workers to the continuation of Bush Tax cuts for the rich. As we all know, the tax cuts did not create jobs as intended since their inception. President Bill Clinton balanced the national budget, without Tax cuts for Millionaires. What then is the justification or economic explanation for continuing with the tax holiday for those who do not really need it, given the fact that it did not create new jobs or catalyze economic expansion? It is politics. And it is class warfare.  And it is Republican at its best.

When has it become an aberration or crime to the police and regulate market manipulation and financial recklessness? President Obama, as any President, has every right to put in place an appropriate regulatory framework to ensure sanity, transparency, and accountability in the financial sector. That is the difference between President Obama and Governor Mitt Romney who want a repeat of the past - a past that created the recklessness that doomed the housing market and almost paralyze Wall Street. Taxpayers do not want a repeat of the infamous past that Governor Mitt Romney is romanticizing with.

SENATOR MITCH McCONNELL AND ONE-TERM PRESIDENT 

Since the arrival of President Obama in the White House, the goal of Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate Leader is to make President Obama a one-term President. He declared on the floor of the House and on other occasions that his goal is to make President Obama a one-term President. For the first time in the history of America, a supposedly honorable member of Congress, TV Anchors, and Talk Radio personalities declared, time and time again, that their desire is for President Obama to fail. Please see the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8a_msdw9VQ&feature=related.   

Oftentimes, to the chagrin of most liberal Democrats, the President veered from his liberal position, and moved to the right of center on most issues - yes, right of center - anticipating that Republicans will reciprocate in order to engender common ground for collaboration and purposeful governance. What did they do in return? They moved further to the right; and with ignominy, filibustered a significant percentage of new appointments and economic initiatives introduced by the President. 

The same people that never stop celebrating President Reagan's virtues are unwilling to embrace Reagan's policies introduced by President Obama who, unfortunately, is not one like them. If President Obama is a Socialist as GOP wants the World to believe, invariably, President Reagan and most Republicans who espouse his ideas and policies are Socialists. Because there is no significant political or ideological difference between Reaganomics and Obama's ideology. It has never been about the policy or the program. It's all about the name and the man. Let's call a spade a spade.

The President and his Security team made substantial progress at home and abroad rooting out enemies of civilization and dismantling terrorism and terrorist networks all around the globe because Republican members of Congress do not participate in the attack process or preparation. The deployment or approval for the deployment of Navy Seal and Drone attacks on 'flighty enemies' is exclusively a decision for the President and his Security team to make. If the takedown of Osama Bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki were subject to Congressional vote or debate, both men would still be walking free today. The attacks were successful because Republican members of Congress did not participate and did not have the opportunity to filibuster rapid-response attacks. The President and his Economic team are not making the intended progress in reviving the economy because of Republicans involved in the process. They gave filibuster a new meaning in order to stagnate the economy and kill job growth.

Now, they are fishing for scandal in the name of "classified documents". This is a White House that humbled Osama Bin Laden, after months of planning and strategizing, without a hint of it coming into the public domain. The same man that Karl Rove and his hawkish bedfellows couldn't trace for years is now a dead man. If Osama Bin Laden was captured or killed under a Republican White House, that would have signaled the demise of Democrats for a run for the White House for many years to come. 

Now, they don't want Democrats to talk about Security. They want to blemish the White House over an immaterial issue (fast and furious) in order to cloud President Obama's success stories and accomplishments in the war against terrorism! They will fail. Americans are smarter and they know better. The Attorney General deserves better treatment from Republican members of Congress.

CONCLUSION 

America is not a dictatorship - there are rules and there are regulations. There is a Separation of Powers as well as Checks and Balances. President Obama can only do what the law permits. Republicans, Tea Party, Christian Right and the numerous talk heads on Radio and TV would rather the economic collapse than work with the President to save it. 

They know he is patriotic and has the requisite vision and intellectual wherewithal to revive the economy and make America great again. But the deep-seated resentment that they harbor against the President makes collaboration a Herculean task. They are befuddled by his virtues, stultified by his stoicism, and peevish by his innovative ideas and decision-making skills. They would rather Americans starve to death than subscribe to a collaborative productive engagement with a President who is a person of color. It is a sheer display of resentment and hatred rooted in racism and fear of history recording President Obama as one of the few 'Great Presidents' in the history of America. 

American electorates are not in exile, they are living witnesses to Republican intransigence and vicious attack on the poor and the middle class, while they vehemently promote and protect tax loopholes for those who do not need them.

In spite of everything, Americans are wiser and they can read the handwriting on the wall. Today, the news is about hiring, construction of new plants, and revitalization of old ones. It is no longer stories of the closure of companies and retrenchment of workers that used to be the major headline news prior to the arrival of President Barack Obama at the Oval Office. 

We are making progress and we are moving forward. President Obama will be vindicated and he will triumph over the Mitch McConnells of American politics. 

God is on the side of the meek and the peacemakers. And God is on the side of President Barack Obama because he wants the very best for every American family. That is why I am standing for him. And that is why I am asking that you stand with me to stand for him. 

God Bless America. 

Disclosure: the term "Invisible Resistance" was used recently by Professor Mike Eric Dyson on his appearance on "The ED Show": MSNBC