Not a reassuring development regarding the enemy whose nuclear weapons development program The One has just given his official blessing:
The United States remains Iran's "number one enemy" despite a recent nuclear deal with world powers [and the United States], the chief of Tehran's top clerical body said Tuesday, Iranian media reported.
The Assembly of Experts is among Iran's most influential institutions, comprising eighty-six elected [?] clerics who appoint and can dismiss the country's supreme leader, led by ultraconservative....
Bet you couldn't guess this was an AP story, couldja?
....Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi.
The nuclear agreement should not "change our foreign policy" of opposition to the United States, "our number one enemy, whose crimes are uncountable," Yazdi said in a speech opening the annual two-day assembly meeting.
"The U.S. and Israel are the source of the situation in the region and (their) goal is to protect the Zionist regime in the Middle East," he was quoted as saying, blaming the two countries for the conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.
Does this sound like a regime that is going to voluntarily renounce the nuclear capability they've been building for over a decade? Or abide by any "deal" stipulations, no matter how favorable to them, that impede that "progress" in the slightest? And before anybody says "religious scruples," let us revisit the concept of taqiyya.
First, as Sun Tzu once taught, all war is deceit:
Muhammad—whose example as the "most perfect human" is to be followed in every detail—took an expedient view on lying. It is well known, for instance, that he permitted lying in three situations: to reconcile two or more quarreling parties, to placate one's wife, and in war. According to one Arabic legal manual devoted to jihad as defined by the four schools of law, "The ulema agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war." Moreover, according to Mukaram, this deception is classified as taqiyya: "Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible."
Several ulema believe deceit is integral to the waging of war: Ibn al-'Arabi declares that "in the Hadith [sayings and actions of Muhammad], practicing deceit in war is well demonstrated. Indeed, its need is more stressed than the need for courage." Ibn al-Munir (d. 1333) writes, "War is deceit, i.e., the most complete and perfect war waged by a holy warrior is a war of deception, not confrontation, due to the latter's inherent danger, and the fact that one can attain victory through treachery without harm [to oneself]." And Ibn Hajar (d. 1448) counsels Muslims "to take great caution in war, while [publicly] lamenting and mourning in order to dupe the infidels."...
"Allah" commands that the "infidels" be lied to in order to facilitate their forced conversion or destruction:
The Qur'an itself is further testimony to taqiyya. Since God is believed to be the revealer of these verses, he is by default seen as the ultimate perpetrator of deceit—which is not surprising since he is described in the Qur'an as the best makar, that is, the best deceiver or schemer (e.g., 3:54, 8:30, 10:21)....
However interpreted, the standard view on Qur'anic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one's intentions.
And that war is to last as long as it takes to conquer the world for Islam:
The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair—until, in the words of the Qur'an, "all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God." In his entry on jihad from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Emile Tyan states: "The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily."...
Obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam's dichotomized worldview that pits the realm of Islam against the realm of war. The first, dar al-Islam, is the "realm of submission," the world where Shari'a governs; the second, dar al-Harb (the realm of war), is the non-Islamic world. A struggle continues until the realm of Islam subsumes the non-Islamic world—a perpetual affair that continues to the present day.
And Barack Obama has now guaranteed that the largest, most powerful empire of Islam will gain nuclear weapons - if they haven't already.
He may have clinched his "legacy," but it's not going to turn out the way he thinks it will, because he's also effectively signed all of our death warrants.