BloggeRhythms

Human Rights Foundation Chairman, and Chess Grand Master, Garry Kasparov, appeared on Maria Bartiromo’s Sunday Morning Futures today. Asked what he thought about the weak response to the incumbent’s attempts to build an international coalition to deal with ISIL, he replied that there’s been a sense of distrust regarding the U.S. since 2008.

 

Mr. Kasparov’s thoughts were quite interesting. Because while not a politician or presently involved in government, he is certainly aware of what people think here and around the world. Especially so regarding Russia.

 

I mention this now because it leads right into an occurrence on Thursday, when Secretary of State John Kerry described the U.S. military effort as “very significant” and a “major counter-terrorism operation,” but said, “war is the wrong terminology.” 

 

Then, the next day, the White House and Pentagon acknowledged that the U.S. “is at war” with the Islamic State.

 

However, “President Obama on Saturday restated his plan to destroy Islamic State but did not say the United States "is at war" with the Middle East terror group, creating more uncertainty what exactly is the U.S. mission." According to Fox News.com. 

 

Following that, “White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough on Sunday dismissed accusations that the Obama administration is waffling over whether the United States is indeed at war with Islamic State, saying the administration has been “very clear” about the military mission against the terror group known as ISIS. We’ve made it very clear from the start,” McDonough told “Fox News Sunday. “Just as we have been at war with Al Qaeda, in similar fashion we are at war with ISIL.”

 

Quite obviously then, the string of comments, beginning with Kerry’s, show either a pattern of inconsistency, or a parade of bumbling incompetents rivaling the three stooges. But either way, Mr. Kasparov’s correct, there’s more than ample reason for former allies to question the sincerity or capability of the current administration. 

 

In the comments following the articles, two readers made very salient points. Goldrimmer wrote, “Mexican drug gangs killed 48,000 by beheading or blowtorch , they are the same as Isis and Obama is relocating them all over the US at the rate of 60,000 a month.” 

 

Marrapash added, “Obama's personal plan to eliminate ISIS. Set up remote teleprompters throughout the Middle East, and talk them to death.”

 

On another subject, Suzanne Goldenberg of the UK’s Guardian writes that, “Richard Branson has failed to deliver on his much-vaunted pledge to spend $3bn (£1.8bn) over a decade to develop a low carbon fuel.

 

Seven years into the pledge, Branson has paid out only a small fraction of the promised money – “well under $300m” – according to a new book by the writer and activist, Naomi Klein.

 

The British entrepreneur famously promised to divert a share of the profits from his Virgin airlines empire to find a cleaner fuel, after a 2006 private meeting with Al Gore.”

 

Ms Goldenberg continues, “By last year, the total of those investments, in corn ethanol and elsewhere, amounted to about $230m, she estimates. Branson made an additional small investment in an algae fuel company, Solazyme. But Branson still puts the total spend at well under $300m – just a tenth of his $3bn pledge.”

 

But here’s the part that caught my attention, “The British entrepreneur has acknowledged that his efforts to mobilise large investments on cleaner fuels have fallen short. However, he told the Observer earlier this year he had lost many millions in failed green investments.

 

“There is no question that Virgin is involved in a number of businesses that emit a lot of carbon, and that is one of the reasons why I have to work particularly hard … but, more importantly, to try to help other people balance their books as well,” he said.

 

“We have invested hundreds of millions in clean technology projects. We haven’t made hundreds of millions profit,” he said.”

 

So, here’s an entrepreneur building and running businesses, making significant financial investments, providing jobs and helping build the economy who agreed to try to help the environment. But after seven years of attempts, nothing he spent his funds on functioned as promised. Meaning he was wasting his money altogether, thus he trimmed his efforts.

 

And what do the extremists do? One of them writes a book chastising Mr. Branson for throwing away only $300 million for which he received absolutely no benefit whatsoever. Therefore, to them, he’s obviously nothing but a four-flushing fraud. Whereas he swore to waste $3 billion to solve a problem that doesn’t even exist, except in the minds of scare-tactic charlatans. 

 

Which leads to the next question of how much of their own money have these scammers contributed to their hoax of a cause? The answer has to be close to zero. Typical of those with nothing to add to life but fears, complaints and their hands in everyone else's pockets.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios