This one is a simple matter of logic, but it is also a fairly clear matter of established law:
Obama’s Actions Declare Him Dictator, Terrorist & Traitor
Given the seriousness of the subject matter, I implore you: read this carefully, and apply your best reason to the argument I am about to present.
We have stated that form & function define things. To this extent, the following story represents a declaration of dictatorship, terrorism and treason by Barack Obama:
President Obama waived a provision of federal law designed to prevent the supply of arms to terrorist groups to clear the way for the U.S. to provide military assistance to “vetted” opposition groups fighting Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.
Now, if you read the entire story (or the actual law), you will find provisions for allowing the President to wave the restrictions on selling weapons to nations associated with terrorist organizations or determined to support terrorism. Obama is claiming that he is rightly invoking the terms of this clause. However, the terms of this clause dictate that the President must prove that he is not giving weapons to an enemy of the United States. It is now well established that the Syrian rebels are directly connected to – and in some cases, may actually be – Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda has declared war on this nation. Whether we acknowledge this or not is irrelevant: the President has a Constitutional duty to defend this nation from anyone who declares and acts to wage war on it. This means Al Qaeda is an enemy of the United States, and that means Obama cannot invoke the terms of this clause to waive the law so he can arm his Al Qaeda allies. But he is doing so anyway. This is an act of dictatorship: