States May Issue Their Own Currency

Can you imagine travelling from Detroit (in my case) to Florida via Interstate 75 and having to carry Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama and Florida currency?  Well, if individual states decide to issue their own coinage, that is what you will have to do.  I wonder if my debit card would work?

Individual states are studying the advantages and disadvantages of issuing their own currency. Tennessee, Virginia, Montana among others are taking a look at something that has not been done since the Civil War. It is in response to the Fed and the apparent irresponsibility  the States feel has been occurring. Obviously, the issue is just coming to the front and it might be years before something would happen. However, if the Fed were to devalue the dollar, or China demand payment of our debt or QE6 occur, then all bets would be off.  We will continue to follow the issue and provide updates as they occur.

Here is the first of this series from www. tennessean.com

Article Title:

Sen. Bill Ketron wants TN to consider creating its own currency

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201103090210/NEWS0201/103090357

Japanese Earthquake

Most of you probably have heard about the earthquake that occurred this morning in Japan.  It is one of the worst tremors in world history, at least since they have been keeping records which is the early 20th century. It is possible that Hawaii and the west coast of the United States may also be impacted by the way of a tsunami.  Reports indicate that Guam may have been spared.

 We pray for all those effected by this traumatic and devastating catastrophe. I am sure there will be fundraising activities for those people killed or hurt and we who are not effected should give to those who are.  Thanking you in advance for your generosity.

Conservative Musings.

American Thinker Blog: Saudi 'Day of Rage' a fizzle?

We have been concerned about the effect the Saudi riots or "Day of Rage" as they have been entitled by those who would create the disturbance.  As I scanned the news this morning, I find that the Rage is a whimper, at least at the present time.  The Saudi government strongly discouraged the riots by taking immediate steps to stomp out any altercations and had religious leaders issue a fatwa against anyone who would cause problems.

It is hoped that the Kingdom will remain in control and that the pressure we have seen from the "democracy" movements will cause the King and his court to continue to increase the freedoms of the Saudi people.  Time will tell.

The American Thinker is a great source of information and if you click on the following link you can see what they are saying about the "Day of Rage.




American Thinker Blog: Saudi 'Day of Rage' a fizzle?

King Obama

Lloyd Marcus writes a very good recap of the Obama Administration and the reasons he cannot be re-elected in 2012.  This article is well worth the time to read.  By the way, Mr. Marcus is an African-American! 

Here is the article, please let me know what you think.



To save America, we must dethrone King Obama



- Lloyd Marcus Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Incredibly, Obama continues to boldly go where no other president has gone before. Apparently, none of the rules apply to him. Without consequence, at will, Obama ignores laws and the Constitution to implement his progressive/socialist agenda.

America’s first black president has morphed into America’s first king. All hail King Obama, our supreme ruler. Think about this, folks, King Obama has put together his royal court of an unprecedented 32 czars who only answer to him. His czars consist of people who have socialist and communist leanings, many simply do not like America. King Obama’s czars, without congressional over sight, set new rules and regulations for our lives; boldly ignoring laws and the U.S. Constitution.

Given Obama’s unprecedented government overreaches, when we vote him out in 2012, will His Royal Obamaness surrender the Oval Office? Just kidding. Such a concern is a bit over the top. Right? Right?

Meanwhile, displaying an amazing total disregard for the sanctity of freedom, guess who cheers on Obama’s every unprecedented lawless “power grab” and dis of the Constitution; the despicable liberal media.

Most of the mainstream media are liberals promoting their progressive/socialist agenda while calling it journalism. A liberal black presidential candidate was their dream come true. Obama’s skin color was a gift from the liberal gods; the ultimate political trump card.

The Left exploits Obama’s black skin color as their “Weapon of Mass Intimidation”; a coat of armor insulating him from all opposition and reasonable critique.

Any supplicant daring to question or oppose His Royal Obamaness is forced to endure the liberal media’s “shock and awe” battery of accusations of racism and violent intentions.

Is it unfair to say Obama governs more like our king rather than our president? You be the judge.

Obamacare was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge. King Obama basically said “screw that! I’m implementing it anyway.”

DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) is the law. King Obama said “I don’t like that law and we are not defending its constitutionality.

A federal ruling said King Obama’s deep offshore drilling moratorium in Louisiana is illegal and ordered it lifted. Again, King Obama simply ignored the federal ruling.

Federal immigration law is much tougher than Arizona’s new Law. The Arizona law says if someone is stopped for a traffic violation or suspected of a crime, they must show proper ID. Well, dah! All Americans are required to show ID in such situations. King Obama wants members of a special ethnic group to be protected from such inquiry. Thus, King Obama has declared the Arizona law racist and is suing Arizona for enforcing “federal law.” King Obama views illegals as potential future new democrat voting supplicants.

King Obama wants to force health workers to perform abortions whether they like it or not. The “Conscience Rule” protects health workers who refuse to participate in abortions or other medical procedures that go against their moral and religious beliefs. King Obama is working on rescinding that law.

If we have learned nothing else from the passing of Obamacare against the will of 70% of the American people we learned, legal processes be damned, whatever King Obama wants, King Obama gets.

And, let us not forget that King Obama fired the CEO and took over a private sector auto company. Thus, the birth of King Obama Motors.

And what about King Obama’s siege of the banking industry. After accepting TARP money, a bank chairman read the tea leaves of things to come; government running his business and dictating salaries. He requested to pay back the TARP money with interest. King Obama denied the bank chairman’s request and threatened “adverse” consequences if he persisted.

The new Black Panther Party is guilty of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. King Obama refuses to press charges against the new Black Panthers; now get this, folks, because they are black. His royal enforcer, Attorney General, Eric Holder, who is black, told the House Appropriations subcommittee that the New Black Panther voter intimidation case demeans “my people.”
Holder went on to explain that the suffering of African Americans seeking the right to vote in the South in the ‘60s far surpass the intimidation white voters recently endured in Philadelphia. So much for any pretense of King Obama dispensing equal justice to all Americans. We’re talkin’ Affirmative Action justice.

King Obama is systematically taking control of every aspect of our lives. Cramming Obamacare down our throats was a huge step toward achieving his goal. Please read, “20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms.”

Exempting themselves, liberals are notorious for making rules for us supplicants. Queen Michelle Obama recently feasted on high calorie greasy bar-b-que spareribs while seeking to federally mandate/regulate menus and portion sizes in schools, restaurants and etc.

Bottom line, King Obama is out of control. In 2012, We The People MUST raise up with pitchforks of votes to end King Obama’s tyrannous reign. America as we know and love it could be lost. Defeat is not an option.

As Vice Chair of The Campaign to Defeat Obama in 2012, I sincerely covet your support.

We are gathering “One Million People To Defeat Barack Obama 2012.” Please join us!

Please sign and encourage your friends to sign this petition.


Lloyd Marcus is the songwriter and vocalist of the “American Tea Party Anthem.” He currently serves as president of NAACPC (National Association for the Advancement of Conservative People of Color). Visit his website at LloydMarcus.com Lloyd can be reached at Mr_LloydMarcus@hotmail.com


© Copyright 2009 by Lloyd Marcus

Saudi Effect On Oil

Yesterday, I posted my comments on the Saudi Royal Family and today Dick Morris chimed in to agree.  His article is posted below.

What are the chances of leadership change  in the Kingdom?  Can it happen? One would think that chances now are about even. Much depends upon the effect the money that is being doled out by the Royal Family; how many agitators there are; how large a demonstration occurs on Friday and the  responses of the government.  Will there be a crackdown like Libya? One would believe the current King would not fire on his subjects like Gaddafi is doing. If they did not crack heads, would that only encourage those who would like to see the end of the House of Saud ? On the other hand, if they violently responded to the protesters, how would the world react? Additionally as we see in Dick's article, the current leaders are not healthy and the young members of the Family are not well respected. For all these reasons, it is 50/50 that we will see new leadership. If I was a betting man, my guess would be they will see new leadership.

So let's talk about the downside. If the current government of Saudi Arabia is overthrown and  the new leadership does not maintain current production levels or re-directed production to countries more favorable to their administration, the world (and most notably the United States) will be rocked to its footings.  Such actions would cause global markets to plummet and gold and oil prices will skyrocket. Currently, the Kingdom produces 13% of the global output of oil when ccombined with the 2% of missing oil from Libya, we have nearly 1 in 6 barrels of oil missing from world markets. That would not be a pretty situation.

We grouse about $3.75 per gallon gas which would seem cheap if everything goes wrong. Can you imagine trying to fill up your car at $6?  Maybe it is time for me to get a motorcycle! 

One would hope that the worst case scenario would not take place, that the Saudi Royal Family would survive and the current Middle East upheavals would end. However, that is like putting your head in the sand and ignoring what might occur. Frankly, I would hope the President, Congress and their advisors are not taking that approach but I doubt that is the case.

Up to this time, we have heard lots of talk and the only action has been a discussion on opening the oil reserve.  Talk about putting  up a beaver dam to stop a flood! There has been no discussion that I have heard regarding opening up ANWR or the Gulf.  This is the time to listen to Sarah Palin and "drill, baby drill." I also like some of Dick's suggestions regarding the gas tax moratorium, nuclear, EPA regulations and drilling incentives.Unless we can provide for ourselves in the U.S. with our oil needs,  we are going to be held captive to world events and that is not a position into which we should put ourselves.

Oil is the one commodity that effects all aspects of our economy.  Not only does it provide the fuel for our vehicles (cars, trucks, trains, ships)  but  many other commodities that we use every day.  Plastics make up nearly every product manufactured today and the roads we drive on are two examples of oil byproducts at use in our daily lives.  Where would we go if we lost a substantial part of our supply of oil?  The answer is not far.

We all need to write our Representatives, Senators and the President and demand (yes, that is the word I would use) they address this issue by taking emergency steps to ensure that the United States has adequate supplies of oil, not for the short-term but more importantly long-term. Now is not the time to experiment with "green" products which for the most part are unproven. We have to go now with proven products and unfortunately that has to be oil  based.  Once we have a guaranteed stream of dependable oil, it will at that time we can then try to replace our oil based economy with these new ways.

Regardless whether the Saudi situation goes the wrong way or not, this is not going to be the only time we will be faced with an oil shortage and now is the time to fix it. We did not do it after 1973 and things have only gotten worse. The time is now and there is no better time to change things than the present. Let's roll!!

Here is Dick's article:

NEXT TO FALL: SAUDI ARABIA

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on March 9, 2011

We can do without Libya's two million barrels a day of oil albeit with significant disruptions in the global economy. But if we lose Saudi Arabia's nine million, we will face a global catastrophe.
And the Saudi monarchy will be the next casualty of the Middle East revolutionary wave. The king is 86 years old and very ill. The next two men in line are both over 80 and both sick. And, behind those three in line are 7,000 princes, each ambitious and at war with one another. The monarchy will not be able to buy off the opposition for long with cash subsidies. (We are indebted to Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal for these insights).

The fall of Saudi Arabia will accelerate the stagflation that will mar the final two years of the one-term Obama Presidency.
Republicans need to ratchet up their rhetoric about new drilling for oil. The 2008 liberal counter-argument that new drilling is not a short term solution begs the question of why the Administration has not used the intervening two years to effectuate the longer term solution that it offered.
Republicans need to be more vocal in criticizing the Administration for its defacto moratorium on off-shore drilling. Obama's people are so sensitive to these criticisms that they just approved the first permit since the BP spill.

Republicans must call for reining in the regulatory hoops that on-shore slate drilling has to go through to get approval.

Republicans should press for much, much shorter approval times for nuclear power and a ban on EPA regulation and taxation of carbon and coal.

The Party should attack Obama's proposed elimination of the Oil Depletion Allowance and other energy tax breaks and make clear that these incentives are vital for new energy development.

Finally, the Republicans should resurrect the issue of drilling in the ANWR Preserve in Alaska.

Sarah Palin should take the lead in this critique since energy development is her major field of real substantive expertise. It is an ideal opportunity for her to speak to a broader constituency.

Republicans should also propose a moratorium on the federal gas tax by passing legislation in the House to trigger a reduction once gas goes above $4 and total suspension if it rises above $5 per gallon. When the price drops again below $4, the gas tax can come back on line. Such a proposal will mean a cessation of campaign funding from highway contractors, but so be it.

Obama's opposition to fossil fuels is his real Achilles Heel. At some level of gas prices, everybody is for fossil fuel development. Nobody is "green" at $6 a gallon!

Should Obama Release Strategic Oil Reserves?

The New Egypt Will Be Anti American and Anti Israel--Can You Believe That?

Watching the implosion of Egypt and the fall of Mubarak, one could only speculate on the end result of these events.  The fog has not totally been burned off but we are beginning to see the road map that Egypt will follow and it is not positive.  In the following article on the UCI (Unity Coalition for Israel) Daily News Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu reports that a prominent Egyptian told Defense Minister Ehud Barak that "Civic parties will hire advisers from the U.S. and Europe and find immediately that what can bring them voters is hostility to America and Israel." Does that sound positive?  I do not think so.

If Egypt turns against Israel and the United States, should we have been cheering the downfall of Mubarak? What will that mean to the peace treaty with Egypt, long-term? What does that mean for oil prices and availability?  Would a new leadership close the Suez Canal?  Would a new leadership "encourage" so called freedom fighters by opening the border between the Sinai and Gaza? Will the U.S. continue to be a supporter of Israel or will Israel have to go it alone?

Obviously there are more questions than answers at this point in time.  One would hope that cooler heads would prevail, however, we are talking about the Middle East here and it is in an upheaval.  Time will tell.

Here is the article, please tell me what you think:

Egypt to Barak: Voters to Back Anti-US and Anti-Israel Policies


Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu - Arutz-7, March 8th, 2011


(Israelnationalnews.com) A prominent Egyptian told Defense Minister Ehud Barak that voters will favor candidates hostile to the US and Israel. The peace treaty is to remain – “for the time being,” he said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

The unnamed Egyptian told the Defense Minister, “'We're going to have a really open election….Civic parties will hire advisers from the U.S. and Europe and find immediately that what can bring them voters is hostility to America and Israel."

Defense Minster Barak called the uprising in the region “a historic earthquake…a movement in the right direction” but at the same time refrained from expressing any long-term optimism on Egyptian-Israeli relations.

His view is that the upheavals require Israel to ask the United States for another $20 billion in military assistance over the next generation. Defense Minister Barak, former IDF Chief of Staff, who worked as an advisor to military firms during his hiatus from politics in the beginning of the last decade, did not detail Israel’s new defense needs.

“The issue of qualitative military aid for Israel becomes more essential for us, and I believe also more essential for you,” he told the newspaper. “A strong, responsible Israel can become a stabilizer in such a turbulent region.”

While insisting that the 1979 Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty will continue, he added that public pressure in Egypt could change the diplomatic recognition, which he said remains “for the time being.”

Barak said he has been in contact with his Egyptian counterpart, Mohammed Hussein Tantawi. The two men fought against each other in a tank battle in the Sinai Peninsula during the Yom Kippur War in1973.

Obama and Israel, The Dissolution of the Relationship

Anyone who has watched the tensions between Israel and the United States government since the Inauguration of Barack Obama  knows that the relationship keeps getting worse. It appears to this observer as if President Obama will keep insisting upon more concessions on the Israelis without the same pressure on the Palestinians.

There are many who think this comes from the President's childhood, his relationships as a young man or his belief that Israel is the cause of all problems in the world.  What is the real factor, no one knows except Barack himself.

Now others are seeing the facts come out in various meetings with Jewish leaders in the United States.  Jerome Kaufman writes today in his blog "Israel Commentary" regarding recent meetings with the President. The impression is that there is genuine hostility toward Israel. This cannot be good for the 60 year old relationship.

Additionally, does this add to the instability in the region?  Is this good for our other "friends"?  If this is true, can the United States be counted on as a dependable ally?  We believe the answers are yes, not good and no.  All of our "friends" should be very wary of depending upon the United States.


March 07, 2011


Obama puts his obvious hostility to Israel right on the table!

Now how many Jews will vote for him or help the Democrats in the 2012 elections?

And, the question is, whose soul should be searched?

Obama tells Jewish Leaders that Israel bears responsibility for advancing peace!

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has expressed concern over some of President Barack Obama's remarks to American Jewish leaders at the White House this week, including his statement urging Jewish communal leaders to speak to their friends and colleagues in Israel and to search your souls' over Israel's seriousness about making peace. This strongly suggests that President Obama holds Israel, not Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority (PA), responsible for the lack of peace, as was indeed the reported impression of many attendees who said that the President stated 'that Israel bears primary responsibility for advancing the peace process.'

We were pleased that President Obama affirmed his deep commitment to Israel's security but troubled by his stating that Jerusalem would be divided when he reportedly said that the Jewish sections of eastern Jerusalem would remain in Israeli hands as part of any peace deal, strongly implying that the Arab sections would not.

It was also troubling that President Obama also reportedly said that the Palestinians don't feel confident that the Netanyahu government is serious about territorial concessions. Some participants interpreted the president's comments either as hostile, naive or unsurprising. One participant also said that many people felt that their worst fears about Obama were confirmed with respect to Israel. They felt an enormous hostility towards Israel.

President Obama also said that Israel has not sufficiently tried to make an acceptable offer to Mahmoud Abbas, a remarkable statement in view of the peace offers of former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, who offered statehood to the PA on 93% and more of the territory of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, only to be rejected by Yasser Arafat and Abbas. This meeting thus suggests that President Obama's view have changed little since the July 2009 meeting he had with selected Jewish leaders when he also said that he wants to help Israel, but that in order to do so, Israel would need to engage in serious self-reflection. Obama and his Administration repeatedly condemn, criticize and pressure Israel to make unilateral concessions and almost never condemn, criticize or pressure the PA to make concessions. The President has not even criticized the PA over its refusal to negotiate with Israel.

In a detailed interview in TIME Magazine in January 2010, President Obama also indicated that he holds Israel responsible for the failure of his peace efforts when he ignored Israel's unprecedented concessions - a 10-month unilateral freeze on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria and qualified endorsement of the idea of creating a Palestinian state - and said that the Israelis still found it very hard to move with any bold gestures.

This week's meeting between President Obama and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which was attended by ZOA National President Morton A. Klein, was respectful, outwardly cordial and without any public display of tension, although some attendees strongly disagreed with some of what they heard and in fact privately acknowledged feeling strong, internal tension that was not visible to the group.

Leaders of the group thanked the President for his veto of the recent vicious anti-Israel resolution in U.N. Security Council. This occurred despite the fact that the Administration stated in casting its veto that we reject in the strongest terms the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity which has corroded hopes for peace and stability in the region¦ We therefore regrettably have opposed this draft resolution, as well as the fact that the Administration sought to obtain the agreement of the Arab states to a different resolution, which it would have supported, condemning these Jewish communities as illegitimate.

Also worrying was President Obama's belief that the present time presents a great opportunity for peace - a remarkable view in light of the fact that, across the region, long-established autocrats are falling, even relatively stable states like Jordan are experiencing rumbling, and within the PA, there are calls for Salaam Fayyad to step down, while Mahmoud Abbas is threatening resignation.

In such circumstances of great uncertainty, turmoil and instability, in which Arab signatories to existing agreements might be swept away from one moment to the next, the ZOA wonders whether seeing to achieve signed agreements with such leaders is appropriate.


Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:53 PM

Saudi World Becoming Unstable

The Royal House of Saud, the rulers of Saudi Arabia, are concerned and rightfully so. Every day brings about more tension within and without the Kingdom. Friends and enemies are overthrown and past relationships like those with the United States become less reliable. Last week we posted our concerns and today in the Daily Beast, Bruce Riedel writes about the same issues. We thought it would be important to have another view of this rapidly changing part of the world explored by someone else.


Why the Saudi Royals are Scared


Bruce Riedel Bruce Riedel – Tue Mar 8, 7:23 am ET

NEW YORK – The House of Saud watches nervously as friends fall and the United States changes its alliances. Bruce Riedel on how money could help them—and why King Abdullah should not be underestimated.

The view from the enormous marble palaces in Riyadh and Jidda is becoming grim. For the House of Saud, the winter of Arab discontent has been unsettling so far as friends fall in waves. It may get a lot worse from the royal family’s perspective. But the Saudi royals are proven survivors who have been around and in power for centuries. They know how to survive and have the money to help.

One of the last absolute monarchies on earth, Saudi Arabia has been rattled by the toppling of old friends like Tunisia’s Ben Ali (now in exile in the Kingdom) and Egypt’s Mubarak (who may not be far behind in moving into a Saudi retirement home). The Saudis have no love for Libya’s Gaddafi, who tried to assassinate King Abdullah only a few years ago, but they are worried by the contagion of unrest that is rolling across North Africa and into the Arabian Peninsula. The unrest in tiny Bahrain next door is particularly alarming as it threatens a fellow Sunni Muslim kingdom linked by a causeway to the Saudi Eastern Province where most of the royals’ oil is located. The Eastern Province is also the home of the Kingdom’s small (10-15%) Shia minority. Unrest among the Shia is endemic, and protests have already begun this month. Shia protests are inevitably seen through the prism of Persian-Arab rivalry with Iran across the Persian Gulf. For the Saudis Shia gains are seen as Iranian gains and thus bad news.

The bad news extends to the south as well for the Saudis. They have never been fond of Yemen’s dictator Ali Abdallah Salih. They tried to overthrow him in 1994 by encouraging a revolt in southern Yemen which only united with the north in 1990. The Saudis lost out in the subsequent civil war to Salih and the north. But Salih is the devil they know and has been the recipient of billions in Saudi aid since the 1990s. Unrest in Yemen threatens to give more room for operation to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which is dedicated to the overthrow of the Kingdom and the death of the family princes. Salih is now in deep trouble, he has lost the backing of the south, many key tribes and some senior Muslim clerics. But the Saudis have few if any options for buttressing him in power.

There are also rumblings of unrest next door in Oman, another longtime Saudi ally. So far this has been confined to a few relatively tame protests but the Sultan has responded by firing some of his cabinet members to appease the opposition. To date, there have only been stirrings of protest in the Sunni heartland against the Kingdom itself. But the royals are taking nothing for granted. After surgery in New York and months of recuperation in Morocco the King returned to the Kingdom a week ago and promised $36 billion in new jobs, pension bonuses and other hand-outs to buy off potential opposition.

As alarming as the unrest in Arabia is to the House of Saud, the American reaction is even more unsettling. The Kingdom has built its security on an alliance with Washington since 1945, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt met with King Saud in the Suez Canal to promise American security protection to the Saudis in turn for oil and influence in the Islamic world from the guardians of the two most holy mosques (in Mecca and Medina) attracting a billion-plus Muslims. But now the United States seems to be betting that history favors change in Arabia and change threatens absolutism.

The Saudi family has been a major player in the politics of the Arabian Peninsula since the early 18th Century. They forged a unique alliance with the arch- conservative preacher Muhammad Abd al Wahhab in 1744 that created a partnership between Saudi family political ambitions; Wahhab’s Islamist credentials that continues to this day. While the Kingdom’s territorial size has waxed and waned over the ensuing two and half centuries, the Saudis have outlasted their opponents from the Ottoman Turks and the British Empire to Saddam Hussein and the Soviet Union. Don’t count them out.

In particular, don’t count out King Abdullah. He was dismissed by many for a stutter early in his career. Then he was seen as too conservative and old fashioned. But he has turned out to be a reformer by Saudi standards and has tried to reform education in the Kingdom and transform the succession process to make it more orderly. He is a canny watcher of American affairs as well. He had little enthusiasm for George Bush, whom the King felt neglected the Palestinian issue and foolishly invaded Iraq. So the king kept his distance from the Americans for most of the Bush term. He was hopeful about Obama, but he can turn a cold shoulder should he need to for domestic political purposes.

The Saudi royals are proven survivors who have been around and in power for centuries. They know how to survive and have the money to help.

The King’s health is still a question mark. His brother Crown Prince Sultan is very ill and not up to the challenge of ruling. Next in line is the arch- conservative Interior Minister Prince Nayif, who would alienate reformers and might precipitate unrest. So much depends on whether the King’s steady hand holds the levers of power for a few more years. Politics in Saudi Arabia are not transparent, so Saudi watchers will have their hands full this spring deciphering the Kingdom’s effort to manage the storm around it.

Bruce Riedel, a former long-time CIA officer, is a senior fellow in the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution. At Obama’s request, he chaired the strategic review of policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan in 2009. He is author of the new book Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America and the Future of the Global Jihad and The Search for Al Qaeda: Its Leadership, Ideology and Future.