It is recorded that Muhammad once said: "If there are two leaders among you, kill one of them". It seems that he saw it coming, and he saw it as the root of the muslims problem.

You know, the Shiah community has always maintain one leader all the time, but would you accept the Ayatullah as your leader?. Hey among all muslims in the world today they are the most techno savvy, as proof beyond the shadow of doubt that their Imamat is working. And their Imams are very pious people when it come to daily life. But the rest of the Sunnis are facing dilemma, a big one too.

There is a saying which I get from a movie, it says: "It is good to be a king". Well Mubarak from Egypt did not want to be left behind, so too the late Gaddafi, and today's Assad in Syria, and Ben Ali in Tunisia, etc etc etc.

To be honest, anyone is fine with me, as long they can proof it. But all of them been there for very long time just accumulating wealth and pose for photos shaking hands here and there, and light hands in killing their people and any people.

The next in line behind Iran when it come to Technological know how supposedly is Pakistan, but the small time Mullahs in the street don't want to be left behind too in tasting: "It is good to be a king". If they are willing to sacrifice a bit of their mini kingship positions, they should be able to move forward even a little, pretty soon. But can they do that? considering "It is good to be a king".

What do you mean?  How is this the root of the problem?

Actually it is not confined to muslims only. The closest one to see in the current democratic system it is called hung parliament, dysfunction. 

The Golden Age was a period of unrivaled intellectual activity in all fields: science, technology, and (as a result of intensive study of the Islamic faith) literature - particularly biography, history, and linguistics.