Why We Need To Be Careful Who We Allow To Settle In America

Yesterday Andrew McCarthy posted an article at The National Review about the death of Omar Abdel Rahman, also known as the“Blind Sheikh.” The Blind Sheikh died in a federal prison Friday night. He was in prison for plotting the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. Andrew McCarthy was the lawyer who prosecuted the case against him.

The Blind Sheikh was an active terrorist before he came to America. Unfortunately the people who allowed him to immigrate to America failed to notice that his name was on the terrorist watch list. He came to America from Egypt, where he issued the fatwa relied upon by the jihadists who murdered Egyptian president Anwar al-Sadat at a military parade in 1981. He was acquitted when he was tried in Egypt for that murder, relying on a defense that he was merely carrying out Islamic Law–under Islamic Law, Sadat deserved to die because he had signed a peace treaty with Israel. This is what we are up against. The Blind Sheikh in America trained, encouraged, and planned various operations with jihadists. While living in America, he was part of a conspiracy to murder Hosni Mubarak during one of Mubarak’s visits to the U.N.

The article concludes:

Omar Abdel Rahman was physically incapable of doing anything that would be useful to a terrorist organization: He couldn’t build a bomb, hijack a plane, or carry out an assassination. The only thing he could do for a terrorist organization was lead it. His life is a testament to the centrality of sharia-supremacist ideology to modern jihadism and to the broader Islamist movement in which it thrives. His death reminds us why we must fight everything he represented.

Omar Abdel Rahman was in America legally. Before he was arrested and tried, he was actively planning jihad against Americans. His story is one reason we need to be very careful about who we invite to live in America.
Please follow the link above to read the entire article. There is a lot we need to learn from our experience with Mr. Rahman.

The Corruption Goes On

On Wednesday, Front Page Magazine reported that Gehad el-Haddad, who left the Clinton Administration for a position with Egypt’s jihadist Muslim Brotherhood has received a life sentence in Egypt for seditious activities.

The article reports:

According to the New York Times, the defendants “were reportedly accused of joining a command center” during an Aug. 14, 2013 Islamist sit-in at Cairo’s Rabaa al-Adawiya Square “that sought to spread chaos across Egypt in defiance of the government.” The Muslim Brotherhood-led protest was in support of President Obama’s Islamist ally, the now-deposed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi. Morsi, whose rhetorical repertoire seems limited to calling Jews “bloodsuckers” and “the descendants of apes and pigs,” himself received a 20-year prison sentence this month and his Muslim Brotherhood organization is now officially banned in the Arab republic.

Gehad el-Haddad was the lead English-language spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood. He is the son of Essam el-Haddad, who was foreign affairs adviser to then-President Morsi. Gehad’s brother, Abdullah el-Haddad, serves as spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood in London, England.

Hillary Clinton, of course, headed the U.S. Department of State during the “Egyptian Revolution of 2011″ that ousted longtime U.S. ally and anti-Islamist Hosni Mubarak and cleared the way for Obama pal Mohamed Morsi.

On March 8, I reported that (rightwinggranny.com) Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking any and all communications – including emails – from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her Chief of Staff Huma Abedin with Nagla Mahmoud, wife of ousted Egyptian president Mohammad Morsi, from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00321)).

Both the Clinton Administration and the Obama Administration have had very cozy relationships with a number of people inside the Muslim Brotherhood. It is encouraging that one of these Muslim Brotherhood operatives is now in jail, even if he is in jail in Egypt rather than America.

Connections Americans Need To Know About

Yesterday the Washington Free Beacon posted a story about Gehad El-Haddad, a former employee of the William J. Clinton Foundation. Mr. El-Haddad was arrested in Cairo on Tuesday and charged with inciting violence.

The article reports:

Gehad el-Haddad served as one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s top communications officials until Egyptian security forces seized him as part of a wider crackdown on officials loyal to ousted former President Mohamed Morsi.

Before emerging as a top Brotherhood official and adviser to Morsi, el-Haddad served for five years as a top official at the Clinton Foundation, a nonprofit group founded by former President Bill Clinton.

…He was raised in a family of prominent Brotherhood supporters and became the public face of the Islamist organization soon after leaving his post at the Clinton Foundation.

However, much of his official work with the Brotherhood took place while he was still claiming to be employed by the Clinton Foundation.

“It was only a matter of time before Gehad el-Haddad was arrested,” Egypt expert Eric Trager told the Washington Free Beacon. “Many of the other Muslim Brotherhood spokesmen have been apprehended, and in addition to decapitating the organization, the military-backed government has been specifically targeting the Brotherhood’s media wing, including by shutting down its T.V. stations at the time of Morsi’s ouster on July 3.”

This is not the only connection between the Clintons and the Muslim Brotherhood. Huma Adedin, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s top adviser, has strong family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The article further reports:

El-Haddad represented the Clinton Foundation’s Clinton Climate Initiative in Egypt during his overlapping tenure, according to his LinkedIn profile.

He additionally “setup the foundation’s office in Egypt and managed official registration,” “supervised policy-making workshops & presented foundations views,” and “presented projects to high-level government officials,” among many other duties.

El-Haddad left the Clinton Foundation in August 2012, two months after Morsi assumed the Egyptian presidency.

He was appointed a “senior adviser and media spokesman” to the Muslim Brotherhood in January 2013 and served in that role until his arrest.

It seems as if the military rulers in Egypt are more aware of the threat to democracy represented by the Muslim Brotherhood than our own elected officials.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Obvious Answer Is Not Always The Best One

First the Saturday People, then the Sunday People. That is an example of graffiti found in Muslim countries around the world. We are now seeing that idea acted out in Egypt. The Jewish population has already been driven out, now the Muslim Brotherhood is going after the Christians. There are two stories up at the Drudge Report this morning that illustrate that principle in action.

One of those stories was posted yesterday in the U.K. Mail. The story relates the story of an Islamist mob in Egypt that attacked a Christian school, knocked the cross off the gate, and paraded the nuns from the school through the streets as prisoners of war.

The article reports:

Police told Sister Manal that the nuns had been targeted by hardline Islamists, convinced that they had given Muslim children an inappropriate education.

‘We are nuns. We rely on God and the angels to protect us,’ she said. ‘At the end, they paraded us like prisoners of war and hurled abuse at us as they led us from one alley to another without telling us where they were taking us.’

Siblings Wardah and Bedour, two Christian women employed by the school, also found themselves having to fight their way through the mob while being groped, hit and insulted by the extremists.

So far two Christians have been killed since the military-backed government moved against protesters calling for former president Mohamed Morsi’s reinstatement.

And dozens of churches, homes and businesses owned by Christians have been attacked and razed to the ground.

The second story, from The Christian Science Monitor, was also posted yesterday.

That article reports:

The Saint Virgin Mary church in Al Nazla is one of 47 churches and monasteries that have been burned, robbed, or attacked since Aug. 14 in a wave of violence against Christians since the brutal police crackdown on the former president’s supporters, according to Ishak Ibrahim of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. He adds that dozens of Christian schools, other religious buildings, homes and shops have also been attacked and burned, and seven Christians killed. Police have done little to stop the attacks.

The victims say the attackers are Morsi supporters angered by the deaths in Cairo, and spurred on by Islamist rhetoric blaming Christians for Morsi’s ouster. The attacks are a realization of the long-held fears of many Christians and have prompted deep worry about widening religious violence in Egypt.

Had President Morsi remained in power in Egypt, these events would have been condoned by the Egyptian government. Although the bloodshed in Egypt is horrendous and will probably continue for a while, there would have been bloodshed if President Morsi had remained in office. A parallel to the coup in Egypt would have been a coup that ousted Hitler shortly after he came to power. Would the world have supported the leaders of that coup? That is the choice we are faced with.

This is not the time to deny aid to Egypt’s military. Egypt’s military will eventually bring stability to Egypt. It would not be wise for the United States to alienate them–they support peace with Israel, they keep the Suez Canal available to American warships, etc. I know our law says we will not give aid to a country after a coup, but we need to look at what this coup removed. The Obama Administration has had a habit of making up laws as they go along and ignoring the actual law. In this case that would be a good idea.

To deny aid to Egypt at this time would be a serious mistake in foreign policy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Muslim Brotherhood Is Not Going Quietly

CBN News posted a story today about the current unrest in Egypt. The ousting of President Morsi may have technically been a coup, but the people of Egypt were genuinely concerned about the direction that he had chosen for the country. The latest propaganda from the Islamists who supported President Morsi is that the Christians in Egypt were responsible for removing him from office. That propaganda has resulted in increased attacks on Christians in Egypt.

The article reports:

On Thursday, the body of a Christian merchant was found decapitated in a cemetery. Last Saturday, a Coptic Christian priest was shot by gunmen in an outdoor market.

Also, days after the military coup that removed Morsi from office, Muslim extremists in southern Egypt burned dozens of Christian homes and stabbed four believers to death.

“It’s part of the Brotherhood’s mobilization that they are targeting Christians, that they are renouncing them as behind this. If the Brotherhood is able to portray what happened as a Christian-dominated or Christian-driven protest, then they get to gain massive support in the streets,” Tadros (Samuel Tadros, a research fellow for the Hudson Institute) explained.

The former pope of Egypt’s Coptic Christian community encouraged believers to stay out of the public eye and politics for fear of backlash.

The military-backed government of Egypt has ordered the arrest of the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and nine other members. The Muslim Brotherhood is suspected of instigating the violence outside the Republican Guard building in Cairo this week.

If Egypt is to be free, with all minorities having equal rights, the Muslim Brotherhood has to be kept out of power. The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is to turn Egypt into a state similar to Iran–with Sharia Law, which does not allow religious freedom. Hopefully the people of Egypt who support freedom for everyone will make their voices heard.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Will Mohammed ElBaradei Be Prime Minister Of Egypt?

Politico posted an article yesterday (updated today) about the recent political turmoil in Egypt.

The article reports:

But underscoring the sharp divisions facing the untested leader, Adly Mansour, his office said it was naming Mohammed ElBaradei, one of Morsi’s top critics, as interim prime minister but later backtracked on the decision.

Mansour’s spokesman Ahmed el-Musalamani denied that the appointment of the Nobel Peace laureate was ever certain. However, reporters gathered at the presidential palace were ushered into a room where they were told by an official to wait for the president who would arrive shortly to announce ElBaradei’s appointment.

The struggle in Egypt is between the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and the military attempting to set up a secular democracy similar to what  Mustafa Kemal Atatürk set up in Turkey after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The Muslim Brotherhood was formed in Egypt as a response to that government model–it was a protest to the idea of a secular government in a Muslim country.

ElBaradei is considered to be someone who would run the country as a secular nation, and the ultraconservative Salafi el-Nour party objected to ElBaradei’s appointment. Talks between the two sides are continuing.
Meanwhile, there are riots in the streets as both sides protest–one in favor or returning Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to leadership and the other in favor of removing Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Which side is the United States on? The State Department is officially not taking sides, but we might take a look at some of the details of President Obama’s 2009 speech in Cairo to answer that question.

On June 3, 2009, Fox News reported that 10 members of the Muslim Brotherhood’s parliamentary bloc received official invitations to attend President Obama’s speech.

The article at Fox News notes:

The Muslim Brotherhood, though, has a complicated history.
Though the hard-line group, which calls for an Islamic state and has close ties to the militant Hamas, is officially banned in Egypt, its members have considerable sway in the country and its lawmakers, who run as independents, hold 88 seats in Egypt’s 454-seat parliament.

The Brotherhood renounced the use of violence in the 1970s and now says it seeks democratic reform in Egypt. It is the most powerful opposition movement in the country, and many analysts argue Washington should engage the Brotherhood directly to show it is open to dealing with nonviolent Islamist movements.

The group is not on the State Department’s official list of foreign terrorist groups.

Keep in mind that the Muslim Brotherhood traditionally practices two types of jihad–violent jihad and civilization jihad. Civilization jihad involves taking over a country by infiltrating its government and quietly seizing power. The goals of both types of jihad are the same–to create a caliphate under Sharia Law. By specifically inviting the Muslim Brotherhood to his speech in Cairo in 2009, President Obama may well have paved the way for the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Unfortunately, things in Egypt may get worse before they get better.


A Major Part Of Any War (Particularly In The Middle East) Is The Propaganda

The Muslim Brotherhood is not going to to quietly. They will use any and every weapon they have to get power back in Egypt. Their goal is a worldwide caliphate. They work on a military level and a political level. In America, we have the exhibits from the Holy Land Foundation Trial that reveal their plan to infiltrate the American government and use our legal system and political system against us (if you have not read the exhibits, look them up). CAIR was established to use the American legal system to introduce Sharia Law, and the infiltration of Muslim Brotherhood members into some of our highest political circles is an ongoing thing. The Center for Security Policy details this in their series “The Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

So a story in yesterday’s Washington Post is no surprise–but it is almost humorous in its content. The headline in the Washington Post reads, “Muslim Brotherhood site says Egypt’s new president is secretly Jewish.” In America that probably wouldn’t really mean much–Joe Lieberman ran for Vice-President, and no one really cared that he was Jewish–but to a devout Muslim, it is a serious charge.

In January of this year, The Blaze posted an article about Mohammed Morsi‘s comments that the Jewish people as “descendants of apes and pigs.” President Morsi has said this numerous times over the years.

According to the article in The Blaze, this is the context of those remarks:

Found within the Quran itself are numerous verses citing Allah’s hex on the Jewish people and their subsequent damnation to live as the aforementioned swine, and primates. Quran verse 5:60 is the key to the kingdom in this regard and serves as the basis for all modern-day iterations. The Hilali-Khan Quranic translation of this verse reads as follows:

Say (O Muhammad SAW to the people of the Scripture): “Shall I inform you of something worse than that, regarding the recompense from Allah: those (Jews) who incurred the Curse of Allah and His Wrath, those of whom (some) He transformed into monkeys and swines, those who worshipped Taghut (false deities); such are worse in rank (on the Day of Resurrection in the Hellfire), and far more astray from the Right Path (in the life of this world).”

This is the context of the charge that Adly Mansour, the interim President of Egypt is Jewish. In the eyes of the radical Muslims who make up the Muslim Brotherhood, he is a descendent of apes and pigs.

It is interesting to note that the article, posted at IkhwanOnline, the official Web site of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, has since been taken offline. It must not have gotten the desired results.

According to the Washington Post, the article at IkhwanOnline also explained the world-wide conspiracy behind the removal of President Morsi:

The article goes on to connect Mansour’s appointment as president to a global conspiracy involving the United States, Israel and Mohamed ElBaradei. According to a translation by the site MBInEnglish, which is run by Cairo-based journalists and dedicated to translating Brotherhood-penned articles into English, the article claimed that ElBaradei had refused to participate in a conference that denied the Holocaust. This, it says, was “a token gesture offered to the Jews by ElBaradei so that he can become President of the Republic in the fake elections that the military will guard and whose results they will falsify in their interests. All with the approval of America, Israel and the Arabs, of course.”

It’s always a good idea when reading news reports from the Middle East to consider the fact that propaganda plays a large role in events in that part of the world. It took more than ten years for the true story of Muhammad al-Dura, the Palestinian child who appeared to have been gruesomely killed at his father’s feet in Gaza on September 30, 2000, to come out (see rightwinggranny.com). Whatever is reported by the press about events in Egypt should be viewed cautiously.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Egypt A Year After The Revolution

It has been a year since Mohamed Morsi became President of Egypt. Egyptians are not happily celebrating that anniversary. Yesterday the Christian Science Monitor reported that as large crowds protested in Cairo, a small crowd attacked the headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The article reports:

A Brotherhood spokesman, Gehad El Haddad, said on Twitter that a group of “thugs” was attacking the headquarters, and said two police captains left their posts protecting the headquarters to join the attack. No eyewitnesses reported seeing police engage in the attack. But Morsi has struggled to bring the security forces, long used for suppressing the Muslim Brotherhood, under his control. The police’s refusal to protect the Brotherhood headquarters and other Brotherhood offices are a telling sign.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al Banna. Hassan al Banna was killed in 1949 by Egyptian security services. A ban on Muslim Brotherhood activities was lifted in 1951. In 1952, the Muslim Brotherhood worked with Gamal Abdel Nasser and some young officers who overthrew King Farouk. Nassar began a crackdown on the Brotherhood in 1954, and much of the organization left Egypt and began operating worldwide. In the past, when Egypt had a leadership crisis, the military took control, and whomever they supported took power. However, President Morsi quickly moved to prevent that from happening.

In August, I reported (rightwinggranny.com) that President Morsi ordered Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi to retire.

I stated:

This move essentially transfers power away from the military and strengthens the power of the President and the Parliament. The Parliament that was elected in Egypt was largely fundamentalist Islamists who support Sharia Law. Taking control of the military breaks down the last barrier to Sharia Law and to Egypt becoming what Iran became after the 1979 revolution there. The next step will be the official breaking of the treaty with Israel (which will only happen when Egypt feels that it has gotten all the U. S. foreign aid money it is going to get).

By taking power away from the military, President Morsi consolidated his power within Egypt. However, the people who began the revolution in 2011 were not all supporters of Sharia Law. Many of them wanted democracy. Democracy does not mean one election and then tyranny. Because it has become evident that President Morsi is steering Egypt toward being a caliphate, many of the people who originally wanted a change in government do not like the change they got.

It remains to be seen whether or not Morsi will hold power. The Muslim Brotherhood is very powerful and is not above using force to maintain power. It would be wonderful to see freedom come to Egypt, but I seriously doubt that will be the way this ends.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Perspective From A Good Source

Yesterday Breitbart.com posted an article by Colonel David Hunt about Benghazi. I thought we had heard everything we needed to know about Benghazi, but Colonel Hunt reminds us of something that may have gone unnoticed in the controversy.

Colonel Hunt reminds us of events leading up to the attack at Benghazi. He then reminds us of something that somehow has gotten lost in the discussion:

That same day, two other American embassies in the Middle East were also under attack in Sana, Yemen and Cairo, Egypt. As a result, our intelligence systems were on high alert. When the calls, satellite and drone feeds, faxes, and reports began bombarding every command center from Germany to the United States, our nation, already at war for eleven years, was again under siege. Staffs from Africa Command, European Command, the National Military Command Center, the CIA Operations Center, the State Department Operations Center, and the White House Situation Room were fully operational.

This all means that on September 11, 2012, our national security apparatus was on full alert. It means everyone was briefed. This is how it works; no games, no conjecture, no television and movie looks, just real battle in real time with real lives at risk.

The road to that indecision is littered with policy and leadership failures that culminated in an American mission and clandestine CIA base being attacked and the murder of our Ambassador and three dedicated Americans doing their jobs. However, the one person responsible for it all is the one man who could have, but refused to, even try to stop the carnage… the President of the United States.

All the President had to say within the first two hours while being briefed by the Secretary of Defense was, “Send in a response force.” This command, followed by his signature on a paper called Cross Border Authority, would have ordered the Department of Defense to do everything and anything to save lives in Benghazi, Libya.

The real question is, “Why was that order never given?”

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Visit That Occurred After The F-16’s Were Delivered

The Blaze is reporting today Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has visited Egypt and met with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi today. This is the first visit to Egypt by an Iranian leader since the 1979 Iranian revolution. The visit also occurred two days after Egypt received its shipment of F-16’s from America.

The article reports:

Though Egypt’s shifting alliances are unavoidably apparent, the United States is continuing to arm the country.  On Sunday U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson held a ceremony in Cairo to mark the arrival of four F-16 fighter jets from the United States.  Twenty in total are due to be delivered throughout 2013.

“Today’s ceremony demonstrates the firm belief of the United States that a strong Egypt is in the interest of the U.S., the region, and the world,” she declared.

According to the United States Embassy website, the U.S. has delivered 224 F-16 aircraft to Egypt.

It is interesting to me that the visit occurred after the planes were shipped. I really do question the wisdom of arming the present Egyptian government. This may easily be something we will regret later.

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Of The Dangers Of The New Media

The credit for this article goes to DaTechGuyBlog. DaTechGuy truly represents the new media–he has his own radio show (Saturday morning 10-12 on WCRN 830 AM or on the internet at wcrnradio.com), he is on twitter, and he will go anywhere to follow a story. He lives in Fitchburg, Massachusetts, and was picking up a pizza in a local pizza place recently where the owner was watching a satellite channel in Arabic. The owner was talking to DaTechGuy about the use of violence by the Muslim Brotherhood to suppress the protests. Naturally, DaTechGuy looked into this.

The article posted at DaTechGuyBlog today shows some of the tweets coming out of Egypt describing what is happening. He posts capture shots of some tweets by Sandmonkey.  One of the tweets of Sandmonkey cites another tweeter, Gehad El-Hadd. Sandmonkey claims that El-Hadd is a liar.

My purpose in pointing this out is to show that the new media can be used for bad or for good. DaTechGuy points out that you have to go through five pages of El-Hadd’s tweets before you get to tweets in Arabic. Sandmonkey tweets both in Arabic and in English. So if most of El-Hadd’s tweets are in English, what audience is he aiming at?

An article in the Egypt Daily News posted yesterday stated:

The Muslim Brotherhood is waging a war of perception, not just for domestic consumption but for a western audience, too. Perception is crucial for two reasons: To defeat non-Islamist opponents, who may lose faith quickly when watching the endless number of pro-Morsy protestors in comparison to their relatively lower number in Tahrir and, secondly, to convince western nations that Islamists are the only reliable, powerful force in Egypt and that they are backed by the “majority” of Egyptians.

Eighty years of a mushrooming underground within Egyptian society has resulted in deep mistrust of mainstream establishments. Islamists view members of these establishments and other non-Islamist forces with deep suspicion and consider them elitist, anti-religious snobs. The strict, rules that govern the Brotherhood’s internal structure were partly introduced to protect the group from outside “corruption.”

This combination plus simmering resentment and years of grievance have finally exploded in the recent crisis in Egypt, and it partly explains the abrupt, odd way that Morsy has chosen to deal with it.

The situation as I see it is that Morsi wants to consolidate his power in Egypt and set up his part of the world-wide caliphate the Muslim Brotherhood is planning to build. This will be easier for him to do if he can convince the West that he is actually the good guy and the people protesting him are the bad guys. He will do his best to put down this rebellion against his power grab, but he doesn’t want the West to think that he is creating the caliphate he is creating. Morsi is an expert at propaganda. It is no surprise that he will use traditional and new media for his purposes.

All of us need to be very careful in deciding exactly who and what what we believe.

One Election Does Not Make A Democracy

Fox News is reporting today that Egyptian President Morsi’s recent changes to Egyptian law are being criticized by the top judicial body in Egypt.

The article reports:

In a statement carried on MENA Saturday, the Supreme Judicial Council says they regret the declarations President Mohammed Morsi issued Thursday.

The council is packed with judges appointed by former President Hosni Mubarak. It regulates judicial promotions and is chaired by the head of the Court of Cassation.

Meanwhile, thousands of people gathered Saturday to protest in central Cairo, where supporters and opponents of Morsi clashed the day before in the worst violence since he took office.

The Times Union of Albany, New York, reports:

Morsi and the Brotherhood contend that supporters of the old regime are holding up progress toward democracy. They have focused on the judiciary, which many Egyptians see as too much under the sway of Mubarak-era judges and prosecutors and which has shaken up the political process several times with its rulings, including by dissolving the lower house of parliament, which the Brotherhood led.

His edicts effectively shut down the judiciary’s ability to do so again. At the same time, the courts were the only civilian branch of government with a degree of independence: Morsi already holds not only executive power but also legislative authority, since there is no parliament.

The timing of this is important. On Wednesday, Morsi brokered a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, and on Thursday, the new edicts were issued. The Obama Administration had just praised Morsi for his work on the cease-fire and was put in a position where it would have been awkward to criticize him. We have been snookered again.

Don’t look for democracy in Egypt. Sharia Law will be in effect shortly, and it is incompatible with democracy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Twisted Logic

I have wondered why news reports keep referring to a video Muslims didn’t like rather than the date of 9/11. I think I have it figured out.

Today’s Washington Free Beacon provided the answer. A statement by Presidential Press Secretary Jay Carney gave me the clue:

CARNEY: We also need to understand that this is a fairly volatile situation and it is in response not to United States policy, and not to, obviously, the administration, or the American people, but it is in response to a video, a film that we have judged to be be reprehensible and disgusting. That in no way justifies any violent reaction to it, but this is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy, this is in response to a video that is offensive to Muslims.

This is very simple–if the protests are about the movie and not about American policy, there is no criticism of President Obama’s foreign policy.

The article also reports:

According to a page on the State Department’s website describing what an embassy is, an attack on an embassy is considered an attack on that country.

“Because an embassy represents a sovereign state, any attack on an embassy is considered an attack on the country it represents,” the page reads.

The logical twists and turns that are taken by the mainstream media to avoid the truth in this situation is amazing.

If you want the full story of what actually happened in Libya (caution: graphic pictures), I would recommend yesterday’s U.K. Daily Mail. Don’t look for the American media to tell the whole story.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Someone Is Finally Telling The Truth

One of the casualties of political correctness is honesty. We simply do not call things what they are for fear of causing offense or facing the consequences of what actually is.

Politico posted an article yesterday by Newt Gingrich commenting on recent events in the Middle East.

The article quotes Mr. Gingrich:

The president asserted we have to oppose “the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.”

Clinton reinforced his analysis when she said, “We condemn in the strongest terms this senseless act of violence.”

This concept of “senseless violence” is at the heart of the left’s refusal to confront the reality of radical Islamists.

These are not acts of senseless violence.

These are acts of war.

We can’t successfully deal with a situation until we realize what it is. One of the things pointed out in the article is the question of how this video clip reached Egypt and Libya. Does anyone actually believe that the film was responsible for these attacks? Have we forgotten the emphasis terrorists put on dates and the fact that the attacks occurred on September 11?

The article concludes:

It is no accident that the embassy in Cairo issued a groveling statement, apologizing to the haters for having inconvenienced them with American freedom of speech.

The embassy was simply following Clinton’s lead, set months earlier in her meetings with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The OIC has a long- term campaign to manipulate the U.S. government into defining any criticism or improper reference to Islam as unacceptable.

No one should be confused by this. As Andy McCarthy wrote yesterday, the Islamist definition of heresy would destroy American free speech.

The Obama administration is waging war on the Catholic Church while appeasing the most extreme elements of Islam.

This is the bizarre situation we now find ourselves in.

We need to remember–When America has a weak President, the world is a more dangerous place.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Bad Decisions Have Consequences

Today’s Washington Free Beacon reports:

Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit U.S. Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blogs spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any U.S. military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”

It really is a shame that Americans are not allowed to sue the government. The article reports that if this information is true, Ambassador Patterson failed to do her duty to protect American interests in Egypt. The American Embassy is considered U. S. territory, and Ms. Patterson’s job (and oath of office) is to protect that territory.

The article further reports:

Given that the siege of the Cairo embassy unfolded over many hours, the source wondered if new orders pertaining to the rules of engagement were ever issued.

Ambassador Patterson was in Washington D.C. during the attacks, according to reports.

“I cannot believe that over an eight hour period that nobody … in that chain of command did not ask those questions of their superiors,” the source said. “These protestors did not just appear and within 20 minutes climb the wall.”

A Marine spokesperson at the Pentagon denied the Free Beacon’s report in a statement to Fox News.

Of course he did. I think we need some new security people.


Special Report on Fox News is reporting that this story is not true. I will post more after I find out who is telling the truth.

Enhanced by Zemanta

As The Smoke Clears

As we all recover from the shock of having the body of an America Ambassador dragged through the streets of Libya, we need to step back and take a look at what happened on September 11, 2012. First we need to realize that it happened on September 11, 2012. Second we need to note that the American Embassy in Libya was not protected in the same way that American Embassies overseas are usually protected.

Hot Air reported yesterday:

The consulate where the American ambassador to Libya was killed on Tuesday is an “interim facility” not protected by the contingent of Marines that safeguards embassies, POLITICO has learned…

A senior administration official Wednesday called the Benghazi consulate “an interim facility,” which the State Department began using “before the fall of Qadhafi.” It was staffed Tuesday by Libyan and State Department security officers. The consulate came under fire from heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades at about 10 p.m. local time on Tuesday. By the time the attack ended several hours later, four Americans were dead and three others had been injured.

The Benghazi consulate had “lock-and-key” security, not the same level of defenses as a formal embassy, an intelligence source told POLITICO. That means it had no bulletproof glass, reinforced doors or other features common to embassies. The intelligence source contrasted it with the American embassy in Cairo, Egypt – “a permanent facility, which is a lot easier to defend.” The Cairo embassy also was attacked Tuesday.

It gets worse. Michael Rubin posted an article at the Daily Caller explaining how demonstrations in Islamic countries work:

The idea that the riots were spontaneous shows detachment from the reality of the Middle East. Dozens of heavily armed and murderous Islamists sacking embassies are not flash mobs of teenagers converging on a mall food court. When I lived in pre-war Iraq, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Yemen, my students and colleagues often spoke of how they had been informed by government representatives where to board buses to attend “spontaneous” rallies to be held the following day.

He concludes:

The war on terrorism and, more specifically, the fight against Islamist radicalism, is an ideological battle. The United States, moderate Muslims, and those valuing freedom and liberty must triumph not only on the battlefield, but also in the classroom and on the airwaves. Alas, apologies and self-flagellation represent not a path to peace, but little more than preemptive surrender.

That is a lesson we need to learn very quickly.


Enhanced by Zemanta

The Failed Revolution In Egypt

In January of last year, over 50,000 protesters filled Tahrir Square in Egypt to protest the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. They were demanding freedom and democracy. Unfortunately, it does not appear that that is what they got.

The U. K. Telegraph reported yesterday on what has happened in Egypt since the original protest.

The article reports:

The two presidential candidates who, as counting nears completion, seem to have got through to a second round of voting are the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood‘s front party, the FJP, and a former Air Force general who was prime minister when the “last dictator” Hosni Mubarak finally stepped down.

It really doesn’t seem like much of a choice, but the author of the article has a slightly different view. He states that this is democracy in action–the candidates got the votes and are therefore the choice of the people.

The article points out how the two candidates won:

The three losers appealed to people who like to argue about politics and ideas, and have “messages”. But they were essentially dilettantes. The Brotherhood and the ex-regime spoke directly to the concerns of ordinary Egyptians, and said what it could do for them.

The Brothers frighten the West with their Islamism. But their campaign talked about education for the poor, and defending traditional values. They came out strongly in favour of free market economics, and while it would be wrong to say Hayek won the election, in most of provincial Egypt, the imam, the teacher, the engineer and the local shop-keeper make more sense than semi-Marxist rhetoric coming out of Cairo; think of Britain and France in the 1950s, captivated by Angry Young Men and Sartre respectively, but voting Tory and Gaullist, and you get the idea.

Shafiq had one message: Mubarak was Mubarak, but security is security; two years ago you could walk the streets safely, and now you can’t. For communities traumatised by crime, that speaks loud.

This is a lesson that should be learned by American politicians–if you want to win, have a plan!

I don’t see any hope for a democracy in Egypt. If the Muslim Brotherhood wins this election, they will institute Sharia Law and that will be the end of freedom. I hope that I am wrong, but the lessons of history are, unfortunately, on my side.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Saudi Arabia Has Closed Its Embassy In Cairo

Yesterday’s Financial Times reported that Saudi Arabia has closed its embassy in Cairo after protests by Egyptian activists at the embassy. The protesters are protesting the arrest of Ahmed al-Gizawy, who was arrested when he arrived in Saudi Arabia for a pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina. The Saudis have accused Mr. al-Gizawy of smuggling Xanax (which is an illegal substance in Saudi Arabia) into the country.

The article further reports that the protesters believe that Mr. al-Gizawy is being held because of a court case he brought in Cairo over the illegal detention of Egyptians in Saudi Arabia. The Egyptians have been held without trial. Mr. al-Gizawy had been tried and sentenced in absentia in a Saudi court, but was not told that in advance of his trip.

Before the fall of Mubarak, the government of Egypt would not have allowed protests against the Saudis. One reason I find this interesting is that I believe that the rulers of Saudi Arabia are the next target of the Muslim Brotherhood in the ‘Arab Spring.’ They are the major non-democracy still standing in the Middle East. Despite the fact that Saudi Arabia practices Sharia Law, it is under the control of the Saudi royal family–not the Muslim Brotherhood.

Make no mistake, the Muslim Brotherhood supports a world-wide caliphate–but only one which they control.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Very Nasty Game Of Chess

CNS News reported the following yesterday:

A top Muslim Brotherhood official has warned that any cuts in U.S. aid to Egypt could affect Cairo’s peace treaty with Israel – the latest sign that Egypt’s emerging political forces intend to call Washington’s bluff over the diplomatic dispute triggered by a crackdown on non-governmental organizations

When America has a President who is perceived as weak, bad things happen. This is an example.

At present 16 Americans and 27 other people working for Non-government organizations that promote democracy are being held in Egypt awaiting trial.

This is called blackmail. The Muslim Brotherhood has made it clear since they began seizing power in Egypt that the treaty with Israel was signed by a government that was no longer in power and would be reviewed.

Unfortunately this is a lose-lose situation for America because of the way the Obama Administration has handled the Middle East since President Obama took office. The President has consistently put pressure on Israel to make concession to those who want to destroy it, and has created doubt in the governments of the countries surrounding Israel as to whether or not America would come to Israel’s defense if needed. The only way to end this blackmail is to tell Egypt in no uncertain terms that any attack on Israel will be regarded as an attack on America and will be responded to as such. Any breaking of the treaty with Israel for whatever reason will be regarded as an act of war. Then we need to stand behind what we say. Unfortunately, in the Obama Administration that will never happen–we will be blackmailed again.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Arab Spring May Lead To A Very Cold Winter


The distinctive multiple-arched BYU Jerusalem ...

Image via Wikipedia

Ynet News reported yesterday on a Muslim Brotherhood rally in Cairo’s most prominent mosque Friday. The rally ended with those in attendance vowing to “one day kill all Jews.”

The article reports:

Some 5,000 people joined the rally, called to promote the “battle against Jerusalem’s Judaization.” The event coincided with the anniversary of the United Nations’ partition plan in 1947, which called for the establishment of a Jewish state.  

The article further reports:

Muslim Brotherhood spokesmen, as well as Palestinian guest speakers, made explicit calls for Jihad and for liberating the whole of Palestine. Time and again, a Koran quote vowing that “one day we shall kill all the Jews” was uttered at the site. Meanwhile, businessmen in the crowd were urged to invest funds in Jerusalem in order to prevent the acquisition of land and homes by Jews.

 Throughout the event, Muslim Brotherhood activists chanted: “Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, judgment day has come.”

I can understand the initial revolt in Egypt. There were a lot of young people who wanted freedom and the opportunity for economic advancement. Unfortunately, I think the so-called Arab Spring has been co-opted and turned into something that will be very ugly and will destabilize the Middle East.

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Angry Mob Is Not A Basic Part Of Freedom

Today’s New York Times reported that an angry mob has attacked the Israeli Embassy in Cairo and that Israel sent military jets to evacuate the Embassy staff.

The Times reports:

In Washington, the White House said in a statement that Mr. Obama had “expressed his great concern” about the embassy situation in his conversation with Mr. Netanyahu. The statement said Mr. Obama called on the government of Egypt “to honor its international obligations to safeguard the security of the Israeli Embassy.”

Israeli officials said the six trapped embassy staff members were rescued by Egyptian commandos early Saturday morning, after hours when Egyptian military and security forces had appeared to stand idle on the sidelines for fear of confronting the mob.

“This went on for 13 hours and there was real concern for the safety and lives of our people,” an Israeli official said. “The mob penetrated the embassy and at the end there was only one wall separating it from six of our people.”  

This is not a comforting move by the newly free people of Egypt. The Times further reports:

For Egypt’s interim military rulers, allowing the invasion of a foreign embassy is an extraordinary breach of Egypt’s international commitments that is raising security concerns at other embassies as well. 

Does anyone remember that in the Iranian revolution in 1979, the American Embassy was attacked and hostages taken? This does not sound like the actions of a democracy in the making.

Enhanced by Zemanta