Apparently, the whole Muslim world knows that Barack Hussein Obama supports and finances the Muslim Brotherhood, why do most politicians and the media in the West pretend he doesn’t? Banned in Syria until recently, the Muslim Brotherhood now has formed a new political party in Syria…just waiting in the wings to grab power once Assad has been ousted.
Rubin Reports The interesting news was not that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was pelted with stuff while visiting Cairo, the important issue was who was doing the pelting. Once upon a time, anti-American radicals threw things at U.S. leaders. But now….
Reportedly, the hurlers of objects were people from the Free Egyptians Party and other Egyptian liberals. At the same time, leading Christians, including Naguib Sawiris who is the man behind that party and perhaps the most outspoken anti-Islamist figure in Egypt today, refused to meet with Hillary.
Why? Because these people see the Obama Administration as an ally of the Muslim Brotherhood. That might sound far-fetched to the mainstream media, but it is taken for granted in much of the Middle East. Oh and they also remember that the Obama Administration cut the financial support to liberal groups granted by its predecessor.
In the articles of liberal Arabs; the statements of Persian Gulf Arab establishment figures; the conversations of Syrian, Turkish, Iranian, and Lebanese oppositionists, the idea that the U.S. government is now helping the Islamists is taken for granted.
So it is the liberals, the democrats, the moderates who now view America as their enemy. Yet supposedly the U.S. policy is promoting moderation and democracy, right?
These critics have a strong case. Obama’s Cairo speech was precisely about encouraging Middle Easterners to redefine their identity from a national one—principally Arab—to an Islamic one. Obama invited the Brotherhood to sit in the front row. And when the upsurge in Egypt began and the State Department wanted to support continuity along with reform, the Obama Administration demanded the end of the regime.
Next, without anyone asking him, Obama said the United States wouldn’t mind if the Brotherhood became the government of Egypt. And more recently, of course, he has supported the Brotherhood against the army, demanding that the military turn over power right away, or else.
And in Syria, the Obama Administration backed a Brotherhood-dominated leadership in the Syrian National Council. Islamist Turkey was the ideal country from the White House standpoint, with Obama lavishing praise and almost never criticizing it for becoming pro-Hizballah, pro-Hamas, pro-Iran, pro-Islamist in Syria, and fanatically anti-Israel. And in Bahrain, the Obama Administration was ready to back a revolution putting (Shia) Islamists in power until the State Department stopped it.
Hillary Clinton said to Egyptian President Morsi: “I want to be clear that the United States is not in the business, in Egypt,”says Clinton, “of choosing winners and losers, even if we could, which, of course, we cannot.”
Wrong! While of course Islamists won elections in Egypt and Tunisia (but maybe lost in Libya), the Obama Administration has been working to pick the winners and losers. The winners: revolutionary, antisemitic Islamists; the losers: old regimes and liberal opponentss.
Did Obama back the Syrian jihadists who assassinated the ‘Christian’ Defense Chief?
chrisstreet The “Syria War” took a horrific escalation this week as Syrian Defense Minister Dawoud Rajha, a Christian, was assassinated in a suicide bombing by the United States backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebels; which was immediately followed by a retaliatory Hezbollah bombing of three tour busses in Burgas, Bulgaria that killed eight Israelis. The FSA attack appears to have been coordinated to occur just before today’s United Nations Security Council meeting on imposing sanctions on Syrian leaders, including Rajha. The U.N. subsequently suspended today’s sanction vote as the war went global.
Since the middle of 2011, the Obama Administration, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have openly backed a Sunni Muslim Jihadist rebellion in Syria as a vehicle to bring pressure against Syria’s key ally, Shite Muslim Iran. As we reported in Obama Tries to Wag a Dog that Bites Back and other articles, the President had hoped that his Syrian adventure would rally patriotic military support just in time for the November elections, in a similar manner as his surreptitious support of the rebel movement and then military bombing led to the ouster Colonel Muammar Gadhafi from Libya.
London Daily Telegraph reported yesterday that President Barack Obama had warned America’s western allies and Syria’s opposition groups that the United States “can do nothing to intervene in the country’s crisis until after November’s presidential election.” But since May, the United States CIA officers operating out of Turkey have been actively helping smuggle arms to the Syrian opposition through the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.
It is unclear so far if the United States had any direct or indirect involvement in the suicide bombing in the Syrian capital today. But the White House told the BBC immediately after the bombing that “Syrian President Bashar al Assad is losing control of Syria, and the international community must help work toward a political transition.” (Gee sounds just like what Obama said before he told Hosni Mubarak to step down)
Here’s what the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria is saying today: “There’s no contradiction between Islamic value and freedom, justice and equality.” Once Assad is gone, we’ll be hearing less about freedom and equality and more about sharia law…just like we are hearing in Tunisia and Egypt.