Big surprise. He has behaved consistently all along, from his refusal to back the protesters in Iran, who were demonstrating against an Islamic Republic, to his backing of these protesters in Egypt, to whom he has just given a green light to establish an Islamic Republic.
In The Post-American Presidency, Pamela Geller and I profile Robert Malley, Samantha Power, and other fierce foes of Israel in the Obama Administration. In light of the information we reveal there, this comes as no surprise.
"U.S. open to a role for Islamists in new Egypt government," by Paul Richter and Peter Nicholas in the Los Angeles Times, January 31 (thanks to Benedict):
The Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said. But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such nonsecular groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis that has enveloped Egypt for the last week.
The statement was an acknowledgment that any popularly accepted new government will probably include groups that are not considered friendly to U.S. interests, and was a signal that the White House is prepared for that probability after 30 years of reliable relations with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
Monday's statement was a "pretty clear sign that the U.S. isn't going to advocate a narrow form of pluralism, but a broad one," said Robert Malley, a Mideast peace negotiator in the Clinton administration. U.S. officials have previously pressed for broader participation in Egypt's government.
The George W. Bush administration pushed Mubarak for democratic reforms, but a statement in 2005 by then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did not specifically address a role for Islamists.
"This is different," said Malley, now with the International Crisis Group. "It has a real political edge and political meaning."
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that a reformed government "has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors that give Egypt a strong chance to continue to be [a] stable and reliable partner." [...]
The National Security Council officials -- Ben Rhodes, Samantha Power and Daniel Shapiro -- were reluctant to discuss Mubarak's fate. The White House has settled on the message that it is up to Egyptians to choose their government and that the U.S. should not be seen as picking the country's leaders....
I never believed obama was a Muslim or that it had that much to do with his policies up until now. Though I still think it's more likely that what we're seeing is leftism in action. Obama is not a dictator, he has admin people and advisors of all backgrounds. It's hardly likely he reached the decision to adopt such appeasing policy alone. After all, we're told by non-Muslim leftists all the time that the MB are really moderate extremists and not extremist extremists, so if the MB seems almost certain to take over, why not try to get along?
As for Iran, maybe the strong backing for the protestors now is a lesson they've leraned from not backing the Iranian protestors enough. Obama was heavily criticized for that, so when it happened again he did back the protestors. Of course, there's a bit of a difference between the Iranian case and the Egyptian case, but we know the left is generally clueless and very loyal to their erroneous paradigm. Obama is probably told by his advisors and the various leftist and Muslim "experts" that the MB is a moderate extremist (we need to be nuanced, don't we?) and that the real aggressor and problem in the ME is Israel, so the result is this kind of policy - reaching out to Iran, reaching out to Syria, reaching out to the MB, while countries fall to the Islamists one after the other.
it should not surprise anyone from obie that stated:
"i will support the mulsims if it goes bad for them"
Shame on Obama for dumping Mubarak after 30 years. The US should have encouraged Mubarak to make reforms, to work with the people and make some concessions to them, to grant them some liberties. Mubarak was the only Arab leader who the US could deal with- he made peace with Israel, albeit a cold peace and stuck to it. Egypt, with Mubarak at the helm, was an ally to the US. If Obama could so easily turn his back on an ally, could he do the same to Israel?
"Obama backs Muslim Brotherhood role in new Egypt government"
Surprise, surprise!
America has a fool and weakling right now as President of the United States. Obama has spent gobs of money and has piled up more debt in two years than all Presidential Administrations combined did from George Washington through Ronald Reagan. He inspires fear in no tyrant on earth. The Russians consider him a joke and the Chinese, the Chinese for Christ's sake, have lectured him on economics. He has brownnosed the Islamic world again and again and is an appeaser across the board. Last week in his State of the Union Address he hardly mentioned foreign affairs (no wonder, his record here is so dismal) and spoke far longer about green energy and high-speed rail lines, both of which are not nearly as important or feasible as Obama and his ilk think they are. No nation who considers America an ally should trust Obama or take his word on anything. The Poles and Czechs never will again. It might actually be better if no one were at the helm rather than him. He's that bad.
So fitting and symbolic that he had Winston Churchill's bust removed from the Oval Office when he first became President. And think what the Great Man would say about Obama were he still here. Can anyone have any doubt what Churchill would say?
Mubarak didn't make peace with Israel, he just didn't break the peace Sadat made. Sadat was ahead of his time. Imagine he actually came to Jerusalem and made a speech in the Knesset (not a very friendly one, but still). You have no idea what it meant back then. I still remeber the general atmosphere in Israel at the time, it was like the messiah is coming soon. BTW, it was a Likud PM, the Likud's historic leader, who conceded the entire Sinai for peace. The Likud that is portrayed by the western media as extremist war mongering peace refusenik, while Fatah is portrayed as moderate.
And Obama would drop Israel in a heartbeat, but he has the congress and the American people, so he started a gradual process. If Obama is reelected we might be in very serious trouble, but even if not I'm not sure the Repubs won't continue what Obama set in motion.
BTW, I think it's going to be a mistake for the west since in case this develops into a global conflict (and no, the destruction of Israel will not prevent it, though the Muslims and leftists will try very hard to make you think so) Israel will be a strategic asset. And if instead they'll give us to the Muslims the Muslims will get all our weapons - all our long-range missiles, all our airplanes and everything else we have. I bet Iran will find our toys quite useful. It'll not necessarily attack Europe, but can blackmail the entire west with just the threat of attacking Europe, until it gets strong enough to really attack.
Yeah, you pretty much summed it up.
So, the Obama Administration demands a meaningless promise that the Muslim Brotherhood rejects violence and accepts democracy as the price of U.S. support? Well, of course they will get the promise, but not the actual deed.
Something tells me the terrorists we released from Gitmo promised not to engage in terrorism before we released them and they went back to killing innocent people.
Obama's attitude in this crisis is further proof of the danger from having a naive and inexperienced man sitting as President in the White House.
"'The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government,' the White House said."
Yeah. Uh-huh.
What I'd like to know is how many members of the Muslim Brotherhood are also members of Obama's cabinet.
Dalia...Oh Dalia girl...
"The organization [Muslim Brotherhood] must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said."
...
"White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that a reformed government 'has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors that give Egypt a strong chance to continue to be [a] stable and reliable partner.'"
...
- - - - - - - - - -
must reject violence and recognize democratic goals, eh? And who will enforce this? And if the MB can seize the reins of power in Egypt, does anyone think it really cares whether U.S. government is comfortable or not with it?
has to reject violence? Says who?
Toothless rhetoric and whistling in the dark. Our government appears to be vaguely aware of the predicament it has gotten itself into and suddenly finds itself headed for a cliff with no time to apply the brakes before plunging over. Gibbs' statement is equivalent to muttering a few final Hail Marys before taking the plunge.
It looks like the Muslim Brotherhood is playing it cool and not prematurely overreaching in its bid for power. Plenty of time for this later. Very smart, and an indication of the quality of leadership thought that we will be dealing with in the future.
It is interesting to note that the Muslim Brotherhood has been portrayed in the MSM as alternately a sort of an Egyptian version of the Salvation Army or a faceless bogeyman, depending on the political persuasions of the commenter or writer. But what are the names of the leaders of the MB behind this movement? Presumably someone, somewhere, knows who the leaders are. It's distressing, but not surprising, that no one on either side of the news seems have thought it important to ask this question. These are the people, not the kids on the street, we'll be dealing with later.
I see can see "Who lost Egypt" shaping up to be campaign question next year in the U.S. The Right will blame it on Obama, the Left on Bush. The ferocity of the debate will be modulated by the number of people hanging from lamp posts in Cairo.
I'm hoping very much the Republicans nominate a decent candidate. I voted for McCain, but wouldn't do so again. He nominated a completely unqualified vice-presidential choice. I also think that McCain's temper and inability to work with opponents would have made him an ineffective and possibly dangerous President.
I think the most important qualification for a Republican candidate is that he (or she) be experienced, be strong when necessary, and be determined to listen to, and consider, different points of view. Obama chose a very experienced vice-presidential candidate, one who is willing to tell him unpleasant truths. Obama also chose Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, a world-class choice when you consider the vitriolic campaign for the Democratic nomination.
Doom-and-gloom wrote: "I never believed Obama was a Muslim or that it had that much to do with his policies up until now"
I do not believe he is a Muslim, but he is the next worst thing, a clueless liberal who believes that all religions are the same and all people are the same. Some people keep screaming that Omama is a Muslim, but if he is, why haven't we heard reports of him praying five times each day? The answer is, of course, is that he is either an atheist or an agnostic with warm and fuzzy feelings about Muslims from his youth.
All of you should be preparing for the next election and not in the way you think. Most Republicans, Tea Party members, and independents will vote Republican, assuming that they do not choose an imbecile candidate like Sarah Palin. Many of you continue to write comments referring to "Hussein" and hint that he is not an American citizen (he is; grow up). This behavior is counter-productive. Point to the lack of jobs and the fact that he has been promising that jobs are his #1 priority for two years now, the Wall Street bailouts he could have eliminated, the skyrocketing budget deficit, the fact that his first state dinner was for India not one of our friends like Germany, the fact that he recently gave a state dinner for China when even Bush II was smart enough to only offer lunch, the fact that Obama supports an Islamic revolution in Tunisia and Egypt, etc.
Any chance this is true?
BREAKING NEWS! - Is Barack Obama Really A Saudi / Muslim "Plant" in the White House?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jhx_2TqffE
Unfortunately, it's only a trailer for an online video rental service so you can't see the whole program without paying, but I would think Avi Lipkin is a credible source.
"This is different," said Malley, now with the International Crisis Group. "It has a real political edge and political meaning."
Give the old 'Islamic corpse' one last dying wish, to bring Sharia to the Islamic-Crescent from Mali to Indonesia. Obama administration is being simply realistic that this is the way Islam will go, before it finally keels over and dies. This is inevitable, politically expedient, and like an extra dose of Communism for the end of Communism, an extra strength double-shot of Islam is what will topple it in the end. Too bad for the people who wanted Freedom. The Islamic "Freedom go to Hell" crowd will win this one in Egypt (and Libya, Algiers, Tunisia, Morocco, North Sudan, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, UAE, etc). The two are mutually exclusive, so we'd better batten down them hatches... the mother of all Islamic storms is a coming... In the primitive mythology of Islamic Crescent Moon-god world ala Mohammad, Freedom will have to wait.
RonaldB wrote: "I'm hoping very much the Republicans nominate a decent candidate"
The barrier to that is the Fox News crowd. Nasty clowns like Rush Limbaugh, ignorant c*nts like Ann Coulter, and looney-tunes like Glenn Beck have hijacked the Republican party. Mitt Romney could easily beat Obama, but he will never get the nomination because of the Fox News crowd's inane RINO categorizations. The fact that Sarah Palin hasn't been laughed off the national stage is an embarrassment to us all. The fact that Christine O'Donnell received 40% of the vote in her recent election is downright scary.
Michelle stated, "If Obama could so easily turn his back on an ally, could he do the same to Israel?" He already has!!!
"... a narrow form of pluralism ..."
Rich!
Paraphrase: We have room in our big-tent pluralism even for those who are inimical to all pluralism.
#
It is just not wise to dismiss the continued existence of the old Brotherhood. The iBros don't deserved all they've suffered since the 1940s, by any means. They've also been used by everyone from Nasser to the Nazis. Still, they are very powerful, far and away the most powerful Islamist group in the world, and quite inimical to liberal, democratic values.
Question: Why is it so hard to find major bad guys who did not start life as members, including OBL and Zawahiri, or the entire leadership of HAMAS?
Answer: They're the gateway drug to Islamist terror.
How that works seems an important question.
#
Since the late 1950s, with the help of an enormous pile of Saudi dollars, the iBros have also been an incredibly baneful factor in the lives of American Muslims. Based on the Obama Admin.'s statements, I can only conclude that they've been learning about the Brotherhood from American members, or their more foolish academic, non-Muslim advocates.
The current administration would do well, at the very least, to read the relatively sober article in the Wikip., or Johnson's A Mosque in Munich, or a few of the documents from the HLF trial, perhaps this one:
www.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/HLF/IkhwanAmerica.pdf
#
Until the U.S. can be certain that the Brotherhood has learned to play well with others, the worst must be assumed. And I don't think it's a good sign of reform that U.S. front groups still refuse to admit the sordid past.
> jcl
Thanks for the correction- IDK where my head was at. Mubarak kept the peace with Israel for 30 years which is a pretty big deal in the Arab world.
Very well stated!
I have a 1930-kinda feeling. Chamberlain (Obama) is in office and Churchill i preparing to step in. Allen B. West is that man. He has as similar background as Churchill who served in India and got to know islam. Allen West served in Afghanistan and has as similar opinion and experience with islam. Please, put this man in the White House as soon as possible.
Huckabee is in Israel now. I liked what he had to say the last time around and I hope he opts to run again. He will definitely have my vote.
Exactly!
Battle_of_Tours wrote: "an extra strength double-shot of Islam is what will topple it in the end"
This is nonsense. You are probably someone who believes that Reagan won the Cold War. He didn't; Gorbachev lost it because he would not employ machine guns against his people, like Stalin and Andropov before him. Totalitarian governments only last as long as their leaders' willingness to slaughter rebels.
Ever wonder why the Roman Empire lasted so long? There are many reasons, but a big one is that they were brutally efficient, with the emphasis on brutal; Spartacus and his gang were crucified, not given probation An Islamic caliphate could last for a thousand years because they would be willing to kill dissenters. Sure, the native residents threw the Muslims out of the Iberian Peninsula, but it took them more than 700 years to do it.
"Obama administration is being simply realistic that this is the way Islam will go, before it finally keels over and dies. This is inevitable, politically expedient, and like an extra dose of Communism for the end of Communism, an extra strength double-shot of Islam is what will topple it in the end."
I hope you are right, BoT. But what you are implying is that there will first be a period during which Islamic Republics will hold sway across the ME, after which the poor benighted citizens in these countries will finally throw off the yoke of Islam of their own accord. Your crystal ball is better than mine. I don't see movement in this direction in places like Iran, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan, but who knows what the cumulative effects of instant communication will be.
How long do you figure it will take for the final death rattle of Islam to occur? You're talking about a social transformation that will occur over generational time scales.
Sure, the native residents threw the Muslims out of the Iberian Peninsula, but it took them more than 700 years to do it.
Different world today. Internet, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc., make the old paradigm obsolete, and are the mortal enemies of tyranny. We're seeing that more and more nowadays. Primitive, violent, superstitious Islam is already dying, it just doesn't know it yet. Give it time to devour itself.
I agree, Battle_of_Tours, that Islam has, as Cornelius put it yesterday, one "last gasp." It's 'acomin', actually it's been 'acomin', and it's going to be ugly and brutal, but once the whole world (including a lot of Muslims) finally take one long, studied look at Islam they will get their fill of this monster of a religion that has been asleep for centuries until oil revenues, Muslim demographics and Western political correctness and multiculturalism came together at the same time to allow this gigantic, fraudulent ideology to have one more go at imposing itself on the world. Then it's over.
Rep. Allen West is Islam's worst nightmare here in America, and the Muslims know it! Finally, we have a warrior leader in Washington who not only knows that the enemy is Islam, understands its totalitarian ideology and modus operandi, and who has the experience, moral courage, integrity, and intention to engage it in battle as well. It just does not get any better than this... Go West!!
@Eastview: How long do you figure it will take for the final death rattle of Islam to occur? You're talking about a social transformation that will occur over generational time scales.
My garage sale crystal ball seems to show about 40 years... give or take a generation. Islam is so out of date in today's world it is laughable and held together only by draconian force, threats of death, suicide crazies, massive shots of Saudi money, etc. Best to isolate the beast and let it die, no need to poke sticks at it, though it is fun. :-)
@Wellington: ...Western political correctness and multiculturalism came together at the same time to allow this gigantic, fraudulent ideology to have one more go at imposing itself on the world. Then it's over.M
True, that this coincidence of events gave Islam one last shove onto the world stage after its collapse with the Ottoman Empire. But that is all it is, one last shot, and then it's over. Western "multiculturalism" and political-correctness came along as subsets of World Peace ambitions of the liberal Left, to not anger, or reproach, or intimidate anyone for peace, with the ludicrous results of emboldening a primitive 7th century violent and regressive theo-political ideology that suddenly imagined itself with a "king of the world" badge. This collective absurdity, theirs and ours, is what gave the primitive Islamic barbarians, in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and now Egypt, Tunisia et al, the self-delusionary belief that they are actually important developments on the world stage of human history. What they are not realizing is they are mere marginal players standing in the way of history, and the regressive and repressive ideology of real dose, double-shot of Islam-straight-up is horribly out of place in a world of equality, democratic constitutional law protecting our human rights, and the real liberal aspirations of a global humanity connected real time, to enjoy life and liberty on levels never imagined by Mohammad and his gang of jihad warriors 1400 years ago. Muslim Brotherhood, Iran Mullahs, Saudi oil money are all trying to bring back the "glory days" of an ancient and outdated mythology of Islam, but that is to no avail. Once the people, and I mean not only Muslims but all people, come to realize the painful, toxic nature of Islamic tyranny, whether by dictators hanging on to power by any means, or by Sharia advocates hanging on to power by any means possible to suppress its people to obey the 'party line' of real Islam; as we already witnessed in the Afghan/Pak Taliban, Iranian Ayatollas, Somali war-lords; then the true nature of primitive Islam will no longer hold the mysteries. First to drop out will be the "holy" nature of the Koran and Hadiths, it's just words written by people; next the "holy" nature of Allah and Mohammad, just Arabian mythology; finally the "unholy" revelations of comparing Islamic morality with Western Judeo-Christian-rooted secular morality, and how truly inferior is Islamic "morality" in the modern world. In the end, the "multiculturalism" moral equivalence will be totally discredited in Islam, that it truly, really is a primitive barbaric cult of the 7th century, that there is nothing "holy" about it. That will be the final death blow to Islam. And then, as you say, "it's over".
Last night Sean Hannity of Fox News interviewed two gentlemen about the Muslim Brotherhood ...
He interviewed Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor - and Walid Shoebat, a former MEMBER of the Muslim Brotherhood:
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/index.html#/v/4519054/muslim-brotherhood-a-threat-to-take-power/?playlist_id=86924
A must watch interview!
And Obama is really out there ...we have a muslim in the Oval Office, folks.
If the Muslim Broho takes power in Egypt, how long before they attack Israel? Israel will need to launch a pre-emptive attack as in 1973 to avoid annhilation.
News to Obama...the Muslim Broho are as serious about destroying Western Civilization as they are about destroy Israel.
Is Obama and his cohorts trying to bring in the Caliph? Something he was taught as a child? He is a snake.
Whenever anyone says the MB hasn't engadged in violence in decades I point out that:
1 They have assassinated 2 egyptian rulers. Where I come from that's kind of a big deal.
2 Groups split off from them before becoming violent precisely in order to allow them deniability. Does anyone remember that horrific attack on tourists at the pyramids many years ago? They jumped the soldiers there then hunted down the tourists among the ruins for hours before more soldiers arrived. That's just one group that had "split off" from the MB.
3 Hamas is a muslim brotherhood organization.
4 Subversion is, though non violent, still a military tactic that goes back to Sun Tzu and the Romans. The MB specializes in it and is engadged in a campagn of subversion in the United States.
5. Their current action plans for various countries call for the future use of violence after the subversion campagns bare fruit. If an axe wielding lunatic is surrounded by dead bodies and saying he will kill people very soon but won't chop your head off right now if you let him in your house- is it safe to believe him?
6. In the last few days MB memebers have said publicly that they will go to war with Israel once they get power. Since when is warmongering the renounciation of violence?
Obama is sucking up to them right now because he thinks their triumph is inevitable but since when is "just relax and try to enjoy it" been a better responce to a thug then kicking them in the nuts?
However I just realised:
The white house and egyptian democratic forces might be thinking, behind closed doors, that once the egyptian people have real democratic reforms and a better economic life then support for the MB will fade. Unfortunatly that will take time and the MB are so adept at conspiracies that even allowing one of them to be elected dog catcher would be a huge mistake.
What Obama or Hilary should say..."go ahead and try a 'democractic experiment' with with your undemocratic sharia based constitution, let extremists posing as moderates subvert the process, pretty soon you'll end up with a dictator again or in a war with Israel. Teach your children to hate others and blame your problems on others. Your economy won't improve because of the corruption inherent in sharia dominated Islamic model society where women are held back and the rule of law is based on fatwas blowing in the wind. In 30 years you can start the process all over again. Go ahead we won't get in your way just keep to yourselves and don't mess with the only true democracy in the M.E. Oh, try to read some books if you can find anything other than Mein Kampf or the Koran. Good luck."
"If the Muslim Broho takes power in Egypt, how long before they attack Israel?"
Hi, Barbara. I just ran across this headline that addresses your query ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Muslim Brotherhood: ‘Prepare Egyptians for war with Israel'
By YAAKOV LAPPIN
02/01/2011
A leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt told the Arabic-language Iranian news network Al-Alam on Monday that he would like to see the Egyptian people prepare for war against Israel, according to the Hebrew-language business newspaper Calcalist.
Muhammad Ghannem reportedly told Al- Alam that the Suez Canal should be closed immediately, and that the flow of gas from Egypt to Israel should cease “in order to bring about the downfall of the Mubarak regime.” He added that “the people should be prepared for war against Israel,” saying the world should understand that “the Egyptian people are prepared for anything to get rid of this regime.”
Ghannem praised Egyptian soldiers deployed by President Hosni Mubarak to Egyptian cities, saying they “would not kill their brothers.” He added that Washington was forced to abandon plans to help Mubarak stay in power after “seeing millions head for the streets.”
http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=206130
Walid Shoebat is not very credible. He claimed to be a former PLO member who carried out some terror attack against Israel, but this terror attack seems to have never happened (according to non-leftist Israeli sources). Now he claims to be a former PLO and MB member. The MB part is news to me, though it's possible that he did mention it before and I missed it. It's also possible that he just invented it because the MB became a major topic in the news and the interest in it is just going to grow. You can make good money out of it. Though the guy is very likable, he seems like a bit of a conman.
Thanks Champ, I think war is on the horizon.
Walid Shoebat is the real deal, he is a warrior against Islam. He is a Christian who speaks about the dangers of Islam from his personal experiences. I respect and admire this man. He is a true advocate against the evil of Islam.
He was a PLO activist here in Chicago, he said he was a terrorist when the media was calling him a "freedom fighter", I remember those days. He is a good guy.
The Muslim Broho is the grass roots for all terrorist activity, the foundation so to speak, there are many tenacles of the MB.
I don't believe in coincidences. All of the anointed one's actions have been pro-islamic. God only knows what is hidden behind the scenes. Add to that the millions spent to cover-up his personal information and connect all the dots. Only fools would ignore the inference. We have been co-opted and their is a muslim shill in the White House.
"The devil is afoot and he is muslim."
sigh...should be "there"
Not very credible? That is a false assertion! Walid Shoebat is not a conman. Remember, there are those whom make the same bogus claims about Robert Spencer, so it's important to note who's making these claims against men like Walid & Robert and why: to silence the truth! You must consider the source when determining whether or not someone might be a fraud; and muslim trolls on JW have accused Robert of being in it for the $$ as well, which is simply not true either. So again, consider your sources before leveling these claims.
Also, take a look at the right-hand side of Jihad Watch's homepage ...they have "Walid Shoebat" listed as one of their links. I seriously doubt that Robert Spencer would provide Walid Shoebat's LINK if he thought that Walid might be a conman, as you purport.
The internet is full of people ready to turn just about anyone into a fraud, so it's important to look at who is saying what, first.
And Andrew McCarthy was also interviewed by Sean Hannity, and his comments corroborates Walid's. Why aren't you accusing Andrew of being it it for $$, too?
I found your comment about Walid to be quite strange and not based upon fact.
Excellent post about the Muslim Brotherhood.
"Walid Shoebat is the real deal, he is a warrior against Islam. He is a Christian who speaks about the dangers of Islam from his personal experiences. I respect and admire this man. He is a true advocate against the evil of Islam.
He was a PLO activist here in Chicago, he said he was a terrorist when the media was calling him a "freedom fighter", I remember those days. He is a good guy."
True, Barbara ...hear, hear!
Allen West could be one of the greatest leaders we ever had. I really hope he can make it to the White House - if he doesn't then God help us. I am sure Mohamedians will put billion dollar stoppers to his move to WH.
I simply do not trust Obama, because he may not be a practicing Mohamedian but sure as hell he is so pro-MoSlum.
Shamefull Plug: I just spent the afternoon doing a teensy bit of research and writing a short piece in reaction to this and elbaradey's ridiculous comments about the MB's renounciation of violence based upon my comment on this page and posted it to my own blog. I doubt it adds anything new but it does outline some points you can make to those saying the MB's involvement is nothing to be worried about. If anyone has any advice about content or legalities or whatever I would apreciate advice. I dunno what the policy about such things is here so the admin can feel free to remove this post if it's not kosher.
http://truthiocity.blogspot.com/
"You must consider the source when determining whether or not someone might be a fraud"
That's why I said it's from Israeli non-leftist sources. Here's from an article in the Jerusalem Post (don't know why it's so messy, but nevermind):
"Shoebat's claim to have been a terrorist rests on his account of the purported bombing of Bank Leumi. But after checking its files, the bank said it had no record of an attack on its Bethlehem branch anywhere in the relevant 1977-79 period. Shoebat told The Jerusalem Post that this could be because the bank building was robustly protected with steel and that the attack may have caused little damage. Asked whether word of the bombing made the news at the time, he said, "I don't know. I didn't read the papers because I was in hiding for the next three days." (In 2004, he had told Britain's Sunday Telegraph: "I was terribly relieved when I heard on the news later that evening that no one had been hurt or killed by my bomb.") Shoebat could not immediately recall the year, or even the time of year, of the purported bombing when talking to the Post by phone from the US. After wavering, he finally settled for the summer of 1977."
There's more there.
I'd like Shoebat to be real, but I think that we should be careful to check the facts and personalities on our side in this information war, for 2 reasons: 1) we should be different from the MSM and fake "liberals" who easily buy lies and hoaxes if they suit their political agenda (the "Jenin massacre", the "Bush military records", Al-Durah etc. etc. the list is really long), 2) if we inadvertently use a phony and it's exposed it will cause us damage. We need our case to be solid.
Sorry, but that article certainly is not enough to label Walid a fraud or a conman; and since you find him so unreliable, then perhaps you should write Robert Spencer and request that he remove Walid Shoebat's link fron his homepage - oh, and perhaps you should also write Fox News as well, since they saw fit to have Walid Shoebat on the air to be interviewed by Sean Hannity, alongside Andrew McCarthy! Stop bothering me with your silly arguments against Walid. Instead, simply contact Robert and Fox News.
Hey I DARE you to send Robert that "article" about Walid Shoebat ...and I bet he'll tell you to stop bothering him with such silly nonsense too, lol ...
chill out champ!
d&g (as well as all of us for that matter) is entitled to her opinion. she showed you courtesy, by replying to your post, with the sources you have requested...
why the hostility?
i think that the hostility would be better applied towards the one who made the headline of this thread...
the fraud @ the oval office!
You really need to educate yourself about this man, Walid Shoebat. He is fighting AGAINST islam & company and he deserves your respect - not your failed attempts to discredit him. I have zero patience for people like you that would try to put a good and decent man down. Like Robert, he has had his life threatened by muslims many times, so show some respect.
No, I will not chill out ...
d&g has launched a smear campaign against Walid Shoebat on not one, but two different threads, and it needs to stop.
If you want people to only be polite to one another on an anti-jihad website, then you've come to the wrong place. If you don't like me confronting lies, then that's your problem. You chill out.
"d&g (as well as all of us for that matter) is entitled to her opinion."
An "opinion" is NOT what d&g put forth. Rather, this commentor is posting dubious information against Walid Shoebat in an attempt to discredit this man - an honest man who's fighting *AGAINST* islam. A man whose life is repeatedly threatened by muslims, or doesn't that matter to you? You seem to care more about my manners towards this poster, than seeing me defend the truth about a fellow warrior against islam: Walid Shoebat! Tsk, tsk ...
champ,
i do not mean to be antagonistic and i am NOT a new poster @ jw.
having read many of d&g incisive, informative and eloquent posts, i do not think that "she has launched a smear campaign against Walid Shoebat" as you say....
i did have a confrontational exchange with another poster sometime in the past that wanted to know 'if d&g was american' in a very badgering and narrow-minded way...
i can certainly understand that if one is passionate about a subject, he will defend it to death, and aggressively attack anyone that appears to harm his beloved subject.
you obviously seem passionate about w.s....
trying to familiarize myself more with him , i have googled and started reading readers comments @ daniel pipes site AND w.s. response to a doubtful reader...
i must thank you for picking my curiosity enough, to ensure that at least one of w.s. books will end up in my library.
while it gives me immense pleasure to have a confrontational exchange with 'islamic empire' and his ilk, i think that we (jw tribe) should remember that united we stand, divided we fall...
so champ, tell me how can a march similar to the ones we saw in cairo, be organized to impeach the muslim-brotherhood rep in the w.h.?
"so champ, tell me how can a march similar to the ones we saw in cairo, be organized to impeach the muslim-brotherhood rep in the w.h.?"
OK, first of all, I am not the one that got this thread off topic, d&g did that by first writing me and calling Walid Shoebat's reputation into question - and now you want ME to get things back on topic? Excuse me? You may admire and be friends with d&g, which is certainly your prerogative, but that doesn't mean that I'm at fault for starting the off topic debate, d&g is, obviously. So why aren't you leaning on d&g to get the conversation back on track, eh? You are willing to be fair regarding Walid, but that's where it begins and ends, it seems. And secondly, you started out very friendly towards me, only to end your comment by attempting to put me in my place. So, the phoenix, which is it, do you want to befriend me or cleverly put me in my place?
Anyway ...
I am of course pleased to see that you're looking at Walid Shoebat fairly and that you aren't swayed by a dismantling of facts in said JP article. And I'm sure that d&g is everthing that you've stated about him/her, and more, so I will forgive this posters current lapse in good judgment.
And now for the good news. Not only has Punxsutawney Phil,the groundhog from Gobbler's Knob, PA, predicted an early Spring (he did not see his shadow). But he also predicted an early demise for the Muslim Brotherhood.
According to Phil, "These guys are not my kind of rodents. The underground isn't big enough for the both of us." Phil believes that the Brotherhood will evaporate as early as 2012, most of them joining Amish communities which also have beards.
For those of you who think this is sarcasm, well let me just say you have hurt my feelings.
My future intentions regarding Walid Shoebat, and my final offer to you, along with my last word on the subject ...
As long as Robert Spencer sees fit to have Walid's link on Jihad Watch's homepage, then I will *continue* to post links and/or interviews that Walid has done when appropriate to the thread - as I did on this thread, so you'll just have to deal with that.
On the other hand, if you do decide to take me up on my challenge by writing Robert and sending him that article from The Jerusalem Post, and he in turn decides that Walid must in fact be a fraud - and Robert removes his link, then I will follow suit and never mention Walid's name again on this forum.
But if Robert does keep Walid Shoebat's link on Jihad Watch, then you need to backoff and respect Robert's decision to support Walid Shoebat. My offer is both right, fair, and reasonable, so the ball is in your court - in fact, its been in your court since yesterday.
Yesterday I challenged you to write Robert and send him that JP article, but for whatever reason you refuse to do that. Your actions speak volumes about what you must truly think of this article, otherwise you WOULD have written Robert by now.
OK, so that's my challenge to you. Either put up, or shut up ...
And if Robert does decide to remove Walid's link from Jihad Watch, then I will also issue the retraction that you're demanding. But you don't get something for nothing, you must write Robert. And as I just stated, this offer is fair, right, and reasonable, so what are you waiting for ...
Walid Shoebat or not, I believe Barbara is correct about a war with Israel when the MB takes political and religious control of Egypt. I also believe the majority of protesters against Mubarak's government are convinced that a strong Islamic state, not a democratic state, will solve all of Egypt's problems. I pray that the jellyfish who presently controls the Oval Office grows a spine and comes to the defence of Israel when the Muslims led by the MB attack that tiny brave nation.
dear champ,
one of the challenges that two anonymous individuals face when communicating through this medium is that there is lack of intonation...
i see you as a comrade warrior against islam. i also recognise that there may be times when ‘the troops’ get restless and tired and for a slight miscommunication a fight is breaking out... all i was trying to do was to put out the flames ...
my ending sentence was not intended ‘to put you in your place’ , but was a true question. it seems to me that waiting till 2012 could lead to a totally irreparable damage caused by the muslim with the teleprompter in the w.h. so i was wondering ‘out loud’ what could be done to impeach this fraudulent imposter...I really think that we should think seriously about this, and think fast.
Thank you for writing, the phoenix ...and for clearing up any misunderstanding between us. And I have signed 1/2 a dozen or more petitions to impeach Obama, so I share your frustration concerning this fraud. Beyond that, I don't know what else I can do in an effort to get rid of this evil man before our next election.