How things have changed: it wasn’t all that long ago that Hamas’s Ismail Haniyeh was meeting with Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi in Cairo (as pictured). Hamas-linked groups in the U.S. such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) will be hardest hit by this news — ironically, now they have a freer hand to operate in the United States than they do in Egypt, despite the Muslim Brotherhood’s stated goal (according to a captured internal document) of “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.” (Hamas styles itself as the Muslim Brotherhood in “Palestine.”)
“Egyptian Court Bans Hamas Activities in the Country,” by Maya Yarowsky for Jerusalem Online, March 4 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
Egypt has banned Hamas activities in the country: the court in Cairo ruled that all Hamas activities in Egypt are officially illegal. Communications media in Egypt report that the decision was made as part of efforts to control the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas’s sister movement and greatest supporter, whose activities in the country were also banned, with Former President Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood leader who was ousted last year, currently facing trial.
The judge asserted in the ruling that Hamas is a security threat to Egypt, blaming members of the organization for terror attacks and activities, along with a connection to Al-Qaeda operatives in the Sinai peninsula. According to reports in the country, Hamas’s offices and bases throughout the country will be closed in light of the ruling.
Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri condemned the decision, stating that the court is ruling against the Palestinian nation, “This act harms Egypt’s image and the country’s position in realizing Palestinian goals. The decision constitutes a new front against the Palestinian resistance”.
The decision by the court is Cairo will mostly hurt the Hamas government in Gaza economically, limiting the activities of the organization and resulting in economic pressure on the regime, which taxes the goods smuggled through the tunnels between Egypt and Gaza….
veggiedog says
Now we wait for an escalation of violence. After all, if they don’t agree with you then they must be put down.
Champ says
Meanwhile, obama met with the MoBro’s a month ago in the White House:
http://freebeacon.com/muslim-brotherhood-leader-meets-obama-in-white-house/
WTH?!
Time for us to clean House, too! But this won’t happen since obama is chummy with the evil Bro’s.
Sam says
Of course no one will ask Obama from media what he thinks that his “secular” Muslim Brotherhood is banned.
dumbledoresarmy says
Ladies and gentlemen.
Observe our latest Defender of Islam, ‘watcher1’, above ( in his post claiming that Peter King supported terrorism and that Peter King bankrolls Mr Spencer [???]) attempting to deploy one of the standard mohammedan tactics: turnspeak and reversal of reality. It’s sooo predictable and it’s sooo boring.
jeffpresidentlo says
And over and over again he spelled Spenser wrongly.
Salah says
They’ve crushed the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization, now they’re on their way to crush filthy Hamas. Egyptians are fighting terrorism, and they’re doing it seriously and efficaciously.
America should learn from Egypt how to peaceably get rid of traitors and tyrants!
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-end-of-muslim-brotherhood.html
Islofob IS-1 says
Another step in a good direction.
However, banning select groups that follow islam (hamas), but allowing others that follow the same islam (fatah), is missing the point. Can hamas just revamp it’s store-front, and hang a new name on a green flag?
Also, as we have been watching, leadership changes are always in the works. Those who sets the rules today will be replaced tomorrow, allowing islam the ability to be welcome once again.
As islam is not the focus of the ban, it opens the door to islam being the base of tomorrow’s new leadership.
Real progress will be when islam itself is rejected, and placed in the failed history section of all books and peoples.
Richard says
@ Watchdawg, how can your wife be a non Muslim? Isn’t that haram? You sound like a delusional liberal impostor fraud.
gravenimage says
Richard wrote:
@ Watchdawg, how can your wife be a non Muslim? Isn’t that haram? You sound like a delusional liberal impostor fraud.
………………………
No, Richard—”Watchdawg” is correct. Since women are regarded as chattel in Islam, marrying an Infidel “Awra” is perfectly Islamic.
What “Watchdawg” *won’t* tell you is that no Jewish or Christian man is permitted to marry a Muslim woman.
There is *nothing* “liberal” about this.
dumbledoresarmy says
Observe. The mohammedthug, above, accused Gravenimage of lying: but you will notice, if you read his post, that he does NOT deny that Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslim men.
We have seen plenty of reports of Muslims murdering non-Muslim men after accusing them of making eyes at a Muslim girl or woman. Sometimes the rumour is totally false, made up in order for the Mob to have an excuse to attack the non-Muslim community.
A Muslim in Iraq murdered his daughter on the mere *suspicion* that she had developed a tendre for a nice young British soldier with whom she had exchanged a couple of awkward words in a public situation (the soldier was assisting with distribution of aid to needy people).
For a true account of the thoroughgoing oppression of women within the Ummah (but mohammedans also prey relentlessly, wherever they can, upon non-Muslim women, as we see from the Muslim pedophile sex gangs preying upon underage British girls, and the Muslim gang rapists in Australia some years ago, and the Muslims who are continually kidnapping, raping, and force-“converting” Hindu and Sikh and Christian girls in Pakistan and Coptic Christian girls in Egypt), see Ayaan Hirsi Ali, “Submission”, and Wafa Sultan, “A God Who Hates” and Nonie Darwish, “Cruel and Usual Punishment”. All three women were brought up as Muslims, in Muslim families, in Muslim countries. They woke up, and jumped ship.
And they do not agree with the mohammedan dawa artist’s rosy picture, above.
I observe he carefully refrained from mentioning the permission to wed and bed little, little girls, girls as young as nine lunar years like Aisha was – it’s taken for granted in the Quran – or the wife-beating verse, Quran 4: 34, and he carefully omitted mention of the Quranic encouragement of polygyny and the keeping of sex slaves, “possessions of the right hand”), and he carefully omitted the fact that in cases of sexual assault (such as rape ) a woman’s testimony – whether of the victim herself or of any other woman who witnessed the attack – is NOT ADMITTED, and that a man can divorce a woman by saying talaq three times, just. like. that, whereas it is infernally difficult – near-impossible – for a *woman* to get a divorce, even if her husband beats and abuses her. And he omitted the fact that under the sharia a daughter’s inheritance is stipulated to be *less* than her brother’s. A man *cannot* leave his daughter equal shares with her brother; she *must* get less.