« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Egypt Approaches The Abyss

Obama Partners With The Muslim Brotherhood -- What Could Go Wrong?

Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak’s son who is considered as his successor has fled to Britain along with his family, US-based Arabic website Akhbar al-Arab reported.

[...]

The report came as violent unrest broke out in Cairo and other Egyptian cities and hundreds of thousands of people reportedly took to the streets in a Tunisia-inspired day of revolt.

The long reign of Hosni Mubarak seems to be in its final decline and the next few weeks will probably determine to a great extent the security picture of the Middle East for a generation.

While we should all applaud the removal of a dictator we should do so with the realization that the odds of the Obama Administration producing an outcome superior to that produced by Jimmy Carter in Iran approaches zero.

As i’ve said many times, no historical analogy is ever exactly right but the parallels developing between the way the Carter administration betrayed the Shah of Iran are chilling.

Yesterday, administration spokescritter, Robert Gibbs, effectively cut the legs out from under any legitimate use of force Mubarak may use to stay in power:

Asked Wednesday whether the U.S. still supports Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs reiterated that Egypt remains “a strong ally” and stressed the importance of universal rights for the people of Egypt.

“This isn’t about support or opposition to leaders – it’s about the support universal rights of assembly and expression. We criticize actions that restrict those values,” Gibbs told ABC News.

Not to put too fine a point on it, there is no such thing as a universal right to assembly and expression. Even in the United States demonstrations must be orderly and lawful, when demonstrations move beyond those limits they become criminal and can be dispersed by force. Implying that demonstrations are de facto legal has the equal effect of delegitimizing any actions by the regime.

According other reporting the Administration is prepared to increase pressure on Mubarak to “embrace democratic changes” but:

Shadi Hamid, an expert on Islamist politics and democratic reform in the Middle East at the Brookings Institution, said the large pro-democracy protests may have broken the “psychological barrier of fear” among Egyptians.

“The U.S. does not want to see the Egyptian regime fall any time soon,’’ Hamid said in a telephone interview. “But people who are protesting, the tens of thousands, do want to see the regime fall some time soon. They are diametrically opposed interests.”

Mubarak knows any “democratic change” for him will more closely resemble what happened in Romania in 1989 than what happened in Prague at the same time.

While the Carter Administration believed for reasons that have never been made clear that it could manage the accession of Ayatollah Khomeini to power, so too the Obama Administration seems to think it has found a working partner in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Why the Administration believes cavorting with an organization that is both violent and islamist makes sense is as unclear as Carter’s man-crush on Khomeini.

The Administration clearly feels that it is sympatico with the Muslim Brotherhood. Early in the Administration the man chosen for “muslim outreach” was heavily involved with the Muslim Brotherhood. And Egyptian media has reported that Obama has recently met with Muslim Brotherhood representatives:

U.S. President Barack Obama met with members of Egypt’s Islamist opposition movement, the Muslim Brotherhood, earlier this year, according to a report in Thursday editions of the Egyptian daily newspaper Almasry Alyoum.

The newspaper reported that Obama met the group’s members, who reside in the U.S. and Europe, in Washington two months ago.

All of this gives the impression that the Administration feels as though the Muslim Brotherhood represents the forces of democratic change in Egypt and it is throwing it’s weight behind the islamist movement while simultaneously trying to guarantee a soft landing for President Mubarak.

One doesn’t need a crystal ball to see how this movie ends. The Muslim Brotherhood is closely aligned with Hamas, another terrorist front organization, and its governing philosophy is anti-semitic and anti-democratic to its very core.

Under less exigent conditions it would be amusing to watch the most incompetent and least qualified national security team ever try to convince itself that it is able to treat an overtly islamist organization as a partner in democratic action. This is not funny.

One would think after two years of humiliation and abuse at the hands of every petty dictator on the face of the earth this bunch would have arrived at the logical conclusion that they are not the sharpest tools in the shed. That they would realize that their actions so far looks far more like a high school campaign for homecoming queen than the foreign policy of THE superpower. But introspection and self-awareness requires intelligence and the imbeciles mismanaging our foreign policy are about to consign 82 million people to the perpetual darkness of islamic rule and they think they are being clever.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • doubledok

    key to short-term response. Unfortunately, the Obama admin remains unreliable in support of the Israeli realists.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      Egypt is where Qtub was an early member if the Muslim Brotherhood that essentially began the Islamist movement to restore the Caliphate and which preaches indiscriminate killing of the infidels. Turabi learned from Qtub and taught Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri.

      Egypt must not fall to the Islamists.

    • kpbenware

      Because this is one of the goals of Islam- to overthrow and remake every country on the planet into an Islamic state. It is the duty of everyone who is Islamic to work toward this goal, and Obama is no different. His administration is not naively doing as Carter did with the Sha, he is working in the background, with his Muslim Brotherhood partners, as a true defender of Islam.

      ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
      The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.–Marcus Aurelius, 14th Roman Emperor

  • bk

    Acting like these are “pro-democracy” protests is about the same as complimenting the Basij for putting down “anti-democracy” protests in Iran after the “elections” there.

    Egypt is going to be a democracy with the Muslim Brotherhood calling the shots about as much as Lebanon, Syria, and Iran are democratic.

  • aesthete

    When are pols going to learn that democracy movements do not necessarily correlate with America’s interests or even an expansion of freedom for the country with this so-called democratic movement?

    • http://www.FranBaker.com frankieb

      Tunis is in riot as well.

      • aesthete

        From what I understand, the character of its insurrection is secular and very different from that of a prior, failedIslamist rebellion. Islamists appear to be at their nadir right now. Still, good call: anything can (and often does) happen in the Islamic world, and we should be very alert to what is happening in Tunisia right now.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          would favor military action to prevent Islamists from getting Pakistan’s nukes and probably even making sure reasonable forces remain in power in Egypt.

          My main points here are that the occasion of the uprisings in Iran last year and the ones in Tunis and Egypt should not be an occasion either for Bush bashing or democracy bashing or blaming America.

          Democracy didn’t cause the tyranny that is causing the oppressed to rise up and world history shows that the greatest happiness and prosperity comes from self government, not dictators.

          • JSobieski

            I just don’t see who it is that you are arguing with.

            Nobody on RS is asserting that our behavior in the ME is somehow immoral.

            Some are suggesting that we need to rethink how we go about achieving our objectives.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            “democracy movement”

          • aesthete

            pols hearting “democracy” mindlessly is not always conducive to America’s interests or the freedoms of the country that the “democracy” movement is taking place in.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            it relevant as the first comment? Nothing.

            I guess you could also have stated that pols heating “enter form of government here” mindlessly (the word that makes it impossible to disagree with what you later say and gives you the ‘out’ you live for…smile) …

            ‘thete, I know you. You know me. You got your non sequitur in, and I refuted it utterly. It was fun.

            Moving on…

            God bless

          • aesthete

            has been to support this movement. That, the references to Iran, and the troubling trend to praise all democratic movements regardless of content (lest you be tarred as – horror of horrors – anti-democratic) make it perfectly relevant as an initial comment. The only non sequitur made in this thread was the reference to Bush-bashing and America-bashing made by RS’s favorite lawyer :)

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            given a broad definition and your assumptions, I guess I would have to cut you some slack…bro

          • aesthete

            Threadjack over ;)

          • JSobieski

            “When are pols going to learn that democracy movements do not necessarily correlate with America?s interests or even an expansion of freedom for the country with this so-called democratic movement?”

            This is not specific to Bush. Its not a bashing of America either.

            Its saying that we have an entire toolbox of option to further American interests, and democracy abroad is not always (i.e. does “not necessarily correlate” with America’s interests).

            Essentially saying democracy is not always the solution is hardly Bush bashing or anti-American.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            My points stand on their own merits. Its not about ‘thete. Its about the points I wanted to make and did, (Mikey happy now) and now I will not be joining the interminable obsessing that you guys enjoy so much. I make no judgments….smile

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            I never do because I think its silly to do so. Let a thousand voices sing to any tune and all at once.

            Can you tell I’m really happy tonight? I am..

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      one can’t have a self-governing democratic republic without moves. Quite often its the second or subsequent elections (see Iraq for example) that bear the best fruit, but the problems in Lebanon and Egypt aren’t the fault of any misapplication of our country’s democratic example nor our foreign policy advocacy of same.

      The problem is that of oppressed peoples wanting to stop being oppressed. “Pols” in America for Liberty around the world aren’t the cause of the power of the Hezbos who are stamping out democracy! In my opinion, the US and Israel should have cleaned out Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza decades ago with crushing military action on the order of the WWII utter defeat of Germany and Japan. Iran the same.

      I’ll never forget the poor Beirut barber surveying his bombed out shop that told a reporter that the next election he would vote against the Hezbos and for a candidate and party that wouldn’t provoke Israel to bomb his shop.

      Obama should be taking military action against Iran and the Hezbos now.

      It appears that the third way in Iraq is encouraging people all across the Middle East to consider action for liberty, as in Iran last year. It is a tragedy that Obama appeased the Mullahs.

      Now Tunisians want to be free.

      The cause of the violence is not democracy movements. It is the evil of tyranny.

      • aesthete

        or even most cases: we have had good relations with Europe, but only since WWII. Besides post-war Europe, it is unclear that democracy is either an unalloyed good or inherently useful for either the expansion of freedom or American foreign policy. India was for many years considered less a friend to the US than Pakistan (particularly during the Cold War), and was not particularly friendly to property rights. Salvadore Allende’s democratically elected government certainly was not friendly to freedom or to Chile becoming more aligned with the US. Many of the countries in Eastern Europe and the Balkans that found themselves behind the Iron Curtain voluntarily let themselves in by voting in overwhelming numbers for communist and socialist parties. Post-colonial experiments in self-governance was typically less, not more, free than the colonial governments that they replaced (particularly in Africa and Ceylon), and certainly less pro-America or pro-western. Several nations in Latin America (and I have personally witnessed this phenomena in some cases) have voluntarily elected demagogues, including present-day Venezuela and many of the communist governments during the Cold War. Italy was largely prevented from going democratically Marxist by the CIA’s interference in their national elections.

        Democracy can many times be very unstable and dangerous: many forget that the Weimar Republic was not only made unstable by Nazis, but also by the communists. If one hadn’t won, the other surely would have. Tragically, a whole lot of oppressed people want to stop being oppressed so that they can start oppressing the people that they don’t like if they hold the keys to the kingdom. A lot of people in the Middle East are not mad about the fact that they are being oppressed, but about the fact that government is not oppressing some group enough (that is the complaint of Islamists in Bahrain, Qatar, and the rest of the Gulf states, as well as in Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon).

        Believe it or not, the monarchs in the Middle East tend to be a good deal less fanatical than the populations that they represent: Jordan’s monarchy rather consistently stands against the popular movements towards Islamism, and Bahrain’s monarch is the main bastion against stripping women of the right to drive and vote (as well as a host of bad things proposed by the popularly elected Islamist majority in their parliament). Saud’s monarchs have routinely been attacked by Wahabist clerics for being too conciliatory towards the West, and for not being nearly as medieval as Wahabism demands — the Saudi people largely side with the Wahabist clerics. Turkey has been having problems with its Islamists, as well — and its main anti-democratic institution, the military, is the bulwark against such sentiments. All of these Islamists want more bellicose hatred of the West from their leaders. Afghanistan’s democracy, when not toying with the idea of returning the last group of jackals to “power” (over the capital city of Kabul and not much else), is busy executing Christians who convert from Islam, and preventing them from building churches.

        What happens when some naif like Carter or Obama decides that “democracy abroad” is more important than pursuing our interests in the region? Simple: Iran and Lebanon happen writ large, with the entire region going up in cinders in a misbegotten (but “popularly supported”!) attempt to take us and Israel with them. Democracy is a tricky thing to rely on: Jesus was sentenced to death by the same mob that praised his name days before. The autocrats in the region are terrible, but popularly elected murderers whose higher body counts people thrill to are much worse, and are the likely outcome of democracy in a region as broken as the ME.

        Suffice it to say, democracy without a concomitant love for liberty, basic educational level needed to properly defend this acquired love from demagogues, and basic morality among the populace is worthless on all fronts: all you’re doing is legitimizing and enabling evil on the part of a majority against a minority. Even with those things noted, there’s no guarantee that democracy will take hold or continue to thrive: Lebanon is evidence of that. I hope that Tunis and Iraq follow the positive examples set forth by Europe, the US, Japan and S Korea, as both countries are well able to do so. The rest of the ME is another issue all together, and allowing its populace to vote on those issues is to seal the doom of minorities (religious and otherwise), freedoms, and the relationship of those countries with the US.

        • OccamsRazor

          I, for one, am not willing to give up on it.

          • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

            being wrong unless wedded to a love of liberty and a body of moral virtues. Democracy can be designed from the top down but can be only built from the bottom up, to survive. These two things can can actually occur contemporaneously, but alas in theory only, as we blew the opportunity in Iraq and Afghanistan both. Both windows are closed now I think.

            No Democrat in memory has paused to consider the underlying popular desire for freedom (not just from oppression) that compels people to take to the street, they only think from the top end, the policy stuff.

            Republicans, conservatives, however do…but then pass the implementation over to bureaucrats (Paul Bremer) who see the world much as Democrats do. The people become objects rather than engine that drives true democracy.

            Strieff is correct to say that islamic tyranny will likely come in on the heels of this breakdown in Egypt (for sure) and possibly Tunisia. INterestingly too is that I don’t think Obama wants to condemn behavior in the streets that his union supporters are apt to encourage here as well.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            I would say that it seems to work better after crushing defeat as in all but Iraq, but clearly Iraq and our security there is better on all fronts than before we removed the dictator.
            See more later.

            But this conversation is all out of whack since Bush didn’t invade either Lebanon, Tunis or Egypt and since oppressed people have been rising up against oppressors since 5000 BC. Moreover, has America been the worse off in Lebanon etc when democrats have held sway? No.

            Sometimes, are the first elections bad? Yes, and if the people want to elect radicals if that is there will, then so be it and when their radicals act as such they should be crushed so that in the second elections the people can decide if they want to elect those that get them killed.

            It is not democracy that is the problem in the world. It is tyranny and sinful people. Hence the miracle at Philly is called such.

            more later

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            after 911 and going back 40+ years from the Left. America is the answer, not the cause of problems.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            we offer same to the people thus freed from tyranny. We “allow” bad things to happen or we cause them thru action.

            Poppycock.

            We have dealt with the regimes we find in the Middle East and elsewhere. That we do so does not mean that we “prop them up”. It is up to the people of a nation to fire shots around the world like we did. It is not our fault that they have not done so and so therefore we deal with who greets us at the water’s edge.

            more later

          • aesthete

            for all that’s wrong with the world, just that leaping to the first democratic movement that pops up in a ME country (and abandoning our admittedly autocratic ally in the process) is not necessarily the best of ideas, as demonstrated by what happened in Iran. The US and the CIA gets a lot of flack from progressives for having suppressed democratic movements towards communism in third-world countries and Italy, Pinochet being the go-to example. You know what? Pinochet was a stone-cold evil autocrat who caused a lot of suffering, but he was pro-America, did not cause as much suffering as Allende’s “democratic” regime probably would have, and eventually (as other autocrats in SE Asia did), relinquished his power to a populace that was well able to maintain freedom in the wake of a horrible dictatorship. I have no problem with the US defending our autocratic allies from democratic movements that harm our interests, and likely the freedoms of the people in the nation itself.

          • ZootSuit

            And the fact that Vassar Bushmills also agrees with you only proves the point!

            It is utterly amazing to me that so many conservatives think that all democracies are, ipso facto, nature allies of the United States. I actually used to laugh at some of the comments that Bush and his “neo-conservative” allies (and apologists) used to make about Iraq. Yes, Saddam was bad and may indeed needed to be overthrown (and executed) when he was but what made anyone think that the Iraq people as a whole would want a single American soldier on Iraqi soil?

            Seriously, no matter how bad the Obama Administration gets, if Great Britain or someone invaded us to restore a free-market economy, who does not think that 99.8% of all Americans, from the Tea Partiers to the New Black Panthers, would in arms, literally, overthrowing the British invasion.

            And if that comes across as “Bush-bashing,” well, in this case I think George W. Bush deserves to be bashed.

            But I digress.

          • aesthete

            How are you? I’m guessing that you can see that RS hasn’t changed much since you left :)

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            see riots in the streets and ipso facto see a bad democracy movement caused by us.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            In his book Heroes: From Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar to Churchill and de Gaulle, Johnson says that he was concerned when Allende, a personal friend, became its president and made it a haven for communists. He speaks very highly of Pinochet, calling his demonization by the intelligentsia “the last triumph of the KGB before it vanished into history’s dustbin.”

            A series of peronal, idiosyncratic mini-biographies, it is an odd book with an extremely eclectic list of heroes, but very enjoyable.

          • aesthete

            but I strongly disagree with him here in many respects: I cannot know what, if any, motivations Pinochet had for doing what he did, but I do know the outcomes. Between four thousand and six thousand mothers, fathers, and children killed for opposing the regime non-violently, and many multiples more tortured, maimed, or imprisoned for the same. Here’s an article describing Colonia Dignidad (a cult/torture camp supported by Pinochet’s regime) that should take away any misconception that Pinochet was a benevolent dictator along the lines of a late Austrian or Prussian monarch, as I and many people more intelligent than me (Hayek, for instance) used to believe. It’s quite long, but I highly recommend reading it or bookmarking it for later. I don’t fault Pinochet’s regime for any violent guerrillas that needed killing during his tenure, of course; I don’t even fault him for depriving people the derived right of franchise. I do hold him culpable for the many who were deprived of life, liberty and property, for non-violent opposition, though. While it seems crass to note given the much greater violations of liberty noted above, I’ll also note that Pinochet was not quite a classical liberal: his first two years were essentially par for the course for dictators (some nationalization and corporatism) which resulted in inflation and the like, and which he (wisely) reversed course on by consulting with some of the Chicago Boys and some homegrown Chilean monetarists. Pinochet was probably better than Allende for several reasons, but he was far from a saint.

            That said, I absolutely agree that propaganda played a large role in leftist opposition to, and hatred of, Pinochet: there were around 26 articles written during that decade critical of Pinochet in the NYT, while only four were written on Cambodia (killed: over 1.5 of a ~7.5 million population), three on the Vietnam which created the crisis of the boat people, three on Cuba (do we even have to go there?), and two on N Korea. Regardless, I think we can all agree that the current democratic government is much better on matters of personal and economic liberty than Pinochet or Allende.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            The Chilean people did not have a choice between Jefferson and Madison, they had a choice between authoritarianism and a totalitarianism.

            I have no doubt that Allende would have been a Castro/Chavez type.

            At least Pinochet eventually stepped down without violence.

          • aesthete

            I simply see on occasion a tendency for conservatives to not see how bad the choice for Chileans really was: Pinochet was, as you note, not a Jefferson or Madison. IMO, you are exactly right about Allende: personal accounts reveal that he was very paranoid, and it is a fact that he was a paid agent of Moscow, per declassified government documents. He had already shifted Chile to the Soviet bloc in the short time that he was in power, and had he remained for longer, he would likely have been about as bad as Castro.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            I’d always written him off as a severe dictator, because that’s how he has been portrayed. The fact that Johnson holds him in high regard makes me curious, though. Thanks for the article, aesthete. I’ll make the time to read it at some point this weekend.

            Kyle, you make a great point that many people overlook when looking at other countries, especially ones where there has been revolution. It doesn?t justify violent purges and the like, but there is probably a tipping point where they are unavoidable. I?m glad that America is unlikely to become a place where that happens.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            Democracy is not a panacea. It simply reflects the values and mores of the populace and, consequently, can create dangerous outcomes in societies that do not have a tradition of liberal democracy or Enlightenment values.

            Democratically elected government is American in America, British in Britain, Palestinian in Palestine. It reflects the nature of the culture at large. More accurately, it reflects the will of the party, group, or coalition that manages to win a controlling share of the government, but while these don?t track perfectly with the preferences of the culture as a whole, they provide an imperfect reflection.

            This is why, in my opinion, promoting democracy worldwide is a fool?s errand. It will only promote American interests in those countries that have values like America?s.

            As far as Iraq and Afghanistan go, there are no easy answers. I think that both wars were justified and the right thing to do. Both are vital to the security of the United States and our allies, and Iraq in particular represented the coalescence of high ideals (getting rid of a dictator) and pursuing American interests (a more stable Middle East).

            I have my doubts about the viability of freedom-friendly democracies in all majority Muslim countries because of the opposition to individual liberty that is inherent in the religion (with the exception of the early days of the religion, a good chunk of al-Andalus, etc). The closest thing that we see to a Western democracy is Turkey, but paradoxically, its relative stability and Western-ness is due largely to its secular nature, the suppression of external religious symbols, universal suffrage, and other contra-Sharia aspects of society. I can think of no other Islamic country that would tolerate atheists, as Turkey does.

            At any rate, the Obama administration needs to be held accountable for their contribution to the coming Egyptian disaster. Here is an article from November, which describes how the administration took a public stance against Mubarak. I would not be surprised if the tacit support of the U.S. President contributed to the boldness of the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical groups.

          • acat

            and Iraq is likely to slip …

            There is something inherently wrong with democracy… H. Beam Piper

            Mew

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            That’s why I see Turkey as a paradox and a great example of why liberal democracy and Islam don’t make for good bedfellows. I suspect that a lot of the growing unrest in Turkey is due to desecularization and the rise of visibly Muslim citizens (i.e. not enforcing headscarf and veil bans).

          • JSobieski

            because Islamo-Fascism is on the rise. Religious tolerance is giving way to violence against minority races, religions, and peoples.

            Democracy in such a context is to merely to provide armed thugs with states.

            There will be more Irans in the coming years. People would be wise to consider that Iran is not comprised of Arabs and that Iran is one of only two Shia countries.

            The impact on the ME when some version of an Iranian-like state occurs that is both Sunni and Arab will be huge. People in neighboring countries wouldn’t fear it–they would welcome its expansion as a sign of Muslim resurgence.

          • acat

            … and it’s a shock to me that the State Department, given how skilled it’s current leadership has been at wedging us apart, doesn’t seem to understand how to play Sunni off against Shi’a, Persian off against Arab against Turk, etc. etc. gven how well they play us…

            Mew

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            since that window opened, many have gone thru it, and not all have been white folks with Bibles and the world is better off for it.

            There is something inherently wrong with Kings, dictators and oligarchs…Mike DeVine

          • JSobieski

            The Bibles reference is also a cheap shot, albeit not as cheap.

            Tibet respected human rights before China took over. Neither white nor Christian.

            India has both human rights and the ballot. Neither white nor Christian.

            Most of Latin America has basic human rights. Not white.

            Russia. White. Christian. No rights, no real ballot.

            Nobody is saying that White people and Christianity are necessary for democracy or immune from slippage.

            What people actually believe and hold dear matters.

            Slipping because of general corruption, laziness, etc. is different than slipping because of the rise of a very specific and identifiable force on the global stage.

            Its not that people need to read the Bible to make democracy work. Its that 50% of the Koran is pretty much antithetical to making democracy work. So when 99% of the population looks to the Koran as THE source of guidance, you are going to encounter problems.

            What makes Hong Kong so uniquely different from the rest of mainland Asia? Not its religion. Not its races. Its values. Fortunately for us, the rest of Asia is becoming more like Hong Kong.

            In the ME, Turkey is becoming more like Iran, and the trend everywhere is the wrong direction.

            To ignore that is unwise.

          • acat

            Did you perhaps miss the “Not” in front of “all are white with bibles” ?

            Mew

          • JSobieski

            with the word “not” that the other position is as if the word “not” is missing.

            For example, if two people are arguing about taxes and one person says “economic growth cannot be achieved without tax increases” isn’t the implication that the other person is arguing that it can?

            In any case, GC called me and set me on the straight and narrow path like charistmatic baptist preacher . . .

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            being the benevolent dictator, well just for a little while.

            There sure would be lot’s of guys on meathooks.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            to people freed from tyranny after we remove regimes that wage war on us.

            There is no panacea, but the peace between democracies speaks for it and while it is easier for nations to conform to our version if raised on Judeo-Christian values, we see in many non-Christian nations that all people yearn to be free and can adopt it OVER TIME.

            We have been attacked by tyrannical dictatorships exclusively so far in our history since 1900. We were attacked by nations that did not reflect the will of their people…or did the people favor attacking the US? I don’t know for sure. We could well face somewhat enhanced threats from nations that overthrow regimes and then vote in people that will attack us, but then we will respond and the next elections in those countries will be changed!

            These cases have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, but 911 and Iraq’s war against Kuwait and us via the ceasefire showed that

          • aesthete

            had nationally-supported and elected governments (read “Hitler’s Willing Executioners”).

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          come to having trouble from any democracy has been France’s duplicity on Iraq.

          Now, get specific on how Bush/Ameerica’s standing up for freedom causes evil people to rise up against dictators and how democracy doesn’t work any more than backing dictators?

          I think America did right to back anti-communist dictators given the great danger of a nuclear USSR. I also think that after the Cold War that 911 showed that the old stability argument no longer worked given Iraq.

          Afghanistan and Iraq waged war against the US and we invaded and removed their regimes. Now, do you claim that we shouldn’t defend ourselves since that could cause others to rise up?

          Or do you claim the uprisings are due to the fact that we offered them freedom rather than merely imposing another dictator?

          Of course, Bush didn’t invade either Lebanon, Tunis or Egypt.

          Moreover, both good and bad people can rise up against good and bad governments.

          Can’t see how standing for self government and democracy can some how be blamed for uprisings. Self government and democracy have been shown to be the long term way to democracy. Yes, securing freedom can be messy but I think its worth it, or would you rather have stayed under King Georg’s thumb?

          I didn’t think so.

          It is the fault of evildoers that do evil, not the USA.

          • Tbone

            and mob rule. Both rely on the concept of majority but that is where it ends.

          • acat

            And we’re not, despite the screeching of the Libs, a “democracy”, we’re a representative republic with some democratic processes.

            Seems to me that, as long as we continue to use the mental shorthand of “democracy” for what we really want, and “religion” for the theocratic religious-government hybrid that is islam* , we should not be surprised that we cannot make it work everywhere…

            Mew

            * note to Martin Knight – yes, I respect that there is a purely religious variant of Islam in the world, and I do hope you can spread it, but for most of the muslims, especially in the middle east, the day-to-day of governance is either directly by the religious leadership or by their surrogates and at their convenience. I cite Iran and the House of Saud as examples.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            If America were a democracy, instead of a constitutional, democratic republic, we may not have made it more than a few years.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            republic with minority rights. But my point doesn’t depend on those distinctions. My point is that America should not be blamed for uprisings because we have stood for Liberty and for offering it after we remove regimes.

          • JSobieski

            I agree that the US isn’t to blame for any of these uprisings.

            We should however do a better job of framing what is important. Ballots are less important than values.

            We spent a lot of time promoting ballots, and little time promoting values.

            I for one NEVER heard President Bush promote the importance of religious tolerance in addressing either Iraq or Afghanistan.

            We have no equivalent of Radio Free Europe promoting those values.

            Instead, we plead through back channels when some Christian converts in Afghanistan are given life sentences for the mere act of converting.

            In Pakistan, a country with plenty of elections under its belt, a governor spoke out against blasphemy laws. The person who killed the governor is being hailed as a hero by “moderate” LAWYERS in Pakistan.

            We need to drop the shorthand. Better to let ballot counting become part of the human rights shorthand, than vice versa.

            Shorthand is for people who know what you are talking about.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            understand that I am not advocating pure democracy/mob rule, including you. Now, many people here at Redstate prefer semantics to substance and the defense of words rather than concepts. I am not one of them. When most anyone says democracy, they mean our form of same.

            We don’t have time to write War and Peace or define the word “is” for every commenter at Redstate.

            I have to work!

            smile

          • JSobieski

            For example, I never heard Bush address freedom of religion in the ME. I am not someone looking to interpret W’s words in a negative way.

            The US should have engaged in a pro-western values propaganda effort as a response to 9/11. We didn’t. That was an error.

          • aesthete

            that protects minority and religious rights when you say “democracy”, then we don’t have democracy in either Iraq or Afghanistan, and the point is moot.

            Ballot-counting just provides a false sense of legitimacy for what a country is doing: I’ve seen countless progs defend their views that 50.1% of the populace should be able to force their lifestyle and choices on the other 49.9%, and I see no reason to accept the false premise that solo democracy is an unalloyed good (though it is a good in the context of western values).

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • Tbone

            it means an elected form of government as is generally recognized in the West that is governed by a rule of law.

            Mob rule can be very basic or very sophisticated and organized. However, there lacks a rule of law as opposed to rule by decree.

            It is entirely possible and not unusual to have a very unfair democracy. OTH, you can have a relatively fair dictatorship.

            There is plenty of steak, but the bone has a pretty sharp end and a big T to shove it in with.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • JSobieski

            We also imposed our values.

            I agree that a lot of this discussion can come of as blame America first, and that such a take on events is 100% wrong.

            However, we would be wise to be more humble about the raw power of democracy and our ability to impose.

            People in Afghanistan and Iraq are imprisoned for crimes like blasphemy and converting to Christianity. Sadam was a monster, the Christians of Iraq arguably had an easier life then they do now (there is a massive Christian exodus out of Iraq). There are many countries in the ME in which the Muslim Brotherhood would easily win free and fair elections—and that would be the end of both freedom and fairness.

            The central premise that democracy requires certain cultural attributes for democracy to really succeed is 100% true.

          • aesthete

            that imposing our values worked on Germany and Japan precisely because they weren’t that far off from our values to begin with: a scant 12 years before the Nazis came along, the Weimar Republic was a vibrant democracy, and the Japanese already had a Prussia-like system after the conclusion of the Meiji restoration that was hijacked by its military. S Korea is the only example I can think of where we successfully transferred our values to a country that did not have them initially, and even then, there were many factor that worked in our favor: homogeneous population, self-selection of people who preferred liberal values (the hardcore leftists all went to the North), a willingness to try out Western ideals, and other factors. (Additionally, S Korea was a military dictatorship, albeit a somewhat liberal one, until around the 80s.)

          • JSobieski

            no religion about killing/subjugating infidels, and the were clearly saved from ruin from the US (N Korea was and is clearly a hell hole).

            Add 30 years, a decent amount of sunshine and water . .. you have yourself a decent country.

            Korea didn’t become a democracy in the GC meaning of the word until after human rights were respected, rule of law established, and economic development had begun.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • Jack_Savage

            That will never happen again, ever. Having 100,000 people killed in a firebombing does a lot to help a populace reconsider their form of government and general attitude toward war.

            Agree on the general points, but I fear the days of strong, principled leaders are behind us.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
        • JSobieski

          “Many of the countries in Eastern Europe and the Balkans that found themselves behind the Iron Curtain voluntarily let themselves in by voting in overwhelming numbers for communist and socialist parties”

          I do not deny that there were home grown communists in those countries. However, the word “voluntarily” is totally inappropriate. Russian soldiers were monitoring the post WWII “elections”. Marxist-Leninists were engaged in what Marxist-Leninists are always engaged in, and they had the power of the Soviety military to back them up.

          Many countries in Eastern Europe were genuinely western looking, with a love for human rights and dignity, the very values that are required to make democracy work.

          If the democrats had tanks in the streets of your neighborhood, would your vote be voluntary?

          If democrats had tanks in the streets of your neighborhood, would Republicans even be on the ballot?

          • aesthete

            East Germany, and the Baltic states. However, the Czech Republic and some of the Balkan states certainly did so of their own volition. Good quibble, though: I agree that Poland and the others would have been fine German/Japanese-like democracies had they not been under the heel of the Soviets.

          • JSobieski

            They didn’t need the “assistance” that was given to Germany/Japan, they just needed assistance in getting the occupying armies out.

            I don’t disagree that there were insiders within all of the “eastern” European countries. However, you are still talking about a vocal minority.

            Unless you can establish that 33%+ supported the occupiers, I think the word “voluntarily” is unfair.

            There is absolutely no way that more than 33% of people in the Baltic states supported incorporation into the USSR. The fact that those nations even exist today is a credit to a strong desire of independence that defied all hope for centuries. Cultures like that don’t “voluntarily” hand over power to Soviet puppets.

          • redneck_hippie

            Agree. Here’s hoping we stay true to our love of independence.

          • aesthete

            Poland-Lithuania was famous for its stringent and conservative constitution, where it was almost impossible for government to get anything done. (that’s sounding better and better all the time…) Not sure if the Baltic states would have gone democratic all on their lonesome (judging from Finland, I think they would have, though), but they surely wouldn’t have gone in for Stalin and communism: this goes double for Poland, which was ravaged by the USSR. Some of the Balkan states, and the Czech Republic, did vote themselves communism, though: Czechoslovakia, for instance, was very bitter with the West for having essentially ceded their country to the Nazis, and had not experienced the brunt of Soviet occupation that Poland and others had. This, plus sympathy for the communist and socialist parties persecuted by the Nazis, translated into a strong plurality for the communist party in Czechoslovakia (~40%, IIRC), with other leftist parties picking up seats, as well. Czechoslovakia learned to hate communism after they were behind the Iron Curtain (and, of course, stripped of their democratic rights), but initially, the communist government was supported by much of the populace.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    real bad. And yet, we still give billions of dollars of aid, even military aid to these unstable mid east governments.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      Has anyone had a talk w/ the CinC regarding what these weapons would be capable of in the hands of an enemy?

      • http://www.scragged.com petrarch

        Let’s hope we wisely allowed Egypt a verrrrry small inventory of them.

        IIRC, the ayatollahs inherited some pretty decent American fighter jets sold to the Shah, but they could never get much good out of them because we wouldn’t sell them any spares and there weren’t but a few on hand. They had to cobble their own fixes which weren’t anything like as good.

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

          Older Ah-64s were genuine Class IX Slots (mispelling in case ther kiddies were online).

          • red_oakster

            Mubarak is one kleptocrat among many in a kleptocratic regime. The army is not about to turn over its power and influence to some street protests. If Mubarak has outlived his viability, the army will send him on his way. It has a good arrangement with the west and is not about to let it go without a fight. The Muslim Brotherhood, moreover, is not capable of uniting the country to overthrow the regime.

            This is not Tunisia and it’s not Iran.

          • acat

            where the “army” dropped their weapons and fled…

            Mew

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    I’ve felt for some time that Egypt was in a downward spiral of no return.

    The Muslim Brotherhood has had Egypt by the nads for some time. And due to Mubarak having had such control over the country for decades – with good old American backing (because hey, a minor baddy is better than a big baddy) – they’ve become a inept in their authority. Sure, they could keep the MB under control, but they emasculated themselves and their country’s future at the same time.

    Even had the swell of democratic prostests not swept from Iran to the Magrib and back to the Middle East, the Mubarak dictatorship would still probably fall to the Muslim Brotherhood. Mubarak’s son has been seen as very weak. When Hosni dies, a power vacuum will/would occur, whether or not his son replaces him.

    The MB would exert control over the Mubarak administration. And as for the democracy movement? Hamstrung from the start due to the way the Mubarak government has squelched freedom for so long. The MB has the infrastructure and friends to overpower any democratic movement.

    Egypt is surrounded by governments friendly to the Muslim Brotherhood: Libya and Sudan. Combine that with Syria, Lebanon and Iran. Iraq is effectively playing Switzerland right now.

    Israel has been playing with Egypt like the US has, but soon they’ll be completely isolated with the exception of perhaps Jordan. Considering how Israel has been reacting to Lebanon, Syria and Iran over the last four years, I suspect that Israel will not engage in any war with Egypt.

    All so Biblical.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    I think the myth of that has already been deconstructed sufficiently by streiff above. I just note that in 2009, Bambi displayed not a bit of interest in any “universal rights” possibly belonging to Iranians unhappy that the despotic government had yet again staged a mock election with phony results.

    I personally saw videos of protesting citizens being shot in the street by the Iranian government. IIRC, there were widespread reports of arrests, disappearances, and rapes of detainees perpetrated by the internal police. Bambi and the whole administration, and the Leftist Media sat on their hands, buttoned their lips, and dutifully reported on the day’s stock market, weather, sports, and Hollywood foibles.

    But now, now that pro-Islamist protests are happening that might result in installing MB forces in power, hey, he’s all about the “rights” of the people to riot, burn, and destabilize.

    Yeah.

    • Finrod

      Obama’s not too fond of the “universal rights of assembly and expression” of the Tea Partiers, either.

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
      • E Pluribus Unum
        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

          that are working on clones of SB1070. And I suspect he’ll really be pissed of at Kansans.

          • aesthete
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            SB1070 here in AZ. He’s doing some work lobbying other states to pass similar legislation and he’s drafting legislation in Kansas to take on voter fraud head on. It will be model legislation for other Red states and hopefully will give us the teeth to go after SEIU etal with RICO prosecutions. And to hell with the DoJ and their so-called voting rights section.

          • aesthete

            I knew that the guy who wrote SB1070 was a lawyer from Kansas, just didn’t know that he was SoS, too. That sounds interesting: the guy’s certainly prolific, that much is true.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    –”the Obama Administration seems to think it has found a working partner in the Muslim Brotherhood” — should frighten the daylights out of anyone who knows anything about the Muslim Brotherhood.

    The Muslim Brotherhood is the primary generator and supporter of Muslim TERRORIST groups all over the world. (And, knowing that, it should terrify us that the Muslim Brotherhood is also the parent organization of every major Muslim advocacy group in the U.S.,including CAIR, ISNA, MSA, et al. [Read the landmark report Sharia: The Threat to America issued last year.]

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      and now it looks like Obama is going to make the same mistake. A very good friend from Ethiopia has long told me that Egypt is the most important nation in the Arab and Muslim worlds and that it is vital that it move toward freedom.

      I fear for the world tonight.

      • Lloyd Davis

        He knows exactly what he’s doing.

        Thats the problem.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            I dislike armchair psychology, and so I was turned off by the premise from the get-go, but I don?t think that he makes a very effective case in The Roots of Obama?s Rage. His anti-colonialism is pretty obvious, but D?Souza relies far too much on speculation (especially the idea that Obama has spent his career trying to be like his missing father).

            Stanley Kurtz?s idea in the book Radical-In-Chief (that Obama is a socialist and has been involved deeply with Democratic Socialism for almost 30 years) is much more defensible,and his book is meticulously documented. Kurtz takes a much more detached, academic position than D?Souza, which makes for a more dry read, but it?s a much more troubling (and important, in my opinion) book.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            But I think both D’Souza and Kurtz are right and having read D’Souza’s book, I found that he relied mostly on facts from Obama’s own words and not psychology to back it up.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            that he relied mostly on facts from Obama?s own words and not psychology to back it up.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            If D?Souza had claimed that Obama is anti-colonialist or that he takes certain anti-colonial positions, that would be one thing. He asserts that Obama is filled with secret rage and is trying to fulfill his father?s anti-colonial ambitions, though. He draws a lot of conclusions from the text of Obama?s book, but they?re often pretty speculative. It reminds me in some ways of the birther phenomenon, where the person latches onto an idea and uses facts selectively (and unconsciously) to bolster and illustrate the argument. Remember, anti-colonialism is a flavor of anti-imperialism, and this can be inspired by Marx, Che, and Ayers directly, without the need for building one?s whole life around trying to realize the dreams of an absent father. This is why I call it armchair psychology. He quotes selectively to explain what Obama really meant in parts and to create his own narrative.

            The idea that Obama is trying to destroy America to fulfill his father?s unrealized dreams (I?m exaggerating a bit) strikes me as pretty silly, especially when an alternative hypothesis makes more sense: Obama is an Ivy League, American progressive/liberal who leans left, is well-connected to radical groups and individuals, doesn?t understand or believe in American exceptionalism, and believes that equal outcomes should be the goal of a society more than equal opportunity.

          • aesthete

            I cannot think of a single action undertaken by Obama that a white progressive would not at least consider taking. Stretching for an answer in other sources seems silly, to me.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            with a bust of Ward Churchill?

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • ZootSuit

            Barack Obama is nothing more than a radical white liberal in blackface. Indeed, I have many liberal Black friends still in Chicago (i.e. who know his early political history and I am not even talking about his lawsuit to get Alice Palmer off the ballot) who agree with me. What I find really strange and disheartening is that so many of his detractors want to think Obama is something “different” when in reality there are literally millions of people like him in this country, most of them White.

            Obama’s association with Jeremiah Wright got all the headlines but most of his critics don’t want to believe that Obama had several longstanding arguments with Wright over the years. It was Bill Ayers who Obama agreed with far more readily. Barack Obama is far more Bill Ayers than Jeremiah Wright.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            don’t be such a stranger.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            marxist globetrotting anti-american mother.

          • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

            I agree with you 100 percent! Bill Ayers is the real devil behind everything that’s going on. I have felt that since the very beginning. I don’t know Bill Ayers personally, but back in my own radical days, I knew some people a lot like him, so I feel that I understand him better than do a lot of Americans — although the real problem is that most Americans don’t even bother to think about him at all.

            Here’s the latest on Ayers. Gave me the willies so bad, I could barely get to sleep last night…

            “Did Muslim Brotherhood learn ‘Day of Rage’ Egypt protest tactics from Obama allies Bill Ayers and Code Pink?”

  • fotophun

    going to recommend that all remain Civil??

    or is the media going to somehow spin that is the right’s fault or even Bush’s

  • Uma Richie

    Putting that in jeopardy is a good way to ensure gas prices rise to Al Gore’s target.

    • Common_Cents

      He has been quoted of wanting to find ways to boost our prices to the levels of Europe.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Which is it?

  • Read Chesterton

    What are the chances that, for the second time, an Israel hating, Marxist loving Democrat POTUS will turn a key ME ally over to a second Israel hating, Marxist loving radical Islamist faction? All in the name of “preserving democracy.”

    I’m not fooled this time. These guys are out to destroy Israel, and if they can do enough damage to get the U.S. completely out of the M.E., they will chalk it up as a bonus.

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    Watch this video clip if you feel like being peace-loving and all that sort of goodness we’re supposed to respect and understand even if we disagree.

    Raw Video: Man Shot in Egypt Protest.

    While we’re at it, here’s a link to video of a dual stoning – a woman and a man – by the Taliban. Those guys are ‘peace partners’ to the administration also, right ? Pretty sure he did say he’d talk with them about life and going green, plus eating properly.

  • throwback59

    “Who lost the whole damned Middle East?”
    Well, we’ll know the answer to that one, won’t we?

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      to the Islamists. Not one Democrat save Joe Lieberman could be trusted with national security.

      If it is true that Obama sees the Muslim Brotherhood as a legitimate alternative to rule Egypt, then that Biden-predicted moment is here and we lost.

      • aesthete
        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • bobmontgomery

    The Department of State is an empty shell.
    The Obama administration is a vile abomination and THIS IS NOT ABOUT SEX.
    The Department of Defense is a willing accomplice in its downward spiral into uselessness.
    And we are two years out.
    Where are the leaders, the patriots? If Israel goes we are completely and utterly morally bankrupt.

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    From a website called “Mashable” with links to legit news items.

    Reports are coming in that Egypt is now under an Internet and SMS blackout, just hours before a new series of major protests are planned against the regime of President Hosni Mubarak.

    Sebone, a major Egyptian service provider based in Italy, is reporting that no Internet traffic is entering or exiting the country as of 12:30 AM Egyptian time. Reporters and citizens on-the-ground are also reporting that they are experiencing Internet and SMS outages.

    ?I suspect the internet cutoff is just a fraction of what the government has in store for Friday,? CNN?s Ben Wederman, who is on the ground in Egypt, said on Twitter earlier today.

    Better fasten your seat belts.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil_truth

    …if the Muslim Brotherhood does take over Egypt.

    What the Muslim Brotherhood (and the Grand Mufti of
    Jerusalem) failed to accomplish working with the Nazis during WWII, their heirs will try anew. And with Hezbollah and Hamas on the same team regarding Israel, things could get even more grim.

    More info on their historical Nazi links:

    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=764

  • OccamsRazor

    There remains a macropressure or two. ;)

  • Adjoran

    But he isn’t exactly Stalin, either. The Shah repressed democratic movements beyond the parliamentary reforms he permitted, but the main target and subject of nearly all the coercive interrogation was the islamists. In the meantime, his people achieved a standard of living unprecedented in the region. Iran was the most open society in the islamic world, and the only one to be a close ally of Israel.

    Now we have an inkling why he repressed the dirty bahstahds.

    Mubarak is not as benevolent, but he faces a similar threat. I can’t celebrate him being deposed until I see what replaces his regime.

    • gekster

      he did nothing to stop the tunnels into the Gaza strip.
      Something he could have well controlled.

    • Jack_Savage

      First and foremost, people in the Middle East know a strong horse when they see one, and a weak horse when they see one. Right now, they see a very, very weak horse in Obama, and the Islamists have basically been given the green light to do whatever they want to do through this inept fool and the boneheads in the State Department. This is the price for division in this country regarding Iraq, and Democrats bear sole responsibility for it.

      Mubarak has been extending the leash to these Islamist thugs, and they have responded, for instance, by persecuting Christians in small ways (throwing Christian teachers out of the country, for example) and big ways (bombings and massacres).

      The Islamists will take advantage of the chaos by promising peace for power, and Obama will have lost Egypt in exactly the same way that Carter lost Iran.

      BTW, did Gibbs issue a statement like this…

      “?This isn?t about support or opposition to leaders ? it?s about the support universal rights of assembly and expression. We criticize actions that restrict those values,? Gibbs told ABC News.”

      …when the protesters in Iran took to the streets and were murdered?

  • http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/ reaganiterepublicanresistance

    Sorry to say, many of you are rooting for the wrong side in this one…
    EGYPT: Be Careful What You Wish For…


  • dajeeps

    Amind all of the understandable cynicism, that is the question at the bottom of it all. Sure, they could end up with an Islamic version of the Jacobins and Napoleon, but we don’t know that they will. Given what has gone on in Iran over the last few years, I can tell that there are other forces at work besides the ones that brought the world the Iranian religious dictatorship and only time will tell which path wins out. Given that I am not prepared to pass judgement as I strongly object to proping up an evil dictator in the name of stability because we think it better for ourselves than the unknown. We do not have that right, but on the contrary, we have the obligation to support freedom and self-governance wherever it breaks out, and we should be prepared to help them, not put them down.

    • Jack_Savage

      And worthy of consideration. The short, glib answer would be that assuming the best in this situation is an example of the triumph of hope over experience.
      The trend in the Middle East seems to be government by armed radical Islamists. I am afraid that unless these protesters want true democracy, and are willing to take up arms against these Islamist oppressors, the end result will be what we saw in Iran.

      • JSobieski

        they will likely be overwhelmed in impact by the violent Muslim Brotherhood types.

        In the Russian Revolution of 1917, there were many earnest democrats in the mix, but idealistic college students and shop keepers are no match for the hoodlums that communism and Islamists can produce.

        • Jack_Savage

          Create or encourage chaos, then move in to either take power or seize a political advantage. The process for installing authoritarianism hasn’t changed much, even allowing for time or geography.

          How have you been, BTW?

          • JSobieski

            After watching that film, any answer besides “I am doing great” would reveal an absolute lack of perspective. Thanks for asking.

            You?

          • Jack_Savage

            Haven’t seen it, but it is on my list.
            Business (commercial construction) is still on life support, but we manage to sell a profitable job here and there. Family is well and so am I, so things are OK for right now.

            Take care…and now back to the discussion….

    • streiff

      how you can look at the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood and think that is a pro-freedom, pro-democracy movement is little short of stunning.

      We actually have the right to do whatever we perceive, true or no, to be in our national interests. That’s what nations do.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    to, well, I don’t know- Saudi Arabia? Then we will see how much Obama talks about meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood to understand their perspective.

    This is nothing but a radical movement co-opting populist sentiment and themes as a means of grabbing power. I wouldn’t be cheering too loudly until all the facts are understood. I would also be careful about linking these events as some type of holistic, popular Middle-East movement when the only common thread is a radical Islamist group.

    Some of these governments are badly in need of democratic reforms. But they have existed for a long time due to the unholy balance they provide. With that arbiter gone there will be a vacuum filled by those with the biggest guns. Based on a quick review of Middle Eastern groups who do you think that is?

    Mr Obama has shown he has no love for democratic movements whether in Iran or Venezuela. He has hosted the communist Chinese as some type of conquering hero role-model dismissing their many serious dictatorial transgressions; not to mention the fact they exist as the antithesis of democracy.

    These despicable Middle Eastern groups know Mr. Obama is either sympathetic or apathetic and have used that posture to gain legitimacy and a foothold against governments they seek to forcefully and undemocratically replace. If this situation continues on the present course and these groups gain power, we will rue the day it occurred either with our governments consent or lack of forceful diplomatic action.

    • Jack_Savage

      Well said.

  • Tbone

    but how much more proof do you need?

    WTF do you think he was doing in Egypt? Visiting the Pyramids? Handing out Rev. Wright sermon tapes?

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      against Obama to justify the assertion that he sees the Muslim Brotherhood as a serious a working partner, force for democratic change and with whom he is sympatico?

      • aesthete

        I don’t necessarily think so. I think that it is more a result of Obama’s lovefest with himself than a serious belief in democracy, a la Bush. I do assume, at the very least, that BO doesn’t want a foreign policy disaster under his watch (if merely for the sake of his re-election prospects), and that his administration is at some level proceeding under the assumption that their actions will not lead to a disaster.

        IMO, Obama thinks that he can talk people into, and out of, anything, and that his speeches and the like really are motivators for change: you’ll note that whenever he has a problem or a crisis, his first course of action is talk without specifics, and that he has the tendency to believe that he and his followers are uniquely the “right people”. With that in mind, I do believe that he thinks that whatever “wrong” beliefs (again, according to him) that the Muslim Brotherhood has are correctable, and that he’s the man to do just that. Obama would just love to see himself at the helm of a “tear down that wall” moment.

        I do believe that many in his administration do legitimately see them as a potential partner, though, and certainly as superior to Mubarak, for whatever reason. I also believe that many leftists (and a clutch of conservatives and libertarians) naively but sincerely believe that even the poisoned tree of the Muslim Brotherhood will yield good fruit, due to its superficially democratic character. I’ve certainly seen some of all political stripes call for withdrawing support from Mubarak’s regime based on these protests: a bad call, IMO.

        On a side note, is it just me, or does the “Muslim Brotherhood” sound like a group of X-Men supervillains?

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          that the protests would inevitably be taken over and used by the extremists. It does appear that there are many secular discontents and not just the MB, that sounds more like a labor union to me than cartoons!

          • aesthete

            We’ll see. The Iranian Revolution had secular components, as well, so I think that Obama is still playing with fire if he thinks he can ride this tiger. (How’s that for a mixed metaphor?)

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            a force for stability and reform!

          • gekster

            I’m also hoping that Egypt wants more freedom, not more religion.
            I know the Islamists are looking for thier chance.
            It’s just like Iran with Carter.
            Egypt just doesn’t have an Ayatolla to arrive and unite the masses.

          • aesthete

            Egypt is essentially the intellectual center for Islam, and one of the many intelligent (but anti-western) clerics could emerge to lead the Islamists. Still, we will see if the secularists can overcome: there was a nice moment where secular Muslims defended the Egyptian Copts protesting with them from being assaulted. More of that would be nice.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
      • JSobieski

        than people give them credit for. MB embraces slow jihad as well as fast jihad. They have a lot more of a PR effort than say the Taliban, and Obama has indicated that the US would deal with the less radical Taliban types.

        BO doesn’t need to think of the MB as a serious partner for BO to make missteps and for MB to gain ground.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          BHO is sympatico etc with a terrorist group, as the author did, is a very serious charge to make without sufficient evidence and of a very different assertion in KIND than what you describe which is mere negligence.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            but not MB

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8289686/Egypt-protests-Americas-secret-backing-for-rebel-leaders-behind-uprising.html

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8289698/Egypt-protests-secret-US-document-discloses-support-for-protesters.html

          • JSobieski

            as purposeful turncoats.

            That BO, a man who knows leftists who play for keeps and a man who spent time in Indonesia, has family in Sudan, etc. doesn’t understand the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood is an indictment of his intellectual curiosity.

            I find no evidence in BO’s actions and words that reveals he has spent any amount of time thinking about anything in any unconventional way.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            we rightly and accurately criticize him. There is too much that we can back up, like what you said, rather than making the stretch to claim he is sympatico etc with a terrorist group.

          • JSobieski
        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          than have one’s smartness judged by actual faster results.

          • JSobieski

            The Muslim Brotherhood has many spinoff and subsidiary groups—I would say that the “non-violent” groups are causing more damage in the US than the violent ones are.

            The most effective aspect of the USSR campaigns against the US were the efforts by the KGB to grow otherwise autonomous home grown organizations and make them more power instruments of harm to the West. The Muslim Brotherhood is having similar effectiveness.

            Groups like CAIR are really just Muslim Brotherhood franchises.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            killed 3000+ Americans and counting from 1993-2011.

          • Tbone

            These riots, instigated by the Obama administration, will be just the cover needed for the radical elements to usurp power. Egypt will become Iran 2.0.

            Obama went to Egypt to geenlight these guys with his phony democracy speech. Obama is in full support of Islamic terrorism.

            You guys need to wake up.

          • Tbone

            http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/28/gop-conference-chairman-america-must-stand-with-egypt/#more-145059

      • runner12

        myself asking as the situation is unfolding in Egypt. The biggest criticism I have of the Obama Administration is that it looked distracted and unprepared when this crisis began. They shot off their mouths without assessing the situation and looked like buffoons. They have since settled down and as hard as it is for me to say, have done the right thing and maintained uncommitted to supporting either side (so far at least, although I never underestimate this administration to screw things up).

        The problem is that there are probably many in Egyptian protestors who really want freedom and democracy. But they may simply become useful idiots when the Muslim Brotherhood attempts to take over the country. Make no mistake, the MB are dangerous and evil people. The best outcome would be that Mubarak stays and institutes some meaningful reform. That may be difficult.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • bobmontgomery

    …to have these discussions among ourselves about ‘democracy’, foreign cultures, et cetera, as long as we are all on the same page about who WE are, and as long as there is straight talk about THE THREAT(s) to us. What we cannot have is our leaders? not calling evil by it’s name. We may not be able to defeat hegemonists or slavemasters in one fell swoop, but detente and ‘outreach’ have not worked. Arguments that “we”, whoever that is, try to “impose” democracy, whether “we” are successful or not, are not central.
    What we need right now is a little enlightened self-interest.
    Perhaps East is East and West is West is true…don’t know. But I think America can walk and chew gum at the same time.

    • bobmontgomery

      And speaking of our leaders, do you remember the days when Senators sand Representatives Republican and Democrat alike, but especially Democrat, and especially Jewish Democrat in re MidEast affairs, weren’ t hesitant about speaking out on foreign policy, weren’t content to just sit back in their little PC domestic agenda worlds and let the State Department tell the world what our values are? We are now looking for a new national leader. Let’s see if what we hear is crickets.

  • bk

    Curfew starting now and the Army has supposedly been ordered to take to the streets to enforce it. This is a definite flashpoint.

    http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

  • js1019

    For those of you who believe in Biblical prophecy, what we are witnessing is nothing short of amazing.
    For those of you rolling your eyes at me as, “oh boy, here we go, another bible kook”, you can stop reading if you like.

    We live in a leaderless time, which will lead to Israel being alone and isolated. This is the only way the Bible’s prophetic words can be fulfilled and while it is a very scary time for the world, Christians need only to look up with hope as we know these things must happen for Christ’s return.

    Yes, these issues of wars, earthquakes, famine, disease, etc., have occurred throughout history, however, we have never lived in a time when the whole world can see these events unfold at the same time. I don’t believe this will happen today, or tomorrow, more to the point that we are to recognize the season.

    Our president IS a muslim by birthright. There is no denying that, and while his claims of being a Christian ring hollow because of his actions towards Islam and muslims, we should not be surprised of the similarities to Carter. Obama is trying to straddle a fence that cannot be straddled. By it’s own doctrine in the Quran, Islam is at war with the rest of the world. There is no peace in there doctrine. You either convert and be subservient to born muslims, or you die.

    Suffice it to say, we are living in extraordinary times and this is not the time to have a weak leader.

    Perhaps the media may be regretting not vetting this president. Once their lives are threatened, I doubt they will hesitate to through Obama under the bus.

    • streiff

      Besides, after Armageddon we’ll have Milton Freedman and Adam Smith back.

      • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

        They’ve renamed Revelations the Book of Milt!

  • proudmarinemom

    Did Obama send him?

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/ayers-dohrn-helped-organize-flotilla-group

    • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

      you know

  • Ausonius

    Unemployment among males under 40 in the Middle East is now flowering: you see them in France and other Islamescing areas: standing on street corners, glaring at passers-by, smoking and drinking (oh yes!), they have no wives, no jobs, and no futures except for hand-outs from welfare.

    Islamo-fascism gives them a purpose. This demographic bomb has been ticking for a good number of years, and it is no surprise that now things are exploding. By not investing in a free economy, and allowing basic freedoms, the Middle Eastern dictatorships have sown the seeds of their own destruction.

    But of course that is why a dictatorship is a dictatorship! :) Why would they be giving up their own power willingly?

    Uprisings of “the people” must not be romanticized: the American Revolution is the great exception. The vast majority of such uprisings fail, and if they succeed, they often lead to something worse than what they replaced.

    The Peasant Revolts in the 1500′s, catalyzed by Martin Luther (who was violently against such revolts), and marked by demands for greater freedoms, all failed.

    The Revolutions of 1848 failed.

    The French rose up for “Liberty, Equality, and Brotherhood” and reaped The Terror, followed by the slaughter of the Napoleonic Wars.

    The Russians ended up with Stalin, and the Chinese with Mao: between 75-150 million slaughtered as a result.

    We shall see what happens: expect nothing but incompetence from BIG BRObama, a man with NO sense of History.

    • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

      Sure economic difficulties are a part of it but this is the direct result of middle eastern despotism which is increasingly incompatible with a world in which even dirt poor people can watch videos of people all around the world enjoying more freedoms and wealth than they have.

      It is also the product of a revolution in personal communication that allows spontaneous organization of mobs.

      Economic problems are just a catalyst for the unleashing of years of unhappiness.

      My sincere hope is that the middle east does not embrace an Islamist movement that will make them all worse off, but that might well happen.

      • Ausonius

        I agree that unemployment is not THE only cause of this!

        Such events always have a variety of minor and major causes.

        I would hold that mass unemployment is a major cause of the unrest.

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Clinton appeals for calm, restraint from Egyptian security forces and protesters.

    Video here: http://www.breitbart.tv/clinton-calls-for-calm-in-egypt

    — — — — — —

    She talks of freedom and rights. — This from the woman who guaranteed ratification of The UN Small Arms Treaty and disarming Americans.

    Mme. Secretary, Ms. Clinton: Go spit up a rope. You’re backing the wrong side of crazy here. Mubarak’s a dictator and the Shari’a-is-everything maniacs running rampant are a billion times worse. Most of the people – they want their country back and to simply be left alone.

    And another thing Ma’am, you may wish to consider that the 12th Imam types pushing the buttons over there from The Muslim Brotherhood, Iran and Hezbollah are coordinating it all — taking over Lebanon AND Egypt simultaneously in order to get to their real goal — Israel.

    But I’m just a typical bitter Jewish God-clinging Constitution-loving Flag-waving gun-owning barking-mad-insane NASCAR fan, so what do I know, right ?

    The merde is about to encounter the ventilateur in a big way.

    And what I expect from the administration here is a “nudge” from Sunstein and words of pure submission from his boss.

    • bobmontgomery

      ….they seem to point to international intrigue.

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8289686/Egypt-protests-Americas-secret-backing-for-rebel-leaders-behind-uprising.html

  • bobmontgomery
  • streetwise

    Just have to keep looking, I guess.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      Considering that Egypt is the largest and oldest Arab nation and one of the earliest recorded civilizations that preceded Christianity and Islam; is the intellectual center and most influential Arab and Sunni Muslim nation or tied with Saudi Arabia; that it has had and still retains many middle class secular types; that it is at peace and has been with Israel for over 30 years;

      but that it has also lived under an autocratic regime for 30 years that gets aid from the US and is also the home of the Muslim Brotherhood which is essentially the founding organization of radical Islamists at war with the West…

      1) What % of the population is most likely secular and opposed to radical Islam?
      2) Is the Leader of the Parliament that would take over under their law if Mubarak resigned, a secularist?
      3)What should have been our policy over the past years in Egypt re Liberty reforms and if you agree that it should have been to promote democratic forces and/or try and get Mubarak to reform, then could it be that Obama’s reported discussions with non-MB groups was arguably proper? Admitting that we don’t know a lot of detail.

      more to come

      • JSobieski

        http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/06/world/la-fg-1206-muslim-poll-20101206

        Keep in mind that since answering the poll in this way in Egypt is an explicit criticism of the Egyption government, there are probably a decent number of people who answered differently than they really feel.

        • JSobieski

          An equally important number is the % of people who are inclined to disagree, but due to the religious component (or due to raw fear) will simply acquiesce to the imposition of strict Sharia law in Egypt (which is the reason the Muslim Brotherhood exists).

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            a) Americanized Muslims that really are not good Muslims if judged by the book

            b) “Regular” Muslims that support Sharia in many regards but that reject violent jihad against innocents

            c) Fundamentalists domestically re Sharia but who do not support war against innocents or the West

            d) Islamists

            PS I think some of your criticisms of Bush re Iraq are not persuasive with me due to the above distinctions.

          • JSobieski

            I took your questions literally and distinct from any previous comment history. I don’t see anyone on this thread characterizing Bush in the way that you assert, so I reject that underlying premise of your followup.

            The key point being that if a majority of Egyptions want laws imposing a death sentence on apostates, it just so happens that the largest opposition organization in Egypt has precisely that same objective.

            That said, I agree with (a) but as the Muslim percentageof the populatin grows, the percentage of “good Muslims” will rise. History supports this. Even in Egypt where the Copts have been in the minority for a long time, the violence against the Copts is more open and more frequent now that they are less than 10% of the population.

            Muslims in France are more aggressive than Muslims in the US because in France, they are just over 10% of the population. 20 years ago, the were far less distinct as a minority group. However, if you visit Dearborn, Michigan (where the numbers are higher) you will find a fairly high percentage of “good” Muslims.

            Sharia defines “innocents” differently than you do. While some fundamentalists may pass on personally engaging in war against the West, they won’t lift a finger to help us, warn us, or otherwise oppose those wishing out destruction. They will however bring in CAIR and lots of lawsuits at the slightest provocation.

            All of that being said. I would prefer focusing exlusively on the Egypt situation at this point. Bush foreign policy and Obama naivete are less important than the truly global forces at play at the ME at this time.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            I’m sure that the % of westernized Muslims in Egypt are few.

            My reference to Bush related to your cryptic comments about Bush as asides (and follow up conversation on the phone) that criticized Bush for not going far enough in the minority rights/Liberty/democratic republic project in Iraq, esp as pertains to your criticism of the Constitution as enshrining Sharia laws that you also referred to here.

            My counter to that criticism is related to the problem in Egypt, as I think absent the kind of crushing blow we leveled against Japan, Germany, which set the stage for MASSIVE change, it would be unrealistic to expect us to be able to have dictated such terms in Iraq, although I suspect that if we discussed Bush and Iraq in detail, I would probably agree with some of the Bremer and other decisions.

            But back to Egypt, if we limit our support for backing liberty forces there to only those that don’t support Sharia in any way, then our only option would be to back dictators hated by the people. I think the more prudent course would be to back those that reject jihad against innocents even if they do support many bad aspects of sharia.

            We agree that the underlying and intractable problem with the Middle east is the evil that is Islam, not just radical Islam.

          • JSobieski

            Read some ME newspapers, and you will realize that they define “innocent” differently. So your proposed litmus test is actually difficult to apply.

          • JSobieski

            http://pewglobal.org/files/pdf/253.pdf

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            it is obvious that the overwhelming majority of the people yearned to live free and peaceful lives as they rejected Saddam, the Taliban and al Qaeda.

            I am not soliciting poll links. I am asking people to evaluate the facts of CONDUCT etc across the region and make an estimate and to consider human nature.

            But I may, admittedly, be looking for silver linings where they don’t exist.

          • JSobieski

            Iraq suggest that Christians are leaving. While violence is down overall, violence against Christians is not. Its not government orchestrated violence, but there are reasons to suspect that the government tolerates such violence or that it can’t stop it.

            The immediate success of Iraq is not in doubt. The medium and long term success of the Iraq project is very much in doubt. How Iraq behaves when we are gone will be very interesting.

            All of that being said, Iraq is one of the places in the world in which the Bush experiment made the most sense.

            One thing you should note in the Pew poll is how the Muslim world blame the West for all of their problems.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
      • streetwise

        Don’t really know specific answers to these questions. But I would observe:

        1) Egypt has the strongest national identity of any Arabic speaking country, and a good part of that identity is rooted in pre-Islamic history.

        2) As long as the basics of Islam are respected by the government, nationalism will win out over Islamic fundamentalism.

        3) The army runs the country, and wll continue to do so.

  • leonidus2010

    1992 Ruby Ridge Idaho..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

    “Before the negotiators arrived at the cabin, an FBI HRT sniper, Lon Horiuchi, shot and wounded Randy Weaver in the back with the bullet exiting his right armpit, while he was lifting the latch on the shed to visit the body of his dead son.[47] (The sniper testified at the later trial that he had put his crosshairs on Weaver’s spine, but Weaver moved at the last second.) Then, as Weaver, his 16-year-old daughter Sara,[48] and Harris ran back toward the house, Horiuchi fired a second bullet, which passed through Vicki Weaver’s head, killing her, and wounded Harris in the chest. Vicki Weaver was standing behind the door through which Harris was entering the house, holding their 10-month-old baby Elisheba[48] in her arms.[49] The Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility Ruby Ridge Task Force Report (June 10, 1994) stated in section I. Executive Summary subhead B. Significant Findings that the second shot did not satisfy constitutional standards for legal use of deadly force.[50] The OPR review also found the lack of a request to surrender was “inexcusable”, since Harris and the two Weavers were running for cover without returning fire and were not an imminent threat. The task force also specifically blamed Horiuchi for firing through the door, not knowing whether someone was on the other side of it.”

    “In 1997, Boundary County, Idaho Prosecutor Denise Woodbury, with the help of special prosecutor Stephen Yagman, charged Horiuchi in state court with involuntary manslaughter. Horiuchi successfully petitioned to remove the case to federal court,[9] where the case was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge on May 14, 1998, who cited the supremacy clause of the Constitution which grants immunity to federal officers acting in the scope of their employment”

    Its nice that in America now after this precedent in 1998 that the Gestapo, I mena FBI and ATF are above the law and immune from prosecution even when they MURDER unarmed citizens / political dissidents. Human rights violations anyone? By the grace of God the 10 month old baby Vivki Weaver was carrying survived the assination by Horiuchi the murderous sniper working for the Pinochet, errI mean Janet Reno and Billy Boy the dope smoking, draft dodging, filandering, perjuror regime.

    Fast forward 1993 in Waco Texas…

    I think everyone is familiar with Janet Reno’s good ole Pinochet-style Texas barbeque for the Branch Davidians that also publicly criticized her regime.

    September 2005

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition

    “Laura Berg, a nurse at a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs hospital in New Mexico was investigated for sedition in September 2005 after writing a letter to the editor of a local newspaper, accusing several national leaders of criminal negligence. Though their action was later deemed unwarranted by the director of Veteran Affairs, local human resources personnel took it upon themselves to request an FBI investigation.”

    “In 1940, the Alien Registration Act, or “Smith Act”, was passed, which made it a federal crime to advocate or to teach the desirability of overthrowing the United States Government, or to be a member of any organization which does the same.”

    It does not seem to me that her actions came anywhere close to advocating or teaching the desireability of overthrowing the US Government. Sharon Angle’s call to 2nd Amendment remedies if some citizens decide they don’t lik election results is alot closed to the definition of sedition if you ask me and I guess they only reason they was never prosecuted for same is that she has friends in high places that Laura Berg being a regular “citizen” did not have access to. I guess in America now there are two classes of people in legal proceding politicians, lobbysists and other “friends of the court” and regular people like us who actually have to follow the laws and take resposibility for our actions something they dont have to do in Washington. She didnt even break the law she merely petitioned her governemnt for a redress of grievances like I have been the last couple years, and many here are also doing – and that 14th amendment illegal alien anhor baby who needs to be deported – Alberto Gonzales had her arrested and maliciously prosecuted her for simply criticizing the government. Human rights violation???

    Last year in 2010 the Obama / Holder dictatorship arrested nine people thought to be Hutaree members in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana for their alleged involvement in anti-government activited basicially criticizing the federal government and demanding a redress of grievances just like the MB are in Egypt? On May 3, 2010 a federal judge ordered that all nine members be freed on bond until their trial, saying that prosecutors were not able to demonstrate that the defendants would pose a danger if released. Human rights violations??? If still held they would essentially be political prisoners since the broke no laws and harmed no one. The governemnt perceived hem as a threat so propaganda was deployed and the dissidents were arrested.

    I’m sure there are many other cases of the US goverment overstepping its bounds and supressing the American people, depriving American citizens of their “human” rights but I guess the current President and Attorney General (as well as past Presidents and Attorney Generals) care more about Egyptians freedom than Americans freedom and “human rights”.

  • leonidus2010

    Am I the only one that thinks shooting a man in the back and then shooting an unarmed woman holding a 10-month old baby is a despicable act of cowardice.

    West Point should disown this traitor and he should be deported. He is lucky the other dispacable un-American cowards in the Clinton White Hosue / Janet Reno DOJ and the federal kangaroo courts were able save him from the DA in Idaho making him pay for his crimes thriough the due process of law. I guess only God Almighty has the power and authority to judge these murderers and in the American Khmer Rouge, I mean the FBI and ATF.

    • gekster

      What has your comment have to do with Carter and the Middle East.

      • leonidus2010

        My apologies for some reson my additional comments re Lon Horiuchi should have attached as a thread to my comment on how we treat out citizens that protest the government vs how POTUS thinks Egypt should treat its citizens I was merely attempting to demonstrate BO’s hypocrisy.

        • gekster

          Just saying he murderded someone doesn’t just tie in.
          what does he have to do with the article.
          Just askin. :)

  • leonidus2010

    What are you talking about.

    I was barely born during his Presidency 40 years ago?

    I think the schlacking he took from Ronald Reagan in 1980 pretty much ended the Peanut Farmer’s relevance in America. Other than blowing the Iranian hostage crisis is there anything else worth mentioning from this Jimmy’s failed attept at leadership?

    • gekster

      1. This is a diary about Carter and the Middle East.
      2. You are posting about murder by someone..
      3. Unless this person is related too or known by Carter, it has nothing to do with these other comments.

      There is presently an “open thread” on the front page.
      Post this where it bolongs.