« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Muslim Brotherhood Becoming Dominant in Egypt

Nothing says democracy like a virginity test


Someone once observed that a liberal’s life consists of confronting one unexpected suprise after another. I think it is safe to say that the same can be said of the typical Ivy League foreign policy wonk, to the extent they are different groups of people.

A lot of people of all political persuasions were excited by the “Jasmin” revolution that started in Tunisia and spread, near instantly, to Egypt and resulted in the toppling of President Hosni Mubarak. Just like the situation in Libya, no one took the time to ask what we knew about the demonstrators before we cast our lot with them.

The average citizen can be excused. The stripey pants set in Foggy Bottom, not so much.

From today’s NY Times, who are also shocked, shocked at the happenings:

In post-revolutionary Egypt, where hope and confusion collide in the daily struggle to build a new nation, religion has emerged as a powerful political force, following an uprising that was based on secular ideals. The Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group once banned by the state, is at the forefront, transformed into a tacit partner with the military government that many fear will thwart fundamental changes.

It is also clear that the young, educated secular activists who initially propelled the nonideological revolution are no longer the driving political force — at least not at the moment.

[...]

“We are all worried,” said Amr Koura, 55, a television producer, reflecting the opinions of the secular minority. “The young people have no control of the revolution anymore. It was evident in the last few weeks when you saw a lot of bearded people taking charge. The youth are gone.”

Hmmm. Committed, ruthless, professional subversives have managed to push aside the Egyptian equivalent of the contributors at dKos. Who would have thought this could come to pass?

And we’re seeing an immediate result of this:

Cairo: Women arrested by Egyptian military personnel during protests at Cairo’s Tahrir Square were subjected to “virginity tests” and other forms of humiliation, claims an Amnesty International report.

Eighteen demonstrators were detained by army officers on March 9 at the end of weeks of protest.

The Amnesty report revealed that the women protesters were beaten, given electric shocks, subjected to strip searches and photographed by male soldiers.

Women were then given ‘virginity checks’ and threatened with prostitution charges if the medics ruled they had had sex, said the report.

Amnesty has called on the Egyptian authorities to investigate this alleged abuse, which it described as ‘utterly unacceptable.’

‘The purpose is to degrade women because they are women”, “All women of the medical profession must refuse to take part in such so-called ‘tests’,” The Daily Mail quoted an Amnesty spokesman, as saying.

The spokesman said one woman who had told the military she was a virgin and then failed the ‘test’ was beaten and given electric shocks.

The only thing left to make this a rousing success for the Obama Doctrine is the inevitable “one man, one vote, one time.”

COMMENTS

  • ThePoliticalHat
    • Ausonius

      Alexander Kerensky was the head of the Provisional Government of Russia after the abdication of the Czar. He was a “democratic socialist” who believed he could play footsy with the more radical leftists, i.e. Lenin and the Bolsheviks, while simultaneously alienating any support from conservatives.

      He continued to keep Russia in the First World War, did not deal with land reform, and – pay attention Barack – unwisely distributed weapons to radical leftists, who fairly promptly went over whole-heartedly to the Communists, who hated Kerensky’s policies.

      I saw Kerensky on the Today show in 1967, which was commemorating the Russian Revolution’s 50th Anniversary. He was still effusively frustrated in his dotage, knowing that he had been bucked off the bull of history.

      I hope to see MAObama – a one-term president – delineated in 2025 as the president who could have guided the exploding and imploding disasters of Black America out of the desert, but instead gazed into a mirror and admired himself most of the time for making it to the top, while his wife worried about America’s waistline. I hope to watch a reporter tell how they ignored the drugs, the indolence, the destruction of family life, and the general suicidal trends in Afro-American areas.

      • izoneguy

        for the continued genocide of his own people, right here in America.

  • saintgeorgegentile

    for the Captain Renault Award
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1DEG6BWgp0

  • lgbpop

    I hear this every other month, when the unemployment claims “unexpectedly” increase or the recent 16% drop in year-to-year housing sales (due to the expiration of the home-buyer credit, no doubt) was “surprising” or the thuggish behavior in Madison WI last month was….oh, excuse me, apparently no one was surprised by that.

    Maybe you guys are (GASP!) liberals? ;)

  • Tbone

    The Muslim Brotherhood is pretty insidious it seems.

    • SoulEspresso

      … and if you’re keeping score, Tbone, you were right.

  • jerseypaul

    If you were a Muslim sympathizer and wanted to do all in your power to further the cause of Islam in the U.S. and around the world, and you could dream a dream of how to do this, what would the dream include?

    You would dream that you could infiltrate the power structure of the U.S. by aligning yourself with groups that did not believe in basic American principles yet were poised to come to power. The best opportunity would likely be a combination of 60′s radicals and left wing unions.

    You would dream that such a coalition nominated you to be President of the United States and the country was so angry with the opposition party that you were elected.

    You would begin to undermine the power of the U.S. by apologizing for past sins, real or imagined. You would send signals that U.S. power would not be used against Muslims or in defense of Israel.

    You would encourage the overthrow of dictators who kept a lid on Muslim extremists while remaining silent when populations objected to religious dictatorships.

    You would support the creation of new governments controlled by Muslim clerics.

    You would weaken the U.S. military by overspending on all other things so that politically you cut cut the U.S. military budget.

    Not saying this has happened, but that’s what the dream would look like for such a sympathizer.

    • aesthete

      I am inclined to disbelieve that a government that can’t so much as send a welfare check promptly would probably have some difficulty hiding a conspiracy that massive, especially since such a conspiracy would necessitate the willing cooperation of 100s of government officials, the vast majority of whom are lily white nominal Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. Occam’s Razor leads me to believe that Obama may have an unrealistic picture of Islam from having grown up in Indonesia, but that he is generally in line with the rest of his party in terms of general cluelessness regarding the religion, and general fecklessness on the foreign stage.

      • littlehouse18

        just one man with a vision and a bunch of unquestioning, fawning fools.

    • z06gal

      I’d say this pretty much sums it up. Great post

  • aesthete

    Systems with a significant democratic component are going to look a lot like the voters. Egypt is the intellectual center of radical Sunni Islam, and had a strong movement of radical Islamists prior to the emergence of the protesters. The extent to which the government remains secular is predicated on how politically free it is: i.e., there is a greater chance for secular government if the army remains in control than if elections are held.

    • Doc Holliday

      just like Turkey.

    • Adjoran

      Such as they are, elections in Egypt attract a small percentage of those eligible to vote, something on the order of 10% participation.

      A well-organized group like the MB will find it far easier to gain support – it’s backers are dedicated and enthusiastic – than other parties starting from scratch. Even if MB couldn’t gain majority control of a new parliament, they would likely be the largest party in terms of seats, and be able to be the major factor in any governing coalition.

      But you would have to take a few days off from the golf course and consult some knowledgeable advisers to find this out, so of course it will come as a shock to Obama.

    • jiminga

      the military has not been infiltrated by the muslim brotherhood, which it most likely has. Why else would the military have “protected” the protestors, thereby endorsing Mubarek’s overthrow. This will not end well for Egypt or the west.

      • aesthete

        Still, the military and its top commanders are both funded by and have ties to both the US and to a lesser extent Israel — they would be the party most amenable to avoiding Islamist government.

  • donnybrooke

    “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

    I’m just surprised that anyone thought this was a secular uprising.
    Only a liberal who rejects religion out of hand would think that the people of Egypt are not Muslims first.

    Where’s that face-palm image?

    • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

      You’ve nailed the reason for the repeated Foggy Bottom failures.

      People who themselves believe that religion is silly/irrelevant/stupid/trivial are always projecting that onto others and therefore discount the very real religious convictions of hundreds of millions of people around the world. The Ivy League professorial types who hold most of the positions of power in the executive branch and in the CIA just ASSUME that the “REAL” reasons for Muslims acting the way they do cannot possibly include heartfelt belief in Islam.

      • littlehouse18

        a significant number of libs feel toward Christianity. Since the Islamists also hate Christianity, they may gain liberal support.

  • Doc Holliday

    I doubt there has ever been, nor will there ever be a non-ideological revolution.

    • aesthete
  • godrick

    (Big news, I know!)

    But wasn’t one of the bigger reasons we fought in Iraq was to spread Democracy throughout the Middle East? I just saw an interview with Israel’s ambassador to the US, and he seemed to be saying that the Netanyahu government was cautiously optimistic about the overthrow of Mubarek and the potential emergence of a SECOND true democracy in a the Middle East. I mean, if Bebe Netanyahu has hope for Egypt, what with Israel’s strong intelligence, etc., shouldn’t we be celebrating this as a validation of the Bush Doctrine?

    In 2003, President Bush spoke to the US Chamber of Commerce, saying:
    ?Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe?because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty,.”

    ?As long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation, resentment, and violence ready for export.?

    After no WMD were found in Iraq, I initially wanted us to just find Saddam, kill him and get out. But a good friend of mine, a solid conservative, shared the above quote with me, and she changed my mind. She told me we had to stick it out or else the rest of the Middle East would live under dictators like Mubarak, Assad and Kaddafi for another generation. Was she wrong? Was President Bush wrong?

    • earlgrey

      more secular pro-democracy forces the time to organize and win over the people. The US at first woudn’t make a stand and then finally did leaving Mubarak little choice, but to leave immediately with all the money he had stolen from the American people.

      I was dining about a month ago with some colleague from Germany and they were confused and frustrated with the how the US was handling the Egypt crisis.

      Everyone is getting a front row seat to amateur hour.

      • godrick

        I’m not sure how we could have helped that happen. Maybe sometime between 2001 and Mubarek’s overthrow, the US government could have done more to support pro-Western, anti-Islamist groups in Egypt, but I’ve been doing about three hours’ worth of research, and I can’t find anything. It seems like we rejected ALL opposition groups, including the secular ones. We didn’t utter a peep when Mubarek jailed Ayman Nour, a VERY secular opposition leader and from everything I’ve read, about as far from the Muslim Brotherhood as one can get.

        So what could we have done in the last month when we didn’t do anything to encourage secular opposition in the past ten years?

        Plus, Mubarek was technically and ally, correct? What if the overthrow had failed and we were seen to be on the side of the anti-Mubarek forces? Hate to sound like Kissinger here, but doesn’t that fly in the face of realpolitik?

        From everything I’ve read, this was a screw-up at least ten years in the making.

        • earlgrey

          I am not convinced that three hours of researching Egypt has made you enough of an expert to declare that it is a disaster 10 years in the making. Why did you pick 2001 as your start date?

          Mubarak came to power in Egypt long before that. He came to power after Anwar Sadat was assasinated early 80s I believe.

          • godrick

            Because that, ostensibly, was the start of the so-called Bush Doctrine. Although I perhaps should have selected 2003, the year I quoted above where he made his speech to the US Chamber of Commerce espousing his plans for democracy in the Middle East.

            So, maybe it is a disaster 30 years in the making?

        • aesthete

          Bush did fund various pro-democracy movements, and his State Dept worked towards getting some of those pro-democracy protesters out of jail. Whether that was wise is another question, but Bush did make a departure from his predecessors by supporting pro-democracy movements in Egypt.

          • edwyrd

            as the beginning of western missteps in the middle east. The versailles peace treaty disenfranchised the entire arab world after the arabs took Turkey out of the war.

    • izoneguy

      has delayed the Islamic caliphate movement – it is coming.
      Obama is enabling the speed at which Islam is spreading.

    • edwyrd

      The female circumcision rate in egypt is 96%, down from 99% after a 4 year government program, sponsored by mubarak. In a recent poll 80% of egyptians agreed with the severing of a thiefs hand.
      Did you watch the video from egypt? Everybody prayed to allah in masse. This cannot be, nor will it ever be anything but an islamic theocracy. That is, another Iran. Do you remember the gaza elections? 70% voted for hamas and war with Isreal.
      In as little as 5 years, a war against Isreal from 3 sides is a real threat.
      So you can sit in your living room decrying the fate of a half billion muslims in the clutches of tyrants, but it is delusional. Their fate is their own choice, and their choice is most certainly war.

      • godrick

        in his assumption that democracy would spread throughout the Middle East.

        Very depressing.

        Guess he didn’t understand the Muslim/Arab mindset after all.

        • blooch

          “Strong Horse/Weak Horse” part of that mindset.

    • The_Gadfly

      makes the vision short-sighted.

      Bush and most of the pro-democracy talking heads (even on the conservative side) are so accustomed to American liberty, that they assume it is like the air: always there and everybody breathes it. But it isn’t. It’s foundation is in so many other things that are fundamentally missing in most other countries (and since at least FDR, eroding away in our own, sometimes more quickly than others):
      – respect for life
      – respect for private property rights,
      – respect for written, logical, equally applied laws
      – a stable currency that allows people to plan how to develop and spend their wealth
      – recognition that in order to create a society in which you to be free, you must grant others the same freedom, and that one of the most important of those freedoms is freedom on conscience, which in turn implies universal respect for religious choices

      Nation building is a long hard slog. You have to develop all of those things within the society. That doesn’t mean Bush is wrong in the long term, or that we should shirk the responsibility. And whereas American freedom developed over a very long period of time (I’d say you are required to go back to the Magna Carta, it’s arguable you need to go all the way back to the Greeks of Hellas), for those countries we are trying to help in might be done far more quickly. Possibly as quickly as 50 years, but certainly far longer than 10. Not all of that time has to be spent in military engagement, but at no time during that development can it be completely off the board either. During that time there are many possible missteps for wise men; fools don’t stand a chance and we’ve got way too many educated fools in charge at State these days.

      • edwyrd

        islamic values eliminate any chance of it.
        The argument muslims use for their “superior” theocratic brand of government is that it is “from God”, and thereby perfect. Who can argue with that? And more importantly it provides for all sorts of medieval cruelty and atrocities, completely antithetical to a safe secure and prosperous society

        • acat

          although I’d likely say Judeo-Christian, or emphasize their traditional nature…

          The point, though, is solid – these values are a part of the reason our culture is successful – they’re relatively unchanging generation to generation, and they lock in a pattern of behaviours that encourages creative thinking and sharing of ideas.

          We are exceptional, simply by holding these values above any king or caliph…

          Mew

      • godrick

        Thanks for the insight, Gadfly.

        Wish there had been more of this kind of thinking over the past 20 years, or so. About the only thing we seem to continue to get right is the Middle East is supporting Israel. Still, I wish American Jews would quit going over there and stirring things up (and I’m speaking as an American Jew – I have cousins who are as crazy as any radical Muslim you would ever meet! Anyone who thinks they have a special right to something because “God said so” is effing crazy in my book, Jew, Muslim OR Christian)

        Ugh, and don’t get me started on the Saudis! If I have to see that video of President Bush holding hands with Prince Abdulla one more time, I’m gonna ralph.

        • aesthete

          There’s a pretty decent argument on their side for them having a homeland that isn’t exclusively theocratic — many rabbis have actually opposed the creation of the secular Jewish state due to beliefs that a Jewish state is illegitimate without Messiah. (Being a Christian, you can guess what my thoughts are on that issue, but I digress :) ) It would be different if Israel had turned into a Stalinist abomination, had stuck with ineffective economic policy, or had gravitated towards the USSR during the Cold War — none of those things happened, and Israel is essentially a Western, democratic, and capitalist nation (albeit a liberal one) in a sea of countries inhabited and ruled mostly by barbarous thugs. As a realist, I favor them as a balancing power in the region, but the humanitarian and cultural case for supporting them is also quite strong.

          • godrick

            But I wish they would stop building settlements. Like I said, I have cousins over there whom I don’t even recognize anymore. They sound as crazy as Muslim radicals, and my father agrees.

            But they lost their parents when they were young, and they fell in with a radical Orthodox group. They believe God gave them the land. To me, they sound as insane as any fundamentalists – Muslim, Christian, Mormon, you name it.

            I’m secular, but I admire Hillel. And Edmund Burke, of course .

            I think there is room enough for everyone, as long as they leave God/Allah out of the picture.

          • aesthete

            It’s not like too many other countries have welcomed the Jews with open arms, and there hasn’t been any organized terrorism on the part of Orthodox Jews since before the creation of Israel in ’48 (and things like the Irgun bombing of the King David Hotel were condemned almost unanimously by Jewish groups at the time). While I’m not a huge fan of the settlements, I don’t really see them as equivalent to the constant barrage of Palestinian terrorist attacks and missile lobbing.

            Personally, I wish that there were some one-shot way to integrate Palestinians willing to submit to the laws and practices of Israel, and to humanely relocate the rest. It would make things much less problematic if Israel didn’t have to exist with a violent rabble living at their doorstep.

          • godrick

            I concur. But since I don’t have any radical Muslims in my family, I guess I know best those who are closest to me.

            Sadly, I visited Gaza years ago, and it was a hell hole under Israeli occupation. But from what I read and see on the news, it hasn’t improved under Hamas, but only grown worse. Ironic that they seemed to do more good for their people when they WEREN’T in power.

            But you are right, the settlements are not equivalent to the constant (and fruitless, politically) rocket bombardments.

            Still, I don’t blame the Muslim people – just call me a bleeding heart conservative, I guess.

          • edwyrd

            where did it go?
            Additionally, if you take a hard look at population demographics and birth rates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_200 ) you will find 500 million muslims and only 6 million isrealis ( with an expected doubling of the muslim population in less than 25 years), you ewill get an idea of the obama doctrine.
            Pet the muslims, spank the jews. this is the undeniable obama policy.

          • aesthete

            the situation in Gaza is intractable: far be it from me to praise military occupation, but it is telling (and pretty sad) that Israel’s military occupation of Gaza saw greater gains in the material security and well-being of Gazans than Gaza self-rule has. When a large proportion of Gazans either want to blow up Israelis or are sympathetic to those who blow them up, there isn’t much recourse. If Israel were to unilaterally withdraw and give them full autonomy, the Gazan government and players would figure out some way to screw that up. Of course, I’ve long believed that Israel should just declare Gaza and the West Bank independent nations, so that they could deal with the inevitable attacks from those areas as one nation would a belligerent nation: with overwhelming force.

          • acat

            Or, if you prefer a more serious reply, what is the U.S. interest in Gaza?

            Mew

          • aesthete

            As a realist, I don’t think that the US should interfere in what is essentially an internal affair with no gains for us. From the vantage point of Israel, there are several interests and security concerns in the region, and for them, the situation is fairly intractable.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    Surprahz, surprahz, SURPRAHZ!!!

  • The_Gadfly

    I think they’ve always been a dominant force in Egypt, which is part of why the secular government outlawed them. Early on Beck pointed out that in the very beginning stages, there were lots of bearded guys and MB signs, but those people and signs were shuffled away when western media started to appear on the scene.

    One of the thing I always find curious is the number of protest signs you see in foreign countries that are spelled out in respectable English. Granted, I’ve never been to Canada let alone a really foreign country, but I would expect that most of the signs would be in the dominant native language, not one as convoluted and difficult for non-native speakers to learn as ours.

    Oh, and just for the record, I suspect the average citizen took more time to ask what we knew about the demonstrators than the suites at State did.

    • blooch

      didn’t have to ask. They instinctively knew that which the mint tea sippers at State refused to believe. Of course, those citizens are also prejudiced islamophobes.

      And the ME is infested with the pampered sons of elites who came to the US or Britain on student visas, observed Progressive street theater on campus, then came back home to embarrass their parents and dabble in magic marker jihad. I hope they’re not expecting a “shukran” from the bearded guys.

      • The_Gadfly

        except when the news interrupted him STILL took more time to ask that question than the suits at State who assumed they knew the answer because they are “the best and the brightest of their generation.”

        • acat
          • The_Gadfly
          • acat

            Reagan, Bush 1.0, Bush 2.0, and to some extent Clinton’s various heads of the DoD did a better job than McNamara…

            If we’re talking Dept. of State, then .. yeah.

            Mew

          • The_Gadfly

            it was more that State lost Vietnam than his over-rated technocracy and “carefully calibrated responses” . And I was focused on State not DoD.

  • johnt

    Panetta ought to be made aware. Perhaps CNN can fill him in.
    Oh, and bring back Valerie Plame, we need more “secret agents” on the job like her. Of course lunches will have to be reduced to two hours.
    But then there are none so blind as those who will not see, an oldie.
    Maybe to be hung in bronze over the CIA entrance.

  • johnt

    No wonder he wanted Muburak out. Try not to show it O. let the media celebrate for you.

  • spainishirish

    The United States might as well donate money directly to al-Qaeda, which incidentally has admitted it is down with the Libyan rebellion and heavily invested in it. We have installed a government in Afghanistan that promotes executions of converts to Christianity. We have turned blind eyes as our troops are quartered in Kosovo and Iraq while Christians in those nations are the subject of outright genocide. And the clown currently in the White House has orchestrated international telephons for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Then Egypt…I guess we will help build the furnaces for the looming Coptic holocaust. Libya is just another psychotic project in the unholy alliance between American liberal foreign policy and the most whacked out elements of our own party’s foreign policy establishment. Maybe the American people will wake up now. Stranger things are happening, right?

  • tarnation

    I think your timeline is confused. The virginity tests evidently took place at the end of the protests while Murbarak was still in power. Seems like the Muslim Brotherhood had nothing to do with this.

    • spainishirish

      This incident is not about the timeline. It is about the same military that administered these tests that now rules the country. Further, it also shows the elements that exert control over that same military that rules Egypt now. The MB can count on the military to do its dirty work because the same mentality dominates it.

    • streiff

      reading comprehension can be your friend if you let it.

      Don’t troll me again, oh, that’s right. You can’t.

  • izoneguy

    Obama has lost Pakistan as well.

    Pakistan Switches Sides, Expanding Arms Allegiance With China and Leaving U.S. Behind

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/26/switching-sides-pakistan-expands-arms-allegiance-china/#ixzz1Hj34XEHJ

  • Marcus_Traianus

    I bet they don’t remember their history, including that Walid Berbers and everyone else in that region and converted them by the sword to Islam.

    Oh yeah and here are two of my favorite articles from today;

    Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

    Al-Qaeda snatched missiles’ in Libya,/a>

    Tell me who we are supporting again?

    • spainishirish

      arms seized in Iraq and Afghanistan, here’s the real deal. I have to note it is reported by the BBC. I won’t hold my breath for the American media’s accounts.

      • Marcus_Traianus

        This is now Obama’s Feckless war. He is going to show the world how wars are fought and won without being “unilateral” (e.g. George W. Bush was wrong).

        So the goals as I see it are;

        1- Support the terrorist rebels. But they won’t be called terrorists. We will be told there are some undesirable elements which will be weeded out. This meme will be supported by the MSM hook, line and sinker.

        2- They are trying to kill Gaddafi. Bush should have killed him. Reagan too, for that matter. Yes and Bush should have killed OBL. Dolt that he was, Bush didn’t. But look, I have Gaddafi’s scalp. Never mind I, Obama was supporting him. Well. That is, up until now. As a matter of fact, a few weeks ago Obama budgeted money for a military exchange program with Libya. Oh, you say you didn’t know that? Well not surprising. Thank the MSM again (your welcome).

        3- Forget Iran, Syria, Yemen, etc. This is the real place for America to fight. Never mind those others. Seen this movie before? Why yes you have. Remember when Obama said Afghanistan was the real war, not Iraq? I do and it is the same strategy here. Forget everything else, this IS the place to make our stand for “democracy”. Again, the MSM will try furiously to support this meme.

        Remember, it’s all about Obama. So Bush was wrong, I am right and my methods are much better. The MSM will throw rose petals at his feet. The end,

        • spainishirish

          I just read my first “Belgian Nuns Raped” story. It seems as if some woman has come forward with a tale about a gang rape at the hands of Gaddafi’s stooges. It may have happened, but the only reason it is reported is to support your first point. Gaddafi thugs are evil, the al-Qaeda elements in the rebellion dwarfed by freedome fighters.

          As to your second point, we soon will read stories and hear broadcasts in which well-placed White House officials on background explain that Mr. Wonderful bucked his Secretary of Defense and others and personally was responsible for the American military involvement.

          And while the Islamists behind the Libyan rebellion never will be mentioned, you can bet your rear end that those who want to overthrow the Syrian dictatorship will be identified as such, true or not.

          • Marcus_Traianus

            Don’t forget the French and Obama’s need to be shown as an engaged CiNC.

            So the French will be seen as providing the “intelligence” (you will forgive me for putting “French” and “intelligence” in one sentence) to find Gaddafi (notwithstanding the fact liberals have killed our ability to gather HUMINT, but I digress). The plot will be they find Gaddaffi and Obama gives the OK to get him. This will all be replete will black and white stills (there is a joke in there somewhere and isn’t this parenthetical commenting annoying? I fell like Meghan McCain or something.. ) showing Obama took a commanding leadership role.

            Besides the fact Mr. Obama walks on water, he will now add to his portfolio pulling together an international coalition, getting the bad guy, not entangling us in a foreign war and propping up what he says will be a government of the “people. Never mind those people are the same jihadists we are fighting in A-stan and plotting to blow us up again. But anyway, Lord Obama did all this while playing countless round of golf and improving his handicap (Damn! Did you see that put? That one’s for you Gaddafi, ba-boom! Oh, yeah and Bush sucks!)

    • Marcus_Traianus

      “forced the Berbers”..

      • spainishirish

        Look for our erstwhile ally to humble and humiliate Obama, and blame any setback on him and take credit for any positive result, if there happens to be one. They are like the croc in the parable, it is in their nature and they cannot help themselves.

        • spainishirish

          Your parenthetical thoughts are coherent.

  • Callie369

    We knew this was where the mess would end up. What can you expect when Obama acts and talks like a dues paying member of the Muslim Brotherhood. He is doing everything he can to help the muslims take over the world.

  • averagevoterdotcom

    will die by our sword. It may be years, but will happen. Don’t forget, we killed over 100K in Afganistan alone.

    Beck needs some good sleep and a vacation.

    Egypt will be mainly secular and fine.

    Libya will be a minor pain but nothing to worry about.

    • streiff

      no where near 100K have been killed in Afghanistan. This past year was the highest number and it was under 3K.

      Don?t troll us.

      • acat

        Without watching the network news, that is.

        (note – no, not Streiff)

        As for living and dying by the sword, we’ll just assume it meant by the firearm… and then we’ll just note who in this country actually both own and know how to use firearms…

        Mew

    • aesthete

      A) That was the number reported for Iraq, not Afghanistan. Different brown people, different countries.

      B) Those numbers for Iraq were discredited a long time ago.

      • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

        even in their vastly inflated numbers they were orders of magnitude less than the number of Iraqis who were massacred by Saddam.

        • aesthete

          ~300,000 Kurds were killed by Hussein in the 3 year period of the Kurdish rebellion in ’86 (think that date’s right). Directly after the first Gulf War, ~100,000 Iraqis were killed in a two-month period to tamp down an uprising. IIRC, more accurate numbers for those killed by insurgents and our own troops (including insurgents and troops) are ~60,000 over an 8 year period — not exactly fun, but not comparable to ~400,000 Iraqis over a 3 year period (not counting those raped, tortured, wounded, forcibly relocated, etc).

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      the Muslims would have been wiped out 13 centuries ago.

    • spainishirish

      nt