Saudi Arabia labels Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Organization

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 8th, 2014

Week in Review

During the Arab Spring President Obama told Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak that he had to go.  A man who was the anchor of peace in the Middle East.  Since then the Middle East has grown less safe.  And closer to Iran.  Which hates Israel, the United States and Western Civilization.

The most organized political opposition in Egypt at the time of the Arab Spring was the Muslim Brotherhood.  An organization that Mubarak had outlawed in Egypt.  As they tended to agree more with Iran than they did with the Mubarak regime.  When they stepped in to fill the political vacuum left by Mubarak President Obama and his fellow Democrats were quick to recognize the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.  Even gave them military aid.  Despite their being a terrorist organization (see Saudi Arabia lists Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah as terror groups posted 3/7/2014 on UPI).

Saudi Arabia added the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah and two Syrian-based groups to its list of terrorist organizations Friday, officials said…

Abdel Latif al-Sheikh, head of the Saudi religious police, described the Brotherhood, Hezbollah, ISIS and al-Nusra Front as groups “ruled from outside to serve political purposes.”

“They are groups that fight moderate Muslims and are causing troubles around the world. This is what we consider against Islamic principles and has given a negative impression about Muslims in the West,” Sheikh said.

Here’s something you don’t hear often.  Or ever.  A Muslim nation speaking out against Islamist extremism.  But Saudi Arabia prefers peace.  Which is why they liked Hosni Mubarak.  And were very unhappy seeing him go.  Especially with the Muslim Brotherhood replacing the Mubarak regime.  Mubarak kept the peace.  The Saudis liked that.  Even though they don’t much care for Israel.  But they would take a peaceful world with Israel in it any day over a world without Israel if it meant having no peace.

Israel is not the source of all the unrest in the Middle East.  There is a huge divide in Islam that has killed more than any war or occupation involving Israel has killed.  Sunni versus Shia.  Saudi Arabia is Sunni.  Egypt, too.  While Iran is Shia.  Saudi Arabia prefers peace.  Iran prefers revolution.  Which is why Hosni Mubarak was good for Egypt.  Saudi Arabia. Israel.  The Middle East.  And world peace.  The Saudis understood this.  Which is why they call the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.  While the Obama administration does not.  Which is why they gave military aid to the Muslim Brotherhood.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Human Rights Violations are Worse in North Korea but Liberals would rather punish Syria for Theirs

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 7th, 2013

Week in Review

The Syrian civil war began in March of 2011.  And is still ongoing.  Some two and a half years later.  And over 100,000 killed.  While displacing close to 3 million refugees.  It is a devastating conflict.  But President Obama made no attempt to help the opposition topple the Assad government.  Despite it being a close ally of Iran.  No, President Obama did nothing to intervene just as he chose to sit out Iran’s Green Revolution.  Another regime that can be pretty cruel to its people.  Yet President Obama told Hosni Mubarak that he had to leave Egypt.  And he used U.S. airpower to help topple Colonel Gaddafi from power in Libya.  Both men were U.S. allies at the time when President Obama helped unseat them from power.  Yet two countries that can’t be considered friends of the United States in any way (Iran and Syria) he does nothing.  Odd.

The Syrian civil war has been going on for so long that al Qaeda joined in.  Looking to fill that power vacuum should the Assad regime fall.  As the civil war intensified and the opposition begged for foreign aid President Obama stood firm.  Not wishing to get involved.  Unless the Syrians crossed the red line.  And used chemical weapons.  Well, someone used chemical weapons.  We’re not sure who did.  It may well have been the opposition to get the U.S. to bomb a stubborn Assad government out of power.  But people died from the use of chemical weapons.  Perhaps as many as 1,500.  Of which about 500 have been children.  A tragedy too great to even contemplate.  And one that made President Obama go to Congress to get permission to wage war on those responsible.  With many on the left supporting his call for a military response.  Which is highly unusual to say the least.

Now chemical weapons are horrible and frightening.  But an additional 1,500 dead after 100,000 already lost their lives?  Those chemical deaths are only about 1.5% of the total dead.  When Saddam Hussein killed 3,200-5,000 Kurds and Iranians in a Chemical attack on the town of Halabja there wasn’t quite the same response from the left.  In fact, when Saddam Hussein failed to document the destruction of his chemical stock piles per the treaty that ended the Gulf War they still showed little concern.  Though they did vote to give George W. Bush permission to wage war against Iraq as the polls showed they were on the wrong side of the issue when they at first opposed the measure.  Even calling for a second vote to get their vote on the record.  But when no weapons of mass destruction were found they were both embarrassed and elated.  Saying that Bush lied to get the country into war.  Due to flawed intelligence reports.  And a strong desire to go to war.  To finish what his dad started in the Gulf War.  They have attacked Bush mercilessly ever since.  But now the shoe is on the other foot.  And here they are wanting to go to war because of weapons of mass destruction.  Many of which could be from Iraq.  Delivered on trucks seen leaving Iraqi weapons dumps on the eve of war.  Or flown to Syria (see Syria’s Chemical Weapons Came From Saddam’s Iraq posted 7/19/2013 on IBD).

But none of that matters now.  What does is that someone in Syria crossed the red line.  And because innocent men, women and children died from poison gas we have to do something.  Even though we haven’t done a damn thing to help people suffering under worse tyrants for about half a century in North Korea (see Up to 20,000 North Korean prison camp inmates have ‘disappeared’ says human rights group by Julian Ryall posted 9/5/2013 on The Telegraph).

There are fears that up to 20,000 may have been allowed to die of disease or starvation in the run-up to the closure of the camp at the end of last year…

The report, North Korea’s Hidden Gulag: Interpreting Reports of Changes in the Prison Camps, reveals that two camps have been shut down in the last year but that 130,000 individuals are still being held in penal labour colonies across the country.

“Through this vast system of unlawful imprisonment, the North Korean regime isolates, banishes, punishes and executes those suspected of being disloyal to the regime,” the report states.

“They are deemed ‘wrong-thinkers’, ‘wrong-doers’, or those who have acquired ‘wrong-knowledge’ or have engaged in ‘wrong-associations’…”

Reports suggest that a severe food shortage meant that little was passed on to inmates and that numbers dwindled rapidly from 30,000 to 3,000…

“North Korea’s 2009 currency devaluation (whereby camp authorities were reportedly unable to purchase food in markets to supplement the crops grown in the camps), combined with bad harvests, resulted in the death of large numbers of prisoners after 2010,” the report states…

Inmates – who can be imprisoned for life, along with three generations of their families, for anything deemed to be critical of the regime – are forced to survive by eating frogs, rats and picking corn kernels out of animal waste.

Activists say that as many as 40 percent of inmates die of malnutrition, while others succumb to disease, sexual violence, torture, abuse by the guards or are worked to death. Men, women and children are required to work for up to 16 hours a day in dangerous conditions, often in mines or logging camps.

Things are bad in Syria.  But North Korea has just about the poorest record on humans rights in the world.  And this has been going on for decades.  You almost have to go back to Nazi Germany to see oppression on this scale.  But do we attack North Korea?  More women and children have suffered and died in North Korea than they have in Syria.  So why Syria and not North Korea?

North Korea does have nuclear weapons.  And a border with China.  Are these the things that eliminate principles?  Killing women and children is wrong in Syria but it’s okay in North Korea?  Is this all it takes to devalue the lives of women and children?  If so God help the women and children of the Middle East when Iran gets their nuclear weapons.

A lot of liberals hate the military.  And jocks.  As these people bullied a lot of liberals back in high school.  Which is why a lot of them go into government.  To have power over other people that they never had before.  But they’re still that kid in high school.  They’ll push around Egypt and Libya when it seems everyone in the area is against them.  Nations they feel they can bully without any repercussions.  But an Iran or a North Korea?  That’s like walking up to and punching the big bully in high school.  Something they were too frightened to do in High School.  And are still too frightened to do now.

Except in Syria.  Which is now more of a religious conflict along the great Sunni-Shia divide of Islam.  With the extreme elements of both sides fighting it out in Syria.  Perhaps this is why the president and the left are willing to intervene now.  Because whoever wins now in Syria will likely be anti-American.  Just like Libya turned out with four dead Americans in Benghazi.  And just like Egypt fell to the Muslim Brotherhood after President Obama told Hosni Mubarak he had to go.  Perhaps they’ll feel safer because they helped our enemies a little.  And because of that our enemies will now like us.  And they will stop giving us wedgies and noogies.  Figuratively, of course.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Things go from Bad to Worse in the Middle East as American Allies fall on Opposite Sides of the Egyptian Power Struggle

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 24th, 2013

Week in Review

Some may think the Middle East is a homogenous region.  Where all Muslim people are the same and think alike.  But it’s not.  And they’re not.  There are huge divides between people in the Middle East.  There isn’t just tension between the United States and this region.  There’s tension between the different Muslim people.  Something President Obama apparently didn’t know with his ‘let’s make nice to Muslims so our former enemies don’t hate us’ foreign policy.  The geopolitical power struggles that exist everywhere else in the world exist, too, in the Middle East.  And you just can’t treat everyone the same (see Obama Caught Between Polarized Allies in Egypt Crisis by Terry Atlas posted 4-19-2013 on Bloomberg).

U.S. regional allies such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey are backing opposite sides in the violent power struggle in Egypt, complicating U.S. diplomacy as the most populous Arab nation is torn by conflict.

In pressing Egypt’s interim government — and the military leaders who hold the real power — for political reconciliation with Islamist protesters, President Barack Obama is finding that U.S. influence is being challenged by financial and political support from Middle East countries pursuing their own stakes in Egypt’s future…

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait have pledged billions of dollars in aid to the new Egyptian government. Qatar was a financial backer of ousted Islamist President Mohamed Mursi’s administration, and Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan denounced last week’s government crackdown on pro-Mursi protesters as a “massacre.”

“What Qatar and Turkey say is almost a 180-degree opposite of what the Emirates and the Saudis are saying publicly,” Katulis said.

There was a balance of power in the Middle East.  And because there was a balance of power there was peace in the Middle East.  And there was one man instrumental in keeping that peace.  Hosni Mubarak.  American friend and ally.  And friend of our other friends and allies in the region.  Those who want to maintain the balance of power.  And the peace.  And our friends were not happy when President Obama told Hosni Mubarak he had to go.  Especially Saudi Arabia.  Who is trying to check the spread of radical Islamism spreading in the region.  Something Mubarak did.  Because he and his allies and friends didn’t want radical Islamism spreading through the region.  And neither does the United States.

Yet President Obama threw the one man that was instrumental in suppressing Islamist revolution in the region, by suppressing the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, under the bus.  And did nothing as the Muslim Brotherhood rose to power.  Even recognizing the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood as the legitimate ruler of Egypt.  Despite warnings from every quarter.  As the Muslim Brotherhood inspired/spawned Hamas, Hezbollah and al Qaeda.  All anti-Western terrorist organizations.  All anti-Israeli terrorist organizations.  And all anti-American terrorist organizations.  These are the people that President Obama said the U.S. can work with.  Despite their credo being: “God is our objective, the Koran is our Constitution, the Prophet is our leader, struggle [jihad] is our way, and death for the sake of God is the highest of our aspirations.”  These are the people that President Obama wanted to make nice to so they would stop hating us.  Because he was naive and inexperienced.  And tended to believe a little too much of the myth-making the American media was spreading about him.

The balance of power and the peace it brought is now gone.  And the U.S. has allies falling on both sides of the Egyptian power struggle.  What a mess.  And it’s not isolated to Egypt.  The Muslim Brotherhood is spreading its tentacles throughout the region.  Making the Middle East a tinderbox.  Where it’s probably going to get worse before it gets better.  Sadly.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend in Egypt

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 15th, 2013

Politics 101

The US supported Saddam Hussein because of the Iranian Revolution and the Iran Hostage Crisis

Remember Saddam Hussein?  He was the dictator of Iraq that the US toppled from power.  Because of intelligence reports that he had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).  In particular chemical weapons.  And the reason this intelligence was so believable is that Hussein had used chemical weapons.  Against the Kurdish people in Halabja.  In southern Kurdistan.  An act of genocide.  And the greatest chemical attack against a civilian population.  As well as against the Iranians in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988).

One of the requirements of the armistice that ended the Gulf War (1990-1991) was for Hussein to destroy his chemical weapons stockpile.  And document that.  With UN inspectors.  Which never happened.  So technically a state of war still existed when George W. Bush launched the Iraq War (2003-2011).  Giving all the legal authorization he needed.  But he still went to the UN.  And asked the US Congress for permission to invade.  Which they gave.  And the US-led coalition went through the Iraqi defenses like a hot knife through butter.  But never found those WMDs.  Which was pretty unbelievable.  But there was something that was even more unbelievable.  Saddam Hussein, the brutal dictator the US toppled from power, used to be a US ally.

How can this be, you ask?  How could the US ally themselves with such a bad, bad man?  Because of Iran.  Iran used to be an ally of the US.  Then came the Iranian Revolution in 1979.  And the Iran hostage crisis (November 1979-January 1981).  This marked the time Iran began calling America the great Satan.  And began their war against the West.  Especially against the US.  Hostile rhetoric.  Some state-sponsored terrorism.  And leading the anti-American sentiment throughout the Muslim world.  So when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran the US threw in with him.  Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

The Muslim Brotherhood had a Problem with Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak keeping the Peace with Israel

Now is this just petty?  Or good foreign policy?  The whole enemy of my enemy is my friend thing?  Well, it turns out that it is good foreign policy.  For the goal of foreign policy is to make things better for your country.  And in the case of Iran and Iraq the choice was clear.  To make things better for the US you allied with Iraq.  Because Iran was going full Islamist against the US.   So by helping Iraq wage war against Iran the less time and resources Iran had to further anti-American sentiment throughout the Muslim world.  And should Iraq win the war it would bring Iran’s oppressive theocracy to an end.  Making life better for the average Iranian.  Especially for Iranian women.

But the Iran-Iraq war ended in a stalemate.  After 8 years of bitter fighting.  But when the war was over nothing changed.  The border was right where it was before the war.  But it wasn’t all for nothing.  With the stalemate Iraq kept its Shia minority population from catching the Iranian bug.  Leaving the Sunni majority safely in the majority.  Something a lot of the Arab strongmen had in common.  Including Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser.  Who had chosen to align Egypt with the Soviet Union during the Cold War.  But when Nasser died and Anwar Sadat took over he switched sides in the Cold War.  Aligning Egypt with the United States.  Even signing a peace treaty with Israel.  Something the Shia minority population did not like in the least.

The U.S. poured money into Egypt.  And made the Egyptian military a force to be reckoned with.  Making Egypt the most modern Arab state.  The most powerful.  And the most secular/Western.  Women could go to college and wear Western clothes.  Like they could in Iran before the Iranian Revolution.  Something the Shia minority population did not like.  Nor their growing political party.  The Muslim Brotherhood.  Who really had a problem with Anwar Sadat making peace with Israel.  As did the Egyptian Islamic Jihad movement.  Who assassinated Sadat (1981).  As they wanted to replace the Egyptian government with an Islamic state.  Just like the Muslim Brotherhood wanted to do.  Which is why when Hosni Mubarak succeeded Sadat one of the things he did was to continue the ban on the Muslim Brotherhood.  And oppressed and jailed its members.

The Nations interested in World Peace favor the Egyptian Military over the Muslim Brotherhood

During the height of the Roman Empire there was great world peace.  The Pax Romana (27 BC to 180 AD).  Made possible by Rome’s massive military might.  During the height of the British Empire there was great world peace.  The Pax Britannica (1815–1914).  Made possible by Britain’s massive military might.  And their unchallenged sea power.  Which let them maintain a balance of power.  For any powerful nation that threatened the peace with thoughts of attacking a weaker neighbor could not attack that neighbor without taking on the mighty British Empire.  For to maintain the Pax Britannica the British would intervene on the behalf of the weaker power.  Allowing weaker nations to live next to more powerful nations without threat of invasion.

This is what a powerful military can give you.  Peace.  If that military power is controlled by a nation interested in keeping the peace.  Which is what the Egyptian military gave Hosni Mubarak.  Under his presidency there was peace in the Middle East.  The Suez Canal was open to world trade.  Egyptian tourism thrived.  Egypt was a modern and secular nation.  Women and Christians lived with the greatest liberty and safety during the Mubarak presidency.  Because Mubarak kept the peace.  Sometimes with brutality.  Especially when it came to the Muslim Brotherhood.  Which is why there was peace in the Middle East.  And women and Christians in Egypt enjoyed liberty and safety.  Because the people who wanted to take all of that away were prevented from doing just that.  But then came the Arab Spring.  And President Obama told Hosni Mubarak that he had to go.  Instead of working with him to implement reforms to ease the tensions in Egypt.

In Egypt there are basically two political forces.  The military.  Which kept peace with Israel.  And in the Middle East.  Then there’s the Muslim Brotherhood.  Who wants to remove Israel from the map.  And install a theocracy in Egypt like they have in Iran.  When Mubarak faced open rebellion he did not turn the military onto his people.  He stepped down from power.  And the Muslim Brotherhood rushed in to fill the political vacuum.  Assuring the world that they wouldn’t do pretty much everything they did.  And one of the last things the democratically-elected Mohamed Morsi did was to give himself dictatorial powers.  Just as bad if not worse than Mubarak exercised.  Only without the peace, liberty and prosperity enjoyed under Mubarak.  Democratically elected or not a Morsi presidency did not foster democracy.  Or peace.  Just as the Muslim Brotherhood does not foster democracy or peace.  Which leaves the other political power in Egypt.  The military.  Which is why Western nations and those nations interested in world peace favor the military over the Muslim Brotherhood.  While the enemies of the West (i.e., Iran) support the Brotherhood.  Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Muslim Brotherhood is out in Egypt for Ruling against the Will of the People

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 4th, 2013

Politics 101

The Muslim Brotherhood did not like Hosni Mubarak or Peace in the Middle East

President Mohammed Morsi is no longer president of Egypt.  Thanks to a bloodless military coup.  Why did the military do this?  Is there some power-hungry general that wanted to become dictator?  No.  The army stepped in to prevent the country from degenerating into civil war.  As the people were unhappy.  And angry.  Filling Tahrir Square.  Protesting the rule of President Morsi.  Just as they protested the rule of Hosni Mubarak.  Back during the Arab Spring.  When democracy was flowering all over the Arab world.

The people were unhappy with Hosni Mubarak because of soaring unemployment.  And his oppressive police state.  To name two things.  The people wanted jobs.  And liberty.  So they demanded democracy.  And got it.  They had free elections.  And the people chose their new leader.  Mohammed Morsi.  Who since becoming president did nothing to improve the employment picture.  And seemed more interested in imposing Sharia law on the Egyptian people than liberty.  In fact, he seemed more interested in restricting liberty.  Especially for Coptic Christians.  And women.

Mubarak’s police state did a lot to suppress the Muslim Brotherhood.  President Morsi’s party.  The Muslim Brotherhood also wanted to impose Sharia law on the Egyptian people.  And did not like Hosni Mubarak for making peace with Israel.  Being secular.  Making it harder to smuggle arms into the Gaza Strip to their friend.  The terrorist group Hamas.  A militant Palestinian Islamic movement dedicated to the destruction of Israel.  And member of the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.  So the Brotherhood was no friend of peace in the Middle East.  Or secularism.  Which is why Mubarak brutally suppressed the Muslim Brotherhood.  But now the Brotherhood was in power.  And they would have their revenge.  As they put Egypt on the road to Sharia law.

Both the Nazis and the Muslim Brotherhood lied to Rise to Power

Hosni Mubarak was a friend to America.  Israel.  And Middle East peace.  He had his faults.  But he was so critical to peace and stability in the region the United States and their friends and allies should have tried to help Mubarak reform Egypt.  Instead of throwing him under the bus.  Like President Obama did.  Who spent his political career bashing George W. Bush for trying to bring democracy to the Middle East.  And here he was.  President Obama.  Trying to bring democracy to Egypt.  Telling our friend and ally, Hosni Mubarak, he had to go.  When the only opposition party in Egypt was the friend of Hamas and Iran.  The Muslim Brotherhood.

The conservatives warned President Obama about letting the Muslim Brotherhood rise to power.  That it was not in America’s best interests.  Israel’s.  Or the Middle East’s.  And the Brotherhood knew the Americans and Israelis and the West in general were uncomfortable with them in power.  So to appease everyone they said not to worry.  They weren’t interested in rising to power.  And they wouldn’t run for the presidency.  They just wanted to help the nation they loved, Egypt, to be free.  That’s all.  But then one thing led to another.  And the Muslim Brotherhood rose to power.  With one of their own becoming president.  Just like conservatives warned would happen.  And the Brotherhood promised wouldn’t happen.  So what happened?

The Muslim Brotherhood, of course, lied.  That’s how you rise to power when you want to change the country against the will of the people.  Adolf Hitler didn’t rise to power through a military coup.  The Nazis won elections.  They didn’t campaign on the truth.  They didn’t tell the people that they were going to invade Poland, Norway, North Africa, the Low Countries, France, Greece, the Soviet Union, etc.  That they were going to build death camps.  Or use a brutal secret police (the Gestapo) to terrorize their own people.  For these aren’t the kinds of things people vote for.  So you lie to the people.  And say you want to do other things.  Not the things people warned would happen if the Nazis rose to power.  Especially those who read Mein Kampf.  Where Hitler himself told the world what he planned on doing.  It was all there.  All you had to do was read his book.

Candidates who Promise Everything typically want to Change the Country Against the Will of the People

Iranian students protested the Shah of Iran.  Just like the Egyptians protested Hosni Mubarak.  Men and women.  Including a lot of college graduates who could not find any work with their new degrees.  They blamed the Shah.  Another friend and ally of the United States.  They demanded jobs.  And liberty.  A democracy of the people.  And that’s exactly what they got.  Then they voted for an Islamic republic.  And those people who protested to overthrow the Shah lost everything they wanted.  Especially the women.  Who had fewer liberties after the Iranian Revolution than they had under the Shah of Iran.  During the elections the Islamists didn’t say they were going to do this.  For people demanding liberty and jobs are not going to vote for someone promising to take away even more of their liberties.  So they lied.  Allowing them to rise to power.  To change the country against the will of the people.

Removing the Muslim Brotherhood from power is good for the United States.  For Israel.  And for peace in the Middle East.  Because with the Muslim Brotherhood in power Iran had a good friend in Egypt.  To help expand their hegemony in the region.  Shiite rule in a predominantly Sunni area.  And what was once a more secular area.  Before the Arab Spring.  Some expressed concern about the military removing a democratically elected president.  Of course they must express this publically.  Especially when they’re trying to spread democracy.  But there is a difference between good democracy and bad democracy.  Bad democracy is the kind that is only transitory.  A tool.  A means to an end.  When you want to change a country against the will of the people.  And once you achieve the end you can dispose of that ridiculous thing called democracy.  Like the Nazis did.  Like the Iranians did.  And like the Muslim Brotherhood was well along the way in doing.

This is something people need to learn.  Not to trust those running for office.  Especially those who promise everything the people want.  You see, there is a reason why the people don’t have everything they want.  It’s just not possible.  It’s too costly.  And you just can’t please everyone.  So no matter how much you give the people there will still be some who want something else.  Always.  Which is good for people running for office.  As they always have something to lie about.  That is, to make a promise they can’t keep.  Or simply have no intention of keeping.  Because they want to change the country against the will of the people.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

President Obama’s Change in Policy during the Arab Spring to Support Change instead Stability spreads Instability

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 17th, 2013

Week in Review

Before the Arab Spring there was the Green Revolution in Iran in 2009.  Where thousands used social media to gather in protests over what they claimed were voting irregularities that kept President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power.  President Obama did not support the Green Revolution.  Despite Iran being a sponsor of terrorism, an enemy of the United States and the greatest threat to regional stability.  President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad suppressed the uprisings.  And jailed some of the opposition.  Where some have made claims of torture and rape.  But as closed a society Iran is these claims have been unsubstantiated.  Though we have the word of the ruling regime that crushed the rebellion that there was no torture or rape.

When the Arab Spring kicked off in Tunisia in 2010 President Obama announced a change in policy.  The U.S. would support change in the Arab world instead of stability.  When the Arab Spring spread to Egypt in 2011 President Obama told Hosni Mubarak that he had to step down from power.  Despite being a stalwart U.S. ally.  An enemy to al Qaeda.  And being the anchor of stability in the Middle East and North Africa.  Now the Muslim Brotherhood is in power there.  Who has close ties with Iran.

When the Arab Spring spread to Libya President Obama supported the opposition based in Benghazi.  Despite Colonel Muammar Gaddafi renouncing terrorism.  And being an ally of America in their War on Terror.  Like Mubarak he oppressed radical Islamists including al Qaeda.  Which explains why al Qaeda was part of the opposition trying to overthrow Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.  They hated him.  And his oppression of anti-western  radical Islamists.  President Obama supported the opposition.  Gave them weapons.  And helped enforce a no-fly zone.  In 2012 Islamists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.  Killing 4 Americans.  Including the Libyan ambassador.  Chris Stevens.  Perhaps killed with weapons we brought into Libya.

When the Arab Spring spread to Syria President Obama did not support the opposition.  Despite Syria being a sponsor of terrorism.  And a close ally of Iran.  As Syria broke down into civil war al Qaeda joined the opposition.  Making any U.S. support now even more complicated.  However Syria turns out it will be a foreign policy failure.  In fact the foreign policy of President Obama has been to abandon U.S. allies that bring stability to the region.  While not getting involved in uprisings in states hostile to the U.S.  Bringing great instability to the Middle East and Northern Africa.  And beyond (see Police: 7 foreigners kidnapped in north Nigeria by SHEHU SAULAWA and JON GAMBRELL, Associated Press, posted 2/17/2013 on Yahoo! News).

Gunmen attacked a camp for a construction company in rural northern Nigeria, killing a guard and kidnapping seven foreign workers from Britain, Greece, Italy Lebanon and the Philippines, authorities said Sunday, in the biggest kidnapping yet in a region under attack by Islamic extremists…

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the abductions, though Nigeria’s predominantly Muslim north has been under attack by the radical Islamic sect known as Boko Haram in the last year and a half. The country’s weak central government has been unable to stop the group’s bloody guerrilla campaign of shootings and bombings. The sect is blamed for killing at least 792 people in 2012 alone, according to an AP count.

Boko Haram, whose name means “Western education is sacrilege” in the Hausa language of Nigeria’s north, has demanded the release of all its captive members and called for strict Shariah law to be implemented across the entire country. The sect has killed both Christians and Muslims in their attacks, as well as soldiers and security forces…

Foreigners, long abducted by militant groups and criminal gangs for ransom in Nigeria’s oil-rich southern delta, have become increasingly targeted in Nigeria’s north as the violence has grown. However, abductions of foreigners in the north have seen hostages regularly killed…

Foreign embassies in Nigeria have issued travel warnings regarding northern Nigeria for months. Worries about abductions have increased in recent weeks with the French military intervention in Mali, as its troops and Malian soldiers try to root out Islamic fighters who took over that nation’s north in the months following a military coup. Last week, the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria’s capital, Abuja, put out a warning following the killings of polio workers in the northern city of Kano and the killing of the North Korean doctors.

President Obama campaigned in 2012 that al Qaeda was on the ropes.  While blaming the death of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans on a spontaneous uprising because of a YouTube video.  Which if it was it means the average Libyan on the street in Benghazi walks around carrying heavy weapons.  Which is highly unlikely.  Then again, the opposition the U.S. supported in Benghazi included al Qaeda.  So maybe they did walk around the streets of Benghazi with heavy weapons.  Just waiting for dates with symbolic meaning (9/11) to attack Americans.

President Obama got what he wanted.  Change instead of stability.  For there is little stability in the Middle East or North Africa.  And now in West Africa.  Where Islamists and al Qaeda affiliates are reaching into Algeria.  Mali.  And Nigeria.  Radical Islamists are spreading their reach throughout the Middle East and Africa and in other parts of the world.  Fueled by the decline of U.S. influence.  And a rise in Iranian influence.  The winner in the Arab Spring?  It would appear that it is the radical Islamists that are benefitting most from the Arab Spring.  While the people in these countries go from a somewhat western culture of liberty (especially for women) towards oppressive theocracies.  Just as the Iranian people did during the Iranian Revolution in 1979.  No doubt the Iranian women who protested the Shah of Iran rue the day they ever joined that protest movement.  For they have none of the liberties they enjoyed under the Shah.

Guess this is what happens when you abandon your friends and help your enemies.  Your friends suffer while your enemies grow stronger.  And the world grows a more dangerous place.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Two Years after the Ouster of Hosni Mubarak and the Egyptian People are still Protesting

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 26th, 2013

Week in Review

Two years ago, during the Arab Spring, President Obama told President Hosni Mubarak he had to go.  The Egyptian people wanted democracy.  And Mubarak was in the way.  So the Mubarak government fell.  Even though he was an ally of the United States.  Which was rather odd for an American president to ask an American ally to step down from power.  Especially when the people standing in the wings to take over that power are enemies of the United States.  But President Obama did.  And he took credit for this.  Proud for his part in the Arab Spring.  And how did all of that work out?  Like most people thought it would (see Tear gas fired by police in Egypt posted 1/26/2013 on Sky News).

Police in the Egyptian city of Alexandria have fired tear gas at protesters, witnesses say, as nationwide rallies mark the second anniversary of the uprising that ousted Hosni Mubarak…

Tens of thousands took to the streets across the country to protest against Islamist President Mohamed Morsi, who is accused of failing to work for the goals of the revolution that ousted Mubarak and consolidating power in the hands of his powerful Muslim Brotherhood.

That’s right, Egypt went from being a U.S. ally to aligning with Hamas and Iran.  Enemies of the United States.  And enemies of Israel.  Greatly destabilizing the Mideast.  For what?  Even the Egyptian people are unhappy with the outcome.  At least the ones who want Democracy.  The Islamists, though, are quite happy with the Muslim Brotherhood in power.  And hope to see them take Egypt down the same road Iran took in 1979.  Where the Islamists rose up in power.  Rounded up the democratic protestors.  And turned the country into a theocracy.  Something that may happen in Egypt.  Thanks to an American president that told Hosni Mubarak he had to go.


Tags: , , , , , , ,

A War Against Women exists…in Egypt

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 8th, 2012

Week in Review

The Left unleashed a war against Republicans by claiming they were waging a war against women.  They shouted from the rooftops the evil that would befall women should Republicans get elected.  Scaring women with the specter of having to pay for their own birth control.  And paying for their own abortions.  Scaring a lot of women with the fear that should Republicans get elected they would force women into marriages against their will.  Raising a family against their will.  Cooking, cleaning and having sex with husbands against their will.  So women voted for President Obama.  To keep their birth control and their abortions.  So they wouldn’t ever have to get married.  So they could have happy fulfilling careers.  Instead of a loving family.  So they can die alone some day.

So this was the silly war the Republicans were waging against women.  It’s a pity the Left doesn’t speak out against a real war on women (see ‘Men don’t have to worry about being caught’: Sex mobs target Egypt’s women by Charlene Gubash posted 12/4/2012 on Workd News).

In the post-Mubarak era, activists and protesters have reported many particularly violent assaults on women. Some experts allege the government and security officials are failing to take the problem seriously. More than 700 claims of harassment were filed across Egypt over the four-day Id al-Adha holiday in late October.

“It is not a country of law, not a state of law anymore. It has given men a chance to harass women without being accused,” said Afaf Marie, director of the Egyptian Association for Community Participation and Enhancement, an NGO.

Some activists fear that women’s rights will suffer under the rule of President Mohammed Morsi, who is an Islamist.

Government inaction has allowed the problem to spiral out of control, Heba Morayef, director of Human Rights Watch for the Middle East and North Africa, told NBC News. Police no longer inspire fear as they did before the revolution. In addition, locals say it appears there are fewer police on the increasingly lawless streets — and often none in Tahrir Square.

“The state is failing to respond,” she said. “Men don’t have to worry about being caught.”

Interestingly, President Obama helped bring President Mohammed Morsi to power.  By telling President Hosni Mubarak that he had to step down from power.  When there was no organized opposition save the Muslim Brotherhood.  Who said they would not try to seize power.  Who the American Left said they would not seize power.  That it wouldn’t be another Iran.  But in the resulting power vacuum left with the fall of Mubarak the Muslim Brotherhood stepped into that vacuum.  And now their man, Mohammed Morsi, an Islamist, is now President of Egypt.

And any women who dare to leave their homes alone are being sexually assaulted.  As the Muslim Brotherhood want women in Egypt to be like women in Iran.  Oppressed and subservient.  And everything the Left accused the Republicans of wanting to do with women they’re actually doing in Egypt.  And worse.  Including sexual harassment and rape in public.  But where is the American Left?  Keeping their eyes on those rascally Republicans.  While their sisters suffer unspeakable cruelties in Egypt.  Suffering in large part due to the actions of President Obama and his misguided Mideast policies.  Who helped to make Egypt a less safe place for women.  By telling Mubarak he had to go.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mohamed Morsi takes Egypt One Step Closer to Radical Islamic Theocracy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 25th, 2012

Week in Review

Hosni Mubarak kept the Muslim Brotherhood out of power when he ruled Egypt.  Suppressing Iranian influence in Egypt.  He even jailed Mohamed Morsi.  A leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood.  When the Arab Spring came along President Obama stated that long-time US ally Mubarak had to go.  Even though the only organized opposition was the brotherhood.  With their Iranian ties.  And their ties to Hamas in the Gaza Strip.  That terrorist group and branch of the Muslim Brotherhood that likes to fire missiles into Israel.  Threatening regional stability.

So abandoning Mubarak was risky business.  For the likely power to fill the resulting power void in Egypt would not be friendly to Israel, the US or regional stability.  But the naysayers, and President Obama, brushed those concerns aside.  For this wasn’t their fathers’ Muslim Brotherhood.  This was a peace-loving brotherhood.  Who wanted only democracy.  Just like those Iranians who seized power in Iran after the 1979 Revolution.  And installed a radical Islamic theocracy.  But that wasn’t going to happen in Egypt.  No, the Arab Spring was making the Middle East and North Africa safe for democracy.  At least according to President Obama.  Of course, those on the ground in Egypt would beg to differ (see Egypt’s President Morsi faces judicial revolt over decree by Tom Perry, Reuters, posted 11/24/2012 on The Vancouver Sun).

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi faced a rebellion from judges who accused him on Saturday of expanding his powers at their expense, deepening a crisis that has triggered violence in the street and exposed the country’s deep divisions.

The Judges’ Club, a body representing judges across Egypt, called for a strike during a meeting interrupted with chants demanding the “downfall of the regime” – the rallying cry in the uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak last year.

Morsi’s political opponents and supporters, representing the divide between newly empowered Islamists and their critics, called for rival demonstrations on Tuesday over a decree that has triggered concern in the West.

Issued late on Thursday, it marks an effort by Morsi to consolidate his influence after he successfully sidelined Mubarak-era generals in August. The decree defends from judicial review decisions taken by Morsi until a new parliament is elected in a vote expected early next year.

It also shields the Islamist-dominated assembly writing Egypt’s new constitution from a raft of legal challenges that have threatened the body with dissolution, and offers the same protection to the Islamist-controlled upper house of parliament.

Guess it’s their fathers’ Muslim Brotherhood after all.  Boy, what a mistake it was throwing Hosni Mubarak under the bus.  We should have worked with other Arab states friendly with Egypt who oppose the Iranian threat in the region to find a better solution than giving Egypt to Iran.  For people may have complained about the restrictions of their freedoms under Mubarak but they haven’t seen anything yet.  Just ask the Iranians who lived through the 1979 Revolution now living under a radical Islamic theocracy.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sad Times for Egyptian Women as Islamic Shariah Law is coming to Egypt instead of Democracy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 3rd, 2012

Week in Review

George W. Bush was criticized severely for nation building and trying to spread democracy.  Those who criticized Bush praise President Obama for bringing democracy to Egypt.  Of course, it’s not quite the same democracy Bush was trying to spread in Iraq.  He wanted a democracy that wouldn’t vote in a theocracy like they did in Iran.  Some 30 years on Iran still does not have a democracy because of that oppressive theocracy they voted in.  Now Egypt appears to be heading down the Iranian road (see Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood says new constitution must be based on Islamic Shariah law by Associated Press posted 10/31/2012 on The Washington Post).

Egypt’s powerful Muslim Brotherhood says Islamic Shariah law must be the basis of Egypt’s new constitution, and legislation must be based on Islamic penal code.

The Brotherhood said in a statement Wednesday that a country ruled by Shariah would not become a theocracy. President Mohammed Morsi comes from the Brotherhood.

This is not good for the US.  It will be good for Iran.  But is sure won’t be good for the US.  Or Egyptian women.  Just ask the Iranian women.

Given the choice between oppression under Hosni Mubarak or oppression under a theocracy I think most democracy-loving people would choose the Mubarak oppression.  For few will argue that life for women in Mubarak Egypt was far better than it was/is in theocratic Iran.

Democracy fails when the wrong people rise to power and vote it away.  Which is what happened in Iran.  And looks like it may happen in Egypt.  And with the al Qaeda-trouble in Benghazi it may be well underway there.  Ultimately it may turn out that the Arab Spring was not good for democracy.  It just threw out the dictators who oppressed those who wanted to make their countries even more oppressive.  And the biggest losers in all of this?  The women in the Middle East.  Who yearn for the freedom and values they enjoy in the West.  Like they enjoyed under the 8 years of George W. Bush, the 4 your years under George H.W. Bush and the 8 years under Ronald Reagan.  Something these women would gladly trade for every chance they got.

You want to talk about a war on women?  I give you the Arab Spring.  And the march towards Iranian theocracy.  Something the policies of the Obama administration have helped along with their foreign policy decisions in Egypt and Libya.  And their snubs to Israel.  The country with by far the greatest women’s rights in the Middle East.  A country that already had a woman, Golda Meir, serve as the leader of their country.  Perhaps if the women of the Middle East were demanding birth control and access to abortion (women’s rights American style) the Obama administration would not advance policy that is so detrimental to women there.  Such as helping to make the way clear for a theocracy in Egypt.  But as these women want things that are not vagina-centered (freedom of speech, escape from second-class status, the right not to be beaten or murdered for not behaving, to be able to go to school, get a job, etc.) this war on women is not heard here by the Obama administration.  And these women will probably soon have the same fate the Iranian women had.  Another country where a poor foreign policy decision (not to support the Green Revolution) has condemned women to further oppression there.  While making the world a less safe place.  As the Iranians are moving closer to having a nuclear weapon.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Previous Entries