Posted tagged ‘Sisi’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

El-Sissi against the Arab world

October 31, 2016

El-Sissi against the Arab world, Israel Hayom, Dr. Reuven Berko, October 31, 2016

(How different would the situation be now if Obama, Clinton et al had supported Sisi’s “coup” rather than Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood? — DM)

The attitude of the Arab Gulf states toward Egypt under President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi is a good example of the insanity of considerable parts of the Arab world, whose twisted suicidal reasoning is unclear to many people outside it.

Given the American wipeout in the Middle East, leaders of the Persian Gulf states are very well aware that the only support they can expect against the expected Iranian aggression on the Arabian Peninsula comes from Egyptian military might. Nevertheless, megalomania, hypocrisy, double talk, and in particular a divisive and violent radical Islamist agenda are leading the Arab leaders to saw off the very branch they sit on.

The competition for hegemony, a tangle of conflicting economic and political interests and defensive manipulations, along with drives for expansion and survival, are leading the Gulf states to arm and fund the radical Sunni terrorist movements in Syria and Iraq to check the growth and terrorism of Shiite Iran, whose military provocations and threat to the Sunni Arab Gulf states is increasing.

But in effect they are encouraging Islamic terrorism in Egypt.

Turkey and Qatar have not accepted the loss of former President Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, and have not relinquished their dream of an Islamic empire. The Saudis, because of their money, reject Egypt as the “Arab mother state.” Mistaken U.S. policy confers transient status on el-Sissi’s regime. All of Egypt’s attempts to ingratiate itself with Saudi Arabia — the military guarantees, the delegations, and the gifts of the Tiran and Sanafir islands — failed to do the trick.

There is an Arab proverb that says, “Starve your dog so he will obey you.” While battling Iran, the Gulf states are inciting for el-Sissi to be ousted while supplying stingy amounts of money and fuel just to humiliate him and keep him “alive,” beaten, and needy — a thug who can attack Tehran for them. While the Al Jazeera network presents the Egyptian president as a sex criminal, an agent of Iran, Israel, and America, a corrupt official who sells weapons to the Houthi rebels in Yemen, the Egyptian government is vulnerable to incitement and terrorism from the Muslim Brotherhood and their protectors in the Gulf (Al Jazeera), flooding, monstrous demographics (thanks to the Islamic ban on birth control), inflation, shortages of fuel, sugar, rice and raw materials, as well as the threat of the water level in the Nile River dropping and a hit to its $55 billion tourism industry.

To encourage his suffering, restive, exposed-to-incitement people, el-Sissi told them that he lived for a decade with nothing in the refrigerator other than a bottle of water. In response, the Saudi king mocked him, delayed shipments of fuel and visas to Saudi Arabia for Egyptians and made threats that el-Sissi would fall, like then-President Hosni Mubarak. In response to the intra-Arab scheming, el-Sissi invited the Russians to conduct a joint military exercise and recently voted against the Arabs — and with Iran, Russia and Syria — in the U.N. Security Council on a solution to the Syrian crisis, knowing that the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad and the success of the Islamists would make him the next target. If the Gulf states don’t change their policy soon, they’ll wind up getting a refrigerator full of explosives from him.

Categories: Arab nations, Egypt, Iran, Iran - Middle East, Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Egypt, Sisi
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Clinton Backed Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Regime

October 13, 2016

Clinton Backed Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Regime, Washington Free Beacon, Bill Gertz October 13, 2016

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton before her departure to Egypt's coastal city of Alexandria in Cairo, Egypt, July 15, 2012. Clinton on Sunday urged Egypt to commit to "a strong, durable democracy" that protects all citizens, hoping to appeal both to supporters of the popularly elected Islamist president and minorities fearful of being repressed under their new government. (AP Photo/Brendan Smialowski, Pool)

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton before her departure to Egypt’s coastal city of Alexandria in Cairo, Egypt, July 15, 2012. (AP Photo/Brendan Smialowski, Pool)

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2012 called the election of Egypt’s Islamist Muslim Brotherhood leader a “milestone” for Egyptian democracy and offered covert police and security help, according to declassified State Department documents.

A nine-page document, once-labeled “Secret,” listed talking points for Clinton’s meeting with newly-elected Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi on July 14, 2012. The talking points said Morsi’s election was a key step toward popular democracy in the strategic North African state.

“We stand behind Egypt’s transition to democracy,” the heavily-redacted Clinton talking points state, adding that the only way to maintain a strong Egypt is “through a successful transition to democracy.”

The first key objective of the meeting was for Clinton to “offer our congratulations to Morsi and to the Egyptian people for this milestone in Egypt’s transition to democracy.”

Clinton then was meant to offer Morsi American technical expertise and assistance from both the U.S. government and private sector to support his economic and social programs.

Clinton’s talking points also included an offer of secret assistance to help Morsi “upgrade and reorient Egypt’s police force toward serving the needs of a democratic people.” The offer included sending a team of U.S. police and security experts to Egypt as part of a “framework of cooperation” that would be carried out “quite discretely.”

Also, the talking points reveal Clinton was ready to help launch an Egyptian-American Enterprise Fund, a private sector initiative of U.S. and Egyptian investors to help Egyptian businesses. The fund was to be launched with $60 million and would later involve Congress adding $300 million over five years.

The fund was created in September 2012.

Many pro-democracy Egyptians who had taken to the streets as part of the 2011 revolution that ousted long-time U.S. ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak viewed U.S. support for Morsi as a betrayal and part of a U.S. strategy of backing the Muslim Brotherhood in the region.

The meeting between Clinton and Morsi took place two months before terrorists in neighboring Libya attacked a U.S. diplomatic compound and CIA facility, killing four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stephens.

A second State Department document revealed that Deputy Secretary of State Thomas R. Nides wrote to Morsi on Sept. 24, 2012 seeking collaboration with the Egyptian leader on Syria and Iran.

“It was a honor to meet with you in Cairo,” Nides wrote in the letter. “We share the goal of growing our markets and increasing trade, as well as a desire for a stable, secure and peaceful region. As I said when we met, the United States also remains committed to helping Egypt address regional issues, including Syria and Iran.”

Both documents reveal that the State Department under Clinton had little understanding of the Islamist threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and its branches.

Andrew C. McCarthy, former assistant U.S. attorney in New York who prosecuted Islamist terrorism cases, said Clinton backed the Muslim Brotherhood over the Egyptian military, stating it was imperative that power be turned over to the winner of the election.

“The defining mission of the Muslim Brotherhood is the implementation of sharia,” McCarthy said. Sharia is Islamic law that critics say is antidemocratic and contrary to fundamental rights and freedoms

The documents were released under a Freedom of Information Act request seeking information on the Obama administration’s secret 2011 Presidential Study Directive-11, or PSD-11.

The directive, according to officials familiar with its contents, outlined how the administration would seek to support the Muslim Brotherhood around the world despite the Islamist supremacist organization providing the ideological underpinning for jihadist terrorism for both al Qaeda and its successor, the Islamic State.

U.S. backing for Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt was derailed by the Egyptian military a year after the meeting. Morsi, the first democratically elected head of state in Egyptian history, was ousted in a coup after he had sought to consolidate power by granting himself unlimited authority in what pro-democracy critics called an Islamist coup.

Egyptian military leaders arrested Morsi on July 3, 2013, after protesters took to the streets to oppose his rule. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi headed a military government and was later elected president.

The Muslim Brotherhood is an international organization founded in 1928 that adopted as its motto “Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our Leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the path of Allah is our highest hope.”

The leaders of the Brotherhood in September 2010 declared jihad, or holy war against the United States and Israel, six months before the Arab Spring uprisings in North Africa and the Middle East.

Clinton’s backing for Arab Spring states was guided by PSD-11 and produced ongoing disasters in the region, namely in Libya and Syria.

U.S. intervention in Libya ousted dictator Moammar Gadhafi but left the oil-rich state in turmoil. It is now viewed as a failed state and safe haven for several Islamist terror groups.

Syria’s civil war helped spawn the emergence of the Islamic State in 2014.

In a section on Israel, Clinton’s talking points expressed appreciation to Morsi for assertions that Egypt would continue to abide by international treaties and obligations.

“Maintaining peace with Israel is a fundamental shared interest and critical for Egypt’s ability to address its economic challenges and enjoy international support as it consolidates its democracy,” the talking points stated. “We may not have a common view, but we do have a common interest.”

The CIA also covertly backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, according to Egyptian news outlets. In December 2013, the news website Al Bashayer published audio recordings of a CIA delegation that met with Muslim Brotherhood Deputy Khayrat al Shatir and Brotherhood official Isam al Haddad at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on Jan. 8, 2013.

The CIA asked the Muslim Brotherhood leaders to open a back channel to al Qaeda “to secure the safe exit of U.S. troops” from Afghanistan.

Additionally, another news outlet, Al-Marshad al Amni, reported that Maj. Gen. Abd-al-Hamid Khayrat, former deputy chief for Egyptian State Security Investigations said the CIA in January 2013 “asked for the help of the MB in Egypt to facilitate… the withdrawal from Afghanistan.” The Muslim Brotherhood agreed to become a “bridge” between the U.S. government and al Qaeda, Khayrat said.

The reports triggered widespread conspiracy theories in post-Morsi Egypt that the CIA was collaborating with Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to destabilize Egypt.

The Clinton talking points about the transition to democracy were reflected in a briefing given by a State Department official to reporters the day before the 2012 meeting. The covert police assistance was not mentioned.

A day after the meeting, Clinton stated in remarks at the U.S. Consulate in Alexandria, Egypt, that she told Morsi the success of his presidency and Egypt’s success “depends upon building consensus across the Egyptian political spectrum and speaking to the needs and concerns of all Egyptians—all faiths, all communities, men and women alike.”

Retired Army Lt. Col. Joseph Myers, a former DIA official and specialist on terrorism, said the documents show the endorsement and support of the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt was “a fools errand and shows a disastrous strategic naivety.”

“The whole policy initiative to support a Muslim Brotherhood government anywhere is another example of a total policy failure of Secretary Clinton,” Myers said.

“But it also raises deeper questions of who in our government is advising and influencing such reckless and dangerous policies that show no fundamental comprehension of the threat we face from radical Islamic jihad,” he added. “Or worse these advisers precisely understand what they are doing to U.S. policy and Secretary Clinton could not.”

Categories: Egypt, Hillary Clinton and Islamists, Hillary Clinton and Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi, Mubarak, Sisi
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Egyptians meet with US officials to try to mend relations after Obama’s support for Muslim Brotherhood

September 24, 2016

Egyptians meet with US officials to try to mend relations after Obama’s support for Muslim Brotherhood, Jihad Watch, , September 24, 2016

The Obama administration has been reluctant to accept the legitimacy of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi after he assumed power following the removal of his Muslim Brotherhood predecessor, Mohamed Morsi.

The Washington Times has exposed Obama’s backing of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), which Obama attempts to justify as “a moderate alternative to more violent Islamist groups like al Qaeda and the Islamic State.” Hillary Clinton also paid “an official visit” to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi when he first took power, and offered him the “strong support” of Washington.

The motto of the Muslim Brotherhood states:

“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration.”

In 2015, al-Sisi visited a Coptic Cathedral and later called for a religious revolution toward a modern reformation of Islam and stated “it’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.”

Sisi has rightly declared about Obama:

You left the Egyptians. You turned your back on the Egyptians, and they won’t forget that.

In addition to Obama’s failing Egypt, he is also failing Americans. Obama’s own administration has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, illustrating the harmful direction in which the American president has led the country into, particularly considering the MB’s stated plan and strategy to turn North America into an Islamic caliphate:

“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…”

sisi-obama

“Egyptian Dignitaries and American Foreign Policy Experts Meet to Restore Strained Diplomatic Ties After Obama”, by Dustin Stockton, Breitbart, September 21, 2016:

NEW YORK – Egyptian media leaders and distinguished members of the Egyptian parliament met with members of the American media and foreign policy community Tuesday to discuss how to mend the relationship between the United States and Egypt.

The Obama administration has been reluctant to accept the legitimacy of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi after he assumed power following the removal of his Muslim Brotherhood predecessor, Mohamed Morsi.

Popular Egyptian media personality and host of American Pulse, Dr. Michael Morgan, organized the event, featuring several American foreign policy experts, including representatives from the London Center for Policy Research. The event gave these foreign policy experts a chance to meet with over one hundred prominent Egyptians, including members of parliament, leading media figures, government officials, and businessmen.

“The dinner was in honor of Egypt the country, and to try to strengthen the relationship between the Egyptians and Americans,” Dr. Morgan said. “After the downfall that has happened over the last eight years between the United States and Egypt [during] Barack Obama’s presidency, we hope that America will turn it’s face back to Egypt.”

Event organizers provided Breitbart News with unrestricted, on-the-record access to participate in the dialogue on a wide range of issues, including the ramifications of the United States presidential election on America’s relationship with Egypt, challenges in the Middle East, and the Egyptian government’s efforts to maintain peace and stability after more than five years of turmoil.

Members of the Egyptian delegation lambasted Hillary Clinton, a major figure in the demise of U.S.-Egyptian relations, after Egyptian President El-Sisi met with both Clinton and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on Monday.

London Center for Policy Research Vice President of Strategic Initiatives and Operations Tony Shaffer argued that Egypt is critical to any solution addressing current conflicts in the Middle East. Shaffer and the London Center for Policy Research have proposed the formation of an “Arab NATO,” led by Egypt and Egyptian President El-Sisi. The concept would use Egyptian credibility and respect from both Western and Muslim countries to bring together a coalition of Arab nations to enforce borders and settle disputes in the Middle East.

For the past five years, Egypt’s diplomatic relationship with the U.S. has been significantly strained.

In 2011, Egyptian protesters successfully deposed President Hosni Mubarak following three decades of rule. After Mubarak’s removal, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsi became president and began to implement hardline Islamist policies. Under Morsi and the Brotherhood, Egypt’s government began to increasingly behave like an oppressive Islamist theocracy. Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton paid Morsi an official visit, lending legitimacy to the Muslim Brotherhood regime.

In 2013, millions of Egyptians again took to the streets to protest the tyranny of the Muslim Brotherhood and President Morsi. The Egyptian military, led by General Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, stepped in to remove Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood…..

Obama was quoted as saying, “while we want to sustain our relationship with Egypt, our traditional cooperation cannot continue as usual…”

General El-Sisi blasted the actions of the Obama administration in an interview with theWashington Post saying, “You left the Egyptians. You turned your back on the Egyptians, and they won’t forget that.”…

In 2015, President El-Sisi called for a “religious revolution” from inside Islam to destroy “extremism.”

Members of the Egyptian delegation were hopeful that President Obama’s replacement could open the door to closer collaboration between the two natural allies.

Categories: Egypt, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Egypt, Obama and Muslim Brotherhood, Sisi
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

‘Al-Ahram’ Columnist: Despite Al-Sisi’s Call For Revolution In Religious Discourse, Al-Azhar Scholars Continue On Their Extremist Path

August 24, 2016

‘Al-Ahram’ Columnist: Despite Al-Sisi’s Call For Revolution In Religious Discourse, Al-Azhar Scholars Continue On Their Extremist Path, Memri, August 24, 2016

(Please see also, Dr. Ahmed al-Tayeb: Meet the World’s ‘Most Influential Muslim’ — DM)

Recently, articles have been published in the Egyptian press attacking Al-Azhar, Egypt’s supreme religious authority, on the grounds that its scholars are not doing enough to implement the call of Egyptian President ‘Abd Al-Fattah Al-Sisi to “revolutionize” religious discourse, but instead continue to cultivate extremism. Two particularly harsh articles were penned by Ahmad ‘Abd Al-Tawab, a columnist for the official daily Al-Ahram. He wrote that one reason for the recent spate of attacks on Copts[1] is Al-Azhar’s extremist curricula, which poison people’s minds. He added that, despite ostensibly welcoming Al-Sisi’s call to reform the religious discourse, Al-Azhar has in fact done nothing to realize this call. [2] The following are excerpts from his articles:

29678Al-Azhar inner courtyard (Image: Muslimheritage.com)

Al-Azhar’s Poisonous Curricula Are Responsible For Attacks On Copts; Al-Azhar Accuses Anyone Who Disagrees With It Of Heresy

In his first article, ‘Abd Al-Tawab wrote: “[Let me say,] without beating about the bush, that the Al-Azhar institutions have not taken a single serious step in response to President Al-Sisi’s call for a religious revolution.[3] [Here is] one example of this strange state of affairs. The state collects taxes from all its citizens, Muslims and Copts, which join its other revenues that benefit both Muslims and Copts. These funds pay for various public [services], among them education, which includes Al-Azhar and its institutions and university. [Yet Al-Azhar’s] students are taught using poisonous curricula that harm the tax payer more than anyone else, and especially the Copts! In other words, society pays to train, educate and cultivate a group [of graduates] that hates society and is hostile to it and attacks it as it pleases! To this very day, Al-Azhar, with its curricula, continues to teach its students to level accusations of heresy at anyone who disagrees with them and to define the construction of churches as a crime. In some of the classes [taught at Al-Azhar], it is stated that churches should be banned in [all] countries that the early Muslims conquered by the force of arms, including Egypt. In addition,[students] are taught that anyone who does not pray – or even prays without first performing the ritual ablutions – must be killed, and the crime of his murder can be taken lightly.

“Some researchers and intellectuals make an effort to inform the public of these frightening facts, among them [Egyptian lawyer and Islamic researcher] Ahmad Abdu Maher. He points out that Al-Azhar scholars have accused him of heresy while they refuse to accuse ISIS of heresy.[4] In fact, some Al-Azhar scholars have [even] said that participating in the [international] coalition to fight ISIS is treason against Allah and His Messenger.

“Hence, it is a mistake to say that the attacks currently taking place against Copts in Minya and elsewhere are the acts of individuals [and not part of a larger phenomenon]. [Al-Azhar] students will continue to study  until they attain a certificate or a license to preach at a mosque, and then they will spread what they learned among the worshipers.

“Nearly two years have passed since the President’s call [for a religious revolution], which was [ostensibly] welcomed by the Al-Azhar scholars. But time proves that they [merely pretended to] show flexibility, so that the wave would pass [over them] quietly. This underscores the importance of forming a national committee to handle this task, which can include Al-Azhar scholars as long as they are not a majority that will take over [the committees’] decisions. Otherwise we will be swept into further waste of time and effort and enable extremism to increase even more.”[5]

Al-Azhar Is Not Helping To Promote Al-Sisi’s Religious Revolution

In his second article,  ‘Abd al-Tawab discussed Al-Sisi’s meeting with Al-Azhar Sheikh Al-Tayeb following the uniform sermon crisis,[6] and repeated his claim that, despite ostensibly welcoming Al-Sisi’s call to reform the religious discourse, Al-Azhar has in fact done nothing to promote this cause. He wrote: “There is a need, even a crucial need, for this revolution [as part of] the effort to institute a constitution that lays the foundations for a modern state. [This must be done] by strengthening the freedoms and defending them, including the freedom of worship, of scientific research, of literary and artistic creativity, etc., and also by strengthening all the international treaties to which Egypt is signatory.

“Al-Azhar’s clerics were quick to welcome the president’s call for a [religious] revolution, but this was never translated into action on the ground. In fact, for more than two years [Al-Azhar’s] activity has been in the opposite direction: it has mercilessly attacked anyone with a differing opinion without hesitating to use the weapon of accusations of heresy, or to file lawsuits that placed several people behind bars, and this based on laws that are assumed to require amendment as soon as possible in order to adapt them to the new constitution.”

“The hoped-for change [in the religious discourse] will not be achieved by means of a breakthrough in combatting extremist ideology on the internet. That is a waste of time and effort [because it is an attempt to] treat the symptoms and the outcomes [of extremism] instead of focusing on the right things – such as [reforming] the curricula that still contain horrifying expressions, improving the teachers and adapting them to the spirit of the times, dismissing extremists from senior positions, and enforcing the [state] law instead of [holding] traditional reconciliation [sessions with the Copts]…”[7]

Endnotes:

 [1] Recently there has been an escalation in attacks on Copts in Egypt, especially in the rural governorates of Minya and Beni Suef, and mainly due to rumors that Copts are using private homes in various villages as churches.

[2] In a third article about Al-Azhar, ‘Abd Al-Tawab criticized its involvement in Egypt’s foreign policy, after Al-Azhar Sheikh Ahmed Al-Tayeb met with Egypt’s new ambassadors. Al-Ahram (Egypt), August 18, 2016. Also noteworthy was an article byAl-Ahram columnist Muhammad Al-Dasuqi, who likewise wrote that this institute was not reforming the religious discourse (Al-Ahram, Egypt, June 20, 2016), and an article was by journalist Khaled Al-Montasser, who wrote in Al-Watan on June 24, 2016 that Al-Azhar was delaying the publication of a comprehensive paper on the renewal of religious discourse written by senior Al-Azhar scholar Dr. Salah Fadl. Al-Watan also published a series of articles about corruption in Al-Azhar’s institutions. See Al-Watan (Egypt),  August 3, 2016; July 13, 20, 27, 2016; June 8, 15, 22, 29, 2016, May 4, 11, 25, 2016; April 13, 20, 2016.

[3] Al-Sisi called for a “religious revolution” in a December 2014 speech. Even before this he endorsed the call made by Mansour Adly, who served as interim president of Egypt before Al-Sisi’s election, to “renew the religious discourse.” See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6114, Egyptian Columnists On Al-Sisi Regime’s Campaign For ‘Renewal Of Religious Discourse’ As A Way Of Fighting Terrorism, July 23, 2015.

[4] On Al-Azhar’s refusal to call ISIS heretical, see MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5910, Al-Azhar: The Islamic State (ISIS) Is A Terrorist Organization, But It Must Not Be Accused Of Heresy, December 21, 2014.

[5] Al-Ahram (Egypt), July 25, 2016.

[6] On this affair, see MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6556, Egypt’s Al-Azhar Opposes Ministry Of Religious Endowments Plan For Uniform Friday Sermon, August 4, 2016.

[7] Al-Ahram (Egypt), August 6, 2016. “Traditional reconciliation” refers to extra-judicial “community justice meetings” that have been used to affect a reconciliation between Muslims and Copts following clashes between the communities. Many Copts, as well as others in Egypt, have protested this practice, claiming that it is used as a way to avoid prosecuting Muslims for violence against Copts or to persuade the Copts to forgo their legal rights. See for example Al-Ahram (Egypt), July 9, 2016; Al-Yawm Al-Sabi’ (Egypt), July 27, 2016; copticsolidarity.org, August 8, 2016; dailynewsegypt.com, May 29, 2016. The “Egyptians against Discrimination” rights group recently held a demonstration in front of the prosecutor general’s office in Cairo in which they protested these reconciliation meetings and accused the state of “conspiring” with the perpetrators of attacks on Copts. Al-Ahram (Egypt), August 16, 2016; Al-Wafd (Egypt), August 15, 2016.

Categories: Al Azhar University, Egypt, Islamic scholars, Sisi
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Stunning: Egyptian Foreign Minister says Israel’s treatment of Palestinians not ‘terrorism’

August 24, 2016

Stunning: Egyptian Foreign Minister says Israel’s treatment of Palestinians not ‘terrorism’, American Thinker, Thomas Lifson,, August 24, 2016

It is an article of faith in the Arab world that Israel is guilty, guilty, guilty of terrorizing the poor Palestinians, which is why Jews deserve to be terrorized worldwide.  The origins of violence lie exclusively on the Jews, too.  So Arabs and all Muslims have a duty to defend their brothers and sisters by acts of extreme cruelty against Israelis in particular, and Jews in general.

This dogma is extremely important because it avoids any scrutiny of Koranic and other scriptural incitements of violence – even genocide – against Jews. I thus serves a dual purpose. And as a result, it must remain unquestioned.  And for decades, there has been rhetorical solidarity on this point.

Until now.

The fall of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and its replacement by the anti-MB regime of General Sisi, along with the spread of chaos in the Arab world has changed matters. Meanwhile, Israel is quietly building itself into a tiny superpower, its high tech economy and rapid development of offshore gas and onshore fracking making it a global economic power, able to finance a high tech military.

As a result, a stunning break with the past happened, beyond the notice of our mainstream media. The Jerusalem Post reports:

Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry said on Sunday that Israel’s actions against Palestinians does not constitute terrorism, eliciting an angry response from a Hamas spokesman who said Egypt’s top diplomat is blind.

Shoukry’s comments came during a Q&A session with students held at the Egyptian Foreign Ministry, where he was asked why Palestinians children killed in the conflict with Israel were not considered victims of terrorism.

“When looking at this issue, it can be defined as a ‘regime of force,’” the Egyptian media quoted Shoukry as saying. He said there was no evidence to link Israel to terrorist organizations.

“There is nothing that leads to this conclusion,” he said.

Shoukry added that Israel’s history has made it very sensitive to security issues, and as a result tightens control over its territory and border crossings to ensure its security.

The reaction has not been favorable among other Arab regimes. In public, at least. Speaking from Qatar, a major Clinton Foundation donor (and recipient of questionable favors):

Husam Badran, a Hamas spokesperson in Qatar, slammed the Egyptian foreign minister in a Twitter post, saying, “He who does not see the crimes of the Zionist occupation as terrorism is blind.”

The Egyptian cozying up with Israel is far ahead of public opinion there. It is inconceivable to me that Shoukry made these comments without first discussing them with Saudi Arabia, Egypt’s primary financial backer.

Tectonic plates are shifting in the Arab world, with some pragmatic leaders realizing that the primary problems of Arabs are created by themselves, and Israel has much more to offer as a friend than as a mortal enemy.

Hat tip: Clarice Feldman

 

Categories: Egypt, Israel and Egypt, Palestinians, Saudi Arabia, Sisi, Terrorism
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Donald Trump’s Outreach to Moderate Muslim Leaders Highlights Clinton Failure in Egypt

August 17, 2016

Donald Trump’s Outreach to Moderate Muslim Leaders Highlights Clinton Failure in Egypt, Breitbart, Tera Dahl, August 17, 2016

al sisi(1)AFP

In his foreign policy speech on Monday, Donald Trump stated that he would “amplify the voice” of moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East, saying, “Our Administration will be a friend to all moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East, and will amplify their voices.”

He also said that he would work with Egypt, Jordan and Israel in combating radical Islam, saying, “As President, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side with our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally, Israel. We will partner with King Abdullah of Jordan, and President Sisi of Egypt, and all others who recognize this ideology of death that must be extinguished.”

He said that, as President, he would establish a “Commission on Radical Islam,” saying, “That is why one of my first acts as President will be to establish a Commission on Radical Islam – which will include reformist voices in the Muslim community who will hopefully work with us. We want to build bridges and erase divisions.”

His comments about cooperating with Egypt, Israel and Jordan were highlighted in the Arab world’s media, with headlines reading “Donald Trump Announces Plan to Cooperate with Egypt, Jordan, Israel to Combat Radical Islam” and “Trump vows to work with Egypt’s Sisi to ‘stop radical Islam’ if elected.”

Under the Obama Administration, US policy has not been friendly towards our Muslim allies such as Egypt. Hillary Clinton recently said in a primary debate with Bernie Sanders that, in Egypt, you basically have an “army dictatorship”.

Egypt is one of the most catastrophic foreign policy failures of the Obama Administration and Hillary Clinton’s State Department. President Obama started his outreach to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood when he delivered his 2009 Cairo speech. The US Embassy invited 10 members of the Muslim Brotherhood to attend the speech, undermining US ally Mubarak – who had rejected to previous U.S. efforts to reach out to the Brotherhood.

The Obama Administration, and Clinton’s State Department, again undermined President Mubarak in 2011 when they urged him to step down and pressured Egypt to hold elections “immediately” after the 2011 revolution. This policy favored the Muslim Brotherhood to win elections since they were the most organized at the time.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi in Cairo offering “strong support” for the Islamist President, saying, “I have come to Cairo to reaffirm the strong support of the United States for the Egyptian people and their democratic transition… We want to be a good partner and we want to support the democracy that has been achieved by the courage and sacrifice of the Egyptian people.”

The Obama Administration embraced the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt, but when millions of Egyptians took to the streets one year later, calling for early elections against the Muslim Brotherhood government, the Obama Administration did all they could to undermine their efforts.

Over 30 million Egyptians took to the streets on June 30, 2013 calling for the removal of the Muslim Brotherhood from power. After one year of being in power, the Brotherhood was taking Egypt towards an Iranian theocracy and the Egyptian people stood against political Islam. The 2011 Egyptian Constitution had no impeachment mechanism included, so the only democratic way to remove the Brotherhood was signing a petition and taking to the streets in the masses. Millions of Egyptians took to the streets again in July, supporting then Defense Minister General el-Sisi and the Egyptian military in their efforts to fight terrorism.

The Obama Administration condemned the Egyptian military and police after the removal of the Muslim Brotherhood and punished Egypt by freezing military and economic aid to Egypt. This was done while the Egyptian military had launched a major offensive to “crush terrorist activity” in the Sinai that had built up during the Muslim Brotherhood government. Egypt had to fight terrorism alone – not only without support from the US – but with pressure to succumb to the requests from the US Administration to release the Muslim Brotherhood members from prison and reconcile.

The pressure from the Obama Administration against the removal of the Morsi regime emboldened the Muslim Brotherhood and they waged an Islamist insurgency, not only in the Sinai but on the streets of Cairo. The Muslim Brotherhood specifically targeted theChristian community and burned down over 65 Christian Churches and hundreds of Christian shops.

The Obama Administration sent U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns to Egypt for “U.S. mediation efforts” and met with Khairat el-Shater, the deputy leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, who was in jail at the time and sentenced for life in prison. Our State Department, under John Kerry, sent a representative to Egypt pressuring the Egyptian government to release terrorists from jail.

The Obama Administration also sent Senators McCain and Graham to Egypt to ask the Egyptian government and military to find an agreement with the Muslim Brotherhood. They asked the Egyptian government to “sit down and talk” to the Muslim Brotherhood, who had waged war on the Egyptian people.

Since being democratically elected in 2014, winning with 97% of the vote, Egyptian President al-Sisi has made history speaking out for equality between Muslims and Christians. He was the first President in Egyptian history to visit the Coptic Christian Christmas mass service in January 2015. During his speech at the Christmas mass, he emphasized the need to look at each other as “Egyptians” and not as Muslim or Christian. He said, “We will love each other for real, so that people may see.” President Sisi again visited the Coptic Christmas mass in January 2016 where he vowed to rebuild the Christian churches that were destroyed by Islamists in 2013 after the Muslim Brotherhood were removed from power.

President Sisi has called for “Islamic reform” within Islam numerous times. During a speech to Islamic scholars in 2015, marking the anniversary of Muhammad’s birth, President Sisi urged reform of Islamic discourse and called on Islamic scholars to send Christmas greetings to Christians. In the televised speech to Islamic scholars, President Sisi stated, “We talk a lot about the importance of religious discourse… In our schools, institutes and universities, do we teach and practice respect for the others? We neither teach or practice it.”

The Egyptian government has also addressed the ideology by banning thousands of radical clerics from preaching in the mosques that are not licensed.

Recently, the government of President al-Sisi introduced a textbook for Egyptian public schools that requires Egyptian pupils to memorize the provisions of the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty and delineate the “advantages of peace for Egypt and the Arab states”. This is a major reform taken from the Egyptian government in normalizing and strengthening relations between Israel and Egypt.

President Sisi should be considered a key ally of America as he is leading Egypt towards democracy and also is leading the fight against global jihad, both militarily and politically, in countering radical Islamic ideology. Instead, he has yet to be invited to the United States from President Obama.

Hillary Clinton has been critical of Trump’s position towards Russia, but policies implemented under the Obama Administration have pushed Egypt towards Russia and have alienated our strongest Arab ally for over 40 years. Egypt and Russia signed a$2billion arms deal after the United States abandoned them during their fight against terrorism. Russia also is providing Egypt with $25 billion to build Egypt’s first nuclear power plant.

Donald Trump in his speech recognized the need to support our Muslim allies in the global war on terrorism. This is critical in defeating global jihad. We cannot afford another four years of a policy of alienating our allies and emboldening our enemies as we have seen under the Obama Administration.

Categories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump, Egypt, Foreign policy, Hillary Clinton and Islam, Islamic reformation, Israel, Jordan, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Egypt, Obama and Islam, Sisi
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Polemic on the Demonstrations by Copts in the USA

August 7, 2016

Polemic on the Demonstrations by Copts in the USA, Gates of Vienna, , August 6, 2016

copts-sisi

Should the Islamic revolution of the Arab Spring be victorious in Egypt, this state would sink into Islamic chaos like Libya, Iraq and Syria. Christians would be the big losers and would soon flee or be murdered. That is why the Coptic Church must maintain a good relationship with the Egyptian state, which can be so much easier with a president who is so critical of his own religion. It could even happen that a model may arise in Egypt of how Muslims and Christians can better coexist. Even if we of the West do not care to hear it, the Islamic states will never produce a democracy.

***********************

The following article from the German-language Copts Without Borders blog discusses the delicate problem posed by the demonstrations against Egypt organized by Coptic groups in exile. The author’s main point is that they, the Copts who stayed behind, must live as dhimmis under Islamic rule; there is no other choice. Copts in the diaspora are asked to consider the strategic ramifications of their protests, since the current Egyptian president has done more to help the Copts than any other president or dictator in recent times.

JLH, who translated the article, includes this note:

As our runaway government greases the skids for ever more Muslim immigrants to enter the country, and turns a blind eye to the pleas of Christian individuals and institutions being plowed into the ground in the Middle East, I was struck by the continuing outreach of the “dictator” Al-Sisi to the most endangered of his citizens. And by the tightrope the Copts feel they must walk in an attempt to survive in what was and should still be our highly valued ally.

The translated article:

Polemic on the Demonstrations by Copts in the USA

Egyptian citizens, whatever their religious affiliation, “all have the same rights and duties under the constitution.” And the Egyptian Christians have “displayed prudence and a spirit for the homeland” in the way in which they have reacted to sufferings and provocations in past years. They have remained sensibly united against the attacks of those who “want to use religion to sow discord and spread extremist ideas.”

These are the significant thoughts expressed by Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi during his meeting with Coptic Orthodox Patriarch Tawadros II, as he received him in the presidential palace, together with a delegation of several bishops from the synods of the church.

Al-Sisi emphasized the value of brotherliness between Christians and Muslims in Egypt by his positive evaluation of initiatives undertaken in the context of the Egyptian Family House. This so-named House of the Egyptian Family is an inter-religious organ for making connections that had arisen several years ago as an instrument for prevention and mitigation of sectarian contrasts.

However, the public demonstrations by several groups of the Coptic diaspora still trigger polemics, for instance those in recent days in Washington in front of the White House that protested against acts of violence against Christians in Egypt. Speakers for the Coptic Orthodox patriarchate did not wish to comment officially on these demonstrations. But recently there have been warnings from the patriarchate of their possible manipulation, as well as the warning against mobilizing public campaigns abroad which could be seen as “attempts at intervention” by foreign organizations and groups in Egypt’s domestic affairs.

The Egyptian writer Michael Fahmy spoke out sharply against such demonstrations organized by members of the Coptic Egyptian diaspora. He labeled them “stupid or treasonous” actions instigated by small groups. He also emphasized that only the Egyptian state can protect the Copts from acts of violence; that these groups are capable of protecting neither the militant Coptic-Orthodox diaspora nor the Copts now sitting in the Egyptian parliament.

Comment From Copts Without Borders

It may seem odd that the official Coptic Church is speaking against demonstrations abroad for Christians in Egypt. But the fact remains that only the Egyptian state — which is an Islamic one — can protect the Coptic Church and its faithful after a fashion, even though, after a period of relative calm, Islamic attacks on Copts in Egypt have increased. But the Copts’ overall situation has improved recently.

The Church must protect its members and make these statements officially. This induces a precarious situation. On the one hand, Christians abroad should not be indifferent to this imposed dhimmi status in Islamic countries, as in Egypt. On the other hand, these protests abroad put pressure on the recently moderate Islamic President Al-Sisi, who had the courage to criticize his own religion.

The churches in Islamic countries that are under increasing pressure in Iraq and Syria, where an extensive exodus of Christian life occurred and is still occurring, should be grateful for the involvement of the still-too-few Christians abroad. Because it is not to be taken for granted. In contrast to Iraq and Syria, where Christians have lost everything and the priests there rightly speak out against the Islamic reign of violence in these countries, the military in Egypt has succeeded in halting the “Arab Spring,” which pummeled especially the Christians and Yazidis. Despite the discrimination, the Copts there are relatively secure and protected. If the Arab Spring had swept across Egypt, there would be no more Copts in Egypt, as there are none in Iraq.

Such demonstrations would only be helpful in the event of the complete collapse of Islam in the Turkish-Arabic-North African area. But that is nowhere in sight. On the contrary, we are undergoing a worldwide radicalization of Islam. As a blog, we thank the demonstrators in the USA and elsewhere in the diaspora for their commitment and ask them not to slacken. But we also ask the Copts in the diaspora to have some consideration for the Copts who must live in Egypt. They could make posters repeating President Al-Sisi’s criticism delivered to the religious leaders in Al-Azhar University when he visited there on taking office. That would even be useful.

This dilemma could more easily be resolved if the Coptic groups abroad would exclusively oppose Islamic acts of violence in Egypt, which is also the Egyptian president’s point of attack. Al-Sisi has proceeded strenuously against the Muslim Brotherhood, and that has also provided relief for the Copts. Yet this, or other radical groups still practice violence against Copts. Europe too, is learning painfully how difficult it is to root out nests of Islamic radicals.

Throwing the baby out with the bath would mean losing everything in Egypt, as the Christians suffered and are still suffering in Syria and Iraq. This has unfortunately proven to be true. The Christian exodus from Iraq and Syria is taking place unnoticed where the Copts are demonstrating, in the USA, in Europe and in western churches. If this were not the case, there would have been, for decades now, much stronger support for fellow Christians and against the persecution of Christians. They have shown that their solidarity with their co-religionists is less than half-hearted. Nonetheless, we thank all those people in church and country who have continued to help to raise the awareness of the great tragedy of contemporary Christian persecution. This task has received too little support from the general population and the Church.

Should the Islamic revolution of the Arab Spring be victorious in Egypt, this state would sink into Islamic chaos like Libya, Iraq and Syria. Christians would be the big losers and would soon flee or be murdered. That is why the Coptic Church must maintain a good relationship with the Egyptian state, which can be so much easier with a president who is so critical of his own religion. It could even happen that a model may arise in Egypt of how Muslims and Christians can better coexist. Even if we of the West do not care to hear it, the Islamic states will never produce a democracy.

The path out of servitude for Christians in Islamic lands is stony and difficult and must be accompanied by tactical measures on the part of the affected churches. Some may find fault, but, under the present circumstances, it is the only practical survival strategy under dhimmi subjection.

We must trust in Jesus Christ, who has not yet abandoned the Coptic Church. We beseech Him to protect Christians in Iraq and Syria, strengthen them in number and in faith. Let us not falter in prayer for persecuted Christians and other persecuted minorities.

Categories: Arab Spring, Christians, Copts, Egypt, Islam and Christianity, Sisi
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Humor? | Let’s give all immigrants and Muslim “terror” groups what they want and need.

June 28, 2016

Let’s give all immigrants and Muslim “terror” groups what they want and need. Dan Miller’s Blog, June 28, 2016

(I marked the post as “Humor?” but it comes very close to reflecting Obama’s world view. The opinions implicit in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

This is a guest post by Loretta Lynchmob, Supreme Attorney of Imam Obama’s Loving America. Her younger sister is among the singers in the following inspirational video, as is Hillary Clinton. Here are her, er, inspiring words.

I also participated in this dazzling performance on my way to support an abortion clinic:

Unfortunately, I did not have enough time to sing What the World Needs Now is Love before or after making my remarks following the White supremacist hate-group’s attack in Orlando, Florida during which almost two hundred innocent  homosexuals and lesbians were killed or wounded. That sad incident, of course, had nothing — absolutely nothing — to do with the wonderful Religion of Peace and Tolerance. Rather than listen to the haters who claim that it was on account of our their beautiful Islam, we must give all Muslims at home and abroad love, not hate.

This brings me to the major point of this article: Since everyone — including Muslim “terror” groups — wants the same loving sort of life that all good Americans want, we must give them what they want and need to end their totally justified “depredations.” To do so is Imam Obama’s Loving American way and we cannot do otherwise; that would not be who we are and would put us on the wrong side of hisherstory.

What do immigrants and the so-called terror groups want and what can we give them?

“Terror” groups, like the immigrants fleeing the poverty and repression they suffer in much of Latin America, want to have the same prosperity and freedom that we have in Imam Obama’s already-great America; America was never greater than under the heel of Obama. The Latin American immigrants want it here, the “terror groups” want it in the countries we wrongfully took from them to give to radical firebrands such as President al-Sisi in Egypt and Prime Minister Netanyahu in Occupied Palestine. They will have the prosperity and freedom they want and deserve only when we give them love, not hate. Trump offers hate, we offer love. Surely, ours is not only the better way, it is the only way.

Aside from our abiding, non-judgmental love, what can we give them? They are poor so we need to give them money and the stuff that money can buy. Based on our outpourings of love, they will not use the money to purchase automatic weapons and other types of assault rifles to use against innocents or even against us. Obama’s wonderful peace deal with Iran is a case in point: due to His wisdom in returning to Iran economic power and money of which she had been unjustly deprived, Iran has joined the world community as a peaceful power, opposed to “terrorism,” and will never have nuclear bombs. Only those in America who cling hatefully to their guns and their religion of hate see the world differently and use weapons of war on innocents.

We can, and must, also help them to learn more about democracy. We encouraged democracy when the Egyptian masses overthrew “their” dictator Mubarak and replaced him with their own peace-loving, tolerant President Morsi. That’s the way true democracy works. Then, sadly, a few thousand Egyptian enemies of the brave and peace-loving Muslim Brotherhood conducted a coup, led by an Egyptian general, and replaced President Morsi with a fascist dictator named al-Sisi. The people of Egypt have not forgotten about how democracy should work, and given a chance will again rebel against fascist al-Sisi and depose him in favor of another brave, peace-loving Muslim Brotherhood advocate. We must do everything we can to help them in their loving quest for true freedom and true democracy.

Much of Occupied Palestine is rich; that’s where the Jews live and parade with their filthy feet in what they call “Temple Mount.”

What do the Jews give their Palestinian brothers — who want only their love and sustenance? When they provide water, they poison it. They often cut off electricity to Gaza, with no better excuse than that their poverty-stricken supplicants there can’t pay for it! Is money all that matters? Is gross human suffering of no consequence?

We can, and must, do everything possible to send the Jews festering in Occupied Palestine back to wherever they came from. It’s only just and fair! The blessed United Nations is one hundred percent with us on this; too long have we vetoed Security Council resolutions even modestly adverse to “Israel.” Were we to sponsor a decree by the UN Security Council to rid Occupied Palestine of its Jews, it would pass without veto. If we believe in love — not the hate spewed by “Israel” — that’s precisely what we must do.

Hillary Clinton is indisputably the best-qualified person to take up Obama’s great work when He, sadly, must leave office next January. There is much left to be done, and only She can and will do it. Even the proprietor of this vile right-wing hate blog has said so. Trump, on the other hand, would destroy everything that Obama has done and thereby destroy America as we know and love her. A vote for Hillary is a vote for honesty, candor and, most important, love. A vote for he-of-the-orange hair is a vote for dishonesty, lies and hate.

****************

Editor’s comments

Ms. Lynchmob does a good job of articulating the differences between Trump and the Obama-Clinton cabal and their visions for America as seen by the left. How many in Obama’s America see things as she does?

 

Categories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump, Egypt, Hillary Clinton, Iran, Islam, Israel, Israel and human rights, Jews, Love sweet love, Multiculturalism, Muslim Brotherhood, National secuity, Netanyahu, Obama, Obama's America, Palestinians, Sisi, Temple Mount, U.S. politics, United Nations, Zionists
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Obama and the Moderate Muslims

June 17, 2016

Obama and the Moderate Muslims, Front Page Magazine, Caroline Glick, June 17, 2016

Imam Obama on Islam

On Wednesday Goldberg wrote that in Obama’s view, discussing radical Islam is counterproductive because it harms the moderates who need to stand up to the radicals.

How can enforcing ignorance of a problem help you to solve it? How does refusing to call out the Islamic extremists that Islamic moderates like the Green revolutionaries and Sisi risk their lives to fight weaken them? How does empowering jihad apologists from CAIR and MPAC help moderate, anti-jihad American Muslims who currently have no voice in Obama’s White House?

************************

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post. 

As far as the White House is concerned, Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic’s top reporter, is President Barack Obama’s unofficial mouthpiece.

This was one of the many things we learned from The New York Times in David Samuels’s profile of Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes.

In the course of explaining how Rhodes was able to sell Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, despite the fact that it cleared Iran’s path to a nuclear arsenal while giving the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism more than a hundred billion dollars, Samuels reported that “handpicked Beltway insiders like Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic… helped retail the administration’s narrative.”

Given his White House-assigned role, Goldberg’s explanation of Obama’s refusal to discuss radical Islam is worthwhile reading. It reflects what Obama wants the public to believe about his position.

On Wednesday Goldberg wrote that in Obama’s view, discussing radical Islam is counterproductive because it harms the moderates who need to stand up to the radicals.

“Obama,” he wrote, “believes that [a] clash is taking place [not between Western and Muslim civilization but] within a single civilization, and that Americans are sometimes collateral damage in this fight between Muslim modernizers and Muslim fundamentalists.”

Pointing out that there are Muslim fundamentalists, Obama has argued to Goldberg, will only strengthen them against the modernizers.

Over the past week, prominent conservative commentators have agreed with Obama’s position.

Eli Lake from Bloomberg and Prof. John Yoo writing in National Review, among others, criticized presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump for speaking openly radical Islam. Like Goldberg, they argued that Trump’s outspokenness alienates moderate Muslims.

But what moderate Muslims is Obama trying to help? Consider his treatment of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

Sisi is without a doubt, the most outspoken and powerful advocate of a moderate reformation of Islam, and of Islamic rejection of jihad, alive today.

Sisi has staked his power and his life on his war to defeat the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic State and jihadist Islam in general.

Sisi speaks openly about the danger of jihadist Islam. In his historic speech before the leading Sunni clerics at Cairo’s Al-Azhar University on January 1, 2015, Sisi challenged the clerics to reform Islam.

Among other things he said, “I address the religious clerics. We have to think hard about what we are facing…. It is inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic nation to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.

Impossible! “That thinking – I am not saying ‘religion,’ but ‘thinking’ – that corpus of texts and ideas that we have held sacred over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world!…

“Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants – that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live? Impossible! “I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You imams are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move…because this Islamic nation is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost – and it is being lost by our own hands.”

Certainly since September 11, 2001, no Muslim leader has issues a clearer call for moderation in Islam than Sisi did in that speech. And he has continued to speak in the manner ever since.

No other Muslim leader of note has put everything on the line as Sisi has to defeat the forces of jihad both on the field and in the mosques.

Moreover, Sisi has put his anti-jihadist belief into action by expanding security cooperation between Egypt and Israel and by bringing the Gulf states into his undeclared alliance with the Jewish state.

He has also acted to end the demonization of Israel in the Egyptian media.

Obviously, supporting Sisi is a no-brainer for a leader who insists that his goal is to empower moderate Muslims. And yet, far from being Sisi’s greatest supporter, Obama opposes him.

Since Sisi led the Egyptian military in overthrowing the Obama-backed Muslim Brotherhood regime as it was poised to transform Egypt into a jihadist terrorist state, Obama has worked to undermine him.

Obama has denied Sisi weapons critical to his fight with ISIS in Sinai. He has repeatedly and consistently chastised Sisi for human rights abuses against radical Islamists who, if permitted to return to power, would trounce the very notion of human rights while endangering the US’s key interests in Middle East.

Then there is Iran.

If Obama fears radical Islam, as Goldberg insists that he does, why did he turn his back on the Green Revolution in 2009? Why did he betray the millions of Iranians who rose up against their Islamist leaders in the hopes of installing a democratic order in Iran where women’s rights, and minority rights are respected? Why did he instead side with the radical, jihadist, terrorism-supporting, nuclear weapons-developing and -proliferating ayatollahs? And why has Obama striven to reach an accommodation with the Iranian regime despite its continued dedication to the destruction of the US? Goldberg’s claim that Obama is interested in empowering Muslim moderates in their fight against radicals doesn’t pass the laugh test.

Obama’s actual schemes for relating to – as opposed to acknowledging, fighting or defeating – the forces of jihad involve empowering those forces at the expense of the moderates who oppose them.

Yes, there are exceptions to this rule – like Obama’s belated assistance to the Kurds in Syria and Iraq. But that doesn’t mean that empowering Islamic jihadists at the expense of moderate Muslims is not Obama’s overarching strategy.

In the case of the Kurds, Obama only agreed to help them after spending years training Syrian opposition forces aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood. It was only after nearly all of those forces cut contact with their American trainers and popped up in al-Qaida-aligned militias that Obama began actively supporting the Kurds.

Then there is his behavior toward American jihadists.

Almost every major jihadist attack on US soil since Obama took office has been carried out by US citizens. But Obama has not countered the threat they pose by embracing American Muslims who reject jihad.

To the contrary, Obama has spent the past seven- and-a-half years empowering radical Muslims and Islamic groups like the pro-Hamas terrorism apologists from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

This week The Daily Caller reported that MPAC President Salam al-Marayati, is serving as an adviser to the US Department of Homeland Security.

Marayati accused Israel of responsibility for the September 11 attacks on the US, and has called on Muslims not to cooperate with federal counter-terrorism probes. According to the report, Marayati has visited the White House 11 times since 2009.

The Daily Caller also reported that a Syrian immigrant to the US was hired to serve as a member of Obama’s task for on “violent extremism” last year.

Laila Alawa, who joined the task force the day she received US citizenship, referred to the September 11 attacks as an event that “changed the world for good.”

According to the Daily Caller, her task force called for the administration to avoid using the terms “jihad” and “Shari’a” in discussing terrorism – as if Obama needed the tip.

So far from helping Muslim moderates, Obama’s actual policy is to help radical Muslims. In stark opposition to his talking points to Goldberg, since he entered office, Obama has worked to empower radical Muslims in the US and throughout the Middle East at the expense of moderates. Indeed, it is hard to think of an anti-jihad Muslim leader in the US or in the Middle East whom Obama has supported.

The victims in Orlando, San Bernadino, Garland, Amarillo, Boston and beyond are proof that Obama’s actual policies are not making America safer. The rise of ISIS and Iran makes clear that his actual policies are making the world more dangerous.

Maybe if his actual policies were what he claims they are, things might be different today. Maybe White House support for anti-jihadist Muslims combined with a purge of all mention of jihad and related terms from the federal lexicon would be the winning policy. But on its face, it is hard to see how forbidding federal employees from discussing jihadists in relevant terms makes sense.

How can enforcing ignorance of a problem help you to solve it? How does refusing to call out the Islamic extremists that Islamic moderates like the Green revolutionaries and Sisi risk their lives to fight weaken them? How does empowering jihad apologists from CAIR and MPAC help moderate, anti-jihad American Muslims who currently have no voice in Obama’s White House? Eli Lake argued that it was by keeping mum on jihad that then-president George W. Bush and Gen. David Petraeus convinced Sunni tribal leaders in Iraq to join the US in fighting al-Qaida during the surge campaign in 2007-2008.

The same leaders now support ISIS.

A counter-argument to Lake’s is that Bush’s policy of playing down the jihadist doctrine of the likes of al-Qaida had nothing to do with the Sunni chieftains’ decision to side with the US forces.

Rather, they worked with the Americans first because the Americans paid them a lot of money to do so. And second, because they believed the Americans when they said that they would stay the course in Iraq.

They now side with ISIS because they don’t trust America, and would rather live under ISIS rule than under Iranian rule.

In other words, for them, the question wasn’t one of political niceties, but of financial gain and power assessments. And that remains the question that determines their actions today.

In the 15 years since September 11, first under Bush, and since 2009, to a more extreme degree under Obama, the US has refused to name the enemy that fights America with the expressed aim of destroying it.

Maybe, just maybe, this is one of the reasons that the Americans have also failed to truly help anti-jihadist – or moderate – Muslims. Maybe you can’t help one without calling out the other.

Categories: CAIR, Conservatives, Countering violent extremism, Foreign policy, Iran and terror, Iranian Islam, Islamic reformation, Islamists, Islamists in America, Moderate Muslims, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Obama and moderate Muslims, Obama and Muslim Brotherhood, Sisi
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Sisi and Mideast Peace

May 21, 2016

Sisi and Mideast Peace, American Thinker, C. Hart, May 21, 2016

Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi’s speech on Tuesday, May 18, set ripples through Israel’s political establishment. Speaking in the southern city of Assiut, Sisi signaled to the Arab world, the Palestinians, and Israel that it is time for an historic breakthrough in peace negotiations.

Responding immediately to Sisi’s comments, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that he is open to working with Egypt and Arab states towards advancing the peace process, not only with the Palestinians but with the peoples of the Middle East region.

Netanyahu’s comments come on the heels of a visit to Israel by French Foreign Minister Jean-Mark Ayrault. The two men met but disagreed on how to advance peace.

France insists on hosting an international parley to force Israel and the Palestinians to come to the peace table. Israel is against the French initiative.

Netanyahu would like to go beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and work directly with moderate Arab states on a comprehensive peace deal. Sisi could be instrumental in building an Arab coalition for peace which would dismiss or weaken the divisive French initiative, releasing Israel from conceding to European demands.

Former Israeli ambassador to Egypt, Zvi Mazel, is currently working as a Research Fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). He is a Middle East expert who has represented Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs as former Ambassador to Sweden and Romania, as well. This writer asked Mazel if Sisi’s comments were spontaneous or were released at this time for political reasons because he wants to strengthen Egypt’s position in the region by helping Israel.

“I don’t think there is a big design… I think that Sisi understands what is going on in the Middle East and he is identifying according to his view — a kind of possibility of advancing the peace process.”

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf countries, and Israel have common enemies: Iran and Islamic State. Already there have been discreet diplomatic and business ties between Israel and these nations

According to Mazel, Sisi is also emerging as a strong respected leader among Egyptians despite the Western media’s portrayal of him as a dictator similar to former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

“Sisi sees himself as a president quite stable among his people. I know that this is not the way they think in the Western media — New York Times and company. They see him as a kind of military dictator; absolutely not! He’s a good man. He’s not Mubarak. He’s Sisi.”

Mazel explains that Egypt is on the way to economic sustainable development. This is what Sisi has been focused on over the past two years and he is seeing success. Unemployment has gone down, despite the fact that almost 90 million people live in Egypt and the country is poor.

“He has started something quite positive, and Sisi thinks that the time has come for Egypt to be in the international arena.”

What that means, according to Mazel, is that Egypt’s current role is still minor. Sisi is asking Israelis and Palestinians to go forward, yet he, himself, does not have a plan. But, in the future, Egypt could emerge as a larger player in the region.

Mazel is pragmatic about the short-term. “It’s a positive step for Egypt, but it is not going to change the world.”

Current peace advances that are being prepared for release are not a positive development for Israel: (a) the French Initiative; (b) a document showing the obstacles to Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts soon to be reported by the Quartet; (c) the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative that, despite being outdated, is still considered a serious option by the Arab world.

In the coming days, the Arab League plans to meet and discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Mazel thinks that Sisi’s statement was good timing for that meeting, but otherwise, was not connected to a bigger scheme.

However, on Wednesday, May 18, American Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Egypt one day after Sisi gave his emotional speech. Some analysts believe that the U.S. is behind Sisi’s bold words, in an effort to circumvent the French from becoming a new power broker in the Middle East.

The question is whether Sisi’s encouragement will lead to Israel courting the Arab nations and the Arab nations courting Israel, while by-passing the Palestinians. Mazel thinks that kind of change is slow in coming, because the Arabs continue to entrench themselves in old positions that favor Palestinian demands.

Refusing to sit down and negotiate with Israel, the Palestinians have insisted on preconditions which the Arab League has accepted. They demand that Israel agree on the right of return for so-called Palestinian “refugees” to Israeli land; that Israel withdraw to the 1967 borders; and, that Israel stop building in West Bank settlements (Judea and Samaria). Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also expects Israel to release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, who have blood on their hands, serving time in Israeli jails because of terrorist attacks against the Israeli population.

So far, these unresolved issues have kept Abbas away from face-to-face negotiations with Netanyahu. However, his real diplomatic scheme is to get the international community to affirm the Palestinian position and force Israel to concede to Palestinian demands. Right now, Abbas sees the best venue to accomplish his goal as a French-sponsored future peace conference, followed by a stinging UN anti-Israel resolution.

Meanwhile, the future pressure on Israel will be to immediately stop settlement construction in order to get the peace process going. Mazel declares, “Absolutely not… we have to go on! Half a million people live there. And, they are the shield of Israel. We continue to build until there is peace.”

Mazel has a real problem with the demands of the Arab League, as well. “The Arab Peace Initiative is more or less the same as the Palestinian attitude. The ‘right of return’ is still there. It should be taken completely out. Most importantly, the Palestinians and the Arabs should recognize a Jewish State in Israel.”

Mazel is also not sure that Netanyahu’s insistence on widening his government, to provide greater stability, is a wise idea. Reportedly, Yisrael Beytenu Chairman Avigdor Liberman will soon become Israel’s new Defense Minister as Netanyahu brings several more ministers into his coalition. Mazel thinks this will not provide a wider diplomatic envelope; nor, will it help change European or Arab attitudes towards Israel; nor will it end the Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

Then there is U.S. President Barack Obama’s failed Middle East policy, which includes his lackluster support of American allies in the region. Mazel says this policy cannot continue.

“It cannot be like that, because America is the most important power in the world… And, whoever will win the presidency, whether it will be Mrs. Clinton or Trump, both of them are in a certain way connected to the Middle East.”

Mazel believes that with 22 countries and more than 300 million people living in the region, the next U.S. president will be more engaged in leading the nations into greater stability.

In the meantime, currently 80% of the Egyptian people support Egyptian President Sisi. His nation has already made peace with Israel (along with Jordan). Helping Israel to extend an olive branch to other Arab countries will encourage Egypt to take up an important leadership role in a region that continues to be embroiled in major upheaval and violence.

 

Categories: Abbas, Arab nations, Egypt, France, Gulf states, Israel, Israel and Egypt, Israeli security, Netanyahu, Obama and Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinians, Sisi, Two state solution
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »