Obama Warns Against Arrests of Morsi and Brotherhood Members
July 3, 2013
By Daniel Greenfield
The Obama definition of 'democracy' is inconsistent to say the least.
Before, when the people were protesting Mubarek, Obama quickly decided Mubarek,
a duly elected president, had to go. Nor did Obama balk when Mubarek
was brought to trial for alleged misdeeds.
Yet now that Morsi has been elected to replace Mubarek, Obama is acting
indignant, insisting that no duly elected president should be deposed or
arrested and is threatening to withdraw support for a new government. Yet,
Morsi's misdeeds are in some ways more grievous than Mubarek's. For instance,
the latter had given the Copts a place in the government. Mubarek kicked them
out of government and sat back as thugs started to decimate their population,
either by killing them or banishing them and burning their churches.
Despite Obama's acquiescence to the arrest of Mubarek, he now suggests an
elected president should not be arrested for misdeeds.
Clearly, Obama's definition of democracy is all about Obama and his
ideology, according to which Muslims are the only legitimate leaders in the
Middle East.
Well, it looks like the Egyptians have spoken, and they don't agree. But of
course, when the people speak as they have now spoken, that is undemocratic to
our White House resident's way of thinking. If you can call it thinking.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-issues-statement-warning-against-arrest-of-morsi-and-brotherhood-members/
J.
Dobbs / Iowntheworld.com
One
Muslim Brotherhood president has been overthrown. But the other one is still on his second
term.
So let’s skip straight to the threats and
the pro-Brotherhood rhetoric.
We are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian Armed Forces to remove President Morsy and suspend the Egyptian constitution. I now call on the Egyptian military to move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process, and to avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsy and his supporters. Given today’s developments, I have also directed the relevant departments and agencies to review the implications under U.S. law for our assistance to the Government of Egypt.
I don’t know who Obama’s Royal We are, it’s
not the American people who don’t give a damn, but he didn’t show the same
concern about the arrests of Mubarak. And a rush to elections is how the Muslim
Brotherhood wound up being the first in line at the ballot box.
Finally, Obama and his minions swore up and
down that they couldn’t possibly stop supplying Morsi with weapons. Now suddenly
Obama is concerned about (gasp) American Law, a subject that he usually cares
less about than the price of tea in China, and the implications of supplying aid
to a non-democracy.
Perhaps he should take that question up with
the Islamist FSA brigades in Syria whom he’s supplying with weapons. I don’t
recall them holding any elections.
The voices of all those who have protested peacefully must be heard – including those who welcomed today’s developments, and those who have supported President Morsy
Why do I have a feeling that
President Morsi Obama weighs the latter group more than the
former
group.
Comment of Donald Hank: From what I am reading, the Egyptians rejected Morsi because he stuck too much to sharia law and they didn't want it.
ReplyDeleteThe Morsi regime had kicked the Christians out of power.
The new regime is being shaped with the participation of Egyptian Christians. The new interim president is part of the old Christian-friendly Mubarek regime. For some reason, the Western powers (US and EU) are anti-Christian in the Middle East.
Reply of Kurt J Fitsch: The Egyptians want Sharia PLUS more rights and freedom. But unfortunately that ain't gonna happen. It's either one OR the other, but never both. At the end of the day, the Egyptians will again vote for an Islamic party and hope that they'll get a kind of "Sharia lite" and an "Islam lite". But there is only ONE Islam, there is no thing such as a "moderate Islam" or "Western style Islam" or "Euro-Islam". We'll never see a Western style kind of democracy in an Islamic country. They first have to get rid of the "ideology Islam" and/or reform the Islam to just a religion. And this ain't gonna happen, because Islam CANNOT be reformed. So, we'll see a back and forth between the so called "moderates" (who still want Islam with all its side effects and rules, but just with a little bit more rights and freedom) and the "devout Muslims", most likely some kind of civil war, unless the Military stays in power and it's a kind of Military dictatorship. It was a mistake to kick Mubarak in the butt and to lay into bed with the Muslim Terror Organization Muslim Brotherhood. Unfortunately Hussein O. is supporting this Terror Organization all over the Middle East. Hussein O. set the whole Middle East on fire!
Delete