Members John81 Posted February 3, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 3, 2011 Egypt’s blood on Obama’s hands? White House is fanning flames of Islamic revolution By THE WASHINGTON TIMES - The Washington Times 2:38 p.m., Wednesday, February 2, 2011 President Obama is signaling the Egyptian opposition that their time has come. In a terse statement last night, Mr. Obama announced a “moment of transformation” had arrived in Egypt, “the status quo is not sustainable” and a new government must begin to form “now.” An administration official later reiterated, “the key part of the statement was ‘now.’ ” Today the formerly peaceful protests in Egypt turned violent. It turns out that words do have consequences. Egypt is at a crossroads, a time of suspense when change could come gradually and peacefully, or quickly with maximum instability. The White House has chosen to back the latter course, which will play into the hands of the best organized, most radical factions, which in this case is the America-hating Muslim Brotherhood. The Obama administration is strangely adamant that Muslim religious parties have to play a key role in the new government, and U.S. officials reportedly are reaching out to the Muslim Brotherhood behind the scenes. White House wishes aside, an Islamist government is not in Egypt’s interest and certainly not in the interest of the United States. The Muslim Brotherhood seeks to increase the influence of shariah worldwide and reverse the progress Egypt has made in becoming a more Western, more secular state. Its foreign policy was succinctly summed up by brotherhood leader Muhammad Ghannem, who said the Egyptian people should “be prepared for a war against Israel.” None of this will be good for America, the Mideast or the world. On Tuesday, embattled Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak acknowledged it was time for change and promised to step down in the autumn, a pledge intended to defuse the tension Mr. Obama seeks to ramp up. The Egyptian Army, the best organized and most pro-Western force in the society, is for the moment siding with the established government. With a transition period stretching into the fall, more opposition groups will have time to organize and more political parties would bring more choices for the Egyptian people, as well as more opportunities for the United States to influence events in a positive way. Mr. Obama, however, is intent on throwing this opportunity away. His administration doesn’t have a strategy, only preachy rhetoric. Its actions will only inflame this delicate situation and give radical voices the upper hand. Then-Sen. Barack Obama showed no such inclination to support regime change during the George W. Bush administration. Nor, as president, did Mr. Obama make such a strident call for change when Iranians took to the streets to protest against their hardline Islamist theocracy. In the summer of 2009, when power was in the streets of Tehran, Mr. Obama chose to make only lukewarm statements about how Iran’s ayatollahs needed to listen more. When it comes to a 30-year partner of the United States, a man who has helped keep peace in the region and been a durable ally in the war on terrorism, Mr. Obama is quick to toss Mr. Mubarak under the bus. Pushing for immediate regime change in Egypt is not in American or Egyptian interests. Cutting the legs out from an already tottering regime could easily lead to widespread violence. If so, some of Egypt‘s blood will be on Mr. Obama’s hands. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/2/egypts-blood-obamas-hands/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bro Jim Posted February 3, 2011 Members Share Posted February 3, 2011 Heard a talking head,(former section chief of the CIA in the middle east) say yesterday that he problem is Israel, and our problem is that we support Israel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 3, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 3, 2011 Heard a talking head,(former section chief of the CIA in the middle east) say yesterday that he problem is Israel, and our problem is that we support Israel. That is the growing view in America. Scripture is clear that Israel has no actual friends and in the end she will stand alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JerryNumbers Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 I don't believe freedom will work over there, 'The Ishmael’s' will take over, & rule with a fist of iron. After all, freedom means a different thing to ' 'The Ishmael’s' of this world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 7, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 I don't believe freedom will work over there, 'The Ishmael’s' will take over, & rule with a fist of iron. After all, freedom means a different thing to ' 'The Ishmael’s' of this world. That's a fact American leaders, and most Western leaders, fail to accept. Not everyone wants what we call freedom and not everyone does with freedom what our ancestors did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Covenanter Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 That's a fact American leaders, and most Western leaders, fail to accept. Not everyone wants what we call freedom and not everyone does with freedom what our ancestors did. Freedom is freedom to live in peace, in a family home, with employment to provide food & clothing & education for the family. Also freedom to choose, change & practise religion. Muslim PEOPLE, as distinct from the power seeking mullahs who constantly make the news, do want to live in peace. The trouble is that the constant harassment of Palestinians, the destruction of Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, means that their view of "Christian" freedom makes it synonymous with oppression. Just as, of course, Christians have no freedom in Muslim countries, & much less as indigenous Christians are considered allies of America. We have a Gospel that gives true freedom in the Lord Jesus Christ. That does not mean inflicting freedom & democracy by military means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 7, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 Freedom is freedom to live in peace, in a family home, with employment to provide food & clothing & education for the family. Also freedom to choose, change & practise religion. Muslim PEOPLE, as distinct from the power seeking mullahs who constantly make the news, do want to live in peace. The trouble is that the constant harassment of Palestinians, the destruction of Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, means that their view of "Christian" freedom makes it synonymous with oppression. Just as, of course, Christians have no freedom in Muslim countries, & much less as indigenous Christians are considered allies of America. We have a Gospel that gives true freedom in the Lord Jesus Christ. That does not mean inflicting freedom & democracy by military means. That's our definition of freedom. Many Arabs view of freedom is more along the lines of freedom for their particular branch, line or sect, with others have less or no freedom. Most want Islam as either the only religion or the dominant religion. No doubt the leadership wants control in all these countries, but the same is true here and elsewhere. Even then, those who benefit from having certain ones in power are supportive of those leaders regardless of what "freedom" the country as a whole has. In many respects Iraq under Saddam was one of the most "free" Arab country. There was, of course, very little political freedom, but beyond that the average Iraqi enjoyed much more freedom than most Arabs. Iraqis tended to have a higher standard of living than their neighbors and there was far greater religious freedom than anywhere else in the region. Now look at Iraq. After two wars upon Iraq coming from the "freedom loving" West and years of occupation Iraq is a mess and extremist factions are ready to take over, plunge Iraq into civil war, or to open the door for Iran to take control. In any event, much of what we consider to be a part of freedom, Arabs view as a license to sin and wickedness that they want no part of. Even what was considered freedom during the early decades of America is not what is considered freedom in America today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Covenanter Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 Yes, John. The idea of the antinomian doctrine of "freedom to sin" was already a serious problem in NT times. Rom 6:1 ¶ What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 2Pe 2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Covenanter Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 There is a widespread idea that democracy is essential the freedom to vote for a government. However ... In many/most cases the result is a government representing the majority, & ONLY the majority, so that minorities have no democratic rights & suffer repression. As the rulers then have "popular support" they increasingly ignore the fact that they are supposed to be representing the people & use their position to enrich themselves. In a true popular democracy, the elected government serves the whole country, including the minorities, & does not enrich itself at the countries expense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bro Jim Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 0 In a true popular democracy, the elected government serves the whole country, including the minorities, & does not enrich itself at the countries expense. Democracies don't serve the whole country, the only serve the majority that exist at that time, they are run by popular vote. Which means they can be like the wind, what ever is popular at the time of a vote is what rules. The government that is to serve the whole country including minorities is to a republic, which is a representative government (which by no means is perfect either) but is design not to be run by popular opinion.[*] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bro Jim Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) Sorry my last post looks weird I tried to use multiquote and I goofed. Edited February 7, 2011 by Bro Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators HappyChristian Posted February 7, 2011 Administrators Share Posted February 7, 2011 I don't believe freedom will work over there, 'The Ishmael’s' will take over, & rule with a fist of iron. After all, freedom means a different thing to ' 'The Ishmael’s' of this world. You're exactly right, Jerry8. And it isn't freedom the Muslim Brotherhood is looking for - although, as in the case of every group which incites rioting, that is the mantra they have pushed onto their pawns. Did anyone get a chuckle out of BO telling the Egyptian protesters (most of which were Brotherhooders....) that "we hear you?" I had to laugh about that. He hears them, in a country where we don't have any business, but HE WON'T LISTEN to the AMERICAN PEOPLE. Typical. And hilariously ironic. The US did support the Shah. And Mubarek was pro-American and friendly toward Israel. The Shah and Mubarek might not be what we, as Americans who truly know what freedom is, would believe to be the right rulers. But...they were actually good rulers (of course, any dictator can be despotic). But radicals (and that includes some here in the US) stirred up the muslims in Iran to revolt and bring back Khomeini, thus ending friendly attitudes toward America and resulting in the American hostage crisis (which resolved itself tout suit upon Reagan's election... ...'cause they knew he wasn't going to mess around). That is exactly what is happening in Egypt now. Mubarek is a dictator, yes. But Egypt has prospered under him, and they have been at peace with Israel for 20 years. That will end with the Muslim Brotherhood seizing control (note that they have refused to make any deals other than that the entire Mubarek government, not just himself, be removed...), also in Yemen and Tunisia, eliminating any true peace for Israel over there. Once that is accomplished, BO (who is supportive of the MB) will likely let it be known more publicly that the new US policy toward Israel is no longer friendly... "Lift up your heads, redemption draweth nigh!!!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Invicta Posted February 7, 2011 Members Share Posted February 7, 2011 It is Tout de suite Hearing many in the square, it is not the brotherhood, but all ranks including students, medicins, merchants, etc, including "christians". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 8, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 8, 2011 It is Tout de suite Hearing many in the square, it is not the brotherhood, but all ranks including students, medicins, merchants, etc, including "christians". The Muslim Brotherhood are the using the masses for their purposes, as they have done before. They have done this before and such is a time honoured method. The communists came to power in Russia in similar fashion as did the Nazis in Germany, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators HappyChristian Posted February 8, 2011 Administrators Share Posted February 8, 2011 It is Tout de suite You're right, and I apologize for using incorrect spelling. But you knew what I meant, right? Thanks for the correction! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.