Opinion: Obama only one upset about downfall of Muslim Brotherhood

It was unexpected.

A rare bit of good news from a region of the world where one does not expect such things.

The Jihadists in Egypt and elsewhere have been dealt a blow, and the people of Egypt, in turn, have benefited, their descent into the night of Sharia law forestalled, at least for now.

The American people, and Israel, too, and the West for that matter, have seen their cause advanced, and all of us, truly, the world, owe the Egyptian military a debt of gratitude. For in deposing President Mohammed Morsi, of Muslim Brotherhood fame, they have displaced a fundamentalist Islamic regime that would not and could not live peacefully with others, with those who do not subscribe to their vengeful doctrines or who worship other Gods. No, an armed and ascendant Muslim Brotherhood, in power in Egypt, the most populous and important Arab state, was a menace and a threat.

The Muslim Brotherhood supports terror and the establishment of a global caliphate. They are Islamic supremacists who do not play well with neighbors. When unable to engage in violent Jihad to meet their goals, they pursue “stealth” Jihad instead, a program of infiltration without assimilation in nations where they are a minority – as they have done in the US, Europe, and elsewhere. They use the freedoms of democracies, the rights and powers of free states to undermine those very same freedoms, and, ultimately, the states themselves, as, indeed, they attempted in their own Egypt.

Their methods are typical and not unlike those of the left with whom they are allied: they penetrate the media, the Universities, and the government, and, over time, create an atmosphere that renders their odious ideology unassailable; they undermine institutions and influence opinion; they impose a form of censorship in which it is impossible to criticize them; they demonize rivals as bigots, and, in general, prepare the ground for tyranny without firing a shot, a form of sabotage from within.

Mohammed Morsi, the now deposed President of Egypt, led the Muslim Brotherhood through its Orwellian named “Freedom and Justice Party.” He won the election after the fall of Hosni Mubarak, and then, like all good dictators, promptly seized power well beyond that of his predecessor. He replaced powerful figures in the military and the government with Muslim Brotherhood cronies, intimidated the media, suspended the courts, delayed parliamentary elections, and began implementing Sharia law, a legal system that is incompatible with individual rights. Democracy, for Morsi and others like him, is merely a stepping-stone; a tool for gaining power, to be dispensed with once it has served its purpose.

The military coup that overthrew the Islamist dictator then was a good thing, perhaps as good as one could expect, and at a time when the Middle East, under the banner of the so called Arab Spring, was being transformed into one vast Islamist sea, with little Tehrans springing up everywhere in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, and elsewhere. But you would never know it from the rants of such as Senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham, who run around shouting about “coups” even though in this case it rid the world of a terrorist regime, a more than equitable exchange.

Democracy appears not to be feasible in the Middle East, save the state of Israel, and the allure of such movements should be discouraged, or at least, not promoted, for the outcomes tend not be good. Elections alone do not a democracy make particularly where there is no tradition of free speech, tolerance, or an open press. Nor where there is not the rule of law. Absent a civil society with established norms, values, and institutions of democracy, “democracy” will not take hold. And one could hardly expect Denmark or Switzerland to emerge in nations where the majority of the populations favor death by stoning for blasphemy or apostasy.

One should also ask whether it serves US interests to pursue “democracy” in the Middle East. The last two years since the “Arab Spring” have more than discredited the notion that democracy leads to stability at least when it comes to the Arab world. Does it really help us when, for the sake of “democracy,” genocidal regimes gain power? Does it serve American interests to require “democracy” in such places where unsavory terrorist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood assume control? It seems preferable to have governments that will fight terror, maintain stability within their borders, protect their minorities and be, at least, marginally sympathetic to US interests – even if they happen to be military governments.

We owe then our thanks to the Egyptian military for its service to its nation, the region, the US, and the world; and it should complete the job it began; it should put down the Muslim Brotherhood for the fascist movement it is. Indeed, we should no more support the return of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt than champion the restoration of the Nazis in Germany.

There is, then, one oddity left to explain, although not really if one understands the man and his background. But is it not strange that the individual most disappointed by the downfall of the Muslim Brotherhood, is none other than our own President, Barack Hussein Obama?

Obama legitimized the Muslim Brotherhood in his 2009 Cairo speech by inviting them to attend the occasion, against the wishes of Mubarak. He then actively supported the ouster of Mubarak, our stalwart ally, at the outset of the Arab Spring; he sent tanks, fighter jets, and other military equipment to the Morsi government; he welcomed Morsi emissaries into his administration and at the highest levels of his White House. And he sulked when Morsi was deposed and hinted at cutting off aid to the Egyptian military. Obama, in effect, supported a Jihadist organization (and government) that actively seeks in one form or another the destruction of the US.

But for a leftist like Obama this makes sense. If one thinks of the US, as a racist and oppressive hegemon, the source of the ills of the world, particularly those of the Muslim world, as most leftists do, then one would naturally endorse those who feel the same way – even if they happen to be our sworn enemies.

Dr. Richard Moss
Jasper, IN

Comments

comments

5 Responses to Opinion: Obama only one upset about downfall of Muslim Brotherhood

  1. Samson September 11, 2013 at 4:54 pm #

    How long before we can be rid of your convoluted way of thinking?

  2. YoRpFiSh September 12, 2013 at 9:49 am #

    This was an amazingly stupid opinion. It just helps to underscore the growing notion that republicans are NOT FIT to hold office. You folk have no interest in governing. You only want to impose a theocracy. One that makes you more money. You’re the very tyranny you rally against.

    You will fail. Miserably. You built that.

  3. Samson September 16, 2013 at 10:19 pm #

    Was this letter edited after it was originally posted? Upon review, it appears the last paragraph or two have been eliminated.

    • dcfreep September 16, 2013 at 10:49 pm #

      The last sentence was removed at the writer’s request.

  4. Samson September 17, 2013 at 5:31 am #

    Since retractions are typically accompanied by public statements, this feels like censorship to me.

Leave a Reply