Black Liberationists, Marxists, Islamists and El-Baradei All Call for Democracy in Egypt
Let’s look at who is calling for democracy in Egypt. Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohamed El-Baradei wants it, but wants “Barack Obama” to impose it. “Obama,” the world’s most famous adherent of genocidal Black Liberation Theology, supports it. Alinskyite Marxist Secretary of State Hillary Clinton supports it. And the Muslim Brotherhood, which assassinated Anwar Sadat 30 years ago, and is dedicated to the worldwide imposition of shariah, supports it. Why, with that kind of support, democracy can’t miss!
“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”—Muslim Brotherhood
Mohamed El-Baradei acts as though he wants “Barack Obama” to act as a dictator or supreme commander, depose Egypt’s lawful leader, and install El-Baradei as president, yet he sees this as a blueprint for “democratic” reform?
El-Baradei really needs to take his irony supplement.
The news reports I read initially either ignored the Muslim Brotherhood’s role in the rioting, or said the group was keeping a low profile, and though some mentioned that it supports imposing shariah, none that I saw mentioned that it was the Muslim Brotherhood that assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981. In fact, some sites ludicrously reported that the Brotherhood has “renounced violence.” And Al Qaeda is just a Koran study group.
Another voice in favor of “democracy” comes from our friends at The Daily Beast, who tell us,
Don’t Fear Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood
The secretive Islamic opposition group has long renounced violence and may be the most reasonable option….
The prospect of change in Egypt inevitably raises questions about the oldest and strongest opposition movement in the country, the Muslim Brotherhood , also known as Ikhwan. Can America work with an Egypt where the Ikhwan is part of a transition or even a new government?
The short answer is it is not our decision to make. Egyptians will decide the outcome, not Washington. We should not try to pick Egyptians’ rulers. Every time we have done so, from Vietnam’s generals to Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai, we have had buyer’s remorse. But our interests are very much involved so we have a great stake in the outcome. Understanding the Brotherhood is vital to understanding our options….
After the army seized power in 1952, [the Brotherhood] briefly flirted with supporting Gamal Abdel Nasser’s government but then moved into opposition. Nasser ruthlessly suppressed it.
Nasser and his successors, Anwar Sadat and Mubarak, have alternatively repressed and demonized the Brotherhood or tolerated it as an anti-communist and right-wing opposition….
Bruce Riedel’s claim that we have always had buyer’s remorse when we picked rulers is not true. Not in South Vietnam, and not in Iran. The former CIA officer also somehow neglected to mention that Nasser’s brutal suppression of the Brotherhood followed their assassination attempts on him, or that the group assassinated Sadat.
Note the non sequitur:
“Can America work with an Egypt where the Ikhwan is part of a transition or even a new government?
“The short answer is it is not our decision to make.”
The answer to what? Riedel’s answer is to a different question, whether America should have any say in the governing of a country that gets $1.5 billion in annual aid from us, and he admits that “our interests are very much involved so we have a great stake in the outcome.” Beyond that, as he well knows, Egypt is essential to regional stability.
Riedel never answers his question, because the answer is “no,” but he does not want to come clean with his true loyalties.
He also ignores the fact that the democratic Egyptian El-Baradei wants America to intervene, and “to pick Egyptians’ rulers.”
The notion that America should be passive in the face of a possible Islamist takeover in Egypt, and in much of North Africa, is completely inimical to America’s interests. Then again, Riedel’s orientation clearly is anti-American: He supported the Communist takeover of South Vietnam, and supports an Islamist takeover of Egypt and North Africa.
Eight years ago, Zeev Chafets observed that Arab Moslems don’t march in favor of more democracy, but for less of it. They don’t march for peace, but for war. Mohamed El-Baradei may have fallen in love with his press clippings, but Bruce Riedel and Hillary Clinton know these truths better than I do.
Award-winning, New York-based freelancer Nicholas Stix founded A Different Drummer magazine (1989-93). Stix has written for Die Suedwest Presse, New York Daily News, New York Post, Newsday, Middle American News, Toogood Reports, Insight, Chronicles, the American Enterprise, Campus Reports, VDARE, the Weekly Standard, Front Page Magazine, Ideas on Liberty, National Review Online and the Illinois Leader. His column also appears at Men's News Daily, MichNews, Intellectual Conservative, Enter Stage Right and OpinioNet. Stix has studied at colleges and universities on two continents, and earned a couple of sheepskins, but he asks that the reader not hold that against him. His day jobs have included washing pots, building Daimler-Benzes on the assembly-line, tackling shoplifters and teaching college, but his favorite job was changing his son's diapers.