Another Two Steps in the Obama Extreme Makeover

Another Two Steps in the Obama Extreme Makeover

Ed Lasky

 

The unfurling of Barack Obama 2.0 (or the re-election
version) continues according to plan. I speculated in January
(Obama 2.0: The reinvention Begins) that among the steps Barack Obama would take
to boost his appeal among Americans would be to play the “religious card.”  Sure
enough..here he goes again.

From the Hill:
President Obama on Thursday called his Christian faith a “sustaining
force,” especially in the face of those who have publicly doubted it.

The president said he feels strengthened in his religious convictions
when his detractors question them – a nod to those who incorrectly assert that
Obama is Muslim.

“My Christian faith has been a sustaining force for me over the years, all
the more so when Michelle and I hear our faith questioned,” Obama said at the
National Prayer Breakfast.

The president reflected on how his faith and
prayers had been particularly helpful for him in the wake of recent tragedies:
the attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) last month, as
well as the ongoing turmoil in Egypt.

To repeat what I wrote last month, Barack Obama has barely attended any
religious services in the last two years, has barely expressed any religious
feelings (or emotional ones, for that matter). He has struck many as being
rather cold-blooded. His blatant bid to appease the Muslim world has backfired
politically as it has fed views regarding his own faith. Now that 2012  is
approaching we will be witnesses his public baptism. All for votes.
Talk about religious hucksters….
P.S. There was also a suggestion in my Obama 2.0 column that there would be
a bid to gain the support of military members and veterans. This time Michelle
did her part using the Oprah Show (the Obamas and Oprah are friends  and Oprah
gave an invaluable boost to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign back in 2008
and is doing so again). On the Oprah show, Michelle urged Americans to offer
more support for the country’s military families. I failed to recall that she
ever made such an appeal before the November shellacking of the Democrats that
sent a warning to Barack Obama regarding his own political future.
Does Michelle  Obama care about military families or about staying First
Lady?

 

Obama issues global warming rules in January, gives GE an exemption in February

Obama issues global warming rules in January, gives GE an exemption in February

Last month, the Obama EPA began enforcing new rules regulating the greenhouse gas emissions from any new or expanded power plants.

This week, the EPA issued its first exemption, Environment & Energy News reports:

The Obama administration will spare a stalled power plant project in  California from the newest federal limits on greenhouse gases and  conventional air pollution, U.S. EPA says in a new court filing that  marks a policy shift in the face of industry groups and Republicans  accusing the agency of holding up construction of large industrial  facilities.

According to a declaration by air chief Gina  McCarthy, officials reviewed EPA policies and decided it was appropriate  to “grandfather” projects such as the Avenal Power Center, a proposed  600-megawatt power plant in the San Joaquin Valley, so they are exempted  from rules such as new air quality standards for smog-forming nitrogen  dioxide (NO2).

There’s something interesting about the Avenal Power Center:

The proposed Avenal Energy project will be a combined-cycle generating  plant consisting of two natural gas-fired General Electric 7FA Gas  Turbines with Heat Recovery Steam Generators (HRSG) and one General  Electric Steam Turbine.

Maybe GE CEO Jeff Immelt’s closeness to President Obama, and his broad support for Obama’s agenda, had nothing to do with this exemption. But we have no way of knowing that, and given the administration’s record of regularly misleading Americans regarding lobbyists, frankly, I wouldn’t trust the White House if they told me there was no connection.

On the upside, at least Job Czar Immelt is creating jobs!

Egypt now fears Obama a ‘Manchurian President’

Egypt now fears Obama a ‘Manchurian President’

‘They are trying to understand why he is acting against U.S.
interests’


Posted: February 02, 2011
8:43 pm Eastern

© 2011 WorldNetDaily

LISBON, PORTUGAL - NOVEMBER 20: U.S. President Barack Obama speaks to the media during a press conference on day two of the NATO summit at Feira Internacional de Lisboa (FIL) on November 20, 2010 in Lisbon, Portugal. The two day summit will address issues including a new strategic concept for NATO. Britain and the US will also seek an agreement to hand over responsibility for security in Afghanistan to local forces over the next four years. (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)
Top members of the Egyptian government say they feel betrayed by President
Obama, charging that he is acting against American interests.
“Mubarak’s regime feels Obama is pushing the advancement of the Muslim
Brotherhood against U.S. interests,” said WND’s Jerusalem bureau chief and
senior reporter Aaron Klein. “They are genuinely trying to understand why Obama
is seemingly championing the anti-regime protests.”
Klein said that a top Egyptian diplomat with whom he has developed a rapport
over the last few years asked him earlier this week to explain Obama’s
motivation to support the opposition to Mubarak.
“I told him none of this should be a surprise,” said Klein, “that the Obama
administration has developed an extensive relationship over the last few years
with allies of the Muslim Brotherhood.
“That my investigating has proven that Obama has been closely associated
throughout his political career with radical-left elements who have long
petitioned for policies many believe are aimed at weakening the American
enterprise both domestically and internationally.”
“The Egyptian diplomat seemed surprised,” said Klein. “I told him this
material was thoroughly documented in my latest book.”
The diplomat requested 20 copies of Klein’s New York Times bestselling book
investigating Obama, “The
Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s ties to communists, socialists, and other
anti-American extremists.”
The diplomat said he would deliver the book, which was co-authored by Brenda
J. Elliott, to senior officials in Mubarak’s embattled government.
Obama in recent days urged Mubarak to give up power in Egypt, where the
Muslim Brotherhood forms the main opposition.
Mubarak has been a staunch U.S. ally and a recipient of billions of dollars
in military aid. His regime has long been considered a stabilizing force in the
Arab world.
The Obama administration’s support for the unrest is strikingly reminiscent
of Jimmy Carter’s support of the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, which
marked the birth of modern Islamist expansion.
(Story continues below)
Some Muslim clerics are already calling the riots in Egypt simply an
extension of 1979′s Islamist conquests.
“Thirty-one years after the victory of the Islamic Republic, we are faced
with the obvious fact that these movements are the aftershocks of the Islamic
revolution,” said Iranian cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, as reported by Iran’s
Radio Zamaneh. “The fate of those who challenge [our] religion is destruction.”
Speaking of media and government leaders, Khatami added, “They want to
highlight the labor, liberal and democratic issues, but the most important
issue, which is the religious streak of these protests, [is] being denied.”
The leader of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood, Hammam Saeed, warned that the
unrest in Egypt will spread across the Mideast until Arabs succeed at toppling
leaders allied with the United States.
“The Americans and Obama must be losing sleep over the popular revolt in
Egypt,” Saeed said at a sympathy protest held outside the Egyptian Embassy in
Amman. “Now, Obama must understand that the people have woken up and are ready
to unseat the tyrant leaders who remained in power because of U.S. backing.”
And on the Internet, the Middle East Media Research Institute reports,
prominent Salafi cleric Abu Mundhir Al-Shinqiti issued a fatwa on the website
Minbar Al-Tawhid Wal Jihad encouraging the protests in Egypt, claiming Islamist
jihadis are now on the verge of a historic moment, an “earthquake” he likened to
the Sept. 11 attacks in New York City.
Obama pushes Egyptian ‘reform’
According to a senior Egyptian diplomat speaking to WND, a former U.S.
ambassador to Egypt, Frank Wisner, specifically told Mubarak on Tuesday the U.S.
would not continue to support his rule and he must step down.
Hours later, Mubarak announced he would not seek another term in office.
The Obama administration dispatched Wisner to Egypt last weekend to report to
the State Department and White House a general sense of the situation in the
country.
WND broke the story yesterday
that the Egyptian government has information Wisner secretly met earlier this
week with a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Issam El-Erian.
The Muslim Brotherhood seeks to spread Islam around the world, in large part
using nonviolent means. Hamas and al-Qaida are violent Brotherhood offshoots.
Muslim Brotherhood declares war on U.S.
Prominent U.S. commentators also have been claiming the Muslim Brotherhood is
a moderate organization and denying there is any Islamist plot to seize power.
Last Friday, President George W. Bush’s former press spokeswoman, Dana
Perino, told Fox News, “Don’t be afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. This
has nothing to do with religion.”
Bruce Reidel, a former CIA analyst and adviser to President Obama, wrote a
Daily Beast article in which he claimed, “The Egyptian Brotherhood renounced
violence years ago. … Its relative moderation has made it the target of extreme
vilification by more radical Islamists.”
Reidel’s assertion the Brotherhood renounced violence, however, is
contradicted by its own statements in recent months, including a call to arms
against the West.
In November, the Brotherhood’s new supreme guide, Muhammad Badi, delivered a
sermon entitled “How Islam Confronts the Oppression and Tyranny.”
“Resistance is the only solution,” stated Badi. “The United States cannot
impose an agreement upon the Palestinians, despite all the power at its
disposal. [Today] it is withdrawing from Iraq, defeated and wounded, and is also
on the verge of withdrawing from Afghanistan because it has been defeated by
Islamist warriors.”
Badi went on to declare the U.S. is easy to defeat through violence, since it
is “experiencing the beginning of its end and is heading toward its demise.”
Barry Rubin, director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center,
noted Badi’s speech showed “the likelihood that more Brotherhood supporters in
the West will turn to violence and fund-raising for terrorism.”
Frank Gaffney, president of the American Center for Security Policy, takes it
a step further.
“In short, the Muslim Brotherhood – whether it is operating in Egypt,
elsewhere in the world or here – is our enemy,” he wrote.
Obama quietly builds ties to Muslim Brotherhood
Klein
reported for WND yesterday
that Obama and top administration officials have
troubling relationships with the Muslim Brotherhood and its worldwide allies.
Muslim Brotherhood members were reportedly invited to attend Obama’s 2009
address to the Muslim world from Cairo. Khaled Hamza, editor of the Muslim
Brotherhood website, confirmed at the time that 10 members of the Brotherhood’s
parliamentary bloc received official invitations to attend Obama’s historic
speech.
Also in 2009, the Egyptian daily newspaper Almasry Alyoum ran a report
claiming Obama had met with U.S. and European-based representatives of Egypt’s
Muslim Brotherhood that year
According to the report, the Brotherhood members requested that news of the
meeting not be publicized. They expressed to Obama their support for democracy
and the war on terror.
The newspaper also reported Brotherhood members communicated to Obama their
position that they would abide by all agreements Egypt has signed with foreign
countries, implying that if they took power in Egypt they would continue that
country’s peace treaty with Israel.
Besides contact with the Muslim Brotherhood itself, there have been reports
the past two years of behind-the-scenes contact with Hamas, which was founded as
an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamas maintains a close alliance with the
Brotherhood; the Brotherhood’s new leader, Muhammad Badi, serves as a de facto
lead spiritual guide for Hamas.
Top leaders of Hamas in Gaza claimed to WND several times they passed
messages to Obama through dignitaries who visited the Gaza Strip, including
Jimmy Carter and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., – both of whom have a close
relationship with the White House.
Kerry, for example, reportedly accepted a letter for Obama from Hamas leaders
in Gaza during a February 2009 visit to U.N. installations in the coastal
territory.
U.N. relief agency chief in Gaza Karen Abu Zayd told the BBC the Hamas letter
had been received by his agency and passed on to an unnamed American official.
Immediately after that month’s elections, Ahmed Yousef , Hamas’ chief
political adviser in Gaza, called Obama’s win a “historic victory” for the world
and told WND that Hamas was sending a letter of congratulation to the
president-elect.
Obama ties to Brotherhood’s U.S. allies
It is not just Obama’s reported contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood and the
group’s allies in the Middle East that are of concern.
The Obama administration also has evidenced a working relationship with
several U.S.-based Islamist organizations that are listed by the Brotherhood as
“likeminded” organizations.
One such group is the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA, a radical
Muslim group that was an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to raise money
for Hamas.
ISNA was named in a May 1991 Muslim Brotherhood document – “An Explanatory
Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America” – as
one of the Brotherhood’s likeminded “organizations of our friends” who shared
the common goal of transforming countries into Muslim nations.
The White House relationship with ISNA began even before Obama took office.
One week before the presidential inauguration, Sayyid Syeed, national director
of the ISNA Office for Interfaith and Community Alliances, was part of a
delegation that met with the directors of Obama’s transition team. The
delegation discussed a request for an executive order ending “torture.”
ISNA President Ingrid Mattson represented American Muslims at Obama’s
inauguration, where she offered a prayer during the televised event.
Mattson also has represented ISNA at Obama’s annual Ramadan dinners,
including the last such event in which Obama announced support for the rights of
Muslims to build an Islamic cultural center and mosque two blocks from the site
of the 9/11 attacks.
In June 2009, Obama’s top aide, Valerie Jarrett, invited Mattson to work on
the White House Council on Women and Girls, which Jarrett leads.
That July, the Justice Department sponsored an information booth at an ISNA
bazaar in Washington, D.C.
Also that month, Jarrett addressed ISNA’s 46th annual convention. According
to the White House, Jarrett attended as part of Obama’s outreach to Muslims.
ISNA sponsored a February 2010 question-and-answer session in which Obama’s
top adviser on counter-terrorism, John Brennan, came under fire for
controversial remarks to Muslim law students.

Read more: Egypt now fears Obama a
‘Manchurian President’
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=258937#ixzz1CutOqWLT

Talk Show Host: Obama Could be Impeached over Egypt

Talk Show Host: Obama Could be Impeached over
Egypt

February 2nd, 2011

Ben Johnson, FloydReports.com

A nationally syndicated radio talk show host has called for Barack Obama to
be impeached if he is secretly pushing
Egypt to become an Islamist country
ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood. Tammy Bruce called for Rep. Darrell Issa to
investigate whether the Obama administration is helping the radical Islamic
fundamentalist organization rise to power after the departure of Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak. Media reports indicate a member of the Obama
administration has met with the Muslim Brotherhood,
and the United States may have supported
a plan to take down Mubarak
since at least 2008. “If it is found that Obama
secretly facilitated or *encouraged* an Islamist takeover of Egypt, an ally, he
should be impeached,” Bruce wrote.
Her call came in the form of four separate tweets,
which she posted
on….
Read
more
.

Will Egyptians Lose Their Revolution?

Will Egyptians Lose Their Revolution?
Posted By Lisa Daftari On February 3, 2011 @ 12:06 am In Daily Mailer, FrontPage | 6 Comments
Despite efforts to prove otherwise, the current political movement in Egypt is following a parallel political course seen in 1978-79 Iran.  From the optimism of the protesters to the hovering fundamentalist influences, the Egyptian people must demand that their movement and cries for freedom are heeded and not hijacked.  The Iranian people learned that the hard way.
Thirty years ago, the Iranian people poured into the streets demanding that their Shah be ousted. They did not have a viable alternative, and the absence of an organized opposition made for a facile takeover by an Islamic government.
Similar to Mubarak’s government, the United States had a friendly relationship with the Shah of Iran and his regime.  The people were liberal. Some women marched in tank tops and short skirts and others in headscarves.  Men and women protested together.  Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Bahais and Muslims stood by one another in demanding that a new democratic government replace the Shah.
Their demands were idealistic with no realistic manner in which to implement them.  Similar to the Egyptians, they were fed up, and the consensus was, there was no going back.  The Iranians could only go forward to see who would fill the political vacancy they had so quickly evacuated.
Iran had several competing opposition groups, but none were sufficiently organized or widely supported to compete with what was to come.  Their preoccupation with the dismissal of the Shah got in the way of their own political gains. The Constitutionalist Liberals, the National Front, Marxist groups such as the Tudeh Party of Iran and the Fedaian, and the most powerful guerrilla group, the People’s Mojahedeen, known today as the MEK (a leftist Islamist group) had been around for decades.  While they were influential in ousting the Shah, they lacked the leadership and political sophistication to actually replace him.
As the Shah departed Iran, the people rejoiced the possibility of freedom and democracy, but instead, Iran’s democratic movement and all other political parties were pushed aside by an organizational genius who was as scheming as he was shrewd: the Ayatollah Khomeini, who had a masterful plan for the Iranian people and the future of the country.
Khomeini quickly formed the Interim Government of Iran in 1979, also known as the Provisional Revolutionary Government, and by February, appointed Mehdi Bazargan as the interim Prime Minister. Bazargan was an obvious choice; a modern, well dressed, highly-educated engineer with good diplomacy skills.
Two days after Americans were taken hostage at the American Embassy, Bazargan and all members of his cabinet resigned Nov. 6, 1979, and Khomeini, seemingly happy about the resignation, handed power to the Revolutionary Council.
Two weeks ago, Mohsen Rezaii, Iran’s former Revolutionary Guard Commander called Bazargan’s appointment “the biggest trick pulled by the Imam Khomeini to hoodwink the Americans back in 1979.”
Given the similarities in movements, we hope that 30 years from now, a commander from the Muslim Brotherhood won’t claim the appointment of Mohamed ElBaradei, the informal Egyptian opposition leader, was a trick used to likewise dupe the Americans now.

The similarities between Bazargan and ElBaradei, coupled with comparisons that can be drawn between the Islamic Republic and the Muslim Brotherhood, are alarming, particularly since they can cost the Egyptians their movement and the future of their country.

//

//


Mohamed ElBaradei, 68, former International Atomic Energy Agency chief, has surfaced as the likely candidate to lead a transition government between Mubarak’s regime and what will ensue.   The danger clearly remains in handing the country over to a politically inexperienced man whose campaign is being endorsed by the Muslim Brotherhood.
If ElBaradei’s track record in Iran as IAEA chief is any indication, he can easily be influenced by fundamentalist entities.  While he condemned Iran for not cooperating with IAEA assessors, he advocated on Iran’s behalf, pushing for diplomatic engagement and claiming that Iran was farther away from becoming a nuclear power than the West and Israel claimed.
Mustafa Al-Naggar, Coordinator of ElBaradei’s National Coalition for Change said about his platform, “We want one of two good things: Freedom or martyrdom,” in an Arabic language television interview now on MEMRI TV. “Let them kill the Egyptian people in its entirety.”
The biggest threat facing Egypt, however, remains the Muslim Brotherhood — the largest, oldest and best-organized Islamic group in the world.  Though the argument has been made that the Muslim Brotherhood does not preach violence and has separated itself from Islamic radicalism, the group’s core beliefs will subject women and religious minorities, including Coptic Christians, to second-class status, threaten the 30-year peace between Egypt and Israel, and fuel terrorist groups including Hezbollah, Hamas and Al-Qaeda.
“If the Muslim Brotherhood takes power in Egypt, radical elements elsewhere in the region will be emboldened, further distancing themselves from the West in general and the US in particular,” according to Dr. Joseph A. Kechichian, a columnist with Gulf News in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and author of Power and Succession in Arab Monarchies. “US interests are not necessarily served by adding to the roster of radicalized Islamic states, where Shari `a Law is the rule of the land, and where anti-US rhetoric can translate into policies.”
The US’s support (or lack thereof) of inchoate political movements has had mixed results.  In the case of Iran, even though the movements of 1978-79 and 2009 had entirely different outcomes—one a full-blown revolution and the other, a lost opportunity—both were failures.  In 1978, President Carter intervened and was instrumental in the ousting of the Shah and paving the way for the creation of a radical theocracy.  In 2009, however, President Obama completely missed an opportune moment to throw support behind a resilient pro-democratic, secular movement that would have made significant changes in Iran and the region, even when the Iranian people asked for US support.
The lessons of the past, however, were set aside as President Obama isolated President Mubarak in the initial hours of protest last week, throwing unconditional support behind those who are fighting for his dismissal.
“Washington’s decision to admonish one of its closest allies in the Middle East will probably result in an Islamic Egypt, if the current regime is replaced,” Dr. Kechichian said.  “No matter how unpalatable Mubarak or his elites may be, the US has a huge stake in the survival of the regime, at least not to repeat the 1978-1979 Iranian experience.”
Whether Mubarak stays or is replaced, the warning comes to salvage the Egyptian movement in its aftermath.  No one is denying the Egyptians their right to freedoms or even questioning their intentions.  Yet, just because it is freedom that they seek does not mean that it is freedom that they will receive. The warnings, whether they come from the Iranians or those who do not wish to see history repeat itself, serve to ensure the best outcome for the Egyptians, for the Middle East and for the rest of the world.
Ultimately, should an Islamic regime take over Egypt, it would be yet another win for Iran’s hard-line regime.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Penetration of the Obama Administration

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Penetration of the Obama Administration
Posted By Jamie Glazov On February 3, 2011 @ 1:00 am In Daily Mailer, FrontPage | 9 Comments
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Pamela Geller, founder, editor and publisher of the popular and award-winning weblog AtlasShrugs.com.  She has won acclaim for her interviews with internationally renowned  figures, including John Bolton, Geert Wilders, Bat Ye’or, Natan  Sharansky, and many others, and has broken numerous important stories —  notably the questionable sources of some of the financing of the Obama campaign. Her op-eds have been published in The Washington Times, The American Thinker, Israel National News, Frontpage Magazine, World Net Daily, and New Media Journal, among other publications. She is the co-author (with Robert Spencer) of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America.
FP: Pamela Geller, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
Well, perhaps for those who are familiar with your work and with your book, it is not a big surprise for them that Obama has endorsed a role for the Muslim Brotherhood in a new, post-Mubarak government for Egypt.
I would like to narrow in with you today about the Muslim Brotherhood’s penetration of the Obama administration. What can you tell us about this Islamist penetration of the White House?
Geller: Thanks Jamie.
The first thing we need to realize is that the Muslim Brotherhood operates in the United States under a variety of names and organizational umbrellas. Technically, there is no “Muslim Brotherhood” in the United States. But the Muslim American Society (MAS), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and others are – according to a document captured in a raid and released by law enforcement in 2007 during the Holy Land Foundation Hamas funding trial) – Brotherhood-linked organizations.
FP: Right, and crystallize for us why we need to be concerned about Brotherhood-linked organizations in the U.S.
Geller: Because, Jamie, that same captured document explains that the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission in the U.S. 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 so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
FP: And people with ties to these organizations are involved with the Obama Administration, right?
Geller: Yes they are, Jamie, in various ways. On the first day of his presidency, the President showed an eagerness to be friendly toward the Brotherhood: he chose Ingrid Mattson, president of ISNA to offer a prayer at the National Cathedral during inaugural festivities on January 20, 2009.
Superficially, Obama’s choice was understandable: Ingrid Mattson was a Canadian convert to Islam who carefully cultivated the image of a moderate spokesperson. But ISNA has even admitted ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, which calls itself “one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine.”
Mattson has also tried to set Jews and Christians against one another. Speaking at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government in March 2007, Mattson said: “Right-wing Christians are very risky allies for American Jews, because they [the Christians] are really anti-Semitic. They do not like Jews.”
But Obama didn’t seem to care about any of that. And so she prayed for Barack Hussein Obama on January 20, 2009. And it gets worse: after that, Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s Senior Advisor for Public Engagement and International Affairs and a longtime, close Obama aide, asked Mattson to join the White House Council on Women and Girls, which is dedicated to “advancing women’s leadership in all communities and sectors – up to the U.S. presidency – by filling the leadership pipeline with a richly diverse, critical mass of women.”
A hijab-wearing leader of a group with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other terrorists and Islamic supremacists – that’s diverse, all right!
FP: Yes diverse all right. I wonder why we haven’t heard Mattson coming to the defense of victims of honor killings and denouncing the Islamic theological teachings that serve as a buffer for those killings. It would be interesting to know what she would have to say about your article, Honor Killing: Islam’s Gruesome Gallery, where you humanize this tragedy by showing us the faces of dead victims and surviving victims of Islamic misogynist violence.
But I guess we shouldn’t hold our breath waiting for Mattson to comment. I encourage all of our readers to look at that Gallery to not only get an idea of the viciousness of Islamic gender apartheid, but also of what kind of people Obama is has around him — since they are the ones who are complicit in and sanction this violence.
Ok, let us move on. Tell us more about the Muslim Brotherhood presence in the Obama Administration.
Geller: In June 2009, Obama appointed a Muslim, Kareem Shora, to the Homeland Security Advisory Council. Shora had been executive director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, a group that had generally opposed anti-terror efforts since 9/11 – as have all the Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups in the U.S. But more worrisome was Obama’s appointment of another Muslim, Arif Alikhan, to be Assistant Secretary for Policy Development at the Department of Homeland Security. Alikhan is affiliated with the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), which is another highly deceptive Brotherhood-linked group.
FP: Why did the President make these appointments?

Geller: These appointments were obvious attempts to show the Muslims of the United States and the world that anti-terror efforts were not anti-Islam or anti-Muslim. Shora and Alikhan would stand as moderate Muslims within the DHS, living illustrations of the iron dogma that all Muslims aside from a tiny minority were loyal Americans who abhorred Osama bin Laden and everything he stood for. But when he made the appointment, Obama didn’t notice, or didn’t care, that as deputy mayor of Los Angeles, Alikhan (who has referred to the jihad terrorist group Hizballah as a “liberation movement”) had blocked an effort by the Los Angeles Police Department to gather information about the ethnic makeup of area mosques.

//

//


FP: You mean to conduct surveillance in Los Angeles-area mosques?
Geller: No, Jamie. This was not an effort to close down Los Angeles mosques, or to conduct surveillance of them. There was no wiretapping or interrogation involved. No one would be jailed or even inconvenienced. Los Angeles Deputy Chief Michael P. Downing explained in 2007: “We want to know where the Pakistanis, Iranians and Chechens are so we can reach out to those communities.” But even outreach was too much for the hypersensitive Muslim leaders of Los Angeles: they cried racism, discrimination, and “Islamophobia” until the LAPD dropped the plan. And Arif Alikhan spearheaded their drive against this initiative.
Did Obama want him to bring to the Department of Homeland Security a similar sensitivity to the quickly wounded feelings of Muslims? I expect so.
FP: Talk a bit about that.
Geller: We are all well aware of Obama’s oft-stated commitment to defending and spreading the ideology of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. Remember: in Cairo on June 4, 2009, Obama boasted that “the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it….I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal.” Five days later, as if to show that Obama was serious about what he said in Cairo, his post-American Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Essex County, New Jersey, charging that the county had discriminated against a Muslim woman, Yvette Beshier.
Beshier was a corrections officer, and had been forbidden to wear her khimar, or headscarf, while working. When she refused to comply, the Essex County Department of Corrections (DOC) first suspended and then fired her – the khimar was not part of the uniform, and corrections officers were expected to conform to uniform policy. But such policies, of course, were drawn up before the days of politically correct multiculturalism. Instead of simply expecting employees to conform to company rules, now the company had to adapt to the religious particularities of its Muslim employees: Barack Obama’s Justice Department sued on Beshier’s behalf.
When Obama in Cairo boasted about fighting for hijab-wearing women in the United States, he promised to “punish” infidels for not submitting to the dictates and whims of Islam. The lawsuit that followed less than a week later showed that he was in earnest.
It was almost certainly the first time that the United States Justice Department had filed a lawsuit in order to enforce an element of Sharia, Islamic law.
On duty, Yvette Beshier, like all her fellow corrections officers, should have worn religiously neutral garb. Off duty, she could have dressed any way she wanted. But ultimately the Justice Department’s suit wasn’t really about the dress code at the Essex County Department of Corrections at all. It was about asserting Islamic practices in the U.S., and establishing and reinforcing the precedent that when Islamic law and American law and custom conflicted, it was American law that had to give way.
And that’s just how the Muslim Brotherhood would want it.
FP: Interesting. I wonder when Obama will make an announcement that will defend Muslim women’s right not to veil and not to fear physical violence or acid attacks on their faces when making that decision? Aqsa Parvez was killed by her father, in part, for not veiling. I wonder why Obama didn’t come to Aqsa’s defense? Thank you, Pamela, by the way, for coming to Aqsa’s defense.
So let’s talk about the upheaval in Egypt. What do you think of how Obama is handling the situation?
Geller: Obama approved of a role in the next Egyptian government for the Muslim Brotherhood just as a Brotherhood leader was calling for war several days ago with the tiny Jewish state. It was telling. What better way to unify the ummah than with tried-and-true, religiously mandated Islamic anti-semitism? For all of those quisling clowns desperately trying to scrub the Muslim Brotherhood, this declaration of war was a good hard slap in the face.
Further, it’s interesting how the Muslim Brotherhood is blaming Israel for Mubarak’s regime. They’re not blaming the $300 billion the US has pumped into Egypt. The Camp David Peace Accord (no matter how cold a peace it established) was a good thing. Now we hear that Obama’s would-be peace partners, the Muslim Brotherhood group Hamas, are going to destroy the accord. But they want peace with the Jews; get it? Me neither.
Obama has been secretly supporting this revolution for three years. Why? He ignored the people of Iran marching against the annihilationist mullahcracy of Iran. He gave his tacit support to mass slaughter where millions took to the streets.
Anyone who, like Obama, sees a Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt as a good thing secretly dreams of the annihilation of Israel. Big media is not giving you the story. Instead they have the Muslim Brotherhood’s U.S. group on, CAIR, calling in from Egypt (and mis-identifying Ahmed Rehab of CAIR as a “democracy activist”). And that was FOX. It’s that bad.
I don’t believe Obama “lost Egypt”; I believe he kicked it to the curb.
FP: Pamela Geller, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.
And we encourage all of our readers to get their hands on Ms. Geller’s book, co-written with Robert Spencer, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56 other followers