Manager of Muslim Brotherhood International Investments

John R. Houk

© August 28, 2013

Malik Obama operates the international investments of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood. Guess who Malik’s brother is?

VIDEO: Obama's Brother Linked to Muslim Brotherhood

It is obvious that President Barak Hussein Obama was supportive of bringing down longtime ally Hosni Mubarak which led to a close election in Egyptian in which the Muslim Brotherhood’s political party won the Office of President in Egypt. Then President Mohamed Morsi proceeded with actions to make the totality of Sharia Law the law of the land in Egypt. Sharia excited MB adherents then began attacking Coptic Christians and their Churches.

In the meantime Morsi neglected Egypt’s economy. The significant amount of secular minded Muslims of Egypt then began a protest similar to that which brought Mubarak down. Obama kept his nose out of internal Egyptian affairs undoubtedly hoping Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood would cool the Sharia stuff and reawaken their social outreach which made the MB popular with Egyptians in the first place. That did not happen. The Egyptian military duly pulled a bloodless coup (which Obama denies) and appointed an interim President until new elections could place another civilian as President.

In the meantime MB acolytes have been confronting the pro-military secularist Muslims with violence which included more Coptic Christian murders and Church burnings. This has all the appearance of an Egyptian Civil War. Where does Obama come down on Egyptian turmoil? Obama seems keen to take out dictator Bashar al-Assad of Syria that would probably pave the way for a Sunni Radical Muslim regime in Syria; however Obama has been quite quiet on whether he favors the Pro-American Egyptian military or the anti-American/anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood adherents.

Frankly I see this as a smoking gun support policy of the Obama Administration to Radical Islam’s Muslim Brotherhood. This goes a long way to explaining the allowance of Muslim Brotherhood connected Huma Abedin to continue as a Deputy Chief of Staff while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. Also there is a bit more light on the Obama cover-up of Benghazigate since Ambassador Stevens was in the midst of negotiating weapons to Syrian rebels (dominated by al Qaeda Islamists) but adds mystery to the reasoning of the suspicion that then President Morsi ordered the attack on the Benghazi American annex that resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

Here is an article that might explain Obama’s reticence toward a proactive foreign policy toward Egypt.

JRH 8/28/13 (Hat Tip: Breaking All The Rules)

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

***********************************

BARACK OBAMA'S BROTHER LINKED TO THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

By Dr. Jerome Corsi PhD

08-21-2013 4:13 pm

Liberty News Online

NEW YORK – President Obama’s half-brother in Kenya could cause the White House more headaches over new evidence linking him to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and establishing that controversial IRS supervisor Lois Lerner signed his tax-exempt approval letter.

Malik Obama’s oversight of the Muslim Brotherhood’s international investments is one reason for the Obama administration’s support of the Muslim Brotherhood, according to an Egyptian report citing the vice president of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt, Tehani al-Gebali

In a news report on Egyptian television of a Gebali speech, translated by researcher Walid Shoebat, a former Palestinian Liberation Organization operative, Gebali said she would like “to inform the American people that their president’s brother Obama is one of the architects of the major investments of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

“We will carry out the law, and the Americans will not stop us,” she said. “We need to open the files and begin court sessions.

“The Obama administration cannot stop us; they know that they supported terrorism,” she continued. “We will open the files so these nations are exposed, to show how they collaborated with [the terrorists]. It is for this reason that the American administration fights us.”

New! “Impeachable Offenses” lays out the blueprint for impeaching Barack Obama for crimes against the United States. Order it now at WND’s Superstore! [Editor: Link not provided by Liberty News Online]

Shoebat said Gebali explained the news is important to Americans who are concerned about their president’s actions, calling it “is a gift to the American people,” implying there were more revelations to come.

In an interview on Egyptian television, Gebali said the cost to Egypt has been great, and she vowed her country will not allow any conspiracy against its people or the Egyptian state. She insisted that pushing Egypt to bankruptcy is unacceptable, because it would plunge her country into a dire state similar to Iraq and Libya.

Shoebat said that if the reports are correct, Turkey appears to play a central role in the alleged conspiracy. He emphasized that Egypt has asserted to the international community that it will not tolerate any attempt to push the country to bankruptcy.

Shoebat’s blog linked to three “very credible sources” that corroborate the report on Gebali’s comments.

Shoebat reported in May that Malik Obama is the executive secretary of the Islamic Da’wa Organization, or IDO, a group created by the government of Sudan, which is considered by the U.S. State Department to be a terrorist state.

In 2010, Malik Obama attended an IDO conference in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum. One of the objectives of the IDO is to spread Wahhabist Islam across the African continent.

Sudan President Omar Al-Bashir supervised the conference. Bashir is wanted by the International Criminal Court on seven counts related to crimes against humanity.

Shoebat asserted the evidence places Malik Obama “in bed with terrorists, working in a terrorist state as an official of an organization created by terrorists.”

Malik’s tax-exempt problems

WND reported in May that funds contributed in the U.S. to a 501(c)3 foundation run by Malik Obama have been diverted to support Malik’s multiple wives in Kenya, an expert on Islamic extremism has charged.

Lois Lerner, the director of the IRS tax-exempt division currently under congressional investigation, signed the letter approving tax-exempt status for the Malik Obama’s Barack H. Obama Foundation.

Lerner, currently on paid executive leave from her IRS supervisory position, took the Fifth Amendment before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on May 22 rather than answer questions on inappropriate criteria used by her IRS department to delay or otherwise deny tax-exempt status for tea party and “patriot” groups.

Shoebat has detailed his allegations in a 22-page investigative report titled “New IRS Scandal: Islamic Extremism and Sex Slaves: Report Reveals Obama’s Relatives Run Charities of Deceit,” published on his website

After a thorough examination of available evidence, Shoebat explained to WND his allegations against the Obama family tax-exempt foundations:

When Malik Obama and Sarah Obama raised money in the United States as the respective heads of foundations claiming to be charities, not only did the Internal Revenue Service illegally grant one of them tax-deductible status retroactively, but these foundations have supported – to varying degrees – illegal operations that acquire funding for personal gain, philandering, polygamy and the promotion of Wahhabism, the brand of Islam practiced by Al-Qaeda.

For the past two years, since long before the current IRS scandals became public, WND has been reporting irregularities in two IRS-approved 501(c)3 organizations operated in the U.S. by Obama’s half-brother and step-grandmother in Kenya.

WND reported in September 2011 the Barack H. Obama Foundation apparently received IRS approval one month after an application was submitted in May 2011. The IRS determination letter June 11, 2011, granted a highly irregular retroactive tax-exempt approval only after the group came under fire for operating as a 501(c)3 foundation since 2008 without ever having applied to the IRS.

In October 2012, WND reported a separate foundation, the Mama Sarah Obama Foundation, created on behalf of Obama’s step-grandmother in Kenya, has transferred funds, 90 percent of which are raised from U.S. individuals and corporations, to send Kenyan students to the top three most radical Wahhabist madrassas in Saudi Arabia.

Since its founding in 2008, the Barack H. Obama Foundation, operating out of a commercial mail drop in Arlington, Va., has solicited tax-deductible contributions on the Internet, listing addresses and telephone numbers both in the U.S. and Kenya, without disclosing the group lacked an IRS determination letter.

In September 2011, the IRS confirmed to WND that the Barack H. Obama Foundation had received a determination letter in June 2011, awarding the group tax-exempt 501(c)3 status retro-actively to 2008

Malik Obama, best man at the wedding of Barack H. Obama, Oct. 3, 1992

Tax-exempt polygamy?

On March 3, 2013, Andrew Malone, reporting for the London Daily Mail, documented that Malik’s youngest wife in Kenya, Sheila Anyano, 35 years his junior, had spent the past two years living with three of Malik’s other wives at the “Barack H Obama Foundation rest and relaxation center,” a restaurant complex that profits from visitors drawn by the family’s connection to the American president.

According to the Daily Mail, members of his extended family in Kenya have accused Malik, a practitioner of Islam and a polygamist, of being a wife-beater and philanderer. Malik is accused of seducing Sheila, the newest of his estimated 12 wives when she was a 17-year-old schoolgirl – a crime in Kenya, where the legal age of consent is 18.

Malone tracked down Sheila’s mother, Mary, who explained to the reporter that Malik Obama had “secret trysts” with the girl after spotting her attending prayers at the mosque he has built in Kogelo, the family’s ancestral home.

Sheila, now age 20, told Ambrose that marrying Malik, now age 55, was the “worst decision” of her life and confirmed that she and Malik kept their marriage “a secret,” because she was 17.

“At first he was good, after he started speaking to me at the mosque,” Sheila told the Daily Mail. “But he has changed. Marrying him has been the biggest mistake of my life. He beats me, but mostly he’s just nasty and quarrelsome.”

Shoebot (sic) charged that Malik Obama is abusing non-profit funds.

“There is no evidence to suggest that Malik is building any houses in Kogelo for widows and orphans as claimed,” Shoebat said.

Neither is there evidence that the Mama Sarah Foundation has built any homes for widows, orphans and HIV/AIDS victims.

“The only evidence where monies were spent involves the Barack H. Obama Recreation and Rest Center in Kenya, which housed Malik’s 12 wives in a facility that includes a restaurant and a mosque with a madrassa,” he said.

“While building mosques is legally considered charity, evidence shows the entire funding came directly from entities and individuals from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain,” Shoebat said. “There is nothing of charitable nature to show for all the funds Malik raises from the United States. To date, there is no evidence for any accomplishments toward building homes for orphans, widows and AIDS victims in Kogelo or anywhere else in Kenya.”

Limited financial reporting

An IRS Form 990-EZ required for tax-exempt organizations was filed on May 23, 2011, only days before the IRS determination letter was sent.

Barack H. Obama Foundation, Form 990-EZ, filed May 23, 2011, page 1
The Form 990-EZ appears to have been hand-written by Malik Obama himself, complete with an unorthodox page of calculations evidently included to back up the amounts entered into the form.

The Form 990 reported the foundation had received $24,250 total gross income for 2010, derived from contributions, gifts and grants.

“We were not very successful this year because of limited contributions,” Malik reported on the Form 990. “The Foundation sponsored a Youth Tournement (sic) and embarked on construction of community bridges.”

Malik surfaced during the 2008 presidential campaign, dressed in African garb and holding a photograph of Barack Obama in African garb.

Abongo “Roy” Malik Obama displays a 1980s-era photograph of Barack Obama in Kenya. Born in Kenya, on March 15, 1958, Abongo Malik “Roy” Obama was the first child born to Barack Obama Sr.

The son of Kezia, Obama Sr.’s first wife, Malik was only 18 months old when Barack Obama Sr. arrived in New York Aug. 8, 1959, on a BOAC flight in transit from Kenya to begin his undergraduate studies at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu.

Having abandoned Kezia in Kenya, Obama Sr. subsequently married Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack Obama Jr.’s mother, while in Honolulu, according to the account Obama relates in his autobiography “Dreams from My Father.”

___________________________

Manager of Muslim Brotherhood International Investments

John R. Houk

© August 28, 2013

__________________________

BARACK OBAMA'S BROTHER LINKED TO THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

SOURCE: http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/obamas-brother-linked-to-muslim-brotherhood/

LIBERTY NEWS ONLINE
Chatham, New York 12037 USA

About Liberty News Online

We, the freedom loving people in North America, Europe and the rest of the civilized world have been gradually surrendering our Freedoms, Liberty and our national sovereignties to the global elite, corrupt politicians and the United Nations for many, many decades. Our countries are all overburdened with illegal immigrants who refuse to assimilate or adopt our cultures, but who demand that we owe them welfare benefits, free medical care, free education and other government handouts. Corrupt or incompetent political leaders in our national governments seem unable or unwiling (sic) to stop their addiction to out-of-control government spending that is placing all of our countries on the verge of bankruptcy. We now have Radical Islamists living among us, failing education systems that are more about indoctrination than education, wide open borders and bigger and more intrusive governments that want to control every aspect of our lives in the name of national security.


It is very clear that western civilization is under attack by those who intend to destroy us. The danger, however, is not coming from foreign enemies and armies, but from the enemies within our own countries. They are the New Communists (the Neo-Coms) made up of a dangerous mixture of Socialists, Progressives, Liberals, Marxists, Radical Islamists, Communists and Globalists within our governments, international corporations and banks, educational institutions and the media who hide behind the very freedoms we value so much, as they plot to progressively destroy our … READ THE REST

Is it Time to Impeach Obama or What?

John R. Houk

© July 22, 2013

The Western Center for Journalism (WCJ) is using an Egyptian TV channel as a resource to report Barack Hussein Obama has diverted billions of dollars to the deposed Mohamed Morsi of Egypt before the Egyptian military tossed him the Office of President. For clarity sake BHO is not being accused of sending the big bucks to the Egyptian government but to Morsi himself.

Below is the video:

VIDEO: Obama's Secret $8 Billion Bribe To the Muslim Brotherhood

The WCJ reporter Kris Zane believes this is a smoking gun piece of evidence that should be the straw that breaks the camel’s back for the road to impeachment. Perhaps this could open the floodgates of information with Obama’s other nefarious actions now called scandals:

1. IRS targets Obama’s enemies

2. Benghazi

3. Keeping an eye on The Associated Press: 

4. Rosengate

5. Potential Holder perjury I

6. The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme

7. Potential Holder perjury II

8. Sebelius demands payment

9. The Pigford scandal

10. GSA gone wild

11. Veterans Affairs in Disney World

12. Sebelius violates the Hatch Act

13. Solyndra

14. AKA Lisa Jackson

15. The New Black Panthers

16. Waging war all by myself

17. Biden bullies the press

18. AKPD not A-OK

19. Sestak, we’ll take care of you

20. I’ll pass my own laws (List courtesy of Prison Planet)

You can read the WCJ report that goes along with this video HERE.

JRH 7/22/13

SlantRight 2.0 Needs Your Support – Support Generously

Obama’s Foreign Policy is Unfavorable to Israel

John R. Houk

© August 17, 2012

Caroline Glick has written an essay that begins with the U.S. Foreign Policy debacle of doing nothing to keep Mao Zedong (Mao Tse Dung) from his Communist conquest of China. Mao wrested control of the Chinese government from the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-Chek who ended up fleeing to Formosa (Today’s Taiwan).

Glick compares Mao’s usurpation of power in China to allowing the Muslim Brotherhood Islamist President Mohamed Morsi of winning a close Egyptian election. Glick reports that Egyptian military authorities and generals have been fired and replaced with Muslim Brotherhood loyalists. Also Morsi has not called the Egyptian Parliament back (disbanded originally by Egyptian military) which Glick believes gives Morsi the power to write Egypt’s new Constitution. If Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood write the next Egyptian Constitution, this will probably instill dictatorial powers on the new Egyptian President. Glick believes these dictatorial powers will be on a larger scale than the Obama abandoned and deposed Hosni Mubarak’s power.

Glick then properly goes on to criticize Obama’s Foreign Policy of joining Turkey in supporting the Islamist rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Now I realize there will be really no difference in Israel-hate and American-hate from which ever Syrian broker eventually stabilizes control of Syria; however deposing Assad would throw a monkey wrench into the Iranian-Syrian military alliance at least for awhile. That actually would be to America’s benefit. Anything that sets Iran back with only a little resource involvement by the US is a plus for America.

If the Sunni-Islamists succeed in taking over Syria the animosity with Iran would only be temporary in my opinion. The one thing that unites and smoothes over the hatred between Sunni and Shia Muslims (Iran is a Shia Theocracy) is a mutual hatred for Jews and Israel.

I suspect if Israel attacks Iranian nuke sites the Sunni regimes of Turkey (Islamist government) and now Egypt (Muslim Brotherhood Islamist government) might begin to offer at the very least clandestine military aid to Iranian client Hezbollah and the Sunni-Islamist terrorists Hamas. Undoubtedly Hamas would join a Hezbollah attack from the north by making a southern military front against Israel. The Saudi Royal Family hates and fears the militant Shia Iran regime in becoming a regional hegemon. I believe it is a pretty good guess that the Wahhabi Clerics in Saudi Arabia would fully support the elimination of Israel’s existence. If the Saudi Royal Family does not want its own civil war it would probably support yet another invasion of Israel while working clandestinely with the USA to help thwart Iranian influence.

Israel’s existence is in volatile times. A nuclear armed Iran would be suicide for Israel. Israel must take the risk of regional war to stop the formation of nuclear warheads that can be placed on Iranian missiles that can easily reach Israel. If a regional war breaks out Israel would have to be harsh on the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians just to survive. I sense a President like Obama would condemn Israel for such self-preservation harshness against Palestinian Authority Arabs and Hamas governed Gaza Arabs. An Obama-like President might even desire to punish Israel by not helping the Jewish State to survive.

YOU DO KNOW what would happen to Jews in a defeated Israel, right? There would be a SECOND Holocaust that would either rival the Hitler-Nazi Holocaust or even exceed those dimensions of butchery.

American voters need to vote for a President that is Pro-Israel and willing to stand with Israel even if doing so is not Politically Correct to the rest of the Western World. Currently that man is GOP Nominee Mitt Romney. Standing with Israel will bring the blessings of God Almighty for blessing God’s Chosen People.

I am not Jewish; nonetheless I and other Biblical Christians support Israel because the Jewish State’s existence is prophetic. Eventually Jesus Himself will Return and the Jews will comprehend He is their Messiah as much as He is the Christian Messiah (i.e. the Christ) of Christian Believers looking for the fulfillment of God’s plans for His Creation. Salvation is of the Jews.

Yup, you pegged me: I am a Christian Zionist (SA Jewish Virtual Library). The kind of person Leftists, Muslims and erstwhile so-called Progressive Christians dislike immensely. Unfortunately many Liberal and Observant Jews distrust the motivation of Christian Zionists.

[SlantRight Editor Side Note: The distrust is in the Christian Zionist motivation to be a friend of Israel. Jews are not real hip to Christian proselytizing because of the unscriptural and horrid treatment Jews received at the hands of Christians taught to hate Jews as Christ-killers. The accusation was unfair in Christian history and it is unfair now.

For one thing polytheistic Romans were goaded into Crucifying Christ at the behest of power-station minded Jewish leadership (viz. the Sanhedrin monopolized by Pharisees but dominated by Greek mindset Sadducees).]

Well that is my two-cents. The analysis of Israel’s predicament and U.S. Foreign Policy is much more eloquently provided by Caroline Glick. You should READ IT.

JRH 8/17/12

Please Support With SlantRight 2.0 Tip Contributions.

******************************

Who lost Egypt?

By Caroline Glick

August 17, 2012, 10:09 AM

CarolineGlick.com

In 1949, the Communist takeover of China rattled the US foreign policy establishment to its core. China's fall to Communism was correctly perceived as a massive strategic defeat for the US. The triumphant Mao Zedong placed China firmly in the Soviet camp and implemented foreign policies antithetical to US interests.

For the American foreign policy establishment, China's fall forced a reconsideration of basic axioms of US foreign policy. Until China went Red, the view resonant among foreign policy specialists was that it was possible for the US to peacefully coexist and even be strategic allies with Communists.

With Mao's embrace of Stalin this position was discredited. The US's subsequent recognition that it was impossible for America to reach an accommodation with Communists served as the intellectual architecture of many of the strategies the US adopted for fighting the Cold War in the years that followed.

Today the main aspect of America's response to China's Communist revolution that is remembered is the vindictive political hunt for scapegoats. Foreign Service officers and journalists who had advised the US government to support Mao and the Communists against Chiang Kai Shek and the Nationalists were attacked as traitors.

But while the "Red Scare" is what is most remembered about that period, the most significant consequence of the rise of Communist China was the impact it had on the US's understanding of the nature of Communist forces. Even Theodore White, perhaps the most prominent journalist who championed Mao and the Communists, later acknowledged that he had been duped by their propaganda machine into believing that Mao and his comrades were interested in an alliance with the US.

As Joyce Hoffmann exposed in her book Theodore White and Journalism as Illusion, White acknowledged that his wartime report from Mao's headquarters in Yenan praising the Communists as willing allies of the US who sought friendship, "not as a beggar seeks charity, but seeks aid in furthering a joint cause," was completely false.

As he wrote, the report was "winged with hope and passion that were entirely unreal."

What he had been shown in Yenan, Hoffmann quotes White as having written, was "the showcase of democratic art pieces they (the Communists) staged for us American correspondents [and] was literally, only showcase stuff."

Contrast the US's acceptance of failure in China in 1949, and its willingness to learn the lessons of its loss of China, with the US's denial of its failure and loss of Egypt today.

On Sunday, new President Mohamed Morsy completed Egypt's transformation into an Islamist state. In the space of one week, Morsy sacked the commanders of the Egyptian military and replaced them with Muslim Brotherhood loyalists, and fired all the editors of the state-owned media and replaced them with Muslim Brotherhood loyalists.

He also implemented a policy of intimidation, censorship and closure of independently owned media organizations that dare to publish criticism of him.

Morsy revoked the military's constitutional role in setting the foreign and military policies of Egypt. But he maintained the junta's court-backed decision to disband the parliament. In so doing, Morsy gave himself full control over the writing of Egypt's new constitution.

As former ambassador to Egypt Zvi Mazel wrote Tuesday in The Jerusalem Post, Morsy's moves mean that he "now holds dictatorial powers surpassing by far those of erstwhile president Hosni Mubarak."

In other words, Morsy's actions have transformed Egypt from a military dictatorship into an Islamist dictatorship.

The impact on Egypt's foreign policy of Morsy's seizure of power is already becoming clear. On Monday, Al-Masri al-Youm quoted Mohamed Gadallah, Morsy's legal adviser, saying that Morsy is considering revising the peace accord with Israel. Gadallah explained that Morsy intends to "ensure Egypt's full sovereignty and control over every inch of Sinai."

In other words, Morsy intends to remilitarize Sinai and so render the Egyptian military a clear and present threat to Israel's security. Indeed, according to Haaretz, Egypt has already breached the peace accord and deployed forces and heavy weaponry to Sinai without Israeli permission.

The rapidity of Morsy's moves has surprised most observers. But more surprising than his moves is the US response to his moves.

Obama administrations officials have behaved as though nothing has happened, or even as though Morsy's moves are positive developments.

For instance, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, one administration official dismissed the significance of Morsy's purge of the military brass, saying, "What I think this is, frankly, is Morsy looking for a generational change in military leadership."

The Journal reported that Egypt's new defense minister, Gen. Abdul-Fattah el-Sissi, is known as a Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer. But the Obama administration quickly dismissed the reports as mere rumors with no significance. Sissi, administration sources told the Journal, ate dinner with US President Barack Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser John Brennan during Brennan's visit to Cairo last October. Aside from that, they say, people are always claiming that Morsy's appointments have ties to Morsy's Muslim Brotherhood.

A slightly less rose-colored assessment came from Steven Cook in Foreign Affairs. According to Cook, at worst, Morsy's move was probably nothing more than a present-day reenactment of Gamal Abel Nasser's decision to move Egypt away from the West and into the Soviet camp in 1954.

Most likely, Cook argued, Morsy was simply doing what Sadat did when in 1971 he fired other generals with whom he had been forced to share power when he first succeeded Nasser in 1969.

Certainly the Nasser and Sadat analogies are pertinent. But while properly citing them, Cook failed to explain what those analogies tell us about the significance of Morsy's actions. He drew the dots but failed to see the shape they make.

Morsy's Islamism, like Mao's Communism, is inherently hostile to the US and its allies and interests in the Middle East. Consequently, Morsy's strategic repositioning of Egypt as an Islamist country means that Egypt - which has served as the anchor of the US alliance system in the Arab world for 30 years - is setting aside its alliance with the US and looking toward reassuming the role of regional bully.

Egypt is on the fast track to reinstating its war against Israel and threatening international shipping in the Suez Canal. And as an Islamist state, Egypt will certainly seek to export its Islamic revolution to other countries. No doubt fear of this prospect is what prompted Saudi Arabia to begin showering Egypt with billions of dollars in aid.

It should be recalled that the Saudis so feared the rise of a Muslim Brotherhood-ruled Egypt that in February 2011, when US President Barack Obama was publicly ordering then-president Hosni Mubarak to abdicate power immediately, Saudi leaders were beseeching him to defy Obama. They promised Mubarak unlimited financial support for Egypt if he agreed to cling to power.

The US's astounding sanguinity in the face of Morsy's completion of the Islamization of Egypt is an illustration of everything that is wrong and dangerous about US Middle East policy today.

Take US policy toward Syria.

Syria is in possession of one of the largest arsenals of chemical and biological weapons in the world. The barbarism with which the regime is murdering its opponents is a daily reminder - indeed a flashing neon warning sign - that Syria's nonconventional arsenal constitutes a clear and present danger to international security. And yet, the Obama administration insists on viewing Syrian President Bashar Assad's murderous behavior as if it were a garden variety human rights crisis.

During her visit with Turkey's Islamist Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu last Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn't even mention the issue of Syria's chemical and biological weapons. Instead she continued to back Turkey's sponsorship of the Islamist-dominated opposition and said that the US would be working with Turkey to put together new ways to help the Islamist opposition overthrow Assad's regime.

Among other things, she did not rule out the imposition of a no-fly zone over Syria.

The party most likely to be harmed from such a move would be Israel, which would lose its ability to bomb Syrian weapons of mass destruction sites from the air.

Then of course, there is Iran and its openly genocidal nuclear weapons program. This week The New York Times reported a new twist in the Obama administration's strategy for managing this threat. It is trying to convince the Persian Gulf states to accept advanced missile defense systems from the US.

This new policy makes clear that the Obama administration has no intention of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Its actions on the ground are aimed instead at accomplishing two goals: convincing Iran's Arab neighbors to accept Iran as a nuclear power and preventing Israel from acting militarily to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. The missile shields are aspects of a policy of containment, not prevention. And the US's attempts to sabotage Israel's ability to strike Iran's nuclear sites through leaks, political pressure and efforts to weaken the Netanyahu government make clear that as far as the US is concerned, Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is not the problem.

The prospect of Israel preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is the problem.

Several American commentators argue that the Obama administration's policies are the rational consequence of the divergence of US and Israeli assessments of the threats posed by regional developments. For instance, writing in the Tablet online magazine this week, Lee Smith argued that the US does not view the developments in Egypt, Iran and Syria as threatening US interests. From Washington's perspective, the prospect of an Israeli strike on Iran is more threatening than a nuclear-armed Iran, because an Israeli strike would immediately destabilize the region.

The problem with this assessment is that it is nonsense. It is true that Israel is first on Iran's target list, and that Egypt is placing Israel, not the US in its crosshairs. So, too, Syria and its rogue allies will use their chemical weapons against Israel first.

But that doesn't mean the US will be safe. The likely beneficiaries of Syrian chemical weapons - Sunni and Shi'ite terrorist organizations - have attacked the US in the past. Iran has a history of attacking US shipping without a nuclear umbrella. Surely it would be more aggressive in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz after defying Washington in illegally developing a nuclear arsenal. The US is far more vulnerable to interruptions in the shipping lanes in the Suez Canal than Israel is.

The reason Israel and the US are allies is that Israel is the US's first line of defense in the region.

If regional events weren't moving so quickly, the question of who lost Egypt would probably have had its moment in the spotlight in Washington.

But as is clear from the US's denial of the significance of Morsy's rapid completion of Egypt's Islamic transformation; its blindness to the dangers of Syrian chemical and biological weapons; and its complacency toward Iran's nuclear weapons program, by the time the US foreign policy establishment realizes it lost Egypt, the question it will be asking is not who lost Egypt. It will be asking who lost the Middle East.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

________________________

Obama’s Foreign Policy is Unfavorable to Israel

John R. Houk

© August 17, 2012

_______________________

Who lost Egypt?

© 2012 Caroline Glick

About Caroline Glick:

I grew up in Chicago's ultra-liberal, anti-American and anti-Israel stronghold of Hyde Park. Hyde Park's newest famous resident is Barack Obama. He fits right into a neighborhood I couldn't wait to leave.

I made aliyah to Israel in 1991, two weeks after receiving my BA in Political Science from Beir Zeit on the Hudson -- otherwise known as Columbia University. I joined the Israel Defense Forces that summer and served as an officer for five and a half years.

From 1994-1996, as an IDF captain, I served as Coordinator of Negotiations with the PLO in the office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In this capacity I was a core member of Israel’s negotiating team with the Palestinians.

After leaving the IDF at the end of 1996, I worked as the assistant to the Director General of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

I then returned to geo-politics serving as Assistant Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in 1997-1998.

From 1998-2000 I went back to the US where I received a Master's in Public Policy from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government in June 2000. Although I … READ THE REST

BHO May not be a Muslim But …

John R. Houk

© July 14, 2012

Vote for the reelection of President Barack Hussein Obama.

Are you freaking nuts?

BHO blames President GW Bush for the state of America’s economy today over 3 ½ years after being elected to allegedly change the course Bush had set. Again here we are over 3 ½ years later and the only change BHO has accomplished is to further divide America along lines of class, entrench a transformation of bigger government on a Socialist-like scale with Obamacare, delegitimize America’s Christian heritage by praising Islam (less than 1% of USA) and promoting special extra civil rights for a group of immoral people known as homosexuals rather than affirming the same Constitutional rights that all Americans have under the rule of law (Homosexual American population – less than 5% of the USA).

In foreign policy BHO made it his mission to travel the globe to apologize everywhere he went for American Exceptionalism as if that was something detrimental for world peace and America’s image. The reality is that for all the foreign detractors of America the people of the world desire to live in America in droves because our political system offers the best opportunity for self-improvement economically than any foreign nation in the world. AND BHO has forgotten that the prosperity of the Western World (declining because of Leftist policies) exists out of the largesse of rebuilding Europe and Japan after WWII by American protection (from the imperialistic Communism of the USSR) and American economic investment in WWII victor and defeated enemy’s economies and infrastructure.

In continuing dragging America’s foreign policy in the mud BHO is now cozying up to the parent of global transnational Islamic terrorists in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood by inviting MB members to the White House and MB political leaders that have achieved an election victory in Egypt to the degree that an MB operative is now the President of Egypt in Mohamed Morsi (or Mursi – Anglicized Arab spelling is rough to pin down).

Israel’s journalist Caroline Glick has the poop on Obama that every American voter should be aware of ESPECIALLY on how Obama has been dragging Israel under the bus while the MSM looks the other way.

JRH 7/14/12

Please Support SlantRight 2.0 - Donations are not tax deductible but are appreciated to help with the bills.

*********************************

Obama's spectacular failure

By Caroline Glick

July 12, 2012, 10:39 PM

CarolineGlick.com

Two weeks ago, in an unofficial inauguration ceremony at Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt's new Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Mursi took off his mask of moderation. Before a crowd of scores of thousands, Mursi pledged to work for the release from US federal prison of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.

According to The New York Times' account of his speech, Mursi said, "I see signs [being held by members of the crowd] for Omar Abdel-Rahman and detainees' pictures. It is my duty and I will make all efforts to have them free, including Omar Abdel-Rahman."

Otherwise known as the blind sheikh, Abdel Rahman was the mastermind of the jihadist cell in New Jersey that perpetrated the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. His cell also murdered Rabbi Meir Kahane in New York in 1990. They plotted the assassination of then-president Hosni Mubarak. They intended to bomb New York landmarks including the Lincoln and Holland tunnels and the UN headquarters.

Rahman was the leader of Gama'a al-Islamia - the Islamic Group, responsible, among other things for the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981. A renowned Sunni religious authority, Rahman wrote the fatwa, or Islamic ruling, permitting Sadat's murder in retribution for his signing the peace treaty with Israel. The Islamic group is listed by the State Department as a specially designated terrorist organization.

After his conviction in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Abdel-Rahman issued another fatwa calling for jihad against the US. After the September 11, 2001, attacks, Osama bin Laden cited Abdel-Rahman's fatwa as the religious justification for them.

By calling for Abdel-Rahman's release, Mursi has aligned himself and his government with the US's worst enemies. By calling for Abdel-Rahman's release during his unofficial inauguration ceremony, Mursi signaled that he cares more about winning the acclaim of the most violent, America-hating jihadists in the world than with cultivating good relations with America.

And in response to Mursi's supreme act of unfriendliness, US President Barack Obama invited Mursi to visit him at the White House.

Mursi is not the only Abdel Rahman supporter to enjoy the warm hospitality of the White House.

His personal terror organization has also been the recipient of administration largesse. Despite the fact that federal law makes it a felony to assist members of specially designated terrorist organizations, last month the State Department invited group member Hani Nour Eldin, a newly elected member of the Islamist-dominated Egyptian parliament, to visit the US and meet with senior US officials at the White House and the State Department, as part of a delegation of Egyptian parliamentarians.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refused to provide any explanation for the administration's decision to break federal law in order to host Eldin in Washington. Nuland simply claimed, "We have an interest in engaging a broad cross-section of Egyptians who are seeking to peacefully shape Egypt's future. The goal of this delegation... was to have consultations both with think tanks but also with government folks, with a broad spectrum representing all the colors of Egyptian politics."

MURSI IS not the only Arab leader who embraces terrorists only to be embraced by the US government. In a seemingly unrelated matter, this week it was reported that in an attempt to satisfy the Obama administration's urgent desire to renew negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel, and to satisfy the Palestinians' insatiable desire to celebrate terrorists, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu offered to release 124 Palestinian terrorist murderers from Israeli prisons in exchange for a meeting with Palestinian Authority Chairman and Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas.

Alas, Abbas refused. He didn't think Netanyahu's offer was generous enough.

And how did the Obama administration respond to Abbas's demand for the mass release of terrorists and his continued refusal to resume negotiations with Israel?

By attacking Israel.

The proximate cause of the Obama administration's most recent assault on Israel is the publication of the legal opinion of a panel of expert Israeli jurists regarding the legality of Israeli communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines. Netanyahu commissioned the panel, led by retired Supreme Court justice Edmond Levy, to investigate the international legal status of these towns and villages and to provide the government with guidance relating to future construction of Israeli communities beyond the armistice lines.

The committee's findings, published this week, concluded that under international law, these communities are completely legal.

There is nothing remotely revolutionary about this finding. This has been Israel's position since 1967, and arguably since 1922.

The international legal basis for the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 was the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. That document gave the Jewish people the legal right to sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, as well as all the land Israel took control over during the 1948- 49 War of Independence.

Not only did the Mandate give the Jewish people the legal right to the areas, it enjoined the British Mandatory authorities to "facilitate... close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

So not only was Jewish settlement not prohibited. It was required.

Although this has been Israel's position all along, Netanyahu apparently felt the need to have its legitimacy renewed in light of the all-out assault against Israel's legal rights led by the Palestinians, and joined enthusiastically by the Obama administration.

In a previous attempt to appease Obama's rapacious appetite for Israeli concessions, Netanyahu temporarily abrogated Israel's legal rights by banning Jews from exercising their property rights in Judea and Samaria for 10 months in 2010. All the legal opinion published this week does is restate what Israel's position has always been.

Whereas the Obama administration opted to embrace Mursi even as he embraces Abdel-Rahman, the Obama administration vociferously condemned Israel for having the nerve to ask a panel of senior jurists to opine about its rights. In a press briefing, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell banged the rhetorical hammer.

As he put it, "The US position on settlements is clear. Obviously, we've seen the reports that an Israeli government-appointed panel has recommended legalizing dozens of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but we do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, and we oppose any effort to legalize settlement outposts."

In short then, for the Obama administration, it is all well and fine for the newly elected president of what was until two years ago the US's most important Arab ally to embrace a terror mastermind indirectly responsible for the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans. It is okay to invite members of jihadist terror groups to come to Washington and meet with senior US officials in a US taxpayer- funded trip. It is even okay for the head of a would-be-state that the US is trying to create to embrace every single Palestinian terrorist, including those who have murdered Americans. But for Israel's elected government to ask an expert panel to determine whether Israel is acting in accordance with international law in permitting Jews to live on land the Palestinians insist must be Jew-free is an affront.

THE DISPARITY between the administration's treatment of the Mursi government on the one hand and the Netanyahu government on the other places the nature of its Middle East policy in stark relief.

Obama came into office with a theory on which he based his Middle East policy. His theory was that jihadists hate America because the US supports Israel. By placing what Obama referred to as "daylight" between the US and Israel, he believed he would convince the jihadists to put aside their hatred of America.

Obama has implemented this policy for three and a half years. And its record of spectacular failure is unbroken.

Obama's failure is exposed in all its dangerous consequence by a simple fact. Since he entered office, the Americans have dispensed with far fewer jihadists than they have empowered.

Since January 2009, the Muslim world has become vastly more radicalized. No Islamist government in power in 2009 has been overthrown. But several key states - first and foremost Egypt - that were led by pro-Western, US-allied governments when Obama entered office are now ruled by Islamists.

It is true that the election results in Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and elsewhere are not Obama's fault. But they still expose the wrongness of his policy. Obama's policy of putting daylight between the US and Israel, and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood against US allies like Mubarak, involves being bad to America's friends and good to America's enemies. This policy cannot help but strengthen your enemies against yourself and your friends.

Rather than contend with the bitter consequences of his policy, Obama and his surrogates have opted to simply deny the dangerous reality he has engendered through his actions. Even worse they have come up with explanations for maintaining this policy despite its flagrant failure.

Nowhere was this effort more obvious than in a made-to-order New York Times analysis this week titled, "As Islamists gain influence, Washington reassesses who its friends are."

The analysis embraces the notion that it is possible and reasonable to appease the likes of Mursi and his America-hating jihadist supporters and coalition partners. It quotes Michele Dunne from the Atlantic Council who claimed that on the one hand, if the Muslim Brotherhood and its radical comrades are allowed to take over Egypt, their entry into mainstream politics should reduce the terrorism threat. On the other hand, she warned, "If Islamist groups like the Brotherhood lose faith in democracy, that's when there could be dire consequences."

In other words, the analysis argues that the US should respond to the ascent of its enemies by pretending its enemies are its friends.

Aside from its jaw-dropping irresponsibility, this bit of intellectual sophistry requires a complete denial of reality. The Taliban were in power in Afghanistan in 2001. Their political power didn't stop them from cooperating with al-Qaida. Hamas has been in charge of Gaza since 2007. That hasn't stopped it from carrying out terrorism against Israel. The mullahs have been in charge of Iran from 33 years. That hasn't stopped them from serving as the largest terrorism sponsors in the world. Hezbollah has been involved in mainstream politics in Lebanon since 2000 and it has remained one of the most active terrorist organizations in the world.

And so on and so forth.

Back in the 1980s, the Reagan administration happily cooperated with the precursors of al-Qaida in America's covert war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. It never occurred to the Americans then that the same people working with them to overthrow the Soviets would one day follow the lead of the blind sheikh and attack America.

Unlike the mujahadin in Afghanistan, the Muslim Brotherhood has never fought a common foe with the Americans. The US is supporting it for nothing - while seeking to win its support by turning on America's most stable allies.

Can there be any doubt that this policy will end badly?

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

___________________________

BHO May not be a Muslim But …

John R. Houk

© July 14, 2012

__________________________

Obama's spectacular failure

© 2012 Caroline Glick