Obama Is Violently Anti-American And His Positions Are Now Crystal Clear!

Decoding the Obama Doctrine

By Daniel Pipes April 8, 2015 , 10:30 am

124 38

17 23Email 294Share

James Jeffrey, Barack Obama’s former ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to Iraq, has this to say about the administration’s current record in the Middle East: “We’re in a goddamn free fall.”

Count the mistakes: Helping overthrow Muammar Qaddafi in Libya, leading to anarchy and civil war. Pressuring Husni Mubarak of Egypt to resign, then backing the Muslim Brotherhood, leading now-president Sisi to turn toward Moscow. Alienating Washington’s most stalwart ally in the region, the Government of Israel. Dismissing ISIS as “junior varsity” just before it seized major cities. Hailing Yemen as a counterterrorism success just before its government was overthrown. Alarming the Saudi authorities to the point that they put together a military alliance against Iran. Coddling Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey, encouraging his dictatorial tendencies. Leaving Iraq and Afghanistan prematurely, dooming the vast American investment in those two countries.

And, most of all: Making deeply flawed deals with the nuclear-ambitious mullahs of Iran.

Is this a random series of errors by an incompetent leadership or does some grand, if misconceived, idea stand behind the pattern? To an extent, it’s ineptitude, as when Mr. Obama bowed to the Saudi king, threatened Syria’s government over chemical weapons before changing his mind, and now sends the U.S. military to aid Tehran in Iraq and fight it in Yemen.

But there also is a grand idea and it calls for explanation. As a man of the left, Mr. Obama sees the United States historically having exerted a malign influence on the outside world. Greedy corporations, an overly-powerful military-industrial complex, a yahoo nationalism, engrained racism, and cultural imperialism combined to render America, on balance, a force for evil.

Being a student of community organizer Saul Alinsky, Mr. Obama did not overtly proclaim this view but passed himself off as a patriot, though he (and his charming wife) did offer occasional hints of their radical views about “fundamentally transforming the United States.” On ascending to the presidency, Mr. Obama moved slowly, uneager to spread alarm and wanting to be reelected. By now, however, after six full years and only his legacy to worry about, the full-blown Obama is emerging.

The Obama Doctrine is simple and universal: Warm relations with adversaries and cool them with friends.

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/useful_banner_manager_banners/20-HebrewNameCertificate-May2014-600WIDE.jpg

Several assumptions underlie this approach: The U.S. government morally must compensate for its prior errors. Smiling at hostile states will inspire them to reciprocate. Using force creates more problems than it solves. Historic U.S. allies, partners, and helpers are morally inferior accessories. In the Middle East, this means reaching out to revisionists (Erdoğan, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Republic of Iran) and pushing away cooperative governments (Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia).

Of these actors, two stand out: Iran and Israel. Establishing good relations with Tehran appears to be Obama’s great preoccupation. As Michael Doran of the Hudson Institute has shown, Mr. Obama during his entire presidency has worked toward rendering Iran what he calls “a very successful regional power … abiding by international norms and international rules.” Contrarily, his pre-presidential friendships with truculent anti-Zionists such as Ali Abunimah, Rashid Khalidi, and Edward Said point to the depth of his hostility toward the Jewish state.

The Obama Doctrine demystifies what is otherwise inscrutable. For example, it explains why the White House blithely ignored the Iranian supreme leader’s outrageous “Death to America” yelp in March, dismissing it as mere domestic pandering, even as Mr. Obama glommed onto the Israeli prime minister’s near simultaneous electoral campaign comment rejecting a two-state solution with the Palestinians during his term of office (“we take him at his word”).

The doctrine also offers guidelines to predict possible developments during Mr. Obama’s remaining tenure, such as: Wretched P5+1 deals with Iran compelling Israel’s government to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. Gentle policies toward Damascus clearing the way for the Assad regime to re-extend its power. Ankara choosing to provoke a crisis in the eastern Mediterranean over Cypriot gas and oil reserves.

The great question ahead is how, in their wisdom, the American people will judge the Obama Doctrine when they next vote for president in 19 months. Will they repudiate his policy of shuffling and contrition, as they comparably did in 1980 when they elected Ronald Reagan over Jimmy Carter? Or will they choose four more years of it, thereby turning the Obama Doctrine into the new norm and Americans into European-style remorseful masochists?

Their verdict in 2016 has potentially world-historical implications.

Reprinted with author’s permission from The Washington Times

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/35614/decoding-the-obama-doctrine-opinion/#4lZotHLxqJIkmBCT.99

State Department Welcome Muslim Brotherhood. Are They Not The Best Example Of Dimmis?

Open Jihad Declared in Egypt Following State Dept. Meeting with Muslim Brotherhood-Aligned Leaders

Muslim Brotherhood call for ‘long, uncompromising jihad’

SHARE

TWEET

EMAIL

AP

      

BY: Adam Kredo
January 30, 2015 5:00 am

The Muslim Brotherhood
 called for “a long,
uncompromising jihad”
in Egypt just days after
a delegation of the Islamist
group’s key leaders and
allies met with the State
Department, according
to an official statement
released this week.

Just days after a delegation
 that included two top
Brotherhood leaders was
 hosted at the State 
Department, the
organization released
an official statement calling
 on its supporters to
“prepare” for jihad,
 according to an
independent translation
 of thestatement first
posted on Tuesday.

The State Department
meeting was attended by
 a deputyassistant secretary for democracy, human rights, and labor and other State Department
 officials.

The Muslim Brotherhood statement also was issued just two days before a major terror attack
Thursday in Egypt’s lawless Sinai region that killed at least 25.

“It is incumbent upon everyone to be aware that we are in the process of a new phase, where
we summon what is latent in our strength, where we recall the meanings of jihad and prepare
ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and whoever marched on our path to a long,
uncompromising jihad, and during this stage we ask for martyrdom,” it states.

Preparation for jihad is a key theme of the Brotherhood’s latest call for jihad.

An image posted with the statement shows two crossing swords and the word “prepare!” between
 them. Below the swords it reads, “the voice of truth, strength, and freedom.” According to the
statement, “that is the motto of the Dawa of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The statement also invokes the well-known Muslim cleric Imam al-Bana, who founded the
 Brotherhood and has called for the death of Jews.

“Imam al-Bana prepared the jihad brigades that he sent to Palestine to kill the Zionist usurpers
and the second [Supreme] Guide Hassan al-Hudaybi reconstructed the ‘secret apparatus’ to
bleed the British occupiers,” the statement says.

The Brotherhood’s renewed call for jihad comes at a time when current Egyptian President
Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is cracking down on the group and imprisoning many of its supporters,
who notoriously engaged in violence following the ouster of Brotherhood-ally Mohamed Morsi.

Egypt experts said the timing of this declaration is an embarrassment for the State Department.

“The fact that the Brotherhood issued its call to jihad two days after its meeting at the State
Department will be grist for endless anti-American conspiracy theories about a supposed
partnership between Washington and the Brotherhood,” said Eric Trager, a fellow at the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). “The State Department should have foreseen
 what an embarrassment this would be.”

One member of that U.S. delegation, a Brotherhood-aligned judge in Egypt, posed for a picture
while at Foggy Bottom in which he held up the Islamic group’s notorious four-finger Rabia symbol,
 according to his Facebook page.

“Now in the U.S. State Department. Your steadfastness impresses everyone,” reads an Arabic
 caption posted along with the photo.

Other members of that group included Gamal Heshmat, a leading member of the Brotherhood,
 and Abdel Mawgoud al-Dardery, a Brotherhood member who served as a parliamentarian
from Luxor.

When asked on Tuesday evening to comment on the meeting, a State Department official
told the Washington Free Beacon, “We meet with representatives from across the political
spectrum in Egypt.”

The official declined to elaborate on who may have been hosted or on any details about the
 timing and substance of any talks.

The meeting was described by a member of the delegation, Maha Azzam as “fruitful,” according
to one person who attended a public event in Washington earlier this week hosted by the group.

The call for jihad, while surprising in light of the Brotherhood’s attempts to appear moderate,
 is part and parcel of organization’s longstanding beliefs, Trager said.

“Muslim Brothers have been committing violent acts for a very long time,” Trager explained.
 “Under Morsi, Muslim Brothers tortured protesters outside the presidential palace. After
Morsi’s ouster, they have frequently attacked security forces and state property. “

“But until now, the official line from the Brotherhood was to support this implicitly by justifying
 its causes, without justifying the acts themselves,” he added. “ So the Brotherhood’s open
call to jihad doesn’t necessarily mean a tactical shift, but a rhetorical one.”

Terrorism expert and national security reporter Patrick Poole said he was struck by the
 clarity of the Brotherhood’s call.

“It invokes the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorist past, specifically mentioning the ‘special
apparatus’ that waged terror in the 1940s and 1950s until the Nasser government cracked
 down on the group, as well as the troops sent by founder Hassan al-Banna to fight
 against Israel in 1948,” he said.

“It concludes saying that the Brotherhood has entered a new stage, warns of a long
jihad ahead, and to prepare for martyrdom,” Poole said. “Not sure how much more
 clear they could be.”

Poole wondered if the call for jihad would convince Brotherhood apologists that the
 group still backs violence.

“What remains to be seen is how this announcement will be received inside the Beltway,
where the vast majority of the ‘experts’ have repeatedly said that the Brotherhood had
abandoned its terrorist past, which it is now clearly reviving, and had renounced violence,”
Poole said. “Will this development be met with contrition, or silence? And what says the
State Department who met with these guys this week?”

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment before press time.

SISI Speaks The Truth About Islam And The Silence Is Deafening!

MUSLIM WORLD LARGELY IGNORES CALL FOR 'REVOLUTION' IN ISLAM

Western analysts react to Egyptian president's speech with skepticism but hope

Published: 16 hours ago

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/12/F.-Michael-Maloof_avatar.jpg

 F. MICHAEL MALOOF About | Email | Archive

 

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/themes/worldnet-theme/_/images//feed.png

 Subscribe to feed

• image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/print.png
  
• Text smaller
• Text bigger

     983

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/01/sisi.jpg

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi

WASHINGTON – It’s been four weeks since Egyptian President Abdel al-Fattah delivered his fiery speech to Islamic clerics at Al-Azhar University calling for a “revolution” in the faith to change its reputation as a violent religion at war with the world. What’s been the reaction in the Muslim world since? Deafening silence.

A request by WND for reaction from Muslim organizations in the United States, including the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Student Association, was met with nearly total silence. In the case of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, the spokesman hung up when asked for comment.

An exception was Stephen Suleyman Schwartz, executive director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, a Sufi Muslim leader know for his criticism of fundamentalist Islam, including the Wahabbi stream of Islam promoted by Saudi Arabia, which is highly influential among U.S. Muslim groups.

Schwartz prefaced his comment saying that he was speaking only for himself.

“I consider el-Sisi’s rhetoric about Islamic reform to be problematical,” Schwartz said. “I do not think a military ruler can effect changes in Islamic thought.

“I am for the separation of the state from religious life, and as an example of that believe el-Sisi should stay out of religious affairs,” he said. “Let him reform the Egyptian state budget, the economy, the educational system and the judiciary.”

Schwartz said Sisi “is a dictator and so perceived even by some neoconservatives in the West.”

“He cannot impose changes in religion.”

The Dar al-Iftaa, an Egyptian government-sponsored religious institution responsible for issuing fatwas and religious opinions under the direction of Sisi, said it would seek to achieve the “highest degree of effective communication” with Muslims.

The group plans a national project aimed at correcting the image of Islam through social media, foreign visits, publications and the issuance of fatwas.

Dar al-Iftaa noted its Facebook page had garnered 1.1 million “likes.”

To press Sisi’s call, Dar al-Iftaa said it had launched an international campaign to introduce the “mercy” of the character of Islam’s founder, Muhammad.

It has hosted an interfaith conference to fight extremism, attended by 700 Islamic and Christian scholars from 120 countries. It said it also has issued several publications rebutting the ideology of ISIS, especially regarding slavery and the treatment of women.

Skepticism

Western reaction, however, was more positive to Sisi’s dramatic call for a revolution to change world attitudes toward the Muslim faith, which the Egyptian president described as “a source of apprehension, danger, murder and destruction in the entire world.”

At the same time, there was skepticism that the Muslim world indeed would rally to Sisi’s appeal, including from Middle East expert Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum.

“Until we know more about Sisi’s personal views and see what he does next,” Pipes said, “I understand his speech not as a stance against all of Islamism but only against its specifically violent form, the kind that is ravaging Nigeria, Somalia, Syria-Iraq and Pakistan; the kind that has placed such cities as Boston, Ottawa, Sydney and Paris under siege.”

The Egyptian president has restored the practice of previous military regimes in Egypt of showing greater religious tolerance. On the Orthodox Christmas Day on Jan. 6, Sisi attended St. Mark’s Cathedral to speak to the congregation.

The reception by the Coptic congregation, numbering in the hundreds, to Sisi’s good wishes to the Christian minority was described as “jubilant.”

“Egypt has brought a humanistic and civilizing message to the world for millennia, and we are here today to confirm that we are capable of doing so again,” Sisi said.

“Yes, a humanistic and civilizing message should once more emanate from Egypt. This is why we must not call ourselves anything other than ‘Egyptians,’” he said.

“This is what we must be – Egyptians, just Egyptians, Egyptians indeed!” Sisi told the Christians. “I just want to tell you that – Allah willing, Allah willing – we shall build our nation together, accommodate each other, make room for each other, and we shall like each other – love each other, love each other in earnest, so that people may see. … So let me tell you once again, Happy New Year, Happy New Year to you all, Happy New Year to all Egyptians!”

Sisi’s New Year’s Day remarks, which didn’t receive much establishment media attention, were nevertheless hailed in the West as an enlightenment, with suggestions that the Egyptian president who forcibly overthrew Muslim Brotherhood-backed President Mohamed Morsi two years ago should receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

Sisi’s action against the militant Muslim Brotherhood received the backing of Saudi Arabia but the condemnation of Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Now Turkey’s president, Erdogan offered the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas safe haven in Ankara and has shown support for ISIS.

Saudi support of Sisi reflected a regional competition of whether Egypt or Turkey would represent the more “moderate” voice of Islam in the region. The Saudi decision, however, wasn’t difficult, since the kingdom had helped finance Sisi’s overthrow of Morsi.

The Saudis look on Turkey as a threat not only for Erdogan’s more Islamist approach and backing of the Muslim Brotherhood but what they see as a Turkish effort to establish a neo-Ottoman caliphate, which the Saudis historically condemn, having lived under the old Ottoman empire.

‘Take responsibility’

Sisi urged the imams take responsibility to change the world’s outlook on Islam.

“I am referring here to the religious clerics. … It’s “inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire ummah (Islamic community) to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of world. Impossible!” Sisi said.

“That thinking – I am not saying ‘religion’ but ‘thinking’ – that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the centuries, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It’s antagonizing the entire world! … All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective,” the Egyptian president said.

“I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move … because this ummah is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost – and it is being lost by our own hands.”

Pipes said that no matter “how fine” Sisi’s ideas are, “no politician – and especially no strongman – has moved modern Islam.”

He said that reforms brought about by modern Turkey’s first president, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, have been reversed, just as King Abdullah of Jordan and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had given similarly “fine speeches” on “the true voice of Islam” and “enlightened moderation” that “immediately disappeared from view.”

“Yes, Sisi’s comments are stronger, but he is not a religious authority and, in all likelihood, they too will disappear without a trace,” Pipes said.

Pipes noted Sisi gave no specifics regarding the revolution he seeks, but he believes that the Egyptian president is look more for a “subtle version of Islamism.”

He said there are “several indications” that point to Sisi being an Islamist.

In one instance, Pipes said the Muslim Brotherhood president, Morsi, even appointed Sisi as his defense minister, “precisely because he saw the then-general as an ally.”

‘Forceful and impassioned’

While Pipe’s reaction has been a wait-and-see approach to Sisi, Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and associate director of the Middle East Forum, called Sisi’s speech “a vocal supporter for a renewed vision of Islam” and made “what must be his most forceful and impassioned plea to date.”

“Although Sisi’s words were directed to Islam’s guardians and articulators, they indirectly lead to several important lessons for Western observers, Ibrahim said.

“First, in just a few words, Sisi delivered a dose of truth and hard-hitting reality concerning the Islamic world’s relationship to the rest of the world – a dose of reality very few Western leaders dare think let alone proclaim,” Ibrahim said.

“As a Muslim, Sisi will not say that Islam, the ‘religion,’ is responsible for ‘antagonizing the entire world,’” Ibrahim added, “but he certainly goes much further than his Western counterparts when he says that this ‘thinking’ is rooted in an Islamic ‘corpus of texts and ideas’ which have become so ‘sacralized.’”

Martin Sherman of the Jerusalem Post said that it is difficult to overstate the potential importance of Sisi’s speech on Islam “and equally important to avoid overly optimistic expectations as to its practical impact.”

Echoing Pipe’s observations, Sherman said that the venue of Sisi’s speech was where President Obama made his 2009 “outreach dpeech” to the Muslim World.

“But the contrast between the two could hardly be more striking,” he said. “As one U.S. analyst deftly noted: ‘Obama began the 2009 speech by praising the same seminary that Sisi reprimanded,’ emphasizing ‘That (Obama’s approach) is different from Sisi, who is trying to suppress the Brotherhood movement and push Al-Azhar’s Islamic leaders toward modernity.’”

Just as Sisi condemned ongoing practices of the Islamic world and was responsible for removing the “ruinous regime of the Muslim Brotherood from power,” Sherman said Obama by contrast “heaped effusive praise on Islam, and insisted on places of honor for senior Brotherhood representatives – to the chagrin of his host, president Hosni Mubarak.”

Sherman added that Obama’s words and gestures in Cairo had provided a “considerable – arguably, crucial – fillip” in sweeping the Brotherhood to power within two years.

Sherman argues that Sisi wasn’t calling for gradual reform but “swift revolution.”

“There does appear to be the beginning of rumbling discontent in the West, and indications that resistance to Islamic-inspired outrages is beginning to emerge – albeit far too timidly and far too slowly,” Sherman said.

“It is still too early to assess whether the savage slaughter in Paris … will prove a tipping-point in the mood toward Islam and shift it from angst to anger,” he said. “There is, however, considerable room for skepticism

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/01/muslim-world-largely-ignores-call-for-revolution-in-islam/#zABs51EFEgh0uLfg.99