Obama Pushes Mubarak Out…But Why?

CALLS FOR MORE “DEMOCRACY” IN EGYPT BUT DENIES IT TO THE UNITED STATES

by Sharon Rondeau

How many constitutions around the world is Obama destroying?

(Feb. 11, 2011) — Obama has recently voiced support for protesters who wanted Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak to step down, claiming that the Egyptian people wanted “change.”

Obama himself had campaigned in 2008 on a platform of “hope and change” which some view as having resulted in massive debt, a stagnant economy, an unpopular, if not unconstitutional, health care bill  and unkept promises of “transparency.”   Obama is  now touting “change” in Egypt, but what kind of change is he advocating?

Obama had apparently advised and expected Mubarak to resign.  On January 30, Time had reported that Obama would “remain on the sidelines.”  But is pushing out the leader of a long-time U.S. ally “remaining on the sidelines?”

Earlier today, it was announced that Hosni Mubarak had resigned amid protests deemed by one report to be fueled by “people power” and a desire for “basic human rights and the ability to congregate and nonviolently state their opinions; they are asking for access to information through a free media that is not censored and that media is not arrested, and they are also asking for the ability to share information with one another so that censorship does not happen on Facebook and Twitter.”

MSNBC has reported that the Egyptian president “until the end seemed unable to grasp the depth of resentment over his three decades of authoritarian rule.”

Regarding the future of Egypt, Obama has stated that he supported the idea of The Muslim Brotherhood’s involvement in a post-Mubarak Egyptian government.  But are Obama and his advisers responsible for toppling Mubarak in favor of Islamic fundamentalists’ taking on a role which had previously been denied them in Egypt?  On February 2, Obama said, “It is not the role of any other country to determine Egypt’s leaders. Only the Egyptian people can do that.”  However, he then called upon Mubarak to step down, advocating a “transitional government.”

It appears that the Muslim Brotherhood is already expected to play a role in the new Egyptian leadership.  According to Wikipedia, the Muslim Brotherhood had indicated that it had sought the establishment of an Islamic government in Egypt prior to the current revolution.  It has been described as “Egypt’s biggest opposition group” and been banned there since the 1950s.

One journalist stated that “He doesn’t think they’re lying” when The Muslim Brotherhood said it does not wish to establish Sharia law in Egypt.  However, the group issued a statement today following Mubarak’s resignation which reads, in part:

Our track record of responsibility and moderation is a hallmark of our political credentials, and we will build on it. For instance, it is our position that any future government we may be a part of will respect all treaty obligations made in accordance with the interests of the Egyptian people.

Because we are an Islamic movement and the vast majority of Egypt is Muslim, some will raise the issue of sharia law. While this is not on anyone’s immediate agenda, it is instructive to note that the concept of governance based on sharia is not a theocracy for Sunnis since we have no centralized clergy in Islam. For us, Islam is a way of life adhered to by one-fifth of the world’s population. Sharia is a means whereby justice is implemented, life is nurtured, the common welfare is provided for, and liberty and property are safeguarded. In any event, any transition to a sharia-based system will have to garner a consensus in Egyptian society.

The Muslim Brotherhood has branches in the Sudan, Somalia, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Jordan and Israel.

Following Mubarak’s resignation, Obama reportedly said of the transition:

That means protecting the rights of Egypt’s citizens, lifting the emergency law, revising the constitution and other laws to make this change irreversible and laying out a clear path to elections that are fair and free. Above all this transition must bring all of Egypt’s voices to the table.

Obama has also supported the changing of another country’s constitution, Kenya, “offering incentives” and reportedly spending $2,000,000 of U.S. taxpayer money to promote the proposed revised constitution last summer.  It ultimately passed a referendum and included the right for a woman to have an abortion for the first time in that nation’s history.

Prior to the 2008 presidential election, Obama had inserted himself into Kenyan politics by openly campaigning for Raila Odinga, a Marxist Muslim educated in the former East Germany, who had run for president in Kenya but lost in a hotly-contested election followed by the murder of approximately 1,500 Christians attending church and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people.

Several Kenyan officials have stated that Obama was born in Kenya, as has a Tanzanian newspaper.  His wife Michelle identified Kenya as her husband’s “home country” during the presidential campaign, but the video appears to have been scrubbed from the internet.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the White House in March of last year, Obama reportedly “humiliated” him by walking out of a meeting to attend dinner with Netanyahu and failing to arrange for the customary photo-op with the visiting head of state.

In his book The Audacity of Hope, Obama wrote that he would “stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”  Has he kept that promise by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood’s re-entry into Egyptian politics and supporting Odinga, who had promised Sharia law if elected?

In regard to the U.S. Constitution, Obama has steadfastly refused to produce even the slightest proof that he meets the eligibility criteria of “natural born Citizen” to serve as President and Commander-in-Chief.  An 18-year veteran of the U.S. Army sits in prison for asking for such proof of the putative commander-in-chief rather than Obama simply providing it to assure all members of the Armed Forces that he holds office legitimately.

Given Obama’s participation in the chaos in Egypt and Kenya, his statement on national TV about “my Muslim faith” and “standing with the Muslims,” his treatment of Netanyahu and his hosting of Iftar dinners at the White House, is it possible that the Muslims have orchestrated a takeover of the United States?  If so, can it be stopped?  Should it be?

5 Responses to "Obama Pushes Mubarak Out…But Why?"

  1. Jon Carlson   Friday, March 11, 2011 at 6:29 PM

    The Nazis always make Germany the good guy wearing the white hat while doing dirty tricks that benefit Germany. For example, Merkel was against the Iraq War but really after the oil there. Merkel for Israel to be treated fairly after Israels prime ally Eypgt was hammered by the Nazis. Of course Merkel against the Holocaust even imprisoning people who want facts to prove it. The Nazis are destroying Israel inspite of Israel desire to have defensible borders. Clearly Germany and the Nazis were involved in 9/11 but a big coverup there. Heck, Germany wanted to prosecute culprits but the US just wouldn’t provide the evidence. You get the picture. BTW, German interest rate hikes set of the financial crisis!

  2. rick   Monday, March 7, 2011 at 12:45 AM

    soetero has one job only, advance islam. communists write the speeches and American laws and tell barry what to respond too or not to respond too. the story was stupid easy to follow in 2006 and is now playin out like it was written. the only reason, this crime continues is, G.W. is not coming back, grant, blackjack, patton, it seems their love of country is not matched by the traitor criminal scum, that command our military now. of all the articles I’ve read, since the illegal alien became CIC, is that there does not seem to be sufficient outrage, that the chain of command is compromised, the oath is meaningless, etc….whosoever survives the earths coming geologic changes, please make sure our traitors DO NOT.

  3. susanm   Thursday, March 3, 2011 at 7:37 PM

    JUST MAYBE HE’LL GO OVER THERE AND BE ”THEIR PRESIDENT” & MICHELLE CAN BE QUEEN…..

  4. 2discern   Saturday, February 12, 2011 at 7:29 PM

    The “progress” of these events and the groups involved are not coincidence. Without being “out there”, what translation would you put to barry soetero famous quote,”fundamentally transforming America”? It would be well be in bounds of interpretation to connect dots and thus see the full thrust of implication- fundamentally= fundamentalists ( muslim extremist) transform= covert to sharia law.

    Remember, lying is not only permissible by islamic code it is encouraged to further the advance of islam. Is it any wonder that the often used title for barry soetero as putative president being, liar-in-chief. It is absolutely unacceptable to have a Lt.Col. in jail based on non-cooperation of barry to support his qualifications to occupy the Oval office.

    These are sad days for America. Using the usurpers own words before a crowd in Michigan, “the protest for a democratic change in Egypt by young people is applauded”.
    Well, it is time for millions to protest our leadership in DC. Peacefully gather and demand the resignation of illegal barry soetero. If Glenn Beck can stimulate a million to show up in DC, why can’t we patriots organize a similar gathering demanding the usurper to step down. Not only step down, but arrested for the fraud perpetrated against the Republic. No benefits, no Secret Service protection for life, nothing but bars and common prison like any other criminal. Let the rules of Federal penitentiary inmates rule his environment. It would be a wonderful experience for him and all the complicit politicians to get involved with the community that is very organized. It is time to uphold the rule of law. We are tired of being scammed.

  5. Harry H   Saturday, February 12, 2011 at 11:58 AM

    Good backgroud and questions raised here. No doubt Obama would like to revise the U.S. Constitution, too, to get rid of that annoying eligibility mandate in Article II, the talk of “qualifying” a president-elect in Amendment 20, and the term limit of Amendment 22.

    And no doubt Islam is an aggressive ideology that is hostile to Christian-American concepts of liberty. In the larger scheme of things, perhaps Islam is being used as a tool to marginalize Christianity in America once and for all because Muslims are generally easier to herd than free Christians. There is a larger scheme of things.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.