Friday, August 16, 2013

Egyptians Enraged by U.S. Outreach to Muslim Brotherhood

PJ Media

In the eyes of tens of millions of Egyptians, Senators John McCain’s and Lindsey Graham’s recent words and deeds in Egypt—which have the “blessing” of President Obama—have unequivocally proven that U.S. leadership is aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Egyptian media is awash with stories of the growing anger regarding this policy.

A top advisor to Egypt’s Interim President Adly Mansour formally accused McCain of distorting facts to the benefit of the Brotherhood, dismissing the senator’s remarks as “irrational”—or, more colloquially, “moronic.”  Ahmed al-Zind, head of the Egyptian Judge Club, called for the arrest and trial of McCain for “trying to destroy Egypt.”  The leader of the youth movement, Tamarod (or “Rebellion” against the Brotherhood) which played a major role in mobilizing the June 30 Revolution, said “We reject John McCain and call on the international community to let the [Egyptian] people decide their own fate.”   Another incensed secular political commentator, Ahmed Musa, asserted that “These two men have made more shameless demands than the Brotherhood themselves would dare,” adding:
He [McCain] is not a man elected by the American people to speak on their behalf; today, he speaks on behalf of an armed terrorist organization—the Muslim Brotherhood…  We had expected [better] from these two men who came to speak with the tongue of the Brotherhood’s leadership, and as if they had been recruited as two new leaders of the Brotherhood, which killed, destroyed, and burned in al-Muqattam, and now in Rab‘a al-Adawiya [the main Brotherhood camp].  The only thing missing is to see them [McCain and Graham] in Rab‘a, surrounded by armed groups, and in their midst Muhammad Badie [supreme leader of the Brotherhood] and [U.S. ambassador] Anne Patterson. That’s all that’s missing!  Here comes Brother McCain today saying that we must “release the [Brotherhood] prisoners”…. are you not aware that these people are accused of murder?  Are you not aware that hundreds of Egyptians have been killed at the hands of the Brotherhood, Morsi, Shatter, Qatatni, Badie, Baltagi—have you forgotten?  Did you not read the report on what happened?  Or did you just blindly accept your ambassador’s [Anne Patterson’s] words that it was a coup, that 33 million people did not go out?
What did McCain do and say in Egypt to earn the ire of millions of Egyptians?

First, most offensive to Egyptians—and helpful to the Brotherhood’s cause—is McCain’s insistence on calling the June 30 Revolution a “military coup.” In reality, the revolution consisted of perhaps thirty million Egyptians taking to the streets to oust the Brotherhood. McCain is either deliberately misconstruing the event, or believes the story as manufactured by Al Jazeera and promulgated by Ambassador Anne Patterson. In this narrative, at least an equal amount of Egyptians supported Morsi, and the military overthrew him against popular will. Al Jazeera has actually broadcast images of the millions of anti-Morsi protesters and identified them as pro-Morsi protesters, disinformation which was quickly adopted by Western media.

Several Al Jazeera correspondents have resigned due to Al Jazeera acting as the Brotherhood’s international mouthpiece.

Fortunately, some American officials have formally rejected this false narrative. A new congressional resolution states:
Whereas in recent weeks, an estimated 30,000,000 Egyptians in a majority of Egypt’s 27 provinces gathered to protest the widespread failures of former President Mohamed Morsi and the Government of Egypt and its violations of the most basic rights of all Egyptian citizens, including Egyptian women, minorities, and those publicly dissenting from its views and policies; Whereas the participants in the June 30, 2013, popular protests far outnumbered those involved in the protests and demonstrations of January and February 2011 …
Even the Obama administration has been sensible enough not to call the June 30 revolution a “military coup.”  Nevertheless, McCain rejected John Kerry’s statement that “the [Egyptian] military did not take over.”

McCain’s designation raises other questions as well. If he considers the ouster of the Brotherhood government to be a military coup, why didn’t he extend that distinction at the fall of Mubarak’s more moderate government, which was also removed by the military in response to popular protests? If McCain’s argument is that Morsi was democratically elected and Mubarak was not, then why was the U.S. giving Egypt billions in aid for decades—thus legitimizing Mubarak’s government no less than Morsi’s?

Further angering Egyptians is McCain’s insistence that all arrested Brotherhood members be released from prison. As Musa said, McCain’s stance does not address the fact that Brotherhood leadership is awaiting trial on serious charges: inciting terrorism, causing the murder of Egyptians, and grand treason by conspiring with foreign powers against Egypt’s interests.

McCain claims he is simply interested in the human rights of the incarcerated Brotherhood members, a statement that is additionally curious. If human rights are at issue, why has McCain and the U.S. administration been indifferent to the fate of Hosni Mubarak? Morsi faces perhaps more serious charges than Mubarak does, yet McCain calls for his release.

McCain’s call to release Brotherhood leadership validates the widespread belief in Egypt that America is a fellow conspirator with the Brotherhood. Egyptians believe the U.S. fears that Morsi and others, if tried, would reveal the nature of their cozy relationship with the U.S. government, leading to any number of ugly revelations—treasonous ties and conspiracies, the exchange of billions of dollars, and Sinai issues. Hence, McCain wants them freed. This belief seems all the more reasonable to Egyptians considering that in 2011, McCain said of the Muslim Brotherhood:
I think they are a radical group that first of all supports Sharia law; that in itself is anti-democratic—at least as far as women are concerned. They have been involved with other terrorist organizations and I believe that they should be specifically excluded from any transition government.
McCain also personally visited Khairat al-Shatter, the multi-millionaire deputy chief of the Brotherhood who is currently incarcerated on charges of treason and terrorism. Interestingly, Shatter was not even a member of Morsi’s government. Why is McCain visiting a civilian? Shatter’s status as a major figure in the largest Islamist organization in the world is leading Egyptians to connect the dots. Even Shatter himself, understanding the awful visuals, asked McCain to visit “the legitimate president” Morsi instead.

U.S. media has said little about the administration’s ties to al-Shatter; however these ties are well-known among Egyptians: ambassador Anne Patterson was frequently seen going to Shatter’s residence.

Egyptian media has also pointed out that McCain repeatedly dodged critical questions by Egyptian journalists at the press conference. When asked about the fact that the Brotherhood in Rab‘a was armed to the teeth, and—with the aid of al-Qaeda—was killing and terrorizing innocent Egyptians, McCain ignored the question. This, of course is in keeping with the fact that McCain has also ignored the question as to why he is the staunchest supporter of the jihad in Syria, which has torn that nation apart, seen the slaughter and displacement of untold thousands of Christians and the destruction of their churches, and the beheadings and “legitimized rapes” by foreign jihadis whom McCain is in favor of arming.

Many Egyptians are also wondering why McCain—as well as the Obama administration—is pushing for elections as soon as possible.  Such a rush contributed to the empowerment of the Brotherhood in the first place: once the long-entrenched Mubarak was removed from power, the only party that was organized and ready to campaign was the Brotherhood. Secular Egyptian parties wanted to postpone the 2012 elections in order to mobilize their campaigns, but the U.S. was adamant that Egypt hold elections immediately. When the military wished to perform a recount, citing irregularities in the election—including widespread allegations of voter fraud by the Brotherhood—Hillary Clinton chastised them and called for a winner to be declared as soon as possible. This turned out to be Morsi, by a tiny margin—if that.

In short, McCain’s remarks and actions in Egypt have further confirmed the popular narrative—as memorably displayed by countless anti-Brotherhood and anti-Obama placards raised during the June 30 Revolution—that U.S. leadership is aligned with the Brotherhood, and thus ultimately a supporter of terrorism. Americans can no longer afford to ignore this serious accusation with broad implications.

A Judge Handcuffs The Cops

by / Personal Liberty Digest

A Judge Handcuffs The Cops
There can be no doubt that the stop-and-frisk actions of New York City’s police department have been hugely successful in lowering the crime rate there.

So, of course, they’ve been under attack by liberal do-gooders. Sadly, this past Monday, a Federal judge ruled that they violated the Constitutional rights of minorities. Is anyone surprised?

Stop and frisk has been an important weapon for police departments everywhere in their efforts to deter crime. Mayor Michael Bloomberg defended the program in New York City, saying:
The NYPD’s ability to stop and question suspects that officers have reason to believe have committed crimes, or are about to commit crimes, is the kind of policing that courts across the nation have found, for decades, to be constitutionally valid.
If this decision were to stand, it would turn those precedents on their head — and make our city, and in fact the whole country, a more dangerous place.
Thanks in large part to the stop-and-frisk program, Bloomberg says that New York is the safest big city in the United States. Unlike Chicago and other cities where crime rates are skyrocketing, New York is seeing record lows in many areas of violent crime.

You won’t be surprised to learn that most of the violent crime in the city is committed by blacks and Hispanics against other blacks and Hispanics. Or that most of the people stopped and questioned by police are also members of these two minorities.

So it follows, as night follows day, that the stop-and-frisk program was challenged in the courts. U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled in a pair of decisions that the police department’s policy violated the Constitutional rights of minorities.

It just so happens that blacks and Hispanics make up about 60 percent of the population in the precinct under dispute in the case. But they made up 96 percent of the people the police stopped and questioned. This was enough to convince Scheindlin that the police department’s actions were racist and unConstitutional.

The judge ignored the fact that an overwhelming majority of crimes committed in the area are by minorities against minorities. In New York’s 88th Precinct, where the alleged discrimination took place, 99 percent of violent crimes (and 93 percent of all reported crimes) were committed by blacks and Hispanics.

Or as former New York Governor George Pataki put it, “You go where the crime is if you want to stop the crime.” And he added, “The effect of the policy is thousands of lives that are saved, largely low-income, minority lives, because we have much lower rates of violent crime.”

Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute pointed out the absurdity of the judge’s logic:
[T]hough whites and Asians commit less than 1 percent of violent crime in the 88th Precinct and less than 6 percent of all crime, according to Scheindlin 40 percent of all stops should be of whites and Asians, to match their representation in the local population.
That would be as ridiculous as having airport screeners pick on grandmothers and young children, just to show they’re not “profiling.” Oh, wait; that happens all the time.

Columnist Gary Bauer points out how stop and frisk benefits minorities in New York:
The irony is that the vast majority of people whose lives are saved by stop-question-and-frisk are minorities, the vast majority of the police officers who employ it on their patrols are minorities and the vast majority of residents who are safer because of the policy are minorities.
But, of course, liberals on a crusade — especially one that will hamstring and handcuff the police — will simply ignore any facts that get in their way.

To realize how absurd some of the arguments can be, consider the case involving David Floyd, the primary plaintiff in Floyd v. City of New York, the class-action lawsuit brought before Scheindlin.

Here’s how The Wall Street Journal described what happened with him:
[Floyd] was observed trying numerous keys and jostling a door in an area where a series of burglaries had recently been reported. Because burglary is often a violent crime, the judge thought the cops were justified in stopping and frisking the men’s’ outer garments but went too far in checking Mr. Floyd’s pockets. Therefore the judge ruled that his Fourth Amendment rights had been violated.
Can you believe what you just read? According to Scheindlin, the police were justified in searching Floyd’s jacket. But how dare they see what he had in his pants’ pocket!

Here’s how The Journal describes a second of Judge Scheindlin’s examples:
Then there’s Clive Lino, stopped and frisked in 2011 because he matched the description of a homicide suspect from a wanted poster distributed to officers that morning – right down to his red leather Pelle Pelle jacket.
Sounds like good police work, doesn’t it? Not good enough, the judge ruled: “Here again the judge saw a reasonable stop and even a reasonable frisk, but a frisk that went too far and created another alleged Fourth Amendment violation.”

In her ruling, Scheindlin said that the New York Police Department conducted 4.4 million stops from January 2004 through June 2012. Yet the class-action lawsuit brought before her cited only 19 cases.

You would think that if you could cherry-pick just 19 examples out of a total of 4.4 million cases, all of them would be horrifying examples of police misconduct.

That isn’t what happened. The judge said that in five cases, such as the two cited above, the stops were reasonable but the frisks went too far. In another five cases, neither the stops nor the frisks were unreasonable.

That left only nine cases — fewer than half — wherein she concluded that both the stops and the frisks were not based on reasonable suspicion and thus were unConstitutional.

Scheindlin ordered that new procedures be enacted by the police to end the discrimination and that a Federal monitor be appointed to make sure her instructions are carried out.

Bloomberg promptly announced that the City will appeal Scheindlin’s decision. Hopefully, the U.S. Court of Appeals — and, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court — will overturn her ruling.

What if that doesn’t happen? The Wall Street Journal put it this way:
The tragedy is that if the judge’s ruling isn’t overturned, the victims won’t be in the tony precincts of liberal New York. They will be in the barrios and housing projects where stop-and-frisk has helped to protect the most vulnerable citizens, who are usually minorities.
Once again, liberal policies hurt the most the very people they claim to want to help. So what else is new?

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

WASHINGTON - Hardly a week goes by that we don't read about the Republican Party's "political problems" in the news media who insist the GOP has become widely unpopular with voters.

The Democrats, on the other hand, are portrayed as a unified party, with rarely a disagreement among them, and as the dominant political force in the country by virtue of their victory in the 2012 presidential election, slight gains in the House and Senate and, well, the people who need to be in charge of the nation's government.

But a closer examination of the political lay of the land reveals a far different story of the GOP's growing strength in recent state elections, its much broader structural base in our political system, and the growing expectation they'll make House and Senate gains in the midterm elections in 2014.

It hardly merits a peep in the Washington national news media, but the Republicans control a large majority of the nation's governorships, including many Democratic-leaning states.

The GOP holds 30 of the 50 governorships, winning 23 out of the 37 gubernatorial elections in 2010, the year the Republicans crushed the Democrats in a wave election that was seen as a nationwide repudiation of President Obama and his party's big government, big spending policies.

Twenty of these GOP governors are up for re-election next year. Many are in heavily Democratic states that are politically pivotal presidential battlegrounds in the upper Midwest that could shape the political climate for the 2016 race for the White House.

But these GOP executives have proven to be far more successful than the Democrats anticipated, turning around their economies, cutting budgets, eliminating deficits, and getting higher job approval polls, to boot.

Ohio's John Kasich, Wisconsin's Scott Walker, Iowa's Terry Branstad, and Michigan's Rick Snyder are among the GOP's new crop of state GOP superstars, some of whom are being seen as possible presidential contenders.

And their success on bread-and-butter economic issues has produced a sharp contrast with the Democrats' abject failure in Washington to get the national economy back on track.

That contrast turned sharper this week when the Gallup Poll reported Thursday that Obama's economic approval score has plummeted to the mid-30 percent range in a new sign that more voters are growing increasingly angry over his failed economic policies.

"Despite President Obama's renewed focus on the nation's economy this summer, he scored worse with Americans on the economy than he did in June," Gallup said.

"His approval on the issue, now 35 percent, is down seven percentage points, and his ratings on taxes and the federal budget deficit are each down five points," the polling service reported.

Here in Washington, the 2014 election focus is on whether the Democrats can keep control of the Senate in such a gloomy economic climate. Right now, the race is a tossup, maybe with an edge to Republicans if Obama's job polls continue to fall and the economy shows little or no signs of improvement.

Right now, Democrats control the Senate with a 54 to 46 seat majority, but Republicans will likely lose this year's special election race in New Jersey, making the division 55-45. Thus, Republicans will need a six-seat gain to take the Senate.

Democrats start out on the defensive, because they will have 20 seats up for election next year, versus 15 for the Republicans. Some of the Democrats' vulnerable seats are in states that were easily carried by Mitt Romney in 2012, but it's hard to find any GOP seat that's in danger next year.

"Republicans don't have any seats that currently look like goners. In contrast, Democrats have three -- the open seats in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia," writes longtime election handicapper Charlie Cook.

Veteran election tracker Stuart Rothenberg flatly says the "Republicans are likely to gain between three to six seats in 2014."

But Cook has a word of caution, noting two potentially offsetting factors that "could make the Democrats' task more difficult."

"First, the six most-competitive [Senate] contests are in states of varying shades of red" that Romney carried by mostly hefty margins. Alaska, by 14 points; Arkansas, 24 points; and Louisiana, 17 points -- "making them tough states for Democrats these days."

Romney also won in other key Senate race states -- in Georgia, for example, by 8 points, in Kentucky by a huge 23 points, but in North Carolina, by only 2 points.

Thus, Cook points out, while the GOP is being pounded for some "image problems nationally, it is far better off in these six states."

Throw in another major factor in next year's Senate sweepstakes: the special interest voter groups that turned out for Obama in 2008 and 2012. Minorities, unmarried women, and younger voters "are far less likely to turn out in a midterm election," Cook says.

Here's the bottom line, he says. "While Republicans have a narrow path to the majority, the seats they must win are in friendly states, and turnout will work in their favor because this is a midterm election."

There's another big warning here, though. Republicans, especially tea party voters, must pick their nominees with care. In 2010, the GOP lost a slam dunk Delaware Senate race when it chose a mediocre candidate who said she had once dabbled in witchcraft, and then ran a campaign ad in which she insisted "I'm not a witch."

Last year, two GOP Senate candidates were on a path to expected victories in Indiana and Missouri, until they made unfortunate remarks about rape pregnancies.

With the U.S. economy poised to turn the Senate over to the GOP, this is no time for bush league politics.

"America has no permanent friends or enemies," Henry Kissinger famously remarked, "only interests."

Super-K was paraphrasing Lord Palmerston who long before Nixon's foreign policy guru spoke had proclaimed that "Britain had no eternal allies and no perpetual enemies, only interest that were eternal and perpetual."

Bismarck must have said something similar. And Disraeli. And Napoleon. And Caesar. And probably Alexander and everyone else remotely successful at building and maintaining world power if only for a period of time.

Which brings us to Egypt and General Abdel Fattah Saeed Hussein Khalil el-Sisi, for the time being --and probably for the next many decades-- the number one guy in Egypt. He is the 58-year old Defense Minister and Commander-in-Chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces.

From Wikipedia:

[Sisi] graduated from the Egyptian Military Academy in 1977. He attended the following courses:

•Mohammed Ragab Command and Staff Course, Egyptian Command and Staff College, 1987
•General Command and Staff Course, Joint Command and Staff College, United Kingdom, 1992
•War Course, Fellowship of the Higher War College, Nasser's Military Sciences Academy, Egypt, 2003
•War Course, US Army War College, United States, 2006
•Egyptian Military Attaché in Riyadh, KSA
•Infantry Course, USA.

Smarter than your average bear, then, and well acquainted with numerous military men and women in the west generally and the U.S. specifically.

Now ousted former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi was also educated in the U.S.. obtaining a PhD even from the University of Southern California. Morsi was even a professor at Cal State Northridge, and returned top a quarter-century academic career in Egypt before his plunge into politics.

Morsi, though, is a member of the Muslim brotherhood, the radical nature of which is detailed in Lawrence Wright's Pulitzer Prize winning The Looming Tower, and Sisi is a military man. Both are Muslims, but both have very different world views.

Most Americans look at Egypt and see a partner in the Camp David accords, the protector of the Suez Canal, and one of the three keys to regional stability along with Saudi Arabia and Israel.

When Egypt has been unstable --under Nassar and over the past two years-- the region has been unstable, and thus the world shakier by far. The authority of General Sisis, whether wielded in concert with an elected civilian government or directly through the military, is simply preferable for American interests than the transition of Egypt into radical Islamist theocracy, whether gradually as has been happening in Turkey or suddenly as happened during the carter years in Iran.

I spent Wednesday interviewing experts on the Middle East generally and Egypt specifically: The New York Times John Burns (transcript here), former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton (transcript here), AEI's Michael Rubin and Fred Kagan and Stratfor's Reva Bhalla (transcripts will be here Thursday by mid-day) and the points of view were varied except for one key point: The Muslim Brotherhood is not a friend of freedom generally or the U.S. specifically. (Reva Bhalla, by the way, should be on every television booker's short list for new faces with talent and charisma).

Kagan would lean hard on the Egyptian military; Ambassador Bolton, not so much. I am in the camp of keeping Egypt out of the hands of the Brotherhood and out of the orbit of the Chinese and the Russians.

I am also for the party that protects religious minorities against sectarian violence of the worst sort, which is the Egyptian military.

Every guest on Wednesday, like every human being with a heart, deplores unnecessary violence and senseless loss of life. "Everybody regrets the bloodshed," Ambassador Bolton told me, "but make no mistake about it, the Brotherhood wanted this confrontation."

There is a civil war brewing in Egypt, though, and the United States cannot stand above the fray and wish that the unicorns would emerge from the forest for all to take turns riding upon.

General Sisi seems to be a man of modernity, his opponents not. Pray the violence ends quickly, and pray as well that when the country returns to stability, an enlightened set of rulers is in place, determined to steer the country towards the West and towards a modern understanding of liberty and human rights, not towards a theocracy that is hostile to all non-believers and committed to an understanding of women that is pre-modern.

This isn't a close call. Jimmy Carter lost Iran to the worst sort of darkness by refusing to stand with a flawed by improving Shah who was far superior in every way to the Ayatollah who replaced him.

Will President Obama double down on losing Egypt as well as Libya and the resistance in Syria?

When he breaks from his golf game, perhaps someone in the kept media will ask him.

Some should NOT walk amongst civilized men 
By: Diane Sori

Egyptian Coptic Christians have become collateral damage…NO…they are being targeted for elimination…as secular Egyptian security forces battle supporters of ousted Muslim Brotherhood ‘puppet’ President Mohamed Morsi.

For days now, Christians churches have been under attack as the Muslim Brotherhood tries to turn Egypt into an islamic authoritarian state where sharia is the law of the land and islam must be practiced by all...practiced by all as the Muslim Brotherhood tries to achieve its true goal of cleansing the Middle East of all Christians and Jews.

Claiming they’re acting in response to government security forces breaking up two protest camps in Cairo’s Nadha and Raba’a al Adiwiya squares a few days ago, the Morsi/Muslim Brotherhood supporters are attacking and torching churches and Christian-owned homes and businesses all across Egypt, killing many innocents as they do so.

And even after interim President Adly Mansour declared a nation-wide state of emergency and a dawn to dusk curfew, these barbarians attacked and burnt to the ground at least 27 church buildings (including firebombing and burning the Mar Geergiss Church, the main Coptic church in the southern Egyptian city of Sohag along with other churches in the cities of Minya, Assiut, and Fayoum), and attacked a women’s-only monastery and two Christian schools. Thirty Coptic Christian-owned homes have been set on fire, along with many businesses, including the destroying of three Bible Society stores.

And just last week, a little 10-year-old Christian girl was targeted and killed while walking home from a Bible class at the Ahmed Esmat Street Evangelical Church.

So where is the outrage from our ‘supposed’ Christian president…from the media…where is it…there is none as the msm won’t even report on this, and if the newspapers mention it at all its buried amongst ads in the back of the paper, and Obama could care less for he supports and aligns himself with the very barbarians committing these acts.

But heaven forbid one (vile) mosque would be torched or one ‘supposedly’ innocent muslim child was killed…the media and Obama would be calling for blood revenge.

And it’s all so sad because under Hosni Mubarrak’s rule, Christians (who make up only around 10% of the population of 85 million) were safe, but in Morsi’s single year in power a chain of abuses against them were committed…abuses committed even after thousands fled the country soon after he took office. Examples of such are arresting and torturing Christian political opponents and any criticizers; trying to stop Copts from voting in last December’s constitutional referendum; tolerating the assault on Coptic Christianity’s holiest cathedral by islamic militants in April; and halting any and all investigations into the October 2011 Maspero massacre that left 30 Copts dead and 500 wounded.

And immediately before and after Morsi’s ouster his supporters bloviated over and over in a heated frenzy that it was the Christian minority who were the cause of all the protests that led to Morsi’s ouster. Fueled on and aided in this rhetoric…in this imans from all across Egypt who called for Christians to be attacked and killed, Morsi and his followers ran rampant with NO one stopping them.

That is until 34+ million Egyptians took to the streets in protest that is. Took to the streets to protest the demise of their personal freedoms, because Morsi replaced Sadat’s 1971 constitution (which replaced Egypt’s 1923 constitution) with a 2012 islamic shariah constitution which became irrevocable as Egypt’s new Supreme Law.

And thus the Morsi/Muslim Brotherhood supporters took to the streets to counter the pro-military protesters, all the while shouting their battle cry...“we will defend islam”...while attacking Christians, turning the Egyptian people’s cry for freedom into a (un)holy war of islam vs. Christianity with a bit of ‘death to all Jews’ thrown in for good measure.

And that is serious indeed for if the government security forces…the military…can’t secure the peace and Egypt falls and becomes a lawless failed state, then Israel faces extremely serious trouble for the Camp David Accords, which have kept the peace between Egypt and Israel for decades, won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on.

Remember back in May when Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh called on then President Morsi to ‘revise’ the Camp David Accords saying, “We ask Egyptian authorities to revise mainly the security articles of the Camp David Treaty even though not cancelling it,” and that “Zionists (Israelis) try to use the gap created by the treaty, which blocks the military presence in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula in order to de-stabilize Egypt’s security and damage Egypt- Palestine relations”.

Well, these words were spoken by a man who hates Jews as much or even more than he hates Christians, and points to the fact that if the Muslim Brotherhood were ever to resume power in Egypt…or even to share in power…that would assure that the Sinai Peninsula…an area already awash in guns, weapons, and terrorist training camps…would become even a worse breeding ground of hate where the rules of the game would be that both Christians and Jews were free for the killing.

And what is Obama’s response to all this…to the newest happenings in Egypt including the fact that yesterday Muslim Brotherhood supporters stormed and set fire to government buildings in Cairo. From Martha’s Vineyard…on yet another  vacation paid for by ‘We the People’…Obama held a hastily arranged press conference where his empty words spoken were that the US will cancel joint military exercises with Egypt in the wake of “brutal and deadly violence,” but he said nothing about cutting off foreign aid to Egypt.

“The United States strongly condemns the steps that have been taken by Egypt’s interim government and security forces,” Obama said. “We deplore violence against citizens.” And so it seems he only deplores violence done by the government forces against Muslim Brotherhood citizens but NOT a word was said about Muslim Brotherhood violence against Coptic Christian citizens …NOT a word.

Oh and lest I forget, Barack HUSSEIN Obama said he wants to be “a partner in Egypt’s future”.

I think Egypt can do very well without him for this man’s loyalties do NOT lie with the Egyptian people's wish for freedom for Obama's bloviating interference goes against the very outcome they're trying to attain.  And with him ignoring the slaughter of the Coptic Christians, it becomes in-your-face obvious that Obama is trying to manipulate the chaos in Egypt and turn it into results similar to those in Syria where the Muslim Brotherhood is thought of as 'freedom-fighters'…'freedom fighters' who just happen to be aligned with al-Qaeda…'freedom fighters' who are anything but yet who Barack HUSSEIN Obama is supplying US guns and weapons to...most in dirty under-the-table in can you say 'Benghazi'.

And so Obama's treasonous actions continue, but this time the Egyptian people are on the receiving end of it with the Coptic Christians sadly suffering the most.