15 1 min 9 yrs

Obama does seem to carry a flame for the Muslim Brotherhood.  The other day, he was insisting that the Brotherhood MUST have role to play in the future government of Egypt. Today he is insisting that Morsi must be released from detention. What is it about the Islamic supremacists in the MB that resonates with Obama?


Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]


  1. //Today he is insisting that Morsi must be released from detention//

    We know, David, how comfortable you are with the idea of armies arresting and holding people without trial, but the rest of us believe that those who haven’t broken the law shouldn’t be arrested, and don’t like to see an elected representative being held by an unelected army.

  2. this is the theater of the absurd. not referring to Noels comment even though it also fits into that category for to many reasons to go into.

    Obama’s middle east policy is now, and has always been support all things in cooperation with the Muslim Brotherhood. He has backed them in the ME he has allowed them to hold high positions in his Administration here in the states. Before cutting the legs out from under Mubarak and the “spontaneous” protests in Egypt. Obama visited and met with ONLY the MB.

    Obama is just a stupid Academic. Enjoy, it’s not just the US that has to suffer the stupidity of his election.

  3. David- what is it with misleading claims that resonate with you? So long as they are lodged against someone you dislike politically you seem incapable of not asserting them. As for the call for the release of Morsi Noel has correctly diagnosed the issue.

  4. Noel/Mahons: obviously the people of Egypt felt that the democratically elected Morsi performed a bait-and-switch, once elected.

    The people of Egypt did not vote for what they got: the elimination of all but Islamists in govt, creeping sharia law,persecution of Christians, government takeover of industries and a trashing of the Egyptian economy.

    which actually sounds a bit like Obama and perhaps answers David questions about the resonance of the Muslim Brotherhood with Obama.

  5. They’re just tactical positioning statements from Obama.

    Washington supported Mubarak and gave him and the Egyptian military $60 billion while he was president.

    Then Washington funded the opponents who forced out Mubarak and insisted on elections.

    The elections were held, Morsi was supported by Washington and the military still received American cash.

    After a year Egyptians mobilised against Morsi and Washington signalled to the military that it would not oppose Morsi’s removal. Military still gets the money.

    Now Washington supports democracy again, gives support to Morsi, still gives cash to the military.

    Bottom line: Washington supports both sides, plays both sides off against each other, funds both sides and Egyptians – as we saw recently – are sick of Washington.

  6. How/when did Washington signal to the military that it would not oppose Morsi’s removal?

  7. He takes RT, owned and controlled by Putin’s inner circle, as a source, easy as you please as if it was a real news site. Sweet mother of God.

    This military coup is worrying, as it did overthrow an elected govt, but it sure seems popular among many Egyptians.

    The conspiracy guys will blame Obama for putting Morsi in, and now for taking him out.

    Egypt is a big country. We don’t control events there. Obama jumped on the first bandwagon, then got out of the way of the second. I’m not sure what else he could have done.

  8. Ehem.

    “The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.”

  9. RT is a deeply focused propaganda instrument supporting Russian state policy. It cannot be compared with real newspapers or authentic TV news as they exist in the UK or America, etc.

    Note that its content appears in a lavish, well maintained website, and on TV systems worldwide in four languages despite the fact that no one pays for it, by subscription or advertising. All is funded by the Russian state, directly or indirectly. Russia pays for it to be on cable systems.

    Their motto is ” Question More ” .But they don’t question anything! It’s a propaganda station!

  10. RT didn’t write that piece. Hence the caveat. Anyway, you know nothing about RT. You’re just flinging out phrases.

    “RT is a deeply focused propaganda instrument supporting Russian state policy. It cannot be compared with real newspapers or authentic TV news as they exist in the UK or America, etc.”


    You’re having a laugh. There are extremely close ties between the White House and senior people at the “authentic” TV news channels.

    The channels are owned by corproates with extremely close ties to government and which profit hugely from these ties.

    One example: For years General Electric was a major owner of NBC. General Electric is a major defence contractor and profits massively from war. You think NBC would go all out against war in that case? With billions at stake for GE? No chance.

    You think those movers and shakers will at ABC, CBS and CNN (CNN?!! It’s comically false!) will report honestly if their wives and husbands and siblings in the White House will be damaged by it? You’re out of your mind of you think.

    You lot make me laugh. You thought Pravda was a government mouthpiece while your TV news channels were reporting the truth.


  11. Pete Moore

    Your 4.51 nails it.

    I detest the MB and all it stands for, but the inconvenient truth is that Morsi won a fair election just a year ago and has now been deposed by a military coup.

Comments are closed.