A great controversy has erupted over a National Journal article by Michael Hirsh entitled, “The Post Al Qaida Era.” I think this is an important issue there is absolutely nothing new here that couldn’t have been seen—as I’ll show in a moment—five years ago.
The Obama Administration has long thought along the following lines:
-
Al-Qaida is an evil and terrible organization. It attacked America on September 11, 2001. It is a sworn enemy of the United States and it uses terrorism. Consequently, to protect the American homeland, al-Qaida must be destroyed. Our “war on terror” is then a war on al-Qaida.
Oh, yes, one more thing:
Al-Qaida is the only enemy and the only threat. So once al-Qaida is destroyed there is no more problem, no more conflict.
In this context, then, all other revolutionary Islamist groups—the Muslim Brotherhood, Hizballah, Hamas, and so on—are not enemies. They can be won over or at least neutralized as threats to U.S. interests. And perhaps even they can become allies because they also oppose al-Qaida or, as they are now called, really radical Salafist groups.
So when the administration now says the “war on terror” is over because al-Qaida has been defeated, it is speaking with total consistency.
Please be patient and let me quote what I wrote about this in 2007, which applies completely to today:
-
“The Brotherhood and the jihadists [especially al-Qaida] are the two main Islamist streams today. They are not enemies, and there has been no violent conflict between them, nor has there been a great deal of ideological battle. Yet at the same time they are rivals, following different strategies and knowing that one or the other would gain mass support and perhaps state power….
“Second, a critical difference between the two groups is that the jihadists–except in Saudi Arabia and Iraq–focus on attacking what is called the “far enemy,” that is, Israel, the United States, the West in general. The Brotherhoods, in contrast, while strongly anti-Israel (and supporting Hamas, see below) and anti-Western, focus on the “near enemy,” that is, Arab governments. Thus, for them, while al-Qaida is fighting for the cause, it is also undermining it (except in Iraq) by pulling resources out of the struggle for change within the Arab world.
“Third, while the Brotherhood groups are tactically flexible (as has been shown above), al-Qaida is exclusively focused on armed struggle. The Brotherhood groups view the revolutionary process as a long-term one, involving such things as providing social services, educating and indoctrinating young people through institutions, using elections, compromising at times with Arab governments, showing restraint to avoid government repression, at times allying with non-Islamist groups, and so on. Thus, while al-Qaida is far more of a danger in terms of terrorism, it is far less likely to seize state power because of what would be called in Leninist terms, its “infantile leftism.”
The best example of this is the use of elections….Contrast here the views of the al-Qaida leader in Iraq, Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi and the influential Brotherhood ideologue Qaradawi. In a January 23, 2005 statement, Zarqawi condemned the upcoming Iraqi elections and threatened to kill those running and voting. In sharp contrast, Qaradawi endorsed elections, arguing that the majority of voters would back an Islamist party, while liberals would get little support. If truly fair elections were to be held, he insisted, Islamists would win by a landslide.
And at the moment Obama was taking office in 2009 I wrote:
-
“Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s policy is the precise and exact opposite of what is needed. Instead of emphasizing the need to combat the [Islamist] radicals and reinforce the moderates, it focuses on conciliating the radicals, which undermines the moderates…..
“Here is the central point and problem for the United States: Its interests and allies are increasingly menaced by a growing threat [revolutionary Islamism] whose existence, meaning, and scope, current U.S. policy does not even recognize yet, much less counters effectively.”
Since then, America’s enemies have made great progress; the Obama Administration almost none at all.
Everything you need to know about the regional situation was obvious five years ago. Everything you need to know about the Obama Administration was obvious three years ago.
At least today it should be clear that a group capable of taking over a country with millions of people and running it for decades (the Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hizballah) is a greater threat than a group that can stage a few terror attacks each year. But it still isn’t even on the radar of the Western mainstream debate or the Obama Administration’s strategy.
As a result, it is misleading to say, as Michael Hirsh wrote in the National Journal, that “the Obama administration is taking a new view of Islamist radicalism.” This is the view it has taken since Obama opened his Middle East policy with a Cairo speech where he invited Brotherhood leaders and told his audience that an Islamic viewpoint was the proper one for Arabs.
Hirsh writes, “The president realizes he has no choice but to cultivate the Muslim Brotherhood and other relatively `moderate’” Islamist groups emerging as lead political players out of the Arab Spring in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere.” But this is misleading because Obama’s policy has favored Islamists in Egypt, the Gaza Strip, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, and arguably in Libya.
Hirsh writes: “The Muslim Brotherhood officially renounced violence decades ago, leading then-dissident radicals such as Ayman al-Zawahiri to join al Qaida.”
This is totally misleading. The Brotherhood has never renounced violence. Its articles and speeches have been full of calls for violence against, for example, against Israel and against U.S. forces in Iraq. The Brotherhood only renounced violence within Egypt because it knew that otherwise the Mubarak regime would respond by—as we used to say in the old neighborhood—knocking them upside the head.
The article continues: “It is no longer the case, in other words, that every Islamist is seen as a potential accessory to terrorists.” But this is misleading because the Obama Administration never thought that way at all.
The passage that has stirred up so much debate is this one:
-
“`The war on terror is over,’” one senior State Department official who works on Mideast issues told me. Now that we have killed most of al Qaida, now that people have come to see legitimate means of expression, people who once might have gone into al Qaida see an opportunity for a legitimate Islamism.’”
Yes, the war on terror is over but now it is the struggle against revolutionary Islamism that should begin. But it isn’t. Instead the phrase is “legitimate Islamism,” meaning in effect, good anti-American, antisemitic, totalitarianism.
And yet there is even more that’s nonsense here. Very few people ever went to join al-Qaida! We are talking about at most a few thousand in the whole world. Meanwhile, the Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hizballah recruited tens of thousands in each country.
Of course, those radicals would be damn fools not to realize that it makes more sense to join groups that have taken power in Egypt, the Gaza Strip, Tunisia, and Turkey than guys hanging out in caves. Who are the effective revolutionaries?
This is like saying in 1917, after the Russian Revolution:
-
The war on anarchist terrorism is over. Now that people have come to see a legitimate means of expression in the Russian November, people who once might have gone into assassinating government officials instead see an opportunity for a legitimate Marxism through Bolshevism.”
And there’s still more foolishness. In Egypt–and this is extraordinarily significant–many of the Salafists (the people the Brotherhood is supposedly protecting us from) have now endorsed the Muslim Brotherhood candidate for president. They understand what Obama, his colleagues, and his supporters don’t comprehend: that the Brotherhood wants the same revolution as the more obviously militant groups.
The article continues:
-
“The president may have no choice but to preside over chaos at this point–a chaos that may not be the disaster that critics say and may in fact be the Arab world’s only path to modernity — but it won’t play well in the seven months between now and election day.”
But it might—in fact, it will—lead to disaster. And it would be a strange path to modernity that aimed at turning back the clock. Still I suppose you could say that Stalin and Mao ultimately led to modernity for their countries, though backing them in their seizure of power might have looked bad to American voters, right?
Remember that in the early Cold War years the far right wing falsely accused a Democratic president of helping Communists gain power. Today, amazingly enough, that equivalent accusation is true, based not on a conspiracy theory but on the open behavior and declarations of this president and his administration!
Finally, to show how ultimately nonsensical the mainstream debate is, consider this passage in the article:
-
“Some of the smarter hardliners on the Right, like Reuel Marc Gerecht, are coming to realize that the Arab world may find another route to democracy–through Islamism.”
The implication is that if you think that Islamism isn’t a great way to achieve democracy you must be a dumb right-wing hardliner. Can’t you just be a good analyst who understands the Middle East, reads the documents, knows the history, and doesn’t have a political agenda? Nope, I guess the political science is settled.
Still, why should someone have to be “right wing” to oppose a group that in Marxist terminology would be called “clerical-fascist?” Why should those on the “left wing” (or mainstream, which sometimes seems to amount to the same thing nowadays) back a group that wants to suppress women, kill homosexuals, wipe out Jews, crush basic freedoms taken for granted in the West, and holds an ideology that resembles fascism more than any other Western ideology? Since when does the “left wing” love those who could be called reactionary religious fanatics?
Would Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, or Hubert Humphrey, for example, think that putting the Muslim Brotherhood into power and not seeing it as a threat was some great liberal idea?
And is nothing too ridiculous as those who think the Muslim Brotherhood is just fine and dandy usually simultaneously view Christians in their own country, or at least Evangelical Protestants and perhaps practicing Catholics, as fundamentalist extremists who want to impose a dictatorship?
Guess what? Even that’s not all that is wrong with Hirsh’s claim in that above-cited paragraph. Gerecht has been advocating engagement with Islamists for years. In 2004 (!) he wrote a monograph entitled, The Islamic Paradox: Shiite Clerics, Sunni Fundamentalists, and the Coming of Arab Democracy. He was making this argument when Obama was still a gleam in David Axelrod’s eye!
It is hard–I’d say impossible–to find any time in American history when the government’s foreign policy has been more clearly disastrous than the Obama Administration’s current Middle East policy. It is equally impossible to find a time when the mainstream conception of international reality has been more totally upside-down.
Obummer supports Al Qaida, Occupy, and the Black Panthers, is slobbing the Taliban’s knob, and is funding the Moslem Brotherhood. Treason of the highest degree! It’s time for the traitors to meet Mr. Sparky, the electric chair. Waterboard Eric Holder!
@ David Chase:
david,
the new york slimes is an abomination. it is the mouthpiece of the bastard (literally and figuratively) in the w.h. and his goons.
they will forever whitewah islam and sharia while making it sound…oh so ‘noble’ and ‘enlightened’ and ‘progressive’
Can we send this article into the OP-ED page of the NY Times?
@ david frankel: You could well be right on the money, but the convicting evidence, if any, is quite hidden. Nevertheless, as the Torah say, “…be sure that your sin will find you out.” Amein.
barak hussien obama is a teroresist him self i wont be surprise if he is a member of alquida
furthermore!
get hold of THIS!:
“Pres. Obama is undermining not just the freedom of religion clause of the 1st Amendment but also free-speech.
Under a new law which Obama signed anyone protected by the Secret Service may request that there be no protests near them. The penalty is a felony.
Consider that Pres. Obama can give Secret Service protection to anyone.
Therefore, you could be arrested by the Secret Service at their discretion or at the request of the protectee and then jailed with a felony charge for protesting anywhere near that person.”
FOLKS!
this bastard (literally and figuratively)must be stopped!
and i’ll just leave it at that.
@ Pazuzu:Sad to say that your testimony rings true, and will be moreso until we finally WAKE UP and turn to YHWH for help He is waiting for us to ask of Him. Then “the curse” (as “ha allah” means), the satan, the devil, will be uprooted and gone, but not until then.
@ Pazuzu:
dear pazuzu,
been saying the same all along… we can not repeat the same message often enough!
recommended reading:
bruce bawer “while europe slept”; “surrender , appeasing islam sacrificing freedom”
pamela geller “stop the islamization of america”
and as far as the musoid bastard (literally and figuratively)like you, i hope he’ll drive in a convertible car in dallas or go to a theatre…
i see no other way.
the bastard will instill martial law to ensure his continued accursed presence in the oval office
Here’s what Obamas actually been doing all along. #1: Obama hates Israel, #2: Obama hates America, #3: Obama hates Jews (except when he’s fund-raising), #4: Obama wants to stop us from exploiting our plethora of natural resources (coal, oil, natural gas, etc. so we have to keep buying oil from his buddies the arabs who can influence policy by threatening to ‘shut off the spigot’, #5: Obama wants to destroy Israel (y’all are on your own) #6: Obama is thick as theives with the moslem brotherhood #7: Obama has seeded the US government with moslems in key positions, the reason is to expedite the islamization of the U.S. #6: Obama favors islam uber alles and is seeing to it through the Dept. of Education that children’s textbooks ,thanks to Saudi Funding and editorial control, also favor islam uber alles. To summarize: Obama is a hateful son of a bitch moslem, and I hope soon someone or something dispatches him to Hell
@ dweller: Our brother Esau has, from the beginning, contested what was given Ya’aqov from on High, even after bargaining away the land in exchange for their abba Yitzchaq’s wealth, and Esau even died (he lost his head, literally) in an effort to keep Yosef from burying Ya’aqov at Hevron. His descendants are still fighting for land that is not theirs, and never will be for eternity. The undying hatred Esau has for Ya’aqov should not be rewarded, and in the end they will lose it. The navi Ovadyah/Obadiah tells us about that, among others. Giving in to them is considered weakness of resolve to keep what is ours. I am glad that, when Moshiach comes, He will not bargain with these swine, but will lead us to drive them off the land, from the Nile to the Euphrates. HalleluYAH!
oops,
here is the link:
http://chickenbonewatt.tumblr.com/post/2949507398/homosexuality-and-the-bible:
@ lois lane:
dear lois,
your comment cracked me up!
it was right on par with this ‘biblical conundrum’…
enjoy!
🙂
@ lois lane: Ah, Miss Lane, but there has to be an Aharonic Kohen doing that sacrificing on ha Mizbeach of the Beit ha Mikdash, and also two or three qualified witnesses to condemn anyone to death. Maybe if you can find Superman, he can help you out of your trouble. This is serious business. Refusal to keep Torah and insistence on following other teachings, lies, lies, and more lies, isn’t that what got us kicked out of Ha’Aretz in the 1st place, and won’t teshuvah before El Elyon bring us back into it? Then we would have NO Islam or Obama or Romney, etc. to drag us through the mud, but the Moshiach who delivered us from Mitzrayim/Egypt would also deliver us from the Galut. HalleluYAH for that day!
@ Shem:
After reading your comments, I immediately went out and sacrificed a goat and stoned a couple of Prostitutes. Now I feel so much better.
@ Canadian Otter:
Should the JEWISH state look like Swiss cheese?
— what’s good for the goose. . . .
@ Canadian Otter:
Perhaps we should remind them of precisely HOW those other perpetrators of the Munich massacre were dealt with?
@ Canadian Otter:
i am speechless…
@ the phoenix:
Oh, yes, a corridor to Gaza. That’s what contiguous means in the “peace with Arabs” lexicon.
Here is Samson Blinded News’ report.
Netanyahu publicly accepted the Palestinian demand that their state should be contiguous. That means a sovereign corridor from the West bank to Gaza, which incidentally makes Israel a noncontiguous state as it breaks our country into two. It also means demolition of many settlements so as not to give Palestinians a Swiss-cheese state.
Previously, contiguity of the Palestinian state was a major bargaining chip for Israel.
http://samsonblinded.org/news/netanyahu-surrendered-one-more-red-line-on-palestinians-26312/comment-page-1#comment-7214
~~~~~~~~~
I’ve had a relaxed and happy week so I didn’t want to ruin it by reading or watching the CNN interview. I only watched one short excerpt where the interviewer tells Mr Netanyahu that the reason why many young American Jews don’t feel a bond with Israel is THE OCCUPATION.
You’d think that if a PM is thrown a false accusation like that he would jump at the opportunity to clarify it. But he did not. He avoided addressing it and chose to speak in general terms about the strong bond US Jews feel for Israel instead.
Here is the short video:
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/24/netanyahu-israel-not-seeking-to-dominate-anyone/
When the prophet Daniel was praying for the peace of Israel, he said, in Daniel 9:ll, that we have all departed from Torah, and therefore the curse–“ha allah”–is poured out on us. That is more the cause of our troubles, and BHO’s apparently illegal rise to the presidency and his density as to the dangers of ANY Islam is only symptomatic of much deeper problems. If we as a nation will learn the lessons that our fathers did not and turn back to the Torah as Moshe Rabbeinu gave it to ALL the b’nai Yisrael, and not only to those of the House of Yahudah, that will be the solution that will get rid of our problematic symptoms, rooting out the cause of the problems, and we won’t have criminals and strangers any more to rule over us, but YHWH Tzevaot. Until then, we will keep doing the same stupid things, such as reelecting BHO or replacing him with Rott Mimney–oops, I mean Mitt Romney. As the old saying goes and is more true than ever, “What fools these mortals be!” May the Kingdom soon be restored to Yisrael and prove once and for all, “AM YISRAEL CHAI!” HalleluYAH for that day!
@ Canadian Otter:
Ok. He said a ‘a contiguous pa sate in judea and samaria.”
You scared me with the Ramallah to gaza Arab sovereign land…..
Shoyn!
Your sentiment is still correct! There used to be a time when I actually believed in bibi (could it be the memory of his brother (?), in whose memory, I have named my son…?)
I would rationalize that ok he is saying what he is saying (bar-ilan speech, 2 states side by side bs) because he KNOWS it would never happen in a million years with the musloid Arabs of judea and Samaria…and thus it would appear that he REALLY tried but, alas, there was no partner….
Today I am really not so sure anymore….
For all the rhetoric of this man , he appears more and more to be full of hot air and nothing else….
“Iran is the greatest menace” was his mantra since forever….
Nu?
If you’re going to shoot- shoot!
The only solution I see is a nationalist leader that does what is good for ISRAEL, and is not afraid to tell the world to go to hell (with a polite smile of course)
@ the phoenix:
A contiguous Palestinian state. I was shocked too when I first read about it. The media, however, has played this down or ignored it.
Here is a segment from a short report quoting the Prime Minister:
He also said he was committed to a contiguous PA state in Judea and Samaria. The future PA state should not “look like Swiss cheese,” Netanyahu said.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/155140
And the entire CNN interview, video and text, is here:
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/23/outfront-exclusive-erin-burnett-interviews-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu/
Netanyahu has crossed another important line, and whatever happens in future negotiations, he can’t back down from there.
The Olmert/Livni team made the same offer but – as far as I know – only as part of secret negotiations, not officially announced to the world media as PM Netanyahu has done now.
PM Netanyahu’s concession is indeed extremely serious and I’m still waiting for big headlines, at least in the nationalist media. Or any Israeli public reaction at all.
@ Canadian Otter:
dear otter,
first, i am in total agreement with your comment.
i would just ask you if you could cite the source to “The Prime Minister just stated that he is all in favor of a CONTIGUOUS PALESTINIAN STATE, meaning that it’s OK if Israel gets split in two, with an Arab sovereign land corridor from Ramallah to Gaza. ”
this is EXTREMELY worrysome and i read it as TREASON pure and simple.
i hope it is a mistake.
The Israeli elite are also involved in a large-scale deception of Israeli Jews. They are complicit in the makeover of Fatah and Mahmoud Abbas into acceptable candidates for a “peace deal” (meaning land surrender) with Israel, while characterizing Hamas as the bad guys.
As if there is any real difference between Fatah and Hamas. They both spring from the very same Nazi roots. They both aim at the complete destruction of Israel. They both train their young to hate and to slaughter Jews.
Not many would guess that the grandfatherly gentleman in a suit, PA President Mahmoud Abbas, is one of the masterminds who perpetrated the Munich Olympics massacre of Jewish athletes.
And he hasn’t reformed. Oh, no. His government continues to glorify terrorists, including those who butcher Jewish children.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The problem for the Israeli ruling elite is how to let the Arabs fleece the Jews of their land. They can’t just hand the land over to the Arabs all at once. So they proceed in stages. First Sinai, then Gaza, then the rest.
And they always find an excuse – unconvincing, but they say present it with a straight face. And it works. People grumble, resist a little, but comply in the end.
If Judea, Samaria, Golan, and Jerusalem are not in Arab hands yet is not for lack of trying by this Israeli elite. But one of these days they’ll hit upon the right formula, or the US will use effective persuasion on the Arabs, and the Arabs will say Yes.
THIS DECEPTION has been so easily planned and carried out that there’s not even an attempt at hiding the steps ahead.
The Prime Minister just stated that he is all in favor of a CONTIGUOUS PALESTINIAN STATE, meaning that it’s OK if Israel gets split in two, with an Arab sovereign land corridor from Ramallah to Gaza.
A contiguous Palestinian State also demands the uprooting of many Jewish communities. But that’s OK too, the elite say, because the deal will be done with Fatah, not with those bad Hamas extremists. So there’s nothing to worry about. Israelis can relax.
When they are muslims.
@ bob:
i commend you bob for this brief and very lucid comment. we cannot speak often enough to WARN the truly well meaning good souls that are deluded to fall for the ‘islam is the religion of peace’ …. (the most nefarious example being that of the moron from texas, dubya pronouncing this shssstuff on national tv immmediately after 9-11!!!)
as i’ve said above, islam is islam their CORE BELIEF is that everybody should either convert or be killed! the rest is fluff.
in a ‘dialogue’ i had with one of the commenters on this site, a jewish fellow from britain, i tried to underline the evil that islam is by stating that “These ‘children’ at prayer are the future jihadis (for THIS is the essence of their prayers, tony), and, believe me , there is no such thing as a ‘cute little scorpion’ when you are a frog. This IS a zero sum game, tony. Not hysterically, just matter of factedly. It is very very simple. It is US or them”.
we must not miss an opportunity to educate the naive and continue to point out, what to you and me is VERY obvious.
Lucky Americans stlll have it all to come
The 5 Stages of Muslim Conquest (tried and tested in 56 Countries over 1400 years) with only 2 reversals Israel and Spain (El Cid and Sophia Loren’s Bosom Etc)
The UK is at Stage 3.
America is at Stage 1
History shows that Stages 2,3,4,and 5 follow as sure as day follows night
Stage 1
New Muslim settlers in a country keep a low profile and remain law abiding (Britain 25 years ago) My Doctor, My pharmacist, Taxi drivers. No problems. What lovely people. They wouldn’t hurt a fly! Would they? No Veils, Niqabs etc
Stage 2
As they increase in numbers, double and triple, money arrives from oil rich countries to build mosques and issue instructions. Then they start protesting against “oppressive” local laws and advance the case for Sharia
Stage 3
As they see the new country’s weak spots, they move into the relevent professions and start to take over areas. (Tower Hamlets, Bradford, Luton, Dearborn Michigan, Malmo Sweden etc, )
Stage 4
As they become confident and strong, financially, materially and militarily, they will carve a piece of land from the country as exclusively their own with finance from oil rich countries (Bosnia, Kosovo etc.) or help and propaganda from the Main stream media
Stage 5
Finally they will go for the kill and total takeover of the country (or piece of the country) as in Lebanon, Kosovo, Northern Cyprus etc
Goodbye Freedom
Hullo Sharia
it is imperative that we call a spade a spade. there is NO such thing as ‘moderate islam’ anymore than there is ‘radical islam’. islam is islam in all its ugliness. it is a totalitarian political cult masquearading as a religion. this phony ‘religion’ is a pathetic excuse for criminals to pose as spiritualists. indeed, it has achieved a very high degree of conversions among the criminals locked up in prison for pedophilia, robbery, murder and so on (after all, muhamad, piss be upon him, did all that, and he is the ultimate example to be followed….)
one of the ‘pillars’ of this so called ‘religion of p…’ is jihad.
got it?
J.I.H.A.D.
and don’t fall for the ‘personal struggle’ bullshit that the islam appologists are putting forth.
it is a fight, that has three outcomes viz. those it is waged against (the infidel):1.be killed 2. convert 3. be allowed to live as an inferior to the musloids, and having to pay a protection tax (jizyia) for this ‘privilege’….
nice, huh?
the whole idea is that the world is divided into two: the dar al islam and the dar al harb
and the mission of the musloids is to spread the islam and constantly take ove more and more of the ‘dar al harb’
THIS is what jihad is all about.
and it is achieved by the sword (by the ‘radical muslims’) AS WELL AS by stealth jihad….by the ‘moderate muslims’, which can take many forms:
*lawsuits for offending their ‘sensitivities’, (i.e. dammage the economy)
*slithering into the school system and poisoning the minds of the next generations (rewriting history, having a say in what gets printed in the book and conviniently omiting the truth from being printed
*slithering their way into the legislative, and ensuring that the law enforcement is turning a blind eye towards musloid crimes
*slithering into the SECURITY SYSTEM (you know, let’s let the fox guard the chicken coop…)
god i could go on and on but obviously the message should be clear.
and now, comes the bastard (literally and figuratively)illegally sitting in the w.h. and he says that ‘we should respect it’….
this musloid teleprompter reader is fighting a stealth jihad campaign. very successfully i might add.
unfortunately.
Furthermore,
http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/04/26/muslim-brotherhood-granted-appointed-to-homeland-security-council/
What I also worry and am very very concerned about is the Muslim Brotherhood penetration and infiltration of the United States government at the highest levels directing USA foreign and domestic policy. You always hear the anti-semites saying that the Jews control the USA; but, in reality, this current President Obama has allowed the Muslim Brotherhood? to control the USA.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/04/26/michele-bachmann-on-rumors-of-war-iii/