Egypt Bans Muslim Brotherhood Group

FlyersFan

stargatetravels
Well this isn't surprising considering they've already arrested the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood leader,...

Egypt recognized that it made a huge mistake allowing these vermin in, so they quickly corrected it. Our own Declaration of Independence tells us to do the same.

US Declaration of Independence - But when a long train of abuses and usurpation's, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

ROTFL.

To that end, after Morsi went forward with the anti-neo-liberal constitution and continued to put off signing a deal with the IMF for so long, it was only a matter of time before he had to go.

And on top of all of that, he was talking to the BRICS nations about what he called “E-BRICS”… and THAT ladies and gentlemen was all she wrote:

willyloman.wordpress.com...

The Declaration of Independence AND the Constitution gives USians no protection against the despotism of central banking and that's who "corrected" the situation in Egypt. After all, the bankers have guaranteed your future security real good and I guess misery loves company.

727Sky
I really do not know much about the brotherhood except what I have read..

There was a thread with several links about Obama's 1/2 brother's connection and money funneling to the brotherhood a while back. Wonder where he lives now?

Ayman Al-Zawahiri was one of Osama bin Laden's closest confidants. Al-Zawahiri's brother belongs to the Muslim brotherhood. The brotherhood and al qaeda have the same objectives - make Islam be the foundation for which all else is built.

If this is the guy your talking about he is still free and just ordered attacks on the United States (in another thread). I don't know about him funneling money but I wouldn't be surprised.

When the Islamic movement was in jeopardy of a secular egyptian government Al-Zawahiri had role models (his uncle Mahfouz Azzam for one) who he looked up to - thus beginning to help him see the world as it was through their eyes. This, along with his own devout religious beliefs, and fuel added to the fire along the way created a terrorist. He was initially an activist but circumstances IMO changed his methods.

He joined his first Islam activist group at age 14. His hate for the government grew as people he looked up to we're killed. He was imprisoned for false accusations yet on unrelated crime. In prison he was tortured. This was corroborated by other prisoners.

When he met bin laden it was like wicked attraction. They further ignited each others hate and desperation. Fighting was already underway when he entered the scene so likely other methods for airing grievances were not in place or wouldn't have worked. But he was an intelligent man. Maybe if circumstances had been different he would have thought of alternative routes.

It began as a sense of purpose, belonging, and protection of identity for him. Circumstances along the way took it up a notch as an inability to create change, religious beliefs, sense of personal responsibility, revenge, group think, etc all culminated into what it did.

This will not end. It's multi generational. Who will run Israel? It will go back and forth indefinitely unless one side kills the other completely or there is not reason to resist anymore.

Is it just me or does "Muslim Brotherhood" sound like something a Westerner made up? (ie; fake group). Next thing you know Cobra Commander will be in charge.

How much money are we giving Egypt? I can't recall how much it's, but its' something on the order of hundred's of millions a year? I recall Obama saying he wouldn't pull aide, but expected both sides in Egypt to respect the law. In any case, throwing money at people doesn't seem to work well. I realize by funding the right groups in Egypt we can possibly reduce terrorism or the likelihood of it growing, but it makes us less neutral. By giving them so much money we're actively participating and are partly to blame for what happens.

It makes me uneasy. First of all, what people don't earn themselves is hard for them to appreciate. It's easy to take for granted things you've had for a long time.

It may be the right choice to "meddle" in other nations by giving them money and attaching strings to it, sort of like how a parent helps a child, but are we really so much better than them? Are we really like a parent and are they really like a child or is it more complicated than that? Could we be making them dependent on our funding?

This is kind of like AGW. How do you stop it? Do you pay nations that reduce emissions? Do you just limit it to education? Do you criminalize emissions? Broadly, this is about figuring out how to put a nation on the right path and correct its course.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


It does a bit, I agree. Along with many other political parties out there that try to make a political party "brand" to instill trust, honesty, integrity, and whatever else needed to convince people they are acting on behalf of their best interests.

Look to other funny political party names like "Republican" and "Democrat" for USA, and for other examples.

reply to post by jonnywhite


Yes because it is western influence. Big issue for them. But they are happy to take our money anyway.

marg6043
reply to post by Philippines

 

Is Ok, Obama will welcome them here in the US as he already have Members or known link members of that terrorist group that he favors soo much and that he was going to handle Libya in a silver platter in positions in his government, how about 6 of them.



These people are terrorist, they are killers and radical fundamentalist Muslims, countries in Middle east that has been forced into regime change by the agenda of destabilization of regimes that do not want to play the Globalist agenda don't even want them, but we got them here at home close to the president.

Figure that out people.

wrong...he still supports the military with money...they are the ones that are the muscle behind this...your hatred for Obama is so deep when it gets to the point where you are making up political scenarios out of thin air. talking to, or trying to negotiate with, one's enemys, is not a sign of "welcome" or a "bromance"

reply to post by jonnywhite


US aid to Egypt:

For the last few decades the United States has given Egypt billions in aid -- $1.55 billion last year alone. Most of it -- $1.3 billion -- goes for military equipment, upkeep and training.

The money is deposited into an account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which Egypt can access to make payments on long-term contracts it signs with defense companies. The U.S. government is a co-signer on the contracts, guaranteeing the payments will be made. If aid to Egypt is suspended, the U.S. government could still be responsible for the deals Egypt has made so far, according to a Congressional Research Service report. - See more at: economy.money.cnn.com...

Aid to the Egyptian people? Meh.

reply to post by Philippines


The indignation of some people on this thread, about the banning of the Muslim Brotherhood, is frankly nonsensical. The organisation we are talking about was right in the middle of taking Egypt apart and making laws and pronouncements which ran directly counter to the revolutionary events which took place in Tarhir Square, which allowed Morsi into power in the first place.

Now, if the Muslim Brotherhood had installed laws according to the will of the majority, rather than attempting to install elements of an Islam inspired code of practice, and the military had STILL taken over, then I could understand the outrage expressed, but when a leader does things that he has no majority mandate to do, there SHOULD be consequences for that leader, for the party which allowed that leader to make such a horrific mess of his opportunity, AND there MUST be a simple, fast route by which the majority can regain control of their nation.

The actions of the Egyptian Military might not be ideal, but they are as just as anything can be in a situation where there has NEVER been as it ought to be.

reply to post by Philippines


Excellent.

The best thing that could have happened IMO

But

Be ready to hear of Suicide Attacks and other Attacks on the news soon.......

reply to post by MDDoxs


First of all there was no proof that the majority wanted MB in power in any of those countries. The riots were setup by NATO and exaggerated via the media. There were hints of vote fraud as well. The people who count the votes determine the victor.

Second "we" meaning NATO had no business arming and funding any rebel group 6-7k miles away from us, especially not when our budget is constantly deficit spending and our debt has exceeded $17 trillion by now with all this quantative easing baloney and giving aid to foreign countries.

Third I support the ban on MB in egypt because I dont like them. I dont like any religious fanatic trying to create a theocratic dictatorship that oppresses minorities.

Fourth america has been running a two party dictatorship via the controlled media for many decades and everyone is either too misinformed, too gullible, to asleep to admit it. Lets get rid of this two party system before we even consider what goes on in other countries.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Fourth america has been running a two party dictatorship via the controlled media for many decades and everyone is either too misinformed, too gullible, to asleep to admit it. Lets get rid of this two party system before we even consider what goes on in other countries.

I entirely agree with this point. So say we get rid of the two party system and elect an outsider but we leave the judiciary and the laws/agencies/NGOs already in place, in place. What will we have gained? Not much.

IMO, that is basically what a transition from the Mubarak dictatorship to a more democratic form of government in Egypt would have been up against. Obviously the judiciary and others already in positions of power would strongly oppose any such changes.

And it would be exactly like that here, the people already in power (with the money) would have no trouble finding (paying) enough people to gather in the streets shouting epitaphs against the duly elected outsider to be convincing to gullible onlookers. It wouldn't even matter what they were shouting as long as it looked good on camera and could be spun to their favor by the media.

Of course it doesn't hurt if the people doing the shouting are speaking a foreign language, either.

ETA: And with Posse Comitatus on its last leg anyway, it would be a simple matter for the US military to be ordered out to put down any true protest or uprising against TPTB.

reply to post by frazzle


There are no religious fanatics in the USA threatning to install sharia law. I think both D and R supporters are going to be much more careful from now on both in the primaries and in the final race.

I also see third parties gaining substantial support. Sure they wont win anytime soon but once they get at least 5% of the total vote, then they get matching funds which helps them finance their campaigns. The less they spend fundraising the more they can concentrate on active campaigning.

The elected officials administer the government, much like the board of directors administer a corporation. Government isn't much different. Once we get new leaders whom care about fixing the problems in this country, then a lot of problems will get solved.

I dont see a civil war happening in america unless the ptb provoke one. They almost did provoke one imo by threatning to attack syria, russia declaring 9-11 a false flag operation, russia sending ships to the meditterean sea. People have been getting royally pissed at obama, kerry, mccain and for good reason!

It's more about money than religion.

The Saudi/Qatar alliances are apparently working as planned.

The alliance is backing both sides.

And Egyptian oil and natural gas production is dwindling.

Who benefits from THAT ?

Hmmm.

=

reply to post by jimmyx


Yes I hate the piece of lying trash, but guess what I was one of those stupid that fell for his lies and gave him my vote in his first term.

So not, I didn't hate him back them, but once I learn what he was about it, you bet your butt I do know.

And yes he have 6 members that he has appointed that have well known links to the Muslim brotherhood and they are in our government.

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by frazzle

 

There are no religious fanatics in the USA threatning to install sharia law.

Then its probably safe to say that you have nothing to fear from Sharia law. TBH, I'm more concerned with secular religious fanatics (more often than not atheists) who consider themselves gods in their own right with enough knowledge, wisdom and authority to dictate to others in foreign lands how and what they must believe, how they must conduct themselves or how they set up their governments.

I also think its a really good idea to know something about a given concept or at least do a little research before condemning that concept out of hand.

www.angelfire.com...

And one should pay particular attention to the part of Sharia law that scares the pants off a capitalist banker.

muttaqun.com...

I think both D and R supporters are going to be much more careful from now on both in the primaries and in the final race.

I also see third parties gaining substantial support. Sure they wont win anytime soon but once they get at least 5% of the total vote, then they get matching funds which helps them finance their campaigns. The less they spend fundraising the more they can concentrate on active campaigning.

The elected officials administer the government, much like the board of directors administer a corporation. Government isn't much different. Once we get new leaders whom care about fixing the problems in this country, then a lot of problems will get solved.

I dont see a civil war happening in america unless the ptb provoke one. They almost did provoke one imo by threatning to attack syria, russia declaring 9-11 a false flag operation, russia sending ships to the meditterean sea. People have been getting royally pissed at obama, kerry, mccain and for good reason!

Your faith in the American election system apparently knows no bounds. Despite all the evidence to the contrary.

MystikMushroom
Is it just me or does "Muslim Brotherhood" sound like something a Westerner made up? (ie; fake group). Next thing you know Cobra Commander will be in charge.

MB is to militant Islam as Sinn Fein is to the IRA.

Muslim Brotherhood is the political wing of militant islam, it is specifically structured to not engage in any violence itself but, to subvert local laws wherever it can to be sympathetic to sharia and, ultimately, to be replaced with sharia.

Is there anyone who supports that mission here?

Picking sides only makes things worse. It's about perspective and no one is going to see themselves as anything other than right. What is the solution? How do you appease all involved - without violence. Someone on here must have some ideas about this.

Forcing your beliefs on others is what makes theocracies, like MB, on the wrong side of any sensible ideal.

Dianec
Picking sides only makes things worse. It's about perspective and no one is going to see themselves as anything other than right. What is the solution? How do you appease all involved - without violence. Someone on here must have some ideas about this.

Not recognizing an existential threat (actual capability aside) is the most dangerous threat to the free world.

Just imagine if Winston Churchill had been take seriously when he was the Lord of the Admiralty and warned everyone about Hitler and national socialism.

We must all pick sides on a daily basis, failing to do so does not make us 'open-minded', it makes us indecisive.

How anyone can not see that the muslim brotherhood is a threat is astounding to me, how they could be so successful in penetrating our government makes all the more sense when I hear this point of view expressed.