I’d like to thank all of my readers and listeners for the last two months on the blog.

December is traditionally a slow month for bloggers but I was just 35 hits below my January 2010 numbers (the Scott Brown Election coverage).

January 2011 was even better. Last January was my second best month ever with over 30k hits. As of this morning (when this post is being written I am 700 hits shy of doubling those numbers).

None of this is possible without you. Thank you all very much.

If you want to know why supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood want us to stop talking about them. This is why:

Mohamed Ghanem, one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, calls Egypt to stop pumping gas to Israel and prepare the Egyptian army for a war with it’s eastern neighbor.

Speaking with Iranian television station Al-Alam, Mohamed Ghanem blamed Israel for supporting Hosni Mubarak’s regime. Ghanem also said that the Egyptian police and army won’t be able to stop the Muslim Brotherhood movement.

But don’t worry about it, because it was said on Iranian TV as far as our media is concerned it doesn’t count.

Israel however is unlikely to ignore this and will unless they are idiots, strike preemptively.

This is the internet age, we do not have the luxury of ignorance. If we ignore it then it will be our own fault.

Update: If people don’t know it won’t be because Stacy McCain didn’t mention it.

There seem to be a lot of “interesting coincidences” going on with Egypt

Item: Today on WCRN there was an interesting caller linking the revolt in Egypt with the attacks on Coptic Churches in Egypt.

Frankly this hadn’t hit me before but it makes a lot of sense. The government came out strong against the attacks with members of the Mubarak family going so far as to be human shields during Church services.

Less than 4 weeks later they are calling for the fall of the dictator.

Item: Take a look at who is supporting revolt actively in Egypt:

The question is begged: What have Obama’s allies Ayers, Dohrn and Code Pink taught the Muslim Brotherhood and other anti-Mubarak organizations in Egypt about using protests, riots and the modern social media to coordinate their actions to undermine the Mubarak regime?

Being that they have common enemies–the United States, Israel, and governements allied with them–it is understandable that they would be allies. It must give them encouragement that President Obama has yet to disavow Jodie Evans and Code Pink, but instead continues to do business with them as Evans and Code Pink act as conduits between terrorists and Obama.

I’m sure when you read the whole piece you will dismiss as just coincidence the connections between Hamas, Code pink and Bill Ayers.

Item: It loses something in translation:

There you have it: the velvet glove with the word “Freedom”; the steel fist with the words “Make Ready” with its well-known Quranic reference. Actually, not steel fist – steel swords, crossed. The Muslim Brotherhood.

It is not “freedom” that they intend to bring to Egypt – or to anywhere else.

But just wait for the CIA, the State Department, the Administration, the mainstream media, and so many others to tell you the Muslim Brotherhood is all about little Aisha and freedom, and if you question them, you’re an Islamophobe (Shariah definition of “Islamophobe”: Blasphemer or Insulter of Islam, punishable by death in an Islamic state).

The Language barrier has apparently been a positive thing for the Muslim Brotherhood and they are very keen to preserve it.

And as Yid with Lid reports we all know who is behind this don’t we:

In a column published today on Media Matters political correction site, MJ Rosenberg claimed that the current Egyptian crisis was the fault of AIPAC and the “Israel Lobby.” For those of you who have lived on a different planet till today, “Israel Lobby” is a polite way of saying “Jews.” It is based on the old anti-Semitic canard that it is the Jews who control the United States government.

It doesn’t matter how you slice it the Anti-Semites will always manage to blame the Jews for everything.

Egyptians, like all people deserve the right to have leaders who govern by the consent of the governed. We need to keep our eyes wide open to make sure that this actually becomes the fact, rather than being governed by an Iranian or Islamic state.

I noticed Jazz Shaw’s post on Evolution linking to Steve Benen “look how dumb those Christians are” post, and Stacy McCain’s answer..

Forgetting the fact that Mr. Benen apparently wants to put a religious test on who can serve in congress and forgetting his seeming ignorance concerning Christianity’s history and science. I suggest he buy a copy of How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization (my review here no wonder the left hates Western Civilization so much but I digress).

I’ve already made my point in this post about the Bible and science:

In our science we basically have educated guesses in pursuit of truth. As time and our knowledge expands our guesses become better and more informed but in the end a lot of it is still a guess, yet these guesses are a million times better than Moses would ever be able to make. If our science would be beyond Moses, how much more beyond him would be the actual methods of how God works explained on a scientific level?

It is my opinion that God gave Moses the answers that were truthful, but also in a way that he and his people, bronze age humans could understand and grasp. Like at the waters of Massah and Meribah he didn’t give him a thesis on Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms combined to create water, he didn’t give a geological explanation of how steams wear down soil and cause erosion, he provided the water.

It doesn’t matter for example if the entire world was flooded in Noah’s time, or if it was an individual continent, or just a country the size of Iraq or whatever. In the understanding of Noah it was the world, and in the understanding of Moses it was the world. It makes it no less the action of God nor do the lessons drawn from it change. It is no different than trying to explain to a 3 year old how something works, you tell him the truth but in a way that he can grasp it.

Now as I said Science is a question of our best educated guess, but many people try to use it as a club to attack Christianity in general and the Bible in particular as Stacy puts it:

Having spent quite some time studying the arguments over evolution, it has for many years struck me that while the scientific priesthood of neo-Darwinian orthodoxy in astrophysics, paleontology and anthropology often disagree vehemently over their own theories and interpretations, they are united by one major agreement: The Bible is wrong.

On that point, they are quite fanatical, and one need not debate fanatics. Merely demonstrate that they are fanatics — occasionally point out their more obvious errors, provoking their predictably intemperate responses — and you will discredit them in the eyes of reasonable people.

I think people often confuse “natural selection” and survival and the fittest, which is certainly scientifically sound and full blown evolution the creation of one species from another.

The second has several problems the biggest of which for me is the math.

Here is what you need for evolution of that nature to work:

  1. You need some kind of mutation.
  2. Said mutation needs to be a beneficial mutation so it doesn’t increase the likely hood of the creature caught by a predator.
  3. You need a mutation that doesn’t prevent breeding with a similar creature
  4. The result of that breed must carry said mutation so it has to be dominant trait
  5. Continual breeding has to take place so that dominant trait spreads until all members of the species without that dominant trait disappear.
  6. Repeat until an amoeba becomes Snooki from Jersey Shore.

Now think about the mathematical odds of each of those steps and imagine the development of a claw from a fin.  Think of NOTHING else, just that single development.  What would the mathematical odds of each step taking place? How many times would the dice have to fall a particular way for that to happen just for that step to take place? What are the odds of such a thing happening by chance and not just by chance, but over and over again for every species that is out there?

Is that possible, sure. I believe in God, with such a God something like this is very possible, what I find amazing is that those who are so vehement in denying the existence of God are willing to bet their reputations on a process that mathematically is so unlikely that they’d never bet real money on it.

I submit that if you believe in Evolution you almost HAVE to believe in God because the odds of such a process taking place without him are so slight as to be nil.

Or to put it another way. You can have God without evolution, but considering the odds involved I submit you can’t have evolution without God.

Now is it really important? Not really, It’s an interesting scientific discussion and like anything such scientific discussion you go where the evidence takes you. We keep researching, we find clues and make assumptions based on them, test them, and repeat. That’s fine. Religion of course doesn’t need to explain the nuts and bolts of how a universe is created, it’s primary job is to save souls. These goals aren’t mutually exclusive and we need to remember what science and religion’s purposes are:

Man didn’t need God to provide him a science text, man can write those texts himself. Man did need instruction on the salvation of his soul. God provided that and still provides it through Scripture, prayer, the Church and Tradition. We can take advantage of those things provided or not. It’s totally up to us.

I await to see Steve Benen’s piece attacking the scientific ignorance of Islam.

If the biggest issue you have to worry about is a Chicken Sandwich, then you aren’t oppressed.

Secondly the idea that if you don’t support Gay Marriage makes you “anti-gay” is nonsense. Under that definition the entire country and world was Anti-gay from almost the start of recorded history till a 4-3 supreme court ruling in Massachusetts.

Thirdly when Gay people are slaughtered in Islamic countries for their simple existence might I suggest that you have your priorities mixed up.

Fourthly as Gay marriage has lost at the ballot box in even California and Maine (why do you think advocates have worked so hard to block a vote in Massachusetts) you apparently think the entire country is by your definition “anti-gay bigots”. The only exception being the media.

The only point I’ll give you is this. the Gawker guy is right about one thing, the Wendy’s Spicy Chicken Sandwich is THE best chicken sandwich out there, but Chick-fil-A is pretty good (I’ve only had one during my Atlanta Trip last year).

Get a life, if you don’t want to eat at Chick-fil-A, eat somewhere else.

Oh and there are a lot more Christians than non-Christians in the country. If you choose to boycott a Christian company for supporting Christian positions, I suspect quite a few companies that support your view can be targeted in reverse with a whole lot more fervor.

Update: Speaking of things the Gay Right’s community might focus on instead:

The new imam at the Ground Zero mosque and cultural center believes people who are gay were probably abused as children and that people who leave Islam and preach a new religion should be jailed.

Abdallah Adhami’s remarks on homosexuals, religious freedom and other topics have brought renewed criticism of the proposed community center and mosque near the World Trade Center site, which purports to be an inclusive organization.

Adhami, in a lecture on the Web site of his nonprofit, Sakeenah, says being gay is a “painful trial” caused by past trauma.

I’m sure we will see the Gay Left go after this with the same furor that they go after Chick-fil-A.

Turned on CNN this morning just before 7 a.m. and a woman was being interviewed on CNN concerning the revolt in Egypt. I didn’t catch the name since I had literally just walked down the stairs and turned on my PC.) There was a very telling moment, at the end of the interview where the CNN folks asked about the Muslim brotherhood. The response was VERY defensive.

“The Muslim brotherhood is not taking part as a movement” She stressed that the brotherhood was talking part only as “individuals” and called on media not to stress them.

I found that very interesting considering this story:

The leader of Jordan’s powerful Muslim Brotherhood warned Saturday that unrest in Egypt will spread across the Mideast and Arabs will topple leaders allied with the United States.

Hammam Saeed’s comments were made at a protest outside the Egyptian Embassy in Amman, inspired by massive rallies in neighboring Egypt demanding the downfall of the country’s longtime president, Hosni Mubarak.

SISU is going long on this theme.

linking our own tweet (above) a layman’s take on the ongoing Middle East turmoil based upon keeping our virtual ear to the ground in the last period of time:

This is what’s really happening. Muslim Brotherhood poised to co-opt restless populations thoughout Middle East.

“Yes, you are right,” McCotter direct-messaged back. We’re inclined to take the Michigan Congressman’s well-considered assessments seriously.

As I type FOX is on with Lisa Daftari is not ignoring the dangers of an 1979 style revolution when good intentions become co-opted by a more powerful organized group. (forget 1979 think of 1918 in Russia and the blood that followed for nearly a century)

John Bolton continues:

This is a protest that may have been percolated by the Muslim Brotherhood. We all know President Mubarak of Egypt is a dictator, but to compare this protest to the Green Revolution may be foolish.

And lets not forget what polls said in 2007:

In a rigorously conducted face-to-face University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org interview survey of 1000 Egyptian Muslims conducted between December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007, 67% of those interviewed-more than 2/3, hardly a “fringe minority”-desired this outcome (i.e., “To unify all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state or Caliphate”). The internal validity of these data about the present longing for a Caliphate is strongly suggested by a concordant result: 74% of this Muslim sample approved the proposition “To require a strict [emphasis added] application of Shari’a law in every Islamic country.”

That is scary. Almost as scary as the concept that Robert Stacy McCain is linking…Robert Fisk?

Cairo now changes from joy to sullen anger within minutes. Yesterday morning, I walked across the Nile river bridge to watch the ruins of Mubarak’s 15-storey party headquarters burn. In front stood a vast poster advertising the benefits of the party – pictures of successful graduates, doctors and full employment, the promises which Mubarak’s party had failed to deliver in 30 years – outlined by the golden fires curling from the blackened windows of the party headquarters. Thousands of Egyptians stood on the river bridge and on the motorway flyovers to take pictures of the fiercely burning building – and of the middle-aged looters still stealing chairs and desks from inside.

Yet the moment a Danish television team arrived to film exactly the same scenes, they were berated by scores of people who said that they had no right to film the fires, insisting that Egyptians were proud people who would never steal or commit arson. This was to become a theme during the day: that reporters had no right to report anything about this “liberation” that might reflect badly upon it. Yet they were still remarkably friendly and – despite Obama’s pusillanimous statements on Friday night – there was not the slightest manifestation of hostility against the United States. “All we want – all – is Mubarak’s departure and new elections and our freedom and honour,” a 30-year-old psychiatrist told me. Behind her, crowds of young men were clearing up broken crash barriers and road intersection fences from the street – an ironic reflection on the well-known Cairo adage that Egyptians will never, ever clean their roads.

I don’t and never have trusted Robert Fisk but he is actually there first hand (talk about a windfall for an international reporter!) so one has to respect that and give his reports the respect that first hand reporting calls for. Yet lets take a peek at once other paragraph from this story:

Their crews, in battledress and smiling and in some cases clapping their hands, made no attempt to wipe off the graffiti that the crowds had spray-painted on their tanks. “Mubarak Out – Get Out”, and “Your regime is over, Mubarak” have now been plastered on almost every Egyptian tank on the streets of Cairo. On one of the tanks circling Freedom Square was a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohamed Beltagi. Earlier, I had walked beside a convoy of tanks near the suburb of Garden City as crowds scrambled on to the machines to hand oranges to the crews, applauding them as Egyptian patriots. However crazed Mubarak’s choice of vice-president and his gradual appointment of a powerless new government of cronies, the streets of Cairo proved what the United States and EU leaders have simply failed to grasp. It is over.

It’s classic Fisk to hit the US on this. But before people get delirious about the future need to read this Michael Totten post from 2005 while he was there with Egyptian blogger Big Pharaoh:

“My biggest fear,” he continued, “is that if the Muslim Brotherhood rules Egypt we will get Islamism-lite, that they won’t be quite bad enough that people will revolt against them. Take bars, for example. Most Egyptians don’t drink, so they won’t mind if alcohol is illegal. The same goes for banning books. Most Egyptians don’t read. So why should they care if books are banned? Most women wear a veil or a headscarf already, so if it becomes the law hardly anyone will resist.”

“How many people here think like you do?” I asked him.

“Few,” he said. “Very few. Less than ten percent probably.”

What was the future he saw:

I asked Big Pharaoh what he thought would happen if Egypt held a legitimate free and fair election instead of this bullshit staged by Mubarak.

“The Muslim Brotherhood would win,” he said. “They would beat Mubarak and the liberals.”

I was afraid he was going to say that.

“I’ve had this theory for a while now,” I said. “It looks like some, if not most, Middle East countries are going to have to live under an Islamic state for a while and get it out of their system.”

Big Pharaoh laughed grimly.

“Sorry,” I said. “That’s just how it looks.”

He buried his head on his arms.

“Take Iranians,” I said. “They used to think Islamism was a fantastic idea. Now they hate it. Same goes in Afghanistan. Algerians don’t think too much of Islamism either after 150,000 people were killed in the civil war. I hate to say this, but it looks like Egypt will have to learn this the hard way.”

“You are right,” he said. “You are right. I went to an Egyptian chat room on the Internet and asked 15 people if they fasted during Ramadan. All of them said they fasted during at least most of it. I went to an Iranian chat room and asked the same question. 14 out of 15 said they did not fast for even one single day.”

How many will end up dying and what kind of war will ensue while the under 30’s learn this lesson?

Meanwhile Joe Scarborough notes something on Twitter.

The Luxor attack and its aftermath explains why the Muslim Brotherhood has gone to great lengths to take no credit for this uprising.

I think its more than that, I think that given the experience of the Iranian revolution and what it produced, and the reality of Islamic terror it is impossible to not understand what an Islamic state would mean.

What is the best move? I’m very torn. I’ve always maintained that people have the right to be wrong. If the people actually WANT this kind of thing what can you do? I think in the end you have to let the people learn this the hard way and deal with things as they come. The best hope is that Egyptians learn from the Iranian mistake. The Egyptian people have the right to make their own choices, and they will also reap what they sow. Part of being free is living with the consequences of your decisions.

  • There are consequences for supporting Islamic terror.
  • There are consequences for going to war with Israel.
  • There are consequences for choosing to be an enemy of the US.
  • There are consequences for supporting Iran
  • There are consequences for closing the Suez Canal

And that doesn’t even touch the consequences internally, but those internal consequences are on them.

Do we have a strong or wise enough administration in the White House to make that case without trouble?

Update: missed Michael’s link, silly me, put in now.

Tonight at 9 p.m. on AM 830 WCRN and DaTechGuy on DaRadio we welcome Fishersville Mike to the show and Aleister of American Glob for his first visit to the station.

We will be talking about the Obama/Reagan myth, The constant harping on conservative women, George Allen running in Va and we’ll touch on Egypt briefly if time permits.

As always you can listen live at the WCRN web site here.

Don’t forget BTW that on Conservatively Speaking from 7-9 Val Prieto of Babalu Blog will be a guest of John Weston and Mike Wade so make sure you start your web feed early.

Next week we go to two hours. My thanks to Mike and Aleister and all my guests, listeners and advertisers who have made that 2nd hour possible

We haven’t had the Arthur Carter Watch for quite a while but this is the ultimate Arthur Carter Moment.

You might recall Jimmy Carter and the transformation of Iran from a stable US ally to an Islamic state that has been the source trouble worldwide for decades.

Now in Egypt we have lets face it a Dictator albeit a friendly one to the US, that has repressed free speech to a degree, and played both ends against the middle.

If there was ever a test of this president, if he is going to be Jimmy Carter or Chester Arthur it is now.

If the Islamic Brotherhood ends up taking over it would be the final irony of Barack Obama the replacement of an American Ally with an Islamic state. It would be the ultimate Jimmy Carter moment. Some in government are already worrying along these lines.

Pam Geller notices one other oddity:

Interesting, too, how everyone, even Obama, is talking about Egypt’s uprising. And yet Iran experienced an even greater people’s movement and Ahmadinejad and the mullahs crushed it with a violence incomprensible to the West. And yet nobody was talking about it. Nobody. There are tens of thousands in the street of Egypt, there were millions in the streets of Iran and they were raped, tortured, publicly hanged, slaughtered because they marched for freedom.

Obama pretended it wasn’t happening. Media too.

Well after all Iran is on the other side and a revolt there affirms what GWB said for years. A revolt in Egypt doesn’t so a revolt is a good thing to the left. And by an odd coincidence there are now protests in Jordan too. What do these two countries have in common? Peace with Israel.

If you see protesters in the US supporting change in Egypt, change in Jordan, but no word about Lebanon where Iran and Hezbollah are calling the shot that will tell you everything about what is going on, it’s also noteworthy to note this via the Lonely Conservative:

Iranian leaders and their state-run media love instability in the Middle East as long as it’s not happening in Iran. They’re gleeful over the unrest in Egypt, according to CNS News.

The Tehran Times, Iran Daily and Resalat newspapers were among those that led their Thursday editions with the Egypt story, using headlines like “Spirit of Tunisia comes to Egypt,” “Egyptians demand end to Mubarak rule” and “Intensification of public protests against Mubarak regime.”

The Tehran Times describes itself as the mouthpiece of the Islamic revolution, Iran Daily is affiliated with the official state IRNA news agency, and Resalat is a conservative daily supportive of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

If Iran is backing revolution in Egypt that adds up to big trouble for the rest of us.

Of course the ideal is a democratic Egypt that is allied to the US and friendly to Israel. The odds of that are slim to impossible.

The disaster result is an Islamic state, run by the Muslim Brotherhood and ready to go to war with Israel. That is disaster and will mean more trouble than anyone can imagine.

Looking at the reaction of the protesters and their reactions, it appears that the military is a more respected than the police. Mubarek is in his 80’s he doesn’t have much more time in charge anyway, and yet you also don’t want to see a repressive government that abuses the Egyptian people. Threading the needle is to give a government that represent Egyptians without an unfriendly power.

For an experienced and strong leader with a discreet diplomatic corps and wise advisers it would be a tough spot requiring a delicate touch.

Unfortunately we have the Obama administration. I don’t envy them this problem. I would suggest a public statement opposing violence and the aspirations of the Egyptian people while privately doing working a deal to:

  1. Keep Iran and China out
  2. Keep Islamists down and out.
  3. Guarantee basic rights for Egyptians
  4. Maintain Peace with Israel
  5. Protect open access to the Suez canal

Remember its not the name of the guy or guys in charge that matters in Egypt, it’s the goals.

If there was ever a time for this president to be Arthur instead of Carter this is it. I wish the administration luck, they’ll need it.

 

Update:  Stacy makes his case for targeted batons, I’m not buying that but I do buy the update:

A former adviser to the Obama administration argues that the Muslim Brotherhood “should not be seen as inevitably our enemy” — which is what you’d expect an Obama adviser to say, I suppose — but Thomas Joscelyn isn’t buying it:

Hosni Mubarak’s regime is no friend of freedom, even though it is certainly an ally against al Qaeda.
In all likelihood, an Egypt dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood (if that is how the turmoil plays out) would be neither.

Having lived through the 80’s I have a distinctive memory of Ronald Reagan. Although I liked his hard line against communism I wasn’t sure about his domestic issues.

What I did know is what every person in media thought of him. They thought of him as a simpleton, an idiot, a warmonger and an actor playing a role. And that’s just the printable opinions.

When Reagan died nothing shook the media more than the public reaction. The outpouring of affection was staggering and the media adapted their coverage accordingly. From that point they have treated the memory of Reagan with kid gloves but they resented the adulation he was given and the necessity of pretending they shared it. (They resented it even more when no similar reaction was forthcoming for Ted Kennedy. The inverse reaction of the public and the media to these two events illustrates the detachment they media has with the public as a whole.

The media as you might recall worshiped Barack Obama, there has never been a president more popular with them, yet he has suffered a major defeat and was forced to compromise on taxes while he still had a democratic Senate and house to prevent a republican house from getting credit

that just about every person in media is now trying to make an Obama Reagan comparison. Gateway pundit notes the Journolist parallel but the most ridiculous thing is the Time Magazine cover story.

Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan’s diaries and attended the May dinner, left with a clear impression that Obama had found a role model. “There are policies, and there is persona, and a lot can be told by persona,” he says. “Obama is approaching the job in a Reaganesque fashion.”

That statement is so SO false that it boggles the imagination. American Glob notes something:

If TIME Magazine had a shred of integrity or credibility, they might have featured the keynote speaker of Reagan’s 100th birthday celebration on the cover. Can you guess who it is? I assure you it’s not Obama.

Gee I wonder who it is that IS giving that speech

Former Republican Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will give the keynote address in February at the Reagan Ranch Center honoring the 100th anniversary of the former president’s birthday.

And what does the Author of that Obama is Reagan piece think of her? Stacy McCain can tells us.

If there is one thing we can say for sure it is not Reagan that Barack Obama reminds people of, but they were close. On the 9th post that this blog ever had I said this:

You sometimes get a rookie pitcher with a winning season but usually not. I’m hoping for Chester Arthur but I’m expecting Jimmy Carter.

That is Barack Obama as for Sarah Palin, well democrats and liberals don’t know ….um they don’t know….ummm l’m not going to touch …. Um is there any way to put this that doesn’t sound like Charlie Sheen?

Update: Kerry Picket provides details on the civility of Liberals toward Reagan during the 80’s