Instigator ? Instigator of what ? Facts ? I see nothing inappropriate about MY OWN article (the whole thing) Both MY OWN here and anywhere else it might have appeared. >> Obama Administration = the Muslim Brotherhood. Please restore the whole OP.
Obama Administration = the Muslim Brotherhood
- Thread starter Protectionist
- Start date
- Status
Instigator ? Instigator of what ? Facts ? I see nothing inappropriate about MY OWN article (the whole thing) Both MY OWN here and anywhere else it might have appeared. >> Obama Administration = the Muslim Brotherhood. Please restore the whole OP.
No one is trying to censor you. We strongly believe in free speech. That being said, I also look out for the growth of this forum. You had 4 threads that were very similar and pointed to various individuals, suggesting they were Muslims. I made a judgement call that this was better served in one thread than 4 considering most people didn't want to repeat themselves over and over. You included had copy/pasted the same exact (word for word) response to tecoyah in 3 of the 4 threads- you can say it once instead of 4 times. No censorship here.
As for copy/pasting even your own articles from other sites- once you post that content, it often becomes fully or partly owned by the website depending on their terms of service. Either way, Google does not differentiate and penalizes sites that just copy content from other sites. If you have a blog or something that YOU own where you have the articles posted, feel free to write a little summary and link to the full blog post, but please don't copy/paste whole things (or excessively link to other forums).
If you have an issue with our policies or want to suggest changes, please use our suggestions forum for that purpose. If it is something you'd like to discuss in private, please pm me.
1. In regard to your >> "You included had copy/pasted the same exact (word for word) response to tecoyah in 3 of the 4 threads- you can say it once instead of 4 times." You might note that they were done that way ONLY BECAUSE they were RESPONSES to posts of tecoyah which had been copy/pasted 4 times. If tecoyah had not said the same post 4 times, I would not have responded samely 4 times, myself.
2. I appreciate the polite, well-mannered way that you have explained all this, quite a contrast from the rude, belligerence I've been receiving in most other posts which quoted me. I will take note of what you've said, however it seems silly to not be able to say the same thing I have said before, just because it was in another forum. I still retain those SAME thoughts and wish to express them here. That shouldn't be nullified.
Well I appreciate that you could also respond back politely too. I don't want to stop you from sharing your views- that is not the goal here. I understand tecoyah made the same response too, but I don't see you getting much of a varied response given the content of the posts. You have to consider that we are smaller than some other forums and 4 threads is a lot, especially on such a similar topic. I'd say, let's let this thread evolve and if the discussions really do diverge into distinctly different topics, I will split it into different threads.
10-4. Message received. Only thing though, there's a lot of critical information (one of my best posts ever) that's still missing from here - all the stuff about Huma Abedin, Rashad Hussain, Mohammed Magid, and Dalia Mogahed.
Only Mohammed Magid is mentioned in this thread. The missing part about Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton's deputy chief of staff) and the pro Muslim Brotherhood character of the State Dept. since they took over (for example) - this is some of the most important stuff in America (to be extracted right out of a thread)
Only Mohammed Magid is mentioned in this thread. The missing part about Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton's deputy chief of staff) and the pro Muslim Brotherhood character of the State Dept. since they took over (for example) - this is some of the most important stuff in America (to be extracted right out of a thread)
Last edited:
If you are trying to deal with a problem, does it not make sense to listen to others more informed and perhaps involved with the intricacies of the issue?
If (as an example), there are risks of cyber attack, would you not listen to hackers on the ways to prevent it?
By listening to the advice....are you now a hacker?
If (as an example), there are risks of cyber attack, would you not listen to hackers on the ways to prevent it?
By listening to the advice....are you now a hacker?
As usual, what the hell are you talking about, and who the hell are you talking to ? And one last question - should I care ?
In the OP of this thread there was an extensive listing of Muslim Brotherhood people in the Obama administration, and a detailed description of them. This appeared right after the words >> "Here is the rogues gallery"
This entire body of the OP is gone (90% of the OP), and has been edited out.
WHY ?
This entire body of the OP is gone (90% of the OP), and has been edited out.
WHY ?
Instead of simply complaining about it you can provide the administration with the information you feel would adequately make clear you're the author and the post could presumably be restored if it is. Some people fail to realize that forum members, being the people they are can sometimes make mistakes and it's fairly easy to clear that little issue up if the staff has the information to work with and if they indeed made a mistake.
As far as Obama's administration and it's relationship to the Muslim brotherhood. I agree there are problems with their handling of the Brotherhood and that they have their share of problems that are highly legitimate, but I'm skeptical of articles from Breitbart's website without a secondary source that deals with issues with a lesser political slant. I don't doubt that some truth is in the arguments, however the associations you argue are stretching any element of truth that you might be getting at, and truthfully I think it goes beyond legit critique. I think if the discussion is about Obama's associations, his relationships with Reverend wright and Bill Aires for example would be much more relevant...
This insinuation that Obama is some closet brotherhood member is a tad outside of reality near as I can tell. Last I checked Obama was rather unpopular in Egypt even during their reign. I find that an indicator, though nothing new... America in general is unpopular in that region.
I find it amusing that a man that spent his adult life at an extremist portatent church get's labeled an extremist Muslim. It'd be like accusing OBL of being the leader of the KKK and it just goes over their head. The fact that they acknowledge his extremist Christian connections and use it to bash him at the same time makes it even better. :giggle:
if you had seen the entire (very large) OP, and more information that was added to it, THEN you could critique. Without all that information, you have no basis upon which to critique, and shouldn't be doing that.
Also, I never "insinuate", infer, or imply anything, ever. What I stated in my OP (which you haven't seen) were FACTS.
For your edification (and anyone's), and if (as you suggested) the staff here might have made a mistake, whatever the case, HERE is the entire OP in its true form. Read it and THEN make your judgements - realizing I have much more factual information to add (such as Huma Abedin's Muslim Brotherhood connection background)
Obama Administration = the Muslim Brotherhood Being that the Muslim Brotherhood is the #1 subversive, Islamist organization in America, composed of dozens of front groups, and whose goal is the destruction of America (and all of Western civilization), it would seem strange that members of the Brotherhood could be found in the Obama administration, but that's exactly where they are, or have recently been. And at the highest levels too.
Here's the rogue's gallery:
1. Huma Abedin - Wife of disgraced ex-Congressman Anthony Weiner, and State Dept. Deputy Chief of Staff under Hillary Clinton, she “has three family members–her late father, her mother and her brother–connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. In addition, before becoming Hillary Clinton’s deputy, she was herself directly associated with a Brotherhood organization, the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an organization founded and funded by Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major Muslim Brotherhood figure also involved in the financing of al Qaeda.
Since Abedin has held this position, an awful lot of pro-Muslim Brotherhood things have been happening at the State Dept. A Fulbright scholarship was awarded to Siham al-Qaradawi, the daughter of Sheikh Qaradawi, an Islamist scholar, and spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, who's banned from the USA, UK, and France. While the sheikh’s daughter is said to be an exceptional chemist, the world is full of exceptional chemists. How is it that Qaradawi’s daughter gets the State Department prize?
And since Secretary Clinton’s tenure began, with Huma Abedin serving as a top adviser, the United States has aligned itself with the Muslim Brotherhood in myriad ways. To name just a few (the list is by no means exhaustive):
Our government
1- reversed the policy against formal contacts with the Brotherhood;
2- funded Hamas;
3- continued funding Egypt even after the Brotherhood won the elections;
4- dropped an investigation of Brotherhood organizations in the U.S. that were previously identified as co-conspirators in the case of the Holy Land Foundation financing Hamas;
5- hosted Brotherhood delegations in the United States;
6- issued a visa to a member of the Islamic Group (a designated terrorist organization) and hosted him in Washington because he is part of the Brotherhood’s parliamentary coalition in Egypt;
7- announced that Israel should go back to its indefensible 1967 borders;
8- excluded Israel, the world’s leading target of terrorism, from a counterterrorism forum in which the State Department sought to “partner” with Islamist governments that do not regard attacks on Israel as terrorism;
9- and pressured Egypt’s pro-American military government to surrender power to the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood parliament and president just elected by Egypt’s predominantly anti-American population.
Makes us wonder >>> Hypothetically, if Huma Abedin did have a bias in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood, and if she were actually acting on that bias to try to tilt American policy in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood, what exactly would the State Department be doing differently?
2. Rashad Hussain - long been involved with various Muslim Brotherhood front organizations including Abdurahman Alamoudi’s American Muslim Council and The International Institute of Islamic Thought (or IIIT) to which jihadists like Sami al-Arian (who pled guilty in 2006 to organizing secret financial contributions to the Palestine Islamic Jihad, a terrorist group) and Jamal Barzinji, a founding father of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, also have ties. Hussain was also involved in the original Brotherhood front in America, the Muslim Students Association.
An example of Hussain’s sympathies can be found in his declaration at a Muslim Students Association conference in Chicago in September 2004 that Sami al-Arian had been subjected to a “politically motivated prosecution.”
In January 2009, Hussain was named Deputy Associate White House Counsel. Among his government responsibilities in that capacity were national security and new media issues. More specifically he has been charged with “helping inform the administration’s Muslim outreach efforts,” and consulting on the drafting of President Obama’s first address to the “Muslim World” delivered in June 2009 at Cairo University in Egypt. On February 20, 2010, the President announced that Hussain would serve as his “special envoy” to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
Even more than his White House post, this job with the OIC has given Hussain a platform for facilitating official outreach to Islamists, as opposed to Islamic moderates. It has enabled him to reinterpret their intentions to American policy makers and to promote their agendas under the guise of “repairing relations with the Muslim world."
3. Dalia Mogahed - She was appointed in April 2009 to the White House Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. also works with the Gallup polling organization’s Center for Muslim Studies where she serves as both the Executive Director and a Senior Analyst.
In September 2008, Mogahed defended two of the most important Muslim Brotherhood fronts in the United States (as named in the Ikhwan’s strategic plan seized by the FBI in 2004) – the Islamic Society of North America and the Council on American Islamic Relations. She contended that the determination made by the FBI and others that such groups are linked to Islamic radicals was “misinformation” and part of a groundless “witch-hunt” aimed at silencing them.
She also gave evidence of her sympathy with Brotherhood rhetoric and objectives by appearing in May 2009 before the 34th annual conference of the Islamic Council of North America (ICNA), a group that has long promoted jihad and Sharia and was listed in the materials captured by the FBI as part of the Brotherhood’s organization. The event was cosponsored by the Muslim American Society (MAS), which was founded to serve as the Muslim Brotherhood’s formal American franchise.
She has also been involved with the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the Muslim Brotherhood’s effort to build a mirror image counterweight to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Anxious to prove that American and Islamic values are similar, MPAC aims to create a moderate image, yet its speakers at pro-Palestinian rallies have routinely called for the destruction of the Jews and of Israel.
4. Mohamed Magid - is the imam at the All-Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center in Sterling, Virginia. The Center has seven branches throughout the Northern Virginia region, making it one of the largest mosque complexes in the Washington D.C. area and in the nation. It is also considered one of the most radical in its promotion of Sharia and other Islamist principles.
Magid’s true identity is suggested by his role as president of the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in the United States: the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) ISNA was identified by the prosecution in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial as an unindicted co-conspirator, a designation that was upheld by four federal judges on the basis of the evidence produced by the government.
Magid used his “relationship” with the FBI to get Director Robert Mueller to capitulate to demands by the ISNA and other Muslim Brotherhood fronts that the Bureau’s files be reviewed for documents and briefing materials offensive to Islamists. On February 8, 2012, Mueller announced to a group that included Magid that 700 such documents and 300 briefings had been purged.
Last edited:
IRRELEVANT. The OP is about Obama putting Muslim Brotherhood members (and some of very high standing, like Mohammed Magid, president of ISNA) into powerful positions in the US govt, not anything about his personal life.
This is why I don't spend too much time in this "forum". :giggle:
You're accusing a fundamentalist Christian with known terrorist (christian/socialist) connections of being part of a right wing, fundamentalist Muslim conspiracy to take over the US. It is extremely relevant but it brings into question the logic underpinning your argument and so you're trying to deflect.
HA HA. A bit difficult to sort out your rather confusing ramble, here. The only accusation flying around here (and a ludicrous one) is yours, of accusing me of saying that Obama ? has 1. "known terrorist connections" (I don't know of any) and 2. that Obama "being part of a right wing, fundamentalist Muslim conspiracy to take over the US."
Well, the Muslim Brotherhood is NOT right wing (and far from it). And I don't recall saying he was part of their conspiracy. I just stated facts about who he has allowed to be part of his administration, and that his administration equals them as long as they are/were in it. And my "argument" as you call it, ISN'T an "argument". It's a report. As for "deflect", I have no idea what you're talking about.
1. I never said you said he had connections, I said you were ignoring them.
2. The MB is a reactionary, pro-theocracy, conservative Muslim movement. It's about as far right as you can get.
So basically....you speak from the ass check, then blame it on your ass when what was said is discounted.....cool.
1. You said Obama had terrorist connections. referring to him, you said this >> "You're accusing a fundamentalist Christian with known terrorist (christian/socialist) connections..", and you said I was accusing him. when I was only reporting was he was doing in his administration. So is that an accusation of THAT. Sure. I would say so.
2. In terms of AMERICAN politics (we're talking about the US Muslim Brotherhood), if it is anywhere, it is squarely on the political left, with its many front groups supported by the ACLU, SPLC, and other liberal left orgs.
It is the conservative (right) faction of America that is most in opposition to it. (ex. Act for America, WND, JihadWatch.com, etc)
(Maybe we're both right - just talking from slightly different standpoints.)
Gimme a sloppy wet kiss lambchop, Your knowledge of this subject is even more powerful than this forum, and that's about as fantastic as it gets.
Everything I said was discounted. Read Post # 33, and spank me like a bad, bad baby.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status