Muslim Brotherhood R4BIA Protesters in NYC Scream Anti-Semitic Slogans Outside Saudi Embassy

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


muslim brotherhood antisemiticm inyc

They’ve got the R4BIA hand of the Muslim Brotherhood Islamist groups. They’ve got microphones and they’re at the Saudi embassy in New York City screaming about the Jews.

It sounds like they’re confused, but the Muslim Brotherhood has been screaming about the Jews for almost a century now since Hassan al-Banna’s claim that the Jews only understand blood and Sayyid Qutb’s “Allah bring down upon the Jews people who will mete out to them the worst kind of punishment, as confirmation of his unequivocal promise.”

It’s what they know how to do and you can’t ask the Muslim Brotherhood, or its front groups like Egyptian Americans for Democracy and Human Rights, to go too far outside their comfort zones. So Yahood, Yahood it is.

“Why did you sell Egypt to the Jews,” the R4BIA goons shout at the Saudis. Apparently the Jews have taken over Cairo after being expelled from Egypt back in the day.

“Saud, you are dirtier than the Jews,” the Egyptian Americans for Democracy and Human Right shout, who don’t look like they’ve taken a bath in a while.

A Muslim Brotherhood speaker in a Russian fur hat demands the liberation of the mosques of Mecca from the Zionist Saudis. That would be the same Mecca that the Saudis have barred Jews and other non-Muslims from even entering. It’s a strange form of Zionism, but who am I to argue with an angry Muslim in a Russian fur hat.

His demand is followed by shouts of Allahu Akbar.

A previous speaker accuses the Saudis of giving $100 million to the “Sons of Zion” who apparently not only run Cairo and Mecca, but also the United Nations.

Oddly enough, the one place that Jews don’t control is New York City so that the Muslim Brotherhood’s faithful followers are free to scream their slogans in the Big Apple, but not in Mecca or Cairo.

  • herb benty

    The inherent insanity of Islam rears it’s ugly head.

  • Agustin Farinas

    The question I ask is: why are these folks here in America? The MB is a terrorist organization ,so why are these guys allowed to be here? Why haven’t they been deported already?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Obama meets with the Brotherhood. So does McCain.

      • A Z

        Why is McCain meeting with the MB?

        He is never going to be president. Unless a Republican wins he is not going to be Secretary of State. If a Republican wins he still won’t be a Secretary of State. Maybe he could be SecDef but I doubt it.

        Is he afraid that if he leaves the Senate he becomes little people?

        His sons are ring knockers. They should have no problems in the military. His son Jack married Renee Swift, She is black. the only reason that is interesting is because the liberals keep bashing conservatives /Republicans over the head for being racist and not looking like America.

        At least George W Bush paints as a hobby in retirement. He also cycles and a lot of other stuff. Does McCain have anything to do if he retires? I really think too many polls do not know anything except how to boss people around.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          McCain is even more gung ho about Syria than Obama.

        • hiernonymous

          If you think being a ‘ring knocker’ is some sort of guarantee of promotion, you’re about 3 decades out of date on the military.

          • A Z

            Promotion is both meritorious and political.

            I know the process.

            I have also seen the way Academy grads are treated.

          • hiernonymous

            Heck, I am an Academy grad. The last time that mattered to anyone in the Army was in the process used to select my first assignment, and in the fact that as a 1LT, I was automatically RA – I didn’t have to compete for an RA commission like the ROTC guys. Guess what – that was eliminated about 20 years ago. The whole WPPA business is leftover mythology.

          • A Z

            Outside of automatic RA there is still a lot of politics.

            http://www.militarycorruption.com/

            You spend any time at Elmendorf?

          • Drakken

            He was a squid, not a zoomie.

          • A Z

            McCain was Navy, I know.

            And Hiernonymous is Army.

            My point is that besides a regular commission being automatic in the past for service academy grads there is more to ring knocking than that. That is all I meant.

          • Drakken

            Sorry, I had a momentary lapse of reason there for a second.

          • A Z

            NP. No offense taken.

          • Bob Caps

            It’s “wing nut” now. Zoomie is out. Also, we no longr call them “ring knockers” we just call them “stupid” now.

          • hiernonymous

            I’m Army, not AF. That said, the guys at militarycorruption.com are pretty lame by journalistic standards. They serve a useful function, I suppose, giving would-be whistleblowers somewhere to vent, but in those cases where I’ve actually known the primaries involved, it’s pretty clear that these guys are running more a gossip rag than an investigative journal.

            They definitely harbor a great deal of resentment toward RLAs. It’s been a few years since I last corresponded with them, but IIRC, one was a retired major, which right there will give you some insight into his probable attitudes toward senior officers.

          • A Z

            I never said you were AF. I did notice the Wullenweber antenna array. I did notice that you are a persistent instructor “type” to some people’s dismay but not mine.

          • Drakken

            That explains everything, give you ring knockers a map and compass and you will be lost every time, and the added benefit that they almost never listen to their NCO’s. At least the mid west college graduates listened to what the NCO’s were trying to teach them.

        • DB1954

          Mac is a fat head.

          • A Z

            Being a fat head could be considered a compliment. The brain is made up of 1/3 rd fat as shock absorber and scaffolding.

            But we both know what you meant and I concur.

    • hiernonymous

      The Egyptian MB is not a terrorist organization.

      You ask some good questions, but they were all questions you could have answered yourself with a bit of thought. A good question to be asking yourself now is: why do you believe that the Egyptian MB is a terrorist organization? Who has said so, how reliable are they, and what are their interests?

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        The muslim brotherhood IS a TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

        They assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat.

        The “blind snake” was behind the 1993 truck bombing of the WTC – he was convicted and is in prison.

        • hiernonymous

          “The muslim brotherhood IS a TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.”

          Not according to our own intelligence organizations or State Department.

          In fact, who has labeled the Egyptian MB a terrorist organization? That’s right – the military government that just ousted an MB member in a coup. Hmmm…

          As for Sadat’s assassination, have you even read Farag’s “The Neglected Duty?” Do you know what it implies about the relationship between the MB and Sadat’s assassins?

          • A Z

            The people at the State Department as a group are not known to be smart.

          • hiernonymous

            Really? The foreign service officers I served with could get a bit wrapped up in their bureaucracy, but they were generally both bright and well-informed. Why do you say that?

          • Drakken

            The foreign service folks I have dealt with have been completely ignorant of muslim nations and have no bloody clue. They have been educated to think that these muslims believe the same things they do and to believe everything that comes out of their mouths. It has almost got us killed a number of times, I call them useful idiots.

          • hiernonymous

            “The foreign service folks I have dealt with have been completely ignorant of muslim nations and have no bloody clue.”

            For what that’s worth.

          • Drakken

            I deal in reality, you deal in wishful thinking, moral equivalence and none enlightening academic exercises in futility.

          • hiernonymous

            “I deal in reality…”

            If you say so. As a rule, I find that “reality” and “common sense” are code words for “I can’t be bothered to do the hard work of actually learning what I’m talking about.”

            If all you’re going to bring to the table at this point is posturing, consider yourself postured.

          • Drakken

            That is what I have always enjoyed about you academy grads, your arrogance, knows no bounds and the I can’t be bothered with mundane things from lowly noncoms attitude always has struck me as counter productive and casualty inducing out of a sense of folks like you know better. Interesting.

          • hiernonymous

            An arrogant and condescending attitude is counter-productive and casualty-inducing when it causes an officer to ignore good advice offered by an NCO in his field of expertise. It’d a a stupid platoon leader who won’t listen to a fire team leader’s suggestions on placing an LP/OP, etc, etc. When I left command, I thanked my NCOs for always doing what I should have asked them to do.

            You apparently resent the fact that I’m treating your rather xenophobic commentary (“all they understand is force” – really? You make Patai look subtle) with the respect it deserves, rather than pretending that it’s quite clever, indeed.

            You’re like the guy who runs a 9-minute mile and is always offering running advice to the marathoners in the unit. (“Yeah, your stride’s a little long, that’ll make you pronate. Try not to swing your arms so much. Hey – puff puff – wait up, I wasn’t finished!”) If you want me to take you seriously – if you want me to treat you with respect – then take the time to learn what you’re talking about and don’t say stupid things.

            And by stupid things, I don’t mean taking positions I disagree with. I mean positions you can’t support – that you apparently don’t even understand are unsupported. There are some people on here who can be troubled to do their homework and make arguments, but you’re operating on 90% bluster, and that’s pretty thin gruel after a while. You think I’m arrogant, but I think you’re a buffoon, and I suppose that one of my character flaws is that I don’t feel much like pretending you’re not today.

          • Drakken

            Well you were Army and I was a Marine, big difference, you talk about it, we do it with less. Me perfect? Not hardly, my experience on the ground is far different than yours apparently, REMF’s like you really do love to believe your own press and so called superiority. Your little arrogant swipes at me doesn’t change the narrative on the ground, sorry, but my methods work, yours is nothing more than an academic exercise that always fails after first contact. Bluster? Not effing likely office boy, I must be doing something right for they always send me to clean up other peoples messes. You obviously come to mind in that regard. You may argue as to my methods, but success makes the point for me.

          • Rick

            I’ll grant “hier not so anonymous” is so pedantic to seem or actually be arrogant. Still unless his online persona is a lie, he does care about his subordinates. I read the story of how one of his subordinates was treated “several” years ago, because they were black. I found the story hard to believe. (Although I did run into a rather nasty sneering lady trice that time ago in the general region. I watched their hands, but I still lost my taste for the product. No repeat business for that place.)

          • Daniel Greenfield

            “Our” State Department is in bed with the MB.

          • hiernonymous

            Really? What does that even mean? I’d like to understand exactly what you mean by that comment.

          • Drakken

            I know you Academy ring knockers have a very hard time understanding simple concepts, so let me break it down for you. The State Dept and DHS for that matter, has from the beginning of Obummers term, brought in to these entities various MB members and leftist sympathizers who openly advocate for the MB and their causes. The MB visits with the White house pretty much with an open door policy and this administrations actions in regard to the MB is downright treasonous.

          • DB1954

            Her name, among others, is Huma Abedin. Deep, deep, deep mole. And she’s probably in an intimate relationship with a former and very senior state dept. official.

          • hiernonymous

            I’m sure Daniel isn’t nuts enough to mean that. But thanks for the input.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            WHY is the US State Department pro MB, pro Arab????

            What’s the deal with the State Department and the UK Camel Corps affinity for all things Arab?

          • ObamaYoMoma

            I agree with you that Muslims are not terrorists, because they are waging a perpetual war against all religions and all infidels to ultimately make Islam supreme. Thus, it is only people that don’t understand that reality that relegate Muslim violence down to being terrorism instead of what it actually is in an idiotic attempt to justify mass Muslim immigration and PC multiculturalism.

            Nevertheless, our own intelligence agencies and State Department has been comprised of nothing but leftwing Marxist radical useful idiots for years, and they have about as much credibility and sense as you do. Indeed, our foreign policy has been nothing but an utter fiasco at least since the last Reagan administration.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Farag?

            Muhammad abd-al-Salam Faraj of “al jihad”?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_abd-al-Salam_Faraj

            What are you trying to say?

            You don’t think the 1993 truck bombing of the WTC was a terrorist act?

            The tooth fairy will visit you when you sleep.

          • hiernonymous

            “You don’t think the 1993 truck bombing of the WTC was a terrorist act?”

            Sure it was. It wasn’t conducted by the MB.

          • A Z

            So why would Morsi want the Blind Sheikh back?

            “Morsi Promises to Free ‘Blind Sheik’ from U.S. Prison”

            http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303561504577497053026356034

          • hiernonymous

            I imagine that they respect him and want him freed.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The MB blind sheik abdel rachman is in a US prison for his advisory role in that terrorist attack.

          • hiernonymous

            Yes, acting in his capacity as leader of Gama’a al Islamia, a hardcore terrorist organization that split off from the MB when the latter renounced violence.

            If you have evidence that the MB was involved in that attack, you’re doing better than the IC.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            renounced violence????

            LOL!

            That’s why the papers are devoid of news of islamofascist terrorist attacks all over the world.

          • hiernonymous

            No, it’s why they’re devoid of any reports linking the many terrorist attacks to the Egyptian MB.

          • Drakken

            Well gee golly, now who else would it be?

          • hiernonymous

            That post probably does represent a good summary of your thought process.

          • Drakken

            Of course it doesn’t but, your narrative that the MB is not waging jihad on the copts doesn’t compute with logic nor facts on the ground.

          • DB1954

            The MB renounced violence, eh? Forever? How long ago was that? Do we have your word on that?

          • hiernonymous

            It was almost 50 years ago.

            If this is news to you, you might want to do more homework before offering a public opinion on the matter.

          • glpage

            Correct, it was done by Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, which was, or is, an offshoot of the MB. The founders didn’t like the MB claiming they were going to be non-violent. Of course, claiming to be non-violent doesn’t mean that you are non-violent, as the MB’s actions in Egypt show.

          • hiernonymous

            “Of course, claiming to be non-violent doesn’t mean that you are non-violent, as the MB’s actions in Egypt show.”

            If the only violence you can cite is in the wake of a military coup and the subsequent to outlaw and crush the organization, I’d say you’re doing more to demonstrate the truth of the claim than anything else.

            Can you actually link the MB to a terrorist attack?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Assassination of Anwar Sadat.
            1993 truck bombing of the WTC.

          • Drakken

            Ask the Copts that question.

          • hiernonymous

            I have. I do. On a regular basis.

          • Drakken

            In the US or on the ground in Egypt?

          • hiernonymous

            Yes.

          • glpage

            Would that Farag, whose pamphlet was the Neglected Obligation, be the same Farag who was friends with Ayman al-Zawahiri? The al-Zawahiri who was bin Laden’s number two and since bin Laden’s demise the head of al Qaeda? I think the connection shows the link between the MB and terrorism.

          • hiernonymous

            Do you? Then you would be demonstrating some pretty sub-par standards for proving MB involvement.

            To put this in current American political terms, many Republicans were dissatisfied with the relatively moderate course the party was taking, and so many young Republicans have jumped on the Tea Party bandwagon.

            The Tea Party is not synonymous with the Republican Party. It wasn’t started as a partisan organization at all, but given the nature of its (admittedly loose) goals, it was largely Republicans who were drawn to it.

            You can be fairly certain that if a group of Tea Partiers sit down to plan political strategy, most of the people in the room are likely to be Republicans. But their actions won’t be Republican actions – they’re not acting or speaking on behalf of the GOP, and, in fact, the GOP leadership strongly disapproves of a great deal of what the Tea Party is trying to accomplish, and of its methods, and sees the Tea Party as a challenge to be overcome.

            So when Ted Cruz comes on TV and makes statements, one must be very careful to understand in what capacity Cruz is speaking.

            No analogy is perfect, but this might help you understand why you can’t simply pull the membership cards out of a fellow’s pockets and claim that every group he belongs to was part of the planning and execution of every activity in which he’s involved.

          • Drakken

            Are you trying to compare the Tea Party to the MB? That really is reaching.

          • hiernonymous

            “Are you trying to compare the Tea Party to the MB? That really is reaching.”
            I’m going to assume, given your current comments about your background, that if you don’t understand the use of analogies at this point in your life, it’s unlikely that I’m going to be able to do much about it.

          • Drakken

            Your the one who used the analogy and compared the two, not me.

          • hiernonymous

            Yes. The tricky part about reading an analogy is in figuring out what element or aspect is actually being compared, and in restricting the inferences drawn to those. If that’s beyond your capacity, let me know, and I’ll see if I can help you out.

          • Drakken

            The inference was there, and thanks for muddying the waters in a convoluted circle jerk of nonsense that says absolutely nothing.

          • DB1954

            Wrong, they were identified as a terrorist organization by Frank Gaffney, et al. That was long before the coup in Egypt.

          • hiernonymous

            This would be “Saddam was behind the WTC bombing” Gaffney? Frank “New American Century” Gaffney? Frank “take out al Jazeera” Gaffney?

            Was he speaking for the IC or for State when he made this determination?

      • Veracious_one

        The Muslim Brotherhood has terrorist goals…
        http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1235

        • hiernonymous

          For the sake of the reading audience, could you explain who wrote this memorandum, on behalf of what organization, and what that organization’s relationship to the Egyptian MB is?

          • Veracious_one

            MB since its founding has supported the use of armed struggle, or jihad, against non-Muslim “infidels.” As al-Banna himself wrote: “Jihad is an obligation from Allah on every Muslim and cannot be ignored nor evaded.” Added al-Banna: “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.” ++

            http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6386

          • hiernonymous

            Yes, quite correct. The MB was conceived as an organization whose function included driving the Western colonial masters out of Egypt. You’ll note that, after WWII, that mission was accomplished, and there were at least two significant points at which the MB had to reassess what it was about. One of those was with the revolution of 1952, and another was in the wake of Nasser’s counterterror campaign in the 1960s.

            As a historical observation, your post is sound. As a definitive statement about what the modern MB is all about, it is nearly 9 decades out of date.

        • Veracious_one

          The memo’s writer, Mohamed Akram, wrote that members of the Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”
          — from the article above

          No, don’t merely put that up on your refrigerator door or bulletin-board. Don’t merely have it at hand when you are engaging others in conversation, or to give out to acquaintances and colleagues, always as evidentiary accompaniment to, and not in lieu of, coherent argument.

          Do something else. Take this remark and a half-dozen or dozen just like it, and put them on big boards, and then the next time you have to counter-picket some anti-American or anti-Israel or anti-Infidel demonstration, make sure you appear with those signboards, with those quotations in very big letters. And make sure the cameras get a view, and the inquiring reporters can’t avoid seeing them.

          And what’s more, perhaps a permanent picketing of the White House and Congress, in which Infidel citizens, will take turns — a number signing up who will, from the Washington area (or from out of town) to picket for one full day, outside either various Congressional office buildings, or outside the White House itself. Make it a permanent thing, with a dozen or so picketers, of the “from-all-walks-of-life” school, and be sure to include, symbolically, all non-Muslim faiths and also those of no faith at all, and of various ages, races, and so on.

          A permanent reminder of the nature of the menace. And perhaps a few of those picketers can also have relevant passages from the Qur’an inscribed (you can find on-line exactly which ones make the greatest imporession, or perhaps just some phrases — “Banu Qurayza,” “Khaybar Oasis,” “Asma bint Marwan,” “Abu Akaf,” “Aisha” — listed, so that those who pass by, and those who report as well, will have to ask, and have to listen to the reply as to each otherwise unfamiliar detail from the Life of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil.

          Up to know, demonstrators have been remarkably limited and unimaginative. How many counter-PLO demonstrators have you seen wearing signs or chanting slogans such as “Israel will live” or “down with terrorism” or “Israel wants peace” or similarly utterly pointless, utterly unconvincing, utterly boring slogans that mean nothing — and do nothing to bring to any would-be audience’s attention the nature of the menace that Israel faces.

          But “Stop the Jizyah” then requires people to find out about the “Jizyah,” “No to the Lesser Jihad” allows people to re-interpret the endless siege of Israel correctly, and not as this phony “nationalist” revolt of the “Palestinians.” “Stop the Campaigns of Da’wa” or “Stop Demographic Conquest” or “Isn’t Ten Trillion Dollars Quite Enough?” will raise other issues — the issue of what constitutes Jihad and the instrments of Jihad, so that those who apparently believe that “Jihadists” (a word to be used sparingly) are limited to those who use violence, who engage in qitaal or combat, will be disabused of the limited nature of their understanding.

          That’s a start. That’s a way of forcing the introduction of needed concepts. Begin with that of the “Dhimmi” and that of “Jihad.”

          • hiernonymous

            Well, points for effort. Now let’s go back. Who was Muhammad Akram, who did he represent, and what is his relationship with the Egyptian MB?

            May I suggest that producing answers to these questions would be more honest and useful than having them to hand to use as evidence, before you really understand what they’re evidence of?

      • john spielman

        if you were a Coptic Christian in Egypt, you certainly would consider the Mo bros a “terrorist organization ” and fascist apartheid anti democratic as well!

        • hiernonymous

          If I were a Coptic Christian, I might have all sorts of reasons to dislike the MB. I’ve lived in Egypt, and there’s no doubt that Copts deal with a lot.

          None of that puts the MB behind terrorist activity; when you’ve got solid evidence of the same, talk to me.

          • Veracious_one

            Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood boasts about its terrorist activities
            http://www.redressonline.com/2014/01/egypts-muslim-brotherhood-boasts-about-its-terrorist-activities/terrorist activities …

          • A Z

            Your link is broken. It gives “Error 404″

          • Veracious_one
          • hiernonymous

            You’ll note that the ‘terrorist’ activity cited in the article is the burning of police vehicles, etc, during confrontations with the authorities in the wake of the coup. Sorry, that’s not terrorism.

            If the claim is creidble, it’s arguably political violence, though it’s clearly directed against the organization that overthrew its government and declared it an outlaw organization.

            Citing violence between the military government and the MB as proof of the MB’s terrorist roots and activities is self-evidently absurd. Is that really the best you can manage?

          • Drakken

            I can’t wait until the Egyptian military is finally let off the leash and purges the MB for good. They are sharpening the scimitars as we speak.

          • hiernonymous

            Okay, your post can be broken down into two parts:
            1. You look forward to the Egyptian military being free to use violence against the MB, and
            2. They are preparing to do so.

            #1 doesn’t require a response; it’s simply about your emotional reaction to a hypothetical event, so I suppose that merits a simple “that’s nice.”

            #2 is a statement of fact, such as it is. Since you’ve given no supporting facts, no source, and no reason to think that you have any special insight into what the Egyptian Army is or isn’t doing, there isn’t much to say about that one, either.

          • Drakken

            Funny, you bring absolutely nothing to the table yourself, interesting to say the least. I do maintain good relations with some folks in the Egyptian military as we do work with them, I will tell you this, sooner or later a purge is coming, because the MB won’t stop attacking the police or military in both the Sinai and Egypt and the military won’t put up with it much longer.

          • hiernonymous

            “Funny, you bring absolutely nothing to the table yourself, interesting to say the least.”

            I suppose it’s good that one of us finds these exchanges interesting.

            “…because the MB won’t stop attacking the police or military in both the Sinai and Egypt…”

            And, at some point, someone may actually provide evidence that they’ve done so at all. So far, that activity is being credited to another organization entirely, Ansar Beit al Maqdis, and it’s the Egyptian government that is making unsupported assertions that the MB is ultimately behind it. That same government is warning that MB is trying to infiltrate local government activities, such as the police.

            Yes, this would be the same government that overthrew the MB, and whose present legitimacy rides nearly entirely on establishing that the MB government was illegitimate.

            Regards.

          • Drakken

            Ansar Beit al Maqdis is nothing more and nothing less than the MB itself with a different name, it is nothing more than a red herring to chase after ghosts, and you fell for it hook line and sinker.

          • hiernonymous

            I’m sure that’s possible. Can you show it to be true? So far, the only public statement I’ve seen associated with a member is linked to a former member of the Islamic Jihad, not to the MB. How do you know?

          • Drakken

            So can you show it is not? The same actors with a different name, same MB and activity. If you cannot see that for yourself I cannot help you.

          • hiernonymous

            “So can you show it is not?”

            This is the sort of buffoonery I’m talking about. You’ve made a positive assertion: Ansar Beit al Maqdis is the same as the MB.

            It’s your proposition to establish and defend. When you try to squirm around and adopt the position that “anything I say is true until you prove it isn’t,” you simply can’t be taken seriously.

            “I cannot help you.”

            That much is likely true enough.

          • Drakken

            Well I guess it will take hours of power point presentations and a organizational chart with arrows pointing to who is who for you to understand it, then a good staff officer like yourself to explain the legal ramifications of said power point presentation and chart organization.

          • hiernonymous

            That’s a nice sulk, but it’s not evidence that Ansar Bait al Maqdis and the MB are one and the same. I was wondering if you knew what you were talking about; now I’m not wondering. Let me know if you ever find out.

          • A Z

            Hezbollah used the “Lebanese Islamic Group” as a front to confuse people. They do the same in many places.

            The MB does much the same.

          • DB1954

            The man is a loon. He’s blind as the Sheik.

          • DB1954

            The Egyptian military IS taking down the Mo Bros. It isn’t a fantasy; it’s a fact. Where have you been, JAG?

          • hiernonymous

            Okay, I’ll pose the question to you. What is the Egyptian military doing now, and how do you know?

          • DB1954

            It’s politiical violence AND terrorism. They’re not necessarily mutually exclusive, you know?

          • hiernonymous

            Terrorism is a subset of political violence; they obviously couldn’t be mutually exclusive. That’s why I made the specific point that the examples in question would fall within the category of political violence, but not within the category of terrorism.

          • john spielman

            so if burning down chuches and slaughtering Christians is terrorism I don’t know what is and YES THE Mo Bros WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.

          • hiernonymous

            To the first part: burning down churches is violence; whether it’s terrorism or not depends on who did it, how, and why. A riot, for example, is not terrorism. Doesn’t make it right or good, but that’s not the issue.

            As for the second part – how do you know? What evidence have you seen showing that the MB, as an organization, is planning and executing political violence?

            And, no, typing in all caps isn’t evidence.

          • glpage
          • hiernonymous

            1. Yes, if substantiated, that would be political violence. It would not be terrorism.

            2. If substantiated, this would be political violence, but not terrorism. I’m skeptical, because the source is die-hard activist Raymond Ibrahim, but there’s no doubt that if the MB were collecting jizya, that would be coercive. I note that the article doesn’t tell us how the MB was involved; did a local MB council meet and reach this decision? Did some locals decide to do this on their own, and they happen to be MB members? If this is new MB policy, why is it happening in Dalga but not the rest of Egypt?

            I would also suggest that you try to limit your examples to before the coup.

          • Drakken

            Your getting lost in semantics, It might not be terrorism attacking the Copts, but it sure as H*ll is Islamic jihad at its best.

          • hiernonymous

            If, in fact, the MB is actually engaging in organized violence against Copts, it certainly would be. So far, nobody has presented evidence that this is actually the case.

            Given that the MB was on the receiving end of an illegal coup and brutal repression afterward, your case concerning the nature of the Brothers will be much more convincing if you can find examples of such organized violence that predate the coup.

          • Drakken

            My God man, connect the bloody dots and quit ignoring reality, jesus h Christ, you didn’t fall off the bloody turnip truck yesterday, your a smart man, open your eyes. Every attack on the Copts has been by organized by the MB, there is no doubt and the evidence is overwhelming.

          • Veracious_one
          • Drakken

            Now you sound like a lawyer. Speaking in legal terms of what is and what isn’t.

          • DB1954

            My guess is that he IS a lawyer.

          • Micah * el

            My guess is that he is a West Point Grad living in south Florida, who may be retired unless it is all a front.

            No hacking and no cracking. I am not like the guy from Massachusetts, who hacked Debka (or took the proceeds of the hack and distributed it.). Me thinks he is in jail. He was the resident troll 2 or 3 years ago. He was the one that was the indie record producers from Boston area.

            With a few more hours of work I could do more all through open sources. But that I will not do.
            I will grant you he is tendentious. I wonder how an lecturer has so much time.

          • hiernonymous

            Oh, the drama.

          • glpage

            So, given your response in #1, the MB has committed terrorism…

            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism

            even though you attempt to separate the definition from the word.

          • pdxnag

            He might have momentarily forgot to distinguish domestic terrorist act with international terrorist organization for purposes of designation of the same by the US. It sounds like he could have been advising Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton on crafting talking points to advance the cause of the MB. (Or advising John Brennan) They need only postpone hitting inside the US to satisfy his metrics.

          • hiernonymous

            Well, no, what I did was to distinguish between the broader category of political violence, and the specific category of terrorism.

            If your understanding of terrorism is contained in an entry in Merriam-Webster’s Online, chances are we’re not going to have a very productive conversation.

          • glpage

            So, there is terrorism and then there is terrorism that really isn’t terrorism, a distinction without a difference. Terrorism does not have to be international to be terrorism. You’re trying to polish a turd.

          • hiernonymous

            “Terrorism does not have to be international to be terrorism.”

            Who has suggested that it must be?

            Political violence covers a whole spectrum of violence conducted for political purposes, from mob violence and riots all the way up to high-intensity state-on-state warfare.

            Terrorism is a very specific form of political violence in which a non-state actor attempts to gain recognition or achieve other political goals by the use of random acts of violence against a targeted civilian population. Key elements of terrorism include the randomness of the attacks. One of the key purposes of terrorism is to instill fear in the population at large, developing in them a sense that “I’m not safe anywhere.”

            So, for example, if a political group raids the military bases in its country, killing soldiers and gathering weapons, that would be guerrilla warfare, but it wouldn’t be terrorism. If the same group planted bombs in shopping malls, or took hostages on trains, etc, targeting civilians in order to demonstrate the inability of the government to protect them, that would be terrorism.

            While there are arguments over how to define terrorism, there’s no argument that it needs a definition, and that not all political violence is or should be treated as terrorism.

            So, no, I’m not trying to polish a turd, I’m trying to keep you from swallowing one you seem to have mistaken for a candy bar.

          • glpage

            And what the MB is doing to Copts in Egypt is “targeting civilians in order to demonstrate the inability of the government to protect them”.

          • hiernonymous

            Ok, let’s take a look at that. What, exactly, do you contend the MB is doing to Copts in Egypt? What sorts of attacks have taken place? Have they been random attacks, intended to instill the fear that anybody, anytime, anywhere could be a target, as opposed to escalating local tensions that have broken out into the open?

            Has the MB claimed credit for the attacks? Terrorist groups are generally quick to claim credit for their attacks, as terrorism is in large part a (violent) form of communication. What sorts of statements have the MB made concerning their campaign against the Copts?

            If the MB hasn’t claimed credit, how have you determined that the MB is behind the attacks?

          • glpage

            According to many reports,you can do web searches as easily as me, attacks have included burning of Coptic church, kidnapping Coptic children, murdering Coptic priests, crucifying Copts, and other violent acts against Copts. (There seems to be this common theme involving Copts.) All after the Coptic church came out in favor of removing Morsi, to which the MB responded that statements and acts have consequences.

            Well, the Cairo Institute For Human Rights Studies thinks they are involved:

            http://www.cihrs.org/?p=7041&lang=en

            As does another rights group, Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights:

            http://eipr.org/en/pressrelease/2013/08/15/1782

            After looking up the definition of terrorism as stated by the DoD, State department, FBI, and other agencies, I’ll stick with the rather general definition I used earlier. The definitions given by those federal agencies provides slightly more detail than Merriam Webster, but basically follows that definition.

            You are attempting to place such a fine edged definition of terrorism as to exclude most violent acts for political or religious (pretty much the same for the MB) reasons.- You seem to believe that only acts claimed by some group are terrorism and then only if they meet some very narrow political range. You seem to be an apologist for the MB.

          • hiernonymous

            First things first. You’ve mischaracterized the ‘evidence’ you presented. Your first link does not involve accusations that the MB organized and executed terrorist acts; it accuses MB leaders of using inflammatory rhetoric that can incite violence. That’s not remotely terrorism.

            Ditto with your second source. The second item complains of police violence against MB peaceful assemblies, then accuses the MB of inciting sectarian violence. In its complaint that the MB is involved in terrorism, close reading reveals that there were two ways in which the group accuses the MB of complicity in sectarian violence: first, by not condemning the violent actions in the wake of the coup, and second, by inflammatory rhetoric by its leaders.

            Note that failure to condemn or stop activity may be morally cowardly, but it’s not an obligation and it doesn’t make someone culpable for the acts of others. It’s not terrorism. Similarly, while inflammatory sectarian rhetoric is hardly a praiseworthy course for the MB to take, and certainly opens the MB to charges that it shares responsibility for the wave of violence sweeping Egypt, it’s not terrorism.

            Terrorism is not a blanket term for every act of violence conducted with a political motive. Terrorism occupies a special niche in our understanding of political violence, precisely because it is horrifying. It targets the innocent, it’s extremely difficult to predict or defend against, and it creates havoc and chaos far out of proportion to the number of people perpetrating it. We allow our security and military personnel to take actions against terrorists that we would not permit against ordinary criminals; the typical governmental response to terrorism involves encroaching on otherwise inviolable human rights. For all of these reasons, it’s important to be as precise as possible in discussing who is and isn’t a terrorist.

            In countries with significant ethnic or religious fault lines, such as between Muslim and Copt in Egypt, or between Protestant and Catholic in Northern Ireland, violence and political violence are going to be frequent. These can range from a local incident gone out of control – a young man on one side attacks a young woman on the other, for example, and the community descends into reprisals, mob violence, etc – to more far-reaching confrontations. In Egypt, for example, there’s no doubt that a MB-dominated government bodes ill for the Coptic Community. This results in a situation in which all communities are on edge. Over the past year or so, we’ve seen Coptic communities erupt in outrage when they’ve perceived a threat to their interests; we’ve seen the supporters of Morsi (a grouping that largely but does not simply coincide with MB membership) take to the streets when their MB president was ousted. The situation is rife with violence, and that violence explodes with depressing regularity lately.

            But that doesn’t make the MB a ‘terrorist organization,’ and it doesn’t make every act of political violence ‘terrorism.’ A mob burning a church is very unlikely to be an act of terrorism. What’s incumbent on you, if you want to establish the MB as a ‘terrorist organization,’ is to prove that the MB is purposely planning acts of random violence against the Christian community and then having them executed. So far, you’ve utterly failed to show anything of the sort.

            “You seem to be an apologist for the MB.”

            That probably says more for your limited command of the concepts in play than my status as an apologist for the MB.

            Let me close by noting that it’s perfectly possible to disapprove of the MB – of its political agenda, of its tactics, of its handling of the post-coup situation – without giving in to the intellectual dishonesty of claiming something you simply can’t demonstrate. The MB doesn’t have to be a terrorist organization for you to oppose it. It does have to be a terrorist organization for you to bypass a good number of Constitutional protections, and that reason alone is good enough to challenge sloppy accusations such as yours.

          • DB1954

            There’s a difference–in the real world–between terrorism and political violence? Who knew?

          • hiernonymous

            Anybody who has spent any time dealing with political violence. Don’t let that embarrass you, though.

          • Egan

            The person you are debating has the following life experiences.

            FYI
            M.S. is Islamic Studies
            Speaks Arabic
            Lived there
            Retired.
            Attended university for a PHD? In?
            20+ years active duty

            Bullheaded.

          • john spielman

            so if I were in Eqypt before the military overthew the Mo Bro and held a sign stating that “Mohammed was a demon posessed pedophile” and the Mo bo threathened to kill me, is that terroism to you?

          • hiernonymous

            Did that happen?

            While following you down the yellow brick road of fantasy hypotheticals doesn’t seem like a very promising endeavor, I’ll indulge you this once. Though you haven’t really made clear what you mean by “the Mo bo threathened to kill me,” as you’ve described it, no, that’s not terrorism.

          • Drakken

            Call it what it is, Islamic jihad.

          • DB1954

            Sorry not enough to convict according to Hiero, the former Army JAG, apparently.

          • Drakken

            The fact that you are trying to defend the MB is rather curious, I am starting to think you went native.

          • hiernonymous

            I can’t imagine why what you think about my status, ‘gone native’ or not, would be of any interest to anyone but you. I do think it’s interesting that you think I’m ‘defending’ the MB, when, in fact, all I’m actually doing is trying to make sure that the criticism of the MB is rooted in fact and focuses on legitimate issues.

          • Drakken

            Anyway you cut it, anyway you slice it, anyway you look at it, anyway you examine it, anyway you try to explain it away, the MB is a clear and present danger to us westerners and US national security interests especially. To allow them into power in the first place was a massive mistake and for the US to try to get them back into power is especially egregious and treasonous.

          • hiernonymous

            “Anyway you cut it, anyway you slice it, anyway you look at it, anyway
            you examine it, anyway you try to explain it away, the MB is a clear and
            present danger to us westerners and US national security interests
            especially.”

            How is “clear and present danger” in any way germane to this context? That’s a test for limiting freedom of expression, and has nothing to do with evaluating potential terrorist threats, Mr. Clancy notwithstanding.

            At any rate, any way you cut it, any way you slice it, any way you look at it, any way you examine it, any way you try to explain it away, making a hyperbolic and emphatic assertion as an incontrovertible statement of Truth doesn’t make it so. Perhaps it was satisfying, though?

            “To allow them into power in the first place was a massive mistake…”

            That’s the Egyptians’ call, not ours. Though perhaps that’s what you meant.

            “…to try to get them back into power is especially egregious and treasonous.”

            Oh, please. I don’t know that anyone’s trying to get them back into power, but if they did, there’d be nothing treasonous about it.

          • Drakken

            Sorry mate, but this is not a court of law, but the evidence is overwhelming.The US State Dept and administration officials are trying to do an end run around the Egyptian military and get the MB back in power, and anyone who does, is helping our enemy, hence the word treason is very appropriate. If you think that a bunch of islamist running a country is a good idea, just look at Iran, yeah what a wonderful exercise in stupidity by Carter and company, and Obummer and his minions are trying to do the same thing in Egypt.

          • hiernonymous

            “If you think that a bunch of islamist running a country is a good idea, just look at Iran…”

            Okay, let’s. I don’t think a ‘bunch of Islamists’ running a country is a good idea; I think a country’s army running the country is even worse.

            Iran is a Shi’a state, of course, so the nature of its Islamist government is very different from the form that would likely take hold in Egypt. There’s no obvious model for what might develop in Egypt, but we might assume that the Islamists there might follow Qutb’s model, which itself was based on Lenin’s “Vanguard of the Proletariat.” I’m guessing that this might look an awful lot like Nasser’s government, with the women covered up and more men in galabiyas.

            Would this be worse than a military dictatorship? I happen to think it’s six of one, half a dozen of the other – they’re both unacceptable – but the advantage of letting the MB have their shot is that while they’re botching it, they’re discrediting the whole notion of religious government. With this coup, after another 10 years of repression, you’ve got a rebellious population, a declining economy, and a MB still waiting stage right to take its shot. If Morsi had been allowed to rule, then in 10 years, you’d have 10 years of repression, a failing economy, a rebellious population – and nothing left to try but secular democracy.

            The point here is not to convince you that I’m right, but to show you how patently absurd it is for you to assert that this thought process is treason, That’s not rationality, that’s trying to avoid hard thinking and hard argument by painting disagreement as anti-American. Meh.

          • Drakken

            You think that an army running a muslim country is just as bad if not worse than a mullah? I do believe history would argue vehemently against that position. The only constant is if islam remains supreme, they will continue to wallow in their misery and stay in the dark ages with western toys to play with.

          • hiernonymous

            If you run into history, tell him to pop by and make his case. You could use his help.

          • DB1954

            A country’s army would be worse than a fanatical religious terrorist group? Oh really? Not even if that country’s military and the US government had a common enemy? Hmm. This IS getting interesting. I’m beginning to think that Hiero may not be JAG, but rather … well … he’s gone native,

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            What a foolish comment.

            The ayatollahs of fascist iran have been in power since 1979 and they have repressed the population. The opposition has been attacked by the regime.

            What could possibly make you think that giving the MB 10 years helming Egypt would result in their being voted out. Islamism does not make a democracy – but a theocracy – and theocracies are not open to opposing views.

          • hiernonymous

            If there’s one thing we’ve learned in the last half century, it’s that declaring a regime a public enemy #1 of the U.S. prolongs its life like nothing else. We’ve declared anathema on North Korea, Cuba, Iran, and watched those regimes remain solidly in place as U.S. administrations whiz by.

            And why not? By imposing sanctions on the Kims, the Castros, the Ayatullahs, we give them the best of all possible worlds. The trains don’t run on time? There’s not enough to eat? It’s not the regime’s fault – it’s the fault of the most powerful country on earth trying to crush us! It’s flawless, and it works because, to a sufficient degree, it’s true.
            When the Iranian regime oppresses its people, it can hold up the example of the countries to its immediate east and west and show that fear of an American invasion is not mere political rhetoric. Would the Ayatullahs still be in power today if we weren’t so obsessed with them ourselves? Possibly, though I think it very unlikely that their government would resemble what it does today.

            And you’ll note that I didn’t say the MB would be ‘voted out’ in 10 years. I said that in 10 years, you’d have a restive population ready for a change, and an MB that will have lost credibility.

          • DB1954

            Exactly my point.

          • DB1954

            Naw, he’s just one of Kerry’s State Dept. former Army JAGs who insists on conducting a police investigation to obtain probable cause for arrest and sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the MB beyong and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.

            Yeah, it’s a mouthful isn’t it? And by the time we say all that, the MB is going to blow us all to kingdom come.

          • DB1954

            JAG, I presume?

          • hiernonymous

            That would be presumptuous.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            What do you mean “Copts deal with a lot”?

            Please explain.

          • hiernonymous

            Sure. Copts are a distinctive minority in Egypt. They face all sorts of pressures, some more obvious than others. And, just as religious and ethnic fault lines in other countries lead to periodic outbursts of violence, that happens in Egypt, as well.

            The pro-Muslim bias in Egyptian official life is undeniable. I know one Coptic major general (retired), but he was part of a pretty rare breed. Egyptian Army units begin the day with a reading from the Qur’an at morning accountability formation (or at least, the units I was associated with did). That can’t go down well if you’re a Copt.

          • Veracious_one

            Copts support a tolerant Egyptian government The Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t…the fact that the Egyptian military agrees with them doesn’t go down well with the Muslim Brotherhood….

          • hiernonymous

            You’re trying to force this into a two-party filter to fit your preconceived notions or biases concerning the political situation in Egypt. The military wants an outcome in which the military is in charge. Judging by Mubarak’s decades of emergency rule, ‘tolerance’ isn’t the objective, ‘compliance’ is. The MB presented the most significant organized political threat to military rule, so too true, the military opposes the MB.

            But here’s where I part ways with your sort of thinking. I firmly believe that military dictatorships are bad. What I don’t firmly believe is that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Right now, too many Americans are making a knee-jerk endorsement of the military coup because they’ve been taught to be afraid of Islamists, and if the military opposes Islamists, well, they’re on the American side, right?

            Well, no. There is a secular democratic movement in Egypt, but it’s too small and impotent yet to stand toe to toe with either of the big players. Trying to persuade yourself that the military is somehow part of this secular democratic movement is kidding yourself.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Egypt is one of the oldest civilizations, and has only recently clumsily experimented with Democracy..

            The rights of minorities need to be respected. The koran is not the foundation of a democracy.

          • hiernonymous

            I agree with everything you just wrote there.

            None of it makes the MB a terrorist organization.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The MB assassinating Sadat advocating jihad that reached into the US in 1993 makes the MB a terrorist organization.

            You can nit pick all you want but the death toll proves your claim wrong.

          • Drakken

            You might want to pay attention o Jordan, it is another place those democracy minded MB folks are going to try to take over, yeah that will turn out real well won’t it? Hopefully Abdullah is more like his father and goes after them wilh a vengeance like Hussein went after the palis when they tried to overthrown him.

          • hiernonymous

            Jordan actually is a pretty good example. When Hussein was dealing with his own religious fundamentalists, you know what he did? He put them in the cabinet. He basically let them run things for a bit. Once they’d discredited themselves politically, they were no longer effective working in opposition. Much more subtle than your ‘mailed fist’ posturing, but it worked for quite a while.

          • Drakken

            You kinda sorta failed to mention a really important part to your thesis, Hussein wasn’t above letting those religious leaders die in :accidents” either, believe it or not the Jordanian security apparatus is a quite good.

          • hiernonymous

            “You kinda sorta failed to mention a really important part to your thesis…”

            Possibly because that wasn’t a key element to my ‘thesis.’ There’s no shortage of ME leaders willing to employ brutality; the whole point of this lesson was that Hussein understood how to politically emasculate someone without having to resort to outright repression.

          • Drakken

            Hussein understood better than most muslim leaders how to use political kabuki theater and utter ruthlessness to get the job done, something you don’t seem to understand since it is not moral in your view.

          • Drakken

            So you think that the MB is a good friend and partner with the US? It looks like your line of thinking is what is coming out of this administration. A middle eastern or far eastern muslim country is either ruled by a dictator or a mullah. The dictator is at least friendly with us, the mullahs are our enemy, period, end of story. Your support for a so called secular democracy in the ME and Far east is naïve at best, and incredibly dangerous at worst. Until and unless islam is stomped on, it is a bloody pipe dream.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            How about some specifics and not your generalities?

            What soft of pressures and periodic outbursts of violence against the Copts?

          • hiernonymous

            “How about some specifics and not your generalities?”

            Largely because there’s no obvious purpose to being more specific. If you’re challenging my characterization, and asking for examples as evidence, I might understand, but as it stands – do you have an actual point to make here?

            If you like, I can offer the example of the fighting in Zagazig, out in Sharqia, back in August of 2012, which escalated into gun battles between Copts and Muslims. That’s a specific – what did you want to do with it?

          • Drakken

            That little skirmish in Bengazi has the MB’s fingerprints all over it. So you must have given advice and tech support to the MB then?

          • hiernonymous

            Did that post even make sense to you when you wrote it?

          • Drakken

            Getting my sense of humor is like my coffee, dark, bitter and murky, but it’s all good.

          • DB1954

            Looks to me like no one could ever produce enough evidence to prove to your satisfaction that the MB is a terrorist organization. By the way, were you Army JAG? You seem to want enough evidence to satisfy a judge. May I remind you that we’re not in a court of law–we’re in the United States of America, a place that’s STILL under attack from various and sundry terrorist organizations not all of which coordinate or cooperate with each other at all times and circumstances. In any case and in all probability, the next terrorist group will stage another 9-11 before you find that legally admissible evidence you’re demanding in order to uh … prosecute (?) the MB.

          • hiernonymous

            “Looks to me like no one could ever produce enough evidence to prove to your satisfaction that the MB is a terrorist organization”

            The same sort of evidence that convinced us that any other group was a terrorist organization would be sufficient. Can you point to an actual terrorist attack that was planned and executed by the MB? No?

            Let’s think about this for a moment. You can’t identify a terrorist act the MB has conducted. The IC and State don’t list it as a terrorist organization (“But wait!,” cries one of our forum mates,”that’s because State is really working with the enemy!“) In fact, the only violent incidents involving the MB at all that anyone can produce were those that occurred after the coup, when the police and military were unleashed on the MB.

            Yet you think I’m so skeptical that I must be JAG. It’s interesting that you think that it’s only in courts of law that we should think logically and expect claims to be supported by evidence.

      • A Z

        Hierarch Anonymous (i.e. the Great & All Knowing Unknown one)

        The MB is not a terrorist oganisation when they are not distributing copies of of Mei Kampf?

        • hiernonymous

          Let’s assume that’s true. Is distributing copies of Mein Kampf a terrorist activity?

          You seem to have confused “terrorism” with “any political activity I disapprove of.”

          • A Z

            It shows where the sympathies lie.

            It shows where their proclivities are.

          • hiernonymous

            Again, let’s assume that’s true. Which of those makes the MB a terrorist organization?

          • A Z

            From the fact they are conducting a Grand Jihad here in America.

            From the fact that the Egyptian government in the 1950s considered them a terrorist organization. It is like being a paranoid . Just because you are not a paranoid does not mean there isn’t someone following you. Likewise just because you are a military government or monarchy does not mean there are not people are out there trying to overthrow you from the start.

            I have read too much about Qutb Sayyid (The Looming Tower & other places) to admire the Muslim brotherhood.

          • hiernonymous

            The MB in the 1950s was a terrorist organization – or, at least, there was credible evidence it engaged in political violence. It wasn’t until the late ’60s that the MB renounced violence.

            If you have such strong opinions, I sincerely hope you haven’t just read about Sayyid Qutb, I hope you’ve read him, as well.

            At any rate, Qutb’s execution was one of the wake-up calls that led the Brothers to abandon political violence as a losing game. They were never going to be more ruthless than Nasser.

            “I have read too much about Qutb Sayyid (The Looming Tower & other places) to admire the Muslim brotherhood.”

            Who said anything about admiring the Brothers? Too many people here seem to operate as digital functions, either on or off. The MB is either good or bad, you’re either with us or against us, etc, etc. That’s simpleminded claptrap. The MB is a religious political organization. Its goals are goals for which I have no sympathy. It wants to undermine individual liberty and substitute religious duty.

            But it’s better to remain intellectually honest and identify the real problems and find morally acceptable solutions. The MB may be all sorts of undesirable, but they’re not terrorists, and distorting the truth to paint them as such undermines the integrity of the individual doing so, and – in my humble opinion, at least – is generally done in order to justify courses of action that are unjustifiable. Label the MB a ‘terrorist’ organization, and you can justify to yourself (and others) supporting the military coup. Attribute enough crime to the MB, and you can excuse a few committed by your own favored thugs.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Renounced violence in the late ’60s?

            That should make Anwar Sadat happy.

          • hiernonymous

            Don’t see how it could; he was assassinated.

            Not by the MB, though. Did you have a point?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Hey genius,

            The assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981 and the 1993 truck bombing of the WTC discredit your claim that the muslim brotherhood renounced violence “wink, wink” in the late 60′s.

          • hiernonymous

            Really? You’ve linked Sadat’s assassination to the MB now?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

            Those crossed swords aren’t crossed olive branches.

          • hiernonymous

            Look, I appreciate the humor value of a “hey, genius” post being followed by a link to wikipedia, but if you’ve got something serious to say, this’d be a good time to say it.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The wikipedia page shows the emblem of the MB and its crossed swords.

            Are you trying to say that those swords are actually olive branches?

          • hiernonymous

            Are you trying to say that the absence of olive branches on the MB symbol demonstrates MB complicity in Sadat’s death? Or was that a more stream-of-consciousness thought that needed to be shared?

            Seriously – is there a point to this? Or are you one of those folks who, when they have nothing to say, lack the discipline not to say it?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The Muslim Brotherhood was responsible for Sadats assassination.

            The Muslim Brotherhoods Blind Sheik Abdel Rahman was one of those responsible for the 1993 WTC truck bombing.

            What other “humanitarian” organization has swords as a symbol of their love of humanity?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Muslim_Brotherhood_in_Egypt

          • hiernonymous

            Those acts were committed by Gama’a Islamia, not the MB.

            “The Muslim Brotherhoods Blind Sheik Abdel Rahman…”

            Abd al Rahman was leader of Gama’a Islamia – how did that slip your mind when summarizing his CV?

            “What other “humanitarian” organization has swords as a symbol of their love of humanity?”

            The most prominent humanitarian organization in the world, the ICRC, uses a sylized Roman execution device as its symbol. What was your point, again?

            That said, though, I don’t think I’ve claimed that the MB is primarily a humanitarian organization; I’ve said that some of the works it engages in are humanitarian in nature. The MB is primarily a political and social movement; I don’t suggest that it’s along the lines of the Red Cross or Red Crescent. But your thought process really needs some honing, so to speak.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            There is nothing “stylized” about crossed swords on the MB logo.

            The sword is used today by terrorists. When was the last time someone was killed with a Roman execution device?

            Please continue your attempts to whitewash islamist terrorism. We need the laughs.

          • hiernonymous

            Interestingly, the Burmese military crucified several people in 2000. Also see this article for some crucifixions in Saudi Arabia.

            “Please continue your attempts to whitewash islamist terrorism. ”

            Who’s trying to “whitewash islamist terrorism?” I’m asking that you support accusations of being an Islamist terrorist with some actual evidence.

            “We need the laughs.”

            Hyenas laugh. It doesn’t mean that they get the joke.

          • A Z

            “At any rate, Qutb’s execution was one of the wake-up calls that led the Brothers to abandon political violence as a losing game. They were never going to be more ruthless than Nasser.”

            Such an apologist.

          • hiernonymous

            How so? There’s nothing particularly controversial about that comment, nor does it cast the MB in a particularly favorable light. Could you clarify?

          • Drakken

            There it is in a nutshell, your line of thinking based in western thought “Morally Acceptable Solutions” where the eastern thought process is anything but moral. PC garbage at its worst. East is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet.

          • hiernonymous

            So it’s a Western “line of thinking” stacked up against some regurgitated Kipling? As you like.

          • Drakken

            You cannot apply western concepts to eastern practices. That is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        The MB is a totalitarians organization, some of whose affiliates and outlying groups are terrorist organizations, and whose leaders routinely call for violence.

        Every Al Qaeda leader was a MB member. Al Qaeda’s current leader came out of the MB.

        • hiernonymous

          I think you’ll find that most members of the Earth Liberation Front are far more likely to have voted Democrat than Republican. The Democratic Party is simply more naturally aligned with its members viewpoints. Doesn’t make the Democratic Party a terrorist organization.

          I personally think that religion and politics makes for bad politics, whether it’s the MB or the Moral Majority, but that doesn’t make the MB a terrorist organization, either.

          Presumably, you know the history of the MB, which is why I’ve been careful to note that we’re talking about the Egyptian MB. There’s no denying that when the Egyptian MB renounced violence in the ’60s, there were members who were unhappy with that decision and they went their own way, forming splinter organizations that continued to conduct terrorism. If you’re arguing that many of today’s terrorists originally either grew up in the MB or were influenced by someone who did, I’d agree with that. That, too, doesn’t make the MB a terrorist organization, nor does it even imply that the MB approves of them doing so (any more than the Democratic Party approves of eco-freaks burning buildings and vehicles here in the U.S.).

          • Daniel Greenfield

            If the Democratic Party originated as a totalitarian hate group with links to Nazi Germany, your equivalence might not be completely laughable.

            Those “splinter groups” are better known as plausible deniability.

          • hiernonymous

            You can’t write for a living and be unable to distinguish between analogy and equivalence. That’s sloppy thinking and sloppy terminology.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            More straw men from hiernonymous.

          • hiernonymous

            Really? How did my comment introduce a straw man?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            If the Democratic Party originated as a totalitarian hate group with links to National Socialist Germany, your equivalence might not be completely laughable.

            Those “splinter groups” are better known as plausible deniability.

          • hiernonymous

            “Those “splinter groups” are better known as plausible deniability.”

            That hasn’t been the conclusion of the intelligence community. What’s your evidence?

          • Drakken

            The intelligence community is split where that is concerned, the side that is advocating outreach to the MB is the side that is writing policy with full administration backing, the other side which is on the sidelines for now, calls them Islamic jihadist that need a good house cleaning.

          • Veracious_one

            what peaceful activities has the Muslim Brotherhood been engaged in?

          • hiernonymous

            Many, but why do you ask? It may be quicker to just make your point than to make a poor attempt at Socratic questioning.

          • Veracious_one

            I haven’t seen any evidence of peaceful activities by the Muslim Brotherhood hence the simple question…

          • hiernonymous

            The short answer is – why would anyone need to produce such evidence? What are you even driving at?

            The longer answer is that the MB has engaged in political and social activity in Egypt for decades. They provide humanitarian assistance, they provide educational assistance, they organize and run people for parliament (though as ‘independents’ through most of this period). They have tried to win a ‘hearts and minds’ campaign, if you will.

            I will note that if you can’t find any examples of peaceful activity by the Egyptian MB, one wonders how or where you’re looking. They’ve been a significant actor in Egypt for so long that it’s hard to imagine you’ve made a good-faith effort to find anything they’ve done and come up completely blank.

          • Veracious_one

            the Muslim Brotherhood is persecuting non-Muslims in non-peaceful ways…at least 60 cases just in the last three years….
            http://www.persecution.org/2014/02/14/egypt-60-cases-of-contempt-of-religion-in-3-years/

          • hiernonymous

            One must be a subcriber to read the whole story. Perhaps you could excerpt the bit you find relevant?

            Based on the bit I was able to read, it looks like the author is complaining about MB use of the “contempt of religion” charge to suppress opposition to the MB. If that’s an accurate summary, then that would lead us to two conclusions:
            1. The MB is playing hardball politics in ways I think we’d agree are unfair and undemocratic, and
            2. That’s not terrorism.

            Obviously, if there’s contradictory evidence offered in the full story, please highlight it and we can go from there.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Did the MB make the trains run on time too?

          • hiernonymous

            I have no idea. If they had done that, though, I’d think I’d have heard about it – nobody else has done so.

            One of the arguments against using violence to repress these religious parties is precisely to expose how inept they are at the prosaic task of governing.

            I happen to oppose the MB, too, but you have to oppose them for what they are, not for what you think you can get away with accusing them of; and you should probably fight them with tactics that expose vulnerabilities, rather than playing to strengths. Does anyone really think that a political party based on religion doesn’t know how to play the role of oppressed opposition?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Anwar Sadat, assassinated by the muslim brotherhood.

            The blind sheik abdel rahman – New Jersey based muslim brotherhood spiritual leader of the 1993 truck bombing of the WTC.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Abdel-Rahman

            Your branding the muslim brotherhood as a humanitarian organization doesn’t make sense when we look at its dark jihadi side.

          • Drakken

            Hearts and minds never works in the end, but the mailed fist always does. Especially when dealing with Islamic entities.

          • hiernonymous

            “Hearts and minds never works in the end, but the mailed fist always does.”

            How remarkably vacuous.

          • Drakken

            How remarkably true!

          • Johny Mac

            The MB was running Egypt into the ground. Qatar loaned or granted Egypt 4$ billion to keep them afloat. They were hemorrhaging $. Obama was giving them tax $ also to float them. It was both a sign of MB incompetence and people’s conviction that the MB were buffoons.
            The question is should General Sisi let the MB wreck everything and let Egypt hit 0 or should they step in before then? For legitimacy purposes someone here is arguing they should let thing hit zero (i.e. GTH1st).

            http://www.tradingeconomics.com/egypt/foreign-exchange-reserves

            Very Good site:
            http://www.tradingeconomics.com/

          • Drakken

            The fact that advocate and condone and support the MB really is stunning by the naïve policies that you are pushing, any dealing with the MB will not come to a good end.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Care to give examples of MB pro-peace activities?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Your Red Herring needs changing.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        The Egyptian MB is not a terrorist organization.

        You’re right for once, the MB is not a terrorist organization, as Muslims wage jihad, i.e., holy war to make Islam supreme, instead, and holy war exactly like all wars is waged both violently and non-violently through stealth and deception.

        Indeed, it is only people married to the cult of PC multiculturalism that relegate Muslim violence down to being terrorism perpetrated by a few radical Muslim extremists that misunderstand the so-called “religion of peace.”

        Nevertheless, the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is the subjugation of all religions and all infidels into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia (Islamic totalitarian law) to ultimately make Islam supreme.

        As a matter of fact, you don’t have to be an authority on the issue to see it. All you have to do is take a careful look around the world to see the enormous damage wreaked by Islam everywhere it touches, throughout the Islamic world in Africa, Asia, and China, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and even in America today as well.

        There is only one solution, ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage and then isolate the Islamic world until it collapses upon itself in a few miserable generations.

        • hiernonymous

          Have I ever taken the time to congratulate you on an exceptionally well-selected avatar?

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Thank you and may I say that you have quite good taste.

          • A Z

            And the left handed compliment is accepted. My first thought, is if there is more back and forth here with OYM, I should sit back take notes and learn something.

      • Drakken

        When an organization like the MB wants to drag a nation back into the 7th century and gives aid and support to AQ, that is the very definition of a muslim jihadist organization. Hopefully the Egyptian military gives them the against the wall treatment, as they deserve. If you support and defend them, you are as bad as they are.

  • Jake

    What’s wrong with this conflict map of Syria?

    “There is a big lobby to picture the Islamists as an acceptable force for western governments, thus calling them “rebels”, Free Syria Army, or whatsoever, for example from pro-bombing or people lobbying to arm these guys … for example McCain.

    http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2014/02/whats_wrong_with_this_conflict.php#comments

  • Berceuse

    What still confuses me is the percentage of American Jews who continue to cling to the Democratic Party, not to mention extreme leftist and Marxist ideology, despite the continued embrace of radical Islam and growing anti-Semitism on the left. I wonder how many liberal New York Jews saw this spectacle and thought, “Well, they have a point.”

  • DogmaelJones1

    I’m beginning to think that the scripts for the American Branch of the Brotherhood are written by the Marx Brothers.

  • Dyer’s Eve

    Who in their right mind would even want to go to Mecca? I wouldn’t. Make it a nuclear waste dump. I’ve had enough of smelly taxi drivers. Isn’t it ironic that smelly Nazis in Russian hats yell abuse at the Saudis. If it were funny, I’d laugh. Nothing to laugh at here.

  • http://best-hacker-tools.blogspot.com/ rajneesh

    Is he afraid that if he leaves the Senate he becomes little people?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    All Muslims throughout the world and not just the Muslim Brotherhood scream about Jews and also all other non-Muslim infidels as well, i.e., Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Druzes, animists, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum, as the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is the subjugation of all religions and all infidels into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent jihad (when necessary) and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad (when necessary) and the eventual imposition of Sharia (Islamic totalitarian law) to make Islam supreme.

    Nevertheless, as long as the Marxist Dhimmicrat Party and the Progressive Liberal Republican Party in America remain married to the cult of PC multiculturalism, what is really non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad for the long-term strategic purpose of demographic conquest will continue to manifest as if it is legitimate and beneficial immigration. Meanwhile, how can true conservatives decry amnesty for illegal aliens without at the same time also condemning mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage that is really non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad?

    Indeed, conservatives must wake up and condemn both forms of self-destruction and demand solutions for both. As a matter of fact, if we are going to reform our immigration system, we must not only stop all illegal immigration and amnesty in any form, but we also must stop very destructive forms of immigration, such as mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, as well.

    Take a look around the world: everywhere in the world where mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage is currently occurring, it has turned into an unmitigated disaster for the host infidel countries and that’s undeniable Meanwhile, every country in the world with already large Muslim populations are in essence Islamic hellholes and economic basket cases. Thus, beyond illegal immigration and amnesty for illegals, we must work to ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration as well.

  • Raymond Hietapakka

    Does suffering from Joooo-on-the-Brain Disease cause them physical pain, I wonder….

  • DB1954

    Some how I think that if Ike were President this wouldn’t have happened. In those days, the FBI recognized threats and dealt with them through infiltration and subversion from within rather than allowing them to do it to us.

  • hiernonymous

    “Throughout this entire conversation you’ve demanded of Drakken and others proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    I’ve asked for evidence. There’s a difference between ‘demanding’ proof sufficient for an individual conviction, and asking for some solid evidence. Drakken’s operating on innuendo and hot air.

    “…and/or before the MB strikes the U.S…”

    See? It’s unreasonable to talk about the inevitability of the MB “striking” us when nobody has shown that the MB has struck anyone, or is even in the business of striking. That’s hysteria.

    “Precisely that will happen if our government is composed of pedantic, idealistic, legalistic, national security analysts like you.”

    As opposed to aggressively ignorant homespun ‘experts’ who want to strike boldly at the wrong targets for the wrong reasons, so that they can satisfy themselves that they’ve done something?

    “You’re one of Zer0′s loyalist flunkies–forever insisting on a criminal justice approach to terrorism–or I’m a monkey’s uncle.”

    They’re not mutually exclusive. As for being a ‘loyalist flunky,’ I retired from the military during Obama’s presidency, and I was as loyal to him as to all his predecessors, so, yeah, I suppose I’m guilty of loyalty. As far as ‘flunky’ goes, well, again, in the sense that I’m subject to recall for the rest of my life, if that’s what you mean. Do I think that the criminal justice approach is the correct one to terrorism? Actually, as a rule, I do. It lacks the immediate gratification that give you short-attention-span types their adrenaline fixes, but it has the nice side effect of not playing directly into the terrorists’ desire to use our responses to generate broader support for their causes. They rely on impatience and stupidity, which you, judging by your comments here, have elevated to virtues.

    • DB1954

      Whooosh … that went right over your head did it, General?

      “Do I think that the criminal justice approach is the correct one to terrorism? Actually, as a rule, I do.”

      Well actually, I think that the CJ approach to international terrorism can be the correct solution but not as a rule. I think that CJ approaches work much better in, well, … circumstances that call for them, like for example, garden variety domestic crime.

      That would mean, I suppose, that you still think that Major Nidal Hassan was one of those garden variety criminals who simply engaged in “workplace violence”?

      “It lacks the immediate gratification that give you short-attention-span types their adrenaline fixes, but it has the nice side effect of not playing directly into the terrorists’ desire to use our responses to generate broader support for their causes.”

      Well gosh darn, General. I’ve looked up and down here, and I just can’t find on this thread one, single instance in which I recommended any specific fixes–adrenalin fueled or not. Not a single one, in fact. I was just saying that responses to terrorism and responses to crime are generally different. In my view, military responses and CJ responses represent a kind of continuum, uh, yeah, that’s right. A continuum of flexible and coordinated responses might, just might, give the government more options.

      But yeah, I can see how we should be concerned that the terrorists might use the Gitmo response in order to “use [it] to generate broader support for their causes.” But on the other hand, I wasn’t real thrilled about trying KSM in Manhatten, NY in the federal District Court for the Southern District of NY. By the way, was that your recommendation?

      As I said, uh … sir, my remarks apparently went straight over your ego-bloated fat head, sir. As for “broader support for their causes,” did you know that Bill Ayers murdered a SF police officer in Feb. 1970? Obama’s buddy–the one that all you liberal types want to forget–was a domestic terrorist. That was according to the FBI. Anyway, Obama’s cause, it seems, is at least one terrorist’s cause. Did you know that Major Nidal Hassan served on your awesome President’s White House transition team in 2008? Funny how Barack Obama and terrorists just have a way of finding each other. I could tell you all kinds of things about B. Hussein Obama II that would cause you great distress, but you’d demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt and vote for the homosexual Marxist anyway as I hear some of the most senior commanders in the Army did. Loyalty. It’s a wonderfully stupid thing, especially when it’s blind, deaf and dumb–as probably 98% of career Army officers are.

      I served one hitch in the Army and got out. Too many naval gazers and lifers–no chance on the outside types who couldn’t think their way out of a wet paper bag, uh … sir. After the Army, I earned three graduate degrees, three foreign languages, and got myself admitted to the practice of law in two states. Me … the uh “stupid” one with the short attention span and no patience.

      • hiernonymous

        “Whooosh … that went right over your head did it, General?”

        It seems very important to you to think so, anyway. I wasn’t a GO, btw, just field grade.

        “That would mean, I suppose, that you still think that Major Nidal Hassan was one of those garden variety criminals who simply engaged in “workplace violence”?”

        No, it would mean that I believe the appropriate response to MAJ Hassan would be to apprehend him and try him in court.

        “But on the other hand, I wasn’t real thrilled about trying KSM in Manhatten [sic], NY in the federal District Court for the Southern District of NY. By the way, was that your recommendation?”

        I didn’t make any recommendations. But I have no problems with that decision.

        “Well gosh darn, General. I’ve looked up and down here, and I just can’t find on this thread one, single instance in which I recommended any specific fixes…”

        “Fix” was used in the sense of a dose of a drug to which one is addicted, in this case, adrenaline. Nothing about that construction implied that you had committed yourself to a specific course of action.

        “As I said, uh … sir, my remarks apparently went straight over your ego-bloated fat head, sir.”

        I haven’t seen anything in your post that indicates that, but whatever.

        “I served one hitch in the Army and got out. Too many naval gazers….”

        In the Army? You sure you know which service you were in?

        “…and lifers–no chance on the outside types who couldn’t think their way out
        of a wet paper bag, uh … sir. ”

        Could be. It’s not likely you saw much of the Army in one stint, and you don’t mention what your MOS was, how long ago this was, or what unit you were in, so I can’t say you didn’t run into folks like that. Still, that doesn’t characterize most of the people I served with.

        “After the Army, I earned three graduate degrees, three foreign languages, and got myself admitted to the practice of law in two states. Me … the uh “stupid” one with the short attention span and no patience.”

        Good for you; I’ve got a couple of grad degrees and languages under my belt as well. Some were real accomplishments, others pretty easy.
        You’ll find, though, that if you have to parade the degrees to convince someone that you’re smart, then you might want to take a closer look at what you’re writing. I seem to have hurt your feelings; that’s too bad.
        The conversation was about political violence and terrorism, and you posts suggest you didn’t attend classes on that topic. I’m sure that you’re unstoppable at contract law or something, but if you’ll look at the posts you’ve made to me, they’re long on posture and short on substance.

        In fact, the only achievement you’ve paraded I can’t match is admission to the bar – which is pretty funny, considering that you pegged me as a JAG.

        Now, if you’re done trying to prove to me that yours is as long as mine, I’ll be more than happy to address any substantive comments you care to make.