re: "The Muslim Brotherhood's American Defenders"

Caroline Glick re-posted her Jerusalem Post article at CarolineGlick.Com ("the most prominent woman in Israel"), regarding America's current mis-comprehension of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Money quote(s):

"On Wednesday, John Brennan, US President Barack Obama's assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism, made a quick trip to Israel to discuss Hezbollah's massacre of Israeli tourists in Burgas, Bulgaria last week."

&

"Unlike previous US counterterror officials, Brennan does not share Israel's understanding of Middle Eastern terrorism.

Brennan's outlook on this subject was revealed in a speech he gave two years ago in Washington. In that talk, Brennan spoke dreamily about Hezbollah. As he put it, "Hezbollah is a very interesting organization."

He claimed it had evolved from a "purely terrorist organization" to a militia and then into an organization with members in Lebanon's parliament and serving in Lebanon's cabinet."

This is what comes of having a "war on terrorism" and "violent extremism" rather than responding directly to the organizations and movements which have employed those tactics against us.

Namely the MB and her sister- and daughter-organizations like Hezbollah.

"Brennan's amazing characterization of Hezbollah's hostile takeover of the Lebanese government as proof that the terrorist group was moderating was of a piece with the Obama administration's view of Islamic jihadists generally.

If there are "moderate elements," in Hezbollah, from the perspective of the Obama administration, Hezbollah's Sunni jihadist counterpart - the Muslim Brotherhood - is downright friendly."

&

"On February 10, 2011, Obama's Director of National Intelligence James Clapper made this position clear in testimony before the House Select Committee on Intelligence. Clapper's testimony was given the day before then Egyptian president and longtime US ally Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign from office. Mubarak's coerced resignation owed largely to the Obama administration's decision to end US support for his regime and openly demand his immediate abdication of power. As Israel warned, Mubarak's ouster paved the way for the Muslim Brotherhood's ascendance to power in Egypt.

In his testimony Clapper said, "The term 'Muslim Brotherhood' is an umbrella term for a variety of movements. In the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular which has eschewed violence and has decried al-Qaida as a perversion of Islam. They have pursued social ends, betterment of the political order in Egypt, etc."

Watching Clapper's testimony in Israel, the sense across the political spectrum, shared by experts and casual observers alike was that the US had taken leave of its senses."

DNI Clapper is not a working-level intelligence analyst. He has to function in the political realm and that can be expected to color his public remarks.

One does have to wonder what the non-public recommendations and assessments look like.

(CAA has no direct experience regarding the DNI but there are people CAA respects who have, and they respect him.)

"The slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood is "Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Koran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the path of Allah is our highest hope."

How could such a high-level US official claim that such an organization is "largely secular"?

Every day Muslim Brotherhood leaders call for the violent annihilation of Israel. And those calls are often combined with calls for jihad against the US. For instance, in a sermon from October 2010, Muslim Brotherhood head Mohammed Badie called for jihad against the US."

One can always blame bad policy decisions on bad advice, but you then have to shoulder the blame for choosing bad advisors.

"The obliviousness of Brennan and Clapper to the essential nature of Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood are symptoms of the overarching ignorance informing the Obama administration's approach to Middle Eastern realities."

&

"(I)n October 2011, according to the Beirut-based Arabic news portal al Nashra, Dalia Mogahed, Obama's adviser on Muslim affairs, blocked a delegation of Middle Eastern Christians led by Lebanon's Maronite Patriarch Bechara Rai from meeting with Obama and members of his national security team at the White House. According to al Nashra, Mogahed canceled the meeting at the request of the Muslim Brotherhood in her native Egypt.

The White House canceled the meeting days after Rai visited with then French president Nicolas Sarkozy in Paris. During that meeting Rai angered the French Foreign Ministry when he warned that it would be a disaster for Syria's Christian minority, and for Christians throughout the region, if the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad is overthrown. Rai based this claim on his assessment that Assad would be replaced by a Muslim Brotherhood- dominated Islamist regime.

And nine months later it is obvious that he was right. With Syria's civil war still raging throughout the country, the world media is rife with reports about Syria's Christians fleeing their towns and villages en masse as Islamists from the Syrian opposition target them with death, extortion and kidnapping."

See my comment above about choosing bad advisors.

"Why is the Obama administration shunning potential allies and empowering enemies? Why has the administration gotten it wrong everywhere?

In an attempt to get to the bottom of this, and perhaps to cause the administration to rethink its policies, a group of US lawmakers, members of the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees led by Rep. Michele Bachmann sent letters to the inspectors-general of the State, Homeland Security, Defense, and Justice departments as well as to the inspector-general of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. In those letters, Bachmann and her colleagues asked the Inspectors General to investigate possible penetration of the US government by Muslim Brotherhood operatives."

Silly idea, right? Because of course none of America's enemies has ever tried to infiltrate our government for purposes of influence and espionage before.

(Well, not if you don't consider World War I, World War II, the Cold War..... )

"(T)he lawmakers made clear that when they spoke of governmental penetration, they were referring to the central role that Muslim groups, identified by the US government in Federal Court as Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, play in shaping the Obama administration's perception of and policies towards the Muslim Brotherhood and its allied movements in the US and throughout the world.

That these front groups, including the unindicted terror funding co-conspirators, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), play a key role in shaping the Obama administration's agenda is beyond dispute."

Do I really have to link to the Holy Land Foundation trial documents again?

I guess so.

"There is an ample body of evidence that suggests that the administration's decision to side with the hostile Muslim Brotherhood against its allies owes to a significant degree to the influence these Muslim Brotherhood front groups and their operatives wield in the Obama administration.

To take just one example, last October the Obama administration agreed to purge training materials used by US intelligence and law enforcement agencies and eliminate all materials that contained references to Islam that US Muslim groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood had claimed were offensive. The administration has also fired counterterrorism trainers and lecturers employed by US security agencies and defense academies that taught their pupils about the doctrines of jihadist Islam. The administration also appointed representatives of Muslim Brotherhood-aligned US Muslim groups to oversee the approval of training materials about Islam for US federal agencies."

She concluded:

"It is clear that the insidious notion that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate and friendly force has taken hold in US policy circles. And it is apparent that US policymaking in the Middle East is increasingly rooted in this false and dangerous assessment.

In spearheading an initiative to investigate and change this state of affairs, Bachmann and her colleagues should be congratulated, not condemned. And their courageous efforts to ask the relevant questions about the nature of Muslim Brotherhood influence over US policymakers should be joined, not spurned by their colleagues in Washington, by the media and by all concerned citizens in America and throughout the free world."

7/27

re: "A Reversal of Fortune"

Richard Hernandez at Belmont Club ("the blogger formerly known as 'Wretchard' ") has the Muslim Brotherhood's number, as they have ours.

Money quote(s):

"Remember when the Muslim Brotherhood was reckoned to be part of the movement for democratic change in Egypt? That was then. This is now."

Remember who reckoned the MB to be democratic?

Good, now don't forget. Maybe next time you'll remember who the idiots are.

"Maybe the State Department can get the Muslim Brotherhood to help the US ambassador out. “Egypt’s justice minister said on Tuesday he had sent back a letter from the U.S. ambassador that asked for an end to a travel ban on Americans being investigated for alleged illegal funding of pro-democracy groups.” America is only the biggest aid donor to Egypt, which is kind of nice for the Muslim Brotherhood because they’re going to have money to spend. You would think that the MB should be going out of its way to do America a favor."

The MB read their Koran, it's sort of their "operating system" and "source code" and take it seriously. It frames their worldview. In that particular "reality tunnel," money from infidels is only their just due; it's tribute or jizya.

So expecting it to buy anything, other than temporary tolerance (or not), is on the foolish side of the ledger.

"(T)hey are probably betting that the administration will keep handing out the money however hard they get poked in the eye. After all, it is still “friends” with Pakistan in spite of what the Land of the Pure has done to its nearest and dearest Western ally. And if you can be friends with Pakistan, how can you even have enemies?"

&

"(T)he Muslim Brotherhood had this figured out even before the Washington Post could write an editorial. They know the iron rule of extortion: the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Be a nice guy and you get zip. Be the Muslim Brotherhood and the other hand and … as applied to Egypt this implies that the Copts get nothing; America gets nothing, but the Muslim Brotherhood gets everything."

2/1

re: "These things happen for a reason"

Lemuel Calhoon at Hillbilly White Trash ("Commenting about politics, religion, firearms, food, Celtic music, beer, science fiction and the Asheville Vortex. Home of the Hillbilly Ecosystem.") is experiencing some existential-level cognitive dissonance. And with good reason.

Money quote(s):

"America went to war with two nations in response to Islamic terrorism and we have killed or captured most of the top leadership of al Qaeda, including bin Laden himself. However our failure to identify the nature of the problem (which is nothing more or less than Islam itself) and our suicidal fealty to the culturally lethal ideologies of multiculturalism and political correctness have rendered us almost defenseless against this kind of home grown jihad and seriously hampered our ability to deal with the problem on an international level.

Right after Sept. 11 president Bush hosted Islamic religious leaders at the White House to prove that the US was not at war with Islam. Then it came out that most of those imams were tied to terrorism in some way. TSA screeners at airports are told not to pay any special attention to people who look Arab/Middle Eastern for fear of being accused of profiling."

Islam's problem seems to be either that it never underwent a reformation (which might have shifted it from its medieval moorings) or that the reformation it has undergone took it in the wrong (from Western perspective) direction.

I understand that Pres. Bush took pains to emphasize that the West, and the U.S. specifically, was not at war with Islam so as to head-off initiating the sort of Huntingtonian "clash of civilizations" that Osama Bin Ladin dreamed of waging. Not playing into what Al-Qaida wanted is a pretty good argument for Bush's policy there, whatever else you may think of the former president.

As for TSA screening guidance.... from a security perspective, you don't want to necessarily exempt non-Arabs/Middle Eastern persons from security screenings since that sort of loophole creates a security vulnerability that just begs to be taken advantage of.

But that doesn't seem to be how things are actually done; TSA gives the appearance of being more afraid of CAIR's press releases than is healthy or helpful. Going out of the way to avoid paying attention to the patterns and indicators of likely terrorists is a losing proposition and indicates a lack of courage of conviction.

That's a recipe of losing the larger war.

"Christian and Jewish clergy must be banned from the 9/11 memorial service at Ground Zero but a building ruined by wreckage from one of the 9/11 planes (making it as much a part of Ground Zero as the WTC site) must be torn down so that a giant Islamic Victory Mosque can be built.

The United States has helped to bring about regime change in Egypt and Libya (actually going to war in Libya's case) to replace governments that were bad but not currently supporting Jihad terrorism with far worse governments that are connected with organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.

The United States and Western Europe (that part of the world once known as Christendom) has seemingly lost faith in itself. In its value to the world. It is very likely too late for Europe but not for the US. That is if we screw up our courage and face facts and take appropriate action."


8/28

re: "Why Will It End?"

Zenster guest-posts the second essay of a three part series at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.").

Money quote(s):

"Why Will it End?

Short answer ― Islam has “unhappy ending” written all over it.

Tragically, for Islam there is no possibility of a happy ending. It has often been said that the only peace which Islam ― famously known as “The Religion of Peace” ― offers anyone is the peace of the grave."

Islam means "submission" (to the will of Allah). Which is not how CAA defines "peace." Especially when said will tends to interpreted (and enforced) on the ground by what is essentially mob rule.

"The Islamic concept of takfir (“impure”), literally assures this in that a more devout Muslim is religiously sanctioned for killing a less pure Muslim. This lack of purity could be interpreted as someone who does not pray all five times a day or consumes food during daylight hours over the course of Ramadan. The possible paths descending into Islamic “impurity” are as numerous as they are varied and it is an ironclad guarantee that Islam will always be torn by internecine violence.

Exacerbating this situation is the West’s collective inability to discern Islam in general and why there is so little hope for it. It echoes the ancient parable about a group of blind men describing an elephant." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Islam just seems so far away, for most folks. Even those Americans who've had the most exposure to it, our men and women in uniform, have to travel for days before they encounter it. And when they do, it's in environments that seem more like something out of Star Wars or John Carter on Mars than the Planet Earth they're accustomed to.

So until that halal shop or mosque opens up on your block, it's hard to believe islam has much to do with the West.

It's like war, in that way. You may not have much interest in it, but it's very interested in you.

"Islam is so voluminous and just sufficiently varied enough that it seems to defy description. This is especially so for the less informed who can but bear shocked witness to the endless discord and bloodshed that pervades the Islamic world."

Again, it appears to most Westerners as something you see on TV, like a movie or something that's not quite real. Until it is.

"Islam has routinely slithered away from history’s spotlight as the cause of ruined civilizations, genocides, mass enslavements and untold human suffering which transcend anything Europe or America ever aspired to in their wildest dreams.

Islam also manifests as a flag around which this world’s criminal elements continue to rally under a banner of religiously sanctioned murder, rape, pedophilia, looting and thieving which, terrorism aside ― as if that was even possible ― fills police blotters and drains global coffers with an almost enviable consistency unmatched by all but the most accomplished career politicians. Like any wall, Islam continually and everywhere builds enclaves which exclude unbelievers within their own domains and barricades Muslims from influences both external and even the threat of internal “westernization” that just as often sees young Muslim women murdered by their own families in so-called “honor killings”."

These would be some of those uncomfortable (even "inconvenient") truths that don't become apparent until it's much too late. Unless, of course, one reads history and pays attention to the news that's not on their local TV station.

"Islamic hijra has thrust Muslims deep within Western civilization only see them infect every last institution with their steady subversion of Constitutional rights and basic liberties. Hackneyed cries of “racism” and “Islamophobia” ― as if a fear of Islam could ever be irrational ― are trotted out in response to every legitimate criticism of Islam; even as Muslims set about stifling free speech and freedom of expression around the world." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

This is why "Exhibit 3-85" (from the Holy Land Foundation trial) should be required reading.

(Don't be afraid; the English translation starts about midway down the document, p. 15.)

"Compounding all of this havoc are the Islamic “principles” of kitman and taqiyya. They amount to religiously sanctioned deceit and outright lying. As if this were not bad enough, the situation is further exacerbated by Mainstream Media’s adamant refusal to provide accurate and unbiased reporting about Islam’s seditious goal of toppling Constitutional democracies throughout the West.

Islam remains a predatory entity that has not been able to establish any self-sustaining degree of industry or technology for almost a millennium. It has relied upon piracy and looting for nearly the entire span of its existence." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

The Islam "package" of the koran, sharia law, and the various elements of Arabic cultural imperialism that accompany it can be seen as somewhat like a computer program or even a computer virus. The multiple memes and re-inforcing behaviors comprise a sort of meta-meme that acts (and re-acts) to extend the area and population under its sway. In a sense, it's frankly an amazing and elegant piece of business.

"One immense irony is that ― despite Islam’s aspirations for a global caliphate ― it is unhealthy for too many unbelievers to be converted into Muslims. Once this happens, the jizya (“poll tax”) can no longer be collected, nor can possessions, businesses or estates be confiscated so readily. There have already occurred phases in Islamic history where further conversion of natives living in occupied lands was discouraged as it interfered with the appropriation of wealth that is central to financing more jihad. It is also vital to remember that any refusal to pay the jizya is punishable by immediate death.

Conversely, there is a twin principal to jizya known as hijra which derives from the Arabic word for “migration” or “flight”. In this case, it is a that strategy involves flooding Muslim immigrants into those Western nations which cannot be overcome militarily. Displaying a regular pattern of behavior, these new arrivals ― in strict accord with Islamic law ― refuse to assimilate or integrate and form exclusively Muslim enclaves while gradually instituting shari’a law whenever possible.

This form of demographic warfare is commonly known as “stealth” or “soft” jihad and it is the strategy of choice for many within Islam who seek to conquer the West."

Again, Exhibit 3-85 invites much closer reading. Zenster isn't just making this stuff up out of hairballs.

"This is nothing other than a process of colonization and it is reflected in how non-Muslims are routinely driven out of these enclaves through threats of violence, boycotts and extortion. Furthermore, when a sufficient population density is attained, even visiting non-Muslims are subjected to physical assault and threats of violence should they stray into one of these “no-go zones”. Due to Islamic polygamy, such population densities arrive far sooner than typical demographics for the host nations involved.

Once established, there begins a process of draining financial support from local or central government. This is in addition to criminal predation upon surrounding neighborhoods in the form of robbery, theft and extortion. Due to purdah ― the confinement and isolation of Muslim women ― typically there is a surge in the pimping, sexual assault and rape of non-Muslim women in areas around these enclaves. Minors are especially vulnerable to this because of how Islam regards Mohammad’s marriage to his six year-old child bride, Aisha, as a model of perfect conduct. Central to any understanding of Islam is that this entire process is one of obtaining tribute (jizya) from unbelievers.

This tribute is regarded as being their automatic due in that Muslims consider themselves to be the world’s Master Race. A proper understanding of Islam cannot be had without recognizing this one central point." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

9/21

re: "Palestine, Back to the Future"

Ted Belman at American Thinker ("a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans") sidestepped the issue of mythological nationhood and lunges for a solution.

Money quote(s):

"There was a time when the lands now known as Israel (including Judea and Samaria and Gaza) and Jordan were called "Palestine." In fact, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 declared that "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."

There followed considerable cooperation between the Jews, represented by Chaim Weizmann, and the Arabs living in Mespotamia, now Iraq and Jordan, represented by Emir Feisal. As a result, the Feisal-Weizman Agreement was signed in January 1919, in which it was agreed that the Jews would get the lands lying west of the Jordan River watershed to the Mediterranean."

Fast forward to the end of World War I and Allied disposition of the Ottoman Empire's non-Turkish possessions.

"What remained was for the League of Nations to draw up the Palestine Mandate. Originally, the boundaries of Palestine included what is now Jordan, but a few months prior to the Palestine Mandate being passed by the League of Nations in September 1922, the Jews were told that they must consent to the removal of Jordan from the Jewish homeland if they wished the Mandate to be passed. And so they did, under duress."

Consider this slice one of a salami-slice strategy.

"Britain severed all lands lying east of the Jordan River from the Palestine Mandate and gave the lands to the Hashemites. It was first renamed Transjordan and then just Jordan."

So an Arab homeland was salami-sliced off of overall-Palestine, leaving a Jewish homeland.

(From which additional future Arab homelands may be sliced.)

"There followed many resolutions, wars, and peace processes, all designed to erode Jewish rights to the land described in the Palestine Mandate, and all to no avail. For all intents and purposes, the peace process is dead, and Abu Mazen, otherwise known as Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the PA, has refused to negotiate for the last three years.

This futile effort has resulted in a search for alternate solutions. Newt Gingrich went public with his newsworthy statement that "[w]e've had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, and were historically part of the Arab community." Gov Romney did him one better and said, "It's the Palestinians who don't want a two-state solution; they want to eliminate the State of Israel." Didn't they know that in our PC world, one is not supposed to declare that the emperor has no clothes? The fiction underlying the failed peace process is more important than the truth."

It's truly remarkable to see such prominent politicians depart from the popular narrative in this manner.

"The "Jordan is Palestine" solution has been mooted for decades. It is now gaining traction due in part to the Arab Spring, which began a year ago. Jordan now is feeling the tremors. The majority of Palestinian leaders in Jordan favor Jordan becoming a democratic/secular state. They have watched in dismay as similar forces in Egypt were overwhelmed by the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists. They are determined not to share Egypt's fate. They are led by Mudar Zahran, the author of "Jordan's King and the Muslim Brotherhood: An Unholy Marriage." "

Consider that the majority of people in Jordan are indistinguishable from "Palestinian" Arabs in any appreciable fashion. And that's not counting the ones who are descended from those who left the Jewish homeland or the "Occupied Territories" of the West Bank and Gaza.

"The rationality and achievability of this solution need no elucidation. The solution itself needs only for the U.S. to get behind it. While such an initiative by the U.S. would be a departure from the position it has held since the founding of the State of Israel, it would not be a departure from her original position."

1/29

re: "Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Favoritism Will Lead to War in the Middle East"

Keith Davies at Big Peace attributes to malice what can adequately be explained by naïveté.

Money quote(s):

"Over the last year we have seen our government sell out Hosni Mubarak, the key leader who has brought relative peace and stability in the region. Instead, we have jumped on board with the “Arab Spring” which has led to Islamists taking power. My colleagues and I are not privy to CIA intelligence, but if we were able to predict such things based on common sense and our expertise in Middle East affairs, why could not our government see? Or maybe they can. It seems our government is infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood and, along with political correctness from politicians who choose reelection over common sense, has allowed the Middle East to become a powder keg ready to explode."

Still and all: once is happenstance or accident; twice is coincidence (even if some folks don't believe in "coincidence"); but three times is enemy action.

12/3

re: "ThinkProgress Flips Out, Unaware of Links to US Muslim Brotherhood Group"

Dave Reaboi at Big Peace reports on old news made new again.

Money quote(s):

"ThinkProgress sent a few of their precocious ‘reporters’ to cover the Western Conservative Summit in Denver, and tried to ambush Frank Gaffney on Herman Cain’s recent and ill-considered meeting with Islamic Society of America (ISNA) President Mohamed Magid.

The breathlessness with which ThinkProgress reports on Gaffney’s comment is unintentionally quite funny. ThinkProgress’ Scott Keyes is so out of his depth on this issue, he runs an entire story on something pretty unremarkable: that ISNA is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood" (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

This "news" is news only to those who either haven't been paying attention or who believe that the "A" in CAIR signifies anything other than geography.

"It’s always fun to trip up ThinkProgress on the logic train; Mother Jones, DailyKos, and the others who’re running with this story and have never heard of the Holy Land Foundation Trial and the Muslim Brotherhood in America will continue to spin their wheels and work themselves into a lather."

The alphabet soup of interlocking MB front organizations amount to little more than the modern day Bund; in other words, in a saner time they would have withered away in shame after 9/11.

"What’s more troubling than ThinkProgress, of course, is why Herman Cain felt the need to meet with the president of the Islamic Society of North America, a group, “among those organizations created by the U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood.”"

That's a little troubling, I'll admit, but hardly unprecedented among U.S. politicians. ISNA (and CAIR, &tc.) will continue to present a problem of continuing education until such time as they, and their adherents, are either outlawed, interned, exiled, or treated as hostile combatants.

re: "Adventures in Smart Diplomacy, #2,783"

MikeM at Confederate Yankee ("Because liberalism is a persistent vegetative state.") reminds us of just how many tentacles the Muslim Brotherhood possesses.

Money quote(s):

"The Muslim Brotherhood is arguably the oldest, most influential and most extreme Muslim organization in the modern world. Founded in 1935 in Egypt, its most modern jihadist incarnation began in 1952 when Sayed Qtub, arguably the modern father of the Jihadist movement, returned to Egypt. He had been studying, of all things, American Literature at the University of Northern Colorado. The behavior of American women he saw in movies and in society in general—remember, we’re talking about the early 1950’s—convinced him that western society and Christianity were depraved and turned him irrevocably toward Jihad. His writings had a major influence on Jihadist thinking, an influence still being powerfully felt.

With branches in at least 70 countries (Hamas is the Palestinian branch), including America, the MB is very influential to Muslims around the world. Fatwas—religious edicts—issued by MB mullahs (priests or pastors) are taken very seriously in the Muslim world. A 2004 Fatwa by MB Shiekh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, for example, proclaiming the religious duty of Muslims to abduct and kill Americans in Iraq was widely observed and cost many lives.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s motto is: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” Americans tend to analyze such things through the lens of America’s tradition of tolerance of all faiths and of the separation of church and state. Observant Muslims do not think of themselves as Egyptians or Yemenis—for example--who happen to be Muslim, but as Muslims first and foremost. Their nationality and loyalty to any nation tends to be far down on their list, after being Muslim, family, tribe, clan, and other concerns, if it registers for them at all. When Muslim Brotherhood members speak of jihad and “dying in the way of Allah,” they are not engaging in pandering or politically correct rhetoric but expressing their duty and willingness to die killing anyone they consider the enemy of Islam.

It is, for Americans, a bizarre paradox that American Muslims, people who identify themselves as loyal Americans who happen to practice Islam, people who would not take up the call of Jihad, are different from Jihadist Muslims, from Muslims who support the MB. In fact, these American Muslims are seen as apostates, fit only for death, by their more radical co-religionists. In fact, Muslims not taking the path of Jihad are not truly observing the dictates of their religion, not the other way around."

This may be the best four-paragraph explanation of the Muslim Brotherhood ever written.

If you've go the time and dedication, take a look at this as well.

"Consider that the MB certainly considers all Americans to be infidels, fit only for slavery, conversion to Islam and Sharia, or death. This is not political rhetoric read from a teleprompter, but the life and belief and passion of all observant Muslims who follow MB philosophy. They particularly consider women to be nothing more than chattel, the possessions of men."

Those of you are curious should look into the status of women taken prisoner or captive in war, under koranic observances. Apparently, the misadventure involved in being taking captive suffices to dissolve the captive's matrimonial bonds, thus absolving those who enslave them from committing the serious sin of adultery as they enjoy a bit of rapine thereafter.

How convenient.

"Prominent MB thinkers have already been speaking of completely Islamicizing Egypt, and calling her archeological treasures such as the pyramids and statuary “idols.” This is significant in that Islam brooks no depictions of Muhammed, Allah, or photographs, statues or similar images, considering it to be idolatry. They would gladly do to Egypt’s priceless treasures what the Taliban did to Afghanistan’s priceless and irreplaceable Buddhist statuary: destroy it as contrary to the Koran."

One would think that the pyramids and all the antiquities of Ancient (and not-so-ancient) Egypt would be safe, being such a money-maker and tourist draw for the country. Certainly there are plenty of Egyptians, in and out of government, who understand the economic realities involved in the millions of Egyptians whose livelihoods are dependent upon the successful exploitation of these pre-Islamic treasures.

Unfortunately, there are no guarantees that those who do understand Egypt's economic realities are going to be any match for those who combine a madrassa-style education (i.e., nothing resembling science or reason) with access to modern weaponry and high explosives.

re: "Quick Takes, June 16, 2011"

MikeM. at Confederate Yankee ("Because liberalism is a persistent vegetative state.") shares some quick takes.

Money quote(s):

"ITEM: He Did WHAT?! Remember, gentle readers, the war over the Falkland Islands? You remember that Argentina seized the British Islands in 1982 and the Brits, plucky critters that they are, seized them back? Since taking office, one of the foremost elements of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy has been egregiously insulting our allies, and none more stupidly and regularly than the British. Last June, he backed an Argentinian call for “negotiations” over the islands (read: for forcing the British to give them to Argentina). And now, fresh from his latest diplomatic debacle of insulting the Queen with a clumsy toast, he has again backed a similar resolution. Oh yes, Argentina is more and more allying itself with our declared enemies in the region, so it’s a cinch that Mr. Obama would support them. Go here for the story."

&

"ITEM: Louis Renault Award, Smart Diplomacy Division. I was shocked, shocked! when I discovered that Mr. Obama and the State Department were—how should I put it? Naïve? Foolish? Abysmally stupid?—in their approach to Egypt and their assumption that everything would be just fine, because after all, the Muslim Brotherhood are really just a bunch of moderates who long for democracy. Right. Not so much. Go here to the Washington Post, which speaks of the current and ongoing battle for the future of Egyptian culture. Will Egypt continue to be a reasonably secular democracy or an Islamic theocracy with all that implies? “There is going to be a battle between two visions for Egypt,” the article quotes. Indeed. And the Islamists are heavy favorites as they will have no hesitation in murdering anyone who disagrees with them. Smart diplomacy indeed."

re: "The Ideology of Pestilence"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.") explains how conspiracy is not necessary when consensus suffices.

Money quote(s):

"To conceive of the Islamic invasion as a centrally-directed process is to misunderstand its nature and impose a Western model of behavior on the collective psychological, social, and political actions of Muslims.

Overall Islamic strategy is not coherent and well-organized, no matter how shrewd and effective any of its individual actors and groups may be. To conceive of it as a political entity with a dictator or single decision-making body is to miss the point.

Islam is effective precisely because it is a distributed phenomenon, and utilizes what might be called a micro-ideology — a small set of easily-understood instructions that are encoded and replicated in hundreds of millions of minds across the length and breadth of the Ummah." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Author Tom Kratman says something similar about transnational progressivism; that it's not necessary for there to be a conspiracy, only a widely-accepted consensus about a world-view.

"The exploitation of the infidel may involve a full violent jihad. It may also take the form of razzia — armed raids, pillaging, looting, rapine, and destruction.

In 21st-century Europe, Canada, and the United States, however, the preferred method is what has been called the “stealth jihad” — the gradual but steady infiltration, occupation, and subversion of Western countries.

This does not need to be a hierarchically-arranged and centrally-directed process to be effective. In fact, a full onslaught organized by an outside political entity would be detected and countered, because this is the traditional form of political conflict which the West recognizes, and in which it is supreme.

The stealth jihad in all its forms is the only strategy which can conquer the West, and it is very effective indeed, since our political systems have no template that includes it. We cannot fit it into any conceptual framework, and seem unable or unwilling to devise a new one that would allow us to deal with it effectively." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

The Muslim Brotherhood actually developed, and U.S. law enforcement discovered, the plan for an Islamic takeover of the U.S. Set your search engine for the Holy Land Foundation trial and take a look at was was entered into evidence. Or peruse some of my earlier posts with the Muslim Brotherhood tag.

"Most of the boat people who arrive on Lampedusa or Pantelleria do not view themselves as the vanguard of an Islamic invasion. They come with all the various motivations that you would expect from a group of poverty-stricken and mostly illiterate refugees — fear of repression and violence back home, a desperate search for a better means of subsistence, the desire to take advantage of the legendary bounty of Europe, etc.

However, since they carry within themselves the encoded instructions of Islamic micro-ideology, their modus operandi will be one of rapacious exploitation. They will have no moral scruples of the sort that a Westerner would understand, and feel no shame or embarrassment about being indolent parasites upon their infidel hosts — the simplified Islam they bring with them tells them that this is exactly their due, their basic right as members of a superior social group living amidst their inferiors.

Individual behavior driven by this imperative, when multiplied by thousands or millions, aggregates into an Islamic conquest. Not necessarily suddenly. It doesn’t have to happen all at once. Gradually, over decades, there are more and more Muslims. Always taking, taking, taking from the kuffar. Slowly, imperceptibly, as they become more numerous, our system fades away and is replaced by theirs.

In the long run, Islamic exploitation always fails. The parasite always kills its host. The process takes centuries — the glory of the Persians and the Byzantines persisted for a long time after the Islamic conquest. But in the end their lights guttered and died, and they became corrupt and backward satrapies until the magic of petroleum revived them."

This process is well understood among leading Islamic scholars. Witness a recent call, in the interests of ending Egyptian poverty, for the taking of loot, booty, and slaves from the (infidel) West.

re: "The Muslim Brotherhood in America (Part IV) - Crossing the Bridge: The Implications of the Holy Land Foundation Trial (Part 1)"

John Guandolo at Big Peace explains some things which should be common knowledge.

Money quote(s):

"On a seemingly normal day on the outskirts of Annapolis, Maryland, a singular event led to the revelation of a deep-rooted enemy with a massive infrastructure inside the United States well on its way to achieving its goal of overthrowing the United States Constitution."

Sounds kinda melodramatic, don't it?

"Traveling on 50 West is a Baltimore County (MD) Marine Police unit carrying two officers. They are slowly overtaking a silver Infiniti sport utility vehicle when they notice the passenger is fully covered in what they believe is traditional Islamic garb. Her attire is not what gets their attention though – she is filming the support structures of the Bridge with a video camera. As they come alongside the vehicle she pulls the camera down, and resumes the filming when the police have passed. The officers catch that move. They notify the Maryland Transportation Authority (MTA) who has jurisdiction of the bridge. The officers conduct a vehicle stop at just about the time the MTA unit arrives on scene."

The view from the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, on a clear day, is rather nice; but the bridge's support structures aren't all that telegenic even on such a day.

"The way this was handled was a fair reaction from law enforcement officers when we understand the driver of the vehicle was identified as Ismail Elbarasse – a Hamas operative (and, therefore, a Muslim Brother), wanted on a Material Witness warrant in a Hamas case out of Chicago. As more officers and the FBI are notified, the cops on scene realize there is something big going on. Why is a Hamas guy filming the support structures of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge? Investigators will later suggest that because of Al Qaeda’s reduced ability to operate in the U.S. after 9/11, it was using other groups, like Hamas, to conduct pre-operational surveillance of its targets. What is most historically earth-shattering is what follows the car stop.

The FBI executes a search warrant of Elbarasse’s home and vehicle in Annandale, Virginia. In the basement of the residence is a sub-basement. In the sub-basement, the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood are discovered. Historical documents, financial documents, strategic documents, organizational documents, and all kinds of other items are found among this incredible discovery.

Many of these documents will be entered into evidence at the largest successfully prosecuted terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (or “HLF” for short). These documents were stipulated to by the defense counsel, meaning there is no legal basis to contest their validity as being what they purport to be." (Bold type added for emphasis. - CAA.)

Mr. Guandolo then summarizes ten key facts established by these documents, facts you might not know, or perhaps disbelieve.

"1. Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic non-profit in the United States and it was a Hamas entity.

2. The leaders of HLF were senior Hamas leaders.

3. Hamas was created out of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood.

4. There is a significant Muslim Brotherhood Movement in the United States which began in the 1950’s.

5. The first national Islamic organization, the Muslim Students Association, was created by the Muslim Brotherhood.

6. The MB seeks to subordinate existing U.S. law to Shariah (Islamic Law) and re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate).

7. The most prominent Islamic organizations in North America are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement to include, but not limited to: Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), Muslim Students Association (MSA), International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) which was demonstrated to be a Hamas entity in the United States.

8. ISNA and NAIT are Hamas support entities.

9. ICNA is partnered with the Muslim American Society (MAS), and their training program to Muslims across North America includes the call to “wage war” against all systems of government not under Islamic rule, and calls Muslims to “hate and despise” all un-Islamic governments, among other things.

10. “Islamic Societies” and “Islamic Centers” across North America are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, meaning along with the mosques, non-profit organizations, lobbying groups, for-profit businesses, and the covert organizations controlled by the MB, the Muslim Brotherhood has thousands of entities in the U.S. at all levels of society working daily to bring Islamic law and Islamic rule to the United States." (Bold type added for emphasis. - CAA.)

Now, you may choose to disbelieve, but remember the provenance of this information. In my academic research (and that paper garnered an "A," by the way*). I've had occasion to read some of the documents which were entered into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial. They're acessable on the internet without a great deal of searching.

"What is most disturbing from this factual information is that federal agencies charged with the security of the United States, as well as state and local law enforcement organizations, have primarily worked with ISNA, CAIR, MSA, MAS or other hostile organization over the years – and continue to do so today. This creates a significant legal and practical danger to American citizens when the very agencies sworn to “protect and defend” are taking their advice from an enemy – the Muslim Brotherhood / Hamas / Al Qaeda – who has made their violent objectives crystal clear to anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear."

This is one of the reasons I find it hard to take a lot of our "homeland security" efforts very seriously.

Be sure to read the final paragraph.

_____
* In the course of some of my academic work, I made it a point of putting the academic integrity of my instructors to the test, by submitting well written, assiduously documented, and painstakingly reasoned research papers leading to quite politically incorrect conclusions.

To their credit, not a single professor ever downchecked me on the basis of their personal leanings. I was very impressed.

re: "Libya: Military Science 101 at work"

McQ at Blackfive ("the paratrooper of love") shows how the enemy gets a vote in how the best-laid plans go aft agley. (We're not the only ones with a learning curve, after all.)

Money quote(s):

"I noted the other day to someone that once Gadhafi’s forces figured out how to adapt to the coalition presence and tactics, they’d probably begin to swing the momentum back to their side. Why? Because they’re better trained and equipped than the “rebels”. "

The Libyan rebels are, almost by definition, a "rag tag band." In other words, they're a "pick-up" team. No hard winter at Valley Forge drilling under Von Steuben for them. To their detriment.

"Think about it - what is the hardest thing to distinguish? Whether or not a civilian vehicle is occupied by good guys or bad guys – or neither. Make your side pretty much identical from the air to the other side or just regular civilians and it makes the job the coalition has undertaken much harder. That’s precisely what the Gadhafi troops have done."

The enemy gets a vote in how your plan (assuming you have a plan developed somewhat beyond the "Underpants Gnome" stage) and will be doing whatever they can manage to foul up and interfere with its successful implementation.

That why the call them "the enemy."

"I hear a lot of talk about the US (or others) arming the rebels and how that will make the difference. Nonsense. While not having the weaponry that the other side has is indeed a disadvantage, it isn’t the rebel alliance’s biggest problem. Their biggest problem is they’re an untrained and undisciplined rabble. And an untrained and undisciplined rabble confronting even marginally trained troops with at least a modicum of discipline are going to lose if all else is equal."

In political terms, this is why the odds favor the Muslim Brotherhood coming out on top of the tweeters and Facebookers in Egypt: the Ilkwan are organized and prepared for violence, just like the Bolsheviks and Khomeini's "revolutionaries" were.

re: "The Muslim Brotherhood in America: Part I – Understanding the Threat"

John Guandolo at Big Peace has begun a frightening series of articles.

Money quote(s):

"It is now March of 2011. That jihadi attack on the United States is over nine years behind us. The declaration of a global jihad from Iran in 1979 is over 30 years in our rear view mirror. The national security apparatus of the United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars to “make America safer,” yet we still have not defined our enemy – or even tried. There is no place in the national security structure which has objectively evaluated the threat doctrine of our enemy, and then created a strategic plan for victory for the United States – per U.S. warfighting doctrine. This lack of strategic understanding of the nature of the threat we face is not only costing us lives on the battlefield in wars with no realistically stated objectives, but so long as we drift aimlessly, we cannot win and we allow the enemy to move our boat as he sees fit. That, is the enemy’s strategy. And he is executing with great success."

This problem has implications far beyond the merely doctrinal and theoretical. When the ever-awkward construction "global war on terrorism" is junked for "man-made disasters," it's not an improvement.

Foreign policy, or at least diplomacy, is just one of the instruments of national power which can be used to implement or support a strategy, grand strategy, or even an operational or tactical plan. Without a clear grand strategy in the current global war, or even an acknowledgement that it exists (that there is something bigger going on that two isolated theatres of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan), foreign policy will be about what you see now.

"The United States continues to view the wars (the establishment sees this as several conflicts, not as one global conflict) as kinetic engagements where guns, air power, drones, bombs, and other weapon of war are brought to bear on “Al Qaeda terrorists” and others with whom we are engaged on the many battlefields around the world."

As I noted above, military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan were not conceived and initiated as wholly unrelated and independent activities, whether you agree with them or not. They were, and are, separate campaigns in a larger strategy.

Students of history will note that strategies, and grand strategies, evolve, as do objectives. Abandonment or feigned ignorance of those objectives, however, partway through their accomplishment courts great hazard.

"Every brand new intelligence officer in the United States military knows that when the United States evaluates a threat, our doctrine drives us to begin our process with WHO the enemy says he is and with WHAT the enemy says are HIS reasons for acting. That is where the U.S. analytical process begins – per our own doctrine. If we had done this after 9/11, we would not have so much confusion about the enemy we are engaging.

One hundred percent of the enemy we are fighting states he is fighting “Jihad” in the “Cause of Allah” in order to implement Islamic Law (Shariah). Therefore, U.S. analysts must begin here. Does Islamic Law exist? If so, what does it say about “Jihad” and the requirements for Jihad?"

Clearly, what even the shiniest new intelligence officer or analyst knows requires years of experience and higher education to unlearn. But it can be done.

"Our entire national security apparatus is focused (fixed) on the threat of the violent Jihadis – Al Qaeda and the hundreds of other jihadi groups throughout the world engaging U.S and allied troops on the ground around the world.

Our enemy has no intention of defeating us on the battlefield. The kinetic war being waged by organizations like Al Qaeda, Hamas, and the many other jihadi groups is meant to bleed us, fix us in place, and create a strategic distraction while the real war they are fighting is won in the information battlespace. While AQ fixes us in place, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) presses the U.S. – and the West at large – into a corner with a stated foreign policy mirroring that of Al Qaeda. Who is the OIC? The OIC is the umbrella organization for every Muslim nation in the world – 57 states (they count Palestine as a state). At the Head of State and King level the OIC seeks to re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate) and implement Islamic Law. They have a 10-Year Plan in English on their website that may begin shedding light on who they are and what they intend for the West."

Oddly, I was recently required (earlier last year) to write a strategy paper as if I were a military analyst tasked with developing a strategy for Al-Qaeda. It looked a lot like what you just read. Of course, I was probably looking at many of the same, publicly available, source documents available to Mr. Guandolo.

"(T)he reason the International Muslim Brotherhood is calling for the death of Qaddafi is because he is “killing Muslims without right,” a capital crime under Islamic Law, and an act defined as “terrorism” by the OIC – that means the Head of State and King of every Muslim nation in the world has a parallel foreign policy from the one they are discussing with our State Department, and our State Department does not have clue one about it."

Our State Department, like the military, is run as a top-down organization and, like aboard the Titanic, it's difficult-to-impossible to change a large organization's course from down here in the engine room. Individual analysts and reporting officers must continue to write the truth as they observe it, as they interpret it, and keep faith that policy and decision makers are doing more than filing things down the memory hole and proceeding with their pre-conceived biases.

"The Muslim Brotherhood, like the OIC and Al Qaeda, seeks to re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate) and implement Islamic Law (Shariah). You do not need a SCIF or a “secure space” to pull this information up on a classified government system. All of the enemy doctrine can be found on the worldwide web, in books, in speeches, in their training curricula, and coming out of their mouths on a daily basis."

What he said.

"When the MB says they have “renounced violence” they are – hold onto your hats – lying.

From several major terrorism trials in the United States, and other information, we now know nearly every major Muslim organization in North America is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) or a derivative group. We know many are support entities for Hamas, and all of the Islamic organizations working with the U.S. government are controlled by the MB. These include: the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a Hamas support entity; the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Hamas organization; the Muslim Students Associations (MSA); the Muslim American Society (MAS); the Interntional Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT); the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC); the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), a Hamas support entity; and many other. We also know that the objectives of the MB mirror those of Al Qaeda.

The MB’s doctrine is crystal clear on their objectives. The means for achieving these objectives is to wage a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” – a “grand jihad” – to destroy us from within. They seek to co-opt our leadership in all areas of our society – political, military, intelligence/law enforcement, media, religious. Civilization jihad by our hands. When we see that the Islamic advisor to President Clinton was a Muslim Brother and an Al Qaeda operative currently in federal prison, or that the MB runs the Shariah Compliant Financial programs for the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or that senior policy advisors to Secretary Napolitano are Muslim Brothers, or that the Assistant Director for the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate is an Iranian-born Muslim, we see that there are catastrophic security issue within the U.S. government and that - just maybe – the MB means what they say."

These statements, if true, have some very scary implications. I'm disinclined to tar everyone with a Middle Eastern or Muslim background with too broad a brush, having served in uniform with more than one such individual in whom I have undiminished confidence. Nonetheless, connections with MB-connected front organizations are not happy-making.

re: "SPLAT!!!"

LC Subotai Bahadur, Lord Pao An at The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler ("HQ of the Rottweiler Empire. An Affiliate of the VRWC.") assembles some information and does a little forecasting.

Money quote(s):

"The Dark Times are no longer a matter of if; but rather of when, how long, and how bad. The Great Depression is now one of the best-case scenarios. It IS going to get hungry out there. “Out there” meaning outside our own homes."

Not to get all "survivalist-compound" on you, but keep reading.

"We have been watching the mayhem in Tunisia, Egypt, and around the Third World with more than a little emphasis on the Ummah, the Muslim world. There are riots in the streets, and general unrest. Most of it caused in large part by the rise in the price of food."

As food prices rise, those on the margins get squeezed past the breaking point; leading one "illegal" Tunisian food vendor to self-immolation.

"Our poor, those officially designated by the government, have as high a per capita income as much of the middle class in the rest of the world, and have more and better material goods and in many cases housing than the middle class of the rest of the world.

One of the points where we come out ahead, even our poor, is in the percentage of income and effort that has to be devoted to getting enough food to eat. In this country, we average 10-15% of our income having to be spent on food. For most of the rest of the world; it is 40-60%. There is also a qualitative difference."

"In our country, the primary dietary problem of the poor is acute obesity. In the Third World, there is not a productive agricultural sector and the governments spend a large proportion of their budgets importing food from overseas and selling it to the people at subsidized prices that do not reflect the actual cost at all. Our government interventions into agriculture are designed to keep prices high enough to continue to encourage continued high volume production by our agricultural sector. We produce enough food to feed our own, fatten our poor, and usually export enough to feed much of the world. And we do it with less damage to the environment than pretty much all the rest of the world.

Now let us consider those rough figures about the cost of food in the family budget. If food prices rise 10% in this country, that means that the total cost of food out of the family budget goes to 16 ½%. Not pleasant, but bearable. We have enough leeway in income to adjust things to make it work. Cutting back on Starbucks and a few other optional purchases more than covers it without touching other necessities. In the Third World, a 10% price increase can mean the food portion of the budget goes to 2/3 of their income; and there is not much other leeway."

"The supply of food is not fixed. It is shrinking.

Aside from the deliberate policy of currency inflation by all the major economic powers [which raises all world commodity prices], there is an actual shortfall of food grains. There are 5 major producers/exporters of food grains that cover the shortfalls in food production around the world.

Russia/Ukraine, Canada, Australia, Argentina, and the United States. Russia/Ukraine has embargoed food exports due to crop failures [drought and fires] so they can hope to feed their own people. Canada’s wheat crop is down 12% below normal due to flooding. Australia has floods and storms in the east and crop destroying droughts in the west. Argentina does not have that great a surplus. And the United States is using 1/3 of its grain crop to make energy inefficient moonshine to burn instead of using it for food.

That is why the governments of Third World countries that can afford it are buying up food grains as fast as they can and are paying a premium for it. And this is not because of any sense of responsibility for those people. It is to avoid being literally torn to pieces by a mob. There is no longer the slack to maintain the subsidies, so food prices are rising. Hungry people who are subjects, and not citizens with alternate means of getting at the government,* will turn to violence fairly immediately."

* I.e., fair and democratic elections, independent judiciaries, rule of law not men, &tc.

"Hunger and inflation are major factors in what is happening in Egypt, both as triggers, and in limiting the riots [people have to stop and find food for their families, as the government food distribution system broke down right smartly]. There is no solution to what is happening there that will come from either a change of government, or some form of the old Nassarite system holding on. Population pressure, and the economic chaos caused by worldwide inflation and a shortage of food grains mean that no matter if things settle down under the Supreme Military Council, eventually it will fall apart. There is not going to be a Constitutional Convention at that point. At one or another interation, the Muslim Brotherhood or a like group is going to end up in charge."

The writer does, in his post, offer some constructive suggestions (not quoted here) as to how the global food shortage may be alleviated by unilateral action of the U.S.

"1/3 of the winter wheat crop in China has been lost to drought. More, maybe all, may be lost.
Think about that for a moment, because there are some pretty dire consequences.

China has made food self-sufficiency a key policy goal since 1949, except for politically caused famines. It has succeeded pretty well up till now. China avoids massive grain imports most years. It just failed."

Bear in mind also that rising incomes in China have led to a more Western type diet among the growing middle class. After all, if you can afford it, why eat like your peasant forebears if you don't have to.

As any honest political scientist (or intelligence analyst) will tell you, it's not downtrodden peasants who make successful revolutions; it's dissatisfied middle classes with rising (and frustrated) expectations.

"China is NOT going to suffer a major famine now if the Chinese government can help it, because over a billion hungry Chinese are going to remember how certain dynasties ended if they do. And the Chinese government can afford to buy the food from overseas. China has a huge trade surplus with us. They have dollars coming out the south end of the northbound dragon. They will bid whatever it takes to secure food supplies. The amounts of both money and grain will be horrendous. And the world price will go up. And up. And up. And the supply of grain available for purchase by the rest of the world is going to go down. And down. And down. It is going to get damned hungry out there in the world. And hungry people do not have much patience."

"We will not be exempt. Food prices will rise. We will be competing with foreign bidders for our crop, which is as it should be. That will be good for our farmers. And we do produce enough for ourselves, if we are allowed to. The only way to limit the food price increases would be to do like Russia, and embargo food exports. That will put Malthus on steroids and increase the bad results elsewhere."

&

"Another possible consequence. China will be using dollars to buy a huge amount of food. They also buy the worthless script that we call Treasury Securities. What if they use the money they buy Treasuries with to buy food; or if they start selling our Treasuries to pay for food. The reduced demand for Treasuries means that government interest costs skyrocket and the shell game is over." (Emphasis in original.)

This last possibility has had me concerned since the Egyptian protests started and I became aware of the food shortage problem. I've since read (can't remember where) that China has already begun selling T-bills and its Japan that's picking up the slack.

I can't confirm it, I definitely read it online (so it must be true) rather than anywhere governmental, but it is worrisome.