This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Foreign Policy

  • Holocaust Denial: Not Just for Iran Any More

    Remember when the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, caused an outcry by publicly denying the Holocaust a few years ago?  You know, when he claimed the Holocaust never happened?  And claimed to be proud of making that ridiculous statement?

    Well, Ahmadinejad now has some help in spouting this ridiculous BS.  And it’s high-level help, as in a senior member of another Islamic nation’s government.

    That company comes in the person of Fathi Shihab-Eddim, a senior official close to Egypt’s President Mohammed Morsi.  Shibab-Eddim was recently quoted as saying that the Holocaust was a hoax perpetrated by US intelligence agencies.  He further claims the 6 million Jews killed during the Holocaust simply moved to the US, and that the true number killed was about the same as the number who died in traffic accidents.

    Seriously.  That’s really what Shibab-Eddim claimed.

    Shihab-Eddim also happens to be the individual who appoints editors for Egypt’s state-run newspapers.  So I guess we won’t be seeing many accurate accounts of the Holocaust in Egyptian newspapers or media any time soon.

    This should be no surprise, though.  The Muslim Brotherhood – with which both Morsi and Shibab-Eddim are affiliated – and other Islamist organizations have a long history of anti-Semitism.  In 2010, Morsi opined that Jews were “the descendants of apes and pigs”.  (Though Morsi claims these words were “taken out of context”, research indicates he’d made numerous similar statements before coming to power in Egypt.)  It’s only a small step from there to outright Holocaust denial.

    And remember: these are the same folks to whom the current Administration is sending massive amounts of US aid – including 20 F16s and 200 M1 tanks.

    Yeah, supporting those Arab Spring uprisings is really starting to look like a great idea, isn’t it?

  • What Difference it Makes…

    “What difference does it make?” Someone on that Senate panel should have responded, Madam Secretary, what a foolish question for a lawyer to ask.” And never forget that Hillary Clinton is a lawyer because you can bet the farm she never has. And as such she knows full well that lawyers make their careers and fortunes on the legal minutiae of cause and effect. Were Hillary acting as legal counsel for a family of one of those deceased navy SEAL’s who died in Benghazi, in a wrongful death suit, she certainly wouldn’t accept a defense argument of, “What difference does it make?” It is difficult to believe that as a lawyer she would have asked that question had she not been coached and prepped to do so for dramatic political effect.

    Her question is also an indefensible and inadequate political response. As a caller to the Rush Limbaugh show gave as examples: what if Nixon had responded to the Watergate charges, “What difference does it make? So a bunch of guys out walking around at night decided to break into Democrat headquarters? So what?” Or, even better, “What if George Bush had responded to the issue of no found WMD’s in Iraq with the same dismissive response?” Do you think the media would have swallowed whole such an indifferent comeback as they’ve done with Hillary?

    The difference it makes Hillary is that there most likely exists tort culpability for wrongful death within the government, whether it’s in your state department or the White House, for those four deaths in Benghazi. And you’d best believe there are going to be far more inquisitive and determined lawyers than you appear to be coming after you and your political cronies. Those fellow barristers aren’t likely to be so easily dismissed as that bunch of fawning senators with:
    “What difference does it make?”

    You can hide behind your sovereign immunity, Hillary, but there are personal injury lawyers out there who know how to pull legal flanking movements on that defense. Whether or not they prevail in court, they will keep your name and your political aspirations in the news between now and 2016.

    And not in a good way…

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • An Egypt Update

    Well, it appears that the Islamists running Egypt are continuing to follow the “playbook”.

    As you probably heard, Egypt approved a new constitution last month – though there were reportedly substantial voting irregularities and a voter turnout of less than 33%.  This new Egyptian constitution defines Egyptian law as being derived from “the principles of Islamic law” and has no explicit protections regarding the rights of women or religious minorities.  But don’t worry, the Islamists say; they’ll respect minority and women’s rights.

    Yeah, right.  Suuuuure they will.  The rest of the Islamic world does that so well – especially in those places where anti-Western Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood have influence.

    In short:  the new Egyptian constitution gives anti-Western Islamist hard-liners the green light to take over.  And that appears to be precisely what the former member of the Muslim Brotherhood and current Egyptian President, Mohammed Morsi, is beginning.

    He’s now shaken up his cabinet, replacing three former cabinet officers with members of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Surprise, surprise, surprise!

    Let’s see – take power through anti-Western street protests while the US stands by and does nothing; gain a veneer of legitimacy via an election held shortly afterwards; re-write the Constitution to eliminate Western influences like religious freedom and women’s rights; ram the new Constitution through in a hasty referendum; and marginalize the opposition afterwards.  So far, we could be talking about either Cairo, 2011-13  –  or Teheran, 1979-1980.

    Unfortunately, the next steps in the “playbook” are fairly nasty ones.  Let’s see if/when they occur.

    I’m hoping they won’t.  But history says they likely will – and that we’ll be feeling the effects for decades.

  • Lessons learned; US evacuates embassy in CAR

    The Washington Times reports that the State Department has evacuated our embassy in the Central African Republican because of rising tensions there and their inability to protect State Department employees in the wake of the Benghazi consulate murders.

    Ambassador Lawrence D. Wohlers and his diplomatic staff left Bangui on Friday with several private U.S. citizens, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said, adding that diplomatic relations with the have not been suspended.

    Americans also are advised not to travel to the Central African Republic (CAR) at this time, as a result of the deteriorating security situation.

    There are also an unknown number of Special Forces soldiers in the area to help the locals defeat those clowns of Joseph Kony.

    Fox News reports that more than 40 people were evacuated with the ambassador to Kenya. And the UN is doing what they do best;

    The U.N.’s most powerful body condemned the recent violence and expressed concern about the developments.

    “The members of the Security Council reiterate their demand that the armed groups immediately cease hostilities, withdraw from captured cities and cease any further advance towards the city of Bangui,” the statement said.

    That should do it. CNN reports that France, the former colonial power until 1960 in the CAR, has a few hundred troops there;

    [CAR President Francois] Bozize directed his call for help to France, saying “the French are our cousins. They should fix what is happening.”

    France has a permanent presence of 200 to 300 military personnel at Bangui’s airport under the mandate of the Economic Community of Central African States.

    But French President Francois Hollande said Thursday that the troops are not intended to “protect a regime” against the advance of the rebels, but instead French nationals and interests.

    France will not “interfere in the internal affairs of a country, in this case, CAR,” Hollande said, adding: “That time is over.”

    Asked about a possible intervention in favor of displaced people or refugees, the French president said that his country could not “intervene unless there is a U.N. mandate,” and, he said, “this is not the case.”

  • Benghazi Redux

    Well, I guess we now know why Ms. Clinton was feeling “too ill to testify” before Congress this week.

    Report on Libya attack cites ‘systemic failures’ in security, confirms no protest

    If I were in her shoes, I certainly wouldn’t want to have to testify under oath about what went on, what I knew, when I knew it, and the like.  Hell, I’d be doing everything I could to disassociate myself from this fiasco.

    But she could be telling the truth about feeling sick.  What I’ve read so far makes me feel pretty sick, too.

    The Accountability Board Report on Benghazi can be found here.  (The Executive Summary alone is pretty damning.)  If you normally run your browser with with scripts disabled, you’ll have to enable them to view it.

  • Unintended Consequences

    Well, it looks like there might well be some additional fallout from our support for those “Arab Spring” uprisings.  As in a resurgence of al Qaeda in North Africa – complete with the establishment of safe havens and training grounds.

    As reported here,  it appears that al Qaeda is making deliberate attempts to set up shop in Libya.  It also appears they’re well along the way to succeeding.

    The article lists 3 factors that, taken together, show strong evidence of an overall plan by al Qaeda to set up shop in Libya.  Those factors are

    • the dispatch of two leaders (Abu Anas al Libi and Abd al Baset Azzouz) who report to al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan;
    • the presence of affilaited groups, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM); and
    • close support by sympathetic local militias, in particular those led by ex-Guantanamo inmate Abu Sufian Ben Qumu.

    The article goes on to provide evidence indicating al Qaeda is likely moving to set up safe haven and training areas in southern Libya.

    I think we’ve seen this movie before – a bit over a decade ago.  As well as around 20 years before that.  And it sucked the first two times around.

    The thesis gets support from the USAFRICOM commander, GEN Carter Ham.  GEN Ham has indicated his concern over “a growing linkage, growing network and collaboration and synchronization amongst various extremist organizations which I think pose the greatest threat to regional stability more broadly across Africa, certainly into Europe, United States as well.”

    Gee, the Arab Spring being organized or (more likely) exploited by al Qaeda for their own benefit.  Yeah, I know – that’s so obvious Stevie Wonder could have seen it coming.

    You’ll have to ask the current Administration why they didn’t, and chose to provide support to the Arab Spring uprisings anyway.

  • Why Am I Not Surprised?

    Remember when we were supporting the Libyan opposition to Qadaffi behind the scenes?  You know, during that “Arab Spring” that was supposed to bring democracy to the Arab world?

    Well, it turns out that we were apparently unwittingly supporting some other folks too.

    Like jihadists.

    According to the NYT, a fair amount of the weaponry the US funneled to the Libyan opposition through Qatar ended up in the hands of jihadist groups.  You know, those same folks who run around forcing women to wear burqas/chadoors, chanting “death to America”, and want to impose Shaira worldwide.

    No evidence has turned up linking any of these arms to the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.

    Yet.

    As I’ve asked before:  tell me again why we’re supporting these “Arab Spring” uprisings?

  • Continuing “Good News” from the “Arab Spring”

    Decrees invoking authority the current ruler doesn’t lawfully have.  Attempts to demonize “old regime” holdovers.  Removing old-guard generals from power.  Pushback from advocates of democracy that are ignored by the rulers – and marginalization of democracy advocates.  Efforts to produce a new constitution so that there’s little or no chance of actual debate concerning its contents.

    Think that sounds like Iran, early 1979, when they were laying the groundwork for setting up the Khomeini Shia theocracy?  You’re right.

    And it also sounds one helluva lot of a lot like Egypt in late 2012.

    The Muslim Brotherhood-backed President of Egypt has done all of that.  Without authority, he has dismissed the nation’s chief prosecutor and placed many of his decrees “off limits” to judicial review – by issuing a decree, of course.  He’s dismissed or marginalized many in the former Egyptian military leadership.  He’s insinuated that no judicial review or input will be appropriate for the planned new Egyptian constitution planned for next year.  And he’s doing all he can to marginalize El Baradi and other advocates of actual democracy.

    In short, as far as I can tell he’s following Khomeini’s playbook to a T – with the exception that he’s putting a Sunni spin on things.  And he’s cagy enough to have done some of the most visible of these abuses of power over a long holiday weekend in the US, and immediately after playing “peacemaker” between Israel and Gaza.

    Tell me again why we supported this movement – and this budding theocratic dictator – in the first place?  Didn’t we get our nose “rubbed in it” thoroughly enough 33 years ago to learn our lesson?