Posted on 01/31/2011 8:18:18 PM PST by kristinn
An Obama administration official, speaking anonymously to the Washington Post, said the administration is open to the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood being in the government of Egypt that will likely replace the rule of Hosni Mubarak:
The official said that while the administration was concerned about "some elements" of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood and other non-secular groups participating in the demonstrations, it was "not ruling out their legitimacy" and place in a future government.
Obama was aware that the Muslim Brotherhood and others were in the audience when he spoke of "a new beginning" in a 2009 speech in Cairo that was directed at the Islamic world, the official said. He cited a passage in the speech in which Obama said that "no system of government can or should be imposed by one nation on any other" and that "America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them."
The Post buried this unsettling revelation in an article about the administration charting a "delicate course to oust Mubarak."
Voice of America reported that at today's White House briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the administration had no contact with the Muslim Brotherhood:
Gibbs was also asked about the U.S. position on potential participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in any new governing structure, saying that the United States has had no contact with the group.
"We have as we have throughout the world, standards for that contact - that is adherence to the law, adherence to non-violence and a willingness to be part of a democratic process, but not use that democratic process to simply instill yourself into power," he said.
While the group professes to be non-violent, the Muslim Brotherhood is widely considered to be the father of international Islamic terrorism and is thought to be working to create a global Islamic caliphate.
Same guy. He was also ambassador to a few other countries including Zambia. While at Enron, he was instrumental in steering taxpayer money into Enron contracts during the Clinton years. I am not sure of his role with AIG, but it obviously did not end well, costing taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. There’s some conspiracy info out there which tries to connect Wisner, AIG, and the CIA. I don’t know the details of that.
you are absolutely right
you are absolutely right
proof..now we know the change he was talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.