Obama and the Shadow Socialist Group Behind Egypt’s Fall?

By Michael Savage and Greg Lewis

© 2011 by Savage Productions, Inc.
All Rights Reserved

Barack Obama has been playing a critical role in making sure that

Egypt, one of our staunchest allies in the Middle East, is positioned to

become the next member of the Union of Iranian Radical Islamist Republics

headed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Every single word out of the president’s

mouth, every single move he’s made has had the effect of stabbing Egyptian

President Hosni Mubarak in the back, of opening the door to Islamist

radicals taking another step on their way to restoring an unholy caliphate in

that region.

The historical precedent for Obama’s actions can be found in those of

another weak liberal Democratic president, Jimmy Carter. In the late 1970s,

the Shah of Iran ruled that country in much the same way Hosni Mubarak

has ruled Egypt, through maintaining tight control over the population with a

strong military and the support of the United States. When Carter withdrew

his support of the Shah in the name of “human rights,” he enabled the

Ayatollah Khomeini to return to Iran from his exile in Paris and assume

leadership of the country.

1
 It looks very much like Obama is following directly in Carter’s

footsteps. The problem is that the situation is much more serious today than

it was 30 years ago. Blame that on Jimmy Carter.

Carter’s turning over Iran to the mullahs has allowed Islamist

radicalism to establish a soon-to-be-nuclear outpost in the region. Mahmoud

Ahmadinejad is set to expand his influence and power by abetting the

overthrow of nations such as Egypt that retain ties with and receive support

from the west. There is no doubt that Ahmadinejad sees himself as the leader

of an Islamist union that wields power over the entire Middle East and

threatens western civilization as well.

Since the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the left in America has

come out on the side of Islamist radicals. They cheered as the Twin Towers

fell and American lives were lost. With the election of one of their own as

president of the United States, the left moved even closer to realizing its aim

of bringing down our country.

It is not out of the question that Barack Obama is actually working to

insure that our allies in the Middle East, including Egypt and Jordan, follow

in the footsteps of Iran in installing a radical Islamist government. It is not

out of the question that Obama seeks the demise of our staunchest ally,

Israel.

2
 What is becoming clear is that, like Jimmy Carter, Obama is on the

side of Islamist radicals. When Iranian students staged an uprising after the

rigged elections in that country insured that the totalitarian government of

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would remain in power, Obama was on vacation in

Hawaii and treated the Iranian insurrection as nothing more than a nuisance.

Instead of intervening and speaking out strongly in favor of the

students and the overthrow of a truly heinous enemy regime, Obama

declined to take sides, saying “it is up to Iranians to decide who Iran’s

leaders will be.” By not speaking out and taking the lead in denouncing the

Iranian regime, Obama revealed where his sympathies lay.

Only a few weeks earlier, Obama had delivered one of his more

insipid speeches. Speaking in Cairo, he had called for America to end torture

and close the prison at Guantanamo Bay in order to reclaim its “moral

authority.”

His insistence that “the people of Iran” should decide who their

leaders are simply ignored the fact that the Ahmadinejad regime had rigged

the election. The point was that there was no way the Iranian people could

decide who their leaders would be. By saying what he did, Obama came

down solidly on the side of the Muslim dictatorship and rigging elections in

order to achieve it.

3
 Less than two years later, the Cairo insurrection against one of

America’s staunchest allies, Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, provided

Obama with another chance to speak out against Islamist radicalism. Instead

he’s again waffled and backtracked and stabbed Mubarak in the back by

demanding that the Egyptian president step down immediately.

Nobody is saying that Mubarak’s government is a paragon of

democratic rule. What Mubarack has done, though, is to provide a

stabilizing influence in the Middle East. He’s the closest thing to a friend

that Israel has in the region. He’s helped Israel secure its borders, and he’s

kept the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood from gaining power in Egypt by

outlawing them. He’s accepted U.S. foreign aid, primarily in the form of

military equipment, and used it to maintain his country’s strength.

Our foreign aid, which Obama has publicly considered withdrawing to

punish Mubarack, represents money well spent. We get back much more in

increased Middle East security through the sale of military equipment to our

ally than can be measured simply in dollars.

After watching silently for several days as demonstrators overran the

streets of Cairo, Obama did what he would not do in the Iranian situation:

He said that Mubarak must step down immediately in order to pave the way

for “free” elections.

4
 But as it turns out, it’s not quite as simple as that. Obama’s words to

the contrary, it’s highly likely that our president had a strong hand in

bringing about the riots in Egypt. Beyond that, he was aided and abetted by

the very man who engineered the financial meltdown that enabled Obama to

get elected in the first place: George Soros.

The U.S. knew as early as December, 2008, that groups opposed to

the Mubarak regime were already developing a plan to overthrow the

Egyptian government. They received the information from a young dissident

who the U.S. had sponsored to attend a meeting for international political

activists that took place in New York City.

In addition, according to documents exposed by WikiLeaks, U.S.

Ambassador to Egypt Margaret Scobey was aware of the plans of the

Mubarak opposition group. Leaked documents also show that while the

United States publicly supported the Mubarak government, U.S. Embassy

officials continued to communicate with the activist in question throughout

2008 and 2009.

The problem is that in order for a country to hold “free” elections, it

must have a democratic infrastructure, a democratic culture. In the most

important sense, there is no Middle Eastern country that has this, except for

Israel. Even our attempts to establish democracy in Iraq have done little to

5
combat the influence of Iran or to insure that democracy will survive after

we leave.

When you try to establish a democracy in the Middle East, Islamist

radicals move in and take over. It’s exactly what happened in Gaza. In the

elections of 2005, the terrorist group Hamas was the big winner over

Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah Party. By 2007, Hamas had drive the Fatah Party

out of Gaza. And when Abbas, still the nominal president of Gaza, called for

elections in January of 2009, Hamas said that anyone who participated in the

election would be “dealt with by the [Hamas] ministry or by other means.”1

In other words, if you vote you die.

That’s what the term “free elections” means in the Middle East. It

means that a radical terrorist organization will move in, intimidate the

population, and make sure that its candidates are elected.

It’s exactly what is likely to happen in Egypt, even if an “orderly”

transition to free elections takes place. First, it’s very likely that even if the

uprising against Mubarak in Egypt began spontaneously, it’s no longer

spontaneous. Ahmadinejad applauded the insurrection loudly when it began,

and there is no doubt that his agents are involved on the street and in the

backrooms where strategies against Mubarak are being plotted.

6
 To this point: One of the key figures in opposition to Mubarak is

Mohamed ElBaradei. He’s the former International Atomic Energy Agency

(IAEA) Director. In that capacity, he whitewashed Iran’s nuclear energy

program, essentially saying that Ahmadinehad was not pursuing nuclear

weapons when it’s clear to everyone that he is. On January 18, before the

uprising in Egypt had begun, AlBaradei, in what was a veiled call to action

for Islamists, warned that a “Tunisia-style explosion” could occur in Egypt.

AlBaradei has emerged as a key figure in a “shadow parliament” that

has formed in Egypt.2 The shadow parliament consists of opposition leaders

who are trying to develop plans for a transition to a new regime through

“free and democratic” elections. Included in the group are representatives of

the Muslim Brotherhood, the radical terrorist group responsible for the

assassination of Egyptian Premier Anwar Sadat in 1981 and the seed group

for other Islamist terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda. The Muslim

Brotherhood seeks nothing less than a government based on Islamist

principles, including the implementation of Shariah Law and waging jihad

against the west.

AlBaradei, given the fact that he looked the other way when

inspecting Iran’s nuclear facilities, is very likely a puppet of the Iranian

regime. In April, 2009, AlBaradei told the press that “more U.S. engagement

7
with Tehran’s leaders would increase regional security.”3 Although many

say he’s unlikely to play a key role in the upcoming elections, he’s

nonetheless one of the agents seeking to give Islamist radicals a voice in the

Egyptian government.

It’s no coincidence that AlBaradei showed up in Cairo only two days

after the uprising began and was immediately named a negotiator by the

Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, he had been waiting in the wings for quite a

while.

He’s on the board of an organization headed by George Soros and

Zbigniew Brzezinski called International Crisis Group. Brzezinski is the

same man who supervised the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979.

Another board member of the ICC is one Javier Solana. Solana is one

of the most powerful figures in the European Union. Because of his Marxist

sympathies and his support for the regime of Cuba’s Fidel Castro, Solana

was once on the USA’s subversive list. Former U.S. National Security

Advisor Sandy Berger, who once smuggled incriminating documents out of

the Clinton White House by hiding them in his clothing is another Board

Member, as is General Wesley Clark, once fired from his NATO command.

Monamed ElBaradei also sits on the ICC’s Board.

8
 The organization’s stated aim is “working to prevent conflict

worldwide.” The group promotes itself as “the world’s leading independent,

non-partisan, source of analysis and advice to governments, and

intergovernmental bodies like the United Nations, European Union and

World Bank, on the prevention and resolution of deadly conflict.”4

The true purpose of the ICC is exactly the opposite of its stated

purpose. It seeks nothing less than the political downfall of moderate

regimes in Muslim countries which maintain friendly relations with the

United States, with the ultimate purpose of destroying our country and

promoting Islamist regimes.

Soros continues to exert a strong influence on the policies and

pronouncements of Barak Obama and his administration. His influence

includes promoting the Muslim Brotherhood to a position of power in Egypt.

To that end, Frank Wisner, a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt, met secretly

with Issam El-Erian, a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, at the

Obama administration’s request. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss

the fate of Egypt after Mubarak was deposed.5 It is also reported that Obama

himself met with members of the Muslim brotherhood in 2009.6

While the situation in Egypt is still fluid, with Mubarak proposing to

remain in power through the elections scheduled for September, the fact is

9
that Egypt is the key player in what is almost certainly a larger movement to

unseat current governments in the region and replace them with Islamist-

friendly regimes.

This week, the Egyptian Foreign Ministry said that President Obama’s

call for an immediate transition from the government of President Hosni

Mubarak has incited violence. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki

said “What foreign parties are saying about ‘a period of transition beginning

immediately’ in Egypt is rejected. He added that such calls “inflame the

internal situation in Egypt.”

Tunisia’s government was dissolved and its president, Zine El

Abidine Ben Ali, fled the country after protests against joblessness and

corruption overwhelmed Tunisia’s security forces in a situation that

foreshadowed what is happening in Egypt.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II has also dissolved the parliament in his

country in response to protests similar, although not as violent and

widespread, to those in Egypt and Tunisia. Abdullah has also promised free

elections within six months.

The situation is ripe for Islamist terrorist organizations to move in and

take control of the Middle East. And Obama is their enabler. He is the

epitome of a weak liberal president. He mouths utopian leftist platitudes

10
while the governments of our allies in the Middle East are challenged.

Obama actually said the Muslim Brotherhood “must reject violence and

recognize democratic goals” in one interview.

His lack of understanding of the consequences of this type of rhetoric

and of the positions he holds is unfathomable. It may well be that at heart he

is true to his Muslim upbringing and is bound to cede the power of the

Judaeo-Christian west to Islamic tyrants.

He supports the demonstrators when there is a chance that his support

will lead to the overthrow of our allies, but he keeps his mouth shut when

truly dictatorial Islamist regimes are threatened by popular uprising.

His weakness is having the effect of enabling a new caliphate to be

formed in the Middle East. We’re very likely witnessing the formation of a

new Islamist alliance led by Iran.

Reaction from people who understand the true urgency of the situation

has universally condemned Obama’s positions. One article about Obama’s

“betrayal” of Mubarak was titled “A Bullet in the Back from Uncle Sam.”

That piece went on to describe “the politically correct diplomacy of

American presidents throughout the generations” as “naïve.”7 Israeli

lawmaker Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said, "I don't think the Americans

understand yet the disaster they have pushed the Middle East into."8

11
 The United States, upon realizing the seriousness of the situation in

Egypt, should have immediately come to the aid of President Mubarack and

the maintenance of stability in Egypt and the region. We should have

deployed naval assets to the Suez Canal in order to protect that channel

through which nearly 10 percent of the world’s goods pass on their way to

their destinations. We should also have made it clear that we support our

allies, Egypt and Israel, and we will do everything in our power to maintain

the status quo, even as Egypt moves toward liberalizing its government.

We should also have made it clear that intervention by other countries,

especially Iran, will not be tolerated. Obama needed to come down on the

side of maintaining our allies in the region. Instead, he sided with Islamists.

The invitation to hold “free elections” in Middle Eastern countries

with no history of democracy and no democratic infrastructure or culture in

place is nothing less than a naive invitation to Islamist radicals to step in and

take control. Such a transition, if it can be made at all, must be very gradual.

People with no history of establishing and maintaining democratic

institutions must be led into their formation.

As Murabak supporters clash with anti-Mubarak forces in the streets

of Cairo, the country’s fate rests more and more with the Egyptian military

and with Omar Suleiman, Egyptian Intelligence Chief who is now Vice

12
President. It is just possible that, if the military is able to retain power and if

Suleiman is able to take over from Mubarak, that the Middle East can retain

its precarious balance. But don’t look to Barak Obama for help.

1
“Hamas in Gaze elections warning,” BBC NEws, October 28, 2009
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8330743.stm).
2
Levinson, Charles, and Steve Stecklow, “Inside Opposition’s War Room, Wall Street Journal, February 3,
2011, p. 1.
3
Tirone, Jonathan, “Iran Divides Mubarack’s Troubleshooter, Opposition’s AlBaradei,” Bloomberg,
February 2, 2011 (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-02/iran-divides-mubarak-s-troubleshooter-
opposition-s-elbaradei.html).
4
http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/about.aspx.
5
Klein, Aaron, “U.S. ‘held secret meeting with Muslim Brotherhood,’” World Net Daily, February 1, 2011
(http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=258405).
6
Bar’el, Zvi, and Avi Isacharoff, “’Obama met Muslim Brotherhood members in U.S.,’” Haaretz.com,
April 6, 2009 (http://www.haaretz.com/news/obama-met-muslim-brotherhood-members-in-u-s-1.277306).
7
Hamilton, Douglas, “Israel shocked by Obama’s ‘betrayal’ of Mubarak,” Reuters, January 31, 2011
(http://af.reuters.com/article/egyptNews/idAFLDE70U1N820110131).
8
“Some in Israel see Obama administration reaction to Egypt as naïve,” The Western Star, February 3,
2011 (http://www.thewesternstar.com/Canada---World/Society/2011-02-03/article-2194672/Some-in-
Israel-see-Obama-administration-reaction-to-Egypt-as-naive/1).

13