Muslim woman who will advise Obama supports engagement with Muslim Brotherhood

Why not just ask Osama bin Laden over for lunch?

I'm serious. There is very little difference between the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda. Both have at their core a radical jihadist view of destroying the west. Both have carried out acts of terrorism. Both support other radical groups whose goal is killing westerners and destroying western civilization.

And here's our president naming Dalia Mogahed to the interfaith advisory board - a woman who was a member of the
US-Muslim Engagement Project that Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch reports called for "engagement" with the terrorist group The Muslim Brotherhood.

Now admittedly, the interfaith board is one of those White House "make work" groups that gives everyone the feeling that they have input into executive decisions. There are about a half dozen of these boards including one on women's issues, consumer issues, and ethnic issues.

But what does it say about Obama's judgment in choosing someone who calls for "engaging" terrorists in dialogue? What would we have to say to each other? What possible middle ground could be reached? These are people who will accept nothing from "engagement" short of surrender.

It should worry us that Obama fails to comprehend this.
Why not just ask Osama bin Laden over for lunch?

I'm serious. There is very little difference between the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda. Both have at their core a radical jihadist view of destroying the west. Both have carried out acts of terrorism. Both support other radical groups whose goal is killing westerners and destroying western civilization.

And here's our president naming Dalia Mogahed to the interfaith advisory board - a woman who was a member of the
US-Muslim Engagement Project that Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch reports called for "engagement" with the terrorist group The Muslim Brotherhood.

Now admittedly, the interfaith board is one of those White House "make work" groups that gives everyone the feeling that they have input into executive decisions. There are about a half dozen of these boards including one on women's issues, consumer issues, and ethnic issues.

But what does it say about Obama's judgment in choosing someone who calls for "engaging" terrorists in dialogue? What would we have to say to each other? What possible middle ground could be reached? These are people who will accept nothing from "engagement" short of surrender.

It should worry us that Obama fails to comprehend this.