Appeasing the Muslim Brotherhood -- Obama's Rubicon Moment

Signed on September 17, 1978, the Camp David Accords ushered in a peace between Egypt and Israel.  This peace is clearly in jeopardy now that Obama has shown that America can no longer be trusted to aid its allies, let alone its own interests.  In 2010, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano secretly met with the Muslim Brotherhood, "a movement that uses a religious identity to mask its political agenda."  Also in 2010, the U.N. Security Council "quietly dropped Youssef Nada, a prominent financial and diplomatic representative of the Muslim Brotherhood from an international sanctions list directed at curbing the activities of alleged terrorist financiers."  At the time, Victor Comras, a former adviser on financial sanctions believed that "the Obama administration would have had to signal that it was willing to go along with this decision."

The Muslim Brotherhood, long a supporter of Hamas and Hezb'allah, deliberately works to "foster confusion" in order to obfuscate its real message.  Thus, conflicting messages come from the Brotherhood leaders, yet it is patently apparent that they are committed to the destruction of Israel.  During the Holy Land Foundation case, one of the most interesting exhibits was a "Muslim Brotherhood memorandum by Mohamed Akram, dated May 22, 1991, where he outlines the Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] vision of the future."  Thus, "the Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

The Brotherhood's slogan depicting a Koran and swords reinforces the group's commitment to jihad and worldwide Islamification.   On October 27, 2009, the Muslim Brotherhood Sheik Mahdi Akef claimed that the "Arab rulers are more despicable than the Zionists" and urged his listeners "to wage jihad."  In 2007, Akef said that the "Brotherhood has not recognized Camp David from the very first day it was signed."  In 2004, Akef declared "his complete faith that Islam will invade Europe and America." 

More recently, in his February 4, 2011 Friday sermon, Iranian Supreme Leader Al-Khamenei exhorted his listeners as he described the events in Egypt as an "Islamic liberation movement."  He reminded his followers of the Iranian Revolution, also known as the Islamic revolution or 1979 Revolution, and reflected on certain parallels with the current Egyptian uprising.  Khamenei called the Camp David peace treaty signed by Egypt and Israel the "Treaty of Shame."  Syria was praised by Khamenei, while Egypt's Mubarak is cited as a traitor to the Islamic movement.  Moreover, Khamenei told his worshipers "not [to] trust the role played by the West and America. ... "

Ominously, Khamenei explained that "the religious scholars, and Al-Azhar ... [would] play a much more significant role [in the new Islamic revolution]."  Thus, "when the people embark on its revolution from the mosques and the Friday sermons, and raise the slogan of 'Allah Akbar,' the Islamic scholars are expected to play a more prominent role.  This expectation is in place."

From his pulpit, Khamenei avowed that "the Zionist enemy, not the Egyptian people, should tremble in fear of the Egyptian army," as he believes the Egyptian army will [eventually] join the masses." 

In November 2007, Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi  wrote for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs that the Muslim Brotherhood's "top priority is constructing a Muslim infrastructure in the West which will slowly but surely enable it to rule during the 21st century.  As far as the final goal is concerned, there are no policy differences between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.  The two organizations have the same objective: to place the entire world under an Islamic caliphate." 

More recently, Dore Gold  asks if "the Obama administration's policy toward Egypt [is] based on a perception that the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood would be extremely dangerous -- Or have they taken the position...that the Brotherhood has become moderate and can be talked to?"

In September of 2010, Muslim leaders were brought to the White House in order to provide the groups "funding, government assistance and resources."  That is, "the workshop apparently provided special access for these Muslim Brotherhood organizers."  Thus, "the White House initiated a taxpayer-funded government stimulus program for the attending Muslim Brotherhood-associated groups."  In fact, "the sponsoring organization (CCMO) or Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations has a long history of associations with the Muslim Brotherhood."

Repeatedly, expert testimony has been given by people who have lived under sharia law and/or have devoted their lives to investigating the terror perpetuated by the Muslim Brotherhood.  In fact, Nonie Darwish described "a former Muslim critic of Islam [who has stated] that he is no longer confident that the US government will protect his civil rights as long as there are people in [the American] government such as Dalia Mogahed, the first White House Muslim advisor who is a firm defender of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both groups that are tied to the Muslim Brotherhood." 

In his 2009 report entitled "The Muslim Brotherhood in the United States," author Steven Merley lists the Muslim Brotherhood Organizations in the United States.  They include the more well-known ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) and the MSA (Muslim Students Association) as well as others such as the Muslim Communities Association, the Association of Muslim Social Scientists, the Islamic Medical Association, the Muslim Youth of North America, the ISNA Political Awareness Committee, the OLF (Occupied Land Fund), the MIA (Mercy International Association), the IIC (Islamic Information Center), to name only a few.

It is now time to test Obama's moral compass.  He needs to be directly asked if he believes the Muslim Brotherhood is a threat to the United States.  If he affirms that it is, then he needs to be forcefully questioned as to why he has not taken more concerted steps to thwart their growth in the United States. 

If, on the other hand, the 44th president states that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a threat, then it is quite clear where his true allegiance rests.  American vulnerability would be publicly exposed putting us at grave risk.

If Obama cannot or will not answer this simple question, then his neutral stance also speaks volumes and will embolden the terrorism of the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is the Rubicon moment for this man.  It is the wake-up call for the rest of us.

Eileen can be reached at
If you experience technical problems, please write to