Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Gates of Vienna News Feed 6/7/2011

Gates of Vienna News Feed 6/7/2011Tonight’s news feed is abbreviated because I’m away overnight, and had to set it up in advance, before I acquired a whole day’s worth of tips.

Pay attention to the story about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. It is the only group that has organized effectively and is well-prepared for the elections in September.

Remember: Barack Hussein Obama pushed Mubarak out and pressed for early elections, virtually guaranteeing success for the Muslim Brotherhood. If Obama isn’t a plant for the Ummah, he might as well be.

To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Insubria, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Commenters are advised to leave their comments at this post (rather than with the news articles) so that they are more easily accessible.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.


Blog Master said...

It has to be pointed out that Mubarak was a dictator and a tyrant, and it is a very black mark on all American Presidents over the last 40 years that they supported him. You are eith for democracy or against, the days of picking and choosing have to end.

Brutus said...

@Blog Master: I agree Mubarak was a very bad lot. But democracy in Islam is liable to result in the election of just as bad a lot, one who also hates America and doesn't depend on America to stay in power. I hope I'm wrong, and the Muslim Brotherhood doesn't gain power.

Egghead said...

Blog Master: "...you are either for democracy or against...."

Please be aware that our highly educated Founding Fathers were against pure democracy because pure democracy is mob rule; and, throughout history, mobs have been notoriously uneducated and easy to sway to support bad ideas - including using violence to implement those bad ideas.

Thus, our Founding Fathers adopted a constitutional republic that enshrined 1) individual rights, 2) states' rights, and 3) federal checks and balances to mitigate the harm of uneducated mob rule.

Muslim countries fully intend to use uneducated mob rule to force Sharia Law which eliminates ALL individual rights, states' rights, and checks and balances.

As the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is well aware, Sharia Law elevates Arab Muslim males to a privileged class and radically degrades the status of women, non-Arabs, and non-Muslims into abject slavery - especially perverted sexual slavery of women and children.

The wiki site below explains what our highly indoctrinated public schools and media have distorted in your current understanding:

Constitutional Republic

charleston said...

Moslems probably set fire to the mosque, in order to blame the JEws.

All these years, no mosques set on fire.......not happening now.

Blogger said...

"pure democracy is mob rule"

Exactly, and the mob majority wants draconian Islamic laws.

Nick said...

you're either for the tyranny of the majority, or you're against it ... the days of picking and choosing have come to an end, apparently.

Hesperado said...

Blogmaster doesn't seem to fully grasp what Islam entails for societies formed by it (and, by extension, for its geopolitical neighbors).

In any society dominated demographically by Muslims, there are only three choices:

1) a deformed democracy representing a majority who are diseased by Islam and who actually want Islam to be the basis of all laws

2) a tin-pot dictatorship (in the old days, "Sultanates") who may or may not be fully Islamic -- and if not, could be exploited for our Western geopolitical interests against the global supremacist expansionist danger of Islam: some have been better for our interests than others (e.g., the Shah of Iran being, as Jack Nicholson would say, "as good as it gets")


3) a colonization by Western powers and indefinite occupation, during which we impose our laws on them and try to keep a lid on the Islamic disease (various historical models of attempting this: Dutch Indonesia; French Algeria; Spanish Philippines; British India -- none of which worked in the long-term because the Western powers concerned didn't fully appreciate the unique depth and breadth of the deadliness of the disease of Islam).

The worst of the three is #1. The best could be #3, if we did it right. #2 is what we usually get, in a world where we continue to allow Muslims to have power at all.

Sagunto said...

Blogmaster -

You seem to equate democracy with "free elections". In general - as indicated by Egghead - but surely in the particular case of Muslims, that is nothing short of a recipe for disaster.

They might be able to persuade Richard Gere for another endearing performance on behalf of staged democracy, just like he did in Gaza. We all know how that worked out just fine ;-)

Kind regs from Amsterdam,

Lawrence said...

Blogger said... "pure democracy is mob rule"

Exactly, and the mob majority wants draconian Islamic laws.

Which means they really don't want democracy.

When they democratically chose a new tyrannical government, will President Obama work against that newly appointed government to reinstall democracy?

What happens is a sham democracy for the sake of foriegn powers, but the same dictatorial government underneath.

Is President Obama that narcissistic that he's more concerned with how they look on the outside in context of how it reflects on him, than with how the actually work on the inside in context of tyrannical subjugation of their people?