Audio: Rand Paul asked about Hillary committing Perjury at January Benghazi hearing

Back on January 24th, after then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I wrote about her response to Senator Rand Paul's question about arm shipments from Libya to Turkey. That response struck me as being the most noteworthy because it was a question she should have known the answer to. Instead, she said she didn't know.

If she did know - one way or the other - it seems her response would constitute perjury.

Fast forward to this week. On his radio show, Aaaron Klein asked Senator Paul if he thought Clinton may have committed perjury when she said she didn't know the answer to that question.

Via WND:

Video: Authors of 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report'

Former Green Beret Jack Murphy and Former Navy SEAL Brandon Webb have co-authored a book that makes some explosive charges about Barack Obama's nominee for CIA Director, John Brennan. Perhaps the most explosive is that Brennan was ordering weapons raids in Libya after the fall of Gadhafi and that he did so without the knowledge of then CIA Director David Petraeus or Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

According to the Daily Mail, Webb was the best friend of Glen Doherty, one of the two Navy SEALs who was murdered at the CIA Annex on September 11th.

Webb and Murphy appeared on Fox and Friends to discuss their charges and connect some very important dots.

Via Breitbart:



For more analysis of what these charges could mean, go here, here, here, and here.

Did John Brennan's actions play a role in Benghazi attacks?

When coupled with the shocking claim by John Guandolo, that Barack Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, converted to Islam while a station chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990's, some of the details released from a new book written by a retired Green Beret and a Navy SEAL may take on added significance. Among other things in the book, Brennan's orders while operating from the White House are identified as the motivation for the 9/11 attacks in Benghazi.

Brennan is Obama's nominee to replace David Petraeus as CIA Director.

But first, take a look at some other relevant information taken from the book, starting with power players at the CIA who wanted Petraeus gone as CIA Director.

Via The Daily Mail:

Media reports indicate that the FBI began investigating Petraeus' affair with Broadwell after Tampa socialite Jill Kelley, a friend of Petraeus and his wife Holly, reported that she had received threatening emails from the mistress warning her to stay away from Petraeus.

The authors say that Kelley's report may have started in the FBI investigation - but CIA officers pressured the Justice Department to keep the inquiry open.

Webb said his sources in the FBI told him federal agents wanted to close down their investigation when they learned that nothing illegal had happened, but they were told to keep digging. The FBI investigators, Webb says, never wanted to out Petraeus' affair.

The FBI reports to the Department of Justice, which is headed by Attorney General Eric Holder. Surely, something as big as investigating the CIA Director had to be something Holder was aware of. Based on the fact that the subject of the investigation was someone like Petraeus, Holder almost necessarily had to have approved pushing it forward, but to what end?

Was it - at least in part - to open the door for Brennan to head the CIA? Early indications are that authors Brandon Webb and Jack Murphy don't appear to go that far but they certainly piece together the groundwork for such a scenario.

Again, via the Daily Mail:

Murphy and co-author Brandon Webb also revealed that the September 11 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was retaliation by Islamist militants who had been targeted by covert U.S. military operations.

The book claims that neither Stevens nor even Petraeus knew about the raids by American special operations troops, which had 'kicked a hornet's nest' among the heavily-armed fighters after the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

John Brennan, President Barack Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser, had been authorizing 'unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure,' according to the e-book. Brennan is Obama's pick to replace Petraeus as head of the CIA.

If this is true, it would mean that Obama himself could be directly accountable for the attacks in Benghazi because Brennan was ordering these raids from the White House. As such, he was a direct arm of the Obama administration. These raids weren't just carried out on orders of the administration. They apparently weren't made known to the people who would ultimately face what could be identified as their consequences.

Petraeus was furious, they say, because he was kept in the dark about the raids being conducted without his knowledge by the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) across Libya and North Africa.

Webb and Murphy claim that the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. consulate and a CIA outpost in Benghazi proved to Petraeus that he was an outsider in the Obama administration and that he would remain marginalized as long as he was at the CIA.

The central premise of 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' is that the attacks were precipitated by secret raids JSOC had performed in Libya. An attack on the Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia days before September 11 may have been the final straw.

According to what Webb and Murphy are saying here, Petraeus was forced out and Brennan's orders to raid Islamist strongholds led to the Benghazi attacks on an unsuspecting consulate and CIA Annex. At least calling that last part into partial question is the fact that U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Sean Smith both seemed more than just a little concerned about coming under attack. Stevens sent cables to the State Department requesting more security and Smith made reference to losing his life while gaming from the consulate / Special Missions Compound (SMC) on the day of the attacks. That said, it's still possible that a growing threat was felt but not fully understood.

Check out this particularly explosive excerpt from the book. It seems to add credence to the concerns of Senator Rand Paul, raised during his questioning of Hillary Clinton last month:

John Brennan also ran a highly compartmentalized program out of the White House in regard to weapons transfers, and Stevens would not have been trusted with that type of information. Stevens likely helped consolidate as many weapons as possible after the war to safeguard them, at which point Brennan exported them overseas to start another conflict.

Ostensibly, that "exported them overseas" part is a reference to weapons sent from Libya (the annex?) to the Syrian rebels (via Turkey?).

If Petraeus and Stevens were kept in the dark relative to Brennan's raids and those raids served as the motivation for the attacks on the consulate and annex, that places blood directly on the hands of those behind Brennan's orders and secretiveness with respect to them. Under such a scenario, it would appear that Brennan is less qualified to be CIA Director than Petraeus was after the affair became public.

Also, if the claims of Webb and Murphy are true, Obama must certainly know that truth. If so, why would he be nominating Brennan to replace Petraeus unless he was fully behind what Brennan was allegedly doing?

That leads us directly to a covert, pro-Muslim Brotherhood strategy coming directly from the Obama White House, which brings us back to the claim made by Guandolo, that Brennan secretly converted to Islam while in Saudi Arabia and that he was turned by the Muslim Brotherhood specifically.

People might point to Brennan's orders to raid Islamist locations in Libya as evidence that he did NOT convert to Islam because his new religion would forbid him from attacking his own. In reality, the concept of Muruna, espoused by none other than the Brotherhood's most senior spiritual adviser - Yusuf al-Qaradawi - sanctions the killing of Muslims if doing so furthers the cause of Islam.

Again, just operating under the premise that Guandolo has already put forth...

If Brennan's objective was to raid Islamist strongholds for the purpose of confiscating weapons that could then be sent to the Syrian rebels in the latter's fight to overthrow Bashar al-Assad, such a thing would be perceived by the Brotherhood as a greater good.

The bottom line, however, is this: If Brennan was the guy behind operations that both left the consulate and the Annex unprepared to defend against attacks caused by White House policy AND if Brennan was the guy behind secretly ordering weapons be sent to Syrian rebels, all of that is made much worse by Obama's decision to nominate him for CIA Director in the first place.

That would tie Obama directly to gun-running from Libya to Syria and THAT would make Fast and Furious look like child's play by comparison.

The cherry on top would be this administration's attempt at gun control in the U.S. while arming al-Qaeda.

For a Genius, Condoleezza Rice not making much sense

She served for four years as George W. Bush's National Security Advisor, another four as his Secretary of State; she had been Provost at Stanford, and is an extremely accomplished pianist. By all accounts, Condoleezza Rice is widely accepted as a genius.

So why on earth is she advocating for what would inevitably lead to Muslim Brotherhood control of Syria? After reading her recent op-ed in the Washington Post, there really is no gray area about where she stands, though as a seasoned diplomat, she does her level best to massage her message. Her position is that Assad must fall and Syria must not be allowed to fall into the hands of Iranian control.

Via WaPo:

The fragile state structure of the Middle East has been held together for decades by monarchs and dictators. But as the desire for freedom has spread from Tunis to Cairo to Damascus, authoritarians have lost their grip. The danger now is that the artificial states could fly apart.

What Rice avoids saying is breathtaking. Whatever desire there is for freedom in the Middle East is being snuffed out by new, religious tyrants who are filling the vacuum left by those "monarchs" and "dictators". Simply put, in every country where the 'Arab Spring' has been successful at removing dictators, things have gotten much worse. Egypt's new Muslim Brotherhood leader is consolidating power and that country is increasingly on the brink of civil war; Libya may have elected a secular government but make no mistake; al-Qaeda is calling the shots. Yemen, Tunisia, et. al. are all seeing similar outcomes.

Therefore, why would Rice think Syria would be any different?

Perhaps the answer lies in the very next paragraph:

In Iraq, after overthrowing Saddam Hussein, the United States hoped that a fledging multi-ethnic, multi-confessional democracy could do what authoritarians could not: give all of these groups a stake in a common future. To an extent it has, with elections repeatedly producing inclusive governments. But the institutions are young and fragile, and they are groaning under the weight of the region’s broader sectarian explosion. The conflict in Syria is pushing Iraq and others to the breaking point. At the same time, U.S. disengagement has tempted Iraqi politicians to move toward sectarian allies for survival. If Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki cannot count on the Americans, he will take no risks with Tehran.

Note how Rice comes precariously close to admitting that going into Iraq was a mistake but qualifies it by implying that more time is needed. The notion that the Syrian conflict is pushing Iraq to the "breaking point" is a bit of an exercise in denial. Make no mistake; Iran has all but annexed Iraq and for Rice to assert anything to the contrary presupposes that the Bush strategy still has a chance. It was doomed to failure when the foundation for the new Iraqi constitution was Sharia law; it was a soft surrender.

As Rice points out, Iraq is 65% Shiite; so is al-Maliki Shiite. Counting on Americans would have involved a Constitution that did not have Sharia law. Assuming that al-Maliki was ever interested in true freedom in Iraq, such interest was snuffed out at that point because it meant the Americans could not be counted on.

Rice runs into another problem. Note I did say she only came "precariously close" to admitting failure. Opining that the United States should not support the ouster of Assad would be an admission of failure in Iraq and inconsistent with the broader strategy of her boss, because it would mean that the perceived liberation of people who are ruled by a dictator can lead to greater enslavement, which it has in Iraq, Gaza, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, et. al. Rice almost has to support Assad's overthrow at this point. Advocating the opposite would torpedo the Bush doctrine of democratization in the Middle East.

Comparing Iran to Karl Marx seems to be an attempt - in part - to liken the former to the United States' cold war nemesis. Take note of her reference to a "theocratic flag" and where it flies:

Today’s Karl Marx is Iran. It envisions the spread of its influence among Shiites, uniting them under the theocratic flag of Tehran — destroying the integrity of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Lebanon. Iran uses terrorist groups, Hezbollah and the Shiite militias in southern Iraq to do its bidding. Syria is the linchpin, the bridge into the Arab Middle East. Tehran no longer hides the fact that its security forces are working in Syria to prop up Assad. In this context, Tehran’s sprint toward a nuclear weapon is a problem not just for Israel but the region as a whole.

Few would argue that there are easy answers in the Middle East but Rice seems to be falling into the same trap that so many westerners do. While being rightfully concerned about Iran, there is this inexplicable underestimation of Turkey, which continues to be wrongly viewed as an ally of the West. In reality, Turkey has been making more gains than Iran, in many ways. With every Muslim Brotherhood victory, Turkey is secretly emboldened and its lustful eye for a reestablished Ottoman empire waters a little more with increased anticipatory desire.

While Rice rightfully bemoans the Shia's "theocratic flag of Tehran", she ignores the "theocratic flag" that is being planted all over the Middle East as Turkey quietly sees those flags as representing a resurrected empire in the near future.

Rice continues...

In recent days, France, Britain and Turkey have stepped into the diplomatic vacuum to recognize a newly formed opposition that is broadly representative of all Syrians. The United States should follow their lead and then vet and arm the unified group with defensive weapons on the condition that it pursues an inclusive post-Assad framework. The United States and its allies should also consider establishing a no-fly zone to protect the innocent. America’s weight and influence are needed. Leaving this to regional powers, whose interests are not identical to ours, will only exacerbate the deepening sectarianism.

Certainly there are risks. After more than a year of brutal conflict, the most extreme elements of the opposition — including al-Qaeda — have been empowered. Civil wars tend to strengthen the worst forces. The overthrow of Assad could indeed bring these dangerous groups to power.

But the breakdown of the Middle East state system is a graver risk. Iran will win, our allies will lose, and for decades the region’s misery and violence will make today’s chaos look tame.

It is simply breathtaking to consider that someone of Rice's intellect does not understand the Islamist nature and goals of Turkey's leadership. She then talks about aligning with them and arming the Syrian rebels but under the condition that there is a post-Assad framework and that the rebels who are armed can be trusted (because that's worked out so well to this point).

Then, she demonstrates an unbelievable amount of naiveté relative to history, both old and recent, when she says that the breakdown of the Middle East state system is a graver risk than the Muslim Brotherhood groups ultimately taking control of Syria. If she was truly interested in preserving the "state system", Assad is the better option.

Does she not know that it is Turkey which desires the dissolution of every nation that has fallen to the Brotherhood?  That would also include Syria if Assad falls.

Rice's former boss - George W. Bush - communicated a similar embrace of the 'Arab Spring' in an op-ed he wrote for the Wall Street Journal last May.

For Rice or Bush to admit the truth would require them to admit failure, which they're obviously not willing to do.

Unfortunately, not doing so smacks of both pride an foolishness.

Are John McCain's chickens coming home to roost?

When it comes to the Arab Spring, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has been on the wrong side far more often than not. Last year, he referred to the Libyan rebels as his 'heroes'. He continues to support arming the rebels in Syria despite mounting evidence that they make up a contingent that is far worse than Bashar al-Assad.

Earlier this summer, he not only defended Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin when legitimate questions were raised about her background but he smeared the woman who raised those questions - Michele Bachmann - from the Senate floor. Now, he's pointing to State Department culpability in the attack / mishandling of the aftermath in Benghazi.

Last month, during an interview with Sean Hannity, McCain attempted to have an 'I told you so' moment with the Fox News host when he all but stuck his tongue out at Hannity while saying he was right about Libya. He pointed to what he said was the election of a moderate government there.

Now, according to Bill Gertz, al-Qaeda appears to be plotting an overthrow of that government.

Via Washington Free Beacon:

Pakistan-based al Qaeda is secretly setting up sleeper cells and a clandestine network of jihadists to destabilize and take over Libya while hiding under a new cover name to prevent exposure and attacks, according to an internal Pentagon report obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

“Al Qaeda has established a core network in Libya, but it remains clandestine and refrains from using the al Qaeda name,” according to the report produced jointly by the Library of Congress and the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office’s Irregular Warfare Support Program, a unit under the assistant defense secretary for special operations.

The report concludes that al Qaeda poses “a significant threat to the state-building process in Libya.”

The 54-page unclassified report describes al Qaeda—which President Barack Obama recently declared to be in decline—as “seeking to create an al Qaeda clandestine network in Libya that could be activated in the future to destabilize the government and/or to offer logistical support to al Qaeda’s activities in North Africa and the Sahel”—the Sahara desert region stretching across northern Africa.

Read it all.

Here is the exchange between McCain and Hannity in the days after the attack on Benghazi.

Egypt's Mohamed Mursi and John McCain allies together Syria

Senator John McCain (RINO-AZ) used his speech at the Republican convention to give voice to a common refrain of his - that the United States should arm the Syrian rebels against Bashar al-Assad (video at bottom of this post). Almost simultaneously, Muslim Brotherhood leader / President of Egypt Mohamad Mursi was calling for the end of Assad's 'oppressive' regime. Mursi likely nodded and applauded when McCain expressed his views on Syria.

Via Reuters:

Egypt called on Thursday for intervention to halt bloodshed in Syria, telling a meeting of 120 nations it was their duty to stand against the "oppressive regime" of Bashar al-Assad, prompting a Syrian walkout.

President Mohamed Mursi, elected two months ago after a popular uprising toppled Egypt's long-standing leader Hosni Mubarak, said Assad had lost legitimacy in his fight to crush a 17-month-old revolt in which 20,000 people have been killed.

Mursi's scathing speech to a summit of non-aligned leaders, hosted by Assad's Shi'ite ally Iran, prompted Syria's foreign minister to accuse the moderate Sunni Islamist leader of inciting further bloodshed in Syria.

The political broadside against the Syrian president came as rebels said they shot down a fighter plane in northern Syria, where his air force has been bombarding opposition-held towns in a fierce counter-offensive against insurgents.

Has anyone been able to figure out why the likes of McCain are seemingly so passionately sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood's cause in Syria?

Let's back up a bit. Who is Mursi's wife? The answer is Najla Ali Mahmoud; she is one of 63 leaders of the Muslim Sisterhood and serves alongside the mother of a woman McCain vehemently defended on the Senate floor last month when questions were raised by Rep. Michele Bachmann about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the U.S. Government. The name of the woman McCain defended while smearing Bachmann is Huma Abedin, Secretary of State Hillary's Clinton's closest advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff.

Saleha Abedin is another one of those 63 leaders and is a close colleague of Mahmoud in that regard. Saleha Abedin is Huma's mother. The effusive and near blind praise McCain heaped upon Saleha's daughter was almost surreal. He admitted to being taken by her charm. Has he also taken up the cause of her mother as a result of that charm?

Here is an excerpt from McCain's floor speech last month, during which he adamantly defended Huma:

“Huma Abedin represents what is best about America,” said McCain. “The daughter of immigrants who has risen to the highest levels of our government on the basis of her substantial personal merit and her abiding commitment to the American ideals that she embodies.”

“I am proud to know her,” McCain continued. “And I am proud – even with some personal presumption – to call her my friend.”

These are precisely the reasons why the details behind Huma Abedin being granted a security clearance must be understood and why charges of 'guilt by association' are unwarranted when denying security clearances because of those associations. Huma hasn't denounced her mother nor the Muslim Brotherhood. Therefore, she is in a position where she could have a conflict of interest. If she were sympathetic to the Brotherhood's cause (which is the cause of her mother), would she not attempt to influence a U.S. Senator who already thinks highly of her?

By the way, Saleha must have been pleased with this part of the speech too:



Perhaps if Mr. McCain were as taken with a Coptic Christian woman as he apparently is with Huma Abedin, he would care more about real persecution in Egypt (right now under Mursi) instead of wanting to arm vicious Muslim Brotherhood rebels in Syria.



Here is another video that shows Coptic persecution in Egypt:

Latest target of 9/11 Truther Alex Jones: Angelina Jolie

If you've ever wondered why talk show host Alex Jones is so effective, it's because his conspiracy theories often contain a significant amount of truth. The problem with Jones has been - and continues to be - his view that entities like the United Nations and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) are the real villains at the end of the thread we're all pulling. He does this while giving the Muslim Brotherhood a pass; that group is nothing more than a tool of the UN and CFR according to Jones.

Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood is taking over the entire Middle East. Jones never seems interested in looking at the possibility that maybe - just maybe - some things are as they appear. If the UN and CFR are using the Brotherhood to achieve their goals, why are they ceding power to the group? Now, if Jones were to assert that the Brotherhood has infiltrated these groups and that's why they're pushing the Islamic agenda, he'd be onto something. But he doesn't; he simply gives the Brotherhood a pass as being nothing more than UN / CFR lackeys.

He is wrong.

That leads to this video of Jones ripping Hollywood actress Angelina Jolie. First, where Jones is right; he targets Jolie for supporting the NATO action in Libya and for her advocacy of the same thing in Syria. I don't know much about Jolie's positions, but if that's where she is, she's wrong and Jones is right to call her out on it.

That's where Jones goes on his conspiratorial tangent. As the Muslim Brotherhood acquires more power on a near daily basis, with the end goal of reestablishing the Ottoman Empire / Caliphate, Jones ignores that and goes after entities that are actually losing to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Nice try, Alex. Maybe next time.

Via Gossip Cop:

Are we already Arming Syrian Rebels?

According to the Syrian rebels' leader, both France and the United States are already arming them, despite the fact that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed opposition to doing so during an interview with CBS (video below). During that interview, Clinton said it would be a mistake to arm the rebels because they consist of both al-Qaeda and now Hamas, which recently pledged support for the opposition.

So how do we explain this, Mrs. Clinton?

Via Russia Today / Eurasia Review:

A general in the opposition militia known as the Free Syria Army has told journalists that the rebels have received French and American military assistance, amid reports of worsening violence in the stricken nation.

In Homs on Tuesday, a general claiming to be from the rebel group appeared on camera and told a journalist from Reuters news agency that “French and American assistance has reached us and is with us.” When asked to elaborate on the nature of the assistance he added, “We now have weapons and anti-aircraft missiles and, God willing, with all of that we will defeat Bashar [President Assad].”

A little further into the article...

This is not the first report of the US covertly supplying the opposition with arms. In December, FBI translator turned whistleblower Sibel Edmonds said she believed the US had been training the Syrian opposition in neighboring Turkey and supplying arms to the country from Incirlik military base close to the Turkish-Syrian border.

In addition, Qatar and Saudi Arabia reportedly held secret meetings to offer financial support to the Syrian rebels to buy weapons.

Turkey's involvement is key because the Islamic caliphate sought by the Muslim Brotherhood would be based in Turkey. If these reports are true, it means the United States is actively working with Turkey to further the cause of the Muslim Brotherhood.

So why would the Secretary of State claim that arming the rebels would be a mistake while her country is arming them at the same time? Amid news reports that al-Qaeda and Hamas are among the rebels she couldn't come out publicly and say we're doing it if, in fact we are. Say, isn't that mentality similar to the one that seems to have been prevalent in Operation Fast and Furious?

Either way, even if the Russia Today report is false, it's still propaganda that can be used by Russia, China, and Iran. All three of those entities support Assad and our arming of the rebels provokes all of those countries unnecessarily while aiding an increasingly powerful Muslim Brotherhood.

***UPDATE*** 3/1/12: Sibel Edmonds cannot be considered a reliable source for this story. She is also a 9/11 Truther. Until there are more credible, corroborating reports about the U.S. supplying arms to the Syrian rebels, the claim cannot be confirmed.

Here is the CBS interview with Clinton, via Shoebat:



h/t Weasel Zippers 

Video: Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman on Arming Syrian Rebels

File this one in the "Someone at the top is making some sense," category. General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN's Fareed Zakaria that the United States should not rush into a decision to arm the Syrian rebels. Though such a position might cause John McCain to get red in the face and Lindsey Graham to stomp and stammer, it's an extremely wise position.

Via CNN:

The United States is not interested in providing weapons to opposition forces in Syria until it has a better picture of what those forces are, the top U.S. military officer said in an interview aired Sunday.

"I think it's premature to take a decision to arm the opposition movement in Syria, because I would challenge anyone to clearly identify for me the opposition movement in Syria at this point," Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS."

More than 50 prominent U.S. conservatives signed an open letter last week urging the Obama administration to "take immediate action" against the Syrian regime, including "self-defense aid" to an armed opposition led by defected government troops. Among the signatories were some of the leading voices in support of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, as well as the former head of the U.S.-led occupation government there. 

And Sen. Joe Lieberman told CNN last week that a "coalition of the willing" should assist Syria's opposition forces since Syrian allies Russia and China vetoed action at the United Nations. Lieberman, a Democrat-turned-independent who was also a leading Iraq hawk, said the United States and its allies could provide the rebels with medical aid, communications and ultimately, weapons.

It is simply AMAZING that supposedly intelligent people are so completely oblivious to what is going on with the Muslim Brotherhood. McCain, Graham, and Lieberman cannot possibly be this clueless, can they? In every instance so far where there has been the removal of a dictator during the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood is filling the void. Why on earth would these people advocate for such a scenario in Syria? Perhaps it's because muruna is working.



h/t Hot Air

Now John McCain wants to Arm Syrian Rebels

Seriously, Senator John McCain is proving to be very dangerous to his country. He continues to say and do things that feed right into the Muslim Brotherhood's hands. It is truly amazing to watch. Despite video of the Syrian rebels with al-Qaeda flags behind them, McCain - along with RINO Lindsey Graham - want to provide them support in the form of weapons.

Via The Hill:

Two prominent Republican U.S. senators urged that the United States arm opposition forces in Syria Sunday as the government of Bashar al-Assad continued a bloody crackdown on the protests that have engulfed the nation.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who both serve on the Senate Armed Services committee, argued that arming rebel fighters in the country could help beat back a Syrian government with close ties to Iran.

“Breaking Syria apart from Iran could be as important to containing a nuclear Iran as sanctions,” Graham said at a press conference in Kabul, according to the New York Times. “If the Syrian regime is replaced with another form of government that doesn’t tie its future to the Iranians, the world is a better place.”

What these two buffoons don't seem to understand is that if Syria falls into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood, the situation there would be much worse. Arming the rebels is the worst possible thing we could do. Not only does it help a Muslim Brotherhood that is growing increasingly powerful but it also angers Iran. I'm all for being tough with Iran but getting in the middle of a dog fight and siding with the bigger of the two dogs is the quintessential lose / lose scenario.

“I believe there are ways to get weapons to the opposition without direct United States involvement,” McCain said. “The Iranians and the Russians are providing Bashar Assad with weapons. People that are being massacred deserve to have the ability to defend themselves.”

“So I am not only not opposed, but I am in favor of weapons being obtained by the opposition,” McCain added.

Not sure why McCain in particular is so thick-headed but for some reason, America's leaders are simply out to lunch when it comes to the Muslim Brotherhood. Remember James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, saying this last year?

This was either perjury or a level of incompetence so severe, he should have been fired.

Iran and Turkey have a Syria-ous Problem

The 'Arab Spring' that has been ongoing for a year now is as much (if not more) about the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) as it is about removing dictators. The Ikhwan seeks a return of the Ottoman Empire, which was centered in what is today Turkey. To varying degrees, the Muslim Brotherhood has gained control of the countries on the map that have red arrows pointing to them. This benefits Turkey tremendously.

Over the last several years, Iran and Turkey have had an alliance of convenience but the situation in Syria is putting great strain on that alliance. Syria, which borders Iraq to its east, Lebanon to its west, and Turkey to its north has essentially been an arm of Iran under the Assad regime. Assad has allowed his country to act as a funnel for weapons and Hezbollah fighters into Lebanon. Prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, those efforts were more difficult.

With the removal of Saddam Hussein and the subsequent withdrawal of American troops from Iraq more than eight years later, Iran has essentially gained control of Iraq. At least one high-ranking cabinet member inside the Iraqi government is also a high-ranking Quds official with loyalties to the Ayatollah; his name is Hadi al-Ameri. That someone like him would hold the position of Transportation Minister in Nouri al-Maliki's government is a serious red flag that signals Iran has already annexed Iraq.

In this behind-the-scenes struggle between Turkey and Iran, the latter has control of Iraq, which also shares a border with Turkey to its north. This makes Syria all that more important for both countries. If Assad is removed from power, the Brotherhood will most assuredly attempt to wrest control for the larger Ottoman movement. Despite its public stance, Turkey is licking its chops over the possibility of acquiring Syria. It would be a huge victory for the Ikhwan and a huge defeat for Iran, which will not give this up easily, however.

As long as Assad is in power, Iran's guy is running the country. When and if he ultimately steps down or is removed, Iran will do all it can to ensure Syria does not come under the control of the Brotherhood.

At that point, Israel could take a back seat in the minds of Iran and Turkey. Syria is that important. As both nations fight over Syria, the mask that has been hiding much of the geopolitics in the region could slip significantly. Turkey's desire for stealth could be more difficult to maintain. In either case, Iran has far more to lose relative to Syria than does Turkey but the latter country has far more to gain if it gets control.

In this game of chicken, Syria is like a piece of meat Iran desperately wants to keep on its plate. Conversely, the Muslim Brotherhood desperately wants to gobble it up for its master - Turkey.

h/t Shoebat

Shoebat: Why Bashar Assad needs to stay in Power

Former PLO member and Muslim Brotherhood activist Walid Shoebat makes the case that despite the rising body count resulting from the Assad regime's crackdown in Syria, the best scenario is if Assad stays in power.

Via Shoebat:

More than 5,400 people have been killed in Syria since the uprising began in March. The number of dead in Homs alone is now over over 200 and climbing. The Assad regime says terrorists acting out a foreign conspiracy to destabilize the country are behind the uprising, not people seeking to transform the authoritarian regime. He’s right, it was Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood that claimed responsibility in December 2011 for two suicide bombings in Damascus that killed 44 people.

Yet, you have Israeli politicians like Moshe (Boge) Ya’alon telling Army Radio that the end of Assad’s regime could bring ‘relatively moderate’ Sunni elements into power, adding that he did not think radical Islam would take over the country if Syrian President Bashar Assad is ousted. Boge says that, “there could be different developments in such a situation, some of which could be positive as far as Israel is concerned, like a fissure in the Tehran-Damascus-Beirut-Hamas axis of evil… There’s a difference between Syria and Egypt,” says Ya’alon.

Syria is not a trophy for Iran exclusively; Turkey is waiting in the wings, ever ready to control the entire region. Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan has been urging Assad in Arabic, “Ya Bashar! Man dakka dukka.” In English, that means: “He who hammers will be hammered” or “what goes around comes around.” He reminded Bashar of what his father did when the Syrian army massacred 10,000 Sunnis in 1982; it will come back to hound him. Paradoxically and quite hypocritically, Erdogan neglects to confess the Armenian Genocide. 

It is no secret that Turkey has worked extensively with the Muslim Brotherhood and has set its sights on Syria. The Turkish Muslim Brotherhood Network, written last year by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, lays out an iron clad case for Turkey’s involvement in the Flotila and its collaboration with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Boge needs to study his region’s history. The Syrian regime’s arch-nemesis is the Muslim Brotherhood. Syria was the first nation after Egypt where the Ikhwan’s movement took root. It was the Arab nationalist Baath Party that banned the brotherhood and tightened state control over religious institutions to weaken its influence. Israel has two choices relative to Syria. It can support one side of the same two-sided tyrannical coin: Arab Nationalism or Islamist Utopianism. I opt for the first and Ya’alon opts for the second while affixing an oxi-moronic “moderate” label to his argument. This in not the first time that the Sunnis wanted to take control. Violent clashes between the Ikhwan and the regime ensued a short time after the Ba’athists came to power in April 1964 when violence erupted in Hamah, led by Marwan Hadid. In 1965, the events in Hamah ignited violence in Damascus as well. Subsequently, in April 1967, riots erupted among the Sunni population all over Syria, but the regime managed to suppress the violence. Law No. 49 stipulates the death penalty for membership in the Ikhwan. In February 1990 the establishment of an Islamist alliance, the “National Front for Saving Syria” (preceded by the “National Alliance for the Liberation of Syria”), ‘Ali Sadr al-Din al-Bayanuni’ declared that the main purpose of this body was to “topple the Syrian regime.”

Read it all.

Report: Troops Fleeing from Assad in Large Numbers

Whether the left wing whackos want to admit it or not, they have espoused positions and supported movements that have resulted in the ceding of the entire North African region to Islamists. There is significant evidence that Iraq has already fallen to Iranian dominance. Now, if this latest report about troops fleeing Assad is correct, Syria is quite likely the next country to fall and could be the nexus for Turkish / Iranian dominance in the region.

Via Haaretz:

More than 10,000 soldiers have deserted the Syrian army, sources say, with as many as half the conscripts not reporting in the last three call-ups.

According to Western intelligence agencies, even though the top brass is still loyal to President Bashar Assad, lower-level officers are deserting in large numbers, and in some cases, whole units have deserted en masse.

The army is considered the main factor safeguarding Assad's regime, after mass protests began in the south in March and spread throughout the country, inspired by the demonstrations elsewhere in the Arab world.

On Tuesday, at least 73 people were killed in Syria in clashes between the army and opposition, most of them in Homs in the west and Idlib in the northwest. The 73 dead added to the 100 who were killed on Monday, among them 14 soldiers ambushed by opposition forces, human rights groups said.

The groups added that Assad's forces were transferring wounded opposition activists from hospitals to army bases to prevent them from testifying to Arab League observers expected to arrive under a deal struck on Monday.

These developments bolster the predictive claims made by Israel's Defense Minister:

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak predicted this month that the Syrian regime would collapse within weeks. Barak said it was impossible to know who would rule Syria in the future, but in any case it would be a blow to the alliance between Iran and Lebanese Shi'ite group Hezbollah.

Another sign of the Syrian regime's frailty is Hamas' decision to move its headquarters from Damascus, as the Palestinian group that runs the Gaza Strip prepares for a possible post-Assad era.

Geographically, Iran may be in a better position to rule Syria, which would go a long way in explaining Hamas - an extension of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood - closing up shop in Syria. Then again, much of the resistance in Syria supports the Brotherhood so who ultimately takes control there is clearly not as easy to determine as say, Egypt or the other North African countries, which are lining up behind the Brotherhood.

h/t Free Republic

Video: Biden calls for Syria's Bashar al-Assad to Step Down

I'm sorry, as tempting as it may be to argue that Joe Biden is this stupid, I just can't do it. While in Turkey, which is rapidly acquiring more and more power with each Middle Eastern dictator that falls, Biden called on Syria's Bashar al-Assad to step down. Once again, the United States is playing right into the hands of the extremely Islamist government of Turkey.

As clear-thinking American citizens warned before Mubarak fell, the Muslim Brotherhood will take over. They have. As clear-thinking American citizens warned before Gadhafi fell, the Muslim Brotherhood will take over. They have. In fact, al-Qaeda flags are flying all over those countries right  now.

Once again, clear-thinking American citizens are warning that when Assad goes, the Muslim Brotherhood will take over.

Well, Biden may personally be this stupid but those directing him certainly are not.

h/t Hapblog

Is Obama Setting the Table for War in Syria?

As bad as the dictators in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria have been, the vacuum that has been filled in the first three instances is proving to be far worse. The Muslim Brotherhood has all but taken over. Al-Qaeda flags are flying in Egypt and Libya today. In each instance, the Obama administration's policies have been in favor of the Brotherhood. The same thing is transpiring in Syria right now and Bashar al-Assad appears to be the next dictator targeted for removal. The US is sending an aircraft carrier to the region under the auspices of helping American citizens leave the country.

Via Daily Caller:

The USS George H.W. Bush, the Navy’s newest aircraft carrier, has reportedly parked off the Syrian coast. The move comes as the U.S. embassy in Damascus urged Americans to “immediately” leave the country. 

“The U.S. embassy continues to urge U.S. citizens in Syria to depart immediately while commercial transportation is available,” began a statement released Wednesday on the embassy website. “The number of airlines serving Syria has decreased significantly since the summer, while many of those airlines remaining have reduced their number of flights.” 

In addition to urging citizens to leave the country, CBS News reports that Ambassador Robert Ford, who was recalled from Syria last month due to what the Obama administration called credible threats to his safety, will not return to the country later this month as planned. 

Syria’s government has been strongly condemned by the international community following months of state-sponsored violence against political activists protesting the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. The violence is said to have left thousands dead in the country, which is a close ally of Iran and a sponsor of the Islamic terrorist group Hezbollah.

The next paragraph in the story should be one of great interest:

Adding to the sense of danger, Turkey, a NATO member and fierce critic of Assad’s government, recently warned its citizens to avoid traveling through the country after Syrian troops fired on at least two buses carrying Turkish Muslims returning from the annual pilgrimage to Mecca. 

Again, Turkey is the proposed site of a return to a global caliphate. Yes, the Ottoman Empire, which is what the Muslim Brotherhood was created to reestablish. Of course Turkey is critical of Assad.

With all the talk of instituting a "no-fly" zone over Syria, coupled with a US aircraft carrier being sent to the region, don't be surprised if American fighters end up being tasked with enforcing that no-fly zone. We are, after all, living through an administration who claims it has to issue Executive Orders because Congress is not acting.

The saddest part about all of these uprisings is the amount of money the United States is spending in support of them while all Turkey has to do is sit back and watch us do their bidding.

More at DC

Syrian Opposition Leader a Prominent Muslim Brotherhood Figure

In the case of Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, the 'Arab Spring' set the stage for something much worse than the existent regimes. The same thing is predictably happening in Syria. The Global Muslim Brotherhood Report has picked up on a Washington Post report that quoted Louay Safi in reference to a council made up of Syrian opposition groups. Safi, who was training US troops at Fort Hood AFTER Nidal Malik Hasan's jihadist attack there on November 5, 2009 is a prominent member of the Muslim Brotherhood. There's more.

The Washington Post quotes Safi but doesn't refer to him as being affiliated with the group. GMBDR then links to an AFP photo of the council and Safi is right in the middle of it. Though that article includes a photo of Safi with the council, it doesn't once mention his name. Via the Epoch Times:

The new Syrian National Council (SNC) formed last month represents the most serious attempt so far by the diverse Syrian opposition to form an alternative to the al-Assad regime. One of the main driving forces behind it are oppositional Syrians abroad, in particular Syrian Americans.

On Thursday, the Syrian opposition group told AP that they will announce a national council made up of 60 Syrians in exile and 70 dissidents inside Syria. The announcement follows meetings in neighboring Turkey.

The Syrian American Council (SAC), which has played an important role in forming the group, presents itself as a “grassroots organization devoted to promoting educational, civic, economic, and human development, as well as advancing civil liberties and human dignity in Syria,” on its website.

The Epoch Times spoke to SAC’s PR Chairman, Hussam Ayloush, over the phone, about how the SNC came about, and what it’s plans and aims are.

GMBDR includes a bio of Louay Safi, who is tied to several Muslim Brotherhood groups and convicted terrorist fundraiser Sami al-Arian:

Dr. Safi reports that in May 1992, he became an associate professor of political science at the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM), closely associated with the global Muslim Brotherhood, and later became a Deputy Dean and then Dean of the Research Centre and College of Islamic Knowledge and Human Sciences. U.S. court records indicate that in 1995, Dr. Safi was in phone contact with convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami Al- Arian. According to a transcript of the intercepted conversation, the two discussed President Clinton’s new executive order banning financial transactions with terrorist groups including the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. In 1998, Dr. Safi was a member of the advisory council of a journal published by the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), a part of the Palestine Committee of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood which was closely tied to Hamas. In January 1999, Dr. Safi reports that he became the Research Director for the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), an important part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. Also in January 1999, Dr. Safi says he was a founding member of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) whose other founding members included several individuals associated with IIIT. CSID is also part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and has close relations with the U.S. State Department. In January 2000, Dr. Safi says he became editor of the American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, the publication of the Association of Muslim Social Scientists (AMSS), headquartered at IIIT. From January 2001 to January 2003, Dr. Safi says he was also AMSS President. In January 2003, Dr. Safi says he ended his position at IIIT and in January 2004 became Executive Director of the Leadership Development Center of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), another important part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. In November 2005, Dr. Safi became Chairman of the newly established Syrian American Congress, described on its website as …a grassroots organization devoted to promoting educational, civic, economic, and human development, as well as advancing civil liberties and human dignity in Syria.” In January 2005, local media report indicates that Dr. Safi was identified as Unindicted Co-Conspirator Four in the indictment against Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami Al-Arian. The report notes that Dr. Safi was the research director at IIIT which provided Al-Arian’s think tank with the bulk of its financial support.In September 2009, Dr. Safi became the ISNA Communications Director. Dr. Safi has been perhaps the leading voice at ISNA in complaining that criticism of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood is a form of “Muslim bashing.”

The Obama administration continues to do the bidding of Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood, which should be considered both a foreign and domestic enemy of the United States.

More at GMBDR

Libya Falls, Now What?

Now that it appears the Gadhafi regime in Libya is coming to a close, let's take inventory of the Arab Spring, which started with Tunisia, a small North African country to Libya's west. Dictator Ben Ali fails to beat back the uprising there and flees the country on January 14, 2011. Soon thereafter, a similar uprising takes place in Egypt with Tahrir Square in Cairo serving as the epicenter of activity. With the help of the liberal media - along with the Obama administration - Hosni Mubarak steps down on February 11, 2011. Then NATO set it sights on Libyan strongman, Muammar Gadhafi, in an undeclared war backed by the Obama administration. To be fair, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) referred to the rebels as 'my heroes.' Though Gadhafi's forces put up more of a fight than Obama probably expected or liked, he surrendered on August 22, 2011.


Now what? As Libya no longer requires NATO support against Gadhafi, and the US is not likely interested in more nation building, watch for our diplomatic, political, and even some military resources to re-focus on Syria, where dictator Bashar al-Assad is facing an uprising of his own. Though the 'Arab Spring' is taking place all over the Middle East, those interested in furthering it are likely going to look for the regimes most vulnerable at any given time. This is clearly the case in Syria, which is dealing with two separate opposition groups that seek the overthrow of Assad. One is the pro-democracy Syrian opposition and the other is the Muslim Brotherhood, which is either seizing or has seized control in the other three countries mentioned.

According to the Assyrian International News Agency (AINA), the Obama administration has chosen to back the Muslim Brotherhood forces. US Senators McCain, Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Joe Lieberman (I-CT), have all publicly endorsed Obama's support for Assad's ouster but seem to be either ignorant of or unconcerned with what will replace him.

There is another country at the center of all of this that seems to be escaping scrutiny. In fact, Turkey, which is now ruled completely by Islamists, is sitting back and reveling in all of these nation states coming to them. The United States, in supporting these uprisings is actually doing Turkey's bidding for nothing in return except a larger debt and a much greater long term threat. When one looks at the history of the Muslim Brotherhood, it was formed in 1928 for one reason - to reestablish the Ottoman Empire, which was based in what is modern day Turkey. Even the liberal LA Times admits this.

This is something former Muslim Brotherhood activist Walid Shoebat has been preaching for nearly a decade now. Turkey has the second-largest military in NATO and the US is the first but we are actually dwindling our resources as a result of reckless spending and wars that actually further the cause of the Muslim Brotherhood and, by extension, Turkey.

Again, why are almost all of the Obama administration's foreign policy decisions in line with the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood, to include our insane deficit spending? We know there are Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers in this administration but we don't know how many. The more we push the Brotherhood's agenda, the more we need to find out.

Timelines for Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya.

Syria the Next to Fall to the Muslim Brotherhood?

First it was Tunisia, then Egypt, now Libya. All are African nation states whose leaders have either been toppled or soon will be. The common thread that runs through all of them is the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group that seeks to eliminate borders and reestablish an Islamic caliphate one day. Its goal is the reestablishment of the Ottoman Empire, based in what is today Turkey. The Turkish government - and now military - has fallen to the Islamist AKP party. Libyan dictator Gadhafi has put up a fight against the Muslim Brotherhood backed rebels but appears to be ready to flee, according to an NBC report:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

If and when Gadhafi falls, look for the Brotherhood to establish a much stronger foothold in Northern Africa. As that's happening, the same thing is going on in Syria. The Obama administration appears to be focusing its attention on that country as Libya seems to be falling to the Islamist rebels. Apparently, there are two groups opposing Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. One is the pro-Muslim Brotherhood opposition and the other is the pro-Democracy opposition. Guess which one the Obama administration is supporting.

Via World Tribune, h/t Jihad Watch:

WASHINGTON -- The administration of President Barack Obama has selected the Muslim Brotherhood over the pro-democracy opposition to lead Syria after the expected ouster of President Bashar Assad, a report said.

The Hudson Institute, a leading consultant to the Defense Department, asserted that the administration has decided to work with Turkey and the Brotherhood in Syria for a post-Assad government. In a report by Herbert London, the institute said Obama has dismissed the pro-democracy opposition as an alternative.

So, not only is this administration supporting the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Syria but it's working with Turkey in order to facilitate the transition. Turkey is just sitting back, watching countries fall to forces that will only make Turkey much more powerful. Does anyone seem to care to ask why the Obama administration is doing this? Could it be that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the White House? In addition to Obama's envoy to the OIC having ties to the MSA (Muslim Brotherhood group), Hillary Clinton's closest aide, Huma Abedin has strong familial ties to the Brotherhood.

Another high stakes dynamic taking place here is the power struggle between Iran and Turkey. Iran, which has supported Bashar Assad for years, has to be watching this unfold with great interest. If and when Assad falls, the balance of power will tip toward Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood in a big way. Iran wants a working alliance with Turkey but is probably getting a bit nervous about the Brotherhood's rise.

To demonstrate the complete and total ignorance of what's really at stake here, Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) are praising Obama for his stance on Syria.

Here is video of Hillary calling for Assad to step down:



h/t Hapblog

Hillary Still Lovin' that 'Arab Spring' Idea

It's public record that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton fully endorses the Libyan (Muslim Brotherhood) rebels in their efforts to topple Muammar Gadhafi. Now we have her telling the world that the United States is open to dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Is it really so difficult to see what the removal of Gadhafi will lead to? The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is rapidly gaining power and it will do the same in Libya if the rebels win. That's not stopping Hillary from giving them her endorsement.

Via CNN:

(CNN) -- The Obama administration is open to dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Thursday about the Islamist group.

"We believe, given the changing political landscape in Egypt, that it is in the interests of the United States to engage with all parties that are peaceful and committed to nonviolence, that intend to compete for the parliament and the presidency," she told reporters in Budapest, Hungary. "And we welcome, therefore, dialogue with those Muslim Brotherhood members who wish to talk with us."

But, she added, any such contacts "will continue to emphasize the importance of and support for democratic principles, and especially a commitment to nonviolence, respect for minority rights, and the full inclusion of women in any democracy. You cannot leave out half the population and claim that you are committed to democracy."

She added that the policy is not a new one and that the Obama administration has had "limited contacts" with the group.

It doesn't end there. While speaking in Lithuania, Clinton took the side of the Muslim Brotherhood-backed uprisings in Syria. Via POLITICO:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday repeated her call for Syria to adopt democratic reforms as she pushed President Bashar al-Assad to do more than simply talk with a rival political group.

"We know what they have to do," Clinton told reporters in Lithuania, the AP reports. "They must begin a genuine transition to democracy and allowing one meeting of the opposition in Damascus is not sufficient action toward achieving that goal."

This is not a matter of taking the side of Gadhafi and Bashar al-Assad, as Clinton suggested when she indignantly chided Congress last week when she said, 'Whose side are you on?' It's about what will replace them. There are forces at work that want a Muslim Brotherhood to unite all of these nations, which would make them exponentially more powerful under one banner.

Remember, Hillary's closest aide for years has been a woman - Huma Abedin - with incredibly suspicious familial ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

More on that HERE and HERE.

Syrian Expert: Assad Will Fall, Muslim Brotherhood will Take Over

Like the situation that's taking place in Libya, Americans have grown to despise Syria's leader. On its face, the toppling of Gadhafi and Bashar Assad appears to be welcome news. In actuality, it would be if the vacuum left by both tyrants were to be filled with someone better. Unfortunately, as the dominoes fall, the entity poised to fill that vacuum is much, much worse. In Libya, the Obama administration is facilitating it and even has the support of the likes of John McCain, who is obviously ignorant of the true enemy the west faces - the Muslim Brotherhood.

IPT reports that an expert from Syria seems certain Assad will fall and the Brotherhood will take over:

The wave of unrest sweeping Syria will drive President Bashar Assad from power and severely weaken the Islamist regime in Tehran, a prominent dissident predicts. "It is a certainty the Assad regime will fall," said Farid Ghadry, president of the Reform Party of Syria (RPS).

Ghadry, currently living in the United States, closely monitors the situation in his native land through a network of contacts there. He said his organization is getting reports that Syrian security men appear tired and demoralized and have reached "levels of mental and physical fatigue they are not prepared for."

Syrian forces killed as many as 40 people during weekend clashes and human rights groups say the total death toll during three months of unrest is more than 1,100 people. A new online video shows Syrian soldiers joking over the bodies of some of those killed."Your father told you to watch out," one soldier says over the body of someone with a head wound, "but you didn't."

The United States continues to implement policies that fuel an enemy we won't identify.

As he looks towards the future, Ghadry does not mince words about the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks to dominate the opposition movement in Syria. He notes that U.S. policy may be helping the Brotherhood's efforts to marginalize non-Islamist opposition to Assad. According to WikiLeaks, since 2005 between $6 million and $12 million in U.S. funds went to Syrian opposition groups. Much of this money went to the Movement For Justice and Development in Syria (MJD), an organization reportedly headed by former Muslim Brotherhood members.

The mother ship for the Muslim Brotherhood - as Walid Shoebat has been saying for years - is Turkey. That is where it seeks to centralize its power in the form of an Islamic caliphate. After all, that's where the last one existed - the Ottoman Empire. Turkey and Iran are jockeying for the most power. The former wants the Brotherhood to take over Syria while the latter wants to keep Assad in charge.

What does it mean when a group like the Muslim Brotherhood takes control of sovereign nations? The answer is more power under one Islamic umbrella. That's what is happening before our very eyes and we have leaders who are either in on it or literally too stupid to recognize it.

Read it all.