Get PJ Media on your Apple

Obama’s ‘New Beginning’ in Cairo Now a Knee-Deep Mess

Does the White House understand why protesters hate the administration? What about that military aid Kerry just delivered? And will Iran's new prez enjoy legitimacy?

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

July 1, 2013 - 8:16 pm
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

The White House reaction to the historic outpouring of Egyptians calling for the ouster of President Mohamed Morsi can be summed up as thus: Don’t turn attention away from President Obama’s heavily touted African tour.

As Obama flew to his last stop on the three-nation swing, Tanzania, Tamarod (Arabic for “rebel”) once again stole his thunder: The protesters won as the powerful Egyptian military announced a 48-hour ultimatum for an agreement to be reached on their demands. Otherwise, they’ll provide a “road map” for a post-Morsi country.

Still, the White House inundated reporters with fact sheets on Obama’s trade initiatives, health and power investments and efforts to combat wildlife trafficking in Africa, along with his new Young African Leaders Initiative.

But the Obama administration is facing uncomfortable truths that dwarf the opposition protesters’ inconvenient timing.

First, the protesters, who ranged from niqab-clad women decrying the Muslim Brotherhood’s lack of religious tolerance to Coptic Christian nuns, were openly expressing their disgust with Obama and U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson for propping up and backing Morsi. “Obama and Patterson support terrorism in Egypt,” read one large banner bearing pictures of the two. Another sign showed Patterson happily shaking hands with Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Badie.

“Anne Paterson will likely go down in history as the most unpopular US ambassador ever for the people in her host country,” tweeted Cairo writer Bassem Sabry.

Not exactly the impression Obama hoped to impart upon Cairo with his 2009 “new beginning” speech to the Muslim world from here.

Second, the protesters are right. Obama welcomed Morsi into office as a democratically elected leader — Morsi won slightly over 50 percent of the vote with around 43 percent turnout in 2012 — while knowing full well the undemocratic aims of the Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi’s anti-Semitic remarks about “apes and pigs” were condemned yet ultimately forgiven. Today, even after the months of Muslim Brotherhood repression, after attacks on Coptic churches, after the conviction of 16 Americans by an Egyptian court for promoting democracy, Obama was practicing a policy of go along to get along.

“Our commitment to Egypt has never been around any particular individual or party. Our commitment has been to a process,” Obama said at a joint press conference with President Jakaya Kikwete in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. “…They went through an election process that, by all accounts, were legitimate. And Mr. Morsi was elected. And the U.S. government’s attitude has been we would deal with a democratically elected government.”

Obama said his administration has “encouraged” the Muslim Brotherhood government “to reach out to the opposition and work through these issues in a political process.”

“It’s not the U.S.’s job to determine what that process is. But what we have said is, go through processes that are legitimate and observe rule of law,” he continued. “…I do think that if the situation is going to resolve itself for the benefit of Egypt over the long term, then all the parties there have to step back from maximalist positions. Democracies don’t work when everybody says it’s the other person’s fault and I want 100 percent of what I want.”

Obama boasted that the U.S. was used to compromise in its democracy because “we’ve had 200-plus years of practice at it.”

“But our position has always been it’s not our job to choose who Egypt’s leaders are,” he added. ”We do want to make sure that all the voices are heard and it’s done in a peaceful way.”

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
"“But our position has always been it’s not our job to choose who Egypt’s leaders are,” he added."
=============================

No it isn't but you certainly got in the game early and declared "Mubarak must go" - and promptly backed the muslim brotherhood in their 'quest'. Before that it was "Gaddafi must go". And somewhere in the middle of all that it was "Assad must go".

Who's next?

Well that would be you Mr. President - you must go!

So now I'm saying "Obama must go"! And I'm not alone in that assessment. I don't think the M.E. (or the world) can take any more of this 'we're not meddling' type of meddling in the affairs of M.E. countries.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (16)
All Comments   (16)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
"Democracies don’t work when everybody says it’s the other person’s fault and I want 100 percent of what I want."

Obama really said that? Wow, he just reads the teleprompter. I have often thought that. He isn't lying, he's just reading.
He describes his own governing principle to a T. Admits they don't work, and just keeps reading. I wonder if he ever thinks about what he is reading.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
A long time ago, I realized that Obama will say anything. He doesn't have a gag reflex.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
It seems to me that Obama's people have been considerably more vocal in responding to the latest Iranian election than they were to the last one, although a fair number of people, worldwide, thought the last election raised quite a few talking-points. This time, I suspect Carney came out with some characteristic drivel, but he would have been spouting exactly the same platitudes, regardless of the Tehran result. Iran could have an incoming president with horns and a forked tail, for all the difference it would make to Obama's response.

If I were an American, I'd worry about this next bit, too (and being a friend of America, I do worry):

"And the U.S. government’s attitude has been we would deal with a democratically elected government.”

They dealt with Chavez, too, and Ortega. When former President Zelaya of Honduras tried to defy his country's constitution, by staying in office beyond his legal term, Obama conspicuously supported Zelaya, not constitutional government. Ortega did the same thing in Nicaragua (and got away with it) - without a peep from Washington DC. It seems that that "democratically elected" part of the White House script is unusually accommodating.

If Obama is consistently ready to condone unconstitutional behaviour in foreign leaders, why is everyone in the United States so convinced he will actually be vacating the White House in 2017? I get the impression that no-one's yet written a Constitutional Amendment that Obama doesn't intend to snipe at.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
Obama boasted that the U.S. was used to compromise in its democracy because “we’ve had 200-plus years of practice at it.”

Um, I think he forgot about Gettysburg and the Civil War, that kind of righted our ship.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
“…I do think that if the situation is going to resolve itself for the benefit of Egypt over the long term, then all the parties there have to step back from maximalist positions. Democracies don’t work when everybody says it’s the other person’s fault and I want 100 percent of what I want.”

On the other hand, when it comes to Obamacare I'll show those Catholic hospitals who's boss.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
Valiant try from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but they must realize that their letter will be marked up by Valerie Jarrett before Obama considers it.

I wonder how Hillary will spin this foreign policy failure in her upcoming book.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
We live in interesting times.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
"“But our position has always been it’s not our job to choose who Egypt’s leaders are,” he added."
=============================

No it isn't but you certainly got in the game early and declared "Mubarak must go" - and promptly backed the muslim brotherhood in their 'quest'. Before that it was "Gaddafi must go". And somewhere in the middle of all that it was "Assad must go".

Who's next?

Well that would be you Mr. President - you must go!

So now I'm saying "Obama must go"! And I'm not alone in that assessment. I don't think the M.E. (or the world) can take any more of this 'we're not meddling' type of meddling in the affairs of M.E. countries.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
Just think, if Obama can stay in office for the rest of this term, and another one too, he would have the whole world in flames. He would probably blame it on global warming. At the rate he's been going this last year though, maybe just the rest of this term will be more than enough.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
LIAR, LIAR
MIDEAST ON FIRE

"...it’s not our job to choose who Egypt’s leaders are." Not true. By Obama forcing the Egyptian election, quickly, w/o allowing time for opposition parties to form, the Muslim BruthaHood was guaranteed to win.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Pyromaniac-in-Chief's "new" beginnings was always about installing the Brotherhood Mafia into power, as opposed to breathing democratic principles into the stultified nation.
The fact of the matter was that he (and his surrogates) knew full well that Islamism would prevail with his embrace of the Brothers. And this was exactly what happened. Moreover, by "koshering" them in Cairo, he assured their "win".
He set a chain reaction of events, so much so that the Syrian Brothers, "the rebels", also become empowered via Benghazigate, now deep in a civil war with Assad's/Iran's henchmen. Al Qaeda is an offshoot of the "rebels". Think about it.
It is way more complicated, but this is for sure: http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/09/22/if-it-looks-like-a-cozy-relationship-it-is-one-barack-hussein-obama-his-fealty-to-the-muslim-brotherhood-mafia-addendum-to-coming-full-circle-the-planned-empowerment-of-the-muslim-m/

Adina Kutnicki, Israel http://adinakutnicki.com/about/
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
The fact of the matter was that he (and his surrogates) knew full well that Islamism would prevail with his embrace of the Brothers. And this was exactly what happened. Moreover, by "koshering" them in Cairo, he assured their "win".

It's as if he had no knowledge of the history of the MB. Is Obama naive or evil? What difference does it make?
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
After drinking a potion of Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, Karl Marx, Bill Ayers, Benito Mussolini, King George III, King Louis XVI and his own creation, Barack Obama is transformed into the cruel, remorseless, pathological, narcissistic, misanthropic, pyromaniac (clinical reference note #1) Herr Hussein, representing the hidden side of Obama’s dual nature brought to the fore. As Barry he has many friends and, with great effort, is able to affect a pleasing personality, but as Herr Hussein he has become more and more fanatical, more and more dictatorial, more and more scape goating, makes ever longer enemies lists, encourages demonization and dehumanizing of political opponents and becomes ever more isolated and fascist like as time goes by as Herr Hussein grows in dominance. After taking this potion repetitively, he now no longer needs to rely upon it to unleash his worst inner fascist demons.

Clinical reference note #1: Such individuals who lack ulterior motive have traditionally been referred to in layman’s terms simply as a variation of a pyromaniac. Most such maniacs lack conscious motivation although they are fully aware of the acts they are failing to stop or they themselves are committing. Typically they will feel intense pleasure, gratification, or relief when causing destruction or when witnessing or participating in the aftermath. Motivation is also classified as pathological and non-pathological. Some research suggests that feeling such joy at horrific situations is pathological. Other research suggests that some motivation for this comes from rational thought. Taking joy in horrific situations for envisioned gains in political power and/or the concealment of the imposition of devious plans are examples of supposed rational decision making.

I must say in conclusion that history has repeatedly and harshly proven that elevating such a profoundly disturbed man to the highest office in any country is never a good idea. Unfortunately it is a lesson that must be learned first hand in every nation and some of those nations survive and some do not.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
That whole pleasing personality shtick is baffling to me. I have always seen Obama as a petty and vengeful politician who says "ah" way to much. His annoying clipped speech and poorly-managed facial expressions should be clues to you. But, I guess I am way too un-naunced to see the extremely fine golden threads that he wears.
41 weeks ago
41 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All