As Muammar Gaddafi butchers his own people, and as evidence of his direct role in the Lockerbie bombing has emerged, President Barack Obama has gone radio silent on the whole thing. His Secretary of State has spoken out. Even the UN has muttered about its “concern.” But the POTUS who helped nudge Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, an American ally who kept peace with Israel, out of power, is now mum.
Why?
I don’t know. His silence has led to curiosity, which led to Google searches, which led to reminders that his former spiritual guide and mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, visited Gaddafi in 1984 at the height of tensions between that dictator and the United States. Gaddafi was already known at the time as a major force behind international terrorism.
To begin, Wright is a close confidant and supporter of Louis Farrakhan. The leader of the Nation of Islam has called Jews “bloodsuckers” who practice a “gutter religion.”
Wright was among those deeply affected in the early ’80s by Farrakhan’s South Side Chicago activism. In 1984, Wright was one of the inner circle that traveled with Farrakhan to visit Libyan strongman Col. Muammar Qadhfi. The ostentatious Farrakhan junket came at a time when Qadhfi had been identified as the world’s chief financier of international terrorism, including the Black September group behind the Munich Olympics massacre.
By the time Wright and Farrakhan visited, Libyan oil imports had been banned, and America was trying to topple what it called a “rogue regime.” In the several years after that, Farrakhan was pro-active for Qadhfi, even as Libya was internationally isolated for suspected involvement in numerous terror plots, including the explosion of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.
Farrakhan’s and Wright’s 1984 visit and subsequent support was done precisely to openly ally themselves with a declared enemy of the United States.
Speaking out against Gaddafi should be a no-brainer. The Libyan dictator has been a malignant presence for decades, through Republican and Democratic administrations. His reign has had no redeeming qualities. Sure, he’s been no friend of the Muslim Brotherhood types, but he has financed terrorism against the United States and our allies anyway. Gaddafi is a thug pirate who happens to misrule a country. Obama’s silence obviously hasn’t done anything to keep anyone from remembering his past with Rev. Wright, and Wright’s past with Gaddafi. So what’s the point of it?
Update: News is moving fast in Libya as Gaddafi loses control, and it’s possible that Obama has remained silent as Americans have been evacuated from the country. If so, fair enough, that’s a very good reason for him not to say anything. Yet.
At this point, it’s pretty clear that Obama sides with anti-US interests, every single time. So, of course, he spoke out against Mubarak, since Hosni was allied with the US. He’s repeatedly spoken out against Israel. Yet he’s silent on Libya, where the regime has killed hundreds of protestors in the past week.
Why was he also silent when protestors were in the streets of Iran back in ’09?
He was silent because he supports loathsome, anti-American dictators. As long as the odious leader is anti-American, he’ll get a pass from this administration. Every. Single. Time.
I think your first guess was closer to the truth. Look- there were still LOTS of Americans left in Egypt when Obama started condemning Mubarak. Granted the situation wasn’t as barbaric as this- but it appeared it could have spun out at any moment.
In the BIG PICTURE view- there’s got to be strong reasons from his point of view that he consistently works agains our interests.
And yet- it’s always wise to look for all possible explanations- so the safety of our citizens is a possibility, though with the track record of this administration, I’m not counting on it..
Glad to see at least one person is reminding people of this fact about Wright, Farrakhan and Khadaffi. I sent an email to Redstate hoping they’d pick it up to. Limbaugh is the guy who has to be shouting it daily. It will be interesting to see if the mainstream media goes after Limbaugh for it or if they do their usual pro-Obama cost-benefit, hurt-help analysis.
President Obama has been extremely impressive during this crisis, which poses an awful dilemma for the U.S. because of our unpopularity in the region. He is by far the smartest and supplest president we’ve had in my lifetime. It might have been emotionally satisfying to hear him react instantly to this horror, but how satisfying would it have been if such a reaction had resulted in Khadaffi taking American hostages? Do you really think that any statement by an American president is going to inspire Khadaffi to somehow see the error of his ways? The man has NOTHING TO LOSE. He is crazy, always has been. He has never been an ally. And even Italy, which has at least as much at stake in this, is being very careful while Italian nationals are still in Tripoli. Nice to have a president who is willing to behave responsibly, for a change. And who is willing to work with our allies through the United Nations to bring an unprecedented — and, therefore, perhaps more constructive — international pressure to bear.