Response to Ianus, "Afghan traditions..."

Submitted by Merry Whitney (United States), Mar 10, 2009 at 00:33

Dear Jan,

We had a slight disconnect:

"On the other hand, US foreign policy is supposed to be based on US National interests. I don't apologize for that. I only wish I could have a scintilla of confidence that US National interests will be at least a consideration to our current Administration, and I dearly hope I'll be proven wrong in my best guess on that score...<

I hope too that you'll turn out to be right. In the meantime I am afraid that the present decion-makers in teh White House in the 'best' traditions of their predecessors - take their own particular party interests for 'national interests'. This will necessarily lead to many decisions which are quite contrary to US national interests. E.g. Obama seems to be bent to selling Israel and its security for vague Moslem symathies and promises while the Moslem shelling of Jewish settlements will continue.

I'm not real hopeful. I had held my breath, uselessly, in hopes my friends were correct and that this president would be pragmatic enough to suppress his ideological impulses. I'm afraid not. In ordinary times, no one branch of our government can go too crazy because of the Constitutional checks and balances; they got around that one with extreme leftists simultaneously in control of both the Executive and Legislative branches, and with enough Senate votes to override or block any minority-party attempts to filibuster or derail (third-branch) judicial nominations, meaning within the next two years prior to an election, they can effectively "stack" the federal courts with lifetime extremist appointments.

"the country where even former Moslems prefer to make their presidential campaigns in protective Christian feathers"

Close, but no cigar: The "Christian feathers" in this particular case are of the "Liberation Theology" variety, an oxymoronic concept of a "blend of Marxism and Christianity." I believe the actual crux of many if not most of our current problems, globally, not just here, gained steam during the 1930's and 1940's, and can be more fully recognized through familiarity with disclosures made by Bella Dodd in the 1950's through both her book, "School of Darkness" and her testimony before Congressional committees. If you're not yet familiar with the name, google her. Interesting stuff.

And, something else to be aware of along that line: At the end of WWII, it was clear that Muslim Brotherhood forces had been working with and under the Third Reich. England's MI6 and US (then) OSS were presented with an opportunity to recruit and "turn" these Brotherhood forces as "assets" against the threatening Bear. The opportunity, which was pursued with glee and gusto, had been presented to "our side" by none other than... (drum roll here) ... Kim Philby, who subsequently defected to the land of the Bear. Check www.tell(the?)childrenthetruth.com and search "al banna nazi" (that (the?) in the former indicates I don't remember whether that article is part of the site name - try variations if it doesn't pull up).

Personally, I have to believe that the Brotherhood strategists were and have been playing all of us for their own eventual purposes --- the Reich, the Bear, and all of the world's infidels. I hope I'm wrong, but I've been saying that a lot, lately. We're pretty much on the same page, Jan (which is to say, worried sick).

Merry

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".