Where's the "Obama has embraced the Muslim Brotherhood" issue?

Submitted by Wallace Edward Brand (United States), Nov 3, 2012 at 21:03

Despite the smoking gun found in "An Explanatory Memoraundum on the Strategic Goals of the [Muslim Brotherhood] Group in North America," introduced in the Holy Land Foundation case, and a similar document found by the Swiss authorities in 2005 on a 100 year plan for Muslim world domination, these "Protocols of the Elders of Islam" -- not a Czarist forgery but entered into evidence withoug objection to their authenticiity, have gone virtually unnoticed in the campaign. Has no one noticed that Obama has embraced the Muslim Brotherhood and the official word is that it has renounced violence despite much evidence to the contrary. Although Romney's Mormon background has been brought up again and again, I have not seen one word about Black Liberation Theology that was the official ideology of the Trinity Church and of Jeremiah Wright and practiced by Obama for at least 20 years..

Nor has there been anything on the shift in tactics from jihad by violence to "jihad by stealth" per Spencer and Frank Gaffney, and jihad by migration and demography per Bernard Lewis. There has been no effort to broaden the AUMF to cover all acts of terror by Islamic radical offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood rather than just one of them, Al Queda and to cover domestic as well as international terrorism.. As a result we have workplace violence in Fort Hood. Nor has there been any focus on Obama's lack of push at the UN for a definition of terrorism. It should be defined as "The use of unlawful violence or its threat to obtain a change of policy by coercion or intimidation, i.e. by extortion..

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".