I posted an article a few days ago titled Deconstructing an Ultraconservative Rant. In it, I clearly showed the lies and misconceptions from this retired general. (I refuse to name him this time, because I will not contribute to the publicity surrounding his rants.) Even though I gave accurate information and links to proofs for every point I made showing him to be wrong, there are willfully blind people who will not see the truth, and keep spreading his lies.
He just did it again—this time about the uprising in Egypt. I find it hard to believe how much the conservatives will twist and bend the truth to make their points. As much as I detest having to listen to him, I’m going to do it just to show he cannot be trusted. This time I will list every point and give the time stamp in the video so you can see and listen for yourself.
1) (00:14) He does not “believe” that the media is covering this uprising in a very accurate way. They have reported it as a “pro-democracy” uprising. If he is not there, and members of the media are there, which do you suppose is more accurate in their view of what is happening?
2) (01:07) Mubarak’s predecessor was “executed” by “the Muslim Brotherhood.” First of all, Nasser was “assassinated,” not executed.1 Words do have meaning. Saying he was executed when he was actually assassinated implies his death was at the hands of the government, not an illegal act by terrorists. His assassination was by Islamic radicals, however, there is no known link to the Muslim Brotherhood. Saying that Sadat was assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood is a misrepresentation of the truth, and seems to be an attempt to inflame passions—apparently successfully.
3) (03:27) One thing Hosni Mubarak has done, is he has outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood. While the Muslim Brother is an illegal organization, this was done in 1954 by Nasser after it made an attempt on Nasser’s life. The Muslim Brotherhood has been illegal, although tolerated to varying degrees, ever since.2 While this may seem to be an insignificant fact, it is illustrative of the general’s loose association with facts. He simply changes them to fit his message.
4) (05:45) While the media and even some of his Christian friends are touting this as a pro-democracy movement, he doesn’t “believe” that is the case. He claims to base his “beliefs” on the statements of the newest leader of the Muslim Brotherhood calling for jihad against the rulers of Arab nations to force them to install sharia (or Islamic law) in their nations. However, regardless of his beliefs, people on the ground in Egypt say the opposite of what he is saying. How he can give so little credence to the people actually involved in this movement is unbelievable. It would be like someone in Europe claiming that the American Revolution was actually a plot by the French to gain the upper hand over England—Without talking to the people actually involved in the revolution.
If you would like to read what the people there are saying, check out some of these links.
- Christians Join Muslims in Plea for Change in Egypt
- Egypt Christians Concerned Amid Demonstrations Against President’s Rule
- Christians, Muslims “One Hand” in Egypt’s Youth Revolution
- Christians join Muslims in plea for change in Egypt
As an example of people actually involved in and working for the overthrow of Mubarak and the installation of a democratic government, I would suggest you watch this video. (There is also a transcript if you would rather read it.
5) (08:00) “My belief is, in spite of what the media has said, I believe that the Muslim Brotherhood was right at the base of this.” This, I believe, is the very core of the general’s message. Why would conservatives in America be afraid of a popular uprising in Egypt to establish a democracy? What do the conservatives gain by painting this as an Islamic conspiracy to gain power? Please note this is my opinion. It is one logical explanation for what the conservatives are doing. There may be other logical explanations, but I cannot think of any.
Please remember that to the conservatives, the government, especially President Obama and his administration are “the enemy.” (You can read these beliefs in some of my earlier articles.) Also, the most radical of them believe that the president is NOT a US citizen. Further, many of them believe that Obama is secretly a Muslim, regardless of any evidence. There has been much discussion about Obama’s “agenda.” Many have accused him of selling us down the river to socialism. Others have accused him of trying to turn this into a Muslim nation. Now, given all of that hatred toward the president and “his agenda,” this angle and level of attack makes sense. If you are so illogical as to believe those lies about President Obama, it would make sense to you that this entire chain of events is part of a conspiracy to create another radical Islamic nation. It would be just one more in the chain of nations that must fall before President Obama in his drive to turn us all into Muslims. (It just occurred to me that the word that most often follows “conspiracy” is the word “nuts)—as in conspiracy nuts. This is one of the nuttiest and one without any facts to support it.
6) (08:20) He attempts to buttress his claim that it has been the Muslim Brotherhood that began and continues this uprising by stating that 60% of the police stations have been burned. And he adds that there have been atrocious things done “…all attributable to the Muslim Brotherhood.” This is a claim without any foundation in fact. If it is true that 60% of the police stations have been burned (I cannot verify this. If anyone has facts on this, please send to me.), please consider this: The police have been the instrument of Mubarak’s oppression throughout his entire rule. The police are hated by the entire population. Blaming the burning of police stations on the Muslim Brotherhood is an exercise in imagination. As for the atrocities, please remember that Mubarak armed his supporters and sent them into the conflict so they could battle with the demonstrators and show that the people “support him.” It is much more likely they are the source of the atrocities, given that the demonstrations had been consistently non-violent until that additional factor was introduced.
7) (09:10) The general also believes there are many “hard core Marxists” involved in this uprising. If you look and listen, please note that he give absolutely no facts to support this allegation. This is a figment of his imagination. Please compare this with his rant about “Marxist insurgencies” that I wrote about a few days ago. Are there Marxists involved? Most likely. Are there anarchists? Probably. But are the core of the uprising? Absolutely not!
8) (10:10) “Islam and Marxism run parallel.” Please note there is nothing given to support this statement other than him saying it. He makes this claim, although most people who study political systems link Islamism more closely with fascism or Nazism.3
Notes & References
1 – According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, execute means “to inflict capital punishment on; put to death according to law.” Assassinate means “to injure or destroy unexpectedly and treacherously,” or “to murder (a usually prominent person) by sudden or secret attack often for political reasons.”