Posted on 03/19/2011 5:52:17 PM PDT by sheikdetailfeather
But I mean, folks, as we told you yesterday, the rebels, who are they? I mean, suppose the rebels are the Muslim Brotherhood. It's a fascinating thing. Whose side do you choose here? It's not altogether clear. Do we sit around and want to openly help establish Middle Eastern regimes that are hostile to us? No, we don't, obviously we don't, but are we in the process of doing that? Only time will tell. Al Arabiya, quoting medical sources, says 25 people are dead in a bombardment of the Libyan city of Misurata after Khadafy forces ignored the ceasefires. It's clear that he head faked them. A doctor in Libya's Misurata says government forces are still shelling the city, 25 people killed. Khadafy forces bombing the city with artillery shells and tanks, 25 people dead at the hospital, including several little girls, the doctor said by satellite phone. And then an update: "Khadafy Forces Shell West Libya's Misrata (sic), 25 Dead." It just continues to pour in. And Mrs. Clinton says "it's not at all clear if the Libyan ceasefire announcement is being matched by actions on the ground." She's obviously learned diplomatic-speak. Not at all clear if the Libyan ceasefire announcement is being matched by actions on the ground.
(Excerpt) Read more at rushlimbaugh.com ...
Rush is always ahead of the game. He must be an awesome chess player.
Bump.
Actually he was back peddling from his stupid statements from the day before.!
I missed it. What where they?
Rush-"But I mean, folks, as we told you yesterday, the rebels, who are they?"
What did he say that was stupid the day before?
I posted this elsewhere, might as well slap it here as well...
IMHO...
Leadership of militant islam, both sunni and shia, is jockeying for control of all North African and middle eastern nations, seeking to install shariah-based governments. This is a long-range plan, whereby alliances will be made between the nations and they will simultaneously attack Israel again. If they are able to get this done before nobama leaves office, he will do everything he can to delay helping Israel until it is too late. After the election in 2012, if nobama loses, that would be the time for them to attack, as he could give them 2 months to destroy Israel. If he wins, there’s no urgency as they have 4 more years to solidify their caliphate coalition.
If one studies military history, it becomes very clear that islamic leaders have been bent on conquering and subjugating the west since islam’s inception. Today we simply have the same islamic war continuing; it never stopped. The dangers of islam have been not taught for hundreds of years because of arrogance, the expansion of western military might and the disassembly of the ottoman empire after WWI. Wealth from oil is the only reason they are relevant at this point.
egypt and libya, once the islamic governments are set up over them, will form one half of a sandwich around saudi arabia. Change to islamic government then just needs to happen in iraq which the U.S. is busy leaving to it’s own devices, which perfectly sets up for a revolution. At that point, saudi arabia could be successfully forced into the alliance or a revolution would take over the country, as there would be no significant non-militant nations nearby. islamic radicals are trying to accomplish this all through revolution as much as possible in the next two years, as nobama is giving them time and even aiding and abetting them with the U.S. military right now in libya.
islamic militants view long-time leaders who cooperated with the west as traitors to islam, as well as long-time leaders who have not contributed enough to jihad and have grown fat and happy; kadaffy fits into that category. They will kill their own that are not murderous and violent enough towards the west; they see all the billions that kadaffy and mubarak made for themselves as money that could be used for their cause. Amazing how the Pan Am bombing does not give kadaffy enough “street cred” to suit the militants.
The day before he was saying something needed to be done, his email probably blew up.
He did not bring up who they were the day before, that was his clean up statement. Stepping back from saying something needed to be done the day before.
Ask yourself (think, workers of the world unite)how did all this come about? Who is supporting that movement. Obama and Hillary couldn’t let some dictator get in the way. Why, that just may put an end to the whole thing. They can’t let that happen, can they?
I don’t know what Rush said about this yesterday, but I give him full credit for saying the right thing today.
And he is virtually the ONLY commentator or reporter who has said the right thing, whether liberal or conservative.
Kaddafi is NOT a nice guy. But his enemies are far worse. Kaddafi has not been our real enemy since Reagan and Bush straightened him out. The Muslim Brotherhood is FAR more dangerous.
Rush has the good sense to see this. And he’s just about the only one.
Glenn Beck Show- March 17, 2011
(This show explains a lot...)
I think it’s a bit hysterical to suggest the rebels are in league with AQ. No doubt the Muslim Brotherhood has some sort of presence in the country but I’ve seen nothing that says they are running the show. Indeed a couple of weeks ago I read a report that the make up of the peoples councils getting organised in Benghazi were made up of professionals, lawyers, businessmen, defected army officers and other people of what you may call ‘stature’.
Libya has always been quite a secular county and I think it may just be possible that if this is brought to a swift conclusion we may just have a reasonably stable, democratic and friendly Libya. Perhaps something like Turkey.
Which has surely got to be good news for everyone?
Can you imagine if Obama is bombing his good friend Qadaffi (don’t care how it’s spelled) and then it turns out that Obama is actually aiding elements of AQ??
Oh, how the press will spin it in the end no matter what happens.
Today I actually heard an ABCNews Radio reporter refer to Obama as “decisive” and “taking action in Libya...”
Good, Lord.
Libya proves that 6 years of “no blood for oil” was nothing more than partisan politics.
Saying that something needed to be done, which was most certainly true, is not the same as saying that a missile attack should be launched by American forces, or prescribing in any sense what action(s) should be taken..
I noticed his backpedaling too. I figure he must have read that wonderful column by his friend Andrew McCarthy about not getting involved in Libya.
Except his backpedaling was the same day that column came out. LOL
Gee, I wonder why?
I have a very good memory and sometime I say gee were these people listening to the same show I was.
Read my lips. No new taxes!"
The Dem's made Bush Sr eat those words with their authorization of Desert Storm. Will the Republicans make Obama sign off on a repeal of obamacare and budget reduction in return for authorization for his war?
Here’s what I’ve been wondering. If, in America, enough people decided to revolt, could they put together an organized rebel force in the same amount of time as the Libyans? Complete with all the weaponry the Libyans seem to have? That’s one thing that makes me wonder if there isn’t some organization to it, after all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.