DarbyScratch • 13 minutes ago


Obama, Clinton get it wrong again. The U.S. is barred by law from assisting military coups. Using that, along with faux support for the "democratically elected," Obama supported Muslim Brotherhood tyrant Morsi in Egypt. When Egyptians realized that Morsi was a corrupt front man for a thuggish terrorist organization, they looked to the military who then deposed and imprisoned Morsi. Egyptians 1, Obama 0.

In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is likewise an Islamist who has jailed reporters, judges, political opponents and made criticism of himself a crime punishable by imprisonment or worse. He has also given only small and grudging cooperation in the war on terror, and has openly allowed ISIS and the Nusra Front to cross and re-cross Turkey's Syrian border at their leisure. He has also moved Turkey away from its traditional secular government and toward an Islamist theocracy with himself as strongman. He is on record as saying, "There is no radical Islam."

So, up pops the notoriously secularist military to depose Erdogan in a coup, and what does Obama do? Why of course, he supports his Muslim suckbuddy Erdogan on grounds that he was "democratically elected." This of course ignores the fact that he either disqualified or jailed his closest opponents before the election, disbanded their Supreme Court that refused to side with him and had his secret police monitor polling stations and take possession of ballot boxes before votes were counted. Sound like Chicago? So in both Egypt and Turkey, Obama has found a justification to loudly support a Muslim tyrant and, in both cases, it is to the detriment of U.S. interests. Almost makes one think that supporting Muslim tyrants takes precedence, doesn't it? Wonder why?