Guess Who's Coming To Dinner? The Muslim Brotherhood...and Iran.

I'm just going to come out and say it. Anyone who thought the "revolution" in Egypt was some kind of feel good let's be a democracy movement is just an amazingly large sap of an idiot. Well, the liberal media thought so, and so did the White House...maybe...though what's been coming out of the White House since 2009 doesn't even pass as stupid. Flailing negligence and ineptitude would be more like it.

To say that the dufus passing himself off as the pResident is a complete moron is an insult to morons. But I could go on and on about the skinny idiot all day so let's get back to the subject at hand.

It seems that the New York Times (all the news that's fit to make up) is now reporting that the Muslim Brotherhood made a deal with the Egyptian military when the so-called revolution took place.

“There is evidence the Brotherhood struck some kind of a deal with the military early on,” said Elijah Zarwan, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group. “It makes sense if you are the military — you want stability and people off the street. The Brotherhood is one address where you can go to get 100,000 people off the street.”

When I first wrote about the hubbub in Egypt I said that the military has a vested interest in preventing the MB from taking over Egypt as the Islamization of Egypt would mean a drastic collapse in the tourist industry, which is largely controlled by the military. Just how many people are running to vacation in Iran? But it seems that the Egyptian military is being a lot more short-sighted than say the days of Anwar Sadat when, in the period following the treaty with Israel, the military consolidated a lot of its power in the private sector. Now it seems they are more interested in short-term stability. The change is getting noticed.

The NYT reports:

When the new prime minister, Essam Sharaf, addressed the crowd in Tahrir Square this month, Mohamed el-Beltagi, a prominent Brotherhood member, stood by his side. A Brotherhood member was also appointed to the committee that drafted amendments to the Constitution.

But the most obvious and consequential example was the recent referendum on the amendments, in the nation’s first post-Mubarak balloting. The amendments essentially call for speeding up the election process so that parliamentary contests can be held before September, followed soon after by a presidential race. That expedited calendar is seen as giving an advantage to the Brotherhood and to the remnants of Mr. Mubarak’s National Democratic Party, which have established national networks. The next Parliament will oversee drafting a new constitution.

Well, wouldn't you just love to be the Muslim Brotherhood and be in power to draft the new constitution of Egypt? I wonder what a shariah constitution would look like?

So what does all this mean? It could mean that the Muslim Brotherhood has effectively infiltrated the military at the highest levels and is simply using its influence to lay the groundwork for a seamless takeover of the country under the guise of a democratic process. It could also mean that the military has decided to keep its friends close, and its enemies even closer. Drawing the MB leadership into the open is a very effective way of setting them up for a fall. There is really no telling at this point which way this will go. But if I had to guess I'd say the MB is poised to seize control of Egypt.

How did this happen? Very simple. Because Odumbdumb decided to let Hosni Mubarak, the only stabilizing secular Arab leader in the region, piss in the wind. And why did he do this? Again, very simple. Odumbdumb's Middle East Policy has only one motivation: correcting what he sees as the historic mistake of the rebirth of Jewish sovereignty in Israel.

His administration has helped dislodge Mubarak, and has turned a blind eye to Hizbullah's effective takeover of the Lebanese government and military. His administration is ignoring Bashar Assad's repression of popular uprisings in Syria, while bombing the crap out of Libya, emboldening the rebels who are in part backed by...Iran.

And funny, who backs Hizbullah? Iran.

Who backs Bashar Assad? Iran.

Who backs Hamas? Iran.

Who has just made an agreement with Syria to open a naval base on its coast? Iran.

Who has stated again and again, while pushing full steam ahead with a nuclear weapons program, that Israel must be wiped off the map? Iran.

So would it seem that the White House has decided that the best bet for brining stability to the Middle East (which in Odumbdumb speak means a Middle East with no Israel) is to allow for the rise of Iranian hegemony? Sounds like an absolutely stupid idea, which means it's exceedingly likely the case.

But let's forget about Israel for a moment and take a look at the bigger picture. Saudi Arabia has essentially annexed Bahrain in an attempt to protect its borders and Sunni oil interests. At some point the Sunni world is going to have to decide whether its going to roll over to Iran, or fight back. Libya could be such a battleground. Clearly Saudi Arabia sees Bahrain as a potential war zone. Of course Saudi Arabia is the ultimate goal, being the home of Mecca. If the White House's actions are any indication the Saudi's can't expect any help from the United States. The White House seems to be in bed with Iran big time.

Maybe this is why the Russians are feverishly attempting to get the Saudis and the Israelis together. Iranian supremacy in the region is bad for all three. Survival makes for strange bed fellows. And some of them wear funny hats.