Why Does ElBaradei 'Traitorously' Pander
to America?! (Al-Wafd, Egypt)
"Instead of resigning, it would have been better for ElBaradei to have informed his friends in America and the
West about the idiotic actions carried out by the Muslim Brotherhood. ... Now calls
to hold ElBaradei accountable for his stance are
pouring in. ... He criticizes the Brotherhood and accuses it of bloodshed, yet rejects
the way in which the armed sit-ins were resolved ... is there not something
profoundly paradoxical in that?"
Mohamed ElBaradei, former interim Egyptian vice president and former chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency. In Egypt's topsy-turvy pre- and post- democratic world, where political arrests and murder are occurring on almost a daily basis, he is being prosecuted for the crime of ... resignation.
Dr.
Mohamed ElBaradei is a complex character, and no one
would deny the role he played during the January 25, 2011 revolution and what followed.
However, we cannot turn a blind eye to what he recently did - resign from his
post as vice president of Egypt. This took everyone by surprise and raised a
myriad of questions about the character of the man.
In
justifying his opposition to breaking up sit-ins conducted by armed terrorists,
ElBaradei said that he rejects all bloodshed, despite
the fact that the state exercised the utmost restraint in dealing with the
sit-ins in the Nahda and Rabia
al-Adawiyya Squares. The two sit-ins were dispersed
according to international law and standards because enough was enough: People
had had enough of the killing, torture, incitement and intimidation that the
Muslim Brotherhood was carrying out against the Egyptian people.
The
resignation of ElBaradei from his post as vice president
of the republic was a bomb that nearly exploded in the faces of Egyptians who
had entrusted the army and police with the task of rooting out terrorism and
eliminating its proponents in the Muslim Brotherhood. When ElBaradei
asked to resign, the president gave him time to reconsider his bizarre stance,
especially since he himself had named among the reasons for resigning his fierce,
forceful criticism of the Muslim Brotherhood and its bloody actions, and as he
acknowledged on more than one occasion the bloody role of the Brotherhood and
its insistence on intimidating and terrorizing the Egyptian people.
So
why did ElBaradei drop this bombshell?! Evidence
suggests he is pandering to America and the West, and it would be no
exaggeration to say that his resignation was a key factor in the decision of France,
Britain and the United States to call on the U.N. Security Council to convene
and discuss the Egyptian issue and leading it to call for a cessation of
violence. The profoundly frustrating thing about this is that the Egyptian
people are peaceful by nature and only know violence thanks to a handful called
the Muslim Brotherhood and their followers - who pursue a policy of bloodshed, murder,
dragging people to death and slaughter; and who now intimidate the Egyptian
people and have brought on the current absurdities.
Posted By
Worldmeets.US
Instead
of resigning, it would have been better for ElBaradei
to have informed his friends in America and the West about the idiotic actions carried
out by the Muslim Brotherhood. What ElBaradei did was
no easy thing, and I have too high an opinion of him to believe anyone could
accuse him of being a traitor. After all, we are talking about the great Egyptian
people, who have witnessed a second revolution - this time against the Muslim
Brotherhood - in which many millions of Egyptians took to the streets on June
30 and July 26 to single out the traitorous Brotherhood and their ilk. So how could
ElBaradei have behaved in so strange a manner?
Now
calls to hold ElBaradei accountable for his stance
are pouring in, because people held out hope in him in his new post as vice president,
and were therefore surprised when his bombshell exploded in their faces. He
criticizes the Brotherhood and accuses it of bloodshed, yet rejects the way in
which the armed sit-ins were resolved ... is there not something profoundly
paradoxical in that?
If
ElBaradei is indeed pandering to America and the West,
then Egyptians have a right to speak badly of him, because they vehemently
reject any intervention in Egypt’s affairs ... and refuse to be bullied by
third parties. Indeed, this is what brought Egyptians to revolt against the
Muslim Brotherhood, because everyone knows they were conspiring to turn Egypt
into a country of divided sectarian fiefdoms!!
