Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) made big headlines this week in a showdown with the Obama administration over the latter’s refusal to unequivocally state that it would not use armed drones to kill Americans on American soil who posed no imminent threat to the country. Paul was relegated to eating candy bars during his twelve-plus hour filibuster while establishment types like Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) were dining with Barack Obama.
The conservative base ate it up. Finally, the new guard was doing what the old guard never seemed interested in doing; Paul was taking Obama on while standing on principle and the establishment didn’t like it one bit. McCain referred to the Senator from Kentucky as well as Senator Ted Cruz as ‘wacko birds’.
However, in addition to winning over conservatives and libertarians, Paul has garnered the support of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood front in America; Turkish Current TV (Al Jazeera) host Cenk Uygur; former Obama Green Jobs czar Van Jones, who is a fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP) – a George Soros entity; and Code Pink, a far left group who was behind the 2010 Gaza flotilla.
CAIR’s Executive Director – Nihad Awad – said the following in a press release:
“We welcome Senator Paul’s efforts to press for a firm answer as to whether drones may legally be used to kill American citizens on U.S. soil. Unfortunately, the initial administration response to that question left room for doubt. We acknowledge today’s statement by Attorney General Holder and hope that it represents a clear and unequivocal rejection of that obviously unconstitutional authority.”
Uygur, long recognized as a far left commentator who left MSNBC to work at Current TV, said the following in reference to Paul’s filibuster:
“I don’t care what his (Paul’s) opinions on other things are — you can call him anything you like, but here he happens to be a constitutional hero.”
Uygur’s employer – Current TV – was recently sold to Al Jazeera, another arm of the Muslim Brotherhood.
How about Van Jones? Here is a guy who worked very closely with the inner circles inside the Obama administration when he was the Green Jobs czar. Jones resigned in 2009 amidst a string of scandalous revelations about his past, which included his signature appearing on a 9/11 Truth document. When he left the administration, he became a senior fellow at CAP, an entity TIME Magazine referred to as the Obama administration’s “idea factory”.
Here is what Jones had to say about the Rand Paul filibuster:
“Well let me just say, I might shock a lot of people as somebody, you know I love this president and I respect this president, Rand Paul was a hero yesterday, and what I’ve been hearing is a lot of shame from liberals and progressives who felt like geez, we should be up there sticking up for civil liberties and we should be the ones asking those tough questions.”
As for Soros, he supported the ‘Arab Spring’ and has some very distinct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood himself. This would at least theoretically explain why both Jones and CAIR are on the same page here.
Then, of course, there is Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin, who said of Paul:
“…compared to the Democratic senators who have, with few exceptions, remained either silent or support of President Obama’s killer drones, Rand made a heroic stand. In gratitude, progressives should “Stand with Rand.”
In 2010, Benjamin worked with Obama friends Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn – through the Free Gaza Movement – to coordinate the Gaza flotilla that attempted to break the Israeli blockade. This was a pro-Hamas movement as well; Hamas is the Muslim Brotherhood.
There are two traits we’ve come to associate with left-wing groups. One is that when they want to collectively push a narrative, there’s a cross-polination of shared words embedded in that narrative. Yet, supposedly independent groups all use those words. In the examples above, Jones, Uygur, and Benjamin all refer to Paul as being a ‘hero’.
The second trait is that leftists – especially those in positions of prominence – don’t break ranks. When Van Jones outwardly expresses a view that is in support of someone who is in direct opposition to Obama on a particular issue, it’s both noteworthy and curious.
Conservatives are always talking about how they can’t trust leftists. Now, all of sudden, because the leftists are agreeing with a conservative / libertarian Senator’s stand against the Republican establishment, we’re to take them at their word? Why isn’t it possible that these leftists see an opportunity to further divide the Republican Party?
Remember, one of Saul Alinsky’s rules states, in part:
Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose.
This is not meant to say that Paul is wrong and the likes of Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) are right. In actuality, on balance, Paul is more right than they are. The problem is that Paul, like his father but not to the same degree, doesn’t seem to understand the Muslim Brotherhood threat to the homeland.
McCain and Graham are an interestingly bizarre pair. Both have supported – and continue to support – arming Muslim Brotherhood rebels to fight dictators. McCain called such Libyan rebels his ‘heroes’ while backing NATO’s efforts to oust Gadhafi. Both Senators have continued to back support for the Syrian rebels as well.
So, McCain and Graham seek to empower the Muslim Brotherhood abroad but want more latitude to attack them domestically. Conversely, Paul rightfully wants to stop funding the likes of Egypt’s Mohammed Morsi and the Syrian rebels while at the same time, he gains the support of Nihad Awad, the head of a Muslim Brotherhood group in America.
In an interview with Fox’s Megyn Kelly, Paul said the following about McCain and Graham:
They think the whole world is a battlefield, including America, and that the ‘laws’ of war should apply. The laws of war don’t involve due process.
In reality, the whole world IS A BATTLEFIELD in the eyes of the Muslim Brotherhood, which consists of CAIR, Hamas, and Al Qaeda. The problem for the likes of Paul, McCain, and Graham is that they do not understand that America is also a political battlefield in the eyes of the Muslim Brotherhood groups here.
Again, this goes back to one very simple reality; The United States did not sufficiently identify its enemy after 9/11 (all Muslim Brotherhood groups in America and Saudi Arabia by extension). As a result and as a nation, we are confused about how best to confront that enemy almost twelve years later.
Until then, internecine battles like this one will likely continue as Muslim Brotherhood operatives in the U.S. remain under the radar.