Lie of ‘Brothers’ innocence

This news has been read 15283 times!

We will write and criticize the Brotherhood, in thought and idea as we wish. Shortly after the liberation, their leaders in the Constitutional Movement announced during a press conference that they will cut all ties with the Muslim Brotherhood and its organization and that they are now working under a different and new name.

One of the qualities of a Muslim, according to the literature of the Muslim Brotherhood, at least, is honesty. But we find them since the founding of their movement, more than thirty years after the liberation of Kuwait, differing sharply on several issues, including the fact that Saddam offered them the chance to rule Kuwait. One of their groups denied that and another says that it was offered, but they rejected it. This means one of the two Brotherhood sides is a liar.

In an article recently published by Al-Qabas for one of their miserable leaders tried to absolve the Brotherhood of any outrageous stances during Saddam’s occupation of our country, and for that he divided the Brotherhood into three categories — the Jordan Brothers, whose position was consistent with Saddam’s; the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood was rejecting the invasion and demanding the withdrawal of Saddam, but opposed the Western forces to liberate Kuwait saying the danger of their presence in Kuwait (according to the writer’s testimony) was no less than the danger of the presence of Iraqi forces. This is a really rude comparison and the Brotherhood of Egypt, Morocco, Yemen, Sudan, Syria and all the ‘Brothers’ of the Gulf, and most Islamic groups in Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Malaysia and others were against the invasion and supported the Kuwaiti right.

In response to what he said, we will make the following observations:

What is the position of the international Brotherhood organization about Kuwait and the position of the Egyptian Brotherhood? Are you fooling us? Wasn’t Egypt at that time the capital of the organization?

Two, when the Kuwaiti Brothers announced, after the liberation, that they had cut off all ties with the international Brotherhood organization and changed their political name, and that they were pure Kuwaiti Brothers, did they mean ‘the brothers of the first, second, or third section’?

Three, the author and others’ claim that they refused to participate in the formation of an interim government under occupation (and it is true, according to their statements, that they refused to take power) did not inevitably come out of patriotism but rather because they did not trust Saddam’s regime. If they were ascetic in ruling, why did they jump to seize the first opportunity to rule Egypt during Morsi’s days? Why did they accept to rule Tunisia, Sudan, Morocco and others, and are currently striving to take power in other Arab or Islamic country?

What about the documented testimony of the first Kuwaiti who was in the United States during the sinful occupation, Ambassador Sheikh Saud Al-Nasser, about the position of the Brotherhood representatives who visited him in Washington (E.S.) and (T.S.) asking him to arrange a meeting with senior members of Congress to convince them not to intervene militarily in Kuwait, in addition the embassy to fund their tour in America to promote the same goal. Their fate was that the ambassador rebuked them violently.

Six, what about the position of one of their senior members who went to the Lahore meeting in Pakistan, and kept silent about all demands to reject Western forces’ liberation of Kuwait?

Seven, what about the position of Youssef Nada, holder of the Brotherhood’s Funds and Secrets, residing in Switzerland who proposed the formation of a Pakistani and Iranian Islamic force to replace the Iraqi forces?

The fact that the Brotherhood does not want to admit is that their stance during the months of occupation was in line with their principles.

All of them had previously sworn allegiance and obedience to the Guide. It is natural to assume that the different positions of the Brotherhood were with the blessing of the leader himself. If Saddam wins and stays in Kuwait, the Brotherhood will say to him: ‘We stood by you’, and if he loses, they will tell us ‘We stood with you’.

If you are not ashamed, say and write whatever you want.

e-mail: [email protected]

By Ahmad alsarraf

This news has been read 15283 times!

Related Articles

Back to top button

Advt Blocker Detected

Kindly disable the Ad blocker

Verified by MonsterInsights