Counter-Revolution

by craig on July 4, 2013 8:49 am in Uncategorized

What we are seeing in Egypt is counter-revolution pure and simple, military hardliners who are going to be friendly with Israel and the US, and are committing gross human rights abuse.

Western backed counter-revolution is going to be sweeping back across the Middle East; do not be distracted by the words of the West, watch the deeds.  It will of course be in the name of secularism.  There is an important correlation between what is happening in Turkey and Egypt.  I made myself unpopular when I pointed out what the media did not tell you, that behind the tiny minority of doe-eyed greens in the vanguard of the Istanbul movement, stood the massed phalanxes of kemalist nationalism, a very ugly beast.  “Secularism” was the cry there too.

 

Tweet this post

712 Comments

  1. “The Muslim end,” replies Anjem C, as he digs into his honeypot and pulls out a piece of albumen whose shape miraculously spells the Holy Name of The Security Service.

    I tend to agree with you. It is late and I have just “Oh I get it now!” (Short Circuit). It was a bit cryptic.

    Peace be upon you too!

  2. I cant’t believe that the hostility levelled against Suhayl on this thread is soley for his use of the term ‘Islamist’ or for expressing preference for secularism or Western culture.

    Something else is at play. What is it?

  3. Jemand – Censorship Improves History

    Me and SS used to get on quite well before this thread. You can read older threads, and I think he would admit it if you ask him.

    Maybe when other issues are discussed we would be on the same side again.

    But you are right, it isn’t just about the term “Islam-ist”, which I find dishonest and racist.
    It is also to do with the generisations he is using on this thread. I have never seen him do that before.
    Drol, thought something in me has changed recently to make me attack him in that way.
    I would say, something in him has changed.

    The examples he gives are of a Muslim somewhere some how doing something that he says is bad. And then using it to say, all of what he calls Islamists are bad.
    Please explain to me how that is different from some racist saying all blacks are bad because obama is black and he has done some bad things.

    If his attacks on the brotherhood were actually to do with their own policies. Even if I disagreed with him, I would be ok with him saying that. But most probably I might have agreed with him. Because they do have many policies I disagree with. There is no one, no group that I agree with 100%, whether they are what he calls Islamists or not.
    As a Muslim I believe Allah is perfect, the rest of us are not, including Muslims.
    What I disagreed with most was his use of organisations that have no connection at all with the brotherhood. People in different countries, with very different idiologies and policies.
    And then he goes, they are all Islamist.
    On this thread he has been acting like the BNP and the racists in this government who blame Muslims here for the actions of any Muslim anywhere on the planet.
    Just like what the tabloids did here. When some Paki cab drivers fiddled with some girls in places up north that I have never heard of.
    It was some how stated that Islam was to blame. When they were cab drivers not leaders of mosques like the pedo prists. Their brown skin and strange names meant it was an Islamic crime. While segregation areas of British prisons are packed with whites with white names, whose crimes are their own. Not shared by others of their race who didn’t do it. Not shared by others of their religion who didn’t take part. Their religion was not even mentioned. People didn’t even try to guess their religion by their names and skin colour. Because it had no baring on their crimes.
    But, the fact that SS says some Saudi guys, come here and sees call girls means what he calls Islam’ism is to blame.
    And this has ramifications on my desire to reverse sykes picot carve up of the middle east, and it means the coup against the Muslim brotherhood win was a good thing.
    Has he interviewed any of them to find out if they are in any of what he calls Islamist groups they belong to?
    Or does he even know whether they even pray, fast and pay charity?
    Does he even know whether or not they are Muslim.
    I mean, if a white british person goes to a prostitute, it is never a case of a Christianity and Prostitution. The way SS says Muslims ruling by Islam is done because Muslims want more call girls just cause he says that is what some Saudis do here?
    I call him a racist because that is how racists themselves make judgements.

    My attack on him has nothing to do with his religious beliefs or his politics. He has always made his religious thoughts and politic beliefs here very clear.
    I have always known he was a secularist. He made his views on Islamic rules he idsagreed with very clear. But with differed on them with respect.
    And up till this thread, I have always thought we have got along.
    My attacks on him was because of his racism.
    That is what has changed.
    He has never used to racist arguments he is doing now.
    This is the verse time I have seen him do that. and this thread is the first time I have attacked him in this way.

    Anyway, it is ramadhan. And half of it has ended. I should be using it to worshiping and not posting on threads here. I have said it before. I will be stricter with myself now. Bye. I might be back after eid.

  4. Re racial prejudice, racism, prejudice etc

    It is natural and important for animals, including humans, to have an instinctive faculty of inductive reasoning – not formal, but natural. This faculty assists animals to adapt to their changing, complex environment. An animal will sense relationships between observations and subsequent events/outcomes with the beneficial effect of allowing it to avoid threats and pursue opportunities for survival.

    It doesn’t matter what that relationship is, complex or simple, causal or associative. It’s fuzzy logic at work.

    Now, it is a common, if faulty, response to observing something (someone) different and seeing a particular outcome and then drawing a conclusion that there is a relationship from which one induces a rule that can be applied to other situations sharing similar particulars. This psychological behaviour is observable in people and animals that are prone to superstition (ie faulty inductive reasoning).

    And there is a long standing argument against prejudice (esp. racial prejudice) that says you cannot/shouldn’t induce generalised rules about people sharing a common attribute based on single or limited observations. That’s more or less correct when there is no cost involved, but does not serve any benefit when the stakes are high – eg survival. 

    Therefore, most animals are born with a primary prejudice – if something is unknown, it is dangerous, unless otherwise later observed to be safe or beneficial – or, if it doesn’t smell like food, it probably sees you as food. Cats aren’t very good at observing this rule, hence ‘curiosity killed the cat’.

    Animals will instinctively be shy, skittish and difficult to approach because there is no value in staying around to learn if it is going to be eaten or not. The benefit of the doubt, therefore, falls on the side of a negative judgement. Why would it be any different for the human animal?

    So conclusions based on very small sets of observations might be risky but not necessarily invalid. Better safe than sorry, eh?

    In regard to Islamic influences on human behaviour, the question should be asked – Is there a relationship between the principles of Islam or culture of Muslims and the violence and destruction that we observe in the world today?

    Observing one Muslim or Christian commit a crime is not sufficient to draw conclusions about Muslims or Christians. But there are plenty – hundreds – of examples of crimes in which we can identify patterns.

    One is the overwhelming fact that most violent crime is committed by males between the ages of late teens and thirties. Do we see many 65yo women throwing Molotov cocktails in violent demonstrations, committing violent sexual assaults or bashing and robbing others? No. Why do you think that is?

    We see lots of Chinese running restaurants, little corner stores and mobile phone kiosks but not so many playing cricket, singing heavy metal or going to the pub and getting drunk. Why is that?

    Would I be wrong to make the observation that males commit violent crimes and Chinese run small businesses? How many exceptions break the rule? One? Two?

    I see a lot of conflict in the Muslim world – between Muslims, between Muslims and non-Muslims. And I see a lot of conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims in the non-Muslim world.

    Is there no relationship between Muslims/Islam and the many incidents of unrest and violence in many parts of the world?

    I think there is. I think that unrest is a result of conflict between people who wish to affirm, defend or spread the influence of Islamic principles in rivalry with non-Islamic principles (other religions, secularism, etc).

    To observe that as a fact (if, indeed, it is a fact) is not racist, it’s perfectly correct.

  5. technicolour

    23 Jul, 2013 - 5:32 pm

    well, well, what a thread.

    Arsalan, good to see you again. I think maybe neither you or Suhayl changed, just the climate around you.

    Suhayl seems to be objecting strongly to murder, torture and repression carried out by people in the name of Islam. I know that this is often sponsored by ‘being bombed back to the Stone Age’ and in dollars, but are you sure you disagree?

    (I’m not sure about this word ‘Islamist’ actually, since people can easily conflate it with ‘Muslim'; I tend to use ‘insane extremist’ of which most ideologies possess a few, poor souls).

    Otherwise I was interested to read your view on Eqypt: wish I was there to dig some more. I’m pretty sure Morsi crossed several lines, which made the electorate rise up, but will go and look. What you know about Somalia fits with what I know btw.

    Agree that it is rotten for Muslim men to be forced not to wear a beard of course: would be interested to know if you think they should be forced *to* wear a beard? Because if so we know we are coming from v different views.

    I think it’s understandable to be upset when the failings of insane extremists are pointed out, and only Islamic extremists are mentioned, because it does play straight into the hands of people like Karimov and also statements like this:

    “Is there no relationship between Muslims/Islam and the many incidents of unrest and violence in many parts of the world?….I think there is. I think that unrest is a result of conflict between people who wish to affirm, defend or spread the influence of Islamic principles in rivalry with non-Islamic principles (other religions, secularism, etc).”

    To which of course there are so many replies that they have occupied whole blog pages, as Jemand well knows (last refutation culminating in the example of Malaysia)

    Suhayl was pointing out that nothing flourishes in a climate of fear and oppression. The most repressive version of Islam available is of course analagous to ‘Christians’ who insanely quote the nastier bits of Leviticus. Or Friedmanites, in economic ideology.

    Think calling him names v odd, v childish! He is not exactly singing the current state’s praises, is he? I think you have just missed seeing that his points are part of a picture.

  6. The arse about tit “observations” with a preface of bollocksology to make it sound scientifically accepted bollocks!!! Have wasted my time reading the oodles of nonsense and crap.

    Should have skipped reading the long diatribe that delivered the same shitty prejudice; I see, and decide!! Fact that seeing itself is based on flawed parameters, not being entertained, but hey when talking bollocks there is no ceiling, and bollocks can stack up to reach the heavens itself.

    Throughout this thread the most glaring point that has not bee acknowledged (I have been waiting for the slightest hint of reappraisal of the prejudicial stances) has been the unsubstantiated assertions; I am an “Islam-ist” that has shaped the ebb and flow of the debate.

    However upon declaration of my none religiousness, post a vicious attack on me for being an anti-s… and an Armageddon merchant, there has been further posts disregarding the fact that I am not religious (I am religious “fundamentalist Muslim” who lies through his fucking teeth apparently), and carrying on the thrust of their assertions, and denunciations unabated.

    These type of transactions are befitting fishwives, and ought not be undertaken by the so called “intellectuals” whom have engaged in asserting their assumptions and following these with their customary denunciations. However, what has sense to do with this debate, or any other debate concerning the inalienable right of people to self-determination?

    Fact that anyone mildly intelligent can adduce the bollocks of “animals being skittish” to be unrelated to “human beings”, that qualifies as to sixty year old men not committing sex crimes. Overlooking the fact that, the said sixty year old men, only can use their addendum/used to be penis for urination, and at most reminisce on an erection that befell their limp addendum once back in 1945 August 6 half past eight in the morning!

    This is the fucking state of debate, conflating of bollocks and defending the said conflated bollocks with resultant wisdom of bollocks, all the while not aware that; could any of this crapfest have anything to do with their rights that is being defended? Hey if these blind bastards could somehow by some fucking miracle discern that, they would not be in the world of shit that they have found themselves in then.

  7. I know exactly what his points are. Calling him a races was a statement of fact. It wasn’t name calling.

  8. Thanks, Technicolour and Jemand.

    “This is the fucking state of debate, conflating of bollocks and defending the said conflated bollocks with resultant wisdom of bollocks, all the while not aware that; could any of this crapfest have anything to do with their rights that is being defended?” Fedup.

    Sounds like you’re describing an agricultural show in Hereford! Bucolic, indeed. In the world of cow pats and hurricanes, we are but butterflies.

    Take it easy, Arsalan and Fedup.

    Listen to the cosmos. Be Middle C. Laugh, smile, pray. Be.

  9. The Muslim population is about 25% of the world. 57 countries are members of the OIC. Other then Muslim majority countries there are large Muslim minorities and many other countries.

    Do people like you and him see WW2 as a christian conflict, between Christians and themselves.
    How about Conflicts in latin America are they seen as Christians killing each other?
    America has had a conlict each and every year since it was created. How many of them are seen as christian conflicts?

    So, yes, it is racism.
    In the same way crimes are seen as black on black when blacks are involved but never white on white when whites are involved.

    Tec
    Millitry coup means millitry coup. It doesnt mean the people went against him. It just meant the army that ruled before the coup, rules again now.
    But to be honest. I believe the army never left power.
    During the few months morsi alegedly rules, all the parts of the state continued taking orders from the army.
    He just gave the orders, everyone who worked for the state ignored them and did business as usual. Until the army said, ok, you have had your turn. Now we are taking back the state.

    I am not surprised, when western governments support the army after an election.
    They did this in Algeria, Palestine, Turkey, Mali, and some other places,
    Well any place where people win an election, if it is a Muslim country. They say Islamists, and support a coup.
    Just as in the past in latin America after a election they would say communists and support a coup.

    In short the will of the people is what ever Israel and America says it is.

  10. technicolour, thanks – good to see you here.

    (I’m not sure about this word ‘Islamist’ actually, since people can easily conflate it with ‘Muslim’; I tend to use ‘insane extremist’ of which most ideologies possess a few, poor souls).

    I agree with the sentiment. I’ve been using the word a fair bit in this thread, though I asked several times what word we might use instead, and answer came there none. I acknowledged the term’s capacity for propaganda, and noted that I would be disinclined to use it in the MSM for fear of accidentally contributing to reactionary narratives about Islam.

    That said, Arsalan did make the point that you can’t “pick and choose” what Islam is – i.e. it is all or nothing. I should think that view is widely contested, of course, but certainly in this case, the word “Islamism” is redundant, since to at least one person, “Islam” is precisely the same thing. Mandatory beards, veils, religious courts, the abandonment of democratic institutions, and the locking down of a regime that incrementally doesn’t wish to cede power under any circumstances. The irony of using democracy to shut democracy down was mentioned at the start of the discussion.

    I’m pretty sure Morsi crossed several lines, which made the electorate rise up, but will go and look.

    This is key, I think – Arsalan’s strong view is that the electorate have not risen up against Morsi, or at least not in sufficient numbers to be able to call it a legitimate popular revolution. Morsi was voted in by the people only a year ago, so Arsalan is unconvinced that they might wish to be rid of him a year later.

    From the little I understand of Egypt, I think there is broad appetite for a secular government that is Islamic in nature, rather than Islamist (i.e. closing down the nascent democratic apparatus and instituting Sharia courts in its place). I know Juan Cole isn’t to everyone’s tastes here – but I do think his posts might shed some light on that. If anyone is aware of useful articles about the reasons for the second revolution, please post.

  11. Here’s an item from the US press and here’s a selection of views from members of the public. This Wikipedia article is also of interest.

    This blog post is skeptical of the claimed attendance to the anti-government rallies, and suggests it was less than 2M people. Quite how many you need in a nation of 84M people to legitimise a peaceful revolution is hugely debatable, of course.

  12. technicolour

    23 Jul, 2013 - 8:58 pm

    Jon, yes, have just looked at implied claims that this was a military operation designed to flush out the Muslim Brotherhood. Is this a minority forcing havoc onto a peaceful majority (which happens) or is this a humanitarian uprising of people in the middle against the extremism at both ends?

    Turkey, from the news on the ground, seemed (seems. does anyone know what’s happening there?) very much the latter. Report after report acclaimed the peaceful solidarity of all the protesters; whether they were kemalist, muslim, atheist, green, hippy, grandmothers, doctors, or what. Egypt seems to be more of a population divided, from what I gather, but I don’t know anyone in Egypt.

    Found this report which left me more informed but equally confused:

    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/77185/Egypt/Politics-/Muslim-Brotherhood,-Police-blamed-for-Egypts-escal.aspx

    – and the Christian Science Monitor. The headline says ‘Muslim Brotherhood Scoffs at Reconciliation’ (surely that should be ‘Scoff’) but the reality of the piece itself is this:

    “Brotherhood leaders say they will continue to protest until Morsi is reinstated – even if only long enough to call early presidential elections. Until then, they will not recognize or participate in the political process, they insist.

    “Our long term strategy is patience. We are not in a hurry,” says Amr Darrag, a senior Brotherhood member and a minister in Morsi’s government. “What else can we do? Do we wait till we are all put in jail and our parties are shut down and we are completely removed from political life?”

    csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2013/0723/Egypt-s-Muslim-Brotherhood-scoffs-at-reconciliation

    So Arsalan’s analysis is shared by the CSM :)

  13. Arsalan,

    (From the other thread, it seems more appropriate to reply here)

    You were the one being the racist. And like a typical Zionist, when you are accused of being racist, you accuse the accuser.

    Isn’t this approach part of the problem? I unreservedly condemn Israel’s cruelty, and its disregard for international law. I am not in favour of Israeli expansionism even slightly. Since Zionism is essentially a biblical justification for that imperialism, it should also help you to know that I am not religious. So, is “Zionist” an appropriate label for me, given that I reject all of the principles and beliefs it is based upon?

    I don’t know what your race is, I don’t want to know. No one wants to know. No one said any racist insults against you at all.

    I referred to your responses as racist, since you were flinging the n-word around despite not being, I think, a person of colour yourself. That is extremely thin ice here, as you know.

    What happened is you said some racist things, and we called you a racist. If you don’t want to be called a racist, stop being one.

    Well, I appreciate that is your view, but it doesn’t correlate at all with what I said.

    If I can encourage you to engage more with what people are saying, that would be a great asset to discussions like this. We agree on more than we disagree, I think, about the nature of imperialism and Western hypocrisy. Again, I am not your enemy here, even though you treat me like one. Again, I am just trying to show that not everyone expressing concern about religious governance is a US stooge.

  14. An article from Juan Cole – he posts so prolifically I had to do quite a bit of clicking! I think this is instructive. Oh yes, and the Wikipedia article I linked to earlier says that the new government promises elections.

    http://www.juancole.com/2013/07/fundamentalist-protesters-ultimatum.html

    I found this particularly confusing:

    Morsi’s misrepresentation of Obama will inflame anti-American opinion further in Egypt, where the opposition generally believes that the US is imposing the Muslim Brotherhood on Egypt for its own nefarious reasons. This impression has been fanned by statements of US ambassador Anne Patterson discouraging the youth from holding the June 30 protest and supporting the elected president. In fact, the US as a status quo power typically deals with the elected government in power.

    I suppose the US could want stability for greater geopolitical reasons (more certainty around the relationship with Israel for example). But I thought Islamic religious governance was a red line for the American deep state, and that Obama’s administration would faithfully reflect that view. Hmmm.

  15. Thinking about it, if the second revolution is backed by the student and left movements, perhaps the US view is that moderate Islamic governance is better than a socialist one? Either way, Cole’s article does make it seem like Morsi has overplayed his hand, especially with the decree stuff.

  16. technicolour

    23 Jul, 2013 - 9:44 pm

    thanks for the piece, Jon, – don’t think the US mind extremists all that much – they keep funding them everywhere. Liked this from that piece too:

    “The youth groups spent the months from February 2011 through August of 2012 demonstrating and demanding that the military go back to the barracks. Their insistence that Morsi call early presidential elections was not intended as an invitation to the army to come back into politics”

    Yeay, youth.

  17. technicolour

    23 Jul, 2013 - 9:45 pm

    well, yes, apart from socialists.

  18. Does anyone know anyone in Egypt?

  19. The US can say what they want about believing in democracy. But what they did do was sent the army f16s in reward for the coup.
    What they didn’t do was call what the army did a coup.
    Because according to US law they can’t fund governments that took power with a coup.
    Solution is simple, just don’t call it a coup. And Obama refused to call it such.
    America does the same with torture, they torture, but they just don;t call it that. And that makes it OK.

    The leftist are falling over themselves with double speech. They claim to believe in democracy. But they also hate Islam. So they say, The Millitry coup was the will of the people!
    LOL
    Liars and hypcrits.

    And I have as much right to use any words I want as anyone else.
    That includes using the word concentration camp to describe Gaza, the word Nigger to discribe how some of you use the word Paki.
    To say these words only beling to some people of some races and religions is the racism.
    :)

  20. That includes using the word concentration camp to describe Gaza, the word Nigger to discribe how some of you use the word Paki.

    You’re the only one using unpleasant racial epithets, Arsalan – check the rest of this thread. I don’t know why you persist in using them when you know they discredit your views so greatly.

    The leftist are falling over themselves with double speech. They claim to believe in democracy. But they also hate Islam.

    I’m sure it’s more complicated than “all left-leaning Egyptians hate Islam” – a good many of them are Islamic themselves. But, of the ones that (peacefully) hate Islam/Christianity/Scientology/Pastafarianism, they should be permitted to do so, right?

    So they say, The Millitry coup was the will of the people!

    The Cole article makes it seem that they are not saying that. They may be saying that the downfall of Morsi was the will of the people, but they are also opposed to the army taking power. These things are complicated – can you not shown some nuance?

    What did you make of the article that suggested that the figures attending the “second revolution” were overstated? Do you have any views on whether Morsi’s decree was undemocratic? I don’t know a lot about the latter, but it seems to be significant in the reasons for the anti-government protests?

  21. Jemand,

    Is there no relationship between Muslims/Islam and the many incidents of unrest and violence in many parts of the world?

    I think it is too complicated to say, in all honesty. If the dominant world power was nominally a Muslim country (in the same way that, despite its fundamentalism, America’s religion is capitalism rather than Christianity) then would secular-Muslim liberals pontificate about the relationship between Christianity and terrorism?

    In other words, violence that is committed in the name of Islam may be a coincidence of sorts – it is just that the primary targets of US imperialism (and the location of many energy resources, by coincidence) is the Middle East, where by dint of fate, Islam is widely practiced.

    Indeed, where “Islamic terrorism” occurs, how Islamic is it? I held my nose the other day to explore the Twitter feed of one of the EDL branches, and in particular their image gallery. Amongst their racist doodlings was an image of several alleged Islamic terrorists around the world, with the caption “Islamic terrorists available in every colour”. Dreadful sentiment aside, it illustrated an important point, rather lost on the artist: that Islam becomes a target for hatred, and a terrorist event becomes motivated by Islam, by virtue of the extremist involved attaching themselves to Islam.

    And here is a major flaw in the treatment of this subject. If an extremist professing Islam wishes to stand in court, after his capture, to denounce Western evils, the MSM would be falling over themselves to condemn “giving him a platform”. In their view, whatever he says will be a lie, especially if he makes (testable) statements about Western imperialism.

    But, on his attachment to the Islamic faith, there is no question in the minds of mainstream scribes that he is telling the truth. This is accepted without discussion. Well, nearly without discussion, anyway: when the young soldier was murdered earlier in the year, early stories described an attacker of “Muslim appearance”. The BBC later apologised, acknowledging that the suspects in question would have better been described as of African descent (I am quite prepared to believe this was subconscious theorising rather than malicious interference with reportage, but even that is telling). This did generate some belated conversation in the mainstream about subconscious racist influences.

    For reasons I can’t remember, this morning I was wondering about racial profiling. As the system stands, you are right that there are likely to be more disaffected Muslims in Britain than there are Christians. On that basis, would I support targetted racial profiling at British airports as a matter of policy?

    I think the answer is that I would not. The first reason is that if outrage held by Muslims results from British/American foreign policy, then their outrage is justified, even though any acts of non-state violence flowing from that are not. The second reason I’ve already outlined – that the outrage is held by Muslims is a result of imperialism’s death toll falling primarily on Muslims – it is just fortunate for the Christians, a stroke of fate, that they are not in the same position.

    I wondered as well that, if racial profiling is instituted, does this not set up a racist feedback loop? That is that, as the gentle weight of paternal state repression is increasingly felt by Muslims, the state may become progressively more discriminatory, perhaps at the level of each individual enforcer of that policy. Furthermore, the targets of that repression may respond with anger or resentment, “proving” to the architects of the system that it is increasingly necessary.

  22. Steady on Jon, you are making me hopeful, and less Fedup! Good points raised @ 23:23

  23. Fedup – I should be pleased if you would consider how those views are entirely compatible with my earlier comments! They come from the same moderate socialist-atheist analysis, I think.

    I’ll be interested in Jemand’s thoughts too. He and I probably have much agreement about atheism and the malign influence of religion, but I do think it is possible to swing too hard, and to clamp down on specific religions in ways that are discriminatory.

  24. I do think it is possible to swing too hard, and to clamp down on specific religions in ways that are discriminatory.

    Now that is a “grown up”, “mature” sentiment, too often a theists forget that dogma cannot be fought with dogma! This particular facet blinds most atheists to the simple fact; some people need the certainty that religion can afford them, and without their religion they cannot live a fruitful and contended life.

    Too often these religious people are the target of the; a theists whom find the constraints of any religion unacceptable to them. Their solipsist mode of thought however dose not allow these a theists to understand; relegion is a matter of personal choice! The first fucking tenet of respect and understanding is to accept that others have rights too.

    Too often the matter of course prejudices and assumptions thereof get in the way of seeing the wood for the trees. I understand where you come from, and I don’t want to condescend upon you by saying you don’t understand where I am coming form! We both wish to bring about a better world, the question is how?

  25. Fedup, you might or might not be religious since we cannot known anything with certainty about you or anyone else on this blog *except* that it is absolutely certain that you’re an obnoxious crackpot who parades his own brand of intellectual pretensions with no sense of irony. If you are not an Islamist, then you are without doubt an apologist of Islamists.

    Regarding dogma, is it really dogmatic to reject the existence of the Easter Bunny and its cultural manifestations?

  26. Jon, thanks for your participation on this thread.

    What I (probably unsuccessfully) attempted to explain in my long post above, is my thoughts on the natural origins of prejudice, defending valid prejudice and identifying invalid prejudice. The standard criticism of prejudice is that it is willful, always invalid, hostile and morally bad. This appears to be the same ignorant stand that some people have on the emotions of anger and hatred. I don’t think there is any prospect of managing problems arising from prejudice, anger and hatred with such an ignorant approach to animal psychology. (not accusing you of this)

    The relationship between Islam and violent incidents is, I agree, very complicated not the least because of the convergence of many issues – religious, political, economic, ethnic, cultural, personal etc. But I also think that amidst the noise, patterns can be identified. For example, when we observe violent incidents, it is overwhelmingly clear that males often instigate and mostly drive these incidents until they are extinguished. Certainly, the issues are complicated but the observable fact that males are at the centre of these incidents 99% of the time demonstrates that some factors, or combination of factors, stand out despite the confluence of aggravating factors.

    Consider the perennial issue of gun violence. Do guns kill people or people kill people? I think guns + people kill people. Whenever we witness an American massacre, several factors stand out. Of course, other factors influence what transpires but it’s not hard to see a pattern emerge. Should we not look at the role of civilian access to firearms? The psychological development of teenagers? The psychology of males? American culture? I think these are all relevent and factor into an observable pattern to the extent that we can predict problems when these factors converge.

    And it is the same with ideas. Ideas + people lead to [something].

    { INTERMISSION }

    So if we deconstruct a so-called ‘terrorist’ incident involving a 20 year old male suicide bomber who is Muslim, a diabetic, from a broken home where the father was abusive, got good marks at school, etc.. When we try to make sense of the incident, looking for factors that have a probabilistic influence on its development, we suspect that some factors are more significant than others. What is the significance of being male versus being a diabetic? What is the significance of intelligence versus being physically abused? Is being a Muslim significant?

    From a single or limited set of observations, as I stated above, it is risky to draw conclusions. We can’t exactly experiment, but we can develop hypotheses and continue to make observations to identify significant factors and patterns. Are there sufficient observable incidents to examine the role of Islamic principles as a significant factor in social and political violence?

    In identifying a problematic attribute, we need to also identify how intrinsically it is attached to or associated with other attributes. Something that is identified as a problem often needs to be enabled by attachment to something else that is not a problem. It is arguable, therefore, that a ‘problematic attribute’ is actually THE problem if it needs other attributes to be enabled. For example, psychopathology is considered a problem (by definition). But it doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it exists in an otherwise functional person in whose behaviour it manifests itself. If you add hypersexuality to the mix, you might have a rapist. If you add paranoia, you might get a rapist and murderer. But if he loses his legs in a car accident, he probably won’t be a rapist murderer any more. What do you think are the most significant factors in this man being a rapist murderer? His legs?

    I think there is enough material that can be analysed to lead us to make reasonable hypotheses regarding the role that religion, in particular Islam, has in contemporary and historical incidents of violence. Was Islam *not* a factor in the Woolwich murder?

    There are many other issues at play. Human rights of freedom of speech, association, pursuit of happiness. And racial or cultural profiling with other security measures can aggravate problems and diminish the intended effectiveness of solutions.

    But let’s not conflate or confuse these many factors with each other. Let’s separate and analyse them for their probablistic significance.

  27. Jon,

    I posted a question for you on the previous page. It was regarding how to judge religions as violent or not. If you have the time to respond, please do.

    In considering your response, please consider the following.

    Violence in sports is an ongoing issue – boxing, probably being the most controversial sport in this regard. Soccer and cricket barely ever receive attention with regard to incidents of violence and might be regarded as non-violent sports. Not surprising really since they are mostly non-contact sports.

    But Rugby and Australian Rules Football are often cited for regular violent incidents. Despite the fact that the rules clearly do not permit and indeed forbid violent behaviour with players being fined and banned for offences, they contine to produce violent incidents. Fractured jaws and ribs; punching teeth out; king hits resulting in hospitalisation and even death after a full-body pounding, are some of the results of playing these sports. It’s no surprise then that they are considered violent sports.

    Interestingly, I think there are more incidents of violence among soccer spectators and tourists than among the players. But that’s a side note.

    We see violence also associated with ideas and communities of people who share the same ideas. Some religions emphasise the need to avoid violence and exercise patience, others appear to advocate violence as a solution. What kind of objective criteria can we use to identify the extent to which a religion is violent or predisposed (primed) to violence?

    I don’t want to pre-empt your reply, but I’ll throw some terms in to stimulate some ideas.

    * Edicts of formal texts of the religion – do they incite or quell violence?

    * Competing interpretations of texts – do ideas get intentionally distorted?

    * Instructions from religious leaders – do they incite antipathy towards others?

    * Behaviour of adherents – to what extent is their behaviour personal, crowd related or instructed?

    * Compatibility (tolerance) with other religions – are they too intolerant to avoid violent confrontations? Is it one-sided or mixed? To what extent?

    * Is the violence internal, external or both? 

    * Is violence highly dependent on or sensitive to specific conditions, eg. Pictorial depiction of Prophet Mohammed?

    * Is the potential violence latent but prone to amplification or easy excitement?

  28. Jon

    What left leaning egyptians?
    Are you forgeting more the 80% of egyptians voted for Islamic parties in the upper house election?
    So what sort of numbers of egyptians are you talking about remembering about 10% of Egyptians are Christian?

    What sort of lefts are they when they are supporting millitry dictatorship? All the opposition being arrested for winning?

    Well, by Islamic, if you mean the Islam acceptable to you. The type you describe as non Islamist. Remembering you gave an example of such by linking to a Qadyani website.
    A Sect founded by the BRitish in India. An organisation which gave british Imperialism in India there full support. A sect that is not recognised as being Muslim by all sects and schools of thought within Islam. Not just that, but that sect has split in to two and both halves accuse the other of being non-Muslim.

    Is that the Islam you say is practiced by the people who support the coup. I think it is an dishonest to call such people leftists?
    Well, maybe your right.

  29. “They may be saying that the downfall of Morsi was the will of the people, but they are also opposed to the army taking power. These things are complicated – can you not show some nuance?” Jon.

    “What sort of lefts are they when they are supporting millitry dictatorship?” Arsalan.

    Nuance? Clearly, the concept of nuance is alien.

    Okay, here is a possible view with minimal requirement for nunace:

    The people voted the MB in. The MB did not address the key economci problems and were oppressing the people. The people rose up en masse. The army deployed a coup to stop the people from taking power.

    Mubarak’s polce state, the army and the MB all have proved that they cannot serve the interests of the Egyptian people and that overall, they have no interest in doing so, and this is because in all cases, their primary goal is enhancing their own power (in the case of the army/police/Mubarak, and/or wealth) and (wrt the MB) that of their ideological control of the state and of civil society to the exclusion of all other nodes of potential power.

  30. And as often is the case, the IMF bears a significant portion of responsibility for the current situation in Egypt. It is a hoodlum organisation and in my opinion, should be dismantled, along with the current configuration of the banking system. Of course, that will not happen. But if ever country subjected to the IMF’s economic warfare simultaneously did an Argentina…

  31. Suhaly Saadi said:

    The people voted the MB in. The MB did not address the key economci problems and were oppressing the people. The people rose up en masse. The army deployed a coup to stop the people from taking power.

    To deliver, there is a need for a coordinated and concious effort across all the government departments, as well as help of the economic movers and shakers intent to solve the endemic problems faced by the target population. This factor cannot be denied, or for the matter argued against.

    To foment dissatisfaction is an all too easy enterprise, given the power structure map, and economic choke points. The coup in Egypt was a text book exercise; Coup D’Etat: A Practical Handbook by by E Luttwak.

    Luttwack being one of the notable neocons, who was shouting the world would end if DPRK got The Bomb, and after DPRK detonated their nuclear weapon, was seen on the TV circuit arguing; a massive device sitting in a shed in North Korea is of no threat value, and is inconsequential.

    A review of the book By A Customer:

    Do you ever feel the urge to take over a small country and do horrible things to its downtrodden inhabitants? If so then this could be the book for you. Coup d’etat excells as a step by step guide through the intricacies of recruiting conspirators, neutralising security forces and keeping loyal members of the military at arms length. You have identified a suitable target country, recruited some cronies and overthrown the government. What now? Never fear! there is even an appendix discussing the ‘economics of repression’ to help determine the optimum balance between propaganda and hypertaxation. Simply brilliant.

    This of course has no bearing on the debate, because we all know that “Muslims” really don’t have a clue about anything included; the concept of nuance is alien.

  32. These dead Egyptians would have wanted to go this way

    Violent clashes between the supporters and opponents of ousted Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi continue in Cairo, with the death toll rising as a result.

    Since Monday, at least 14 people have been killed in the unrelenting clashes between Morsi’s fans and his opponents.

    Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood said on Wednesday that plainclothesmen fired on pro-Morsi demonstrators in Cairo, killing two people.

    However the death toll is not enough for General Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi :

    “Please, shoulder your responsibility with me, your army, and the police and show your size and steadfastness in the face of what is going on,”

    The killings to follow in the name of “democracy”, and “secularism” is as yet not understood and when it happens, the examination in minutia will not yield much for those whom verily believe Egyptians lot will be better under the new management!

    The fact that there is a right mess of a breakfast foule in Cairo, evidently has not sunk in yet here. BTW if you don’t know what is “foule”, it means you have no idea about Egypt, and in all probability you an’t tell the difference between a fava bean from a fart, on matters concerning Egypt. However this should not stand in the way of approval of the coup that has set Egypt on its way towards a “secular democracy”!

    If the developments in Egypt were not so ghastly and disturbing, the debate here would have made a heck of a comedy sketch!

  33. “This of course has no bearing on the debate, because we all know that “Muslims” really don’t have a clue about anything included; the concept of nuance is alien.” Fedup (or was it Passerby?).

    This clearly refers to Arsalan, as Jon was addressing Arsalan in his request for nuance. But you and Arsalan both seem to conflate yourselves with ‘all Muslims’.

    Well, I am Muslim and I do not agree with your political stances. But I do not pretend that I exemplify or represent all Muslims. Therefore, when people disagree with me on this or that, as they often do, I do not hide behind the last refugee of crying, “Mother, he’s attacking all Muslims because he’s critiquing my views! Mother! He must be racist!”

    This is merely another example of the unwillingness of those who espouse or support Islamism to brook any dissent.

  34. Fedup, you might or might not be religious since we cannot known anything with certainty about you or anyone else on this blog *except* that it is absolutely certain that you’re an obnoxious crackpot who parades his own brand of intellectual pretensions with no sense of irony. If you are not an Islamist, then you are without doubt an apologist of Islamists.

    Wheehhheeey might or might not, [ie you (I) could be lying through your (my) teeth, to us all. clearly those “Muzzies” are lying, cheating, dastardly bastards, and we cannot rust any of them.]

    Oh Mr. Darcy slap my thigh I am called obnoxious,….. Laddy my middle name is Obnoxious, and worse still I am your fucking worst nightmare, I am beyond your brand of a theism. I don’t need to attack other peoples belief to convince myself I am not religious.

    There is only one crackpot with a go faster stripes zimmerframe mate, and that is you. I have never had any pretensions of “Intellectualism” and no claims as to know all the answers, as you seem to be the only one who really know there is no Easter Bunny. Fuck me then where the chocolates come from?

    Your hatred of Muslims can be pretty well disguised through your a theistic cover, and you can have a license to pour your bile freely and at will, in a free fire fashion, and be respected for it too, in the peer group you seem to be ensconced. Further, anyone who calls you out, then you can string a whole lot of pejorative adjectives and end it with; you are without doubt an apologist of Islamists

    OK Sherlock, I am an apologist for Islam-ists, what the fuck that makes you to be, fucking witchfinder pursuivant?

    Your prejudices cannot or will not allow you to respect other peoples beliefs, will it?

    I don’t want to pre-empt your reply, but I’ll throw some terms in to stimulate some ideas.

    Jumped up prick, all the “questions” you have forwarded are devoid of the following:

    Which religious book gave instructions for the Atomic bomb?
    Which Fucking prophet brought the schematics for the trigger circuits for the Hydrogen Bombs?
    Which religion ordered the fire bombing of Tokyo, bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki?
    Which fucking bunch of Muslims ever invaded any of the Western countries that seem to be bent on the destruction of Muslims?

    Forgot, it was the oh so secular wankers who have been bombing the shit out of the Muslims from Karachi to Djibouti? That is depleted Uranium, killing them there and then and then carry on killing them for decades to come.

    You wax lyrical about the ills of Islam without ever mentioning Christian fucking fundies, or Jewish fucking fundies, but hey you are an a theist who only hates fucking “Muzzies” aren’t you? You racists little fuckwit.

  35. Suhayl Saadi

    24 Jul, 2013 – 1:34 pm

    You are being dishonist. The elections had just taken place a few months ago. In cases such as that it doesn’t mean people changed their mind. It wasn’t a case of the egyption population, 73% in the lower house election, more than 80% in the upper house election, saying, “Oh silly me, I ticked the wrong box”.
    I repeat to accuse the population of a country so bog of being so thick, is racism, plane and clear.

    What happened in Egypt is what happened in Algeria.
    There was an election and the side you don’t like won.
    Just as in Egypt now, people made excuse to support Millitry dictatorship while claiming to support democracy. In Algeria they said, “Some times we need to use undemeocratic means to support democracy” Quote from the leftist Guardian.
    And with egypt, “Yes well they changed their minds, how do we know they did, the army that took over told us they did”.

    Be honest, end the hypocrisy and admit, this is about people you don’t like ruling by something you don’t like.
    You and many others who claim to believe in democracy, just believe in their own superiority.
    But are too hypocritical to admit it.

    Suhayl Saadi
    You know why I called you a racist. Don’t pretend you don’t. the reasons were given each time I used that word to describe you.
    Your attacks were race based, they had no connection to policies or beliefs at all.
    I don’t want to go through them again. If you want to refute what I said about you, scrole up, and cut and past what I said and refute each reason why I gave for you being a racist. I can’t be bothered.
    You hypocrisy and dishonesty is clear. I am glad this thread was started.
    I always knew what your politics were and your religious beliefs. It was never a secret we disagreed on them. What I didn’t know was your dishonesty, arrogance and hypocrisy. I am glad you have made them clear to me now.
    If you want to know I believe you have these qualities, scrole up, I have already given the reasons.

    I think I have more respect for people like the Turkish general that said, “If all the people want Islamic government, I will kill everyone”, at least people like that are honest. People like you believe in exactly the same thing as them, but you lie, and pretend speak as if you represent a people you dispise.
    You have made it clear how you feel about people who you call Islamists. The elections have shown most of the population are those people you dispise. But instead of clearly stating your feelings, you come out with nonsense such as, “they have changed, now I support them in their take over”.
    When the people who have taken over are the same people that ruled under Mubarak, sadat and Nasir.

  36. Fedup, oh dear. Suhayl could not make it plainer, I think, that he is not attacking you, although he is well within his rights to assert that you are not engaging with the debate. But in losing your temper and resorting to abuse, do you not lose the debate automatically? How does it help your cause – the precise nature of which is not clear anyway – if you insult the people who you set out to persuade?

  37. you insult the people who you set out to persuade?

    Jon do you really believe that Jemand (as in “someone” in German) is open to any kind of persuasion? To be so myopic as he is and to believe all the ills of the world are based on religion when it is the godless bastards who are raining shit on those poor bastard whom have nothing other their god to hang onto, to go through the drudgeries of what they call life?

    Suhayl on the other hand is bit of a mixed-up soul. He claims to be a communist. Alas his kind of communist is the sort that Hradial Bains decries foul. Before the left is to become relevant, it should take the first step is; take off the ideological blinkers and let their minds absorb the human condition in the backwaters of the planet. Where life is a ghastly series of never ending drudgeries.

    Those souls stock in the middle of the steps of Afghanistan, or deserts of Pakistan with no access to medicine, potable water, proper food and nutrition, who have to travel two days for the nearest Doctor to see them. If these souls did not have their belief, how can they pull themselves out of their beds and start another day in the cold, or in the heat?

    Trouble with the armchair lefties is these have forgotten who their constituencies are? As Hardial Bains puts it; it is the taxi driver, the bus driver, the mechanic, the labourer who are the ones that need the communism, not the cloistered well fed and provided for middle-class!

    Suhayl claims to be one of the “Muslims” but then he exhibits a disconnect that is astounding. These people he condemns as “Islam-ists” a label that you rightly classify as racists and sectarian, then Suhayl validates his views by going on about the hookers in the knights bridge, and their clientèle of the rich sheikhs.

    As we debate the poor Saudi families are getting imprisoned and tortured because they have complained about their deplorable living conditions. The bloggers who have highlighted the terrible poverty of the quarter of the indigenous population are imprisoned for speaking out. These poor Muslims are not “Islam-ists” or any other “-ist” they are punters in search of a bellyful of food, and a roof over their heads, yet their leaders are the very same pederasts who are the regular visitors of the hookers in Paris and in Knights bridge. Whilst parading their brand of Wahhabism. These charge hands know who they should suck up to and who they should kick down.

    Suhayl blames the victims of these actors, and denounces anyone who will not agree with his narrow and impotent take on the Communism/left sensibilities.

    The fact is, which one of you has ever taken the trouble of getting to know the difficulties of these people living in the god forsaken places, and to feel the same weight of these difficulties on your shoulders, and then find; can you take the next step without the aid of the certainty of your god being with you?

    These people have nothing but their god to hang onto, and you want to deprive them from even that “luxury”?

  38. I don’t want this to turn in to a thread which is all about why I think what about who. What needed to be said was said, and then repeated over and over.
    I’m going to move on now.

    When it comes to the Egyptian left. I think they realised just how little support they had in Egypt. They had the option of remaining in obscurity. Or siding with the winning side. And the winning side is the side with the guns.

    This is exactly what happened to the Iraq left, when the Americans invaded.
    They choose to side with the invaders.

    RAND stated they will coopt leftest in a selective way to do this.
    This will not support leftest or help them take power. What they will do is make it clear to them they are in the same side with them against who rand defines as traditionalists and fundamentalists.

    I am not sure what planet leftests think they live in?
    Do they really think Baradi and general sisi will be leftists?

  39. Do they really think Baradi and general sisi will be leftists?

    They don’t know the situation in Egypt.

    Try and explain it to them. The idealogical divide, is compounding the misunderstanding.

  40. One day, Arsalan, you may emerge from your ideological dwam and when you do, I would like you please to remember this conversation.

    Fedup, I think it is deeply cynical of you to have egged on Arsalan in the manner you appear to have done on this thread.

    Both of you, what you are proposing is a form of Orientalism – a natvist, tribal ideology that actually is based on modern European concepts, rather than in Islam – and it has, and will continue to, ghettoise Muslims in this country, both internally and externally. Your political ideology has not done Muslim people – us – any favours, quite the opposite. It and Far Right racism, feed off one another, empower one another. Your views, to which you are fully entitled, are not shared by the majority of Muslim people in this country, or globally. I want to make clear, here, that you do not monopolise the discourse with power, with civic society, with matters pertaining to social class, economics or indeed religion.

    I fought racism and bigotry of all kinds on the street, among communities and on the page, long, long before you, Arsalan, was a Muslim. We speak with a clear voice and never again will we be silenced. And we really are millions.

  41. technicolour

    24 Jul, 2013 - 9:46 pm

    Arsalan, I don’t get it. Even if you are right about Egyptian voters, and Suhayl, despite his analysis of the IMF’s role, completely wrong, I don’t see how you can justify calling him a liar, a hypocrite and so on. If he were a liar and a hypocrite, he would be pretending to agree with you. Instead, he is advancing several reasons why your point of view is questionable. You have not mentioned the IMF, or the US sponsorship of the Brotherhood. Instead you’re calling him a racist and again, it’s not possible to see why.

    Fedup, thanks for your view of the poor masses. Again, I don’t see why pointing out the hypocrisy of their rulers is either racist, or anti-Muslim, or pro anything apart from a small measure of truth and reality. People, including rulers, do not, in my experience, benefit from being forced into narrow boxes. If they can, they will break out of them.

    Finally, I was the person suggesting that ‘Islamist’ was a shorthand for the lunatic fringe, not Suhayl. I was thinking of people like Hesb and Hekmatyar. Seems it can now, more widely, mean, someone who either believes in the Caliphate or not, but who supports sharia whatever? I’m still not going to use it but apologise if I skewed it too far.

  42. Both of you, what you are proposing is a form of Orientalism – a natvist, tribal ideology

    So you propose to enforce EU regulations and standards on Afghans and Pakistanis?

    The thrust of my argument has been; let them be, and let them find their own way out of the mess that we in the West have created for them. Have you just understood that and are set against it too?

    Your argument here is on two issues, the Muslims in this country, and the Muslims in their own lands, which one are you talking about mate?

    Finally why do you think am I egging on Arsalan?

    So far on this thread there has been not a great deal of understanding about the Egyptians and their sudden permitted experiment in democracy that subsequently has gone pear shaped and handed back to Generals.

  43. You know, what is strange is he claims to be a commi, and he says he supports the demonstrators. Even though the person in charge of the demos was Naguib Sawiris, the second riches man in egypt.
    lol
    he is a joke or just really very ignorant.

  44. Arsalan, if I may ask, what are you views on lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-gender human beings?

  45. drat, Arsalan, please provide links instead of shouting? It’s news to me that the demonstrations are being led by a very rich person, for example. Link please!

    Just been looking a bit and the alternative truth is indeed that Morsi had turned his back on the IMF which is why he had to go:

    “Rather than seeking a deal with the IMF, Morsi turned to other Arab states for financial support. An EU source said that some in the interim administration are talking of resuming negotiations with the IMF, because they want Egypt’s credit status to be stabilised, as one signal that the country itself is becoming more stable.”

    http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2013/july/eu-calls-for-morsi-s-release/77937.aspx

    This is all quite a bit of research which I have not much time for but which seems to me valuable, since it’s not really the main story. I’ve been away, Arsalan, and I am quite ignorant about this. So if anyone else has any good links, please, as Jon says, post.

    (Btw where did Suhayl say he was a ‘commi’? And what is wrong with being a ‘commi’?)

  46. Posting this again from Anon, earlier –

    A larger point is that the rhetorical dynamic in the immediate aftermath of the Morsi regime’s fall has been misguided. The Western press was full of sombre meditations on the fall of an “electorally legitimate” regime and the apparent failure of a “democratic experiment.” In opposition to this, some of the most articulate voices among the many millions who marched on June 30 were angry at having their successful campaign against Muslim Brotherhood rule labelled as a “coup” rather than an on-going struggle for true democracy. But the coup vs. will of the people debate goes nowhere. It is better to put these terms to the side and acknowledge that among the diversity of interests that motivated people to enter the streets on June 30 there was significant input not just from the old regime, but also from the security state. This is not to say that Morsi’s opponents actually were nothing but filul, as his supporters often claimed. But alongside well-justified objections by Morsi’s opponents to the American media’s failure to understand what was happening in Egypt, a narrative crystalised of plucky youth challenging the Morsi regime by circulating a petition. It is important to move beyond this attractive image before it turns into another over-romanticised and ultimately distracting “Facebook Revolution” legend. The story of tamarrud as a brave act of resistance is by no means wrong, but neither is it sufficient to explain the current situation.

    …Walter Armbrust is Hourani Fellow and University Lecturer in Modern Middle East Studies at Oxford University.

  47. been looking a bit and the alternative truth is indeed that Morsi had turned his back on the IMF

    It is a lot more involved than that. IMF was intent on “restructuring the economy” ie Greece redux. Morsi had no alternative but to turn to the Saudi and Qatari sheikhs and the subsequent change of stance on Syria, as a manifest and direct result of paying fealty to his new best sponsors.

    Morsi was a weak president knowingly thrown in among the wolves and he could not deliver. Further his life was made even more difficult by various elements within the government, army and yes the rich in Egypt. Check out Naguib Sawiris Note the mickey mouse and mini mouse in Islamic garb joke, and the references. Also noteworthy; he was the broker between Mubarak and the revolutionaries.

    It is wheels within wheels, and it is more fucking convoluted than the Chinese courts. Fact that al Sisi arrived and shoved more than sis hundred MB leadership into jail is not given any publicity.

    Al Sisi is another US trained General in charge of the military controlled enterprises. He is no liberal, or a nationalist, he is the epitome of the graduates of the “school of Americas” kind of a place for the mid east.

    ===

    Arsalan, don’t emphasis the “ignorant” it is no sin; not to know, best try and explain the facts, the sources of information available to most people in the west does not include the full picture (wonder why?).

    BTW skip the inflammatory questions tabled at you, or it will be a fuckfestfrago without the ziofuckwits pressing a key on their keyboard.

  48. come offit. Inflammatory questions tabled at Arsalan. When Suhayl has been greeted throughout with consummately hysterical language – liar, hypocrite, blah blah. If you think that, under cover of the Eqypt question, this attempted bullying and dismissal of a particular and humane perspective has gone unnoticed, you are wrong.

    In fact, for shame. If I wasn’t quite sure that Suhayl is fair-minded, and would therefore want to see this, I wouldn’t be posting it. You could have scuppered a valid perspective just by being horrible. Think on.

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article179480.html

  49. It’s a very simple question, Arsalan. Why would it be “inflammatory”? Why would such a question inflame someone? Here it is again:

    “Arsalan, if I may ask, what are you views on lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-gender human beings?” Me.

    Human rights is a key issue, in Egypt and across the Middle East. LGBT rights form a key part of that fabric.

    And Fedup, why is it unacceptable to ask questions about LGBT rights?

  50. Technicolour, thanks again. Much appreciated.

    Wrt the “Commie” thing, I wrote that I was not a liberal, but “a Red under the bed”.

    Arsalan conveniently took this to mean that I am a Communist, which I am not. But you see, if I am painted as a Communist, then I cannot be a Muslim and that would be a convenient configuration in this specific dialectical framework.

    I am a Muslim and I have socialist views.

  51. And Fedup, why is it unacceptable to ask questions about LGBT rights?

    You damn fine well know the answer, don’t you?

    Other than intention on painting the Muslims as a bunch of “savages” why did you ask the question?

    Whilst everyday Muslims in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somali, ……. are droned, dying from the most trivial of diseases, getting blown up as collateral damage, have little food, shelter, no access to education, medicine, ….. Never mind all these basic problems. Explore the minority fucking vociferous cause of Gay, Lesbian Bi-sexual and Transgender (sex,sex,sex,sex) that is in shorthand too, the fuckers cant be arsed to write it out in whole and it has come to be a Q code (don’t know that fucking tough) to be splattered all over the place, exposing the ultimate sin of the fucking Muslims, get the ducking stool out, and waterboard the bastards.

    Suhayl you have a nasty streak a fucking mile wide, you are trying to paint the Muslims in the worst possible light and will not cease to resort to the lowest denominator tricks in the book, the latest of which is the LBGT.

    Asking rhetorical questions, why don’t you go ahead and fucking answer the question, yourself. You have no intentions of reaching an understanding, you are too busy being fucking clever, sort of a Muslim Habashagfuckwit opposite number.

    PS you do know that in the Islamic Republic of Iran there is a government grant which transgender patients can apply for to help them pay the costs of their gender change operations?

    ====

    come offit. Inflammatory questions tabled at Arsalan. When Suhayl has been greeted throughout with consummately hysterical language – liar, hypocrite, blah blah. If you think that, under cover of the Eqypt question, this attempted bullying and dismissal of a particular and humane perspective has gone unnoticed, you are wrong.

    Now the debate has moved on to a new low.

    Dissembling the truth, only to reiterate the current wave of hatred and prejudice against Muslims coming from any quarter is wrong and despicable be it from the purported Muslims, or card carrying members of the EDL.

    Then the final link to the Voltaire I did not know that!!!!!!

    I wrote earlier Wheels within Wheels, did you think I am referring to some kind of a Ferris wheel?

    Mid east is a dangerous place, strange place, nothing is at seems, and anyone taking the time to study it, will be amazed at the fluidity of the relationships, and rules of contract. The more you find out the more you shall realize how little you know?

  52. Fedup, I don’t know if it is cruel or not to laugh at you. You genuinely appear to be mentally disturbed. Normally I’d entertain the possibility of your posts being a tedious exercise in pranking, but you’re not even funny enough for that theory to pan out.

    Not only are your comments mostly devoid of coherence, structure, cogency and intellectual value, they are also clearly repulsive to people who might even agree with some of your points (if they can be called that). Simply put, you have the personality of an ugly, spoilt, child who was once raped by a Catholic priest dressed up as a Teletubby – the purple one would be my guess. So you can understand why I feel conflicted about whether or not to pity you.

    I think you have also received extraordinary leniency in the moderation of this thread given the readiness of Jon to excise comments that dare to approach the invisible line that must not be crossed. Perhaps you are seen to serve a useful purpose, say, as a political scarecrow?

    Interesting too is what company you keep on this blog.

  53. Fedup: “Mid east is a dangerous place, strange place, nothing is at seems, and anyone taking the time to study it, will be amazed at the fluidity of the relationships, and rules of contract. The more you find out the more you shall realize how little you know?”

    – yes, exactly. And thanks for earlier background. am going to hunt for sources of disinformation in my spare time :)

    I’d heard that about Iran before. Perhaps it is a bit unfair to ask Arsalan about LBGT rights – like asking Queen Victoria. No disrespect to either intended :)

  54. Whether or not it is sly of Suhayl to ask Arsalan his views on LGBT issues, it is certainly fair. Does Arsalan hold no views? That would be ok. But if he does hold clear views, why be shy about sharing them unless fearful of the criticism that might follow? 

    I don’t particularly care what those views are and I wouldn’t beat Arsalan up regardless of what they are. But the sneaky way others have hurredly interposed to head off a potentially embarrasing conflict of opinion is very telling.

    Suhayl, I’d press ahead and encourage Arsalan to share his views and in your own polite way explore the issues of melding orthodox Islamic principles with modern demands for social pluralism. I think this might have been an issue that aggravated dissent in Egypt prior to Morsi’s ousting.

  55. ” ‘And Fedup, why is it unacceptable to ask questions about LGBT rights?’

    You damn fine well know the answer, don’t you?

    Other than intention on painting the Muslims as a bunch of “savages” why did you ask the question?” Fedup.

    Well, no. I am Muslim and have views on LGBT rights. I do not regard myself as a savage. Is this simply more Orientalism on your part?

    Here is a Muslim academic/activist, Amanullah de Sondy who has progressive views on LGBT rights, among other things. He is deeply devout and has a PhD in Islamic Studies.

    http://progressivescottishmuslims.blogspot.co.uk/

    And here is the Muslim Institute’s website. They publish a regular magazine, entitled, ‘Critical Muslim’, which I would thoroughly recommend to anyone. Among their leading lights are Merryl Wyn davies, Ziauddin Sardar and Robin Yassin-Kassab.

    http://www.musliminstitute.org/

    As I said, human rights are of key importance in the Middle East and in Egypt specifically. The rights of religious minorities and indeed of everyone, is of key importance. My view would be that LGBT rights include all of those broader umbrella rights but that there are other, specific rights, which it inmportant they are granted.

    I agree with Jemand. I’m not sure why asking this is question would be deemed, unfair. It is a question that is being discussed widely in Muslim fora, inclduing the two which I gave above. Arsalan self-evidently is not Queen Victoria and in any case, why would one not put the question to Queen Victoria (if she were still alive)? She might even have been amused!

    And Fedup, are you Arsalan’s keeper? I didn’t ask you your views on LGBT rights, though I would be very happy to hear them if you wish to share them with everyone.

  56. “Arsalan self-evidently is not Queen Victoria” – :)

    I agree, actually (I only said ‘perhaps a bit unfair’) And I don’t see how the question’s an attempt to paint Muslims as savages – of course not.

  57. Jemand – Censorship Improves History goes on record;

    .. spoilt, child who was once raped by a Catholic priest dressed up as a Teletubby – the purple one would be my guess. So you can understand why I feel conflicted about whether or not to pity you.

    What is the reason anyone could afford any latitude of tolerance for this exchange?

    I would like to know!

  58. Passerby, it was a literary device – imagery to describe the internal rage of a tortured soul. Feel free to use it, if you like.

  59. Thanks, Technicolour.

  60. “PS you do know that in the Islamic Republic of Iran there is a government grant which transgender patients can apply for to help them pay the costs of their gender change operations?” Fedup.

    Yes, I was aware of that. I’m also aware of state policy in Iran towards gay men.

    But I wasn’t asking Iran. I was asking Arsalan.

  61. ss

    About Poofs, you can ask what you want. But remember, I answer what I want the way I want.

    Well, to be honest with you, I don’t sit arround all day thinking about them.
    And something tells me you want to divert attention from the last thing I posted about Naguib Sawiris.
    So I will answer you in a way that will bring attention right back at him.

    My beliefs about homosexuals would be exactly what the Quran and the Prophet pbh said about them. If you want to know my beliefs, try reading them.
    But even though you say you are a Muslim, whatever the Book of Allah and the words of the Prophet of Allah pbh say on the issue are not relivant are they?
    Because you believe Allah and his Prophet pbh should be ignored on certain issues don’t you. Obeying them in politics would make you an ISlamist and not a Muslim wouldn’t it?
    Well not just politics, when you listed who you call Islamists, you mentioned a groups that had nothing to do with Politics didn’t you?
    So, well using the Quran and the Sunnah on any issue would make you an Islamist and not a Muslim wouldn’t it?

    Remember, we are not talking about me and you interpreting the Quran and the sunnah differentlty. You believe Islam has no place in as a sorce for politics. That isn’t about interpretation, that is about rejection.

    Considering how you feel about Egypt. I am starting to wonder if your communism is like your Islam?
    I mean you are siding with the side that gets funded by Saudi Arabia and UAE, gets armed by America?
    The movement you call the will of the Egyptian people is headed and funded by Naguib Sawiris, the second riches man in Egyptian.
    Your communism seems like your Islam, neither seems to get in the way of your politics?

    And SS, you are being dishonest again. I called you that because it was you yourself who labeled yourself a red under the bed.

    But even so, your socialism seems like your Islam then? It doesn’t stop you calling a movement headed and funded by the second riches man in egypt the will of the people?

    technicolour
    Iran is not an acception. Even Saudi recognises gender surgery and so does Pakistan. I don’t know of a Muslim country that doesn’t. SS judges me and the Muslim world by his own prejadices. Laws do not interfer with what happens in peoples bedrooms if people keep it within their bedrooms.

    SS, yes, when the Khilafah people who rule by Islam are not going to legalise Gay Marriages in mosques, get over it.

    Jemand – Censorship
    SS was trying a sneaky trick by that last comment. Whether the Brotherhood rules, or the army rules. Even if the people who he supports as leftists rule. Egypt isn’t the UK, no one there supports Gay rights, whatever they call themselves.

    The People supported the brotherhood. The elections prove it. Whatever they or I believe about homosexuality It doesn’t change the fact.
    Or is it, “yes, almost everyone voted for them, but they don’t like gays, so that means people really support the army”.

    It is a dishonest argument. And I am not playing that game.
    Look for things about homosexuality in this book:
    http://quran.com/
    Whatever that book says, I believe it all. So you will find my views on every issue in there.

    SS If you use some comments by gays on how they interpret Islam to be gay friendly, to say how Muslim states should rule, doesn’t that make you an Islamist?
    I mean you are using an interpretation of religion in an afair of state?

    But whatever the people in egypt think of homosexuality. Are the laws they make on the issue, their right or yours?
    Well I’m glad you brought this up, because I can say the same about all of your points your raised here about what you call Islamism, in every country that you listed.
    Whether you like or dislike what they rule by, isn’t what they rule by the right of the people of that state?
    Or do they have to rule by the values of the white country you live in? And rule by white values?

    It might be as late as after eid before I reply. I am trying to cut down on internet use during ramadhan.

  62. “About Poofs, you can ask what you want. But remember, I answer what I want the way I want.” Arsalan.

    But you didn’t answer at all. Referring me to the Quran is fine. If I wanted to ask the Quran, I would’ve picked one up and read it. I didn’t ask Iran and I didn’t ask the Quran. I asked you. I would like to know what you think about LGBT rights.

    Wrt Egyptian oligarchs, I’m sure there are many powerful and wealthy forces trying to manipulate people and events in lots of directions.

    I’m with the people, myself: ‘Bread, Freedom, Justice!’ Aren’t you…?

  63. Well, what you call the people are the oligarchs.
    Well when it comes to this guy. A lot of people forget, before he became the poster boy of “the will of the people the caused the coup”, he was Hosni Mubaraks Gamal’s best friend.
    Some people have very short memories.

    You missed the reason why I refered you to the Quran.
    LGB rights is an individiual issue. The real issue is secularism. This isn’t about how I interpret the Quran in regards to LGB rights. It is about people being allowed to interpret it on this or any issue.
    Is being a Muslim about reading this book and ignoring everything in it, or ignoring the parts of it that contract with your values.
    Or is being a Muslims basing your values on the book.

    Yes people have very different interpretations of the book. But this isn;t about one interpretation over another is it. It is about people being allowed to rule if they are influnced by that book.

    So, as said before. You want to know what I think about that issue. I refer you to the Quran and Sunnah.
    Ruling by Islam isn’t about all two billion Muslims agreeing on an interpretation of Islam. It is about us using Islam as a bases to argue our differences. Even though interpretations of Islam are different, Islam is something all Muslims share.
    So that is the starting point that Muslims can use to decide where we go next.

  64. sorry
    that was meant to be
    He was Hosni Mubaraks son’s best friend.
    He was Gamal’s best mate.
    I think to use Hosnis best mate as the face of the revolution to bring back millitry would be to much for anyone to swollow.
    When it comes to his son’s best mate. It is easier for people to forget that?

  65. Gamal is hosni Mubarak’s son

  66. Arsalan, thanks for engaging on this issue of homosexuality and LGBT.

    Referring to the Quran is reasonable but insufficient. As you know, Islamic principles need to be implemented as actionable rules that are consistent for myriad situations. Since homosexuality is often at odds with longstanding customs and expectations of human behaviour, problems will arise that need to be dealt with in conformity with the Quran’s teachings.

    Therefore, laws need to be enacted to give unambiguous effect to Islamic principles. The devil, it always seems, to be in the details.

    Can you explain how the Quran regards homosexuality in a practical sense or modern setting? For example, while the Quran does not tolerate homosexual sex, does it forbid Muslims from tolerating homosexuals (men) from residing with each other with the suspicion that they are engaging in sex? This is, of course, getting into the area of ‘What if this.. What if that’ but very relevant for people to know where they stand in relation to society’s rules.

    And while there seems to be some accomodation of so-called transgendered people in some parts of the Muslim world, I would not expect that this means that, for the purposes of marriage and sex, such people would then be considered as sexually converted. Do you have thoughts on this?

  67. Yes, thanks, Arsalan, for these links. This is exactly what I feared – and what I’ve been suggesting right through this thread had happened/would happen. The people’s uprising – which of course began in 2011 – and re-erupted recently – was stopped in its tracks by the military/neoliberals power plexus. It’s a hijack – again. But as I wrote early on in this thread, if El Baradei et al don’t deliver – and I’ve seen no sign that they will – the people rightly will rise up and boot them out too. Until they boot out the military from the economy and from political power, though, it will not stop.

    Yes, that’s a decent answer at 7:46pm, thanks again, Arsalan. And Jemand’s at 753pm was a good point, too.

  68. @Jon

    Jon, are you considering a reply to my question?

  69. Jemand, yes I’ll certainly reply to you, apologies that I’ve not been able to spend the necessary time to do so. Busy, that’s all. And, presently having consumed a goodly amount of excellent whisky this evening, I will await a time when I am able to offer a cogent reply – probably the weekend now. I appreciate the dialogue.

    I think you have also received extraordinary leniency in the moderation of this thread given the readiness of Jon to excise comments that dare to approach the invisible line that must not be crossed.

    A fair point indeed – certainly, moderation is not always a consistent example of itself. In this thread, the dreadful abuse from Arsalan was left partly because Suhayl is fairly fireproof, and partly because I felt it served as a good example of what happens when certain lines of questioning are crossed. I felt it served the dynamic here, rather than acted against it.

    In any given exchange, a judgement needs to be made as to whether aggression is distracting from an exchange on the core issues. It often derails things on this site, but for whatever reason, this thread remains discursive.

  70. Jon, no worries.

  71. I think you have also received extraordinary leniency in the moderation of this thread given the readiness of Jon to excise comments that dare to approach the invisible line that must not be crossed.

    Jon put down that bottle and read properly, there the old Aussie is having a go at me. Needless to point out that I am not surprised with your sanguine reply to this foul mouthed old fucking codger.

    When the other day I asked Sniper Suhayl to stop “finger banging Mary Jane Rotten Crutch, and publish more than drive by one-liner insults”. Despite the fact that you were sober, your retort to me was:

    Fedup: that’s plainly abusive, as well as featuring (nonsensical) strains of sexual violence. Rather unpleasant, surely?

    That was after the Irish contingent had already registered her insults.

    However in this case the fucking mad geriatric (no not the hasbawanker) the Aussie tosser with a German nick has gone on record:

    Not only are your comments mostly devoid of coherence, structure, cogency and intellectual value, they are also clearly repulsive to people who might even agree with some of your points (if they can be called that). Simply put, you have the personality of an ugly, spoilt, child who was once raped by a Catholic priest dressed up as a Teletubby – the purple one would be my guess. So you can understand why I feel conflicted about whether or not to pity you.

    Clearly implied sexual violence of rape, and paedophilia. This evidently then has earned the offending old wanker for his steadfast defence of Sniper Suhayl. That is overlooking his promotion of such an abhorrent sexual violence as rape and paedophilia.

    The fact that I have had to state that I am not religious, because you had me a foaming in the mouth jihadi bent on killing all the Jews and initiation of the of the world procedures. This then compelling me to come clean that I am not religious in the interest of moving the debate forward. That has been followed by, you asking me to submit a resume.

    While you were asking for my resume, Sniper Suhayl was busy interrogating me to come clean about my Jihadi ways (as well as my other nicks) because sure as hell, I was lying through my Muzzie Islam-ist teeth.

    You lament this thread has been discursive. No shit Sherlock! This thread has been littered with Sniper Suhayl firing his one-liners from various angles, and Arsalan trying to duck and a dibble, stumbling to the next word trap.

    Given the dynamics and the undercurrent, neither Arsalan has been converted, nor Sniper Suhayl has managed to gain any advantage. Although the old fucking Aussie Geriatric has managed to insult Muslims, and Christians whilst steering clearly away from the J_W, and getting praised for it too.

    Well I know it is a tough life out there, and a good job too. Because then I don’t fucking whine like Village Idiot, and Hasbawanker or this thread would have been the epitome of the slipping standards of the impartiality of the blog and all that shit.

    Pity we didn’t get to have a good debate with Arsalan though, clearly there is more mileage in Muzzie Bashing than actually trying to see eye to eye with the Muslims.

    Craig has summed it right; In Russia you cannot say Putin is corrupt; in the UK you cannot say Israeli state policy is malign.

  72. Does this mean we can’t be friends, Fedup?

  73. “all the masks fell from Mohamed Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood organisation… They and the remnants of the old regime are two sides of the same coin, which is tyranny and enmity towards the people”.

    http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2012/12/11/swp-egypt-croydon

    “In its counterrevolutionary offensive, the Egyptian ruling elite is relying on the affluent liberal and pseudo-left milieu in Egypt, which is shifting sharply to the right. Threatened by the mass movement of the working class, political forces that formerly criticized the Mubarak regime are caught in a wave of right-wing chauvinism.”

    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/07/26/egyp-j26.html

  74. Good analysis by Sarah Eltanawi of the situation 2 months ago, before the most recent uprising. Sarah is in Egypt right now – she was teaching at one of the universities/doing research – when this uprising, then the coup, happened.

    http://www.fairobserver.com/article/ten-months-muslim-brotherhood

  75. And an excellent interview, from 4 weeks ago:

    http://www.tunisiachronicle.com/?p=2147

    Anyway, there you go – a few links – good reading!

  76. “That was after the Irish contingent had already registered her insults.”

    Where? And how?

    “Suhayl was busy interrogating me to come clean about my Jihadi ways (as well as my other nicks)”

    Ah yes … Your “other nicks”. But when I mentioned that subject in the past, you attacked me like a flaming rabid pitbull. As if it wasn’t pitifully obvious that you were posting under more than one name.

    Hey Jemand, apparently (d’après Fedup/Passerby) I’m on a zimmerframe and you’re an ‘old fucking Aussie Geriatric’. Doesn’t it say a lot about someone that they try to use age as an insult?

  77. Thanks Suhayl. I will read them, tonight.

  78. Fedup, apparently (26/7 7.10pm): “When the other day I asked Sniper Suhayl to stop “finger banging Mary Jane Rotten Crutch, and publish more than drive by one-liner insults”. Despite the fact that you were sober..”

    that was crazy sick bad.

  79. Where? And how?

    That is the trouble with the senior moments, isn’t it?

    Delightful, Fedup. (Your personality in a nutshell, I might add.)

    I did not rabidly attack you, as you put, it! I encouraged you to lay off playing detectives. Your strange transactions on this board include; deriding the comments; as the risible crap that visitors to this blog will not read, then starting to play fucking witchfinder pursuivant, and “out” those whom you perceive to be using differing nicks because it will give the impression of a bigger foot print to the support for a particular subject. Which of the these two cases is it that you believe? This fuck knows, probably you have forgotten it by the time you write it out. Although it could be the fucking Cat’s (Schrödinger) fault too!

    This strange confusion in approach is to be found in you accusing me of rabidly attacking you, that is sure as hell a fucking sign of my guilt, and then also attacking me for not being vocal when Sniper Suhayl was interrogating me for being one and the same character of three characters. Yeah sure as hell a fucking sign of guilt again.

    However, what the fuck is achieved by filling the threads with the same shite and going over the same grounds? But this seems to be some kind of a fucking ocd that afflicts certain characters when they run out of bullshit to splatter all over the place. Why don’t we start an ID card system on this blog, to stop Identity Theft, and Identity Fraud???? Give me fucking strength, oh I nearly forgot seeing as all the labels are no enough, now Ageist is added to the long list of my misdeeds too!

    =====

    Does this mean we can’t be friends, Fedup?

    what happened to Aw Hugs?

  80. that was crazy sick bad.

    et tu?

    Simply put, you have the personality of an ugly, spoilt, child who was once raped by a Catholic priest dressed up as a Teletubby – the purple one would be my guess. So you can understand why I feel conflicted about whether or not to pity you.

    Not sick or bad, only;

    imagery to describe the internal rage of a tortured soul. Feel free to use it,

    What the fuck gives around here?

    Has this thread collapsed into some kind of The Stepford Wives fucking dimension?

  81. “The fundamental cause of trouble in the world is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”

  82. Dreoilin, yes I’ve received insults regarding my imaginary old age many times on this blog. It might be because I grew up on a diet of very old movies and so picked up and now project some of that old-time vibe on this blog, often sardonically but flying right over some heads. In any case, it is funny how some can rail so aggressively against racism but then resort to the same irrational hatred towards old people.

    Fedup appears to operate on only two settings – zero and eleven.

  83. I’d thoroughly recommend this site, the Middle East and North Africa Solidarity Network, a trade union-based network. Incisive commentary on the current situation Egypt.

    It’s important to remember too that from 2008 workers in Egypt with their independent (as opposed to government-run) trade unions, were going on strike, etc. en masse, long before anyone else in the world realised cracks were appearing in the Mubarak regime. It’s also pertinent to recognise the central role women workers and organisers have had in the process. This is a narrative about which we seem to hear little.

    Here is Fatma Ramadan, from the Egyptian Federation of Independent Trade Unions:

    “We are thus faced with jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. The Muslim Brotherhood committed crimes and it must be held accountable and prosecuted for them, just like police and army officers and men of the Mubarak regime must be held accountable and prosecuted for their crimes. Do not be fooled into replacing a religious dictatorship with a military dictatorship.”

    This is exactly what I have been suggesting right through this thread. It is what Egyptians on the ground are saying.

    http://menasolidaritynetwork.com/

  84. Elected government = dictatorship to the people who voted for the other side.

    In Egypt the left and right are the same people.
    There is a westernised elite, that have gone to Private schools and Egypt and forign universities outside of egypt.
    Some label themselves as left others as right, but both look down on who they reguard as the ignorant masses.

    Morsi’s crime was the crime of winning the election.

    “How there he win, doesn’t he know Islam has no place in politics, why couldn’t the socialists win! Why couldn’t the westernised, why couldn’t people who believe in liberal democracy!”

    The elite in egypt rule egypt like how colonialist minorities ruled places they conquered during imperialism.
    The Army and the people that back them view the egyptian masses and the election win as the natives getting a bit upperty and needing to be put back in their place.

  85. It is amazing that people use the fact that people demonstrate for a millitry coup to claim it is democracy.
    When people that demonstrate against it are killed. 130 is the last count for the last demonstration.
    I think they believe in a Zionists democracy or the type that exists in Israel.
    Where Israel got its democratic mandate by killing and expelling 80% of the population who would have voted against them.

  86. Nope, sorry Arsalan, that (12:26pm and 3;39Pm, today) holds no water. The links I’ve provided are mainly from/about Egyptian workers and trade unionists. They do not support the coup – why are you (Arsalan) pretending that they do? Because it is convenient from an ideological point-of-view, for you to do so?

    Nor do they support the Islamists, who, when they got into power, in terms of oppression of the people, behaved no better than the Mubarak regime had before them. These ordinary Egyptian people experienced the violent oppression of both the military and the Islamists. So, some of them may well have voted for the Muslim Brotherhood last year, thinking that the Islamists meant it when they said they would rule for “all Egyptians”. But when they experienced Islamists as the government, they realised that was not the case. That is why millions – 16 million people – rose up and went out into the streets. This is the largest single uprising in history. Now the military has taken over. But if they screw around with the Egyptian people, there will be 30 million out on the streets.

  87. I see there are reports of a massacre by security forces today in Egypt. There is going to be an ocean of blood, I fear. Algeria, Redux. The people will be squeezed.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/27/us-egypt-protests-idUSBRE96O11Z20130727

  88. Mona Eltahawy’s Twitter feed. Check it out:

    https://twitter.com/monaeltahawy

  89. “The fundamental cause of trouble in the world is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”

    Oh so condescending! How intelligent is it to push a series of contradictory positions on a whole lot of issues as “doubts”? In fact it is not intelligent but fucking clever! Stupid, yeah lately looked at what you have been sputtering around the board? If its not me, then there is always Mary to have a go at Oh the Stupid are cocksure; Yes, Mary, Theresa May and her diabetes have been all over the place today.. Talking for all those who read the comments, now that is really not cocksure assumptive position, not at all.

    ===

    I grew up on a diet of very old movies and so picked up and now project some of that old-time vibe on this blog, often sardonically

    That explains a lot, to learn world according to Hollywood; as written all over you fucking diatribes. Then akin to a plot of the best B mvoies; my imaginary old age many times on this blog! Yeah so convincing, so very convincing, forget about the bitter crap that have been sputtered around the place by a bitter old fucking geriatric who has declared war on the whole of fucking existence, never mind the planet.

    Sardonically, my arse, more like an old tosser pours venom, bile and bitterness, taking it out on the world for all his fucking failures and shortcomings. Imaginary yeah, that too, you are doing a lot of imagining there, pardner.

    Being old is not a fault or a disadvantage, it is a consequence of being young. However what is damning is to have not learnt from the experience of life, and to be devoid of love for a life that was never valued and so wasted, only to end up so bitter and twisted. Wisdom unfortunately can only come from knowledge, knowledge is only made possible through love of life, and respect for all living. Otherwise the obtuse minds and closed hearts can never evolve.
    ===

    Boy good job these “democratic Generals in Egypt” respect the secular human rights and only shoot the MB supporters.

    Over 100 supporters claimed dead as soldiers are accused of shoot-to-kill policy to clear protest urging Morsi’s release

  90. Fedup wisely tells us, from his heart –

    “.. what is damning is to have not learnt from the experience of life, and to be devoid of love for a life that was never valued and so wasted, only to end up so bitter and twisted. Wisdom unfortunately can only come from knowledge, knowledge is only made possible through love of life, and respect for all living. Otherwise the obtuse minds and closed hearts can never evolve.”

    After spitting in our faces –

    “.. Oh so condescending! .. Stupid, yeah lately looked at what you have been sputtering around the board? .. forget about the bitter crap that have been sputtered around the place by a bitter old fucking geriatric who has declared war on the whole of fucking existence, never mind the planet. .. more like an old tosser pours venom, bile and bitterness, taking it out on the world for all his fucking failures and shortcomings. ..”

    I’m not a psychologist, but I’m pretty sure he’s schizophrenic. And I’m not convinced that he is not an Islamist given that he walks and quacks like an Islamist. Moderate Muslims certainly have their work cut out disassociating themselves from the likes of Fedup.

  91. I posted a report from Al Jazeera, about Egypt, on a thread higher up, and it got no reaction. I went looking for it, to ask Suhayl’s opinion of it. But I couldn’t find my own comment which included the link. So I went and searched on Al Jazeera. And I find that the original report has caused controversy. The controversy is reported here

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/07/201371315254181476.html

    The original report is visible here

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/07/2013710113522489801.html

    It involves the NED (National Endowment for Democracy) which is frequently criticized on the Landdestroyer blog for engaging in, or funding, ‘protest’ (interference) in other countries (one example being Pussy Riot).

  92. “I’m not a psychologist, but I’m pretty sure he’s schizophrenic.”

    I wouldn’t know about that, Jemand. But he’s sure full of hot air. ;)

  93. Thanks for the links on US funding of Egyptian unrest, Dreoilin.

  94. SS I see you still insist that it is only democracy when it is your own people who get elected?
    If you call the people who were elected ISlamist, than it means the egyptian people are Islamists. They were the people that elected them.
    Im sure someone like you would consider their rule as oppression, but I am sure they would find your rule, or the rule of the tiny minority in Egypt you support as oppressive.
    And that is the point, your views are only shared by a tiny minority in Egypt.
    Most people are the brotherhood who you call Islamist, they are followed by the Salafi who you call Extreme Islamists. Next comes the people who want millitry rule, because they know in a country like egypt, where the majority of people want Islamic law, the only alternative to it is oppressive millitry rule. At least some people are honest enough to admit it.
    The hypocritical left who call play with words, claiming it is democracy if the people want what they want, and dictatorship when they want something else is the tiny minority that is left over.

    People like the Zionists, including the Zionists politicians here and the Zionists press here admit it openly. Democracy in the Muslim world = ISlamic government. They admit that is why they support the dictators and kings.
    Some in the left are just as dictatorial, but they just don’t have the guts to be honest.
    So what is it SS, when eer there is an election, and people you don’t like get elected. That is dictatorship and not democracy. BEcause if you don’t like them, it means, the people, changed their minds directly after the election?

  95. I’m going back to the forum until after eid at the earlist.
    Just to make clear, none of what I have written was an attack on your politics. It was all an attack on your hypocrisy and dishonestly.

    There are openminded leftests. But you act like a trotskyite. Talking to you is like talking to someone from the Socialists worker. You seem to want to choose who others choose.
    When a election shows the people don’t support what you support, it is a case of “they changed their minds”.
    What kind of nonsense is this?

    There are leftists that say, “I wish they wouldn’t have choosen who they did, but it is there choose not mind”, others that would see the challange of convincing the vast majority of people of their case, and others who would admit, the only way they can have the people ruled by their ways is by force.
    You choose something else. You choose to lie to yourself and others, by living in a dream world where you dictate what others want.

    This is also the mindset by the elite in the middle east. The mindset of “My people love me, they will die for me my people”.
    A mind set where what the people want is not relivant, what matters is what you say they should want. This is the mindset of the westernised elite, who look down on who they consider the ignorant masses.
    I repeat, I view that mindset as no different from the racism held by the imperialists during colonislism.
    More than that, I view it is a continuation of colonialism. I replacement of Direct european rule by natives who rule on behalf of the imperial masters.
    It is just white supremacy by another name.
    SS, no matter how good you think the system you believe in is, it is only democracy if the people it is imposed on want it. Making others live the way you want to be free to do, isn;t freedom for them, if they don’t want it, and they have to be forced to submit to it.
    That is why your secularism is only freedom and democracy in western countries where people wnat it. In Muslim countries where people have just voted for something else, your secularism is dictatorship and oppression.

  96. technicolour

    2 Aug, 2013 - 1:18 am

    Arsalan, lost track of this slightly, but won’t let this stand. You have in no way shown that Suhayl’s humane, thoughtful posts are anything but that; you have failed to respond to the information he has posted.

  97. Arsalan,

    I second Technicolour’s point above.

    That is dictatorship and not democracy. BEcause if you don’t like them, it means, the people, changed their minds directly after the election?

    This is the key to your misunderstanding, I think. As I’ve said in the past, you can’t repeat the above ad nauseum and hope that it becomes more true in each instance.

    Here’s the key points for you to respond to:

    1. There was a revolution in which Mubarak was ousted (we agree on this)
    2. The Brotherhood won the election and formed a government (we agree on this)
    3. The government over-reached, especially in relation to presidential decrees
    4. There was another revolution in which widespread dissatisfaction was expressed with Morsi
    5. Morsi was deposed and the army resumed power

    No-one on this thread, I think, has expressed support for the army taking power. As you rightly said, many generals would be pro-Israel and pro-US – an authoritarian stooge government, again.

    So, no-one here has expressed support for removing the Brotherhood because of their religious governance. However, I think it was noted that support for the Brotherhood appears to have collapsed, a year on from the optimism of the first revolution.

    In your last post you have repeated the same unfortunate untruths about colonialism and white supremacy that absolutely no-one has voiced on this thread. They are inventions of your own that you have injected to avoid dealing with the point that the people kicked Morsi out.

    (They may regret doing so if Egypt now turns to civil war or a police state, but that is a very separate matter).

    If you wish to tackle the argument head on, rather than ignoring it, you could take several routes:

    1. The demonstrations were insufficient in size to represent the will of the people (I disagree with this, but I think it might be your view. If you restate it, please cite links)
    2. Morsi was indeed making an undemocratic power-grab and the people are broadly glad to see his downfall. People in Egypt and elsewhere who wish to see an Islamist government in Egypt should now support party X. Or, they should support the Brotherhood with a new leader. (I think that won’t attract much support, but if you do, let’s hear it).

    Ultimately what I am trying to get you to do is to adopt a less dogmatic perspective. You often engineer the facts around your support for Sharia governance, but I don’t think you are aware that you do so. Thus, I give you the benefit of the doubt and continue discussing with you.

    With the above in mind, what are your hopes for Egypt now? My ideal would be to see a socialist secular party in power, but the US would destabilise such a grouping using dirty tricks, and in any case they would find it hard to unify a very divided society. Thus, a moderate leftist group that the US might leave alone, and that could promise economic recovery, jobs and security, whilst improving its relationship with Islamic neighbours, would be good. I’d prefer them to be secular, but if the people choose Islamic-democratic at the voting booth, then okay.

    (I’ll come back to the religious debate, Jemand, when I’ve much more time).

  98. Thanks, Jon, Technicolour and Dreoilin – I agree with all of you on these points. Complex situation in Egypt, well analysed.

  99. Paul Barbara

    4 Aug, 2013 - 3:03 am

    Kemal Ataturk was turned by the West, and joined Freemasonry in a Lodge in Salonika; many Muslims are aware of this. The Turkish military, like that of Egypt and Pakistan, is in the pockets of the Yanks.
    Arab Spring my posterior. The whole thing was brought about, like the colour revolutions in ex-Soviet states, by Yankee dollars, George Soros, NED, and other poxies (pardon, ‘proxies’).
    In 2007 (and also, I believe, in 2006) 4* General (ret) Wesley Clark, ex-Supreme Allied Commander Europe, stated in video interviews that he had visited the Pentagon shortly after the 9/11 attacks (he had an open invitation to visit the Pentagon anytime he was in town) and was told by a serving 3* General, who he had worked with, that the US was going to topple ‘7 governments in 5 years’ (just search that plus ‘Wesley Clark’) and named them: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.
    Obviously the time scale slipped, but other countries have obviously been added: Cote D’Ivoire, Tunisia and Egypt.
    Again, Arab Spring my aunt Fannie.
    Secular/Clerical: bit like Demoprat and Repugnant, or the similar charade that marks UK ‘Democratic Elections’.
    Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dummer (though we’re the dumb ones, for falling for it.
    And to get on my favourite Hobby Horse, check out ‘Aaron Russo Historic Interview’. Like many serious pains in the neck to the Establishment, he is now dead (God rest his soul), having ‘contracted’ cancer when he started speaking out in 2001.
    Nick Rockefeller (yep, in person) befriended Aaron, and told him, eleven months before 9/11, that there was going to be an ‘incident’, and it would lead to the US going into Afghanistan and Iraq, there would be US troops ‘hunting through caves for Arabs’, there would be a ‘War on Terror’, and after that they would go after Venezuela. Rockefeller also tried to recruit Aaron into the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
    Please watch the interview; you will not be wasting your time.

  100. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Aaron_Russo

    Paul Barbara, 3:03am: The usual right-wing mix of the obvious (imperialism, militarism, NED, strategic imperatives, tactical alliances, etc.) with the absurd. Ex-snooker BBC TV presenter typifies the tendency. Also, people in countries in the Middle East do have agency.

    “Kemal Ataturk was turned by the West and joined Freemasonry,” Paul Barbara.

    Turned, from what, exactly? And did he roll up his trouser-leg?

  101. ” stood the massed phalanxes of kemalist nationalism, a very ugly beast”

    This is the bullshit we have had to deal for a long time in Turkey. Sorry to say, you are like the has beens who put us in the situation we are in. By giving the government too much power and helping them fill the judiciary with their lodge members. They too used the same words to paint a authoritarian,islamist party as a friend to the people.

    Even photos of the dead people who got killed in gezi are considered evidence of wrong doing in the police state.

    Gezi park protesters are targeted by Erdogan’s ministers, who called on the judiciary to give them for life in jail, using your exact same rhetoric.

    Gezi was also a call to stop the government to try to shape our life. to stop pulling the bullshit USA wants to Turkey to pull in Syria. To stop endless police brutality and such.

    Right now, there are no private media oppostion in Turkey. They either bent the knee by enormous tax fines or got fired or locked up. One basketball player who refused to talk to a pro-Erdogan private channel,got benched in the international tournaments.

    State and private estate working together. That’s what you are defending by trying do demonise the opposition.

    Kemalists, didn’t need your approval in Turkey to promote secularism in 1928. The civil protesters,kemalists among them, don’t need your approval to defend it now.

    Tell the people who “inform” you on the situation in Turkey: Satılmışsınız.

    For people like you, Internet has great memes. Here’s one:

    DEAL WITH IT.

  102. Absolutely, Anon2, at 12:15pm. The AKP proved the maxim that Islamist political movements are totalitarian at their core. Some do it quick (eg. Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Khomeini et al in Iran, so-called Mujaheddin/Taliban in Afghanistan) and some do it slow (eg. AKP in Turkey, Jamaat-i-Islami and other ‘religious’ parties in Pakistan), but all do it. That is their stated goal and they have demonstrated its pursuance every time they’ve assumed power.

  103. That’s the problem with Craig’s spiel. We have heard it for a long time in Turkey.

    Because there simply is no other way to defend an islamist party other than playing to people’s baser desires and demonising the opposition.

    It has gotten stale. Craig’s views on this subject has no validity. 2007 called, they want their rhetoric back.

    Craig has bout into it so deeply, he recited what the ruling party says in defend of itself when reciting the first years of AKP rule. Word by word.

  104. Well, I don’t support the coup in Egypt either. The Islamists and the Army both hijacked the revolution for their own purposes. And the IMF sits in the background, holding the Egyptian people to ransom.

    Bread (not if the IMF has anything to do with it), justice (not if the Army has anything to do with it) and freedom (not if the Islamists have anything to do with it).

  105. “Well, I don’t support the coup in Egypt either. The Islamists and the Army both hijacked the revolution for their own purposes. And the IMF sits in the background, holding the Egyptian people to ransom.

    Bread (not if the IMF has anything to do with it), justice (not if the Army has anything to do with it) and freedom (not if the Islamists have anything to do with it).”

    Pretty much.

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos