Egyptian Violence

[AEON]

Egyptian Violence

A Bible Society of Egypt statement posted online Wednesday reported the "complete burning and destruction" of its bookshops in the cities of Assiut and Minia, in southern Egypt.

Where they burn books, at the end they also burn people. Heinrich Heine

 

[Galeongirl]

I'm starting to have the feeling that these middle eastern riots are starting to show a major divide between east and west. It's rather telling how all these years the poor nations were supported by do gooders from the west, instead of the oil rich nearby middle eastern nations. And now they're at war they suddenly come out and support the muslim parts of the countries?

Maybe I'm a bit radical in this, but to be honest, I think it's best if 'we' as the west stopped interfering with these countries. Stop paying them money, it's rather obvious that a western democracy idea isn't going to work for these countries.

 

[Pearl]

Maybe I'm a bit radical in this, but to be honest, I think it's best if 'we' as the west stopped interfering with these countries. Stop paying them money, it's rather obvious that a western democracy idea isn't going to work for these countries.

I agree. They don't trust or even like us anyway, so why bother? Just step in for humanitarian reasons, like if Egypt really gets into a civil war like Syria.

 

[the iron horse]

Amnesty calls on government to protect Christians in Egypt - Daily News Egypt

 

[AEON]

Amnesty calls on government to protect Christians in Egypt - Daily News Egypt

According to the report, 38 churches have been attacked and completely destroyed across Egypt and 23 churches have been partially damaged, with 21 of the attacks combined occurring in Al-Minya, where the situation is exceptionally bad, as reported by Amnesty.

If these were mosques in a "Christian" or secular nation - the Left would be going nuts. Why the Left seems so enamored with Islam is something I will never understand. I am thankful the Amnesty International is bringing this some attention.

 

[Irvine511]

If these were mosques in a "Christian" or secular nation - the Left would be going nuts. Why the Left seems so enamored with Islam is something I will never understand. I am thankful the Amnesty International is bringing this some attention.

You have no basis to make this claim whatsoever.

 

[AEON]

You have no basis to make this claim whatsoever.

Did you watch any of the Christ Hitchens video's that were posted over the past few weeks?

 

[Irvine511]

Did you watch any of the Christ Hitchens video's that were posted over the past few weeks?

what does that have to do with what you said?

 

[AEON]

what does that have to do with what you said?

He takes issue with the fact the liberal media capitulates to Islam (BTW - Hitchens is no Conservative). And I think the relative quietness about the Egyptian church burnings prove him right (along with the general "religion of peace" talking points that JT pointed out that thread).

 

[Irvine511]

He takes issue with the fact the liberal media capitulates to Islam (BTW - Hitchens is no Conservative). And I think the relative quietness about the Egyptian church burnings prove him right (along with the general "religion of peace" talking points that JT pointed out that thread).

What would be an appropriate level of loudness? And how can you compare that to a "can you imagine" conjecture, as well as the working assumption about the boogeyman "liberal media."

I know all about Hitchens.

 

[AEON]

What would be an appropriate level of loudness? And how can you compare that to a "can you imagine" conjecture, as well as the working assumption about the boogeyman "liberal media."

I know all about Hitchens.

If you can learn to take a more balanced view - you will see the lies of both sides. Don't be a pawn.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

"Wake up, sheeple."

I don't get this "The Left is so enamoured with Islam" bit, much less do I understand what "The Left" is supposed to be, is it just an alternate name for left liberals?

For what it's worth, I'm not enamoured with Islam, or with any religion for that matter, this matter is not purely black and white.

 

[Irvine511]

If you can learn to take a more balanced view - you will see the lies of both sides. Don't be a pawn.

You mean like you do?

I hardly think I'm less informed than you.

 

[BVS]

If these were mosques in a "Christian" or secular nation - the Left would be going nuts. Why the Left seems so enamored with Islam is something I will never understand. I am thankful the Amnesty International is bringing this some attention.

It's so ironic given the fact that most of those that built the left wing media boogeyman syndrome would place AI in that "Left" category.

 

[AEON]

You mean like you do?

I hardly think I'm less informed than you.

Do you have any views that would be considered Right wing? Perhaps I missed those posts.

If not, then I would tend to think, even with all the information you've collected, you're point of view is not exactly "balanced".

 

[AEON]

It's so ironic given the fact that most of those that built the left wing media boogeyman syndrome would place AI in that "Left" category.

I'm not referring directly to the media here )though they are part of this) - but to most liberal teachers, politicians, public debaters...etc. It seems rather apparent they are more quick to defend Islam than to condemn it - even though Islam stands against just about everything the Left endorses.

The Right is guilty of the same things, but on different issues (like their strange defense of the super wealthy and gun control)

 

[Irvine511]

Do you have any views that would be considered Right wing? Perhaps I missed those posts.

If not, then I would tend to think, even with all the information you've collected, you're point of view is not exactly "balanced".

i don't make false equivocations. or feel the need to adopt a certain position in the interest of trying to appear as if i'm balanced.

simply being balanced doesn't mean you are informed. it's helpful to see all sides of an issue and to understand different lines of thought, but that doesn't mean all lines of thought are of equal quality.

 

[Irvine511]

I'm not referring directly to the media here )though they are part of this) - but to most liberal teachers, politicians, public debaters...etc. It seems rather apparent they are more quick to defend Islam than to condemn it - even though Islam stands against just about everything the Left endorses.

The Right is guilty of the same things, but on different issues (like their strange defense of the super wealthy and gun control)

and this seems to be a good example of bad thinking and false equivocation. you can't even name your opponents, or give clear examples of what it is you're talking about.

you just have this feeling, don't you, that we're nicer to the Muslims than we are to the Christians, and that there are only two options: defend or condemn Islam.

the consistency of the Left is that we believe in secularism -- which enables all people to practice their beliefs right up until the point where one's beliefs infringe upon the rights of others. i will defend your right to your belief that a marriage is only between a man and a woman, but you cannot use that belief to reduce my rights. likewise, there's a lot in Islam i find crazy, there's a lot in Mormonism i find side-splittingly hilarious, there's a lot in Catholicism that's idiotic. but what i defend is not these beliefs but the right to hold them.

and given the laws passed against the apparently existential threat of Sharia Law (!!!) in southern states like NC or OK, it really does seem to me that in this country people really are out to get Muslims in general. i think the Left has a natural reaction to preserving the rights of minorities because many of us well know what it's like to be persecuted by the majority.

in other countries it's a different story when it comes to who is the minority, and i'm aware of issues regarding the Christians of Egypt. in addition, i've posted about the hanging of gay teens in Iran, and the treatment of women in the Muslim world in general.

what else do you want from me, and from others on what you believe makes up the amorphous blob you call "the Left"?

 

[AEON]

what else do you want from me, and from others on what you believe makes up the amorphous blob you call "the Left"?

You can plug in the term "liberal" if you want. I didn't know that you were offended by the term, "Left." I suppose I would want some consistency - as I mentioned above, and again below.

and this seems to be a good example of bad thinking and false equivocation. you can't even name your opponents, or give clear examples of what it is you're talking about.

I think my point is more about the absence of outcry - hence the lack of examples. In fact, it is the lack of examples which is the evidence.

you just have this feeling, don't you, that we're nicer to the Muslims than we are to the Christians, and that there are only two options: defend or condemn Islam.

You do come across a bit seething here, if so - please take a breath and calm down and not take these discussions so personally. From my "bad thinking" brain - it does seem difficult to see how a "liberal" could defend an ideology that would essentially wipe them out if they had the chance. The examples are the Muslim dominated countries in the Middle East (with a few exceptions).

the consistency of the Left is that we believe...

Why is it you feel you can lump yourself into this "amorphous blob" you call "the Left" - and yet you're offended when others identify you as such? I'm simply trying to use shared terminology in order to have a discussion.

secularism -- which enables all people to practice their beliefs right up until the point where one's beliefs infringe upon the rights of others

And how well is that going in the Middle East?

and given the laws passed against the apparently existential threat of Sharia Law (!!!) in southern states like NC or OK, it really does seem to me that in this country people really are out to get Muslims in general. i think the Left has a natural reaction to preserving the rights of minorities because many of us well know what it's like to be persecuted by the majority.

Perhaps they want to let the Muslims that are in those states know that Sharia Law has no chance of taking hold there.

 

[Irvine511]

I think my point is more about the absence of outcry - hence the lack of examples. In fact, it is the lack of examples which is the evidence.

what kind of an outcry would satisfy you, especially given that over 1000 people have been killed in the streets of Cairo during the past week or so. that seems to have dominated the news -- it's not that there's a spate of church burnings, but that there's widespread violence in Egypt and church burnings are one aspect of that violence.

you're trying to prove some sort of double standard here, but this is apples to oranges. it's two totally different countries.

You do come across a bit seething here, if so - please take a breath and calm down and not take these discussions so personally. From my "bad thinking" brain - it does seem difficult to see how a "liberal" could defend an ideology that would essentially wipe them out if they had the chance. The examples are the Muslim dominated countries in the Middle East (with a few exceptions).

again: no one is (necessarily) defending an ideology, but, at least in the US, the RIGHT TO HOLD AN IDEOLOGY.

And how well is that going in the Middle East?

not well? i'm talking about the US.

Perhaps they want to let the Muslims that are in those states know that Sharia Law has no chance of taking hold there.

right. there is no chance. it's not a concern. it never was, never has been and never will be.

and yet, there's a need to pass a law? it's eerily similar to the "gay propaganda" law in Russia. it's the scapegoating of a minority in order to create a feeling of crisis and solidarity among a small group of people.

 

[AEON]

what kind of an outcry would satisfy you, especially given that over 1000 people have been killed in the streets of Cairo during the past week or so. that seems to have dominated the news -- it's not that there's a spate of church burnings, but that there's widespread violence in Egypt and church burnings are one aspect of that violence.

The persecution of Christians in the Middle East and Africa has been prevalent for some time now.

you're trying to prove some sort of double standard here, but this is apples to oranges. it's two totally different countries.

You lost me here - what do you mean by "two totally different countries"?

again: no one is (necessarily) defending an ideology, but, at least in the US, the RIGHT TO HOLD AN IDEOLOGY.

Yet, that same ideology does not extend the same rights to others - so if it did "come to power" other ideologies would get suppressed if not exterminated.

not well? i'm talking about the US.

I wasn't. The thread is about Egypt specifically, and through the course of the conversation it got extended to other countries in Middle East.

right. there is no chance. it's not a concern. it never was, never has been and never will be.

I wouldn't take that for granted. There are examples in Britain and France where Muslims are demanding Sharia Law.

and yet, there's a need to pass a law? it's eerily similar to the "gay propaganda" law in Russia.

Banning Sharia Law is not the same as banning gay propaganda. Didn't you just post this:

i don't make false equivocations.

 

[Irvine511]

i'm not getting into a tit-for-tat discussion.

you had expressed concern that there wasn't enough "outrage" about the burning of churches in Egypt, and then wondered why "the Left" loves and adores Islam but is "silent" about the burning of churches in Egypt.

i explained that the Left doesn't really care about Islam itself, but the right of people to believe as they choose so long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. this works best in a secular society like the US.

the point is that you're mistaking a defense of the right of people to be Muslim as some sort of love and affection for Islam itself.

you're also wondering why there isn't more "noise" about the burning of churches, and i replied that it's because the 1000 people killed in the streets of Cairo have likely overshadowed the burning of 30 churches (where no one was killed). i also think there would be more "noise" if the churches were burned in, say, France, or Canada, rather than a non-secular society like Egypt that's undergoing what amounts to a civil war.

the broadest point is that you're trying to find examples of inconsistencies in "the Left" when there's no inconsistency -- you're fabricating one.

as for the gay propaganda law, yes, it's very similar. they invented a problem -- encroaching Sharia Law, gay "propaganda" turning teenagers gay -- and then presented a solution that does absolutely nothing other than punish a vulnerable minority for the satisfaction of the majority in order to create a sense of crisis and then solidarity.

finally, the "liberal media" is a myth. sure, there is liberal media out there -- MSNBC, Mother Jones -- but mainstream news, from CNN to NBC to Time, takes enormous pains to not be liberal, which in fact swings coverage conservative.

 

[Diemen]

I wouldn't take that for granted. There are examples in Britain and France where Muslims are demanding Sharia Law.

1) Have their demands been met?
2) We don't have the same form of government as France or the UK.
3) We have this thing called the 1st amendment already in place to prevent any such implementation. As such, extra laws are unnecessary at best, and unrealistic, irrational fear-mongering & scapegoating tools at worst.

 

[AEON]

This was the point that started this tangent:

If these were mosques in a "Christian" or secular nation - the Left would be going nuts

Since I am not aligned with the Right or the Left, I think I can call that out for what it is - hypocrisy. You have claimed in this thread, and in other threads, that you do care about what happens in other countries. Are you suggesting that the atrocities against the Christians and their cultural landmarks (some of the churches and monasteries date back to the 4th century) - who just happen to be born in a non-secular society are not entitled to the same attention as figure skaters in Russia?

 

[AEON]

1) Have their demands been met?
2) We don't have the same form of government as France or the UK.
3) We have this thing called the 1st amendment already in place to prevent any such implementation. As such, extra laws are unnecessary at best, and unrealistic, irrational fear-mongering & scapegoating tools at worst.

For the most part - I tend to agree with this. But I do think it illustrates the opposite point that in a country dominated by Sharia Law - very few of our precious rights exist.

 

[Irvine511]

This was the point that started this tangent: Since I am not aligned with the Right or the Left, I think I can call that out for what it is - hypocrisy. You have claimed in this thread, and in other threads, that you do care about what happens in other countries. Are you suggesting that the atrocities against the Christians and their cultural landmarks (some of the churches and monasteries date back to the 4th century) - who just happen to be born in a non-secular society are not entitled to the same attention as figure skaters in Russia?

if there were mosques, or churches, or synagogues in a secular nation, the Left and the Right and everyone else would be going nuts because we have freedom of religion guaranteed by a secular government.

Egypt is a different story, it is a different country, it is a different history, and right now thousands of people are dying in the streets. yes, this seems to me to be of more pressing concern than churches being burned.

you missed, entirely, the point i made about the Russian anti-gay laws.

i'm sorry that you feel you're not getting enough attention. i know it's tempting to imagine that "the Left" and the "liberal media" are deliberately ignoring you, but that isn't the case.

your claim that you aren't "aligned" with the Right or the Left doesn't give you some sort of automatic credibility or turn you into an umpire that allows you to "call something out" and have more legitimacy than someone else. it rests upon the quality of argument, and you haven't really presented an argument at all -- just gut feelings and suppositions ("can you imagine!") and straw men.

 

[BVS]

It seems rather apparent they are more quick to defend Islam than to condemn it - even though Islam stands against just about everything the Left endorses.

Rather apparent? How? Why does it have to be one or the other? Why is it quick to defend or condemn, have we no other choices?

I find this line of thinking to be BS, first of all the stories are very often not the full story. A poster here in FYM once posted an article about churches being burned in the Middle East during an outbreak of violence like this and asking where the outcry was, only to find out the article was BS and just as many Mosques were damaged in these riots and even more Muslims were killed than non-Muslims.

The outcry should be over the outbreak of violence, period. Why are these countries more prone to outbreaks of mass violence compared to other countries, even other Muslim countries? If the US were in a place in history where we were as prone to mass violence would we see more Mosques or more Churches burnt to the ground?

 

[AEON]

I suppose you both would have a valid point if this was isolated:

500 Christian villagers hacked to death in Nigeria

Muslin violence against Christians in the Middle East

One person who is not afraid to term the violence a “war on Christians” is Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the former Somali Muslim who fled to the West, served in the Dutch Parliament, wrote the controversial film “Submission,” and lives in hiding in the United States due to her views about Islam.

“We hear so often about Muslims as victims of abuse in the West and combatants in the Arab Springs’s fight against tyranny,” she wrote in a February 6 piece for The Daily Beast. “But, in fact, a wholly different kind of war is underway – an unrecognized battle costing thousands of lives. Christians are being killed in the Islamic world because of their religion. It is a rising genocide that ought to provoke a global alarm.”

 

[BVS]

Your first article shows an area that's torn between religions and both sides are very violent.

Your second article is published by a guy who was fired from the Times Moscow for his anti-Muslim pro-Israel bias so he started his own publication.

 

[AEON]

Your first article shows an area that's torn between religions and both sides are very violent.

Human Rights Watch

Your second article is published by a guy who was fired from the Times Moscow for his anti-Muslim pro-Israel bias so he started his own publication.

Do you dispute the facts of the article, or are you going to hope we all settle for your ad hominem fallacy? On the other hand, maybe the Left is getting its act together. It turns out this author worked for Al Gore.

Lawrence J. Haas, a former senior White House official and award-winning journalist, is Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the American Foreign Policy Council. He is also a member, and former Vice President for Policy, of the Committee on the Present Danger. Haas writes widely on foreign affairs, is quoted often in newspapers and magazines, and appears frequently on TV and radio. At the White House, he was Communications Director for Vice President Al Gore and, before that, for the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Source

Haas is a frequent public commentator. He writes a column for The North Star National, blogs for The Fiscal Times, and pens a quarterly “Letter from Washington” for the Henry Jackson Society. His op-eds have appeared in the New York Times, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, Washington Examiner, Baltimore Sun, Miami Herald, Houston Chronicle, Sacramento Bee, and scores of other newspapers, and he has written articles on foreign affairs for The Journal of International Security Affairs, DEMOCRATIYA, inFOCUS, and other magazines.

The author of three books and a contributor to others, Haas has appeared on FOX, CNN, CNBC, C-SPAN, Voice of America, AlHurra, NPR, the BBC, and many local TV and radio shows. He has served as a guest lecturer at the Government Affairs Institute and Legislative Studies Institute, and also spoken at Yale University, Pennsylvania State University, George Washington University, and the University of Rhode Island. Haas is also a commentator on “MarketPlace,” a business radio show that airs on nearly 400 stations across the country.

source: