Egyptian Violence

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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.

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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"?

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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.

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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.

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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.

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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:

Originally Posted by Irvine511

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]

Originally Posted by AEON

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]

Originally Posted by Diemen

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]

Originally Posted by AEON

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]

Originally Posted by AEON

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]

Originally Posted by BVS

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

Human Rights Watch

Originally Posted by BVS

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:

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

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.

I was speaking to the publication itself and it's publisher.

I would have to look into the facts(although they seem pretty thin), but when you start off an article like

Unfortunately, America’s top newspapers find it too hot to handle

I have to wonder what the point of the article is...

Having religious leaders have rule over governmental law is dangerous, no matter what the religion. Minorities will be targeted and blamed.

[Irvine511]

i deplore all violence, and i understand that in some parts of the world, religious violence is aimed at Christians. it's every bit as bad as all other religiously-motivated animus.

can we move on now?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

it's every bit as bad as all other religiously-motivated animus.

can we move on now?

Maybe. Do you really think in this day and age, there is any other religion that is slaughtering "non-adherents" on the scale of Islam?

Is it possible there is not as much intellectual and popular opposition to Islam because professors and journalists are afraid of reprisals?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by BVS

I have to wonder what the point of the article is...

That WAS the point

Originally Posted by BVS

Having religious leaders have rule over governmental law is dangerous, no matter what the religion. Minorities will be targeted and blamed.

True, but how many Christian/Buddhist/Jewish theocracies exist in the world today? There are several such Islamic states and another handful that are not exactly there, but are close to it.

One of the few exceptions is modern Turkey - but of course, the Christians were already wiped out about 100 years ago:

wikipedia The Armenian Genocide was the Ottoman government's systematic extermination of its minority Armenian subjects from their historic homeland in the territory constituting the present-day Republic of Turkey. It took place during and after World War I and was implemented in two phases: the wholesale killing of the able-bodied male population through massacre and forced labor, and the deportation of women, children, the elderly and infirm on death marches to the Syrian Desert. The total number of people killed as a result has been estimated at between 1 and 1.5 million. Other indigenous and Christian ethnic groups such as the Assyrians, the Greeks and other minority groups were similarly targeted for extermination by the Ottoman government, and their treatment is considered by many historians to be part of the same genocidal policy.

[LJT]

The violence in Egypt doesn't fit neatly into the 'it's all Islam's' fault anyway. A great number of people in Egypt seem to have voted a for a mainly Islamic government (now I know there are reports of vote fraud and intimidation but then there are plenty also saying it was a fair enough election. either way its a bit inconclusive what actually happened). Before this Egypt was more or less a secular dictatorship which abused its people. While Morsi certainly started implementing a form of theocracy he was elected by the people as far as we know. Now we have a a country being controlled by its military which is quite secular in its outlook murdering former supporters of the deposed government, a broad swathe of whom appear to be relatively innocent protesters. And then you have the Islamic fundamentalists targetting the Christians, no doubt as scapegoat for what they see as Western influence in their affairs and of course it's awful and wrong of them to do this.

But as you can see its not really a simple right or wrong situation where the Muslims are the bad guys and the biggest perpetrators of violence in this situation. I'd say the secular military is doing much more killing than anyone else in Egypt.

There have been wars in the Middle East where Christians have been just as evil as whatever Muslim force they are fighting against as well, such as the Maronite Christians in the Lebanese civil war.

And as always i'll argue the position that most violence is between the haves and have nots, very little is motivated purely by religions. This whole build up of Islam against the oh so brilliant West is absurd.

[LJT]

Originally Posted by AEON

That WAS the point

True, but how many Christian/Buddhist/Jewish theocracies exist in the world today? There are several such Islamic states and another handful that are not exactly there, but are close to it.

One of the few exception is modern Turkey - but of course, the Christians were already wiped out about 100 years ago:

The Nazis tried to wipe out the Jews only 60 years ago, Russians did similar with their ethnic groups, the Chinese in parts continue to suppress many of its ethnic groups. Its not so much a uniquely Islamic quality, Britain itself has been involved in the slaughter and torture of the Mau Maus (hey and why not throw in where i'm from Northern Ireland as well).

Lots of historical examples near and far.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by LJT

The Nazis tried to wipe out the Jews only 60 years ago, Russians did similar with their ethnic groups, the Chinese in parts continue to suppress many of its ethnic groups. Its not so much a uniquely Islamic quality, Britain itself has been involved in the slaughter and torture of the Mau Maus (hey and why not throw in where i'm from Northern Ireland as well).

Lots of historical examples near and far.

True - but Islam is the current "mean kid" on the block.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by LJT

And as always i'll argue the position that most violence is between the haves and have nots, very little is motivated purely by religions. This whole build up of Islam against the oh so brilliant West is absurd.

That is true at the highest levels, at least in most cases, but these leaders will certainly use religious ideology to stir up the masses.

[LJT]

I'd really like to know what this weeping and wailing about Islam will achieve? All I get is a be on your guard? Against what exactly? This sweeping horde of Arabs descending upon us with their Sharia law? Should we ban Islam? Should we invade and sort them out? Should we have laws that are only applicable to muslims like none of that Allah stuff in public? All i'm hearing is 'BEWARE' in a comedic scary voice like the stone faces in the oublient in The Labyrinth.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by AEON

Maybe. Do you really think in this day and age, there is any other religion that is slaughtering "non-adherents" on the scale of Islam?

this has been answered, but i'd also point to Buddhists killing people in Myanmar/Burma. seems so utterly antithetical to the teachings of the Buddha, but that's how it works i suppose since religion has a unique capacity to justify violence.

Is it possible there is not as much intellectual and popular opposition to Islam because professors and journalists are afraid of reprisals?

no.

i'm a little surprised at how much you're buying into this Clash of Civilizations thing.