Posts Tagged ‘egypt’

Egypt and test of democracy

Posted: January 27, 2011 by datechguy in middle east, opinion/news
Tags: , , , ,

Things continue to get more and more volatile in Egypt. Egypt has had a long-term relationship with the US and has received Billions each year as a bribe to keep the peace with Israel US ally. Egypt has also been a dictatorship that Mubarek and his clan has ruled for 40 years and this rule has reflected poorly on the US.

There is no question that the Egyptian people deserve to be ruled by leaders of their own choice. There is also no question that repressive government is unjust. There have been plenty of strategic reasons to have a good relationship with Egypt (the Suez canal comes immediately to mind) no matter who rules it but the US will be making a large mistake if it backs a repressive regime vs the will of the people.

The big question remains unanswered. If Mubarek falls what replaces him? If it is another strong man then we are right back where we were waiting to see what bribe he wants to be friends and awaiting the next coup for his removal. That is actually the easy scenario.

If Egypt becomes an Islamic state than all bets are off and we can expect a new and exciting conventional war with Israel before the end of the decade.

The really interesting test is if he is removed by a popular revolt and an actual republic is created. How will a democratic Egypt act?

Will it open the border to Gaza? Will it keep the peace with Israel? With it cozy up to Iran? With it with information not controlled by the media find out the realities of Egyptian defeats at the hands of Israel and demand revenge? How will the Christians be treated? Will it be a place of sanctuary for jihadists?

It has been an axiom that democracies do not go to war with each other, but the Arab public has convinced itself that Israel is the center of all evil in the world. Arabs have been fed a steady stream of anti-Jewish propaganda and it would not it would not be a shock for a democratically elected Egypt to decide to “avenge the wrongs” they believe have been done against them and their brother Arabs. Remember the generation that was crushed by Israel in 72 is in their 60’s. Their grandchildren have been told stories of Egypt’s great victories. They do not know or understand what they would actually be getting into and likely wouldn’t believe us if we warned them.

That is the elephant in the room. Will an Egyptian democracy decide to wage a popular war against Israel and ignite the entire Middle East? Will they decide that the balance of power has changed enough for them to win? More importantly will Israel decide that Egypt is planning on doing such a thing and 1967 them to keep it from happening or even worse, will they with Iran about to go nuclear, Lebanon now under Hezbollah control and an unfriendly Egypt to the north finally decide that the Nuclear option’s time has now come?

This more than anything else is the big question. It is also why stopping Iran was so important. if Iran was neutralized and their nukes stopped then Israel would not have to fear an Egyptian attack as they could count on their traditional forces to crush them if they tried anything and an Egypt seeing a neutralized Iran would be less inclined to follow their example.

I hope and pray that this works out right in the end but I’m very afraid that our decision to play “kick the can” with Iranian nukes to avoid a small conflict may result in a larger, more deadly and more catastrophic war than we can dreamt of.

The media tells us who they fear

Posted: January 12, 2011 by datechguy in culture, media
Tags: , , , , ,

One of Rush Limbaugh’s favorite lines about the media and the democrats is they will tell you who they fear by their reactions.

One of the reason’s why the media has no problem “calling out” the Tea Party without evidence and why they have no problem going after the Catholic Church is not only do they disagree with their positions, but they understand and no they actually have no physical reason to fear them.

At No Paesran via Glenn we see the difference between reporting on people you fear vs people you don’t. First the shooting in Arizona and the Conservatives in Le Monde:

The shooting in which a Democrat was seriously wounded in Arizona has appalled the American Left, which denounces the “poisoned rhetoric” of the ultraconservatives…

He continues illustrating the comparative nonsense within the paper itself and their willingness to post blames, Yet not two weeks after the attack in Alexandra against Coptic Christians that was international news (prompting a rare positive reaction) we have this story out of Egypt:

An off-duty policeman has opened fire on a train in Egypt, killing a Christian man, but it is unclear whether the attack was sectarian.

At least another five people were reported to have been injured in the shooting on a train between Assiut and Cairo.

Officials said at least four of those hurt were Coptic Christians.

That’s just the fact but note how the story ends:

The BBC’s Jon Leyne reports from Cairo that it is difficult to see how the gunmen would have known he could target Christians by boarding the train.

Here you have the media making it a point to say it’s hard to see a direct religious connection the lack of evidence to make a connection to radical Islam vs the Coptic.

Although he approves of that last statement No Paesran’s head spins:

It is unclear whether the attack was sectarian! We learn that “Officials said at least four of those hurt [there were five wounded altogether] were Coptic Christians” and we learn that “Witnesses said hundreds of Christians later clashed with police outside the hospital where the wounded were taken” and we are reminded that “Tensions between Muslims and Christians in Egypt have been high following a bomb attack on a Coptic church in Alexandria at the new year that killed 23 people.” But! It is unclear whether the attack was sectarian!

All of this speaks volumes. I think it’s not just bias, I think it is the knowledge that if the BBC suggests islamic violence they may have to deal with repercussions personally.

Restraint is easy when your skin is at stake.

Just a peaceful batch of folks

Posted: December 28, 2010 by datechguy in war
Tags: , , , ,

Just remember abandoning Gaza was supposed to make things peaceful

Egyptian security forces uncovered a munitions stockpile, including anti-aircraft missiles, destined for Gaza, the Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported on Tuesday.

According to the report, the weapons stockpile was found in an abandoned warehouse in the middle of the desert in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula.

It’s my opinion that if all the Jews in Israel went to the other side of the world the arabs would find an excuse to try to kill them.

An interesting parallel

Posted: June 17, 2010 by datechguy in catholic, opinion/news
Tags: , , , , , ,

Although I cast doubt upon the veracity of Ahmed Aboul Gheit claim concerning the president. I see an interesting parallel between the tactics.

In Egypt we have this story via Pajamas Media:

The head of the Coptic Church in Egypt has rejected a court ruling that orders the church to allow divorced Copts to remarry in the church emphasis mine. In a press conference held on Tuesday June 8, Pope Shenouda [III], reading from the statement issued by the Holy Synod’s 91 Bishops, including himself, said: “The Coptic Church respects the law, but does not accept rulings which are against the Bible and against its religious freedom which is guaranteed by the Constitution.”

Mind you divorce has always been legal, this rules order the church to accept divorce in its doctrine. As PJ Media points out concerning the Coptic Pope :

he is not enforcing a totalitarian law that Copts must accept; he is simply saying that, in accordance to the Bible (e.g., Matt 5:32), and except in certain justifiable circumstances (e.g., adultery), Copts cannot remarry in the church: “Let whoever wants to remarry to do it away from us. There are many ways and churches to marry in. Whoever wants to remain within the church has to abide by its laws.”

If this still sounds a tad “non-pluralistic,” know that at least Copts have a way out: quit the church. No such way out for Muslims: Sharia law — Egypt’s “primal source of legislation” — mandates death for Muslims who wish to quit Islam.

The Coptic pope is not taking this laying down:

Pope Shenouda further threatened to defrock any priest who allows a divorced Christian to remarry, except in cases where the divorce was on the grounds of adultery. Those that have remarried after divorce will not be allowed in Church.

On the heels of regular persecution of Coptics in Egypt this ruling seems a thinly veiled attempt to divide the strongest Christian church in the area.

Meanwhile in the US we see divide and conquer in another context

The first point to understand is that Obama knows about the debate Catholics are having over him.

That’s why he usually talks only to Catholics who share his agenda. He has been careful to ensure that the terms of his debate with Catholics have always been on his terms. He sends CHA a video and gives Sr. Keehan a pen because he knows that these individuals chose to follow him instead of the bishops. So he makes a place at his table for them and rewards what he sees as their loyalty.

The Bishops however are very clear on what is what.

In April, three bishops of the USCCB ad hoc Health Care Concerns Committee, Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Kevin Vann of Fort Worth and Thomas J. Paprocki of Springfield, also met with Sr. Keehan to try to make her understand the bishop’s concerns and thus bring CHA back in line with Church teachings, however the meeting concluded with “the same frustrating results.”

The president of the USCCB reiterated the bishop’s fundamental opposition to the health care reform. “The bill which was passed is fundamentally flawed. The Executive Order is meaningless. Sr. Carol is mistaken in thinking that this is pro-life legislation,” Cardinal George emphatically said.

The cardinal also expressed disappointment with CHA “and other co-called Catholic groups” because, “in the end, they have weakened the moral voice of the bishops in the U.S.”

In that regard, Cardinal George highlighted that the USCCB and CHA’s positions on Obama’s health care are not just “two equally valid conclusions inspired in the same Catholic teaching,” and reiterated that what the bishops said on May 21 in their statement “Setting the record Straight” is and will remain the official position of the USCCB on the contentious issue.

The president knows and understands this. It is not possible for a faithful Catholic to support abortion in this manor, thus the attempt to divide the church is what this president and the pseudo catholic organizations. The American Papist again:

I have yet to hear a Catholic who supports the Obama agenda say, “I like Obama’s agenda, but of course I don’t believe what he thinks about or how he acts towards the Church.” It seems that the Catholics who support Obama’s agenda, or the individuals who criticize Catholics for not supporting his agenda, very often couch their support for him in political, not religious terms. But Obama has made religious claims, and overstepped religious boundaries, in pursuit of his political goals. In the ensuing mix-up, there can be no complaint that Catholics who oppose Obama are confusing politics with religion, for when Obama places himself against the authority of the bishops, he has stepped into the Catholic scene.

To provide a couple brief parallel (and purely hypothetical) examples, what if Obama sent a message to a group of orthodox jews who violate kosher laws and praised them for supporting his domestic initiative of promoting American pork consumption?

To put it simply the president understands that a strong and faithful American Catholic Church is going to be a problem for him (as does the media) and his agenda and any attempt to divide or weaken it is in his political interest.

Older Entries
Newer Entries