Tunisia and Egypt play dominoes?

[lord of flies]

I posted a link in this thread where the leader of Egyptian MB call for a Jihad against the US. Of course to you that's a good thing.

I just checked through this thread, and as far as I can tell, you didn't. Also, "jihad" doesn't mean violence.

Enoch posted a document which exactly explains the Islamist philosophy, which I quoted from, but I guess to you that's no proof either.

Ah, yes, you mean the quotes you took and radically reinterpreted? Like where you decided that the Muslim Brotherhood protecting Jews from AQ was them playing "good cop/bad cop"? Or where you believe that tactics make no difference in ideology? Nominally, social democrats and communists have the same end goals and differ only in tactics (reform versus revolution), yet I think even a political buffoon like yourself would agree that they are for all practical purposes very, very different.

Interesting that LoF is weighing in on the MB's side.

Interesting that LoF is weighing in on the side of truth. The Muslim Brotherhood is not some big bad evil monster. Edited February 3, 2011 by lord of flies

[Calax]

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/04/026000.php

 

The thing that I'm trying to get at is it's a translation. Translations are tricky and can be manipulate based on what was said. Also, having read the guys previous links you've provided, I gotta say, he tends to be overly reactionary and often finds connections that aren't actually there.

 

I am surprised that on the internet you posted a link to something you didn't check out.

 

Also on the monday episode of Colbert, they had the director of multicultural studies from georgetown say the exact opposite of what GLORIA decided to say

 

http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes...-dr--paul-offit (it's about mid episode).

 

I mentioned it before but nobody seemed to have paid attention.

Edited February 3, 2011 by Calax

[Zoraptor]

Turkey got the AK party and Attaturk's secular dream is dead.

[citation needed]

<insert links on the AKP's struggle against the judiciary and their constitutional reform work>

 

There is an ongoing effort on the part of the AKP to dismantle if not secularism, at least Kemalism, as embodied in Turkey's constitution. This is not an either-or between a return to a less secular Turkey and simply greater powers for the executive, it's actually both.

Most of their reforms are aimed not at turning Turkey into an Islamic Republic though, but at reducing the power and influence of the army, with some cosmetic sops to their voter base which is largely conservative. IIRC reducing the power of the armed forces was actually one of the things Europe wanted from them as a condition for EU membership.

 

[not from same post as above]Not bad in theory, but in reality what you have is autocratic regimes in which, in true Ottoman tradition, the council of Islamic doctors have in practice lost any actual influence over the rulers, be it a king or the "guardians of the revolution". In practice, these supposedly advisory bodies bend over to authority.

While I'd agree that a lot of Islamic authorities have been pathetic supine lickspittles to a succession of woeful Arab leaders over the past sixty years the record of Christian denominations has hardly been exemplary over the same time period. That religious authorities tend to bend to the will of authoritarian regimes is hardly surprising.

 

I do find it interesting that much of the recent religious resistance to central government authoritarianism has come from Buddhists in Burma and Tibet (albeit Tibet was as much ethnic as religious resistance).

[Walsingham]

I just think it's interesting that it seems people will put up with lmost anything until they get hungry, or fuel prices go above a certain point.

[Orogun01]

I just think it's interesting that it seems people will put up with lmost anything until they get hungry, or fuel prices go above a certain point.

Never heard of the Milgram experiment? People usually go to extreme lengths before they defy authority.

[Calax]

Milgrim is funny in a sad way with some of hte reactions.

[Wrath of Dagon]

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/04/026000.php

 

The thing that I'm trying to get at is it's a translation. Translations are tricky and can be manipulate based on what was said. Also, having read the guys previous links you've provided, I gotta say, he tends to be overly reactionary and often finds connections that aren't actually there.

So you're such an expert that you know that those connections aren't there? If you don't trust his translation, run it through Google translate, I assume it can handle Arabic. As far as not checking him out, I'm familiar with his work, I know he doesn't have the credibility of having been on the Colbert report, but we'll just have to live with that.

[Calax]

I'm gonna trust an observer from Georgetown University who's focus is Islamic studies over somebody who is so highly reactionary and conservative think tank.

 

Being on the Report doesn't necessairly bring legitamacy, but it was where I saw the guy, and an easily available video source that anyone could watch.

[Wrath of Dagon]

You don't have to trust him, translate the Arabic using Google translate (it does handle it) and see for youself, if you find it was wrong we can discuss that. I could cite other terrorism experts, like Stephen Emerson and Andrew C McCarthy, but of course you won't accept the views of anyone who's not on the left, so we're at an impasse there.

 

Edit: Just watched your so-called expert, he claims MB reformed itself in the 60's, when in fact they assassinated Sadat in 1981 and Zawahiri didn't break with them until much later.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Wrath of Dagon

[lord of flies]

I just think it's interesting that it seems people will put up with lmost anything until they get hungry, or fuel prices go above a certain point.

Never heard of the Milgram experiment? People usually go to extreme lengths before they defy authority.

On the other hand, when revolutions do come, we see a huge upsurge of what I'd have to call "revolutionary spirit," embodied in the form of voluntarism and a united people. You can see this in the ongoing conditions of Egypt, with Christian anti-government protesters protecting the Muslims while they pray, or earlier when people formed a human chain around the national museum to protect it.

[Orogun01]

I just think it's interesting that it seems people will put up with lmost anything until they get hungry, or fuel prices go above a certain point.

Never heard of the Milgram experiment? People usually go to extreme lengths before they defy authority.

On the other hand, when revolutions do come, we see a huge upsurge of what I'd have to call "revolutionary spirit," embodied in the form of voluntarism and a united people. You can see this in the ongoing conditions of Egypt, with Christian anti-government protesters protecting the Muslims while they pray, or earlier when people formed a human chain around the national museum to protect it.

Of course there is a lot "revolutionary spirit", this is the moment when the dictators seduce us, tease us and treat us to dinner before they **** us in the ass.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Orogun01

[lord of flies]

Of course there is a lot "revolutionary spirit", this is the moment when the dictators seduce us, tease us and treat us to dinner before they **** us in the ass.

As long as they buy me dinner first. ~.0 Edited February 4, 2011 by lord of flies

[Calax]

You don't have to trust him, translate the Arabic using Google translate (it does handle it) and see for youself, if you find it was wrong we can discuss that. I could cite other terrorism experts, like Stephen Emerson and Andrew C McCarthy, but of course you won't accept the views of anyone who's not on the left, so we're at an impasse there.

 

Edit: Just watched your so-called expert, he claims MB reformed itself in the 60's, when in fact they assassinated Sadat in 1981 and Zawahiri didn't break with them until much later.

No, I just won't accept any views of somebody who is pointedly anti-islam.

[213374U]

You don't have to trust him, translate the Arabic using Google translate (it does handle it) and see for youself, if you find it was wrong we can discuss that. I could cite other terrorism experts, like Stephen Emerson and Andrew C McCarthy, but of course you won't accept the views of anyone who's not on the left, so we're at an impasse there.

 

Edit: Just watched your so-called expert, he claims MB reformed itself in the 60's, when in fact they assassinated Sadat in 1981 and Zawahiri didn't break with them until much later.

No, I just won't accept any views of somebody who is pointedly anti-islam.

Yes, this is called bigotry. No, I'm not talking about Barry Rubin.

[Wrath of Dagon]

You don't have to trust him, translate the Arabic using Google translate (it does handle it) and see for youself, if you find it was wrong we can discuss that. I could cite other terrorism experts, like Stephen Emerson and Andrew C McCarthy, but of course you won't accept the views of anyone who's not on the left, so we're at an impasse there.

 

Edit: Just watched your so-called expert, he claims MB reformed itself in the 60's, when in fact they assassinated Sadat in 1981 and Zawahiri didn't break with them until much later.

No, I just won't accept any views of somebody who is pointedly anti-islam.

None of the people I mentioned are anti-Islam so far as I know. They're all anti fundamentalist islamists, with good reason. Of course to a leftist there's no distinction, so forget it.

 

You have chosen to ignore all posts from: lord of flies.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2011 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

You don't have to trust him, translate the Arabic using Google translate (it does handle it) and see for youself, if you find it was wrong we can discuss that. I could cite other terrorism experts, like Stephen Emerson and Andrew C McCarthy, but of course you won't accept the views of anyone who's not on the left, so we're at an impasse there.

 

Edit: Just watched your so-called expert, he claims MB reformed itself in the 60's, when in fact they assassinated Sadat in 1981 and Zawahiri didn't break with them until much later.

No, I just won't accept any views of somebody who is pointedly anti-islam.

None of the people I mentioned are anti-Islam so far as I know. They're all anti fundamentalist islamists, with good reason. Of course to a leftist there's no distinction, so forget it.

Except that everything I read out of the place you cited has been attacking Islam, and anything related to Islam. If they say that they're peaceful, he'll say they're hiding their agenda and are actually OMGZTERRORIST!

 

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2011/0...-process-policy

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/1...and-middle-east

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/1...dges-demonizing

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/1...here-isnt-peace

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/1...-against-israel

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/0...d-peace-process

http://www.gloria-center.org/blog/2010/10/...-iran-apologist (Note the attack on the US Imam)

http://www.gloria-center.org/blog/2010/12/...i-tank-missiles (OMG ARMZ SALEZ GOING TO TERRORISTS AUTOMATICALLY!)

http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/1...bying-by-murder (Because somebody has some reading material around, they're automatically extreme... as are the people who disagree with the judgement)

 

 

Of course, to a "rightist" there is no real distinction between your Average muslim and a radical Islam because the "radical" groups are always hidden and thus anything that might remotely be connected to them is proof!

[Walsingham]

Bigoted people, by definition of the term bigotry, hold opinions that are prejudiced against certain groups. As such, their opinions are prejudiced on these subjects, their words are biased and unreliable. You wouldn't trust someone to give you an objective view of the person they're in love with, and you wouldn't trust a racist to give you an objective view on race relations in the United States. Indeed, it would be irrational to automatically accept these viewpoints, because it is known that they have been reached by an individual who is (more) irrational (than usual) on the subject. This isn't rocket science.

 

And I am curiously hesitant to accept the opinions on any subject of a person who is on record as having such counter-factual views on communist atrocities. Indeed who views extreme violence in pursuit of communist revolution as positively toothsome.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Except that everything I read out of the place you cited has been attacking Islam, and anything related to Islam. If they say that they're peaceful, he'll say they're hiding their agenda and are actually OMGZTERRORIST!

He's not attacking Islam or anything related to Islam, he's attacking people who happen to be Muslims, not because they're Muslims, but because of what they say and do. Since his specialization is Jihadist terrorists, it would be kind of hard to ignore anyone who happens to be a Muslim.

 

Edit: Give me a specific quote that you find objectionable.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

http://www.gloria-center.org/blog/2010/12/...i-tank-missiles (OMG ARMZ SALEZ GOING TO TERRORISTS AUTOMATICALLY!)

 

This entire article. His only leg is that Lebanon is purchasing anti-tank missiles and attack helicopters, something any state does, from france, and instantly makes the leap to "OMG the weapons are going to be moved into Palestine to support terrorists there" without any proof of this, and even kills his own argument noting that the missiles are french made, and the helicopters would be shut down faster than a nudist dance orgy on mormon church grounds.

[Wrath of Dagon]

@Calax That's the worst you can do? You didn't even understand the article. All he's saying is that Israel is concerned about the sale. Quite justifiably too, since Hezbollah just took over Lebanon. No where is there indication of any anti-Muslim feeling on his part, which I thought is what you were trying to prove.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

He doesn't just act "concerned". That sort of language and tone is usually found by those who are trying to fire up a population to take *cough* drastic *cough* measures against those the person/people in question. Particularly given his implication that they'll be smuggled into Israel to be used in terror attacks.

 

Also, He's concerned that a tiny country nearby is purchasing weapons systems, this happens all the time why should Lebanon be singled out?

 

Why doesn't he flip out when Israel purchases weapons systems from anyone? It's for the same reasons as Lebanon.

 

Anyway, how many people think that Egypt's population is going to oust the president before his "term" is up? Particularly given him sending his police force as "pro-Mubarak protesters".

[Zoraptor]

@Calax That's the worst you can do? You didn't even understand the article. All he's saying is that Israel is concerned about the sale. Quite justifiably too, since Hezbollah just took over Lebanon. No where is there indication of any anti-Muslim feeling on his part, which I thought is what you were trying to prove.

Hezbollah didn't take over Lebanon, its ethno-religious based constitution (which enshrines over representatioon of Christians and under representation of both major Muslim sects) makes it impossible for them to do so short of military coup which would restart the civil war. They simply got enough people to agree with them- primarily, iirc, General Aoun's Christians- to get 'their' US educated, Sunni, candidate into the Prime Ministership exactly (well, 'exactly') as would happen in any other democracy.

 

Israel would be right to 'worry' about Lebanon getting AT missiles anyway, and not just because of Hezbollah destroying tanks live on TV in 2006. If there's one thing nearly everyone in Lebanon can agree on, from their former buddies in the Phalange to itty bitty players like the Druze and Alawites it's that no-one likes Israel.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Zoraptor

[Pidesco]

How about we stop with the personal attacks and go back to reasoned discussion?

[Wrath of Dagon]

@Calax That's the worst you can do? You didn't even understand the article. All he's saying is that Israel is concerned about the sale. Quite justifiably too, since Hezbollah just took over Lebanon. No where is there indication of any anti-Muslim feeling on his part, which I thought is what you were trying to prove.

Hezbollah didn't take over Lebanon, its ethno-religious based constitution (which enshrines over representatioon of Christians and under representation of both major Muslim sects) makes it impossible for them to do so short of military coup which would restart the civil war. They simply got enough people to agree with them- primarily, iirc, General Aoun's Christians- to get 'their' US educated, Sunni, candidate into the Prime Ministership exactly (well, 'exactly') as would happen in any other democracy.

 

Israel would be right to 'worry' about Lebanon getting AT missiles anyway, and not just because of Hezbollah destroying tanks live on TV in 2006. If there's one thing nearly everyone in Lebanon can agree on, from their former buddies in the Phalange to itty bitty players like the Druze and Alawites it's that no-one likes Israel.

You totally misunderstand the situation. Hezbollah gets to say who's appointed prime minister, because they have all the guns. Aoun has been their and Syria's ally for a long time. It was actually the bitty Druze players who swung the parliament to Hezbollah because their leader, Jumblatt, doesn't want a bullet in his head. Jumblatt used to be very anti-Syrian, but people in that part of the world tend to be very sensitive to which way the wind is blowing. Their popular prime minister, Harriri, got assassinated by Hezbollah just like in any other democracy. It's because Hezbollah wants to disrupt the UN investigation of his assassination that they made his son's government fall. Also Lebanon isn't as hostile to Israel as you portray. That's all driven by Hezbollah, a creature of Iran, Lebanon wouldn't dream of fighting Israel if it wasn't for them.

[Calax]

Who says they dream of fighting Israel right now?