The ongoing turmoil in Egypt is in its sixth day with no obvious end in sight and it is far too early to know the outcome. Perhaps even informed speculation is premature. But speculate we do for many reasons. Egypt is a major American ally and has been for several years, at least back to the Carter presidency.( More on the Carter connection a bit later.) Egypt is the most populous and probably most influential Arab country with a very large army and air force and is a very close neighbor of Israel. And so we wonder about many things. How did this uprising or revolution begin? Was there a trigger event? What ( not if) outside influences are involved? Vice-president Biden’s comments to the contrary, Mubarak seems unlikely to survive. If he goes, then what or who? Who do we favor, the government or those opposing the government?
The UK Daily Telegraph has an article today stating that we have backed Egyptian dissidents who have worked on regime change for at least three years, ostensibly trying to bring about a democratic government. Of course in its 6,000 year history Egypt has never had such a government and is unlikely to have one any time soon.
Much of the above referenced speculation is drawing parallels between this uprising and the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979. The result of course was an Iran with which we still have issues. Some are calling this a Carter moment for Obama, i.e. Carter”lost” Iran and Obama could be well on his way to “losing” Egypt.
Meanwhile the turmoil, including rioting, looting, organized prison breaks etc continues. And at least three countries, Israel, Turkey and the United States have begun evacuating their citizens with others preparing to do likewise.
The turmoil will eventually end and answers to most if not all of our questions will come. But what kind of outcome will that be?
- “Obama to Egypt’s Coptic Christians: “If I were in your shoes right now Iâ€™d be…” “LEAVING! What a GOOD idea!”" and related posts (directorblue.blogspot.com)
- Egypt According to Sharon (narmer.wordpress.com)
Several days ago, I wrote about Europe and Great Britain in particular vis-a-vis Islam and terrorism and some of its implications. At the time I was attempting to read Londonistan by Melanie Phillips. I have finally managed to complete that self-assigned task. I might add that the fault is not that of the author but rather my unfamiliarity with her style and the complexity of the subject matter.
Moving forward, my intent is not to review the book but rather make reference to some things that intrigued me and speculate about what these things might or might not mean. As always dissent/disagreement is welcome. My comments do not follow the book from beginning to end since some areas were more pertinent for me than others. The author has an excellent notes section if one desires to trace her source material and pursue things further.
There are many references to people in the book with the majority of those names probably being Arabic. I won’t refer much to those individuals. Upfront i will assert that neither the author nor this writer are anti- Muslim ‘ She does however, make use of the term Islamaphobia which also appears in the American media. It refers of course to those who harbor an irrational view of the Islamic faith. An accusation of such is used at times to stifle even legitimate criticism of Islam. ( That didn’t work so well for Salmon Rushdie did it? ) She makes the point that adherents of the Muslim faith can often be sensitive to criticism( as are Christians) and use that to justify or explain away certain actions. Her starting point, the London bombings of 2005 was such a thing. Muslim leaders condemned the attacks but added that since the bombers were un-Islamic ( native Brits) they could not have been real Muslims. And this next that they added which is a relatively prominent reoccurring theme, is a concept she calls moral inversion. In general Muslims regard Western values as an assault on their principles so they present their own aggression as legitimate self- defense. Or, a country’s support of Israel or the Iraq war is ample cause for some sort of attack. Current example is related to the furor over the New york mosque/cultural center. The chairman of those efforts Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was interviewed by CBS just after 9/11. He opined that the United States did not deserve what happened but that its policies ” were an accessory to the crime.”
So what were the policies to which he referred? If you say support for Israel go the head of the class. That attitude in Britain, she writes, is even more prevalent. In Britain the prevailing wisdom regarding the Middle East is that of a territorial dispute. Before May 14, 1948 all was well between Arab and Jew and would be again if Israel acceded to legitimate Palestinian demands. The problem, that is not factual. This cannot be totally addressed here but factor in this one truth . Palestinians could have had a separate state in 1936, 1948 or 2000. Also, many Arab writers and leaders have often spoken of the inherently evil Jew out to conquer the world and they are demonized as the source of all evil in the Middle East. Let me hasten to add that Israel is not always right in its actions/methods but neither are they behind every conflict on earth as Palestinian Authority imam Ibrahim Mudayris said in 2005.
But let me continue. Let me refer to some of her conclusions but encourage the reader to interpret them on their own. Britain is a hub of Islamic jihad and has been.In Britain there continues the long-standing policy of appeasing terrorism which has now been combined with the prevailing doctrine of multiculturalism and ” victim culture.” She asserts that Britain is at a crossroads and could ease further down the road of appeasement. So the country that is the global leader of English speaking culture no longer champions those values. ( Sound a little like American education?)
She wonders if her native country will reverse its sleepwalk towards “cultural oblivion ” or sink further into disarray and drag the West down with it. Serious things to consider.
- What Obama Should Have Said About Mosque [Dispatches from the Culture Wars] (scienceblogs.com)
- CNN and Time Promote Accusation That ‘Bigotry’ is Driving Mosque Debate (newsbusters.org)
- Op-Ed: The words behind the man behind the mosque (jta.org)
This is a subject that I have been pondering for quite awhile and is probably just an initial effort at expressing some opinions. To me the subject is at once complicated, disturbing and perhaps a view of our ( United States ) future.
I am a great fan of political novels, especially those set in our era. Those that depict events similar to those that are occurring and make reference to actual people and places in the course of their books. I have referred before to Daniel Silva whom I thoroughly enjoy and I have just finished a book by Michael Walsh, Hostile Intent, that addresses some similar issues but from a quite different perspective. Factored in to my post is a challenging nonfiction book that I have just begun to read. It is by British author Melanie Phillips and it its premise dovetails nicely with my fictional reading.
These slightly disparate works all have one word common to them that struck me quite forcefully. That word is Londonistan, which is the title of Ms Phillips book. Walsh mentions and I am fairly certain that Silva does also. Both fictional writers speak heavily of the concept as well.
What is the concept of which they speak? Ms Phillips says it best in the intro to her book. She begins her intro with the London subway suicide bombings of July 7. 2005 and its implications . She asserts that it reveals London as the epicenter ( good Joel Rosenberg word) of Islamic militancy. She uses the word ” Londonistan” which is a mocking play of the names of London and state sponsors of terrorism such as Afghanistan. You can think of others. She added this chilling detail that one could argue that al-Qaeda actually began in London in the 1980s and 90s. She continues to talk about Britain in essence turning on itself and attacking its own historical values.
And this next may be the most troubling. There is underway an attempt to establish a separate Muslim identity in the country. This is in a country approximately 5% Muslim . So there is a minority attempting and succeeding in many ways to impose its values on the host country. A tiny but illustrative example is that piggy banks are banned from British banks lest Muslims be offended. Funny, maybe, but not ha-ha funny by any means. British Muslims actually insist they are under Western attack and blame any wrongdoing by Muslims on others. One more thought before part #1 closes.
British liberals fear being labeled racist or Islamophobic so Muslim extremism goes somewhat unchecked and criticism is against the so-called bigot. The London train bombings were, by this logic, caused by American , Israeli or British policies.
My intent is to refer to Ms Phillips book again in part #2 as well as some fictional references from Walsh and perhaps Silva. As I alluded, her book is a difficult read for me but I hope to plow through a bit further.
A friend of mine emailed me the following story. It sounds plausible and she is a quite reliable source. Whether the actual event occurred or not is not germane to the truth lurking in the story. So read and laugh a bit but take note of what is being said.
An ingenious example of speech and politics occurred recently in the U N General Assembly which made the world community smile ( probably not all of it though) . An Israeli representative began: ” Before beginning my talk I want to tell you something about Moses. When he struck the rock and it brought forth water ( Old Testament book of Exodus, Chapter 17, verse 6) he thought, ” What a good opportunity to have a bath.” He removed his clothes, put them aside on the rock and entered the water. When he got out and wanted to dress, his clothes had vanished. A Palestinian has stolen them.”
The Palestinian representative to the U N jumped up furiously and shouted, ” What are you talking about? The Palestinians weren’t there then.”
The Israeli diplomat smiled and said,” And now that we have made that clear, I will begin my speech.”
This is an unusual thing for me but I thought the subject worthwhile and that it was read in its entirety by the original author. By clicking on the above link, you will be taken to an opinion piece by Jose Maria Aznar, prime minister of Spain from 1996-2004. The article appears on the website of aish.com the world’s largest Jewish content website. I don’t necessarily endorse all that Mr Aznar has to say, but his article is well worth a read.
The President hosted a nuclear summit last week in Washington last week. Not to be outdone, another country on the other side of the world, hosted one just a couple of days ago. This event was spearheaded by that noted peace- loving country of Iran. Can you imagine having something called a nuclear disarmament conference in Tehran? It would almost be amusing if it were not true.
And to make things even more interesting, 3 Arab leaders expressed their support for Iranian nuclear rights. Now that’s a new one on me, the concept of nuclear rights. The Syrian Foreign Minister, Walid Muallem, is quoted as saying that ” We support Iran’s pursuit of peaceful nuclear technology.”
Now, just for a minute think why Iran wants or needs nuclear technoogy. Do they intend to use it to generate electricity? When you are sitting on as much oil as they are, why on earth would you do that? Wonder what other purpose they might have in mind for their nuclear knowledge? Weaponry, surely not, must be missing something here, I guess.
Well let us hear from 2 other Arab leaders who were at the summit and no Israel wasn’t at this meeting other. First we hear from Lebanon’s Foreign Minister, Ali al-Shami who said that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful and they are certainly not violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Our thirdArab spokesman’s comment should really get our attention. This is true partly to what he said and partly due to where he is from. He is Iraqi, yes Iraqi, Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. Our Iraqi friend said that “we reject any threat against Iran and insist on Iran’s right( there is that word, right, again) to use peaceful nuclear energy.” Reckon he cleared those comments with Obama?
The other thing on which these three agreed may very well the biggest news from the conference. They all agreed that Israel must dismantle its nuclear weapons and allow its nuclear facilities to undergo IAEA inspection. You might say that Israel has no intention of dismantling anything based on an Arab nuclear summit. And you would be correct. What if these guys are just stalking horses, so to speak, for someone else and the comment are just the ground work for stronger demands by more prominent nations?
Joel Rosenberg described just such an event in his 2005 work of fiction, The Ezekiel Option. In that book, it was, guess who, Russia, who made a dramatic call for Israel’s nuclear disarmament at a U N session. In the book it was quite well received by virtually everyone. Just wondering.
A 47 nation nuclear summit was just concluded in Washington. It was notable in a number of ways. Those who weren’t there, Israel and Britain among others, the minimal opportunity for the media to ask questions, the massive security that wa was in place; just to name a few. One might say that any effort to reduce nuclear weapons or nuclear tensions is always a good thing. Presidents all the way back to Eisenhower have made this a goal. What was accomplished at this latest session may depend on to whom one pays heed.
Example: reporters Lynn Berry and Betty Nguyen both used the term” complete success.” Whatever it was or wasn’t, it was not complete. Check out some of what Dana Milbank at the Washington Post had to say. By the way, it would accurate to call him a voice in the wilderness.
Just a portion of what Milbank wrote:
World leaders “entered a capital(ours) that had become a military encampment with camo-wearing military police in Humvees and enough Army vehicles to make it look like a May Day parade.” Question, what country does military style May Day parades?
There is more. This is quite interesting when you juxtapose it with another Obama quote. Milbank again. “In the middle of it all was Obama-occupant of an office once informally known as “leader of the free world.” Ouch!!
Now the Obama quote. Sad to say, this statement may be the most troubling thing that I have heard the President say. I offer it without comment, at least for the moment.
” Whether we like it or not, we remain a military superpower.”
If you’re President Barack Obama, things are looking rather good these days. That is, other than the really low approval ratings ( which would have been great media fodder if it were George Bush, wait a minute, it was media fodder), high unemployment numbers, a growing budget deficit, etc.
Your health care bill is now the law of the land. Although I would not express it the way blue-collar Joe said, it is a big f…ing deal in ways that we as yet do not know.You have just negotiated an arms reduction deal with the Russians and you are showing Netanyahu and Israel who’s the boss.
As a result we seem to be seeing the return of Obama the perpetual campaigner. And, the Democrat base has got to loving it. He ‘s in the face of the Republicans verbally and otherwise. Try the recess appointments of 15 individuals featuring Craig Becker as an example. And today, Obama will sign the health care fixes bill. One tiny little jewel in that bill will decimate the private student lending business by in essence, federalizing the student lending program.
Oh and the Democrats, via Henry Waxman, are sending a message to those companies warning of higher health care costs. Hearings begin April 21. The elections, in case you have forgotten, are in November.
Had to step away from the health care fiasco for a bit although I guess this may end up being related somehow or the other. One of my fellow bloggers did a great job raising issues and points of concern of which you may be unaware. So check out warrantonegirl for some good info.
Back to our regularly scheduled blog. For the uninitiated, the title refers to cemeteries. I had not heard the term until a co-worker identified where he lived as being across the street from the boneyard. Rather apt term, come to think of it. I actually grew up just a block or two from our local boneyard in Eden, nee Leaksville, NC. The name is Lawson Cemetery, the name of the street on which I lived.
I know very little about the place other than it has always been there( since 1843 I learned) and it was the final earthly resting place for both of my parents. I was always intrigued by the place as a child with all the different tombstones and grave markers and how old I thought they were, little did I know how true that was.
So why boneyards? I suppose with the onset of spring and the approach of Easter I have ben thinking about such issues. I typically read and re-read the Gospel narratives (Matthew,Mark,Luke and John) about Passion Week that of course culminates in Jesus resurrection. There will be a time a bit later for more about that subject.
But, strictly from a boneyard aspect, I remember teaching a high school age Sunday School class many years ago on the above topic and discovering that in New Orleans and in Israel ( not sure where else) that people had to be buried above ground due to those areas being largely below sea level. Not sure if the class was as fascinated with that trivia as was I .
I have noticed since my arrival in the northeastern corridor of our state that not all boneyards are like that of my childhood. There is a plethora of small, family plots in some of the most unlikely places. Usually there are just a handful of graves, often barely marked and separated from a busy highway by virtually no barrier at all. But, ahh the history that lies in these small plots, gradually but inexorably fading away.
…..wasn’t it supposed to be over and done by now? Something about December and deadlines and agreements and how Russia has smoothed it all over and wasn’t all the Arab world going to fall in love with us? You remember the speech in Egypt that was so great, do you not?
And just the other day, Defense Secretary Gates held out hope for the sanctions to work. And now Hilary has given an interview that kinda says Iran is not the real problem since they don’t have a bomb,yet.
Don’t I remember somebody using the phrase “axis of evil” and being roundly condemned for it. Why that cowboy diplomacy that makes the world hate us,how dare he!
And yet, today I read that Iranian President Ahmadinejad has told his atomic agency to significantly enrich the country’s stockpile of uranium. And German Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg referred to the farce being played out just like in the past. “The outstretched hand of the international community has not only been taken but pushed back.”
What did Herr Guttenberg mean do you think? We will agree with the UN plan maybe says Iran. If more sanctions were imposed it would a 4th round, if you’re counting, and neither Russia nor China seems all that excited about it.
I just feel that I have written all of this before and yet here we are again. Wonder what Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel think about it all? Are they watching closely?” Bet your sweet bippy” they are. In fact he is in Russia as we write on a “long-planned trip.” Wonder what they will discuss?
- Bible study
- Christian living
- Foreign Policy
- International politics
- Legal system
- Life and Death
- Local Politics
- State Politics