With Libya now moving to a Sharia-based system that will impose religious values on the population, Egypt is also rapidly moving toward an extreme Sharia based system. Indeed, Hesham al Ashry (the leader of the Salafists) announced this week that “I am the enemy of democracy.”
Businessman Naguib Sawiris now calls Egypt’s future “dim … bad.”
Al Ashry put the reality into perspective: “This is a big opportunity and it’s not going to go back. This was mentioned by the Prophet Mohammed. Peace be upon him. He said this was going to happen.” Thus, the freedom that led to the overthrow of Mubarak regime will now be extinguished to embrace a new form of oppression — just faith-based rather than tyrant-based repression.
One of the objections made to the intervention of the United States in Libya was that, in addition to the absence of any declaration from Congress, President Obama could bring bring about a more radical regime. Even at the time, Libyan rebels were known to have extremist elements, including some linked to Al Qaeda. Some of the same concerns were heard in our Egyptian policies. I am less critical of the Obama policy on Libya. Indeed, I thought the Administration struck the right tone — without military intervention. However, there is a general misconception that the “Arab Spring” necessarily means a triumph of democracy and human rights. Movements in both Libya and Egypt show the powerful pull of theocratic oppression. The denial of the separation of mosque and state (as well as religious freedom) undermines a host of other rights from free speech to free association. The Obama Administration undermined those rights further with its shocking support of a United Nation’s resolution that embraced the concept of blasphemy prosecutions.
With the move to Sharia law, Egypt is showing other signs of extremism. Sectarian violence, particularly against Christians, has increased with little intervention from the military.
The loss of Egypt to religious extremism would be extremely destabilizing for the regime. It will also raise a question of our continued massive support for the country. Even though we have cities and states breaking under economic pressures, we are still pouring billions in aid to both Israel and Egypt.
Bdaman,
I’ll smack the straw man out of your mouth too.
Prove how looking out for millions of individuals interests in seeking justice over the interests of the few means I don’t care about individuals.
You can’t, but it would sure be funny to watch you try.
Bron,
No, the proof that what you say isn’t a fantasy rests entirely with you. The root of the Wall Street problem can be directly traced to the repeal of Glass-Steagall and ever erosion of campaign finance laws by lobbyists to allow corporations to dictate public policy instead of a Congress that works for We the People. The problem isn’t government. The problem is government co-opted by industry. But that fact simply trashes your blind faith in free markets and the inherent good will of the business man. It’s not my fault you chose your religion poorly.
“You fail to see the hand of government in the failure of Wall St. because
1. you are a partisan socialist/marxist hack who believes government can solve all of the worlds problems and put a chicken in every pot and
2. you are too stupid to pour piss out of a boot.”
Not an argument. Simply more name calling using terms you don’t really understand. You can call me a Marxist all you like and it doesn’t make me one. You can call me a partisan (when I’m critical of all parties) and it still doesn’t make me partisan. You can create yet more straw men to try to insert into my arguments and that doesn’t make them true. It simply means 1) you are incapable of arguing in any kind of good faith and 2) you’re dumb enough to think that using easily discredited tactics over and over again is some kind of victory.
As to your assessment of my intelligence? Really. Don’t make me laugh, Mr. Doesn’t Know the Meanings of Words He Uses. You don’t like me. We all get it. Too bad for you I don’t care what the ignorant and the brainwashed think of me, let alone someone who is that paragon of ignorance, an Objectivist. Too bad for you too that I don’t respond to your animus with simply more hatred, but rather with ridicule and indifference.
****************
Bdaman,
Again, you want to place blame with those seeking justice rather than those who committed the crimes which people are protesting against. That’s backwards causation. By that “analysis”, the Indians following Gandhi were responsible for the conditions leading to the Indian revolution and not the British Raj for being occupiers.
Remember, a straw man argument requires that I misrepresent someone else’s argument in order to destroy it
Gene your so full of shit. I told you that I was speaking about everyday people. Gave you an example and then you want to say I’m talking about the staff of the banks. Your full of shit.
Bron why do you waste your time on someone who doesn’t care about the right of one individual but the greater good of many. Isn’t individual rights and freedoms important anymore.
Gene probably agrees with this guy too. Ends justifies the means. I can’t wait until it breaks out into full chaos so they can start playing clips of Obama and Pelosi backing the movement.
United Steelworkers international president Leo Gerard has a message just in case the Occupy movement fails. Gerard is urging union members to fill that gaping void with “more militancy.”
GERARD: You’re damn right Wall Street occupiers speak for us. They do in Pittsburgh, they do in Chicago, they do in Oakland, they do in San Francisco, they do all across the country. And I think what we need is, we need more militancy.
SCHULTZ: What does that mean, more militancy?
GERARD: I think we’ve got to start a resistance movement. If Wall Street occupation doesn’t get the message, I think we’ve got to start blocking bridges and doing that kind of stuff. This doesn’t have to be this way. The economy doesn’t have to be this way. It’s being put this way because the Wall Streeters are getting their way.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/2011/11/02/union-chief-leo-gerard-resistance-movement-needed-seize-bridges-banks-
Gene H:
“In light of the deregulation that led and was lobbied for by the industry leading up to this fiasco, your statement can only be categorized as fantasy.”
hardly fantasy. Go do your homework and look at how marvelous the regulatory hand of government is. Peel that onion and really look. Me telling you isnt going to make you a believer.
OOOh ICAAN.
I dont agree with everything the Austrian school has to say, Toodles.
You sound like a person on the edge of a mental breakdown, be careful.
Do you make this shit up as you go along?
You fail to see the hand of government in the failure of Wall St. because
1. you are a partisan socialist/marxist hack who believes government can solve all of the worlds problems and put a chicken in every pot and
2. you are too stupid to pour piss out of a boot.
The 2 usually go hand in hand.
Bron,
“attributing to me the mantle of venal apologist for corporate criminals is definitely ad hominem at the very least because it is not true.”
Oh, but it is true as evidenced by your continued statements against OWS.
“You want government intrusion in all aspects of our lives, there is no straw man in that statement.”
Prove it, Mr. Straw Man.
“And it certainly speaks to the issue of just how criminal Wall St. is in light of the fact that the Federal Reserve created artificially low interest rates and that the sectors involved in the bust are some of the most strictly regulated industries in our country.”
In light of the deregulation that led and was lobbied for by the industry leading up to this fiasco, your statement can only be categorized as fantasy.
“Funny how the least regulated, computers and the Internet didnt go bust isnt it? Even with the great uprising of innovation in the 1990′s and the many companies that started and went bankrupt or went on to create great wealth for people.”
Pitiful and simplistic analysis. Computers and the Internet are both heavily regulated and said regulation had nothing to with their growth. ICANN was created under contract with the U.S. Department of Commerce. Necessity and utility drove that growth. You’re simply regurgitating more of your religious mantra about “regulation bad/laissez-faire economics good”. You’re doing so because 1) you’re not very bright and fail to realize it was these kinds of policies that created the Wall St. Fiasco and 2) it’s your religious conviction that the un-scientific and increasingly discredited Austrian School of Economics view is right.
Funny how you want to talk about flailing when that’s exactly what you are doing.
Why not try to move the goal posts some more or create a diversion? See how that works out for you.
Gene H:
attributing to me the mantle of venal apologist for corporate criminals is definitely ad hominem at the very least because it is not true.
You want government intrusion in all aspects of our lives, there is no straw man in that statement. And it certainly speaks to the issue of just how criminal Wall St. is in light of the fact that the Federal Reserve created artificially low interest rates and that the sectors involved in the bust are some of the most strictly regulated industries in our country.
Funny how the least regulated, computers and the Internet didnt go bust isnt it? Even with the great uprising of innovation in the 1990’s and the many companies that started and went bankrupt or went on to create great wealth for people.
Flail some more McFlail.
Bron,
You have yet to say anything of substance when backed into a corner but reply with simple name calling, usually using words you don’t know the meaning of.
As to you being a partisan hack and apologist for corporate criminals?
You’re the one injecting party into your dismissal of those seeking to bring said corporate criminals to justice.
It’s not ad hominem when a description is accurate, Mr. Doesn’t Know the Meanings of the Words He Uses.
As to the “intrusion” remark made in an effort to move the goal post?
Now that is a straw man.
Gene H:
I went back and reread, you might be right. It could be ad hominem as well.
Since you say that people who are in support of Wall St. are venal apologists for corporate criminals. Which I am not.
But then you could look at it as a straw man argument as well, it would certainly be easy to argue against venal apologists for corporate criminals.
But I will say you are a venal, partisan, hack apologist for government intrusion into our lives. That is not a straw man or ad hominem that is the naked truth.
Bron,
Prove how what I said was a straw man or continue to be an ignoramus.
I predict the later.
Bdaman:
I found Buddha is Laughing, he is up in New York at the OWS. Here is a clip of him being interviewed. He makes as much sense in person as he did when he posted here. And Gene H sounds a lot like this guy as well.
Gene H:
Go read about Mussolini, numb nut. Fascism is nothing more than national socialism. Do your homework McFlail.
I think you project too much.
And by the way, I actually do know what modeling is, I do it every day in my work. Except I model actual, specific entities which get constructed so I have to be a bit more diligent in my assumptions than a theoretical mathematician playing with squirrels and acorns.
you are such a tool.
Bron,
Explain, in detail, how looking out for the good of millions of individuals in their interests in seeing the criminals that harmed them are brought to justice over the good a few hundred individuals who might work directly for said criminals means I care less about individuals as a whole is a straw man argument.
Remember, a straw man argument requires that I misrepresent someone else’s argument in order to destroy it when all I’ve done is destroy the lame arguments of apologists for Wall Street criminals by pointing out that the greater number of individuals are served by seeking their being brought to justice even if their being brought to justice may impact a few jobs compared to the millions of jobs said criminals ruined in their unfettered greed.
Show your work.
Because by what you call logic?
We shouldn’t arrest wealthy criminals because it would put their maids and gardeners out of a job.
Or you could simply admit that you don’t know what a straw man actually is any more than you understand mathematical modeling or Fascism or any of the other myriad topics upon which you regularly display your general ignorance. In short, you could admit that you really don’t know what in Hell you are talking about. Not that this is necessary. That fact is usually readily discernible and when it isn’t, it usually doesn’t require much work to point it out.
Gene H:
definitely straw man. you are the king of straw men.
Not a straw man, but rather simple math that apparently is beyond your grasp, Bron.
As far as you being an intellectual threat? No, really, you aren’t in the slightest. I refute your nonsense so that others won’t get the false idea that you know what you’re talking about on any given subject when you usually don’t have a clue.
Howington old Chap:
you sure have spent a lot of time and energy over the last couple of years refuting some one who is not an intellectual threat.
Gene H:
straw man again, do you have a farm which grows hay?
You are smart enough to use a few lawyer tricks to say absolutely nothing at all while appearing brilliant to the unwashed masses of your fellow travelers.
But other than that, not so much.
put a couple of thousand people in jail, kill a million people, put a couple of hundred people out of work. It is the greater good that is important, the individual is of no consequence when the collective says so.
Mao Tse Howington, yeah that has a nice ring to it.
“Come on hot shot is that all you got? I may be venal but at least I am not a candy ass. Hey there sweetums, cats pissing in your oaties?”
Candy ass? What I am is I’m smart enough to know that in looking out for the interests millions of individuals over the interests of a few hundred or a couple of thousand individuals, I’m doing more good for more individuals than you are by being a venal apologist for corporate criminals.
1,000,000 > 2,000
As an aside, if you think you represent a threat to anyone let alone a threat intellectually, Bron?
You’d be sorrily mistaken.
A state you should be quite used to by now.
Don’t you have some boots you need to be licking somewhere?
City Cuts Power To Occupy Baltimore Site
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2011/11/02/city-cuts-power-to-occupy-baltimore-site/