An Egyptian court this week sentenced three al-Jazeera journalists to long jail terms despite international outcry over the attack on the freedom of the press. To further guarantee that nobody would mistake this for a real court, the judge further accused them of being guided by the devil in their work as reporters. Australian journalist Peter Greste, Egyptian-Canadian Mohamed Fadel Fahmy and Egyptian producer Baher Mohamed were convicted in June of aiding the Muslim Brotherhood by covering the “civil war” in Egypt. The court gave Greste and Fahmy seven-year terms and Mohamed a 10-year term. It also tried eleven defendants in absentia, including one Dutch and two British journalists. They were given 10-year sentences.
The Court insisted that the reporters “took advantage of the noble profession of journalism … and turned it from a profession aimed at looking for the truth to a profession aimed at falsifying the truth.” It then added that “The devil guided them to use journalism and direct it toward activities against this nation.” That “devil” work was reporting on the crackdown on the supporters of Islamist president Mohamed Morsi.
Source: Yahoo
Well, Paul, those guys you think of basically evil are doing evil things all right, but if you follow them all the way down the road you will see the points where they deliberately make mistakes to get themselves caught and punished or killed. Occasionally it carries over more than one lifetime, so you don’t always see the full picture. But you can look at the life of the criminal and see them leave unnecessary clues to help the average not so bright cop trip them up.
tl – I am thinking more of people like Mao or Stalin or your upscale serial killer.
Hmmmmmmm…..Is Egypt the only place in the world where we can be safe from the Muslim Brotherhood?
An MSNBC Journalist solves the problem. Listen to Obama’s speech played backwards. Roll it.
Someone said it is a shame that radical Islam is taking hold in Egypt, but this current regime, obviously radical with such treatment of international journalist is radically against the Muslim Brotherhood, considered by some as a radical Islam group in favor of Sharia Law I believe. So you have to denounce radical where you see it, Islamic or not. That’s where understanding suppression comes in. The Illuminati’s ‘Arab Spring’ is just a bunch of botched up regime changes and possibly an intended increasing of conflict in the Middle East. If America sat on its hands for the next ten years & kept out of everything international we might see a slight improvement, but we know that is not going to happen.
SierraRose, this is a high profile case going on for many months, covered by PRI, Democracy Now, Fox News and all. I do not think there is any doubt that these guys were just being good journalists and reporting factually on Egyptian news, including the Moslem Brotherhood who were duly ellected by the people in Egypt. While its not a good idea to elect a party based on religion, the world should have been more appalled than it was on this military coup. The good news is that they are showing their true colors by persecuting international journalists doing a good job with Al Jazeera, these days a better source of news than even the BBC.
No one is pure evil as man is basically good. But, yeah, it sometimes looks that way, Vlad the Impaler being a classic example. People are suppressive of others because of a hidden fear of others, particularly of others more able than themselves. Too many have the reins of power right now, but they are not more than around two and a half percent of the population. They infect about 20% of the population who can also become dangerous, but that still leaves 80% willing to do the right thing every time & get along. Knowing this stuff could swing the pendulum and get more psychos out of high positions.
tl – it would be nice to think that people are basically good, but some are basically evil and some are pure evil.
This article seems a bit incomplete. I’d like to know what they were reporting. Were they reporting facts of making up things to support one side over the other? Were they giving accurate news coverage or biased and inaccurate coverage?
We have a way to go here but until Obama declares a national emergency and activates the National Defence Authorization Act, this shameful army rug Egyptian regime is far worse than what we have here right now on this topic.
About the only difference between kangaroo courts in the USA and in Egypt is that those in the USA hide some of their beliefs.
99guspuppet – the kangaroo courts in the US usually have an avenue of appeal.
Paul:
” Belief in evil is the concept you have to hold on to.”
****************
I don’t know many people who don’t believe in evil. I just think the enlightened ones don’t think it comes in the person of a red man with a pointy tail.
mespo – enlightened is a condescending term in this context. I have trouble with the pointy tail but I am a firm believer that evil exists and that some people are pure evil. Actually, remember that Lucifer (the angel of light) is the fallen angel. He/she/it should have wings and not tail. Although the devil with a tail reminds me of a very funny portion of a Blackadder show.
Dredd:
Didn’t see it in the filter.
Once again, is this a surprise? For many years Mubarak was a great friend of the US. So they are back to radicalism. Same movie, move on… I’d have to look back and see, but I believe that was another NED job–like the other “color revolutions” and “springs.” The chickens will come home to roost one day soon, and we’ll all pay the price.
You don’t lose your freedom of religion once you own a company.
It’s a shame that radical Islam is taking hold again so strongly in Egypt. If we want to see how this will play out, we have only to look at at the rest of the regain, excluding Israel. Muslim Expansion only has one result – the abuses of Sharia Law. That’s why some moderate Muslims emigrate to the US – to escape the extremism and oppression.
WordMess ateth my comment.
If an admin has the time, please retrieve.
Paul C. Schulte
Dredd – maybe he’s the government. There was a European theologian (name escapes me) who contended that governments could be immoral or amoral, but never moral. Since this particular government is clearly both immoral and amoral, maybe it is the Devil.
=======================
There is support for your assertion in the scriptures:
Those verses are not embraced by the majority, however.
“Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be ‘perceived as favoring one religion over another,’ the very ‘risk the [Constitution’s] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.”
What health insurance options did Hobby Lobby offer prior to the ACA?
barking dog:
Not all Catholics believe in an anthropomorphic devil though most do. In fact many modern scholars both inside and outside if the church see the devil more as allegory than personification of evil.
Paul:
The difference is that the gay marriage decisions have their basis on the Constitution. The Hobby Lobby decision is based on a theological interpretation of a federal statute. It’s clear to most any lawyer that the Catholic theology took precedence over the law. As Justice Ginsburg noted in dissent:
Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. … The distinction between a community made up of believers in the same religion and one embracing persons of diverse beliefs, clear as it is, constantly escapes the Court’s attention. One can only wonder why the Court shuts this key difference from sight. [emphasis mine]
(…)
Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be ‘perceived as favoring one religion over another,’ the very ‘risk the [Constitution’s] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.
mespo – I think religious believers make up a greater percentage of the population than do homosexuals. Belief in evil is the concept you have to hold on to. There is a national conference someplace on evil every year, I think.
John Oliver,
Is it being suggested someone’s personal views should be a disqualifier for public service? Or, should we measure a person on their record? Hmm, makes it even more incredible anyone would be elected without the latter and a seriously questionable former.
=======================
Yep.
Is it being suggested someone’s personal views should be a disqualifier for public service? Or, should we measure a person on their record? Hmm, makes it even more incredible anyone would be elected without the latter and a seriously questionable former.