Oh aerial…. your threads are always their own little microcosm of our political culture. Talk about losing the message in the presentation. Its an important message, so its frustrating to see it ignored, and everyone jumping on you instead of discussing the topic. But there are reasons for that. LOTS of them. If you want your voice to be heard and influential (which, at root, is the point to sharing our beliefs with others, no?), you need to be viewed as a credible source of information by your peers. Judging by prose, you didn’t write this, and haven’t credited the author (yup, googled a line from it – its from a blog you’ve copied from before – the ‘barracudabrigade’….takin cues from a person who dedicates their journalistic ambition to Sarah Palin?…..lol)…You will not gain any credibility by plagiarizing divisive, sensationalist drivel like this.. How can I take this seriously if the first thing I notice is that its stolen, and you are too embarrassed by the source to link to it? Why can’t you take the basic message conveyed, and find a decent source to copy/paste, or just type out your own thoughts, instead of discrediting the whole topic by passing this crap off as yours?
“Obama supports terrorists”….yes, he does. So does pretty much every government, and the definition of ‘terrorist’ is so ambiguous that anyone with a brain should recognizes it as a flag that the writer is trying to manipulate your opinion. Anyone with NO brain recognizes it as ‘angry muslims’. I think we all know readers of this blog see the latter. Still, it’s important to point out the hypocrisy of the US government in their ‘war on terror’. Too bad that conversation will not be had when language like this is used. It’s the same trick the government uses to justify their policies and leave no room for debate – journalists/bloggers/you are no better when doing the same. If indeed there was a coordinated effort (not an “attack”), by ‘hundreds of thousands’ of Egyptian citizens, to raise awareness of US actions in Egypt, it IS newsworthy…but that point is lost in hysterical rhetoric. Why do teaparty types always say they’re ‘against big government’ in general, then so easily fall into partisan bullshit by attacking the figurehead – BHO - specifically?
Also want to say that I agree that foreign aid is a joke…saying it should be stopped because the people in that country hate the US anyway is missing the point. Foreign aid is used to buy influence, almost always from corrupt dictators in nations needed to support US interests. Read: countries that are resource rich, in important strategic military locations, or along shipping/transport corridors. This is pretty much universally accepted….until someone criticizes US policy, then its paraded out that the US is the ‘worlds biggest donor to foreign aid’ :roll: Egypt controls the Suez and is vital to Israel’s security….so no fuckin way aid to that country stops, no matter who is running it.
This is a good post.....let me explain
I did not intentionally try to pass this off as mine...in fact I didn't even know it was being taken that way till your post......I saw this on Breitbarts facebook page https://www.facebook.com/BreitbartOneSi ... nsAwakened
I did not post it because I thought it would be a search to find it on his facebook page.....and I was late for a Doc. Appointment.
I really thought the conversation would be more about what the egyptian people had to say......Thoughts like ....Are we funding terrorist? Should we cut off aid? Even though people are being raped and Tortured. I was genuinely surprised they are posting on the White house facebook page.
Things like this...
Sherif Mohsen Fayed All americans :we are the egyptian people inviting you to demonstrate hand in hand with the true egyptian people in front of white house and washington post against Obama who is stealing american people money and funding terrorism of muslim brotherhood terrorism in egypt with it
Remon Magdy This is the Truth in Egypt
The real Coup was done by Morsi and Muslium Brother Hood > who broke his presidential oath of protecting homeland, law and democracy and abused his authority in every possible way along with the brotherhood .Egyptians who went down the streets on June 30th in a pure national revolution asking for a very democratic request (Early presidential elections) which was strong...ly fa...ced by rejection from Morsi who said "I would rather die" and frankly threatened all his people. So, people asked him to leave. The military forces had nothing to do but to stand by the people in their just request and they only transferred authority to another civilian president who is the head of the Supreme Constitutional Court (highest legal authority in Egypt) and then stepped back to only protect people's lives and institutions as well as borders without any interference in the political life. So please:
STOP SUPPORTING THE TERRORISM OF MUSLIM BROTHER HOOD
SHAME ON YOU
These are the things I thought would be discussed.....on another note the definition of many words have become ambiguous with so many trying to redefine the English language because of Political Correctness.
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
People want Obama to help the Syrian rebels (whom many are part of al Queda I hear) and then people don't want us to aid Egypt because that means we would support terrorism.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Oh aerial…. your threads are always their own little microcosm of our political culture. Talk about losing the message in the presentation. Its an important message, so its frustrating to see it ignored, and everyone jumping on you instead of discussing the topic. But there are reasons for that. LOTS of them. If you want your voice to be heard and influential (which, at root, is the point to sharing our beliefs with others, no?), you need to be viewed as a credible source of information by your peers. Judging by prose, you didn’t write this, and haven’t credited the author (yup, googled a line from it – its from a blog you’ve copied from before – the ‘barracudabrigade’….takin cues from a person who dedicates their journalistic ambition to Sarah Palin?…..lol)…You will not gain any credibility by plagiarizing divisive, sensationalist drivel like this.. How can I take this seriously if the first thing I notice is that its stolen, and you are too embarrassed by the source to link to it? Why can’t you take the basic message conveyed, and find a decent source to copy/paste, or just type out your own thoughts, instead of discrediting the whole topic by passing this crap off as yours?
“Obama supports terrorists”….yes, he does. So does pretty much every government, and the definition of ‘terrorist’ is so ambiguous that anyone with a brain should recognizes it as a flag that the writer is trying to manipulate your opinion. Anyone with NO brain recognizes it as ‘angry muslims’. I think we all know readers of this blog see the latter. Still, it’s important to point out the hypocrisy of the US government in their ‘war on terror’. Too bad that conversation will not be had when language like this is used. It’s the same trick the government uses to justify their policies and leave no room for debate – journalists/bloggers/you are no better when doing the same. If indeed there was a coordinated effort (not an “attack”), by ‘hundreds of thousands’ of Egyptian citizens, to raise awareness of US actions in Egypt, it IS newsworthy…but that point is lost in hysterical rhetoric. Why do teaparty types always say they’re ‘against big government’ in general, then so easily fall into partisan bullshit by attacking the figurehead – BHO - specifically?
Also want to say that I agree that foreign aid is a joke…saying it should be stopped because the people in that country hate the US anyway is missing the point. Foreign aid is used to buy influence, almost always from corrupt dictators in nations needed to support US interests. Read: countries that are resource rich, in important strategic military locations, or along shipping/transport corridors. This is pretty much universally accepted….until someone criticizes US policy, then its paraded out that the US is the ‘worlds biggest donor to foreign aid’ :roll: Egypt controls the Suez and is vital to Israel’s security….so no fuckin way aid to that country stops, no matter who is running it.
Ladies and gentleman, I give you Professor Drowned Out. I def couldn't have said it any better. Well said my friend.
Oh aerial…. your threads are always their own little microcosm of our political culture. Talk about losing the message in the presentation. Its an important message, so its frustrating to see it ignored, and everyone jumping on you instead of discussing the topic. But there are reasons for that. LOTS of them. If you want your voice to be heard and influential (which, at root, is the point to sharing our beliefs with others, no?), you need to be viewed as a credible source of information by your peers. Judging by prose, you didn’t write this, and haven’t credited the author (yup, googled a line from it – its from a blog you’ve copied from before – the ‘barracudabrigade’….takin cues from a person who dedicates their journalistic ambition to Sarah Palin?…..lol)…You will not gain any credibility by plagiarizing divisive, sensationalist drivel like this.. How can I take this seriously if the first thing I notice is that its stolen, and you are too embarrassed by the source to link to it? Why can’t you take the basic message conveyed, and find a decent source to copy/paste, or just type out your own thoughts, instead of discrediting the whole topic by passing this crap off as yours?
“Obama supports terrorists”….yes, he does. So does pretty much every government, and the definition of ‘terrorist’ is so ambiguous that anyone with a brain should recognizes it as a flag that the writer is trying to manipulate your opinion. Anyone with NO brain recognizes it as ‘angry muslims’. I think we all know readers of this blog see the latter. Still, it’s important to point out the hypocrisy of the US government in their ‘war on terror’. Too bad that conversation will not be had when language like this is used. It’s the same trick the government uses to justify their policies and leave no room for debate – journalists/bloggers/you are no better when doing the same. If indeed there was a coordinated effort (not an “attack”), by ‘hundreds of thousands’ of Egyptian citizens, to raise awareness of US actions in Egypt, it IS newsworthy…but that point is lost in hysterical rhetoric. Why do teaparty types always say they’re ‘against big government’ in general, then so easily fall into partisan bullshit by attacking the figurehead – BHO - specifically?
Also want to say that I agree that foreign aid is a joke…saying it should be stopped because the people in that country hate the US anyway is missing the point. Foreign aid is used to buy influence, almost always from corrupt dictators in nations needed to support US interests. Read: countries that are resource rich, in important strategic military locations, or along shipping/transport corridors. This is pretty much universally accepted….until someone criticizes US policy, then its paraded out that the US is the ‘worlds biggest donor to foreign aid’ :roll: Egypt controls the Suez and is vital to Israel’s security….so no fuckin way aid to that country stops, no matter who is running it.
This is a good post.....let me explain
I did not intentionally try to pass this off as mine...in fact I didn't even know it was being taken that way till your post......I saw this on Breitbarts facebook page https://www.facebook.com/BreitbartOneSi ... nsAwakened
I did not post it because I thought it would be a search to find it on his facebook page.....and I was late for a Doc. Appointment.
I really thought the conversation would be more about what the egyptian people had to say......Thoughts like ....Are we funding terrorist? Should we cut off aid? Even though people are being raped and Tortured. I was genuinely surprised they are posting on the White house facebook page.
Things like this...
Sherif Mohsen Fayed All americans :we are the egyptian people inviting you to demonstrate hand in hand with the true egyptian people in front of white house and washington post against Obama who is stealing american people money and funding terrorism of muslim brotherhood terrorism in egypt with it
Remon Magdy This is the Truth in Egypt
The real Coup was done by Morsi and Muslium Brother Hood > who broke his presidential oath of protecting homeland, law and democracy and abused his authority in every possible way along with the brotherhood .Egyptians who went down the streets on June 30th in a pure national revolution asking for a very democratic request (Early presidential elections) which was strong...ly fa...ced by rejection from Morsi who said "I would rather die" and frankly threatened all his people. So, people asked him to leave. The military forces had nothing to do but to stand by the people in their just request and they only transferred authority to another civilian president who is the head of the Supreme Constitutional Court (highest legal authority in Egypt) and then stepped back to only protect people's lives and institutions as well as borders without any interference in the political life. So please:
STOP SUPPORTING THE TERRORISM OF MUSLIM BROTHER HOOD
SHAME ON YOU
These are the things I thought would be discussed.....on another note the definition of many words have become ambiguous with so many trying to redefine the English language because of Political Correctness.
you do know that the muslim brotherhood is no longer in charge of Egypt yeah?
so by providing aid to Egypt its actually doing the opposite of supporting the muslim brotherhood.
Morsi was a dangerous Islamist who was busy dismantling the structure of democracy that put him into power in the first place at the time he was deposed. The Egyptian army are opportunistic thugs that saw a chance to restore military rule in Eygpt under the pretense of doing it "for the people", what they have done to those protestors is unforgiveable, and military aid absolutely should be cut off until transparent and fair elections have been held, and democracy restored.
It's a terrible situation all round, neither side has a leg to stand on morally speaking. It's made all the more depressing by the fact that right wingers who care not a jot for the blood that has been spilled would take this as an opportunity to launch clumsy uninformed attacks on Obama. There's a legitimate argument to be had about the way Western countries have propped up undemocratic regimes for decades, regardless of who is in power, but don't sit there and pretend that you have any interest in engaging in it.
my little nephew is 16 months old ..his nicknasme is Taliban..was at the hospital and 4 nurses try to put him down and couldnt..imagine when he grow up..that guy is dangerous
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Morsi was a dangerous Islamist who was busy dismantling the structure of democracy that put him into power in the first place at the time he was deposed.
This is not true. In fact, think about the sentence you wrote yourself: isn't it a bit eery that one would try to dismantle the system that put him in power? Why on earth would one want to do that, considering that it's worked out for him (and his organization) so far? Five elections were held in Egypt since Mubarak was deposed in 2011. Do you know which group overwhelmingly won every single election? The Muslim Brotherhood. Their base of support is so huge in Egypt, they would have absolutely no reason to oppose democracy. It worked in their favor every single time. In the meantime, secular and liberal groups did very poorly in every single election. Even the constitutional referendum, for which they did not even call for a boycott but rather tried to argue that Egyptians should go out and show they do not support it, was lost on their part since 64% of the country approved it.
People often find it extremely easy to make accusations without providing any evidence, even when those accusations actually go against logic, such as the bizarre idea, that somehow caught on, that 33 million people (a third of the entire Egyptian population) went out in late June to protest against Morsi, a number which any analyst with a brain should have discredited immediately.
Take for instance the accusation in this thread that the Muslim Brotherhood is a "terrorist" organization. It's made without absolutely any regard to the history of the organization, which has been incredibly nonviolent. The creator of this thread, with some respect, has absolutely no knowledge of the organization. I doubt the person has ever read any scholarly material on the history or ideology of the organization, but probably gets his or her information on the group from rightwing blogs, hardly a respectable source of knowledge when it comes to something like this. Meanwhile, in the real world, the Muslim Brotherhood has been a socio-religious organization that entrenched itself deep into Egyptian society by doing things over the past decades such as opening clinics, providing food, and so many services to communities that the autocratic state was otherwise ignoring. Someone like the creator of this thread will step in and say, "Well, what about Person X, who was in the Muslim Brotherhood before going to join Al Qaeda, or what about Hamas, etc etc." Well, what about that? Don't you think it is an important fact that Person X left the Brotherhood to join Al Qaeda? The reason for that is that the Brotherhood is absolutely against violence as a tactic to further their objectives. That's why when people join these other Islamic groups, they have to first leave the Brotherhood.
Islamic groups are not one and the same. All are created with specific purposes and objectives. For instance, it is worthless to study Hamas solely as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Hamas was created first and foremost as a Palestinian group to resist the Israeli occupation (whether you agree with their tactics is not the point of this discussion). Thus, it was created with a very specific purpose that would be stupid to hold the MB in Egypt accountable for. Al Qaeda's ideology is far more extremist than the MB's, which was founded by Hasan al-Banna in fact as a reformist movement. For someone to sit here and argue that there is this incredible conspiracy, of a network of Islamic organizations all over the world, from violent ones to nonviolent ones, that all go back to the MB in Egypt, only shows that said person knows nothing of the history of these organizations, the individuals who founded them, what they founded them for, what they founded them in response to, the differences of each society each organization was founded in, and so on. Even consider organizations founded in Apartheid South Africa, as compared to those founded in America during the Civil Rights struggle. Sure, they had one uniting theme, to end the discrimination against black people, but their tactics were different, their organization structures different, etc. You can't remove these groups from the contexts that they were formed in, just as you can't remove Hamas from the context it was born in in Palestine as opposed to, for instance, the MB in Egypt. The point is, religion is not something that is universal in how it is expressed. It is very clear that while some of these groups happen to be more conservative than others, what most distinguishes them is the context in which they are created, and most importantly, what drives them to pursue different tactics: almost always, it is a political issue they have, not religious (i.e., against U.S. imperialism, not "we hate them because of their freedom").
If the people of Egypt want to create their own form of democracy, and if that form happens to experiment with a religious trend, then who are we in Western countries to deny them that right? I know people here aren't necessarily advocating denying them that right, but even seeing the above quote from Pingfah, as well as some of the other posters, "Islamist" and "Islamism" are viewed at either very negatively or at the very least suspiciously. It is true that secular democracy seems to be the trend that is most favorable to Western societies, but it was naturally born out of very unique circumstances in this part of the globe. We cannot artificially impose this type of governance on a country like Egypt, where the population is very religious and sees their religious identity as important to them. If they want to govern themselves that way, providing they respect minority rights, who are we to suggest they cannot? They need to be given the opportunity to experiment with their own forms of democracy.
Ultimately, supporting a military coup for ideological reasons (i.e., for reasons "against Islamism" and "for secularism") is just plain wrong and undemocratic. Additionally, supporting it for reasons that simply don't hold up historically ("the MB is a boogeyman") is a position that should not be taken very seriously. We need to look at all these individual movements critically and give their study the appropriate attention, but to paint them all as simply terrorist does not allow for a productive dialogue, particularly when these movements are overwhelmingly popular in that part of the world.
UK couple sentenced to life in prison for plotting terrorist attack
why do you keep bumping these old threads? most of them have no reason to be resurrected and died for a reason.
Bumping for attention whoring is bad no matter what political beliefs you have. It's just as bad as trolls liking liberal Facebook pages so they can troll.
UK couple sentenced to life in prison for plotting terrorist attack
why do you keep bumping these old threads? most of them have no reason to be resurrected and died for a reason.
Bumping for attention whoring is bad no matter what political beliefs you have. It's just as bad as trolls liking liberal Facebook pages so they can troll.
trolls gonna troll.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Comments
This is a good post.....let me explain
I did not intentionally try to pass this off as mine...in fact I didn't even know it was being taken that way till your post......I saw this on Breitbarts facebook page https://www.facebook.com/BreitbartOneSi ... nsAwakened
I did not post it because I thought it would be a search to find it on his facebook page.....and I was late for a Doc. Appointment.
I really thought the conversation would be more about what the egyptian people had to say......Thoughts like ....Are we funding terrorist? Should we cut off aid? Even though people are being raped and Tortured. I was genuinely surprised they are posting on the White house facebook page.
Things like this...
Sherif Mohsen Fayed All americans :we are the egyptian people inviting you to demonstrate hand in hand with the true egyptian people in front of white house and washington post against Obama who is stealing american people money and funding terrorism of muslim brotherhood terrorism in egypt with it
Remon Magdy This is the Truth in Egypt
The real Coup was done by Morsi and Muslium Brother Hood > who broke his presidential oath of protecting homeland, law and democracy and abused his authority in every possible way along with the brotherhood .Egyptians who went down the streets on June 30th in a pure national revolution asking for a very democratic request (Early presidential elections) which was strong...ly fa...ced by rejection from Morsi who said "I would rather die" and frankly threatened all his people. So, people asked him to leave. The military forces had nothing to do but to stand by the people in their just request and they only transferred authority to another civilian president who is the head of the Supreme Constitutional Court (highest legal authority in Egypt) and then stepped back to only protect people's lives and institutions as well as borders without any interference in the political life. So please:
STOP SUPPORTING THE TERRORISM OF MUSLIM BROTHER HOOD
SHAME ON YOU
These are the things I thought would be discussed.....on another note the definition of many words have become ambiguous with so many trying to redefine the English language because of Political Correctness.
People want Obama to help the Syrian rebels (whom many are part of al Queda I hear) and then people don't want us to aid Egypt because that means we would support terrorism.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Ladies and gentleman, I give you Professor Drowned Out. I def couldn't have said it any better. Well said my friend.
you do know that the muslim brotherhood is no longer in charge of Egypt yeah?
so by providing aid to Egypt its actually doing the opposite of supporting the muslim brotherhood.
as in not supporting the brotherhood.
yeah?
cool
It's a terrible situation all round, neither side has a leg to stand on morally speaking. It's made all the more depressing by the fact that right wingers who care not a jot for the blood that has been spilled would take this as an opportunity to launch clumsy uninformed attacks on Obama. There's a legitimate argument to be had about the way Western countries have propped up undemocratic regimes for decades, regardless of who is in power, but don't sit there and pretend that you have any interest in engaging in it.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
People often find it extremely easy to make accusations without providing any evidence, even when those accusations actually go against logic, such as the bizarre idea, that somehow caught on, that 33 million people (a third of the entire Egyptian population) went out in late June to protest against Morsi, a number which any analyst with a brain should have discredited immediately.
Take for instance the accusation in this thread that the Muslim Brotherhood is a "terrorist" organization. It's made without absolutely any regard to the history of the organization, which has been incredibly nonviolent. The creator of this thread, with some respect, has absolutely no knowledge of the organization. I doubt the person has ever read any scholarly material on the history or ideology of the organization, but probably gets his or her information on the group from rightwing blogs, hardly a respectable source of knowledge when it comes to something like this. Meanwhile, in the real world, the Muslim Brotherhood has been a socio-religious organization that entrenched itself deep into Egyptian society by doing things over the past decades such as opening clinics, providing food, and so many services to communities that the autocratic state was otherwise ignoring. Someone like the creator of this thread will step in and say, "Well, what about Person X, who was in the Muslim Brotherhood before going to join Al Qaeda, or what about Hamas, etc etc." Well, what about that? Don't you think it is an important fact that Person X left the Brotherhood to join Al Qaeda? The reason for that is that the Brotherhood is absolutely against violence as a tactic to further their objectives. That's why when people join these other Islamic groups, they have to first leave the Brotherhood.
Islamic groups are not one and the same. All are created with specific purposes and objectives. For instance, it is worthless to study Hamas solely as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Hamas was created first and foremost as a Palestinian group to resist the Israeli occupation (whether you agree with their tactics is not the point of this discussion). Thus, it was created with a very specific purpose that would be stupid to hold the MB in Egypt accountable for. Al Qaeda's ideology is far more extremist than the MB's, which was founded by Hasan al-Banna in fact as a reformist movement. For someone to sit here and argue that there is this incredible conspiracy, of a network of Islamic organizations all over the world, from violent ones to nonviolent ones, that all go back to the MB in Egypt, only shows that said person knows nothing of the history of these organizations, the individuals who founded them, what they founded them for, what they founded them in response to, the differences of each society each organization was founded in, and so on. Even consider organizations founded in Apartheid South Africa, as compared to those founded in America during the Civil Rights struggle. Sure, they had one uniting theme, to end the discrimination against black people, but their tactics were different, their organization structures different, etc. You can't remove these groups from the contexts that they were formed in, just as you can't remove Hamas from the context it was born in in Palestine as opposed to, for instance, the MB in Egypt. The point is, religion is not something that is universal in how it is expressed. It is very clear that while some of these groups happen to be more conservative than others, what most distinguishes them is the context in which they are created, and most importantly, what drives them to pursue different tactics: almost always, it is a political issue they have, not religious (i.e., against U.S. imperialism, not "we hate them because of their freedom").
If the people of Egypt want to create their own form of democracy, and if that form happens to experiment with a religious trend, then who are we in Western countries to deny them that right? I know people here aren't necessarily advocating denying them that right, but even seeing the above quote from Pingfah, as well as some of the other posters, "Islamist" and "Islamism" are viewed at either very negatively or at the very least suspiciously. It is true that secular democracy seems to be the trend that is most favorable to Western societies, but it was naturally born out of very unique circumstances in this part of the globe. We cannot artificially impose this type of governance on a country like Egypt, where the population is very religious and sees their religious identity as important to them. If they want to govern themselves that way, providing they respect minority rights, who are we to suggest they cannot? They need to be given the opportunity to experiment with their own forms of democracy.
Ultimately, supporting a military coup for ideological reasons (i.e., for reasons "against Islamism" and "for secularism") is just plain wrong and undemocratic. Additionally, supporting it for reasons that simply don't hold up historically ("the MB is a boogeyman") is a position that should not be taken very seriously. We need to look at all these individual movements critically and give their study the appropriate attention, but to paint them all as simply terrorist does not allow for a productive dialogue, particularly when these movements are overwhelmingly popular in that part of the world.
UK couple sentenced to life in prison for plotting terrorist attack
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."