I am amazed at the current U.S. debate over Syria. Those urging intervention may be driven by humanitarian good intentions, to end the fighting and ease suffering. But whatever they are proposing–no-fly zones, safe havens, direct supply of weapons to rebels, etc—have they actually considered how four highly visible, recent precedents turned out?
Afghanistan: There is no question but that after September 11, 2001, the United States had to invade Afghanistan, destroy the al-Qaida infrastructure there, and overthrow its Taliban partner. Yet today, twelve years later U.S. troops are still in Afghanistan! The delusion of rebuilding that country has predictably failed. About 2200 Americans have died, many of them killed by Afghan “allies.” The Afghan government is not exactly “grateful.” The Taliban is still strong. Again, that war was necessary but how worthwhile was it and how expensive and difficult has it been for the United States to extricate itself. Even after 4 and one-half years of Barack Obama U.S. soldiers are still there.
Egypt: U.S. intervention in Egypt overthrew an ally. Many Egyptians now see, despite the talk about democracy, that they are worse off. Talk about freedom quickly turned into domination by the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist mobs. The economy is going down the drain. Christians are under siege; women’s rights are shrinking. Other than a free media it is hard to see what Egyptians got out of it. Certainly, this intervention was a strategic defeat for the United States.
Tag Archives: Egyptians
“It gives us the sense that the Egyptians want to attack Israel,” claims International Assessment and Strategy Center Senior Fellow Richard Fisher, on an arms deal that will send North Korean Scud missile parts through China to Egypt.
The Hermit Kingdom and the Brotherhood | Washington Free Beacon
United States intelligence agencies recently uncovered a covert deal between North Korea and Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood government to ship Scud missile parts from North Korea through China to Egypt.
Intelligence reports from mid-November were circulated to senior officials in the State Department, Pentagon, and intelligence agencies. The shipment would be the first by the North Korean regime to the new Egyptian regime headed by Mohammed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood-backed president.
The problem with Egypt and many other Islamic nations is they are ignorant of what they are demanding, and are left ignorant by their own media and educational system.
The problem in Egypt is not Mubarak or Morsi, King Farouk or Nasser. It is the ignorance of Egyptians about basics of their beloved religious law that they say they want enshrined in their constitution. I recently asked several Egyptians if they are aware of the following laws in Sharia pertaining to the Muslim head of state:
- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph (Muslim head of state), even if he is unjust.
- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power, meaning through force.
- A Caliph is exempt from charges of murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape.
From the laws above, Morsi has not done anything against Sharia, but not one of the Egyptians I spoke to was aware of any such laws, and that Morsi’s recent power grab was in perfect harmony with the Sharia. By now it seems apparent that Egyptians are intentionally ignorant about Sharia and do not even want to take the effort to learn the truth abut Sharia, in case they they might reject it – an act which would turn them into apostates, eligible for death. Remaining ignorant and in denial about the Sharia elephant in the room therefore seems the only option.
This is also a warning, they claim, of what may happen across the Middle East. The era of the Muslim Brotherhood appears to have arrived. President Obama has hailed the Brotherhood’s President Mohammed Morsi as a pragmatist who helped end the Gaza crisis. Egyptians here think the Brotherhood has conned Washington, just like it conned them.
“President Obama is supporting a terrorist,” a man told me amid chants of “Leave! Leave!” in Tahrir Square and “Down, down with the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader.” Before, it was “Down, down with Mubarak.”
Three years ago, 41 % of Egyptians said they wanted their country to acquire a nuclear bomb. Now, 87% of Egyptians said they “would be happy” if Egypt acquired the bomb.
Even though Shi’ite Muslims are viewed unfavorably by Egypt’s Sunni Muslims (68% according this poll), 62% of Egyptians said that “Iran and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are friends of Egypt,” despite Iran’s hard-line Shi’ite affiliation. In addition, 65% expressed a desire to restore diplomatic relations with Iran, and 61% supported the Iranian nuclear program.
A dramatic change in the Egyptian population’s view of Israel was also prominent in the results of the poll. Just three years ago, less than 25 percent of Egyptians favored breaking Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. Now, 77 percent agreed that “The peace treaty with Israel is no longer useful and should be dissolved.”
A poll of Egyptians conducted last month shows that they have increasingly positive views of Iran, believe that both Iran and Egypt should obtain nuclear weapons, and still trust their own military more than any other institution in Egypt.
The poll of 812 Egyptians, half of them women, was conducted in a series of in-person interviews by the firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and sponsored by the Israel Project, a pro-Israel advocacy organization with offices in Washington and Jerusalem. According to the poll, Iran is viewed favorably in Egypt, with 65 percent of those surveyed expressing support of the decision to renew Egypt-Iran relations and 61 percent expressing support
of the Iranian nuclear project, versus 41 percent in August 2009.
By 2006, members of the Muslim Brotherhood began advocating for a nuclear weapons program. Dr. Hamdi Hassan, a Muslim Brotherhood spokesperson, stated that Egyptians “are ready to starve” to obtain a nuclear weapon. Similarly, Saad Al Husseyni, another Muslim Brotherhood representative, suggested thatEgypt develop a “strong and deterrent military power,” arguing that…nuclear weapons would be more effective…than promoting a nuclear weapons-free zone.In 2009, Muslim Brotherhood MP Dr. Ibrahim Al-Ja’afari called for the militarization of Egypt’s nuclear program….
Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who called for Israel’s destruction in a speech to a million followers in Tahrir Square soon after Mubarak’s overthrow, is the global leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. In 2009, Shay notes, Qaradawi said Muslim countries needed to possess nuclear weapons “in order to strike terror in our enemies.”
Last month saw Egypt’s latest large-scale “collective punishment” of Christian Copts. It started when a Christian launderer accidently burned the shirt of a Muslim customer, which led to a brawl between the two Egyptians (first reported here). The next day “the Muslim, with approximately 20 of his followers, went to the Christian’s home to attack him. Expecting this, the Christian was prepared and climbed to the highest point of his roof, hurling Molotov cocktails at the Muslims.” One Muslim man was injured and later died in a hospital. Before he died, between 2,000-3,000 Muslims attacked the Christians of the village, leading to an exodus of approximately 120 Coptic families. AINA has details of the aftermath:
The sectarian crisis in the village of Dahshur escalated on August 1 after the burial of the Muslim man who died yesterday in hospital. Hundreds of Muslims torched and looted Coptic businesses and homes despite hundreds of security forces being deployed in the village. Eyewitnesses reported that security forces did not protect most Coptic property… “As 120 families had already fled the village the day before after being terrorized, the businesses and homes were an easy game for the mob to make a complete clean-up of everything that could be looted,” said Coptic activist Wagih Jacob. “The security forces were at the scene of the crime while it was taking place and did nothing at all.” After the violence, the family of the deceased Moaz Hasab-Allah said that destroying Coptic property is not enough and that Copts have to “pay for their son’s death” with lives.
Collectively punishing dhimmis—the barely tolerated non-Muslim infidels indigenous to the lands conquered by Islam—for the crimes of the individual is standard under Islam, and a regular occurrence among Egypt’s native Christians. Other examples include:
by Raymond Ibrahim
September 4, 2012
Recently an Egyptian Muslim posted a YouTube videotape of himself cursing Islam, its holy book, the Koran, tearing the latter to pieces and throwing it in the garbage. Excerpts of what he said follow:
There it is, Allah’s book, this is the basic catastrophe. I don’t know what day it is of this disgusting month of Ramadan! You are making the tearing of the Quran such a big and dangerous thing… it is instinctive to tear this book, those sons of [profanity] think they can threaten me and challenge me to tear the Quran, but I want to prove to them that they are nothing and what is the big deal in tearing this book!! There it is [he starts tearing the Quran] in the trash. Are you feeling better now! You cannot touch a hair on my head! We keep blaming Hamas and Gaza, but it is not them, it is this son of [profanity] book that I am stepping on right now. That book is the source of all evil and the real catastrophe. There is nothing new here, it is not Omar Abdel Rahman, Abbud or all the others; it is this garbage that is causing us to run in a demonic never-ending circle that will never end.
While this latest Koran desecration is a reminder that there are everyday Egyptians who are sick of the Talibanization of Egypt, a recent talk show on Al Hafiz channel concerning this incident is an indicator of what is in store for them.
After the video of the man tearing the Koran was played, one of three guests, a bearded and white-robed Dr. Mahmoud Sha’ban, visibly shaken by what he had just seen, said:
Someone like him must receive the punishment he deserves—and it is death. He is an apostate… It is clear from what he says that he is a Muslim, and must be killed as an apostate. As for that act itself, it is an infidel act, and he deserves to be struck by the sword in a public place—and as soon as possible; as soon as possible; as soon as possible. It must be announced and photographed and disseminated among the people, so that all the people may know that we respect our Koran and its words from Allah, and whoever insults it, receives his punishment from Allah. If people like him are left alone, they will only get bolder and bolder.
The next guest, Sheikh Abdul Mohsin, said: “I support the words of Sheikh Mahmoud [who just spoke], that this man must be killed fast, that he may be an example to others, so that all learn that we have reached a new phase in respecting Islam and the holy sanctity of the Koran and Sunna. This man has become an apostate and must suffer the penalty in front of the people.”
The third and final guest, Dr. Abdullah, was somewhat critical of the first two Islamic scholars—not because they called for the man’s death, but because, by focusing on the fact that the man had apostatized, it seemed as if they were exonerating non-Muslims: “The issue of killing him is not limited to his being a Muslim and then apostatizing. No, it is known to us from the Sharia that whoever insults the Prophet or tears the Koran, his judgment is death—whether he’s a Muslim or non-Muslim, or non-Muslim.”
Later, a listener called in saying, “Just so you know, if I ever meet one of these people, their life is void—they’re simply dead.” The talk show host, who agreed that the man must be slain, responded with some moderate talk about letting the state handle such people, to which the first sheikh, Dr. Mahmoud Sha’ban, erupted in rage:
“Man, we’re talking about the religion of Allah! The religion! The religion!! The woman who insulted the Prophet, he voided her life! There were ten people at the conquest of Mecca whose lives the Prophet also voided!”
When the host tried to get a word in, the cleric exclaimed: “I am the sheikh, not you. I am the sheikh, not you! I am the sheikh! Hear me to the end, before I get up and leave!!”
Dr. Abdullah tried to mediate by clarifying to the host: “Do you know what the word ‘void’ [hadr] means [in Islamic jurisprudence]? It means it is the right for anyone who meets them [those who insult Islam] to kill them.”
Simply put, the host was wrong to think that those who insult Islam should only be killed by the state. Any good Muslim can—and should—kill them, wherever he finds them. Of course, with a Muslim Brotherhood president in office, whether those who offend Islam are killed by the state or by Islamic vigilantes becomes somewhat semantic.
Already under President Morsi’s first two months, Islamists have become more emboldened—whether by pressuring women to wear the hijab, killing a Muslim youth for publicly holding hands with his fiancée, or disseminating flyers that call for the total genocide of Egypt’s Christian Copts—flyers that even openly included names and mosque contact points for those Muslims who wish to collect their rewards for killing Christians.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
If you are confused about the Muslim god called Allah, then I hope articles like this will set you straight. Apparently, he likes the blood of all who won’t submit. This is also a warning about the future – first Saturday, then Sunday.
Please do not confuse the Muslim god with the God of Christians and Jews. If you think they are the same then you are in big trouble. Apparently, Islam is ultimately successful in seizing control of the world. Take a look at the pictures comparing 666 in Greek numbering to the Arabic script for In the Name of Allah: Going from Greek 666 to “In the Name of Allah”. If you haven’t seen it lately then take another look. I changed it to make the comparison easier.
In order to successfully resist Islam to the bitter end, one must understand what they are dealing with. This is something new for the West. Most westerns do not properly understand the extreme dangers in Islam. Therefore, they are susceptible to joining Islam. A good Christian or Jew must resist Islam even unto death. That’s easy for me to say now, but perhaps not so easy in the future.
A month ago, as President Mohamed Morsi was sworn in, Egyptians who loved and loathed him could agree on one fact: The Islamist would be a relatively powerless leader.
But just weeks into his tenure, the man who was until recently widely regarded as a charmless, accidental president has cast aside rivals and consolidated power with stunning speed and shrewdness.