Egypt’s banned Muslim Brotherhood movement has unveiled its plans to scrap a peace treaty with Israel if it comes to power, a deputy leader said in an interview with NHK TV.
Rashad al-Bayoumi said the peace treaty with Israel will be abolished after a provisional government is formed by the movement and other Egypt’s opposition parties.
Steve,
Great work. NHK, the Japanese news organization alerting the world about the dangers of believing that “the politics is settled” around the idea of democracy.
A quick look at history shows that democracy almost always leads to horrible consequences. After American developed the first democratic system, it was quickly followed by the horrors of the french revolution. Democracy in Russian and China led to the horrors of those revolutions, and most recently the foolish attempt by that Champion of Democracy George W Bush, led to an islamist takeover of Iraq, when it had been a stable secular country just a two decades before.
And of course the unintended consequences in the US, when the worst president in history was elected. Jimmy Carter, who allowed another stable country full of happy smiling people to fall to democracy, Iran. Fortunately he did support the Indonesian dictatorship to kill hundreds of thousands in East Timor, delaying the cancer of Democracy there for several decades.
lol, democracy is a SOB ain’t it. Tony, you’re confusing democracy with freedom. There is a huge difference.
Nice snark, but revolutions in the Islamic world haven’t typically led to freedom and pluralism.
There is reason to be concerned here.
Maguro,
There certainly is reason to be concerned.
I don’t see the solution being the US supporting dictators.
Neville, the solution is to do nothing and then wait until it turns into WWIII.
Steve,
Who is suggesting doing nothing?
Are you accusing the Muslim Brotherhood of being democratic?
RW,
I am not accusing MB of anything. As far as I know it is not an organization that advocates violent revolution and beheadings, and it has participated in elections in Egypt. It seems to me to fit into the general heading of groups that oppose westernization and the immorality and commercialization and violence and oppression that have resulted from secular western domination of the middle east. Some of their views seem reasonable to me and some remind of me fundamentalist christians in the US who want to bring about a kingdom of God on earth, and woe be unto any that oppose them.
Obama’s trying to outdo Carter on this one. Incredible stupidity, or outright sabotage of Israel, and the entire region. Mubarak may be a tyrant, but the alternative is much worse. I hope he can pull it together.
I have friends in Europe who recently vacationed in Egypt. Forget anything like that if Mubarak falls.
Airframe,
I could easily see the word “Bush” replacing Obama, and “Hussein” replacing Mubarak, and the rest of your comment being almost the same.
OK. Just to screw things up completely, how about Mubarak Hussein Obama? Why not? Barry has changed his name before.
But more to your point, what Obama said recently has helped the opposition to Mubarak, and Mubarak played well with Israel, while Saddam did not. So Bush did what Israel wanted while Obama did not. Big difference.
AlGored,
I see. The key point of all of this is that policy has to play well with the current Israeli government. Was that in the original constitution or one of the amendments I missed?
Read the part about making treaties and honoring them.
Steve you are right.
Things like the Geneva conventions, which the US helped formulate, and various other international and US laws that Israel has broken should be considered.
See the current situation in Russia for a view of the future of America. There are history lessons in Europe of countries that were divided to allow separate “Ethnic” States. Promoting “Diversity” promotes separatism and “Tribalism”. Sort of like reverse “Evolution” and most claims by our own TonyD make it appear that he is a promoter of RE along with others in the Chicken Little Movement!
Mike,
As expected, assumptions about what I support and believe have no relation to reality.
But following your logic, what the world needs is more Stalin’s, Tito’s and Hussein’s as they were major preventers of Reverse Evolution in their countries.
TonyD:
What is needed is not Dictators nor Tribalists. Both are regressive forms of government! The group that assigned the name Progressive to their movement is just a modern form of Marxist repression.
If we had a Constitutional government that protected individual rights rather than a group that wants a Mommy State I would say we are on our way to real democracy and we could be an example to other nations.
No we should not support Dictators but at the time it was considered the lessor of evils as it consolidated the country under one government.
It is not the business of our country to tell others how to live and the UN has become a promoter of repression in other countries. Any solution I would offer would be considered harsh because the current form of Charitable Compassion is one of the major causes of problems in some of the countries.
Mike,
I think I agree with you theoretically, your specific assertions fit more with ideological belief than reality. Equating progressive movement with Marxist repression is pure ideology. I live in the most “progressive” state in the country. The only one with a “socialist” member of congress, and there is nothing remotely repressive compared to other states. I have also lived in Denmark, which is MUCH more progressive than even Vermont and it is considerably less repressive than any US state I have visited. Your correlating progressives with wanting a mommy state is pure propaganda, that does have threads of truth, as the best propaganda does.
the United States has a long history of telling other countries how to live, and the UN’s role in repression, while again having threads of truth is more propaganda. The UN has in fact been instrumental in decreasing repression in a number of cases. Specifically with East timor recently, but also in many small ways in areas around the world. I know a number of people who have worked in the UN, and while i have heard inside stories about corruption and misguided pol;icy and hypocritical action, there are many many instances of valuable activity that has indeed had a very positive effect on the world. Of course this is unacceptable to ideologues who are only interested in facts that support their world view.
“especially with east Timor recently”
You’ve got to be kidding. You’re obviously speaking from total ignorance of the east Timor situation.
The frigging UN sat idle for years until the Australian Government decided to take action. Yes this action was sanctioned by the UN and the US, but if Oz hadn’t decided to do anything, Indonesia would still be in East Timor.
Try another example Tony, preferably one you know something about.
Reasonable minded people would have a tough time finding any instances of the UN being instrumental in reducing repression.
In fact one could argue that the UN is so hog-tied in beurocracy, red tape and diplomacy that their inaction has perpetuated repression the world over.
Think Kosovo, think Somalia, think Burma, think Rwanda and on and on and on.
The single most useless damaging institution mankind has ever come up with. The UN, full of corrupt, crooked, agenda chasing Europeans and Africans.
My old man used to have a saying, “Five cent help, Ten cent damage.” That’s the UN.
Baa,
yes indeed only information that fits your ideology.
So I guess you are saying that the UN should have military power to go in and stop oppressive regimes from murdering their people. In fact I know people intimately involved with what happened in Timor and was following it in the 70’s as well.
You will only see what you want and that is that the UN = bad.
No argument about bureaucracy, the people I know all agree that this is a problem, but they all, and they are reasonable people, are very clear about the actions that have limited repression and sometimes possibly prevented wars.
You give no instance of UN actions that have supported repression, just where their lack of action has allowed it. That I do not dispute, how this means they are perpetrators of repression any more than anyone else escapes me. Much of that has to do with the politics, and quite a bit of that politics has to do with US interests that have hardly been concerned with lessening repression. You are right that the UN did nothing about repression in Haiti, or Guatemala, or Argentina or Chile when US supported regimes killed tens of thousands and tortured many more.
What a stupid comment “yes indeed only information that fits your ideology.” You know nothing about my ideology.
Similarly “You give no instance of UN actions that have supported repression, just where their lack of action has allowed it. That I do not dispute, how this means they are perpetrators of repression any more than anyone else escapes me.”
One doesn’t need action to support something. If you and others in your neighborhood witness crime regularly but don’t report it, the criminals keep doing what they’re doing, that’s support via lack of action.
“You will only see what you want and that is that the UN = bad.” hah! is that like Tony D’s US = Bad?
There are many many good things to say about the US and I doubt anyone will dispute this, not even you. However, I’d like you to list the GOOD things the UN has done. List some of the more profound ones Tony.
I notice you mention you have some knowledge about E Timor but you didn’t dispute my point that the UN did f all about E Timor until Oz action.
I’m not a blind US lover Tony, there is a lot not to like about the US, but there is a hellova lot more to like than not like. Geopolitics to date demands a superpower, I’d rather the US as that superpower than the Russians or the Chinese any day.
Baa,
well what IS your ideology? You are right I do not know what it is, but your responses indicate only seeing facts that support one possibility that is not based on reality. Just as there are leftists who believe all corporations are bad and libertarians who believe all government action is bad.
And you have given NO instance of where the UN has supported repressive actions. No UN troops sent out to protect Hussein, or Rios Mott, or Duvalier. I will grant you that because of the reasons you mentioned there are instances when the net effect is to provide cover for repression, even when that is not the stated purpose. And as for Australia’s role in East Timor, the UN is prevented from sending troops into sovereign territory without the express permission of the country, and being as the US and the rest of the world, had done nothing to prevent Indonesia’s murderous takeover of ET in the 70’s Indonesian permission was necessary. Australia initially did not support independence. Partly due to public pressure in Australia and Howard’s eventual decision to force the issue, including insisting on Australia playing the lead role, UN forces with tepid backing of the US were able to help secure East Timorese independence.
There are hundreds of instances of UN military and humanitarian intervention that reduced violence or the threat of violence, or improved the lives of these affected.
I will give you some homework. look up every UN action in the past 60 years and tell me which ones led to more repression and which ones eased tension of prevented violence.
Let me see. One instance would be an obscure country in Southeast Asia, called East Timor. After a violent independence process, various UN efforts helped establish the new government and support the development of political infrastructure that led to a stable democracy. Maybe you have heard of it.
The UN has over and over again “reported’ on repression all over the world and the member states and or members of the security council often decide to ignore it.
look up Brian Urquhart. http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/6582
As for a current situation, http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/current.shtml
let me know in which of these cases the UN has increased repression.
Of course that is just the peace-keeping function. I don’t know much about those Jack Booted Fascists/Communists at the WHO, UNICEF or UNHCR however.
I am neither a blind lover or hater of the US. I would certainly say that I love my country, but I don’t turn away from it’s faults. I try to look at all the effects it has. You apparently are a blind hater of the UN, and unless given reason to think otherwise, my experience indicates that people who hold such black and white views do so out of allegiance to an ideology.
hey you guys, i hear if you want to throw on a brown shirt and grab a stick mubarak is offering 100pounds and a bag of rice!
earn back some of your tax dollars by crushing liberal skulls! that has to be a freedom hating right-wing wet dream!
Peter:
It appears to be more of one extremest group crushing the skulls of another extremest group. There are probably many political agendas at play in that situation and it reminds me of the song “One Tin Soldier”. The end result will be nothing gained and a good part of the future lost. Egypt has had a sham Government and it is doubtful is the outcome leads to anything other than another sham government. Chances are we will have another Iran in Egypt and another Iran in Iraq when we finally leave there.
Pretty naive to assume that the demonstrators are “liberals”.
Maguro,
As it would have been naive to think that about members of the Boston tea party
Bad analogy. Compare the published views of the Muslim Brotherhood with the pre-revolutionary writings of Adams, Jefferson and Franklin.
maguro,
it is NOt a bad analogy related to the idea of liberals.
There were liberals in England who supported the Monarchy. The American revolutionaries, were, as their name rightly states, revolutionaries.
I am not saying I support all the views of the Muslim Brotherhood, though I imagine there are some things I would agree with them about. The question is whether the US supports democracy. It has, over and over in the past, NOT supported democracy, when it suited our political interests, and of course many times that we have. It is a hard philosophical position to rationalize supporting democracy only when it results in the outcome that you want.
Hitler rationalized his ending of democracy (he never came close to a majority in any election) because of the danger from Communism. Asserting the same rational because of exaggerated fears of Islam is just as hypocritical.
You’re positing a binary choice between “democracy” and “non-democracy” that bears no relation to the reality of Egyptian politics today. Whatever happens to Mubarak, the next government will probably be authoritarian and controlled by the military or the Muslim Brotherhood, or perhaps a combination of both. A touchy-feely Euro-style social democratic government is probably not in the cards no matter what the US does.
For the record, the Muslim Brotherhood’s motto is:
– Allah is our objective.
– The Prophet is our leader.
– Qur’an is our law.
– Jihad is our way.
– Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope
Doesn’t sound very democratic, does it?
maguro,
Most fundamentalist Christian groups in the US don’t sound democratic either. Much as I think it would be helpful to bar them from voting or holding office in the US (the damage they did under Bush will still take years to undo if ever), I don’t count myself wise enough to decide who has the right to vote or serve in public office.
It actually IS a binary choice. There either are elections that allow anyone to participate in, or there are not. While the US is controlled by corporate and ideological interests that manipulate issues for public consumption, we actually do have a functioning democracy. Iraq, in spite of the idiocy and horror of the war there has a functioning democracy, Egypt does not.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. The Brotherhood’s goal is to implement a pure Islamic theocratic state, not stick a copy of the Ten Commandments in front of some courthouse.
Not to worry, we’ll see soon enough how this turns out.
Maguro,
thanks for letting me know that I don’t know what I am talking about.
It would be helpful in the future if you provided me with information I was not aware of, so that I could learn from someone who does know what they are talking about.
I must say I am GREATLY reassured that all fundamentalist christian organizations are only interested in posting copies of the ten commandments, and have no interest in forcing their religious beliefs on the rest of the world. Obviously those hundreds of attacks on abortion clinics in the US in the 80’s and 90’s were the work of secular or muslim anti abortion activists. And the rather insane born again Christians I went to school with only pretended to do whatever their “paster” told them, because Jesus spoke to him the true word of God.
and you are right, we will see pretty soon how this all turns out. If the MB takes over, declares the beginning of the new era of the Caliphate and declares war on Israel, you will have a VERY quick apology from me!
Lots of Christians sneak explosives in their underwear on airplanes.
Steve,
they don’t need bombs in underwear. They have fighter planes and tanks and guided missiles and drones that are much more exciting. There is great video of soldiers killing unarmed civilians from this organization called wikileaks, and soldiers convicted of raping and burning 14 year old girls and their families. After all they are only Haji’s and towel heads trying to take over the US and impose Sharia, so anything we do to them is OK.
I really enjoyed getting molested at the airport last week thanks to the constant threat from your buddies. You know how to pick em.
Steve
Really sorry.
Are those Quakers up to no good again?
The Brotherhood has already stated that they will trash the peace deal with Israel.
People often put forward ideas and opinions about the Arab world without actually understanding the culture.
Get familiar with the history of the Arabs and their close relations the Iranians and the Afghanis before commenting.
Baa,
as I have already stated if the MB takes over and proclaims a new caliphate and declares war on Israel, I will have been proven wrong and will admit such.
However there actually are other people in Egypt besides Mubarak and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Even if they were to “take over” I find it interesting what happens to groups when they come into power and have to deal with reality. The MB is not quite the simplistic caricature you represent. But again you can only see what your ideology allows you to see
On the basis of this entry in Wikipedia, (not any old ideology) then I am of the opinion that Tony Duncan will discover he has absolutely backed the wrong horse.
“The Brotherhood’s stated goal is to instill the Qur’an and Sunnah as the “sole reference point for … ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community … and state”. Since its inception in 1928 the movement has officially opposed violent means to achieve its goals, with some exceptions such as in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or to overthrow secular Ba’athist dictators in Syria where they were routinely massacred (see Hama massacre). Jeremy Bowen, BBC Middle East editor, says “Unlike the jihadis, it does not believe it is at war with the West. It is conservative and non-violent and “untested in government and poorly understood – especially in the West”. (As it happens, I do have a very low opinion of BBC reporters.)
Not a government-in-waiting then! Just another bunch of conniving, grasping politicos who want to seize the reins of power and settle scores with the customary “extreme prejudice”.
I look forward to learning that Tony has taken himself off to Egypt and offered his skills to the MB.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_brotherhood
BTW, “After years of studying astrophysics, evolutionary biology, social psychology, and educational theory, Tony finally bowed to the inevitable and became a juggler.”
http://www.jentony.com/about.html
Reading between the lines and teasing Tony just a little, that extract scans as if Tony studied all those subjects, but because he could not get the grades, he dropped out and became a juggler. ;<) Omissions create uncertainty, just like the Climategate whitewashes.
Perry,
Ah, a new person who doesn’t actually read what I say and makes bizarre assumptions about what I know and believe. Just shows how ideology blinds those that only see what they want.
To be clear, Perry please indicate where I have said that I back MB? or anything that is not indicated in the comment you just posted?
as for my academic career. You are partly about the first one regarding astrophysics. I did drop out largely because of poor grades, but that is a long story. partly that resulted from one final where I derived a formula that was supposed to be memorized. For that bit of creativity I was given no credit, so instead of an A or B I got a D. That still smarts after all these years.