Liberal Wall

Obama’s Speech

2009-06-04T22:18:00.001+02:00

When it was announced that Obama would choose Cairo as the venue for his awaited Speech to the Muslim World, I was filled with rage. Here was another manifestation of Obama’s lack of interest in Democracy promotion and human rights. Appeasement was the word that came to my mind. My problem with his speech however was not limited to the venue alone. The idea of a speech to the Muslim World itself was problematic to begin with. In choosing to address the Muslim World, the Obama administration has signaled out its confirmation of the existence of such an entity in the first place and thus danced to the region’s propaganda tunes.

The ridiculous nature of such a choice can become clear when one imagines a similar address by a President, American or any other, to the Christian World. Such a speech would be greeted with utter disbelief. What is the Christian World anyway would be the question. No sensible politician would ignore differences between nations and categorize them according to religion. The only such example that would come to mind would be Osama Bin Laden’s addresses to the Christian World, since for him the world is such divided, but for an American President to do so!

In choosing to give this speech millions of diverse people were categorized by their religion and the region’s myth was accepted. Regardless of one’s nationality, diverse regional problems, or one’s adherence to the religious doctrine itself, all were united in this speech. Such a notion would include nations as far apart as Mali and Indonesia.

The second disturbing aspect of the speech itself is problem of Islam itself. The issue is simplified by some by the question of who speaks for Islam, but the question is much deeper: What is Islam in the first place? Like any religion Islam is a huge pool of ideas that can work in harmony or in conflict and like any other religion its traditions and in a great sense its set of beliefs has been shaped differently in various countries on the basis of history, geography and culture. In that sense there are many Islams and not just one which one can address. It is not only the extremist’s Islam and the moderate’s Islam, but the Egyptian version of Islam as opposed to that of Saudi Arabia. It is the version of Islam in Mali as opposed to that in Afghanistan. Again like any religion it is ridiculous to categorize it in one form or to address it as one entity. Bin Laden speaks for Islam just as Sheikh Tantawey speaks for it and both can find the supporting text for their ideas just as both the Crusaders and John Paul II could do the same. Perhaps Ali Ibn Abi Talib was the earliest to see this when he said referring to the Koran: “The Book has many Faces”.

Moving away from the idea of the address itself, one has to wonder what the goal is in the first place. Like any political action a certain goal is set and thus measured upon. I must say it utterly escapes me what the goal of such a speech is. Is the goal to inform the audience that America is not at war with Islam? Well who believes that such a war exists in the first place except the conspiracy theorists in the “Arab/ Mulsim World” and should one acknowledge their theories? It is of course besides the point to argue that such an audience would not be convinced. The minds that live on the conspiracy theory will not change their minds suddenly because of a few words by the ONE. The “Hate America crowd” will continue with their hatred for in reality their hatred is not based on substance but on ignorance, intolerance and a set of fascism that has overtaken a region since the 30’s. The speech thus is only a song for the choir, the internal and the external ones. The leftist audience in the US and their lunatic fellows in Europe will rejoice at the speech as a break from their imagined Bush policies and the external audience in the “Muslim World” will explode in joy at the ONE’s gesture towards them. Outside of that no clear goal was evident to my unintelligent eyes.

The venue itself is of course personally disturbing. As an Egyptian it is utterly disgusting to see the American President ignoring all American and universal values and appeasing an authoritarian regime. Mubarak’s regime which has been the cornerstone of the maintenance of the region’s continued state of repression was being given a gift of the first class. It is only ironic that Obama would choose to speak from a capital that embodies all the values that America stands against. Appeasement to such a regime is not only wrong but absolutely dangerous as 9/11 has taught us. It would be stupid of the American administration to think that such a speech is addressed to the Egyptian people who were besieged in their houses for his visit and who’s daily lives he disturbed. Those people who have been under a military dictatorship for the past 56 years whether in its totalitarian form under Nasser or in its authoritarian form under Sadat and Mubarak, were obviously the least suitable for his speech. If such a speech was to be delivered in the first place a better venue should have been chosen. A democratic country, where personal and religious freedoms were established would have been much more suited for his speech if he had intended to talk to the region’s people and not their authoritarian leaders and hate filled elites. Baghdad would of course had been perfect, but so would many others. The idea that the Muslim World consists only of dictatorships is naïve. There is no Islamic problem with democracy or a vacuum of freedom within it. Such a vacuum exists only in the so called “Arab World”. Many Muslim countries if countries can be categorized by religion are available from Albania to Indonesia and from Turkey to the Maldives. To ignore all these options and choose Egypt can only be viewed as a slap on the face to all the democracy activists in the region and to the values that Obama supposedly stands for.

With this anticipation or more precisely the lack thereof I awaited his speech and the impact it would have. Obama’s speech seemed to be generating a lot of results even before it began. The Egyptian regime whishing to look in its best form before the eyes of the ONE and the rest of the world embarked on a huge program of renovation and cleaning. Cairo University was cleaned as it had never been before and its dome shined as it had never shined. Every street that Obama would pass through was cleaned and decorated. The intense renovation program by the government led to Egyptians joking that they wanted Obama to visit every street and district in Cairo so that the whole city can be cleaned.

The speech itself of course held no surprises. Obama as a great speaker was the most suitable for his skeptical audience. This should not be however interpreted as a huge success. Obama received the numerous claps, but only when he played to the audiences previously held ideas or as the Sandmonkey once put it “when he gave them a hand job”. Their masturbation session was complete and the audience reached its orgasm with every line about Palestine or appeasement to their world view, but Obama received an utter silence when he discussed other issues. The parts on the Holocaust and 9/11 were met with a complete lack of reaction.

Obama’s speech was however disturbing to me in what he did say and what he chose to ignore. Let us begin by what he said.

Obama framed the tension between the West and Muslims as a tension rooted in history from religious wars to colonialism. Here Obama fell prey to the “Muslim World’s” interpretation of the conflict and not to the conflict as it is. To argue that the Crusades or the imperialist era is the root of the current conflict, Obama chose the Bin Laden vision of the world. The current conflict is not rooted in religious wars by any side nor is it rooted in occupation. The current conflict is rooted in modernity and the clash between a modern world and a pre modern fascist movement that is the child of Hitler and Mussolini. The Crusades are not part of the story here neither is the Islamic invasion of the region in the 6th century. Colonialism is also not related and was not in any term a religious conflict. As to the Cold War’s treatment of Muslim-majority countries as proxies without regard to their own aspirations, one has to wonder whether the same could not be said on his own actions ignoring those who aspire to be free in the region.

Obama’s second framework for his speech is that of a suspicion towards Islam that was built after 9/11. Here again Obama fell prey to such lunacy held ideas as the existence of Islamophobia. Such a notion only serves to crush any serious debate of actions undertaken by people and where they originate from. Such a term has been the easiest way out for oppressive regimes and fascist elites not interested in self examination and not capable of standing in front of a serious examination.

The third dominant idea throughout his speech is that of a new beginning. This new beginning would be based on respect and that America and Islam are not in competition. While the notion of a conflict between a Democratic State and a world wide religion is laughable in the first place as no such conflict can exist, Obama’s insistence on framing it as such only plays once again to the region’s conspiracy theories defining the Bush years as against Islam or as part of the Crusades.

Moving through the speech Obama chose to ignore facts and to invent ones when necessary. While Islamic centers of learning were indeed beacons of light in the Middle Ages, Al Azhar was certainly not. The Mosque and the School were both built after the decline of intellectual freedom and innovation in the Muslim world. Al Azhar did not play the role that Cordoba, Baghdad or Cyprus played in the exchange of culture and innovation. Al Azhar stood for the exact opposite. It stood for the repression of free thought and innovation.

In choosing the Tripoli Treaty of 1796 as his example, Obama also played freely with the facts. The Tripoli Treaty was a bribe paid by the young nation to pirates after their Ambassador in London informed Thomas Jefferson that “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every Muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.” Having no Navy capable of fighting those pirates the US paid them $1 million a year. The Treaty was broken after the US decided not to pay the bribe anymore and in reality the first relationship between America and that part of the world was war and not peace. The first war America fought after its independence was against Berber Pirates in Tripoli and was followed by the second Barbary War in 1815.

Obama also sited a number of American Muslims that is outside any factual estimate. The City University of New York has put the number at 1.1 milion, the Glenmary Research Center at 1.6 million, the World Factbook at 1.8 million, and the Pew Research Center as 2.4 million. The number of 7 million is only used by such organizations as CAIR.

Moving on to the 7 issues Obama discussed, one has to applaud his courageous words on 9/11. Obama words could not have been sharper when he said; “These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with”, but Obama has failed to give the intellectual moral framework for the conflict. Being no George Bush, Obama chose not to call it evil and to frame the conflict as Bush did as that of Islamofascism against the world. He thus failed to put the conflict in perspective of the world’s fight against its likes before from Nazism to Communism. Being also no Bush and lacking his clear perspective he choose to define the Iraq War as a war of choice and not as a fight against Fascism just as Afghanistan is. He also fell prey to the region’s fantasies regarding torture and double standards by America. The War on Islamofascism is not contrary to American ideals, it is the embodiment of those ideals.

On the question of Israel and Palestine, Obama was courageous enough in his first words on the unbreakable bond between America and Israel. Such words while true take a lot of courage to state in front of such an audience. Also courageous and clear was his statement on the Holocaust and his condemnation of its denial. What lacked however was the conclusion. Why did the Holocaust take place and how can we make sure it never happens again? How can we stop Anti Semitism from rising and how can we stop a nuclear Iran from repeating history? These are the questions Obama left unanswered. Also left unanswered is the major question of why the Palestinian people have suffered so much and the region’s role in that suffering? It is utterly hilarious to discuss the Palestinian intolerable situation in Gaza or the West Bank while ignoring their equally intolerable situation in Lebanon. Such set of thinking is all too common in the region, but that does not make it acceptable for Obama to follow suit. In a real discussion of the issue one has to question the region’s real interest in solving the conflict or helping the Palestinians. His statements on the two-state solution were clear enough although they ignored all the evidence proving such a solution unattainable currently. For a Palestinian State to be established Obama discussed institution building but was completely silent on democracy and combating extremism not in deeds alone but on the textbooks that ensure the continued cycle of violence. In using the term “Arab Israeli Conflict”, Obama again fell prey to the region’s version of history. While a Palestinian Israeli conflict exists and needs to be addressed, an Arab Israeli one is only an invented mechanism of the region’s authoritarian regimes to continue to ignore their people’s real needs and aspirations in pursuit of an invented conflict.

On the Iranian question Obama talked as little as possible, but his talk was troubling. The conflict between America and Iran is not one of decades of mistrust, it is between two ideas, two sets of values and two world views. Iran is not a case of a misunderstanding that leads to lack of trust. Iran has been very clear in where it stands and no illusions exist on that matter. The real question is what to do about it.

Perhaps shorter than his discussion of Iran was his mention of democracy. While it is true that no system of government can or should be imposed on one nation by another, it is also true that no system of government can or should be imposed on a nation by one man, one party or one ideology. While Obama was clear that ideas of democracy, the rule of law and a transparent government are not an American idea, but a human right, he fell silent on how he would support them.

In his Religious freedom paragraphs, Obama chose again to play with facts. While it is true that Andalusia had a proud history of tolerance such words can not be said on the whole Islamic history. Those centuries were filled with peaceful coexistence as they were also filled with religious intolerance, Dzimmi Status and persecutions. Indonesia, which Obama mentions is a current example of that with its religious conflicts between Christians and Muslims. To try to pass modern notions born out of modernity such as human rights, religious freedom and democracy on a pre modern religion is naïve. The idea that a modern ideal such as tolerance is part of Islam is as laughable as an argument that Jesus Christ’s answer on giving the coin to Caesar is a deeply rooted secularism in Christianity. Pre modern religions, ideologies and values are not related to modernity. As to his comments regarding charitable giving rules on America, one is left wondering what exactly he means. Should rules on one religion’s charitable organizations be different from the others? Also ambiguous is his comments on Muslims being barred from practicing religion in Western countries. While Turkey’s practices and laws against Hijab are disgusting and illiberal, one is left wondering on the lack of comment on forcing Hijab on girls that are 6 or 8 years old.

This brings us to women’s rights. While anyone viewing a veiled women as less equal is disgusting, one wonders where those people exist? Whom in the West has promoted such notions? While it is also true that Muslim countries have elected a Women President while the United States has not, such a measurement of women’s rights is extremely simplistic and naïve. Obama failed to address real issues that women face in the region from family killings, arranged marriages to violence and humiliation against women.

What Obama did not mention however is as important as what he did. He only touched on issues of democracy, human rights and religious freedom. He chose to ignore the plights of the people in the region whom can not choose their own lives and fortunes. He made no reference to the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes that rule the region and whose policies and ideologies destroyed not only its present people but generations to come. What he most ignored was a challenge to Muslims for self examination and thus an opportunity to reach a real understanding of one’s self and the world around him. In this Obama fell silent and in this he failed. Having no clear strategy in my view for his address, the address will fade away as soon as the realities on the ground become clear. Those who are living in the alternative universe of the conspiracy theories will not change their minds and those of us who seek a better world have gained little. One lesson however is absolutely clear. For those Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese who fight for their freedoms in their countries, who believe in the values of democracy and the rule of law have lost a Friend in the White House and have gained an ENEMY. For someone who fights for his freedom there is only two options: You are either with me or against me.

The Grand Jewish Zionist Conspiracy

2008-03-29T22:01:00.001+02:00

In my attempt to follow the daily news, I am a member of various yahoo groups that include hundreds of members sending daily emails. These groups vary in terms of interest and political orientation. Usually you get hundreds of worthless emails, but from time to time you get some real items of news that are of interest to me.

Following the emails sent by people is however more interesting to tell their mentality and general mood. Of course they are not totally representative of Egypt and its population, but they are an interesting indication nonetheless as they are supposedly more educated and more aware of the world around them.

In one of these groups I received an email that was quite interesting to say the least. The email was quite short and read as follows: “Do you know that you carry the Star of Israel, God curse her, on your Computer? Did you know in the first place that your Computer had the Star of Israel in it? Go to my Computer, then go to the C Drive, Open Program Files, then open Microsoft Office, enter Media, then CAGCAT10. You will find the picture under the name JO285926. Remove this trash from your Computer and spread this message by all means possible.”

I followed the instructions given and indeed I found a picture of the Menorah and the background had the Star of David. Here was the greatest proof of all conspiracy theories. Finally the Arab Conspiracy Mind can rest assured that all its fears and theories are true. Microsoft has included a symbol on all its Computers to have a laugh at us. But wait a minute. What are those other pictures in the folder? There is a picture of the Eifel Tower! Yes the French must be part of the conspiracy. Isn’t Sarkozy’s mother half Jewish! Santa Clouse picture! So what the Christians are part of the Grand Conspiracy, aren’t they? A Hammer? Of course Communism is part of the Jewish Conspiracy. Buda? Well they are Pagans anyway and it wouldn’t be a surprise if they were part of the conspiracy. But what is this picture next to Buda. It is a squared black stone and around it is what looks like a ….. Mosque!!!!!!!!!! Could it be the Kaaba? How come????????? Is Islam part of the Jewish conspiracy? Well it must be an attempt to fool us by putting an Islamic symbol there. It must also be an insult to put a symbol of Islam next to those pagan symbols.

Of course it is a waste of time to try to explain to such idiots that Microsoft has simply included some pictures in the Office, 85 in total, for use. Such simple explanation is of course too naïve of me. It would also of course be too stupid of me to argue with such mentalities that the Star of David is a religious symbol and so is the Menorah and that they are not “trash” as the author of the email so eloquently wrote.

A smarter person that the one that sent this email replied to everyone with his warning to all of us that it might be a virus or a Trojan file that gathers info on us!!!!!!!!

Daniel Pipes has written an excellent book on Conspiracy Theories in the Arab world, but I think his book is too old by now. With the new technology advancement the Conspiracy Mind has found new unexplored rooms and venues. A Second part of his book is badly needed to cover the new conspiracy theories.

Al Ahram and the Holocaust

2008-03-18T17:37:00.003+02:00

Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor is in a historic visit to Israel. Her visit is in many terms historical. She will be the first German Chancellor to address the Israeli Knesset in a speech today. This speech has created a huge debate in Israel as many Israelis are still uncomfortable with the idea of a German Chancellor addressing the Knesset. Germany is after all the country that has produced to the world the likes of Hitler and the memory of the terrible atrocities he has done are still very much alive in the world’s memory and especially in the memories of the Jewish people. As David Hazony writes at Contentions: “And yet, one cannot really blame those few members of Knesset who have threatened to walk out in protest. There are certain things that neither time nor reason overcome. Nothing can ever make up for the Holocaust. The Jews are a people of exceptionally long memory, and we should be more surprised by the Knesset’s willingness to host Merkel than by the few who oppose the visit.”

Hazony goes on in analyzing the benefits of the visit and of closer Israeli German relations. He argues that “Israel should embrace the friendship Germany has offered, while at the same time continuing to study the Holocaust, hunt down the remaining Nazi criminals, and bring foreign dignitaries to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial, to reinforce the lessons of what humanity is capable of.”

The visit however had a different reading in the Arab press. That the visit would be attacked by Arab journalists is no surprise, but today Al Ahram really took this too far. Al Ahram ran a story on the visit with the following headline “Merkel submits to Blackmail and admits her country’s responsibility for the Holocaust”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is of course laughable to try to mention to Al Ahram that Germany has admitted its responsibility before, but the headline raises more serious questions.

Is asking for Germany to admit its crime a Blackmail?

More importantly if Al Ahram thinks that Germany should not submit to such blackmail and admit its responsibility for the Holocaust, WHO SHOULD?

Was it perhaps the Americans who planned and executed the Holocaust? America is to be blamed for everything after all.

Or did the Jews execute and gas themselves?

Oh how could I forget, the Holocaust never took place. It is a myth and a propaganda by the Elders of Zion and a conspiracy.

Stupid Me!

Mubarak No. 8

2008-02-23T23:11:00.001+02:00

Analysts, Presidents, and ordinary people all over the world have had various thoughts on Fidel Castro’s decision not to seek another term as President. In Egypt however his decision had a different impact. Besides the usual news stories in the newspapers, Castro leaving power had another impact on Egypt.

Castro had for so many years maintained his position as the world’s longest serving President. Having taken over power in 1959, very few world leaders have remained for so long, but Castro’s decision helped President Mubarak a lot. Instead of being No. 9 on the list of the world’s longest serving Presidents, Mubarak has jumped to No. 8.

The list is quite entertaining to read. The current standing is as follows:

1. Gabon: Omar Bongo 1967
2. Libya: Moammar Gadhafi 1969
3. Yemen: Ali Abdullah Saleh
4. Maldives: Maumoon Abdul Gayoom 1978
5. Equatorial Guinea: Teodoro Obiang 1979
6. Angola: Jose Eduardo dos Santos 1979
7. Zimbabwe: Robert Mugabe 1980
8. Egypt: Hosni Mubarak 1981

Of course it is lovely to see all those countries rankings on the United Nations Human Development Index to get the full picture of those great leaders tremendous efforts on behalf of their countries.

Gabon (119)
Libya (56)
Yemen (153)
Maldives (100)
Equatorial Guinea (127)
Angola (162)
Zimbabwe (151)
Egypt (112)

Mubarak might be happy with his newly hard worked rank, but as an Egyptian I see it as a disgrace we should be No. 1. Why should Gabon be better than Egypt? Mubarak should send his intelligence and state security to do the job and give him his rightful place in history No. 1.

To make matters funnier, El Badeel newspaper in celebration of Egypt’s great victory in reaching No. 8 published a list of the public places that Mr. Mubarak has dedicated to himself and named after himself. The list is awesome and crystallizes how Egyptians love their President.

2600 Schools
400 Hospitals
52 Housing Project
300 Villages
90 Research Centers
180 Agricultural Projects
600 Conference Centers
62 Streets and Bus Stations

The Saudi Dynasty have renamed the whole country to their founders name, Egypt should not stand there watching them take that prestige. Let’s rename the country after Mubarak. Let Egypt’s name from now on be Al Mubarakia.

The Coptic Church and Anti Semitism

2008-02-13T23:11:00.002+02:00

Some people might think that ongoing Anti Semitism in Egypt is a phenomena that is restricted to Muslims. That is not really the case. Statements by Muslim religious leaders have been covered by the press, but little attention has been given to the Coptic Church, which has had its share of Anti Semitism.

Christian books are filled with Anti Semitic remarks and stories especially the “Sineksar”, the official Church book of Saints in which you can find stories that include Blood Libel.

Pope Shenouda II, the leader of the Coptic Church has made statements in the past that included many Anti Semitic views. In an interview on the Egyptian Television on the 8th of April 2007 he said: “the Western Churches were wrong to exonerate Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and criticized recent statements apologizing for Christian anti-Semitism.”

“Asked whether Jews were “Christ-killers”, responsible for the crucifixion, Shenouda stated, “The New Testament says that they are,” and asked rhetorically whether the Vatican was “against the teachings of the New Testament?”

He further added a hilarious statement on why he had banned Christians from going to pilgrimage to Jerusalem by saying: “Shenouda stated he had banned Copts from visiting Israel for fear they will “be influenced by the Israeli media, and we will not be able to prevent this. Who knows what ideas they will return with?”

Pope Shenouda is not the only Coptic Church leader that holds Anti Semitic views. Father Morcos Aziz Khalil in a recent article in Nahdet Masr Newspaper devoted his entire time to bashing the Jews. He said: “The Jews saw that the Church is their No. 1 Enemy and that without Priesthood the Church looses its most important component, thus the Masonic Movement was the secret Zionist hand to create revolution against the clergy. The Zionist Ideology has kept its conspiracies a secret buried in silence.”

He then added that the Zionist Movement has tried to work in Egypt through Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists and that those organizations are merely a cover that has American Zionists behind it.”

A new element was added to this ongoing smear and hatred campaign after the decision by the Catholic Church to change a Prayer that was insulting to Jews. While Bishop Morcos dismissed the matter as an internal issue inside the Catholic Church and that the Catholic Church is free to change its internal rituals, Father Salib Matta Sawires was quick to express his disapproval. He said: “For us the fact remains that the Jews will be responsible for Christ’s blood as they themselves said in the Bible unless they convert to Christianity.”

It is of course a waste of time to argue with minds like these that believe that the Jews living after 2000 years after the crucifixion are responsible for that. More hilariously sad is the reason the Pope gave for banning pilgrimage. Fear of Israeli media influence!

While an explanation can be found in the Church’s attempt to position itself as patriotic as the rest of the country, it is sad that Christians that face an ongoing hate campaign and discrimination would show the same to others.

Truly Sad.

Egyptian Workers in Israel should be flogged

2008-02-13T22:16:00.001+02:00

The ongoing debate about Egyptians working in Israel has seen many accusations and variations, but little content. The number itself of these workers is a matter of myth. From a number of 600 given by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry, 10,000 by the Media, to the hilarious 220,000 given by a Muslim Brotherhood Member of Parliament, the numbers have varied, but the uproar has continued.

The matter took a new twist in an interview given by Hussein Megawer to the daily Egyptian Newspaper El Masry El Youm. Hussein Megawer is amongst numerous jobs and titles that he holds, a NDP Member and Parliament and the Head of the official pro government Workers Union. Mr. Megawer said in this interview that “he will not interfere in any capacity to solve any problems that the Egyptian workers face in Israel.” To explain his decision Mr. Megawer said that “one can not call those people workers. They are traitors that deserve to be flogged for forgetting the blood of their fathers and grandfathers that were killed by Israel.”

Mr. Megawer added that “he requests that the Egyptian Citizenship be withdrawn from any Egyptian that betrays his country and works in Israel.”

Obviously no one told the NDP MP that flogging is not part of the Egyptian legal code of punishment, but that could be remedied very soon. Mr. Megawer you are an MP and you have the right to suggest laws. You are a leader in your governing party so I am sure that you can get this important piece of legislation passed. Why don’t you go ahead with your words Mr. Megawer?

Pass the law o flog people and earn your place in history.
Or shall I say in history’s garbage can.

Egyptian Journalism and Anti Semitism

2008-02-13T21:38:00.002+02:00

Egypt’s ongoing problem of Anti Semitism seems to be increasing lately. The last example was published just yesterday in El Gomhoria newspaper, which is a government, owned and run newspaper. Mohamed Abu Hadid writes a weekly column in the newspaper that covers nearly one whole page. He usually writes a long article on a topic and after that writes small one line comments on important news of the week. In his article on the 10th of January the comments section included this line that read as follows: “Insisting on confirming its bias, the US Congress has sent to us a member to visit Egypt by the name of Steve Israel”.

First of all it is quite sad that Mr. Mohamed Abu Hadid does not know that individual members of Congress visit countries on their own and are not sent in blocs based on a decision by the government as in other countries. Mr. Steve Israel is a member of Congress and he decided to visit Egypt. Congressman Israel is a member of the House Appropriations Committee and served previously on the House Armed Services Committee. Thus it is only natural that he would decide to pay Egypt a visit, with the growing debate about the AID to Egypt and the accusations on the Tunnels in Sinai. Thus he is not sent by Congress and there is contrary to the writer’s imagination no hidden or official message. It is not an attempt by Congress to prove anything let alone its bias.

More importantly however is the question of why the writer found the visit as a proof of bias or a confirmation of it. Is it perhaps the member’s name? The Congressman’s name is obviously provocative to the writer. Or might it be that the Congressman is indeed Jewish? In both cases why is that provocative? Israel is a biblical name that is used by both Christians and Jews. I personally have an Egyptian Christian friend whose family name is Israel.

Well for Congress to overcome creating such hard feelings and to destroy any claims of its bias I have a suggestion to make to American lawmakers. Do not send us any Jews. Whether they are Congressman, Diplomats or just Tourists just don’t send them. It obviously hurts our honorable writer’s feelings and while we are at it why elect them in the first place. Please people of America do not elect Jews. If you do we will consider it an insult!!!

The German Betrayal

2008-02-12T22:36:00.000+02:00

Germany and the rest of Europe have had a long standing policy of appeasement to Dictators and Tyrants all over the world. One would think that a country that has suffered so much from tyranny and that saw the results of dictatorship would have learned the lesson, but no such lesson was obviously been learnt. While the US has had its own share of support for tyranny and while a lot of its actions does not follow its rhetoric, the Europeans have been the masters in this field.

I was getting a bit optimistic on that after the recent European Parliament resolution condemning Human Rights violations by the Egyptian government, but the Europeans reactions afterwards left no room for optimism. No clearer example can be found than the recent statement by the German Ambassador in Egypt. During a recent meeting of the Egyptian European Council the German Ambassador stated the following: “Egypt is a country that enjoys enough freedom and democracy to overcome any negatives that take place in the Egyptian Society”. He then went on to argue that a clear indication of the freedom atmosphere in Egypt is Egyptian art and gave an example of two recent movies that were critical of the government. He also added that the European community respects Egypt’s special states in dealing with its internal problems as a strong country that aces its challenges in a constructive manner and on the highest level.

The Finnish ambassador was quick to add his endorsement to his colleagues statement.

To add insult to stupidity the German Chairman of the Egyptian German Chamber of Commerce said in an interview with El Masry El Yoom newspaper when asked about Gamal Mubarak inheriting the Presidency from his father that: “There is a Pharaohnic tradition that the son assumes power after his father”. He added that there are many countries that speak a lot about democracy and elections and have now disastrous conditions like Kenya and Brazil.

I suggest that Freedom House changes its category for identifying democratic countries to suit the new European standards. It is not free elections, it is not respect for Human Rights, it is not Religious Freedom, it is ………. Movies.

An Interesting Poll

2008-02-12T21:58:00.000+02:00

A recent poll was conducted by the Electronic Center for Public Opinion about which countries Egyptians consider as friends or enemies. While any poll in a dictatorship must be viewed with suspicion as it is only natural for people to be afraid of stating their opinions, this poll gave an interesting result.

As expected Saudi Arabia was the No. 1 friend in the eyes of Egyptians with 88% considering it a friendly nation. It was followed by Sudan, Palestine, Jordan and Lebanon.

In the non Arab countries Japan led with 58% followed by China.

The 2 most interesting numbers were those of Iran and Israel. Only 44% viewed Iran as a friend. This is a surprise after all the rhetoric lately and the worming of relations. It might have to do with the Sunni Shiite divide or with Iran’s handling of the Sadat’s murderer issue.

The other great surprise is that related to Israel. 56% viewed Israel as a great enemy and 22% viewed it as an enemy. The total is 78%. Israel led the list of countries that are viewed negatively by Egyptians. That is no surprise. Whether through the education books or the media, Egyptians have many stories to explain their hatred to Israel.

The real surprise however is that 22% of Egyptians do not view Israel as enemy. While people might argue that Christians are less likely than Muslims to have strong feelings of animosity towards Israel, the number exceeds any estimation of the Christian population in Egypt.

People in Israel should not open their champagne bottles yet, but it is an interesting number to watch.

Hamas wants us silenced

2008-02-12T21:42:00.000+02:00

The Muslim Brotherhood’s English website has published a statement by Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri in which he tried to justify the attacks on the Egyptian soldiers on the boarders with Gaza by saying: “what happened was as a result of an asphyxiating state suffered by one and a half million people in Gaza”

He went on to say: “that those who overstated the attacks on Egyptian soldiers did not talk about the position of Dr Mahmoud Al-Zahhar who went to apologize to the Egyptian officers and the Hamas delegation who handed gifts to the Egyptian security men.”

Now I fail to understand how one can overstate an attack on Egypt, its soldiers and boarders, but it seems that Hamas has another definition of the word attack.

This is all expected from a Hamas spokesman, but the real funny part came at the end of his statement when he said that: “The spokesman called on the Egyptian leadership to silence the "poisonous" voices that cause bitterness and pain to the Palestinian people.”

Now I don’t know how Mr. Abu Zuhri wants us silenced, but one can have images from the Hamas takeover of Gaza last summer to understand Hamas’s definition of silencing people.

Egyptian Journalism Ethics: Can it get any worse?

2008-02-03T22:13:00.000+02:00

I have written previously on Egyptian journalism and its deterioration, but this is probably the worst example I have seen.

The CEO of Al Ahram newspaper, the official government newspaper, Mosry Atallah, has written an article on the 24th of November 2007 expressing his disapproval of how Egyptian newspapers are highlighting the problems in Egypt. He stated that we exaggerate in blaming ourselves in the name of press freedom. He added that the Egyptian press has become only focused on the negatives and not on the positive things in Egypt. He claimed that he is not calling on the newspapers not to cover the negatives, but that real freedom is based on preaching hope.

Mr. Morsy Atallah then gave an example from the US to prove his point. He said that some years ago he was traveling with President Mubarak to Washington D.C. As usual, as he says foreign and Arab journalists flock to the Hotel where Mubarak is staying to learn of his opinions. Mr. Atallah says that an Arab journalist had met with him than and blamed Egyptian newspapers for covering on the front page a water pump explosion in Tahrir square, Egypt’s main square. The claimed Arab journalist had supposedly told him this happens all the time in the US and that it is not covered by US newspapers as they have an unwritten agreement between US newspapers to avoid highlighting such negative incidents so as not to shake the union of the American people. He then showed him a copy of the Washington Post and highlighted a little story in the internal pages about a plane crash that left 45 people dead and 53 injured. The claimed Arab journalist then asked him if such an incident had occurred in Egypt, would it receive such minor coverage or would all newspapers talk about it?

My first reaction was to write a strong article totally mocking the so called unwritten agreement and talking about the US newspapers in uncovering Watergate and Abu Ghrieb, but I cautioned myself not to jump on the guy’s throat and to research the matter further. I decided to look up in the Washington Post archives to find this plane crash and to analyze the coverage it received in US newspapers. My efforts failed totally as there was no mention of the plane crash in the Washington Post. That was quite a surprise to me and it seemed to support Mr. Atallah’s claims.

I then went on and searched the archive’s of all plane crash incidents in the world and my surprise was complete when I received confirmation that no incident anywhere in the world fits with Mr. Atallah’s description even if we go back to the 1930’s.

Mr. Atallah in an attempt to support his otherwise unbelievable argument and claims has totally made up his supporting evidence. This is not the first time for the highest ranking journalist in Egypt. In June 2007, Mr. Atallah wrote a whole series of articles in which he discussed the neoconservative ideology. The articles were typical of the Egyptian media’s ignorance, but that is not the issue here. Having been virtually ignored on the 2th of June, Mr. Atallah published an article in which he claimed that he had received a reply from Egyptian American political commentator Magdi Khalil defending neocons and the US government. Mr. Atallah went on to attack Magdi Khalil and his stands accusing him of calling for the cut of US Aid to Egypt. Magdi Khalil sent a reply to Al Ahram stating that he had not sent Morsi Atallah any reply whatsoever and asked for it to be published. Al Ahram of course did not publish his letter and Magdi was forced to publish it elsewhere.

This level of journalism can be expected from an unknown journalist in a tabloid newspaper, but not from Al Ahram’s CEO.

Anti Semitism Revisited

2008-02-03T22:02:00.000+02:00

My previous post on Anti-Semitism in Egypt created a lot of debate and was criticized by many people. That was not entirely unexpected.

I believe that people are blinded by their hatred to Israel and do not see that it has turned to hatred to Jews as Jews. This growing Anti-Semitism in Egypt and the Arab world in general largely remains unchallenged. The historical plight of Jews in the Arab world has largely remained unnoticed in the eyes of Arabs. From the massacre in Baghdad in 1828 to the Damascus Passover Bread massacre in 1840 the list is endless. The modern Jewish exodus from the Arab world is estimated to have included up to 856,000 Jews. It is a common myth that these Jews left Egypt by their own will. More than 3,000 Jews were imprisoned or detained. Their homes and properties were confiscated and the government media campaign made no effort to distinguish between Egyptian Jews, which had lived in Egypt for centuries and were an integral part of the Egyptian society and between Egypt’s wars at the time with Israel. This led to attacks on Jews and their life in Egypt became unbearable.

This media campaign has continued even after the Camp David Accords and the Peace Treaty with Israel. Even thought the government had officially made peace with Israel, it allowed Anti-Semitism to grow and flourish until it became impossible to distinguish between a person’s position towards Israel and his hatred to Jews. Myths like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion continued to be advocated reaching its climax in the October 2002 T.V. Drama.

The latest example of such failure to distinguish between the State of Israel and Judaism occurred in Rome. The leaders of the Muslim community in Rome, represented by the Islamic Cultural Center and its affiliated Rome Mosque, were scheduled to pay a visit to the Rome Synagogue. The visit was part of the continuous efforts on dialogue between religions. The visit was scheduled to take place on the 23rd of January, but was cancelled after Al Azhar intervened. While the Egyptian Ambassador to Italy denied such claims and stated that Al Azhar does not intervene in the administration of the Islamic Cultural Center, Al Azhar’s role was stated in an interview by Al Azhar’s Deputy Leader, Abdel Fattah Allam, in which he said that in Al Azhar we have a positive stand towards the dialogue between religions, but in regards to the dialogue between Islam and Judaism this is not an option until rights are returned to its rightful people.

It is of course eye catching that Al Azhar would intervene in the running of the main Islamic Center in Italy. This role of religious institutions in Egypt and Saudi Arabia has had a negative effect on Islamic centers and leaders in Europe and the US and has pushed them to more fundamentalist positions.

The question that haunts me is why Egyptians keep mixing up between their political position towards Israel and Jews. This failure to distinguish between a political stand and a hatred to Jews is a serious threat to all of us and should not be ignored.

As Martin Niemoller said in his famous poem:

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

We all stood silent when they targeted the Jews. We all stood silent when Egypt lost its Jewish population. We felt it wasn’t our problem and we not only didn’t care, we participated actively.

We all stood silent as the Shiite’s were arrested and tortured. We all stood silent when the Christians were denied their rights to build Churches. We all stood silent when the elections were forged. We all stood silent when political prisoners were tortured. And we are all standing now silent as the Baha’is are being denied their basic rights.

The question is when are we going to stand up and speak???

Its Egypt’s Security Stupid!

2008-01-26T20:29:00.000+02:00

As an Egyptian I am totally frightened by the situation in the past couple of days in Sinai and along the border with Gaza. This is not an over alarmist position. The situation in Sinai now poses the greatest threat to Egypt’s national security.

Immediately after electricity was cut from Gaza we saw a movement by Palestinians towards the Egyptian borders. At first came the women and after them the militia men started blowing up holes in the border which led to the situation going totally out of control and an estimated 700,000 Palestinians entering Sinai.

The Egyptian President gave a speech in which he stated that Egypt would not allow the starvation of Palestinians. Although it was clearly a late attempt to show that he was in control and that he had let the Palestinians in, his words gave me no relief. The situation continued to escalate and more holes were blown on the border and more Palestinians came in. The border became a joke as it became a freeman’s land allowing even Egyptian bloggers to enter into Gaza and meet Ismail Haneya. This is in itself a joke. I mean the guy that is supposedly the second sought man by Israel after Nasrallah is easy to locate and sit with. Where are those supposed assassination attempts by Fatah that Hamas was screaming about just a few days ago? More hilarious is that Ismail Haneya, seems to be having a lot of free time to sit with bloggers. Instead of doing his job the guy is giving interviews.

I am honestly disgusted of those Arab Nationalists, Socialists and Islamists who have been screaming for decades about Egypt’s National Security. They have been giving us lectures in strategy and nationalism and that Egypt’s national security is not limited to its boarders. Whether they talked about Palestine as a national security issue for Egypt, or they reached the Pakistani boarders, they continued to argue for national security for Egypt and have made Egypt pay for 59 years with its own blood and wellbeing for the greater Arab Cause. What shocks me is that when Egypt is itself under threat they have shut up and called for demonstrations against the Egyptian government and its position in Gaza. I am the last person on earth to support the Egyptian government, but seriously what do you want them to do Mr. Heakal and the rest of the so called experts? Do you want us to take them all in???

It also is quite surprising that just 1 day after the electricity shut off, thousands were storming the borders. I mean with all due respect to everyone, people do not starve in 1 day!!!

I am not against letting people in. Egypt is bound by international law to take refugees fleeing, but I seriously question the way this was done. People crossing any border should be at least be registered and searched. Israel has been arguing lately that Egypt is not doing enough in stopping weapons smuggling through the tunnels. Now with the situation being complete chaos on the borders there is no way to stop the weapons going in or for this matter going out.

Any Palestinian crossing the border could take with him weapons and explosions and supply them to Al Qaeda affiliated groups in Sinai. With Al Qaeda reportedly being active in Gaza this scenario seems very possible. Even if it was not Al Qaeda, Gaza is full of weapons and not just by Hamas. Weapons are available there for every street gang and organized family crime. Can anyone take the risk of some El Kassam rockets being available to be fired at Hotels in Sharm El Sheikh. In addition to this it would be interesting to see how the situation on the borders is affecting Tourism in Sinai. Egypt is heavily dependent on Tourism income and any drop in Tourists would have a huge effect on the Egyptian economy.

Even if my fears of weapon smuggling and terrorist acts prove to be premature, there is no way to determine that the people crossing into Sinai do not include thugs and thieves.

Once again no one is saying that Palestinians should starve or die. If the situation inside Gaza proves to be a humanitarian crises, a humanitarian action should be considered not on the bases of Arab Nationalism but on pure humanity. In that case humanitarian assistance going to Gaza or some cases that need medical assistance going into Egypt is expected, but before they are let in an action plan needs to be formulated that takes into consideration the humanitarian situation and more importantly Egypt’s national interests and security.

Gaza should not be turned into Egypt’s problem. Israel since its disengagement and withdrawal from Gaza has been looking for ways to deal with it. With the world viewing Gaza as still Israel’s problem, Israel has been looking for ways to officially disengage from Gaza. Noah Pollak and David Hazony have written excellent articles on the matter in contentions. Although worth reading is Alex Fishman’s piece.

Is Egypt ready to take responsibility not just for a short period, but permanently for Gaza? Are we ready to deal with the situation there?

The current situation allows Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank to go on with the Peace process and reach a 2 State solution, while Egypt willingly or unwillingly is left to deal with Gaza, whether by assuming control there as it did before 1967 or by taking a huge number of refugees on a permanent basis inside Sinai, from the already overpopulated Gaza.

In whose interest is this?

It defiantly is not in Egypt’s best interests.

The Muslim Brotherhood congratulates Christians on Christmas

2008-01-10T23:14:00.000+02:00

The Muslim Brotherhood has issued a very nice statement this year to congratulate Christians on the occasion of Christmas. Unlike previous years the letter is very clear and strong in its words. It is written and sent by Mahdi Akef and the entire Executive Council of the Muslim Brotherhood. It sends its greetings not only to Copts in Egypt, but also abroad. More importantly it has some very strong words on religious freedom, tolerance and equality and state that the Muslim Brotherhood is committed to these basic principles.

I was quite taken aback by the statement. It is to my knowledge one of the strongest worded statements by the Muslim Brotherhood to congratulate Christians, but before anyone jumps to conclusions the statement was issued and published in English and on the Muslim Brotherhood’s English website. When I searched the Muslim Brotherhood’s Arabic website the result was nothing, zero, non. The statement was not published there at all.

This leaves me with a couple of possibilities to explain this.

The Muslim Brotherhood Chairman and Executive Council do not speak Arabic, but rather English. This is why they wrote it in their native tongue.
Christians in Egypt do not speak Arabic, but rather English. Thus the Muslim Brotherhood leadership thought it appropriate to congratulate Christians in their own language.
The audience and target of this letter are not the Christians, but the outside world and especially the West. This is why the statement was issued and published in English to show a moderate face of the Brotherhood.

Which possibility do you think makes more sense???

Shisha is 7aram

2008-01-10T23:01:00.000+02:00

On the 6th of January, just like every year I travel with my family to Quesna in Monofeya. Quesna is the city where my Father was born and we still have many relatives there. On the 2 occasions of Christmas and Easter, the whole family gathers to celebrate together.

Quesna is quite a huge city with more than 150,000 residents and over the years I have come to know most of the streets there. It is worth mentioning that it is very close to the village where Mubarak was born and raised and also to where Sadat was born.

Being a Shisha addict, I usually find some time to skip part of the family reunion and go to smoke a Shisha. Over the years and like all of the Egyptian cities Shisha places grew in number. I have smoked in a couple of Shisha places there and although the Shisha is not great it serves the purpose.

This year I went to the Shisha place just 2 blocks from my family’s house. I entered the place as usual and greeted people there and took a seat. A waiter came to me and asked me what I wanted to order and I told him an Apple Shisha. His response was “There is Non”. I thought that was weird, but told him to bring me any other flavor he had. His response again was “There is Non”. I became quite confused. I thought the Egyptian Police must have raided this Shisha Place, as they do in Cairo, and took the Shisha’s. I asked him why there were non and a man sitting next to me answered by “Its 7aram” (Religiously Forbidden in Arabic) . At first I thought the guy was joking. I mean I am sitting after all in a Shisha place! I asked jokingly who maid it 7aram and both the waiter and the guy looked at me seriously and said “Its 7aram”. Fearing that the conversation might lead to dangerous grounds I got my stuff said Salam 3aliekom and left.

Now I am not discussing here if Shisha is 7aram or not. Frankly for me that doesn’t matter. If religious leaders want to forbid people from smoking Shisha, that’s their issue and that of the people that follow them. What really leaves me puzzled is why someone opens a Shisha place, when he believes that Shisha is 7aram??? It is as if you enter a whorehouse to be greeted by the owner saying that adultery is 7aram! Why doesn’t the owner go into another kind of business? Isn’t it ironic to waste his money on a place that is 7aram in itself and that probably would not generate any income?

If anyone can explain the logic to me, please do.

And by the way for those wondering, I went to another Shisha place and smoked there.

Totally Bewildered

A Letter To President Bush

2008-01-08T20:30:00.000+02:00

I have thought a lot about writing this letter. I know that by writing it I am opening the gates of hell and that accusations of being a foreign agent and treason will flow in the air, but after considering all option, I felt compelled to write it anyway.

Dear President Bush,

You are visiting the Middle East starting tomorrow and in the brief week of your visit you will visit many countries and meet with many leaders. I am sure your advisors prepared you well for this visit. I am sure they gave you many briefings on the Peace Process and how to solve the deadlock in the conflict in the Holy Land. I am positive you will discuss Iran with the Presidents, Princes, Prime Ministers and Kings in the region. I am sure you will mention combating terrorism during those meetings. These are all important issues that touch the lives of the people in the region and in the US, but this is not what I am writing you about Mr. President.

I am writing you today to talk about Democracy, Human Rights and Freedom.

“We have seen our vulnerability - and we have seen its deepest source. For as long as whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny - prone to ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder - violence will gather, and multiply in destructive power, and cross the most defended borders, and raise a mortal threat. There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom.”

“We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.”

These are the words of a very brave man Mr. President. A man that sees beyond the urgencies of today and faces the challenges of tomorrow. These are your words Mr. President in your inaugural speech. Do you remember that day Mr. President? Do you remember your strong commitment to Freedom? Do you remember your promise that “So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.”?

I urge you to remember them Mr. President. Your advisors might have forgotten them, your Secretary of State might have ignored them, and your diplomats probably never believed in them, but what about you Mr. President? Do you still remember those words? The people in the region haven’t. They have seen your administration ignore democracy and freedom time after time, but they have not forgotten those words. They do, as you said, believe in freedom. For them as for you, freedom transcends all boundaries, breaks all chains and defeats the mightiest walls of oppression and tyranny.

I would like to question you Mr. President about freedom. Where is democracy promotion in the region? Where is telling them that “those that deny freedom to others deserve it not to themselves.”? Where is your promise to me and to my countrymen that “the US will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors”? Egyptians are standing for their liberty Mr. President, where do you stand? Are you standing with them or are your standing with those that oppress them?

Your diplomats will tell you that Democracy is a hopeless case in the Middle East and that stability is your only and best option. Do not believe them Mr. President. They are as wrong now as they were in the past. Their so called realism was chattered to pieces the minute the World Trade Center was hit. Do not revive their world view again. Do not repeat the same mistakes yet again and do not wait for another 9/11 to realize that something is wrong.

Your advisors have urged you to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They have told you as they have told your predecessors that solving it will solve all the region’s problems. They have told you that people in the streets of Cairo care more about what happens in the West Bank than they care about what happens in their own neighborhoods. Do not believe them Mr. President. They are as wrong now as they were wrong in the past. Your so called experts with their realist view have failed yet again to understand that people care about their own livelihood than that of the Palestinians.

Mr. President try to solve the situation in the Holy Land as much as you want, but do not think that by doing so you have solved the Egyptian people’s problem.

Mr. President when you meet Mubarak and talk to him about the Peace process, the weapons tunnels and Iran, please take some of your time to talk to him about Democracy, please spare a moment of yours and discuss Human Rights and please while you are leaving the room or having dinner with him do not forget to mention Freedom. Do not forget me and my fellow countrymen Mr. President during your visit. Remind everyone that you stand with us in our struggle and that we are not alone in our quest for freedom.

Do you remember Ayman Nour Mr. President? Do you remember that man that dared to challenge tyranny? Ayman Nour sits rotting in his jail cell for the third year. You remembered him in Prague during your speech there. Could you please remember him in Egypt.

Mr. President have you read your State Department’s yearly published report on Religious Freedom? Have you realized that in the 21st century people in the Middle East are still being denied their right to worship? Do you know that in Egypt a women was sentenced in 2007 for wanting to remain a Christian? Do you realize that Baha’is are denied their most simple and basic rights? Are you aware Mr. President that people get arrested in Egypt and tortured for no reason other than their calls for freedom? Whether they are Liberals, Muslim Brotherhood leaders or Socialists, the Egyptian regime has spared no one.

Mr. President I urge you to take the bold step and discuss democracy with the rulers of the Middle East. I urge you to talk about human rights conditions with them, but more importantly I urge you to take an action.

In Prague you said in your speech that: “I look forward to the day when a conference like this one include Alexander Kozulin of Belarus, Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma, Oscar Elias Biscet of Cuba, Father Nguyen Van Ly of Vietnam, Ayman Nour of Egypt.” Mr. President you do not need to wait for another conference in Prague to meet Ayman Nour. He is in an Egyptian Prison cell. Is it to much to ask you to pay him a visit?

Mr. President, I leave you with your own words to think about.

“The most powerful weapon in the struggle against extremism is not bullets or bombs -- it is the universal appeal of freedom. Freedom is the design of our Maker, and the longing of every soul. Freedom is the best way to unleash the creativity and economic potential of a nation. Freedom is the only ordering of a society that leads to justice. And human freedom is the only way to achieve human rights.”

Essam El Erian and Ignorance

2007-11-15T23:15:00.000+02:00

Abdel Monem Mahmoud, the active and well respected Muslim Brotherhood Blogger met with Essam El Erian, a political leader of the Muslim Brotherhood just as he was released from Prison on the 9th of October. Abdel Monem discussed many issues with Essam El Erian most importantly of course was the Muslim Brotherhood political platform that was issued while Essam El Erian was held behind bars.

Essam El Erian had some insightful points regarding the program that deserve an analysis. What I found alarming however is his response to a question regarding Christians and Women being allowed to run for President. El Erian said that this issue should be left to the regulating customs in the Constitution that might not be written, but they are more powerful in practice than the written articles of the Constitution.

El Erian gave an example of the American Constitution which can not be ruled by a Catholic according to the Customary regulations and rules of the US Constitution and the one time that a Catholic ruled America, and that was Kennedy he was killed 1 and a half years after he became President.

Now I have studied the US Constitution in University and I know of no such Customary regulation or rule, but since Mr. El Erian is an authority on political issues he might be able to guide me to those rules.

More importantly however Mr. El Erian, Kennedy was the President of the United States from the 20th of January 1961 till the 22nd of November 1963. He was President for 2 years and 10 months Mr. El Erian and not 1 and a half years.

It is also worth mentioning that John Kerry, the Democratic Nominee for President in 2004 is Catholic and that Michael Dukakis, the Democratic Nominee for President in 1988 is Greek Orthodox, Al Smith, the Democratic Nominee for President in 1928 was Catholic.

Joe Lieberman, the Democratic Nominee for Vice President in 2000 is Jewish, Geraldine Ferraro, the Democratic Nominee for Vice President in 1984 is Roman Catholic, Sargent Shriver, the Democratic Nominee for Vice President in 1972 is Roman Catholic, Edmund Muskie, the Democratic Nominee for Vice President in 1968 is Catholic.

The 2008 Presidential Elections has Catholic candidates on both Parties. Bill Richardson, the Democratic candidate is Catholic and so are Christopher Dodd and Joe Biden. On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani, the leading Republican candidate in polls is also Catholic.

Doesn’t look like a customary regulation banning Catholics to me.

Mahdi Akef and Ignorance

2007-11-15T22:19:00.000+02:00

Mahdi Akef, the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, gave a statement to Ikhwan Online, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Arabic Website regarding the Muslim Brotherhood’s Political Platform and the banning of Christians and Women from running for President.

This issue of banning Christians and Women has sparked a lot of debate and needs a full review, but that is not my interest in this article.

What interests me however is the justification that Mahdi Akef gave for this decision. In an attempt to justify this decision, Mahdi Akef used the US as an example. He said that, and I quote, America itself refuses that its Presidency is taken by a Protestant or a Catholic. As John Kennedy, who was a Catholic was killed and he was the only non Evangelical President of the US.

Yes ladies and gentleman, No Protestant President!!!

The Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood does not know what Protestant is or obviously Evangelical.

This is no surprise from Mahdi Akef. The guy is obviously old and we can not expect from him to know such basic information. What is surprising however is that this statement was given on the 6th of November, 9 days ago and during those 9 days members of the Muslim Brotherhood Political Bureau, Guidance Council and many Muslim Brotherhood members have read this statement and no one noticed the obvious ignorance.

If Mahdi Akef does not know what Protestant is, doesn’t anyone in the Muslim Brotherhood know?

An MP with a lot of imagination

2007-11-15T21:58:00.000+02:00

The issue of Egyptians being married to Israeli citizens has been discussed very heavily in the Egyptian newspapers recently. Various T.V. programs were done about this issue and various articles written. Calls have been made to take the Egyptian citizenship from those Egyptians and many accusations have been made against them accusing them of being traitors and spies. Almost all those reports have talked about the number of these cases as being 10,000 Egyptians and most of them have mentioned that they are married to Israeli Jews in some cases but in most to 1948 Arabs that hold an Israeli passport.

The issue seems to be the hot issue of the week and a Muslim Brotherhood member of Parliament by the name of Dr. Farid Ismail has presented a question in Parliament to the Prime Minister regarding this issue. In his question he stated that 220,000 Egyptians are married to Zionists and have received the Israeli passport as a result. He said that the Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel has made this easier. He said that those Egyptians have fallen to temptations and were married to Zionist sluts. He added that the government had to do something to stop those spies that were all over Egypt and that worked for the Zionist enemy.

The honorable member of Parliament seems to have a very wild imagination.

220,000 men married to Zionists!!!

I guess Israel would be an Arab majority country by now if the number was true.

And then Zionists!

Does this include 1948 Arabs???

Are all Jews Zionists???

More than that the honorable member of Parliament has accused these women of being sluts. Are these accusations easy to say Dr. Farid Ismail? Have you concrete proof that they are sluts or is it just some words in the air? How can a person who claims to be a religious Muslim accuse 220,000 women of that without even blinking?

And the men are spies Dr. Farid Ismail? All of them? Do you have proof for that or is it just some fancy words you use?

Sir, when you accuse people with such words you better have proof for it or just shut up. For staying silent is much better than accusing people unjustly.

Lack of Journalism Ethics or lack of Talent?

2007-11-15T21:36:00.000+02:00

Yesterday the Egyptian President made his annual visit to Parliament to deliver his speech at the opening of the Parliament’s session for this year.

His speech was expected and had the usual slogans and promises, thus it was received with a general lack of mention except in the official newspapers that gave it 3 pages.

What is of interest however is the coverage that the Muslim Brotherhood Arabic Website and Al Masreyoon website had. Al Masrreyoon website published a report on the session and an analysis of the audience and some rumors. The report was written by Salah El Deen Ahmed.

Ikhwan Online published a report on the session by Ahmed Saleh.

The two reports are nearly identical. They both talk about the Pope attending, Political Parties Presidents greeting him, El Azhar Sheikh and the Mufti being late, Ein Shams University President attending, sitting besides Momtaz El Kot, the rumor of him being the next High Education Minister, Kamal Badr attending, the Journalists Syndicate elections being the major topic of discussion, Moustafa El Fiqy sitting there, Osama Saraya sitting there, Farouk Hosny being absent, Suzanne Mubarak not attending and thus other Officials wives being absent and so on.

This was not just a mere coincidence of coverage. Both reports used the same words and the same order of mentioning people. As an observer I am left to conclude that one of these websites just copied the other.

The question is which of these websites copied the other? Was it Ikhwan Online, or El Masreyoon? And which reporter claimed to have written the report while in reality he just plagiarized?

Any answers?

Robert Mugabe, Al Ahram and the Axis of Comedy

2007-11-10T21:12:00.000+02:00

On the 3rd of October 2007, Al Ahram reporter conducted an interview with Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe. In her interview introduction the reporter said that the West had accused Mugabe of being a bloody Dictator and Human Rights violator, but that she had found him to be a simple, humble and nice person. The interview was clearly target towards showing him as the victim of the West’s campaign against him.

In the interview Mugabe claimed that there was no economic crises in Zimbabwe and that the high unemployment rate was an exaggeration by his enemies. He also said that the situation in Zimbabwe was much better than that in many other countries and that services and health care was better than many other cases.

Mugabe who is the eternal Head of Government in Zimbabwe since 1980 is one of the world’s most notorious Dictators. According to human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch the government of Zimbabwe violates the rights to shelter, food, freedom of movement and residence, freedom of assembly and the protection of the law. There are assaults on the media, the political opposition, civil society activists, and human rights defenders.

He has also led his country to economic collapse and massive starvation. Zimbabwe has the highest inflation rate in the world predicted to hit 1.5 million % by the end of 2007, and is, according to the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, Africa's worst economic performer. With a record 85 % unemployment and ~8000 % inflation rates, Zimbabwe is in its worst economic crisis since Mugabe took power.

All of this interview is expected as Al Ahram’s definitions of Human Rights violations and economic crises are those of the Egyptian regime. That is to say very loose. The interview can be fairly seen as a Dictator’s gift to another.

What is hilarious however is the reporter’s following question:

Bush has said that Iran, Syria and Zimbabwe are the Axis of Evil and should be destroyed. What is your comment to that?

Zimbabwe ….. Axis of Evil?

Last I heard the term Axis of Evil was used by President Bush in his State of the Union Address on the 29th of January 2002 to describe governments that he accused of sponsoring terrorism and seeking weapons of mass destruction. Bush named Iraq, Iran, and North Korea in his speech. He defiantly did not name Zimbabwe in that.

On the 6th of May 2002, the United States, then Under Secretary of State, John Bolton gave a speech titled “Beyond the Axis of Evil” in which he added Cuba, Libya and Syria to the list. Again no mention of Zimbabwe.

The fact that the reporter had no idea what the Axis of Evil is, is a sad reflection of the quality of journalism that Egypt has now. The reporter had obviously no idea what the term meant or who was included. More frightening is the quality of editing in Al Ahram. No one in Al Ahram’s Editorial Team had obviously noticed such a grave mistake.

What is more frightening and laughable however is Mugabe’s answer. Mugabe said:

My comment is that George Bush is not God. He is the furthest from that. He is the man that represents the Axis of Evil in the world. Look at the lies that he has said and his occupation of Iraq and what he did to the prisoners in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, these are not simple accusations, they are a crime against Humanity. How can a man like that dare to accuse others. At least I haven’t killed anyone, his hands however are full of the blood of the innocent in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Robert Mugabe as it seems like the reporter had no clue of what the Axis of Evil was. I wouldn’t be surprised if very soon he will give a speech to the Zimbabwean people denouncing the Devil George Bush who said that Zimbabwe is in the Axis of Evil.

Truly an Axis of Comedy.

You are Anti Semitic: Admit It even if just for Yourselves

2007-11-08T18:53:00.000+02:00

The Jewish Synagogue in Cairo was reopened just a couple of days ago. The Synagogue had been closed for some time for renovation. This celebration should have been a great celebration of this historic building’s opening and a time to celebrate the long Jewish presence in Egypt. Many articles could have been written, and many lectures could have been held to celebrate this opening and to remember the rich history that Egyptian Jewish citizens had in this country. The Jewish community in Egypt may number close to 100 people currently, but before 1952, Egypt had had a vibrant and culturally rich Jewish community that numbered around 80,000.

Egyptian Jews constituted the oldest Jewish community outside Israel in the world. The community’s leaders included such famous Egyptian national as René Qattawi and famous writer Yaqub Sanu.

Unfortunately this celebration was marked by controversy. Gaber El Beltagy, a Professor of Music at the Arts Academy and an Opera singer, sang a few poems at the opening of the Synagogue in what should have been a perfectly normal event. An uproar automatically followed and the Head of the Musicians Syndicate denounced the singing as an act of normalization with Israel. He added that the Musicians Syndicate will call the Singer to an investigation that would probably end up in him being kicked out of the Syndicate and thus banning him from singing. The Egyptian Opera house also issued a statement denouncing the Singer.

Gaber El Beltagy had not sung the Israeli National Anthem nor has he sang at an Israeli Embassy party. All he did was sing at the opening of the Synagogue, thus the issue has nothing to do with the State of Israel and whether you agree to normalizing relations with it or not. It is related however to Egyptian intellectuals and people not being able to differentiate between their political stands against Israel and their internal hatred for Jews as Jews.

A Synagogue is a religious place that has nothing to do with politics or with how one feels towards Israel. The fact that people can not differentiate between these 2 things shows that Anti Semitism is deeply rooted in their hearts.

Ladies and Gentleman hate Jews as much as you want, that’s your own prejudice inside of your hearts, but don’t you dare state that you are not Anti Semitic.

The Copts Abroad: Begging for Understanding

2007-11-01T20:54:00.000+02:00

Many things were written about Copts that live outside of Egypt and many accusations were leveled against them from treason, collaborating with Zionists, calling for Aid to Egypt to be cut and generally being fanatic Christians that exaggerate about the situation in Egypt.

When I was invited to attend the Coptic Conference being organized by the Coptic Assembly of America in Chicago, I had mixed feelings about it and felt hesitant to accept. My own experience in meeting some of the Coptic Political leaders abroad had not been very encouraging and I knew that if I attended I was going to be automatically labeled with all sorts of terms.

I thought a lot about it and decided to attend. Part of that decision was based on my interest in meeting those people that are so much hated by the Egyptian media and forming my own opinion about them.

I traveled to Chicago for 4 days and can claim to have met most of the Coptic activists there and my own conclusions are quite different from what has been written about them.

I met extremely patriotic Egyptians that loved their country very deeply and that hoped for the best for it. It was extremely painful to see them one by one talking about how much they loved their country and how much they were proud of their Egyptian heritage.

Cameel Halim, who heads the Coptic Assembly of America, is a very successful businessman in Chicago. He had emigrated from Egypt in 1968 and built his life in the States from there on. As a successful businessman in his elder years a very easy decision is to relax after so many struggles and enjoy life to the fullest, yet he very passionately talked about his homeland and as an Egyptian American urged the US to increase its AID to Egypt.

Rebecca Michaels, a very successful young lawyer represented the Coptic youth in America in her speech and although she represented a generation that was not born in Egypt, her passion for Egypt and her hopes for a better future for the country were no less than Cameel’s. She had the same pride in being Egyptian and the same dreams for Egypt.

Outside the Conference I had a chance to go out with some of the younger Egyptian Americans. I met Joseph, Paul and Bassem who were all young Egyptians that were struggling to build a future for them and their families in a very competitive environment, but this made them no less patriotic.

I had the pleasure of meeting Atef Mackar, who is the President of a consulting company in Chicago and in his middle years. I was quite impressed by his calmness and his wisdom. His hopes for Egypt and his determination to improve it are remarkable.

I can go on and on about all those young and old Egyptian Americans and how they destroyed all those myths associated with Copts abroad one after the other. Whether young or old, whether they have succeeded in their adopted country or were still struggling to build their future, they all shared a deep passion and compassion to plight of the Egyptian people and also a lot of sadness. You could see that very clearly in their eyes. Whether they left Egypt willingly or unwillingly they still loved it very much and it hurt them deeply to be labeled as traitors.

I do not deny that I saw some crazy men that were full of hatred to Islam and that could not distinguish between Islam and Muslims, and between the painful incidents that they had suffered from in Egypt, but I can clearly state that they are not in any way the majority and that the Copts Abroad are much more patriotic than many Egyptians that I have met in Egypt.

The Copts Abroad have succeeded in building their lives and careers in the US, Europe, Canada and Australia. They are doctors, lawyers, businessmen, university professors and engineers. Isn’t it time that Egypt benefits from this strong pool of resources???

The International Religious Freedom Report Part 5: The Muslim Brotherhood

2007-09-24T03:08:00.000+02:00

As the public attack on the State Department’s International Religious Freedom Report started the Muslim Brotherhood could not waste this chance to join.

In an interview on the 20th of September 2007 with the Muslim Brotherhood’s English website, Dr. Abdel Moneim Abul Fotouh, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Executive Office rejected the content of this report.

He said that America should rather condemn itself first before it attacks other countries and that we reject any intervention from the US administration for a blackmail.

He said he didn’t want to comment of such a US report because the truth and neutrality of the US administration in issuing the reports is questioned and because it also exploits such reports to blackmail regimes in various countries.

As for the religious freedoms in Egypt, he said: Egyptian regime persecutes all Egyptians in general- Muslims, Copts or any other. It exercises a political and social exclusion against all political and social powers in Egypt.

Regarding the effect of such reports, Dr. Abd Al-Moneim said: Undoubtedly, this report may increase the gap between Muslims and other sects in Egypt. This is because the report contains a flagrant exaggeration which is divorced from reality. There is no shred of accuracy in this report.

Some parties in Egypt may exploit such a report to achieve their interests, also through showing Copts in Egypt as oppressed, which is actually divorced from reality.

The most hilarious part in his interview was when he said that if we compare between rights given to our Coptic brothers in Egypt, with rights given to Muslims in France or any other western country in general, we will find that situations in Egypt are much better that many other countries.

He wondered about rights of the Muslim minority in America itself where there is no mosque in Washington or New York, while churches and mosques are simultaneously in Egypt.

He then said that there were no Muslim US secretaries or under secretaries in the US government. All of us remember when a Muslim reached a certain post in the US State Department, a state of fury and rage was unleashed at that time!!

He added that we also differ between that a human being has a freedom of choice of religion and the creed he wants, and between absurdities. What is currently taking place in Egypt is absurd and an offensive to religions. The misunderstanding comes from here.

Mr. Abul Fetouh’s comments constitute a complete negligence of the facts on the ground and an intentional ignorance.

Mr. Abul Fetouh compares the situation of Christians in Egypt, who are historic inhabitants of Egypt to Muslim minorities in the US or France whom have immigrated there in recent years.

Mr. Abul Fetouh seems completely ignorant on the fact that there is a Muslim member of the US Congress, and that the US’s Ambassador to the UN is also a Muslim.

He also chooses to ignore the fact that France has a Muslim Minister in its cabinet.

As to his hilarious comment regarding there being no mosques in New York or Washington, I do not know if I should laugh or cry. I don’t know where this guy gets his information?

As to the state of fury and rage that he talked about, I am honestly at loss here having read nothing on such an instance. My personal assumption is that he is mistakenly talking about Keith Ellison, the Congressman from Minnesota.

The Myth that Mr. Abul Fetouh says that all Egyptians are persecuted is unfortunately shared by many Egyptians. This deserves a special article, but I can briefly say that while all Egyptians suffer under the current regime, Copts have endured an added persecution due to their religion.

Mr. Abul Fetouh’s conviction that there is no shred of accuracy in this report deserves a challenge to him to highlight this lack of accuracy.

Did the Bamha attack never take place Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Are Churches allowed to be built Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Are Baha’is allowed to worship Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Are there any Christian Presidents of Universities Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Are there any elected Christian Members of Parliament except Youssef Boutros Ghali Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Which part of this holds no shred of accuracy Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Which part of the report is a flagrant exaggeration which is divorced from reality Mr. Abul Fetouh?

Mr. Abul Fetouh warns us that this report may increase the gap between Muslims and other sects in Egypt. Mr. Abul Fetouh no one will use it in such a way except yourself and your followers.

I dedicate this story to a friend who still believes that Mr. Abul Fetouh is a Moderate.

Cheers for Moderates folks.

The International Religious Freedom Report Part 4: The Public Debate

2007-09-24T02:24:00.000+02:00

Some objective media reports were done after the State Department issued its International Religious Freedom Report.

Sameh Fawzy a writer in Watany commented on the report saying that in September every year the State Department issues its Religious Freedom Report and usually this report is met with 3 reactions; a complete attack, official ignoring and the government media highlighting the lines that say that Egypt is progressing.

This year there was an official condemnation from the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a campaign in the government media attacking the report.

He rightfully says that the report was mistaken in talking about the Muslim Brotherhood as the persecution that it suffers from is not an issue related to religious freedom, but instead to its political struggle with the Egyptian government.

He adds that this report constitutes a challenge to the National Council on Human Rights, which has been established for years and has failed to handle issues of religious freedom.

He also rightfully says that there are real problems facing Christians, Shites, Quranists and Baha’is that need to be addressed and solved regardless of their numbers and regardless of what the religious view of these groups is.

Watany newspaper also provided its readers with a summary of the report’s main points and interviewed 2 intellectuals regarding their opinion of the report.

Mr. Samir Morcos, whom is worth mentioning is a member of the NDP Party’s Policies Bureau headed by Gamal Mubarak said that it is the right of the Coptic Church to defend its faith against various sects such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and that this case has nothing to do with religious freedom because it surpasses religious freedom!!!!!

He said that the Church and the Ministry’s decision in 1960 to ban them is not out of refusing religious freedom, but out of refusing what threatens the existing Coptic faith and it’s the Church’s right to defend itself.

He added that there are no limitations on Christian’s freedoms but problems that are defined as religious problems.

For his part Gamal El Banna, the moderate Islamic Thinker, attacked the State Department saying that they don’t know our problems more than us. At the same time he attacked the Interior Ministry calling on it to lift its hands from religions and not to use violence.

The International Religious Freedom Report Part 3: The Coptic Church

2007-09-24T01:37:00.000+02:00

After the State Department issued its International Religious Freedom Report, the Coptic Church issued some statements and its leaders had some interviews to attack the report.

This was started in El Masry El Youm article on the 17th of September. In this article El Masry El Youm interviewed 2 Coptic Priests; Father Salib Matta Sawirous and Father Morcos Aziz, Mr. Gamal Assaad and Mr. Rouf Hindy a leader of the Baha’is in Egypt.

It is remarkable that in any issue related to the Copts, the Egyptian media chooses to interview Mr. Gamal Assaad. Mr. Assaad is presented as an expert on Coptic issues. Mr. Assaad for those unaware of him is an ex Member of Parliament that was a member of El 3amal Party. He was elected on the Muslim Brotherhood’s list in 1987. He has since been an outspoken supporter of the Brotherhood. He also played a major role in the 2006 breakup in the Kefaya Movement with some fellow Islamists. Mr. Assaad’s views on Coptic issues are controversial to say the least as he denies any problems facing Copts in Egypt and is always invited by T.V. programs such as El Hakika on Dream T.V. to show that Copts are happy and have no problems in Egypt. He is also usually used as an attacking machine against Coptic activists and Human Rights activists in general as he usually distributes accusations of treason by the bucket.

Returning to the other interviewed characters, Mr. Hindy accused the government of practicing persecution against the Baha’is as they were denied their most basic rights.

The 2 Coptic Priests differed tremendously in their comments. Father Sawirous denied any existence of religious persecution in Egypt and said that some countries exploit these issues and accused some people inside Egypt, whom he didn’t name of working as voices for foreign organizations. He also asked the Commission to visit Egypt to see the spirit of love between Muslims and Christians in Egypt, explaining that Egypt has transformed this spirit to the whole world and to the White House itself!!!!!

It is worth mentioning that Father Sawirous is a member of Egypt’s NDP governing party.

Father Aziz on the other hand said that Christians were persecuted in Egypt. He accused those Christians that say that there is no persecution of being liars. He also said that while he was against asking for foreign help he agreed to presenting such persecution to International Organizations.

Such comments by Father Sawirous were attacked by Copts both inside Egypt and abroad and were also criticized by Muslim Human Rights activists sympathetic to the Coptic problem. Mr. Ahmed El Aswaney who said that these comments left Muslims defending Coptic rights in an awkward position as the Church itself denied these problems.

As if that shameful position by a Priest was not enough, the next day on the 18th of September El Masry El Youm published an interview with Bishop Mosses, the Youth Bishop in the Coptic Church known for his moderate views on many issues.

Bishop Mosses said that the Church does not accept any foreign interference in internal Egyptian issues and that the Church does not use the word persecution and instead talks about the existence of problems. He also said that the Church does not want the United States to interfere in its relations with the State or with Muslims and that it refused any attempt by any Copt abroad to ask a foreign country to interfere in asking for their rights in Egypt.

This statement can be fully understood as an attempt by the Church to please the Egyptian government or as pressure put by the government on the Church. What can not be understood or accepted is the last line in his interview in which he said:

Bishop Mosses condemned the report’s method of equality between Copts, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons and Baha’is. He said that the Baha’is problem is because the issue of writing their religion in Egyptian ID’s is a sensitive issue because the Constitution is favoring religions and not sects.

Bishop Mosses proved once again that the problem is not in Islam or Muslims. It is in the culture that we all suffer from. Bishop Mosses who would very much like for Copts to get their rights is not willing to give the Baha’is their rights. He uses the same language that Muslim extremists use to deny Copts their rights.

Isn’t the case of Coptic converts who want to return to Christianity a sensitive issue Bishop Mosses?

Isn’t the case of building Churches a sensitive issue for some people Bishop Mosses?

Isn’t the appointment and election of Christians to public office a sensitive issue Bishop Mosses?

If you want to get your rights Bishop Mosses you have to defend the rights of others.

The International Religious Freedom Report Part 2: The Government Reaction

2007-09-24T00:17:00.000+02:00

As soon as the State Department issued its International Religious Freedom Report a public outcry took place in Egypt. The Egyptian Foreign ministry was first to condemn this report and soon after Egyptian newspapers were flooded with articles attacking the report. The number of these articles and the high level journalists it attracted suggests an organized government campaign to slander the report and stop any real public debate regarding its contents.

Morsy Attalla, the Chairman of Al Ahram’s High Board took the lead and published an editorial on pages 1 and 3 of Al Ahram on the 20th of September 2007. To summarize his long article Morsi Attalla said the following:

1. The US has no right to issue such a report as this is the UN’s job.
2. The Arab and Egyptian media did not cover the courageous statement by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry, which refused the report.
3. He was not interested in refuting the content of this report and said after its publication, US officials should not ask the naïve question of why America is hated.
4. The US did not criticize Israel for its discriminatory acts against Christians and Muslims.
5. He concluded that this will not be the last as long as the Zionist hands were still able to act and influence the American decision making process.

In answer to Mr. Attalla I can say:

1. The US has the right to issue any kind of report it wants. Such a report is not an infringement on Egypt’s sovereignty. It is a report that is intended to inform the American decision maker, whether that maybe in the Administration or Congress of the situation of religious freedom in various countries so as to help that decision maker. As such if Egypt wants to issue its own report regarding Religious Freedom or any other issue around the world it can do so. Although I am sure that will be an extremely funny report to read.
2. No one gave any attention in the Arab media to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement in the Arab media, because in a very simple journalistic sense Mr. Attalla it was not news. No one is interested in what the MFA is saying and unlike your distinguished newspaper Al Ahram, journalists elsewhere do not get orders to publish stories from the Presidency, the Interior Ministry or anyone else.
3. Mr. Attalla refused to refute the report because simply he could not. The report is a collection of facts and I dare him to be able to refute these facts.
4. Unlike Mr. Attalla who obviously never read the report, I have and the report on Israel is full of comments criticizing the Israeli government such as:

Tensions remained high due to institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's non-Jewish citizens.

The Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty describes the country as a "Jewish" and "democratic" state. Most members of the non-Jewish minority were generally free to practice their religions but were subject to various forms of discrimination, some of which have religious dimensions.

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law applies to holy sites of all religious groups within the country and in all of Jerusalem. The Penal Law makes it a criminal offense to damage any holy site. However, the Government only issued implementing regulations for Jewish sites.

According to Government figures, the 2006 budget for religious services and religious structures for the Jewish population was approximately $329 million (1.4 billion NIS). Religious minorities received approximately $26 million (112 million NIS), or just over 7 percent of total funding.

Approximately 306,000 immigrants from the former Soviet Union were ineligible to marry in Israel because they were not recognized as Jewish by Orthodox authorities.

In November 2004 the Arab-Israeli advocacy group Adalah petitioned the Supreme Court to compel the Government to protect Muslim sites. Adalah charged that all of the locations designated as holy sites were Jewish, and the Government's failure to implement regulations had resulted in desecration and conversion of individual Muslim sites. Responding to a 2004 Supreme Court order to respond within 60 days, the Government stated in January 2006 that it had appointed an interministerial committee to examine the administrative and budgetary management of holy sites. The Supreme Court, which repeatedly rescheduled the initial hearing since 2004, had still not heard the case by the end of the reporting period. At the end of the reporting period there were 136 designated holy sites in the country, all of which were Jewish.

In 2004 the Arab Association for Human Rights (AAHR) issued a comprehensive report documenting what it referred to as the "destruction and abuse of Muslim and Christian holy places in Israel." In its report, AAHR asserted that 250 non-Jewish places of worship had either been destroyed during and after the 1948 war or made inaccessible to the local Arab population. For example, lands of destroyed Arab villages were given to Jewish farmers, and the surviving mosques in these villages had been used as animal pens or storage depots. In Ein Hod, a town south of Haifa, the mosque was turned into a bar.

Building codes for places of worship are enforced selectively based on religion. Several Bedouin living in unrecognized villages were denied building permits for construction of mosques, and in the past the Government has destroyed mosques built in unrecognized Bedouin communities. Adalah reported that, in 2005 the state requested a demolition order for a mosque in Husseiniya. The case was still pending at the end of the reporting period. According to the Regional Council for the Arab Unrecognized Villages in the Negev, the Government did not destroy any mosques during the reporting period.

The Government discriminated against non-Jewish citizens and residents, the vast majority of whom were Arab Muslims and Christians, in the areas of employment, education, and housing. The Orr Legal Commission of Inquiry, established to investigate the 2000 police killing of 12 Israeli-Arab demonstrators, issued a final report in 2003 noting historical, societal, and governmental discrimination against Arab citizens. The Government has not implemented either the Orr Commission recommendations or those of a follow-up interministerial committee.

Lastly Osama Saraya, Al Ahram’s Editor in Chief published just the next day on the 21st of September an article attacking the report. Besides being a copy of his colleague’s comments and not being able to refute a single incident mentioned in the report, he added that Egypt does not acre if the US and its report admit the progress that Egypt did in the religious Freedom issue.

Well Mr. Saraya if you don’t care why have you bothered to answer?????

The International Religious Freedom Report Part 1: The Report Content

2007-09-23T23:46:00.000+02:00

The State Department has issued on the 14th of March 2007 the new International Religious Freedom Report for 2007.

This year’s report is a great improvement from the previous ones in terms of its content. Previous reports were subject to numerous mistakes such as the 2005 Report, which said that Al Ahram newspaper was a privately funded newspaper with some governmental oversight.

This year’s report documented various abuses of religious freedom in Egypt. It talked about diverse issues ranging from Christian converts cases, Quranists arrest, the Baha’is ordeal, restrictions o building churches, Hala Helmy Boutros’s case, and various sectarian clashes.

The report was successful in highlighting cases that have received little attention in the Egyptian media such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Nawal El Saadawi’s book confiscation, the Egyptian Army’s magazine El Megahed attacking Christianity, and Mormons.

The report was also successful in highliting various cases of church building problems:

On October 15, 2006, Watani newspaper published an interview with General Nabil Al Ezaby, the Governor of Assuit, who asserted that not less than 120 churches had received reconstruction permits in the past 6 months. Subsequently, the Watani reporter learned from the governor's office that 58 churches had received repair permits, but when pressed for details the governor's office was only able to provide a list of 16 churches.

At the unlicensed Evangelical Church in Maadi, a suburb of Cairo, police reportedly halted a reconstruction project in 2004 and prevented church members from entering the church. Work on the church remained suspended during the reporting period. For 50 years the church has been unable to obtain a license.

The Assiut bishopric has been waiting a decade for local officials to issue a building permit for a new church in the governorate's Arbaeen District, despite a 1997 order from the President and approval from the Ministry of Interior to issue the decree. Assiut's El Hamra District and Burg al Arab, Alexandria Governorate, have been waiting since 1997 and 1988, respectively. The Brothers denomination, also in Assiut Governorate, received a permit to build a church in 2001, but local police stopped construction of the building's foundation.

After 18 years St. George Church in Dafesh, a majority Christian community near Assiut, Upper Egypt, obtained approval from the local governor in 2000 to build a new church to replace the original building, which had become too small to accommodate the growing community. Shortly after construction began in 2000 the new site was vandalized. The Government halted construction, ostensibly because the church had only obtained local approval and not the presidential decree required to build a new church. Construction remained halted at the end of the period covered by this report. The congregation continued to worship at the older site.

In 1999 the governor of Assiut issued a decree to St. John the Baptist Church at Awlad Elias in Sadfa, near Assiut, stating that the Orthodox church was given a license to effect several remodeling projects and restoration projects. In 2001, however, Sadfa police halted repairs because authorities believed that the church would enlarge its size by extending the building into the churchyard. After negotiations with SSIS, the church received permission to demolish a wall to extend its size. However, after the newspaper Watani published an article exposing this issue and the outcome, SSIS officials halted construction a second time. As of the end of the reporting period, construction had not resumed, and the church was still waiting for the Ministry of Interior to permit resumption of repairs. The congregation was forced to erect a tent in the small church courtyard to conduct prayers.

Despite governorate level approval in 2001 for restorations to the Mar Guirguis Church in Sahel Salim, Assiut, local authorities blocked work on the church under a variety of pretexts until a presidential decree in June 2005 paved the way for the complete rebuilding of the church, which subsequently occurred.

In Ezbet al-Nakhl, East Cairo, Coptic leaders of the Church of the Archangel Mikhail received permission from the Ministry of Interior in 1996, ratified by the Governor of Cairo in 2001, to expand the church to accommodate its growing congregation. However, local authorities in the district of al-Marg refused to accept the request to expand the church without a presidential decree, which was required for the renovation. The church, which had originally sought a presidential decree in 1987, had not been able to obtain one, and the project remained frozen at the end of the period covered by this report. Government officials asserted that the project was frozen because church officials did not employ the proper procedures while seeking a presidential decree, therefore making it illegal to renovate the church.

The report however was not without faults. It talked about issues not related to religious freedom such as constitutional amendments and the Muslim Brotherhood. It also gave too much attention to the National Council on Human Rights, although it stated that it is a quasi-governmental body and to interfaith dialogues sponsored by Al Azhar and the Coptic Church.

Free Essam El Erian

2007-09-23T23:13:00.000+02:00

Essam El Erian, a leading figure in the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is currently spending his days in an Egyptian prison cell. This is not the first time for El Erian. In fact it is his 5th time to be arrested and imprisoned by the Egyptian regime.

As Ibrahim Al Houdaiby so clearly explains in his article published in the Daily Star, Essam El Erian was arrested in 1981, 1985, 2005, 2006 and now in 2007.

In total he has spent 7 years in prison due to his political views.

Essam El Erian did not carry arms against the government and he has not joined an armed movement. He is an intellectual and political activist and while I personally disagree with his political convictions and ideas, his freedom is not an issue to differ with.

The Egyptian state for 55 years has been unable to contain or end the Muslim Brotherhood. They have used every means from killings, torture and mass arrests, but the Brotherhood still exists and flourishes.

Ideas can not be fought by arms they need to be fought on the intellectual arena.

When People write about what they do not know!

2007-09-04T20:02:00.000+02:00

After spending 4 months in the States, I was amazed of the lack of knowledge that we have in Egypt and the Middle East in general towards the United States.

In Egypt the media continuously informs us that the 2 parties in the US are just the same and that there are no real differences.

As a person who likes to read I knew that was not the case and that there were real differences, but I was totally shocked when I was there at how polarized the US political landscape is and at the amount of ideological differences between the Democrats and Republicans.

I found it frightening that in Egypt people knew nothing about that. The Media has for years given people that image of the US and nothing was there to change it. It amazed me that the US spent so much money, time and effort in various Think Tanks and universities to understand the region, whist no such effort was done on our side to understand that Superpower that had a huge effect on our lives.

There are many factors for this lack of information from lack of real Think Tanks in Egypt, lack of appropriate educational systems, failed US diplomatic efforts, or just general bias or hate.

In my view however the most important factor is just poor journalism. The journalist in any Egyptian newspaper is asked to write about foreign policy or internal American affairs and since he knows nothing about it he has 2 options; either he copies an existing analysis in foreign news sources or he fabricates an article based on his limited knowledge.

In the former case this usually is not noticed as it provides general information and analysis by a western media source. The problem exists of course in the creditability of that news source itself as it is common to copy from known media outlets such as newspapers and less likely to know about or follow respectful Think Tanks. It is also pure bad journalism and plagiarism when the article is copied word by word and the source is not mentioned and an Egyptian author’s name is put on the article. This is the case with an article in Al Ahram that was copied from Foreign Policy magazine. The journalist probably assumed that no one in Egypt reads Foreign Policy Magazine.

The later case is however much more disastrous as the journalist just makes up the story he is writing. He is assuming that no one in Egypt follows American internal politics closely enough to know that what he is writing is absolutely untrue.

The most recent example is an article published in El Ahram Newspaper on Monday the 3rd of September by Abdel Azim Hammad. The article given a quarter of a page in Al Ahram is titled: “A New American Era”.

Mr. Hammad basically argues that the Republican Party is history and that we are witnessing the beginnings of a new Democratic era. He gives a bit of background on the Republican Party’s control of US politics for the past 40 years and then gives the indications for his analysis of the Democrats regaining control:

1. In Iowa’s Agricultural Fair, 25,000 people gathered to hear Barack Obama speak, while only 40 gathered to hear Mitt Romney.
2. The Democrats have out funded the Republicans in the Presidential campaign.
3. The Democratic Party is leading the Republican Party in national polls by a 15% margin.
4. The recent Congress elections not only gave the Democrats control of both houses, but they took back the South from the Republicans. This Democratic control of the South has led them to choose their convention venue in the South, IN DENVER, COLORADO.

He then goes on to explain why this Democratic victory has happened and gives the following reasons:

1. President Bush’s failure in Iraq.
2. The Neoconservative program shattered.
3. Democrats giving up on their gun control campaign.
4. Democrats lessening their support to causes that conservatives were fearful of such as abortion and gay marriage.
5. The rift in the Christian Right between Catholics and Protestants.
Climate Change becoming an important issue for religious conservatives more than abortion.

Mr. Hammad’s lack of knowledge of American politics is frightening, but more frightening is his lack of geographic knowledge.

As a person trained on research I did my homework and came with the following info to answer back Mr. Hammad.

1. The definition of what the South is varies amongst US scholars from the Old South, the New South, the solid South, and the Confederacy. Generally it would include those States that seceded from the Union; Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. Some people also add Oklahoma and Kentucky to the list. These states together have 142 House seats and 26 Senate seats. The Republican Party has out of these 85 House seats and 21 Senate seats, whilst the Democratic Party holds 57 House seats and only 5 Senate seats. Does this look to anyone as a Democratic sweep of the South???
2. The Democratic Convention is indeed in Denver, Colorado, but Colorado is not by any definition in the South!!!
3. I am unaware of any poll that puts the Democrats ahead of Republicans by a 15% margin. The latest polls conducted by Rasmussen Report Polls shows Rudy Giuliani leading Hillary Clinton 47% to 44%, and Hillary leading Fred Thompson by 48% to 44$, whilst Barack Obama leads Giuliani 45% to 43% and Thompson by 45% to 41%. Does it look like a sweeping victory to anyone???
4. It is hilarious to suggest that Mitt Romney the leading Republican candidate in Iowa would get only 40 people to attend his speech, while Barack Obama the No. 3 Democratic candidate in Iowa primary polls would get 25,000 people to attend his speech.
5. I am not aware of any Democratic move to lessen their support of abortion and gay rights causes. By looking at the positions of the 3 leading Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards on these issues we get the following statements:

Hillary Clinton: Clinton has been a staunch supporter of the legal right of a woman to end her pregnancy by abortion as determined in the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision of 1973. Clinton believes that the acceptance and availability of birth control and sex education will reduce unwanted pregnancies and the number of abortions.
National Abortion Rights Action League gave Clinton a score of "100%". She votes in favor of maintaining the legality of abortion with every vote on the subject.
In a March 2007 interview with ABC News correspondent Jake Tapper, Clinton said that the U.S. military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy was not working and that openly gay people should be allowed to serve: "We are being deprived of thousands of patriotic men and women who want to serve their country who are bringing skills into the armed services that we desperately need, like translation skills.
In August 2007, Clinton participated in a forum hosted by the Human Rights Campaign and Logo. When responding to questions regarding same-sex marriage, Clinton said she would move to repeal the third section of the Defense of Marriage Act, which federally defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Barack Obama: In his write-in response to a 1998 survey, Obama stated his abortion position as: "Abortions should be legally available in accordance with Roe v. Wade.
While serving in the Illinois Senate, Obama had a 100 percent rating from the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council due to his consistent voting in favor of abortion rights, family planning services, and having female contraceptives covered by health insurance. Since his election to the United States Senate Obama has maintained a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood (as of 2007) and NARAL (as of 2005). While serving in the Illinois State Senate, Obama opposed legislation that required "medical care for aborted fetuses" because the legislation's wording defined the fetus as a child -- a measure he said would "essentially bar abortions.

John Edwards: Edwards supports legal access to abortion. Kate Michelman, a nationally prominent abortion rights activist and former leader of NARAL, has joined the campaign as a senior adviser, charged with outreach to women.
Edwards opposes a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, preferring to leave that decision up to individual states. He does support civil unions and partnership benefits.

This article is just an example of the problem faced. An effort needs to be done to address this issue. In this world that we live in, were globalization has destroyed many boundaries and were the US is the sole superpower whose policies effect the whole world such ignorance is not only dangerous, but can also prove fatal.

Democratic Front collects Zakat and 3oshour

2007-08-23T21:25:00.000+02:00

The Democratic Front, Egypt’s newly established Liberal Party has intensified its efforts to build the Party structure and offices in various governates. The Party has conducted elections in the various governates and they have started operations.

Last Tuesday the members of the Cairo bureau held a meeting led by the Cairo Secretary Margret Azer to discuss members suggestions and needs and to choose party cadre that would implement the Party’s agenda in the next stage.

The decisions taken were to look for headquarters all over Cairo and to finance them through personal initiatives, to hold lectures and seminars by Party leaders in Cairo to encourage Party membership, and also to send letters to the Party’s members to collect from Muslims Zakat (Percentage of wealth that Muslims should pay to the poor and needy) and 3oshour (Percentage of income that Christians should pay to the poor and needy).

They also decided to establish a committee to guarantee that the money would reach those in need in Ramadan.

This decision to collect money really leaves me extremely amazed.

First of all it is prohibited by law that any individual or group collects Zakat or 3oshour unless they have a permission to do so. This is a crime under Egyptian law.

Secondly, under which definition of a political party’s role does this fall.

A political party should focus on so many other issues than this. Such charity work is not one of them. Such work is left to NGO’s, and religious institutions.

Have the people in the Democratic Front already done all the required work that needs to be done to encourage Egyptians to engage in politics, increase party membership and prepare themselves for the next elections that they have so much spare time to collect donations.

All of this is of course besides the point of our guarantees on where the money will go.

Lebanese Elections

2007-08-07T21:32:00.000+02:00

The Lebanese Parliamentary Elections on the 2 vacant seats in Beirut and El Matn resulting from the assassination of Anti Syria Politicians Walid Eido and Pierre El Gemayel are over and it is now the time to analyze their results.

The easy case for analysis is that of Beirut. Many articles were written in the pro Syrian Media about the lack of voter participation. A clear analysis of past results reveal that such claims are unreal.

In the 2000 elections Walid Eido received 25,065 votes. In the 2005 elections he received 25,123. In this elections Al Mustaqbal candidate Mohamed Al Amin Itani received 22,998 votes. The decrease in numbers can be attributed to the nature of this elections as a By-elections on a Sunni Seat. The nature of the Lebanese political system is based on this sectarian devide.

The Second district is a pure Christian district in Mount Lebanon. With the exception of around 5,000 Muslim voters the 160,000 voters registered are Christians. This made the elections main question related to Christian political leadership. With the Sunnis by a huge majority supporting Al Mustaqbal and its leader Saad Al Hariri, the Shiites with an overwhelming majority supporting Hizbollah and Amal, and the Druze totally backing Walid Junblat, the main question was who was the Christian leader? Were the Christians in the 14th of March bloc or with the 8th of March one?

The 2005 elections had shown a clear Christian majority had supported the Free Patriotic Movement of General Michael Aoun. The 2 overwhelmingly Christian districts of El Matn and Jbiel-Kesrwan had given him 15 seats in Parliament and the fairly Christian district of Zahle has also given him 7 seats, but all of this was before Aoun had changed his political stands. The Aoun of 2005 was the General who stood against Syria for 15 years and called for Syrians to end their occupation of Lebanon. He had also been the one that called for Hezbollah’s arms. After 2005 Aoun signed a political understanding with Hezbollah and his stands became more pro-Syrian and he joined the Lebanese Opposition consisting of Hezbollah, Amal, Marada, Lebanese Baath Party and Syrian Nationalist Social Party in their street demonstrations and their calls for Prime Minister Sanioura’s Government to resign.

Aoun’s candidate won the elections, but a closer observation of the results show a different outcome.

In 2005 Aoun’s candidates received 56,840 / 54,776 / 48,847 / 55,017 / 56,906 / 48,662 / 53,272, while the 14th of March candidates received 29,421 / 27,565 / 24,217 / 22,304 / 20,115 / 28,973 / 19,683 / 25,043.

Thus Aoun received an average of 53,474 votes, while 14th of March Movement received an average of 24,665 votes.

This time around Aoun’s candidate received 39,534 votes, while former President Amin Al Gemayel received 39,116 votes with a difference of 418 votes.

Aoun has thus lost 13,940 votes which represents 26% of his previous votes, while Al Gemayel gained 14,451 votes representing a 58% increase from the previous results.

Aoun’s loss of votes is attributed to his changing position towards Hezbollah and Syria. The clear mandate that the Christians of Lebanon had given Aoun in 2005 is clearly ended and the Christian votes are evenly divided between Aoun and the 14th of March Movement.

An important aspect of Aoun’s victory in the elections is due to Armenian votes. Armenians gave Aoun 8,400 votes, while they gave El Gemayel only 1,600 votes. There is a clear need for the 14th of March movement to start talking to Armenians, who really feel isolated and threatened. This is in the hands of Saad El Hariri and his Al Mustaqbal Movement has they have ignored the Armenians wishes in the Beirut elections and thus fueled hatred from their side to 14th of March. By endorsing more acceptable Armenian candidates in Beirut, 14th of March can overcome this fear.

This result is a clear defeat for Aoun who had claimed sole Christian Leadership and his presidential hopes are truly diminished after these results.

Shenouda

2007-08-03T23:20:00.000+02:00

Pope Shenouda the 3rd had some interesting comments today.

He advised Christians not to eat Pork and said that although there was no ban on eating Pork, eating it was the cause for many diseases.

He also added that the Bank’s interest rates are 7allal (Religiously Acceptable).

Dear Mr. Shenouda since when do we have 7allal and 7aram in Christianity?

Who are you to tell me to eat Pork or not?

I suggest you find something better to do with your time, such as caring for the Christians that are your religious responsibility.

And I will continue to eat Pork!

Abdel Nasser is Above Criticism

2007-08-03T23:17:00.000+02:00

Mr. Ahmed Nawar the head of Culture Bureau commented in a meeting by the Egyptian Committee for Solidarity that Abdel Nasser was not a ordinary character. He said that those that attack the 1952 Revolution are just like the Israeli Enemy.

He added that respecting the other point of view is not with the curses.

Mr. Nawar seems to be living in another world.

He seems to be still living at the era of Abdel Nasser, when criticism was not allowed and you were not allowed to say anything contrary to Abdel Nasser’s Policy.

Criticizing Abdel Nasser is anyone’s absolute right, as is criticizing any other public figure.

And Please Mr. Nawar if Abdel Nasser was no ordinary character, what was he?

A God?

A Prophet?

Or What?

It is not Mr. Nawar’s mistake that he thinks this way. The real mistake is from the one who put him in such a position responsible for the Egyptian Cultural Apparatus.

Stalin ... Jews ... and MBC

2007-08-02T19:00:00.000+02:00

Today at 3:00 o’clock MBC’s Channel 2 was showing a movie called Stalin by Robert Dryfus and Julie Armond.
It was a very nice movie that showed all the horrors of Stalin and gave an example that could be applied to all Dictators.
It showed how a Dictator thinks and behaves and how he convinces himself that he is the best for his people until he can not even imagine their lives after him.

What struck me however was the translation.

There was a scene between Stalin and his wife after he had bashed his soon for his choice of wife.
Stalin said: He wants to marry a Jewish women. I can not allow him to marry a Jewish women.

The Arabic translation however was very different.

It said “He wants to marry a women bella deen. I can not allow him to marry a women bella deen.”

For those of you who can not understand Arabic the translation is a women “Without a Religion”.

Is Judaism not considered by MBC to be a religion?????

How can such a translation take place? Who approved i? And what red lines did he fear crossing?

Is it forbidden to say the word Jewish on screen?

And who is the Idiot who didn’t notice the contradiction in Stalin, being an atheist, disapproving of his son’s marriage to a women without a religion?

Muslim Brotherhood: Apologize

2007-07-10T21:17:00.000+02:00

Maikel Nabil Sanad has posted a comment on a book titled the Muslim Brotherhood and Copts by Robier Fares.

In this book it is stated that Mohamed Abdel Kodous, a leading figure in the Muslim Brotherhood wrote an article in El Da3wa magazine in 1981, where he quoted Hafez Salama as saying that Muslims should not sell land to Christians as this is an attempt by Christians to plant Churches everywhere and this is how Palestine was lost.

He also quotes Mohamed El Ghazali as saying that Islamic Theologians have issued a fatwa prohibiting selling land in Palestine to the Jews and that this applies to Egypt.

Mohamed Abdel Kodous presents himself to the Egyptian political community as a moderate but actions speak louder than words.

If you are truly a moderate Mr. Abdel Kodous and if the Muslim Brotherhood, which is very keen at presenting itself to the West as a moderate group really mean what you say, then apologize for your actions.

The Catholic Church New Document

2007-07-08T16:45:00.000+02:00

I don’t understand the big fuss regarding the Vatican’s latest document which states that the Catholic Church is the only Church of Christ.

Father Morcos Aziz, of the Coptic Orthodox Church and who loves to comment on everything and anything has called this document a joke.

He also called on Benedict not to be a toy in the Devil’s hand.

Well Father Morcos doesn’t your own Church claim to be the only Church of Christ?

How are you different from the Catholic Church in that?

How do you dare to attack what you yourself preach?

Change yourself before you call on others to change!

Dear Pope: Convert to Islam

2007-07-08T16:41:00.000+02:00

Zeinab Abdel Aziz, an Islamic scholar has attacked the dialogue between religions.

I personally think that this dialogue has been a waste of time and money, but what struck me in her article were the conditions that she set for this dialogue to take place.

She says that the Vatican has to change the Book of Genesis so as to acknowledge Ishmael as the son which God promised Ibrahim.

To admit that the Arabs are Ishmael’s sons.

That God talked to Mohamed through divine inspiration.

And finally to acknowledge the Quran as God sent.

What puzzles me is why she thinks we need a dialogue in the first place.

If the Vatican does all what she demands then there will be no need for a dialogue.

They would be Muslims.

She should have titled her article as: A call for the Pope to convert to Islam.

If you go to work you will get shot!

2007-07-08T16:22:00.000+02:00

An example of the current conflict in Palestine between Fatah and Hamas can be seen in the conflicting decisions taken by the 2 governments.

The most hilarious of which is the current problem in official holidays. The Hamas government which controls the Gaza Strip has decided that Thursday and Friday are the official holidays for government employees, while the Emergency government in the West Bank has decided that Friday and Saturday are the official holidays.

This has left government employees in Gaza in a state of confusion of which government orders to follow.

The funniest part happened last Thursday when government employees tried to go to work they were shot at by the Hamas forces.

This is up to my knowledge the first time someone is shot at because he wants to go to work.

Muslim Brotherhood says Sectarian incidents fabricated!

2007-07-06T20:09:00.000+02:00

Dr. Mohamed Morsi, a prominent leader of the Muslim Brotherhood commented on the ongoing sectarian incidents in Egypt.

He said that: “Such incidents happening recently in Egypt are all fabricated and artificial problems.”

I don’t know how these incidents can be fabricated. Do people make them up?

Has Al Ayat attack never happened?

Are we imagining the Alexandria clashes?

Have we been dreaming about 20 Christians being killed in Al Kosh7?

Please Mr. Morsi before you talk, know what you are talking about.

Prime Minister Nazif attacks Human Rights Organizations

2007-07-06T20:03:00.000+02:00

Egypt’s Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif attacked Human Rights Organizations saying that they only cover the Government’s negatives and ignore positives.

Mr. Nazif also complained that the Human Rights Organizations do nothing but write reports.

He later ignored a question of why the Government does not answer these organizations back regarding the problems that these organizations claim.

Now there are 2 options to explain what Nazif said:

Either Nazif lives in another country.

Or he does not know what the role of Human Rights organizations are.

Human Rights Organizations job Mr. Nazif is to cover the negatives. Their role is to expose violations and not to praise you or your boss.

Mr. Nazif obviously does not know the difference between Human Rights Organizations and Al Ahram newspaper.

A Political Party for the Family

2007-06-30T20:40:00.000+02:00

I have nothing against Osama El Ghazaly Harb. He is a distinguished political scholar and I admire his breaking ranks with the NDP over the Constitutional Amendments in Egypt in 2005.

I also have nothing against the Democratic Front. It is a new addition to the liberal movement in Egypt and I wish them all the best.

I was however truly shocked when I read today about the Democratic Front forming its new 10 committees and choosing their heads.

3 out of the 10 committees are chaired by relatives of Osama El Ghazaly Harb.

I do not know any of these individuals nor do I know of their qualifications for such posts, but I defiantly know that a political party is not supposed to be a family ranch.

If the whole Egyptian opposition is angry at President Mubarak preparing his son Gamal to follow him in the NDP and as President, why would Osama El Ghazaly Harb do the same thing.

Mr. Harb, if you want to give your family positions or posts open a company, but don’t open a political party.

Truly disappointed!

Brotherhood Football Game

2007-06-30T20:28:00.000+02:00

The Muslim Brotherhood website has published a very nice news article in which it attempts to answer any fears that the Christians have from the Brotherhood.

The Brotherhood breaks the news that it organized a football match for deaf people in Suhag. The great news that they wanted us to know is that this football tournament was refereed by a Christian.

I would like to thank the Muslim Brotherhood for their great tolerance in football matches.

I was really worried about Christians as referees in football matches, but thank God for the great Brotherhood.

A Wrong Choice in Palestine

2007-06-23T22:09:00.000+02:00

Palestinian internal fighting has reached its inevitable conclusion with Hamas totally wiping the Fatah forces from Gaza.

A showdown in the West Bank would be less dramatic as the Fatah forces are much stronger there.

The Egyptian President and other Arab leaders have taken Fatah’s side and so did the US, Israel and the European Union members.

While the Arab position is understood that of the rest of the world isn’t.

The US government is repeating its pre 9/11 mistakes by supporting an Arab Dictator just for the fact that he seems pro western or ensures stability.

Abu Mazen is neither pro western nor is he the real option for stability in Palestine or the region as a whole.

It is only natural for Arab dictators to support their brother in Palestine and is only natural for Arab fundamentalist groups to support their brothers in Palestine, but Arab Liberals and the rest of the world should know better than to support a corrupt gang like Fatah just because they are not Hamas.

The solution is Palestine as in the whole of the Arab world is to find the third way or alternative to those two monsters: Corrupt repressive governments and Islamic fundamentalist groups.

Supporting Abu Mazen today means a continuation of failed US policy that has not learned anything from the horrors of 9/11.

Failed States

2007-06-18T20:36:00.000+02:00

Foreign Policy issued its index for the World’s most failed states.

The Index judges the countries according to 12 Indicators of Instability that include:

Demographic pressures, Group Grievance, Uneven Development, Economy, Human Rights and Security Apparatus.

It came to no surprise that our great country Egypt ranked 36 as the world’s most failed state equivalent to Rwanda.

Congratulations Guys.

Hezbollah: A State within Lebanon

2007-06-17T23:38:00.000+02:00

A weird incident took place 2 days ago in Lebanon.

The Lebanese police received news of a problem in Beirut’s southern suburb (A Hezbollah stronghold) between 2 Lebanese citizens.

The police promptly sent a police unit to investigate and it arrested the people responsible only to be surrounded later by a group of Hezbollah’s security units.

The Hezbollah gang freed the arrested and arrested the police and confiscated their weapons and took the police unit for interrogation in the Hezbollah headquarters and later freed them after phone calls by Lebanese officials to Hezbollah’s leaders.

How can such an incident take place in a state called Lebanon?

Who do theses morons in Hezbollah think they are?

And before any supporter of Arab nationalism jumps in and screams about the resistance, this has nothing to do with resistance.

This is about a criminal gang that thinks that it is above any law and that the rules of the Lebanese state do not apply to them.

This gang needs to realize that they are citizens in a state and that the state laws are above the highest head in Hezbollah and above Hassan Nasrallah.

Lebanon is a sovereign state and its police forces have the right to enter any street or house even if it is Nasrallah’s house.

I wonder where those that gave us headaches about state sovereignty are?

Do they only cry and scream when it is America or Israel and never talk when it is the criminal within?

What Does it mean to be an Egyptian Liberal?

2007-06-14T21:05:00.000+02:00

What does it mean to be an Egyptian Liberal?

Does it mean that you believe in democracy as the best form of government?
Well so do others. The Muslim Brotherhood currently defends democracy as any liberal would.

Does it mean you defend freedom and personal liberties in face of state tyranny?
Well now even the most historical enemies of liberties, the Marxists, are in the streets defending freedom.

Does it mean that you believe in a free market economy?
Well even the NDP is calling for that right now.

What does it mean that you are a Liberal?
What do you call for?
What are your distinctive ideas?
What are your plans for your country’s future?

Egypt is now full of so called Liberal Parties from Al Wafd, El Ghad, Democratic Front and even the NDP.
Egypt is also full with so called Liberal Thinkers from Tarek Heggy, Hesham Kassem, Abdel Monem Said and many others.

Has all of this resulted in a clear understanding of what Liberalism is?
On the contrary, the term Liberalism is as ambiguous and unclear in people’s minds as it always was and maybe even more.

Has the Egyptian society suddenly adopted Liberalism?
On the contrary, the Egyptian society is as illiberal as it had ever been.

The Egyptian Liberals need now more than ever to clarify their opinions and present their ideas.

I am not calling on the formation of a united Liberal front or writing the “Liberal Manifesto”.

I believe that Liberalism is a way of thought and not a movement. It is a pool of ideas and not a party. As Joshua Muravchik talks about neo-conservatism in one of his essays “a distinctive neoconservative sensibility”, I believe in this Liberal tendency or way of thought.

If Egyptian Liberals have any hope for a better future for their country, they have to start working and stop talking.

Or else it will just be as Farag Fouda once wrote “Whispering to the Wind”.

The Butcher Kills Again

2007-06-14T20:28:00.000+02:00

Once again the Syrian Butcher Bashar El Assad and his cronies have killed another Lebanese Free Voice. This crime is a part of a long chain of killings and bombings that this criminal has ordered to kill every Lebanese that calls for his country’s independence from the Syrian occupation. The Syrian dictator can not face the reality that Lebanon is not his to rule. Like his criminal father Hafez El Assad he is not satisfied with butchering his own people and ruling them with an Iron fist since 1966.

Like any common criminal he does not realize that the time will come when he will be arrested and put in the cell and like any common dictator he does not realize that the Lebanese and Syrian people’s hopes for democracy, freedom and respect are stronger than his killing machines.

Bashar thinks that by killing Walid Eido he can put fear in the Lebanese’s hearts and that they will run back to his “stability” and “resistance” regime.

Well Mr. Bashar, you can kill one member of Parliament and you can defiantly kill a dozen, but you can not kill the millions that went out on the 14th of March 2005 asking for their countries true independence.

We will not forget Walid Eido as we haven’t forgotten Rafik Al Harriri, Samir Kassir, George Hawy, Ghassan Touiney and Pieere El Gemayel.
We will just add him to your long list of crimes that you will pay for.

The International Court is coming and you will sit in the cage just like any common murderer and justice will be served.

Christians own 33% of Egypt’s Wealth

2007-06-04T21:53:00.000+02:00

The ILO has issued a report regarding conditions of labor worldwide. In this report it criticized Egypt for discrimination against Copts in the work force, education and government appointments.

The statement said:

One of the most resilient forms of discrimination is that targeting Copts in Egypt, who are denied equal access to education and equal opportunities in recruitment and promotion. Very few are appointed to key positions in the Government or are candidates for parliament. Enrolment of Copts in police academies and military schools is restricted, and very few are teachers and professors.

What really shocked me is the government response.

The government response came in a statement by Aisha Abdel Hadi, Labor Force Minister who said that Copts own more than 33% of Egypt’s wealth.

I would love to know how she came up with this number!

Did she count the Supermarkets and found out that Copts owned 33% of them or did she count the cafes?

Is this based on tax returns submitted or on bank accounts?

And who is the sectarian idiot in the first place who ordered such a count?

How can a so called state count the wealth of its citizens based on religion?

Aisha Abdel Hadi further said that Copts represent 10% of Egyptians, which comes as a huge contradiction from the last official government census that placed them at 6%. Which number should we believe Madam Minister? Or should we believe Osama El Baz when he said that Copts were 12.5%?

If you claim to be a non-sectarian state then act like one.

NDP: A Liberal Party?

2007-06-04T21:22:00.000+02:00

A recent posting on El Wafd Party website puzzled me greatly.

The news was about Sameh Makram Ebied being elected to represent Egypt in the Arab Liberal Parties Forum.

Although I do not know Sameh personally, I heard really good comments about him from people saying that he was a true liberal and reformer.

This is not however what annoys me. What really bothers me is that he was elected by representatives from Egypt’s so called liberal parties; El Ghad, Democratic Front and the NDP.

Who is the idiot that identified the NDP as a liberal party and on what grounds?

How can a totalitarian party be a member of a liberal forum?

On the Egypt Briefing

2007-05-28T03:02:00.000+02:00

On Wednesday the 23rd of May there was a briefing in Congress regarding the Religious Freedom status in Egypt.

The hearing was on the overall a nice experiment for me as it gave me great insights regarding the way the Congress operates.

I am however especially troubled by what was presented during this hearing.

There were good testimonies given by Nasser Weddady on the blogger Abdel Karim Soliman and an excellent testimony by Nina Shea, Chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom that gave a general assessment on the problems of religious freedom in Egypt and suggested solutions.

But unfortunately these testimonies impact were overshadowed by that given by Michael Meunier, the President of U.S. Copts Association.

Instead of talking about the problems that Christians have in Egypt, Mr. Meunier used his allocated time to talk about the Muslim Brotherhood.

Mr. Meunier said that “Lastly, I am sad to say that the above solutions are not workable solutions in the current environment in Egypt as long as the Egyptian government continues to tolerate the Muslim Brotherhood and its ideology of hatred and violence.”

His most shocking statement was when he said: “While the next literal victims of the Brotherhood’s ideology may be Copts being publicly slaughtered on the streets of Egypt followed by the Egyptian regime itself, ultimately it is American interests in Egypt and throughout the region that will suffer the most. I invite you to imagine the threat to our National Security here in the U.S., and to our freedom and values, with an extremist group such as the Brotherhood in power in Egypt.”

Now I am not a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and I have concerns regarding their position towards democracy, human rights and religious minorities, but to claim that Copts will be publicly slaughtered in the streets of Egypt is both wrong and naïve.

There are many points that the Muslim Brotherhood can be criticized for regarding their views on Christians, their rights as citizens and religious freedom in general, but slaughtering Christians is defiantly not one of the.

Christians in Egypt are suffering from certain unfair practices from building Churches to attacks against them that go unpunished, but to say such naïve statements only hinders the fight for equality for Christians in Egypt. It also does not win you any favors in the West. People that you are talking to are not idiots. They know the problems and they know the lies.

The Christians working on this issue have to rise above such claims and work as Egyptians to gain their rights. The Coptic cause has gained a lot of momentum lately due to the efforts of people like Magdi Khalil and Cameel Halim. They analyze issues in a fair and academic manner and provide a real human cause that Muslims before Christians can sympathize with. It is very unfortunate that their efforts are being damaged by such actions.

The most hilarious thing however was the statement that the Egyptian Embassy distributed during the briefing.

They actually had the nerve to say: “The Government of Egypt is fully committed to upholding the Human Rights of its citizens.”

Their nicest claim was when they said that the government was working on solving the problems that Copts have faced and gave as an example: “The government organized a high-profile celebration in 2000 to commemorate the journey of the Holy Family to Egypt two millennia earlier.”

Way to go guys. You have really solved the problem.

NDP: There are no Christians in Egypt

2007-05-25T21:38:00.000+02:00

I had decided to continue talking about the sectarian problem in Egypt.
Unfortunately the upcoming Shura (Upper House of Parliament) elections in Egypt force me to post a comment.

The ruling Mubarak & Son NDP party has nominated 109 candidates for the 88 contested seats.

Many comments can be said about the Shura elections, from the opposition parties boycotting, Muslim Brotherhood members being harassed, lack of fair supervision to vote rigging, but another important issue struck me while reading the NDP candidates list.

There are no Christians on the list.

Out of 109 candidates, Mubarak could not find one single Christian to nominate.

Now there are two explanations one could come up for this.

The first is that the NDP is a discriminatory party that has no Christian members. Of course this is not true. The NDP is our great ruling party and represents Egypt and all Egyptians.

The second is that there are no Christians in Egypt in the first place.

This makes sense, doesn’t it? The NDP did not nominate any Christians because Egypt has no Christians.

I want to dedicate this story to three people: Pope Shenouda and the Coptic Church in Egypt who supports Mubarak and the NDP at every elections and at every moment; and to those that claim that the NDP is pro Christians or gives Christians more rights; or those Christians that think that they have a lot to fear if the Muslim Brotherhood rules Egypt.

Defining the Problem

2007-05-23T03:29:00.000+02:00

The issue of Christian Muslim relations or tensions has been an exploding matter that has taken the form of clashes, intolerance and has resulted in a major problem that the country is facing today.

To talk about the issue one has to first define the problem.

There have been many explanations and theories such as:

1. Christians are discriminated against in Egypt.
2. All Egyptians are discriminated against by the Egyptian regime.
3. The Muslim majority feels that Christians are getting more than their rights in Egypt.
4. There is a problem in the relations between Christians and Muslims.
5. There is a general problem of intolerance in Egypt and the region as a whole.

All of these theories hold some truth to them and each of them needs to be discussed.

One of our problems in the Arab world is that we love to explain things and attribute events to only one reason or factor.
We have to realize that there are many dimensions and faces of any issues and ignoring any of them will only lead to a failed understanding of the problem and thus an unrealistic solution.

We need to discuss each of these factors and arguments to reach a sound understanding of the problem we are facing.

Why do we have a Sectarian Problem in Egypt 1

2007-05-23T01:28:00.000+02:00

The recent events in Bamha have pushed the issue of the Sectarian problem in Egypt back to the spot light. People were outraged by the reports they heard regarding the horrible events that took place there. Numerous calls were issued for action in Bamha ranging from initiating dialogue, helping the victims and calls for an apology.

But Bamha is not the first and will probably not be the last of these incidents.

Egypt has witnessed numerous sectarian clashes, attacks and problems since 1970. Starting with El Khanka, the names of the Egyptian villages have been carved into the world conscious and memory as each took its share of these events.

Although these incidents have become so frequent, no concrete action was taken to try to solve this issue. Campaigns were started and ended, articles were written and rewritten and the same arguments have been played over and over again.

No attempt was made to deal with the real causes of the problem.

Thus the problem continued and will continue unless we start facing the reality of the situation and start dealing with the real causes of the problem.

I will attempt in the next posts to first identify the problem, go through its causes and history and at the end suggest some solutions.

I welcome any contributions in starting a real analysis of the problem and trying to find a light at the end of the tunnel.

There Used To Be A State Called Egypt

2007-05-23T00:09:00.000+02:00

There Used To Be A State Called Egypt

Once again the sectarian issue has come to the surface in Egypt and yet again it is due to an ugly episode that like it predecessors have failed to awaken us.
Yet again have the horrible circumstances on the ground failed to open our eyes to the reality of situation.
Yet again the issue is buried with wonderful words about the deeply rooted Christian Muslim relations and once again the beards kissing beard are seen as a sign that things are fine and that those minor incidents will not affect the historic relationship.

Well, THINGS ARE NOT FINE.

The case of Bamha is neither the first nor will it be the last. It is just a minor incident in a long chain of events that have started since 1971. Many things can be blamed for this from intolerance to economic conditions, but the main reason is a very simple one. There is no state called Egypt.

As my friend Nora Younis has said what happened in Bamha could happen anywhere in the world. All over the world there is intolerance and intolerant people, but this does not lead to what happened and even if it does it does not continue. Intolerance and hatred and fear of what you do not understand lead to sectarian clashes, but they would not continue if a state existed.

We can tackle intolerance for 100 years and we still will not end it. There are still people in the States who hate Blacks. There are still people who hate Jews or Catholics or nowadays Muslims. This will never end. You can defiantly fight it and reduce it, but a society can not solve this issue. Any action on this intolerance would be very much appreciated but would die in vain because it will not end the problem. We can all go to Bamha and help its people, we can hold as many lectures as we want and we can start programs to increase tolerance. All of this is great and good, but we will solve the issue in Bamha only to run one year later to the next explosion.

The real problem is again the lack of the existence of a state.

Why don’t people who are intolerant or hateful of others just go and kill people and why even if these cases happen don’t they become a phenomena? The reason is that the state interferes. The state stops such actions from happening and when they happen punishes them so that they wouldn’t happen again. That is the simple role of the state. To solve matters of conflict between individuals and to regulate differences so that people do not just go ahead and kill each others. To protect its citizens rights and freedoms.

We used to have a government in Egypt, when we used to have a country in the first place. Today we have neither. We have a great vacuum and everyone fills it in his own way.

The case of Bamha is a very simple case. A group of people burned and looted the homes and shops of others. It does not need a lot of debate or discussion. In any decent country, no in any normal country the government would act immediately. It would punish those responsible and compensate the victims.

Its Police forces would arrest the criminals.
Its Judicial branch would punish them.
Its Parliament would pass laws to make sure this does not happen again.
Its Media would discuss the causes.
Its Educational system would teach people how bad these actions are.

The Egyptian State did nothing. It was simply not there. It did as any society would do that had no system. It acted as a tribe and held a Majles Orfy and the wise men passed their decisions. This is something that happened before the existence of the State, before the existence of a form of government, but it does not happen in a modern state.

The reason for this action is not due to a problem in the system. There is no system in the first place. There is no country nor is there a government. There is a free for all geographical spot called Egypt where everyone can do what he wants as long as he does not get near the president or his gang.

In this vacuum everyone acts as he wants with no fear of punishment. The security forces are not there to protect the citizens, but instead to protect Mubarak & Co. The Judicial system is there only to punish those against Mubarak & Son and the Parliament is there only to pass laws to maintain the rule of the Holy Family.

There are 2 options now. The first is that everyone protects himself in his own way. Everyone acts as if there is no central authority in the first place and looks for other means of protection.

Women that are harassed in the streets should carry guns to shoot those that harass them.
Muslim Brotherhood members should form militias to protect themselves from unfair government actions.
Copts should form militias to protect themselves from sectarian attacks.
Businessmen should form private armies to protect their business.

If someone intimidates you beat him.
If someone hits you kill him.
If you don’t like something take matters in your own hand and act.

This is the solution and where we are heading.

If you however like me don’t like this. If you like me don’t want things to reach this stage. And if you like me care for this place called Egypt and want to build it in a real country, then act now and start building a country.

ACT NOW OR FACE THE FLOODING!

Defend Abdel Monem ..... Defend Your Freedom

2007-05-23T00:02:00.000+02:00

Defend Abdel Monem ..... Defend Your Freedom

Abdel Monem Mahmoud, a young Egyptian remains in an Egyptian prison cell for no reason but his strong belief in his freedom. That freedom that is God’s greatest gift to man and that the Egyptian authorities, like all oppressive regimes in the world insists on taking from him. Abdel Monem was a firm believer in that freedom. He cherished his freedom and like all human beings tried to break those walls that oppression puts around them. He expressed himself in the best way that he could, through his pen. He wrote about his dreams for his country, he wrote about his torture experience, but most importantly he wrote about his freedom. His belief in freedom was strong enough that it included the freedom of others. He defended those that differed with him in belief and ideology and in this lay the greatest threat to dictatorship.

Any oppressive regime gains its strength from the weakness of those that it rules, from the fear that its tyranny puts in the hearts of man. Tyranny like darkness fears the light more than anything else and Abdel Monem represented this light. He was not afraid. He knew that he was living in a closed room with walls surrounding him from all sides. He did not accept that fate. He rose above his own weaknesses and fears and pushed the wall. He took a hammer and banged on the wall and opened a small window for himself. It was not a big opening. He could not escape the room, yet he breathed and with his breath his hopes were strengthened. He saw light and it filled his heart with ….. Freedom.

That was his sin. Here lay his mistake. He dreamt of a better future for himself and his country and his dream was so strong that it included the dreams of others.

Thus Abdel Monem was a threat to the system.
Thus he was an enemy that had to be killed.
How dare he think of Freedom?
How dare he believe in Freedom?

I am not a member of the Muslim Brotherhood nor do I share their ideology or point of view, but that matters little. I believe in my freedom of expression and I know that my freedom will not be complete if others do not have the same freedom. I know that my freedom can only be strong when others enjoy that same freedom. I know that every pen that is broken is my pen, that every soul that is imprisoned is my soul, and that every dream that is killed is my dream.

I can not stay silent when my freedom is taken and Abdel Monem is part of my freedom. I do not know Abdel Monem personally, but I know that in many ways our fates are linked. His freedom of expression is part of my freedom of expression. The Egyptian government would love nothing more than do divide us and thus win.

Abdel Karim is against Islam and we shouldn’t defend him.
Abdel Monem is Ikhwan and we shouldn’t defend him.

We can not continue to buy into their game. History has taught us that lesson time after time. If we do not defend the rights of others our own rights will be taken and no one will rise to defend them. The lessons from Hitler’s Germany are very clear as someone truly said: First they took the Jews, and I was not a Jew so I did nothing, then they took the Catholics and I was not A Catholic so I did nothing, then they took the Gypsies and I was not a Gypsy so I did nothing, then they took the Communists and I was not a Communist so I did nothing, and then they took me, and there was no one left to do anything.

By defending Abdel Moem I am not defending him or the Muslim Brotherhood. I am defending Myself. I am defending my own freedom. Whether you are Muslim, Christian or Jew, weather you are a Liberal, a Communist or an Islamist I call on every human being to rise above his own stereotypes, differences and beliefs and defend the freedom of Abdel Monem. Defend him or you will be next.

The Liberal Wall

2007-05-22T23:49:00.000+02:00

The Liberal Wall

I would like first to welcome you to my blog.

I am a young Egyptian Liberal who cares for his country and the region.
After being politicaly active for a couple of years, I have finally decided to create this blog as a medium of expressing my views.

I can not promise you that you will agree with what I write.
I will however promise you this.

This wall will defend freedom.
This wall will try to present a Liberal point of view on issues.
This wall will defend people's opinions even if I disagree with them.
This wall will never support tyranny, injustice or dictatorship.