Monday, April 30, 2012

Can We Say “I Told You So”?

Remember the “Arab Spring”? How about “democracy in the Middle East” — does that ring a bell?

Well, that was then, and this is now.

More than a year ago, before the blood had been hosed off the concrete in Tahrir Square, those of us who have studied the history of the region were not as sanguine as the mainstream media about the anticipated rosy future for the Muslim Middle East.

The past four decades of Lebanese history offered an instructive example, as did the election of Hamas in Gaza. It was obvious that when the “Arab street” finally got a chance to vote in a real election, it would install the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates in office.

Which, of course, is exactly what happened in Tunisia and Egypt, and to a lesser extent in Morocco. And the mandarins of the MSM are now shocked — shocked! — to discover Islamic fundamentalists calling the shots in their beloved new “democracies”.

All this brutality, murder, homophobia, and misogyny — who could have guessed?

The following article is from Saturday’s Washington Post, but similar pieces have recently appeared in The New York Times, Foreign Policy, and other venerable leftist organs.

It seems the Progressives of the media are waking up to the unintended consequences of what they pushed so fervidly to achieve last year. Or, to be more cynical about it, perhaps their masters in the Obama administration have ordered up these reports as advance damage control in anticipation of a long, hot Arab Summer just before the election:
The ‘Islamist Spring’ Continues as Tunisia Suffers Fundamentalist Takeover

One year after the uprising that sent autocratic leader Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali packing to exile in Saudi Arabia, Tunisia stands divided between two visions of its future. Last year’s street clashes in this sun-spangled city by the sea have morphed into a different kind of battle — more intimate confrontations in which many families struggle with essential questions of identity.

Secular parents, surprised to find their daughter covering her hair in public, worry they are losing their child to extremism. Moderately religious families argue over a son’s decision to grow a beard and demonstrate against aspects of Tunisian life they have always taken for granted: beer and wine, bikinis on the beach, Hollywood movies on TV. In workplaces, kitchens and sidewalk tearooms, one question dominates: Can and should Tunisia’s blend of Western and Islamic values and practices be maintained under the North African country’s new freedom, or has that freedom unleashed a religious extremism that threatens to push this land of 10 million people toward a new kind of dictatorship?

Read the rest at the WaPo website.


Harry the Horrible said...

I knew this was going to end badly almost from the very beginning. This is actually what Al Qaeda was aiming for all along - the overthrow of secular governments in Moslem countries.

When we went "soft" in the war on terror, this outcome became inevitable. The Arabs might be savages, but they are not stupid. They back winners not "nice guys." If we weren't willing to do what it took to win, no matter how savage and bloody, then they were going to follow Al Qaeda's lead.

And that is where its headed now.

Anonymous said...

To rejoice in the Arab Spring without knowing what will spring from it, to rejoice in the Arab Spring obstinately obtuse to what will likely spring from it, is delusion flirting with insanity. How, in a pendular world, does immutably retrogressive islam fit in? It fits only if the pendulum has reversed. To rejoice in the Arab Spring is to rejoice in the West's fall.

George Pal

Zilla said...

This is what Obama wanted. Remember in November!

Qualis Rex said...

The Arabs might be savages, but they are not stupid

That is a racist and incredibly ignorant comment. Once again, I must remind readers of this blog that Arab DOES NOT EQUAL Mohammedan. There are millions of Christian Arabs in the middle East (no, not including the Egyptian Copts) who are neither savage nor stupid. They are in dire need of our support.

Anonymous said...

Okay, the New York Times and the rest of the PC-MC establishment got what it wanted. From now on, everything that happens is on their bailiwick.

The questiom is, what are we in the "Islam aware" community going to do about it?

Are we just going to let them slink away and prtend they had nothing to do with it, or are we, for once, going to hold them accountable for their actions?

I say we should shove it in their faces relentlessly. Every time they stone someone to death in Egypt or Tunisia, post the link of the WaPo or NYT or Guaridan cooments section. Every time a gay person is hanged from a crane, do the same. Every time an apostate gets sentenced to death for not believing in Allah, etc.--again and again and again.


Dymphna said...

@ Qualis Rex-

Calling Arabs savage - they're still selling slaves and killing witches and cutting off hand, feet and heads - isn't racist. It's the truth.

I don't know where the average Arab ranks in intelligence, but the two reasons their execrable behavior works is (i)savage terror against perceived enemies, and, (2) enough money to support and spread their savage ways.

Just because they conquered others doesn't mean the virus didn't start among the Arabs...

You may continue to differentiate the "good" Arabs from the "bad" Arabs, but the the bad ones have ramped up their wipe-out of the good ones to the level of genocide.

In addition, these good Arabs are often deeply anti-Semitic - e.g., the Copts. As long as *that* hatred exists in a purportedly Christian community, then it violates the basic commandment of its Founder.

Robert said...

I suspect one of the things that will spring from the "Arab Spring" is World War III. Those who rejoice in and celebrate the "Arab Spring" are pretty much rejoicing in and celebrating the birth of the next major world-wide war.

1389 said...

It's going bad all over the Middle East and North Africa. I never thought I'd have occasion to blog about Timbuktu, of all places.

Qualis Rex said...

Dymphna - as a (very orthodox) deacon of the religion you claim to espouse, I'm thinking you probably don't want to lecture me on Christianity. Have you ever read the Talmud? This is the Jewish "holy" book, second to the Torah (it is in fact the definitive treatise on the Torah). The Talmud has over 60 anti-Christian passages (I cannot even repeat here what it says about Our Lord). So, it runs both ways (always has). When the Jews decide to remove all negative passages about Christianity and Our Savior from the Talmud, I have no doubt this would go a long way towards bridging the gap in the hatreds that have been caused on both sides. But I'm not going to hold my breath here, are you?

Regarding anti-Arab bigory, under your logic, I can say "Americans are savages because they sell their children on the internet". We see this story over and over, but this would be ridiculous to say, as it is not indicative or Americans in general. Nor is saying "Arabs sell slaves, cut off hands and feet" etc. indicative of CHRISTIAN Arabs. They do not do these things! It is Mohammedan Arabs who do so (and as you know, not ONLY Arabs, but Mohammedans around the world) because of Mohammedanism and the commands to do so straight from the Qur'an...NOT because they are Arab.

I really did expect a higher callibre of thought and discussion here. I thought we were past this.

Qualis Rex said...

and once again, the truth gets censored on this blog because it is inconvenient to hear. Isn't that the definition of propaganda?

How is that any different than the the propaganda of the socialiss, leftists and Mohammedans that you vehemiantly fight against?

Anonymous said...

In Political Studies 101 we used to study 'Unbridled Power' by Geoffrey Palmer, describing how a democracy needs a constitution to protect everyone's basic rights. The MSM seem surprised the Arab Spring is resulting in majorities voting in sharia law. Majority power alone is far from a truly democratic and just society.


Qualis Rex said...

and once again, the truth gets censored on this blog because it is inconvenient to hear. Isn't that the definition of propaganda? Ironic, since your above post talks about the important of "freedom of speech". Very ironic.

How is that any different than the the propaganda of the socialiss, leftists and Mohammedans that you vehemiantly fight against?

Liquid said...

Qualis Rex--

The Assyrians of Södertälje.

Anonymous said...

QR, I think most of us feel intense sympathy for non-muslims and reluctant muslims trapped under increasingly islamist regimes.

Regarding the Talmud, my understanding is that Judaism has had centuries of Rabbinical law and humanistic civilisation to make negative passages irrelevant, not literally followed (e.g. stoning people). Also, this site does mainly deal with the threat Europe faced at the Gates of Vienna, and that certainly wasn't Judaism!

As for what kind of discussion we have on this site - well it's up to us, isn't it?


Makaro said...

I agree I think this wont stop until WW III The Prophet Ezekiel seems to have spoke of this in chapter 38

Anonymous said...

so why is it called an Arab spring then, if no one is permitted to talk about arabs?

Dymphna said...

@ Qualis Rex-

I'm not sure how your "truth" is getting censored here. Only when you call other people's ideas "rubbish" have I deleted your truth.

I don't agree with you, but that's not censorship.

Your straw man rhetorical fallacy re rogue American behavior vs. Arab Muslim required behavior fails to compare American law and Sharia law. Those behaviors I mentioned are not only permitted, they required under Islamic law. The Constitution, otoh, neither promotes nor condones the behaviors you use for comparison.

Please re-read my comment. I never said Christian Arabs follow Sharia Law. What I did say is that they are largely anti-Semitic. For just one personal recounting of that tragic experience in Egypt, check out Egyptian Jewish Bat Ye'or's moving autobiography. She was a child during the last great expulsion of Jews from Egypt.

As for your position in the diaconate, good on you. It requires a lot of work, study and devotion to reach that position. May you continue to grow in wisdom and grace.

Eastern Christianity was once a vital spring, and for the most part, Christian and Jewish scholars worked together. That it was decimated, dhimmified, and desiccated so terribly mauled by the savage Bedouin tribes is a great and largely untold tragedy.

We have little knowledge and even less understanding of the annihilation of swathes of Mediterranean culture right from the get-go. It is almost impossible to picture Egypt before Islam. It had a thriving culture and was part of the Mediterranean breadbasket. Its huge papyrus export business allowed for wide-spread literacy in southern Europe.

Islam created countless deserts, of which Egypt is only one example, though an egregious one. Islam destroyed Egypt's previous history as it did throughout No. Africa. This impoverishment, destruction, and annihilation of cultural history happened throughout the Med, creating the beginning of the Dark Ages and the advent of fortified walled cities in the higher altitudes.

Before Islam, the Church didn't torture or kill heretics. Read Augustine for a glimpse of No. African Xtianity. Look at the threads of Roman, Greek and Jewish history - generally, that's not what they did to dissenters. Only with the advent of Islamic marauders did such things begin.

Next time someone rants about the Inquisition, remind them that Spain was a student of Islam...

And yes, despite your concerns re what you perceive as our bad faith, we will continue to fight vehemently against barbarism in all its forms - including the degraded nihilism of the Left.

Anonymous said...


"Before Islam, the Church didn't torture or kill heretics."

Why then, was the Church such an assiduous student of Islamic methods of oppression?

Long before Islam was glint in Mohammed's eye, the Church was systematically eliminating dissenters and destroying 'pagan' culture. We, in the West escaped from theocracy, perhaps that was due to the nature of Christianity itself or the heritage of Greco-Roman civilisation-who knows?

You might be interested in "The Closing of the Western Mind" by Charles Freeman.

Old Man.

babs said...

This might be an aside but, it is pretty clear to me that Christianity is being wiped out in Muslim lands.
Hundreds of thousands of Christians have either been wiped out or emmigrated from what is now called Muslim countries. Kind of hard to argue against that.

Qualis Rex said...

Dymphna, I'm quoting what you said: slaves and killing witches and cutting off hand, feet and heads - isn't racist. It's the truth.

You did not qualify this with Mohammedan Arabs until your second paragraph (when you finally say "behavior vs. Arab Muslim" and I thank you for that). Of course my straw-man argument was lunacy; as is painting all Arabs with the word "savage", since the Christian Arabs are simply NOT responsible for the savagery you are talking about. I think we understand each other now.

Liquid - Assyrian is not Arab. Two separate groups, two separate languages, two separate histories.

Susan - I am totally with you and I can assure you as a Christian I share no enmity against Jews because of the Talmud (I have a very good Rabbi...a woman...who shares your exact interpretation). However, there are fanatic Jewish groups (Hassidim) who do take the Talmud as the guide of how to treat Christians (and it is very negative) just as there are Christian groups who take the sayings of the early Fathers on how to treat Jews. In both cases, I think we agree, these negatives are based on historical situations and based more on fear than reality. The only reason I brought it up was because Dymphna brought up the "hate" that she claimed certain middle-Eastern Christians have. All groups (maybe with the exception of Quakers) have harbored some "hate" against other groups. And I guess I am saying it doesn't do anyone any good, to label or defame an entire people, especially when the enemy would like nothign better than to "divide and conquer".

Anonymous said...

Qualis Rex: Yet again, I ask you to provide cultural elements that ALL Arabs share - whether those Arabs are Muslim, Christian, or Jew - that are NOT Muslim-derived or Muslim-caused.

I ask you this question in a true Socratic manner in order to help you to understand that Arab culture is nonexistent if Arab culture cannot be expressed separately from Islam and still shared by Muslim, Christian, Jew, and atheist.

In other words, Arab culture is SYNONYMOUS with Islamic culture to Muslims and non-Muslims around the world.

Jews long ago gave up identifying themselves as Arabs, and current Christians who make the mistake of identifying as Arabs are simply victims of a sad sick Stockholm Syndrome (which is lately enforced by the evil OIC-controlled United Nations refusing to grant refugee status to Christians attempting to escape from Arab and Muslim lands intent on complete elimination of all non-Muslims).

By the way, please provide the names of any Christian churches openly operating in Saudi Arabia - the titular home of all Arabs - the same Saudi Arabia that forbids - upon pain of torture and murder - any and all representations of Christianity including personally owned Bibles and personally worn crosses.

Since Muslim Arabs rule Arab lands while Christian 'Arabs' run for their lives, Arab = Muslim - at least for the last 1,400 years.

Western Christians of Arab descent should be grateful to escape Arab lands with their lives and sanity - and should witness that miracle to everyone that they meet instead of pretending that any Christian tolerant 'Arab' culture exists inside or outside of Muslim Arab culture in a bizarre modern public relations campaign that ultimately benefits the Muslim Arabs who plan to eliminate all Christians first in Arab lands and then in the West!


laine said...

As anyone who had done their homework could have told our lazy and ignorant media types, the Arab Spring meant a Spring Backwards. Obama was cheerleading each takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood whom he insisted be honored guests at his Cairo celebration of Islam. The single group he shunned were Iranians trying to shake off their oppressive theocrats. How telling. Obama loves the scent of totalitarianism in the morning...

Russkiy said...

I woul like to add here that Copts in Egypt, although arabic speaking, never call themselfs arabs. Same goes for Moronites in Lebanon and Assyrians in Iraq. Places where christians were treated well by muslims i.e. Syria until recent events, Iraq, until overthrow of Sadam have greater tendencies to associate themselfs with pan arabic identity.

Copts is an opposite example. They have been treated poorly by the state for decades, and therefore they have strong distaste towards everything muslim and arabic

Qualis Rex said...

Russkyi - very well said. And for that reason I said speciffically I was not counting the Copts among the "Christian Arabs". But once again, Assyrians are not Arabs in ethnicity, identity, language etc. I know many Assyrians who actually come from Iran, and they don't even speak Persian (although many understand more than they let on).

Anonymous said...

What kind of "spring" was it again?

krag said...

Krag says
Hello All, hello Susan. Geoffrey Palmer. I am guessing we live in the same part of the world; one with, at the moment very few muslims. For my part I am not interested in the racial makeup of today's muslims and yes extremist groups exist in other ideologies but none is as widespread as
Islam. I will state that if the adherennts of islam gain the
ascendency over national institutions hundres if not thousands of millions are going to die and die horribly. Which
is why the arab spring is going to instructive to humanity.Because under islam this is as good as it gets.

Liquid said...

Qualis Rex--

"Liquid - Assyrian is not Arab. Two separate groups, two separate languages, two separate histories."

Well, strictly speaking you are correct. But then again by excluding all these groups I think you just made what I believe was the essence of Dymphna's original point: That we are talking about a justified generalization here.
Because if you exclude all groups that are living in the Arab world, but are not ethnic Arabs, like Copts, Maronites and Assyrians, then there isn't too much left.

Anonymous said...

'Arab' spring - maybe someone ought to tell all the spin drs & media around the world that they shouldn't be calling it an 'Arab' spring at all then.

But it is referred to as an Arab Spring, so using the same term to describe it's shortcomings seems fair enough.

Qualis Rex said...

Liquid - no. you sound pretty confused there. I wasn't just correct "strictly speaking", I was 100% correct. Just because people live in the same region does not mean they are to be lumped together. A Turk is not an Armenian and a Jew is not a Mohammedan just because they share the same zip code.

Liquid said...

Qualis Rex--

Most Copts and many Assyrians don't speak their ancestral languages any more, their cultures have become ever closer to that of the Arabs over the centuries and even you cannot possibly believe that among the Assyrians there is still a sizeable population of "purebloods". So you were correct - Only relatively speaking, though.
But that wasn't even the point of my posting that you related to.

Anonymous said...

Qualis Rex: I notice that you have ignored my extremely relevant questions to you. Then, in a bout of EXTREME irony, you just made my point for me.

You say: "Just because people live in the same region does not mean they are to be lumped together. A Turk is not an Armenian and a Jew is not a Mohammedan just because they share the same zip code."

I answer: Yes, and that is WHY Christians, Jews and atheists are NOT Arab - but Muslims are.

Now, I fully understand that some non-Muslims who currently live - or more likely formerly lived - in Arab lands stupidly self-identify as Arabs, BUT the Muslims do NOT return the favor EXCEPT as to consider non-Muslims as Muslim traitors unwilling to submit to the Arab Allah.

I believe that DNA tests show that Middle Eastern Jews and Arabs share a lot of DNA as is to be expected, yet Jews do NOT identify as Arabs! In the same way and for the same reasons, Christians of Arab descent should also reject being called Arabs.


Qualis Rex said...

Liquid - do you know any Assyrians? MOST Assyrians (every one I've met) speaks Assyrian as their first or "ancestrial" language, so you're wrong there. You are correct about Copts; for the most part Coptic is a liturgical language (like Latin, spoken mostly at church or in religious activities). This has nothing to do with "pureblood" or racial purity and everything to do with how these groups self-identify.

Let's use some logic here; if an American Indian who lives on a reservation speaks English (and might not even speak their "ancestrial language") chooses to say, "I am a native american of the (fill in the blank) tribe" and self-identify as native American, then the fact that they are close if not immersed in mainstream American culture does not erase or change the fact that they are still native American. This is the case of Assyrians, Copts, Armenians etc living in Mohammedan lands.

I hope this is clear to you now.

Russkiy said...

Something important that hasnt been mentioned in this discussion at all, is the role of so called arabic christians in fighting Islam. There are two setelite channels al haya (funded mainly by Copts) and Aramaic Broadcasting Network (funded mainly by Iraqi Christians) are dedicated to converting Muslim arabs to christianity. They are telling the truth about Islam to the Arabic speaking audience. Many muslims leave islam because of this great effort. Is there an English or other European language channel that is dedicated to exposing islam? I dont think there is. There are two arabic networks that do exactly that, causing great fitna in the arab world.

There are ofcourse some Arab Christians who are unti western and anti Israeli, but they mainly originate in Palestinian territories or those who are part of Asad regime in Syria. They are commited to provining their pan arabic credentials. As for others, their view of Israel is that of sympathy or neutral.

Besides, I dont think that unti islamic credentials have to be proven by Support of Israel, people can have different opinions on this issue but stil be united in the desire to defeat Islamic ideology.

Qualis Rex said...

Russkiye - thanks so much for your comments; you are clearly informed on this subject. And you are absolutely correct; Father Botros Zakaria, a Coptic priest is a frequent guest on many programmes with the courage to speak out against Mohammedanism (including Michael Coren). If anyone is interested, they can find his videos on youtube, but his weekly programme is in Arabic (broadcast in exile). if only we had such regular programmes in English...

Anonymous said...

Qualis Rex: I notice that you are STILL ignoring the elephant in the room.

WHERE does Father Botros Zakaria broadcast from? EXILE.

WHO does Father Botros Zakaria broadcast to? MUSLIM ARABS.

Just because Voice of America used to broadcast into Western-hostile countries, were their broadcasters citizens of those countries? NO.

In the same way, Father Botros Zakaria is an ex-patriate under constant Arab Muslim death threat BECAUSE he is Christian versus an being an 'Arab' Christian allowed to participate freely in a 'tolerant' Arab society.

You can sell it any way that you want, but the fact is that Arab Muslims OWN the Arab identity - along with the Arab lands - and that Arab identity is VICIOUS and HOMICIDAL to Christians worldwide.

Given the chance, Arab Muslims - and other Muslims as well - would violently murder Father Botros Zakaria in a heartbeat - whether the good Father considers or calls himself an Arab or not.

I am glad that Father Botros Zakaria acts for God, but that does NOT make Father Botros Zakaria an 'Arab' Christian - merely a Christian of Arab descent.

The label of 'Arab' Christian is akin to calling German Jews in WWII to be Nazi Jews. Wrong!

The label of 'Arab' Christian is patently ridiculous and damaging because it enables evil Muslims to use misguided 'Arab' Christians to promote the idea that Islam is 'tolerant' of 'Arab' Christians - which is an absolute lie of the greatest magnitude - unsupported by any past or present evidence or actions on the part of Arab Muslims.

Even the Arab Muslims converted by Father Botros Zakaria dare NOT to openly express their Christianity!