Muslim Brotherhood, ElBaradei in talks to form post-Mubarak govt in Egypt

Mubarack is going to have two choices, stand and fight, literally, or hop in his helicopter, with his suitcases of gold and cash, and make a run to Venezuela, where Hugo will greet him with open arms and help him with his luggage...
The Muslim brotherhood is on a roll, at the moment, they have momentum...But that could suddenly change if Mubarack got really tough and decided to pacify the population by force...The only question then is if the military will obey him...He better keep that copter warmed up, things could change rapidly...

More like a firing squad.

"...guard your portfolio with great care."

Indeed. Already started moving into cash and bonds.

As usual, you are dead on, duh_swami.

Just this weekend, Eastview, I moved several thousand from stocks into fixed income. Ah, I wonder if I moved enough. I despise the way a troglodyte religion, founded by a deeply warped, fraudulent seventh-century Bedouin, can impact upon my financial future. I take it personal like. Big time.

I could believe that. I think Mighty Mo' was probably loosely based on some average, desert warlord. They threw that stuff about being a Prophet in later on.

Al Jazeera is owned by the Dubai govt... What do you expect objectivity. Instead of being a witness, they are an actor in the unfolding events.

Sheik Yer'Mami wrote:

Worst reporting ever from the ene-Media!

These fools spin the shouts of 'allahu akbar' into "freedom & democracy", something every Arab Muslim despises.
..........................

Very true, Sheik. KCBS news radio just had on Hisham Ahmed, who has ensconced himself over at the Political department of Saint Mary's College in the San Francisco Bay Area, where he usually talks up Hamas, makes excuses for homicide bombers, and holds forth on such matters as Muslims joining Al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan only because they are "starving" and we haven't been quick enough with "rebuilding projects" (i.e. Jizya).

His take on Egypt? He said "I have no doubt that the will of the people will prevail!". The credulous host clearly believed that this means American-style democracy and freedom will break out on the Nile any minute now.

The prevailing ignorance—over 30 years after the "Islamic Revolution" in Iran—is just staggering.

I know, FT. I think its owned by the Emir of Qatar and headquartered in Doha. But in any case, it's good to hear what AJ has to say, because it gives insight into what Allah's soldiers are thinking. Sun Tzu and all that. An additional reason for watching is that Al Jazeera's English language service is staffed by ex-BBC people. This is perhaps why BBC and AJ reports sound so similar.

Just now I'm listening to a Juan Cole interview on AJ. This is the guy that has been dissected by Hugh in times past,

I miss Hugh. We need his insight in this time of troubles in the Muslim world.

"An enlightened world would pay Mohammed and Islam no respect. Unfortunately, we do not live in an enlightened world. Islam is re-energized and the West is largely run by mediocrities .."

In an enlightened world all of this which has happened in regards to building democracies in the Middle East would be impossible. Our Founding Fathers, and the philosophers they drew intellectual inspiration from were very aware of what Islam is, and well versed in the evils of religious theocracies, which Muslims tend to create.

In an enlightened world the folks that lived in it and took advantages of its freedoms, would be a world whose inhabitants could quote, and name the philosophers responsible for the intellectual genius which was the inspiration behind the creation of the freedoms they enjoyed.

What we have now is multiculturalism and equivalencies, where ethnocentrism is an accusation of intolerance. We live in a world where defining yourself and the ideology that provides the freedoms you enjoy as something good is considered bigotry. Instead of knowing ourselves, which would enable us to use ethnocentrism as a tool, we just have this hodgepodge of ideas, where sharia is just as good and equivalent to the same political and social theories that created our culture and freedoms. So here we are, the average idiot switching from Snookie on MTV, then to CNN cheering the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt thinking this mob is "democracy" and freedom, when reality couldn't be further from the truth.

If you don't know yourself it is impossible to know your enemy.

Eastview

you said, 'I miss Hugh'.

Just hop on over to the 'New English Review' and you'll find him. Not so many lengthy essays, but a nice array of sarcastic headlines, and a short and biting disquisition or two, such as here:

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/32285

To think that this mob in Middle East could create freedoms relative to western norms can only be seen though western ethnocentrism. It is ingrained in us to believe that people will always chose liberty as we know it. As such a belief such as this can only be explained through the fiat of ignorance, or the clouded vision of irrational emotive compassion.

"An enlightened world would pay Mohammed and Islam no respect."

I don't think it's so much that, as just pure ignorance of the religion on the part of Westerners. Because we haven't had much interaction with it until very recently when it presented itself to us by screaming in our faces. Most people were under the assumption that Islam is just kind of this wacky, desert sister religion to Christianity like Judaism is. This ignorance was made worse by the fact that most Muslims themselves really don't know the true teachings of the faith either.

Because violence has been done in the name of religion all over the world and through out history, most people just took the apologists word that The Jihadists really were just an anomaly like The IRA or The Tamil Tigers. They just assumed that the religion and it's teachings were peaceful, and that Bin Laden was like some sort of David Koresh-figure who was distorting the faith. Because more often then not, that tends to be true of every other faith on the planet when violence is committed. Which is why for years we heard that all crap from the media and The Bush Administration about Jihad being an "Inner Struggle" rather then it's true meaning of "Holy War" and we believed it completely.

It never really occurred to anyone that it was all BS. It never really occurred to anyone that when Muslims commit violence, it's BECAUSE of the teachings of their faith. Unlike everyone else which is always in spite of theirs. That Bin Laden was not a distortion of Islamic teachings, but rather a product of it. That he wasn't doing anything that Muslims haven't done for 1400 years. It was a hard thing for people to wrap their heads around. The idea of a religion that teaches it's followers to commit acts of violence is a pretty foreign concept most people. Most of us still haven't accepted it.

..or rather could only be seen as such through a distorted watered down version of western ethnocentrism rendered as meaningless by multicultural equivalencies.

Wellington

I mentioned this in the other thread - the portfolios are cooked anyway since 4 years, so that shouldn't be an overriding consideration when discussing what should happen to Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia and all these countries. Remember, one of the things that sparked the 1967 war was Egypt trying to close the Straits of Tirane, and that's why Israel took pre-emptive action. Expect the Ikhwan regime to do the same, even if they make El Baradei the president of Egypt.

Given all the military firepower Egypt has been getting from the US for years (mainly as a bulwark against Libya & Syria, but now poised to be used against Israel), it'll be too tempting for Ikhwan to start a war (Hizbullah & Hamas only started provocations, like shelling Galilee or Sderot, but Egypt will be different - will start a war, and drag Syria, PA & Lebanon into it, if not Jordan as well. Hopefully, Israel will then do what's needed and reduce them to what they became in 1968. Take out the entire PA leadership - Hamas, Fatah, et al, and expel all Muslims from Israel, Sinai, West Bank & Gaza.

Once the Muslims are that humiliated, they'll turn their hatreds inwards - like Egypt vs Iran, and make places like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria & Lebanon their battlefields. That'll be worth watching.

Ethoman _ I basically agree with what you're saying on this thread, but I'm hesitant to approve of the term "ethnocentrism", especialy as you leave it undefined. We should think about how this or that term becomes possibly modified if it ever reaches mainstream discussion. I just looked it up in my dictionary. Ethnocentrism is defined there too broadly to include race along with culture etc. I can't make the dictionary change that to exclude race from the word's meaning. In the U.S. we already have words like "American exceptionalism", "American Patriotism", which have regular usage in political discussion and which we all know already don't mean racism. "Ethnocentrism" could suggest racism to the ears of the unschooled millions. Yes, I know we're already burdened with the bane of "multiculturalism" as a term and concept which causes the problem of countering it in the public arena and finding effective terminology.

Otherwise I understand and agree with you (I think).

DDA

I loved the article on the Stuxnet worm that Hugh cited, which was a detailed account of how Israeli & American planners, unable to militarily knock out Iran's reactors, created a worm that worked itself into Iran's nuke controlling computers and caused a meltdown of some 400+ centrifuges, setting back that program significantly. I do visit his site now to read his articles.

Muslim Brotherhood is the parent org of al Qaeda, and definitely like the Taliban. Egypt is very much like Pakistan - the people are more like Nasser than Sadat, and despite getting Sinai back, long for the days that they can eviscerate Israel. It's a mistake to think that the army is a sensible entity here.

I am hoping that the Muslim Brotherhood takes over, but for the reasons I mentioned to Wellington 2 posts above - make it impossible for Israel not to respond w/ war, and not to decimate them. One more thing - since US clout w/ Israel has gone considerably down, thanks to Obama, the US won't even be able to diplomatically stop Israel if they want to, w/o actually going to war against Israel, which I don't think even a smooth talking snake oil salesman like Obama can pull off.

Exactly! Islamic Jurisprudence == Shariah!

Only question - do any of the schools of law change - say Hanafi to Shafii - if the Ikhwan takes over

The military won't do a thing. It's between the military and the Brotherhood and they are more likely to share power. Mubarak is gone.

haha, actually I was drawing that from direct personal experience, derived from an insult directed at me recently.

I was talking to someone about what is happening in Egypt in regards to the logical disconnect of an Islamic culture arriving at a the same cultural model western societies have developed, because they lack the same sort of philosophers western cultures have been able to produce. I went on to name a few, and was told that my opinion was "ethnocentric" and "hateful". I replied that her belief in the Muslim Brotherhood producing freedoms in a western sense was actually more accurately described as "ethnocentrism" on her part, but only misguided by a sense of compassion, and was therefore irrational in regards to the data available.

A confusing topic, which I'm trying to make some sense of ... almost got it nailed down I think, those libs can be pretty slippery.

Ethnocentrism being a culture defined by ideology for this topic I guess, but it was actually an insult directed at me in context, which I have been trying to wrap my head around :-).

Anyways, I thought I scored a bonus point for calling her "irrational" ... we all know how the ladies love being called that hehe, LOL.

The military are unlikely to obey Mubarrack. Or at least a sizable section of them. Did you see them hobnobbing with the crowd?

The Muslim Brotherhood are likely to use ElBaradei as a stooge for their Taqqiya with western Govts. Tough situation.

Our only hope is you kicking Bama Hussein out in the next election.

How about give Egypt another Israel, to split the country into two parts and make autonomous region for the christians!

The military and the hated police work for the same employer...The military has not attacked the people...Yet...
So far it looks like the military is still obeying government orders...None of the players want to give up power, how bad they want to keep it, is yet to be seen...

Well somehow being a barefoot, pregnant Orc breeding factory draped in a blanket has become valuesequivalent to the feminist model western sufferents fought so hard for.

If you say such a thing to a modern feminist, you will be called a bigot, and accused of ethnocentrism :-).

"It never really occurred to anyone that when Muslims commit violence, it's BECAUSE of the teachings of their faith.

"...never really occurred to anyone..."???

The subject of seamless connection, indeed perfect causal relation, between the "teaching of their faith" and muslim violence has been a major theme of, for example, this, website since the day of its inception. In fact, the idea must have occurred to all neighbours of islam starting some 1400 years ago. As expressed by S. Huntington; "Islam has bloody borders" - and it always had. Long enough for its neighbours, and not only neighbours, to figure out the connection between "teaching of their faith" and behaviour of its followers.

Infidel Pride wrote:

I am hoping that the Muslim Brotherhood takes over, but for the reasons I mentioned to Wellington 2 posts above - make it impossible for Israel not to respond w/ war, and not to decimate them. One more thing - since US clout w/ Israel has gone considerably down, thanks to Obama, the US won't even be able to diplomatically stop Israel if they want to, w/o actually going to war against Israel, which I don't think even a smooth talking snake oil salesman like Obama can pull off.
.............................

Well, I understand your frustrations, Infidel Pride. But I *do not* want this to happen. Yes, Israel can kick the ass of any number of Arab Muslim countries, no doubt about it. But I believe you are mistaken in believing that even a bellicose takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt would, in the eyes of most of the world, give Israel sanction to act.

*I* believe it would, and so do you, and so do many here at JW. But I believe that from the beginning, Israel would be savagely criticized and hampered, even by many of her supposed allies—even by some of her own clueless citizens—just look at the reaction to the small-scale Operation Cast Lead.

Moreover, I believe that things have changed since the 1960s and 1970s—that Israel today likely wouldn't just be at risk from Egypt and surrounding Arab Muslim countries, but from a potentially much larger swath of the Muslim world. Turkey's recent bellicose turn, along with Iran's intent to "wipe Israel off the map" are just two examples.

In addition, her allies—such as they are—seem a lot less solid than they did 30 or 40 years ago. I believe that most of the American people solidly stand with Israel, but the government is less of a sure thing—*especially* under our current "commander in chief".

Of course, Israel has military superiority, strategic superiority, and great courage, but I would not want to see these tested under such dire circumstances.

Now, it would feel perverse to fervently hope for another underhanded antisemitic dictator like Mubarak—but that is likely the best we can hope for in Egypt.

And, of course, I am all too aware that we have no control over what emerges in Egypt, in any case. The rise of the Muslim Brotherhood there—whatever its repercussions—seems the most likely scenario.