Didn't he get the memo that the Ikhwan is "moderate" and "largely secular?" "Brotherhood sheikh to run for president," by Hany ElWaziry for Al Masry Al Youm, May 29 (thanks to Zulu):
Muslim Brotherhood Sheikh Hazem Abu Ismail announced his intention to run in Egypt’s upcoming presidential elections.
He said that if elected he would implement Islamic sharia law and cancel the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.
Ismail was the Brotherhood’s candidate in 2005 parliamentary elections for Dokki in Giza.
The group announced earlier that it would not take part in the presidential elections and confirmed that it would compete for only half the seats in Parliament. But Ismail is the second Brotherhood member to have announced his intention to run for president in defiance of the group's leadership. The other Brotherhood candidate is Abdel Moneim Abouel Fotouh, a liberal-minded Islamist.
The devil is in the details, and the first question regarding Fotouh's "liberal-minded" credentials is: compared to what? Will non-Muslims have equal rights with Muslims? Will Muslims be able to change their religion publicly and officially, as well as privately?
Abu Ismail said Saturday during a speech in a Dokki mosque that he will sweep the elections. Since he is an ordinary man, he said, the masses will support him.
Abu Ismail said that his platform revolves around Islam, while "Mohamed ElBaradei, Amr Moussa, and Hamdeen Sabahi, the liberal candidates, will be unable to present a clear vision” for the country.
“If I could apply sharia in Egypt, all people, including non-Muslims, would applaud me four years later,” said Abu Ismail.
Only if you succeeded in obliterating free speech. Otherwise, don't bet the farm on it.
The sheikh said that no current presidential candidate represents the Egyptian people.
“We seek to apply Islamic law, but those who don’t want it prefer cabarets, alcohol, dancers and prostitution, as the implementation of Islamic law will prohibit women to appear naked in movies and on beaches,” Abu Ismail added.
Translation: All who oppose me are depraved perverts.
For his opinion on Brotherhood, he said, “They are chaste people and my opinion would not change even if they don’t support me.”
Concerning the peace treaty with Israel, he said, “The Camp David peace treaty is insulting to the Egyptian people, so it must be canceled, and I will do my best to convince people to cancel it.”
Having Israel yield up every square centimeter of Egyptian territory--even disputed Mandate-era beachfront--and receiving billions in jizya just to keep the peace, and prop up their wretched state, AND THAT'S AN INSULT??
So let me get this right many of those who were protesting a few months ago for more freedom etc now it looks like in fact they will have far less freedom.
here is what is insulting imo:
a fraudulently 'elected' empty suit, muslime by birth (father = muslime, end of story)telling **israel** what to do and not to do...
a criminally biassed media insulting our intelligence 24-7 with whitewashed stories of crimes committed by muslimes (youtes, immigrants, men...)
a huge bloc of elected representatives failing MISERABLY to do the job they were sent to do and instead they are drinking muslime koolaid (taquyia)and appease...
Get ready for Islamic democracy: One man, one vote, one time.
Now I am completely baffled.
The expert said on Danish Television that the Brotherhood would never gain enough votes to be a major and deciding force in Egypt.
And the politicians - two very influential politicians - agreed that the peace treaty would stand, that all talk to the contrary would be rhetorics only.
And they all were very certain that this was so, almost offended that anything else was even discussed.
Well, the "expert" looked like he started each day by saying his "Workers Unite!" instead of prayers, and the politicians are of the kind that has had a stint in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, imbibing its indoctrination that diplomacy solves everything, and therefore always knows best even when suffering from Wishful Thinking.
The West needs to with hold any money, food going to Egypt! let them produce their own food! enough of our money going to this corrupt cesspoolstan. they want to be shaira loving state. let their rich sowdi brothers pay them off!
Muslim Brotherhood sheikh to run for president of Egypt; promises to implement Sharia and cancel peace treaty with Israel
.................................
And yet, most Westerners are still cluelessly applauding the "Arab Spring".
More:
Muslim Brotherhood Sheikh Hazem Abu Ismail announced his intention to run in Egypt’s upcoming presidential elections.
.................................
Here's the candidate himself, at a Shari'ah conference run by the "Egyptian Lawyers’ Union", calling for an "effective plan to free Aqsa". This might seem odd, to those who know that the "Aqsa" mosque is controlled by the Muslim Waqf council, which bans Jews and other non-Muslims from entering.
But this is code—"freeing Al Aqsa" means *destroying Israel*. Here, from the Ikhwan's own website:
"Egypt: Conference Calls For Effective Plan To Free Aqsa"
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=3666
More:
The other Brotherhood candidate is Abdel Moneim Abouel Fotouh, a liberal-minded Islamist.
The devil is in the details, and the first question regarding Fotouh's "liberal-minded" credentials is: compared to what? Will non-Muslims have equal rights with Muslims? Will Muslims be able to change their religion publicly and officially, as well as privately?
.................................
Abdel Moneim Abouel Fotouh actually has called for the involvement of women and Coptic Christians in Egyptian government—although whether this would just involve "window dressing" positions such as "Minister of Education" or "Minster of Minority Rights" or some such is hard to tell. Many draconian Islamic states have a few such completely symbolic positions.
It seems Fotouh is playing "good cop"—as the West sees it—to Sheikh Ismail's "bad cop". Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh wrote in an article run by the Washington Post:
"Contrary to fear-mongering reports, the West and the Muslim Brotherhood are not enemies. For Muslims, ideological differences with others are taught not to be the root cause of violence and bloodshed because a human being's freedom to decide how to lead his or her personal life is an inviolable right found in basic Islamic tenets, as well as Western tradition. Our track record of responsibility and moderation is a hallmark of our political credentials and we will build on it."
In 2009, Fotouh and several others were suspended by the Muslim Brotherhood for being *too moderate*—but now he seems a useful fig leaf to allay allay Western fears of an "Islamist" power grab in Cairo.
More, from Abu Ismail:
“If I could apply sharia in Egypt, all people, including non-Muslims, would applaud me four years later,” said Abu Ismail.
.................................
How common is this? Many Muslims claim that even Infidels just *love* living under dhimmitude. And would they dare to contradict him? Not if Abu Ismail and other pious Muslims have their way.
More:
“We seek to apply Islamic law, but those who don’t want it prefer cabarets, alcohol, dancers and prostitution, as the implementation of Islamic law will prohibit women to appear naked in movies and on beaches,” Abu Ismail added.
.................................
Also very, very common—the idea that freedom and democracy are nothing but superficial license. This also smears any few Egyptians who are interested in actual freedom.
If they can't or won't WORK for their freedom,(as opposed to just bitching for it and expecting hand-outs)due to islame literally choking them to death,then they're screwed. The more they procreate,(prodestroy?),and adhere to islame,the worse things will get for them. islame can't compete or blend or enhance(a) or improve(a) with a modern world..It sucks..It's evil and backward..Period.
Well SURPRISE! SURPRISE! Things are developing in Egypt just as predicted by people with common sense and played down or ignored by most political leaders - and of course this Muslim Brotherhood fellow shall win...
ahhhh yes...exchange a little tyranny for near total slavery. Good choice.
fightback wrote:
ahhhh yes...exchange a little tyranny for near total slavery. Good choice.
........................
A foolish choice, fightback—but hardly uncommon. It's what the Iranians did in 1979, and the Chinese in 1949, and the Russians before them in 1917.
Of course, there were those who *knew* it would mean slavery before they started, and embraced it outright. Even many of them were eventually eaten in the end by what they had unleashed...