Monday, April 24, 2006

Deadly Blasts In Egypt

The AP has the story.

By now, you have no doubt heard the news. I guess we should all be used to this, but somehow, I cannot.

I have two points, I would like to make.

  1. This doesn't add a lot of credence when I hear terrorists talking about not harming other Muslim brothers and sisters. If they do not care about them, how can anyone trust them? Which leads me to think that those that think we should sit down and talk to these murderous thugs, are living in a fantasy world.
  2. This also tells me that Egypt is easy to hit. How many people really believe that this was their first choice?

Just a couple of things to think about.

11 comments:

Always On Watch said...

This is the fundamentalists' way of telling Egypt that the nation needs to be less Westernized. Also, many Jews vacation in the Sinai, and we all know about Islam's pathological hatred of Jews.

Egypt is easily attacked because it is a more open and a tourist-friendly nation. According to Islam, Muslims and Jews should not occupy nearby space; but Muslims and Jews so do in the resort areas of Egypt. Therefore, as far as the fundamentalists are concerned, these Muslims are "eligible" for attack, and the Muslims-don't-kill-Muslims rule doesn't apply (Not that it ever did!)

Just a hunch here....Keep an eye on Turkey. OBL has sworn to take down Turkey because the Turks "sold out" by disbanding the Ottoman caliphate in the early part of the 20th Century.

Another hunch....Saudi is too friendly with the West, as far as the Islamic fundamentalists are concerned. The royal family is fat and greedy and are too Westernized to be "true" Muslims.

If you want an excellent analysis of what the fundamentalists believe, read this. OBL has tied the fate of ALL Muslims' souls to joining him. He's persuasive, too, because all Muslims read the same Koran and Hadith.

LASunsett said...

AOW,

I have suspected Turkey will get hit at some point. I doubt OBL likes their aspirations to become a member of the EU.

ms. miami said...

i would just add that it is important to not look at islamic fundamentalism as a monolith. just as mlk and the black panthers somewhat shared a cause, they had radically different ideas on achieving those goals.

also, there is no one interpretation of islam. jews lived relatively well under islamic rule with 'dhimmi' status for hundreds of years.

yes, muslims read the same koran and hadith, but often come to completely different conclusions (the same thing happens within christianity and judaism).

Always On Watch said...

LA,
You may have already seen this, but if not, it's worth the read. Pretty much goes along with my previous assessment, though the material at the link is more erudite than my off-the-top-of-my-head comment.

LASunsett said...

Ms. Miami,

jews lived relatively well under islamic rule with 'dhimmi' status for hundreds of years.

Relative to now when they are the target of senseless violence? Relative is quite a big word there.

If you mean they had a short period of time here and there, when they weren't slaughtered just because they are Jewish; and they were treated as second-class citizens and discriminated against heavily, then I would say you are right.

LASunsett said...

AOW, thanks. I did read that.

The thing that I find interesting to note is, there are many groups that are now operating in the world, especially the Middle East. OBL does not have to call the shots, there are many new jihadist groups that have mutated into separate entities. They all appear to be capable striking anywhere in the Middle East.

Egypt appears to be in a world of hurt, because that tourist trade will soon be drying up. Not only that, if the government clamps down, they could have the makings of a revolution on their hands, faster than many may suspect.

This bears watching, it's a long summer ahead.

ms. miami said...

lasunsett- with 'relative,' i was thinking relative to christendom at that time.

of course "human rights" is a relatively new concept in the history of humanity. yes, they (and christians) were second-class citizens for centuries under islam, but life and limb were usually protected, unlike much of europe.

alas, it seems that lots of groups have become targets. apparently new yorker, londoner, madrileƱo, or tourist in egypt is enough to become a target these days.

ms. miami said...

lasunsett- by the way, i've just finished a fabulous book you might like: "The Island at the Center of the World" by Russell Shorto. It's a history of the dutch colony at manhattan.

shorto does a good job explaining how unusual the dutch republic was at the time for tolerating religious diversity, giving refuge to jews as well as various protestant sects that were not tolerated elsewhere. he argues, however, that the tolerance wasn't so much due to philosophical openness, but rather a business decision.

he goes on to argue that it was this dutch influence that made manhattan what it is today, and indirectly the entire united states.

LASunsett said...

Ms. Miami,

"The Island at the Center of the World" by Russell Shorto.

Is that a fairly new book or an older one? Based on what you have said about it, it certainly rings a bell and does sound interesting.

Anyway, thanks for the tip, I will look for it, if I ever get a moment to hit the library or a bookstore.

ms. miami said...

lasunsett- i think that it came out a year or two ago.

the work is based on documents that have only been translated out of 17th-cent. dutch in the last couple of decades (apparently they had been gathering mildew for a few centuries before that).

LASunsett said...

Ms. Miami,

Thanks again, I will watch out for it.