Skip to comments.To declare the Muslim Brothers terrorists is meaningless
Posted on 01/05/2014 9:17:40 PM PST by Eleutheria5
Recently, only hours after a deadly suicide car bombing that targeted a police headquarters in the Nile Delta city of Mansoura, Egypt, the Egyptian government blamed the Muslim Brotherhood for the attack and declared the group a terrorist organization.
The Muslim Brotherhood, on the other hand, denied involvement in the bombing, and an al-Qaida-linked group based in Egypts restive Sinai Peninsula, Ansar Bait al-Maqdis, claimed responsibility for the blast, which killed 16 people.
Though the Muslim Brotherhood is not connected to that group and there is no direct evidence regarding the Brotherhoods alleged involvement, the military- backed government said it made the decision because of the Brotherhoods serious escalation in the use of violence against Egypt and Egyptians.
But violence by whom, and against whom? Thousands of anti-coup activists were killed at the hands of the army and police. Two of my best friends were killed in Rabaa when the army and police broke up the sit-ins. The first was a 38-year-old computer engineer and owner of a localization company; the second was a 30-year-old journalist at the national newspaper Akhbar El-Youm.
Furthermore, almost all leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood have been detained since last July, so who are the masterminds of the alleged bombing? In addition, if the judicial authority in Egypt is respected, why didnt the government wait for investigations and trials? Another main question is, will the government declaration of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group have any effect on the groups popularity? Two months ago, an Egyptian court banned all activities of the Muslim Brotherhood. One senior security official has been quoted in The Huffington Post as saying, The plan is to drain the sources of funding, break the joints of the group, and dismantle the podiums from which they deliver their message.
(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...
The government views messaging as short-term and issue-based, rather than long-term and morally-based. In cognitive science, however, messages employ words, words evoke frames. Effective messaging requires existing strong, high-level, long-term, morally-based frame systems.
The Muslim Brotherhoods messaging system has existed and has been extended and strengthened over 85 years. In other words, like conservatives in the US, the MB activists have, over a long period of time, consistently and patiently strengthened their moral worldviews, prototypes and versions of vital political concepts (e.g., Life, Freedom, Responsibility, Government, Accountability, Responsibility, Equality, Fairness, Property, Security).
As a result, the MBs language is constantly heard in many parts of Egypt, especially inside universities, schools, mosques, etc. Such a language automatically and unconsciously evokes the groups frames and the high-level framing systems they are part of.
In this view, the Muslim Brotherhood has a large effect on the public even when theyre out of office. Importantly, their communication system is never out of the scene. It is already deep in the minds of bi-conceptuals, those who are partly Islamist and partly secular. As a result, there is always a chance for the groups moral system to be activated.
This would explain why the group, along its long history, has successfully fought off every threat to its existence. It also explains why the MB consistently wins elections and changes policies even without winning elections.
The MB activists very much understand this. So they will never take up arms against the state.
The second point is that the government doesnt understand the difference between systemic and direct causation.
Bombing a hospital is direct causation.
Any local application of force that produces a local effect in place and time is direct causation. Systemic causation, in contrast, goes beyond the immediate local situation. A systemic cause, as cognitive linguist George Lakoff states, may be one of many. It may need some special conditions, and may be indirect, working via a network of more direct causes.
We drill a lot more oil, burn a lot more gas, put a lot more carbon dioxide in the air, the atmosphere of the earth heats up, more moisture evaporates from the oceans producing bigger storms in some places and more droughts and fires in other places: systemic causation.
The coup in Egypt has led to pro-legitimacy sit-ins at Rabaa and Nahdah.
Breaking up the sit-ins by force has resulted in two things: 1) violence in Sinai against the army and police; and 2) protests across the country asking for revenge for the killings of the protesters.
Violence and demonstrations led to the announcement of the state of emergency in the country for a month and then for two more months. Declaring the state of emergency has undermined the economy, making no foreign investor want to come, disrupted the tourism industry, and stifled freedoms. And so on.
To the government, the crisis is still primarily about direct causation. To them, the problem is the direct terror of the Muslim Brotherhood. When the media reports on Egypt, it reports on terror. If the army Gen. Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi is understood as addressing the Muslim Brotherhood, and he proposes directly bombing the Muslim Brotherhood, the natural question is whether that eliminates the daily terror and improves the countrys economic health.
When the government admits it does not and extends the state of emergency for two more months, the question naturally arises, why bomb when it wont solve the direct problem, but would result in more problems? The government doesnt understand these two points at all, and continues its demonization of the opposition and stifling freedoms, proposing no real initiative to get out of the crisis.
The writer is an Egyptian poet, actor and a PhD student at Lodz University, Poland.
He is also a former lecturer at Um Al-Qura University, Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
The writer needs a JDAM dropped on him, IMO.
the solution in Egypt, like in Isr, is to eliminate those that would terrorize or murder you
after that, we can discuss “semantics” with this guy
since it will then be as meaningless as his article is now
The Muslim Brotherhood were terrorists before al Qaeda even existed.
I’ve long thought that there isn’t a dimes worth of difference between the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda. One day a guy works with the Muslim Brotherhood, and the next he is farmed out to al Qaeda for a project they have going on.
Perhaps I’m all wet here, but that’s my take on it.
We know that Obama has members of the Muslim Brotherhood as advisers, and we know that he arms al Qaeda.
Who lobbies for al Qaeda if not the Muslim Brotherhood advisers? Oh... John McCain. That’s right. LOL
Islam embraces Global Warming? Actually, I do like the analogy, it must be the greenhouse effect that's behind the destruction of so many cities in the middle east, the 'rebels' aren't happy until everything around them is destroyed, including the lives of their women and children, who, if they aren't killed in the sorry position of being used as human shields, are forced to live in overcrowded camps and rely on Western charity to feed them...while the boys shoot the shiter out of everything around them.
Global Warming it is. It's all our fault for driving cars and using aircon. sarc.
Someone should slap the guy, the US government is now making noise about the human rights of a terrorist group in Egypt!
“Global Warming it is. It’s all our fault for driving cars and using aircon. sarc.”
In a way it is. The money for the petrol then finds its way into the MB or El Qaeda, or Iran and its host of Shiite loons. They then destroy anything that makes piece with them.
The first step in eliminating an anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-life collective is to identify it. Then you I.D. the members and expose/incarcerate/eliminate as necessary, providing your collective supports truth, freedom, individuals, life.
Islam embraces Global Warming?
I almost stopped reading when he got to the Global Warming riff as it reveals a political bent Im not interested in and that tends to invalidate his other arguments. But, I persevered as his thinking dovetails with Walter Lippmanns Public Opinion. A better analogy would be something real. A cartel is importing drugs into the United States (direct causation, a company brings in an illegal product.) The US begins the War On Drugs (direct action.) The cartel holds down completion to almost nothing by killing even small operators who might transfer even so much as a single kilo. So, the amount of drugs into the United States is limited to only what the cartel can ship. The price remains high.
The WOD takes out the cartel (direct action.) In so doing it eliminates the cartels injunction against small operators. Why then is the price of cocaine lower now than when the cartel operated? Because now hundreds, or, perhaps thousands of small entrepreneurs are bringing in drugs (systemic actions.) The WOD has taken on a life of its own and the harder it takes direct action the lower the price of drugs because the WOD addresses only one element of the problem. The problem is not and never has been the importation of drugs. The problem is that a large portion of people want the drugs. Those people create the systemic demand. That could be addressed but it is not politically popular so it will never be addressed. (For example, drug testing to have a drivers license or after any accident with permanent revocation if proven to be using drugs. Drug testing for any form of welfare including earned tax credits. Make it illegal and punishable if Hollywood portrays drug use as fun, victim free or makes fun of the efforts to end it. Etc.) Im not suggesting any of these actions because I havent thought them through and some of them may not currently be legal. I provide them as theoretical systemic responses addressing the actual problem that the government could take instead of the one they are taking which has proven that it doesnt work.
The writer is a Gore-bot, too?
Bammy is a terrorist. Who’s going to fix that?