I’m not at all sure…
…whether this article, which I found at Drudge, is reporting the truth.
If it is, however, that would be a very ominous sign in Egypt.
On the other hand, ye olde blood libel is alive and well and living in Sauda Arabia, as well as a number of other middle-eastern Muslim countries.
Since the Allies split up the old Ottoman Empire during and after WW I, and in the case of benighted places like Afghanistan, failings of the various cultures have been laid to the evil colonialists, or to their dictatorial and kleptocractic dictator-successors.
Since two of the dictatorial regimes–Afghanistan and Iraq–were overthrown by the west, and the Arab Spring came to North Africa and will soon to Syria–we will see how Muslims will arrange things when they are free to arrange things the way they prefer.
That will be a blow to the loonier multiculturalists who will either have to insist that doing things “that way” is perfectly congenial, or that, if it’s tried here it couldn’t possibly actually happen, not in the slightest detail except if you object to its working you’re islamophobic.
Remember when the Taliban destroyed those ancient Buddhist statues in Bamiyan, Afghanistan?
I recall telling several folks that I thought that was like Kristallnacht; nobody was listening then and nobody was listening now.
Since then we have had 9-11, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Arab “spring” and now we are about to have a full-fledge Arab “nightmare.”
Are we still not listening? Are our grandchildren going to be reading in their history books about the genocide of non-muslims in the muslim world and ask us why we didn’t do something to prevent it? Can we do something to prevent it?
The violence against others is ok because it is in the koran? Sounds like a good reason to ban islam in the US.
Charles “can” has two aspects. One is, can we stop the murders. Probably not. Recall that the Rwandan genocide was mostly one’s friends and neighbors using machetes. It would have required western soldiers–mostly white–all over the country, prepared to shoot without much in the way of ROE any time they thought four or five guys with machetes weren’t actually heading for the fields.
Impractical. Insufficient resources.
Then there’s the political “can” which will insist we do only the ineffective. If that. No sense the US being imperialistic and killing brown people and all that.
So, no.
Now, to the extent it’s government inspired or enabled, we can use cruise missiles or B2 bombers to blow up local president-for-life types until we get one who will do as he’s told.
Not. Gonna. Happen.
See the Westphalian Model.
We need to lift the executive order against assassinating foreign leaders. Some of them don’t deserve to live and it might make them behave a bit better if they thought the next missile-armed drone or poison carrying robot insect was bound for them.
holmes.
In some other universe it might happen.
Since 1865, being president has been the most dangerous job in the US. Why should our guy be the only one? But, point is, it can’t get much worse as a kind of tit-or-tat.
And the idea of, say, Assad shuffling off this mortal coil courtesy of the red, white, and blue, warms my cold, cold heart.
For starters.
This item has a large redolent cloud of BS all around it. To begin with there are, as far as I can determine, no photos or video of these “crucifixions.” Highly suspect in a mob action in this camera drenched age in which Arabs love to send image of their evil around.
Second, the WND bozo seems to have only one live link into the substance of the story — crucifixions — and that link leads you to this dubious statement:
” Sky News, which was first to report about the crucifixions, has taken down its original article (though the URL still appears in the address box with the Arabic words “protesters-crucified-in front of-egypt’s-presidential-palace”).
While one may argue that Sky News removed the article because it was found false, one can equally argue that it censored itself for fear that it would be next in the terror campaign against the media.”
And immediately following that is the statement: “In reality, there is little reason to doubt this crucifixion story. ”
That tells me that this story has no legs nor proof.
holmes Says:
August 18th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
We need to lift the executive order against assassinating foreign leaders.
===
Holmes, you are stark raving mad.
Richard Aubrey Says:
the idea of, say, Assad shuffling off this mortal coil courtesy of the red, white, and blue, warms my cold, cold heart.
For starters.
===
Aubrey,
You are just as loony tunes as Holmes.
You start making it a sport for chief executives to kill for sport from the sky on just a whim and, guess what, you are next.
I agree the “crucifixion” story sounds over the top. My question is this: when your enemies are killing your enemies why intervene? Western Civilization has no friends inside any nation where Islam predominates. The big mistake we made in the Iran-Iraq war was to arm only one side. We made a mistake during the USSR occupation of Afghanistan. We should have given the mujahideen just enough material support to keep fighting, not enough to make the USSR withdraw.
And, I agree with vanderleun about assassinating foreign leaders. Its not a one way street.
vanderleun
I’m already next.
Anyway, the question was how to do something. If the means are unacceptable, that something is not going to be done.
There are multiple reports of ‘crucifixions’ happening, though it appears to be the dead bodies of murdered victims being nailed to crosses.
In reality, there is little reason to doubt this crucifixion story. Militant Muslims crucifying their opponents is a regular feature of the Islamic world–recent cases coming from the Ivory Coast, where two Christian brothers were crucified, similarly by supporters of a Muslim president who ousted a Christian; Indonesia, where Islamic separatists crucified a fellow Muslim for being a military informant; and in Iraq, where Muslim militants crucified Christian children.
Moreover, those alleged to have been crucified in Egypt certainly fit the Koran’s description of who deserves to be crucified. According to Allah, “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this: that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off…” (Koran 5:33).
Evidently the crucifixions are a scare tactic to frighten ME Christians into fleeing the area. Islam’s version of the KKK burning crosses…
They may not be doing much crucifying, but our friends in the Religion of Peace (ROP) have been doing a lot of beheading. Daniel Pearl (Pakistan), Nicholas Berg (Iraq), Theresia Morangke (15), Alfita Poliwo (17) and Yarni Sambue (17) (indonesia), and Aasiya Hassan (Buffalo, NY) come to mind almost immediately. Of course, we should ignore the witches beheaded in Saudi Arabia and God knows how many acts of barbarity committed in the name of Allah.
Vanderleun- what is insane is accepting that leaders of nations like Iran and whatever emerges from the mess in Egypt are somehow legitimate. What is insane is accepting that these methods are somehow out of bounds when we are dealing with madmen. Madmen who will have terrible technology at their disposal sooner or later. And to do that because of what? Some sort of gentleman’s agreement? I’m not saying it should be the usual course of business, but I don’t think it is out of bounds whatsoever. It’s a time honored tradition in fact and, if it had been used more effectively in the 20th century, could have prevented a lot of bloodshed.
You must forgive Vanderleun, Holmes. Even the most committed right-winger comes down with a bout of Allahpundititis–cutting the other side slack, assuming them to be rational, honorable people just like us–once in a while.
I wish him a quick recovery. Those attacks of humanism and gentlemanliness can put good people out of action and their civilizations overrun (cf. Edmund Burke, or in a less refined but equally pointful way, the Spaceballs Maxim: “Now you know why evil will always triumph: Because good is dumb”).
^ This.
It is self-evident truth that obviously evil people must be killed when they became dangerous, like rabid dogs.
Technically if you know what a rabbi does at a bris… well, they do drink the blood of babies… no? they spit it out again… (and then there is that rabbi with herpes that ends up killing his subjects)…. [metzitzah b’peh]
the copts have had it bad in egypt for a long time making a living collecting and recycling trash… in a country where an ambulance may leave you at the side of the road, anything is possible.. though this will probably be unfounded in the long run
The Saudis are still using public crucifixions to execute people. Instead of a cross, they use an X-shaped frame. They also still amputate hands and feet for various crimes.
So, yeah, I believe it. The moslems in Nigeria locked Christians into churches and burned them alive.
Nothing is more dangerous than a mob of religious fanatics who think they have a divine license to kill.
More on the moslems and their beheadings, crucifixions, and amputations: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080803015603AAoHfA3
There are photos also, if you can stomach it, if you google Saudi Crucifixion Pics.
It’s not good in Egypt.
Not good?
not good=a nightmare
Caroline Glick: “Who Lost Egypt“.
It’s on.
I call bullshit on this story.