Hat Tip: BB
Read more at iOwnTheWorld…
Hat Tip: BB
Read more at iOwnTheWorld…
By: Ashraf Ramelah
Voice of the Copts
On Monday, November 4th, an Egyptian Triple Seven elite military force helicopter will transport former Egyptian president, Mohammed Morsi, out of secret hiding where he has been held in custody by authorities since July 3rd this year. Morsi will be flown to a courtroom inside Toro Police School to begin his trial for high treason and other suspected crimes. On the eve of his political career and presidential candidacy, Morsi sat in prison awaiting trial for spying against Egypt. Now he is accused of continuing these efforts during his presidency.
According to Egyptian news agencies, Morsi recently notified his family that he alone will defend himself before the judge and jury. Meanwhile, Muslim Brotherhood organizations across the world scramble to bring to Egypt lawyers from the West and East who will try to prove that Morsi is blameless and his trial unfair. This will not be easy. Egyptian attorneys are unified against foreign attorneys appearing in the courtroom on Morsi’s behalf. In any case, proving Morsi’s innocence will be a herculean task.
In a country where no regulation or law exists to govern taping of conversations or, more aptly, where the Attorney General appointed by the President permitted secret recordings by Egyptian intelligence of the President’s meetings and phone conversations, judges dismissed by Morsi and now reinstated will be presented with tape recordings of Morsi’s discussions with Aymen Al Zawahiri of Al Qaeda.
These will show Morsi requesting the terrorist’s support. Morsi’s negotiation with the Al Qaeda leader delays application of the Iran and Taliban models for Egypt until a more receptive time and, in return for Al Zawahiri’s favor, the President agrees to immediately enforce Sharia law and release five thousand jailed terrorist-jihadists, including Aymen’s brother, Mohammed. All jihadists jailed under Mubarak were freed by Morsi within the first month of his installation to prove to Aymen Al Zawahiri that he could be trusted, according to leaked information paraphrasing the contents of the tapes.
If found guilty of conspiring with foreign entities against the welfare of the Egyptian state, Morsi will be assigned the death penalty and, since he is non-military, sentenced to hang. He stands trial on more counts that could link to the same charge, such as, attempting to establish an Egyptian Free Army within the country (parallel to the Egyptian military), creating a project to cleanse Egyptian presence from the Sinai Peninsula, accepting foreign financial aid against the interests of the country, protecting terrorists from prosecution, using jihadists to create chaos during pro-democracy freedom protests by ordering them to attack military points in Sinai, and urging “all jihadists everywhere to help us” to fight opposition in the streets and preserve his presidency.
As an elected, whose arrogance and power-grab as President placed himself “above the law,” Morsi has been disputing his removal from office. He claims his legitimate obligation to fulfill his term in spite of his alliance with terrorists and, to a lesser degree, his disregard for promises he made to the country to bring about infrastructure improvements, jobs, and safety within his first one hundred days of office. If the course of this event remains uninterrupted, Morsi will find himself in front of the court and, for the second time in Egypt’s history, a President will stand trial. Moreover, the Egyptian people will, in all probability, view two former Presidents in separate courtrooms at the same time with the overlapping trial of Hosni Mubarak whose current trial is likely to last beyond next week.
Mubarak’s trial is proving to Egyptians how he and his sons syphoned off the country’s assets and resources into their personal bank accounts and erected a tyrannical dynasty — all linked to Mubarak’s illegal use of the emergency law, “freezing” Egypt’s constitution, and ignoring the daily persecution of Egypt’s Christians. But Mubarak was a man of the state, a pro-Egypt nationalist. On the other hand, Morsi is anti-Egypt and pro-Islamic Umma (united Arab states). For this reason, much is at stake for Egypt and the world in Morsi’s upcoming trial. True justice will reveal Morsi’s alliances inside and outside the country.
The evidence from Morsi’s trial will likely incriminate wider circles — potentially the U.S. administration, the European Union, Qatar, Tunisia, Sudan and others. With the expected court examination of tape recordings and documents (to be aired on Egyptian TV and open to the international press), Morsi’s backers and supporters will be exposed unless backroom deals are brokered in advance. Morsi’s trial could mean Egypt confronts “international conspiracy”– the story developing while Morsi was in office and gaining momentum after his fall. It focuses on the unverified information that the Obama administration gave $8 billion to the Muslim Brotherhood to assign 40 percent of Sinai’s land to Hamas and, more recently, that a U.S. delegation of Senators tried to pressure the interim government into releasing Morsi from jail and re-installing him as President.
Additionally, it holds that European Union representative, Catherine Ashton, pleaded for Morsi’s release and reinstatement and, failing this, requested Morsi’s leave with asylum status; also, that Qatar made a private deal with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood to lease the Pyramids and Sphinx for billions of dollars placing ancient monuments in jeopardy, and that electricity was diverted from Egypt’s plants to Hamas as Hamas used Egypt’s gasoline from underground containers near the Gaza border while Egyptians were shorted and forced to ration.
Egyptians saw the West (EU and U.S.) respond to Mubarak’s toppling as an opportunity to replace him, whereas Egyptians see in Morsi’s arrest calls for his reinstatement or release and re-establishing respect for the Muslim Brotherhood. During the beginnings of Egypt’s January 2011 uprising, the U.S. endorsed Egyptian freedom fighters in their protests against the tyranny of Mubarak’s regime. President Obama congratulated Egyptians for this deed, but thereafter regarded those who stole their efforts for terrorist aims as “freedom seekers” and aided the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power. The freedom movement – in genuine pursuit of liberty, equality and universal human rights – persisted without terror gangs and toppled Mohammed Morsi, an autocrat considered far worse than Mubarak.
All this has brought clarity to Egyptians regarding a general consensus on Western intervention. Egyptians see foreign leaders submit to the political desires of a remnant Muslim Brotherhood already weakened by the demise of Morsi’s fascist regime, inhibiting the cause of secular government and popular sovereignty. This impedes the reform of injustices in Egypt. Now, what exactly is the purpose of the anticipated six-hour visit to Egypt by U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, planned for Sunday, November 3rd, one day before the date set for Morsi’s trial?
It came as no surprise to Egyptians, despising America’s White House for helping the Muslim Brotherhood and the ousted Morsi, that recently the U.S. sought grounds to freeze military aid to Egypt by categorizing Morsi‘s July 3rd arrest as a military coup d’état. Likewise, it came as no surprise to Egyptians that America settled upon a characterization of Egypt’s military combating Morsi’s armed terror bands (“peaceful” MB protesters) as “brutality” when the “military coup” rationale became implausible. It comes as no surprise anymore to freedom fighters yearning for human rights and Western values to see that the U.S. has left a gaping hole in diplomatic relations between their two countries by a vacancy still remaining in the position of U.S. Ambassador to Egypt.
By: Susan Knowles
Yesterday, I read that the Obama Administration has ordered the Navy Seals to remove the “Navy Jack” or the “don’t tread on me” flag from their uniforms. The Navy Jack has been a symbol of the U.S. Navy for over two centuries.
It was Benjamin Franklin who first used the symbol of a rattlesnake in 1751 to make a point. During this time, Great Britain was sending their criminals to America and it was Franklin who suggested that America send Britain rattlesnakes as a thank you.
Franklin went on to use the rattlesnake in 1754. He cut the snake into eight pieces which represented the eight colonies in America. Under the snake were the words “Join or Die.” Franklin would later go on to state that the snake would be a good representation of the American spirit.
The flag originally got its start in the military in 1775 and was designed by an American general Christopher Gadsden. While it is known as the “don’t tread on me” flag it is also known as the Gadsden flag. The U.S. Marine Corps used this flag as their motto. The yellow flag depicts a coiled rattlesnake ready to strike. The words “don’t tread on me” appear underneath the snake.
The U.S. Navy was established in 1775 with the purpose of stopping British ships from delivering supplies to British troops positioned in the colonies. U.S. Marines accompanied the U.S. Navy on their mission. The Marines carried drums painted yellow with a coiled rattlesnake with thirteen rattles, representing the thirteen original colonies. Underneath the coiled snake were the words “don’t tread on me.”
Right before the Navy left on their first mission, then Colonel Gadsden presented Commodore Hopkins with the yellow rattlesnake “don’t tread on me flag” as a show of solidarity. The flag represents one of the first flags of the United States which was later replaced by the flag we have now. Flying this flag is a First Amendment right protected under the U.S. Constitution.
Why is a history lesson important when discussing this administration’s ordering of the Navy Seals to remove the “don’t tread on me symbol?” Because this symbol represents America! It illustrates who we are at our core. We are hardworking, never give up, freedom fighters who love this country. This flag represents everything that constitutionalists stand for and everything that this administration hates about America.
It goes beyond a patch worn on the uniform of a serviceman or woman and this administration knows it. It is the very identity of the beginnings of our country and our military with their purpose to “support and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.”
I believe that the removal of the symbol by the administration is an attempt to strip the military of its historical identity in this country and secondly, an attempt to turn America’s very military against its own people.
The Tea Party uses this “don’t tread on me” flag as their symbolic fight to preserve the U.S. Constitution. They are astrong and influential group of individuals that are seen as perhaps the last roadblock in the administration’s attempts to usurp the constitution. Both progressive Democrats and progressive Republicans are afraid of what the Tea Party can do to their cause if left intact.
The upcoming mid-term elections and 2016 presidential election are must wins for the Democrats to hold on to power and continue to chip away at the U.S. Constitution, a document that they see as outdated and perhaps as insignificant as America’s history itself.
The Tea Party and the military have much in common regarding their allegiance to the constitution. The Tea Party seeks to preserve American’s rights as listed in the U.S. Constitution while the military seeks to protect it against all enemies foreign and domestic. The “don’t tread on me” symbol is a bond these two groups share.
The act of stripping the Navy Seals of this important American symbol is also an effort to “psychologically” separate the military from the Tea Party. It is a way for this administration to divide and conquer in the event the military is ordered to prohibit the Tea Party from asserting their First Amendment rights in the future. The Obama administration is counting on the fact that once the historical significance and the bond have been lost, the Tea Party will stand alone as the “enemy” of the State.
Perhaps in the not too distant future, the military will need to ask itself who in fact is violating the constitution and where their allegiance should lie. History will show that this administration hates the “rattlesnake.” Hopefully, history will also show that the military carried the “rattlesnake” proudly and honorably into every battle.
Susan Knowles is an author, psychotherapist and former practicing attorney. Her latest book, a political fiction, is entitled, “Freedom’s Fight: A Call to Remember” available on Amazon.com. Her website is www.susanknowles.com, where this article may also be found.
By: Aeneas Lavinium
I recently came across a short article by Tim Murphy at a website called Mother Jones. The title of the article shrieked out “Anti-Islam Activists Are Freaking Out About Crayons Now”! The alarmist tone anticipating some kind of ‘crayon war’ seemed to me to be yet another example of smearing, as unreasonable, people who have concerns about sharia. Like the widespread usage of the term ‘Islamophobia’ to demonise people this approach seems to be part of a general refusal to discuss the issues and engage in dialogue. It would have been far more positive if the article had tried to engage with those with whom it disagreed.
The article related to a decision by crayon manufacturer Crayola to make Islam themed colouring books for Ramadan and the negative reaction to this from some sharia critics. Unfortunately, negative rhetoric sometimes results when people feel that their culture is being routinely discriminated against. Many people believe that Islam is being promoted while other religions are being undermined; the colouring book decision obviously touched this particular nerve. This is the real issue and those that engage in promotions such as the one organised by Crayola should try to be sensitive to such feelings.
They should also, perhaps, do a bit more research before they begin similar promotions in future. What immediately struck me about the Mother Jones article was that the image that was used to illustrate it may actually be regarded by many Sunni Muslims as un-Islamic. This relates to the picture of the boy kneeling down happily reading his book (the Koran?). The decision to include this particular image ignored the prohibition of Aniconism is Islam. A Wikipedia article makes this basic point as follows:
“Aniconism in Islam is a proscription in Islam against the creation of images of sentient living beings. The most absolute proscription is of images of God in Islam, followed by depictions of Muhammad, and then Islamic prophets and the relatives of Muhammad, but the depiction of all humans and animals is discouraged in the hadith and by the long tradition of Islamic authorities, especially Sunni ones. This has led to Islamic art being dominated by Islamic geometric patterns, calligraphy and the barely representational foliage patterns of the arabesque…”
The article in fact reminded me of another faux pas made by a school that changed the name of a play from the three little pigs to the three little puppies without realising that dogs as well as pigs are haram in Islam.
Well-meaning but ill-informed people who blindly embrace political correctness often seem to know very little about the subjects on which they make judgements. Similarly those who denounce sharia critics as somehow being “racist” often have a profound lack of knowledge themselves. They seem to believe that feeling something in their heart makes that something so. It is therefore ironic when “Islamophobes” are accused of lacking knowledge of Islam. The website Unveiling Islamophobia provides the following introductory sentence in its misconceptions section:
“In many, if not all cases, Islamophobia is often fueled [sic] by a lack of knowledge of Islam itself.”
This raises the question of who the real “Islamophobes” are. Are they the sharia critics who have done extensive research or the politically correct pro sharia crowd who have not?
Crayola’s decision to create a themed colouring book for Ramadan is certainly not a problem as far as I am concerned. In fact, concern for the freedom of artistic expression is what made me concerned about sharia in the first place. I am in favour of Islamic artistic expression just as much as I am in favour of other forms. However, Crayola should perhaps consider making themed colouring books available in relation to the festivals of other religions too. Will Crayola be giving out free Christian themed colouring books at Christmas, Hindu themed ones at Diwali, or atheist themed ones on Richard Dawkin’s birthday? By treating all religions and beliefs equally Crayola could be making its own unique contribution to inter-belief dialogue. “Harmony through colour” might be a good slogan to promote such a campaign. After all, colour is the business of Crayola and colour is evident in many religious themes. [UPDATE: If Crayola have already done this then they are certainly worthy of positive recognition – if there are any such promotions then please link to them in the comments]
The colourful rose window at Chartres Cathedral showing colour in Christianity.
Interior of the Shrine of Hazrat Ali, Afghanistan showing colour in Islam
Diwali lanterns showing colour in Hinduism.
Islamic art is beautiful and unique and should be celebrated along with other art forms. Sometimes the coming together of artistic traditions can create new and interesting results. When Roger II conquered Islamic Sicily Muslims were tolerated and he had Muslims in his royal court:
“Roger II hosted at his court, among others, the famous geographer Muhammad al-Idrisi and the poet Muhammad ibn Zafar.”
He also must have embraced the artistic skills of many of his new Muslim subjects judging by the eclectic artistic legacy that has been left behind. On a visit to Monreale Cathedral near Palermo in Sicily I saw how Byzantine, Arab, and Norman artistic traditions came together seamlessly and enhanced one another is the same space. In Monreale, pagan columns, Biblical pictorial scenes, and Islamic geometric patterns formed the artistic components of the cathedral.
Sharia critics are concerned about its impact on human rights not on the arts. Islam has produced some wonderful works of art that should be cherished by all. Those that suggest that sharia critics are against Islamic art are wrong. Most sharia critics that I have met like beautiful things, after all, a world without beauty is a world without hope.
 Anti-Islam Activists Are Freaking Out About Crayons Now, Tim Murphy, Mother Jones, accessed on 2 November 2013, http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/07/anti-islam-activists-are-freaking-out-about-crayons-now
 Church school renames Three Little Pigs to avoid offending Muslims, Chris Brooke, Mail Online, accessed on 4 November, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-442555/Church-school-renames-Three-Little-Pigs-avoid-offending-Muslims.html
 Unveiling Islamophobia, Misconceptions section, accessed on 2 November 2013, http://unveiling-islamophobia.weebly.com/misconceptions.html
 Islam in Italy, Conquest of Sicily, Wikipedia, accessed on 2 November 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Italy#Conquest_of_Sicily