Think that comparisons between crackdown on right to protest in Egypt are not comparable to USA and UK? Think again.

No I don’t.

An increasing number of military figures in Egypt are now citing police brutality at #OccupyWallStreet protesters as justification for their own actions.

So what? What is the connection exactly? Since when does the lying two faced propaganda of the Egyptian government have anything to do with the price of eggs? What does their claim have to do with the real world?

The idea that people in Egypt are completely divorced from what’s happening in the US simply doesn’t stand up any more.

This seems to me to be a fallacy built on a strawman. Who ever once said that the people of Egypt are divorced from what is happening in the US? And even if they were, how does the fact that the Egyptian government uses this excuse to justify their completely different policies mean anything at all? They would do it anyway. For their own reasons. In their own vastly more brutal way. Regardless. They just can cite America as a (dishonest) justification now.

Yesterday, this video of police casually spraying helpless students with pepper spray (which is a chemical weapon) went viral.

Sorry but why is pepper spray a chemical weapon?

No wonder Egyptian generals feel emboldened to crack down at dissenters at home.

You have not shown that they have been emboldened. It just seems more of the same old Arabs-are-passive-victims-and-have-no-agency to me.

If there is any criticism to be made here, it ought to be of those that are too quick to leap to false equivalences because it seems the Egyptians have learnt that they too can play the “beam in a non-White guy’s eye is irrelevant compared to a microscopic mote in the eye of a Westerner” game.

Except, Comrade SMFS, the little inconvenient fact that Egypt is correct in it’s assertions, da.

@1

I think the argument in the original post is quite clear. It is arguing that the Egyptian generals feel emboldened because now it is harder for Western governments to condemn them effectively when they suppress protests.

You might disagree with the argument if you think that the potential effectiveness of Western condemnation doesn’t have that big an effect on the generals’ boldness, or that the effectiveness hasn’t actually been reduced, but those are differences in opinion, not logical errors or reasons to accuse people of racism.

3. Teddy Groves

I think the argument in the original post is quite clear. It is arguing that the Egyptian generals feel emboldened because now it is harder for Western governments to condemn them effectively when they suppress protests.

I am not so sure it is clear, but suppose it is. That rests on the basic fallacy that what the Egyptian Army is doing is remotely comparable to what the NYPD is doing. If you do not accept that basic fundamentally flawed idea, the whole argument looks like nonsense.

America is not going to torture anyone. They are not going to run over anyone with tanks. They are unlikely even to deploy tear gas. They are doing so to protect some other people’s rights. The protesters will still be allowed to protest. Indeed the Constitution will continue to protect their right to do so. They will be allowed to vote in the next election if they like. They have full rights to put their case. They just can’t continue to squat on someone else’s property and create a public health hazard.

In no way are the two situations comparable. The fact that the Egyptian regime sees an argument put forward by the Left that they may want to pick up does not make the argument any better. Because it rests on a fundamentally flawed, wrong and even dishonest premise – that there is anything remotely comparable here. There isn’t.

You might disagree with the argument if you think that the potential effectiveness of Western condemnation doesn’t have that big an effect on the generals’ boldness, or that the effectiveness hasn’t actually been reduced, but those are differences in opinion, not logical errors or reasons to accuse people of racism.

I don’t think that was an accusation of racism. Aimed at Sunny that would be kind of stupid don’t you think? But you can go along with the rest of the Left in assuming Arabs have no agency without thinking it is due to racial reasons. And this assumes no agency by the Arabs. Worse, it is indifferent to the reality on the ground in the Arab world. It is only concerned with a few entirely superficial similarities to make a case to bash the West. It is absurd.

“That rests on the basic fallacy that what the Egyptian Army is doing is remotely comparable to what the NYPD is doing.”

That’s true, what the NYPD is doing is worse.

“The fact that the Egyptian regime sees an argument put forward by the Left”

Nope, it’s the right who are breaking heads. Your soul-mates. Just like the Egyptian Generals, who would be entirely comfortable with your world-view.

America is not going to torture anyone.

Oh dear…

@4

Maybe this is labouring the point a bit but the argument doesn’t actually depend on there being actual comparability between the two situations. Even if there is only superficial similarity, that might still be sufficient to make Western condemnation less effective and thereby embolden the Egyptian generals.

A quite good comparison I think is with water-boarding. Doubtless the harm meted out in US torture chambers is not very high compared to some others in the world – perhaps they are not even remotely comparable to the worst – but still the difficulty of drawing an unequivocal distinction makes it hard for the US to condemn torturers.

Similarly with regard to suppressing protests, the more lines the West technically crosses – pre-emptive arrests, unprovoked violence, use of teargas bombs, absurd sentencing etc – even if the actual harm done isn’t in the same ballpark as other countries, the harder it becomes to draw unequivocal distinctions.

Also not sure in what way this argument assumes no agency by arabs. Even agents can be influenced by condemnation right?

7. Teddy Groves

Maybe this is labouring the point a bit but the argument doesn’t actually depend on there being actual comparability between the two situations. Even if there is only superficial similarity, that might still be sufficient to make Western condemnation less effective and thereby embolden the Egyptian generals.

So you think the Egyptian government is likely any time soon to say that because Americans eat hot dogs they can clear the square? I think that it is hard to understand the logic of anyone who denies that Sunny is trying to make a clear parallel here. Sufficient to make Western condemnation less effective? Sure. If we buy into the Leftist narrative that the only guilty people in the world are White, it will make it hard for us to condemn Egypt. If, on the other hand, we adopt some sort of sane frame of reference, we will say that the Egyptian people deserve and should have the same rights as Americans – and that perhaps one day they will. Not today of course.

A quite good comparison I think is with water-boarding. Doubtless the harm meted out in US torture chambers is not very high compared to some others in the world – perhaps they are not even remotely comparable to the worst – but still the difficulty of drawing an unequivocal distinction makes it hard for the US to condemn torturers.

No, the correct comparison is between the torture handed out by the Egyptian military and that pepper spray. If that. Water boarding is torture. Clearing a square in New York is not remotely even close to the repression that has and will fall on the Egyptian people. There is no problem for any sane person to condemn what has, is and will happen in Egypt based on the rights that the West has no problem offering people.

Similarly with regard to suppressing protests, the more lines the West technically crosses – pre-emptive arrests, unprovoked violence, use of teargas bombs, absurd sentencing etc – even if the actual harm done isn’t in the same ballpark as other countries, the harder it becomes to draw unequivocal distinctions.

What lines? What pre-emptive arrests? Notice that pre-emptively arresting someone has always been possible in the West. Actions likely to breach the peace. Going prepared for a crime. Incitement. But in general they are kept to a minimum – or they were until the Left grabbed control of the State. As soon as the Occupiers stop their unprovoked use of violence, violence will stop. I don’t see the point. We should wish the rest of the world would use tear gas. As opposed to Tanks, APCs, bullets and so on. Absurd sentencing? It is true that we might gain some respect in the world if we actually punished criminals but again I don’t see the problem. People don’t get eight weeks for beating their girlfriend’s to a pulp in Egypt.

Again, despite all the false equivalences, there is no comparison between Egypt and the West. Go live there.

Also not sure in what way this argument assumes no agency by arabs. Even agents can be influenced by condemnation right?

Well let’s see. Have Egyptians traditionally been denied such rights? Going back to the Pharaohs except for the brief period of British control? Will they be denied such rights again? Will the Egyptian generals inevitably crack down on protesters – regardless of what the West wants, does or says? The answers to these questions are obvious. The only issue here is whether the Egyptian generals have found an argument that *Western* liberals will buy and so disarm Western condemnation. Egyptians won’t be fooled. Egyptians don’t care.

So we have an argument that is irrelevant to the entire population of Egypt. That has nothing to do with what Egyptians will do. That is only of interest to the Western liberal Left. What else is it but nonsense?

5 – Grow up, you are capable of making intelligent arguments so why resort to trolling this time? It is quite clear that SMFS does not approve of the authoritarian methods used in Egypt. It is also absurd to suggest that the NYPD, whatever their faults, are worse than a repressive military.

Well as long as those beaten and gassed are the raving mad, illiberal, homophobic, sexist, bigoted, fanatical, torturing, murdering Islamist freaks that have shown up the so called Arab Spring for the Islamic Uprising it really is…. Who cares!??

@10 – Right, and why should I care about you, who hold essentially the same views?

@9 – Ah right, it’s fine for WESTERN police to behave violently and abusively. Saying otherwise is childish! I mean, think of the childr…oh, wait, no, think of the Terror…crap…hey, they’re blocking the sidewalk!

The US subsidises the Egyptian military to the tune of $3 billion a year. Why is not Obama demanding that the Military Council stand down in Egypt? Oh yes, he’s lost all authority to claim America stands for democracy by the brutal way in which the Occupy Movement is being treated in the States. America is betraying its roots funding oppressive military and religious regimes abroad and cracking down on protest and free speech at home.

No, I’m not sexist, homophobic, I don’t believe in all powerful/ do as they say or else invisible supernatural beings, and the only time I want action taken against people is when they are fanatical zealots who are enemies of evolved thought, reason and hard fought for freedoms… All of which puts me far away from religious mad men.

And yeah, just like when fighting The Nazis, sometimes hard choices and actions are needed to defend all that shitheads like you don’t care about.

True liberals fight all that is illiberal… Even if it hides behind skin colour and supernatural sky fairy garbage.

ALL unlike you.

Don’t fertilize the astroturf, it will just grow ever more invasive.

Consider:

Restating (misstating) “opponents” points deliberately in order to make them appear ludicrous to the casual reader.

Ad hominem.

“It’s right because I say it’s right.”

@13 – Sure, you’re just an isolationist racist. And I fight intolerance. Which includes your intolerance.

@SMFS

“So you think the Egyptian government is likely any time soon to say that because Americans eat hot dogs they can clear the square?”

Nonsense.

“I think that it is hard to understand the logic of anyone who denies that Sunny is trying to make a clear parallel here.”

I agree. However, this was not done by the poster you replied.

“Sure. If we buy into the Leftist narrative that the only guilty people in the world are White, it will make it hard for us to condemn Egypt.”

How is that a leftist narrative? That’s just plain racist.

“If, on the other hand, we adopt some sort of sane frame of reference, we will say that the Egyptian people deserve and should have the same rights as Americans – and that perhaps one day they will. Not today of course.”

If we as a collective were sane, both Americans and Egyptians would have ‘better’ rights, today.

“No, the correct comparison is between the torture handed out by the Egyptian military and that pepper spray. If that. Water boarding is torture. Clearing a square in New York is not remotely even close to the repression that has and will fall on the Egyptian people.”

Very true. Calling pepper spray and unprovoked violence torture is diminishing real torture. Calling it abuse, immoral or a crime would be more accurate.

“There is no problem for any sane person to condemn what has, is and will happen in Egypt based on the rights that the West has no problem offering people.”

One problem is that the West has a problem offering these rights to people in countries like Egypt, by supporting these regimes until they fail under the pressure of the people.

“”Similarly with regard to suppressing protests, the more lines the West technically crosses – pre-emptive arrests, unprovoked violence, use of teargas bombs, absurd sentencing etc – even if the actual harm done isn’t in the same ballpark as other countries, the harder it becomes to draw unequivocal distinctions.

What lines? What pre-emptive arrests?”

Assumption: Lines of law, if there are such lines. The pre emptive-arrests made by police during the OWS-protests.

“Notice that pre-emptively arresting someone has always been possible in the West. Actions likely to breach the peace. Going prepared for a crime. Incitement. But in general they are kept to a minimum – or they were until the Left grabbed control of the State. As soon as the Occupiers stop their unprovoked use of violence, violence will stop. I don’t see the point. We should wish the rest of the world would use tear gas. As opposed to Tanks, APCs, bullets and so on. Absurd sentencing? It is true that we might gain some respect in the world if we actually punished criminals but again I don’t see the problem. People don’t get eight weeks for beating their girlfriend’s to a pulp in Egypt.”

Yes, pre-empticely arresting someone who’s about to or reasonably suspected to commit a crime makes sense. When breaching the peace is peacefully protesting, pre-emptive arrest doesn’t make any sense. Unprovoked use of violence? And no, we should wish that no country would use neither tear gas or tanks etc. Are you trying to imply that there are no absurd sentencings being carried out in the west? Police usually don’t get any reprimands for violating laws.

“Again, despite all the false equivalences, there is no comparison between Egypt and the West. Go live there.”

Of course there is comparison between Egypt and the West in this context. Go live there? Awesome argument.

“Well let’s see. Have Egyptians traditionally been denied such rights? Going back to the Pharaohs except for the brief period of British control? Will they be denied such rights again? Will the Egyptian generals inevitably crack down on protesters – regardless of what the West wants, does or says? The answers to these questions are obvious.”

Going back to the Pharaohs egyptians had relatively far reaching human rights. Jumping to the period of British, yes, they were indeed denied rights. Yes they will be denied such rights again, and are being denied. No, of course Egyptian generals wont do anything they wants regardless of what the West does. The West are their allies, contributing a big chunk of their resources. The answers might be obvious but not when you spin it like you do.

“The only issue here is whether the Egyptian generals have found an argument that *Western* liberals will buy and so disarm Western condemnation. Egyptians won’t be fooled. Egyptians don’t care.”

What? How is this the only issue? Everyone is being fooled, both you and me.

“So we have an argument that is irrelevant to the entire population of Egypt. That has nothing to do with what Egyptians will do. That is only of interest to the Western liberal Left. What else is it but nonsense?”

Even it only was of interest to the Western liberal Left, and a blatant lie, the argument in itself makes sense. Condemning the use of violence against peaceful protests while using violence against peaceful protest, is nonsense.

16. ArnulfZeAlien

How is that a leftist narrative? That’s just plain racist.

And yet it is the way the Left behaves. Try actually reading them.

If we as a collective were sane, both Americans and Egyptians would have ‘better’ rights, today.

Sure. We could go the “fairies and unicorns” route. If only we all had a unicorn delivered from a magic rainbow land. But we don’t. What we have is rights in the West. What they don’t have in Egypt is anything remotely like those rights.

One problem is that the West has a problem offering these rights to people in countries like Egypt, by supporting these regimes until they fail under the pressure of the people.

There was this thing called decolonisation. You may have heard of it. It means that we cannot offer these or any other rights to anyone any more. Because, you know, they are independent. All we can do is encourage them to be more democratic. Which does work. That is why the world has gone from about half a dozen democracies in 1944 to pretty much the entire world – all under the protective hegemony of the United States. But if the Egyptians don’t want human rights or democracy, and it seems they don’t, then there’s not a lot we can do.

When breaching the peace is peacefully protesting, pre-emptive arrest doesn’t make any sense.

So you have no problem with Christians preaching homosexuality is a sin in public as long a they do so peacefully?

Of course there is comparison between Egypt and the West in this context. Go live there? Awesome argument.

Then explain what it is. The only cure for terminal naiviety is experience.

Going back to the Pharaohs egyptians had relatively far reaching human rights.

Name three. Why do you make this sh!t up?

Jumping to the period of British, yes, they were indeed denied rights.

But they had more rights than ever before or ever since. Kind of the point really.

Yes they will be denied such rights again, and are being denied. No, of course Egyptian generals wont do anything they wants regardless of what the West does. The West are their allies, contributing a big chunk of their resources. The answers might be obvious but not when you spin it like you do.

So we are in agreement. The Egyptians don’t really want these rights. We do provide some cash, but not very much compared to the economy. But as we have seen in the past, they will do what they need to to stay in power. If that means giving up the cash, they will give up the cash. We don’t make the political weather in the Middle East. We follow after the mob and deal with whoever they have put in power.

Even it only was of interest to the Western liberal Left, and a blatant lie, the argument in itself makes sense. Condemning the use of violence against peaceful protests while using violence against peaceful protest, is nonsense.

No it does not. Not unless you commit the fundamental logical error of comparing the torture in Egypt with the relatively peaceful eviction in NY. Which is utterly absurd. The argument relies on a sort of reductio ad absurdum.

And as such should be condemned, not merely ignored.

@17 – “And yet it is the way the Left behaves. Try actually reading them.”

Nope, it’s your caricature in your head of how they behave.

Your complete revisionism of the Caliphate era is notable, too. Sure, the Ottomans were brutal. But denying centuries as a modern country, when Europe was ruled by an inbred bunch of squabbling “Holy” Roman nobles…

@SMFS

“And yet it is the way the Left behaves. Try actually reading them.”

Ok, so, assuming you are a part of the ‘Right’, should I compare you to *insert crazy right-winger*? Nopes.

“Sure. We could go the “fairies and unicorns” route. If only we all had a unicorn delivered from a magic rainbow land. But we don’t. What we have is rights in the West. What they don’t have in Egypt is anything remotely like those rights.”

Yay, unicorns. Much better than GMO-corn. Yay! Remember, we have wrongs too.

“There was this thing called decolonisation. You may have heard of it. It means that we cannot offer these or any other rights to anyone any more. Because, you know, they are independent. All we can do is encourage them to be more democratic. Which does work. That is why the world has gone from about half a dozen democracies in 1944 to pretty much the entire world – all under the protective hegemony of the United States. But if the Egyptians don’t want human rights or democracy, and it seems they don’t, then there’s not a lot we can do.”

Right, decolonisation, Unicorns, you may have heard of it. When they come riding on leprecauns they mean that even though in your fairyland we gave back the keys to city hall to the people of the 3rd world, we still have and excercise our power world wide. Yes, let’s encourage them with humanitarian aid a la Orwell and billions of dollars. They also whisper in my ear that democracy isn’t actually democracy if it’s not “the rule of the people”. But wait a minute, if the Egyptians don’t want democracy, and don’t have, darn it, they have it.

“So you have no problem with Christians preaching homosexuality is a sin in public as long a they do so peacefully?”

None what-so-ever in the way you say it. I would of course argue against them. Rather them being out in the open arguing with people so they can get some insight in the world than having them hiding out somewhere, plotting evil christian schemes.

“Then explain what it is. The only cure for terminal naiviety is experience.”

2011, planet earth, humans, cities, globalisation. The only definition of terminal is that there is no cure. Oxymorons are sweet n salty.

“Name three. Why do you make this sh!t up?”

Read up some on the history of Egypt. I admit it’s not very relevant how it was during the time of the Pharaos but I couldn’t help it, you brought it up. Don’t use dirty words, it’s f’ed up.

“But they had more rights than ever before or ever since. Kind of the point really.”

No, kind of my point really.

“So we are in agreement. The Egyptians don’t really want these rights. We do provide some cash, but not very much compared to the economy. But as we have seen in the past, they will do what they need to to stay in power. If that means giving up the cash, they will give up the cash. We don’t make the political weather in the Middle East. We follow after the mob and deal with whoever they have put in power.”

No, we are not in agreement about this. Dont put words in my virtual mouth. I will not speak for the Egyptians, neither should you. So, by comparing an entire economy with a part of the economy, that part of the economy is relatively irrelevant? If cash is the means for power, no, they should not give up the cash if they want power. I see you are a training spin-doctor indeed. Whether you have read about the history of the political weather in the ME or not, you should know that we have had substantial influence over who’s in power and have been in power there.

“No it does not. Not unless you commit the fundamental logical error of comparing the torture in Egypt with the relatively peaceful eviction in NY. Which is utterly absurd. The argument relies on a sort of reductio ad absurdum.

And as such should be condemned, not merely ignored.”

Well, as you have been pointing out, there are indeed differences between Western societies and Egypt, especially when it comes to human rights. I am comparing the acts of violence in the context of their respective countries. The argument relies on a sort of, relativism ad abuse.

Sorry for being kinda silly, but this sort of spin has got my head spinning.

19. ArnulfZeAlien

Ok, so, assuming you are a part of the ‘Right’, should I compare you to *insert crazy right-winger*? Nopes.

I am guessing it will take you, tops, five more minutes to call me a crazy right winger. However the view that only White people are evil is not isolated on the Far Left. It is a mainstream idea.

Yay, unicorns. Much better than GMO-corn. Yay! Remember, we have wrongs too.

Ahh, I see, you’re doing parody.

Right, decolonisation, Unicorns, you may have heard of it. When they come riding on leprecauns they mean that even though in your fairyland we gave back the keys to city hall to the people of the 3rd world, we still have and excercise our power world wide. Yes, let’s encourage them with humanitarian aid a la Orwell and billions of dollars. They also whisper in my ear that democracy isn’t actually democracy if it’s not “the rule of the people”. But wait a minute, if the Egyptians don’t want democracy, and don’t have, darn it, they have it.

We do not, despite your fantasy, exercise much power in the Third World. We do give them aid. We are such bastards.

Read up some on the history of Egypt. I admit it’s not very relevant how it was during the time of the Pharaos but I couldn’t help it, you brought it up. Don’t use dirty words, it’s f’ed up.

Been there, done that. Name three. It is not relevant because you made it up. No other reason.

No, we are not in agreement about this. Dont put words in my virtual mouth.

I didn’t say we were and so of course I didn’t. Why are you wasting my time?

So, by comparing an entire economy with a part of the economy, that part of the economy is relatively irrelevant? If cash is the means for power, no, they should not give up the cash if they want power.

If they hold power they can loot the entire country. The entire country is worth more than the aid. They have just removed all the independent directors from the State Bank and so looting is clearly on their mind. Thus if given a choice between keeping 90% of the cash and staying in power or giving it all up, I tend to think they are going to stay in power.

Whether you have read about the history of the political weather in the ME or not, you should know that we have had substantial influence over who’s in power and have been in power there.

As any fool with even a passing interest in the Middle East knows, not only do we have next to no influence in who is in power in the region, our support is often a kiss of death. We deal with the disaster the Middle East mob throws up. No more.

Well, as you have been pointing out, there are indeed differences between Western societies and Egypt, especially when it comes to human rights. I am comparing the acts of violence in the context of their respective countries. The argument relies on a sort of, relativism ad abuse.

So your argument is back to that whole White People Are Uniquely Evil thing? The argument you denied making? If you want to admit you’re wasting my time, please feel free to keep doing so.

“I am guessing it will take you, tops, five more minutes to call me a crazy right winger. However the view that only White people are evil is not isolated on the Far Left. It is a mainstream idea.”

I’ll settle for crazy if you belive that people in general have such an idea. And if possible even crazier if you think the Far Left is mainstream.

“We do not, despite your fantasy, exercise much power in the Third World. We do give them aid. We are such bastards.”

Indeed, we do give them aid. We also own vast amounts of their resources and land. We even from time to time stage military coups and appoint their next leader.

“Been there, done that. Name three. It is not relevant because you made it up. No other reason.”

Yes you got me, you have lifted the veil off of my hoax. I am the one who carved all those hieroglyphs explaining Egyptian law. But I did not build the pyramids, that was some one elses scheme.

“I didn’t say we were and so of course I didn’t. Why are you wasting my time?”

What the..? –> “So we are in agreement.”

“If they hold power they can loot the entire country. The entire country is worth more than the aid. They have just removed all the independent directors from the State Bank and so looting is clearly on their mind. Thus if given a choice between keeping 90% of the cash and staying in power or giving it all up, I tend to think they are going to stay in power.”

I’m sorry I don’t follow you here. I agree that the entire country is worth more than the aid and removing all independent directors from the State Bank does indeed imply looting. But how does this lead to the choice between keeping 90% of the cash and staying in power or giving it all up?

“As any fool with even a passing interest in the Middle East knows, not only do we have next to no influence in who is in power in the region, our support is often a kiss of death. We deal with the disaster the Middle East mob throws up. No more.”

Indeed official support like we’ve given the regimes of Afghanistan, Iraq, SA, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait Egypt, Libya, you know, more or less all totalitarian regimes of the ME is frowned upon by the local ‘mob’. And calling me a fool won’t get you anywhere. I am not impressed with your apparent views of the people of the ME. Maybe you should move there, get some experience and find a cure for that terminal disdain you seem to posess.

“So your argument is back to that whole White People Are Uniquely Evil thing? The argument you denied making? If you want to admit you’re wasting my time, please feel free to keep doing so.”

Let me try this; I belive that all people, regardless of skin color, shoe size, political beliefs, religion or lack thereof are equally capable of evil and good. Clear enough?

Yes, I seem to be wasting your time, since your beliefs seem so rigid it feels pointless arguing. Me on the other hand, I think I actually will learn something from this. So thank you and I’m sorry you’re wasting your time.

This is going viral and you don’t have any sources other than tweets? This is not journalism, this is gossip.

@ Leon Wolfson

‘“That rests on the basic fallacy that what the Egyptian Army is doing is remotely comparable to what the NYPD is doing.”

That’s true, what the NYPD is doing is worse.’

How? Has the NYPD has been killing people? No. Whereas the Egyptian Army has been doing so.

What peculiar moral universe do you inhabit where pepper-spraying people is ‘worse’ than killing them?

“Think that comparisons between crackdown on right to protest in Egypt are not comparable to USA and UK?

Think again. An increasing number of military figures in Egypt are now citing police brutality at #OccupyWallStreet protesters as justification for their own actions.”

As pointed out above, so what, Sunny? Do you believe any old excuse?

The murderous crackdowns in Egypt started long before Occupy Wall Street. How prescient of the Egyptian police and military to see a figleaf excuse would be along at some time in the future – and that some in the west would nod along with it.

More logical – if still indefensible – would be to offer the example of the Egyptian army and police as an excuse for the subsequent behaviour of the NYPD. Citing the latter as an excuse for the former shows an inability to grasp even mere sequentiality, let alone causation.

@23 – Ah right, so America is no morally better than Egypt in your world. Thanks for standing up and being counted.

@26 – Nope, the cop’s a republican. It’s all your side’s fault. Your disclaimer is meaningless, you support it via your own blanket logic.

@27 – Again, thanks for the call for dozens of deaths and for everyone to race to the lowest common moral denominator. That’s what your post says, after all. And then you condemn people for it…

@29 – Nope, your screed is near-identical to theirs, not mine. And it’s your sloppy wording, not mine.

You always have to blame the other for everything, though.

21. ArnulfZeAlien

Indeed, we do give them aid. We also own vast amounts of their resources and land. We even from time to time stage military coups and appoint their next leader.

Sorry but none of those claims is true except the first one. We do give them aid. We own virtually none of their resources. You do know the first thing about the oil industry, right? We own even less of their land. We do not stage military coups. Once the West had a minor involvement in an otherwise entirely Iranian affair. Get over it. The coup would have happened anyway. Coups were common in the Middle East at the time. Why do you care about this one?

Yes you got me, you have lifted the veil off of my hoax. I am the one who carved all those hieroglyphs explaining Egyptian law. But I did not build the pyramids, that was some one elses scheme.

So you’re admitting you lied? Fine.

I’m sorry I don’t follow you here. I agree that the entire country is worth more than the aid and removing all independent directors from the State Bank does indeed imply looting. But how does this lead to the choice between keeping 90% of the cash and staying in power or giving it all up?

Because if the choice is doing what we ask, giving up power, or losing aid, they may well decide they will ignore us, lose the trivial sum our aid represents and continue to loot the state.

Indeed official support like we’ve given the regimes of Afghanistan, Iraq, SA, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait Egypt, Libya, you know, more or less all totalitarian regimes of the ME is frowned upon by the local ‘mob’. And calling me a fool won’t get you anywhere. I am not impressed with your apparent views of the people of the ME. Maybe you should move there, get some experience and find a cure for that terminal disdain you seem to posess.

Afghanistan is a limited exception. But we did not choose the government of Iraq. The Iraqi people did. They voted for our enemies as well. We did not choose the government of Saudi Arabia. The Wahabis and the al-Sauds drove out our choice of the Hashemites. Qatar’s al-Thani family has been ruling Qatar since 1825. We had nothing to do with that. Although I suppose it is possible we had some involvement in the 1995 coup that put the present King in power. Bahrain’s al-Khalifa family came to power even earlier – 1820. Again nothing to do with us. The al-Sabah family took over Kuwait in 1756. In all three cases we simple dealt with the people in power already. Egypt? We had a troubled relationship with the son of a b!tch who was in power before WW2. Siding with the Italians as he did. But then the relatively pro-British King was thrown out by an utterly anti-British coup. Then the less radical Naguib was thrown out by the even more anti-British Nasser. You may recall this if you paid attention in school. Again, we did not choose these people. The Egyptian Army did. Who then chose Sadat and then Mubarak after him. Nothing to do with us. As for Libya, we had an unfriendly but workable relationship with the King of Libya, who we did create, sort of. But then he was thrown out for Gaddafi. Who hated us.

The facts are obvious no matter how much you want to ignore them. We do not choose such people. We deal with them once they are in power.

Let me try this; I belive that all people, regardless of skin color, shoe size, political beliefs, religion or lack thereof are equally capable of evil and good. Clear enough?

You say it but you don’t believe it.

@ 25

Leon,

“Ah right, so America is no morally better than Egypt in your world.”
Please don’t straw man my argument. I did not suggest it is no better. on the contrary I indicated that I think it IS better. That is why I made the following points to you:

“Has the NYPD has been killing people? No. Whereas the Egyptian Army has been doing so.”

and

“What peculiar moral universe do you inhabit where pepper-spraying people is ‘worse’ than killing them?”

Now I asked you to substantiate your grand claim that “what the NYPD is doing is worse.”

You haven’t even attempted to. Is that because even you realise in retrospect that it was an utterly foolish and illogical claim?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c29CAXR141s#!

try to translate this , this is a video of a woman saying wat the egyptian military did to her and several other woman,they went through hell the army are just a bunh of rapists

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c29CAXR141s#!

try to translate this , this is a video of a woman saying wat the egyptian military did to her and several other woman,they went through hell the egyptian army are just a bunh of rapists