Explain a Muslim "Day of Rage"

[Gullveig]

Can somebody explain why 36 Churches were torched?

english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/79124/Egypt/Politics-/Churches-torched-across-Egypt-in-antiCoptic-violen.aspx

My guess would be that it has to do with the pre-existing history of religious violence in Egypt, which actually pre-dates Islam (re: the murder of Hypatia) and the fact that some fundie Islamist groups seem to believe, probably incorrectly, that the Coptic Christians are part of the demographic complicit in undermining Morsi.

 

[Porknpie]

Exactly.
This a problem the United States has created with our policies in the mid-east. We sell the weapons, stir the pot, create caos, and stand back and looked shocked. Christians are now being killed and churches being burned.
Where’s the outrage from Washington? Thier silence speaks volumes.

Justa,

The USA did not create the Muslim Brotherhood and the USA did not create an Egyptian military that would fire on many defenseless citizens.

Our policies are less than stellar but it wrong thinking to believe that the USA created the issue that we are seeing on TV.

Pork

 

[Porknpie]

Now, I will admit my cynicism toward cable news and ESPECIALLY Fox “news”, but I noticed something strange on the footage I watched about an hour ago on the FNC. It showed a crowd of apparent protestors and off in the distance, on top of a building was a “Fox” billboard.
Fox is on television in Egypt? That seems odd.
It would not be the first time cable news has used deceptive footage.

Justa,

Why do you watch Fox if you don’t like it? Best news on TV IMHO is the BBC. Love it.

Pork

 

[Randy_Carson]

Post a thread on how Mohammed died, and every Muslim member of CAF jumps into the discussion.

Ask a tough question or two about the “day of rage”, and not a peep.

Well, it is Friday…maybe everyone is at the mosque.

 

[dronald]

There are websites dedicated to showing Christians being persecuted. 99 percent of the time, it’s in the name of Islam against Christians. Facts are facts.

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

It is unfortunate. I think the religion of peace thing is media PR, not based in facts at all. Of all the world religions, Islam seems to have more official warlike stances.

The Fact: 23% (1.6 Billion) of the world’s entire population are Muslim. That’s nearly 1 in 4 people!!! - as of December 2012 recorded in the Global Religious Landscape report from Pew Research Center/Religion & Public Life

With that Fact in mind, as large of #s as Islam has, if it were Not actually a religion of Peace as it claims to be, then the entire world would be in deep trouble!!!

If 1/4 of the world’s population (100% of Muslims) were to pick up a weapon and kill 3 non-Muslims, then the entire world would be Muslim and we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Heck, we’d be in trouble if it were only 1/4 of all Muslims (1/8 of the entire world’s population) who were violent.

The reality is that those Muslims who are actually violent are very, very few.

Based on the Facts, it’s the Media that perpetuates Islam as warlike, violent, etc.

 

[MartinJordan]

Scapegoat…

The Coptics will be the easiest prey. People forgot that during the military takeover and subsequent press conference el Baradei, El Baradei, even the grand Imam were there along with the Coptic Pope. Weren’t they all supporting the ousting of Morsi?

MJ

 

[JHow]

The Fact: 23% (1.6 Billion) of the world’s entire population are Muslim. That’s nearly 1 in 4 people!!! - as of December 2012 recorded in the Global Religious Landscape report from Pew Research Center/Religion & Public Life

With that Fact in mind, as large of #s as Islam has, if it were Not actually a religion of Peace as it claims to be, then the entire world would be in deep trouble!!!

If 1/4 of the world’s population (100% of Muslims) were to pick up a weapon and kill 3 non-Muslims, then the entire world would be Muslim and we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Heck, we’d be in trouble if it were only 1/4 of all Muslims (1/8 of the entire world’s population) who were violent.

The reality is that those Muslims who are actually violent are very, very few.

Based on the Facts, it’s the Media that perpetuates Islam as warlike, violent, etc.

Warfare doesn’t work like that. Numbers don’t guarantee a win. It is not a case of “lying media”. Islamic violence is an obvious threat around the world. Everywhere Islamic societies butt up against their neighbors, there is friction: Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, all suffer under muslim majorities, to say nothing of soccer players, kite flyers and homosexuals.

Also why is it liberals preface their opinions with “The reality is…”? It really is a verbal tic.

 

[dronald]

It’s not easy being a Christian in the Middle East, and that’s a fact.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Justa,

The USA did not create the Muslim Brotherhood and the USA did not create an Egyptian military that would fire on many defenseless citizens.

Our policies are less than stellar but it wrong thinking to believe that the USA created the issue that we are seeing on TV.

Pork

So the US doesn’t deserve any blame despite the fact our foreign policy for most of the last century centered around us making sure governments (such as Egypt’s) that were friendlier to us than the Soviets stayed in power regardless of how repressive and/or authoritarian they were?

A repressive regime + an outside more powerful state wanting the regime to stay in power = a situation in which the only opposition that exists after the fall of the regime is extremist + a massive unleashing of internal violence over issues that the repressive regime was able to ignore/“keep a lid on” with the use of heavy handed tactics

The bottom line is that the MB has the power and legitimacy that it has within the Egyptian populace because they were the only ones who were extreme enough and hard line enough to survive the political crackdowns under the US supported Egyptian governments of the past. Had our foreign policy focused less on short term gains (allies against the Soviets) and more on long term gains (long term stable ally) and forced the Egyptian government to “behave” we’d be looking at a Egypt in which the MB was a minor mostly powerless party that was overshadowed by more politically/socially moderate groups.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

In the West, we don’t hear about every drone strike, missile launch, combat mission, etc. that is going on daily there. I think I would have a “day of rage” myself if that was happening here!

It’s just silly when they rage about cartoons and things like that, though.

A “day of rage” targeting your fellow countrymen because a foreign power that they have no connection to is conducting combat operations in your country sound logical to you? It doesn’t to me.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

This entire conflict in Egypt is tragic and very troublesome. Egypt is the Christian holy land of St Mark the holy evangelist. Old & New Testament country of God that both Judaism and Islam share.

Watching these young people shot to death on TV is heartbreaking.

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

So the US doesn’t deserve any blame despite the fact our foreign policy for most of the last century centered around us making sure governments (such as Egypt’s) that were friendlier to us than the Soviets stayed in power regardless of how repressive and/or authoritarian they were?

A repressive regime + an outside more powerful state wanting the regime to stay in power = a situation in which the only opposition that exists after the fall of the regime is extremist + a massive unleashing of internal violence over issues that the repressive regime was able to ignore/“keep a lid on” with the use of heavy handed tactics

The bottom line is that the MB has the power and legitimacy that it has within the Egyptian populace because they were the only ones who were extreme enough and hard line enough to survive the political crackdowns under the US supported Egyptian governments of the past. Had our foreign policy focused less on short term gains (allies against the Soviets) and more on long term gains (long term stable ally) and forced the Egyptian government to “behave” we’d be looking at a Egypt in which the MB was a minor mostly powerless party that was overshadowed by more politically/socially moderate groups.

You’re Spot-On (unfortunately)

 

[GaryTaylor]

The US needs to get their act together.

breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/08/16/Report-Egypt-Sending-Diplomatic-Mission-to-Russia

 

[livingwordunity]

The Fact: 23% (1.6 Billion) of the world’s entire population are Muslim. That’s nearly 1 in 4 people!!! - as of December 2012 recorded in the Global Religious Landscape report from Pew Research Center/Religion & Public Life

With that Fact in mind, as large of #s as Islam has, if it were Not actually a religion of Peace as it claims to be, then the entire world would be in deep trouble!!!

If 1/4 of the world’s population (100% of Muslims) were to pick up a weapon and kill 3 non-Muslims, then the entire world would be Muslim and we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Heck, we’d be in trouble if it were only 1/4 of all Muslims (1/8 of the entire world’s population) who were violent.

The reality is that those Muslims who are actually violent are very, very few.

Based on the Facts, it’s the Media that perpetuates Islam as warlike, violent, etc.

I don’t think anyone is saying that all Muslims are violent. Even conservative commentators will tell you that most Muslims are peaceful people. But it’s not the peaceful ones we are concerned with, it’s the radical Islamists. I’ve heard estimates that about 10 To 15 percent of all Muslims are radical jihadists. But 10 percent of 1/4 of the world’s population is still a lot of people, and this small percent of Muslims is also the most active of Muslims. Because of their intense zeal they tend to be the ones to dominate and rise to power while the peaceful Muslims are more passive. That’s why this small percentage can’t be ignored. And this could explain why globally there have been 21,417 deadly terror attacks carried out in the name of Islam since 9/11/01. (Source)

 

[Brendan_64]

If the (democratically elected) government of your country was overthrown by the military, who then installed a government, and then had its forces kill 600 unarmed civilians because they took to the streets to protest the illegal overthrowing of your democratically elected government, then would you not feel enraged? Would you respond to this in a purely peaceful manner?

 

[Brandon_Cal]

Why should any civilized society respect those in the Muslim world who call for a day of rage whenever their sensibilities are offended? I really want someone to explain and justify what appears to my Western eyes like a collective temper tantrum.

Does any other religious group in the world behave this way?

If Islam is a religion of peace, would someone explain why “radical extremists” are being allowed to bring shame upon Islam without being disciplined by its leaders?

Are people simply afraid of speaking out against the more violent members of the Islamic community?

Or is it that extremists are on the leading edge of bringing about the Islamization of the entire world - something Muslims actually long for?

Just trying to understand here, folks…not looking for a fight.

+++

To the mods: I’m not attacking an individual member, and I’m not disrespecting Islam. I’m trying to understand a phenomenon that appears largely confined to the Muslim community and must be a potential source of embarrassment to peace-loving Muslims everywhere.

I’m double-checking the forum rules, and I will delete this post if necessary. If I have misunderstood the rules, and can’t edit or delete, please delete this thread for me.

Thank you.

Do you realize that the vast majority of those killed in this Day of Rage are other Muslims, who no doubt would have disagreed with the religious underpinnings of such an event?

I think you’re too quick to take the religious interpretation of the offending group as the “Gospel” for all Muslims. Religious belief doesn’t work that way. In fact, many evil people have used religion as a pretext for the promulgation of their non-religious goals in times of yore… many, many, many times.

Let’s go back to post-Antebellum America, when slavery was a hot topic. Both the North and the South were “Christian” through and through. Both sides used their Christianity as support for their respective positions on slavery. Which side was the “true” Christianity? It’s quite possible for Christians to argue either point and come to a reasoned conclusion, but what if a non-Christian were to just immediately take the more extreme position as a Straw Man of Christianity to attack? “Christianity supports slavery, and I know this because this White American Southerner said this… [blah blah blah] and he cited the Bible as evidence!”

We must realize that religion exists as a continuum, a sort of spectrum if you will. Much like politics, even when we associate with a brother or sister as carrying the same label as us, they may very well hold some views we find horrendous! I have Egyptian Muslim colleagues who have just lost family members from this whole ordeal. They are grieving right now, insisting that their family members did not deserve this, and that the culprits are not “true” Muslims. Who’s right? The extremists or my colleagues? And more importantly, by what authority do you judge the two not being Muslim yourself?

 

[Catholic_Press]

The Army is negotiating with the protesters to clear the building. Yesterday, more than 1,000 Islamists were arrested. Blood bank torched; protesters shot at firemen. Christian organizations draw up a list of churches attacked yesterday. Hamas and Iran defend Muslim Brotherhood.

More…

 

[GaryTaylor]

The attack yesterday started with an assault by the MB on a police station. The muslim, brotherhood are radical terrorists.

That’s their agenda, its unacceptable and the fact its been allowed to excel to this point is an indication of just how lost we have been along with the rest of the civil world… The fact that other radical terrorist flock to their aid really isn’t surprising as indicated above.

Who the true muslims are is a moot point. That’s for them to work out peacefully. Killing in Gods name lost popularity this month.

I don’t hate people for what they believe they must do, and in this case its promote their cause by violence in Gods name, and die in Gods name if need be. Common agenda historically. However, the agenda is unjust and un true. The mosque in the AM for prayer and killing in Gods name in the afternoon. The only truth is this, if that’s what you read in the book, then you read a lie.

Sad people pray for an end, but it continues over and over again. They need to figure out their own forward progress. They refuse to address their own barbaric behavior, refuse to alter the terrorist agenda. Maybe that is the TRUE Islam. And those good muslims are simply misguided.

I didn’t see not one individual from the Government state they were heading out to die a martyr in Allahs name. The muslim brotherhood are the only ones who embraced this misguided agenda of suicide because they can’t get their way.

Barbaric blood lust which sadly was promoted by the MB leaders and the weak of mind and emotionally fragile were preyed upon and indoctrinated, then used to support the violent agenda. Also another well know tactic by predators.

"Witnesses report that not all of the protesters were helpless civilians. Some were fully armed with automatic weapons. The army clashed with them when they tried to attack and set fire to government buildings and police stations. One of the buildings that was destroyed in the clashes was the Cairo blood bank, near Ramses Square, which houses millions of blood donations. The Islamists penetrated the building setting fire to it while employees trapped inside tried to save themselves. The pro-Morsi protesters even greeted firemen who rushed to the scene with gunfire.

As in recent days, pro-Morsi Islamists yesterday launched fresh attacks on churches and Christian buildings. Unconfirmed reports speak of more than 50 buildings affected, but a more objective verification by Christian organizations now confirms the sacking of five churches, in addition to the 39 buildings burned in recent days.

The Egyptian population seems to be increasingly siding with the army and especially against the Muslim Brotherhood who they are describing as “terrorists” given the violence and radical Islamic nature of their projects" .

Here read this one more time so it sinks in… “Egyptian population seems to be increasingly siding with the army and especially against the Muslim Brotherhood who they are describing as “terrorists” given the violence and radical Islamic nature of their projects”

 

[Brendan_64]

It is a bit biased to describe all the demonstrators arrested as being ‘Islamists’ bearing in mind that they are, on the whole, unarmed civilians calling for the return of the democratically elected government that was overthrown by the military.1000 people arrested and 600 people killed by the military is a huge proportion of killings to arrests (there will be many more injured who survived). Do those figures look like the military’s response is proportionate? If I was one of those inside the mosque, I’m not sure I would be that confident of being able to walk out of it peacefully without being shot dead by the military.

If there was a scenario where the American military overthrew the democratically elected US government and established control themselves, how do you think people would respond in the USA? Would they take to the streets in angry protest? If the military then shot dead 600 civilian protesters, what would the reaction be? Would it be entirely peaceful?