We should not just "figure out ideologies". We should figure out the REASONS these extreme ideologies develop.
It is now a war for the US, but before that it was just extremist political dissent in other countries. Because it was not treated then by the societies that had it, it fled abroad and went out of control.
The analogy to Nazism and Fascism and wars against them is fallacious too. These were countries against countries, with defined armies, leaders, equipment, theaters of operations,...etc. So, it was easy to attack a well defined enemy, and have a declared state of war.
Terrorism is more amorphous, hidden, and clandestine. It does not have defined head quarters, nor armies, nor a theater of operation.
It is more like crime, than like war.
If it is to be defeated, it is by eliminating the cause(s) for it. Before these causes can be eliminated, they should be diagnosed and identified.
Oh, and I disagree this is a "war of culture", as much as the extremists (on both sides) want it to be.
The virus writer is responsible for sure, and should be punished for what he did. That was not the point.
Just like those who exploit unlocked homes should be punished nevertheless.
However, the root cause is a vulnerability in Windows. That hole has to be plugged. Otherwise, another virus writer will exploit it, and another and another...
A good physician diagnoses the cause of the disease, and proceeds from there to treat it. A so so physician will only treat the symptom (Got a headache? Take a pain killer, Fever? Take an analgesic,...etc.), meanwhile the disease can get worse and worse.
Microsoft takes the approach of fighting the symptom (malware,...etc.), and not the root cause (flawed security design,...etc.).
This is the same way many governments approach things like terrorism. They address it like a security problem only, that Intelligence Agencies and the Military/police handle. Why these ideologies developed, and what are the social, economic, and political reasons that lead to it is never even attempted.
And it is not only America, this has happened before in Ireland, Spain, Egypt and elsewhere.
Unless the root cause is studied, a correct diagnosis is made, and then remedial actions are taken, no amount of policing will fix the problem for good.
We are all paying thru the nose at the pump now for gas.
Like the assumption that reconstruction contracts and defense work would jumpstart the economy, the cheap oil dream did not pan out at all. Put it up there on the board with Iraqis welcoming the US forces with flowers. A year now, and it is a worst nightmare scenario.
That is what you get when you are driven by sheer ideology, and do not listen to others raising red flags along the way.
Back to oil: Iraq war is sure one factor, but perhaps not the only one.
Several years ago, there was this article in Scientific American that stated conventional wisdom said that oil supplies will be steady and shortage would only happen in half a century or so, and by then there will be alternative sources. They gave several convincing arguments that the shortage would happen within a decade.
Here is a link to the article, The End of Cheap oil by Colin J. Campbell and Jean Laherrere, March 1998. This web site, Hubbert's Peak seems to be dedicated to the same premise.
So, the future is somewhat bleak, if this sharp spike is really the ushuring of that prediction, and not just an anomaly reaction to the war in Iraq.
I hope that politicians who lie know that they will be voted out.
See what happened in Spain? The neocons want us to believe that "Spain appeased the terrorists" and "gave them what they want". To me, it is not that at all. It was politicians who went to a war that is no concern of them, against 90% of what the people wanted, and lied to the people by blaming ETA for it! The answer: out you liars!
To summarize then, we can say the following:
Get educated on the issues that matter politically.
Watch out for entrenched interests (big multinationals, lobbies, career politicians,...etc.).
Perhaps in time a better Western democracy would evolve that would prevent the pitfalls of the current American politics (campaign contributions, two party system, voter apathy,...etc).
Oh, and make voting mandatory with a fine that increases every time you not vote. That will get people to participate for sure.
Not academic eduction mind, but education on how societies can be manipulated by a few (politicians and/or mass media), even in a democracy.
Think about traditional oppressive authoritarian regimes (say Stalin, Saddam,...etc).
In such systems, there are several defining characteristics:
Absolute power is consolidated in the hands of a few
Opposition is harshly suppressed
Propaganda is used to brain wash the masses
Western liberal democracies used to put down such regimes who had authoritarian rule, by symbolic novels like Orwell's 1984, and Animal Farm.
The aftermath of September 11, 2001 in the USA shows, in my opinion, that Western democracies are very much susceptible to the same dangers of a few usurping power, conformity and consent are coerced, and mass media directs what people know.
For starters, I think Americans should know what is happening in the world in their name. They should also be aware of what the Patriot Act and other measures like it are harmful to them and erode their well earned and cherished liberties. They should also not be intimidated to voice dissent by demagogue-style labels like "Anti American" and "unpatriotic".
There has to be other things that can be done for Americans to do, for example, more voter turn out for example.
There we go: AC labeling legitimate criticism as anti semitism to silence dissent and end the debate!
No one said anything about Jews here. The criticism is for "unconditional support Israel at any cost", "Israel can do no wrong" mentality, and the pro-Zionist neocons engineering it all.
I guess Godwin's Law has to be amended with an "Anti Semite" corollary.
One can enumerate the reasons for Iraq's invasion as follows:
Establishing a precedence for preepmtive war.
Now America has bybassed the UN, and global opposition to this
unilateral action. If the will to build an empire arises, then it
will be done without any regard to what the rest of the world think
or say. You can read the following articles too:
Specially interesting is this page in the Project
for the New American Century Statement of Principles where you
can see who signed this document. Interesting to note that all of
them are either now in the Pentagon (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith,...etc.), or are
aids to Cheney (Libby, Abrams,...etc.)
Construction Contracts. The Infrastructure contracts
for US corporations to rebuild Iraq is a lucrative business. Of
course the Halliburton link has been reported several times (Cheney
used to be its manager or director). The defence spending, plus the contracts should fuel the US economy for a while, or that is what they thought would happen.
As many would notice, Bush is not running the show. Bush is the
ideal front for such an operation. He thinks he is doing the right
thing, and that God has to do something with it. You can see this PBS
program The Jesus Factor.
There are two factions grappling for Bush's attention. The
moderate pragmatics (Powell, Armitage), and the extremist ideologue
(Cheney, his subordinates, Rumsfeld, his subordinates). Powell's
position is almost identical to Shimon Peres when he was the Foreign
Minister in the Sharon government, a rational pragmatic dove amid the
ideologue extremist hawks.
What is funny and sad at the same time, is that the US Foreign policy is now crafted by the Pentagon and the Vice President in accordance with neocon think tanks like the PNAC. No role whatsover is given to the Department of State (where it should really belong), and Powell is merely a messenger (go tell the UN we are doing so and so, try to sell it diplomatically,...etc.). No wonder Powell has said that he will not seek a second term even if Bush gets reelected (and repeated it a few weeks ago). Not nice thing being in his shoes I guess.
I would not go as far as to say that they intentionally planned and executed the September 11 thing. But the neocons sure did exp
The way I see it (I may be wrong), the BJP originally won because of a strong Hindu nationalist agenda. Lal Krishna Advani supported the Ayudhya incident, and gained support (much like Sharon and his Sept 2000 visit to Al Aqsa mosque).
This has led to serious riots, killing and ill will between various ethnicities/religons in India (e.g. Post Ayudhya riots, Gujarat riots,... etc.)
Some Indians I know are disppointed by having an Italian for a PM, and others said that she will not understand what the poor really need.
My questions to our Indian colleagues are:
- What was the real reason the Congress lost back in early 1990s?
- How much a factor was the sectarian strife in the Congress returning to power
You think this might have something to do with not having the same ruler for 20 or 30 years, like some countries do? It is kind of hard to keep the same long-term focus when different elected officials come into office every few years.
I think this is a factor for sure. How can you think long term while your time horizon is 4 years, one of which is spend campaigning for a second term?
However, one must weigh the danger of absolute power and dictatorship against this short term thinking. Which is more evil?
I guess humanity has not discovered the perfect system for government yet. Democracy is still an ugly system, but it is the least ugly of them all.
Also, how can one explain that some policies are consistently the same (often controversial, or plain wrong, such as Cuba since the 1960s, and the unwavering support for Israel no matter what), while others are erratic or short term?
I am not sure I have the answer to that, but I guess the answer lies in:
the influence of special interest groups (e.g. lobbies), and
the disinterest and detachment of the average American of what happens in their name abroad.
Let us face it, Americans have historically (and either do not know, or do not care to know, what their government foreign policies really do overseas.
There may be other reasons that I am not aware of, but like to hear them.
I think that to blame Americans for inventing this kind of short term tactical alliances is incorrect. The Americans did not invent this kind of world politics.
We can blame the Americans for not learning the lesson from the mistakes of others though.
Let me help you there with other examples from history:
At the height of Muslim rule in Spain, the Umayyad Caliphs, and then Al Mansour Ibn Abi Aamir (Almanzor), allied with various Christian kingdoms against others (Leon, Castille, Navarra,... etc). This policy increased resentment from the Christian Spaniards, and eventually contributed to the downfall of the Muslim empire in Spain.
Then the tide turned and the Muslims were split into weak Taifa kingdoms. The Spanish kings then played the game of "divide and conquer", allying with one to topple the other, then devouring the first when the chance came. Eventually, the policy worked out and the Spanish Christian ousted the Muslims. However, the Inquisition that followed, and the expulsion of the Moriscoes are not something to be proud of as a legacy.
In retrospect, there are differences between these scenarios, and Britian's, and the current American ones.
The current American scenario suffers from "enemy of my enemy is my friend" and from severe short sightedness. At best they are tactical, and they create long term enemies.
Foreign policy has been erratic at best, and extremely short term.
Examples of mistakes in supporting the wrong people abound:
Bin Laden and the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan. Not only were they supported, but when the USSR left, the country was left to duke it out on its own. The Mujahedeen turned against one another, and a civil war ensued. In Kabul alone, 50,000 people died over 5 years. The emergence of the Taliban was a direct reaction to the frustration that was there at the time (insecurity, killing,..etc.) These same Mujahedeen are the Northern Allaince who are in control today in Afghanistan.
The Manuel Noriega example is well known. From ally to foe.
Saddam's example is well known too. The fact that he oppressed his own people was overlooked.
The same goes for other regimes in the area (can you say "The spice must flow"?
In some cases, they are long lived, and endure various administrations: examples are the policy towards Cuba (no effect except on people and economy), Iran (more or less the same), and the long standing "Israel can do wrong" attitude.
None of these policies were productive.
As another poster pointed out, the same short term high gain, long term no gain policy is rampant in the corporate world too. Outsourcing internet dot com bubble bursting, and accounting scandals is the direct result of such penny wise dollar foolish policies.
So, will the Americans learn and adjust? Or are they doomed to repeat the mistakes of history?
I thought it was destroyed by Omar (Caliph of Baghdad) in 640-someting AD.
Omar was not the Caliph of Baghdad, and never even set foot in it. He was Caliph of the Muslims at the time, and Baghdad was not build yet, nor was the seat of power transferred to it yet (this was more than a century after he died. Omar lived in Medina in the western Hijaz region of Arabia. He travelled to Jerusalem to receive the city from the Byzantines though
Julius Caesar would've taken his shot way earlier (47BC) and then by anoher Christian dude.. But if it was destroyed by Omar in 640s it means it was still around to destroy.
The story of Arabs burning the library is apocryphal. It was burned twice before them. See the links in my other post
Well, I am glad that others raised the Arab and Muslim parts. As much as I like that though, I have to respond to them and to you.
You raise a valid point, but you confuse the timeline, and over generalize. I think that modding you as a troll is a bit too much though.
Perhaps they were more liberal, tolerant or progressive at the time of St. Isidore (that was 6th or 7th century or so?)
However, the Catholic Church became corrupt, aggressive and oppressive at the turn of the millenium. At that time they started the Crusades in the name of God.
At the time of the Rennaissance they became antagonistic to science, since it challenged their authority.
During the 16 century it became more so, It was then when they clashed with Galileo, and instated the Inquisition.
At the same time corruption was so rampant, that Luther had to publish his 95 articles in protest of the selling of indulgences.
Check about Bruno and Savonarola sometime too.
That period was indeed bad, and they did indeed sort of recant their errors during the 19th and 20th century.
The Brucheion would be on the promontary that is just east of where "Raml Station" is marked, facing West.
Where it says, Qaitbay Fort still stands today, and is said to be on the site of the famous Pharos Lighthouse of Alexandria, one of the seven wonders of the world, and build using the stones from its ruins.
There was another daughter library at Pompey's pillar (which was not built by Pompey by the way). This one survived for 4 more centuries, but was plundered by Christian fanatic mobs. The same mob dragged the philosopher/mathematician/priestess Hypatia
Yet another older map from 1855 depicting the battle of Alexandria on 1801 between the French and the British.
Franck Goddio has done extensive marine archology excavations in the eastern harbor and other places in Egypt (Abu Qir for example). Interesting photos there, including this map of underwater buildings and artifacts, and an artist view of the same.
Egypt is floating on archeology, literally. It is very common to find amphorae and stuff when digging foundations for buildings.
Oh, and by the way, here are some pictures from the city today, focusing on the electric tramways, two types, narrow carriage for downtown, and a wider one for the eastern parts.
> But then 20 minutes out of central Cairo and > you see people living in mud brick houses, and > riding donkeys everywhere.
Yes.
For the average farmer, life has not changed much since over 4 or 5 millenia. They still live in mud brick homes, and farm the land.
Even relatively well to do and educated people in villages used to have their houses built using mud brick (not the case anymore, concrete is the name of the game now).
Think about it, mud is abundant (thanks to the Nile), cheap and flexible. It also insulates well. All it takes is something akin to Amish barn raising party, some straw, water, and there you have it!
Did you know that even pharoahs lived in mud brick palaces? Only the temples were build using stone. Recently, the palace of the illustrious Amenhotep III (father of Akhnaten), was recently excavated, and it was all build using mud. Even the paintings on the ceiling and the walls were made on mud.
> We met some American tourists, who told us they > were accompanied everywhere by armed guards. I > think this is more to reassure them than > anything else.
It is a show of force more than anything, and a psychological comfort factor.
It all started after the massacre of some tourists at Luxor in the mid 1990s by some armed militants.
Since then, the presence of guards in the south part of Egypt (where most of the monuments are) has been very visible.
Think about how the US deals with terrorism today, and it is the same approach taken by the Egyptian government in the 1990s. Tough stance, no dialog, no compromise, and more importantly, no probing of the reasons behind terrorism, nor any attempt to diagnose (let alone remedy) the underlying social, political and economic reasons for it.
That strategy can work in the short term, but will fail long term.
And the last time I checked, Sudan was an Arabic country.
If Egyptians aren't Arabs, then Americans aren't American.
I just posted another message above in reply to the original.
Do not confuse ethnicity, language and culture.
Sudan is a composite country with many ethnicities, but the African ethnicity is the most visible.
Some parts are Arabic speaking, other are not.
The vast majority in Egypt speaks Arabic, which is the only official language. Few speak Nubian, and fewer speak Coptic, although it is a liturgical language of the Orthodox Coptic Church.
Egyptian culture today has things that are Arab, things that are Muslim, things that are Pharaonic, and other influence. It is what makes Egypt Egyptian today.
> A large portion of the Egyptian population are > actually Nubian (probably about 50% overall > from what I could see with this figure tending > towards 100% further south) and their physical > features are more Sudanese.
You are confusing several things here: ethnicity, language, and culture.
Nubia had its own culture and language, and even invaded Egypt, and its rulers were Pharoahs over Egypt (Tahraqa) about three millenia ago.
As for 50% of Egyptians being Nubian, this is way too inflated.
The Nubians of today are not only black subsaharan Africans ethnically, but also have their own language that is totally unrelated to the Arabic spoken now, and very little in common with the middle Egyptian that was spoken in Egypt during its ancient history.
You can say 5% or 10% or so are Nubians (by language and culture), but not 50%.
As for seeing more African type people as you go south, this is due to many factors, mainly ethnic mixing, which has been a tradition in Egypt for 5 millenia or more.
There are lots of other blood that contributed to the Egyptian mix, including Ribu (Libyans), Shardana (Sardinians and other Sea People), Asiatics (Hyksos and others), Macedonians, Greek, Roman, Arab, North Africans, Kurds, Turks, Central Asians, Kipjaqs, Albanians, Circassians, and more...
A university professor made a study about half a century ago on anceint Egyptian skull features, and compared them to modern Egyptians. He found that the present average Egyptian type is anthropologically equivalent to the Egyptian in the Middle Kingdom. A mix of Semitic and North African mainly.
Quite a mix as I said.
Egypt today is not only Pharaonic, nor only Coptic, nor only Arab. It is a composite mosaic of all those cultures.
And do not confuse language, culture and ethnicity. Asian Americans today speak English, but are ethnically still Asians.
> About the schooling: his assessment is dead on. > It is a shame but the social and economic > structure of Egypt is really a reason why > we see young men joining jihad oriented > organizations, not their hatred of the USian > Empire and 'Freedom.' If you can't get > affirmation via the maninstream, you certainly > can via groups that give your life a purpose.
You may be right, and that could be a factor, but it is not the whole picture. Other more important factors are at work here. For example:
- A struggling economy for half a century, due to government mismanagement and swinging between "nationalization" which kills private industry, or whole sale "privatization" where the money goes to the rich and powerful.
- A lack of job prospects
- High cost of living (mainly apartments) compared to income
- A dictatorship that does not tolerate any form of real opposition, and holds on to power at all costs
- A lack of any peaceful mean for political change
- Rampant corruption at all levels (government, police,... etc)
- Extremely slow judicial system that cannot be relied upon to make the wrongs right
- Social changes over 2 or 3 generations that are both a cause and an effect of all the above
So there you have it, youth graduate form a so so education system, but cannot find decent jobs, nor can they vote the government out. So, no wonder some become extremist in their views, because all other means of change have been blocked.
These are only the internal factors, add to that the foreign policy of the powerful nations in the region (the US being the most powerful in recent decades), the double standard in dealing with the region, and no wonder the US becomes the evil empire...
Hope this gives a clearer picture on some important factors.
But even if it did, it is a classic case of "Microsoft is the only platform that exists" when developing a web site. Myopia, and just shows the point I made in my original post.
The center part should render fine on any OS/Browser combo that supports Arabic (Windows with Opera and Windows with FireFox, Linux with Konquerer do show it correctly).
However, when the menu on the left and on the right will not show unless you are on IE. Some parts of the page use ActiveX as well (Yuck!)
Yes I am, but not living there for quite a few years.
> That's something that's always interested me about the various Arab lands. It seems like they're always 100% traditional clothing or 100% western. I've always wondered what the reality was vs. what's usually seen on the news.
Normally it is on a country per country case by case thing, so there is huge variations. For example, in Egypt most people in the cities would wear western clothes. Most of the folks in the villages and rural area would wear the traditional dress (flowing robes, cap or turban,...etc.)
The history of such dress codes has to do with the "Westernization" in the colonial and post colnonial periods (say late 19th and early 20th century).
>> By taking the English geekspeak letters FR15T P05T!? and translating them into the hieroglyph equivalent. > >Could that actually be done? Oh, man... I'm thinking million-selling T-shirt if it ever gets done.
I was joking here. I am sure FIRST can be translated, but POST is so internety, I do not think we can find a word for it.
>> Seriously, Egypt now speaks Arabic.
>Is the Arabic spoken in Egypt the "standard" kind, or is it a dialect? (Obviously, I know *nothing* about the language. I'd like to learn, though.)
No country speaks standard Arabic on a day to day basis. Standard Arabic is used in newspaper, official speeches, news bulletins on TV,...etc. But each country has a dialect of Arabic on its own. They can be quite difficult to undestand to unintelligible altogether (e.g. Egyptian folks have trouble understanding the Gulf Arabs, and cannot undestand Algerians, Tunisians.
Another example, in Egypt, the J sound is pronounced as a G. Something that does not happen in the rest of the Arab countries.
Also, the gap between dialects have narrowed, because of the prevalence of satellite TV. Now countries are exposed to other dialects more often.
> Mountain Dew is a drink prized by American nerds for its high caffeine content.
I know that one! Been reading Slashdot for years. I like Mountain Dew too, but never knew it contained so much caf until I read that here.
> Qat is the only Arabic thing that I could come up with that was similar.
Actually Qat is more on the other side. It sedates the person and make him asleep. So it is the opposite of Caffeine.
> "Pyramid Dew" was just a stupid play on words imagining the Egyptian version of Mountain Dew.
Yup. I got the joke.
> > However, there is Fayrouz and all its flavors (non alcoholic beer like beverage, with many flavors).
> Hmm... I have a friend who goes to Egypt about once a year. I'll have to get her to bring some back for me. Sounds tasty!
Really depends on your taste. It is sweet, and fruity, more appealing to the local taste there. So it is not like beer. There are two varieties as I recall, one in glass bottles, and one in aluminum cans. Ask her to get both.
>> Camels are there only for retired American tourists who visit the Pyramids. Oh, and they are made into shish kebab as well!Not very common, but those who tried it say it is good.
> You can eat camel? Oh *man*! That's something I have to try before I'm gone.
I should try it too. Never tried it myself. Here it is good.
> Seriously though, thanks for the info. We don't know nearly enough about you guys over here.
True, and it is sad too. With all the problems in the last few years, the gap has widened more and more, and US Foreign policy is making it worse.
Slashdot Mirror
We should not just "figure out ideologies". We should figure out the REASONS these extreme ideologies develop.
...etc. So, it was easy to attack a well defined enemy, and have a declared state of war.
It is now a war for the US, but before that it was just extremist political dissent in other countries. Because it was not treated then by the societies that had it, it fled abroad and went out of control.
The analogy to Nazism and Fascism and wars against them is fallacious too. These were countries against countries, with defined armies, leaders, equipment, theaters of operations,
Terrorism is more amorphous, hidden, and clandestine. It does not have defined head quarters, nor armies, nor a theater of operation.
It is more like crime, than like war.
If it is to be defeated, it is by eliminating the cause(s) for it. Before these causes can be eliminated, they should be diagnosed and identified.
Oh, and I disagree this is a "war of culture", as much as the extremists (on both sides) want it to be.
The virus writer is responsible for sure, and should be punished for what he did. That was not the point.
...etc.), meanwhile the disease can get worse and worse.
Just like those who exploit unlocked homes should be punished nevertheless.
However, the root cause is a vulnerability in Windows. That hole has to be plugged. Otherwise, another virus writer will exploit it, and another and another...
A good physician diagnoses the cause of the disease, and proceeds from there to treat it. A so so physician will only treat the symptom (Got a headache? Take a pain killer, Fever? Take an analgesic,
See the difference?
I cannot help but see the analogy here.
...etc.), and not the root cause (flawed security design, ...etc.).
Microsoft takes the approach of fighting the symptom (malware,
This is the same way many governments approach things like terrorism. They address it like a security problem only, that Intelligence Agencies and the Military/police handle. Why these ideologies developed, and what are the social, economic, and political reasons that lead to it is never even attempted.
And it is not only America, this has happened before in Ireland, Spain, Egypt and elsewhere.
Unless the root cause is studied, a correct diagnosis is made, and then remedial actions are taken, no amount of policing will fix the problem for good.
Yup.
We are all paying thru the nose at the pump now for gas.
Like the assumption that reconstruction contracts and defense work would jumpstart the economy, the cheap oil dream did not pan out at all. Put it up there on the board with Iraqis welcoming the US forces with flowers. A year now, and it is a worst nightmare scenario.
That is what you get when you are driven by sheer ideology, and do not listen to others raising red flags along the way.
Back to oil: Iraq war is sure one factor, but perhaps not the only one.
Several years ago, there was this article in Scientific American that stated conventional wisdom said that oil supplies will be steady and shortage would only happen in half a century or so, and by then there will be alternative sources. They gave several convincing arguments that the shortage would happen within a decade.
Here is a link to the article, The End of Cheap oil by Colin J. Campbell and Jean Laherrere, March 1998. This web site, Hubbert's Peak seems to be dedicated to the same premise.
So, the future is somewhat bleak, if this sharp spike is really the ushuring of that prediction, and not just an anomaly reaction to the war in Iraq.
Excellent post zogger.
I hope that politicians who lie know that they will be voted out.
See what happened in Spain? The neocons want us to believe that "Spain appeased the terrorists" and "gave them what they want". To me, it is not that at all. It was politicians who went to a war that is no concern of them, against 90% of what the people wanted, and lied to the people by blaming ETA for it! The answer: out you liars!
To summarize then, we can say the following:
Perhaps in time a better Western democracy would evolve that would prevent the pitfalls of the current American politics (campaign contributions, two party system, voter apathy, ...etc).
Oh, and make voting mandatory with a fine that increases every time you not vote. That will get people to participate for sure.
Thanks for a good post.
Excellent!
I guess education is the most important factor.
Not academic eduction mind, but education on how societies can be manipulated by a few (politicians and/or mass media), even in a democracy.
Think about traditional oppressive authoritarian regimes (say Stalin, Saddam, ...etc).
In such systems, there are several defining characteristics:
Western liberal democracies used to put down such regimes who had authoritarian rule, by symbolic novels like Orwell's 1984, and Animal Farm.
The aftermath of September 11, 2001 in the USA shows, in my opinion, that Western democracies are very much susceptible to the same dangers of a few usurping power, conformity and consent are coerced, and mass media directs what people know.
For starters, I think Americans should know what is happening in the world in their name. They should also be aware of what the Patriot Act and other measures like it are harmful to them and erode their well earned and cherished liberties. They should also not be intimidated to voice dissent by demagogue-style labels like "Anti American" and "unpatriotic".
There has to be other things that can be done for Americans to do, for example, more voter turn out for example.
There we go: AC labeling legitimate criticism as anti semitism to silence dissent and end the debate!
No one said anything about Jews here. The criticism is for "unconditional support Israel at any cost", "Israel can do no wrong" mentality, and the pro-Zionist neocons engineering it all.
I guess Godwin's Law has to be amended with an "Anti Semite" corollary.
One can enumerate the reasons for Iraq's invasion as follows:
Establishing a precedence for preepmtive war. Now America has bybassed the UN, and global opposition to this unilateral action. If the will to build an empire arises, then it will be done without any regard to what the rest of the world think or say. You can read the following articles too:
The True Rationale? It's a Decade Old by James Mann, March 7, 2004
PBS had a good program before Iraq was invaded called the War Behind Closed Doors. You can watch the entire program in 30-60 minutes intervals:
Specially interesting is this page in the Project for the New American Century Statement of Principles where you can see who signed this document. Interesting to note that all of them are either now in the Pentagon (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, ...etc.), or are
aids to Cheney (Libby, Abrams, ...etc.)
An overview of who is who in the neocons circle of power.
Securing cheap oil. That is obvious. Bush's family history in oil makes that an easy one to figure.
Complete Dad's job. The personal desire of G.W. Bush to continue where his father has left, to finish the job, and do better.
The Israel Factor. Read the Israel connection, and how Zionism influences US foreign policy. If you take a look at the players in the PNAC above, and you will find them all staunch Zionists, whether Jews or Christians.
Construction Contracts. The Infrastructure contracts for US corporations to rebuild Iraq is a lucrative business. Of course the Halliburton link has been reported several times (Cheney used to be its manager or director). The defence spending, plus the contracts should fuel the US economy for a while, or that is what they thought would happen.
The planning to invade Iraq was done before September 11, 2001 attacks, as ex-secretary Paul O'Neill has revealed
As many would notice, Bush is not running the show. Bush is the ideal front for such an operation. He thinks he is doing the right thing, and that God has to do something with it. You can see this PBS program The Jesus Factor.
There are two factions grappling for Bush's attention. The moderate pragmatics (Powell, Armitage), and the extremist ideologue (Cheney, his subordinates, Rumsfeld, his subordinates). Powell's position is almost identical to Shimon Peres when he was the Foreign Minister in the Sharon government, a rational pragmatic dove amid the ideologue extremist hawks.
What is funny and sad at the same time, is that the US Foreign policy is now crafted by the Pentagon and the Vice President in accordance with neocon think tanks like the PNAC. No role whatsover is given to the Department of State (where it should really belong), and Powell is merely a messenger (go tell the UN we are doing so and so, try to sell it diplomatically, ...etc.). No wonder Powell has said that he will not seek a second term even if Bush gets reelected (and repeated it a few weeks ago). Not nice thing being in his shoes I guess.
I would not go as far as to say that they intentionally planned and executed the September 11 thing. But the neocons sure did exp
I have a question to our Indian friends.
... etc.)
The way I see it (I may be wrong), the BJP originally won because of a strong Hindu nationalist agenda. Lal Krishna Advani supported the Ayudhya incident, and gained support (much like Sharon and his Sept 2000 visit to Al Aqsa mosque).
This has led to serious riots, killing and ill will between various ethnicities/religons in India (e.g. Post Ayudhya riots, Gujarat riots,
Some Indians I know are disppointed by having an Italian for a PM, and others said that she will not understand what the poor really need.
My questions to our Indian colleagues are:
- What was the real reason the Congress lost back in early 1990s?
- How much a factor was the sectarian strife in the Congress returning to power
- What do you guys think about Sonia as PM?
Thanks in advance for the replies.
You think this might have something to do with not having the same ruler for 20 or 30 years, like some countries do? It is kind of hard to keep the same long-term focus when different elected officials come into office every few years.
I think this is a factor for sure. How can you think long term while your time horizon is 4 years, one of which is spend campaigning for a second term?
However, one must weigh the danger of absolute power and dictatorship against this short term thinking. Which is more evil?
I guess humanity has not discovered the perfect system for government yet. Democracy is still an ugly system, but it is the least ugly of them all.
Also, how can one explain that some policies are consistently the same (often controversial, or plain wrong, such as Cuba since the 1960s, and the unwavering support for Israel no matter what), while others are erratic or short term?
I am not sure I have the answer to that, but I guess the answer lies in:
Let us face it, Americans have historically (and either do not know, or do not care to know, what their government foreign policies really do overseas.
There may be other reasons that I am not aware of, but like to hear them.
Yeah.
..etc.
Add to that the recent boasting by Bush and Blair that Libya has abandoned WMD plans and has "reformed" itself.
Qaddafi is now portrayed as a redeemed terrorist supporter, and an example of how Saddam could have avoided war,
That is all fine and dandy, but the real question is: Are Libyans more free now? Do they have more democracy now? Is Qaddafi or his Green Book gone?
What is the message here then? If you obey what Bush and Blair say, then all is well, and people go to hell?
I think that to blame Americans for inventing this kind of short term tactical alliances is incorrect. The Americans did not invent this kind of world politics.
We can blame the Americans for not learning the lesson from the mistakes of others though.
Let me help you there with other examples from history:
In retrospect, there are differences between these scenarios, and Britian's, and the current American ones.
The current American scenario suffers from "enemy of my enemy is my friend" and from severe short sightedness. At best they are tactical, and they create long term enemies.
Foreign policy has been erratic at best, and extremely short term.
Examples of mistakes in supporting the wrong people abound:
In some cases, they are long lived, and endure various administrations: examples are the policy towards Cuba (no effect except on people and economy), Iran (more or less the same), and the long standing "Israel can do wrong" attitude.
None of these policies were productive.
As another poster pointed out, the same short term high gain, long term no gain policy is rampant in the corporate world too. Outsourcing internet dot com bubble bursting, and accounting scandals is the direct result of such penny wise dollar foolish policies.
So, will the Americans learn and adjust? Or are they doomed to repeat the mistakes of history?
I thought it was destroyed by Omar (Caliph of Baghdad) in 640-someting AD.
Omar was not the Caliph of Baghdad, and never even set foot in it. He was Caliph of the Muslims at the time, and Baghdad was not build yet, nor was the seat of power transferred to it yet (this was more than a century after he died. Omar lived in Medina in the western Hijaz region of Arabia. He travelled to Jerusalem to receive the city from the Byzantines though
Julius Caesar would've taken his shot way earlier (47BC) and then by anoher Christian dude.. But if it was destroyed by Omar in 640s it means it was still around to destroy.
The story of Arabs burning the library is apocryphal. It was burned twice before them. See the links in my other post
Well, I am glad that others raised the Arab and Muslim parts. As much as I like that though, I have to respond to them and to you.
You raise a valid point, but you confuse the timeline, and over generalize. I think that modding you as a troll is a bit too much though.
Perhaps they were more liberal, tolerant or progressive at the time of St. Isidore (that was 6th or 7th century or so?)
However, the Catholic Church became corrupt, aggressive and oppressive at the turn of the millenium. At that time they started the Crusades in the name of God.
At the time of the Rennaissance they became antagonistic to science, since it challenged their authority.
During the 16 century it became more so, It was then when they clashed with Galileo, and instated the Inquisition.
At the same time corruption was so rampant, that Luther had to publish his 95 articles in protest of the selling of indulgences.
Check about Bruno and Savonarola sometime too.
That period was indeed bad, and they did indeed sort of recant their errors during the 19th and 20th century.
Well, it is my home town. I was born and raised there many moons ago.
Anyway, to give some perspective and background:
Egypt is floating on archeology, literally. It is very common to find amphorae and stuff when digging foundations for buildings.
Oh, and by the way, here are some pictures from the city today, focusing on the electric tramways, two types, narrow carriage for downtown, and a wider one for the eastern parts.
I miss it!
Can't agree more!
Of all the free CMS that I recently saw, Drupal is the best of the crop for sure.
It is not only a blog, forums, publishing system, but even have modules for things like syndication, weather, e-commerce and more.
You can see it as a product, or as a framework that you can customize to your own liking.
It runs on Windows or UNIX, either Apache or IIS, and MySQL, Postgresql, or even MS SQL.
Writing a module is not a hard task.
Unless you are anti-PHP or a Perl bigot or something, give Drupal a try.
You will not regret it.
> But then 20 minutes out of central Cairo and
> you see people living in mud brick houses, and
> riding donkeys everywhere.
Yes.
For the average farmer, life has not changed much since over 4 or 5 millenia. They still live in mud brick homes, and farm the land.
Even relatively well to do and educated people in villages used to have their houses built using mud brick (not the case anymore, concrete is the name of the game now).
Think about it, mud is abundant (thanks to the Nile), cheap and flexible. It also insulates well. All it takes is something akin to Amish barn raising party, some straw, water, and there you have it!
Did you know that even pharoahs lived in mud brick palaces? Only the temples were build using stone. Recently, the palace of the illustrious Amenhotep III (father of Akhnaten), was recently excavated, and it was all build using mud. Even the paintings on the ceiling and the walls were made on mud.
> We met some American tourists, who told us they
> were accompanied everywhere by armed guards. I
> think this is more to reassure them than
> anything else.
It is a show of force more than anything, and a psychological comfort factor.
It all started after the massacre of some tourists at Luxor in the mid 1990s by some armed militants.
Since then, the presence of guards in the south part of Egypt (where most of the monuments are) has been very visible.
Think about how the US deals with terrorism today, and it is the same approach taken by the Egyptian government in the 1990s. Tough stance, no dialog, no compromise, and more importantly, no probing of the reasons behind terrorism, nor any attempt to diagnose (let alone remedy) the underlying social, political and economic reasons for it.
That strategy can work in the short term, but will fail long term.
Hey, Alaa Basha!
As an Egyptian Linux enthusiast living in the West, I must say it ...
A big thank you for the excellent, clear and informative answers.
Not sure you will see it, since I came late in the discussion, but you are a cool guy, had you not been a Cairene (I am Alexawy! :-)
I second that Alaa.
Drupal is a great CMS for a web site.
Mainly, entering and displaying Arabic.
...etc.) they *may* want a full Arabic interface. Really depends.
As a techie, this is the way I want things to be. I don't want a full Arabic interface.
However, for end users (say office admins,
And the last time I checked, Sudan was an Arabic country.
If Egyptians aren't Arabs, then Americans aren't American.
I just posted another message above in reply to the original.
Do not confuse ethnicity, language and culture.
Sudan is a composite country with many ethnicities, but the African ethnicity is the most visible.
Some parts are Arabic speaking, other are not.
The vast majority in Egypt speaks Arabic, which is the only official language. Few speak Nubian, and fewer speak Coptic, although it is a liturgical language of the Orthodox Coptic Church.
Egyptian culture today has things that are Arab, things that are Muslim, things that are Pharaonic, and other influence. It is what makes Egypt Egyptian today.
As for Egypt's ethnicity, see my post above on Ethnicity, Language and Culture in Egypt
> A large portion of the Egyptian population are
...
> actually Nubian (probably about 50% overall
> from what I could see with this figure tending
> towards 100% further south) and their physical
> features are more Sudanese.
You are confusing several things here: ethnicity, language, and culture.
Nubia had its own culture and language, and even invaded Egypt, and its rulers were Pharoahs over Egypt (Tahraqa) about three millenia ago.
As for 50% of Egyptians being Nubian, this is way too inflated.
The Nubians of today are not only black subsaharan Africans ethnically, but also have their own language that is totally unrelated to the Arabic spoken now, and very little in common with the middle Egyptian that was spoken in Egypt during its ancient history.
You can say 5% or 10% or so are Nubians (by language and culture), but not 50%.
As for seeing more African type people as you go south, this is due to many factors, mainly ethnic mixing, which has been a tradition in Egypt for 5 millenia or more.
There are lots of other blood that contributed to the Egyptian mix, including Ribu (Libyans), Shardana (Sardinians and other Sea People), Asiatics (Hyksos and others), Macedonians, Greek, Roman, Arab, North Africans, Kurds, Turks, Central Asians, Kipjaqs, Albanians, Circassians, and more
A university professor made a study about half a century ago on anceint Egyptian skull features, and compared them to modern Egyptians. He found that the present average Egyptian type is anthropologically equivalent to the Egyptian in the Middle Kingdom. A mix of Semitic and North African mainly.
Quite a mix as I said.
Egypt today is not only Pharaonic, nor only Coptic, nor only Arab. It is a composite mosaic of all those cultures.
And do not confuse language, culture and ethnicity. Asian Americans today speak English, but are ethnically still Asians.
> About the schooling: his assessment is dead on.
... etc)
...
> It is a shame but the social and economic
> structure of Egypt is really a reason why
> we see young men joining jihad oriented
> organizations, not their hatred of the USian
> Empire and 'Freedom.' If you can't get
> affirmation via the maninstream, you certainly
> can via groups that give your life a purpose.
You may be right, and that could be a factor, but it is not the whole picture. Other more important factors are at work here. For example:
- A struggling economy for half a century, due to government mismanagement and swinging between "nationalization" which kills private industry, or whole sale "privatization" where the money goes to the rich and powerful.
- A lack of job prospects
- High cost of living (mainly apartments) compared to income
- A dictatorship that does not tolerate any form of real opposition, and holds on to power at all costs
- A lack of any peaceful mean for political change
- Rampant corruption at all levels (government, police,
- Extremely slow judicial system that cannot be relied upon to make the wrongs right
- Social changes over 2 or 3 generations that are both a cause and an effect of all the above
So there you have it, youth graduate form a so so education system, but cannot find decent jobs, nor can they vote the government out. So, no wonder some become extremist in their views, because all other means of change have been blocked.
These are only the internal factors, add to that the foreign policy of the powerful nations in the region (the US being the most powerful in recent decades), the double standard in dealing with the region, and no wonder the US becomes the evil empire
Hope this gives a clearer picture on some important factors.
I do not think this does the trick.
But even if it did, it is a classic case of "Microsoft is the only platform that exists" when developing a web site. Myopia, and just shows the point I made in my original post.
Anyway, the site is Al Jazeera. Try it yourself.
The center part should render fine on any OS/Browser combo that supports Arabic (Windows with Opera and Windows with FireFox, Linux with Konquerer do show it correctly).
However, when the menu on the left and on the right will not show unless you are on IE. Some parts of the page use ActiveX as well (Yuck!)
> Awesome! Are you Egyptian?
...etc.)
...etc. But each country has a dialect of Arabic on its own. They can be quite difficult to undestand to unintelligible altogether (e.g. Egyptian folks have trouble understanding the Gulf Arabs, and cannot undestand Algerians, Tunisians.
Yes I am, but not living there for quite a few years.
> That's something that's always interested me about the various Arab lands. It seems like they're always 100% traditional clothing or 100% western. I've always wondered what the reality was vs. what's usually seen on the news.
Normally it is on a country per country case by case thing, so there is huge variations. For example, in Egypt most people in the cities would wear western clothes. Most of the folks in the villages and rural area would wear the traditional dress (flowing robes, cap or turban,
The history of such dress codes has to do with the "Westernization" in the colonial and post colnonial periods (say late 19th and early 20th century).
>> By taking the English geekspeak letters FR15T P05T!? and translating them into the hieroglyph equivalent.
>
>Could that actually be done? Oh, man... I'm thinking million-selling T-shirt if it ever gets done.
I was joking here. I am sure FIRST can be translated, but POST is so internety, I do not think we can find a word for it.
>> Seriously, Egypt now speaks Arabic.
>Is the Arabic spoken in Egypt the "standard" kind, or is it a dialect? (Obviously, I know *nothing* about the language. I'd like to learn, though.)
No country speaks standard Arabic on a day to day basis. Standard Arabic is used in newspaper, official speeches, news bulletins on TV,
Another example, in Egypt, the J sound is pronounced as a G. Something that does not happen in the rest of the Arab countries.
Also, the gap between dialects have narrowed, because of the prevalence of satellite TV. Now countries are exposed to other dialects more often.
> Mountain Dew is a drink prized by American nerds for its high caffeine content.
I know that one! Been reading Slashdot for years. I like Mountain Dew too, but never knew it contained so much caf until I read that here.
> Qat is the only Arabic thing that I could come up with that was similar.
Actually Qat is more on the other side. It sedates the person and make him asleep. So it is the opposite of Caffeine.
> "Pyramid Dew" was just a stupid play on words imagining the Egyptian version of Mountain Dew.
Yup. I got the joke.
> > However, there is Fayrouz and all its flavors (non alcoholic beer like beverage, with many flavors).
> Hmm... I have a friend who goes to Egypt about once a year. I'll have to get her to bring some back for me. Sounds tasty!
Really depends on your taste. It is sweet, and fruity, more appealing to the local taste there. So it is not like beer. There are two varieties as I recall, one in glass bottles, and one in aluminum cans. Ask her to get both.
>> Camels are there only for retired American tourists who visit the Pyramids. Oh, and they are made into shish kebab as well!Not very common, but those who tried it say it is good.
> You can eat camel? Oh *man*! That's something I have to try before I'm gone.
I should try it too. Never tried it myself. Here it is good.
> Seriously though, thanks for the info. We don't know nearly enough about you guys over here.
True, and it is sad too. With all the problems in the last few years, the gap has widened more and more, and US Foreign policy is making it worse.