"Egyptian talk show host Tawfiq Okasha will face trial on 1 September on charges of calling for the murder of President Mohamed Morsi, the official MENA news agency reported on Thursday.
The editor of the small independent newspaper Al-Dustour, Islam Afifi, will also face trial on 23 August on charges of spreading false news and inciting disorder." Al- Ahram
-----------------------
(irony alert) What can you say? They must be guilty. It's a bit like the girlie band in Russia. Maybe this will teach people a lesson. pl
*******************
"With an Islamist prime minister, whose cabinet would be freed from SCAF supported ministers, either in the next two weeks, some sources argue, or after parliamentary elections, and with an Islamist head of the military, an Islamist vice president and an Islamist parliament, along with the predominantly Islamist drafting body for the constitution, the Islamist current, and president, is fully in control." Al-Ahram
---------------------
(irony alert) There might be a new editorial staff at Al-Ahram soon. They should stop "bitching." The people voted and this is what they wanted, most of them. pl
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/140/50576/Egypt/First--days/Morsis-next-move.aspx
Colonel,
Sounds like the Mursi crowd is using the calling out fire in a theater when there is no fire, as the basis for their their purported prosecutions. Hmmm, where have we seen such political antics on the worlds stage being played by those in positions of power.
While the world presses focuses their peepers on the latest egyptian (small e) madness, I'll focus my peepers on Kyrgyz beauty. One of my favorites is the singer Гулнур Сатылганова whose singing voice and style tugs at my heartstrings. Sooo... for a break from the madness at hand, here's a song of the universe "Асман":
Гулнур Сатылганова"Асман"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erl7bme87wI
Have a good weekend to one and all.
Posted by: J | 17 August 2012 at 03:48 PM
First of all, interesting piece by Elliot Abrams hrtr on Mursi: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314030/cairo-packs-egypt-s-media-elliott-abrams
Second, interesting J mentions Kyrgyzstan. I used to work for USAID and spent much time in Bishkek in the mid 90's. At the time, I heard lots of people promoting the country as the "Switzerland of Central Asia". Two coups and numerous Kyrgyz-Uzbek ethnic battles later, I'd reckon the term no longer applies!
Posted by: Israel attack on Iran | 17 August 2012 at 04:39 PM
Col: The Russian girlie band did invade the cathedral. Sorry, but "protesting" in church doesn't get much sympathy from me.
Posted by: Matthew | 17 August 2012 at 05:40 PM
matthew
(irony alert) You are right. We need limits of freedom of speech here. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 17 August 2012 at 05:55 PM
2 years in prison for protesting in church. Yep, Pussy Riot got what was coming to them.
Posted by: Medicine Man | 17 August 2012 at 07:37 PM
The church is safe now that Pussy Riot is locked up.
Posted by: optimax | 17 August 2012 at 07:40 PM
Col.: Years ago, on a radio interview I recall, you commented that you have a "rather dour personality" and that the Middle East rarely fails to satisfy your outlook.
It really doesn't.
So when does the Muslim Brotherhood face re-election? I suppose when they suppress rival parties and rig the election the rest of us will have caught up to you at last.
Posted by: Medicine Man | 17 August 2012 at 07:44 PM
Yes, it is funny in a way, watching Western commentators running from one Muslim state to another in search of (Secular) Democarcy.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 17 August 2012 at 09:05 PM
Matthew,
A scatological parody of the liturgy near the High Altar of Westminster Abbey – or indeed Westminster Cathedral (RC), or the equivalent in a major synagogue, mosque, or temple in London would certainly be a non-trivial public order offence.
One may argue as to whether two years is an excessive punishment. However, there are special sensitivities. Built to commemorate the victory against Napoleon, the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour was blown up in 1931, as part of the ongoing attempts by the Soviet government to extirpate Orthodox Christianity. Like the Cathedral of the Dormition in Kiev, blown up by the Soviets as they retreated in face of the German advance in 1941, it was rebuilt following the collapse of communism.
Posted by: David Habakkuk | 18 August 2012 at 06:54 AM
DH and Matthew
American society is founded on the bedrocks of private property and freedom of speech and assembly. A charge of trespass or creating a public nuisance would have been appropriate. A defense of judicial restriction of free speech on the basis that this speech occurred in a "sacred space" is not in the American tradition. If some fool decided to defecate in front of the high altar in the National Cathdral in Washington while carrying a sign inscribed "I hate God," that would merit prosecution but not for "hooliganism," or "hate speech," or "disrespect," "Hooliganism" was a favorite Soviet tool for suppression of the masses. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 18 August 2012 at 07:44 AM
The big mistake was singing the song asking the Virgin Mary to free Russia from the grip of Putin, that was probably the "no-no."
Posted by: Basilisk | 18 August 2012 at 11:44 AM
Basilisk
Yes, that was a step too far. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 18 August 2012 at 11:51 AM
"American society is founded on the bedrocks of private property....."
Except, it seems when the swindler is Jon Corzine or a banker or the government. Then, apparently, the legal system rules in favor of those that violate property rights.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=210250
Posted by: zanzibar | 18 August 2012 at 12:10 PM
Basilisk,
There is a long analysis of the legal position by Alexander Mercouris. Certainly given that he was struck off from the London bar after some distinctly dodgy conduct, what he says should be checked. However, he does reference his assertions, and the following response to an objection made in the subsequent discussion seems to me reasonable:
“Perhaps religious groups should be more tough minded about this sort of thing and there is always a question of whether it is right for the law to give protection to the feelings of religious believers. In France all such protections were abolished at the time of the French Revolution. Recently not just in Russia but in Britain and elsewhere in Europe they have been creeping back. Like you I am far from sure that this is a good thing but that is the law in Britain as well as in Russia and as I said in my post there is nothing in the European Convention of Human Rights that says that is wrong. Since it is the law the authorities have a duty to enforce it, which is what they are trying to do in this case.”
(See http://mercouris.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/pussy-riot-2/ )
Posted by: David Habakkuk | 18 August 2012 at 12:18 PM
DH
You did not address me, but... We have no "esteblishment of religion" in the US and so a church or other place of worship has no specal status other than as private property. We except churches from property taxes but that seems to be about all. In Egypt there are all kinds of legal protections for churches and mosques as such but that does not no seem to protect the Copts, nor will it. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 18 August 2012 at 12:36 PM
Interesting and relevant to this discussion I think, if true:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Official-Egypt-s-president-to-visit-Iran-3798094.php
Posted by: Lee | 18 August 2012 at 03:03 PM
Putin has been an effective leader for the Russian Federation.
Broad spectra of Russian population support him.
Yes, by all means, "free" Russia from Putin and then what?
Who is going to rule Russia and how?
There has never been as representative a dispensation in Russia as that of that which Putin has helped to create.
Yes, it is not Sweden but it is not Stalinism either.
In regards to Mr. Putin's past; he is not KGB.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 18 August 2012 at 04:19 PM
Churches and othe places of worship are not germane to American Creed.
In your opinion, what would have happened to a group, such as Dixie Chicks, if they had occupied the US Supreme Court or the US Congress under George Bush II?
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 18 August 2012 at 04:22 PM
Babak
Houses of worship are not protected under the US constitution because the constitution specifically prohibits an "estblishment of religion" (1st Amendment) by the congress. it has nothing to do with my opinion of an American "creed" whatever that is. The buildings of the federal government are federal property. They are guarded abd trespassers are punished. The Supremee court and the Congress are not houses of worship. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 18 August 2012 at 04:30 PM
Babak
The FSB behaves similarly to the KGB and Putin is a former KGB "hood." All right he is a former KGB man who would like to be tsar. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 18 August 2012 at 04:32 PM
I understand all of that.
But the religion of vast numbers of Americans is "America"; with its sacred texts such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights. And then these sacred texts have commentaries called "Acts of the Supreme Court of the United States" as well as interpretations ("tafsir") such as the Federalist Papers. Then thare are saints such as Washington, Lincoln, MLK and others.
My point is this: the places of worship in UK, Russia and elesewhere occupy a conceptual place that does not exist in the United States - as you have rightly pointed out.
In my opinion, their analogues, in the context of the American Creed as I have expressed above, could be considered to be certain buildings and sites; such as US Congress, the US SC etc.
[UK is technically a theocracy and the Westminster Abbey occupies a special place within the English Constitution - as I understand it.]
In my opinion.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 18 August 2012 at 04:47 PM
Mr. Muris clearly has not been rented by money from the Persian Gulf Arabs.
And, furthermore, he accepts Islamic Republic of Iran as a legitiate state with its own legitimate interests in Syria (and in the Middle Eas).
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 18 August 2012 at 04:52 PM
Why would you equate the Dixie Chicks with an unknown Russian punk band? The comments the former's lead singer made (years ago) were at a concert in London and the actions taken against them were led by a radio show host. While quite effective at commercially removing their songs from airplay they were were not actions of any government body or official.
Posted by: Fred | 18 August 2012 at 06:04 PM
I have tried to answer your objection below in my reply to Col. Lang.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 18 August 2012 at 08:26 PM
Babak,
Putin was KGB from 1975 to 1991 resigning with the rank of lieutenant colonel. As far as Putin being good for Russia, I agree with you.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 18 August 2012 at 11:40 PM