Crucifixions in Egypt by Muslim Brotherhood Supporters


Michael Stuart Kelly

Recommended Posts

Crucifixions in Egypt by Muslim Brotherhood Supporters

The following article just popped up on Drudge.

It is mostly sourced to the standard anti-Islam people (Pamela Geller, etc.), but I did some several-layers deep link following and searching and there definitely is something being reported in mainstream places in the Arab world about Morsi supporters crucifying opponents on trees in front of the presidential palace. I have yet to see photos, but I have seen that the story is now spreading to other places in the mainstream.

Arab Spring run amok: 'Brotherhood' starts crucifixions - Opponents of Egypt's Muslim president executed 'naked on trees'

by Michael Carl

August 17, 2012

WND

From the article:

The Arab Spring takeover of Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood has run amok, with reports from several different media agencies that the radical Muslims have begun crucifying opponents of newly installed President Mohammed Morsi.

Middle East media confirm that during a recent rampage, Muslim Brotherhood operatives “crucified those opposing Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi naked on trees in front of the presidential palace while abusing others.”

I still have the image of that young Google employee blubbering on TV in my mind during the overthrow of Mubarak.

I wonder if he is interested in the topic of crucifixion.

Nothing like getting in touch with ancient traditions...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's kinda funny that I went all over the web this morning to make sure this wasn't just a media thing and didn't even think to look at The Blaze (which is where I usually get this kind of stuff).

Glenn has been giving too much focus on religion these days and I find the overkill forced and boring. I don't mind him mentioning religion within the context of his own motivation--in fact, I admire his willingness to stand for his values, but he's outright preaching these days. And that is not what I tune in for.

Anyway, here is the article from over there:

Shock Report: Muslim Brotherhood ‘Crucifies’ Opponents on Trees in Front of Presidential Palace

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

As reported by Jonathan Kay in the National Post (mainstream, right-wing paper up here), this story cannot be traced to any original sources, no names or photos can be found. It appears to be a hoax..But of course, the ink pileup from online sources quoting each other will mean that many people will end up believing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

I just looked to make sure. (The Internet is a wonderful thing. In older times, people would be discussing this stuff for weeks based on assumptions instead of having more actual information to look at.)

Here is an article from WND, the organization that kicked off the dust-up.

It discusses Jay's article, which I have not read yet other than the parts quoted in the article. Also, I have not looked any deeper on this development than just skimming this article (including visiting the links in the excerpt below and looking at the video mentioned), so it is what it is. Later I might have a more solid opinion.

Video report confirms Egyptian crucifixions

From the article

the video of the report had only a minuscule 157 views as of today, even though it was published, by the MaghrebUnion2012, on Aug. 8.

Walid Shoebat, a former radicalized Muslim who converted to Christianity and is today an acknowledged terrorism expert and Arabic translator, told WND the Sky News article did indeed exist and that, though apparently later removed from the Sky News site, survived on YouTube (and has since been loaded onto WND servers).

Several Arab newspapers also referenced the crucifixions as a fact, he said, and noted that a number of websites had reported on the situation, including one that posted an image of a man who had been targeted, but apparently survived with a gaping wound in his side.

Said Shoebat, of the image: “Al Dostour, a reputable Egyptian newspaper under the title ‘The Muslim Brotherhood Crucify Dissidents in Front of The Presidential Palace in Egypt,’ showed a photo that was originally taken by al-Watan News of a man the Egyptian security forces saved. The side of his flesh looks as it has been literally eaten away, its a gruesome photo which can be seen with the full article.”

Tunisia-Sat also reported on the situation, Shoebat said.

Yet another site revealed a photo of the Sky News article, including what apparently is a naked man who was rescued. That report, translated for WND by another Arabic translator, states the Muslim Brotherhood crucified several protesters against the president of Egypt in front of the Presidential Palace.

Al-Wai Al-Arabi (Arab Awakening) is another source that took a photo of a naked man covered with a blanket who was rescued from the crucifixion, said Shoebat, confirming that the Arabic text says victims were crucified on trees in front of the palace.

Shoebat said the Lawyers Union in Egypt investigated the story and demanded a probe, accusing Morsi of preventing the Republican Guards from intervening to rescue what they termed Muslim Brotherhood gangs on “what seemed as the most despicable attack on civilians.” The report was approved by Shadi Tal’at, president of the Lawyers Union.

Egypt Now also reported it, and Al-Watan News even mentioned the Sky News article being deleted.

Another image of the original article also was posted at this site.

Al-Madanya (The Secular) did its own independent report on what happened in front of the presidential palace, and noted several witnesses said the attacks happened with “sticks and knives and Molotov cocktails on the evening Aug. 8 and reports indicate crucifixions on trees …”

btw - If you visit the links, Google Translate is your friend.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SkyNews says they took down the report, because it came from a third party and none of their correspondents could independently confirm it; and that the photo also came from a third party and was unidentifiable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

I fully agree with your indictment of the poor professional standards of the press.

As to the subject, you lean believing it is not true while I lean believing it is. We have our reasons, but we both bow to facts when they become clear. In this case, I think both of us believe the entire story is not being told and are a bit miffed about all the BS we have to wade through when matters of this nature are reported.

So the only thing to do is wait and see what else pops up.

Crucifixion is near and dear to the Western heart. So is Islamist terrorism. The result? This received a lot of attention.

There are very biased interests on both sides (and a few tangential sides) with deep pockets and artful sources. As they are all hell-bent on controlling public perception, undoubtedly more is coming.

I am, as I am sure you are, awaiting new puffs and probes with bated breath...

:smile:

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

I fully agree with your indictment of the poor professional standards of the press.

As to the subject, you lean believing it is not true while I lean believing it is. We have our reasons, but we both bow to facts when they become clear. In this case, I think both of us believe the entire story is not being told and are a bit miffed about all the BS we have to wade through when matters of this nature are reported.

So the only thing to do is wait and see what else pops up.

Crucifixion is near and dear to the Western heart. So is Islamist terrorism. The result? This received a lot of attention.

There are very biased interests on both sides (and a few tangential sides) with deep pockets and artful sources. As they are all hell-bent on controlling public perception, undoubtedly more is coming.

I am, as I am sure you are, awaiting new puffs and probes with bated breath...

:smile:

Michael

I certainly am. I would assume that SkyArabia and other reputable news organizations are on the ground looking for the facts, not on the net quoting each other. At least Glenn Beck mentioned that he had not inde[pendently checked the sources of the story (one for you, Glenn!) , but that only one person bothered to contact SkyArabia to get independent confirmation is staggering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

I fully agree with your indictment of the poor professional standards of the press.

As to the subject, you lean believing it is not true while I lean believing it is. We have our reasons, but we both bow to facts when they become clear. In this case, I think both of us believe the entire story is not being told and are a bit miffed about all the BS we have to wade through when matters of this nature are reported.

So the only thing to do is wait and see what else pops up.

Crucifixion is near and dear to the Western heart. So is Islamist terrorism. The result? This received a lot of attention.

There are very biased interests on both sides (and a few tangential sides) with deep pockets and artful sources. As they are all hell-bent on controlling public perception, undoubtedly more is coming.

I am, as I am sure you are, awaiting new puffs and probes with bated breath...

:smile:

Michael

I certainly am. I would assume that SkyArabia and other reputable news organizations are on the ground looking for the facts, not on the net quoting each other. At least Glenn Beck mentioned that he had not inde[pendently checked the sources of the story (one for you, Glenn!) , but that only one person bothered to contact SkyArabia to get independent confirmation is staggering.

(That one person was of course, from You Know Where)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoddy journalism - or bravely breaking the story?

It's a market out there, measured in minutes. Regulation is never

the answer, so the reader has to beware.

(In my day, we had 6 hours to get the "scoop" on the opposition paper.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoddy journalism - or bravely breaking the story?

It's a market out there, measured in minutes. Regulation is never

the answer, so the reader has to beware.

(In my day, we had 6 hours to get the "scoop" on the opposition paper.)

Certainly, there is that. But reputable news orgs try not to run "unconfirmed reports" unless they decide there is a high probability of their proving true (massacres in Syria right now, eg). The immediate image of crucifixions in front of the presidential palace, as Kay points out, is like hearing there was a lynching in front of the White House , and professional s woulld surely wait for more confirmation before reporting it. They would rather lose a scoop than be a hoax victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update - no new facts, but Kay's article has been picked up all over the place, so I guess he has a scoop of sorts.

I hadn't seen any reports, except as aforementioned on the net, about this here until I read Kay's article, and then I remembered MSK had started a topic on it, which I did not want to read for fear it might be true and I am squeamish. Have there been any anywhere, except on blogs? When did this apparently happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update - no new facts, but Kay's article has been picked up all over the place, so I guess he has a scoop of sorts.

I hadn't seen any reports, except as aforementioned on the net, about this here until I read Kay's article, and then I remembered MSK had started a topic on it, which I did not want to read for fear it might be true and I am squeamish. Have there been any anywhere, except on blogs? When did this apparently happen?

Carol:

It is probably a vicious slur on the peaceful religion of Islam as expressed by its advocates and followers in Egypt...

I mean its not like the Egyptians during this beautiful Arab Spring engaged in any activity like this in the prior year...

I mean its not like there were serial rapes of white western women...oops

Never mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But reputable news orgs try not to run "unconfirmed reports" unless they decide there is a high probability of their proving true (massacres in Syria right now, eg).

Carol,

I presume you are talking about last century. I'm having difficulty groking your appendage of the adjective "reputable" to "news orgs" if the time frame is today.

I have been doing a lot of studying about story and the brain recently. I am beginning to get a glimmer of something I am having trouble naming. It's something like core-story or frame-story. Maybe nest-story--although in this case, the image of the universe as a nest is too weird for me to run with. The idea is like a backstory, but only bigger. It deals not only with the subject story, it also deals with the entire context.

The thing about this kind of story is that we end up living in it whether it exists or not. This is not because we lie to ourselves, but because that's the way our brains are constructed.

Daniel Kahneman told a story in a presentation I saw about a group of people lost in Switzerland. They were gone for two days and all rescue attempts failed due to the heavy snows. But on the third day they showed up. When asked how they managed to find their way back, one of the members presented a map.

"But that's a map of the pyramids of Egypt!" a person exclaimed.

The guy said, "At least it's a map."

Our minds seem to be wired like this. It needs a map for abstracting space. And if it has an imperfect map, it can still peg what it sees to the map and keep some kind of bearing while the person moves around.

That's space. What about time? Well, for time in this sense, I believe the mind needs story--a sequence of events. When we place ourselves inside a bigger story, it gives us meaning and a way to navigate through life--an event map (so to speak) to peg things to as we go along.

When we take this to a cosmic scale, we get the major religions. Even though people don't believe in ghosts, they can believe in a "ghost God" who made the universe and drew up a special plan for their lives. It may be a map of Egypt in a Swiss snowstorm, but, lacking anything else relatively easy to understand, at least it's a map.

Notice that with all (or most of) these universal framing stories, there are good guys and bad guys. And by fitting yourself on the right side in the story with the good guys, you are superior to the bad guys without doing anything. It's automatic. Now that's seductive. And this goes for political framing stories, clique framing stories, and so on.

(This applies in spades to Objectivism. I'm not saying that's bad. I'm merely identifying how the mind works.)

The feeling superior part is only gravy for the level I'm thinking about, but it is germane to my point here. It's a quite real effect you can see all around you and it leads to fear and scapegoating when a person who adheres to the framing story does not challenge it internally.

So how does this relate to the poor standards of today's press? It's simple.

Modern journalism organizations are more interested in detecting hot-button elements of framing stories than in presenting facts. They fight to control the frame at root, not to present what actually happened. Actual news is what they work with in order to tap into the frame.

For example, if you get the frame for a cure for cancer wrong, like saying someone stumbled across it while fiddling around in his basement drinking beer, even if that's 100% accurate, nobody will consume it. At least not without a really hard sell by several media companies, and they just won't run with it. They know people will change the channel, click away or whatever. The story does not fit the framing-story of how medical advances happen. The media folks would think nobody will believe it. (They are probably right, too.)

But if you talk about the good guys (us in the West) who, in the framing story have abandoned a barbaric practice like crucifixion because that's what happened to God's Son, and you talk about the bad guys (Islamists) who can--and want to--kill any of us with a terror attack at any moment, and you present a story to fit within that frame such as the Islamists are now crucifying poor bastards in front of their new President who just got legitimized, one word from deep within the framing story immediately surges up in your mind--even if you are not a Christian. That word is Satan. If not the word, at least the image. Or the shudder from blocking the image out of your mind. And that's powerful. It gets everyone's attention.

This is demonization in the purist sense possible. This makes me suspect the story has been created artificially for the media. That's certainly why it spread so easily. But making a barbaric show of force from the Muslim Brotherhood in order to intimidate followers is plausible based on its history (its own framing story), so who knows what to think?

This was a perfect narrative for today's media. Who needs facts when there are such powerful images of good and evil that perfectly align with the predominant cosmic-level framing story in the subconscious of most everyone in society?

So I say "reputable news orgs" my foot. What is reputable about that? The way they did this is propaganda, not news.

(btw - I really need to find a good term for framing story. Everything I try, including that, sounds so damn clunky, even "genus story"...)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, I know that the MSM has no reputation for trustworthiness with you. Maybe I should have said, "News orgs that are more credible than blogs to enough people that they can stay in business".

Maybe the multiple sources who relayed, but did not originate, this particular report, are more trustworthy and credible than SkyArabia, but I have no way of evaluating that, and SkyArabia itself says it was not the originator. So we are stuck, so far, with no source.

As to the framing story synonym, I'm on the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update - no new facts, but Kay's article has been picked up all over the place, so I guess he has a scoop of sorts.

I hadn't seen any reports, except as aforementioned on the net, about this here until I read Kay's article, and then I remembered MSK had started a topic on it, which I did not want to read for fear it might be true and I am squeamish. Have there been any anywhere, except on blogs? When did this apparently happen?

Carol:

It is probably a vicious slur on the peaceful religion of Islam as expressed by its advocates and followers in Egypt...

I mean its not like the Egyptians during this beautiful Arab Spring engaged in any activity like this in the prior year...

I mean its not like there were serial rapes of white western women...oops

Never mind.

Or it could be someone who wants to kill the Egyptian tourist industry for good!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update - no new facts, but Kay's article has been picked up all over the place, so I guess he has a scoop of sorts.

I hadn't seen any reports, except as aforementioned on the net, about this here until I read Kay's article, and then I remembered MSK had started a topic on it, which I did not want to read for fear it might be true and I am squeamish. Have there been any anywhere, except on blogs? When did this apparently happen?

Carol:

It is probably a vicious slur on the peaceful religion of Islam as expressed by its advocates and followers in Egypt...

I mean its not like the Egyptians during this beautiful Arab Spring engaged in any activity like this in the prior year...

I mean its not like there were serial rapes of white western women...oops

Never mind.

Or it could be someone who wants to kill the Egyptian tourist industry for good!

I will take that as a joke because it certainly is not an argument unless you have been fitted with a Jerry-helmet which sees conspiracies in corners and plots in pantries...

Did he send you one of these?

220px-ManWearingTinFoilHat.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update - no new facts, but Kay's article has been picked up all over the place, so I guess he has a scoop of sorts.

I hadn't seen any reports, except as aforementioned on the net, about this here until I read Kay's article, and then I remembered MSK had started a topic on it, which I did not want to read for fear it might be true and I am squeamish. Have there been any anywhere, except on blogs? When did this apparently happen?

Carol:

It is probably a vicious slur on the peaceful religion of Islam as expressed by its advocates and followers in Egypt...

I mean its not like the Egyptians during this beautiful Arab Spring engaged in any activity like this in the prior year...

I mean its not like there were serial rapes of white western women...oops

Never mind.

Or it could be someone who wants to kill the Egyptian tourist industry for good!

I will take that as a joke because it certainly is not an argument unless you have been fitted with a Jerry-helmet which sees conspiracies in corners and plots in pantries...

Did he send you one of these?

220px-ManWearingTinFoilHat.jpg

He told me it was the latest style in widow's caps!

Carol

I'll never learn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the framing story synonym, I'm on the case.

"Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, while ignorant armies clash by night", this is what is really going on!

A little too long maybe, not punchy.

The hat is taking over her brain...soon she will be stalking Toronto in search of Hockey players for the Maple Leafs...so sad...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoddy journalism - or bravely breaking the story?

It's a market out there, measured in minutes. Regulation is never

the answer, so the reader has to beware.

(In my day, we had 6 hours to get the "scoop" on the opposition paper.)

Certainly, there is that. But reputable news orgs try not to run "unconfirmed reports" unless they decide there is a high probability of their proving true (massacres in Syria right now, eg). They would rather lose a scoop than be a hoax victim.

I have no preconceptions of who or what is "reputable" in news gathering.

They all tread a fine line between being first, and being accurate: none

want to be disreputable. They'd lose credibility - and lose their market.

The only distinctions are differing editorial policies, which might, or might not,

influence any single news report, on any given day.

For the rest, WE are the market: it is we who demand to be titillated and

angered - and oh yes...informed - by news. When I say "reader beware", I also

mean let the reader search his mind for what he secretly desires to be true,

or not true. And ask himself why?

Ultimately, media networks feed us what they have established we 'want'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the framing story synonym, I'm on the case.

"Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, while ignorant armies clash by night", this is what is really going on!

A little too long maybe, not punchy.

The hat is taking over her brain...soon she will be stalking Toronto in search of Hockey players for the Maple Leafs...so sad...

Hey, I been doing that for years. Caught me a couple, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

I just looked to make sure. (The Internet is a wonderful thing. In older times, people would be discussing this stuff for weeks based on assumptions instead of having more actual information to look at.)

Here is an article from WND, the organization that kicked off the dust-up.

It discusses Jay's article, which I have not read yet other than the parts quoted in the article. Also, I have not looked any deeper on this development than just skimming this article (including visiting the links in the excerpt below and looking at the video mentioned), so it is what it is. Later I might have a more solid opinion.

Video report confirms Egyptian crucifixions

From the article

the video of the report had only a minuscule 157 views as of today, even though it was published, by the MaghrebUnion2012, on Aug. 8.

Walid Shoebat, a former radicalized Muslim who converted to Christianity and is today an acknowledged terrorism expert and Arabic translator, told WND the Sky News article did indeed exist and that, though apparently later removed from the Sky News site, survived on YouTube (and has since been loaded onto WND servers).

Michael

It did exist on Sky news who received it from a third party , they removed it as they could not verify it. The video also has no provenance except the word of WND.

I looked at WND and they make the Blaze look like the Daily Worker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoddy journalism - or bravely breaking the story?

It's a market out there, measured in minutes. Regulation is never

the answer, so the reader has to beware.

(In my day, we had 6 hours to get the "scoop" on the opposition paper.)

Certainly, there is that. But reputable news orgs try not to run "unconfirmed reports" unless they decide there is a high probability of their proving true (massacres in Syria right now, eg). They would rather lose a scoop than be a hoax victim.

I have no preconceptions of who or what is "reputable" in news gathering.

They all tread a fine line between being first, and being accurate: none

want to be disreputable. They'd lose credibility - and lose their market.

The only distinctions are differing editorial policies, which might, or might not,

influence any single news report, on any given day.

For the rest, WE are the market: it is we who demand to be titillated and

angered - and oh yes...informed - by news. When I say "reader beware", I also

mean let the reader search his mind for what he secretly desires to be true,

or not true. And ask himself why?

Ultimately, media networks feed us what they have established we 'want'.

The infotainment explosion is another issue. Old-style tabs like the Enquirer, check their facts. They confirm from multiple sources. They make witnesses take polygraph tests. TMZ is similarly rigorous. This is how they survive most of their libel suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now