Crucifixions in Egypt by Muslim Brotherhood Supporters


Michael Stuart Kelly

Recommended Posts

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 f

Michael

When I followed the trail to the Blaze, I found I could not read the article, or anything else, for more than a few seconds at a time because a newsletter subscription ad kept popping up, obscuring the whole screen. I would click "no thanks" but it would come back after a few seconds, very frustrating. Is the Blaze not interested in browsing traffic, or is this some marketing thing I don't understand?

Just wondering

Carol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

When I followed the trail to the Blaze, I found I could not read the article, or anything else, for more than a few seconds at a time because a newsletter subscription ad kept popping up, obscuring the whole screen. I would click "no thanks" but it would come back after a few seconds, very frustrating. Is the Blaze not interested in browsing traffic, or is this some marketing thing I don't understand?

Just wondering

Carol,

It's not supposed to keep popping up. Try cleaning your cookies. (btw - I am no fan of that pop-up.)

I'm glad you are taking a look over there. At least you can see the reporting is not right-wing wacko ranting as given in the progressive framing story.

I'm confused about your comment about WND--unless you are talking about the comments to the stories. Otherwise, the site is mostly news curation. Granted, it has a right wing slant, but most of the articles are mainstream news.

The comments are another thing. I get weary reading them (although I rarely read anything on WND). Ditto for the comments on The Blaze stories.

You get a mix of ideologues of all stripes, kooks and Soros-bots trying to appear as right-wing kooks--and once in a while an intelligent poster. Among the yellers, it's hard to figure out who is who since most of the posters use pseudonyms.

I have posted a few times on The Blaze, but I don't have much enthusiasm for it because of the signal-to-noise ratio. I have gotten some follow-ups from other posters, but nothing to write home about. Mostly opinions. I don't expect this to develop into anything else than what it is now--an occasional itch I scratch when I know I should be doing something more productive.

Re the crucifixion thing. I read Jay's second article. Here is a quote:

Over the last day or so, I have had an ongoing email correspondence with Michael Carl, the WND reporter who wrote the crucifixion article. He tells me he is sticking by his story. When I asked him if he has “any information from any of the tens of thousands of people who would have seen an actual ‘crucifixion’ if one really did take place in front of the presidential palace,” he told me that he had. Tantalized, I pressed him for details. Alas, he refused to divulge any of the evidence to me — or anyone else. If he did, he explained, the Muslim Brotherhood “would kill my sources.” And so ended our correspondence.

Ordinarily, since there are no photos of the actual crucifixions or people stepping up as eyewitnesses, I would be totally on board with Jay. But I still remember the rape of CBS reporter, Lara Logan, in the middle of a crowd in Tahir Square when Mubarak stepped down. She was hauled out of the mob by soldiers. Here is a quote by her:

And I felt them tear out, they literally just tore my pants to shreds. And then I felt my underwear go. And I remember looking up, when my clothes gave way, I remember looking up and seeing them taking pictures with their cell phones, the flashes of their cell phone cameras.

I have looked for such photos. I imagine someone would have uploaded something by now. Or even a photo of her being carried off by the soldiers. I haven't been able to find anything.

But I don't doubt Logan's story.

Granted, the crucifixion story is different, but there is a precedent for people over there being very careful about witnessing sensitive events in the press. Even if they are brave about their own lives, they all have families. So I don't think lack of photo is proof of anything in this case, one way or the other. It's complicated. If this really happened, there probably are photos. They are just not in the press.

To me it's still a crap shoot if it happened. I prefer to give it some time before letting my opinion become something more defined. I'm pretty sure there are some hungry journalists running after this thing.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Logan too, of course. But in this story there is no Logan.

There is only Fr. Carl, whose protectiveness of his sources is commendable. However, too many sources (and reporters) have proven that they are willing to face death in Egypt in order to bear witness and have the truth be known, for me to believethat no one would come forward to verify such an atrocity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, too many sources (and reporters) have proven that they are willing to face death in Egypt in order to bear witness and have the truth be known, for me to believethat no one would come forward to verify such an atrocity.

Carol,

You mean like the ones who have posted the photos of Logan's rape and identified her rapists? Being that the rapists must surely be serving time by now, convicted by the testimony of all those "sources (and reporters)," especially seeing as how they did it in front of a crowd? And the perpetrators were caught on many cameras to boot?

Heh.

The way I see it, if something like crucifixion did happen, maybe the ones who saw it aren't too keen about being next.

To our Western eyes and ears, crucifixion is "such an atrocity" and a gigantic step backward. To a mentality that accepts rape in the middle of a crowd as something you better not comment on when you see it, ditto for public stoning and so forth, crucifixion is merely a small step.

It's a perspective thing. And that makes it plausible for me.

I learned a lot about cultural perspective by living in a different one for over 30 years.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't crucifiction Western--like the Romans did it a lot? Are the Arabs so intelligent and knowledgeable about this to make an ironic statement by actually doing this to Christians? I sense some bs made up by a westerner or someone heavily educated or influenced by western religious culture.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, too many sources (and reporters) have proven that they are willing to face death in Egypt in order to bear witness and have the truth be known, for me to believethat no one would come forward to verify such an atrocity.

Carol,

You mean like the ones who have posted the photos of Logan's rape and identified her rapists? Being that the rapists must surely be serving time by now, convicted by the testimony of all those "sources (and reporters)," especially seeing as how they did it in front of a crowd? And the perpetrators were caught on many cameras to boot?

Heh.

The way I see it, if something like crucifixion did happen, maybe the ones who saw it aren't too keen about being next.

To our Western eyes and ears, crucifixion is "such an atrocity" and a gigantic step backward. To a mentality that accepts rape in the middle of a crowd as something you better not comment on when you see it, ditto for public stoning and so forth, crucifixion is merely a small step.

It's a perspective thing. And that makes it plausible for me.

I learned a lot about cultural perspective by living in a different one for over 30 years.

Michael

In that culture, an assault on a woman may not have attracted alarmed notice, A public assault on men in such an unusual manner as crucifixion. to my mind would have attracted more. Especially from associates or survivors of the victims. So to me, it still is implausible.

I too hope there are hungry journalists out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do I get the thought we are being prepped for war? Reminds me of Germans crucifying Belgians before we got into the Great War.

--Brant

Brant, that ws exactly my thought, and exactly the image that came to mind. Also the Kuwaiti preemies torn from their incubators by Iraqis.

The lack of evidence of this story will appear to many to be evidence itself - even Michael can construct a theory of why there is no evidence - and most people do not evaluate such stories, they either believe them or not without thinking.

This story has done its work, embedding the most potent symbol of Christianity outraged possible into minds ready to receive it. I can think of many historical PR experts who would be proud of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have actually found one sort of witness, on Algeneimer. "Engineer" said, "I live 2 miles from the presidential palace and pass it regularly. It didn't happen."

Of course I cannot locate or interrogate Engineer but at least somebody in Cairo has said something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Raymond Ibrahim's point of view.

http://www.raymondib...ns-not-fictions

This was posted on Sept. 5. Today is Sept. 12. The content of this poster is moderated, so it only appears after I approve it. I only just now saw it.

Still, it is pertinent and informative to the discussion.

I'm sorry I missed this one for so long.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raymond Ibrahim's point of view.

http://www.raymondib...ns-not-fictions

This was posted on Sept. 5. Today is Sept. 12. The content of this poster is moderated, so it only appears after I approve it. I only just now saw it.

Still, it is pertinent and informative to the discussion.

I'm sorry I missed this one for so long.

Michael

"a close read of my article shows that I never said [the crucifixions] did happen."

=Ibrahim

Because they didn't, and he probably wrote the original "report" in the first place or received it from his fellow propagandists.

Carol

close reader

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "report'' is a companion piece to the despicable video that has incited the incitable to murder. We don't know yet, how much blood will be on the hands of Ibrahim and his ilk.

I'm assuming it's a false report, but I have little doubt the Muslim Brotherhood will eventually reveal itself

as another tyrant. (I do not see the causality between the inciting and the incitable. Evil is whoever takes lives.

There can be no moral equivalency - that's a collectivist fallacy to spread the blame and guilt.)

Yes, I think that video is disgusting, from conception to finished product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused about your comment about WND--unless you are talking about the comments to the stories. Otherwise, the site is mostly news curation. Granted, it has a right wing slant, but most of the articles are mainstream news.

Michael

Here are today's two top "Mainstream News" Headlines on WND:

"Obama's not heterosexual - or Bi - He's Homosexual" (large banner headline on top)

"Obama Backing Groups behind Libya, Egypt Attacks"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know yet, how much blood will be on the hands of Ibrahim and his ilk.

Carol,

You mean the blood is not on the hands of the bullying murderers and their "ilk"?

What an odd way of thinking...

Michael

I don't say it is not on the hands of the murderers (did Pilate drive in the nails?)

Unfortunately there is all too much innocent blood to go around , enough to drench all the guilty hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

Do you really think taunts are effective causal agents of public persuasion?

That taunts cause riots and murder?

Heh.

They are the last point in a campaign. To use a metaphor, they are the trigger, not the ammunition, not the gun--and even more important, not the shooter. The taunts are the trigger the shooter pulls when he is aiming at innocents.

When done right, you don't use the taunts from your own side as that trigger to pull. You use taunts from the other side. That way, it looks like "they" did it. Your side gets to murder all it wants and their side gets the blame for the murders.

People never say the murderers "have blood on their hands." They always say the dumb meat-heads who taunt "have blood on their hands."

Just like you did just now.

Cool how that works out, huh?

:)

(btw - That works regardless of which side it is. You just have to adapt the details for cultural and social differences so that people can be manipulated correctly.)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

Do you really think taunts are effective causal agents of public persuasion?

People never say the murderers "have blood on their hands." They always say the dumb meat-heads who taunt "have blood on their hands."

Just like you did just now

Michael

Michael, I am confused about what I "did just now" that you are referring to. Am I "people" who never say murderers have blood on their hands? (I explicitly said that they did). Am I a dumb meat-head who taunted? Surely you do not think I am a bullying thug or a trigger, or trigger puller...I hope not anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I "people" who never say murderers have blood on their hands? (I explicitly said that they did).

Carol,

You only did that when called on it.

If not called on it, you would still be going on about "how much blood will be on the hands of Ibrahim and his ilk" and not a peep of outrage about the actual murderers.

You show you are being manipulated when you do that.

Obviously, I don't believe you approve of the murderers or anything like that. (Nor does taunt, trigger and all that other stuff apply--I wasn't saying that about you.) But I do believe you are vulnerable (sometimes) to being manipulated by the progressive propagandists--despite your fine mind. When I see you react in public with the buzz whrrrrr bing! of a wind up toy, I merely alert you.

What you do with the alert is up to you.

Note, this has nothing to do with holding different values and intellectual positions. In other words, ideas and convictions. It has everything to do with being manipulated by propagandists.

Nowadays, the propagandists--the ones who are manipulating you (and me and everyone, for that matter)--use covert things like "frames" and metaphors and core stories and things like that (see George Lakoff, The Little Blue Book, for example). They stay in the background and pull the strings from a distance. They don't use taunts except as triggers.

And the propagandists are never the ones who taunt. They leave that to the rabble. They just use the rabble as tools.

After all, taunts are so very vulgar for superior people...

:smile:

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I "people" who never say murderers have blood on their hands? (I explicitly said that they did).

Carol,

You only did that when called on it.

If not called on it, you would still be going on about "how much blood will be on the hands of Ibrahim and his ilk" and not a peep of outrage about the actual murderers.

No, I did not, and I would not. That was your buzz whirr bang reaction.

The primary guilt of murderers is so obvious that I had no reason to reiterate on this forum, to this readership. Because I did not mention it and my abhorrence of all murderers, should not lead you to assume I was going to continue in the fashion you prescribe.

I am not in the business of ascribing proportional blame and guilt to the perpetrators, planners and inciters of murder, As I said, there is enough guilt to go around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If not called on it... ... and not a peep of outrage about the actual murderers.

The primary guilt of murderers is so obvious that I had no reason to reiterate on this forum, to this readership.

Carol,

The way I see it, you just said what I said.

Even though you then say it would be different if (whatever...).

But if I pissed you off, that's good.

:smile:

Makes you think about how your words sound to others.

Michael

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