Theodore Roosevelt [1858-1919] on the prospects of Muslim liberalization



Quote:

...observations [of] former president Theodore Roosevelt made after visiting that country [Egypt] in 1910. Discussing the Egyptian Nationalist movement, which sought to expel the British imperialists, Roosevelt noted that while some of its leaders had liberal ideas, their views would not prevail. He wrote: [quote]    The real strength of the Nationalist movement in Egypt, however, lay not with these Levantines of the cafes, but with the mass of practically unchanged bigoted Moslems to whom the movement meant driving out the foreigner, plundering and slaying the local Christian, and a return to all the violence and corruption which festered under the old-style Moslem rule, whether Asiatic or African.

More, from another commentator....

As an exclamation point to your recent comments I would simply add the following. In Christopher Caldwell’s Reflections on the Revolution in Europe he cites both Ernest Renan in 1883 and Hilaire Belloc in 1938 as examples of European intellectuals who warned that the West should be neither impressed by Islam or forgetful of it.

Renan is quoted as follows:


Quote:

Those liberals who defend Islam do not know Islam. Islam is the seamless union of the spiritual and the temporal, it is the reign of dogma, it is the heaviest chain mankind has ever borne. In the early Middle Ages, Islam tolerated philosophy because it could not stop it. It could not stop it because it was as yet disorganized, and poorly armed for terror … But as soon as Islam had a mass of ardent believers at its disposal, it destroyed everything in its path. Religious terror and hypocrisy were the order of the day. Islam has been liberal when weak, and violent when strong. Let us not give it credit for what was merely unable to suppress.

Belloc is quoted as follows:


Quote:

[Westerners] have forgotten all about Islam. They never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is decaying, and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will not concern them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and persistent enemy which our civilization has had, and may at any moment become as large a menace in the future as it has been in the past … It has always seemed to me possible, and even probable, that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons and grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent.

[/quote]
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/019355.html




+++

The chance for moslem liberalisation, in any age, perhaps today ?

No chance.

Silly Orientalist ['Westerner'] !

Why would moslems need to reform ISLAM [or reform their own ideas and 'ideals'], when moslems already 'know' and are certain that ISLAM is Allah's perfect and inerrant religion ?

Their clerics tell them so.

And who may enter into debate about what Allah's will is, when every moslem is taught from childhood that they must obey their moslem clerics, without question.

"We sent not a messenger, but to be obeyed..........they ['believers'] can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction."
Koran 4.64, 65

And today, obviously, moslem clerics stand in Mohammed's 'place'.iThere can be no 'moderation' of mainstream ISLAM.

There is no need for any moderation of mainstream ISLAM.

Because ISLAM is already perfect.

Quote:

There can be no 'moderation' of mainstream ISLAM. There is no need for any moderation of mainstream ISLAM.

The world may have moved on a bit since 1910, old son.

newtown_grafitti wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2012 at 11:37pm:

Quote: There can be no 'moderation' of mainstream ISLAM. There is no need for any moderation of mainstream ISLAM. The world may have moved on a bit since 1910, old son.

But ISLAM has not.

ISLAM is still murdering those who dare to scrutinise, and criticise, its murderous and unjust philosophy, just as it did in 1910.

Moslems are still murdering those who do not believe, as they believe, just as they did in 1910.






Quote:

"....the death of those who are killed for the cause of God gives more impetus to the cause, which continues to thrive on their blood."

ISLAMIC scholar, Sayyid Qutb, .......A moslem, promoting, justifying, ISLAM's murder of all humanity if necessary, to further the moslem Allah's cause.

Sayyid Qutb 1906 - 1966


Quote:

Sayyid Qutb was an Egyptian author, educator, Islamist theorist, poet, and the leading member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s and '60s.

The world has moved on (modernity) but Islam has not, and will not. Declaring itself the immutable, perfect word of Allah, it has locked itself into a position where compromise (a normal part of life) is impossible.

So either Islam will bend the world to its will or the world will have to break Islam. As neither of these is likely to happen completely, the conflict and crisis is set to remain perpetual, as it has been since the 7th century.

Quite right, old chap. Two world wars and a cold war between Western powers in the last century alone.

But that’s nothing compared to the constant state of crisis caused by the attempt at Muslim world domination.

These Musels are despicable.

So Japan and Russia are now the west? And the 'Muslim nations' were uninvolved in these wars or any other local wars? You are starting to sound like Abu.

You’re right, FD. I stand corrected.

Not only were the Moslems responsible for the rape of Nanking, they were behind the Bolshevik revolution as well. 

That’s your Muselman for you. Sinister.

Karnal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:21pm:

You’re right, FD. I stand corrected. Not only were the Moslems responsible for the rape of Nanking, they were behind the Bolshevik revolution as well.  That’s your Muselman for you. Sinister.

K,

You [and many others] choose to give moslems a 'pass'.

Having come to the knowledge of what ISLAM promotes, i do not give moslems or ISLAM, a 'pass'.

That is the difference between us.

I want to separate everything which i value, from the influence of moslems and ISLAM.

I want to separate everything which i value, from the wickedness of ISLAM.

And you do not.

I know that everything which ISLAM 'touches', will be corrupted by the violence and lies of ISLAM.






In this physical realm good and evil can exist in very close proximity to each other.

And it can be difficult sometimes to immediately discern the one, from the other.

And it would seem, that people like yourself desire that good and evil should exist in close proximity to each other [in this physical realm].

Why so ?

Because i think that you know, that the proximity of evil to the good, will corrupt what is good, and what is innocent.

And that is your desire, imo.





IMO, discernment and discrimination are spiritual virtues.

My opinion is that we should not mix the precious with the vile.

We should choose to separate ourselves from what is [spiritually] vile, and [spiritually] evil.

Some of us will choose that path.





2 Corinthians 6:17
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
18  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.





+++


ISLAM will never be 'reformed'.

The nature of that 'beast' makes reform of ISLAM impossible.

But, will we [who are not 'ISLAM'] choose to allow ourselves to be corrupted, and destroyed, by what ISLAM is ?





Look at what ISLAM has already done, to moslem nations!

Look at what ISLAM has already done, to all of those persons who have chosen to embrace ISLAM!

All societies in the world today, which claim to be ISLAMIC and Sharia guided, are nests of oppression, depravity, corruption, violence, injustice, and human poverty.



Life is so easy.

Just make good choices.

Choose the good.




Ecclesiastes 12:13
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14  For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

But Yadda, how can you separate everything you value from the all-pervasive evil that is Islam?

They’re responsible for the state of heightened danger that we have always found ourselves in. These people are out to get us.  We are at war with Islam. We have always been at war with Islam.

Even when we’re at war with someone else, we’ll still be at war with Islam.

These people are trecherous.

Karnal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 12:41am:

But Yadda, how can you separate everything you value from the all-pervasive evil that is Islam? They’re responsible for the state of heightened danger that we have always found ourselves in. These people are out to get us.  We are at war with Islam. We have always been at war with Islam. Even when we’re at war with someone else, we’ll still be at war with Islam. These people are trecherous.

ISLAM allows no freedom of conscience. - ISLAM requires that those who abandon ISLAM be killed by moslems.

ISLAM allows moslem parents to kill their own children.

ISLAM allows moslems to lie to non-moslems, to misrepresent ISLAM, to non-moslems.   Google; taqiyya

ISLAM allows moslems to steal the property of non-moslems.

ISLAM allows moslems to kill non-moslems.

ISLAM requires moslems to engage in a never-ending warfare against non-moslems, to bring non-moslems into subjugation under moslems and Sharia law.

ISLAM prevents non-moslems from giving evidence against moslems, in a Sharia court.

ISLAM allows sexual slavery.
....and on, and on.




K,

ISLAM-o-reality, not ISLAM-O-PHOBIA

Like i said, you choose to give moslems and ISLAM a 'pass', i do not.

Karnal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 3:32pm:

Quite right, old chap. Two world wars and a cold war between Western powers in the last century alone. But that’s nothing compared to the constant state of crisis caused by the attempt at Muslim world domination. These Musels are despicable.

Your post-colonial blinkers are in evidence, PB.

I was talking about the conflict between modernity (West) and Islam. There are other conflicts. Some resolved, some not.

But this conflict is slated to remain unresolved. Islam used to clash with Christianity, with Judaism, Hinduism,  Buddhism, with 'what have you got?'. It has always had bloody borders.
Now it is clashing with modernity. That's what it does. It clashes.

Quite right, dear. Like a paisley cravat or a loud pair of golf trousers. These Muselmen have no sense of sfyle. Have you seen the kaftans? Unbearable. How can one live alongside such a tasteless people?

Mind you, that new Egyptian president wears a dapper looking suit. Cunning, eh?

I find it’s the ones who don’t clash that you have to watch.

Karnal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 10:30am:

Quite right, dear. Like a paisley cravat or a loud pair of golf trousers. These Muselmen have no sense of sfyle. Have you seen the kaftans? Unbearable. How can one live alongside such a tasteless people? Mind you, that new Egyptian president wears a dapper looking suit. Cunning, eh? I find it’s the ones who don’t clash that you have to watch.

OBSERVATION;
If you defeat K's argument in debate [with logic], K will always revert to responding with absurdities.




Quote:

K is capable of presenting a reasonable argument, and engaging in reasoned debate. But what you must understand about K and his debating style, is that if you defeat K's argument in debate [by presenting a fact supported counter argument], K will never cleanly concede [by acknowledgement, or, with his silence] that you have defeated his argument. Of course, K would try present another counter argument, to try to defeat your argument, if he could. But unable to defeat your argument with sound reason [or with supporting facts] K will then, ALWAYS, resorts to responding with absurdities. ....With K, it seems to be an ego 'defence mechanism'. Defeat K's argument, and all he has left is inane reply,  ....which is intended to deflect [and discredit] the thrust of your own reasoned argument.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356906751/62#62

True, Yadda. The old boy’s point about mofernity and Islam  is superior logic.

You know, no holocausts, Hiroshimas or total war. That’s modernity. That’s playing by the rules.

Your Muselman ’s tactics are much more discrete and sinister. It’s a matter of style, no?

Karnal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:32am:

True, Yadda. The old boy’s point about mofernity and Islam  is superior logic. You know, no holocausts, Hiroshimas or total war. That’s modernity. That’s playing by the rules. Your Muselman ’s tactics are much more discrete and sinister. It’s a matter of style, no?

Your stupid examples about Hiroshima and the holocaust try to make it out as if the argument against Islam was that it causes every conflict. You are not so smacking stupid to actually believe that that was the argument but you are smacking dishonest and mendacious enough to twist and invert it as if it was.

Well, I’m cunning, no? The conflict and the crisis is set to remain perpetual, as it has been since the 7th century.

When you’re right you’re right. Islam has not caused every conflict. How many conflicts have there been between modernity and Islam?

And how many between modernity and itself?

Still, your conflict is with Islam. It’s always been the enemy, remember? How many times have we played this game?

The world’s turned a bit over the last 3 years, old chap, but you’re still right where you were.

And that’s why we’re so fond of you. Sometimes it’s the enduring things we appreciate most, no?

Karnal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:09pm:

Well, I’m cunning, no? The conflict and the crisis is set to remain perpetual, as it has been since the 7th century. When you’re right you’re right. Islam has not caused every conflict. How many conflicts have there been between modernity and Islam? And how many between modernity and itself? Still, your conflict is with Islam. It’s always been the enemy, remember? How many times have we played this game? The world’s turned a bit over the last 3 years, old chap, but you’re still right where you were. And that’s why we’re so fond of you. Sometimes it’s the enduring things we appreciate most, no?

You should take a look in a mirror.




+++


People can ignore what is true and important, and still live a happy life,   ....sometimes for a very long time.

But the consequence of ignoring what is true and important, will usually always eventually bite them on their ar$e.




You may be enjoying a wonderful vista, while you are running towards the unseen edge of a precipice.

But soon after you tumble over the edge of that precipice the vista is going to change, drastically.

Having little or no care for our immediate environment, is foolish, and potentially dangerous.

I couldn’t agree more, Yadda. While we’re waxing philosophical about modernity and its enemy, the world’s getting warmer. While the world fights over the 57% of oil reserves under Arab land, the oil’s burning up.

The real enemy isn’t Islam, it’s overpopulation, food and energy security, and unprecedented levels of greed for sh!t no one needs. The real clash of civilizations is between 20% of the world wbo live like us, and the 80% who live like them.

There’s no nice slogan, no real solution, and no enemy.

Perhaps that’s the most confusing thing of all.

Karnal wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 12:13am:

I couldn’t agree more, Yadda. While we’re waxing philosophical about modernity and its enemy, the world’s getting warmer. While the world fights over the 57% of oil reserves under Arab land, the oil’s burning up. The real enemy isn’t Islam, it’s overpopulation, food and energy security, and unprecedented levels of greed for sh!t no one needs. The real clash of civilizations is between 20% of the world wbo live like us, and the 80% who live like them. There’s no nice slogan, no real solution, and no enemy. Perhaps that’s the most confusing thing of all.

If that is true, and i am not saying that it is not, what sort of worldwide political philosophy would some people judge to be best suited, to 'solving' that particular problem ?

Mankind are so, so, clever.

Aren't they ?        :o

And men have thought through every possible eventuality.

Haven't they ?        :o





No.

Some men think that they are though.

And it is man's own nature which is driving God's plan forward.

Yadda wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 12:29am:

Mankind are so, so, clever. Aren't they ?        :o And men have thought through every possible eventuality. Haven't they ?        :o

Isaiah 28:15
Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16  Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17  Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
18  And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19  From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.

Karnal wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 12:13am:

The real enemy isn’t Islam, it’s overpopulation, food and energy security, and unprecedented levels of greed for sh!t no one needs. The real clash of civilizations is between 20% of the world wbo live like us, and the 80% who live like them. There’s no nice slogan, no real solution, and no enemy. Perhaps that’s the most confusing thing of all.

Bollocks on stilts.

The poor countries are trying to get out of poverty (and are not waging a terrorist campaign against the non-Buddhists, non-animists, non-Hindus, non-whatever) while Mahomet crowd are waging a campaigbn to return to the 7th century.

Arab Spring - what's it all about? Not about hpow to catch up with Korea, Taiwan or even Thailand or Malaysia.
It's about how to get sharia established - ie turning back the calendar.

Karnal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:09pm:

Well, I’m cunning, no?

No. I said dishonest and mendacious.

Soren wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 10:29am:

Karnal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 11:09pm: Well, I’m cunning, no? No. I said dishonest and mendacious.

Thanks, old chap. Is it dishonest and mendacious to claim that the Arab spring has ANYthing to do with the establishment of Sharia? Not at all.

It’s just mindnumbingly stupid. Crackpot stupid. Lobotomisingly stupid.

And again - a claim created out of thin air.

All that is solid, old boy...

You must have tuned into the TV station only you can receive (again), PB.

Have a look at the developments in the Arab world.
Egypt - Muslim Brotherhood with even more concentrated presidential powers. 0 point.
Lybia - murdering the US ambassador on 11 September - a real democratic development, what? 0 point.
Syria - bloodbath as fascists and islamists duke it out for supremacy. -10 points
Tunisia - mild Islamists yet to be hijacked by radicals. + 1 point.
Yemen - oy gevalt! -2 points


Anything else?

Karnal wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 12:13am:

I couldn’t agree more, Yadda. While we’re waxing philosophical about modernity and its enemy, the world’s getting warmer. While the world fights over the 57% of oil reserves under Arab land, the oil’s burning up. The real enemy isn’t Islam, it’s overpopulation, food and energy security, and unprecedented levels of greed for sh!t no one needs. The real clash of civilizations is between 20% of the world wbo live like us, and the 80% who live like them. There’s no nice slogan, no real solution, and no enemy. Perhaps that’s the most confusing thing of all.

Karnal, what role do you think Muslims are playing in what you see as the 'real problem'?

Karnal wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 12:08pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 7th, 2013 at 10:29am: Karnal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 11:09pm: Well, I’m cunning, no? No. I said dishonest and mendacious. Thanks, old chap. Is it dishonest and mendacious to claim that the Arab spring has ANYthing to do with the establishment of Sharia? Not at all. It’s just mindnumbingly stupid. Crackpot stupid. Lobotomisingly stupid. And again - a claim created out of thin air. All that is solid, old boy...

You are an arsebandit so you are naturally confused and discombobulated. Comes with the territory. But that doesn't mean that everyone else is.

You can't tell your arse from your elbow, you are still grappling with identity  so it's all very confusing for you, PB. You are conflicted about who you are, why not about this as well? As long as there is ambivalence, you are happy (well, you are not unhappy).

Soren wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 1:11pm:

You must have tuned into the TV station only you can receive (again), PB. Have a look at the developments in the Arab world. Egypt - Muslim Brotherhood with even more concentrated presidential powers. 0 point. Lybia - murdering the US ambassador on 11 September - a real democratic development, what? 0 point. Syria - bloodbath as fascists and islamists duke it out for supremacy. -10 points Tunisia - mild Islamists yet to be hijacked by radicals. + 1 point. Yemen - oy gevalt! -2 points Anything else?

Your not making any worthwhile points here soren. karnal's assertion that the arab spring had nothing to do with installing sharia still stands. It started in Tunisia over high prices and general economic and political stagnation. It flared up when a street vendor self-immolated after his stall and with it his livelihood was confiscated by police. It then spread to Egypt where, among other things, trade-unionists gathered to commemorate the anniversary of a brutal crackdown of workers at a factory 4 years earlier. Islamists were noticeable in their absense of the famous Tahrir Square rallies. The muslim brotherhood played no part in the fall of Mubarak, and only cashed in during the subsequent elections.

The 'Arab Spring' is a western journalistic formulation.

The Muslim Brotherhood has been planning to capture Egypt and the wider Islamic Arab world for almost a century. This has never been a secret to Egyptians and other Muslim Arabs, even if it is a surrprise to you and PB.
It has now succeeded in Egypt. Mosri has now greater dictatorial powers than Mubarak. Constitutionally.

Unless Egypt collapses economically and the generals take over, the Muslim Brotherhood is there to stay because there is no political alternative. 
ANd the funny thing is that in the Islamic cointext, we are lucky that it is not the mad mullahs or the crazy warlords and Talibs who have taken over the place. Islamists in suits are still preferable to Islamists in pyjamas.

Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 11:09am:

The 'Arab Spring' is a western journalistic formulation.

The overthrow of Ben-Ali and Mubarak were no one's formulation - they actually happened. They also had nothing to do with islamists - they did not participate in the overthrow, and there is no shred of evidence that they played any role in the overthrows whatsoever.

If the islamists jumped on the bandwagon after the fact, then that in no way refutes the fact that the actual revolutions themselves had nothing to do with the islamists.

They 'didn't jump on the bandwagon'. They seized power.
In Egypt, it was inevitable as they have been working towards that goal for a century. To now say that it has been unforeseen that the Muslim Brotherhood would seize power is a stupid attempt at pretending ignorance.

What other political force has there been in Egypt that is organised enough and significant enough to outweigh the MB?? Nothing.

They haven't swapped their suits for pyjamas yet because they need financial bail-out and support to avoid economic collapse and with that, another much more violent convulsion.

Just because they are a bit more savvie than the grizzly, bearded monsters of Afghanistan doesn't mean they are any less of an Islamist outfit.

You're still not getting it Soren.

No one is disputing the fact that the MB "seized" power (albeit democratically) - once the revolution had achieved the fall of the old regime.

The point is, they did not cause the revolution. The revolution itself was not islamist - in Egypt or in Tunisia.

D'oh!

Revolutions are messy things. By definition, they are not an orderly way of change.

But as every schoolboy knows, and even you and PB, the MB has been the largest political organisation opposed to the regime in Egypt.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 2:49pm:

You're still not getting it Soren. No one is disputing the fact that the MB "seized" power (albeit democratically) - once the revolution had achieved the fall of the old regime. The point is, they did not cause the revolution. The revolution itself was not islamist - in Egypt or in Tunisia.

I'm sure it was for many reasons and one I'm really sure of was for islamist reasons. And it's really silly to think political parties don't have a role in organising protest rallies. Of course they do. One thing that is for absolute sure is that the  poor old Egyptians are going to end up living in a bigger shitehole than when living under the old regime. Countries ruled by religious people just don't work.

Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 11:09am:

The 'Arab Spring' is a western journalistic formulation. The Muslim Brotherhood has been planning to capture Egypt and the wider Islamic Arab world for almost a century. This has never been a secret to Egyptians and other Muslim Arabs, even if it is a surrprise to you and PB. It has now succeeded in Egypt. Mosri has now greater dictatorial powers than Mubarak. Constitutionally. Unless Egypt collapses economically and the generals take over, the Muslim Brotherhood is there to stay because there is no political alternative.  ANd the funny thing is that in the Islamic cointext, we are lucky that it is not the mad mullahs or the crazy warlords and Talibs who have taken over the place. Islamists in suits are still preferable to Islamists in pyjamas.

I couldn’t agree more, old chap. I think the new Egyptian president is very smart.

Donna Karen tie, 1 point. Calvin Klein glasses, 2 points. Hugo Boss suit, 3 points.

Karnal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:58pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 8th, 2013 at 11:09am: The 'Arab Spring' is a western journalistic formulation. The Muslim Brotherhood has been planning to capture Egypt and the wider Islamic Arab world for almost a century. This has never been a secret to Egyptians and other Muslim Arabs, even if it is a surrprise to you and PB. It has now succeeded in Egypt. Mosri has now greater dictatorial powers than Mubarak. Constitutionally. Unless Egypt collapses economically and the generals take over, the Muslim Brotherhood is there to stay because there is no political alternative.  ANd the funny thing is that in the Islamic cointext, we are lucky that it is not the mad mullahs or the crazy warlords and Talibs who have taken over the place. Islamists in suits are still preferable to Islamists in pyjamas. I couldn’t agree more, old chap. I think the new Egyptian president is very smart. Donna Karen tie, 1 point. Calvin Klein glasses, 2 points. Hugo Boss suit, 3 points.

Unassilable dictatorial powers guaranteed by the constitution - priceless.

Caliphate, innit?

Don’t worry, old chap. That little "Spring" will turn into Winter before long. Do you think we’d let a bunch of children run an oil-rich country that just happens to border the Suez Canal?

Yes, the Muslims are the George Costanza of the world - they'll never get the upper hand. They have no hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g3tQaqizh0

Muslims? Good God, no.

I was referring to pluralists.

Karnal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:48pm:

Don’t worry, old chap. That little "Spring" will turn into Winter before long. Do you think we’d let a bunch of children run an oil-rich country that just happens to border the Suez Canal?

It's all your fault, PB.

Gay and left-wingers conspire against Egyptian society

Thinking of moving to Egypt are we, old chap?