City
Toronto steps up its show of support for Egypt
Toronto's latest rally in solidarity with protesters in Egypt asking for President Hosni Mubarak to resign was held at 1pm at Queen's Park on Saturday. After numerous speakers addressed the crowd -- mostly calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to renounce his support for Mubarak -- protesters made their way along College Street, turned north on Yonge, and then headed back towards Queen's Park along Wellesley Street.
The solidarity protest was larger than last week's and louder. Canadian politicians and labour figures, including NDP leader Jack Layton, and Ontario Federation of Labour head Sid Ryan were in attendance. Numerous communist and socialist groups took part in the protest as well.
Discussion
65 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
Fear-mongers claim the Muslim Brotherhood will turn Egypt into a theocratic state like Iran, but they have maybe 20-30% of the country's support and won't be fielding a Presidential candidate. A constitution supported by the army will always prevent Egypt from becoming an Islamic dictatorship.
Egypt needs a government that represents its people. How Canada, the U.S., or Europe factor into that is irrelevant.
This revolution is not going to turn out the way these protesters want it to...it's just a question of whether they'll go from the frying pan to the fire or perhaps vice-versa. Best of luck to them, however.
And please don't refer to people who see the risk of another Islamic theocracy as "fear-mongers". It is a legitimate possibility AND threat. What you don't seem to get is that while this Muslim Brotherhood may appear to want to "play nice" initially, once entrenched, they won't continue to do so.
We are in a situation were the 'bringers of democracy' are upset because the places that they have chosen not to 'bring democracy' to are bringing it to themself. It's pretty ironic. Do you guys feel this way about all enslaved nations or just predominantly Muslim ones?
Let me get this straight... Western governments (made up mostly of Christians) have killed over a million people in Iraq, tens of thousands in Afghanistan, thousands more in Pakistan, Yemen, and other countries, AND YET it is Muslims that the world needs to fear?
I would expect this sort of obedience to the state in a totalitarian country, not in a supposed democracy like Canada where people should be able to see through the propaganda. Unbelievable.
Egyptian Christians and Muslims and non-religious folks; women, old men, and children; they're all out in the streets risking molotov cocktails, whip-swinging cavalry, and secret police dissapearings.
You mentioned Iran - do you know who the Shah was, and who paid his bills?
Goes to show that Americans are sheep.
Conversely:
How many Christians are killing cartoonists and filmmakers in the Netherlands? How many fatwas have Italians shop owners placed on journalists and artists who playfully mocked Italian culture over the last 50 years? Last I checked it was Salman Rushdie, and not Martin Scorsese, that needed to live in fear for the last 2 decades for his expressions in art...
When are you apologist types going to realize that your feeble attempts to whitewash fundamelist Islamic intolerance with the notion that we North Americans do the same sort of thing just doesn't wash???
I want to know how many Italian/Irish/Jewish/Russian immigrants to Canada and the US have been arrested for plotting to blow up airplanes in their adopted homelands, or for plotting to kill the Prime Minister, or for taking up arms against us and our allies in the Middle East? I imagine you'll tell me that these are just examples of strange coincidence. Probably just another case of us Fox News types misinterpreting the peace-loving nature of Islamic "culture".
Wake up dude.
"They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life. (وما أحوجهم أن يدركوا أن الإصلاح والتغيير الذي تنشده الأمة لا يمكن تحقيقه إلا بالجهاد والتضحية وصياغة جيل مجاهد يحرص على الموت كما يحرص الأعداء على الحياة.)
Source: IkhwanOnline; IkhwanPress
Sounds like the engineer of a democracy to me. Woe to Israel and the entire west if this party comes in to fill the void vacated by Mubarak.
You know the saying about the devil you know?
* = Muslims actually account for only about 3% of the EU's population, many of whom are secular and fully assimilated
** = Islam has been losing ground to a resurgent Christianity in many parts of Africa
*** = while Islam has some ability to bring wavering believers back into the fold, it has almost zero appeal to people not born Muslim. Most converts to Islam are from the lumpenproletariat
What difference does it make? If the U.S. had not invaded Iraq in the first place the deaths would not have occurred. If the U.S. ever invaded Canada and there were tanks and soldiers on Yonge Street killing people and destroying property, anyone resisting them would be deemed a 'militant', just like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most of the militants are simply defending their country and their livelihoods. When people are desperate they do desperate things.
"How many civilians did Sadaam Hussein or the fundamentalist lunatics running Iran murder over the last 30 years?"
The U.S. invasion of Iraq has killed FAR MORE civilians than Saddam Hussein ever did. Not only that but the West supported him DURING HIS WORST CRIMES. In addition, the UN estimated that a million Iraqis, mostly children, died from the brutal economic sanctions imposed by the West for twelve years.
As for Iran, I don't support the regime in power but they have killed far fewer people than the Shah did. If the U.S. and U.K. had not overthrown the DEMOCRATICALLY-elected government in 1953 and installed the murderous Shah with his secret police SAVAT, the Islamic Revolution of 1979 would likely not have happened and Iran would be democratic today.
"How many Christians are killing cartoonists and filmmakers in the Netherlands?"
None that I know of. But how many fundamentalist Muslims are killing abortion doctors in Iraq? My point was not that all Christians are evil and all Muslims peace-loving but that we pay disproportionate attention to the crimes of others and overlook our own.
When Canadian mining companies destroy communities in Africa and South America (to use but one example) our media are silent. So very few people other than some activists or independent journalists know about it. When a fatwa is issued against a Western writer it gets worldwide attention in all the media. If your view of the world is based on what you glean from CBC/CTV/BBC/CNN/etc. you are being given a very selective portrayal of how the world functions and who is responsible for most of the world's atrocities.
Since you mention both Italian and Irish immigrants not doing anything bad, what about those Italians who came over and started up the mafia? My grandpa, the son of Sicilian immigrants who had moved to Hamilton by the thousands in the early 1900s, has pointed out street corners where there were mafia hits on people when he was growing up. To say the Irish did nothing bad is silly, they didn't get along with the Protestants very well...
nuff said.
At last count I believe it was none. Protests to be sure but if a Danish cartoonist was murdered perhaps you could offer proof?
And the facts were right: people in the South DID consider them owning slaves to be a right. They continualyy voted to uphold that right and it was only when they're democratic vote was overturned (by the Civil War) did slavery finally get abolished.
Jim stating that it was right for the US to go to war to abolish slavery and suspend the South democratic rights was justified does not make him a piece of shit. Do you support slavery?
And please feel free to disagree with me, just don't call me or anyone else a piece of shit. It doesn't make you sound smarter.
I support the Egyptian movement, but let them be careful what they receive. West 'democracies' have as much blood on there hands as the authoritative regimes they prop up.
American democracy is one fat man in a suit smoking a cigar and holding a donkey puppet in one hand and an elephant puppet in the other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina_v._Mann
Owning a slave in pre-Civil War North Carolina was considered a democratically upheld right.
This is a fact. Look it up. Millions believed that was ok, just as millions believe now, in various parts of the world, that women are are not equal to men, homosexuality is illegal etc. Slavery was democratically upheld for decades and people didn't think it was wrong.
Hopefully in my lifetime I'll see countries such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc. also declare that all people are equal regardless of gender, religious beliefs or sexual orientation. Let's agree to disagree.
Funny how you didn't have a witty retort about "how many Muslims are killing Dutch filmmakers?".... why is that?
And re. killing cartoonists, you're right, he didn't kill him (or his daughter), only because police shot him first. This peace lover's defense in court was that he was only trying to "scare" the cartoonist.
Ignorance = bliss.
http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/somali-convicted-attacking-danish-cartoonist-0
Substitute gay people or women for slaves in your quote.
If half the population has decided that women don't deserve democracy then you can't call it democracy.
So we shouldn't call what these protesters are fighting for democracy. Even by your own statements it is not.
I agree they shouldn't call it democracy. It would be like calling a Kia a BMW.
Is your solution for the assumed apartheid to deny a nation democracy period?
Voting:
Lebanon—Partial suffrage. Proof of elementary education is required for women but not for men, while voting is compulsory for men but optional for women.
Saudi Arabia—No suffrage for women
Same-sex sexual activity:
Illegal in Kuwait (punishable by 10 years in prison), Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia (punishable by death!), Syria, UAE, Yemen (flogging or death)
So yes gays can vote even if they're gay in most of the Middle East, but in reality if they are found out to be gay, they can't vote because they will be in PRISON OR DEAD.
So no gays cannot vote. Actual real people are being killed. Please stop and think about that. I think your attitude towards LGBT and women needs to be more compassionate.
I thought we agreed to disagree. The reality is that this argument is an optimist vs. A pessimist and that really my guess is just as good as yours which is to say neither of us really know what will happen (that includes you)
The Supreme leader of the Muslim brotherhood, Dr. Muhamad Badi, in a Sept 2010 response to the issue of people who would question the validity of continued armed struggle:
"They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life. (وما أحوجهم أن يدركوا أن الإصلاح والتغيير الذي تنشده الأمة لا يمكن تحقيقه إلا بالجهاد والتضحية وصياغة جيل مجاهد يحرص على الموت كما يحرص الأعداء على الحياة.)
Source: IkhwanOnline; IkhwanPress
Comments?
Taken out of context, the statement you cite (which is not a word-for-word translation) would suggest he's advocating violence against anyone who opposes his views. If you read his entire speech, you will realize that he's singling out those who are already using violence against Muslim people: Israel, the U.S., and especially those Arab governments who are oppressing their own people. Many Western leaders regularly use bellicose language against people or governments they disagree with (North Korea, etc.) but it's not regarded as incitement and they are rarely admonished for it. What Mr. Badi was saying is that Muslims should not be timid in the face of those who are attacking them.
Unfortunately, many people in the West consider anything with the word 'Muslim' attached to it as a threat and as something that can only lead to extremism. The Muslim Brotherhood has a long history in Egypt and have taken centrist positions on most issues. I personally don't support them but if the Egyptian people do, then that's their decision.
I have heard this refrain before about the misunderstood "struggle".
I suppose the countless recent examples like 9/11, the thwarted shoe bombers, Theo Van Gogh's murderer, the violent protests over cartoonist renditions of Muhammed, Indonesian club bombings, Russian airport bombings, the horrific "honour" killings of innocent girls that have occurred time and again in recent years, and the suicide bombing idiots who try to change the world with quick-fix symbolic and horrifically violent gestures in Israel and elsewhere are just misunderstanding the beautiful notion of Jihad that you are trying to sell us on.
If you tell me that a word means something noble and beautiful, but the misappropriated use of it is associated with the disgraceful violence I cited above, then I care little for what it "means".
If this nut is talking about taking up violence against US, Canada or Israeli civilians because of what is happening in the Middle East, then he is my enemy, because he threatens the people I love and care about. It's unbelievable to me that you don't feel the same way. I suppose if your family members died at the hands of a "struggling" Jihadist, you'd post the same comments above in their eulogy?
People can and always have used language to couch their true intentions, but actions truly do speak, and the actions I have cited above seem to be part of a pattern of behaviour of so many members of a certain religious/cultural group that repeatedly demonstrates a staggering lack of respect for certain human lives, in particular, "non-believers", "rebellious" women who want to go on dates or show their faces and bodies, homosexuals, and "land occupying Zionists". If you happen to be an unfortunate member of one of those groups, you might wind up the tragic victim of some nutjob's well-meaning but misdirected act of "Struggle".
No thank you.
".....pursues death just as the enemies pursue life."
Am I reading this somehow differently????? Is this someone we can share democratic and peace-loving values with? Really? Really????
The combined deaths from all of these incidents amounts to a fraction of the deaths inflicted by the U.S. & its allies against Muslims over the years. Just as not all people who believe in the "American way of life" are terrorists (despite their government causing the most harm worldwide) so too not all people who believe in Islam are terrorists or sympathize with them. 99.99% of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims are moderate, just as most Christian/Jew/etc. are moderate. If you feel threatened by people simply because of what they are "associated" with (to use your word), then I feel sorry for you because you must live in perpetual fear.
Amazing how you can allow your own assumptions to cloud what you read. HTP did not state, or imply, that the word jihad "means something noble and beautiful." He/she merely said the word is not synonymous with holy war and has a wider meaning.
you wrote: "If this nut is talking about taking up violence against US, Canada or Israeli civilians because of what is happening in the Middle East, then he is my enemy, because he threatens the people I love and care about. It's unbelievable to me that you don't feel the same way..."
Are you as sympathetic to the millions of innocent people killed by U.S. bombs, to Palestinian women and children killed by Israel, to ordinary Afghans killed by foreign troops? I think it's obvious where your sympathies lie.
BTW, I myself am an atheist so I detest all religions equally, but I don't like when any one group of people is singled out and demonized, be they homosexuals or Muslims.
"".....pursues death just as the enemies pursue life."
Comments???
Funny how no one is able to spin this one into anything but what it says. Am I misunderstanding things somehow????
If you hate the US and Canada so much, go try and practice your atheism in the Islamic world. I am sure that the word moderate is in play for most Islamic governments when it comes to freedom of religion, same sex relationships, womens rights, and education for the masses.
I' think most objective observers would say that intolerance rules over "moderation" in most settings in the Muslim world. But maybe that's just crazy old me....
And in response to your derisive assumptions, I am sympathetic to all loss of human life. I just wish that the fanatics who want to change the world by flying planes into civilian buildings in midtown Manhattan, and by bombing crowded Russian airports, or by hiding in hospitals and crowded Palestinian neighbourhoods to launch rocket attacks on Israeli border towns would do the same.
Time will tell who is right, but for now your opinion is no more noble, objective or reasonable than mine, and while I disagree with you, I respect your opinion, and sincerely hope that you are right. But to be SO unwaveringly certain that "moderation" will be the prevailing force for change in the Middle East is not something that you can state with any certainty. Because if you're right, great, but if you guessed wrong and our faith in the inherent good of people is somehow misplaced, we're all in deep sh-t.
It won't be the first time people assumed the best of man, and we got the worst.
Obviously. Your question has already been addressed by others. Badi was referring to those who use violence against Muslims and like someone said it's not a direct translation. I'm sure some who doesn't speak English might think that "killing two birds with one stone" is about cruelty to animals. If the best you can do is focus on a few words while missing the big picture then I think you've conceded your point.
And if you're sympathetic to the loss of all human life then why are you so focused on Western victims when far more Muslims have been killed? You need to stop following the narrative of the news media and do your own research. All the information is out there if you take the time to look for it.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php?articleid=11025