This article is by an Egyptian who understands the MBs and what they represent, and what they really are. They are inherently, deep down in their ideological genetic code radical hate-filled jihadists who have an insane view of the world and think they alone are God's agents
Prof. Cole writes, "But such violence (inexcusable as it is, especially toward innocent Christians) is an outcome of the coup and of the dispersal of their protests, and was not typical of the movement in the past 3 decades."
That last statement is demonstrably false. Yes, the past three decades -- and more -- have seen many acts of Muslim Brotherhood members using terrorist violence against Coptic Christians. The clear Party Line for the vast majority of MB members and supporters is that the Coptic Christians are a treacherous, foreign-controlled movement that needs to be severely intimidated. There is a mountain of evidence showing this.
Prof. Cole has an excessively pollyanna-esque view of the Muslim Brotherhood. They never really renounced violence, but only claimed to renounce it for propaganda p.r. reasons. The leaders and rank and file are just as bloody-minded as the people who killed Sadat, and who founded Al-Queda. They pretended to be a "new and better" group. It was pretense. They are killers and hate-mongers, and there are volumes and volumes and volumes of evidence showing this.
Prof. Cole, we all want peace in Egypt. Who really likes to see a military crack-down? But in a world of greater and lesser evils, the Muslim Brotherhood is a great evil--they show this by their words and deeds every day for decade after decade. Please come to terms with the ugly truth of this group, not what you wish were the rosy truth of this group.
Prof. Cole wrote, "some 20 Coptic Christian churches were attacked ..." What he did not say was that several Coptic Christians have been murdered, and others beaten--the attacks are not simply against property.
We have to be honest: the MBs are a hate-filled quasi-terrorist organization. They are scapegoating Christians who have only a very minor role in the downfall of their government. They are lashing out against a weak minority simply to terrorize it and vent their anger and create an anarchistic situation. During Morsi's rule they behaved like bullies, not democrats. Since Morsi's removal they have behaving with maximum belligerence toward the Christian population.
I don't think the military attacking the MB camps was ideal, but was there any other realistic alternative? Can a legitimate government that wants to stabilize society and create conditions for free elections allow that kind of violence against Copts (and even the military itself) that the MBs were in fact practicing and preaching? The MBs put themselves outside the law by opting for violence against innocent civilians who had little to do with their situation, not unlike Timothy McVeigh or any other terrorist who scapegoats the innocent to foment hatred and anarchy. The MBs are not unlike the KKK and other White Supremacist groups in the US. They are purveyors of irrational hatred and violence against the weak to make political points. Again: what alternative did the military have? The MBs after six weeks showed no sign of softening, and indeed they were becoming more enraged and more dangerous.
A follow-up to my point earlier:
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/iw/contents/articles/opinion/2013/07/egyptian-identity-stupid.html
This article is by an Egyptian who understands the MBs and what they represent, and what they really are. They are inherently, deep down in their ideological genetic code radical hate-filled jihadists who have an insane view of the world and think they alone are God's agents
Prof. Cole writes, "But such violence (inexcusable as it is, especially toward innocent Christians) is an outcome of the coup and of the dispersal of their protests, and was not typical of the movement in the past 3 decades."
That last statement is demonstrably false. Yes, the past three decades -- and more -- have seen many acts of Muslim Brotherhood members using terrorist violence against Coptic Christians. The clear Party Line for the vast majority of MB members and supporters is that the Coptic Christians are a treacherous, foreign-controlled movement that needs to be severely intimidated. There is a mountain of evidence showing this.
Prof. Cole has an excessively pollyanna-esque view of the Muslim Brotherhood. They never really renounced violence, but only claimed to renounce it for propaganda p.r. reasons. The leaders and rank and file are just as bloody-minded as the people who killed Sadat, and who founded Al-Queda. They pretended to be a "new and better" group. It was pretense. They are killers and hate-mongers, and there are volumes and volumes and volumes of evidence showing this.
Prof. Cole, we all want peace in Egypt. Who really likes to see a military crack-down? But in a world of greater and lesser evils, the Muslim Brotherhood is a great evil--they show this by their words and deeds every day for decade after decade. Please come to terms with the ugly truth of this group, not what you wish were the rosy truth of this group.
Prof. Cole wrote, "some 20 Coptic Christian churches were attacked ..." What he did not say was that several Coptic Christians have been murdered, and others beaten--the attacks are not simply against property.
We have to be honest: the MBs are a hate-filled quasi-terrorist organization. They are scapegoating Christians who have only a very minor role in the downfall of their government. They are lashing out against a weak minority simply to terrorize it and vent their anger and create an anarchistic situation. During Morsi's rule they behaved like bullies, not democrats. Since Morsi's removal they have behaving with maximum belligerence toward the Christian population.
I don't think the military attacking the MB camps was ideal, but was there any other realistic alternative? Can a legitimate government that wants to stabilize society and create conditions for free elections allow that kind of violence against Copts (and even the military itself) that the MBs were in fact practicing and preaching? The MBs put themselves outside the law by opting for violence against innocent civilians who had little to do with their situation, not unlike Timothy McVeigh or any other terrorist who scapegoats the innocent to foment hatred and anarchy. The MBs are not unlike the KKK and other White Supremacist groups in the US. They are purveyors of irrational hatred and violence against the weak to make political points. Again: what alternative did the military have? The MBs after six weeks showed no sign of softening, and indeed they were becoming more enraged and more dangerous.