From Correspondence – A White House At Play With the Muslim Brotherhood?


, ,

From correspondence:

Yours Truly: Obama has given MB plenty of room for operating and for being observed. As he is not a President for Life, the stronger elements that comprise our government will survive him and probably be able to use the knowledge gained during his tenure. I would fear as much a flip toward the extreme Right in America. We really need a central, progressive, and prudent politics, and the zealots in politics have really skewed the conversation away from the middle ranks. That needs fixing, so I am becoming a Passionate Moderate Liberal.

Correspondent: Unfortunately, your fears aren’t baseless. After the communist revolution in Russia in 1917 and many other countries 1919, 1920 where it failed, extreme right came to power, including Nazis in most devastated Germany. That’s why from the very beginning the idea of European Union was not to go separate ways, to keep together, thereby not allowing a fascist regime to surface in a singly taken country. Still, fascists raise their head in Hungary, Greece… I think drastic economic changes bring drastic political changes and false expectations… Only the ability to realistically analyze them, or rather inability, can bring extreme regimes into power. Once installed they cannot be peacefully removed, that has to be remembered. The main lesson of WWII perhaps should be that many countries that could do something to prevent the appetites of the Nazi Germany did simply nothing for wanting to be left in peace. Want to be left in peace, from many lazy western countries, isn’t that what helps bring all sort of criminals to power nowadays? If the progressive world media would together denounce Hamas and ISIS, what chance of survival would they have? Close to none, I think.

My correspondent had started here:

The Muslim Brotherhood, who took power in Egypt following the Arab Spring, were recently ousted by the Egyptian military and declared a terrorist organization.

Even still, they have been embraced by President Obama, invited into his administration, placed on a “hands off” list protecting them, and are even setting up their own official political party here in the United States.

I leave room for the Obama Administration to have been adventurous, curious, experimental, observing in attempting to integrate into the democratic process such as Mohamed Elibiary, who has been enjoying this week his share of “right-side” press for tweeting remarks about the inevitability of the global Islamic caliphate, for example:

Mohamed Elibiary was until last week a senior member of DHS’ Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC). After years of controversy about his status at DHS, Elibiary announced his final day with the department on Twitter earlier this month and said he would remain close to the agency.

Media outlets have raised questions about the circumstances surrounding his departure, speculating that his provocative comments about the “inevitable” return of the Muslim “caliphate” may have played a role. – 9/15/2014.

Although organizing Arab support in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria may amount to showbiz with an Administration and within an international political environment deeply invested in image — the wars for detectives and poets may turn out one day to have been wars for psychologists too, lol — the institutional memory Elibiary will leave behind will also inform this and successive governments in regard to the al-Qaeda-type assortment of Islamist challengers bent on acquiring power beneath the banners of Islam and with themselves conflated — by themselves — with God Almighty.


# # #

FTAC – MEC in Five ‘Graphs


, , , ,

From recent correspondence, a brief explanation:

Pakistan is a Muslim-majority state that may need to protect its minority populations and accept the same — Christians and Jews (I know of one) — as citizens with equal rights, not dhimmi status.

Israel is a Jewish-majority state that has enfranchised its Arab Christian and Muslim citizens fully.

Surrounding Arab rejection of Israel / a Jewish-majority state / of Jews, in general, has kept trapped the remaining refugees of 1948. Egypt will not absorb Gaza. Refugees in now built camps in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan indeed remain barred from citizenship in those states.

In the stateless preoccupied territories intended in part for independent statehood, the two key power brokers, Fatah and Hamas, have not been able to negotiate peace between themselves. As their anti-Semitic beliefs and postures remain genocidal, Israel have had to work with both in a perfunctory manner as regards the delivery of basic services, including their security against crime (Washington writes the paychecks for Abbas’s security force, which is trained in Jordan by Israel instructors).

Here’s where I sympathize, however, in departure from more conservative elements: I think it’s time to get Fatah and Hamas thugs out of the way and enable the residents of Gaza and the West Bank to take control of their own lives. On that, however, the realpolitik continues to work opposite, and Hamas, which has made everyone in Gaza unhappy, has been gaining popularity in the West Bank, which is a headache for Abbas. – 11/11/2013. – 7/28/2014. – “Israeli minister: Abbas is world’s “most anti-Semitic leader” – 1/30/2014.

One now may easily and rapidly compile data on piratical leaders and their organizations, but the three pieces noted above might suffice to underscore what has happened to the hapless refugees of 1948 and their generations: Arabs have contained them in camps in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt; Israel, despite the claims of The Preoccupation (with the Jews), have provided and promoted a palette of basic services while leaving the Arab politics to the meddling “gentle character of Arab leaders and Arab-wannabee Muslim potentates with their own versions of brown shirts and jack boots on the ground.  In the way of Arab suffering at Arab hands, the results loom clear in Hamas, which has spirited now billions of dollars out of the Gaza trough (while sacrificing the lives of somebody’s children as tunnel diggers and sundry others — to about 2,000 recently — by pushing the same in harms’ way as human shields), and in Fatah, which hasn’t yet produced a convincing self-governance replete with human rights, freedom of speech, and general political freedom.

Anyone in for another sixty-six years of the same rigmarole?

One would hope the old Jew-hating and Jew-killing enthusiasm just a little bit aged, brittle, reduced by the criminality of those most responsible for those who have driven it a too long time.

# # #

FTAC – On the Ideas of Genocide and War


, , ,

“X” appears here careful to avoid the misappropriation of the term “genocide”, which really refers to a categorical cultural-racial basis for the elimination of an entire people. In such a frame, the Tutsi of Rwanda were the target of genocidal Hutu mania. Similarly, the white Arab onslaughts brought against the black animists of Darfur similarly constitutes “genocide” —

The perception of “war crime” cannot hinge on carnage alone, nor some whacked out ideas about fairness in the parity of death counts. The war against war entails the destruction of one party’s will to war, or, if failing that, ability to make war. If one were to suggest that WWII was excessive in every aspect by every party in every respect, one would have difficulty arguing against that and the necessity of having in place, at least, a United Nations and an International Criminal Court. Of course, neither have proven of much use in Syria or against ISIS in Iraq, but at least we have them, and in time, we may have each other in such a way as to forestall the empowerment of personalities who lead themselves, their nations, and all surrounding into immense destruction.

Notably, the forces massed against Berlin (at the end of WWII) — and with an immense Russian force doing the honors — may suggest what it has taken in the past to eliminate the grandiose messianic will driving such war. That will, fear, drive, motivation, etc. exceeds limits, does not reason, would seem to fight to and perhaps even beyond death — and then it may work against an energy equal to its challenge and, eventually, greater than itself.

If hate were shit, and it is, a lot of people would seem to be walking around with a load in their pants.

A part of the psychology addressed in the generation of bigoted rhetoric lays out within the “paranoid delusional narcissistic reflection of motivation“.  How that becomes pattern in behavior and indicative of habits of mind, I wouldn’t hazard to guess but would suggest the language process associated with the same resides in childhood and a natural cowardice and imagination inclined to package fear borne by objects in such a way to push them away from the personal atmosphere.

I barely understand adults.


I don’t understand children.

However, to understand adults — to “get” an anti-Semite or other form of vociferous bigot — it might help to delve into the formation of language-sustained beliefs and attitudes adopted in childhood, and the coming into existence of some socially grammatical, rule-deriving, and later rule-based response to natural fears and emotional needs.

# # #

FTAC – Syria – A Note on Beyond the Burning


, , , , ,

The foundations of the invisible wall surrounding Assad start about here:

“In a gloomy interrogation room the children were beaten and bloodied, burned and had their fingernails pulled out by grown men working for a regime whose unchecked brutality appears increasingly to be sowing the seeds of its undoing.”

And then it builds to about here:

“But there is something legitimately scary about the weapon’s do-it-yourself ethos and its new systematic deployment against the neighborhoods of Aleppo. It speaks to the regime’s single-minded focus on finding new ways to kill, its narrow and obsessive pursuit of mayhem and destruction as seemingly official strategy in the conflict that has run for nearly three years now.”

Being a merely “bloody dictator” in a conflict cauldron that has in it argument over despotism, democracy, egotism, goodness, God, morality, and narcissism (finally) is not merely a bad position.

The condemnation backed by astounding imagery and numbers to match may not be overcome with exigent maneuvering.

I know: faced with Hitler, one might be eager to bargain with Stalin.

Call that yesterday.

This day with Assad having produced a war that has brought al-Qaeda affiliates and such to his doorstep and that has incubated and loosed ISIS on the world, may be different.

How happy should one be to be led by Assad today?

That’s not my question to answer.  It’s a question for Syrians to answer for themselves in whatever condition and place the war now finds them.

If “Assad or Burn It” was the slogan, it has been working a long time, and once burned — in whatever portion — what then?

What now?

# # #

Orphaned Gaza


, ,

“In the end you are left with 1.7 million people in Gaza, and you don’t really want that.”


Ehud Yaari‘s remark at The Washington Institute’s two-person panel “Sept. 11 – Gaza and Beyond: The Arab-Israeli Arena in the Wake of the Hamas War,” may tell how Israel’s latest response to Gaza rocket fire (and assault tunnel building) reached completion without changing much.

Indeed, Robert Satloff, the second speaker, would go on to characterize the incursion as “urgent, not very important.”

When asked in the Q&A that followed, “What does Israel want?”  Yaari suggested that what Israel wants is to “let Hamas rot in the Gaza Strip.”

Noting that Hamas had seen fail it’s “Gaza Fortress” approach to assaulting Israel, the journalist said the Hamas would “try to make a leap to the West Bank . . . a whole new opera” with the contemplation of its terrorism reaching everywhere in Israel.


Not only Hamas may rot in Gaza, for no powerful or key element seems to want even to approach taking responsibility for 1.7 million Gazans.

Egypt, having with decision made the Muslim Brotherhood its problem, certainly does not want Gaza’s most egregious problem, except to keep the same exactly where it is.

Israel and Israelis: ditto, Egypt.

If there’s a transition plan for Gaza from Hamas sanctuary to, say, protectorate or suzerain in enthused and lasting peace (with the Jews and the Jewish State), I should like to hear of it.

The highly experienced and now octogenarian Mahmoud Abbas, who, anti-Semite that he may be, has been promoted as representing the Next Best Government, has looked over the nest and, so suggests Yaari, hasn’t the wish to run Gaza while Hamas, aspiring to ape Hezbollah, maintains its own army.  While Hamas planners in Turkey pass thoughts to the West Bank Committee in Gaza, with interest in unseating Abbas, Abbas would have to address the massive screening of old staff, the mustering of troops sufficient to overwhelm Hamas, and that’s not happening.

Gaza appears to be stuck with Hamas.

Even worse for Hamas, Hamas appears to be stuck with Gaza.

While Hamas stews over Gaza as well as in it, Israel and the Arab World, so suggests Satloff, may be experiencing some convergence of perception of regional states of affairs.

Perhaps such as ISIS helps with that.

While Hamas may be isolated in Gaza — imho, it sure looks that way — and both Egypt and Israel control the boundaries and crossings containing the same and the Global Jew-Hate Commune emphasizes hate over help (most often) and the UNRWA remains deeply compromised (as a Hamas helper), Gaza may have one partner for peace after all: Gazans.

It’s what we all have, isn’t it?

Ourselves when it’s us.

Themselves when it’s them.

Some friends convince me that Gazans love Hamas, vote for Hamas, die for Hamas.



And some friends convince me otherwise.

Except through the Hamas filter — media controlling, politically intimidating, image obsessed — one cannot “see” Gazans (politically) otherwise, or, perhaps simply not yet.

Reference – 9/11/2014

Blogger’s Note

It’s true I may now scribble notes at a desktop two hours away from the event location — but can I read them afterward?  :)  And did I get words down right in the first place?  And can I do a better job of differentiating between what someone else said and what I happen to think?  Of course.  With practice.

Every day online brings with it a slightly updated dawn that changes even the most remote soul’s intellectual ecology.

Yesterday’s live event, which I watched, is now a recorded event at the URL noted in reference.  I may give it another listen, and if I must update here, I will.  Internally, there’s an art in play — listen, notate, reflect, report, opine — and each step is its own dimension.

Update — “From Gaza to ISIS: A Trip Report Assessing the Arab-Israeli Arena”, Robert Satloff, September 12, 2014

# # #

Bozosphere Journalism – Just a Note


, , ,

To make a longer story very short by summing it as if for a cable (or txt mssg) — Idlib, Syria – destroyed by blast: Ahrar-al-Sham – “The Free Men of Syria” — described by Breitbart as “main rival to ISIS.”

Nearly fifty senior commanders of a major coalition of Islamic ‘moderates’ opposed to ISIS in Syria have been killed by an explosion at their secret command bunker as they met to discuss strategy against the the Islamic State. – 9/11/2014.

Main rival to ISIS or main moderate opposition to ISIS?

The leader of one of the biggest Islamist rebel groups in Syria has been killed by an explosion in the north-western province of Idlib. – 9/10/2014.

Note the date of the BBC report.

Another wrinkle: “The doctor saw bodies with frothing at the mouth and fluid coming from the eyes and noses, Abu Baraa said, adding: ‘This was a highly sophisticated attack in a location that was very secure.'”

Big concussive blast with fire or some other kind of explosion with a chemical payload?

Oh, who cares how they died, eh?

An activist collective called the Edlib News Network, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and Syrian state media also reported Aboud’s death. The activist reports said the men died in a suicide bombing. – 9/9/2014.

I kid about the not caring — caring is what matters and how whatever has happened has happened matters in numerous ways.  But to push on: with the count coming down to “over 40″ (cited in the HuffPost piece) from 50, somehow 10 (or less) people (somewhere) have gotten to live.  Credit the AP writers with noting how the numbers are reported (in tens) and uncertain in the wake of an event.

A statement posted on Ahrar al-Sham’s official Twitter feed said the blast had hit a meeting in Idlib province in north-west Syria and confirmed Hassan Aboud, the group’s leader, among at least 12 dead. – 9/9/2014.

The Guardian makes mention of 28 dead (citing another source, probably the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights) before dropping the count to 12.

What we know: the story broke at least two days ago; about 50 leaders of Ahrar al-Sham, an ISIS rival, had assembled in a basement to discuss the war; and there was an explosion (of some kind) leaving between 12 and 50 dead.

What we also know: the event was not a 9/11 event.

Why post it as one?

It may be making the rounds as “news” cogent to the anti-Jihad when it was news two days ago and not particularly about “moderate” forces opposed to Assad’s absolute rule.

Moreover, with Ahrar al-Sham aligned with al-Qaeda, why characterize it as part of the bands of the “Free Syrian Army” even if in the field cooperation develops and dissolves according to conditions and who else is in the field?

Ahrar al-Sham cooperates with the Free Syrian Army and other secular rebel groups, however, it does not maintain ties with the Syrian National Council.[27] Although they coordinate with other groups, they maintain their own strict and secretive leadership, receiving the majority of their funding and support from donors in Kuwait. – as viewed 9/11/2014/2125-ET

Way down on the irreducible floor of the Islamic Small Wars, there is in addition to an underlying argument about integrity (with all men, not only Muslims) a similar one about mankind: does nature dictate “all against all”, which appears the zeitgeist most in play across Syria and Iraq, or is a democratic, egalitarian, systematic, and reasoning “all for all” a real possibility for most of the world?

Stay tuned, but adventure out where ye may and live beyond war: it looks like answering the simple binary posed today in Syria and Iraq will take a lot more time, possibly generations.

# # #



, ,

The courtship between Eastern European far-right parties and Russia has been going on for years, of course. In 2008, Eastern Europe’s far right supported the Russian war against Georgia. In May 2013, leaders of Jobbik, the Hungarian far-right party with dubious fascist origins, met with Russian Duma leaders and academics at Moscow State University. The neo-Nazi Bulgarian Ataka party has vocally supported Putin and Russian foreign policy. In 2012, Ataka’s leader, Volen Siderov, traveled to Moscow, reportedly at his own expense, to celebrate Putin’s sixtieth birthday and express admiration for the Russian president’s strong leadership. After Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Siderov threatened to withdraw his party’s support from the coalition government if it supported further sanctions against Russia. – September/October 2014.

FTAC – Note – Media Audience and Moral Entrepreneurship


, , , , , ,

One may differentiate between casual audience comfortable with the world it knows and humanist-intellectual audience with amateur or professional background and buy-in with regard to shaping the next world.

If you are here, you are either between those broad classes or in the latter, and if there’s even just a tiny bit of appropriate education or training back there, then you may be trusted to read critically, to both demand and sift data, to argue about dimensions and variables with a subject of interest, to engage in introspection and reflection as well as judgment, and to think broadly about what would be helpful — anthropologically, ethnographically, evolutionary — in the creation of a greater, more peaceful, more progressive global commune.

The prompt was a piece in Honest Reporting about pandering.

Pandering is a form in lying predicated on the enforcement of loyalty by the panderer.  The seminal fairy tale that is “The Emperor’s New Clothes” applies; it really is not a favor to be told how brave, glorious, and self-sacrificing one is by a personality inclined to sacrifice you in the interest of their own aggrandizement and unbridled glorification.

With the review of media coverage of the latest war in Gaza, the political skewing of the news devolves both to overt Hamas intimidation of the press and the reluctance of the same to either give up a story or taint the same with an acknowledgment of the compromise of their integrity.

Compromised journalism comprises its casual audience.

As suggested at the top of this post, not all audience is casual.  In fact, while a vast global intelligentsia has come into being with the development of the World Wide Web — the numbers may be low but the distribution must certainly be global — a large analytical class has also been present in the world either with partisan loyalties or greater humanist and spiritual motives.  From the “desk analysts” of national security bureaus to the latest in NGO do-gooders, there are plenty of readers who read for data and the arguably most accurate picture they may obtain from the same.  While some things lend themselves to a technocratic objectivity, from conventional defense arrangements to road building coupled with economic development, other themes require a broadened vision of humanity — that “anthropolitical psychology” I’ve mentioned on this blog — and also a world of poetry and consideration for the remaining 7,000 or so living languages in the contemporary human inventory and the cultures and individuals suspended in them in time.

# # #


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 383 other followers