We will not tolerate the intolerant


len West isn’t very happy with the University of Maryland, College Park.  It wasn’t only Muslim students who opposed a screening of “American Sniper” at the school, but West certainly did voice his displeasure with Muslim students, telling them to “go home,” and calling them “jihadists.”

West’s attack came in the form of an article on his website, where he attacked the Muslim Students Association, claiming them to be an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood.  West doesn’t seem to understand that Muslims aren’t necessarily foreigners, and that it doesn’t take someone to have aimed a weapon at Americans to be offended by the war propaganda film he so desperately loves.

In typical West fashion, apples were compared to pistachio nuts and slavery came to the forefront:

But who are these individuals to tell an American university what can be shown on its campus? I wonder if the movie “Twelve Years a Slave” was shown at the University of Maryland? And if these MSA students believe “American Sniper” is offensive to Muslims it means means [sic] they are supportive of Islamic terrorism and jihadism.

Sorry, Allen, but there’s a big difference between showing a movie that depicts a historical period accurately and one that glorifies violence and hatred towards an entire religion.  “American Sniper” was nothing but a kill-fest that martyred a mass-murderer.

And no, it doesn’t “means means” that they are supportive of terrorism and jihad, it means they found the tone of the movie distasteful, much like most rational people find you.

West has a plan for these “jihadists.”  The title of his article starts with “Incoming,” and the piece ends with gun nut uber motto “molon labe.”  Clearly West thinks the only solution to deal with these horrible students opposed to the violence in a movie is to mount an attack on Universities and rid them of this ominously peaceful presence:

Your time is running out, as we will not tolerate the intolerant for much longer. You will be crushed and defeated, because in America we just don’t take crap for too long — regardless of the complicit bond you’ve found with progressive socialists — stretching from the White House to the College and University campuses — Islamic fascism will not prevail in these great United States of America.

Two words: Molon Labe!

Will the attacks on college students by psychopaths who think Chris Kyle is a hero begin before or after your Presidential campaign is squashed?

Lighten up, Allen.  And please…go away.  Don’t go away mad, just go away.

Comment: Antifa-chickens coming home to roost? Anyway, learn Arabic so you don’t have to rely on second-hand information. Hell is eternal, hell is eternal, hell is eternal…

Anonymous makes French video targeting Sharia for Belgium


Posted on June 16, 2013 by Eeyore

This is interesting. The vigilante hacker group called, ‘Anonymous’ has made a video threatening one of Anjem Choudary’s affiliates, Shariah for Belgium. It will be interesting to see what they actually do, what the various Muslim brotherhood affiliates will to in response and whether youtube will remove all the Anonymous videos as a breach of the terms of service on threatening or intimidating behaviour.

*NOTE: I do not endorse anonymous but had this translated and subtitled it in English because it is an important document. I made the best effort to translate accurately. If there are errors please point them out and if they are serious I will re do. However no attempt was made to distort the message of Anonymous. This was translated and posted here in the spirit of making available any news item that should be known to the public.*

Comment: Now they surely deserve Muslim girlfriends 😉 This does not conflict with attacking the EDL. Many people oppose both “extreme” Islam and “fascism”. Why not oppose Islam and “extreme fascism”?

The revolution, back in black

The black bloc must provide Egyptians with a positive vision if they want their struggle to succeed.
Last Modified: 02 Feb 2013 14:05

The black bloc in Egypt say they are the defenders of protesters opposed to President Mohamed Morsi’s rule [AFP]
The last time kids in black caused this much trouble in Egypt, it was Satan’s fault. Well, at least that’s what the Muslim Brotherhood and the Mubarak government claimed during the infamous “Satanic metal affair” of 1997, when over 100 metalheads – musicians and fans – were arrested and threatened with prosecution and even death simply because they dressed in black and liked extreme music.

The persecution of Egypt’s metalheads, or “metaliens” as many called themselves, drove the burgeoning scene underground for much of the next decade. It did not begin to resurface until the mid-2000s, at the same time as political movements like Kefaaya emerged, and the strikes in the industrial centre of Mahallah occurred. This period saw a renewed, if still sporadic, militancy that would coalesce into the revolutionary surge of late 2010 and early 2011.

It didn’t surprise me, then, to see that some of the key organisers of the 18 days of protest were old friends from the country’s metal scene. The seemingly sudden reemergence of black among Egypt’s remaining revolutionaries, specifically the visual markers of the black bloc – which despite being described as a group by the media [AR], commentators and government, is more accurately understood as a tactic and strategy – thus brings back vivid memories, of both the sounds of Egyptian metal and the anarchistic heart beat of the original Tahrir protests. Metal and anarchy – as Egypt’s political and religious authorities have argued with great ferver – have always gone together quite naturally.

Indeed, there was a clear if little remarked upon anarchist presence in Tahrir during the original 18 Day uprising; anarchist books can in fact be found in stalls along Talat Harb Street on the way to the Square where the group held a public march and prayer. And Tahrir itself remains in many ways the epitome of the ideas of horizontalism (horizontalidad) and self-organisation (autogestion) that are at the core of modern anarchist theory and practice.

Anarchism’s Egyptian roots

In fact, anarchism actually has a long history in Egypt and the Levant more broadly. As the research of Edinburgh University Professor Anthony Gorman has demonstrated, it stretches back to the 1860s when Italian political refugees first made their way to the more hospitable surrounding of Alexandria and other Egyptian cities, where they inspired the foundation of the “Free Popular University” in 1901.

Egypt in this period was in the midst of an unprecedented and increasingly desperate state-driven modernisation campaign that increased its integration into the global economy during the first and in some ways still most intense phase of globalisation. The constant movement of northern Mediterranean communities to and through its eastern and southern shores going back centuries – as merchants, slaves, pirates, workers and activists – is a seminal lesson in how integrated the Mediterranean has traditionally been, and hopefully will again be.

Anarchism, along with any other political ideology that would compete with Nasserism, was sidelined during the heyday of pan-Arabism in the 1950s and 60s. But at least some contemporary Egyptian anarchists trace their roots to local anarchist activity in the 
1940s [AR].Italians and Greeks, who by the fin de siècle had established vibrant communities tens of thousands strong in the major cities of the Mediterranean’s southern and eastern rims, were increasingly enmeshed in the politics of the indigenous labour movements, and brought a strong dose of anarchism, including anarco-syndicalism, which specifically focused on labour struggles through self-organisation. Anarchist-agitated strikes were being staged and arrests being made for illegal organising by the 1890s, if not before.

The rise of the anti-corporate globalisation movement

Anarchism’s appearance in Egypt in the 19th century provides the historical context for understanding its reappearance today, during the next great struggle age of global integration within a Western-led (but no longer dominated) global neoliberal system. Since Sadat’s initiation of the infitah, or opening in the 1970s, Egypt has been as deeply – and unfavourably – incorporated into this system through its dependent relationship with the US, and with the IMF and World Bank as it was into the 19th century European dominated global economy.

Mubarak, father and even more so son, tried to use neoliberal policies to strengthen the power elite’s economic position within Egypt and globally. Policies of privatisation and liberalisation offered unprecedented potential for the elite to strengthen its control over the economy. The problem was, and remains, that the greater concentration of wealth can only come at the cost of a far more precarious economic position for the vast majority of the population. This demanded not just increased repression but also the cooptation of new actors into the power elite, whether the emerging bourgeoisie of the 1990s (epitomised by Gamal Mubarak) or the Brotherhood elite in the last decade.

From Morocco to Syria the struggles for “freedom”, “social justice”, “democracy”, “bread” and particularly “dignity” – which has been a key word for struggles against neoliberalism at least since the Zapatista movement made it a centrepiece of its discourse in the early 1990s – are quintessentially anti-neoliberal struggles. In this regard, they are the natural continuation of the struggles of the anti-corporate globalisation movements in Latin and North America and then Europe of the 1990s and early 2000s (as epitomised by Buenos Aires, London, Seattle, Prague and Genoa), which then morphed into the anti-war movement that emerged around the US invasion of Iraq.

Theatres of violence

Many of the anarchist organising principles which Egyptian black bloc activists have adopted as their own – such as self-democracy and decentralised organisation, as well as militant and often violent confrontations with security forces and symbols of systemic power – were deployed by the first generation of black bloc activists in the anti-corporate globalisation movement. These activists emerged not just out of anarchist circles but also groups like Ya Basta!, Tutte Bianche and Attac (which actually had branches in some Arab countries).

They in turn were powerfully impacted by Latin American grass roots struggles epitomised by the Zapatistas in Mexico, whose movement, I argued already in 2005 in my book Why They Don’t Hate Us, constituted the best model for then inchoate politicised youth movements to emulate. Indeed, the US government-sponsored think tank RAND warned [PDF] that the Zapatista uprising “demonstrated how new technology made it possible for ‘swarms’ of ‘flies’ to overrun governments”, precisely the kind of tactics that defined the Tahrir phase of the Egyptian revolution.

However, it was also clear by the anti-IMF Prague protest of September 2000 that the use of violence, however theatrical and limited to property and aggressive security forces, was becoming counter productive. The police used the threat of such violence to deploy ever larger and overzealous forces who arrested (often violently) peaceful activists and helped disrupt, as well as infiltrating them with greater frequency. The nadir was reached with the killing of Italian activist Carlo Giuliano at the Group of 8 summit in Genoa in July, 2001, just two months before September 11 completely delegitimised any kind of violence by protesters in the US and Europe for the next half decade.
It could be argued that the anti-WTO “Battle of Seattle” of late 1999, which first put the movement on the media and activist map, would have never received the attention it did had it not been for the violence against property deployed by protesters, which was and remains a rare phenomenon in the US outside of “riots” in poor minority communities.

Simply put, routinised violence against property cost the anti-corporate globalisation movement significant support in the US and Europe precisely because the the vast majority of people in these countries were not suffering enough under the existing system to support the level of chaos and disruption such violence was intended to generate. Anarchists and hard-core anti-corporate globalisation activists might have wanted the “fall of the system”, as Egyptians have chanted since the eruption of the revolution (and in fact, before), but most everyone else was only looking for a far less painful process of reform.

Militant oppositional politics became even more difficult during the Bush War on Terror years, both because there was less public tolerance for them and because governments used anti-terror laws to increase surveillance, infiltration and prosecution of militant activists. It has reappeared with the rise of the Occupy movements globally, especially in Greece, Spain and to some degree the United States. But even in the midst of the worst economic period since the Great Depression, black bloc tactics alienated at least as many potential supporters of the movement as they attracted, leading normally sober observers like Chris Hedges to label the tactic (in fact, like so many others, he erroneously labeled it a movement) the “cancer of the Occupy movement“.

Globalisation on steroids in the Arab world

The Arab and broader Muslim world constitute a very different environment for struggles against neoliberalism and the various policies it involves than did the advanced capitalist West. Unprecedented petroleum rents allowed for rapid development of the smaller Gulf countries in the last two decades, but for the economic and political situation of the vast majority of the region’s peoples has become more bleak during the last generation. This at the same time that their ability to connect with and become culturally – if not economically and politically – integrated with global movements and ideas increased at an unprecedented rate.

In a lecture-hall filled with 500 people at the Prague anti-IMF protests of September 2000, not a single audience member raised their hand when I asked if anyone was from the Muslim world. Within a few years, however, activists from the Middle East and North Africa were becoming an increasing presence in the global peace and justice movement, while at the same time taking advantage of the opportunities afforded to them by Western governments and NGOs to network with their peers (and especially each other) in the mushrooming number of “civil society”-related workshops and conferences of the post-US Iraq invasion period.

The internet, of course, made it that much easier to learn about tactics – such as that of the black bloc’s – and allowed various groups both in and outside the region who shared similar goals and attitudes to become acquainted. At the same time, the growth of the now (in)famous Ultra movement, clearly inspired by similar movements of football fans in Europe, provided the perfect laboratory for experimenting and perfecting the kinds of aggressive and even violent confrontations with security forces and regime thugs that between January 28 and February 4, 2011 literally saved the revolution.

It is not surprising that as their ability to shape the political situation has lessened in the two years since the initial uprising, the Ultras and sympathetic fellow-travellers among Egypt’s revolutionary movements would search out new strategies, tactics and symbols to reshift the momentum, and as important, the national narrative, towards more favourable terrain. Members of the Revolutionary Socialists, the most sympathetic group to anarchists in terms of strategies and political goals (and who’ve consequently been attacked with them by SCAF and the Brotherhood) have from the start of the Revolution repeatedly told me that the key to its success will be constantly learning from and teaching ever widening circles of people. The explosion of talk about the black bloc in Egypt – even more so among the government, its supporters and the Egyptian and Arabic-language media than in Western media – is evidence of just how successful their strategy has been.

From an examination of the proliferation of Egyptian black bloc websites (including hereherehere, and here),video pronouncements of activists, (see also here), twitter feeds, and the use of black bloc description and logos, and discussions with friends in the broader Ultra movement and others who’ve followed recent changes in strategies, it’s clear that while the adoption of black bloc tactics is centred around the Ultras, it’s not limited to them, since not all activists who’ve donned the balaclava or black hoodie are members of one of the main Ultra clubs, such as Zemalek or Ahly.

It’s also clear that while the activists who came up with the idea to publicly identify themselves with the tactic are familiar with its recent history, it would be a mistake to assume they share (or even spend time debating over) a coherent anarchist political agenda or philosophy, or are all equally grounded in the larger anarchist-influenced discourses that have shaped the broader global Occupy movement – which, let us remember, was directly inspired by and even born out of Tahrir’s historic 18 days of anarchist-style self-organisation. On the other hand, some of the self-identified Egyptian black bloc activists list their “university” on their facebook page as “UNAM”, the National Autonomous University of Mexico, which has a long history of affiliation with the Zapatistas, while a return to some of the analysis of black bloc tactics written during the pre-2001 period reveal similar debates and challenges facing the movement in the West then and in Egypt today.

Revolution as creative destruction

It’s hard to overstate the dangers a well- yet self-organised and decentralised protest movement could present to Egypt’s power elite. The country’s military chief, Abdel Fatah al-Sissi, is not exaggerating when he says ongoing protests threaten a “
collapse of the state“; nor are prosecutors wrong in considering those deploying black bloc tactics as “terrorists“. For what is the goal of revolution if not the collapse of the existing state, and how can protests aimed at that end not terrorise those presently in power?In the wake of the Brotherhood/FJP’s electoral victories, the anemic performance of the official “opposition” represented by the “National Salvation Front” and a population desperate for some sort of economic recovery, revolutionary forces were on the defensive in the last few months. But the mass protests and then violence surrounding the Port Said verdict and the second anniversary of the start of the uprising on January 25 has generated a recalibration of the political scales. The black bloc has become a public (and even more so media and government) symbol of the militant opposition that is quite literally on the march against the still unstable emerging order.

All true revolutions involve a supreme act of creative destruction – an anarchic and ordering impulse that both destroys the old order while creating something new to take its place. The reason most revolutions either fizzle out or are hijacked or taken over by forces other than and often opposed to those who first led them lies precisely in the failure to move successfully from the destructive to the creative phase and discourse. This is as true of the axial religious revolutions, including the Abrahamic faiths, as well as for modern political revolutions in Mexico, Russia, China, or Iran.

It’s anarchic impulse stems directly from the fact it is directly taking on the existing system. But if one state – that is, arrangement and network of power relations – is to be replaced by another one, a new system has to replace the one that disintegrates. Similarly, every true revolution is a powerful combination of what the sociologist Manuel Castells calls “resistance” and “project” identities; the former being narrow, closed and hostile to outsiders, the latter open, inviting and future-oriented.

You can’t bring about the “downfall of the system” and the creation of one in its place without both. As important, you can’t in the long term keep tens of millions of people supporting destruction if the positive vision of the future is not there for them to see. The problem is that while the two halves of the creative destruction equation naturally overlap for much of a revolutionary period, at some point the destruction has to subside and the creation has to become the dominant process, otherwise the revolution becomes either self-destructive and nihilistic, coopted, or redirected (often by the military, as epitomised by the phenomena of Bonapartism or Caesarism). In such a situation, one time supporters will turn against it in favour of the stability of a restored if changed ancien regime (if in new clothes).

What made Tahrir truly revolutionary during the 18 days, but sadly too few days since, was that in the Square you could see, feel, the possibility of a new Egypt, a different Egypt, an Egypt that could fulfill the dreams of the majority of its inhabitants. Young and old, rich and poor, Muslim and Copt, metalhead and Sufi, everyone radiated “silmiyya” – peacefulness – even as they screamed at the top of their lungs for days on end.

It was clearly a liminal, paradoxical experience, and one which, as Georgetown professor and Jadaliyya co-editor Adel Iskandar reminded me in a recent conversation on the present situation, was itself a two-part phenomenon: “the one from January 25 to February 4 which was violent, confrontational and black bloc-esque… and the Tahrir of the Utopian imaginary that dominated between February 4 to 11… The two continue to exist and manifest with oscillating frequency.”

The key question is, of course, how to control the oscillation, particularly when you can’t really tell either when the tipping point has arrived and which way it is tipping. For two years now the Egyptian “state” has been in this liminal state; the structure at its core – that is, the deep state of power holders through whom the vast majority of the networks of power and wealth flow in Egypt – has remained seemingly stable, and is enlarging a bit as the Brotherhood and its own networks of power and patronage are, with some difficulty, absorbed into this elite. But the state remains gelatinous and porous outside of the core nucleus, and if the opposition can siphon enough power and legitimacy away, the system could, as General al-Sissi warns, move towards collapse.

Millions, if not tens of millions of Egyptians understand that if the state structure rehardens or concretises in the shape it’s apparently taken, they will be either frozen into pretty much the same place they were under Mubarak, or pushed even closer to the margins or completely outside the state. Indeed, the “state of emergency” once again declared, now by a democratically elected President, and the organised attacks on women by forces clearly aligned with the existing power regime, reflects this desperate need to clear as many people away from the power networks as possible before the new system hardens.

Follow spotlight coverage of the struggling young democracy

And that’s where anarchist and black bloc tactics come in, as they constitute one of the most imaginative and creative responses to the hardening process (it’s also why those commentators who have dismissed them as “pretty silly” have little understanding of the history of such tactics or their proven utility in revolutionary Egypt). The question is how the majority of Egyptians who are not directly involved in this struggle (but directly affected by it) will understand this dynamic. How will they respond to the kind of tactical violence epitomised by black bloc tactics and anarchist principles if it continues and the government responds with more violence?

Will they see the creative and project aspect of the protests, and accept them as the only means not merely to finish the job of taking down the system but of building a truly new political and social economy for Egypt? Or will they focus mostly on the destructive and resistance element of it – as a one way path towards social, political and economic disintegration and chaos against which a religio-authoritarian system, however unpalatable in principle, seems the better choice?

However we might want to judge their tactics more broadly, their commitment and loyalty to other protesters are hard to question. When women were being brutally attacked in Tahrir Square last week, beyond the ability of groups like Operation Anti-Sexual Harassment to protect them, black block activists have literally appeared out of nowhere to take on the often armed groups of attackers and protect the women and other activists.

Limited success, broader future?

It’s worth noting that the success of Zapatismo has in fact been fairly limited on the ground. The Zapatistas have managed to carve out a relatively – and constantly threatened – autonomous zone for indigenous Mexicans living in the Chiapas region. It has not fundamentally changed the broader political economy of Mexico, never mind defeated or even seriously challenged “global neoliberalism”, against which the movement launched its war on January 1 over 19 years ago (although Subcommandante Marcos’ words to disappointed tourists hoping to visit the local Mayan ruins the day the revolution was launched – “I’m sorry. This is a revolution” – was surely repeated to scores of disappointed tourists unable to visit the Antiquities Museum at Tahrir Square during the revolution).

While holding off the brutal march of neoliberalism into the Lacondan mountains of Chiapas is certainly a victory, the Egyptian revolution cannot succeed if it’s limited to one geographic region or social group; its initial success and ultimate victory depend precisely on its spread throughout society and across the country. There is no partial victory, and small “liberated” spaces, such as Tahrir, cannot survive surrounded by an ocean of Brotherhood-cum-military neoliberal authoritarianism.

It’s clear that black bloc tactics and the militant revolutionaries deploying them will not on their own carry Egypt further than the Zapatistas have pushed Chiapas (which, interestingly, has a Human Development Index ranking of .646, almost identical to Egypt’s .644), never mind Mexico as a whole. But if they succeed in throwing the country’s power-holders off-balance and reinvigorating the youth led-opposition, and can provide a creative and ultimately positive vision and strategies for continuing the revolution into its third year and convincing increasing numbers of ordinary Egyptians to keep up he struggle for real freedom, dignity and social justice, they will have played an important role in Egypt’s tortured transition from an authoritarian to truly democratic system.

Mark LeVine is professor of Middle Eastern history at UC Irvine, and distinguished visiting professor at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Lund University in Sweden and the author of the forthcoming book about the revolutions in the Arab world, The Five Year OldWho Toppled a Pharaoh.

Egyptian Anarchist Movement Emerges with Wave of Firebombings and Street Fights


From www.voiceshakes.wordpress.com

A black bloc marches in Cairo tonight [24/1], preparing for confrontations with security forces near Tahrir Square on the even of the second anniversary of the revolution.

Also see: “Revolution, Elections, and Betrayal: Hard Lessons from Egypt“(https://voiceshakes.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/revolution-elections-and-be…)

Anarchists have been present in Egypt before, during, and after the revolution, but until today, they have yet to organize a mass grouping under the banner of anarchism. The Ultras of Egypt’s football clubs have for years been associated with anarchist ideas and actions, and they are widely credited with having initiated the level militancy that brought down the Mubarak government in February of 2011.

Last night, anarchism left the graffitied walls, small conversations, and online forums of Egypt, and came to life in Cairo, declaring itself a new force in the ongoing social revolution sparked two years ago with multiple firebombings against Muslim Brotherhood offices. Later, the government shutdown the “Black Blocairo” and “Egyptian Black Bloc” Facebook pages, but they were soon re-launched (https://www.facebook.com/blackblocairo2)

“Wait for our next attacks as we respond to the closing of our official page…” they posted in a statement posted online this morning (translated below).

Today, the black bloc made its first mass-appearance in Tahrir Square, and, shortly after, firebombed the Shura Council (Egyptian Parliament), tore down a section of the protest-barrier walls leading from Tahrir Square, and, with others, engaged in fighting against security forces.

These statements and actions are in preparation for tomorrow’s second anniversary of the revolution, and for what some are calling “a whole new level” or protest in Egypt.

Anarchism and the black bloc concept has grown in recent months across Egypt, Stemming from various anarchist grouping/circles that coalesced during the revolutionary period. A massive distrust among the youth of all political parties, a sharp critique of the role of religion within governance, and the inspiration of anarchist resistance around the world (largely symbolized by the late-2008 revolt in Greece) have helped it catalyze.

Below is the statement of Black Blocairo in regards to the removal of their websites, their firebombing attacks against government offices, and their calls for revolt:

“Yesterday and after we finished our event, we met some of the revolutionary movements and we decided to unite together in our next attacks, hence we did our first two attacks, as we told you yesterday:

1- Setting fire to Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) online office.

2- Setting fire in the Ikhwan office in Al-Manial street in Cairo.

And we announced our revolution since today in Al-Tahrir Square until Egypt and it’s people get their rights back! Life, Freedom and social justice!

Black Blocairo, The Hooligans

Wait for our next attacks as we respond to the closing of our official page…”

Tags: black bloc Caïro Egypt

Egypt-UAE relations worsen with ‘Brotherhood’ arrests


CAIRO — Mistrustful ties between Islamist-run Egypt and the United Arab Emirates deteriorated further this week with the reported arrest in the UAE of more than 10 Egyptians allegedly spying for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

The report, carried by the UAE newspaper Al-Khaleej, stirred a flurry of diplomacy and other activity as Egypt sought to limit the fall-out, which had the potential to add diplomatic woes to its already dire economic and domestic political problems.

The government of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, who hails from the Muslim Brotherhood, has so far made no public comment confirming or denying the information.

But a spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood, Mahmoud Ghozlan, told AFP the accusations in the report had “no basis whatsoever” and were simply part of an “unfair campaign” against Egyptians in the UAE.

One of Morsi’s advisors has been dispatched to the UAE for talks with the Gulf country’s leaders.

And the Egyptian senate has set up a council to “work towards the release” of those arrested, newspapers quoted senate president Ahmed Fahmi as saying.

Al-Khaleej, quoting an unidentified source it said was well-informed, reported on Tuesday that UAE security had broken a Brotherhood spy ring that had been collecting secret defence information on the country and illegally sending “large amounts” of money to its parent group in Egypt.

More than 10 people “belonging to the leadership of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood” had been arrested, the newspaper said, adding that the cell had been recruiting expatriate Egyptians in the UAE.

It reported that the cell had held “secret meetings” across the country with Brotherhood members who instructed it on “the means of changing leadership in Arab countries”.

Any suggestion of regime change is extremely sensitive in the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf states, which have been largely spared the upheaval of the Arab Spring that from early 2011 swept aside autocratic governments in the Middle East and North Africa.

Egypt’s Morsi came to power in June last year on the back of the uprising in his own country, which ousted dictatorial leader Hosni Mubarak in February 2011.

Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood, which had long survived underground as a banned organisation, took power through its political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party, on a vision of establishing more Islamist rule.

The UAE, for its part, has become especially vigilant for any signs of insurgent sentiment, last year arresting at least 60 Islamist dissidents it claims were plotting against state security.

Most or all of the men arrested identified themselves as members of the UAE’s Reform and Social Guidance Association (Al-Islah), which Emirati authorities say is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Also, last month, the UAE said it dismantled a cell of Saudi and Emirati members alleged to have been plotting “terror” attacks in the two countries and other states, intimating they were Al-Qaeda-linked Islamists.

Dubai police chief Lieutenant General Dahi Khalfan has repeatedly lashed out at the Arab Spring uprisings. After Morsi’s election in June, Khalfan implied on his Twitter feed that the Brotherhood might try to sow dissent in the Gulf.

Again, as I said, Muslim-on-Muslim tension rising. This creates opportunities for another religion.

Avenge the Pyramids, avenge Black African Heritage


“Now, however, as Bahrain’s “Sheikh of Sheikhs” observes, and thanks to modern technology, the pyramids can be destroyed. The only question left is whether Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president is “pious” enough—if he is willing to complete the Islamization process that started under the hands of Egypt’s first Islamic conqueror.”

As we can see, Muslims destroy Black African heritage. All Black Africans should rethink Islam. Black Africans should demand reparations from Arabs. The oil sheiks fear Israeli nukes, so they will comply.


This will not go well with Afrocentrists. Actually, regardless whether Muslims will become enraged or not, nuking Mecca becomes a moral and religious duty. Mecca is the idol of the Muslim. The very fact that Mecca has to be protected or avenged, proves that it is an idol. After all, that is the logic Muslims use when they attack someone else’s religious stuff. The destruction of Mecca proves that the Muslim will burn eternally in hell.