"Religious Tolerance" in EGYPT

[jimnyc]

Egyptian Islamic Police Killing Christians Coptic in the Church in Omraneya,Giza,Egypt 24-11-2010


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rXaR0KLRMig?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rXaR0KLRMig?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[Noir]

The only place you can expect religious tolerance is in a secular state.

[abso]

Egyptian Islamic Police Killing Christians Coptic in the Church in Omraneya,Giza,Egypt 24-11-2010


<EMBED height=385 type=application/x-shockwave-flash width=480 src=http://www.youtube.com/v/rXaR0KLRMig?fs=1&hl=en_US allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></EMBED>

since you dont know anything on the subject, dont post it.

in this church, the christian wanted to build a community service building, and they got the license to build it, and they started to build it.

but after that, they built a church instead of a community service building, so the governor decided to stop the building, because they didnt build what they got the license for, they lied, so their license was revoked.

if they want to build a church, they should ask for a license for a chursh, to build something you need a license, you cant just lie to the authorities, if i want to build a mosque, i will have to get a license too.

so when the police went to the site and told them to stop the construction work, they started to attack the police, and throw stones on them, and bottles filled with flammable liquids, and they even attacked the governor building, destroyed the entrance, and burned the cars around it, and they injured deputy head security forces in giza and deputy head of central security forces in the area and other 5 officers and 20 soliders.

the police didnt start the violence, it just went to stop the construction in illegal building, which had its license revoked, but the christians got violent and threw rocks and bottle with flammable liquids, more than 3000 christians attacked the police, so what you saw in the video, wasnt the truth at all.

what did you expect, let them build wutever they want, without any license, are they above the law ???

[Kathianne]

Abso, it may be yourself that is having some problems regarding the media:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AO2AY20101125

Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:45am EST

CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's attorney general ordered the detention of 156 protesters involved in clashes with riot police after the authorities blocked construction of a church in a Cairo suburb, the official news agency MENA said on Thursday.

One Christian was killed and dozens were wounded in Giza on Wednesday when about 3,000 Orthodox Copts hurled stones at police lines. Some officers threw them back and Muslims also lobbed rocks at the Christian protesters from behind the security cordon.

The attorney general decided to hold the 156 protesters for 15 days on suspicion of inciting the riots, MENA reported. It did not say whether they had been formally charged.

...

"The prosecutors denied the lawyers' request to consult privately with the accused. They refused to put on record the lawyers' arguments questioning the validity of the proceedings and they also refused to put on record the injuries sustained by some of the accused," the group said.

Giza Governor Sayyed Abdel-Aziz said the Christians appeared to have misused a permit for a social center to build a church.

The Christians said they had the right permit and would continue to build the three-storey domed structure.

(Reporting by Sarah Mikhail, editing by David Stamp)

Considering this earlier report, it should make you think a bit:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6A23LA20101103

Analysis: Qaeda threat to Egypt may stir militants
Wed, Nov 3 2010

By Sarah Mikhail and Marwa Awad

CAIRO (Reuters) - Militants may feel emboldened by an al Qaeda threat against Egypt's Christians, even if the network itself might struggle to mount such an assault.

The al Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq, which launched an attack on a Baghdad church on Sunday that left 52 dead, has also threatened Egypt's church.

While there are no signs of a re-emergence of a 1990s-style Islamist insurgency, Egypt remains alert to anything that could stir communal tension that sometimes boils up over issues such as cross-faith relationships and conversions.

Egypt crushed a militant uprising in the 1990s and that experience should help it counter any new threat, Christians and Muslims said.

Egyptian authorities were quick to condemn the al Qaeda threat and to boost security at churches in the country, where Christians make up 10 percent of the 78 million people, the biggest Christian population in the Middle East.

"This threat is not directed only at Christians but at the Egyptian state. Egypt's security ended terrorism in the 1990s and it is capable today of eradicating these threats," said Father Abdel Maseeh Baseet of the Coptic Orthodox church, the biggest Christian community in Egypt.

The Iraq attack was against a Catholic church. The Egypt threat was directed against the Orthodox community - al Qaeda accused it of detaining two women converts to Islam.

....

Instead, he said it might be taken up by followers of the strict Salafi school of Islam, who have been vocal critics of the Coptic church in the conversion row.

Orthodox Bishop Morkos of Shubra al-Khaima in Cairo echoed the comments: "The (Iraqi) massacre will not lead to a rise in sectarian strife in Egypt but it could catalyze dangerous attempts by extremists."

...

[jimnyc]

since you dont know anything on the subject, dont post it.

I'm growing a bit tired of you trying to tell me what I can and cannot do around here.

And I simply posted a video which CLEARLY shows abuse NO MATTER what the reason.

[Noir]

And I simply posted a video which CLEARLY shows abuse NO MATTER what the reason.

The video shows very little of nanything TBH

but, the real ramdon clunker is 'no matter the reason' you're saying that no matter what those christians did there would never be a reason to use riot police? EVER.

I'd like to know what you'd suggest happing if a couple of hunderd Muslims started rioting in New York because someone tried to revoke their licence for their Mosque, and if you'd feel as sympathetic to their cause as you do these Christians

[jimnyc]

The video shows very little of nanything TBH

Bodies and or major injuries from the police isn't enough?

but, the real ramdon clunker is 'no matter the reason' you're saying that no matter what those christians did there would never be a reason to use riot police? EVER.

Riot police to quell the situation, yes. Riot police to engage and kill people, no.

I'd like to know what you'd suggest happing if a couple of hunderd Muslims started rioting in New York because someone tried to revoke their licence for their Mosque, and if you'd feel as sympathetic to their cause as you do these Christians

The NYC riot police and probably the FBI would be sent on to the scene and ALL violent people will likely be brought down with tasers, bean bags and other non-lethal means and they will all be arrested. I certainly wouldn't expect them to start killing people who are throwing rocks!!

BTW - you have me confused with another "Christian". Seems many times you try and toss christianity in my face when I speak the truth about muslims. Thing is - I AM NOT RELIGIOUS and don't defend the actions of "christians".

[Noir]

Bodies and or major injuries from the police isn't enough?

wow, well, maybe its just having grown up in Northern Ireland, but a few bloody faces and an acidental death is hardly anything to write home about.

Riot police to quell the situation, yes. Riot police to engage and kill people, no.

Right, riot police that must quell a violent mob without engaging, got ya =/

The NYC riot police and probably the FBI would be sent on to the scene and ALL violent people will likely be brought down with tasers, bean bags and other non-lethal means and they will all be arrested. I certainly wouldn't expect them to start killing people who are throwing rocks!!

BTW - you have me confused with another "Christian". Seems many times you try and toss christianity in my face when I speak the truth about muslims. Thing is - I AM NOT RELIGIOUS and don't defend the actions of "christians".

Oh, but what if one of those tasers kills someone? Or what if a non-leathal like a batton round hits someones face and they get a bloody nose and someone is their to film it!!!!

When you take part in a violent riot you take a chance, and chance that you have put yourself in. Now clearly if the police wanted to they could of shot hundres of these people dead, afterall they arrested 400ish of them, the fact that only one died and a few others got a broken face should be a relief.

[abso]

The video shows very little of nanything TBH

but, the real ramdon clunker is 'no matter the reason' you're saying that no matter what those christians did there would never be a reason to use riot police? EVER.

I'd like to know what you'd suggest happing if a couple of hunderd Muslims started rioting in New York because someone tried to revoke their licence for their Mosque, and if you'd feel as sympathetic to their cause as you do these Christians

if muslims started throwing stones and molotovs at newyork police, what would the police do ?

[jimnyc]

wow, well, maybe its just having grown up in Northern Ireland, but a few bloody faces and an acidental death is hardly anything to write home about.

Well, in most civilized societies we still take ANY deaths at a protest very seriously.

Right, riot police that must quell a violent mob without engaging, got ya =/

I never said they couldn't engage. In fact, I clearly laid out what they should do when they engage. You make no sense.

Oh, but what if one of those tasers kills someone? Or what if a non-leathal like a batton round hits someones face and they get a bloody nose and someone is their to film it!!!!

Wait, you just stated a second ago that I stated they shouldn't engage. Now your replying to the portion I wrote about them engaging. Weird, isn't it?

And your analogies are retarded. I'm talking about riot police throwing rocks and shooting at protesters. Again, at least in the civilized society I live in, the riot police do not throw rocks at protesters and they don't shoot them. They engage in non lethal means to the best of their ability.

When you take part in a violent riot you take a chance, and chance that you have put yourself in. Now clearly if the police wanted to they could of shot hundres of these people dead, afterall they arrested 400ish of them, the fact that only one died and a few others got a broken face should be a relief.

Maybe police should be doing their jobs and not engaging protesters in a rock throwing duel?

[jimnyc]

if muslims started throwing stones and molotovs at newyork police, what would the police do ?

It's been done before, MANY times. The riot police use batons, bean bags instead of bullets, full riot gear, tasers...

They don't join the retards and throw stones and fire bombs back at them. That shit happens in shitty countries like yours.

[abso]

Bodies and or major injuries from the police isn't enough?


Riot police to quell the situation, yes. Riot police to engage and kill people, no.



The NYC riot police and probably the FBI would be sent on to the scene and ALL violent people will likely be brought down with tasers, bean bags and other non-lethal means and they will all be arrested. I certainly wouldn't expect them to start killing people who are throwing rocks!!

BTW - you have me confused with another "Christian". Seems many times you try and toss christianity in my face when I speak the truth about muslims. Thing is - I AM NOT RELIGIOUS and don't defend the actions of "christians".

the police didnt kill people, its just one person died from his injuries, and he didnt die at the site of the church, he was among the people who went to attack the government building and burned the cars around it, so the police were defending themselfs there, not attacking, the attacks didnt happen at the site of the church, when the police stopped the construction, more than 3000 christians went to the governer and tried to get into the building and destroy it.

[abso]

It's been done before, MANY times. The riot police use batons, bean bags instead of bullets, full riot gear, tasers...

They don't join the retards and throw stones and fire bombs back at them. That shit happens in shitty countries like yours.

fire bombs ???,, if they did that, dont you think that there would be more than 1 death ???

they arrested about 200 christians, with only 1 death, does that tell you that they were using lethal weapons ?

[jimnyc]

fire bombs ???,, if they did that, dont you think that there would be more than 1 death ???

they arrested about 200 christians, with only 1 death, does that tell you that they were using lethal weapons ?

No, here in the US people toss around molotov cocktails at the police pretty much after every major sporting event championship. The police are protected by full riot gear and shields, and they DO NOT throw stuff back at the "protesters". They simply keep backing them up until they disperse, and those dumb enough not to will likely get a baton to the legs, a bean bag to the chest or a nice numbing feeling from a taser. But you will NEVER see our police engaging in rock throwing or trading molotov cocktails with protesters. That simply makes matters worse and is the sign of shitty police work.

[Noir]

Well, in most civilized societies we still take ANY deaths at a protest very seriously.

Ofcourse it should be taken seriously, but it should be in no way surprising, and if anything expected. But do you not agree that if theh police where out on a mission to kill that there would be allot more dead than one?

I never said they couldn't engage. In fact, I clearly laid out what they should do when they engage. You make no sense.

Oh right, see when you said "Riot police to engage and kill people, no." I thought would meant they shouldn't engage =/ and obviously the death was either an accident or the action of an individual, and not part of a policy to kill the rioters.

Wait, you just stated a second ago that I stated they shouldn't engage. Now your replying to the portion I wrote about them engaging. Weird, isn't it?

Yeah, because i was being sarcastic. Re-read with the sarcasm intended please

And your analogies are retarded. I'm talking about riot police throwing rocks and shooting at protesters. Again, at least in the civilized society I live in, the riot police do not throw rocks at protesters and they don't shoot them. They engage in non lethal means to the best of their ability.

No method is non-leathal, just less-likey-to-be-lethal.
Obiously i don't think the police should of used rocks etc, seems rather unprofesional,

...but yeah, we're civilised enough to fire plastic batons and shot electric jolts (please note sarcasm here)

Maybe police should be doing their jobs and not engaging protesters in a rock throwing duel?

Oh yeah, their job of qwelling a violent protest without engaging xD
As i said, rock throwing is silly, but iroicly it was probably the most non-lethal weapon used that day xD