To cool the temperature, Muslims can take two steps: end terrorism and stop the rioting over cartoons and novels. That will cause the antagonism toward Islam built up over the past decade to subside. At that point, I will happily retract my appeal to editors and producers to flaunt offensive cartoons of Muhammad. Sep. 24, 2012 update : A current example of anti-Christian venom: Using the most vulgar language possible, a cartoon posted prominently on the street in the German town of Kassel has a heavenly voice announcing to a crucified Jesus that God had sex with Jesus' mother. So far, much disgust but no riots. That said, protests by Christians lead to the removal of the cartoon from the street but it remained in the exhibition. अभी हाल के एक उदाहरण को लें , The Onion नाम की हास्य वेबसाइट ने No One Murdered Because of This Image शीर्षक से कुछ कार्टून प्रकाशित किये। “इसमें मोजेज, जीसस, गणेश और बुद्ध को बादलों में दिखाया जिन्हें कि ऐसी उत्तेजनात्मक यौन क्रियाओं के साथ दिखाया गया था जो कि अपमानकारक था। इस पत्रिका ने बताया कि , ” सूत्रों के अनुसार हालाँकि कुछ यहूदी, ईसाई,हिंदू और बौद्ध आस्था के लोग इन चित्रों से काफी रुष्ट हुए, अपने सिर हिलाये , अपनी आंखें नचायीं और अपने दिन के कार्य में लगे रहे”
42.
For the Gulf sheiks Turkey remains a safe investment haven and it is Arab money that has flooded into the country, fuelling a financial bubble and high inflation. These investors are unlikely to be concerned about the tactics Erdoğan employs to quash protests and will continue to view Turkey as a safe investment haven after the Arab Spring as they are wary of investing in Western countries because if unrest breaks out, their assets could be frozen. Western investors have a different view - partly driven by concern over returns - and partly by the reputational risk that could arise from investments in Turkey if protests escalate and Erdoğan instigates another crackdown against them. The financial outlook is also worrying. Related Topics: Turkey and Turks receive the latest by email: subscribe to daniel pipes' free mailing list This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL. Comment on this item वेतनभोगी रोजगार में 5 प्रतिशत की कमी आयी है। वर्ष 2012 के मुकाबले 2013 की पहली तिमाही में उपभोक्ता खर्च में 2 प्रतिशत की कमी आयी है। जब से प्रदर्शन आरम्भ हुए हैं इस्ताम्बुल का स्टाक मार्केट 10 प्रतिशत गिर गया है और ब्याज दरें 50 बढ गयी हैं। तुर्की में इस्लामवाद के भविष्य का आकलन करने के लिये अर्थव्यवस्था की ओर संकेत करने वाले इन सकेतों को देखें।
43.
For the Gulf sheiks Turkey remains a safe investment haven and it is Arab money that has flooded into the country, fuelling a financial bubble and high inflation. These investors are unlikely to be concerned about the tactics Erdoğan employs to quash protests and will continue to view Turkey as a safe investment haven after the Arab Spring as they are wary of investing in Western countries because if unrest breaks out, their assets could be frozen. Western investors have a different view - partly driven by concern over returns - and partly by the reputational risk that could arise from investments in Turkey if protests escalate and Erdoğan instigates another crackdown against them. The financial outlook is also worrying. Related Topics: Turkey and Turks receive the latest by email: subscribe to daniel pipes' free mailing list This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL. Comment on this item वेतनभोगी रोजगार में 5 प्रतिशत की कमी आयी है। वर्ष 2012 के मुकाबले 2013 की पहली तिमाही में उपभोक्ता खर्च में 2 प्रतिशत की कमी आयी है। जब से प्रदर्शन आरम्भ हुए हैं इस्ताम्बुल का स्टाक मार्केट 10 प्रतिशत गिर गया है और ब्याज दरें 50 बढ गयी हैं। तुर्की में इस्लामवाद के भविष्य का आकलन करने के लिये अर्थव्यवस्था की ओर संकेत करने वाले इन सकेतों को देखें।
44.
(4) Protests from Islamists notwithstanding, Bush has indicated that he plans to continue using this term. His spokesman, Tony Snow , explained in an e-mail interview with the Cox newspaper chain that Bush has gradually shifted from the “war on terrorism” to “war with Islamic fascists.” With this new specificity, Snow continues, Bush “tries to identify the ideology that motivates many organized terrorist groups. He also tries to make it clear that the label does not apply to all or most Muslims, but to the tiny factions,” such as Al-Qaeda. 4 - इस्लामवादियों के विरोध के बाद भी बुश ने संकेत दिया है कि वे इस शब्द का प्रयोग जारी रखेंगे. उनके प्रवक्ता टोनी स्नोक ने काक्स समाचार पत्र को एक ई मेल साक्षात्कार में स्पष्ट किया कि बुश ने धीरे -धीरे आतंकवाद के विरुद्ध युद्ध के स्थान पर इस्लामी फासीवाद शब्द का प्रयोग करना आरंभ कर दिया है . स्नो के अनुसार इस नयी स्पष्टता से बुश उस विचारधारा की पहचान करना चाहते हैं जो बहुत से संगठित आतंकवादी संगठनों को प्रेरित करती है . वे यह भी स्पष्ट करना चाहते हैं कि यह चस्पा सभी या अधिकतर मुसलमानों को नहीं वरन् अल -कायदा जैसे छोटे से समुदाय पर लागू होता है .
45.
The decision to write a new IDF doctrine - which dictates the way commanders are supposed to counter and contain violent protests and marches - was made amid concern that Israel will face a growing number of demonstrations in the coming months, particularly following UN recognition of Palestinian statehood at the General Assembly in September. “The whole idea in incidents like these is to know how to confront the people marching as unarmed - if they really are - and to do everything possible to prevent casualties on both sides,” Edelstein told The Jerusalem Post in an interview on Monday. … “This doctrine will be relevant for mass marches with the aim of containing them,” he said. लेकिन बिडम्बना है कि यह परिवर्तन इजरायल के लिये हानिकारक सिद्ध हो सकता है। कुछ अर्थों में इसे फिलीस्तीनी हिंसा से बल मिला है। कुछ अंशों में इस कारण कि हिंसा अत्यंत विद्रूप स्वरूप है और कुछ अर्थों में इसलिये कि इजरायल ने राजनीतिक क्षेत्र की अपेक्षा सैन्य क्षेत्र में अपनी श्रेष्ठता सिद्ध की है । राजनीतिक क्षेत्र में संघर्ष को परिवर्तित कर देने से इजरायल को हानि होगी। मुझे नहीं लगता कि इस परिवर्तन से इजरायल को कोई लाभ होने वाला है क्योंकि मुख्य लक्ष्य वही रहने वाला है और वह है यहूदी राज्य का विनाश।
46.
His rise through Israel's national camp institutions reveals tactical skill: serving as assistant to Uzi Landau, as head of the World Betar Organization, then head of the World Likud Organization, as organizer of street protests and challenger to the prime minister for the party's leadership. These efforts culminated in his strong showing in his party's electoral list (coming in No. 5) and the jaw-dropping 85 percent of the vote he won in elections to lead Likud's Central Committee. With reason, the Forward newspaper calls him “a master of social and conventional media” and the Times of Israel deems him “a major stumbling block toward Palestinian statehood.” उज़ी लंडाउ के सहायक के तौर पर विश्व बेटार संगठन में काम करना, उसके उपरांत विश्व लिकुड संगठन के प्रमुख, पार्टी के नेता के तौर पर प्रधानमंत्री को चुनौती देने वाले और सडकों पर विरोध प्रदर्शन आयोजित करने वाले। इन प्रयासों के चलते वे मतदाताओं की सूची में ( पाँचवें नम्बर पर आये) आगे आये और रिकार्ड 85 प्रतिशत मत प्राप्त कर वे लिकुड की केंद्रीय समिति के प्रमुख बने। इसी कारण फारवर्ड Forward समाचार पत्र ने उन्हें “ सोशल और परम्परागत मीडिया का स्वामी कह डाला” और टाइम्स आफ इजरायल Times of Israel ने उन्हें “फिलीस्तीनी राज्य के निर्माण में सबसे बडी बाधा बताया”
47.
Yet Mr. Siddiqi vehemently protests my presentation of his argument. Why? According to him, he sees the Islamization of America happening through a “long, peaceful process,” whereas I use “accusatory language without any proof” to suggest otherwise. Hardly: my article emphasizes precisely Mr. Siddiqi's point-that he envisages Islam peacefully taking over. So why the outrage? Could it be that his schema is intended for certain eyes only, and that I made it public to an audience likely to be less enthusiastic about an Islamic Republic of America? इसके बाद भी श्रीमान सिद्दीकी वैमनस्यपूर्वक मेरे द्वारा प्रस्तुत किये गये उनके तर्कों का विरोध करते हैं। क्यों? उनके अनुसार अमेरिका के इस्लामीकरण की प्रक्रिया लम्बी और शांतिपूर्ण होगी। जबकि यही बात मैं कहता हूँ तो बिना किसी साक्ष्य के यह आरोप लगाने वाली भाषा दिखती है। मेरा लेख श्रीमान सिद्दीकी के बिंदु पर ही जोर देता है कि उन्हें दिखता है कि इस्लाम शांतिपूर्वक नियंत्रण स्थापित कर सकता है। तो फिर उन्हें क्रोध क्यों आ रहा है? शायद इसलिये कि उनके ढाँचे में कुछ ही लोगों को यह जानने का अधिकार है और मैंने इसे सामान्य जनता के समक्ष ला दिया जो कि इस्लामी गणतंत्र अमेरिका को लेकर कम उत्साहित होगा।
48.
The movie really did matter : The Obama administration dishonestly skirted responsibility for the murder of four Americans in Libya by claiming that the attack was a protest that got unpredictably out of hand against the “Innocence of Muslims” video. In response, leading analysts have concluded that the video hardly mattered anywhere. Barry Rubin scorns the video as a “phony excuse for the demonstration” in Egypt. Michael Ledeen upbraids the administration for claiming “that attacks against Americans aren't attacks against Americans at all, but attacks against a video.” “It is not about a video,” writes Andrew McCarthy , “any more than similar episodes in recent years have been about cartoons, teddy-bears, accidental Koran burnings, etc.” Hussein Haqqani dismisses the protests as a “function of politics, not religion.” For Victor Davis Hanson , the video and similar incidents “are no more than crude pretexts to direct fury among their ignorant and impoverished masses at opportune times against the United States, and thereby gain power.” Lee Smith speculates that “blaming the video is part of some complex public diplomacy campaign.” Cliff Kinkaid flatly calls the video “a diversion intended to save Obama's presidency.” विक्टर डेविस हैंसन के लिये वीडियो और इसी प्रकार की घटनायें “ अपनी अज्ञानी और निर्धन भीड को अमेरिका के विरुद्ध सही समय पर भडकाकर सत्ता ग्रहण करने की कटु सच्चाई का नमूना है” । ली स्मिथ का अनुमान है कि “ वीडियो को बदनाम करना एक जटिल सार्वजनिक कूट्नीति का अंग है” क्लिफ किंकेड ने तो सीधे सीधे वीडियो को “ ओबामा का राष्ट्रपतित्व बचाने के लिये ध्यान हटाने के आशय का कार्य बताया है” ।
49.
Yemen : Yemen presents the greatest likelihood of regime overthrow and the greatest chance of Islamists gaining power. However deficient an autocrat and however circumscribed his power, the wily Ali Abdullah Saleh, in office since 1978, has been about as good an ally the West could hope for, notwithstanding his ties to Saddam Hussein and the Islamic Republic of Iran, to exert control over the hinterlands, limit incitement , and fight Al-Qaeda. His incompetent handling of protests has alienated even the military leadership (from which he comes) and his own Hashid tribe, suggesting he will leave power with little control over what follows him. Given the country's tribal structure, the widespread distribution of arms, the Sunni-Shi'i divide, the mountainous terrain, and impeding drought , an Islamist-tinged anarchy (as in Afghanistan) looms as a likely outcome. In Libya, Syria, and Yemen - but less so in Egypt - Islamists have opportunities significantly to expand their power. How well will the former Muslim inhabiting the White House,* so adamant about “ mutual respect ” in U.S. relations with Muslims, protect Western interests against this threat? यमन : यमन को देखकर लगता है कि शासन परिवर्तित हो जायेगा और सम्भव है कि इस्लामवादी अधिक शक्तिशाली हो जायें। एक तानाशाह कितना भी अयोग्य रहा हो और उसकी सत्ता भले ही सीमित रही हो लेकिन 1978 से सत्ता में रहने वाले अली अब्दुल्लाह सालेह पश्चिम के इस आशा के साथ मह्त्वपूर्ण सहयोगी थे कि सद्दाम हुसैन के साथ सम्बंध और इस्लामिक रिपब्लिक आफ ईरान के साथ सम्बंधों के बाद भी देश पर नियंत्रण , भावावेश रोकने और अल कायदा के साथ लडने में पश्चिम उनसे सहयोग की अपेक्षा कर सकता है।
50.
Dominate Egypt? If the military colludes with Islamists to remain in power, obviously it, and not Islamists retains ultimate control. This is the key point that conventional analysts miss: the recent election results allow the military to keep power . As aspiring Egyptian politician Mohamed ElBaradei correctly notes, “it is all in the hands of SCAF right now.” True, if Islamists control the parliament (not a sure thing; the military could yet decide to reduce their percentage in future rounds of an unusually complex voting procedure open to abuse), they acquire certain privileges and move the country further toward the Shari'a - as far, anyway, as SCAF permits. This maintains the long-term trend of Islamization underway since the military seized power in 1952. What about Western policy? First, press SCAF to build the civil society that must precede real democracy, so that the modern and moderate civilians in Egypt have a chance to express themselves. Second, instantly cease all economic aid to Cairo. It is unacceptable that Western taxpayers pay, even indirectly, for Islamizing Egypt. Resume funding only when the government allows secular Muslims, liberals, and Copts, among others, freely to express and organize themselves. Third, oppose both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis. Less extreme or more, Islamists of every description are our worst enemies. Mr. Pipes ( www.DanielPipes.org ) is president of the Middle East Forum and Taube fellow at the Hoover Institution. Ms Farahat is an Egyptian activist and co-author of a book about the Tahrir Square protests. A man walks by a graffito that proclaims “No to military rule,” crosses out a picture of military dictator Mohamed at-Tantawi and calls him a “fag.” Dec. 6, 2011 addendum : The text above refers to the USSR but Russia held elections two days ago that the U.S. secretary of state denounced for their “electoral fraud and manipulation.” At least they don't insult everyone's intelligence with 99-percent results. Egypt's military rulers said Wednesday that they would control the process of writing a constitution and maintain authority over the interim government to check the power of Islamists who have taken a commanding lead in parliamentary elections. मिस्र पर नियंत्रण? यदि सेना सत्ता में बने रहने के लिये इस्लामवादियों के साथ समझौता करती है जो कि ऐसा करेगी और इस्लामवादी अंतिम रूप से पूरा नियंत्रण स्थापित नहीं करते। यह मुख्य बिंदु है जिसे कि परम्परागत विश्लेषक भूल जा रहे हैं: हाल के चुनाव परिणाम से सेना को सत्ता पर नियंत्रण का अवसर मिलता है। जैसा कि मिस्रके उदीयमान राजनेता मोहम्मद अल बरदेयी ने सही ही कहा है, “ अभी तो सब कुछ एससीएसएफ के हाथ में है”।
