Friday, August 03, 2012

The Economist correspondent has rendered her verdict: it is a secular "revolution"--still

"Secular-minded rebels still predominate..."  But I like that the second part of the sentence begins:  "but jihadists with links to al-Qaeda are coming in."  Wait: so the "revolution" is secular but the Jihadis are coming in? Coming in to where? How could they come in if they have no local hosts and comrades?  Explain that one please.

PS But I just realize: that the Western media's definition of secularism in the Middle East is rather peculiar. By secular they merely mean "pro-US".  Thus, Wahhabi clerics and Salafites in Lebanon are also secular.