Juan Cole on Libya, Egypt and the butterfly effect

September 14, 2012 at 12:01 am (Egypt, islamism, Libya, Middle East, reblogged, Republican Party)

By Juan Cole (at his blog, Informed Comment)

The late science fiction writer Ray Bradbury authored a short story about time travelers. They were careful, when they went back to the Jurassic, not to change anything, but one of them stepped on a butterfly. When they got back to the present, the world was slightly different.

When scientists studying complexity put forward the idea that small initial events could have large effects in non-linear, dynamic systems like the weather, they chose the term ‘butterfly effect.” One of the images students of weather instanced was that a butterfly flapping its wings might set off minor turbulence that ultimately turned into a hurricane. (In the older model of Newtonian physics, small events have small effects and large events have large effects, so you wouldn’t expect a minor action to produce big changes).

So the Associated Press did a careful investigation of the ‘Sam Bacile’ who supposedly directed the hate film, ‘The Innocence of Muslims.’And AP found that probably he does not exist, but is a persona used by a convicted Coptic Egyptian fraudster, Nakoula Bassely Nakoula.

But the story gets more complex. Nakoula had Coptic and evangelical associates in the shooting of the film, including Steve Klein, a former Marine and current extremist Christian who has helped train militiamen in California churches and has led “protests outside abortion clinics, Mormon temples and mosques.” My guess is that most of the Egyptian Copts involved are converts to American-style fundamentalism.

The Egyptian Coptic church has roundly condemned the hateful film they made smearing the Prophet Muhammad.

Anyway, the bigotry of the edited film, directed at Muslims, is part of a movement of religious prejudice that also targets . . . Mormons.

Mitt Romney may want to rethink his ‘visceral’ reaction to the US embassy in Cairo’s tweet condemning the group’s hate speech.

Then it turns out that the film was shot in such a way that there was originally no mention of the Prophet Muhammad in the script, and the cast had no idea what they were getting themselves into, and then the name of Muhammad was clumsily dubbed into the final edit.

So, the film was from the beginning a fraud. It was directed by a fraud. It was promoted by a militia trainer. And Nakoula marketed it fraudulently as the work of a fictitious Israeli-American Jewish real estate agent, ‘Sam Bacile,’ and falsely said it had been funded by “a hundred Jewish donors.”

The group behind the film, in other words, managed to evoke all the classic themes of anti-Semitism as a way of disguising the Coptic and evangelical network out of which the ‘film’ came. When they weren’t busy picketing Mormons and defaming Muslims they were trying to get Jews killed for their own smears of Islam!

Of course, given the strident hatred of Muslims promoted by a handful of Jewish American extremists such as Pamela Geller, David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes and others, in which they gleefully join with white supremacists and Christian fundamentalists, it was only a matter of time before their partners in hate turned on them and used them.

The bad, dubbed ‘film’ only had one theater showing in some dowdy place in LA. Then in July the group had the trailer for it dubbed into Arabic with subtitles as well, and put it on Youtube, where it was found by strident Egyptian Muslim fundamentalist Sheikh Khaled Abdallah, who had it shown on al-Nas television and caused the sensation that led to Tuesday’s demonstrations in Cairo and Benghazi. As I argued yesterday, the vigilante extremists or ‘jihadis’ have been left on the garbage pile of history by the democratic elections in Egypt and Libya, and are whipping up the issue of this film in a desperate attempt to remain relevant.

Aware of the building sensation about the film, an employee of the US embassy in Cairo condemned it as hate speech before the rally began outside its premises.

In other words, this is a non-film and a non-story, a fraud, promoted by the worst people in each culture.

In Cairo, the rally allegedly got out of hand because the Ultras or soccer ruffians joined in, and they were probably the ones who tore down the American flag and ran up a black Muslim-fundamentalist one. Ultras are not fundamentalists but they are mischievous and resent authority, so a superpower that backs the army and police they hate might be a target of their wrath. There may have also been a handful of al-Qaeda supporters there, not surprising on the anniversary of September 11. The crowd at the American embassy was tiny by Egyptian protest standards.

In Benghazi, Hadeel Al Shalchi got the story. She talked to Libyan special forces members who explained that there were three stages to the events there. First, there was a demonstration. Then when the police and consulate guards tried to curb it, the demonstrators got angry and some of them went for guns and a rocket propelled grenade, so that the consulate was set on fire and looted. It was at that second stage that US ambassador Chris Stevens and another diplomat were killed (Stevens inhaled too much smoke in the fire and the other man was shot). Stevens’ death is a great tragedy and irony, since he was liaison to the transitional national council during the Libyan revolution and many Libyans lionize him. Why in the world he was in an insecure minor consulate in a provincial city on September 11 is a mystery to me.

Then 37 embassy personnel escaped to a rural safe house. The Libyan special forces commander charged with evacuating them to Tripoli at first was stymied by not having enough vehicles for so many people. Then the safe house came under fairly precise mortar fire from members of an al-Qaeda affiliate operating in Benghazi, which must have been surveilling consular personnel. Finally, the Libyan government forces got the Americans to the airport and they flew back to the capital of Tripoli.

It should be remembered that Libyan forces fought and risked their lives to protect Americans. In opinion polling in Eastern Libya, the United States has a 60% favorability rating, while the Salafis or hard line Muslims stand at only 28% favorable.

It was while all that was going on in Cairo and Benghazi that Mitt Romney took it into his head to condemn Barack Obama for the tweet issued by the Cairo embassy before the demonstration. He alleged that Obama had *reacted* to the embassy attacks by showing some sympathy for the attackers. This allegation is untrue and absurd, but Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan went on repeating it all day Wednesday.

Romney was caught on camera walking away from that shameful performance with a shark-like grin on his face. Since he was talking about matters of life and death, the expression was inappropriate. But a darker theory is that he was grinning about having stuck it to Obama.

Romney’s politicization of September 11 and of the horrible events in Benghazi was poorly received among opinion leaders, including prominent Republicans, and some observers suggest that this miscalculation may have been a decisive nail in the coffin of his sputtering campaign.

Meanwhile, the Libyan government apologized for and vehemently condemned the attack on the consulate and the killing of its personnel. And, on Wednesday Libyans staged pro-American demonstrations in several cities.

In Egypt, in contrast, small demonstrations were held again in front of the US embassy, until police pushed the activists back. When, on Thursday morning, protesters set two cars afire with Molotov cocktails, police arrested 12 of them. The police have the embassy surrounded and have closed the roads leading to it in Garden City.

Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, fell short of strongly condemning the Cairo and Benghazi attacks. Late on Wednesday the Muslim Brotherhood finally retweeted comments of one of its other leaders, Khairat al-Shater, in condemnation of the attacks. Nevertheless, the Brotherhood is sponsoring rallies protesting the film on Friday, a ‘day of rage.’ Morsi is no doubt worried that religious and political currents to his right will outflank him on the issue of the blasphemous film and its American provenance. But Morsi has a Ph.D. from the US and surely knows that the US government cannot suppress films, and it is shameful that he did not condemn forthrightly the killing of Ambassador Stevens and the others.

In Tunisia, Salafis rallied on Wednesday in front of the US embassy, but were fairly quickly dispersed by police deploying tear gas. Tunisian president Moncef Marzouki denounced the killing of Stevens and the others as an “act of terrorism.”

So the Butterfly Effect set off by a low-budget bad propaganda film gotten up by two-bit frauds and Christian supremacists, and then promoted by two-bit Egyptian and Libyan fundamentalists, has provoked some squalls and cost the lives of four good men.

The storm provoked by this butterfly has revealed character on an international scale. The steely determination of an Obama to achieve justice, the embarrassing grandstanding of a Romney, the destructive hatred of a handful of extremists in Cairo and Benghazi, and the decency and warmth toward the US of the Libyan crowds, all were thrown into stark relief by the beating of the butterfly’s wings.

In the end, the violence and extremism of the hardliners on both sides is a phantasm of the past, not a harbinger of the future. The wave of democratic politics sweeping the region has left the haters behind, reducing them to desperate and senseless acts of violence that will gain them no good will, no popularity, no political credibility.

A little-noted major event of Wednesday was the democratic selection of a new prime minister in Libya for the first time in the country’s history. Mustafa Abushagur defeated the Muslim Brotherhood candidate handily. Abushagur for a long time taught college in the US, at the University of Alabama Huntsville. Libyans again showed themselves nationalist and non-fundamentalist. This remarkable achievement, and what it portends for the shape of Libyan politics, will be drowned out by the atrocity in Benghazi, but it is the development that is likely to be marked by future historians as a turning point in Libya and in the Middle East.


  1. Faster Pussycat Miaow! Miaow! Miaow! said,

    what the fuck is a ‘soccer ruffian’?

  2. bler4eg omceonmretatry said,

    Juan Cole is a fictional great aunt from an Enid Blyton novel circa 1947.

  3. bler4eg omceonmretatry said,

    crossbred with a yank.

  4. Monsuer Jelly said,

    Via Peter The NoT very Large gEntleman On A keyboarD

    Peter also mentions a particularly stupid and repugnant piece of shit opinionbollox in his post here as well

    Also worthy of note see this – Putie-pUte – worra stalinist thick fuckking nasty evil cuernT – the article itself is by a dozy fuckker as well but at least he supplies the quote i have highlighted in bold…


    “Chris stood by the Libyan people through the revolution, and he came back as ambassador because he believed in (their) cause.”

    For his efforts, he suffocated to death in the fire lit by Libyan terrorists as they attacked his embassy Tuesday. Three other Americans also died. Meanwhile in Cairo, terrorists there were trying to do the same thing to the U.S. embassy. Don’t believe anyone who says these were spontaneous uprisings over an anti-Muslim film in the U.S. These were well-planned, co-ordinated assaults that took place on a day, September 11, that radical jihadists think was their best day ever.

    And yet, here in the West, we seemed surprised, even shocked, by these attacks.

    But none of this will surprise Russian President Vladimir Putin who as much warned Prime Minister Stephen Harper during their one-on-one meeting in Vladivostok on the weekend that the West should expect this kind of thing for “instigating” mobs in Egypt and Libya. According to officials in the room with the two men, Putin said Harper and other Western leaders are acting like “Trotskyites” – that was Putin’s line — for exporting revolution and promoting instability. …”

  5. pinkagendist said,

    Excellent article. The ‘crazy christian’ factor has been colouring politics for much too long. In the US they seem blind to it (for the most part), until disaster strikes, gays start getting killed in Uganda and embassies are bombed.

  6. Roger McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

    Given the wingnuttery of the film’s perpetrators I really can’t believe that they weren’t hoping to spark off a a repeat the Teheran embassy crisis that destroyed Carter’s 1980 Presidential campaign.

    Fortunately Romney has completely fucked up his response – but it is early days and when there are severed American heads being paraded around the streets of Cairo or Karachi on sticks and Obama can do nothing that won’t deepen the crisis US opinion could shift dramatically.

    • Roger McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

      or really can’t not believe…..

    • Robin Carmody said,

      Quite. Especially if you believe, as I do, that a second term for Carter would have made a One Nation Tory internal coup against Thatcher before it all kicked off in the Falklands something close to a certainty, or at least a serious likelihood.

  7. paul fauvet said,

    I’m surprised that Cole gets the Ray Bradbury story (“A Sound of Thunder”) wrong.

    Cole says that, after one of the time travellers has inadvertently stepped on a butterfly, the modern world they return to “was slightly different”.

    In fact, the change is massive, and involves a US Presidential election. When they travelled to the Mesozoic, the time tourists left a world where the liberal candidate has just won. When they go back, after killing the butterfly, they find that the liberal has been defeated, and a far-right militarist is in the White House.

    So the butterfly effect means how something apparently insignificant can have enormous consequences.

    Possibly the fraudsters who made this film hoped that they too could influence a presidential election.

  8. Clive said,

    Though it has to be said that when you think of what *might* have been different as a result of stepping on a butterfly in the Mesozoic, a different result in a US presidential election is maybe not so much.

  9. Monsuer Jelly said,

    hitchens was correct. Juan cole was wrong re iraq. and he has the nerve to talk about “what might have been’. what a thick cunt.

  10. Getting angry over a shit film? « Representing the Mambo said,

    […] makers of the film whose origins are explained in a bit more detail here, must be like dogs with two dicks at the moment. They have been successful beyond their wildest […]

  11. comradeNosaj said,

    So a small, organised group of far-right Islamists kick off and murder people in the Middle East while small, organised far-right bigots and Christian racists in Europe and the US get what they wanted: reaffirming their hatred for all Muslims. Bunch of fucking cunts one and all, fuck em. Up against the wall the lot of ’em

    Sick of this fucking liberal free speech shit like from BlodWorTH here:

    As if this film is some kind of real protest of free speech like the people behind it or involved in it like Terry Jones are fucking Salman Rushdie or true heroes of the Left. Thick tosspot. Same with Dawkins twitter feed this AM: yay!!! lets defend bigots and anti-semitic/anti-islam cunts cus it’s all just like freedom to criticise religion dontchaknow?? nowt a political agendA there at all, good sir! justy critising religion dontchaknow

    • Monsuer Jelly said,

      you are correct

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: