I do not buy it. I do not think that islamic leaders "represent" the oppressed masses in any meaningful way. They seem to be simply fascist entrepreneurs gaining windfall from popular dissatisfaction. In that way, they are no diffrent than fascist thugs in Italy who attracted the peasant followers by dispensing favors and privileges bankrolled by landowners. It is a sad commentary on the state of the Left to see it being so starved for a revolution that they take an obviously reactionary, sponsored from above, plot for one.
I sez:
Low blow, dude, if you are sliming me w/the accusation that I somehow have mistaken what you accurately characterize as a "reactionary plot sponsored from above" with a strike for human emancipation. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and not accuse you of pinning this on me, since there are various ways one can interpret your message.
It seems that your line is that the conspirators are bloodthirsty crazies who cynically use the oppression of the Muslim masses as cover for their sinister designs. Has it occurred to you that they genuinely believe they are acting in the best interest of a benighted transnational Muslim community, whose members have been seduced by the charms of "Western" (of course this is a misnomer) impieties -- secularism, rank materialism, formal gender equality, etc.? That their ideals are reactionary, that their pretensions to speak for a whole people are ludicrous, and that their sources of finance may come from capitalists whose personal adherence to the cause is dubious _does not_ mean, as Kelley suggested, that they are mere cynical opportunists. After all, their charred remains are mixed in with those of 6000 others.
with warmest regards, john