This just in, from Rod Dreher at NRO's Corner:

Members of Egypt's persecuted Coptic Christian minority have been putting icthyus (fish) bumper stickers on their cars, announcing their Christian identities. Muslims have responded by putting hungry shark stickers on their bumpers.

The full story is available here from a source of unknown reliability, but there seem to be ties to the Associated Press and Media General, which does happen to have a significant presence in Virginia as a news-services company in television and print media.

Part of me is amused by this response. On the surface (no pun intended) this would be a cute little game of one-upsmanship between fans or something in another one of those ridiculous college rivalries held dear by so many booze-swilling alums. I can't help but chuckle when I think of it. If my undergraduate institution's enemies had a fish for a logo, I'd certainly think about a shark motif to show the Way Things Will Be.

On the other hand, being cognizant of the context in which this occurs makes me a little less likely to be charitable when Egypt comes crying for American dollars. One response that comes to mind is to think that there's something akin to Klansmen displaying a noose on their vehicles in response to a theoretical symbol of something (oh, say that distinctly colored cloth---kinte?---that is somehow tied to their history/heritage) on vehicles.

If you accept that the Coptic Christians of Egypt are indeed a persecuted minority¹ then these sharks are downright threatening. I don't like this, no sir, not one bit. It smacks of anti-Christian activity, or at the very least the deliberate creation of a hostile environment. I would be less certain of my finding if the Islamics had taken to displaying a crescent-and-star or something, but who in the world worships a shark? That doesn't have too many uses, and it does signal some sort of danger.

The historical parallel between Rome and Egypt is chilling---once again, people united by display of the second-most popular historical Christian symbol are under the boot of an oppressive government. This time, however, they're not alone, or so I would hope. Ideally, ol' Hosni Mubarak would get the proverbial horse head-in-the-bed or a pleasantly worded suggestion that it would be in his best interest to back off on policies that persecute these Coptic Christians.

I'm never happy when I see Christians under the boot of government and I very rarely excuse it. (Befuddled leftists who are more akin to apologists for Communism or the like, protesting American deployment of the Pershing II while the Soviets deploy the SS-20 generally fall within the latter class, if disapproval or arrest after illegal entry can be described as being 'under the boot'.)

Things like this will continue to happen, and I suppose that for the moment it can be excused, but if this erupts into open violence, I expect the bloody government over there to crack down. I wish I could follow that up with a threat of American intervention, but for a variety of reasons that threat could never be made, much less followed through on.

Ende.

¹ I'm not offering this for the truth of the matter but rather to show that the statement has been made. Evidence-law bloggers, descend and shred me on this, since the Federal rules of evidence are arcane to me.

Posted by: Country Pundit at 03:36 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 574 words, total size 4 kb.