# Christian Exploitation! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 19, 2001, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572 "2001-03-19T10:26:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/1 "2001-03-19T10:26:21Z")
Christian Exploitation, sexy headline no? Now the meat. Without commentary, a quick and dirty translation from \_al-Hyaat, p5 18 March: Delegation of American “Committee of/for Religion Freedom” faces problems meeting with Coptic and Islamic religious authorities. Cairo: The delegation of the American “Committee for/of Religious Freedom” [I don’t know what the actual English is] which announced it will arrive in Cairo next Wednesday is facing severe difficulties in setting appointments with Egyptian religious authorities or human rights organizations after a campaign launched by Muslim and Coptic intellectuals against the Committee. It was announced that arrangements for the delegations visit, which will last four days under the leadership of Elliot Abrams, (should) include defined appointments the Sheikh of al-Azhar [the leading Islamic theological university] Sayyed Tantaawiy, Baba Shanouda the Third [Coptic Pope] and the Mufti [of Egypt, leading religious authority] Nasr Fareed Wasil but the three authorities have not yet responded to the Committee’s request. (article continues) * * * Additional Reporting, from me, your source. I was just talking about this a few weeks ago with a certain leading opposition figure with close ties to Baba Shanouda(\*). He reported the Baba is pissed off about this, finding the timing and approach of the Committee to be all wrong. The church’s position, per unofficial but reliable source, on this is: (a) American investigation is ham handed and inflamatory enough to undermine domestic mechanisms working for their fight against discrimination (b)timing is all wrong as their view is US should investigate what they perceive as Israeli discrimination against Arab Muslims and Xtians and © timing is all wrong because the intifada and perceived US position in re Israel makes such interventions look bad, above all for the Copts to be seen running to the Americans at this time. (\*: recent yellow press articles have accused the same source of being in the Baba’s pocket. Bizarre) Opinions? Commentary? In re motivation of this Committee. Appropriateness? ---
**Author:** ![magdalene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df788c/32.png) [@magdalene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magdalene)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/2 "2001-03-19T13:01:23Z")
Collounsbury, can you give us more info on who this Committee is? Why should anyone meet with them at all? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/3 "2001-03-19T13:57:28Z")
> [@](#): > > (b)timing is all wrong as their view is US should investigate what they perceive as Israeli discrimination against Arab Muslims and Xtians and > © timing is all wrong because the intifada and perceived US position in re Israel makes such interventions look bad, above all for the Copts to be seen running to the Americans at this time. Huh? What do _we_ have to do with this? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/4 "2001-03-19T14:31:25Z")
The Committee, to my _understanding,_ is a US congressional committee, or sponsored thereby. I’m not sure of its precise composition. In any case, it’s an official delegation. I’ll translate a follow up today as soon as I can. The Cmtee is supposed to be holding investigatory meetings in the American Embassy. The Embassy is reported to be “pressuring” authorities to meet with the Cmtee. In re Allesan’s question, as you should know, the Arab position is to see Israel and the US working hand in hand. Whatever the factual nature of this is, that’s their feeling. The position is, “before you come investigating the Copts position in Egypt uninvited, go investigate Arab religious freedom under Israeli rule.” I am reporting, as previously, their position w/o commentary. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/5 "2001-03-19T15:01:21Z")
To the best of my understanding, derived from local sources, the question at hand is re suitability of an official American investigation of religious freedom in Egypt in re the Copts – Egyptian Christians . I would verify more but unfortunately I only have the Arabic translations of its name, etc. which apparently are inexact. This makes searching a bit problematic. ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/6 "2001-03-19T16:00:00Z")
Just to clarify, the news story is refering to the [U.S. Commission on International Religous Freedom](http://www.uscirf.gov/). Elliot Abrams, appointed by Clinton, is the current chairman. It is part of the _Department_ in the _Office of International Religious Freedom_, which is, I believe, part of the _Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor_. For those interested, here is the [Executive Summary](http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/irf_exec.html) of the 2000 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom. The Commission regularly travels to various countries and meets with various religious and political figures. Here’s the Commission’s latest reports on [Egypt](http://www.uscirf.gov/dos00Pages/irf_egypt.php3) and [Israel](http://www.uscirf.gov/dos00Pages/irf_israel.php3). ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/7 "2001-03-19T16:02:54Z")
That was supposed to be: “It is part of the _Department of State_…” And the Commission name should say “Religious” instead of “Religous”, which for some reason I keep typing. ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/8 "2001-03-19T16:39:59Z")
Now, as to the OP: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Collounsbury \* > He reported the Baba is pissed off about this, finding the timing and approach of the Committee to be all wrong. > > The [Coptic] church’s position, per unofficial but reliable source, on this is: > (a) American investigation is ham handed and inflamatory enough to undermine domestic mechanisms working for their fight against discrimination > (b)timing is all wrong as their view is US should investigate what they perceive as Israeli discrimination against Arab Muslims and Xtians and > © timing is all wrong because the intifada and perceived US position in re Israel makes such interventions look bad, above all for the Copts to be seen running to the Americans at this time. What’s interesting is that the main issue the Commission is probably looking at is discrimination and persecution of the Coptic Christians. Reason A, if true, could be a valid reason for Baba not wanting to meet with the Commission. I don’t know enough about how the Commission works to address it, but the Commission doesn’t strike me as being particularly “inflamatory”. Reason B doesn’t make sense since the Commission hasn’t singled out Egypt or ignored Israel. I can understand the thinking behind Reason C, at least the second part. If anti-Israel (and anti-American) feelings transfer to anti-non-Muslim (how’s that for a word?) feelings, the Coptic Church could be concerned about the impact of American activity on its members. These sentiments can get tied together is ways that don’t always make sense. > [@](#): > > In re motivation of this Committee. Appropriateness? I don’t think there is any unusual about the Commission’s visit to Egypt at this time. It’s just part of its on-going efforts. As to the appropriateness of the Commission’s existence, well, that’s another GD altogether. ---
**Author:** ![celestina](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/258eb7/32.png) [@celestina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/celestina)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2001, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/9 "2001-03-19T17:04:36Z")
C- I may be flying in the dark here, but if as you say this American committee is trying to pressure meetings/negotiations for a more peaceful co-existence between Copts (the religious minority in Egypt?) & Muslims, well yes there is a problem. 1.) I can see how annoyed Copts & Muslims would be to have the US come in and say, Ok. since we’re trying to get Israel to settle its differences with the Palestinians, and we’re trying to get the Middle East to clean up its messy relations, Egypt should jump on the bandwagon and get it together too, and we’re just the people to make that happen. That’s arrogant, smacks of terrible diplomacy, and really makes me think that said Copts & Muslims in Egypt probably wonder how much the US knows or cares about their differences. Copts & Muslims are not going to decide the time is right to start negotiations just because the US says so. It’s insulting because Copts & Muslims have been at differences for quite awhile now. They probably feel that they should be able to work out their differences, and if not THEN AND ONLY THEN call for outside mediation. It sounds like the problem is that they have NOT called for outside mediation. 2.) Of course, if you’re getting your reports from primarily Egyptian news sources, then they may well be biased against the US. Do you have the American perspective on this committee? 3.) Not that I’m an expert in Egyptian culture–my only link to it is a brief one. I once knew a young Egyptian woman whose family was forced to flee Egypt and come to America due to religious persecution. She and her family are Coptic Orthodox. I know that this messed with her mind, poor thing, for she found the culture shock difficult to deal with, in particular good old American prejudice & ignorance in people labelling her either as one of those fanatic Arabs or as black because she comes from Egypt and has kinky hair . . . But that’s another matter. The point is that there is a serious problem of religious persecution of Copts by Muslims in Egypt. I’m just not sure what negotiations or attempts thereof the Copts & Muslims have made on their own. 4.) Would US interests be best served by our intervention in Egypt, or would we just be making matters worse? If the US is going to get involved, it should BE VERY CAREFUL how it does so. Do you have any particulars about this American committee’s planned role in the negotiations beyond trying to get them to meet? ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2001, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/10 "2001-03-20T00:10:28Z")
celestina wrote: > [@](#): > > 4.) Would US interests be best served by our intervention in Egypt, or would we just be making matters worse? Considering that “U.S. Intervention in” a country usually means dropping laser-guided bombs on it, I’d say it’d make matters worse. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2001, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/11 "2001-03-20T07:27:26Z")
Foist thank you to **JeffB** for the further information in re the Committee. I was suspicious of the claims of my Egyptian “source”, and so reported them w/o comment, although they are useful as indicative of the high feelings this produced. I am going to enjoy telling him the Committee does in fact ‘investigate’ Israel. In re the visit, the timing does strike me as quite poor, but comments to Celestina clarify this. Now my Egyptian “source” — quite sophisticated although prone in typical Egyptian political fashion to making overblown claims — made some intriguing statements linking the visit to American religious right pressure to find persecution of Xtians, i.e. he connected this with FoG politics. As normally reliable al-Hyaat mentioned obliquely something of the same, I wonder if there is a grain of truth in this and if some folks are not exploiting the situation. However, I’ve not seen any English lang sources so I invite comments and treat this with all due caution. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by celestina \* > C- I may be flying in the dark here, but if as you say this American committee is trying to pressure meetings/negotiations for a more peaceful co-existence between Copts (the religious minority in Egypt?) & Muslims, well yes there is a problem. No, following al-Hyaat reports (international arabic paper infinitely more reliable than the Egptian press) the Committee is seeking — and the Embassy is exerting “pressure” in support— to undertake an investigation on Coptic Xtian-Muslim relations / Coptic religious freedoms. In re Copts-Muslim relations > [@](#): > > 1.) I can see how annoyed Copts & Muslims would be to have the US come in and say, Ok. since we’re trying to get Israel to settle its differences with the Palestinians, and we’re trying to get the Middle East to clean up its messy relations, Egypt should jump on the bandwagon and get it together too, and we’re just the people to make that happen. That’s arrogant, smacks of terrible diplomacy, and really makes me think that said Copts & Muslims in Egypt probably wonder how much the US knows or cares about their differences. Copts & Muslims are not going to decide the time is right to start negotiations just because the US says so. It’s insulting because Copts & Muslims have been at differences for quite awhile now. They probably feel that they should be able to work out their differences, and if not THEN AND ONLY THEN call for outside mediation. It sounds like the problem is that they have NOT called for outside mediation. Your analysis is largely like me own given what I know to date. However, one clarifications, it’s not really a matter of “negotiations” between C & M as domestic politics – there are many sides here: Government & ruling party, the Muslim Brothers(\*), the opposition parties – which include Copts, the Coptic Church. (\*: who per today’s report on the issue are weirdly enough the only folks not to reject the whole thing out of hand. Very peculiar as normally the Brothers want nothing to do with the Embassy.) > [@](#): > > 2.) Of course, if you’re getting your reports from primarily Egyptian news sources, then they may well be biased against the US. Do you have the American perspective on this committee? Actually I have been following mostly the international arab press on this, I have a low regard for the Egyptian press. However, my work also leads me to have contact with political figures, such as the one I “quoted.” Unfortunately until just now I didn’t have the real name and affiliation of the Committee so I was unable to get “the other side of the story.” > [@](#): > > 3.) [snip] The point is that there is a serious problem of religious persecution of Copts by Muslims in Egypt. Well, here is something I question. Given what I have seen and heard, on the street, in the countryside and in the halls of power, I don’t think there is a “serious problem of religious persecution of Copts by Muslims” in Egypt. There is real discrimination — I don’t think one can call it persecution. I’m not sure that it’s any more serious than discrimination against blacks in America. Unfortunately, for many reasons, good stats are unavailable, but given my personal observation Copts seem well represented in the private sector, well integrated — no such thing as segregated neighborhoods — in society. Copts and Muslims work together (not just in my firm, in public functions, in political parties etc.) They appear to get along. However, there is clear discrimination in certain government functions, above all in education. Muslims tend to be quite blind to Copt culture and you never see it on TV. Benign neglect. Most, but not all, public religious references are specifically Muslim (although there is a large overlap in religious language so lots of things are equal opp by accident). There is an idiotic old Ottoman law from the 1850s still on the book which requires Xtians to get the “ruler’s” permission to build churches, which nowadays means good old fat boy himself, Mubarek. To my understanding there has never been a refusal, although there are accusations of the Interior Ministry sitting on applications for a while in order to be obnoxious. Hard to say the truth there, as the Egyptian bureaucracy is not known for its speediness. Of course, greasing the wheels always helps. > [@](#): > > 4.) Would US interests be best served by our intervention in Egypt, or would we just be making matters worse? If the US is going to get involved, it should BE VERY CAREFUL how it does so. Precisely, I feel quite uncomfortable with this insofar as my personal experience suggests the context makes this visit highly unproductive. If Baba Shenouda, an ornery old bastard, is refusing the meeting this suggests to me the approach is not well-timed nor welcome. ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2001, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/12 "2001-03-20T14:40:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Collounsbury \* > Foist thank you to **JeffB** for the further information in re the Committee. You are quite welcome. > [@](#): > > Now my Egyptian “source” — quite sophisticated although prone in typical Egyptian political fashion to making overblown claims — made some intriguing statements linking the visit to American religious right pressure to find persecution of Xtians, i.e. he connected this with FoG politics. I don’t think that this Commission is specifically under pressure from religious right, nor does it attempt to promote a certain strain of politics. The Commission was set up under the Clinton administration and seems to have a fairly diverse membership. Here is the entry from the Commission’s FAQ about membership: > [@](#): > > Among the Commissioners are prominent leaders of the Baha’i, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim communities; two former assistant secretaries of state; experts in international law, religious freedom, and human rights; a law-school dean; a justice of the Washington State Supreme Court; and (as ex-officio) the former head of World Vision, an international Christian relief agency, who now serves as the first United States Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom. > > Elliott Abrams, President of the Ethics and Public Policy Institute, serves as Chairman. Vice Chairman is Dr. Firuz Kazemzadeh, who recently retired as Secretary for External Affairs of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the United States. The other Commissioners are Laila Al-Marayati, M.D., John R. Bolton, Theodore Cardinal McCarrick, Rabbi David Saperstein, Nina Shea, Justice Charles Z. Smith, and Michael K. Young. Robert Seiple, Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, serves as a non-voting, ex-officio member. This hardly seems like a group that is promoting the (Christian) religious right agenda. And to be completely honest, I don’t think that the _extreme_ religious right would be terribly concerned about the Copts. > [@](#): > > Given what I have seen and heard, on the street, in the countryside and in the halls of power, I don’t think there is a “serious problem of religious persecution of Copts by Muslims” in Egypt. There is real discrimination — I don’t think one can call it persecution. I’m not sure that it’s any more serious than discrimination against blacks in America. You certainly have a better perspective than I do on the actual situation in Egypt. I don’t think that the Commission is suggesting that there is wide-spread, active persecution by the government. Here are a few excerpts from the Commission’s report in 2000: > [@](#): > > members of the non-Muslim minority worship without harassment and maintain links with coreligionists abroad… > > There was a trend toward improvement in the Government’s respect for and protection of the right to religious freedom during the period covered by this report. The Government undertook a series of initiatives to address the concerns of the Christian community, including the facilitation of church repairs, the appointment of Copts to senior positions in the ruling political party, and expanded treatment of Coptic themes in the media. There was a significant increase in press and public discussion of the subject of religious discrimination… > > The subject of religious freedom remains an important and active part of the bilateral dialog between the U.S. and Egyptian Governments… > > In December 1999, President Mubarak issued a decree making the repair of all places of worship subject to a 1976 civil construction code. The decree is significant symbolically because it places churches and mosques on equal footing before the law… > > However, the approval process for church construction is time-consuming and insufficiently responsive to the wishes of the Christian community. Although President Mubarak reportedly has approved all requests for permits presented to him, Christians maintain that the Interior Ministry delays–in some instances indefinitely–submission to the President of their requests. They also maintain that security forces have blocked them from utilizing permits that have been issued… > > In January 1999, the Government formed a committee of academics to revise the history curriculum in the primary and secondary schools. A primary objective of the committee is to reintroduce into the curriculum the Coptic and Byzantine periods of Egyptian history… > > At times religious tensions flare up and individual acts of prejudice occur. Discrimination is practiced by members of both faiths… > > The subject of religious freedom is an important part of the bilateral dialog. The subject has been raised at all levels of government, including by the President, Secretary of State, Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs, the U.S. Ambassador, and other embassy officials. The Embassy maintains formal contacts with the Office of Human Rights at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In addition, the Ambassador has discussed religious freedom with senior government officials and religious leaders. The Embassy also regularly discusses religious freedom issues in contacts with other government officials, including governors and Members of Parliament… Sorry for the length, but I wanted to show a couple of things. First, the Commission does not view Egypt as a religiously intolerant state but as a country that has had some issues in past that it has been dealing with. Second, the issue of religious freedom is part of the on-going dialogue between the U.S. and Egypt (and many other countries). As far as I can tell, the trip and the meeting the Commission was trying to set up are part of its regular activities and not a response to any particular incident or situation. The Commission is not trying to “intervene” (which it has no power to do any way). > [@](#): > > If Baba Shenouda, an ornery old bastard, is refusing the meeting this suggests to me the approach is not well-timed nor welcome. The Commission has met with Coptic Bishop Thomas in the past, so I don’t think the problem is the idea of meeting but more with the timing. I’m also sure that there are people who find the whole idea of the U.S. monitoring the religious freedoms of other countries to be offensive. And I can see their point. It’s not like the U.S. has a perfect record when it comes to ensuring non-persecution and non-discrimination of religions. This, combined with the perceived influence of the religious right on government policy, can raise suspicions as to the motives of this Commission. Imagine how Americans would feel if another country was reporting on religious freedom in the U.S. (Maybe someone does.) I think it would actually be interesting to have the Commission do a report on the U.S. (I checked; they haven’t.) ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2001, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-exploitation/58572/13 "2001-03-21T10:03:53Z")
In re the Commission: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JeffB \* > I don’t think that this Commission is specifically under pressure from religious right, nor does it attempt to promote a certain strain of politics. The Commission was set up under the Clinton administration and seems to have a fairly diverse membership. Agreed, now that I’ve had an opp. to see the real thing, rather than 2nd hand, they do seem to be working well. However in re pressure, I have some doubts. Let me be clear and state that I don’t think, from what I have seen from their matierials now, that the Com. is biased, but I do wonder about political pressures, which is relevant in re the apparent origins of the issue. But a moment… > [@](#): > > This hardly seems like a group that is promoting the (Christian) religious right agenda. And to be completely honest, I don’t think that the _extreme_ religious right would be terribly concerned about the Copts. I would have thought so myself, but then there is the whole “persecution of Xtians” thingy which Friend of God folks seem to be pushing. A domestic agenda, and let me be clear, I am not poopooing religious repression, but I am wary of exploitation of the issue for domestic political purposes: I dimly recalled the following article about this, which this site seems to faithfully reproduce from the NYTimes: [http://usaengage.org/news/971221nyt.html](http://usaengage.org/news/971221nyt.html) I also located the following article: [http://www.phrmg.org/english/feb98/persecution.html](http://www.phrmg.org/english/feb98/persecution.html) Although on Palestine re Palestinian issues by the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, the critique of misrepresentation of evidence rings from what I see from the sites below: This site seems to have an agenda. In re the Koshha indcidents, some claims are false insofar as I know: [http://www.persecution.org/humanrights/egypt.html](http://www.persecution.org/humanrights/egypt.html) The overall aim of the site seems to be to push the idea of specifically Xtian persecution. I found this article a bit interesting, frankly folks like Palau are not helpful: [http://www.oregonlive.com/special/series/christians.ssf?/special/series/christians\_story6.frame](http://www.oregonlive.com/special/series/christians.ssf?/special/series/christians_story6.frame) I also found this rather inflamatory citation (towards the end) at this Catholic site [http://www.mindszenty.org/report/1997/apr97.html](http://www.mindszenty.org/report/1997/apr97.html) And another from the IFCJ with similar characteristics [http://www.ifcj.org/edit4.htm](http://www.ifcj.org/edit4.htm) As this one: [http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/prsecutn/egypt2.html](http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/prsecutn/egypt2.html) Finally this from the Christian News Service [http://www.idrel.com.lb/shufme/archives/docsme/cns000728.htm](http://www.idrel.com.lb/shufme/archives/docsme/cns000728.htm) (Oddly one item mentioned, that Churches do not recieve state funding is not a complaint that I know of from Copts – their religious hierarchy is infinately more independant) I have on overall impression that there is such a campaign apparently rather driven by domestic US concerns as much of what appears in these sites strike me as half-truths and the like. **the Commission’s report in 2000** > [@](#): > > Sorry for the length, but I wanted to show a couple of things. First, the Commission does not view Egypt as a religiously intolerant state but as a country that has had some issues in past that it has been dealing with. Good representative selection of what I have now read also, absolutely agree, and I think this is a supportable view, in fact close to my own. > [@](#): > > The Commission is not trying to “intervene” (which it has no power to do any way). Should clarify this, “intervene” in Arab political vocabulary includes this sort of “fact-finding” missions. Given the current political atmosphere, it still strikes me as poorly timed. Given the usually quite reliable al-Hyaat raised the issue of “outside” pressures in re the visit, I’m reserving judgement in re domestic issue for USA. > [@](#): > > The Commission has met with Coptic Bishop Thomas in the past, so I don’t think the problem is the idea of meeting but more with the timing. Thomas? Is that Shenouda in English? Huh. But yes, the timing is horrible. > [@](#): > > I’m also sure that there are people who find the whole idea of the U.S. monitoring the religious freedoms of other countries to be offensive. And I can see their point. It’s not like the U.S. has a perfect record when it comes to ensuring non-persecution and non-discrimination of religions. This, combined with the perceived influence of the religious right on government policy, can raise suspicions as to the motives of this Commission. Imagine how Americans would feel if another country was reporting on religious freedom in the U.S. (Maybe someone does.) I think it would actually be interesting to have the Commission do a report on the U.S. (I checked; they haven’t.) I think this gets to the meat of the problem. Given the apparent context, I feel deeply uncomfortable with the issue, although the Commission in fact seems to be doing good work and helping perhaps debunk the extreme claims of some of those sites cited above.