According to Ritzy Mabrouk, anti-radical-Islam blogger, Abdolkarim Nabil Seliman, was arrested by state police at his home.
The whereabouts of blogger Abdolkarim Nabil Seliman who was abducted from his home by Egyptian state security on Wednesday Oct. 26 is still not known. The police refused to answer questions by AP, the first wire to run the story. The last report about his whereabouts said he was on his way to an unknown detention center.
It was 3 a.m. when seven police officers took the 21 year old blogger away from his family home in Alexandria. His mother, Yousseira, says the house was searched; books and copies of Seliman’s writings were confiscated.
His friends and family says Seliman was targeting radical Islam in his writings, despite his strong connections to the Muslim community. Seliman is a student of law at Al-Azhar, the world’s highest seat of learning for Sunni Muslims. His pious Muslim family had returned from a pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca just days before his arrests
“He is stubborn, he has ideas that contradict the true religion and he posts that on the Internet, serving no one but himself,” Seliman’s mother said.
Another blogger who closely followed Seliman’s detention says it is the fundamentalist Islamic Salafi movement that is behind the arrest. The blogger, Malik Moustafa, said Seliman recently had accused the Salafis of inciting the latest sectarian tensions in his neighbourhood of Mouharm Bay.
Read more.
Democracy and freedom are needed badly in the Middle East.
Update: It turns out that I had it wrong, according to the Sandmonkey. He is not a anti-radical Islam blogger, he is a radical anti-Islam blogger. Nonetheless, no one should be arrested for expressing his thoughts. Thank God our forefathers had the foresight and wisdom to make Freedom of Expression one of the rights granted in the First Amendment of our Constitution. Now if only we can get some of the Islamic regimes and other non-democracies in the world to do the same.
BEAR TO THE RIGHT 
Gary,the kid is not an anti radical islam blogger, he is a radical anti Islam blogger. But that’s just semantics.The point is, the authorities chose their target well. You should see the fighting in the comments section on whether or not to support the dude. Hell, his family doesn’t really support him either. I am supporting him, because I don;t think that any opinion should send his/her hodler to jail. Civil rights and all, you know?
LikeLike
Gary,I’m delighted to hear that you support freedom of expression, but of course it’s easy to do when you agree with the person.Somehow you change your mind when you disagree with the opinion being expressed, as in the ACLU’s support of a live-sex show.You can’t have it both ways, my friend. You either support freedom of expression or you don’t. If you do, then you have to be tolerant of even the most absurd, ridiculous and obnoxious points of view. That was the genius and foresight of our Founding Fathers. I detest white supremacy groups, Nazi revisionists, Holocaust deniers, KKKers, fringe religious groups who spread hate, but I accept and support their rights to express their opinions, however detestable and disagreeable they may be.On another note, I guess I’ve won our little bet, since the Senate Judiciary Committee has decided to put off confirmation hearings until January.I don’t expect to be back until last May, but I look forward to meeting you. I think you’ll like the Vermont Restaurant, if you haven’t been.Howard
LikeLike
Howard,One of the problems with liberals is that they seem to be incapable of drawing lines. I am a total believer in free expression/free speech – EXCEPT when that expression becomes unsafe for the community. You know the proverbial yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater. Not allowed. The courts have long held that pornography, if it offends community standards, is not legal. So, not all expressions are permitted. Yes, I am opposed to live sex acts being performed for the public. I don’t think they should be permitted for many reasons, not the least of which is it degrades our civilization. Yes, I oppose the ACLU for its support of those acts, just as I oppose the ACLU for its denial of free expression to those who would display religious symbols.The lesson, which the left seems to have difficulty getting, is that not everything goes. There are limitations if we are going to maintain a healthy vibrant community and civilization.More to the point of this post. I am a blogger. I think the internet provides a great opportunity for people everywhere in the world to express their opinion and point of view. I do not want to see, anywhere in the world, anyone arrested for expressing that point of view. If authorities in Egypt, China, or elsewhere don’t like what a particular blogger is saying about their government, then they should still let their people express their point of view – and perhaps listen, because if one person feels that way, he may be expressing the thoughts of many citizens of that country.In any event, blogging ought to be an arrest-free zone.As far as our bet – it looks like you won. The Senate managed to defer the Alito hearings until January. I will look forward to taking you to dinner at the Vermont Restaurant in May.
LikeLike
Hi Gary,I agree–freedom of expression has its limits. Community standards should prevail. In the case of the live sex show, the Oregon Supreme Court agreed, 5-1, that community standards premitted such a display. No one is forced to attend or pay to see it. The ACLU merely defended the proprietor’s right to put on such a show. If you have a problem with this, take it up with the courts, not the ACLU.And that’s my problem with your line of thinking: you’re blaming the defender, not the decider. The ACLU defended, the court made the decision, but somehow it’s the ACLU’s fault. Unless you truly believe the Oregon Supreme Court justices are incapable of independent thought.Howard
LikeLike
No, I blame the liberal court as well. It is just that the case most likely would never have gotten to the court without the ACLU. I know you see that as a good thing. I don’t.
LikeLike