In the heat of Hitler's invasion to the European countries in the second World War, Arabs were the most ones that were pleased with his victories when more than two thirds of the region was under the European colonialism, claiming that this leader will be their savior from it, and perhaps they didn't know that the ranking that he set for the people put Arabs before last with African people. The problem in thinking is when it changes to complete naivety, where the current events in Britain, and before it the protests in western countries, where interpreted in a humorous way by Iran and Libya. The First requested the interference of the Security Council to protect the unarmed from the British police violence, while the Libyan official requested the British Prime Minister to leave because he left his legitimacy. Britain is not innocent all of its history, but it is the biggest democracy that is based on justice, and its action with the protesters doesn't mean that it is justified, because the voices that came from within critiqued the law violations and called for analyzing the causes that led the angry youths to burn and rob all what he can get its hands on, and investigating with all sectors. The issue is not naively simple, because the variation of incomes and the creation of a poor and ignored class led to precedents in democratic countries, even in France, Britain and Greece that are among the most countries that experienced situations of disorder. But the treatment is different than what happened and happening in Iran and Libya due to the varying constitutions and the profundity of laws that penalize regardless of the position and value of any person in a society. The Same thing is in Israel where it is a democratic country that trialed officials and prime ministers for their violations and removed them from their positions. But this did not happen except if there was a military revolt on an authority whose leaders are criminalized and are taken to military courts, not civil courts, and they get punished with the leader's orders and not the law legislations, and the only thing that happened in the current phase is the trial of President Husni Mubarak, his sons and the members of his government. What is going on in Britain as well as Israel is not as what caused the Arab revolutions, but the reason is the violence of the capitalism that failed to enforce equality under the justification of individual freedom. The evidence is that the bottoms of the current financial crises might blow up most of the countries that used a non-fair economy that created corruption elements, but for us to interpret it the same way for what is going on Arab wise is considered over mind and logic. Britain doesn't have any problem with the residing communities that merged within its society; rather it took the burden of welcoming people from opposing countries and gave them all of their rights. Moreover, its social system remained ideal in giving unemployed people and political refugees special salaries, which is well known and not something to tolerate its external policy, and it put the interest above all laws and regulations when it deals in the concept of the brute force. Hitler in general was not a hero and did not achieve freedom for Arabs, and Britain will not experience the marching of protesters in its squares to free their wills, and even Israel is able to defeat the difficulties of increased prices and house rents, but our interpretation for the events remains naïve and a justification to wipe our problems away from the right solutions.
