Can Egypt hold it together? President's son, family flee to Britain

[Earnie Shavers]

Did you see the islamist jihadi sharia KITTEN?!?

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally Posted by deep

Glenn Beck is fun to watch, his real theatrics are so much better than any parody on Stewart or SNL.

As nutty and ridiculous as Beck is, he knows he's 80% entertainer. I'm sure he believes it all, but it's very deliberately ramped up to the super-nutty. O'Reilly knows his persona/market best, and in that smugness you get the sense that he actually thinks his audience are idiots - "this is too easy", laughing all the way to the bank, and all that. But you know Hannity is 110% serious, and so I actually find his off the charts righteous ignorance to be by far the most entertaining thing on Fox.

[Earnie Shavers]

From the voice-to-twitter service that has been set up:

Saynow: Voice Message from Voice of Egypt

[trojanchick99]

Well, Israel is angry at the US and Europe for not supporting Mubarak. Netanyahu claims it's because of "political correctness". Seriously, seriously? I understand why they are nervous, but to be surprised that the US is supporting an emerging democracy is strange.

Reauters.com article.

[AliEnvy]

Chris Hedges: What Corruption and Force Have Wrought in Egypt - Chris Hedges' Columns - Truthdig

The uprising in Egypt, although united around the nearly universal desire to rid the country of the military dictator Hosni Mubarak, also presages the inevitable shift within the Arab world away from secular regimes toward an embrace of Islamic rule. Don’t be fooled by the glib sloganeering about democracy or the facile reporting by Western reporters—few of whom speak Arabic or have experience in the region. Egyptians are not Americans. They have their own culture, their own sets of grievances and their own history. And it is not ours. They want, as we do, to have a say in their own governance, but that say will include widespread support—especially among Egypt’s poor, who make up more than half the country and live on about two dollars a day—for the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic parties. Any real opening of the political system in the Arab world’s most populated nation will see an empowering of these Islamic movements. And any attempt to close the system further—say a replacement of Mubarak with another military dictator—will ensure a deeper radicalization in Egypt and the wider Arab world.

The only way opposition to the U.S.-backed regime of Mubarak could be expressed for the past three decades was through Islamic movements, from the Muslim Brotherhood to more radical Islamic groups, some of which embrace violence. And any replacement of Mubarak (which now seems almost certain) while it may initially be dominated by moderate, secular leaders will, once elections are held and popular will is expressed, have an Islamic coloring. A new government, to maintain credibility with the Egyptian population, will have to more actively defy demands from Washington and be more openly antagonistic to Israel. What is happening in Egypt, like what happened in Tunisia, tightens the noose that will—unless Israel and Washington radically change their policies toward the Palestinians and the Muslim world—threaten to strangle the Jewish state as well as dramatically curtail American influence in the Middle East.

The failure of the United States to halt the slow-motion ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Israel has consequences. The failure to acknowledge the collective humiliation and anger felt by most Arabs because of the presence of U.S. troops on Muslim soil, not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but in the staging bases set up in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, has consequences. The failure to denounce the repression, including the widespread use of torture, censorship and rigged elections, wielded by our allies against their citizens in the Middle East has consequences. We are soaked with the stench of these regimes. Mubarak, who reportedly is suffering from cancer, is seen as our puppet, a man who betrayed his own people and the Palestinians for money and power.

The Muslim world does not see us as we see ourselves. Muslims are aware, while we are not, that we have murdered tens of thousands of Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We have terrorized families, villages and nations. We enable and defend the Israeli war crimes carried out against Palestinians and the Lebanese—indeed we give the Israelis the weapons and military aid to carry out the slaughter. We dismiss the thousands of dead as “collateral damage.” And when those who are fighting against occupation kill us or Israelis we condemn them, regardless of context, as terrorists. Our hypocrisy is recognized on the Arab street. Most Arabs see bloody and disturbing images every day from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, images that are censored on our television screens. They have grown sick of us. They have grown sick of the Arab regimes that pay lip service to the suffering of Palestinians but do nothing to intervene. They have grown sick of being ruled by tyrants who are funded and supported by Washington. Arabs understand that we, like the Israelis, primarily speak to the Muslim world in the crude language of power and violence. And because of our entrancement with our own power and ability to project force, we are woefully out of touch. Israeli and American intelligence services did not foresee the popular uprising in Tunisia or Egypt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, Israel’s new intelligence chief, told Knesset members last Tuesday that “there is no concern at the moment about the stability of the Egyptian government.” Tuesday, it turned out, was the day hundreds of thousands of Egyptians poured into the streets to begin their nationwide protests.

What is happening in Egypt will damage and perhaps unravel the fragile peace treaty between Egypt and Jordan with Israel. It is likely to end Washington’s alliance with these Arab intelligence services, including the use of prisons to torture those we have disappeared into our vast network of black sites. The economic ties between Israel and these Arab countries will suffer. The current antagonism between Cairo and the Hamas government in Gaza will be replaced by more overt cooperation. The Egyptian government’s collaboration with Israel, which includes demolishing tunnels into Gaza, the sharing of intelligence and the passage of Israeli warship and submarines through the Suez Canal, will be in serious jeopardy. Any government—even a transition government that is headed by a pro-Western secularist such as Mohamed ElBaradei—will have to make these changes in the relationship with Israel and Washington if it wants to have any credibility and support. We are seeing the rise of a new Middle East, one that will not be as pliable to Washington or as cowed by Israel.

The secular Arab regimes, backed by the United States, are discredited and moribund. The lofty promise of a pan-Arab union, championed by the Egyptian leader Gamal Abd-al-Nasser and the original Baathists, has become a farce. Nasser’s defiance of Washington and the Western powers has been replaced by client states. The secular Arab regimes from Morocco to Yemen, for all their ties with the West, have not provided freedom, dignity, opportunity or prosperity for their people. They have failed as spectacularly as the secular Palestinian resistance movement led by Yasser Arafat. And Arabs, frustrated and enduring mounting poverty, are ready for something new. Radical Islamist groups such as the Palestinian Hamas, the Shiite Hezbollah in Lebanon and the jihadists fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are the new heroes, especially for the young who make up most of the Arab world. And many of those who admire these radicals are not observant Muslims. They support the Islamists because they fight back. Communism as an ideological force never took root in the Muslim world because it clashed with the tenets of Islam. The championing of the free market in countries such as Egypt has done nothing to ameliorate crushing poverty. Its only visible result has been to enrich the elite, including Mubarak’s son and designated heir, Gamal. Islamic revolutionary movements, because of these failures, are very attractive. And this is why Mubarak forbids the use of the slogan “Islam is the solution” and bans the Muslim Brotherhood. These secular Arab regimes hate and fear Hamas and the Islamic radicals as deeply as the Israelis do. And this hatred only adds to their luster.

The decision to withdraw the police from Egyptian cities and turn security over to the army means that Mubarak and his handlers in Washington face a grim choice. Either the army, as in Tunisia, refuses to interfere with the protests, meaning the removal of Mubarak, or it tries to quell the protests with force, a move that would leave hundreds if not thousands dead and wounded. The fraternization between the soldiers and the crowds, along with the presence of tanks adorned with graffiti such as “Mubarak will fall,” does not bode well for Washington, Israel and the Egyptian regime. The army has not been immune to the creeping Islamization of Egypt—where bars, nightclubs and even belly dancing have been banished to the hotels catering to Western tourists. I attended a reception for middle-ranking army officers in Cairo in the 1990s when I was based there for The New York Times and every one of the officers’ wives had a head covering. Mubarak will soon become history. So, I expect, will neighboring secular Arab regimes. The rise of powerful Islamic parties appears inevitable. It appears inevitable not because of the Quran or a backward tradition, but because we and Israel believed we could bend the aspirations of the Arab world to our will through corruption and force.

[maycocksean]

^I think there is a lot of truth in this article particulary in regards to what kinds of ideology will be voted in by the people.

The problem is that radical Islam will only support democracy as it serves their ends. Once in power I doubt they'll be much different than Mubarak has been. These ideologies are not open to free speech, human rights, or any of the other values of a free and democratic society.

[Irvine511]

Drudge has just decided how the GOP will fall, and it will be reflexively anti-Obama, since that's all that matters. witness, the headlines on Drudge today:

Muslim Brotherhood: 'Prepare for war with Israel'...

Israel shocked by Obama's 'betrayal' of Mubarak...

DAY 7: Massive crowds gather across Egypt...

'I will stay here till I die'...

Tehran taunts Washington for wavering...

[Bonoa]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Drudge has just decided how the GOP will fall, and it will be reflexively anti-Obama, since that's all that matters. witness, the headlines on Drudge today:

That'll be the wordt case scenario for Egypt. I hope they'll follow in the footsteps of Tunisia...

[AliEnvy]

King Abdullah II of Jordan sacks government amid street protests - Telegraph

Are We Witnessing the Start of a Global Revolution?

[anitram]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

The problem is that radical Islam will only support democracy as it serves their ends.

Which is the exact same way that the Americans support "democracy".

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by anitram

Which is the exact same way that the Americans support "democracy".

I was about to agree with you but then. . .I think I should first ask for clarification. Are you suggesting that--as I believe is the case with radical Islam--if certain American political groups get ahold of political power they will then suspend the democratic process? Because I don't think that is true of any serious political ideology in this country. I do believe it's true of these radical groups though--their theocratic ideology is not compatible with democracy.

If on the other hand you were saying that everyone supports democracy in the hopes of getting what they want, then yes I agree with that. I would also agree that putting the power in the hands of the people runs the risk of the people making poor judgments.

[U2Fanatic4ever]

Official: Egypt's Mubarak will not seek re-election - CNN.com

[anitram]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

I was about to agree with you but then. . .I think I should first ask for clarification.

I meant that the American government promotes democracy overseas only insofar as it furthers its own interests, and actually has a history of overthrowing democratic regimes when such regimes were not palatable to them.

Case in point - they were very excited about democracy in the Palestinian territories, until the Palestinians elected Hamas. Then democracy was a bad, bad thing. Salvador Allende in Chile is also a rather fantastic example of this.

[financeguy]

The probable underlying cause of the Egyptian revolution hasn't even been mentioned in the thread.

[Popmartijn]

Originally Posted by financeguy

The probable underlying cause of the Egyptian revolution hasn't even been mentioned in the thread.

Well, it's so secret that even you don't know it (otherwise you would've mentioned it).

[Bonoa]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

I was about to agree with you but then. . .I think I should first ask for clarification. Are you suggesting that--as I believe is the case with radical Islam--if certain American political groups get ahold of political power they will then suspend the democratic process? Because I don't think that is true of any serious political ideology in this country. I do believe it's true of these radical groups though--their theocratic ideology is not compatible with democracy.

Muslim extremistst will seize the opportunity to gain power by legal elections. After that, they will indeed eliminatie all form of democracy to hold on to the position of power. I certainly hope that'll never happen and it sickens me to think about that, for my love of the country.

If on the other hand you were saying that everyone supports democracy in the hopes of getting what they want, then yes I agree with that. I would also agree that putting the power in the hands of the people runs the risk of the people making poor judgments.

What Anitram says is true. Through history the US is known for supporting dictators as long as they were not communists or religious fanatics, or to support their own interest. It is known that Saddam Hussein was helped by the US to gain power to form a buffer against Iran. In Afghanistan, the US helped the Taliban to gain power to help them fight against the Russians.

And here is Egypt with dictators Mubarak and his predecessor Sadat that forms a gateway to Israel and the rest of the Middle East. Too bad for the Egyptians...

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by Popmartijn

Well, it's so secret that even you don't know it (otherwise you would've mentioned it).

Remember Clinton's old catchphrase, "It's the economy, stupid."

If food was cheap and the standard of living better they really wouldn't give a fuck if Mubarak built himself a thousand palaces.

US monetary policy has lead to hyperinflation in the Third World.

Egypt and Tunisia usher in the new era of global food revolutions - Telegraph

[deep]

the cause is the standard of living. cost of food, bread. people live 2-3 dollars a day.

[Bonoa]

Originally Posted by financeguy

Remember Clinton's old catchphrase, "It's the economy, stupid."

If food was cheap and the standard of living better they really wouldn't give a fuck if Mubarak built himself a thousand palaces.

US monetary policy has lead to hyperinflation in the Third World.

Egypt and Tunisia usher in the new era of global food revolutions - Telegraph

Absolutely true. Add the poor rate of freedom of speech and you'll get some really angry masses.

Can you imagine that I send Mubarak a fan letter when I was 14 saying how much I loved the country and how eager I was to study Egyptology (that's a good one for zoo confessionals or IO, right? )

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by anitram

I meant that the American government promotes democracy overseas only insofar as it furthers its own interests, and actually has a history of overthrowing democratic regimes when such regimes were not palatable to them.

Case in point - they were very excited about democracy in the Palestinian territories, until the Palestinians elected Hamas. Then democracy was a bad, bad thing. Salvador Allende in Chile is also a rather fantastic example of this.

Ah, America's attitude towards democracy OVERSEAS. In that case I agree with you completely.