Egypt REVOLUTION! Military Coup = Succuessful. U.S. paid military now in power.

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by TeamJordan79

The U.S. government had been planning to topple the Egyptian President for the past three years - that's according to diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks.


[h1][/h1]
[h1]Egypt protests: America's secret backing for rebel leaders behind uprising[/h1][h2]The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change†for the past three years, The Daily Telegraph has learned. [/h2]

The American Embassy in Cairo helped a young dissident attend a US-sponsored summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police.

On his return to Cairo in December 2008, the activist told US diplomats that an alliance of opposition groups had drawn up a plan to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and install a democratic government in 2011.

The secret document in full

He has already been arrested by Egyptian security in connection with the demonstrations and his identity is being protected by The Daily Telegraph.

The crisis in Egypt follows the toppling of Tunisian president Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali, who fled the country after widespread protests forced him from office.

The disclosures, contained in previously secret US diplomatic dispatches released by the WikiLeaks website, show American officials pressed the Egyptian government to release other dissidents who had been detained by the police.

Mr Mubarak, facing the biggest challenge to his authority in his 31 years in power, ordered the army on to the streets of Cairo yesterday as rioting erupted across Egypt.

Tens of thousands of anti-government protesters took to the streets in open defiance of a curfew. An explosion rocked the centre of Cairo as thousands defied orders to return to their homes. As the violence escalated, flames could be seen near the headquarters of the governing National Democratic Party.

Police fired rubber bullets and used tear gas and water cannon in an attempt to disperse the crowds.

At least five people were killed in Cairo alone yesterday and 870 injured, several with bullet wounds. Mohamed ElBaradei, the pro-reform leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner, was placed under house arrest after returning to Egypt to join the dissidents. Riots also took place in Suez, Alexandria and other major cities across the country.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, urged the Egyptian government to heed the “legitimate demands of protestersâ€. Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, said she was “deeply concerned about the use of force†to quell the protests.

In an interview for the American news channel CNN, to be broadcast tomorrow, David Cameron said: “I think what we need is reform in Egypt. I mean, we support reform and progress in the greater strengthening of the democracy and civil rights and the rule of law.â€

The US government has previously been a supporter of Mr Mubarak’s regime. But the leaked documents show the extent to which America was offering support to pro-democracy activists in Egypt while publicly praising Mr Mubarak as an important ally in the Middle East.

In a secret diplomatic dispatch, sent on December 30 2008, Margaret Scobey, the US Ambassador to Cairo, recorded that opposition groups had allegedly drawn up secret plans for “regime change†to take place before elections, scheduled for September this year.

The memo, which Ambassador Scobey sent to the US Secretary of State in Washington DC, was marked “confidential†and headed: “April 6 activist on his US visit and regime change in Egypt.â€

It said the activist claimed “several opposition forces†had “agreed to support an unwritten plan for a transition to a parliamentary democracy, involving a weakened presidency and an empowered prime minister and parliament, before the scheduled 2011 presidential electionsâ€. The embassy’s source said the plan was “so sensitive it cannot be written downâ€.

Ambassador Scobey questioned whether such an “unrealistic†plot could work, or ever even existed. However, the documents showed that the activist had been approached by US diplomats and received extensive support for his pro-democracy campaign from officials in Washington. The embassy helped the campaigner attend a “summit†for youth activists in New York, which was organised by the US State Department.

Cairo embassy officials warned Washington that the activist’s identity must be kept secret because he could face “retribution†when he returned to Egypt. He had already allegedly been tortured for three days by Egyptian state security after he was arrested for taking part in a protest some years earlier.

The protests in Egypt are being driven by the April 6 youth movement, a group on Facebook that has attracted mainly young and educated members opposed to Mr Mubarak. The group has about 70,000 members and uses social networking sites to orchestrate protests and report on their activities.

The documents released by WikiLeaks reveal US Embassy officials were in regular contact with the activist throughout 2008 and 2009, considering him one of their most reliable sources for information about human rights abuses.



This ain't no damn Revolution, this is a fraud.
indifferent.gif



1. �Title of the article says US backs rebel leaders. �The cable talks about one dissident.
2. �The cable never says the dissident's trip to New York was paid for or even arranged by the United States. �It doesn't mention the U.S. helping the dissident attend anything, anywhere.

Direct quotes from the cable itself.


(C)�xxxxxxxxxxxx described his Washington appointments as positive, saying�that on the Hill he met with xxxxxxxxxxxx, a variety of House staff�members, including from the offices of xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx),�and with two Senate staffers. xxxxxxxxxxxx also noted that he met�with several think tank members. xxxxxxxxxxxx said that xxxxxxxxxxxx's�office invited him to speak at a late January Congressional hearing on�House Resolution 1303 regarding religious and political freedom in�Egypt. xxxxxxxxxxxx told us he is interested in attending, but�conceded he is unsure whether he will have the funds to make the trip.


Why would the dissident worry about funds to make the trip to Washington if he was backed by the U.S? �What...the US doesn't have a thousand bucks to spare for his plane ticket?

He alleged that�several opposition parties and movements have accepted an unwritten�plan for democratic transition by 2011; we are doubtful of this claim. �several opposition parties and movements have accepted an unwritten�plan for democratic transition by 2011; we are doubtful of this claim.


Whoever wrote this cable clearly did not know about this supposed revolution beforehand.


xxxxxxxxxxxx�conceded that April 6 has no feasible plans for future activities. �The group would like to call for another strike on April 6, 2009, but�realizes this would be \"impossible\" due to SSIS interference,�xxxxxxxxxxxx said. He lamented that the GOE has driven the group's�leadership underground, and that one of its leaders, xxxxxxxxxxxx, has�been in hiding for the past week. 8.�

(C) Comment: xxxxxxxxxxxx�offered no roadmap of concrete steps toward April 6's highly�unrealistic goal of replacing the current regime with a parliamentary�democracy prior to the 2011 presidential elections. Most opposition�parties and independent NGOs work toward achieving tangible,�incremental reform within the current political context, even if they�may be pessimistic about their chances of success. xxxxxxxxxxxx�wholesale rejection of such an approach places him outside this�mainstream of opposition politicians and activists.


[font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]This gem comes from the end of the cable.  It doubts the claim of any soon to berevolutionsand the credibility of the dissident himself.[/font]

This leaked cable doesn't show anywhere that the US supports the overthrow of the current Egyptian Regime. �It's an inaccurate piece of sensationalist headline journalism by the Telegraph.

Go read the cable for yourself.
 
Its That Dude: Sensationalized headline is prob. right since all media is striving to augment their ratings and views. But the dissident does not necessarily need to be pampered by the US taxpayers for him to be out right "supported" by them. Sometimes people are recruited by Intelligence agencies without even knowing it. The US could lay back and watch the dissidents do their thing or they could diffuse the situation. There is a myriad of Egyptian ex-pats that study in the West with anti-government sentiments. US Foreign policy significantly influences Egyptian domestic policy. If the US did not see this coming in Tunisia and Egypt as well as in other Arab states then I would be very surprised. It's really not that hard to spark an uprising esp. in a powder-keg country such as Egypt. Society works like an electrical current and if certain components are disturbed such as commodity prices (which are influenced by market speculation and value of the dollar), this will lead to a predictable response - rebellion. Again, this is just my view on the matter. It's really cumbersome to argue of who did exactly what now esp. with the limited scope of info that we have on the matter. It will be easier to discern the motive and the people behind the movement after the dust settles. 

The mob started looting the Egyptian museum 
ohwell.gif
 
Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most. LOL
 
Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most.eh
Eh.
Be careful what you wish for. Most revolutions are dirty and prolonged. The Egyptians as a whole want some change but do they know exactly what they want? Do they have a plan they are willing to implement?  If not then a solution will be forced upon them by those who do have organization and some force behind them. That usually means just another  quasi dictator at the very least. 
 
Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most.eh
Eh.
Be careful what you wish for. Most revolutions are dirty and prolonged. The Egyptians as a whole want some change but do they know exactly what they want? Do they have a plan they are willing to implement?  If not then a solution will be forced upon them by those who do have organization and some force behind them. That usually means just another  quasi dictator at the very least. 

The Egyptians are educated people and should be given full opportunity to take care of themselves, regardless of whatever concerns any neighboring country may have.  You are right though, these revolutions aren't exactly always successful.

I really hope you're wrong this time though.
 
Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most.eh
Eh.
Be careful what you wish for. Most revolutions are dirty and prolonged. The Egyptians as a whole want some change but do they know exactly what they want? Do they have a plan they are willing to implement?  If not then a solution will be forced upon them by those who do have organization and some force behind them. That usually means just another  quasi dictator at the very least. 

The Egyptians are educated people and should be given full opportunity to take care of themselves, regardless of whatever concerns any neighboring country may have.  You are right though, these revolutions aren't exactly always successful.

I really hope you're wrong this time though.
Their education has little to do with it. There hasn't been a shortage of educated people in the last few centuries wreaking violence and destruction. 
Is there a plan for after Mubarak past simply "democracy"? Do they have a leader(s). DO they want a new figurehead or a completely revamped political system? Do they have a framework for a new political system if that is what they want? Democracy comes in a lot of forms. Hezbollah in Lebanon. Russian Democracy proceeding the fall of the USSR. Somalian democracy which is lawlessness but still democracy. 

Whether the Egyptian people like it or not there will be a lot of external pressure from outsiders as a result of Egypt's political and geographic importance.
 
People tend to forget that the United States was established after a violent revolutionary war..If it wasn't for the countless lives lost and the huge overhaul of the current government that was done in the name of democracy, we wouldn't be living in the country we are today..The Egyptian people want the freedoms that Americans and other democractic peoples have experienced for decades/centuries..When there is a dictatorial leader like Mubarak in power, there is no such thing as a non-violent revolution to enforce change
 
Originally Posted by UPPTEMPO8387

People tend to forget that the United States was established after a violent revolutionary war..If it wasn't for the countless lives lost and the huge overhaul of the current government that was done in the name of democracy, we wouldn't be living in the country we are today..The Egyptian people want the freedoms that Americans and other democractic peoples have experienced for decades/centuries..When there is a dictatorial leader like Mubarak in power, there is no such thing as a non-violent revolution to enforce change
The war against the British was more a war for independence than a true revolution. Even so, the colonies had plenty of true leaders and free thinkers who cooperated with each other. The frame work for the new government was built over more than a decade of relative peaceful debate amongst the Americans. Even then, because they didn't/ couldn't settle the single biggest problem, 500k+ Americans died some 70 years later. 
 
Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most.eh
Eh.
Be careful what you wish for. Most revolutions are dirty and prolonged. The Egyptians as a whole want some change but do they know exactly what they want? Do they have a plan they are willing to implement?  If not then a solution will be forced upon them by those who do have organization and some force behind them. That usually means just another  quasi dictator at the very least. 

The Egyptians are educated people and should be given full opportunity to take care of themselves, regardless of whatever concerns any neighboring country may have.  You are right though, these revolutions aren't exactly always successful.

I really hope you're wrong this time though.
Their education has little to do with it. There hasn't been a shortage of educated people in the last few centuries wreaking violence and destruction. 
Is there a plan for after Mubarak past simply "democracy"? Do they have a leader(s). DO they want a new figurehead or a completely revamped political system? Do they have a framework for a new political system if that is what they want? Democracy comes in a lot of forms. Hezbollah in Lebanon. Russian Democracy proceeding the fall of the USSR. Somalian democracy which is lawlessness but still democracy. 

Whether the Egyptian people like it or not there will be a lot of external pressure from outsiders as a result of Egypt's political and geographic importance.
I believe former IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei has procured the support of most of the powerful opposition groups, and thus is the de-facto leader as of now. And in my opinion it doesn't matter what form the governance comes in, as long as popular sovereignty is observed. Of course this whole turnabout is a process, but as long as the concerns of the nation are put first, all these "outsiders" and their interests should have no say in the matter.
 
Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most.eh
Eh.
Be careful what you wish for. Most revolutions are dirty and prolonged. The Egyptians as a whole want some change but do they know exactly what they want? Do they have a plan they are willing to implement?  If not then a solution will be forced upon them by those who do have organization and some force behind them. That usually means just another  quasi dictator at the very least. 

The Egyptians are educated people and should be given full opportunity to take care of themselves, regardless of whatever concerns any neighboring country may have.  You are right though, these revolutions aren't exactly always successful.

I really hope you're wrong this time though.
Their education has little to do with it. There hasn't been a shortage of educated people in the last few centuries wreaking violence and destruction. 
Is there a plan for after Mubarak past simply "democracy"? Do they have a leader(s). DO they want a new figurehead or a completely revamped political system? Do they have a framework for a new political system if that is what they want? Democracy comes in a lot of forms. Hezbollah in Lebanon. Russian Democracy proceeding the fall of the USSR. Somalian democracy which is lawlessness but still democracy. 

Whether the Egyptian people like it or not there will be a lot of external pressure from outsiders as a result of Egypt's political and geographic importance.
I believe former IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei has procured the support of most of the powerful opposition groups, and thus is the de-facto leader as of now. And in my opinion it doesn't matter what form the governance comes in, as long as popular sovereignty is observed. Of course this whole turnabout is a process, but as long as the concerns of the nation are put first, all these "outsiders" and their interests should have no say in the matter.
?
The Suez canal says different (amongst other things). Whether the Egyptian populace likes it or not. 

Like I said before; popular sovereignty can take the form of many things. Russia had "democracy" after the fall of the USSR. Look how that went for over a decade. 

El Bareidei's just as much of a puppet as Mubarak is. Probably a bit more. The truth is the Egyptian military is the single most powerful institution in Egypt and they will not turn Anti US. 

What is this uprising about anyway? Political or economic? 

In a recent Der Spiegel article they quoted 1 protester as saying, "Mubarak can run the country. I just want a job"
 
I have no idea what you're talking about, and apparently, neither do you. Basically, this mass protest is concerning unemployment, rising food prices, and all-around civil unrest due to the oppressive policies of Mubarak. I said "outsiders" SHOULD have no say, mainly because this is a conflict about a populace not being satisfied with its current government. This budding Egyptian revolution, and the establishment of a new system should fall on Egyptians, and Egyptians alone, should it not?

Not sure what you meant by referencing the Suez Canal, seeing as how the canal will not be affected by civil unrest, and certainly has no bearing on the conflict. The only thing that has changed is that the prices of crude oil are the highest since 2008, and will always fluctuate on the whispers of any sort of instability in the Middle East.

Anti US? What does the US have to do with anything? A billion dollars in military funding here and there does not signify any sort of enduring loyalty, nor should it. The military will have to choose whether to support Murbarak or defend the role of the military in the state, and my money is on the latter. Already it's apparent that military leaders are inclined to leave the millions of protesters to their cause, and it's clear the leaders believe that maintaining the military's status as a symbol of Egyptian nationalism is more important then upholding Mubarak. Once the people have their say, I'm almost certain the US/Israel will be dealt a blow in terms of their influence/support.

Not sure what you're basing your puppet comment on, but arbitrary claims about ElBaradei are arbitrary.

As for popular sovereignty, the idea is just that the government derives its power from the citizens it governs. This is certainly not true of Mubarak's regime, and if such a revolution occurs, I have trouble believing an oppressive, autocratic government would be replaced by another one. As long as the people of Egypt have their say in their government, it's fine by me.
 
Originally Posted by Cronicmolemolereturns

Damn, they destroying Mummies... I wouldnt mess with that *%%%

Yo i don't care what happens in the revolution. just don't mess with the Mummies and the ancient artifacts b
 
Its That Dude wrote:
Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by TeamJordan79

The U.S. government had been planning to topple the Egyptian President for the past three years - that's according to diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks.


[h1][/h1]
[h1]Egypt protests: America's secret backing for rebel leaders behind uprising[/h1][h2]The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change[/h2]
 
Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Its That Dude

al-jazeera has been shut down in egypt
The last attempts of a dying authoritarian administration to control the narrative in Egypt.

In other news, reports say that the Israeli government has voiced their concerns, and grow nervous over the developing situation. Probably because their boy Mubarak will no longer be providing them with 40% of their natural gas, and the fact that the only support (though fleeting) they had in the Middle East is gone. Gotta love how Israel has been spouting off about how they are the only democracy in the Middle East for years, and now when Egypt is on the cusp of revolution, via a wide class demographic protest, it is revealed that another democracy coming up is what they fear most. LOL
The irony.
 
Originally Posted by abovelegit1

I have no idea what you're talking about, and apparently, neither do you. Basically, this mass protest is concerning unemployment, rising food prices, and all-around civil unrest due to the oppressive policies of Mubarak. I said "outsiders" SHOULD have no say, mainly because this is a conflict about a populace not being satisfied with its current government. This budding Egyptian revolution, and the establishment of a new system should fall on Egyptians, and Egyptians alone, should it not?

Not sure what you meant by referencing the Suez Canal, seeing as how the canal will not be affected by civil unrest, and certainly has no bearing on the conflict. The only thing that has changed is that the prices of crude oil are the highest since 2008, and will always fluctuate on the whispers of any sort of instability in the Middle East.

Anti US? What does the US have to do with anything? A billion dollars in military funding here and there does not signify any sort of enduring loyalty, nor should it. The military will have to choose whether to support Murbarak or defend the role of the military in the state, and my money is on the latter. Already it's apparent that military leaders are inclined to leave the millions of protesters to their cause, and it's clear the leaders believe that maintaining the military's status as a symbol of Egyptian nationalism is more important then upholding Mubarak. Once the people have their say, I'm almost certain the US/Israel will be dealt a blow in terms of their influence/support.

Not sure what you're basing your puppet comment on, but arbitrary claims about ElBaradei are arbitrary.

As for popular sovereignty, the idea is just that the government derives its power from the citizens it governs. This is certainly not true of Mubarak's regime, and if such a revolution occurs, I have trouble believing an oppressive, autocratic government would be replaced by another one. As long as the people of Egypt have their say in their government, it's fine by me.

Is it political or economic? Pick one because it ain't both. As with most revolutions/ uprisings this concerns the economics of the situation. You seem to be in favor of the uprising mostly because " the US/Israel will be dealt a blow in terms of their influence/support. " I can assure you they will not because Egypt is not independent in the geopolitical or global economic sense.  Egypt will close itself off, say $++@ you to the US and thrive? It's a bit more complicated than that, right?

The Suez canal is a symbol and facilitator of world trade < = > outsiders care what happens in Egypt. Especially when it effects their economies. Even with all the threats and rhetoric coming from Iran, do they dare close off the strait of Hormuz? If they did, they'd have their nuts chopped off in under a week (by various entities, not just the US). It's not as simple as "we take over and do what we want". Maybe if this was Madagascar but it's not.

As for El Baridei; You don't get to be head of the IEAE unless you've sucked off some white people (in our era; in past eras epochs it may have been African or Chinese or Arab or choose some other ethnicity) and shown that you could "play ball". The notion that El Baridei is some kind of revolutionary with some balls is laughable.
 
Who said El Baradei was some sort of revolutionary? The guy is merely just one opposition figure and nothing more. Within Egypt he still suffers from a lack of credibility. Citizens and politicians (including political parties that are now working with him) have questioned his allegiance to the country seeing as how he's lived outside of Egypt for the better part of the last 3 decades. He's also been viewed as someone who doesnt really understand Egyptians and he has not yet shown the ability to relate to the poorest segments of the Egyptian population. He is 68 years old and returned to his Vienna home last year after the Mubarak regime were able to execute a successful smear campaign against him. It seems to me like he is reluctantly trying to spearhead change in Egypt due to the absence of other Egyptian agents of change. It seems like he wont mind leading the transitional government and help develop a new constitution before bowing out of the Egyptian political scene not too long after.

Also, ElBaradei was the first to point out that this revolt was launched by the Egyptian people themselves and that he had nothing to do with it.

As for him being a puppet to the West, I think this is completely incorrect. Lets not forget this is the same man that was a thorn in the U.S. and Israel's side in his last term as IAEA head as he not only tried to prevent U.S. conflict with Iraq and has criticized the U.S. and Israel for having nuclear weapons while trying to prevent Iran from acquiring them. He also criticized the U.S.'s approach with Iran which led to some increased tension between the Bush administration and himself. Also, lets not forget that yesterday he announced a coalition agreement with the Muslim Brotherhood. How do you think white people feel about this?
 
ElBaradei's relationship with the West indicates anything but him being a puppet to their agendas:

Over at Firedoglake, Marcy Wheeler has an excellent recap of the past neoconservative smear campaign against ElBaradei. Before the invasion of Iraq, the Bush Administration pooh-poohed his warning that there was “no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear-related activities in Iraq
 
Originally Posted by OnTheNephs

Yo seriously how can a leaderless revolt be planned? Do you guys really believe what you are saying. 
The reason I mention my Egyptian citizenship is to show you guys that this is not a overnight thing like you guys think. Just because you live outside of Egypt and you do not/ have not interacted with Egyptians daily you have no idea how long this has been coming. That wikileaks document shows some dude who went to the states to attend some convention in 2006 or 08. Do you know how long people have felt this way?

Mubarak had attempts on his life since 95. If it could have been done then, they would have done it. The difference is the generation who started this revolution, and the manner in which it was done. Yo we revolutionized the revolution homie, dont worry about what we do. The problem is all of you have your best interest of YOUR nation, that you belittle the efforts of the people in Egypt to simply say it was all staged over the past 3 years. 

The thing is the Egyptian population does not give a , about all ya'll. Straight up the people themselves don't care for all that aid from the States, we don't approve of friendly relations with the states or Israel any ways. Its the head figure who has been supporting and being a lil b to the States. As real as it sounds and I am not being offensive but the stance of the States on almost everything political do no reflect 10% of the Egyptian mentality. 


May I ask where you live?
 
/canonical.org/~kragen/kjlogobgsmall.png);">http://canonical.org/~kragen/kjlogobgsmall.png); margin-left: 7.48em; margin-right: 7.48em; text-align: justify; font-family: FreeSerif, Palatino, serif; line-height: 135%; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ">[h1]Why Egypt’s popular rebellion is the greatest historical event in a decade, and how Barack Obama missed the boat.[/h1]
ليس هناك جيش أقوي من ÙكرØ[emoji]169[/emoji] حان وقتها


(Above: No army is more powerful than an idea whose time has come.)

I’m writing this on January 28th, 2011, at 11:53 AM Cairo time, although I’m an ocean away from Cairo. But, as someone wrote the other day on Twitter, yesterday, we were all Tunisian; today, we are all Egyptian, andtomorrow, we will all be free. So today I am writing this on Cairo time.

Three days ago, I read Barack Obama’sState of the Unionaddress. He delivered it on the same day that the#Jan25 protestsbegan in Egypt. I was dismayed that hedidn’t mention the protests at all, because they’re more important than almost everything he did mention. This essay is an attempt to explain why they are so important, why Obama ignored them, and what the possible results of that choice could be.

What Egypt is like



For readers who don’t know much about Egypt, like most Americans, here’s my attempt to sum up a country of 80 million people in three minutes.

Egypt is not a republic, any more than the People’s Republic of China is.Egypt is a brutal dictatorship, governed by the same dictator since 1981, 29 of those years under state-of-emergency regulations. That dictator, Hosni Mubarak, was the vice-president of the previous dictator, Anwar Sadat, who in turn was the vice-president of the dictator before him, Gamal Abdel Nasser, who had held absolute power since 1956. Egypt has been under one-party rule since 1952, and although the ruling party has changed its name several times, it has never yielded its power.

Egypt has gradually declined in influence and quality of life throughout Mubarak’s reign.

Some opposition parties are now formally allowed. They currently hold 3% of the Egyptian parliament.All influential opposition parties are banned, and the press is heavily censored. Mohamed ElBaradei, an Egyptian who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work fighting nuclear proliferation, moved to Vienna so that he can find reporters willing to talk to him.

Egypt is desperately poor. The majority of the country depends on the bread dole for survival.

Egypt is one of the countries where the US would ship prisoners to have them beaten, electrocuted, and raped by the Egyptian police for years, as a means of interrogation. (Abu OmarandAhmed Osman Salehare two of the best-known cases.) Indeed, itsreputation for torturewas so well established that it was the first US ally selected for this “extraordinary rendition†program.

The Egyptian police are famous for their lack of controls. Last year,Khaled Saidwas sitting in an internet cafÃ[emoji]169[/emoji]; a couple of policemen came in and demanded to see everyone’s ID, which is against Egyptian law. He refused, so they dragged him outside,beat him to death, and dumped his body in the street.

It’s also one of thetop recipients of US aidin the world, much of which is earmarked for the security forces — the same security forces who are currently beating journalists bloody and shooting protestors with US-made tear gas, birdshot, and now bullets.

Much of Egypt’s military, thetenth largest in the worldand the largest in Africa, is actuallypaid for by the US. Egypt produces US-designed armaments such as the M1 Abrams tank under license. Without the political and financial support of the US, it is generally believed in Egypt that the current dictatorship would have fallen decades ago.

AsShahi Hamidsaid, “If the army ever decides to shoot into a crowd of unarmed protestors, it will beshooting with hardware provided by the United States.â€

However, as Steven A. Cook of CFR says, all those soldiers “are not there to project power, but to protect the regime.†He calls the Egyptian military “the ultimate instrument of political control.†In other words, all those weapons arebought to be used against Egyptians, not to protect Egypt.

This is exactly the sort of situation that fosters non-state terrorism: a disempowered citizenry, kept in check by only the military might of an unaccountable and corrupt dictator backed by a faraway country, watching their future being destroyed one year at a time — all so that that faraway country can have a "reliable friend" to support political goals the nation opposes. This country profile fits both Saudi Arabia and Egypt, as it has for decades. And, indeed, non-state terrorism has been on the rise in Egypt for decades, and in 2001 an Egyptian flew a plane into a US building with the help of 15 Saudis and a couple of guys from other countries. We have not begun to see the end of this.

US elites believethatcrushing the Egyptian people’s dreamsof opportunity and justice, year after year, is a worthwhile price to pay for having Egypt as an ally in the region. Understandably, US elites are not very popular among Egyptians.

The revolution in Tunisia



Last month, there was aTunisian revolution. It started when oneMohamed Bouazizi, of Sidi Bouzid, committed suicide. There’s 30% unemployment in Sidi Bouzid. At 26 years old, he was eking out a living as a fruit vendor, one of a series of marginal jobs he’d been working since he was ten years old — until a police officer slapped him in the face, spat at him, confiscated his fruit cart and electronic scales, and beat him.

So heburned himself to deathin protest.

This sparked mass protests by the Tunisian people, and after a month, the 23-year rule of Tunisian dictator Ben Ali ended, and he fled the country. This was thefirst successful popular Arab uprisingin history.

Even as I write this, the new government is still reshuffling; yesterday, six ministers left over from Ben Ali resigned from the cabinet. It is possible that the new government will still not be truly democratic, but it seems likely that protests will continue to make the country ungovernable until there is at least a credible promise of improvement.

The Tunisian dictatorship had been considered stable and a steadfast ally of the US government, to the point that it, like Egypt, accepted “extraordinary renditions†from the US government for torturing.

There’s a lot of debate aboutwhat made this revolution happen nowand not at some time during the previous 23 years. Perhaps the economic situation finally got bad enough; perhaps it was the Al-Jazeera coverage; perhaps a critical mass of Tunisians had access to Twitter and Facebook to organize; perhaps US embassy cables leaked via Wikileaks sparked new anger, or made Tunisians realize that their dictator’s backing from the US government was weaker than it had appeared.

The uprising in Egypt



Whatever it was that happened in Tunisia, Egypt has been following suit. The story I mentioned earlier, ofKhaled Said, has been a rallying point.

(Liz Henry’s running summary of sourcesis good.)

OnJanuary 25th, Police Day, almost a hundred thousand people protested in the streets — mostly peacefully. This was the biggest protest since 1977, when Sadat cut off the bread dole. There were mass arrests, but only of a few hundred people. A policeman was killed by a thrown rock, and several protesters were killed. The government illegally and erratically blocked the web sites of Twitter, Facebook, Bambuser, the opposition newspaper Dostor, and other services. The Muslim Brotherhood, the strongest opposition party (one of the illegal ones), didn’t participate in the protests.

One freelance Al Jazeera news cameraman survived being shot by the police with 11 rubber-coated steel bullets, which were surgically removed over the following days.

There was a rumor that Gamal Mubarak, the son of the dictator, had fled to England with his family.

Nour Ayman Nour, the son of Ayman Nour, the leader of the El Ghad party, was arrested at from a protest, but escaped.

Hillary Clinton said that Mubarak’s government as “stable and looking for ways to respond†to the protestors’ demands.

OnJanuary 26th, protests continued, and activists made plans to have big protests on January 28th after prayers. Police began shooting protestors with birdshot instead of rubber-coated bullets. Hundreds of detainees were being held incommunicado with no access to lawyers. (The interior ministry said it had detained 860 people.) Hillary Clinton said that Mubarak should allow protestors to demonstrate, and “should implement reforms.†Crowds burned down government buildings in Suez and reported being “massacredâ€. Minister Rachid canceled his planned trip to the World Economic Forum.

ByJanuary 27th, at leastthree more peoplehad died. Mohamed ElBaradei returned to Egypt. Crowds stormed morgues in Suez to recover the bodies of the dead. The stock exchange halted trading for 45 minutes due to rapidly dropping stock prices. 140 protestors were charged with sedition. Ahmed Ezz, the country’s wealthiest businessman, was rumored to have fled the country. The Muslim Brotherhood pledged to participate in Friday’s protests. Crowds burned a fire station in Suez. Egypt canceled football games. ElBaradei published an op-ed entitled “A Manifesto for Change in Egyptâ€.

A major protest is planned for the 28th, right after early afternoon prayers.

On the morning ofJanuary 28th,they turned offnationwide internet access, BlackBerry messaging, and SMS, and there are rumors that satellite phones are jammed. The news media is supposedly forbidden from reporting. Ham radio and telephone systems are still in operation, including internationally.

Mona Eltahawy, an Egyptian expatriate journalist, has warned that this dark curtain being drawn around Egypt is intended to conceal a massacre.

The police began mass arrests of Muslim Brotherhood activists, and police started setting fire to cars for no apparent reason. Joe Biden says he wouldn’t call Mubarak a dictator.

One ISP remains connected internationally, permitting banks, the stock market, and activists to reach the rest of the world.

What is at stake in Egypt

First,Mubarak could fall. The new government could be democratic, military, or Islamist. 80 million people could be liberated from tyranny.

Tunisia is a tiny country with little influence. Egypt, however, isone of the most powerful countriesin the Middle East and in Africa. It houses al-Azhar university; it’s the origin of many of today’s Middle Eastern political movements; and it has immense military strength. Its current government is also a key ally of the US in the region.

If Egypt democratizes, it is very likely that other Arab autocrats will be overthrown by popular uprisings, too. Hundreds of millions of people could wrest back their futures from the hands of the greedy autocrats who rule them today.

Because the people of the region have been living under US-supported dictatorships for so long, it is likely that any new governments will be less favorable toward the US (and Israel) than the current ones — although Egypt is probably the most severe case of this.

It’s likely that such a transition would result in more violence in the short term, but less in the long term.

And the influence of the US would be dramatically reduced.

On the other hand, the army couldmassacre hundreds of thousands of people, finally putting to use all those US-made, US-funded guns and bombs. There is surely some level of violence at which the people would be cowed, even if there wouldn’t be anything left fighting for afterwards.

Obama’s choice to snub the Egyptian activists



Barack Obama, in his speech, naturally spoke most about the United States; but he also spoke about Korea, Russia, Chile, China, India, Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama, Pakistan, Brazil, El Salvador, Sudan, and Colombia. He even said he supports the revolution in Tunisia:
And we saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.


But he didn’t say a word about Egypt.

Of course, actually “supporting the democratic aspirations of all people†would mean that he supports the Egyptian protestors in their efforts to liberate their nation from its ruthless dictator. But Obama’s vice-president,Joe Biden, says he doesn’t even think Mubarak is a dictator, and that some of the protestors’ demands are not “legitimateâ€.

Obama is a first-class politician, maybe the best in the world. He wouldn’t leave out Egypt by accident.

It seems that he’s simply continuing the policy described earlier, supporting the Egyptian government no matter how oppressive it is, because it might survive and he believes its support is essential.

Perhaps he has calculated that any new government would likely be anti-US whatever he does, so he has nothing to lose by backing Mubarak. Or perhaps he thinks he can get away with taking no real action, and later claiming that he always supported the democratic aspirations of Egyptian people?

In any case, his support emboldens Mubarak for the massacre he is planning a few hours from now. Some of the innocent Egyptian blood shed today will be on Barack Obama’s hands.

It is often difficult and risky to take the side of justice, righteousness, freedom, and democracy. But those who side against them will not be remembered kindly by those who risked their lives for them.Obama has chosen cowardice and expediencyover principles and honesty. And that choice undermines his stirring rhetoric much more than any sloppy choice of words could have.

By Kragen Javier Sitaker,@kragenon Twitter.

Added 2011-01-28:If you want to mirror this page, including the images, an easy way to do it is to download thiscompressed archive(4.7MB).


This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
[h2]MONDAY, JANUARY 31, 2011[/h2]
[h3]The US State Department’s Position on Egypt[/h3]
I must note thatper the New York Times, the memo appears to have gone out that Mubrak no longer has US support, but that is a very long way from saying that the US is in favor of uncontrolled outcomes, despite the sudden adoption of “pro democracy†spin:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called on Sunday for “an orderly transition to meet the democratic and economic needs of the people†in Egypt, stopping short of asking its embattled president, Hosni Mubarak, to resign, but laying the groundwork for his departure.
Related

Mrs. Clinton, making a round of Sunday talk shows, said Mr. Mubarak’s future was up to the Egyptian people. But she said on “State of the Union†on CNN that the United States stood “ready to help with the kind of transition that will lead to greater political and economic freedom.â€

Speaking more bluntly than administration officials have so far, Mrs. Clinton said Mr. Mubarak’s appointment of a vice president was only the “bare beginning†of a process that must include a government dialogue with the protesters and “free, fair, and credible†elections, scheduled for September.


I’d love to have overheard the call with Netanyahu.

This little piece strikes me as a tad closer to the truth:

Given the fact that our little policy ofbacking dictators that are willing to bend to our interestshas just backfired in a rather serious way, one might think a fundamental reassessment might be in order. As former CIA director Emile Nakhleh writes in the Financial Times:
The possible toppling of the regime of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, following unprecedented street protests, will be as dramatic for US policy as the removal of the Shah of Iran over three decades ago. US policymakers were caught just as off guard in 1978 as they were last week. The question of “who lost Iran†that bedevilled US policy and intelligence leaders must now be crackling again in the air as those sitting in Washington watch Cairo burn. They were not prepared for the chaos following the Shah’s collapse, and they are not prepared for what may follow Mr Mubarak today…

The problems that faced the US since the ayatollahs took power in Iran could quickly be repeated in post-Mubarak Egypt. When Tunisia’s dictator was ousted three weeks ago, Washington and other western capitals did not believe the scenario could be replicated in Egypt, for the same tired arguments: the state is too strong, the security services are in full control, and the army is loyal to the ruler. A variant of this argument says that secular elites, frightened of Islamists, would not rise up against a fellow “secular†regime. Or even more condescendingly: the Egyptian people are apathetic and afraid….

Failure to anticipate the intensity, size and persistence of these anti-Mubarak protests show that US policymakers have ignored the social and economic realities. They have been lulled by a pro-stability narrative that has been spun out by Mr Mubarak and other Arab autocrats. Unfortunately for Cairo and Washington, the street is saying the game is up.

Before I left the US government four years ago, my colleagues and I on numerous occasions briefed policymakers on Egypt’s dire economic and social conditions. If those conditions were not addressed, we argued, the “Arab street†would boil over. We said the tipping point would occur when different segments of the population – notably secular and religious – coalesced against the regime. Yet when our policymakers expressed concern to Mr Mubarak and other autocrats, they were told: “Don’t worry about it, we have it under control.†No longer fighting foreign wars, their militaries and security services were trained against their peoples.


So the uprising was not a “whocouldanodeâ€; the powers that be were warned, but changing course no doubt looked inconvenient and costly. And while Nakhleh is hopeful that Obama will live up to his promises of a “new beginning†in Cairo, those of us who have seen his “change†bait and switch at close range know better.

Article 1:http://canonical.org/~kragen/egypt-massacre-sotu.html

http://canonical.org/~kragen/egypt-massacre-sotu.htmlArticle 2:http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/01/the-us-state-departments-position-on-egypt.html
 
Back
Top Bottom