Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby AlicetheKurious » Wed Mar 09, 2011 3:31 pm

Nordic wrote:
hava1 wrote:
Barak: Israel may seek additional $20 billion in US defense aid'
http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=211362



That's infuriating. He should get in line. Behind all the jobless homeless and sick people. Fuck him, what a prick.


He is what he is. You might want to direct your fury at those who are supposed to be accountable to YOU but who choose instead to take your money and give it to him and his kind, along with a huge arsenal of advanced weapons that they use to commit war crimes.

On edit: rhetorical you, not you you.
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby hava1 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:56 am

Did Mubarak's Secret Service Order Terror Attacks?
http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 89,00.html


that's re the 2005 terror attacks. I wonder if anything comes out about the tabba bombing, and if so, will Egypt release docs that point to Israeli false flags as well.
hava1
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:07 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:02 am

.

How much of this is the security forces, and how obvious is it?

- The harrassment of the not-a-million but hundred-women march?
- The riots and killings of Coptic Christians?

If it is them, is it obvious enough that it's exposed? What kind of stand is the new PM taking? The army? The protesters in the square? Are they under attack from thugs, plainclothes or uniformed?

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby vanlose kid » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:03 am

Egypt Government Warns Of "Counter-Revolution" As Military Regime Retrenches Power
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/09/2011 14:14 -0500

It is not like we don't have enough revolutions to worry about, now we have to be concerned about that good old staple: the Thermidorian reaction, made so popular during the first real revolution, and now about to be repeated in Egypt. According to Agence France Presse, Egypt's new government warned Wednesday of a "counter-revolution," the official MENA agency reported, following clashes in several parts of the capital widely blamed on diehards of the former regime. Those expecting press releases of the "Egypt is not Egypt" variety will not be disappointed: it was only on February 24 that Reuters reported that "Egypt's new military rulers assured the nation on Thursday they would guard against what protesters have called a counter-revolution by associates of Hosni Mubarak, deposed nearly two weeks ago in an 18-day uprising. The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces said it noted the use of political expressions such as "the counter revolution" and denounced what it said were "attempts to create strife", saying it was taking all steps to meet the people's demands." It is oddly ironic then that it is the very Supreme Council using threats of taboo "counter-revolution" suppression to get the people to finally understand that they deposed one dictator and replaced him with another.

From Dow Jones:

The government stressed that it "is fully committed to the interests of the people and to implementing the goals of the revolution; and it will stand firm against plans for a counter- revolution."


Of course by the time a government which attained power in a violent military coup stresses the futility of a counter revolution, it is too late. Look for concerns about Suez blockage to hit the Mainstream Media some time in late March.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/egypt- ... ches-power
"Teach them to think. Work against the government." – Wittgenstein.
User avatar
vanlose kid
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby vanlose kid » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:07 am

Rage, rage against counter-revolution
By Pepe Escobar

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas

Islamophobes of the world, shut up and listen to the sound of people power. Your artificial Middle East dichotomy - it's either "our" dictators or jihadism - was never more than a cheap trick. Political repression, mass unemployment and rising food prices are more lethal than an army of suicide bombers. This is the actual way history is written; a country of 80 million - two-thirds of which born after their dictator came to power in 1981, and no less than the heart of the Arab world - finally shatters the Wall of Fear and crosses to the side of self-respect.

Egypt's neo-Pharaoh Hosni Mubarak threw a curfew; people never left the streets. The police dissolved; citizens themselves organized for security. The tanks rolled in; people kept singing "hand in hand, the army and people are together". This is no think-tank-engineered color revolution, this is not regimented Islamists; this is average Egyptians bearing the national flag, "together, as individuals, in a great co-operative effort to reclaim our country", in the words of Egyptian Nobel prize-winning novelist Ahdaf Soueif.

But then, inevitable as death, counter-revolution reared its weaponized head. Made in USA fighter jets and military helicopters "bravely" flying low over the crowds at Tahrir Square (picture the Mubarak regime as the occupation army in Egypt; and imagine the West's outrage if this was happening in Tehran). Military commanders cozying up on state TV. A threat that made-in-USA tanks in the streets - manned by elite combat troops - would soon mean business (although soldiers told al-Jazeera reporters they would not fire a single bullet). To top it off, "subversive" al-Jazeera abruptly taken off the air.

Say hello to my suave torturer
The Egyptian intifada - among its multiple meanings - smashed to pieces the Western-concocted propaganda drive of "Arabs as terrorists". Now, minds finally decolonized, Arabs are inspiring the whole world, teaching the West how to go about democratic change. And guess what: one does not need "shock and awe", renditions, torture and trillions of Pentagon dollars to make it work! No wonder Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh, London or Paris never saw it coming.

We are all Egyptians now. The Latin American virus - bye-bye dictatorships plus arrogant, myopic neo-liberalism - has contaminated the Middle East. First Tunisia. Now Egypt. Next Yemen and possibly Jordan. Soon the House of Saud (no wonder they blamed the Egyptian people for the "riots"). But the Northern African political earthquake of Tunisia 2011 also got its spark from the 2010 mass strikes in Europe - Greece, Italy, France, the United Kingdom. Rage, rage, against political repression, dictatorship, police brutality, out of control food prices, inflation, miserable wages, mass unemployment.

Pharaoh 2011 does look like a remix of Shah of Iran 1979. Sure, there's no ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to lead the Egyptian masses, and former International Atomic Energy Agency chief, Egyptian Mohamed ElBaradei, is being accused by quite a few in the streets of "stealing our revolution". But it's hard not to remember that the Shah of Iran is buried in Cairo because Iranians wouldn't allow his body to rejoin the motherland.

The Pharaoh reacted to the Intifada by swiftly appointing his "suave" intelligence czar, Omar Suleiman, as vice president (the first since the Pharaoh took power in 1981), and virtual successor. Suleiman is a sinisterly suave Central Intelligence Agency-trusted "rendition" expert who has supervised countless torture sessions of alleged "terrorists" in Egyptian soil; the English-speaking lord of an Arabic Guantanamo. The Washington establishment is not exactly displeased.

Yet imperialists should take note: the last time the Egyptian street gelled this way was during the 1919 revolution against the British. Now, for Muslims and Christians, the working class, the middle class, the unemployed masses, lawyers, judges, scholars from al-Azhar University, students, peasants, theologians, independent journalists and bloggers, Muslim Brotherhood activists, the National Association for Change, the April 6th movement, for all them the days of Mubarak's Animal Farm are numbered.

Five opposition movements - including the Muslim Brotherhood - have mandated ElBaradei to negotiate the formation of a transitional "national salvation government". The odds that the Pharaoh will negotiate anything are next to zero. To add to the complexity the bulk of the urban young activist generation trusts "popular committees" rather than ElBaradei.

True, as far as next September's elections are concerned, Mubarak, 82, is dead. And so is son Gamal, 47. Unconfirmed reports swirl that in typical son-of-dictator mode he may have fled to London, using his British passport, with a lot of luggage, and is now in hiding in his townhouse in Knightsbridge.

The crucial, immediate future hangs on which way the Egyptian army will lean to. As it stands, even a Tiananmen option - hardcore repression - is not totally ruled out. Anyway, the regime's power play is clear; the Pharaoh might even board that plane - echoing the chants in the streets - but the regime, a military dictatorship, has got to stay.

General Hussein Tantawi, the army's commander in chief and minister of defense, who was being wined and dined by the Pentagon - from whom he gets US$1.3 billion a year in "aid" - flew back to Cairo. On a parallel track, the Pharaoh, desperately playing to the heart of the West's fears about "stability", tried to typecast the whole Intifada as an unruly mob of greedy slum dwellers bent on chaos and destruction. An array of Egyptian bloggers is adamant - the strategy is to scare people back into their homes begging for "security".

Issander El Amrani, on The Arabist blog, stresses his "hard time believing that Mubarak is still in charge, and that the hardcore of the regime is using extreme means to salvage its position". At street level, there's overwhelming suspicion of a Washington-orchestrated coup at the very top of the regime - the US/Israel betting on the formula "maybe no Mubarak/but definitely no regime change", even as Saudi, Israeli and official Egyptian media are pulling all stops to discredit the revolution. Just to put it into perspective; on the US one had Ronald Reagan (two terms), George H W Bush, Bill Clinton (two terms), George W Bush (two terms) and Barack Obama. In Cairo, one always had Mubarak.

The impoverished but proud, educated Egyptian middle class as well as the working class would love nothing better than a country following the rule of law and holding transparent elections. So how could they possibly trust Suleiman, a CIA-connected torturer, to conduct the transition? Not to mention a parliament totally controlled by the unbelievably corrupt Mubarak's National Democratic Party, whose headquarters was set on fire by the protesters.

Walk like a (dissident) Egyptian
I spent two months in Cairo and Alexandria in early 2003 waiting for the Bush invasion of Iraq - and hanging out mostly with the ocean of rejects of the Mubarak system, from college graduates to Sudanese immigrants, including dejected representatives of the 40% of the population that lives on less than $2 a day. Needless to say, all of them viewed Mubarak as a repulsive Washington poodle - and were in shock at the fate of Iraq, historically revered in Egypt as the eastern flank of the Arab nation. Their outlook of the regime was of the "throw the bums into the Nile" kind.

It was all very enlightening - and very painful - to experience on the ground the consequences of the Mubarak regime being a dutiful pupil of US-enforced neo-liberalism. Inevitable consequences were high inflation and widespread unemployment. The urban middle class had practically disappeared. The working class was subdued via ironclad control of unions. And the rural middle class - the regime's former base - also dwindled as more young people had to go urban to find a job (they didn't). What survived was a small, corrupt state-connected business class (most of whom are now scurrying off to Dubai on private jets).

So it's not puzzling that this is not an Islamic revolution, like Iran in 1979. It's the economy, stupid. Islam in Egypt today is essentially split between two currents; non-politicized Salafism and the Muslim Brotherhood - decimated by decades of repression and torture, and ultimately also without an explicit political program apart from providing social services neglected by the state.

The fact that the Brotherhood has been in the revolutionary backstage so far has to do with two factors. If it exposed itself too much, Mubarak would have had the perfect excuse to label the revolution as concocted by "terrorists". Additionally, the Brotherhood evaluated that this time it is only one actor among many.

This is a spontaneous popular movement following on the heels of Kefaya ("Enough!") - a "yellow" popular movement (its color of choice) by intellectuals and political activists whose slogan already in 2004 was La lil-tamdid, La lil-tawrith ("No to another mandate, no to a hereditary republic").

Kefaya, although an elite, leaderless, non-ideological movement, was the spark that launched a thousand movements, such as "Journalists for Change", Workers for Change", Doctors for Change" or "Youngsters for Change" that led to the current wave of urban, middle and lower middle class, web-savvy citizens organizing countless online forums.

Another crucial development has been the 2008 strike by textile workers in the Nile Delta town of Mahalla al-Kubra when three people were killed by Mubarak's security apparatus on April 16 - inspiring the homonymous online movement.

The Holy Grail was always to fully mobilize the masses. Last week, they finally crossed over. The Kefaya-influenced young still prefer popular committees over politicians to guide this revolution on the go. The pulse of the streets seems to point to many Egyptians not wanting any political or religious ideology to monopolize what is essentially a liquid, pluralistic, multiform movement bent on radically reforming the country and propelling it as a new model for the whole Arab world. It's all so seductively romantic, perhaps. But the yearning for a catharsis is inevitable after three decades of living in an Animal Farm.

I rebel, therefore I am
London School of Economics professor Fawaz Gerges has pointed out all this "goes beyond Mubarak. The barrier of fear has been removed. It is really the beginning of the end of the status quo in the region." It is in fact bigger; it's a graphic example of grassroots, organic political activism.

Or, in the elite speak of US foreign policy guru Dr Zbigniew Brzezinski, this is his dreaded "global political awakening" in action - the Generation Y across the developing world, angry, restless, outraged, emotionally shattered, mostly unemployed, stripped of their dignity, acting out their revolutionary potential and turning the status quo upside down (even with the Pharaoh promoting the biggest Internet blackout in history).

As much as Kefaya was the spark, this was also a Facebook revolution - now renamed in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and Suez as Sawrabook ("the book of the revolution"). The RASD ("monitoring", in Arabic) network was launched at the very first day of the protests, last Tuesday, configured as a sort of "observatory of the revolution".

It's crucial to note that at the time - less than a long week ago - al-Jazeera was not even on the scene and Egyptian state TV was showing, as usual, faded black and white movies. In only three days, RASD networked 400,000 people in Egypt and abroad. When the Pharaoh regime woke up it was already too late - Internet shutdown and all.

It's this spirit of solidarity in action that has spilled over to the streets in the form of young activists operating landline phones, documenting injuries or setting up impromptu clinics. Or in the form of average Cairo residents boarding up their homes and setting up neighborhood watches to protect themselves from looters and thugs - widely reported by bloggers to be carrying security services IDs and Mubarak regime-issued weapons.

As alarmed as the rarified global elites may be by now - one just has to follow the labyrinth of ambiguities oozing from Washington and European capitals - at least Brzezinski has been wired enough to catch the drift, as in "major world powers, new and old ... face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low."

The new order is dying, but the new has not yet been born. The Age of Rage in the arc from Northern Africa to the Middle East may be on - but still no one knows what the next geopolitical configuration will be. Will people have a say - or will it all be corralled and controlled by the powers that be?

Egypt won't become a working democracy because of lack of political infrastructure. But it has to restart from scratch, with most of the opposition almost as reviled as the regime. The younger generation - empowered by the feeling of being on the right side of history - will be crucial.

They won't accept an optical illusion of regime change that ensures continuous "stability". They won't accept being hijacked by the US and Europe and presented with a new puppet. What they want is the shock of the new; a truly sovereign government, no more neo-liberalism, and a new Middle East political order. Expect the counter-revolution to be fierce. And extending way beyond a few bunkers in Cairo.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009). He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB01Ak02.html


*
"Teach them to think. Work against the government." – Wittgenstein.
User avatar
vanlose kid
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby vanlose kid » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:12 am

Egypt: Counter-Revolution Brought To You By...
Submitted by Pepe Escobar
February 7, 2011 - 8:26am
...Originally published at Asia Times

It will be a long, winding, treacherous and perhaps bloody road before the popular Egyptian revolution even dreams of approaching the post-Suharto Indonesian model (the largest, most plural democracy in a Muslim-majority country) or the current Turkish model (also sanctioned at the ballot box).

As predicted (Rage, rage against the counter-revolution - Asia Times Online, February 1) the counter-revolution is on, and brought by the usual suspects; the Egyptian army; Mubarakism's comprador elites; and the triad of Washington, Tel Aviv and European capitals.

After more than two weeks of protests on the streets of Egypt against President Hosni Mubarak, this is what the White House's "orderly transition" is all about - with Washington still playing all sides even as the Egyptian street smashed the mirror and defied for good the "stability"/terror imposed on it by the dark side.

The counter-revolution goes way beyond comments by Frank Wisner, a United States Central Intelligence Agency/Wall Street asset who is US President Barack Obama's secret agent to Cairo and a personal friend of the Egyptian president, on the desirability that Mubarak stay and supervise the transition.

It comes across almost casually as Robert Springborg, professor of national security affairs at the US Naval Postgraduate School, tells Reuters, "The military will engineer a succession. The West - the US and the EU [European Union] - are working to that end. We are working closely with the military ... to ensure a continuation of a dominant role of the military in the society, the polity and the economy." Translation; erase the people to ensure "stability".

The tent city in Tahrir Square in the capital, Cairo, is very much aware that decades of Egypt as a US client-state plus endless International Monetary Fund/World Bank manipulations created the perfect economic storm that was a key cause of the revolution. That's also a key cause for the street to want - according to one of its top slogans - the whole regime brought down. Connecting the dots, the street also knows that a truly representative, sovereign Egyptian government cripples the entire US-controlled Middle East power arrangement.

Historically, what Washington always really feared is Arab nationalism, not crackpot self-made jihadis. Arab nationalism is intrinsically, viscerally, opposed to the 1979 Camp David peace accords, which have neutralized Egypt and left Israel with a free iron hand to proceed with its slow strangulation of Palestine; for As'ad Abu Khalil of the Angry Arab website, every Middle East expert who worked on the accords "helped construct a monstrous dictatorship in Egypt".

Former Israeli peace negotiator Daniel Levy, now with the New America Foundation, spells it out further for the New York Times, "The Israelis are saying, apres Mubarak, le deluge ... The problem for America is, you can balance being the carrier for the Israeli agenda with Arab autocrats, but with Arab democracies, you can't do that."

Correction; in fact it's after Mubarak not the deluge but "our torturer" - Vice President Omar Suleiman, the head of the Mukhabarat, widely dubbed by protesters "Sheikh al-Torture", after his performance tossing at least 30,000 people in jail as suspected jihadis, accepting CIA renditions, and torturing the rendered. Innocents among them include Sheikh Libi, who, under torture, confessed that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's goons were training al-Qaeda jihadis; former US secretary of state Colin Powell had no qualms using this "information" at his infamous speech to the United Nations in February 2002 justifying war on Iraq.

Throw the bums into the Nile
Essentially, this is what the Egyptian street wants. Mubarak down immediately. Suleiman starts a national dialogue with an opposition coalition, observed by a neutral UN delegation. Then a constitutional assembly is established to amend articles 77, 78 and 88 of the constitution to enable any Egyptian to be a candidate for the presidency.

The state of emergency (in effect for over 25 years) is lifted. The judicial system establishes monitoring bodies for future elections. A national coalition body is established to monitor the transition during the next six months, and organize elections according to international standards. New guidelines are set for legal political parties not vetted by Mubarakism's National Democratic Party (NDP) but by an independent neutral body. The country starts over with the rule of law and an independent judiciary.

The youth groups central to the revolution go way beyond. They want; the resignation of the entire NDP, including Suleiman; a broad-based transitional government appointed by a 14-strong committee, made up of senior judges, youth leaders and members of the military; the election of a council of 40 public intellectuals and constitutional experts who will draw up a new constitution under the supervision of the transitional government, then put it to the people in a referendum; fresh local and national elections; the end of emergency law; the dismantling of the whole state security apparatus; and the trial of top regime leaders, including Mubarak.

The street simply does not trust the self-described "Council of Wise Men" - which includes secretary general of the Arab League Amr Moussa; Nobel prize-winner and Obama adviser Ahmed Zuwail; professor Mohamed Selim al-Awa; president of the Wafd party Said al-Badawi; powerful Cairo businessman Nagib Suez and lawyer Ahmed Kamal Aboul Magd - who are all in favor of Suleiman presiding over the "orderly transition", under the pretext that the opposition leadership is extremely divided and cannot agree on anything. But to believe that Suleiman will agree to dissolve his own party, dissolve parliament, dissolve the police state and change the constitution, they must be all under the spell of an Orientalist opium dream.

For the moment, the new Wafd party (six seats) and Tagammu (five seats) are the largest regime-approved opposition parties in parliament (518 seats). Then there's al-Ghad ("Tomorrow"), founded by Ayman Nour (he contested the last presidential election and ended up in jail). The Generation Y in the streets views them all as irrelevant; they congregate around the Kefaya ("Enough") movement, and have just formed a Youth Front for Egypt.

For the moment the only opposition group spelling out key economic demands is the brand new Egyptian Federation for Independent Unions; they want a monthly minimum wage of 1,200 Egyptian pounds (about US$204), annual raises matching inflation and guaranteed rights to bonuses and benefits.

Obviously nothing will change in Egypt without a new constitution capable of guaranteeing political rights to Copts, Shi'ites, Baha'i, Nubians, Bedouins, you name it. At the same time, secular Egyptians, Christians, the brand new Youth Front for Egypt, Nasserists, New Wafd partisans, socialists, all seem to agree there is no specter of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) turning Egypt into sharia law. Superstar scholar Tariq Ramadan, whose grandfather Hasan al-Banna founded the MB in 1928, stresses this is "completely an ideological projection to protect geopolitical interests".

The MB by all local estimates does not represent more than 22% of the Muslim population; so 78% wouldn't vote for them. Egyptian society already practices what can be considered a very moderate brand of Islam. Islam is the state religion; the hijab and the niqab are common, as well as the galabiya for men.

And for those brandishing the specter of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran (and who obviously cannot tell a Shi'ite from a Sunni) Egypt's social and religions composition is completely different from Iran's. What's definitely more revealing is what the Arab world itself considers to be a threat. An August 2010 Brookings poll showed that only 10% of Arabs regard Iran as a threat; instead they consider the US (77%), and even more Israel (88%) as the major threats.

Allow me to spread you with democracy
The street has pyramids of reasons to worry. All evidence points out to these days that shook the world evolving towards a Washington-spun definition of "stability", with an "orderly transition" conducted by a former torturer and the regime fully in place, buying time, arguing that all crucial constitutional changes need to be discussed - plus the internal Egyptian argument that Mubarak cannot step down now either because it's unconstitutional or because then it would be chaos.

And as the standoff persists - even with the street still fully mobilized - what passes for dialogue between the regime and a few sectors of the opposition, including the usurpers of the revolution, is bound to split the already divided and essentially leaderless protest movement. Washington is not exactly unhappy. Nor are the EU minions. The EU's foreign policy chief Lady Catherine Ashton defends Suleiman - with whom she has spoken - as having a "plan in place" to meet some of the protester's demands. The crucial operative word here is "some".

Imagine the result of all this sound and fury, the hundreds dead and thousands wounded by the regime - in addition to the untold thousands eliminated these past three decades - being this aseptic "orderly transition" conducted by "Sheik al-Torture", hailed by politicians and corporate media in Washington, European capitals and Tel Aviv as a democratic victory for the street revolution/collective will of the Egyptian people.

Minimalist political/economic reforms are already being dangled as rotten carrots - even as foreign journalists keep being arrested, goons terrorize protest leaders and state media remains in Animal Farm mode. Egyptian public opinion is being slowly, methodically split. The military junta is showing no cracks. Suleiman and Annan are Washington darlings. Defense Minister Field Marshal Mohammed Hussein Tantawi is Pentagon supremo Robert Gates' darling.

The military dictatorship certainly wants America to keep spreading democracy in Egypt - as in aid money paying for Abrams tanks assembled in suburban Cairo, Boeing selling CH-47 Chinook helicopters, Lockheed Martin selling F-16s (a $230 million contract), Sikorsky selling Black Hawks, L-3 Ocean Systems selling equipment for detection of submarine threats, CAE from Tampa, Florida selling C-130H weapons system, plus an influx of 450 brand new Hellfire II missiles, not to mention the very helpful tear gas canisters from Combined Systems Inc (CSI) in Jamestown, Pennsylvania.

And don't forget those Pentagon contracts showing the US government spent over $110 million to buy and maintain Mubarak's fleet of nine Gulfstream jets. Those in Tahrir Square would be wondering whether any one of the Gulfstreams could be used to jet him to Guantanamo?

A wily counter-revolution is exactly what the revolution needs right now to remain on maximum alert. When "orderly transition" is finally seen for what it is, there's a great probability not only Egypt but the whole Arab world will become a ball of fire.
..............................

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009). He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

http://antemedius.com/content/egypt-cou ... rought-you


*
"Teach them to think. Work against the government." – Wittgenstein.
User avatar
vanlose kid
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby hava1 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:27 am

Alice, again on the feminist issue, if u care and have a take.

I am seeing that the "feminist mafia" sort of, in Israel is tied up closely to CHannel 10 here, which kind leads the issue in the public. Channel 10 is owned by Yossi Miman, former Mossad but also the borker bn Mubarak and the gas deal. Another leading feminist PR lady, Hana Beit Halachmi, is also family of a top ISraeli businessmen (and former whatever...) who long lives in Cairo (maybe he left now, but used to), also tied up to the same gas group.
Naturally, the ones who would be doing business with Mubarak would come from the "progressive" sector here, but it seems like a fishy connection, one of those USA=ISraeli "export democracy" Inc when convenient and "export sex slaves" when otherwise needed...to schmooze whoever is the "moderate arab" dealt with (in this case mubarak).

It appears like the same group is pulling the feminist card for political agenda, here and in Egypt.

I dont have anything in particular except a hunch of an "old guard" hypocritical elite that sponsors both bribes (with trafficking when needed) AND the feminist card. Wouldnt be surprised to find a fourth leg in Italy.

----
That kind of feminism, I want to give an example. I met a group which is pretty prominent here for women's causes. I met the chairlady and her vice p. whom I didnt know. In the intro, the viceP lady said her name, and that her husband is the marketting CEO of IMI, a leading arms corp in ISrael. Since I personally know IMI uses sex slaves to bend tender bids of arms deals abroad, I had mentioned that initially. The lady then moved in her chair and said she doesnt know that. I said, well that's what Im here to talk about. SO she said, this- "I do not cut the branch I sit on", and the meeting was over.

I have had numerous discussions with feminists in Israel over the issue, and similar. Their opinion, quite simple, is that its ok to operate from this position and politically, there is nothing to do about the IMI (or similar) trafficking, which does not mean other things cannot be done at the same time. and that "politics is the art of the possible". Etc.
hava1
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:07 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby hava1 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:28 am

deleted double
hava1
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:07 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby 23 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:36 pm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03269.html
Saudi police open fire at protest

CAIRO -- Saudi police have opened fire at a rally in the kingdom's east in an apparent escalation of efforts to stop planned protests.

Government officials have warned they will take strong action if activists take to the streets after increasing calls for large protests around the oil-rich kingdom to press for democratic reforms.

A witness in the eastern city of Qatif says gunfire and stun grenades were fired at several hundred protesters marching in the city streets Thursday. The witness, speaking on condition of anonymity because he feared government reprisal, said police in the area opened fire. The witness saw at least one protester injured.
"Once you label me, you negate me." — Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
23
 
Posts: 1548
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:57 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby vanlose kid » Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:08 pm

interesting, considering the author's background.

Livni's guidance on Arab democracy
Robert Grenier examines Tzipi Livni's disingeuous calls for a "code" on all democracies.
Robert Grenier Last Modified: 09 Mar 2011 17:42 GMT

According to Livni's principles of democracies, participation in the Arab world would be hindered, and would greatly limit democratic movements not only in the wider Arab world, but within Israel itself [CC - Truthout.org]

I don't have a string of letters following my name, and so I am not qualified to make clinical judgements. But it seems to me that for a brief period, at least, following the attacks of September 11, 2001, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon went crazy.

On October 4, 2001, Sharon made a speech - more of a rant, really - which literally shocked official Washington. He attacked US efforts to generate support among Arab countries for the coming war on terror. "Do not try to appease the Arabs at our expense," he said. "Israel will not be Czechoslovakia."

To president George W. Bush and his cabinet, preoccupied by imminent hostilities in Afghanistan, and preparing to lead a hoped-for international coalition against terrorism, the raw, emotional words from the Israeli leader comparing a US president to Nazi appeaser Neville Chamberlain came like a bolt out of the blue. The following day, the Israeli leader launched the heaviest Israeli military incursion into Palestinian-controlled areas since the start of the second Intifada the year before, effectively ending a cease-fire only recently agreed with PLO Chairman Arafat. As secretary of state Powell remarked at the time, "Sharon's behaviour in the last few days borders on the irrational."

But to those familiar with the workings of Sharon's fevered mind, and with the history of US-Israel relations more generally, there was a clear explanation for these outbursts. For decades, the only international relationship which has mattered to Israel has been its tie with the US. So long as America can be kept on-side, the thinking has gone, Israel can withstand any pressures, regional or international. Critical influence over US policy, then, is not something to be left to chance. And in the aftermath of the most devastating surprise-attack on the US since Pearl Harbor, when US policy was entering a period of rapid transition, there was no telling what the US might do.

Democracy as a threat

It was clear in the aftermath of 9/11 that if the US were to take effective action against Islamically-inspired terrorism, it would need to seek the support of Muslim countries to demonstrate that it was not engaging in a war against Islam. There was talk at the time of plans to launch a new Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative to be announced at the UN; there was even talk of US support for a Palestinian state. In the days following 9/11, defence secretary Rumsfeld made a quick tour of key Middle East countries seeking support; he did not bother to stop in Tel Aviv. In such an atmosphere, for those of Ariel Sharon's turn of mind, paranoia was the order of the day. Even if most Americans were not yet "connecting the dots", Sharon was seized of the guilty knowledge that it was his and Israel's continuing repression and occupation of Palestinian lands which lay near the heart of Al Qaeda's appeal for Muslims. He explained his thinking at the time to the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth:

"There is a moment when you discover things are being done behind your back. I decided, this far and no more. A war is soon to begin. Israel will be asked to make excessive concessions to the Palestinians. Should it refuse, it will be accused of undermining the war. It was the last possible moment [to act]."

I was reminded of this brief, long-forgotten chapter in US-Israeli relations just a few days ago, when I came upon an op-ed in The Washington Post authored by Israeli politician Tzipi Livni, penned in reaction to the "democratic revolutions" taking hold in the Arab Middle East. Few Americans, I'm willing to bet, are equipped to understand the Israeli leader's words, or the fears which lurk behind them.

Once again, US policy in the Middle East appears to be at an inflection point. Indeed, the history of the entire region is at an inflection point. And once again, a US president is expressing a dangerous degree of solidarity with the aspirations of the Arabs. The US administration has even indicated that there is a place for participation by the Muslim Brothers in a democratic Egypt and, one presumes, a place for democratic participation by Islamists elsewhere as well. If Ms. Livni provides us any indication, Israeli leaders are again experiencing a period of fear and trepidation not unlike that which gripped Ariel Sharon nearly 10 years ago.

Well they might be concerned. The future direction and ultimate outcomes of the revolutionary forces unleashed in the region remain very much to be seen. But to those who suppose that Israel's greatest perceived threat in the region is a descent into political chaos and an increase in regional terrorism - well, I would advise them to read Ms. Livni's column carefully. For once one has stripped away the self-serving cant and deciphered the coded language, it becomes clear that what the leader of the Kadima party - and, one presumes, other Israeli political leaders as well - fear most in the region is…democracy itself.

Delegitimisation

It is important to remember that Israel has never wished to see democracy among the Arabs, whether in Palestine or anywhere else. Given the opportunity to exert pressure in favour of Palestinian democracy after the Oslo Accords, for example, the Israelis did much the opposite: Far better to deal with leaders relatively immune from popular pressures, with whom cynical deals could be cut, rather than with genuine politicians who are constrained to be responsive to their constituencies.

For a putative democratic leader to simply come out against Arab democracy before an American audience, however, would be rather awkward, to say the least. But there is too much at stake here for Israel, to do nothing: In Livni's own words, "…mere anxiety is not a policy for any leader". Moreover, Israel is not about to repeat its "mistake" of 2006, when it allowed Palestinian elections to go forward, and had to exert great ex-post-facto efforts to undermine their results once the wrong party - Hamas - had won them.

No, this time Tzipi Livni has a far more clever idea: To delegitimise those parties whose presence it finds inconvenient before they can ever participate in an election. The solution? International acceptance of a "universal code for participation in democratic elections". Under this scheme, every party hoping to contest elections would first have "to embrace, in word and deed, a set of core democratic principles: the renunciation of violence and the acceptance of state monopoly over the use of force, the pursuit of aims by peaceful means, commitment to the rule of law and to equality before the law, and adherence to international agreements to which their country is bound."

Livni's transparent expectation is that Islamist parties, in particular, would not be able to meet these criteria, and that any Arab country coming dangerously close to genuine democracy would be put on notice "that electing an undemocratic party would have negative international consequences." In short, if Israel were to hoodwink, say, the US and the EU into accepting these "democratic principles," it would not have such a hard time subjecting Islamist parties to the Hamas treatment, delegitimise the entire democratic process, and help ensure America's continued alienation from the Arab world - which, in the end, is precisely the point.

An inconvenient truth

Of course, there is one small inconvenience in these proposed international criteria for acceptance as a genuinely democratic party: The vast majority of Israeli parties, and certainly Livni herself, could not meet them. "Renunciation of violence…and the pursuit of aims by peaceful means"? Given Israel's past use of violence in pursuit of its interests, surely Livni cannot be serious. But let's take a moment here to consider more carefully the issue of violence. My own country came into being as a result of a violent revolt against perceived repression and abuse of inalienable rights.

Violence? The US has never hesitated to employ violence itself or to support those employing it on their own behalf in legitimate self-defence or in resistance to oppression - and quite properly so. However, all too often, the US, at least where Israel is concerned, has allowed opposition to terrorism to be conflated with opposition to the use of violence. On the contrary, opposition to terrorism is opposition to the illegitimate use of violence against innocent non-combatants. To oppose terrorism is by no means to oppose legitimate resistance to oppression.

I happen to believe that Palestinians are best advised not resort to violence, simply because in the context of their struggle, non-violent resistance, properly applied, would serve their cause far better than resort to violence. I'll gladly compare counter-terrorism credentials with anyone - but certainly have no objection in principle to the use of violence in legitimate resistance to an oppressor.

Renunciation of violence and acceptance of state monopoly over the use of force are legitimate demands of political actors within a state, but that is hardly Livni's concern here. When Israelis demand renunciation of violence, what they really mean is that others must accept their right to abuse Palestinians with impunity.

And what of "commitment to the law and to equality before the law"? Let's remember that it was Livni who was revealed in the Palestine Papers to insist repeatedly that Israel's Arab citizens should in fact be considered Palestinians, and who made clear that given the opportunity to do so, if an agreement on a two-state solution were ever reached, she would support negotiated adjustments to Israel's borders designed specifically to disenfranchise Israeli Arabs and transfer them, without their consent, to a Palestinian state. So much for equality before the law.

And finally, regarding adherence to international agreements: Again, can Livni be serious, given Israel's blatant contempt for a long string of UN resolutions applied to it, dating back to the beginning of its existence and extending over many decades? As for adherence to agreements "in word and deed", who can forget Israeli leaders' systematic refusal to meet the terms of the Oslo Accords, in spite of their nominal acceptance of its obligations?

These are but the early days of a hoped-for transition to democracy in a significant part of the Arab world. There is much that can go wrong, and many reasons for pessimism. But as the process moves forward, the US should beware the advice of putative friends whose interests do not nearly coincide with America's. This cynical and disingenuous essay from a prominent Israeli politician is but an early salvo in what promises to be a long Israeli campaign to undermine US support for Arab democratisation. US politicians should understand the motives which lie behind these efforts, and resist them at all cost.

Robert Grenier was the CIA's chief of station in Islamabad, Pakistan, from 1999 to 2002. He was also the director of the CIA's counter-terrorism centre.


http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/op ... 3851.html#


*
"Teach them to think. Work against the government." – Wittgenstein.
User avatar
vanlose kid
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby wintler2 » Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:27 pm

Holy moley, the things that slip by..

Hidden energy crisis in the Middle East
By Victor Kotsev

TEL AVIV - While most of the world is preoccupied with the impact of instability in the Middle East on oil prices and the world economy, a different kind of energy crisis is unfolding practically unnoticed. An ongoing reshuffle in natural gas supplies has left at least two countries - Israel and Jordan - without much of the gas they need.

In general, the politics of Middle Eastern gas will probably be just as dramatically affected by the upheaval as those of oil, but will follow a separate trajectory. Their effect will, at least initially, be more local in nature, and will vary for each country. However, the energy status quo in the region is slated to change dramatically.

On February 5, at the height of the uprising against then-president Hosni Mubarak, a massive explosion rocked a gas terminal near the Egyptian town of El-Arish. The head of the Egyptian natural gas company, Magdy Toufik, blamed it on ''a small amount of gas leaking',' but it soon emerged that the most likely cause was an act of terror - in some accounts, two separate terrorist attacks. According to reports in the Associated Press, ''The terminal's guards testified that [four masked gunmen] stormed the terminal in two cars, briefly restrained the guards and then set off the explosives by remote control.''

The terminal lay on the Arab gas pipeline carrying Egyptian gas to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and even Turkey. The section that branches off of that pipeline into Israel was not affected, but Egypt shut off gas supplies to the Jewish state as well. Egyptian authorities claimed that the system needed ''to cool off',' and that they would resume supplies within a week or so.

Over a month and US$150 million of losses later (for Israel and Jordan combined), the gas is still not flowing. Egyptian authorities are quickly changing their tune: having missed at least two self-imposed deadlines to resume the supplies, until a few days ago they continued to insist that the pipeline would be activated very shortly.

Now, however, they have started to ask for an increase in the price at which they are selling the gas. ''Egypt has officially informed Jordan that the gas supplies will resume only if Amman signs an agreement on new rates,'' an unnamed official told Agence France-Presse on Tuesday. ..



According to a report in the Israeli business daily Globes, last Sunday, ''Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ... proposed to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu-Mazen) to jointly develop the Gaza Marine and Noa offshore natural gas fields. The Noa field, which has 7-8 billion cubic meters of gas could replace Egyptian gas, if its supply is not resumed, while the 30-billion cubic meter Gaza Marine field could meet the electricity needs of Gaza's 1.5 million residents.''

This specific proposal is, at best, tongue-in-cheek. The political climate right now would hardly allow for such a joint project to develop. The Gaza rulers from Hamas have a bitter feud with the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank; both Netanyahu and Abbas are weak internally, challenged by right-wing factions in their own governments. With all the instability in the region, one can never be sure if one's partners of today will still be around tomorrow.

However, under different conditions - for example, a significant advance in the peace talks - the idea could be quite viable. Israel is already drawing most of the gas that it consumes from a smaller find nearby, called Mary-B, which is expected to be exhausted in a year or two.

Other aspects of this thinking - the idea of energy independence for Gaza - can also aide unilateral action by Israel. In my article ''A major reshuffle in the Levant'' (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MC05Ak07.html, Asia Times Online, March 4, 2011), I argued that Israel will most likely attempt to disengage fully from Gaza in the near future. Netanyahu's statement can be interpreted in this context as well.
..



Most of Libya's gas exports go via the Greenstream underwater pipeline to Italy; the Greenstream has been shut off since February 22, meaning that Italy is hit the hardest. According to a Reuters report, however, the closure could actually work to Italy's favor. ''The lack of Libyan gas means [Italian oil and gas company] Eni can take delivery of fuel it would have to pay for anyway under take-or-pay (ToP) contracts with Russian export monopoly Gazprom,'' Reuters writes. [4]

If this analysis is correct, it is conceivable that Gaddafi very carefully picked which resource to shut off first, taking into account the sensitivities of his friend Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. By contrast, and despite reductions and the bombing on Wednesday of the major oil terminal of Libya, Gaddafi's oil exports to Europe have not stopped, as a recent Financial Times report indicates. ..

More at link.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby DevilYouKnow » Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:37 pm

^^^ CIA's top man in Pakistan on 9/11 2001. Interesting background indeed.
DevilYouKnow
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:49 pm

DevilYouKnow wrote:^^^ CIA's top man in Pakistan on 9/11 2001. Interesting background indeed.


Who? What'd I miss?
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby DevilYouKnow » Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:50 pm

Vanlose's post above the one above mine.
DevilYouKnow
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Mar 11, 2011 4:05 pm

DevilYouKnow wrote:Vanlose's post above the one above mine.


Ah, Robert Grenier, author of that column.

http://www.historycommons.org/searchRes ... &search=Go

Hm, according to standard news reports supposedly involved in:
- Negotiating with Taliban in the weeks after 9/11 but before the invasion. (He claims they rejected an offer to hand over OBL.)
- Moved to Iraq as CIA mission manager, supposedly disliked torture and renditions and was bypassed by Kiriakou, his supposed underling.
- One of many caught up in the complicated chain of those spreading around Plame's name to punish Wilson, supposedly didn't want to reveal her.
- CIA counterterrorism chief pushed out in 2006 for not being rabidly for renditions and torture.

On the Plame thing, one of the items that convicted Libby was lying about talking to Grenier:
Libby also claims not to remember discussing Plame Wilson with Robert Grenier, the CIA’s Iraq mission manager. “I don’t think I discussed Wilson’s wife’s employment with, with Mr. Grenier,” he testifies. “I think if I discussed something it was what they knew about the request about Mr., about Mr. Wilson. I don’t recall the content of the discussion.” Asked “if there was an urgency to the conversation” with Grenier, Libby replies, “I recall that I was reaching Mr. Grenier—I was trying to reach Mr. McLaughlin [John McLaughlin, then the CIA’s deputy director, who spoke to Cheney the day before about Plame Wilson—see 12:00 p.m. June 11, 2003) and couldn’t, and spoke instead to Mr. Grenier. And so if I did that instead of just waiting for Mr. McLaughlin, it was probably something that was urgent in the sense that my boss, the vice president, wanted, wanted to find something out. Not, not necessarily in the real world, but he wanted an answer and usually we try and get him the answer when we can.” Libby did indeed meet with Grenier, and quizzed him about Plame Wilson (see 2:00 p.m. June 11, 2003).


The duality of the state, one side thinking it's according to law and civilian rule, the other understanding it's about the exceptions, the "emergency," exists even in the institutions of the deep state itself, such as the CIA. Or to put it less charitably, this guy seems to be a due-process hair in the Langley beard they stick on the anarchic self-licking spook hydra.

.
Last edited by JackRiddler on Fri Mar 11, 2011 4:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 171 guests