Egyptian riots

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Early on most people were observing that there were a lot of women and children, especially at the 'Million man march.'

I think that since it turned violent they are staying out of harm's way, unsurprisingly. And that picture I linked is mostly of Muslim's praying, men and women do that separately anyway.

Women were definitely back in the streets today. I don't think you'll see them at night, though.

Yep, and some women here:

IMAGE(http://blogs.aljazeera.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/blogpostFeaturedImage/images/alex.jpg)

and

IMAGE(http://blogs.aljazeera.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/blogpostFeaturedImage/images/egyptfriaftrnoon.jpg)

There's definitely more men, but the same applies in unrest here, I don't think it's an Egyptian thing, more a 'not wanting to get run over by police vehicles and hit with rubber bullets' thing. Women are far more sensible.

Revolution tends to be a sausage party.

*Edit*

Hearsay, but interesting.

6:01pm Media in Montenegro is reporting that Hosni Mubarak may find exile in their country, and that his son and close personal friends are preparing things for him to arrive there. Montenegro is where deposed Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, sought refuge.

Another thing I saw in a headline on a RSS feed, but on a website I can't access from work. The Muslim Brotherhood has said they won't go for leadership during elections.

I don't have any sources to back it up, but there was a guy speaking on NPR last night that said the Muslim brotherhood isn't nearly as scary as the West thinks. It is a fundamentalist Muslim political group, yes, but if you replace "Muslim" with "Christian," you just described a huge chunk of Congress. They believe that religion should guide their politics, but they also generally want to be at peace with their neighbors.

They are no more or less scary than fundamentalist Christian politicians.

....

(take that how you will)

Seth wrote:

I don't have any sources to back it up, but there was a guy speaking on NPR last night that said the Muslim brotherhood isn't nearly as scary as the West thinks. It is a fundamentalist Muslim political group, yes, but if you replace "Muslim" with "Christian," you just described a huge chunk of Congress. They believe that religion should guide their politics, but they also generally want to be at peace with their neighbors.

They are no more or less scary than fundamentalist Christian politicians.

....

(take that how you will)

Yeah, I saw something a couple of days ago too, the Brotherhood did have a rougher past, but they renounced violence a while ago, and have stuck to it.

Oh, and here.

The Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's biggest opposition group, has no ambitions to run for the Egyptian presidency, a leading member of the Islamist movement told al-Jazeera television on Friday.

Mohammed al-Beltagi also said government representatives who had invited the Muslim Brotherhood to talks on political reform had indicated that the group, which is formally banned, would receive official recognition as a party.

"We are ready to negotiate after [the end of] the Mubarak regime," he said, adding that the government was "flirting" with the group.

"We have said clearly that we have no ambitions to run for the presidency, or posts in a coalition government," he said.

Muslim Brotherhood activists have been taking part in mass protests against President Hosni Mubarak's rule, but the group says it has had no role in organising the demonstrations.

Will Egypt continue with the Presidential model or move to a Parliamentary model?

Regime seeks honourable exit for Mubarak.

After 11 days of anti-government protests marked by deadly unrest, the regime appears to be trying to find an "honourable exit" for Egypt's 30-year President Hosni Mubarak.

The 82-year-old Mubarak has promised he will not stand for re-election in September polls, but anti-regime protesters have kept up demands for his immediate ouster.

On Friday, newly-appointed Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq appeared to echo that call in comments to Al-Hurra television station, stressing the need for an "honourable departure" for the embattled ruler.

From the Twitters

NewshoundNews The protests are set to continue until Mubarak leaves office - people are just not leaving the Square.

People are in for the long haul, at least the weather in Egypt is better than the Ukraine.

Encouraging, but on the other hand, with the government running reporters out of the country, it makes you wonder if they don't want them to see something.

So here's a totally awesome bit of Christians forming a human shield to protect Muslims during prayer. Which is probably repayment for the Muslims doing the same to the Coptics a month ago. You stay classy, Egypt. And I mean it.

[size=6]It's not what you think, it's just a speck of dust in my eye. *sniff*[/size]

Minarchist wrote:

So here's a totally awesome bit of Christians forming a human shield to protect Muslims during prayer. Which is probably repayment for the Muslims doing the same to the Coptics a month ago. You stay classy, Egypt. And I mean it.

[size=6]It's not what you think, it's just a speck of dust in my eye. *sniff*[/size]

I saw that too. I thought it was one of the best things I have seen come out of this, and it actually gave me hope for the whole Christian / Muslim debacle. Very touching, indeed. Maybe, just maybe, we won't destroy ourselves as a species after all.

Minarchist wrote:

So here's a totally awesome bit of Christians forming a human shield to protect Muslims during prayer. Which is probably repayment for the Muslims doing the same to the Coptics a month ago. You stay classy, Egypt. And I mean it.

[size=6]It's not what you think, it's just a speck of dust in my eye. *sniff*[/size]

*Cough*

:p

I agree totally, it's really awesome. Gives me chills, I'm such a cheeseball.

*edit*

Bwahahahahaha.

People are getting nervous all over the Middle East.

Saudi top cleric blasts Egypt protests

Saudi Arabia's top Islamic scholar condemned anti-government protests in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere as a plot by enemies of Islam to spread instability, Saudi newspapers said on Saturday.

The longer he holds, the hardest it'll be for them to force him out. I'm trying to remain optimistic, but having been in a similar situation it worries me they'll let the guard down and allow the guy to rehold power or play a new trick that'll make previous agreements moot. "I was being blackmailed, I really have no intention of stepping down" Something of that nature.

Mubarak has stepped down as head of NDP party. Interesting to see the consequences of that.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Mubarak has stepped down as head of NDP party. Interesting to see the consequences of that.

Whole lotta nothing as far as the protesters are concerned.

Rat Boy wrote:
MrDeVil909 wrote:

Mubarak has stepped down as head of NDP party. Interesting to see the consequences of that.

Whole lotta nothing as far as the protesters are concerned.

It's not what they want, but in many countries with one party states government is an extension of the party. If he's losing his grip on the party it means that he's probably going to lose his grip on government next.

Another interesting perspective from Twitter

@avinunu: Mubarak is no longer relevant. Struggle now between Egyptian people's will for democracy, and US imperial power to prevent it. #jan25

Was watching a bit of Al Jazeera today at work. It can actually be a charmingly amateurish news network. They are not nearly as slick as the bigger networks.

They had a few people in studio discussing the idea that seems to be getting espoused by some American pundits that Egypt isn't ready for democracy. If anyone really does feel that it's astoundingly insulting and patronising.

The anchor asked an Egyptian currently resident in Washington if he wouldn't rather see his country stable, his answer was great.

'A graveyard is very stable. I would rather have my nation unstable and free than stable and under repression.'

They were talking mostly about the how the US policy of chasing regional stability is futile in the longer term.

*edit*

Reports of Mubarak stepping down were false. The Party Executive Policy committee was changed.

Chips went down, and Israel has shown it's true colors...

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Was watching a bit of Al Jazeera today at work. It can actually be a charmingly amateurish news network. They are not nearly as slick as the bigger networks.

They had a few people in studio discussing the idea that seems to be getting espoused by some American pundits that Egypt isn't ready for democracy. If anyone really does feel that it's astoundingly insulting and patronising.

Well, read between the lines there... well... there aren't really any lines to read between, it's in bold print. "Not ready for Democracy" basically means "what if the Muslim Brotherhood gets power?" and assume that, if they do, there will be a Middle Eastern Islamisplosion. Imagine the PEPCON disaster, but with more hummus and burquas.

Yep. People are only 'ready for democracy' when they will vote for who the west likes. America doesn't want a repeat of the Gaza situation in a bigger country.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Yep. People are only 'ready for democracy' when they will vote for who the west likes. America doesn't want a repeat of the Gaza situation in a bigger country.

You say this sarcastically, but for a section of America's politicos, it's true. Like, deadpanning, no facial emotion true. And i'd argue it's largely true for the Obama Administration as well, albeit not quite so bald-facedly.

Sadly, there wasn't much sarcasm there. I remember very well the US response to Hamas' victory in Gaza. It was actually a major influence on my view of America's foreign policy.

*edit*

And back to Egypt:

8:03am The Muslim Brotherhood says in a statement that it "has decided to participate in a dialogue round in order to understand how serious the officials are in dealing with the demands of the people."

It also says the participation is driven by the Brotherhood's interests in "protecting the interests of the nation and its institutions. It is also driven by interest in "protecting the independence of Egypt and their rejection of any international or regional intervention."

8:12am Our correspondent in Alexandria, one of the Muslim Brotherhood's strongholds, says many people are surprised by the group's decision to enter talks with the government. He says it's a major concession that might be seen as a "weakness" that the Brotherhood didn't hold on to it's previous statement that it wouldn't join negotiations until President Mubarak resigns.

Curioser and curioser.

*edit again*

This is cute

4:37am Talk about a wedding anniversary that will be hard to forget. Here's a young couple who will spend their honeymoon in Tahrir Square.

IMAGE(http://blogs.aljazeera.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/FeaturedImagePost/images/wedding.jpg)

It's certainly seeming like, whatever comes of this, the Muslim Brotherhood will be prominently involved, which is going to cause all sorts of consternation here, and in Israel, but it's clear that we're going to meddle in this (we're already meddling, let's be honest), so how it shakes out will be very interesting.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Yep. People are only 'ready for democracy' when they will vote for who the west likes. America doesn't want a repeat of the Gaza situation in a bigger country.

If this is the case, then America the Government reflects America the people. What is the reaction here when people in a flyover state pass some kind of quasi-anti-Gay legislation or California does not pass a marijuana law? Most of the discussion is about how the majority is crazy. The American government just happens to have the power to enforce on a global scale the same thing many in the minority in the US would like to impose on a local scale.

The more that western media throws in mentions of ElBaradei the more I think of Ahmed Chalabi.* Granted ElBaradei has more credentials, but I can't help feeling like ElBaradei's being propped up a bit.

*Not to say that he isn't being mentioned on AlJazeera, but his name seems to get mentioned in every article and news story I read/see.

sheared wrote:
MrDeVil909 wrote:

Yep. People are only 'ready for democracy' when they will vote for who the west likes. America doesn't want a repeat of the Gaza situation in a bigger country.

If this is the case, then America the Government reflects America the people. What is the reaction here when people in a flyover state pass some kind of quasi-anti-Gay legislation or California does not pass a marijuana law? Most of the discussion is about how the majority is crazy. The American government just happens to have the power to enforce on a global scale the same thing many in the minority in the US would like to impose on a local scale.

I think the difference is that we generally don't send the CIA to overthrow Midwestern governors or assassinate state legislators. By in large, we accept that the population has the right to govern itself even if we do disagree with it. It may seem to you a subtle difference, but it really isn't. It is pretty substantive and more than just a matter of degree.

Do we really know that? The FBI is routinely infiltrating even the most peaceful of protest groups these days.

Interesting piece by Noam Chomsky.

It's not radical Islam that worries the US – it's independence

A common refrain among pundits is that fear of radical Islam requires (reluctant) opposition to democracy on pragmatic grounds. While not without some merit, the formulation is misleading. The general threat has always been independence. The US and its allies have regularly supported radical Islamists, sometimes to prevent the threat of secular nationalism.

A familiar example is Saudi Arabia, the ideological centre of radical Islam (and of Islamic terror). Another in a long list is Zia ul-Haq, the most brutal of Pakistan's dictators and President Reagan's favorite, who carried out a programme of radical Islamisation (with Saudi funding).

"The traditional argument put forward in and out of the Arab world is that there is nothing wrong, everything is under control," says Marwan Muasher, a former Jordanian official and now director of Middle East research for the Carnegie Endowment. "With this line of thinking, entrenched forces argue that opponents and outsiders calling for reform are exaggerating the conditions on the ground."

Therefore the public can be dismissed.

In b4 'Chonksy is an America hating anarchist, blah, blah, blah.'

Here is a more Israeli sympathetic way of saying pretty much the same thing.

link

Israel prides itself on being the Middle East's only true democracy, so most Israelis may be loath to admit their fear of self-government spreading to Egypt, their most important Arab ally. But by their calculation, freedom in Egypt is bound to morph into venomous anti-Israeli attitudes and actions.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion

Here are some Haaretz, Israeli newspaper, opinion pieces. They are sane and looking at reality. Egypt cannot be a dictatorship forever.

goman wrote:

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion

Here are some Haaretz, Israeli newspaper, opinion pieces. They are sane and looking at reality. Egypt cannot be a dictatorship forever.

I need to have a good look, but just glancing through the titles looks interesting. I've long thought that there must be a rational undercurrent in Israeli society, as opposed to the politicians, that we tend not to hear about.

Thanks for the link.

Saw something on Twitter last night during the Super Bowl in response to the controversial Groupon ads. Can't find the original tweet but it went along the lines of, "Hundreds of people have been injured during democracy riots in Egypt, but my friends and I got a tour of the pyramids for just pennies through Groupon!"