53
   

Tunesia, Egyt and now Yemen: a domino effect in the Middle East?

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 04:49 pm
There's a report just now that the riders of the camel and the horses into the crowd last week were not Mubarak paid thugs at all. They were business men who hired out horses and camels for the tourists to ride round the pyramids on. Their customers had fled. One said he had 25 workers and stables full of camels and horses to muck and fodder and no money coming in. The protesters beat them up for protesting.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 04:51 pm
@spendius,
What's the source of that report?
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 04:51 pm
@msolga,
His bar stool.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 04:53 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
There's a report just now that the riders of the camel and the horses into the crowd last week were not Mubarak paid thugs at all. They were business men who hired out horses and camels for the tourists to ride round the pyramids on. Their customers had fled. One said he had 25 workers and stables full of camels and horses to muck and fodder and no money coming in. The protesters beat them up for protesting.
Only Mubarak's friends and allies have been allowed to suck up wealth in Egypt, businessmen are by definition Mubarak thugs...

I thought I heard you claim to have some understanding of Egypt?? Guess not....
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 04:53 pm
@failures art,
It does seem as though the police mentality in egypt is not morally correct.

This may be another case that is not for children's eyes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8tMw-ichOw
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 04:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
businessmen are by definition Mubarak thugs...


Wow!! What a thing to say. Are you just applying that definition to Egypt?

I never claimed to have any sort of reasonable understanding of Egypt. I was there once and it was incomprehensible.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:01 pm
@msolga,
Sky News at 10. An hour ago. They interviewed one guy with the pyramids in the background and they showed the empty streets. He looked a farmer type.

But the protesters beat them up for protesting.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:01 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Are you just applying that definition to Egypt?
Pretty much...it also applies to North Korea, Russia, Iran, Syria and to some extent China.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:02 pm
@spendius,
A fellow was just interviewed on the CBC about this - the camel/horse providers were apparently paid $200 pounds each by the Mubarak gang.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:04 pm
@JPB,
Thank you Jpb you are correct I did copy and paste that! It should have read some Americans and not all. I would only hope that people would know that in any given country that not all the members in the country share the same ideology.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:05 pm
@ehBeth,
I only posted the damn thing to demonstrate how reports can vary and there is an emotional aspect to which ones we believe. I haven't the faintest idea which one is true and I never said I had.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:08 pm
@spendius,
Yes, ceili and I have posted previously on how different our coverage here is to what we see from the U.S.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 05:31 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
how different our coverage here is to what we see from the U.S


a big part of the reason......

Quote:
That we often don’t know as much about the people in these countries as we do about their Tweets is a testament to the cutbacks in foreign coverage at many news organizations — and perhaps also to our own desire to escape a war zone that has for so long sapped American energy, resources and patience. We see the Middle East on television only when it flares up and then generally in medium or long shot. But there actually is an English-language cable channel — Al Jazeera English — that blankets the region with bureaus and that could have been illuminating Arab life and politics for American audiences since 2006, when it was established as an editorially separate sister channel to its Qatar-based namesake.

Al Jazeera English, run by a 35-year veteran of the Canadian Broadcasting Company, is routinely available in Israel and Canada. It provided coverage of the 2009 Gaza war and this year’s Tunisian revolt when no other television networks would or could. Yet in America, it can be found only in Washington, D.C., and on small cable systems in Ohio and Vermont. None of the biggest American cable and satellite companies — Comcast, DirecTV and Time Warner — offer it.
The noxious domestic political atmosphere fostering this near-blackout is obvious to all. It was made vivid last week when Bill O’Reilly of Fox News went on a tear about how Al Jazeera English is “anti-American.” This is the same “We report, you decide” Fox News that last week broke away from Cairo just as the confrontations turned violent so that viewers could watch Rupert Murdoch promote his new tablet news product at a publicity event at the Guggenheim Museum in New York.

Unable to watch Al Jazeera English, and ravenous for comprehensive and sophisticated 24/7 television coverage of the Middle East otherwise unavailable on television, millions of Americans last week tracked down the network’s Internet stream on their computers. Such was the work-around required by the censorship practiced by America’s corporate gatekeepers. You’d almost think these news-starved Americans were Iron Curtain citizens clandestinely trying to pull in the jammed Voice of America signal in the 1950s — or Egyptians desperately seeking Al Jazeera after Mubarak disrupted its signal last week.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/opinion/06rich.html

Americans are not nothing if not ignorant of the world around us...it accounts for a lot of the mistakes we make.....
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 06:30 pm
@msolga,
Interesting article on The Muslim Brotherhood "bogeyman", published in today's Guardian.

According to Wikileak-ed cables, Egypt's new vice president, Omar Suleiman has consistently demonized the long-banned Muslim Brotherhood in his contacts with US officials. (Whose reactions make for interesting reading.) It seems they were more than a little sceptical of his claims.

Mubarak has blamed the Muslim Brotherhood for the unrest in Egypt and has said that if he leaves, the group will exploit the ensuing political chaos.

Mr Suleiman now (apparently) acknowledges that the Brotherhood is a credible organisation with an important role to play in resolving the current crisis with Egypt & is negotiating with them.

Perhaps Robert Fisk (see article I posted above) is right in his assessment. Replacing one autocratic leader with another is not the solution to the problem.:


Quote:
WikiLeaks cables: Egypt's Omar Suleiman demonised Muslim Brotherhood
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 6 February 2011 16.41 GMT

Former spymaster turned vice president accused Islamist group of extremism in his contacts with US officials, leaked cables reveal
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/1/29/1296315216098/Egyptian-intelligence-chi-007.jpg
Egyptian intelligence chief, Omar Suleiman, who has been appointed vice-president WikiLeaks cables show Omar Suleiman, Egypt's new vice-president, has long tried to portray the opposition Muslim Brotherhood as the 'bogeyman'. Photograph: Eitan Abramovich/AFP/Getty Images

Egypt's new vice president, Omar Suleiman, has long sought to demonise the opposition Muslim Brotherhood in his contacts with sceptical US officials, leaked diplomatic cables show, raising questions whether he can act as an honest broker in the country's political crisis.

US embassy messages from WikiLeaks's cache of 250,000 state department documents, which Reuters independently reviewed, also report that the former intelligence chief accused the Brotherhood of spawning armed extremists and warned in 2008 that if Iran ever backed the banned Islamist group, Tehran would become "our enemy".


The disclosure came as Suleiman met opposition groups, including the officially banned Brotherhood, to explore ways to end Egypt's political crisis. The US has been exploring options for speeding up President Hosni Mubarak's resignation, including a scenario that calls for turning over power to a transition government led by Suleiman and backed by the military.

Mubarak, who had done without a vice president for 30 years, hurriedly appointed 74-year-old Suleiman as his deputy last month as protesters demanded the forcing out of the autocratic ruler.

Suleiman privately voicing disdain for the Brotherhood will not surprise Egyptians. The comments could stoke suspicions, though, as he draws the movement into a dialogue on reform in response to mass protests.

The clear implication in the cache of state department cables was that US officials were sceptical of Suleiman's effort to depict the Brotherhood as "the bogeyman".

In a cable on 15 February 2006, then-ambassador Francis Ricciardone reported that Suleiman had "asserted that the MB [Muslim Brotherhood] had spawned '11 different Islamist extremist organisations', most notably the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Gama'a Islamiya [Islamic Group]".

In the 1990s Egyptian security forces crushed groups that campaigned for a purist Islamist state by targeting tourists, Christians, government ministers and other officials, and have kept a lid on them since.

The Brotherhood once had a secret paramilitary section, but it now says it is committed to promoting its policies through peaceful, democratic means.

The government has been unable to prove any serious act of violence orchestrated by the movement's leadership for more than 50 years.

Suleiman, then Mubarak's top spymaster, was speaking to the FBI's director, Robert Mueller, who was visiting Cairo in February 2006, the cable says.

The cable, which uses the spelling Soliman, said he had told Mueller the Brotherhood was "neither a religious organisation, nor a social organisation, nor a political party, but a combination of all three".

It added: "The principal danger, in Soliman's view, was the group's exploitation of religion to influence and mobilise the public. Soliman termed the MB's recent success in the parliamentary elections as 'unfortunate', adding his view that although the group was technically illegal, existing Egyptian laws were insufficient to keep the MB in check."

The cable was referring to parliamentary elections in November and December of 2005, in which the Brotherhood made strong gains, although Mubarak's National Democratic party maintained a big majority.

In a cable dated 2 January 2008, Ricciardone reported Suleiman as saying that Iran remained "a significant threat to Egypt". "Iran is supporting Jihad and spoiling peace, and has supported extremists in Egypt previously. If they were to support the Muslim Brotherhood this would make them 'our enemy'," the ambassador reported Suleiman as saying.

In a cable dated 25 October 2007, Ricciardone said Suleiman "takes an especially hard line on Tehran" and frequently refers to the Iranians as "devils".

The cables suggest US officials have consistently responded sceptically to the Egyptian government's dire warnings about the Brotherhood.

In a 29 November 2005 cable to Mueller before his visit, Ricciardone said Egyptian authorities "have a long history of threatening us with the MB bogeyman". "Your counterparts may try to suggest that [then president George Bush's] insistence on greater democracy in Egypt is somehow responsible for the MB's electoral success," he wrote. "You should push back that, on the contrary, the MB's rise signals the need for greater democracy and transparency in government.

"The images of intimidation and fraud that have emerged from the recent elections favour the extremists both we and the Egyptian government oppose. The best way to counter narrow-minded Islamist politics is to open the system."

In a follow-up cable on 29 January 2006, Ricciardone seemed to foreshadow the current unrest when he wrote to Mueller: "We do not accept the proposition that Egypt's only choices are a slow-to-reform authoritarian regime or an Islamist extremist one; nor do we see greater democracy in Egypt as leading necessarily to a government under the MB."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/06/wikileaks-egypt-omar-suleiman-muslim-brotherhood
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Feb, 2011 11:41 pm
Latest BBC update:

Quote:

7 February 2011 Last updated at 05:15 GMT
Egypt protesters unmoved by talks

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/51126000/jpg/_51126101_011206047-1.jpg
Protesters in Tahrir Square, 6 Feb Hundreds of people are resisting attempts by the army to restore order to Tahrir Square

Talks between the Egyptian government and opposition groups on tackling the country's political crisis have failed to end protests in central Cairo.

Crowds of protesters, who have occupied the city's Tahrir Square for two weeks, say they will only leave when President Hosni Mubarak stands down.

The government offered a series of concessions at Sunday's talks, but the opposition said they were not enough.

US President Obama has said Egypt will not "go back to what it was". ..<cont>


Quote:
Analysis
Magdi Abdelhadi BBC News, Cairo

There are three parallel narratives in Egypt today: that of the protesters in Tahrir Square, that of the opposition talking to the government, whilst the rest of Egypt may be a different story altogether.

The protesters are in no mood to compromise and insist that President Mubarak step down immediately, and that parliament, which they view as the product of fraudulent election, is dissolved.

They have gained in confidence and feel, justifiably, that the street protest has so far paid off. They also say that the opposition leaders who are talking to the government are only representing themselves, not the demonstrators.

This is bound to complicate the task of the politicians who met Vice President Omar Suleiman. They came out of the meeting saying they are yet to be convinced that the regime is sincere in carrying out genuine political reforms.

As to the rest of the country, its virtually impossible to know exactly where the majority stand. Arguably, those who are politically aware are cautiously optimistic. They say Egypt has changed, and will never be the same again.

Yet no-one is sure about the shape of the final outcome. For the average Egyptian, it is safe to assume that he or she simply wants to get on with earning a living.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12378828
msolga
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2011 12:06 am
@msolga,
Would the person who just voted the above (posted report) down like the BBC to write another version of events, which suits them better? Wink
hingehead
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2011 12:11 am
@msolga,
Consider yourself stalked by a wanker who doesn't even read the posts - it just targets certain posters. Believe it or not Lash was being similarly stalked last week - I'll thumb you up again in a show of solidarity with posting an article complete with source.

msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2011 12:24 am
@hingehead,
I'd really like to hear alternative opinions to the BBC & Guardian reports I posted, whether the thumbs downer wants to address them her/himself, or from other media reports offering another perspective.

THEN we can have a discussion.
And that's what we're here for, yes?




msolga
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2011 12:39 am
@hingehead,
Consider yourself stalked by some ejit who is not prepared to speak or offer anything substantial to the discussion, too, hinge.
Your last post just received a thumbs down. Razz

Now vote this one down, too, dork brain.





cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Feb, 2011 12:48 am
@msolga,
msolga, Don't let these simple-minded minions of a2k upset or distract you; just consider the source. They just don't have any intelligent response, so they play children's games.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 09:10:11