Its a testament to what a giant shinola sandwich this crisis is that Obama continues to be praised by most prominent Republicans for his management of it despite shifting tactics, oh, say, every six hours or so. There are no good options, so why dump on him for reluctantly choosing bad ones? For instance, remember a few days ago when Gibbs was asked how soon a meaningful transition should begin and he said now means yesterday? Well, change of plans: More
#1
But, but, but Obama was supposed to change world opinion so that it was favorable, then walk on water, heal the sick and afflicted through Obamacare, and part the Red Sea. In his opinion everyone before him was a dumba$$ and didn't know what they were doing. Even Oprah punched his ticket. Hollywood was behind him.
(I swear, my boy's preschool class could handle this better than the gang o' dorks in Washington. Note to self ~ no Ivy League college for the kids, just state schools or service academies.)
#5
Something about half the time, the US is America, and other half of the time it's a leftoid assholocracy that'll give the FSU the serial numbers on your nuclear deterrent and tell you you're not being inclusive enough to the Muslim Brotherhood.
I understand that a lot of people in Egypt who don't believe in government-by-violent-protest are dissatisfied for what they see as the US undermining their government. This is what I'm hearing from customers in Egypt.
#6
I disagree. He had good options at the beginning; instead we have a quarterback who fumbled the snap running about still trying to make a 40 yard pass. I think he acted very quickly and decisively and went all in on a plan acceptable only to Beredai and the MB. Then ya got the mouth out there explaining that baseball and football are exactly the same because in baseball a player can bunt, where the ball dribbles down the line, dribbling in also in basketball where a player can score 3 points like a kicker can in football.
I know there is a lot of anectdotal evidence out there which as a whole makes the administration..shady..in its relationship with the MB. I don't see how they can explain a way out of the heap if there is real evidence of the US actively supporting a coup to install the MB with Baradei as a figurehead, and poorly to boot.
[Asharq al-Aswat] It is clear that it will take some time for the dust to settle and for the future blueprint of Egypt's political composition to become clear, following the storm of change that the country seems to be on the verge of following the events of 25 January 2011, which even the official media [in Egypt] is describing as a revolution.
Egypt has witnessed rapid daily developments, forcing the entire world to breathlessly monitor what is happening in the country, particularly as many forces that emerged on the ground -- especially the youth movements that incited this popular movement -- came as a surprise to the outside world. However there was a trial-run of what happened two months prior to 25 January 2011, with protest movements organizing -- following calls on the internet -- protests in the case of Egyptian youth Khalid Said [who was allegedly beaten to death by coppers], and in fact, there is now a protest movement in his name. The following are a number of observations about the events that occurred in Egypt over the past two weeks;
The first observation concerns the re-discovery of the extent of the importance of a country like Egypt. Many of the analysis and views stated in the previous months spoke about the erosion of Egypt's role, regionally and internationally, and there was even talk about there no longer being any need for Egypt to play such a role. However after the recent events occurred, and following the confused and tense regional and international reaction to what is happening, and anticipation of the path that the country could potentially take; this reconfirmed Egypt's significance and importance.
The second observation is that despite the depressing scenes witnessed by the entire world with regards to what the demonstrators faced, particularly the "battle of the Camel"; these protests have wiped the dust from the negative image that was present about the region and confirmed that the people of Egypt are not passive and deserve respect. What happened [with regards to what the protestors faced] was akin to a wave of madness or immaturity from certain parties that were against the Tahrir Square protestors, and it was these protesters who have negated the view about the region -- and which has been promoted in the international corridors of power -- that this region is an exception to the rest of the world, and that democracy is not natural to this region due to what they describe as its "special nature." However, The infamous However... as I said, what has happened in Egypt has proven the inaccuracy of such ideas, and that the people of this region are not passive and deserve respect.
The third observation is that the "Republic of Tahrir Square" has forced everybody, especially the western world, to review and rethink what has happened in recent years, from the events in Gazoo to what happened in Iran. I am talking about their belief that any change to the status quo would result in the advancement of Islamist fundamentalism, or in the case of Egypt, the Mohammedan Brotherhood, who [they believe] would come to power and implement an krazed killer policy internally, whilst -- externally -- following the pattern of what happened in Iran following their revolution.
The events in Egypt have confirmed that the Mohammedan Brotherhood is not responsible for inciting the 25 January protests, and it has also been confirmed that they are neither qualified nor likely to take power for nobody in the ongoing Egyptian protest scene holds krazed killer ideology. Let us borrow the words of an observer and analyst with regards to what is happening in Egypt, which is that Mohammedan Brotherhood ideology is one that grows stronger in the absence of genuine politics, or in other words when society lacks free politics, the star of the Mohammedan Brotherhood rises because they are the only party -- other than the ruling party and the government institutions -- that have any organized and effective power on the ground, even if the youth that are responsible for these protests were able to organize this via the internet.
Lastly, numerous victims exist in the midst of such storms that nobody pays any attention to, and here there must be a degree of fairness towards ousted Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif. The information and internet revolutions which the 25 January youth utilized to express their views would not have occurred were it not for him, and the economic reforms that were implemented during his time in office have been the subject of international acclaim, resulting high growth rates for Egypt, foreign investment, and an unprecedentedly high export rate in the history of Egypt's economy; the problem was that not everybody in society enjoyed the "fruits" of this, but that is another issue.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/09/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It is clear that it will take some time for the dust to settle and for the future blueprint of Egypt's political composition to become clear
Actually genius, it's very simple: Suleiman can get the Army to fire on protesters, or he can't. If he can, Egypt goes on as usual with Suleiman instead of Mubarak. If he can't, Islamic Republic of Egypt teaches us we've been too harsh on Iran.
[Al Jazeera] The apparently sudden and unexpected violence against Egyptian protesters that started on February 2 has an interesting historical ring to it. The date marks the unbanning of liberation movements in South Africa in 1990, and the start of political negotiations between the apartheid regime and the African National Congress. It also marks the start of the most violent period in South Africa's turbulent political history.
The parallels with Egypt start with Mubarak's speech to the nation on February 1, ostensibly making a significant concession to the protesters and a commitment to Egypt's democratic future. The next day thugs, many now clearly identified as members of the security forces, rallied in central Cairo and launched attacks on hitherto peaceful demonstrators.
The tactics of deploying so-called third forces is a tried and tested method of autocratic regimes, usually utilised when the regime realises that it is on the strategic defencive politically. The focus of the regime then shifts from merely ruling as usual to extending its reign as long as possible, while at the same time sapping the material and political energy of its opponents.
In South Africa this tactic was intended to legitimise the regime as the only thing standing between an orderly transition to democracy on the one hand, and chaos on the other. At the same time it sought to drain the energy of the liberation movement by killing some of its leaders, forcing it into a defencive mode of thinking and compelling it to accept a compromise favourable to the regime. Mubarak's statements prior to the unleashing of his 'police-in-civilian clothing', the inaction of the army and the apparently reasonable response of his Prime Minister after the fact that they will vigorously investigate the violence and bring the perpetrators to book, are well rehearsed elements of a 'third force' strategy.
Like in South Africa, the Egyptian 'third force' will be constituted of a variety of elements, including members of the security services operating as civilians, party loyalists and some civilians who are attracted by financial incentives. Even criminal gangs will be increasingly utilised, providing further 'evidence' that the violence is not perpetrated by the regime but plainly criminal. In the end the entire effort is neither spontaneous nor independent.
Any decent investigation will find that this force is organised, resourced and directed by elements within the Mubarak regime. The Tahrir Square protesters have already collected ample evidence to this effect. In South Africa it took the brave Justice Richard Goldstone (of the UN Gazoo Report fame) to expose a similar and wide-ranging network of regime instruments masquerading as various independent third forces.
Unless the army intervenes on the side of the Egyptian democracy movement, this 'third force' will continue to strike, not only in Cairo and other cities but increasingly also in the rural parts of the country. In South Africa the third force violence lasted from 1990 to 1994. In Egypt Mubarak's regime has until September to produce a disorganised, leaderless and desperate opposition unable to execute a proper election campaign. The lessons of South Africa are instructive in how to defeat this effort by a desperate regime.
The continued unity of South Africans, in protest, was the central element that defeated the efforts of the apartheid regime to continue governing. If the Egyptian people continue protesting, as they have for the last two weeks, any claims of legitimacy by the regime are transparently ridiculous. In South Africa the central demand of the liberation movement at the height of third force violence became one for a transitional government.
No autocratic regime can oversee its own demise, and a real election could only take place if the entire state apparatus, including its security forces, were placed under the control of an interim government. The South African Transitional Executive Council established in 1993 and acting as an interim government, ensured the holding of free and fair elections in April 1994.
Anything less than the departure of Mubarak and his key allies will mean a transition always under threat of violence by a so-called third force, and an election that might disappear amidst the violence visited upon the Egyptian resistance.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/09/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Skidmark: I suspect the Republicans knew it would fail, because they want a later introduction under simple majority rules, that would allow amendments. The Patriot Act needs a lot of major revisions.
Some sections are clearly good and work; others are a wash, do nothing and are expensive as hell; others work, but are used exclusively for ordinary crimes, not terrorism, and are unconstitutional, so need to be discarded.
#3
The South African Transitional Executive Council established in 1993 and acting as an interim government, ensured the holding of free and fair elections in April 1994.
...oh yes of coruse, "free and fair elections" in a one party system. Details, details, details.
The worst possible president at the worst possible time. Nice essay on why Bambi is the worst and is threatening to drag this country not only into bankruptcy, but into a possible civil war. This man simply can't be allowed to win the 2012 elections.
Only partially. If the Republicans can't field a candidate worth snot and several 3rd party ones come out, Obama can win by just holding onto his base who are willing to go over the cliff with him.
A strong center-right Republican candidate with a history of fiscal responsibility with the ability to be diplomatic and yet get things done will win by a landslide. Another McStain will bring about Obama part 2.
#5
Financial conservatism + solid record + zero kook factor = Republican POTUS in 2013.
We Republicans have to be big kids during the primary. No fighting among ourselves. No Ron Paul. No search for a candidate that believes 100% of what we do - or else we take our balls and go home. 60%-80% works for me when I agree with Obama on 10%-20%. Maybe.
If we do this right we can maybe - maybe - hold our country together. A second term for Obama will spell doom for our republic.
#9
People say we don't have another Regan. I say we do.Should an individual with his traits (man or woman) could turn this country around on a dime. Media will attack, Rino's, Dino's and the regressive left will attack. Just do as he did and reduce government and regulation. Our country is different because of our constitution. Each person working to better themselves improves life for all of us. Look how we have helped so many in other countries. I don't see China doing that. People came here to better themselves this must be fostered. With our system we will have bounty with the current government we will have to make do with less.
#11
This man simply can't be allowed to win the 2012 elections.
"it matters not how the people vote, It only matters who counts the votes" REMEMBER?
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
02/09/2011 23:05 Comments ||
Top||
#12
If the Republicans can't field a candidate worth snot..
Anyseptagenarian, "it's my turn now", senators?
Ummm, no, Darth and Grom, it's much, much worse than that. Looks like National Review is starting to actively promote the candidacy of...wait for it, wait for it...Jeb!
If the Trunks insist on committing an act of such breathtaking, self-immolating stupidity, not only will I VOTE for Obama, I'll volunteer to work for his campaign. I can't stand that treasonous Marxist affirmative-action baby, but I'd be more willing to take a chance on four more years of him - restrained by an aggressive, Tea Party-dominated Republican House and Senate - than on yet another Kennebunkport commando farming out control over our energy policy to Riyadh and our immigration policy to Mexico City.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
02/09/2011 23:51 Comments ||
Top||
[Asharq al-Aswat] After Iran's Supreme Leader gave a sermon last Friday, talking about the events in Egypt, Hezbullies leader, Hassan Nasrallah, presented us with a new discourse. He addressed the Egyptians, about their revolution and Arab dignity, promising that a victory for the demonstrators in Egypt would change the face of the Arab region.
What we saw in Nasrallah's speech was nothing but blatant demagoguery, and a falsification of the facts, as is common in Iranian discourse.
Arabs and Iranians love one another like brothers. Really!
However, The infamous However... we must stop to examine several points mentioned by the Lebanese "Supreme Leader". Nasrallah apologized to both the Tunisians and the Egyptians for the delay in pledging his solidarity with them. He justified this as a means of protecting "the entire revolution" from accusations, suggesting that if he had taken this stance previously, "they would say that the protestors in Tahrir Square, or the demonstrators in cities around Egypt, are being motivated by cells belonging to Hezbullies, Hamas, always the voice of sweet reason,, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Then this genuine national movement would be accused of serving a foreign agenda".
Of course, Nasrallah is acknowledging the danger of Hezbullies and Hamas' constant affiliation with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and this is the first time in which he has said so in such a way. However, The other infamous However... the other important matter, clearly, is that Nasrallah previously delayed commenting about Egypt and Tunisia. This was not out of fear of tarnishing the demonstrators as agents of a foreign agenda, as he said, but rather because he was waiting for the signal from Tehran. Nasrallah gave his speech after the Iranian Supreme Leader had come out in his Friday sermon, to say that the Egyptians were following the path of the Iranian Revolution!
If Nasrallah was sincere in his call to the people, to stand up and demand their rights and dignity, then he would have at least apologized to the Iranians, after their Green Revolution was suppressed [in 2009]. At the time, Nasrallah was in favor of this suppression, in support of the Wali al-Faqih regime. He held grand celebrations for the Iran's diminutive President when he recently visited Leb, in order to provide Ahmadinejad with internal support. If Nasrallah believes in the rights of the revolutionaries, and he sees what revolutions can achieve, then he cannot accept the repression and violence used against the Iranians during the Green Revolution. Immediately after the Iran's Supreme Leader gave his speech on Egypt, Iranian opposition figures began a call to organize demonstrations on the streets of Iran. Does Nasrallah support them?
As for his talk about Arab dignity, if Nasrallah was concerned about the dignity of the Arabs -- as he says -- then he wouldn't occupy Beirut by force of arms, or the whole of Leb for that matter, to the extent where he is now the authority who names the Lebanese Prime Minister. Therefore, Nasrallah's Egypt speech was merely an attempt to capitalize on what the Egyptians did in their country and a clear attempt to clean up his image somewhat, after several outrageous attempts by Iran and its agents to 'kidnap' our Arab world. As I have repeatedly said, there are wolves circling around Egypt, trying to exploit this transitional period.
All that Nasrallah wants to say is that he is a friend of Arab citizens, Egypt, and the Egyptian masses. Here, one can only repeat the famous proverb "with friends like these, who needs enemies?"
The classic Jewish question, so useful in that part of the world.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/09/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Asharq al-Aswat] It is clear that it will take some time for the dust to settle and for the future blueprint of Egypt's political composition to become clear, following the storm of change that the country seems to be on the verge of following the events of 25 January 2011, which even the official media [in Egypt] is describing as a revolution.
[Al Jazeera] The apparently sudden and unexpected violence against Egyptian protesters that started on February 2 has an interesting historical ring to it. The date marks the unbanning of liberation movements in South Africa in 1990, and the start of political negotiations between the apartheid regime and the African National Congress. It also marks the start of the most violent period in South Africa's turbulent political history.
The worst possible president at the worst possible time.
[Asharq al-Aswat] After Iran's Supreme Leader gave a sermon last Friday, talking about the events in Egypt, 
