# Egypt uprising



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

*.*

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> First Tunisia, now Egypt. This has been simmering under the surface for a long while like a pressure cooker.
> 
> Hopefully the replacements they are fighting for will be an improvement, they could end up with something worse if it all backfires.
> 
> It's spreading....


Yes, all too true MCB. Hopefully, some form of democratic movement takes hold and stability revolves around that movement and not fanatical fundamentalism. We shall see. 

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

It'll be interesting to see which country offers Mubarak sanctuary. He should, by rights, have plenty of friends. These dictators mostly manage to run off scot free, generally with a handsome, self-service gratuity.

As for what sort of regime follows, that will be truly exercising the minds of the Foreign Service and its equivalents in Western capitals and Tel Aviv.

Egypt is the big one.

Wikileaks isn't to blame for this. The Mubarak dictatorship is to blame.


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

I was going to post about this last night, but I thought that there must have already been a thread, usually ehmacers post really early on when these things happen.



Dr.G. said:


> Yes, all too true MCB. Hopefully, some form of democratic movement takes hold and stability revolves around that movement and not fanatical fundamentalism. We shall see.


There has been no evidence of it being a fundamentalist uprising so far. I think that this is a stereotype that when muslim countries have uprisings is because of religious fundamentalists seizing control. Like I said so far there hasn't been much sign of it as there is little to no religious symbols being displayed in the protest.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

ertman said:


> There has been no evidence of it being a fundamentalist uprising so far. I think that this is a stereotype that when muslim countries have uprisings is because of religious fundamentalists seizing control. Like I said so far there hasn't been much sign of it as there is little to no religious symbols being displayed in the protest.


Fully agree, ertman, but it's more a question of who grabs control after the people's dust has settled and the uprising has lost its populist lustre. At present it's all up for grabs.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

ertman said:


> I was going to post about this last night, but I thought that there must have already been a thread, usually ehmacers post really early on when these things happen.
> 
> 
> 
> There has been no evidence of it being a fundamentalist uprising so far. I think that this is a stereotype that when muslim countries have uprisings is because of religious fundamentalists seizing control. Like I said so far there hasn't been much sign of it as there is little to no religious symbols being displayed in the protest.


Agreed. This is actually a middle-class uprising from what I have heard. If the poor of the cities join in and the military stays out of it, there will be an overthrow of the current government. We shall see.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

ertman said:


> I was going to post about this last night, but I thought that there must have already been a thread, usually ehmacers post really early on when these things happen.
> .


The Domino Effect


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Egyptian state television reports Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has named a vice president for the first time since coming to power 30 years ago, choosing his intelligence chief and close confidant Omar Suleiman, according to the Associated Press.

This does not appear to be a step in the right direction. We shall see.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I know everyone is clapping and cheering for "democracy" but they better be careful that they may get something they didn't bargain on. I have a really bad feeling this isn't going to work out for "freedom" that many seem to think it will. It has an Iran scenario feel all over again. Look where that got those folks? The ordinary citizen is FAR FAR more oppressed than under the Shah who was very much a Muslim moderate. Women in Iran back then had equal opportunities, dressed fashionably and were well educated. They could speak freely and of course NEVER was a woman stoned to death because she was raped. Democracy isn't always best despite what we've been led to believe. The ability to elect your oppressor is not freedom at all. Things were far from perfect in Egypt but the country remained stable and rather moderate. The extremists were jailed and kept in check. I have to wonder if those young women protesting have really thought things through? I really do hope they don't look back at this time with regret.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

The title of a thread is the most important part of the thread. There is often not enough thought put into the choice of words. In this case the word "Egypt" was critical to the thread content. "Domino effect" gave no clue to the content without opening the thread itself. It happens all to often. The last one I recall was a thread called "Breaking News". I thought it was a thread to post breaking news events, but once opened, it focused on a single event.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> I couldn't tell from the title, sorry.
> 
> I caught something about our government would not get Canadian citizens out unless they paid $2000 cash on the spot and they are leaving thousands of Canadians behind that could not pay? Wouldn't be surprised if this is true.


Perhaps some research before posting wrong information is warranted. I have to wonder why you'd think this misinformation was true or was it "wishful" thinking?

Canadians are being asked to sign an agreement that they will repay the government $400 upon return to Canada. I personally think this is fair. 

I have a link below referring to the $2000 that some passengers had to collect amongst them to pay off a cop to let them in the door of the airport. 

First few Canadians trickle out of Egypt on charter flights; $400 per seat


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I think it's fair to make them pay the 400 bucks to cover the costs.

As for the airport fee, I get fleeced for 10 bucks at certain airports here, I don't need to be in egypt to face that.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

"The Domino Effect" is a term coined from the news,
I had thought everyone was up to date and well versed, So I aptly named the thread thus.

Perhaps I should have put (Starting with Tunisia, Then Egypt) in brackets as well in the title.

Sorry if I caused any confusion.

Dave


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yeah someone almost lost an arm!!!

I got it, no worries.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I see Layton is getting all puffed up about the government charging $400 for the flight. He's barking up the wrong tree. Taxpayers should not be on the hook like we were in Lebanon. The majority wanted changes and the government heard the calls from the taxpayers. 

I travel quite a bit for pleasure and know that problems could arise anytime either from natural causes or politics. I'm always aware that I may need to take care of myself in an emergency. Have we become such a nanny state that we expect the government to save our backsides at someone else's expense? 

Canadians face shakedown in Cairo - thestar.com


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

I don't think there's any need for apology, Dolawren. Thread titles aren't as important as the content of the thread once it gets under way, as long as in retrospect the reader can see how the thread content can follow on from the title. Your thread title passes that test. There's no need for this thread to end up getting derailed with inwardly spiralling nitpicking - that's the potential problem, not the thread title in here.

There are many examples to chose from in the ehMac archives, where the thread title doesn't specify or describe the contents of the first post. For example, and to add to those already put forward, I add, in no particular order of merit nor demerit:

_Seven Billion And Counting: Things You May Not Know

Frozen Blackberry

End of an Era_

The first begs the question, "Seven billion what?" and prompts the curious reader to inquire within. That's the split-second effect it had on me, although I thought it might well be to do with the world's population. Once I read the first post I could see the connection with the thread title
The second - well, is it the start of a thread about iced desserts? No, but the first post ... etc.
The third is wide open - which and what sort of era? First post answers the question(s) and the title makes a perfectly good fit with the proposed thread content.

Quoting these examples in no way implies vitriolic, nor disdainful, criticism of the thread titles quoted, nor the OPs.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

If anyone is interested in seriously following this. Watch Al Jazeera English online here: 

Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English

And get Twitter, and follow the Tahrir Square tweets. Amazing insight into whats happening.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

adagio said:


> I know everyone is clapping and cheering for "democracy" but they better be careful that they may get something they didn't bargain on. I have a really bad feeling this isn't going to work out for "freedom" that many seem to think it will. It has an Iran scenario feel all over again. Look where that got those folks? The ordinary citizen is FAR FAR more oppressed than under the Shah who was very much a Muslim moderate. Women in Iran back then had equal opportunities, dressed fashionably and were well educated. They could speak freely and of course NEVER was a woman stoned to death because she was raped. Democracy isn't always best despite what we've been led to believe. The ability to elect your oppressor is not freedom at all. Things were far from perfect in Egypt but the country remained stable and rather moderate. The extremists were jailed and kept in check. I have to wonder if those young women protesting have really thought things through? I really do hope they don't look back at this time with regret.


I agree with your sentiments adagio. The only thing I'd add is that we as yet don't know what would replace the current government and who the emerging players would be. It looks likely that there will not be one clear leader rising out of the welter of competing interests; nor does it look like clerics are going to turn the state into a tool of oppression under the guise of some kind of zealous orthodoxy. I'm guessing a more likely outcome is coalition politics - provided democracy can actually take hold long enough - that will prevail until the power vacuum left behind can naturally be filled.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I really hope you're right, Max. What worries me is some strong fundamentalists are in the thick of things now. Time will tell.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Adrian. said:


> If anyone is interested in seriously following this. Watch Al Jazeera English online here:
> 
> Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English


Adrian, be happy you're Canadian. Al Jazeera is still banned-by-omission from most U.S. cable providers...


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)




----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Ottawaman said:


>


Very, very interesting, O-man. We shall see how this goes. I am hoping for Democracy. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

given the attempts at imposing religious will on laws in the US, one has to wonder if this cartoon has a small similarity to the power struggle in the US.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

groovetube said:


> given the attempts at imposing religious will on laws in the US, one has to wonder if this cartoon has a small similarity to the power struggle in the US.


An interesting observation, GT. We shall have to see who is running against Pres. Obama in 2012. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)




----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

CubaMark said:


>


Ha ha...


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

CubaMark said:


>


Laugh if you will, but she is seriously considering running for president in 2012. We shall see.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Dr.G. said:


> Laugh if you will, but she is seriously considering running for president in 2012. We shall see.


We can only hope. A Palin / Bachmann ticket would guarantee Obama a 2nd term (yeah, unfortunately, another term of Obama's centrism is the best we can hope for)


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> Laugh if you will, but she is seriously considering running for president in 2012. We shall see.


Gotta give credit to the Founding Fathers giving *every* citizen the right to run for president, no matter how far beyond his or her level of competence he/she aspires to.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

CubaMark said:


> We can only hope. A Palin / Bachmann ticket would guarantee Obama a 2nd term (yeah, unfortunately, another term of Obama's centrism is the best we can hope for)


What about a Bachmann/Palin ticket????   XX) Same result I believe. I am thinking that Mitt Romney will be the Republican candidate in 2014 ...... maybe Bachmann can be his VP choice? We shall see.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

And now, a short commercial break.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

And now back to the scheduled programme.



> Talk of democracy from Obama and Clinton will not purge the record of US involvement ...
> 
> The career profiles of the man Obama picked to send to Egypt to talk to Mubarak, and the man Mubarak had just picked to be his vice president, give a useful mini-portrait of US-Egyptian realities, shorn of happy talk about democracy and the will of the people.
> The 72-year old Frank Wisner is a former US ambassador to Egypt and a senior fixer in Washington. He has secure footholds in government and corporate America. Until recently he was vice chairman of AIG, which he left to become a foreign policy adviser at the politically powerful law firm and lobbyshop, Patton Boggs.
> We're talking the Permanent Government here. Wisner's father, Frank Sr., ran the CIA's covert arm, went mad after the failure of the Hungarian rising of 1956 and committed suicide in odd circumstances in a CIA secure house outside Washington DC in 1967.





> Well known to Wisner was the first vice president Mubarak had ever appointed in his three-decades rule, intelligence chief Omar Suleiman. This urbane fellow has played a pivotal role in the US rendition-to-torture programme.





> Egypt's heavy-handed security and intelligence apparatus probably created more terrorists than it intercepted. Egypt ended up being a not particularly useful ally to have in the region.
> On the other hand the White House is being besieged by the Israel Lobby which is following the script being hysterically written in the press in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, with headlines such as 'We're on our own' 'Obama's betrayal of Mubarak', and 'A bullet in the back from Uncle Sam'.



Read more: Egypt and America: the people won't forget their long and dirty history | News & Politics | News & Comment | The First Post


----------



## mgmitchell (Apr 4, 2008)

If Mubarak wanted to really cause a splash - and catch the Americans completely off-guard - he'd make his official exit in full view tomorrow around 6:45 p.m. Just as the beloved Super Bowl kick-off was about to happen. The American networks would have quite the dilemma ...


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

LOL

Wouldn't they just.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

mgmitchell said:


> If Mubarak wanted to really cause a splash - and catch the Americans completely off-guard - he'd make his official exit in full view tomorrow around 6:45 p.m. Just as the beloved Super Bowl kick-off was about to happen. The American networks would have quite the dilemma ...


Not really. there's only one network that broadcasts the superbowl (it's on Fox this year). They'd probably run a scroll at the bottom of the screen for a minute and go on as usual.

The rest of the networks could cover it business as usual.


----------



## mgmitchell (Apr 4, 2008)

Just pokin' some fun. You didn't need to analyze it death, thanks.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

i know, and you're welcome.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

mgmitchell said:


> If Mubarak wanted to really cause a splash - and catch the Americans completely off-guard - he'd make his official exit in full view tomorrow around 6:45 p.m. Just as the beloved Super Bowl kick-off was about to happen.


Screwin' with the Super Bowl? That would be construed as un-American and tantamount to 'terrism'.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

*US envoy's business link to Egypt*

From The Independent newspaper.



> Frank Wisner, President Barack Obama's envoy to Cairo who infuriated the White House this weekend by urging Hosni Mubarak to remain President of Egypt, works for a New York and Washington law firm which works for the dictator's own Egyptian government.
> 
> Mr Wisner's astonishing remarks – "President Mubarak's continued leadership is critical: it's his opportunity to write his own legacy" – shocked the democratic opposition in Egypt and called into question Mr Obama's judgement, as well as that of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
> 
> The US State Department and Mr Wisner himself have now both claimed that his remarks were made in a "personal capacity". But there is nothing "personal" about Mr Wisner's connections with the litigation firm Patton Boggs, which openly boasts that it advises "the Egyptian military, the Egyptian Economic Development Agency, and has handled arbitrations and litigation on the [Mubarak] government's behalf in Europe and the US". Oddly, not a single journalist raised this extraordinary connection with US government officials – nor the blatant conflict of interest it appears to represent.


Edit: Here's Frank, looking like an angel on his Patton Boggs CV page.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

It's like watching a bad Punch and Judy show, except nobody is laughing and most are starting to wonder more about the puppeteers than the puppets. 

Who is manipulating which puppet(s)? I suspect some puppets may have more than one hand up their backsides. That's gotta be a titch uncomfortable, I'd guess.

The crocodile is feeling ill...time for nurse Judy to appear.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

This just in from the Washington Post --

Breaking News Alert: 'Strong likelihood' Mubarak will step down tonight, CIA director says
February 10, 2011 11:07:27 AM


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

What a disappointment with Mubarak's speech. No real changes. tptptptp

Now it is up to the Egyptian people. We shall see.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

The decision is now in the hands of the Egyptian military. 

They must decide whether to stand by and watch the swell of demonstrations that will surely escalate to the point of the civilians storming the palace. Or maybe the Military will choose to control and perhaps fire on the crowds and lose the alliance with them that they now seem to have. 

Or, will they stage a military coup? I'm guessing this one. Quicker, cleaner and the military maintains the support of the people. It's only hours till dawn there. If the military does not take care of it before prayers, the people will act immediately after prayers have ended.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

KC4 said:


> The decision is now in the hands of the Egyptian military.
> 
> They must decide whether to stand by and watch the swell of demonstrations that will surely escalate to the point of the civilians storming the palace. Or maybe the Military will choose to control and perhaps fire on the crowds and lose the alliance with them that they now seem to have.
> 
> Or, will they stage a military coup? I'm guessing this one. Quicker, cleaner and the military maintains the support of the people. It's only hours till dawn there. If the military does not take care of it before prayers, the people will act immediately after prayers have ended.


I think that you are correct in your speculation re the military, KC4. We shall see.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

The sad part is that the best coverage is from Press TV and Al Jazeera. Our major networks are far too busy trying to insert their own spin to properly cover an entire nation discovering and demanding a say in how their country is run.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

I have a couple Egyptian friends, one is in Egypt now, and has tons of family and friends in Egypt, many who are right in the thick of things. 

I have been fascinated, as I have been getting frontline news about the uprising. A lot of the time, I'm hearing it a day or two before it hits the major news outlets. You also realize the disconnect between what's really happening, and what show's up on entertainment news sites like CNN.

Anyways, I heard this and had to share, as I don't see it on any major news site yet. 

Tomorrow, the palace is going to be taken and Mubarak ousted one way or another. The military is going to let protestors have at the palace. There are already protesters moving to the palace, and it will really hit the fan after morning prayers. 

The mood of most protesters were to keep it peaceful, but apparently tomorrow, thousands upon thousands are going to escalate to violence to end Mubarak's rule. 

There's some talk that this is what Mubarek wants, to have some people become violent, the military will be on his side, and they can then restore rule of law and crack down. But word is that just like they thought these protests would of died over a week ago and everyone would go home, the protesters will come down hard tomorrow and the military will let it happen. *They may even assist tomorrow.* Tomorrow will be by far, the biggest protest and the major turning point in all this. 

The state media building it going to be taken over tonight. 

---

Fascinating stuff... we shall see what happens tomorrow.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

adagio said:


> I know everyone is clapping and cheering for "democracy" but they better be careful that they may get something they didn't bargain on. I have a really bad feeling this isn't going to work out for "freedom" that many seem to think it will. It has an Iran scenario feel all over again. Look where that got those folks?


I agree, There's still no indication that this is a democratic uprising, or at least, that the instigators have democratic sentiment. If Mubarak is ousted, the real story will be who grabs power after the "democratic forces" do all the storming of the gates and associated PR work.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

This just in from the Washington Post -- tptptptp:-(

Breaking News Alert: Egypt's military council backs Mubarak, Sept. elections
February 11, 2011 5:45:10 AM


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

This just in from the Washington Post -- 

Breaking News Alert: Egyptian President Mubarak leaves Cairo, state television reports
February 11, 2011 9:38:15 AM

Egyptian state television has reported that President Hosni Mubarak and his wife, Suzanne, have left the capital of Cairo. Their destination was unknown.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

They found Dodge, now they are getting out of it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> Egyptian state television has reported that President Hosni Mubarak and his wife, Suzanne, have left the capital of Cairo. Their destination was unknown.


I heard much earlier than that they were heading for some sort of Egyptian resort village.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> I heard much earlier than that they were heading for some sort of Egyptian resort village.


Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak arrived in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh as hundreds of thousands of protesters packed squares and marched on presidential palaces and the State TV building in Cairo on Friday.

Mubarak spends a good deal of time in Sharm, about 400 kilometres from Cario, where he has a palace.

Egypt protests intensify as Mubarak leaves Cairo


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Since an election is due a few months from now anyway, on the six-year cycle, I don't see what stepping down would accomplish. Anyone Mubarak or his party selects as his successor would be considered a puppet. Only the military has the level of authority required to replace him at this point.

It's the military that's promising a fair election in the fall anyway, so essentially they are the power broker.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

*Mubarak steps down, Cairo streets erupt with joy*

Vice-President says Mubarak steps down, Cairo streets erupt with joy




> Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has resigned his office, according to an announcement by vice-president Omar Suleiman.
> 
> Hundreds of thousands of Egyptian protesters waved flags, cried, cheered and embraced in celebration on Friday when the resignation of Mr. Mubarak was announced.
> 
> “The people have brought down the regime,” chanted the crowds in Tahrir Square....


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

For whatever reason, that link is dead. This one works:

Vice-President says Mubarak steps down, Cairo streets erupt with joy - The Globe and Mail


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

My friend has been right every single time for the past 4 weeks. I knew Muburak would be out of power today. 20 Million Egyptians took to the streets today, and there would of been more tomorrow. 

If anything that is clear, its that this is a people's revolution, not any political opponent or faction group. Contrary to reports, the military is on the side of the Egyptian people.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

SINC said:


> For whatever reason, that link is dead. This one works:
> 
> Vice-President says Mubarak steps down, Cairo streets erupt with joy - The Globe and Mail


Strange... it was working a few minutes ago, now it links to the same story as yours, thanks for pointing it out SINC


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ehMax said:


> If anything that is clear, its that this is a people's revolution, not any political opponent or faction group. Contrary to reports, the military is on the side of the Egyptian people.


That isn't clear at all at this point. I hope it's true though.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Macfury said:


> That isn't clear at all at this point.


Only for those getting their information from news outlets.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ehMax said:


> Only for those getting their information from news outlets.


Well, now we have the military in charge.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Don't kid yourself, Mr. Mayor - the man on the ground doesn't see the whole situation, either.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

So Mubarak stepped down - great start. What happens next? Who emerges from the chaos?


----------



## friend (Nov 14, 2009)

Anything can happen now.
We can only wish them good luck
and keep them in our prayers.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Yep. I hope that the jubilation will be sustained.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Max said:


> Don't kid yourself, Mr. Mayor - the man on the ground doesn't see the whole situation, either.


Don't kid yourself, the people on the ground on the front lines, behind doors, in the trenches see things much clearer than the foreign news outlets. 

Don't underestimate my statements... I have literally been completely amazed at the disconnect from what I was reading in news outlets daily, to what was really happening in the streets. I was told things would happen a week before they did. For about a month now, everything I've been hearing from the streets has happened. 

I said this yesterday: _"Anyways, I heard this and had to share, as I don't see it on any major news site yet. 

Tomorrow, the palace is going to be taken and Mubarak ousted one way or another. The military is going to let protestors have at the palace."_

I'm telling you now, news outlets and the media don't have a sense of how much the military is on the side of the people of Egypt. In fact, the military really is the people of Egypt... they are regular friends, neighbours, and family of the protesters. 

All the protesters knew they were going to take over today and the military would let it happen.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

LOL!

OK, have it your way, Mister Mayor. It makes no difference to me either way.

What's important is what kind of command and control structure emerges from this mess and who emerges to become supposedly accountable to the people, and how soon. Will the people be content to let the military rule? Who emerges to fill the vacuum?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If the military has held the balance of power for 30 years. What took them so long? Friends and neighbours and all...


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Macfury said:


> If the military has held the balance of power for 30 years. What took them so long? Friends and neighbours and all...


Corrupt dictator and party, Egyptian parliamentary police that is many times the size of the military and "emergency law", and illegal torture and murder that for years struck terror into Egyptian people. Something that the average Canadian knows nothing about and not in a position to armchair quarter-back about.


----------



## friend (Nov 14, 2009)

Macfury said:


> If the military has held the balance of power for 30 years. What took them so long? Friends and neighbours and all...


It is always a delicate matter for a military to seise control
out of the hands of the ruling power. If they don't get 100% control at once
all hell breaks out and there is a potential death penalty in a failing coup.
It took for ages for Easter Europe to regain democracy, so I'm not surprised
at the thirty years passing.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ehMax said:


> Corrupt dictator and party, Egyptian parliamentary police that is many times the size of the military and "emergency law", and illegal torture and murder that for years struck terror into Egyptian people. Something that the average Canadian knows nothing about and not in a position to armchair quarter-back about.


Well, good thing it didn't take 50 years for them to actually do something, I guess. If the people vote in the Muslim Brotherhood this fall, I wonder if the country will see a return to good old-fashioned Sharia Law.


----------



## friend (Nov 14, 2009)

Macfury said:


> Well, good thing it didn't take 50 years for them to actually do something, I guess. If the people vote in the Muslim Brotherhood this fall, I wonder if the country will see a return to good old-fashioned Sharia Law.


Not many muslims would want that.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

friend said:


> Not many muslims would want that.


Well, it's in the party platform.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Macfury said:


> Well, good thing it didn't take 50 years for them to actually do something, I guess. If the people vote in the Muslim Brotherhood this fall, I wonder if the country will see a return to good old-fashioned Sharia Law.


This won't happen. Too many people in Egypt that value secularism. The Muslim Brotherhood had nothing to do with this uprising.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

ehMax said:


> This won't happen. Too many people in Egypt that value secularism. The Muslim Brotherhood had nothing to do with this uprising.


ehMax, remember in neocon-land you have to manufacture threats in order to legitimise (read brain wash with fear and binary landscapes) trillions of dollars in defence spending while cutting health care because the country can't afford it.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Adrian. said:


> ehMax, remember in neocon-land you have to manufacture threats in order to legitimise (read brain wash with fear and binary landscapes) trillions of dollars in defence spending while cutting health care because the country can't afford it.


I'd prefer to try to stick to information, and debating and discussing the information in posts rather than get into leftwing / rightwing name calling. 

If I never have to read words like neocon, fiberal etc.. again on these boards, I'd be a happy man.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Macfury said:


> That isn't clear at all at this point. I hope it's true though.





Max said:


> Don't kid yourself, Mr. Mayor - the man on the ground doesn't see the whole situation, either.


+1 to both

Once the euphoria subsides, demands for elections will ramp up. Will the military hold true to their promise to hold elections in the fall or will they hold them earlier - or perhaps, now that they are in control, there is a chance they will delay elections? I hope not.

In the interim, the Defense Minister Field Marshall Mohammed Hussein Tantawi will want to maintain some sort of political vehicle in place (parts of the NDP?) to run the country and hopefully counter the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> In the Iranian revolution less than 20% of the people wanted the Ayatollahs to take power. "Word on the Street" was that they were going to get a new democracy, they ended up with a terrible theocracy. They got the opposite of what they fought for.
> 
> The word on the street that I have been hearing from people in Egypt and other parts of the middle east do seem to match what the Mayor's Egyptian friends have been telling him.
> 
> ...


+1

My family was very close to an Iranian family when they first arrived in Canada after fleeing the Ayatollahs. They told us repeatedly the young people never counted on the horror to come. They thought they were going to get democracy. Instead they got something far far far worse than the Shah. 

I recall the tears in our friend's eyes as they explained they'd never be able to return to Iran, what life was like for those who remained. 

I'll say it again, I sure hope the Egyptians get their real democracy but please don't get excited yet about the fall of it's dictator. As for the guy on the street? He has NO idea what and who is manipulating all the protests. He has no idea who may be waiting in the wings for the right moment. I sure hope ehMax's friend doesn't have to flee with nothing but clothes on their backs like my parent's friend did.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Ah, so someone understands well what I wrote. 

Time will tell, eh?


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

There is always a danger of power vacuum being filled by a worse power. I don't mind people pointing out the risk, but at the same time i find it sickening when westerners say they should be happy with the evil that they know.

If things turn out worse then they'll have to deal with it, but IMO Egypt's future looks *much* brighter because they were willing to stand up to their dictator.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

i-rui said:


> i find it sickening when westerners say they should be happy with the evil that they know.


Your disdain for westerners is obvious. And that's a shame.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

SINC said:


> Your disdain for westerners is obvious. And that's a shame.


There's a lot of things Western culture does to be shameful of.


----------



## K2ACP (Sep 11, 2010)

Maybe history is repeating itself, remember when the evil Russians were thrown out o Afghanistan only to be replaced by the Taliban? Throwing out the dictator was a huge gamble, and really only time will tell if that was a good idea


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

ehMax said:


> There's a lot of things Western culture does to be shameful of.


Yeah, we've got so much to be ashamed of all right. 

Bangladesh: Girl, 14, Lashed to Death after Rape by 40-year-old Cousin

Somali girl 'pleaded for mercy' before Islamists stoned her to death for being raped


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Let's say the scenario that you just described was realized. You know who the new high priests and mystics would be? The very watchdogs who were put in power to keep religion at bay.

Power is power, baby.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

SINC said:


> Yeah, we've got so much to be ashamed of all right.
> 
> Bangladesh: Girl, 14, Lashed to Death after Rape by 40-year-old Cousin
> 
> Somali girl 'pleaded for mercy' before Islamists stoned her to death for being raped


Certainly, there is lots of things for the West to be ashamed of. Whether it's recognized, or not. 

There are lots of things very shameful in human history and present day. To think the west is exempt from atrocious shameful acts, is believing in a fantasy world. 

The atomic bomb, proliferation of weapons across the world, history of slavery, continued displacement of first nations, Japanese Internment, propping up bad regimes, corruption on wall street, being the largest consumer and purchaser of cocaine from Columbia and Mexico, highest obesity rates, the highest rate of food waste, respect for the elderly and teachers, rocketing out of control debt etc.. etc...

I am proud to be a Canadian and very proud of my culture, but I'm not so delusional to think there aren't things to be ashamed of as well. 

The west very often has propped up dictators under the idea that an enemy of my enemy is a friend, causing a lot of anguish for people's. To say to someone who criticizes that aspect, that they have disdain for westerners, is ridiculous.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> If they end up with a similar situation the way that Iran did, then what?


Then they'll have to muster up the courage to overthrow another tyrant. The point is they've fought for their freedom and it should be applauded.

The fact that it might turn out bad isn't the point. They were in a terrible situation for 30 years. To ask them to keep the status quo is bull**** of the highest order.

Why don't Egyptians have the right to be free? 



MazterCBlazter said:


> If it backfires, it is going to be a problem not just for them, but for Israel and anyone doing business through the Suez Canal. They have been a big peace stabilizer for the region. If that gets ruined, it will have a significant negative effect on the whole world.


To expect Egypt to keep their dictator just because it's convenient for everyone else is the height of selfishness.

I recognize that there is the potential for things to get rough. 

I also recognize that things in the middle east and africa may also get infinitely better. This may be a crucial point in history that sees democracy finally come to that area of the world.

For every country in that region that gets a democratic government the hold of every other dictator will weaken exponentially. 





ehMax said:


> To say to someone who criticizes that aspect, that they have disdain for westerners, is ridiculous.


it was ridiculous wasn't it?


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

There's always a chance for a power vacuum to be filled by the wrong sorts once a popular uprising succeeds in ousting a dictator. We can see that with the collapse of totalitarian Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries. Some states turned out all right, some fell under other dictators or criminal mafias. Many were mixed results, better in some ways, maybe worse in others. But who at the time would have said, "Stick with the Stalinists, stability is better than uncertainty"?

Unfortunately, it seems that many who would advise that for the Egyptians are not so much worried about stability for Egyptians, but are worried about losing the stability for the West guaranteed by Mubarak. Do we need to mention our great interest here — oil?

In the meantime, events in Egypt and Tunisia have given many Arab regimes leaders sleepless nights: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/world/middleeast/12arabs.html?ref=middleeast



> “All the regimes are shaking now,” said Fawaz Traboulsi, a prominent Lebanese writer and columnist. “They are becoming more and more fragile. This is just the beginning.”


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> The point is that this has big potential to backfire hugely, and it will be devastating especially for them if it does. No guarantee that they will be able to protest their way out of it either. If they end up with an extremist government, that government will use it's military to squash dissent with murderous force.
> .


no, the point is it also has the potential to succeed. *big time*. it's a risk vs reward proposition and the people have chosen to take that risk, and they have every right to. it's their country and their lives.



MazterCBlazter said:


> The Iranians had lots of freedom before their revolution, as do the Egyptians under pre-revolution conditions. After their revolution the Iranians lost their freedom and their country. They have been unable to overthrow the current regime.


so because Iran failed in the past every other country is doomed to the same fate and it's people shouldn't try to change things for the better and merely accept their lot in life? 

Iranians almost reclaimed their country a few years back. I'm confident they'll try again, and with each attempt they'll be closer to succeeding. As more dictators and regimes change the more it will fuel their eventual change.



MazterCBlazter said:


> If the wrong people get into power, the Egyptians will lose their freedom and have a far worse tough oppressive regime that they cannot overthrow in their lifetime.


So they should have accepted Mubarak's reign indefinitely and not overthrown him in their lifetimes because theres a *chance* things might get worse? 

If you were in that situation would you lie down & roll over?


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

i-rui said:


> so because Iran failed in the past every other country is doomed to the same fate and it's people shouldn't try to change things for the better and merely accept their lot in life?
> 
> Iranians almost reclaimed their country a few years back. I'm confident they'll try again, and with each attempt they'll be closer to succeeding. As more dictators and regimes change the more it will fuel their eventual change.
> 
> ...


I couldn't agree with these comments more. It's hypocritical that the regime in Iran has made a big show of urging on the Egyptian protesters for propaganda reasons, while crushing their own revolt not that long ago. But there are Iranians who are planning demonstrations in Tehran next week in spite of that and this presents the regime with a real quandary. If they step on the protesters like they did in 2009, the obvious hypocrisy will hurt their cause in the Arab world. 

The reality is that what has happened in Egypt make the mullahs as nervous as all the other despots in the region. I agree with those who say that this is the worst possible news for al Queda and other extremists, provided we in the Western democracies stand behind this move, rather than prop up the same dictators we always have.

People attempting to take political power in their own hands is always messy, but never wrong.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

This is indeed creating a lot of nervousness. Already signs of unrest in other Middle Eastern countries. 

Perhaps Israel will be nervous enough to start acting like a good neighbour rather than their recent steal all they can while they can antics. Just dreaming, but it could go a long way to resolving some serious problems they helped to create.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> I do not buy at all into the idea that having more power necessarily makes someone more corrupt. It's just an old wives tale proven wrong time and time again. How good or bad, honest or dishonest, generous, or miserly someone is in some but not all cases proportional to the level of power, wealth, intellect, popularity, or athletic capacity they have.
> 
> Some people stay the same as they acquire power. Some become worse, others, become better people. I have rubbed shoulders with all kinds of people rich and poor, wimpy and super athletic, geniuses and simple. In my experience, people born into wealth and culture are often better people, mainly due to having supportive families, part of the reason they are wealthy. The kind of person often not so good, the poor person who strives to become very rich at all costs and is not afraid to use people and circumstance to further his cause.


I in turn can't agree with your disagreement. You pounded away at religion and suggested we'd do better having none of it; you advocate for a world in which religion is put firmly in its place. If you grant a certain segment of society to have the power of discretion to confer favour on some and deny it to others, you are automatically creating conditions which will one day inevitably lead to abuses. Ergo, in attempting to solve one problem you create another one exactly like it. Corruption is corruption; power is power. If you form an anti-religion committee, they are bound to become a politburo which, in time, will begin to act like royalty or religious authorities. I think it's just the way we are hard-wired.

Again, contrary to your stated opinion, I don't believe there are those who remain the same as they acquire power. Just as death of loved ones changes a person, a radical change in personal material fortunes has a strong effect. I don't mind if you disagree with that assessment. I'm quite happy if you think I'm wrong, matter of fact.

And let's get one thing clear; I have no particular axe to grind with those who are born into power. But I don't give that class of people an automatic pass either; your bland contention that the rich are often "better" is curious. I mean, I have to ask: _better than what?_ To suggest they are somehow better because their families are more supportive is fine as far as it goes, but it strikes me as incomplete logic. Would they be so supportive if they couldn't afford to be supportive? - if they didn't already have a solid roof over their heads, if their health care concerns were already provided for?Seems to be a chicken and egg kind of question. On the flip side, we could just as easily say that those born into power are often out of touch with the concerns and tribulations of the common masses, having been too long insulated and coddled by their wealth and the complacency it breeds. Is that true as well? Depends, doesn't it. That's the problem with these huge generalizations. They break down in the face of specifics.

But back to religion. I am still amazed that you have declared your animosity towards it, given your past record in here of going on shilling for your own occult powers. It's truly bizarre. Am I to believe you are a reformed man, or are you merely one who prescribes homilies to others that you yourself are not prepared to personally exemplify? Are some religions and belief systems less equal than others? Evidently, most of the world believes the answer to be 'yes.' That's part of the reason why the world remains an infinitely interesting, desperately uneven place for we humans.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> In 2009 the Iranian people didn't even come close to reclaiming their country, nor at any other time since the Ayatollah's took over. If you believe that, you are completely misinformed.


the 2009 election protests were the largest displays of dissent the people had shown their government since the revolution. *Millions* of protesters took to the street. the seed was planted. it may not have bloomed, but it's still there and i believe the younger generation will step up again to the cause.



MazterCBlazter said:


> Why do you think that the Iranian government, which is controlled by the Ayatollah's, is so supportive of this revolution?


because they're jockeying for position in the power vacuum that will be created. everyone knows that. it's common knowledge.



MazterCBlazter said:


> Ayatollah Khamenei and all the Mullahs and Ayatollahs are celebrating this revolution. They have been working in the background on this for a long time. They are anything but nervous..


by all accounts this revolution was started by the young. it was secular. you're giving *far* too much credit to islamic extremists. they will of course try to hijack the movement, but they weren't the originators.



MazterCBlazter said:


> Already they are working with great success in acquiring lots of influence and power with Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Those governments take their orders from the Ayatollahs.


The way they seize power is by selling their extremist religious views to those without hope. That's why they're able to take hold in countries that are in poverty.

The solution to the problem they pose isn't to prop up a strongman in hope that it'll keep the population docile and in line. that's a band-aid that only delays the inevitable. As long as dictators are in control & oppressing their people, then extremists can recruit more people to their line of thinking.

The *REAL* solution to peace in the middle east is to offer the population of these countries *legitimate* hope. If people have something to live for and a shot of happiness in their lives they won't be filled with the anger and hopelessness that extremists can hijack for their cause.



MazterCBlazter said:


> Soon, the Egyptian government will also be in their control.


If you can see into the future please tell me next friday's lotto max winning numbers.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

you do realize that saying this:



MazterCBlazter said:


> To be able to see into the future and accurately predict future outcomes is something that any successful investor's survival and capital growth is dependent on. One of my big concerns beyond the welfare of the people is how these events will affect the value of investments.


is in direct contrast to saying this:



MazterCBlazter said:


> Many people overseas hate the west, with legitimate reason, and have and may continue to be terrorists to us. So long as our governments prop up and support ruthless dictatorships *when it is convenient* to get oil cheaply while their people are persecuted, oppressed, and ripped off. So long as we can strive to drive Hummers and other SUV's, most people don't care about the west's hypocritical role in this mess.


?


----------

