Beck wonders about his Egypt/China/New Zealand/Europe theory: ‘Is it so farfetched, really?’ Um, yeah, it is.
February 4, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Glenn Beck seems to be a little nonplussed that everyone is pointing and laughing at his typically GlennBeckian apocalyptic conspiracist take on the events in Egypt . On his Fox News show yesterday he basically doubled down: They were reacting with surprise afterwards, you know, like what? I’ve never heard that. Because she’s 100 percent wrong. First of all, that’s not the network’s theory. That’s not Fox’s theory. That’s my theory. My theory. And it’s not Van Jones or anything else. Let me ask you this, let’s start here. Since when is having a theory when you’re trying to figure out what’s going on a bad thing in America? And it’s really less theory than it is facts in their own words. But, just in case, let me show you what my “theory” is. And I stand by it. Everybody on the left, this is my theory and I stand by every word of it. Groups from the hardcore socialists and communist left and extreme Islam will work together because of the common enemy of Israel and the Jews. It’s not just capitalism, it’s not the United States, it’s your way of life in the West. And I stand by that. Groups from the hardcore socialist left and communism and extreme Islam will work together to overturn relatively — relative stability because in the status quo, they are both ostracized from power and the mainstream in most parts of the world. That’s — here, I’ll even put it up for you — Glenn’s theory. Here it is. Got it? That’s it and I stand by it. Is it so farfetched, really? Yes. This has been another edition of simple answers to simple questions.
Continue reading …
Firms such as BP criticised for being too close to government of president Hosni Mubarak British companies are flying out staff and halting operations as the civil disorder escalates in Egypt but they have also found themselves under verbal attack for being too close to the government of president Hosni Mubarak. BP has also been accused of working “hand in glove with dictatorship” while Vodafone is under fire for bowing to presidential pressure to shut the mobile telephone network down. BP, which has sunk $14bn into oil operations and is hoping to double production there, said “hundreds” of employees or their dependents were being evacuated from Cairo and some drilling operations had been halted. BG, formerly part of British Gas, said it had closed its Cairo office and flown home all non-essential expatriate staff from Egypt, but its production of liquefied natural gas goes on. Vodafone has flown 25 people and their families back to the UK in recent days, the company’s chief executive Vittorio Colao disclosed. The boss of the world’s biggest mobile phone operator added that two of its Egyptian employees are known to have been injured in rioting between supporters and opponents of Mubarak. One of the two is missing, and the company is trying locate him. And British banks such as Barclays, airlines such as BA and others with exposure to the growing Middle East market have seen their shares hit as investors worry about the damage to UK plc from the turmoil in the region. BP has been criticised by the non-governmental organisation Platform, which claims the oil company had with other British and American oil companies “worked hand in glove with dictatorship.” The environmental and social justice group also said Hesham Mekawi, the BP Egypt chairman, has praised “the stability of the country” and claimed BP had allowed the American Chamber of Commerce in Cairo – of which it is a member – to put pressure on US Congress not to support a recent motion calling on Mubarak to hold fair elections and respect human rights. BP said it had played a constructive role in Egypt which had benefited the entire population. “We’ve been in Egypt for 40-plus years as a major investor in the country’s industry, employing a well-trained workforce in quality jobs, supplying significant amounts of energy to meet the rapidly growing population’s needs,” said a spokesman. BP has made Egypt one of its top priorities after a major gas find in the Nile Delta last summer. It hopes to more than double its oil and gas production to over 320,000 barrels a day – almost a tenth of its global output. Meanwhile Vodafone’s Collao said: “We have also suffered some ‘infrastructure damage’,” which he defined as mobile stations out of action due to fuel shortages, or because Vodafone staff are unable to provide essential maintenance. The British company owns 55% of Vodafone Egypt which employes around 6,000 and has nearly 29m customers. Colao defended his decision to shut down its mobile phone network in Egypt last week on the regime’s orders. “The network was down for 24 hours. We didn’t have any option as the government was within its rights under emergency powers that it invoked after the outbreak of demonstrations.” He said disruption to services is continuing with many Egyptian customers unable to send text messages, but that the network was operational for those taking advantage of ‘roaming’ agreements between different operators. “Our main concern at the moment is for the safety of the people of Egypt and our colleagues. But we are not telling people to stay at home, some employees can work their shifts. This is a very fluid situation.” Last year, Vodafone was approached by its Egyptian partner, Telecom Egypt, with an offer to buy out the British company’s stake. But talks broke down because the two sides couldn’t agree a price. Vodafone reckons its holding in its Egyptian joint venture will rise in value because only around 70% of Egypt’s population owns a mobile phone, whereas in Europe there is saturation coverage. Egypt BP Vodafone Hosni Mubarak Middle East Protest Terry Macalister Richard Wachman guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Matthews Rips Obama’s Handling of Egypt Crisis: ‘I Feel Ashamed As an American’
February 4, 2011 5 Comments
MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews appeared on Morning Joe, Friday, to slam President Obama's handling of the escalating crisis in Egypt, saying it made him ” ashamed as an American .” Matthews, who famously declared Obama gave him a “thrill” up his leg, excoriated what he perceived to be the President's disloyalty to Egypt's leader, Hosni Mubarak. The Hardball host berated, ” And Barack Obama, as much I support him in many ways, there is a transitional quality to the guy that is chilling.” He added, “I believe in relationships…You treat your friends a certain way. You're loyal to them.” Matthews has previously lauded the authoritarian Mubarak.. Pointing out Mubarak's stand against Hezbollah and other extremist elements in the region, the anchor on January 31 wondered, “How can you say he'll easily be replaced? This guy's the George Washington of peace over there.” [See video below.] Deriding immediate calls for Mubarak to step down, Matthews lamented, “Character and planning…I feel shame about this. I feel ashamed as an American, the way we're doing this. I know he has to change. I know we're for democracy, but the way we've handled it is not the way a friend handles a matter.” Matthews even attacked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's performance: “I watched Secretary Clinton today. I don't get anything. I don't see anything other than two and two are four. I keep waiting for five. Show me you've done your jobs over there.” A transcript of his answer to Joe Scarborough's question, which aired at 8:22am EST, follows: JOE SCARBOROUGH: Chris, a statement yesterday from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, real concern among Arab states, if this is how we treat our ally of 30 years and I know it's tough to bring these facts up to people who want to call for his immediate lynching, but if we treat an ally of 30 years this way, demanding that he leaves quote “now,” Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, are other allies in the region start questioning America's character [sic]? CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well, I think that's the great word, Joe. It's character. Our national character. We do is have a character. And Americans think about ourselves as the good guys and being good friends and loyal. And these are values that mean a lot to us as people. You don't walk down the street and watch your friend get gunned down and not do anything about it. We're not Kitty Genovese here. We're not a situation in New York or something when somebody gets mugged and we watch it happen. Was he our friend for 30 years? Are we denying that? I remember, Joe, when he came to one of those afternoon events they had in the House Foreign Affairs committee back in 1981 after Sadat had been assassinated. And, of course, we Americans loved Sadat. There was a great emotion towards him because of what he had done for peace and his courage. And we just loved his dignity and his personality. And Along came Mubarak, this strong personality. We thought things might come apart over there and he held everything together. He was strong. I was with Tip O'Neil that day and I walked aback from that meeting with him and I said, “He's a strong guy.” And we were just chatting about what an impressive figure he was and we've been with him for 30 years. And now we're saying, it's time for the gate. Well, we should have known this. My second point of view about this, it's friendship. He's 83 in May. He's getting old. We should have prepared this 10, 20 years ago. In friendship, where was the State Department? Don't we have hundreds of people sitting over there in Foggy Bottom with no other job except to know what's going on in Egypt, with no other job, but to know the culture and politics in that country and to understand who the potential leaders and factions that might off set the Muslim Brotherhood? What are they doing? I watched Secretary Clinton today . I don't get anything. I don't see anything other than two and two are four . I keep waiting for five. Show me you've done your jobs over there . And I just wish, in our friendship, we should have been smart and I think we don't have a plan B. I mean, the guy's almost 83. His plan was Gamal]. I was talking to Secretary Powell while ago. I hope it wasn't off the record, because he said it rather clearly to me. I said, “What do you think of Mubarak?” He said, “He's like every other leader in the world there. All they think about is primogeniture.” They want their oldest kid to be their successor, whether it's Gadaffi or Bashar Assad. They call themselves Baathist, monarchist, whatever, Islamists. It all comes down to the same thing. They want their oldest kid to replace them. And what was the plan for transition for our friend? Did we ever talk to him about it? Did we talk about it, encourage him? That's my view. Character and planning. And I don't see- I feel shame about this. I feel ashamed as an American, the way we're doing this. I know he has to change. I know we're for democracy, but the way we've handled it is not the way a friend handles a matter. We're not handling as Americans should handle a matter like this. I don't feel right about it. And Barack Obama, as much I support him in many ways, there is a transitional quality to the guy that is chilling. I believe in relationships. I think we all do. Relationship politics is what we were brought up with in this country. You treat your friends a certain way. You're loyal to them. And when they're wrong, you try to be with them. You try and stick with them. As the great old line was, “I don't need you when I'm right.” You've got to help out people when they're in trouble and all I'm seeing is transaction. Who we going to get the next deal with? And, by the way, we don't have a plan for the next deal, so we're not even good at transactions, let alone relationships. What are we good at here? That's what I keep asking. What have we done as leaders and friends? Nothing except watch. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Wow! — Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter .
Continue reading …
Ingraham regrets Obama is US president, Limbaugh wishes he were Egyptian president and Michael Savage thinks he’s Lenin As violence in Egypt escalates and the death toll mounts, conservative radio hosts are growing increasingly concerned about the crisis of leadership here in America. Laura Ingraham Laura Ingraham was nonplussed by what she felt was a wimpish response from President Obama to the uprising, and was wistful for bygone days when America knew her place in the world ( listen to clip here ). “What did I say on Monday: if you don’t know who you are, then it’s difficult to lead in a time like this. If you don’t know really what your country’s purpose is, whether really we’re any better than any other country, then it’s really hard in a situation like this where you have all these other moving parts.” To demonstrate how things could be if we only had the right kind of president, she played a clip from a speech given by former President Ronald Reagan offering his unequivocal support to the Polish solidarity movement during their struggle for independence from Russia. Ingraham, who admitted to being half-Polish, totally understood how important it was for the struggling people of Poland at the time to have the American President behind them. It was essential to nurture these movements in order to ultimately wrestle them from the grips of the Soviet Union and encourage the people on the ground, who were good people and who had a lot of courage to stand up against the old Soviet stranglehold on that country. It took an enormous amount of courage and they received that jolt of bravery and that inspiration from an American leader who understood how important that was, who basically said I’m there with you. It wasn’t a mixed message. But lest you think, as I briefly did, that Ingraham was going out on a limb as the lone conservative voice urging more American support for the courageous protesters on the streets of Egypt, who are risking their lives in the hope of a better one, know that it was only the style of Reagan’s message that she wished Obama would emulate (that is, “America is in charge”) and not the substance (“America supports your cries for freedom”). She clarifies her position later when she discusses the matter on the O’Reilly Factor, with political consultant Dick Morris. They both agreed that the current administration seems to be “bored with foreign policy” and did not sow the seeds on the ground in Egypt during the past two years for a secular movement to emerge; and now we are “opening the door to Islamic fundamentalist domination”. Morris went further and said that we should be going more aggressively against the protesters, that it was a mistake to have urged the military to stand aside and that we should not have requested pro-Mubarak supporters to refrain from violence. (He must be relieved now to know that they have ignored this particular request.) He also said that Obama seems to only “oppose America’s allies and not our enemies”. Ingraham was in full agreement. It seems like they have been pretty good at giving hell to our friends and criticising them quickly, but the people who actually do not have America’s best interests at heart and actually want to destroy and kill our enemies. It’s giving them every benefit of the doubt and that’s where I think this whole thing breaks down. There’s this utopian idea that this is all going to turn out and people are going to reach their aspirations, as President Obama said last night, but look at these pictures we’re seeing. Is this the people reaching their aspirations? Ingraham might want to take a leaf out of her hero President Reagan’s playbook about not sending mixed messages. Rush Limbaugh Rush Limbaugh was also perturbed by President Obama’s handling of the Egyptian riots ( listen to clip here ). “OK, Pharaoh Obama’s ordering Mubarak what to do.This is after Mubarak says he’s vamanos . After Mubarak says he’s leaving, he’s getting out of there in eight months, Obama gives a speech to claim credit for it.” Limbaugh was angered by Obama’s assurances to the people of Egypt, particularly to the youth, that America was on their side and he was not buying the current story line (put forward even by some commentators who could not be dismissed as “far left loons”) that the situation in Egypt is delicate, to say the least, and that the president has to walk a tightrope. What tightrope here? I’ll tell you what tightrope. Obama’s taken credit for the mob, folks. Why else do the speech? Trying to take credit for Mubarak stepping down which was supposed to end all the protests, or at least ratchet them down. These guys are clamouring for new leadership. OK, Pharaoh Obama comes in, makes it happen. Fine, everybody goes home, except they are not going home. They are ramping up. They are getting more violent. The numbers are increasing, and the signs are more and more written in English. Rush, then, proposes his own radical solution to address both countries’ leadership crisis. Why don’t we send Obama over to Egypt to be their president – and don’t tell me he can’t run for president of Egypt because he wasn’t born there. I don’t want to hear that. I don’t want to hear that. Apparently, he can be president anywhere he wants to be. Maybe a movement to get Obama’s name on the Egyptian ballot. He likes it over there, went over to make his speech in Cairo. Just think of the fun they would have getting Obama to produce his birth certificate. Michael Savage Savage thinks Obama’s interference in the Egyptian uprising (or lack of interference, depending on his mood) is a recipe for disaster ( listen to clip here ). “Remember the phrase, if you want to make an omelette, you’ve got to break a few eggs. You know who said that? I believe it was Karl Marx [sic] , and Karl Marx said if you want to make an omelette, you got to break a few eggs – in this case, the eggs are Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen and then Israel. Because if international Marxism can make the new omelette, meaning the new world order, where the capitalists continue to rake in the trillions, then, my friend, it’s a new theory, is it not?” For someone with so combative a nature, Savage is strangely unsettled by revolutions and seems to believe that, in general, they are of no benefit to the people revolting. He cites the French revolution of 1789 as an example of a movement that backfired horribly on the instigators (though, in fairness, the majority of French people today do have fairly decent jobs, healthcare and universal access to nice wine and cheese). Back to the present day, Savage tries to make the point that dictatorships are not always a bad thing. I have never seen a consistency, as I have now seen, between the quote “left” and the “right”, the conservatives and the liberals, all of them are lost; they’re all babbling the same thing; they’re all saying these are legitimate grievances of the pent-up demands of the people. They’re making Mubarak into the worst dictator in history. They’re making him worse than Ahmadinejad. It’s astounding to listen to this, and they’re only so much I can listen to until I explode. Why is it they’re always on the side of communist tyrants and never on the side of, let us say, different types of tyrants? In the end, though, as far as Savage is concerned, it doesn’t really matter who’s right or who’s being wronged in Egypt or elsewhere. There’s no point trying to fix what’s already broken. Lenin says [sic] if you want to make an omelette, you got to break a few eggs. And I think that our president, being a lifetime Leninist, is breaking a few eggs. In this case, the eggs are Tunisia, Egypt Jordan and Yemen. But I will tell you this, there’s a dozen eggs in a normal package and if you think that this egg is going to remain whole, you are mistaken. I’m guessing Savage doesn’t like his eggs scrambled. Egypt Talk radio Radio US television Protest Barack Obama Obama administration Republicans Ronald Reagan US politics US foreign policy Middle East Sadhbh Walshe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Ahmed, a pro-democracy protester in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, speaks to Al Jazeera about the injuries that he has recieved while demonstrating, and who he wants to see in government.
Continue reading …
Jerusalem Post editor warns Israel’s ‘concrete strategic assumptions liquefied almost overnight’ As pro-democracy demonstrations continue in Egypt, Israel’s reaction has been of rising panic, as typified by Jerusalem Post editor David Horovitz. He today warned that Israel’s “concrete strategic assumptions were liquefied almost overnight”, representing a “colossal psychological blow” and a reminder that Israel is “territorially and demographically dwarfed by the seething entities arrayed around us”. Israel has been following events in Egypt and across the Middle East with mounting concern, as entrenched positions look set to shift, destabilising a status quo that has long been taken for granted. “The Israeli government is freaking out,” said Dr Shmuel Bachar, at the Israel Institute for Policy and Strategy. “For the past 30 years we have depended on Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. Now, suddenly, we have rediscovered the existence of something called an Egyptian public, the existence of which we’ve vigorously tried to ignore.” Israel has been troubled by sight of masses of Egyptian people on the streets calling for democratic rights, freedoms and the ousting of Hosni Mubarak. Last week senior officials reported that a dozen key Israeli embassies were urged by the foreign ministry to stress the importance of Egyptian stability to host countries. Several Israeli commentators have expressed anger at US criticism of Mubarak, arguing that is not in US or Israeli interests. In a poll published by mass-circulation daily Yediot Ahronot, 65% of Israelis think Mubarak’s removal from office would be a bad thing for Israel. Of primary concern are fears that the Muslim Brotherhood, perceived as anti-Israel and anti-Semitic, could take control and reverse relations with Israel. The treaty signed with Egypt in 1979 brought about a frosty sort of peace in practice, but it had dramatic benefits. Significantly, Israel has for decades budgeted on the assumption that it will not have to fight a war on the Egyptian front, according to Giora Eiland, a retired general and former head of the army’s planning branch. “The defence budget was more than 30% of the gross domestic product before 1979 and went down to 7% after the peace treaty,” he said. “One reason for Israel’s economic prosperity is that it could decrease the defence budget for all those years.” Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, signalled potential budgetary changes last week when he said that, should Egypt renege on the peace treaty, Israeli would “protect it with security arrangements of the ground”. Several analysts point out that, in such a scenario, Israel would face an Egyptian enemy that has been the beneficiary of advanced US weaponry. But Eiland sees other strategic worries over developments in Egypt. “If the Muslim Brotherhood takes control, there could be an immediate reaction in Palestinian society, where Hamas, the Palestinian wing of the Brotherhood, could be encouraged to take control of the West Bank.” The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank has shut down recent demonstrations in solidarity with the pro-democracy protesters in Egypt. As well as fears over the smuggling of weapons from Egypt into Gaza, Israel is worried about potential ruptures in Jordan, resulting in a scenario whereby Israel is, according to Eiland “surrounded only by enemies, which would be a strategic change”. Although many Israeli commentators are rehearsing these fears about Islamist politics, some have questioned these reactions. “There are no religious slogans in Tahrir square, but still we look upon the Muslim Brotherhood as though it is the greatest threat,” says Zvi Bar’el, veteran middle eastern affairs analyst for Haaretz newspaper. “This is how we are educated by the government and media, to see Islam as a symbol of evil.” Bar’el adds that Israelis do not register the contradiction of claiming to support democracy, but only on condition that Islamic parties such as the Palestinian Hamas or Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood are not elected. “It has no meaning if you attach these terms,” he says, adding that Israel’s position is: “We support democracy, as long as you keep the dictatorial regimes in place.” Dr Bachar at the IPS says that Israeli policy is based on the assumption that there are only two alternatives in the Middle East: “a dictator that can be worked with – or chaos.” He cautions that Israel “needs to change the record, insert a new disc”. Israel Egypt Middle East Rachel Shabi guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
With US-made tear gas canisters fired on protesters in Cairo, Washington’s role in arming Egypt is under the spotlight In early January 2010, Bob Livingston, a former chairman of the appropriations committee in the US House of Representatives, flew to Cairo accompanied by William Miner, one of his staff. The two men were granted meetings with US Ambassador Margaret Scobey, as well as Major General FC “Pink” Williams, the defence attaché and director of the US Office of Military Cooperation in Egypt . Livingston and Miner were lobbyists employed by the government of Egypt, helping them to open doors to senior officers in the US government. Records of their meetings , required under law, were recently published by the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington, DC watchdog group. Although the names of those who attended the meetings have to be made public, the details of what was discussed are confidential. I called Miner to ask him about their meetings, but he referred me to Karim Haggag, the spokesman for the Egyptian embassy in Washington, who did not respond. Miner did confirm that he was a retired Navy pilot who had worked for clients like the Egyptian government, as well as several military contractors. The cozy relationship between the lobbyists, members of the US Congress, Pentagon officials and the Egyptian government is easily explained: much is at stake. Egypt has received over $70bn in economic and military aid approved by the US Congress in the past 60 years, according to numbers compiled by the Congressional Research Service. Maj Gen Williams is the man in charge of the $1.3bn in annual US military aid supplied to the country. Specifically, the aid money pays for US-designed Abrams tanks assembled in suburban Cairo under contract with General Dynamics. Boeing sells Egypt CH-47 Chinook transport helicopters, Lockheed Martin sells F-16s, Sikorsky Aircraft sells Black Hawk helicopters. Lockheed Martin has taken in $3.8bn from Egypt in the last few years; General Dynamics $2.5bn; Boeing $1.7bn; among many others. In addition, hundreds of Egyptian military officers come for short training courses to the US each year. Two days after Livingston and Miner met with the US officials in Cairo, the embassy sent a cable to Washington with a list of Egyptian officials approved to take a three-week military training course in the US in February 2010. Under the “Leahy law” – a human rights requirement named after Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont that prohibits US military assistance to foreign military units that violate human rights – the embassy must, as a matter of routine, vouch for the prospective trainees. One of the training courses listed in the cable made public by WikiLeaks was listed as one in how to handle explosives. The WikiLeaks cables show that numerous officials working for “state security”, aged between 30 and 50 with ranks from major to lieutenant colonel, were given clean bills of health to take a variety of such specialised military training programmes. After the US lobbyists returned to their offices in Washington, DC, Miner kept in touch with “Pink” Williams, corresponding via email. A little over three months later, an Egyptian military delegation led by Major General Mohamed Said Elassar, assistant to Mohammed Hussein Tantawi, the Egyptian minister of defence, came to Washington. Livingstone and Miner were on hand once again to take the Egyptian officials to meet with a number of members of Congress, as well to visit the office of the secretary of defence to discuss “US/Egyptian security issues”. So, when protesters in Cairo last week were struck by tear gas canisters fired by Egyptian security officials , it was not surprising that pictures taken by ABC TV would show that the canisters were manufactured in the US. Nor does it seem that surprising that a journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald would find 12-gauge shotgun shells with ”MADE IN USA” stamped on their brass heads when he visited the wounded in a makeshift casualty ward in a tiny mosque behind Tahrir (Liberation) Square. The photographs show that the tear gas comes from a company named Combined Systems Inc (CSI), which describes itself as a “tactical weapons company” and is based in Jamestown, Pennsylvania. A similar picture from the protests in Egypt was posted on Twitter of a “Outdoor 52 Series Large Grenade” grenade made by CSI, which is designed to discharge “a high volume of smoke and chemical agent through multiple emission ports”. (CSI did not return calls for comment.) Although CSI markets these products as “less-than-lethal” , several incidents indicate that they can cause injury and death. Bassem Abu Rahmah, a Palestinian man, was reportedly killed on 17 April 2009, when a CSI 40mm model 4431 powder barricade penetrating tear gas grenade struck him in the chest , according to a report by the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem. Nels Cooper Brannan , a US marine deployed to Fallujah, Iraq, unsuccessfully sued CSI for injuries caused by an allegedly defective MK 141 flashbang grenade that caused serious damage to his left hand when it exploded accidently. While the Egyptian protesters were facing tear gas grenades fired by security forces in Cairo, another delegation of Egyptian senior military officials led by Lieutenant General Sami Hafez Enan, the chief of staff of Egypt’s armed forces, was back in Washington to meet with Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (No public records have been filed yet, so it is unclear if Miner and Livingstone were escorting them again.) Within hours of the news of the huge protests, Enan cut short his trip and dashed back to Cairo last Friday, but his boss, Minister Tantawi, has kept in touch with Washington, making daily phone calls to US Defence Secretary Robert Gates . Both men – together with Egypt’s spy chief, Omar Suleiman – are among President Hosni Mubarak’s closest allies and enjoy close ties with Washington, according to the diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks. And it was these men that Thomas E Donilon, the US national security adviser, was frantically phoning last weekend to try to gauge how to prevent the collapse of the Mubarak regime. It could days, maybe even weeks, before the future of the Egyptian government is decided, and with it, the relationship with the US. But one thing is clear: the Egyptian protesters are well aware of the close ties between officials in Cairo and Washington and not happy about the US training and tear gas shells supplied to the Egyptian military. Crowds gathered in Liberation Square last week chanted: “Hosni Mubarak, Omar Suleiman, both of you are agents of the Americans.” The protesters believe that the billions in military aid that kept Mubarak in power have helped him keep democracy from flowering in Egypt. Two years after Obama’s famous speech in Cairo , in which he called for a “new beginning between the United States and Muslims”, it might be a little late for his administration to heed the words of Mostafa Amin , Egypt’s most famous columnist and journalist: Maybe America gains a lot when it exports to us arms and cars or planes, but it loses more when it does not export the best that its civilisation has produced, which is freedom and democracy and human rights. The value of America is that it should defend this product, not only in its country but throughout the world! It may harm some of its interests, but it will make gains that will live hundreds of years, for the friendship of peoples live forever, because the peoples do not die, but governments change like the winter weather. Egypt Arms trade US military US foreign policy US Congress United States Hosni Mubarak Protest Human rights Middle East WikiLeaks The US embassy cables Pratap Chatterjee guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media There’s no love lost between Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and President George W. Bush’s former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. The senator from Arizona gave a terse response Thursday to claims made in Rumsfeld’s new book, Known and Unknown. In the book, Rumsfeld had claimed McCain had a “hair-trigger temper” and “a propensity to shift his positions to appeal to the media.” “I respect Secretary Rumsfeld,” McCain began by telling ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “He and I had a very, very strong difference of opinion about the strategy that he was employing in Iraq, which I predicted was doomed to failure,” he continued. “Thank God he was relieved of his duties and we put the surge in. Otherwise, we would have had a disastrous defeat in Iraq,” McCain said. It’s not the first time McCain has taken his criticisms of Rumsfeld public. “We are paying a very heavy price for the mismanagement — that’s the kindest word I can give you — of Donald Rumsfeld, of this war,” he said while running for president in 2007. “I think that Donald Rumsfeld will go down in history as one of the worst secretaries of Defense in history.”
Continue reading …
White House says suspension of $1.3bn in annual aid to Egypt would undermine push towards a post-Mubarak system The Obama administration today resisted calls to cut its massive military aid to Egypt and is instead working behind the scenes with the commanders of the country’s armed forces on how to oust President Hosni Mubarak. The White House sees the Egyptian military as the key to removing Mubarak, regarded as a necessary first step towards implementing substantive political and economic reforms. Cutting aid would risk alienating them. The US defence secretary, Robert Gates, the chair of the joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, and other senior Pentagon figures have been in regular contact with their Egyptian counterparts all week. Mullen, in an interview with ABC television today, said the US should wait to see what happens next before suspending aid, which amounts to more than $1.3bn (£800m) a year. “There is a lot of uncertainty out there and I would just caution against doing anything until we really understand what’s going on,” he said. “I recognise that [$1.3bn] certainly is a significant investment, but it’s an investment that has paid off for a long, long time.” The US and Egyptian armies are closely intertwined, not just through military aid but joint training and exercises. The US would suspend aid immediately if the military was to crackdown on peaceful protesters in the way of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in 2009 and the Chinese military in 1989. Mullen said he had been in contact with his counterpart in Egypt, who assured him the miliary would remain neutral and not fire on the protesters. Haim Malka, deputy director of Washington’s Centre for Strategic and International Studies, said suspending aid would be a mistake. “The United States’s ability to influence that system is already limited. Freezing military aid now undermines what leverage the US government does have to promote a post-Mubarak system that is more than just a reconfiguration of the status quo,” he said. The Pentagon press spokesman, Geoff Morrell, said Gates had spoken with the Egyptian defence minister, Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, three times this week. Tantawi visited Tahrir Square today to talk with anti-government protesters, signalling that the military would not participate in a crackdown. Mullen has been in contact with Lieutenant-General Sami Enan, a national hero in Egypt. Under one of the options being discussed between the US and the Egyptian military, Enan would lead the transitional process along with the new vice-president, Omar Suleiman, the former head of intelligence who is close to the military, as well as Tantawi. The US vice-president, Joe Biden, spoke with Suleiman yesterday. The White House has been criticised throughout the week for failing to call unambiguously for Mubarak to go immediately. But the administration does not want to alienate pro-American leaders in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region with an unseemly rush to dump a long-time ally. It also does not want to be seen as interfering in Egyptian domestic politics and fears humiliating Mubarak would be counterproductive to efforts to push him towards the exit. The Obama administration is keen for him to leave as soon as possible so the reform process can get under way that will hopefully lead to free and fair elections. “The president has said that now is the time to begin a peaceful, orderly and meaningful transition, with credible, inclusive negotiations,” a White House spokesman, Tommy Vietor, said. “We have discussed with the Egyptians a variety of different ways to move that process forward, but all of those decisions must be made by the Egyptian people.” Obama administration United States Egypt US politics Hosni Mubarak Middle East Protest Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Al Jazeera’s Joanna Gasiorowska reports on day two at the Qatar Masters, which sees world number one Lee Westwood fail to make the cut while a little-known Austrian pursues an unlikely dream.
Continue reading …