Click here to view this media The right-wing Media Research Center’s Brent Bozell was on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show last night to talk about how horrible the American media have been in covering the situation in Egypt. How have they been horrible? Why, apparently because they aren’t being sufficiently Becklike in fearmongering over an imminent radical Islamist takeover: BOZELL: What happens when the government crumbles? What happens when this country is reduced to utter anarchy? What happens when the killings begin and the death begins? Are they still going to credit Barack Obama’s soaring oratory for that, or are they going to separate them? What happens if an Islamic caliphate takes over? Are they going to credit his soaring oratory at that point? No they won’t. And what happens, Brent Bozell, if the government remains standing but reconstitutes itself as a democratic republic? What happens when the violence subsides? Will you and Hannity be going on the air and abjectly apologizing to your audiences and the American public and President Obama and to your media colleagues for needlessly fearmongering and spreading panic? Um, no. You won’t. But Bozell reserved his special reservoir of venom for Chris Matthews, who dared compare the Muslim Brotherhood to the Tea Party. This, of course, made Hannity’s an Bozell’s collective pea-sized brains explode: BOZELL: Look, I listen to Chris Matthews and I have two reactions to that. My first reaction is, ‘Let’s put aside civility for just a minute and to say, I’m just so sick and tired of these disgusting, horrible, despicable attacks, I’m going to slug you and deck you one of these days.’ But that’s wrong. That’s the wrong reaction. The right reaction is to listen to him, and to listen to him clearly, and just start laughing at the guy. Look, if a meteor came out of the heavens and hit New York City, he would blame the Tea Party for it. He would blame Michele Bachmann for it. HANNITY: No. He would probably blame George W. Bush or Sarah Palin. Let’s be honest. BOZELL: Yeah, but if it hit Fox News, he would say it’s OK. Yeah, and if it his NBC News instead, Bozell and Hannity would say it was OK. Especially because we know that “first reaction” is, for right-wing clowns like these two, the one we’re going to get most of the time. Especially when it’s being encouraged by top-tier pundits on a cable network with an audience of millions. Oh, but if a liberal protester is overheard saying nasty things, why, that’s proof positive that it’s the “left” that cannot be civil.
Continue reading …It is right to be anxious about Egypt but not the weary, confused organisation that represents political Islam there Fear of political Islam is the pivot around which debate on Egypt’s future in the outside world often revolves. It is the spectre which a jittery Israel invokes, and it is still President Hosni Mubarak’s last card in arguing that the system which he and his predecessors created should survive more or less intact, even when he is no longer part of it. Al-Qaida’s Egyptian connections are remembered and the Iranian revolution’s tragic slide into religious fascism recalled. Thus it is that many who cheer on the Egyptian demonstrators feel anxiety when they ask themselves what comes afterward. Yet that anxiety is misplaced. It is misplaced in the very precise sense that it is right to be anxious about Egypt but not right to centre that anxiety on the rather weary, confused and unready organisation which represents political Islam in Egypt today. The Muslim Brotherhood will play a serious part in any new politics. But it is now less a radical organisation than a conservative one, striving to be relevant to modern needs, and divided on how far it can or should trim its policies. Its leadership looks back on several decades of hard decisions, as well as of hard times under a president whose instincts always tended toward persecution or exclusion rather than reconciliation. The most fundamental such decision was to abandon violence, both in practice and in theory, at least on Egyptian soil. Distancing itself from violent means was, quite apart from the question of morality, the right thing to do if the Brotherhood was to have standing among Egyptians, who have consistently shown that they find such means abhorrent. It earned the Brotherhood the hatred of al-Qaida, but that was a political help, not a hindrance. Since then the Brotherhood has
Continue reading …Ahdaf Soueif looks back on a week of deceit and violence in Egypt – and finds it has also been a week of hope and democracy in action As you start reading this, you will know something I don’t: you will know how this day – Friday 4 February – has turned out for us. I’m writing this at 7am. I slept in my brother’s house last night, so now I’m hearing different patterns of birdsong and muffled conversation from the street. The renewed pro-democracy protests are set to start soon and we shall all make our way to Tahrir Square. We shall be families – with the young people in the lead. We’ve called friends who’ve spent the night in the square. They say everything’s quiet. On Thursday the new vice-president said the protests had to end. And the new prime minister stated he had no idea how violence came to happen on Wednesday in Tahrir, but that it would be investigated and, meanwhile, he was apologising to the people. And meanwhile, also, the government’s battalions of violent-crime-record personnel and plainclothes security forces were being moved around the city, yelling and brandishing banners and weapons and confronting protesters. But let’s do this in sequence. These are short extracts from my diaries of these days … Friday 28 January The protests have been going for three days – but I’ve just come to Cairo from Jaipur and this is my first. I walked through the streets of Imbaba with a small group of activists clapping and chanting. As people look down from balconies they wave at them: “Come down from the heights / come and get your rights.” People wave back. For two hours we walk the neighbourhood chanting against corruption, unemployment, sectarian division, fear. “We’re your kids, we’re part of you / What we’re doing is for you.” By the time we head to Tahrir Square, the focus of the protests, we are five thousand. As the protests from every quarter approach Tahrir the Central Security Forces start using teargas, rubber bullets, shotguns and live ammunition. They turn the march into a battle. Much of the ammunition is marked ‘made in the USA’. This is not a surprise but is noted and commented on by everybody. The internet and all mobile communications have been cut off. Saturday I am so amazed and touched by the field hospital at the back of Tahrir Square. The young doctors, male and female, are professional, dedicated and sympathetic. The injured are polite and so brave. Volunteer private cars ferry critical cases and bring in supplies. The government has removed police and all security from the streets and neighbourhoods are policing themselves. Young people have formed neighbourhood watches and are guarding their areas. They’re having fun, inventing barricades and passwords, checking IDs and ushering you through with a theatrical flourish. Everyone – particularly women – are talking about how much safer they feel with the police off the streets. Sunday One of my sons has been trying to get back from DC and today succeeds – after a last minute panic when the plane was turned back to Athens. It takes three and a half hours to make the half-hour journey from the airport as the army have blocked the tunnel bypassing President Mubarak’s home, where he doesn’t live. In the evening we go to the square. No police in sight and the army and young volunteers guarding the entrances. There’s music and food and water and camp fires and debates and universal courtesy. The government has closed down the banks, schools, offices. They’re bringing the country to a halt and pretending the protests are somehow doing it. Tuesday 1 February Today is the “million person protest” and the atmosphere in the square is brilliant. We look like people who’ve woken up from a spell, a nightmare. How many are we? In the square there are hundreds of thousands. Across Egypt, the military estimate 4 million out on the streets. And the watchword everywhere is “silmiyyah” (peaceable). We say to each other, how did they divide us? How did they make us think badly of our youth, of each other? We revel in the inclusiveness, the generosity, the humour that comes so easily to us. People offer each other food and drink, people chat, people pick up litter. Streetsweepers, businessmen, waiters, academics, farmers, we are all here together. There is no going back. Wednesday I’ve woken up with a cold and sore throat. Spend the day doing radio interviews in my pyjamas. My son calls from Tahrir to say that something’s different. There are no civilians on the checkpoints and the military are not checking people any more. No bags are searched. Truck-loads of government thugs are being delivered to the entrances to the square. I write and talk to the media. My voice is practically gone. My doctor aunt gives me lozenges with cortisone. My son calls and says government thugs are attacking. He describes battles at the entrances to the square. Young men and women forming defence lines to fight off the thugs. Trucks supplying the thugs with weapons and lasers shone at the protesters. A clinic set up and running. Thugs caught and handed unharmed to the army – that stands by doing nothing. I’m supposed to speak to Channel 4 News. I ask if they’ll send me a car but they say the situation is too dangerous for them to take the responsibility of transporting me. So I transport myself. And when we’re finished Jon Snow walks me back to my car. The Battle for Tahrir is taking place not a hundred metres from where I’m parked. Somewhere in there my nieces are manning communications with the outside world, my son is filming the fighting, and various friends are variously deployed. How many ways can this government disgrace itself? The area between the Egyptian Museum and the Rameses Hilton has become a badlands. They’ll tear up the country rather than depart? Thursday I’ve woken up much better and the net’s working although it’s slow. Our mobiles work but without messages. We all phone to check up on each other. The grocer calls to ask if we need anything and we ask for bread, milk, tea, eggs and so on. The laundry delivers ironed curtains I’d taken down and washed in a fit of euphoric physical activity on Monday. I hang them. For those of us not spending 24-hour days on the square it seems to be necessary to maintain a level of normalcy: our revolution likes fresh curtains. Heading for the square today the mood is grim; we feel we should move in groups. Several of us arrange to park and meet by the Opera House; from there it’s a short walk across Qasr el-Nil Bridge to the square. The street is lined with parked cars. Everyone walking to Tahrir is carrying something: blankets, cartons of water, medical supplies. Lots of us are taking mobile charge cards. As we get to the middle of the bridge we’re approached by three men and we know from their body language they’re not friends. We automatically form into a tight phalanx. They’re trying to grab the blankets and first aid bags and shouting that we have to be searched, that these things have to be delivered to an “official station”. We shout louder. In fact we scream: “Get away from us! Get away from us!” This is the first time I’ve screamed in the streets. I think it’s the first time I’ve even said these words. We’re holding on to our supplies and on to each other and we keep moving. My sister (a professor of maths at Cairo University) hits the man who’s trying to grab her bag. We’ve just had news that her husband, Ahmad Seif, and several of his lawyer/activist colleagues have been grabbed from the Hisham Mubarak Legal Centre where they provide support for political detainees and a hub for other humanitarian organisations. We don’t know where they’ve been taken. My sister says Ahmad had told her that if this happened we should not spend time looking for them but should concentrate on holding Tahrir and making the protests work. Activists run forward from the square to help us and we reach the young people’s checkpoint and are thoroughly and politely searched: men by men, women by women. Two army soldiers stand by. A young activist asks us to give them blankets; he says they’ve been there for two days with no cover. They demur but take the blankets. In the square the mood is sober, determined, indignant. The disinformation, the smears being spread by the government are hurting – perhaps more than the wounds and bruises so many people are carrying. Now I properly understand why revolutions need to seize radio and TV stations – you need to stop the other side lying about you. That this regime should dare to say that the protesters are agents of Israel, Iran and Hamas(!) beggars belief. This is what people are talking about. This, and that there’s no turning back. I’m meeting friends who live and work in London, in Brussels, in New York and Doha. We hug each other. We have all come home. I go to look at the front line of yesterday’s battle between the Egyptian Museum and the Franciscan School. The thugs have been beaten back but they’re regrouping. The clinic area hums with activity, and young men are standing at the edge of the square with linked arms to protect it. A woman sees me writing and says: “Write. Write that my son is in there with the young men. That we’re fed up with what’s been done to our country. That this regime divides Muslim from Christian. That it’s made people hungry. Our young men are humiliated abroad while our country is bountiful. But they’ve made it a country of corruption.” We get news that 39 more people have been taken. Among them seven of the young organisers – kidnapped from the street after a meeting with El-Baradei. A friend phones. She says many Egyptian Christians are fasting; fasting for victory. Friday I shall leave now for Tahrir Square. My family is already there. My son phoned and said it’s fine: the military are running checks and everything’s orderly. The questions that are being settled on the streets of Egypt are of concern to everyone. The paramount one for us today is this: can a people’s revolution that is determinedly democratic, grass-roots, inclusive and peaceable succeed? 8pm: The thugs have stayed in the side streets. The square is well defended, and has provided all day – as in the other two days of peace we have had – a space for debate. Many ideas for moving forwards are being articulated and discussed. What we have here is the opposite of a vacuum; we have democracy in action on the ground in Tahrir Square. We are full of hope and ideas, and our gallant young people are guarding our peripherary. A British journalist I met on the square told me she was privileged to have witnessed Tuesday. This, she said, is the ideal revolution that we never dreamed could actually happen. Well, here it is, and we shall do everything peaceable and decent to hold on to it. Ahdaf Soueif is the author of The Map of Love and many other books. She lives in Cairo and London Egypt Middle East Protest Ahdaf Soueif guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …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 …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 …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 …Egyptian president has cash in British and Swiss banks plus UK and US property President Hosni Mubarak’s family fortune could be as much as $70bn (£43.5bn) according to analysis by Middle East experts, with much of his wealth in British and Swiss banks or tied up in real estate in London, New York, Los Angeles and along expensive tracts of the Red Sea coast. After 30 years as president and many more as a senior military official, Mubarak has had access to investment deals that have generated hundreds of millions of pounds in profits. Most of those gains have been taken offshore and deposited in secret bank accounts or invested in upmarket homes and hotels. According to a report last year in the Arabic newspaper Al Khabar, Mubarak has properties in Manhattan and exclusive Beverly Hills addresses on Rodeo Drive. His sons, Gamal and Alaa, are also billionaires. A protest outside Gamal’s ostentatious home at 28 Wilton Place in Belgravia, central London, highlighted the family’s appetite for western trophy assets. Amaney Jamal, a political science professor at Princeton University, said the estimate of $40bn-70bn was comparable with the vast wealth of leaders in other Gulf countries. “The business ventures from his military and government service accumulated to his personal wealth,” she told ABC news. “There was a lot of corruption in this regime and stifling of public resources for personal gain. “This is the pattern of other Middle Eastern dictators so their wealth will not be taken during a transition. These leaders plan on this.” Al Khabar said it understood the Mubaraks kept much of their wealth offshore in the Swiss bank UBS and the Bank of Scotland, part of Lloyds Banking Group, although this information could be at least 10 years old. There are only sketchy details of exactly where the Mubaraks have generated their wealth and its final destination. Christopher Davidson, professor of Middle East politics at Durham University, said Mubarak, his wife, Suzanne, and two sons were able to accumulate wealth through a number of business partnerships with foreign investors and companies, dating back to when he was in the military and in a position to benefit from corporate corruption. He said most Gulf states required foreigners give a local business partner a 51% stake in start-up ventures. In Egypt, the figure is commonly nearer 20%, but still gives politicians and close allies in the military a source of huge profits with no initial outlay and little risk. “Almost every project needs a sponsor and Mubarak was well-placed to take advantage of any deals on offer,” he said. “Much of his money is in Swiss bank accounts and London property. These are the favourites of Middle Eastern leaders and there is no reason to think Mubarak is any different. Gamal’s Wilton Place home is likely to be the tip of the iceberg.” Al Khabar named a series of major western companies that, partnered with the Mubarak family, generated an estimated $15m a year in profits. Aladdin Elaasar, author of The Last Pharaoh: Mubarak and the Uncertain Future of Egypt in the Obama Age, said the Mubaraks own several residences in Egypt, some inherited from previous presidents and the monarchy, and others the president has commissioned. Hotels and land around the Sharm el-Sheikh tourist resort are also a source of Mubarak family wealth. Hosni Mubarak Egypt Middle East Phillip Inman guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …