Egyptian Youth Activist Speaks with Democracy Now’s

Egyptian Youth Activist Speaks with Democracy Now’s Sharif Abdel Kouddous

Democracy Now! senior producer Sharif Abdel Kouddous speaks with Alaa Abd El Fattah, an Egyptian activist and blogger, about youth organizing efforts as they stand on the 15th day of the uprising.

ALAA ABD EL FATTAH: I’m Alaa Abd El Fattah. I am a blogger and an activist. And we’re here in Tahrir Square in—what is it? This is the 15th day of the revolution. In terms of what’s happening right now, the numbers are swelling again, but people have been discussing, like, the best methods to escalate the pressure on government for a while. It’s a very slow process, making a decision among this crowd.

Some of the proposals are that, you know, a small number of protesters would—like a small sample of protesters would leave the square and head towards the TV building, because right now that’s the regime’s strongest castle. That’s where they’ve been mounting their latest attacks. And we know—I mean, it’s thousands of people work there, and we are sure the majority of them are with us, but they continue to obey orders and so on. I’m not sure this is going to be successful.

Another proposal that is being discussed is to actually—how do you say that in English?—is to actually, like, change the rules of how Egypt is governed, enforce people power in institutions. Since people are going back to work now, for since the beginning of the republic, we haven’t had the right to establish unions. All elections, you know, like official syndicates or labor unions or so on, were not free elections, were like full of discrepancies and forgery and so on. So there’s now a call for people to liberate their workplaces, to enforce and, you know, put facts on the ground around that.

Some of that has been happening in other cities, like in Suez they’ve actually elected a governor. They kicked the current governor, who—governors have been appointed by the President since '85, I think, or something like that, and they've elected one.

So, in the past five years, many independent labor unions were established. They are not recognized by law. So now they want to call for general assemblies in their labor unions and re-elect, so that the independent labor union becomes the labor union, and the government-controlled one no longer exists. If this happens, even on a small scale, I think that will be great. That will be massive pressure on the government, but it will also mean that the revolution is making gains and changing Egypt right now, not just when Mubarak leaves or if Mubarak leaves.

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Now, members of the six established opposition parties met with Omar Suleiman, as did the Muslim Brotherhood, as did some younger activists. What are your thoughts on these talks?

ALAA ABD EL FATTAH: Apart from the political parties, these younger activists, nobody knows them. We don’t know who they represent. So the only representation for young activists who are part of known political groups is the group called [in Arabic], which means the Coalition of Young Revolutionaries, or whatever. They don’t represent—they don’t claim to represent all of the revolution. They basically represent political parties and organized groups like 6 of April, Kefaya and so on. And they’ve only been meeting with the Committee of Elders, or Committee of Wise Men. They’ve been only pressuring their parties’ leadership; they have not been in direct talks with the government.

All opposition parties—or, like the six recognized opposition parties and the Muslim Brotherhood met. My understanding is that they all pulled back from negotiations because the government was not serious about it. The recognized political parties have always been playing a very soft game. They’ve always been part of legitimizing the regime, so we don’t really trust them, though many of their cadres are with us, you know, like we disassociate the institution from the people.

For the Muslim Brotherhood, I think it was a calculated move on their part, and I think it was a very good idea. They have been—the government has always treated them as a banned group, as an illegal group. Sometimes we tolerate them, sometimes we crack down very heavily on them, but, you know. So, by going to meet Omar Suleiman, who is also a figure not just of the establishment but also of the security establishment and the cooperation with the U.S. government in anti-terrorism and so on, so he is very much a symbol of absolute intolerance to Islamists of all kind—so, by going to meet him, they make a point that we are a legitimate group. And then, they were the first to pull out of negotiations, and they were the one with the most forceful message. So, I don’t think there’s anything negative in them going there. They’ve established their legitimacy, which also means that they’ve established the legitimacy of any group, that their legitimacy comes from popular support and not from state recognition or anything like that.

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Now, there’s been a lot of debate over what comes next after Mubarak, how to implement certain changes, how to dissolve parliament, how to amend the constitution. What are you calling for?

ALAA ABD EL FATTAH: A lot of this is very technical, and, you know, you hear multiple propositions. Most of them sound reasonable. So, I know more about what I don’t want than—I mean, what I personally dream of is revolutionary mandates, that we don’t need to deal with the complexities of the current constitution. The current constitution was created by an illegitimate government anyway. I’m a radical leftist, but I can’t claim that this is the general mood in the square or in other cities, you know, among the revolutionaries. Egyptians—it’s amazing that this uprising is happening, and it’s been an incredible one, but Egyptians are generally, you know, conservative in their action. And so, the moment you remove the very hated enemies, I think, I’d expect that a majority of them would ask for smoother transitions.

There’s also other benefits for smoother transitions. Like right now everyone is—we are really united, but there are topics that are very divisive. They are just not relevant right now. But if we immediately embark on writing a new constitution, revolutionarily reshaping Egypt, we might have to start discussing secularism versus—you know, everyone wants a modern civic state, but how secular or—and that’s just one example of these very divisive topics. So, it may be that it’s better to heed the advice of people who are telling us how to do these transitions smoothly.

But I think anything that requires a regime figure like Omar Suleiman overseeing the transition period is not acceptable. We can’t trust them. We don’t even trust that they represent—we can’t trust that they would not try to maintain a security regime, even within democracy. We can’t trust that they would not try to impose, you know, this continuation of the policy of heeding all imperialism, of heeding the interests of Israel and the U.S. and all these imperialist-imposed policies that Egypt has been having, and even on a symbolic level.

The original call was for the regime to fall. We are focusing now on Mubarak because Mubarak tried to reshuffle cards and remain in power. So that’s why we are now really focusing on Mubarak. But the goal of this revolution has always been for the whole regime to fall. And so, a regime figure being the custodian of the transition period is unacceptable. But things like the head of the constitutional court, although he’s not very independent, but at least his position is, or a presidential council that is mostly manned by judges, proposals like these are reasonable and possible.

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Today marks the two-week anniversary of the beginning of this uprising. Do you think you will ultimately be successful in toppling Hosni Mubarak?

ALAA ABD EL FATTAH: Well, I think we already are. I mean, it doesn’t seem like Mubarak is in power. In the minds of everyone here and many who aren’t here, he is already the deposed president. And, you know, this current phase is really about what happens next. And so, we are continuing the pressure because we want what happens next to be power to the people and to be through democratic Egypt that represents all of its people.

We should also remember that the initial slogans were not just "Topple the regime" but also [speaking in Arabic], which is "Bread! Freedom! Social justice!" And we will need a lot of pressure in order to achieve something like social justice, because that doesn’t just hit the interests of the regime, but, you know, broader interests, although the unity that you see here, the number of people representing all classes, I think it means that even the very rich—you know, the ones who didn’t flee the country—agree that the need for social justice and for bread and freedom is universal.

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/2/9/egyptian_youth_activist_speaks_with_democracy_nows_sharif_abdel_kouddous

“We Are Writing History by Our Blood”

“We Are Writing History by Our Blood”: Egyptian Physician on Why Protests Won’t End Until Mubarak Resigns

Democracy Now! senior producer Sharif Abdel Kouddous speaks to Egyptian physician Dr. Ali El Mashad in Cairo’s Tahrir Square over the weekend. Dr. Mashad describes being injured in the streets and bleeding from the head. “We are writing history by our blood,” he says. Mashad says he will not stop demonstrating until Mubarak leaves office. [includes rush transcript]

AMY GOODMAN: In Tahrir Square over the weekend, Democracy Now!’s Sharif Abdel Kouddous spoke to an Egyptian physician named Dr. Ali El Mashad who is participating in the demonstrations. He said the longer the revolution lasts, the more beautiful it becomes.

DR. ALI EL MASHAD: My name is Ali El Mashad. I’m from Cairo. I’m a doctor, physician. I see that the more delayed or the more late his decision to go away is, the more creative, more beautiful is the revolution. So, I want him to give us some more time to do or to make a more beautiful revolution, a more historical revolution, a more creative one, a more distinguished one. That’s it, just as war, because this was very ultra-violent, ultra-violent. But thank God we are here. I don’t know why, I don’t know how.

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Did you ever expect Egyptians to be able to do this?

DR. ALI EL MASHAD: No, not ever. And I didn’t expect we can overcome these partisan, these armies. We faced gas bombs. And I was dying. I was gasping. Eight days now.

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Spent the night here?

DR. ALI EL MASHAD: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I went home for three to four hours within these eight days, to take a bath, take a shower, to sleep for two hours, couple of hours. But I’m sleeping here. I’m living here. And I don’t want to go back home. My wife is coming now. She was striving to come, and I said, "Leave the kids and come." Why not?

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Do you think it will work?

DR. ALI EL MASHAD: Yeah, yeah, I’m sure. It is working. It is working. We have succeeded. I think after Wednesday, after the massacre of Wednesday—I was there. I was in the first line there, and I took one of the—I took an honor here, a little honor, compared to the other [inaudible], who took—I know one went to the hospital six times to get stitches, six times, and returns back to resume war. He was fighting. He was fighting like a soldier, without any training, without any organization, without any past history. I don’t know how. But I saw the people, the youth, fighting, fighting like death, 15 hours, for 15 hours. I can’t believe it.

At 3:00 a.m. Thursday, I was sure we’re down. We can’t resume. So I prayed to God. I couldn’t throw stones. I couldn’t do anything. So I stood up with the people, to die with the people, and started praying. Then, I decided to go to sleep. I couldn’t stand up.

At 5:00, I had a phone call from my wife. She said, "You’re leading. You had a victory already." I said, "How? How come?" After one-and-a-half hours of sleep. Then my colleagues came. They said, "The army, this army that they brought to us, has gone. It has gone. We are controlling the bridge." I said, "We are controlling the bridge? We are controlling the bridge?" They said, "Yeah. And also, we have three—we have three deaths." I didn’t get sad. I said, "That’s how the revolutions—that’s how the revolutions succeed, by this blood, by this blood, by these clean, clear youth, who are dying, who are dying for the country, for their rights, for their future and the future of their kids."

I told my wife on the phone, "Tell my kids, if I pass away here, tell my kids, 'Your father was a man, was a man of his word. He stood up for his rights, for your rights, and he went away for you. So, don't lose this.’" And I was sure this may happen. I’m sure, 'til now, this may happen. I am ready to it. I am trying to be ready to it. I'm trying real hard to be ready, to be ready for bullets, for fire, for the last fight. I’m ready. I’m trying, trying to be ready.

I think he’ll go, easily. I’m sure. I am sure he’ll. I think he’ll go easily. But I am putting all the odds. He may not go easily, so we’ll fight him to go hard. But he’ll go. Three days, four days, two weeks, a month, a year? He’ll go. He has been judging us, he has been stealing us, he has been fighting us 30 years ago. So, we are ready to fight him, a year, two years, here.

Everybody, every, every single drop of blood which is shed here is one of the—is one of the steps towards victory, towards freedom, towards history. We are writing history here, by the blood of our youth, by our blood. We all know that. When I felt the first drop of blood on my head, I was very happy. It was very happy. It’s my first time. It’s my first time to shed blood here. I used to do this all the time. I used to protest against all the decisions. But this was my first drop of blood. So I felt we are near. This time, we’re real near. This time, we are almost. We will never give up. We’ll never yield. He is the man who will give up. Soon he’ll go away. And I’m telling him here, go away now. Go away now, or you’ll be killed.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Dr. Ali El Mashad, an Egyptian physician participating in the demonstrations in Cairo, speaking in Tahrir Square over the weekend. Special thanks to Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Jacquie Soohen. This is Democracy Now! When we come back, we’ll be joined by Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Anjali Kamat of Democracy Now! and speak with Human Rights Watch. The numbers are going up of those who have died—over 300, it’s believed at this point. And how many thousands have been detained? We’ll speak with a researcher for Human Rights Watch in Cairo. Stay with us.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/9/we_are_writing_history_by_our

We Became One in the Street : Egyptians are More United than Ever

Renowned feminist and human rights activist Nawal El Saadawi was a political prisoner and exiled from Egypt for years. Now she has returned to Cairo and is participating in the protests in Tahrir Square.

She spoke to Democracy Now! about the feeling of community that emerged in Tahrir Square, particularly after the violence last Wednesday night.

NAWAL EL SAADAWI: The men on horses were shooting everywhere and throwing—I don’t know—fireballs. I don’t know. I was seeing fireballs in the sky. I don’t know what was happening, because the men carried me away. They just carried me away from the scene. They told me, "You are 80. You cannot stay here." So they carried me away from that. It was amazing. They were like my sons and daughter, you know, because they were surrounding me.

Blood was in the square. But the doctors and the group, the committee, the health committee, the doctors’ committee, took them, because there is now a hospital next to the Midan, where all doctors volunteered. And people, suddenly, in few minutes, people brought cotton and bandage and medicine. In few minutes, can you imagine? So we became like a city, square now, Midan Square, like a city, with its hospitals and with its police and everything.

I am very confident that we are winning. And now I feel the power of the people. I know the power of the people, but I never, never felt the power of the people like those days and especially tonight. The whole Midan is surrounded by the tanks, by the military tanks, and also by the group that—it’s like our police, you know? Police of the people, police of the demonstrations, who are not allowing anybody to enter until they see their card, etc., so that nobody of the gangs enter. It’s like a feast, like a festival. People are dancing, saying poetry. They are singing. Poets are writing poetry and reciting. So it became a cultural event, a culture event. It is amazing what’s happening tonight. What happened tonight was amazing.

I am a doctor. I am a psychiatrist. And I am a writer, and I observe myself. I don’t feel tired. Before that, if this happened, in a normal situation, I would be exhausted. But I’m so happy. People are coming to my home, so the walls of our apartment broke down. People visit each other at night. People sleep in tents in the square and mix together. Through the whole of people, there are no families now. We don’t have families and special homes and special apartments; we became one in the street. And even those who come to their home, they come temporarily, to have a shower. I came to have a shower and then go, you know? And then go back. So the plan is, we will never move. And we are increasing, increasing, increasing, until Mubarak say, "I’m leaving. I’m leaving." And then we put him on trial, because now the slogan, it’s not enough for him to leave; he should be on trial for the crimes, for the killing of hundreds of innocent Egyptians who are 20 years of age.

Guest
Nawal El Saadawi, Egyptian feminist and human rights activist. She was a political prisoner and exiled from Egypt for years.

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/2/7/we_became_one_in_the_street_leading_egyptian_feminist_nawal_al_saadawi_says_egyptians_are_more_united_than_ever

Egypt: Swapping a Dictator for a Torturer

By JAMES RIDGEWAY

As things now stand, the United States appears ready to have Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak tossed out in exchange for his newly-named Vice President, Omar Suleiman, the Egyptian spy master. That is, maintain the status quo by swapping one dictator for another.

Of course, Israel must sign off on this deal aimed at assuring that Egypt can remain as America's main base in the region, straddling as it does North Africa and the Middle East. Without that status quo, the U.S. would have to rethink its entire neo-colonial policies in the region.

But Suleiman looks like a nasty piece of work. 

You don't get much about him in the US corporate media, but Agence France Press has pulled together the basics:

"For US intelligence officials, he has been a trusted partner willing to go after Islamist militants without hesitation, targeting homegrown radical groups Gamaa Islamiya and Jihad after they carried out a string of attacks on foreigners. A product of the US-Egyptian relationship, Suleiman underwent training in the 1980s at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare School and Center at Fort Bragg in North Carolina….

"After taking over as spy director, Suleiman oversaw an agreement with the United States in 1995 that allowed for suspected militants to be secretly transferred to Egypt for questioning, according to the book "Ghost Plane" by journalist Stephen Grey. ..

"In the run-up to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the CIA relied on Suleiman to accept the transfer of a detainee known as Ibn Sheikh al-Libi, who US officials hoped could prove a link between Iraq's Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda. The suspect was bound and blindfolded and flown to Cairo, where the CIA believed their longtime ally Suleiman would ensure a successful interrogation, according to "The One Percent Doctrine" by author Ron Suskind. A US Senate report in 2006 describes how the detainee was locked in a cage for hours and beaten, with Egyptian authorities pushing him to confirm alleged connections between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. Libi eventually told his interrogators that the then Iraqi regime was moving to provide Al-Qaeda with biological and chemical weapons. When the then US secretary of state Colin Powell made the case for war before the United Nations, he referred to details of Libi's confession. The detainee eventually recanted his account."

Thus our loyal ally Egypt provided the fake information used by the United States to justify go to war in Iraq.

Stephen Soldz of the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis and co-founder of the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology provided the following excerpts from authors who discussed Sulieman:

Jane Mayer, in The Dark Side, pointed to Suleiman's role in the rendition program:

"Each rendition was authorized at the very top levels of both governments….The long-serving chief of the Egyptian central intelligence agency, Omar Suleiman, negotiated directly with top Agency officials. [Former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt] Walker described the Egyptian counterpart, Suleiman, as 'very bright, very realistic,' adding that he was cognizant that there was a downside to 'some of the negative things that the Egyptians engaged in, of torture and so on. But he was not squeamish, by the way'" (pp. 113).

Stephen Grey, in Ghost Plane, his investigative work on the rendition program, also points to Suleiman as central to the program:

"To negotiate these assurances [that the Egyptians wouldn't 'torture' the prisoner delivered for torture] the CIA dealt principally in Egypt through Omar Suleiman, the chief of the Egyptian general intelligence service (EGIS) since 1993. It was he who arranged the meetings with the Egyptian interior ministry…. Suleiman, who understood English well, was an urbane and sophisticated man. Others told me that for years Suleiman was America's chief interlocutor with the Egyptian regime — the main channel to President Hosni Mubarak himself, even on matters far removed from intelligence and security.

Suleiman's role in the rendition program was also highlighted in a Wikileaks cable:

"The context of the close and sustained cooperation between the USG and GOE on counterterrorism, Post believes that the written GOE assurances regarding the return of three Egyptians detained at Guantanamo (reftel) represent the firm commitment of the GOE to adhere to the requested principles. These assurances were passed directly from Egyptian General Intelligence Service (EGIS) Chief Soliman (sic) through liaison channels — the most effective communication path on this issue. General Soliman's word is the GOE's guarantee, and the GOE's track record of cooperation on CT issues lends further support to this assessment. End summary."

"Shortly after 9/11, Australian citizen Mamdouh Habib was captured by Pakistani security forces and, under US pressure, torture by Pakistanis," writes Soldz. "He was then rendered (with an Australian diplomat watching) by CIA operatives to Egypt, a not uncommon practice. In Egypt, Habib merited Suleiman's personal attention. As related by Richard Neville, based on Habib's memoir":

"Habib was interrogated by the country's Intelligence Director, General Omar Suleiman…. Suleiman took a personal interest in anyone suspected of links with Al Qaeda. As Habib had visited Afghanistan shortly before 9/11, he was under suspicion. Habib was repeatedly zapped with high-voltage electricity, immersed in water up to his nostrils, beaten, his fingers were broken and he was hung from metal hooks. That treatment wasn't enough for Suleiman, so:

To loosen Habib's tongue, Suleiman ordered a guard to murder a gruesomely shackled Turkistan prisoner in front of Habib – and he did, with a vicious karate kick.

After Suleiman's men extracted Habib's confession, he was transferred back to US custody, where he eventually was imprisoned at Guantanamo. His "confession" was then used as evidence in his Guantanamo trial."

JAMES RIDGEWAY is senior Washington correspondent for Mother Jones Magazine. For 30 years he was Washington correspondent for the Village Voice. He edits the Unsilent Generation, where this article also appears.

http://www.counterpunch.org/ridgeway02042011.html 

Every Square is a Tahrir Square

By AHMAD BARQAWI
Amman, Jordan.

For thirty years; generations of Arab people were deliberately spoon-fed a fallacious reality about themselves; a reality of passiveness, instinctive capitulation and quiet submission; a reality that seemed to contradict –and indeed often wrestled with- their true identity, their heritage and honorable history of rising against social injustices, rule of force and corruption; from the Great Arab Revolt against the Ottoman rule to the 1936 Palestinian Revolution against the British, from the Egyptian Revolution of 1952 to the two blessed Intifadas in Palestine in 1987 and 2000, still oddly enough; for thirty years we've found ourselves admiring the history of the French revolution instead, romanticizing the American War of Independence and cheering –from afar- for the fall of the Berlin wall.

For thirty years, Arab youngsters were raised on the unshakable conviction that waking up in the morning and feeling a bitter contentment with what little is remaining of their diminishing social rights and freedoms is actually an unquestionable "winning formula" for safety and happiness, that "people's power" means absolutely nothing in the midst of their daily and backbreaking task of securing the scarce necessities of life, that even if a "change" is due; it'll be in the form of a destructive foreign military occupation –such was the case in Iraq-; and even then, we'd roll along and adopt some kind of a darwinian approach in dealing with and adapting to it; and just like that; we were programmed to settle for this brand of democracy at the point of a gun and its twisted sense of "nobility".

For thirty years, silence has become compelling with governments' inexcusable laxity towards pressing social matters; and a collective sense of powerlessness was carefully nurtured as inglorious exploits of Arab nations' resources ran amok and a ludicrous gap between the very thin layer of the rich class and the rest of society grew glaringly wider, for thirty years; successive Arab generations surrendered each day to this somber "reality"; that every struggle for dignity they might get into is a foregone conclusion, and that the collective Arab nation is nothing but a sad ghost of glories past; buried in the grave and wretched morass of rising unemployment rates, sinister poverty lines and gag orders.

Now, in what seemed like a fleeting moment, Arab youngsters in Tunisia and Egypt have broken this decades-old thick crust of silence; and managed to weather the storm of fear and mass intimidation and clung onto their god given right of free speech and peaceful expression of popular will, they're setting a fine example for even the most civilized nations in the world; Arab nations no longer bear the moral stigma of self-defeat and stagnation, they no longer want to hide their light under a bushel; they too have a voice and they are making sure it is being heard loud and clear the world over.

We no longer survive on nostalgia for an ancient storied history of pride and free will; these days; a new history is being written for future generations, in our hearts; every square is a freedom square.

Ahmad Barqawi, a Jordanian freelance columnist & writer based in Amman, he has done several studies, statistical analysis and researches on economic and social development in Jordan.

http://www.counterpunch.org/barqawi02012011.html

Americans are Oppressed, Too

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Police in the US now rival criminals, and exceed terrorists, as the greatest threat to the American public. Rogelio Serrato is the latest case to be in the news of an innocent person murdered by the police. Serrato was the wrong man, but the Monterey County, California, SWAT team killed the 31-year old father of four and left the family home a charred ruin.

The fact that SWAT teams often go to the wrong door shows the carelessness with which excessive force is used. In one instance the police even confused the town's mayor with a drug dealer, broke into his home, shot dead the family's pet dogs, and held the mayor and his wife and children at gun point. But most cases of police brutality never make the news. 

Most who suffer abuse from the police don't bother to complain. They know that to make an enemy of the police brings a lifetime of troubles. Those who do file complaints find that police departments tend to be self-protective and that the naive and gullible public tends to side with the police. 

However, you can find plenty of examples of police brutality on youtube, more than you can watch in a lifetime. I have just searched google for "youtube police brutality" and the result is: "497,000 results." There's everything from police shooting a guy in a wheelchair to body slamming a befuddled 89-year old great grandmother to tasering kids and mothers with small children. The fat goon cops love to beat up on women, kids, and old people.

The 497,000 google results may contain duplicates as more than one person might have posted a video of the same event, and the incidents occurred over more than one year. However, probably only a small percentage of incidents are captured on video by onlookers, and many incidents of police brutality have no witnesses. What the videos reveal is that a large percentage of police move with alacrity to assault the public. The number of incidences could be very high. One million annually would not be an exaggeration. 

In contrast, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, in 2009 (the most recent year for which data is compiled), there were 806,000 aggravated assaults (not including assaults by police against the public) by criminals against the public, of which 216,814 were committed by hands and feet and not by weapons. (In the U.S. if you merely push a person or grab his arm, you have committed assault. "Freedom and democracy" America uses any excuse to multiply the number of felons.) 

Considering the data, one might conclude that the police are a greater danger to the public than are criminals.

Indeed, the trauma from police assault can be worse than from assault by criminals. The public thinks the police are there to protect them. Thus, the emotional and psychological shock from assault by police is greater than the trauma from being mugged because you stupidly wandered into the wrong part of town. 

Why are the police so aggressive toward the public?

In part because their ranks attract bullies, sociopaths and psychopaths. Even normal cops are proud of their authority and expect deference. Even cops who are not primed to be set off can turn nasty in a heartbeat.

In part because police are not accountable. The effort decades ago to have civilian police review boards was beat back by "law and order" conservatives.

In part because the police have been militarized by the federal government, equipped with military weapons, and trained to view the public as the enemy. 

In part because the Bush/Cheney/Obama regimes have made every American a suspect. The only civil liberty that has any force in the U.S. today is the law against racial discrimination. This law requires that every American citizen be treated as if he were a Muslim terrorist. The Transportation Security Administration rigorously enforces the refusal to discriminate between terrorist and citizen at airports and is now taking its gestapo violations of privacy into every form of travel and congregation: trucking, bus and train travel, sports events, and, without doubt, shopping centers and automobile traffic. 

This despite the fact that there have been no terrorist incidents that could be used to justify such an expansive intrusion into privacy and freedom of movement.

The TSA has not caught a single terrorist. However, it has abused and inconvenienced several hundred thousand innocent American citizens. 

The abuse happens, because people with authority are dying to use the authority. The absence of terrorists means that the TSA turns innocent Americans into terrorists. There have been so many absurd cases. One woman traveling with her ill and dying mother, who required special food, had contacted the TSA prior to the flight, explained the situation, and was given permission to take the special food onboard. But when she went through "security," the food was taken away, and when she protested she was arrested and hauled off, leaving the elderly mother in a wheelchair deserted.

Others have been arrested because a member of the household used a suitcase or carry bag to take guns and ammunition to the gun club or on a hunting trip and forgot to remove all the ammo, or the explosives test detected gunpowder residuals. Boy Scouts forgot to remove pocket knives from backpacks that they took on camping trips. Lactating mothers forced to give up breast milk. And so on.

These are the "great dangers" that the TSA protect the american sheeple from, and the sheeple submit, even servilely thanking their oppressors for protecting them. 

Submission is what the government and the police want. Anyone who argues with TSA or the police will be abused. An American who stands up for his rights is likely to be beaten to a pulp. TSA has announced that such Americans are "suspects" and will be held in indefinite detention. 

And "our" government assures us that we have "freedom and democracy." We have a police state, and everyone who forgets it is in deep trouble. 

The Amerikan police state is closely allied with police states all over the world--Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Israel in the Middle East and former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire in Central Asia. The U.S. government never lifts a finger in behalf of democracy anywhere. In fact, the U.S. government quickly moves to overthrow democracy wherever it rears its head, as the U.S. recently did in Honduras. Before Honduras it was Palestine where the U.S. overturned the election that brought Hamas to power. Now Washington is targeting Lebanon where Hisbollah has gained. 

Everywhere on earth the U.S.government prefers an autocracy that it can purchase to free elections that bring to power candidates unwilling to serve as American puppets.

The U.S. government is the most determined foe of democracy in the world. Yet, Washington lectures China, which has more civil liberties than Bush/Cheney/Obama permit Americans.

If Americans ever find the emotional strength to acknowledge the oppression under which they live, they, too, will be in the streets.

Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

 http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02042011.html

American Hypocrisy in the Middle East

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

The hypocrisy of the US government is yet again demonstrated in full bore force. The US government invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, laid waste to much of the countries including entire villages and towns, and massacred untold numbers of civilians in order "to bring democracy" to Iraq and Afghanistan. Now after days of Egyptians in the streets demanding "Mubarak must go," the US government remains aligned with its puppet Egyptian ruler, even suggesting that Mubarak, after running a police state for three decades, is the appropriate person to implement democracy in Egypt. 

On January 30, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared that "freedom and democracy" America neither seeks nor supports the ouster of the Egyptian dictator. Israeli prime minister Netanyahu told the US and Europe that criticism of Mubarak must be curbed in order "to preserve stability in the region."

By "stability" Netanyahu means the unimpeded ability of Israel to continue oppressing the Palestinians and stealing their country. Mubarak has been for three decades the well-paid enforcer for the US and Israel, sealing off Gaza from the outside world and preventing aid flows across the Egyptian border. Mubarak and his family have become multi-billionaires, thanks to the American taxpayer, and the US government, both Republicans and Democrats, do not want to lose their heavy investment in Mubarak.

The US government has long corrupted Arab governments by paying rulers installed by the US to represent US/Israeli interests rather than the interest of Arab peoples. Arabs put up with American-financed oppression for many years, but now are showing signs of rebellion. 

The murderous American-installed dictator in Tunis was overthrown by people taking to the streets. Rebellion has spread to Egypt and there are also street protests against the US-supported rulers in Yemen and Jordan. 

These uprisings might succeed in ousting puppet rulers, but will the result be anything more than the exchange of a new American puppet ruler for the old? Mubarak might go, but whoever takes his place is likely to find himself wearing the same American harness. 

What dictators do is to eliminate alternative leadership. Potential leaders are either assassinated, exiled, or imprisoned. Moreover, anything short of a full-fledge revolution, such as the Iranian one, leaves in place a bureaucracy accustomed to business as usual. In addition, Egypt and the country's military have grown accustomed to American support and will want the money to keep flowing. It is the flow of this money that ensures the purchase of the replacement government. 

Because the US dollar is the world reserve currency, the US government has financial dominance and the ability to financially isolate other countries, such as Iran. To break free of America's grip, one of two things would have to happen. Revolution would have to sweep the Arab world and result in an economic unity that could foster indigenous economic development, or the US dollar has to fail as world currency.

Arab disunity has long been the means by which the Western countries have dominated the Middle East. Without this disunity, Israel and the US could not abuse the Palestinians in the manner in which they have for decades, and without this disunity the US could not have invaded Iraq. It is unlikely that the Arabs will suddenly unite themselves.

The collapse of the dollar is more likely. Indeed, the policy of the US government to maximize both budget and trade deficits, and the policy of the Federal Reserve to monetize the budget deficit and the fraudulent paper assets of the large banks, have the dollar heading for demise. 

As the supply of dollars grows, the value diminishes. Perhaps the time is not far off when rulers cease to sell out their peoples for American money.

Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

 http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02012011.html

The Muslim Brotherhood and Democracy in Egypt

By JOHN L. ESPOSITO

We are witnessing an extraordinary and potentially historic transformation in Egypt and the Arab world. Sparked by the Tunisian pro-democracy movement and toppling of the Ben Ali regime, the rulers of Egypt, Jordan, Yemen and Syria are facing popular demands for reform. As the Gallup World Poll, the largest and most systematic poll of the Muslim world representing the voices of a billion Muslims, reported, majorities in most countries, including Egypt, want democratic freedoms.

President Mubarak and other nervous Arab rulers, warn that the choice is between security and stability on the one hand and demands for greater democratization and liberty on the other. Their trump card with Western governments has always been to cast this choice as one between a tried and true ally or an Islamist takeover. Images of the thousands who turned out to meet Rachid Ghannoushi, leader of Tunisia’s banned Ennahda (Renaissance) Movement, on his return from political exile in London and the significant role Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood in Egyptian politics and society, have raised concerns among Arab and Western governments, Israel and others about the role of religion, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, in a future Egyptian government.

Will the departure of Mubarak mean the “threat” of an Islamist takeover, instability and social chaos?

Gallup World Poll polling found that while majorities of Egyptian Muslims believe religion is important to their spiritual lives and to progress, they also want greater democratization, freedoms and the rule of law. In fact those in the region were the most likely to say that greater democracy and attachment to spiritual and moral values would contribute to a brighter future.

But, does regime change mean a Muslim Brotherhood takeover?

Since the late 20th century, far from being advocates of religious extremism, the Muslim Brotherhood like other Islamically-oriented candidates and political parties in Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia have opted for ballots, not bullets. Among the Brotherhood’s most vigorous critics (and enemies) have been Egyptian militants, including Al-Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiry. For decades the Muslim Brotherhood, though officially illegal, has proven to be the largest and most effective non-violent opposition movement, politically and socially within mainstream Egyptian society. It and other Islamic organizations have provided an effective social service network of schools, medical clinics, and youth camps, an effective alternative an indictment of the government’s inability to deliver. Politically, despite government persistent provocation -- harassment, arrest, imprisonment and violence against the Brotherhood, it has remained non-violent. The government regularly arrests Muslim Brothers before presidential and parliamentary elections, detaining them until after elections. Despite lack of access to media and the ability to hold public political rallies etc., the Brotherhood managed to emerge as the most effective opposition in Egypt’s rigged elections. In 2005, it took 20 per cent of parliamentary seats despite official intimidation and limits on its candidates. 

But what about the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in this period of political change and in a post-Mubarak Egypt? 

Because Egypt’s repressive political context, political parties have remained weak. The National Democratic Party (NDP), founded by Anwar Sadat and then led by Mubarak, has enjoyed uncontested power in state politics. At the same time, the government has controlled the creation and functioning of political parties, the government registers political parties and can and does intervene. The net result is that the Muslim Brotherhood, though technically illegal and not a political party, has been the main opposition movement.

However, the Brotherhood did not initiate nor led the pro-democracy protest. While the Brotherhood, like many others was caught off guard and initially did not as an organization support the protest, members of the Brotherhood have participated in protest demonstrations. The Brotherhood supports El Baradei’s current leadership role and has been invited along with other opposition spokesperson to dialogue with Vice President Omer Suleiman. While the Brotherhood will no doubt continue to have an influential role, in a new more open and pluralistic political climate, they will be one of many potential political players and parties. The Muslim Brotherhood and Tunisia’s Ennahada as many other Islamist parties in the past elections, absent other political choices, were the only game in town. They garnered the votes not only of their members and supporters but also of those who wanted to express their opposition or disfavor with the government. Though it has a strong following, its religious conservatism, as witnessed by a 2007 draft political program that proposed setting up an Islamic council to vet laws and banning women and Christians running for president, will not appeal to many other Egyptians.

Though it subsequently backed off the idea of an advisory Islamic council, it will need to be more explicit on issues of the full equality of all citizens, the acceptance of religious and political pluralism, and its understanding of the role of Shariah.  

But, what about fears that a post-Mubarak Egypt will become an Iran?

Egypt is not Iran. The Iranian revolution was dubbed an Islamic revolution because of the heavy use of Islamic symbols, slogans, and reliigously legitimate ideology and its leadership and infrastructure, the Ayatollh Khomeini and the mullah-mosque network. In contrast, Egypt’s pro-democracy popular revolution is not primarily about religion. It is about democracy and the rule of law. What is taking place is not an attempt at an Islamist takeover but a broad based call, supported by secular and religiously minded, young and old, men and women, Muslim and Christian, the poor, middle and upper classes. As their signs, placards, statements and demands demonstrate protesters want Egyptian unity, speak of one Egypt and sing the Egyptian national anthem; they wave Egyptian flags not Islamist placards.

Religious leaders have not been at the forefront of the protest nor publically spoken out and rallied support. If anything prominent religious leaders have been silent or publically not been supportive. However, diverse, they are driven by longstanding political and economic issues and grievances: the lack of democracy, a growing gap between a rich minority and the middle class and poor, rampant corruption, rising food prices, high unemployment levels, and lack of opportunity and a sense of a future for young people. 

For too long, Western governments have supported authoritarian regimes and subordinated the desire of peoples in Egypt and many other parts of the Arab world for broader political participation and human rights. As a result, majorities in some 35 Muslim nations surveyed by the Gallup World Poll did not believe that the U.S. was serious about the establishment of democratic systems in the region. Only 24 per cent in Egypt and Jordan and only 16 per cent in Turkey agreed that the United States was serious about establishing democratic systems. As Amb. Richard Haas, a senior State Department official in the George W, Bush administration, noted prior to the invasion of Iraq, America for decades had practiced "democratic exceptionalism" in its promotion of democracy, what then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a speech at the American University in Cairo on June 20, 2005 described as America's record of supporting regional tyrants for six decades.

Barack Obama, recognizing Egypt as a center of gravity for the region, went to Cairo early in his presidency and affirmed his commitment to democratic freedoms and human rights: "no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other." Obama stressed, "That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people.... I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere." America and Europe must press Hosni Mubarak to exit now and thus enable Egyptians to sort out their future. Regrettably, thus far the administration seems to have succumbed to the Achilles heal of US foreign policy in the Middle East, opting for a policy of “perceived” stability more than democracy, driven more by fear of the unknown, of a process whose outcome it cannot control, than support for our principles of self-determination, democracy and human rights. 

In the political transition that follows, emerging governments and reformers in Tunisia and Egypt will be challenged to form a national unity government, to demonstrate commitment to political liberalization, civil society and human rights by fostering the development of those civil institutions and values that support democratization. The litmus test will be the extent to which their policies and actions reflect an acceptance of basic democratic freedoms, diversity of opinion, multiple political parties and civil society organizations, as well as an appreciation for the concept of a "loyal opposition" rather than viewing alternative voices and political visions as a threat to the political system. 

John L. Esposito is Professor of Religion & International Affairs at Georgetown University and founding director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, author of The Future of Islam and co-author with Dalia Mogahed of Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think. He can be reached at jle2@georgetown.edu

http://www.counterpunch.org/esposito02072011.html

Mubarak Masih Bertahan di Mesir Karena AS Ragu-ragu

Jakarta - Lebih dari sepekan demonstrasi antipemerintah Hosni Mubarak di Mesir berlangsung. Mubarak berjanji tidak akan maju dalam pemilihan presiden mendatang dan tidak akan mendukung keluarganya yang ikut pemilu. Tapi janji itu tidak cukup bagi rakyat Negara Piramid. Mereka kukuh Mubarak harus angkat kaki.

Mubarak tetap bertahan dengan alasan tidak ingin terjadi kekacauan di Tanah Airnya. Namun lebih dari 300 orang tewas akibat bentrok yang menjadi buntut dari demonstrasi anti Mubarak. Kendati AS menyerukan transisi teroganisir di Bumi Firaun itu, namun AS tidak tegas meminta Mubarak memenuhi tuntutan rakyat. AS terkesan ragu-ragu.

"AS saya lihat ragu-ragu. Barack Obama masih mencari kata-kata. Mesir di-back up oleh negara Barat. Kalau Mubarak mundur dan penggantinya adalah dari kalangan Ikhwanul Muslimin, AS tidak mau," ujar pengamat Timur Tengah dari UGM Siti Mutiah Setiawati.

Berikut ini wawancara detikcom dengan staf pengajar UGM yang pernah menempuh pendidikan di Universitas London, Inggris, ini pada Jumat (4/2/2011):

Unjuk rasa terjadi di sejumlah negara Timur Tengah. Mengapa demonstrasi Tunisia bisa melebar ke negara-negara lainnya?

Sebetulnya negara di Afrika bagian Utara sebagian besar merupakan republik. Mesir, Tunisia, Aljazair, Yaman merupakan Republik namun berakting seperti raja. Mereka umumnya berkuasa terlalu lama atau kendali pemerintahan kemudian diturunkan kepada anaknya. Yang seperti itu kan model kerajaan, dan itu rupanya tidak diinginkan oleh rakyat.

Apalagi kemudian parlemen tidak berfungsi, check and balance tidak berfungsi. Meski Mesir tidak termasuk negara yang sekaya Arab Saudi namun dia punya universitas yang populer. Dalam ilmu politik, kerajaan merupakan sistem yang tradisional. Rakyat ini sudah pintar, mereka hidup di negara republik tetapi kok masih seperti kerajaan.

Kalau bukan kerajaan, tentu kepala pemerintahannya harus diganti secara periodik. Lalu ada yang mengawasi yaitu parlemen. Nah ini tidak berfungsi. Di hampir semua negara di sana seperti itu.

Tapi sepertinya Libya relatif tenang padahal Muammar al Gaddafi berkuasa sejak 1969?

Di Libya memang relatif belum terjadi gejolak. Gadaffi itu orangnya sederhana. Berbeda dengan Mubarak di Mesir dan Ben Ali di Tunisia yang hidup bermewah-mewah, istrinya glamour padahal rakyatnya miskin. Sedangkan Gadaffi, dia hanyalah seorang kolonel yang tidak mau menjadi jenderal dan senang hidup berpindah-pindah dengan tenda/khemahnya. Ini mendekatkan dia dengan rakyatnya.

Kalau seperti di Mesir dan Tunisia, presidennya melanggengkan kekuasaan untuk keuntungan keluarga dan kroninya. Ini juga yang membuat rakyat tidak puas.

Terkait kasus di Mesir, menurut Anda mengapa Mubarak masih kukuh bertahan?

AS saya lihat ragu-ragu. Barack Obama masih mencari kata-kata. Mesir di-back up oleh negara Barat. Kalau Mubarak mundur dan penggantinya adalah dari kalangan Ikhwanul Muslimin, AS tidak mau. AS dan negara Barat juga dilema. Di satu sisi mereka ingin demokrasi ala mereka diterapkan, tapi di sisi lain mereka juga tidak mau kalau Mubarak mundur dan penggantinya dari Ikhwanul Muslimin.

AS meminta transisi yang teratur, tapi situasinya sudah seperti ini. Apalagi media Barat mengesankan bahwa Ikhwanul Muslimin itu membahayakan. Ini menjadi tidak fair. Sebenarnya apa salahnya kalau Ikhwanul Muslimin yang naik. Apakah kalau menghalangi kepentingan mereka lantas dihalang-halangi.

Jalan keluar seperti apa yang terbaik bagi Mesir?

Saya kira, kalau Ikhwanul Muslimin naik ya tidak usah dihalang-halangi, kalau memang itu keinginan rakyat Mesir. Dulu saat revolusi di Iran kan dikhawatirkan Iran otoriter, tapi buktinya kan tidak. Ketika Pahlevi (Syah Reza Pahlevi) mundur tidak ada gejolak seperti yang dikhawatirkan.

Saat revolusi Islam Iran, Iran tenang. Hanya AS saja yang menggoyang. Iran tenang dan tenteram. Di negara demokrasi, kalau rakyat dipimpin oleh orang dari mayoritas ya tidak masalah kan. Kalau mayoritas Syiah dipimpin Syiah ya wajar.

Selama 30 tahun Mubarak berkuasa tidak mencegah gerakan masyarakat pada umumnya. Ekonomi memang cukup baik tapi masyarakat tidak puas karena terlalu lama presidennya berkuasa hingga ingin menciptakan dinasti di pemerintahan.

Kalau mau demokrasi diterapkan, Ikhwanul Muslimin yang siap. Diberitakan kalau Ikhwanul Muslimin tidak didukung masyarakat Mesir, tapi saya tidak melihat begitu. Banyak dukungannya. Memang mereka ini dilarang pemerintah karena dianggap pesaing dan membuat Barat khawatir karena kalau mereka yang berkuasa dikhawatirkan menerapkan Syariah Islam. Tapi apa salahnya? Toh 98 persen masyarakat di sana Muslim. Memang ada Koptik di Mesir, tapi bukan mayoritas.

Kalau diterapkan syariah Islam apa lantas yang lain tidak boleh hidup di sana? Kan tidak seperti itu. Di Mexico juga menerapkan aturan Kristen tidak apa-apa. Yang lain masih bisa tinggal di Mexiko.

Ini sangat terlihat double standard-nya Barat. Mereka keberatan politik Islam berkuasa karena dianggap tidak sama dengan Barat. Double standard itu, meraka mengaku pluralis tapi ternyata tidak mau merima yang berbeda. Ini harus diubah mindsetnya agar tidak terus Barat. Demokrasi itu tidak harus selalu ala Barat.

Dengan Mubarak mundur dan pergi apakah akan menyelesaikan masalah di Mesir?

Di Mesir ini yang pro Mubarak juga kuat. Mereka yang diuntungkan selama 30 tahun pemerintahan Mubarak karena membangun legitimasi struktural.

Kekacauan memang terjadi, karena sekarang ini pun kekacauan telah terjadi. Dalam masa transisi politik seperti itu bisa dimaklumi. Tapi ini tidak akan lama, sama seperti negara lain. Biarkan saja, kalau itu menghilangkan campur tangan asing.

Barat harus menahan diri tidak melakukan campur tangan di Mesir. Ada chaos, gejolak, itu biasa. Tapi saya yakin tidak lama karena akan ada perubahan yang baik. Seperti Iran yang diramalkan bergolak, tapi nyatanya kan tidak. Ada peralihan dari kerajaan menjadi republik dengan mulus. Jadi Barat harus tahan diri untuk tidak ikut campur.

Kemungkinan terbentuk negara boneka lagi?

Sangat mungkin kalau Barat terlibat. Karena di Aljazair/Algeria kan demikian. Ketika gerakan politik Islam menang tiba-tiba dianulir dan orang pro-Barat yang berkuasa. Lalu Tunisia juga demikian. Ketika Ben Ali pergi dan digantikan tokoh Islam, di media dikesankan tidak bagus, tidak terima sehingga yang berkuasa kecenderungannya kelompok pro Barat. Barat memang berpengaruh kuat karena teknologi yang mereka miliki. Apalagi sebagian besar negara Timur Tengah ada eksplorasi minyak bumi yang tergantung Barat.

Sebelum ada pemerintahan yang lebih permanen, perlu pemerintahan transisi?

Pemerintahan transisi itu yang paling sedikit risikonya. Wapres Omar Suleiman maupun Mohamed ElBaradei bukan tokoh kontroversial dan bisa diterima kedua kubu. Untuk transisi, minimal mereka bisa. Namun selanjutnya biarkan rakyat Mesir yang menentukan.

Kalau Mubarak mundur dan digantikan oleh Suleiman yang sebenarnya pro-AS juga, tentu tidak ada perubahan politik yang berarti. Untuk menjalankan permintaan AS yaitu orderly transition, Suleiman dianggap baik karena pro Barat.

Kalau ada perubahan kepemimpinan yang sangat berbeda dengan Mubarak, tentu akan berpengaruh di kawasan Timur Tengah. Mesir itu sudah memiliki perjanjian damai dengan Israel untuk mengakui eksistensi Israel, juga punya kedutaan Israel, dan Israel tentunya menginginkan keadaan yang tetap seperti itu. Bagi Israel tentu tidak aman kalau pemimpin Mesir adalah orang yang memusuhi Israel. Jadi pasti Israel akan meminta AS agar Mesir dikuasai orang yang pro AS karena pasti akan pro Israel.

Kalau Mesir dipimpin oleh orang yang tidak pro AS dan Israel tentu menjadi kabar gembira bagi Palestina. Karena dukungan kepada mereka akan bertambah.

Jika dipimpin oleh orang yang bukan pro AS, ada kemungkinan Terusan Suez akan ditutup sebagai posisi tawar mereka?

Terusan Suez pernah dinasionalisasi pada 1956 dan membuat marah Inggris, Israel dan Perancis. Dulu ada perjanjian dengan pengelolaan bersama-sama Terusan Suez yang menghubungkan Laut Mediterania dan Laut Merah ini. Israel punya Teluk Aqabah, kalau ditutup ya dampaknya besar juga buat Israel.

Senjata itu tidak selalu bedil. Untuk melawan musuh kalau sudah buntu maka bisa digunakan Terusan Suez untuk melawan. Kalau terusan ini ditutup maka negara Eropa harus melingkari Afrika untuk menuju Asia. AS pun harus mengambil rute yang lebih jauh kalau masih menduduki Irak. Ini sangat strategis karena menjadi penghubung Eropa dan Asia. Jarak bisa diperpendek 8-10 kali.

http://us.detiknews.com/read/2011/02/04/182139/1560461/158/siti-mutiah-mubarak-masih-bertahan-di-mesir-karena-as-ragu-ragu?nd991107158

Ulasan: OK cuma mengenai dua perkara: 1. Presiden Gaddafi pun memerintah secara kejam. Sila semak dengan pelajar yang pernah ditahan oleh polisnya. 2. Naib Presiden, Omar Suleiman pun ada masalah kerana beliau adalah orang sangat rapat Mubarak dan kawan rapat Israel.

Live Free or Dead: Protestors Made Firm Decision

"I Either Leave Here Free or Dead": Egyptian Protester Refuses to Leave Tahrir Square Despite Violent Attacks by Mubarak Supporters

Egyptian protester Nazly Hussein describes bloodshed in Cairo and the role of the United States in funding the violent oppression by the Egyptian government.

NAZLY HUSSEIN: I am Nazly Hussein. I was at a medical center about half an hour ago. People come in with all kinds of injuries. People are dead. I tried to get a count of how many people are dead, and I couldn’t.

This is unbelievable. We are surrounded from all directions with thugs. A lot of them were caught. A lot of them belong obviously to National Democratic Party or to police forces. I don’t know if this is documented. I saw cards, identity cards of people in the police forces.

We’ve been on the square for the past few days. I slept in the middle of the square for four nights. I felt extremely safe, extremely safe. Today, the army was surrounding us, and there was also night watch. People had their shifts, and they were watching the square.

Today, there were demonstrations. They came in the form of demonstrations, pro-Mubarak demonstrations. And then all of a sudden—and then we had taken—everyone met and talked and said people can come in and demonstrate for Mubarak. It’s freedom of expression. [inaudible], as well. And then, all of a sudden, they have knives. They have—right now they’re throwing fire balls. They’re throwing all kinds of things, all kinds of things, at us, Molotovs, everything, everything. Things are on fire around us. The army is trying to keep them out. But they’re not doing much. When they come really, really close, shoot in the air for people to back off. But they’ve been surrounding us all day, all day, all day. People in the middle of the square are terrified. And on the outskirts, around all the entrances and exits, we’re all protesting there, but people come back really, really injured. I didn’t go to the front line, to be honest. But people come back really, really injured.

The international community must come out and say, "Enough is enough. Enough is enough" Taxpayers in the United States must know where their money is going. We’ve been hit with all kinds of weapons, all made in the United States of America. And this is all documented. I’m sure you’ve seen pictures and video. There’s tear gas canisters that were exported in 2003—and there’s a warning: do not use after 2003—were made in the U.S.A. The rubber bullets were also made in the U.S.A. The [inaudible] bullets, I don’t know what they’re called, the ones that shatter into a million bullets, also made in the U.S.A. The taxpayers’ money are being part and they’re contributing to my oppression. This needs to stop. For people who call for democracy and for freedom of expression and for all kinds of rights, this needs to stop. There needs to be an end to this.

We’ve been out here about—I don’t know how long now. I’ve lost track. About eight days. I’ve been on the square. I’m not leaving. I’m not leaving. I either leave here free or dead. I either leave here free or dead.

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/2/2/i_either_leave_here_free_or_dead_egyptian_protester_refuses_to_leave_tahrir_square_

despite_violent_attacks_by_mubarak_supporters

Mubarak's Last Gasps

By ESAM AL-AMIN

"There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen.”
--V. I. Lenin (1870-1924)

“Victory is accomplished through the perseverance of the last hour.”
--Prophet Muhammad (570-632 AD)

According to the CIA's declassified documents and records, senior CIA operative, Kermit Roosevelt, paid $100,000 to mobsters in Tehran, in early August 1953, to hire the most feared thugs to stage pro-Shah riots. 

Other CIA-paid men were brought weeks later, on August 19, into Tehran in buses and trucks to take over the streets, topple the democratically elected Iranian government, and restore Shah Reza Pahlavi to his thrown. It took the people of Iran 26 years, enormous sacrifices, and a popular revolution to overthrow the imposed, corrupt and repressive rule of the Shah.

This lesson was not lost on the minds of a small clique of officials who were meeting in desperation in the afternoon of Monday, Jan. 31, 2011, in Cairo. According to several sources including former intelligence officer Col. Omar Afifi, one of these officials was the new Interior minister, Police Gen. Mahmoud Wagdy, who as the former head of the prison system, is also a torture expert. He asked Hosni Mubarak, the embattled president to give him a week to take care of the demonstrators who have been occupying major squares around the country for about a week.

Not only he had to rapidly reconstitute his security forces, which were dispersed and dejected in the aftermath of the massive demonstrations engulfing the country, but he also had to come up with a quick plan to prevent the total collapse of the regime. 

The meeting included many security officials including Brig. Gen. Ismail Al-Shaer, Cairo’s security chief, as well as other security officers. In addition, leaders of the National Democratic Party (NDP)- the ruling party- including its Secretary General and head of the Consultative Assembly (upper house of Parliament), Safwat El-Sherif, as well as Parliament Speaker, Fathi Sorour, were briefed and given their assignments. Similarly, the retained Minister of Information, Anas Al-Feky, was fully apprised of the plan.

By the end of the meeting each was given certain tasks to regain the initiative from the street; to end or neutralize the revolution; and to defuse the most serious crisis the regime has ever faced in an effort to ease the tremendous domestic and international pressures being exerted on their president.

They knew that eyes around the world would be focused on the massive demonstrations called for by the youth leading the popular revolution while promising million-strong marches on Tuesday, Feb. 1. True to their promise the pro-democracy groups drew a remarkable eight million people (ten percent of the population) throughout Egypt on that day. 

People from every age, class, and walk of life assembled and marched in every province and city by the hundreds of thousands: two million in Tahrir Square in Cairo, one million in Martyrs Square in Alexandria, 750 thousand in downtown Mansoura, and a quarter million in Suez, just to name a few. It was an impressive show of strength. This time, they demanded not only the immediate removal of Mubarak but also the ouster of the whole regime.

An evil plan devised

As the fierce determination of the Egyptian people to remove their autocratic president became apparent, governments around the world began pressuring Mubarak to step down and be replaced by his newly appointed Vice President, the former head of intelligence, Gen. Omar Suleiman. President Barak Obama, for example, dispatched over the last weekend former U.S. Ambassador, Frank Wisner, a close friend to Mubarak to deliver such warning. 

Wisner indeed delivered a firm but subtle message to Mubarak that he ought to announce that neither he nor his son would be presidential candidates later this year. He also urged him to transfer his powers to Suleiman. Western governments have been alarmed by the deterioration of the situation in Egypt and were trying to give their preferred candidate, Gen. Suleiman, the upper hand before events favor another candidate that might be less amenable to Israel and the West, and therefore shift the strategic balance of powers in the region.

On Saturday Jan. 29, The National Security Council advised the president to ask Mubarak in no uncertain terms to immediately step down. However, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, whom the president consulted, strenuously objected and pleaded for time to allow Mubarak to stay in power at least until he finishes his term in September.

Openly criticizing Obama, former Israeli Defense minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, a longtime friend of Mubarak, said, “I don't think the Americans understand yet the disaster they have pushed the Middle East into.” The Israeli lobby and Saudi Ambassador Adel Al-Jubeir went overdrive and intensified their lobbying efforts in Congress in order to exert immense pressure on the administration. Reluctantly, the U.S. president relented.

Meanwhile, the last touches of a crude plan to abort the protests and attack the demonstrators were being finalized in the Interior Ministry. In the mean time, the leaders of the NPD met with the committee of forty, which is a committee of corrupt oligarchs and tycoons, who have taken over major sections of Egypt’s economy in the last decade and are close associates to Jamal Mubarak, the president’s son. The committee included Ahmad Ezz, Ibrahim Kamel, Mohamad Abu el-Enein, Magdy Ashour and others.

Each businessman pledged to recruit as many people from their businesses and industries as well as mobsters and hoodlums known as Baltagies – people who are paid to fight and cause chaos and terror. Abu el-Enein and Kamel pledged to finance the whole operation. Meanwhile, the Interior Minister reconstituted some of the most notorious officers of his secret police to join the counter-revolutionary demonstrators slated for Wednesday, with a specific plan of attack the pro-democracy protesters. 

About a dozen security officers, who were to supervise the plan in the field, also recruited former dangerous ex-prisoners who escaped the prison last Saturday, promising them money and presidential pardons against their convictions. This plan was to be executed in Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, Port Said, Damanhour, Asyout, among other cities across Egypt.

By Tuesday evening, Mubarak gave a speech in response to the massive demonstrations of the day. He pledged not to seek a sixth term, while attacking the demonstrators and accusing them of being infiltrated, in an indirect reference to the Muslim Brotherhood. Nevertheless, he pledged to complete his term and that he would not leave under pressure. 

Although he pledged not to run, he was silent about whether or not his son would be a candidate. He ended his 10 minute address by giving his nation a grave warning that the situation was extremely dangerous, and that the country would face either “stability or chaos,” presenting himself as the embodiment of the former. Leaders of the pro-democracy demonstrators immediately rejected his characterization and insisted that he leave power.

Although Sen. John Kerry, the Chairman of the Senate Relations Committee, called publicly on President Mubarak two days earlier to disavow any plans for his son to seek the presidency, the Egyptian president ignored his call. However, a former senior intelligence aide, Mahmoud Ali Sabra, who used to present daily briefs to Mubarak for 18 years (1984-2002), said publicly on Al-Jazeera that Mubarak has indeed been grooming his son to become president since at least 1997. Although Jamal had no official title in the government, Sabra stated that Mubarak asked him to present these daily intelligence reports to no one in the government except to him and his son. 

Sabra also described how Mubarak was disturbed after the first stage of the 2000 Parliamentary elections, when the Muslim Brotherhood won a majority of seats. He then ordered his Interior Minister to manipulate the elections in the subsequent stages and forge the results in order to put NDP on top.

Shortly after the besieged president’s address to his nation around midnight on Tuesday, the baltagies were unleashed on the pro-democracy demonstrators in Alexandria and Port Said beating and clubbing them in a rehearsal for what was to come the following day at Tahrir Square.

Tahrir or Liberation Square has been the center of action in Cairo throughout the protests. It’s the largest square in the country located in downtown Cairo where millions of demonstrators have been gathering since Jan. 25. Eight separate entrances lead to it including the ones from the American Embassy and the famous Egyptian museum.

Around 2 PM on Wednesday Feb. 2, the execution of the plan of attack ensued in earnest. Over three thousand baltagies attacked from two entrances with thousands of rocks and stones thrown at the tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators gathered in the square, while most attackers had shields to defend themselves against the returning rocks. While a few were armed with guns, all baltagies were armed with clubs, machetes, razors, knives or other sharp objects. 

After about an hour of throwing stones, the second stage of the attacks proceeded as dozens of horses and camels came charging at the demonstrators in a scene reminiscent of the battles of the middle ages. The pro-democracy people fought back by their bare hands, knocking them from their rides and throwing their bodies at them. They subsequently apprehended over three hundred and fifty baltagies, turning them over to nearby army units.

They confiscated their IDs which showed that most assailants were either NDP members or from the secret police. Others confessed that they were ex-cons who were paid $10 to beat up the demonstrators. The camel and horse riders confessed to have been paid $70 each.

The third stage of the attack came about three hours later when dozens of assailants climbed the roofs in nearby buildings and threw hundreds of Molotov cocktails at the pro-democracy protesters below, who immediately rushed to extinguish the fires. They eventually had to put out two fires at the Egyptian museum as well. By midnight the thugs started using tear gas and live bullets from a bridge above the protesters killing five people and injuring over three dozens, ten seriously. 

Interestingly, one hour before the planned assault the army announced to the demonstrators on national TV that the government “got the message” and then implored the protesters to end the demonstrations and “go home.” But when the protesters begged the army units to interfere during the brutal attacks that persisted for 16 hours, the army declared that it was neutral and partially withdrew from some entrances despite its promise to protect the peaceful and unarmed demonstrators.

By morning, the Tahrir Square resembled a battleground with at least 10 persons killed and over 2,500 injured people, 900 of which required transport to nearby hospitals as admitted by the Health ministry. Most of the injured suffered face and head wounds including concussions, burns and cuts because of the use of rocks, iron bars, shanks, razors, and Molotov cocktails. Al-Jazeera TV and many other TV networks around the world were broadcasting these assaults live to the bewilderment of billions of people worldwide.

Before the attacks started that afternoon, the Minister of Information had also executed his part of the plan. He called on all ministry employees to demonstrate on behalf of Mubarak in an upscale neighborhood in Cairo. He then asked the Egyptian state TV to broadcast live- for the first time in nine days of continuous demonstrations- the ensuing confrontation between the protesters and the government-sponsored thugs, in order to show the Egyptian people what chaos would bring to the country as Mubarak had warned them in his address just the previous night.

The battle plan was for the baltagies to block seven entrances of the Tahrir Square, leaving only the American Embassy entrance open for the thugs to push back the demonstrators in order for them to come so close to the Embassy that its guards surrounding it would have to shoot at them and thus instigate a confrontation with the Americans.

But the heroic steadfastness of the demonstrators lead by the youth was phenomenal as they not only withstood their ground but also chased them away every time they were pushed. By the next morning the assault fizzled and the whole world condemned the Mubarak regime for such wickedness, cruelty, and total disregard of human life. 

“The events in Tahrir Square and elsewhere strongly suggest government involvement in violence against peaceful protesters,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of the Human Rights Watch. “The U.S. and other allies should make clear that further abuse will come at a very high price.”

By that afternoon every major Western country has called for Mubarak to step down including the U.S, the European Union, the U.K, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Norway and many others. In Washington, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs called the violence by the pro-Mubarak crowd “outrageous and deplorable” and warned that it should stop immediately.

On the other hand, by daybreak, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians joined their fellow pro-democracy activists in order to show support and solidarity. The leaders of the protests have already called for massive demonstrations on Friday across Egypt after congregational prayers, calling the event “Departure Day,” in a reference to the day they hoped to force Mubarak to resign or leave the country.

In an attempt to contain the damage about what happened in Tahrir Square on Wednesday, Prime Minister Ahmad Shafiq offered his apology to the people. He also denied his government’s involvement, calling for a prompt investigation and swift punishment for those who were responsible. Moreover, Vice President Suleiman appeared on state TV offering an olive branch to the opposition, declaring that all of their demands would be accepted by the government, while ignoring the main demand of Mubarak’s ouster. He then pleaded for time to implement political reforms. 

He also appealed to the nation to allow President Mubarak to complete his term until the upcoming presidential elections in September. For the first time, the regime then vowed that the president’s son would not be a candidate. He further called for dialogue with all opposition parties.

Ahmad Maher, 29, the national coordinator of the “April 6 Youth” movement, the primary group that called for and organized the uprising, immediately rejected the offer by Suleiman, calling it a trick to abort the revolution. He insisted on the main demand of removing Mubarak from power before any negotiations could take place. 

All other opposition groups, including the popular Muslim Brotherhood, followed suit. Friday’s “Departure Day” is promising to be a decisive day where the pro-democracy demonstrators vowed to continue the protests until Mubarak is ousted.

Meanwhile, the regime in a last-ditch effort to limit the effect of the demonstrations have asked all foreign journalists to leave the country before D-Day (Departure Day), and dismantled all cameras from Tahrir Square. There is not a single network in Cairo today that can broadcast the event live. Clearly, this last ploy was designed to intimidate the demonstrators who insisted that they would not cowed.

Likely scenarios: remember Marcos?

The Obama administration is evidently very frustrated with Mubarak because of his stubbornness and obliviousness to reality. President Obama bluntly declared on Tuesday, “It is my belief that an orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful and it must begin now.” 

Since the crisis began ten days ago, the U.S, which has been supporting and subsidizing the Egyptian regime for three decades, expected that its beleaguered ally would listen to its advice, limit the damage, pack up and leave. But his performance and ruthless behavior have endangered its other allies in the region, and caused long-term damage to its strategic interests, namely, Israel, stability, oil, and military bases.

Egypt was one of the most important countries and allies to the U.S. in the region. It was a cornerstone in its strategic equation. If Egypt were to be lost to a more independent leader, the strategic balance of power in the region would radically shift against America’s interest or its allies. 

In turn this change might cause a major re-assessment of the long-term American strategy in the region, especially in regard to policies related to Israel and counter-terrorism. Thus, Vice President Suleiman is considered by the U.S. and other Western allies, as the best person who could fulfill this role of maintaining the status quo. Thus, the more Mubarak maneuvered to stay in power, the less likely this prospect would be realized.

Ambassador Wisner, who has been in Egypt since Saturday, was asked to deliver to Mubarak an ultimatum from Obama. It would be similar to the one given to Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines in 1989 by then President George H. W. Bush. Mubarak would be told that he should resign and transfer his presidential powers to his vice president. 

If he refuses, the army would then remove him anyway, while Western governments would go after the billions in American and European assets that he and his sons have hoarded over the years. He would also be told that he would face a certain indictment by the International Criminal Court on War Crimes against his people. Surely, Mubarak would be expected to choose the first option and leave either to Germany under a medical pretext, or join his two sons in London.

As Omar Suleiman is promoted to become the new President of Egypt, this appointment will be hailed by Western governments and media as a great victory by the pro-democracy forces and as the expression of the will of the Egyptian people. Political and economic reforms will then be promised to the people, in an effort that allows great leeway in internal reforms but keep foreign policy intact.

However, this move will undoubtedly divide the country. The leaders of the revolution, namely the youth, who have led the demonstrations for the past two weeks and sacrificed blood for it, would continue to press for total and clean break from the previous regime. They will also be supported by popular and grass-roots movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

On the other hand, other opposition movements, which have little or no popular support but were largely created by the Mubarak regime as a décor to portray a democratic image, will accept Suleiman and embrace the new arrangements in order to have a seat at the table and get a piece of the pie. The Egyptian public will likely be split as well. 

With the monopoly of the government over the state media and other means of government information control, the new regime may bet on getting a slack from the public while it consolidates its power. 

Alternatively, the youth movement, which started its march towards freedom and democracy using social media and independent means of communications, while spearheading the most robust and forceful democracy movement in the whole region, may actually have the last word. 

Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com

from: counterpunch

Opposition Groups Reject Regime's Offer To Engage In Talks

Thursday, February 3, 2011 21:22 
IkhwanWeb 

Following the last two days of violence Opposition groups have rejected offers to engage in talks.
 
The Muslim Brotherhood group has demanded an immediate resignation by President Hosni Mubarak and the creation of a unity government including all opposition groups. According to the MB the regime is attempting to push people to walk away from the protests so it can regain control. Furthermore both the MB and former IAEA chief Dr.Mohamed ElBaradei rejected the offer by new Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq to meet with the regime for talks. 

Meanwhile Wafd Party President Sayyed Badawy has said that the party refuses to meet with the Vice President Omar Suleiman after the violence that occurred yesterday asserting his party confirmed reports that many of those in the pro-Mubarak rally were thugs hired by the National Democratic Party. Badawy added that the Wafd's position stands that the party's demands that Mubarak resign immediately, the process of drafting a new constitution begin, the state of emergency is ended, and parliament is dissolved.

http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27951

Comment: Mubarak & gangs please GET OUT.

Egypt – The Time Has Come

The current uprising in Egypt is a massive popular democratic revolution, with broad support from virtually every sector of Egyptian society

Friday, February 4,2011 12:28 
IkhwanWeb 

The current uprising in Egypt is a massive popular democratic revolution, with broad support from virtually every sector of Egyptian society. After decades of dictatorship, political repression, and economic hardship Egyptians have taken to the streets in Cairo , Alexandria , Suez , and many other towns and cities to demand the removal from power of Hosni Mubarak, and to seek the institution of true democracy in the most populous Arab nation in the world.  

This uprising follows the popular uprising in Tunisia, and is evidence of the broad call for true political freedom and reform that is sweeping through the Arab world. Massive discontent is not limited to any one part of Egyptian society. Students and youth, religious organizations, organized labor groups, intellectuals and academics, working people, women's organizations, journalists, and the masses of poor Egyptians are united in their demand for a fundamental change in government.  

True democracy in Egypt will be beneficial to the overall struggle for peace and social justice in the world, and it will help thwart the spread of extremism and terrorism, anti-American violence, and armed attacks on civilians.

http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27954

Comment: Dear strong and bold Egyptians: Go on protesting till Mubarak is OUT. May Allah help you all.

The people no longer trusts Mubarak & the regime

MB chairman: The people no longer trusts the regime 
Friday, February 4,2011 17:47 
IkhwanWeb 

In a statement, the Muslim Brotherhood chairman Dr. Mohamed Badie asserted that it was significant that Mubarak resign immediately if there was to be any constructive dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood.

He emphasized the necessity for the abolition of the state of emergency, and the dissolving of both the Shura council and the parliament highlighting that they were both illegitimate institutions who forced their way ignoring the people’s will after forfeiting elections.

Badie stated that the people no longer trust the regime or the ruling party and have had enough of hollow promises and lame speeches asserting that despite promises that there would be freedom of speech thugs have taken to the streets attacking peaceful protestors and raiding press and media headquarters in an effort to intimidate press to prevent coverage. He added the regime imposes only violence and does not understand the concept of mature and civilised dialogue where its only solution to the people’s uprising is violence.

The chairman stressed that the group welcomed dialogue with all political opposition adding that in fact all groups have agreed on uniting in the call for peaceful political reform that would serve Egyptians as a whole asserting that the current uprising is not an Islamic Revolution but an Egyptian People’s revolution that included all Egyptians from all sects, religions and political trends.

Badie ended his statement paying tribute to the resilient protestors and offered condolences to any Egyptians who lost family members to the violence by the regime’s thugs during the protests calling on the protestors to continue in its resilience against the tyrannical dictator and his corrupt regime asserting that the MB do not seek power and have no intention in its agenda in nominating any of its members for presidency or being part of the interim government.

http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27957

Comment: The dictators are usually too little too late to realise that the people power is enormous.  You can kill thousands of them but they will never surrender. Your action of torturing people so far makes them pass the threshold of fear. Once they have taken to streets, then your days are numbered. Rakyat hakim negara People are judges. They will return only with NEW EGYPT.

Egypt's Uprising: Celebrate or Fear?

Should the West Fear or Celebrate Egypt's Uprising? 
  
Friday, February 4,2011 22:21 
IkhwanWeb 

For the past ten days Egypt has experienced fear of autocracy, euphoria and fear of chaos. Starting off relatively small, the protests started with a few thousand people on January 25th, then escalated to a thrilling climax on February 1st, when millions of people assembled in Tahrir Square demanding the removal of Hosni Mubarak. After this the demonstrations deteriorated into violence as pro-Mubarak supporters attacked demonstrators.
 
Despite the violent scenes during the week, the developments in Egypt are welcomed. A nation that has been downtrodden for too long is now tasting freedom. The Arab world is buzzing with expectation, as ageing autocrats are suddenly looking shaky.

The West is juggling stability and democracy and as they struggle to attain balance, the Arab pro-democratic movement appears disturbing. Fearing the vacuum formed by the deterioration of Mubarak's regime, the West fears the Muslim Brothers, the anti-Western, anti-Israeli opposition. Responding to their fears, the US sees it must redouble its efforts to secure a prolonged managed transition by retaining Mubarak or getting someone else like him at the helm.

Despite the fears of the US and Israel, the popular call for Mubarak to step down offers the Middle East the best chance for reform in decades. The West has been calling for democracy for years and if they fail to support Egyptians in their quest for democratic rule, the arguments of the US for democracy and human rights elsewhere in the world will fall on deaf ears. Egypt is also juggling; it is choosing between risk and stagnation. 

The Egyptian protests are not an 'Islamic' uprising, but a mass protest of Muslims against an unjust, autocratic regime. The only 'Islam' shown throughout the scenes of demonstrators was the peaceful behavior, prayer, determination and resolution of a nation.

The result of these protests will certainly not be a perfectly formed democracy as it is likely that there will be disorder for some time. But on the plus side Egypt, though poor, has a sophisticated elite, a well-educated middle class and strong sense of national pride and these are indicators that Egyptians can pull order out of this chaos.

Fear of the Muslim Brotherhood is grossly overdone as they are respected for their piety, discipline and resilience. The Brotherhood grows with history and is constantly evolving. The movement at the present time can not be equated with its past. Calling for democracy, the voice of the people, free and fair elections, while not nominating any candidate, and having no desire for leadership or even a place in the interim government, the Brotherhood is the level-headed voice in Egypt. 

The past few weeks have proved that the Brotherhood is a integral part of Egyptian society and if democracy is to flourish in Egypt, the Brotherhood must be given a voice. The alternative to democracy is a dead end. Egypt under Mubarak has been becoming increasingly repressive, leaving 85million people to live under dictatorship, burdened by a corrupt and brutal police force, the suppression of the opposition, and the torture of political prisoners. This was sufficient fuse to light the uprising.

Despite the obvious difficulties, even a disorderly democracy could eventually be a rich prize—and not just for Egyptians. If Egypt becomes democratic it could once again be a beacon to the region, answering the conundrum of how to incorporate Islam in Arab democracies. An Egyptian government that speaks for its people might contribute to a settlement with the Palestinians more than authoritarianism ever could.

The US has lost much of its credibility in pursuing stability above democracy and it could turn this negative image around by making amends now. As America still has influence with Egypt’s political, business and military elite, it could help speed the transition from autocracy through chaos to a new order and improve its standing in the region.
 
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27959

Muslims and Christians United in the Battle for Tahrir Square

Friday, February 4,2011 18:32 
IkhwanWeb 

Egyptian protesters are holding their ground in Cairo 's Tahrir Square today against pro-regime thugs as foreign journalists and activists were attacked, beaten, and arrested in what appears to be the prelude to a harsh crackdown.

Muslim and Christian protesters in Tahrir are edgy despite the generally safe and celebratory atmosphere. They are organizing themselves in case pro-regime thugs enter the square. 

In the past days of unrest, as Muslims prayed in Tahrir Square during the protests, Egyptian Christians protected them from pro-Mubarak thugs in a moving scene of solidarity and humanity.

Western journalists and Muslim and Christian activists trying to get into Tahrir Square were beaten by thugs on many occasions. Despite rising food prices, closed banks and businesses and many hurt and injured people from the protests, Egyptians from all religions and walks of life are again taking to the streets demanding that Mubarak steps down.

http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27958

Penduduk Mesir teruskan tunjuk perasaan

KAHERAH 5 Feb. - Tunjuk perasaan bagi mendesak Presiden Hosni Mubarak berundur masuk hari ke-10 hari ini dan merebak ke bandar-bandar besar lain dengan beribu-ribu penduduk berhimpun selepas sembahyang Jumaat, semalam.

Di Kaherah kira-kira 100,000 penunjuk perasaan antikerajaan yang datang dari beberapa daerah berarak menuju Dataran Tahrir selepas solat Jumaat melalui beberapa jalan raya utama menyebarangi jambatan Kasr el-Nil yang merentangi Sungai Nil sepanjang satu kilometer menuju ke dataran itu.

Sebuah pondok kawalan tentera hanya membenarkan kira-kira tiga penunjuk perasaan melalui jambatan itu pada setiap saat.

Sementara itu di Iskandariah, beribu-ribu penunjuk perasaan berkumpul dan melaungkan ‘Penduduk mahu mengubah sistem pemerintahan itu’ dan ‘Kami tidak mahu berundur, beliau (Mubarak) akan berundur’.

Di Suez pula, beribu-ribu penunjuk perasaan berhimpun di bandar raya pelabuhan itu selepas solat Jumaat.

Manakala di bandar raya Ismailia, beribu-ribu penunjuk perasaan antikerajaan berhimpun di beberapa jalan utama di mana sebelum perhimpunan yang dikawal ketat tentera itu berlangsuang, kira-kira 100 penunjuk perasaan pro-Mubarak berhimpun di situ dan kemudiannya bersurai.

Di bandar raya Port Said, beribu-ribu penunjuk perasaan antikerajaan berhimpun di jalanan, sementara beratus-ratus penunjuk perasaan pro-Mubarak cuba menyusup masuk ke dalam kumpulan itu tetapi dihalang oleh tentera dan kemudiannya kedua-dua kumpulan penunjuk perasaan itu berpecah.

Bandar raya Mansoura pula memperlihatkan beribu-ribu penunjuk perasaan mendesak pengunduran Mubarak dan pentadbirannya, kata seorang anggota pergerakan pembangkang 6 April.

Selain itu kira-kira 5,000 penunjuk perasaan berhimpun di bandar raya Damanhour yang di terletak di Lembah Nil.

Tidak ketinggalan, kira-kira 1,000 penunjuk perasaan antikerajaan dan 1,000 penyokong Mubarak berhimpun di beberapa jalan di bandar raya Qalyubiya.

Manakala di bandar raya El Arish di Semenanjung Sinai, beribu-ribu penunjuk perasaan anti-kerajaan berhimpun, tetapi tiada tanda-tanda menunjukkan kumpulan pro-Mubarak turut sama berhimpun.

Di bandar raya Aswan pula, kira-kira 2,000 penunjuk perasaan antikerajaan mengadakan perhimpunan, sementara beberapa ratus penunjuk perasaan pro-Mubarak cuba menyelinap ke dalam kumpulan antikerajaan, tetapi dihalang oleh sekatan yang dibina oleh penunjuk perasaan antikerajaan. - REUTERS

Countdown Day 10: Mubarak mahu letak jawatan

KAHERAH 4 Feb. - Presiden Mesir, Hosni Mubarak berkata, beliau mahu meletakkan jawatan tetapi khuatir huru-hara akan meletus jika beliau berundur sekarang.

Mubarak, 82, memberitahu wartawan ABC News, Christiane Amanpour dalam wawancara lewat semalam bahawa beliau 'sudah bosan menjadi Presiden dan ingin melepaskan jawatan sekarang, tetapi tidak dapat berbuat demikian kerana khuatir negara ini akan terjerumus ke dalam kancah huru-hara'.

Bagaimanapun akhbar New York Times melaporkan, pentadbiran Presiden Amerika Syarikat (AS), Barack Obama sedang berunding dengan para pegawai Mesir untuk membolehkan Mubarak berundur dengan serta-merta...

Ulasan: Teruskan berdoa supaya rakyat Mesir menang dapat kerajaan baru yang adil dan Mubarak TURUN TAHTA. Rakyat menjadi lebih suka kalau Mubarak turun CEPAT.

Countdown Day 10: Over a Million March in Day of Departure Rally in Egypt

Over a Million March in Day of Departure Rally in Egypt  

More than million protesters have gathered in Cairo’s Tahrir Square Cairo in a rally billed as the day of departure calling on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to resign. Protesters have flooded into the square which has come under attack for the past two days by pro-Mubarak supporters.

Ahmed Naguib: "This is not just a revolt to topple a regime; this is a revolt for our dignity.   We need justice. We need to punish those who committed atrocities and crimes against                 humanity in this square."

Hundreds of thousands of protesters are also gathering in Alexandria, Mansoura, and other cities in Egypt.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/4/headlines#1