Is a revolution at hand?

January 27, 2011 5:55 PM

In preparation for massive protests after Friday prayers, it's being reported that Egypt has completely shut down access to the internet and most text and MMS messaging.

In June of 2010, 28 year old Khalid Saeed was allegedly dragged away from an internet cafe after refusing to show identification, and then brutally beaten to death in a nearby hallway. Though the authorities claim he died from choking on a bag of drugs he was trying to conceal, the graphic and disturbing photo of his disfigured body show broken teeth, a broken jaw, and horrific lacerations. This event and the wide distribution of the photo sparked massive demonstrations and a Facebook page to honor him, with the slogan "We Are Khalid Saeed." Today, just after an AP video surfaced of a protester being shot in head, Egypt seemingly shut all communications down.

Fast forward to the present, and the success of Tunisian protesters ousting their own dictator of 23 years has sparked protests from Algeria to Lebanon, and seems to have taken hold in Egypt. President Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled since Anwar Sadat was assassinated for signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1981, is accused of holding false elections (since no one else can run against him under the current constitution) and widespread cruelty. Egypt has largely been under a state of emergency for his entire rule, and dissidents are regularly tortured and killed according to numerous sources.

And today in Egypt, where Friday has already began, the most massive portion of the protest has been planned to begin after Friday prayers. Egypt has called up it's counter-terrorism units, cut off roads, communications, and continued sweeping protesters up in massive arrests from Cairo to Alexandria to Suez. (Jack Shenker, a Guardian reporter, provided a harrowing recording of his experience at the hands of Egyptian police.) Meanwhile the popular opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei has arrived in Cairo to participate in the protests. President Mubarak has not been seen publicly since the start of the protests, though his son and his son's family have already fled to Britain.

Amid the rising tension, the US State department has issued soft statements recommending change and supporting freedom of expression, though it continues to support Mubarak's government as legitimate. Egypt is the second highest recipient of US aid despite their lengthy human rights record, receiving over 1.2 billion dollars every year. It is seen as a stabilizing force in an area that is very valuable not only because of the Suez Canal and the hundreds of millions of barrels of oil that pass through it every year, but as a regime friendly to Israel and US interests. Egyptian military forces were even among the first to enter Kuwait during the first Gulf War to oust the Iraqi invasion.

Already editorials are weighing the merits of democracy in Egypt: the Muslim Brotherhood would see widespread gains in influence if they were allowed representation. The group has yet to show official support of the protests, though it is allowing members to participate individually, and may officially appear in the Friday protests. Founded in 1928 in Egypt, it is one of the oldest political groups in the Islamic world. Though the group officially condemns violence, it has turned more fundamentalist in its viewpoint in the past decade, and officially seeks Sharia Law. One of its most influential members, Sayyid Qutb, believed in violence as a tool to oust governments and reportedly was a huge influence for Al Qaeda. (At the time of this writing, it is being reported that leaders of the Brotherhood have been arrested.)

Among all the uncertainty, the question remains: will the United States support democracy in Egypt? If the interview with PJ Crowley of the State Department by Al Jazeera is any indication, it looks like Washington is going to wait to see what happens later today.

posted by notion (2589 comments total)

I would be very surprised if the United States supported a people's uprising against tyranny.
posted by fuq at 5:57 PM on January 27, 2011 [38 favorites]

Tehran is using this moment to kill the green revolutionaries.
posted by humanfont at 5:58 PM on January 27, 2011 [9 favorites]

Have we ever supported a "democracy" that wasn't in fact a client state? Ever?
posted by orthogonality at 6:02 PM on January 27, 2011 [5 favorites]

Mohamed ElBaradei was the Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency during the Iraq war, so his name was in the news a bit back then.
posted by delmoi at 6:14 PM on January 27, 2011

Have we ever supported a "democracy" that wasn't in fact a client state? Ever?

I guess it depends how you define "support", "democracy", and "client state". There's lend-lease to the UK during WWII; the Marshall Plan (France is certainly not a US client state, at least not since the Suez crisis); significant aid to non-aligned India throughout the cold war; disaster aid of various types to dozens of nations over the decades; we'll sell weapons to pretty much whoever the hell can pay; there's some current development aid to Brazil; etc...

Just trying to pick out examples that are clearly not client states. Not sure what you mean by "support", though.
posted by mr_roboto at 6:16 PM on January 27, 2011 [10 favorites]

I'm really happy the general state of American apathy won't keep me from seeing the future cutting edge videos of a cat on a vacuum cleaner.
posted by I love you more when I eat paint chips at 6:16 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

Define "supported." Remembering that it took quite a long time for us to start a sizable collection of client states, and that we have lots of allies.
posted by SMPA at 6:16 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

In one fell swoop, the candor of the cables released by WikiLeaks did more for Arab democracy than decades of backstage U.S. diplomacy.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:17 PM on January 27, 2011 [94 favorites]

it's a game of chess, isn't it? I intensely dislike the hypocrisy and the suffering of the average Egyptian. But is it completely wrong to ask, well, what would happen if Egypt fell apart? could the geopolitical realities outweigh our desire for other people to enjoy the rights that we have?

I know this was the argument made during the Cold War, and that U.S. propping up authoritarian regimes brought on mass suffering. However -- and I say this as a devil's argument sort of thing -- I don't know this disproves the completely disproves the idea that containment of Communism was a good thing.

Please don't misunderstand me: I do get that the U.S. does all sorts of nefarious, hypocritical things globally. I get that people suffer as a result. What I'm not sure about is whether more people would suffer if the U.S. wasn't such a fucking hypocrite about the "democracy agenda."
posted by angrycat at 6:19 PM on January 27, 2011 [10 favorites]

Mubarak has been an ally of ours in a number of things. And he’s been very responsible on, relative to geopolitical interest in the region, the Middle East peace efforts; the actions Egypt has taken relative to normalizing relationship with – with Israel. … I would not refer to him as a dictator.”
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:19 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

Open thread
posted by briank at 6:20 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

could the geopolitical realities outweigh our desire for other people to enjoy the rights that we have?

our desire? Is that what's important here?
posted by delmoi at 6:21 PM on January 27, 2011 [16 favorites]

I think "wait and see" probably is the US response here.

If we support the uprising and it fails, we take a massive hit with our second closest ally in the region. I can't see it being possible for us to do any business with the Egyptian government after that.

If we support the regime and it falls, we lose any and all opportunity to work with the succeeding regime, similar to what happened in the Iranian Revolution.

If we do nothing, we remain at least potentially able to do business with whoever winds up in power on Saturday.

Sounds like the prudent path to me.
posted by valkyryn at 6:23 PM on January 27, 2011 [9 favorites]

Hoping I'm wrong, but don't put too much stock into a Twitter-olution: "When you look at the figures you realise that only a very small number of Iranians were using it. In 2009, according to a firm called Sysomos which analyses social media, there were 19,235 Twitter accounts in Iran – 0.03 per cent of the population. Researchers at al-Jazeera found only 60 Twitter accounts active in Tehran at the time of the demonstrations, which fell to six after the crackdown."
posted by webhund at 6:27 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

what would happen if Egypt fell apart?

I totally get where you're coming from with this, and part of me agrees with your Devil's advocating. But I think the only way to stay true to our own values and the values of our society is to support freedom and self-governance wherever it sprouts, regardless of geopolitical consequences.

If we're living in a world where fighting for democracy in Egypt unstabilizes everything, then fuck it. Bring it all down.
posted by auto-correct at 6:29 PM on January 27, 2011 [22 favorites]

I'm mostly computer-illiterate...but...is there anything that people on the rest of the Internet can do to help, at least with regard to the net access?
posted by Sticherbeast at 6:31 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

It absolutely amazes me that it's possible to shut down even wireless networks but I guess they need towers and those can be disabled. Actually amaze is incorrect. Fucking terrifies me is more accurate.

Cell towers are just like huge WiFi routers. Just like you still need to plug a WiFi router into a regular Ethernet port/DSL or Cable line, the Cell Towers need their own internet connection (or they might link to a phone companies internal network, which will then take your requests out onto the internet)

But the bottom line is that, basically, once the internet gets shut down at the root level, cellular internet will get taken down too.

And actually what I heard was that the cell network survived longer then internet or the landline phone system. I don't know how accurate that is.
posted by delmoi at 6:34 PM on January 27, 2011

our desire? Is that what's important here?

nope, that's not what i'm arguing at all. to the extent that our desire matters, i'd say that it only does insofar our desires align with humanity's ability to thrive.
posted by angrycat at 6:34 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

I think the only way to stay true to our own values and the values of our society is to support freedom and self-governance wherever it sprouts, regardless of geopolitical consequences.

That's a nice thought, but if the consequences are bad for the values of our society, and it's entirely possible that they are, the analysis changes somewhat, no? Ideological purity may be emotionally satisfying but it isn't all that helpful in deciding the best course of action a lot of the time.
posted by valkyryn at 6:36 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm mostly computer-illiterate...but...is there anything that people on the rest of the Internet can do to help, at least with regard to the net access?

Not really, but how long can they keep this up? Lots of businesses rely on the internet working. I assume that's true in Egypt too.
posted by delmoi at 6:36 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

e.g: what the Suez canal becomes outside of the control of Western influence. Yes, our energy policies have made us dependent on the canal to the extent that we are. Stupid, maybe evil policies. But that doesn't mean that there wouldn't be great suffering if the canal closes up, given our petroleum dependence.
posted by angrycat at 6:37 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

That's a nice thought, but if the consequences are bad for the values of our society

In other words, what if they vote for the wrong people?
posted by delmoi at 6:37 PM on January 27, 2011 [12 favorites]

given *humanity's* petroleum dependence. Not just the U.S.
posted by angrycat at 6:38 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

In other words, what if they vote for the wrong people?

Yup. That's the big problem with democracy right there.
posted by fuq at 6:39 PM on January 27, 2011 [8 favorites]

is there anything that people on the rest of the Internet can do to help, at least with regard to the net access?

Almost certainly not. If I understand it correctly, the Egyptian government has essentially turned off their telecommunications network, or at least severed its ties to the outside the world. As Telecom Egypt is down, one assumes that's what's happened.

This is really, really easy to do, and there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about it.

That's the thing about all this talk that the Internet is supposed to usher in some kind of new age of freedom: for all its perceived decentralization, it remains, on a hardware level, massively centralized, particularly in economies with a single telecom provider, as one assumes Egypt has. All it really takes is someone throwing a single switch and bam, no net access for you! Even if all they did was shut off access to the outside world and maintained Egypt's internal network, that'd produce much the same effect, as most of the servers that run sites like Facebook, Twitter, etc. are located outside the country.

The only reason the Tunisian revolution worked as well as it did is because it took the government by surprise, where someone was apparently asleep at the wheel. The fact that that government didn't crack down the way Mubarak's is suggests that the Tunisian government was pretty weak already.
posted by valkyryn at 6:42 PM on January 27, 2011 [19 favorites]

e.g: what the Suez canal becomes outside of the control of Western influence. Yes, our energy policies have made us dependent on the canal to the extent that we are.

Actually, most of the oil we use comes from Canada and Venezuela, as well as local production.
posted by delmoi at 6:44 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

In other words, what if they vote for the wrong people?

Not exactly. I mean that saying we're going to support any and every democratic grassroots movement is going to mean that we stop being able to have normalized relationships with a huge chunk of the world's governments, some of whom are either 1) pretty important to US interests abroad--including our commitment to democracy!--or 2) not necessarily worse than a "democratically elected" government might be.

No, just because an opposition movement is populist and the reigning regime is tyrannical does not automatically mean that our interests and values lie with the former. I mean, Liberian President Charles Taylor was democratically elected, and look how that worked out.

Again, I say we wait and see what happens and then try to work with whoever is in power after the dust settles. It is, after all, fundamentally an Egyptian problem. Where's all the concern about us not getting involved in foreign entanglements?
posted by valkyryn at 6:49 PM on January 27, 2011 [7 favorites]

In one fell swoop...

I hurt my fingertip tapping the + that hard.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:51 PM on January 27, 2011 [9 favorites]

Hopefully Mubarak will come to his senses, find his old patriotism, and resign to a caretaker government that holds swift elections.
posted by vrakatar at 6:51 PM on January 27, 2011

I read that just DNS is down, not full internet access. (Although certain sites may be blocked by IP address)
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 6:53 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

How's that internet kill switch looking now?
posted by unSane at 6:55 PM on January 27, 2011 [37 favorites]

Actually, most of the oil we use comes from Canada and Venezuela, as well as local production.

No, most of it, just barely, is domestic. But the crude we do import doesn't go through the canal (VLCCs are too big; hence the Suezmax designation for that dwt). What we do import from the Middle East goes around the Cape in the (almost) biggest ships you can imagine. Ditto for Japan and China.

Europe, however, would be fucked should something shut down the Suez. Actually, if anything shuts down the Suez, the knock-on effects would be...bad.
posted by digitalprimate at 6:55 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

I read that just DNS is down, not full internet access. (Although certain sites may be blocked by IP address)

You can't even hit Egyptian government sites via IP. I think it is more than DNS.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:58 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm mostly computer-illiterate...but...is there anything that people on the rest of the Internet can do to help, at least with regard to the net access?

I believe witness.org may help place tiny satellite base stations in some of the worst-offending countries for video uploads of human rights violations.

There's not much a government can do to prevent uploads if the video can be delivered to the base station.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 6:59 PM on January 27, 2011 [13 favorites]

Egypt pop 78.866.635 (July 2009 est) , NTRA number of DSL subscribers in Egypt is 1.027.488 (date unclear) source wikipedia. That's 1,28 lines per hundred inhabitants.
So I guess at best 2-3 million people get the net in Egypt? And I wonder how filtered it is.

That without considering that indeed internet is massively centralized in many countries, and it is rather easily turned off.

That makes Fidonet look like reliable, for it relied on ordinary modems.
posted by elpapacito at 7:00 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

webhund: “Hoping I'm wrong, but don't put too much stock into a Twitter-olution...”

I wanted to note here that I have seen the flurry of Twitter-skeptical articles about the Iranian uprising, and while the articles are factually correct, the general implication is flat wrong. The internet has been used a lot in Iran, and is still used by many to keep in touch and keep tabs on what's going on. Twitter is not as large a player in this as some have said, it's true; that's because Twitter certainly doesn't afford the privacy or layers of acquaintance that, for example, Facebook does. And it's my feeling that Facebook played a large part in Iran, and is playing (or did play, until Egypt went offline) a large part in Egypt. The difference is that it's not exactly possible to know that; Facebook feeds aren't public, you can't track who is following who easily, and you can't gather data on it the way you can with Twitter. Which is sort of the whole point of its utility.
posted by koeselitz at 7:05 PM on January 27, 2011 [5 favorites]

If you are a ham you might be able to help.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:10 PM on January 27, 2011 [19 favorites]

We are of course still far from seeing a truly independent Egypt. We may never see one. But a great wall of public fear has been taken down today; the hollow facade of the American-backed tyranny has been punched through, by a courageous upsurging of ordinary people, driven, like the protesters that took down another American-backed tyranny in Tunisia, by the common human need for bread, for employment, for freedom, for dignity, not by religious or ideological fervor. - Chris Floyd
posted by Joe Beese at 7:15 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

In other words, what if they vote for the wrong people?

Are the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip better off since electing Hamas? That's not supposed to be a leading question. I don't think they are, but I'm not sure they're worse off, either.
posted by fatbird at 7:23 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

> And actually what I heard was that the cell network survived longer then internet or the
> landline phone system. I don't know how accurate that is.
> posted by delmoi at 9:34 PM on January 27 [+] [!]

If you want a medium/network that can't be taken down centrally you're pretty much limited to ham radio.
posted by jfuller at 7:24 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

I wonder how filtered it is
The internet in Egypt is not filtered. Facebook has been the main site activists have used to organize these movements, along with Twitter and SMS.

is there anything that people on the rest of the Internet can do to help, at least with regard to the net access?
I contacted the White House and told them that I am very concerned about the situation in Egypt and asked them to pressure Mubarak to let people protest and open back up SMS and internet.

I know the US can't send in troops and force out Mubarak--but I'm horrified by the idea that one of our closest 'friends' and allies is preparing to massacre its people and yet there's nothing we can do to stop it. I hope Hillary is burning up that phone line.

The latest reports are that Mubarak has activated his counter-terrorism forces (US tax dollars at work to train these troops!) and recalled the police.
posted by bluedaisy at 7:25 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

If you want a medium/network that can't be taken down centrally you're pretty much limited to ham radio.

Even then, it's possible to kill the power if the government is absolutely determined...
posted by mr_roboto at 7:28 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

This is what I was referring to: https://twitter.com/kate1956/status/30812662656933888. Some people are able to connect out to Facebook and Twitter by IP address.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 7:36 PM on January 27, 2011

Hmm, but it appears that routes to all Egyptian ISPs (except for one small one, Noor Group) have been withdrawn: http://www.renesys.com/blog/2011/01/egypt-leaves-the-internet.shtml
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 7:39 PM on January 27, 2011 [4 favorites]

Ham radio is not an option for clandestine reporting. Unless one is not worried about tracking.
posted by clavdivs at 7:39 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

I didn't want to put it in the FPP unnecessarily, but most of the weapons, including the tear gas and military vehicles, are US made and/or retrofitted and funded by American taxpayers.

We used Egypt as a black site in the post 9/11 era to torture and hold our prisoners for us, so there are darker forces with a keen interest in keeping our ghost detainees a secret and well out of judicial oversight. There's probably a lot of heated phone calls circulating the beltway tonight, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are deciding whether or not to shuffle detainees to other black sites and risk upsetting Mubarak's certainty that his regime will be upheld.

Members of the Rendition Group follow a simple but standard procedure: Dressed head to toe in black, including masks, they blindfold and cut the clothes off their new captives, then administer an enema and sleeping drugs. They outfit detainees in a diaper and jumpsuit for what can be a day-long trip. Their destinations: either a detention facility operated by cooperative countries in the Middle East and Central Asia, including Afghanistan, or one of the CIA's own covert prisons -- referred to in classified documents as "black sites," which at various times have been operated in eight countries, including several in Eastern Europe.

In the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the CTC was the place to be for CIA officers wanting in on the fight. The staff ballooned from 300 to 1,200 nearly overnight.

"It was the Camelot of counterterrorism," a former counterterrorism official said. "We didn't have to mess with others -- and it was fun." (source)

posted by notion at 7:40 PM on January 27, 2011 [27 favorites]

Some people are able to connect out to Facebook and Twitter by IP address.

That was yesterday. This is not the case since this afternoon (in the US), when they've managed to block everything, so it seems. I'm even seeing reports from friends that they've managed to block the internet connection of the US Embassy (which runs separately).
posted by bluedaisy at 7:41 PM on January 27, 2011

Yeah it wouldn't be too hard to just jam the hams.

Actually, most of the oil we use comes from Canada and Venezuela, as well as local production.

No, most of it, just barely, is domestic.

If most of our oil production was domestic, then it would also be true that most of oil comes from Canada and Venezuela, as well as local production, since the second is a superset of the first.
posted by delmoi at 7:41 PM on January 27, 2011

Pruitt-Igoe: if you follow #JAN25 on twitter, you'll see that most everyone is saying it's been down. That particular tweet you linked was going around a lot yesterday.
posted by notion at 7:41 PM on January 27, 2011

You can test this yourself.

www.egypt.gov.eg [81.21.104.81]
cairo.usembassy.gov [62.140.73.207]

By domain or IP address, you will time out.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:43 PM on January 27, 2011

That was yesterday. This is not the case since this afternoon (in the US), when they've managed to block everything, so it seems. I'm even seeing reports from friends that they've managed to block the internet connection of the US Embassy (which runs separately).


Oops! Sorry, I read the wrong tweet.

The problem is that no one can read those messages, so it might not help anyone.
posted by bluedaisy at 7:44 PM on January 27, 2011

Instructions for the protests Friday were widely distributed before everything went down, it's going to continue but aside from journalists with sat phones not much is going to get out.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:47 PM on January 27, 2011

Confirming what a few have reported this evening: in an action unprecedented in Internet history, the Egyptian government appears to have ordered service providers to shut down all international connections to the Internet. Critical European-Asian fiber-optic routes through Egypt appear to be unaffected for now. But every Egyptian provider, every business, bank, Internet cafe, website, school, embassy, and government office that relied on the big four Egyptian ISPs for their Internet connectivity is now cut off from the rest of the world. Link Egypt, Vodafone/Raya, Telecom Egypt, Etisalat Misr, and all their customers and partners are, for the moment, off the air.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:51 PM on January 27, 2011 [11 favorites]

In other words, what if they vote for the wrong people?

We'll spit through the streets of the cities we wreck
And we'll find you a leader that you can elect
Those treaties we signed were a pain in the neck
'Cause we're the Cops of the World, boys
We're the Cops of the World

And when we['ve] butchered your sons, boys
When we['ve] butchered your sons
Have a stick of our gum, boys
Have a stick of our bubble gum
We own half the world, oh say can you see
And the name for our profits is democracy
So, like it or not, you will have to be free
'Cause we're the Cops of the World, boys
We're the Cops of the World

posted by orthogonality at 7:54 PM on January 27, 2011 [6 favorites]

The United States produces 2 billion barrels of oil per year as of 2009. It imports 4.2 billion barrels of oil per year, down from a high of 5 billion barrels in 2005. In 2008 we imported 2.1 billion barrels from OPEC nations, and that fell to 1.7 billion barrels in 2009.

To put it another way, if OPEC (which includes Venezuela) decided to stop shipping us oil, our strategic reserve of only 727 million barrels would not last us six months, and maybe a year or 18 months with extraordinary rationing that would cripple our economy. Even if prices of oil dropped due to the economic slowdown worldwide, the sheer lack of production capacity would inflate the price for the West.

I can't find the talk right now, but I remember Chomsky saying that most of the projections he read from the 70s and 80s discussed moving production to more reliable sources closer to the United States, especially North Atlantic sources, but keeping control over middle eastern resources as "veto power" in world affairs. Since the vast majority of our military action and base construction has taken place near Iraq, it seems they are following through with their long term plans.

(from the other thread... sorry for the dupe, but this is the correct spot)
posted by notion at 7:55 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

It absolutely amazes me that it's possible to shut down even wireless networks but I guess they need towers and those can be disabled. Actually amaze is incorrect. Fucking terrifies me is more accurate.

it absolutely amazes me that young, allegedly tech-savvy people don't know that wireless networks are just radio transmitters and receivers. fucking terrifies me actually.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 8:12 PM on January 27, 2011 [28 favorites]

Looks like the BGP routes were withdrawn.

For the non-technical people, BGP is the Border Gateway Protocol. It's the communication protocol used by the large network providers to tell other network providers what routes are reachable via them.

It looks like the Egyptian government told the big four Egyption ISPs to pull all of the routes. Without that information, other networks on the Internet don't know how to reach individual hosts.
posted by formless at 8:13 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

Doh, furiousxgeorge beat me to it.
posted by formless at 8:13 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

Back in 1999, Noopolitik was one look at what the future effects of open information on US foreign policy could be.

It's always better to be truthful if the structure of information and communication means that all lies, like soft crypto, have a short half-life.

One thing the US could do right now is be a truthful window into what's happening in Egypt. It's not exactly the same thing as transparency, since not all information has to be public. But the information made public should be free of distortion, spin, or manipulation.
posted by warbaby at 8:13 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

No one even mentions the attempt in Myanmar/Burma anymore.

The unadorned fact is, revolution is hard, and rarely succeeds. We can point to the successes because they are dramatic, but for each success there are a hell of a lot more that fail, and even of the successes they don't all lead to good outcomes.

I hope it turns out fantastic in Egypt and Tunisia and all others that try this, I do remain pessimistic though.
posted by edgeways at 8:16 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

Suez protester felled by bullet
posted by Joe Beese at 8:22 PM on January 27, 2011

The Egyptian Stock Exchange appears to be the only site remaining available.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:24 PM on January 27, 2011

The Guardian's Liveblog.

Big stuff a-goin' down... I'm hoping it produces a bit more change than the Iranian election protests.
posted by kaibutsu at 8:26 PM on January 27, 2011

And this is when I consider taking up HAM radio. Get involved doing Internet over HAM.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:26 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

In other words, what if they vote for the wrong people?

Yeah, Cheney and Bush
posted by the noob at 8:29 PM on January 27, 2011

And this is when I consider taking up HAM radio. Get involved doing Internet over HAM.

http://pastebin.com/fHHBqZ7Q

!!!
posted by tapesonthefloor at 8:35 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

This is a ghettoization of a collective consciousness.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 8:37 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

It looks like an icecast/shoutcast might get setup for the ham stream here shortly? http://twitter.com/AnonOnABike/status/30843824557260800
posted by curious nu at 8:38 PM on January 27, 2011

Wikileaks just tweeted:

"We will soon release numerous cables on Egypt."
posted by ofthestrait at 8:39 PM on January 27, 2011 [16 favorites]

Unless journalists are traveling with sat phones, nobody can get information in or out. I fear that it's a foreshadowing of a violent response from the government to tomorrow's protests.
posted by dejah420 at 8:41 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

Wikileaks just tweeted:

"We will soon release numerous cables on Egypt."
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:44 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

@notion: compare this to this.
posted by digitalprimate at 8:45 PM on January 27, 2011

Where things go next is hard to tell. Unlike Tunis, the army is probably quite willing to use force to back up the police. The army does benefit from the current institutional arrangement. Nothing says this to me quite as much as the immense growth over the last 30 years of the Officer’s Club in Zamalek, a very affluent section of Cairo, which now has a luxury hotel, an outdoor restaurant, and (at least as nearly as one can judge from peeking through gaps in the very high and solid wall) an extremely relaxing oasis of a club in this island in the middle of the Nile.
posted by Joe Beese at 8:45 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

Ack! That should have read this to this. Not also the separate break out for OPEC imports.
posted by digitalprimate at 8:47 PM on January 27, 2011

Living on a boat, I've come to rely on satellite for my data connection. I can't help but feel that small sat dishes donated en masse to key dissidents could keep the lines of communication open among the resistance. One dish the size of a coffee pot could serve hundreds. In key locations, given to key people could mean the difference between an Iran style outcome and a Polish one.
posted by karst at 8:51 PM on January 27, 2011 [11 favorites]

Nick Baumann at Mother Jones on What's Happening in Egypt Explained (via medley's twitter)
posted by genehack at 8:53 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

I don't think this has already been posted.

From the NY Times: Cables Show Delicate U.S. Dealings With Egypt’s Leaders
posted by bluedaisy at 8:54 PM on January 27, 2011

Ham radio is not an option for clandestine reporting. Unless one is not worried about tracking.

EME - Moon bounce!

Do you have a directional antenna, a 2m SSB transceiver with 50 W output and a PC?

"If your answer is YES then, believe it or not, you are capable of making a QSO with EA6VQ (and other stations) using the Moon as a reflector. Please continue reading this page and you will discover a new world of DX communications, where you can work stations all around the world on 144 MHz."
posted by zippy at 8:56 PM on January 27, 2011 [18 favorites]

I want to stay up, but I have a long day tomorrow. I just want to say that I hope the Egyptians earn their freedom today without bloodshed, Insha'Allah. If this is an issue you care about, please put a call or an e-mail to your representative, or share this story with anyone you know in DC, or even just tweet some support with #JAN25.

Whatever your beliefs may be about democracy in Egypt, it's obvious that the Mubarak regime isn't sustainable in the long run. Let's make what sacrifices we must to accept their right to free will.

(No, I don't believe in God... but I don't think hoping for a little cosmic help can hurt.)
posted by notion at 9:03 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

I wonder how many Egypt-based international businesses will set up hosting outside the country after this.

Also, will the government or the ISPs pay for all the broken internet uptime agreements for business customers?

Finally, is it possible for an enterprising ISP outside Egypt to publish the correct BGP routes and reestablish contact, assuming the physical links are up?
posted by zippy at 9:04 PM on January 27, 2011

Okay. How about a bluetoothed message-passing network? Pass packets on sneakernet. And on open wifi, so neighborhoods can be covered.

City-to-city becomes difficult.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:04 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

I would argue that sustaining authoritarian rule in the Muslim world does more damage to national security, by giving no outlet internally for grinding poverty and alienation. Ultimately these become recruits for terror, and extremists point to the support for authoritarians from the West to back up their claims that the West must be extinguished. We would do better to proclaim universal rights and denounce state-sponsored violence, than being measured and careful and worried about Islamist rule. If we’re going to be involved at all in the Middle East, we need to be on the right side of history.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:08 PM on January 27, 2011 [6 favorites]

As a ham radio operator, moonbounce isn't as nice and untraceable as you'd like. Directional antennas are never 100% directional- there's always some leakage.

Oh- and if we're worrying about whether dictators should be propped up because the people might vote for the wrong guys, i'd rather go lie down and die.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:10 PM on January 27, 2011 [12 favorites]

Can some tell me, am I interpreting this correctly?

I'm under the impression Egypt has gone black-out: no communications except mouth to ear and whatever samizdat press as exists.

Now I'm about to go browse what purports to be real news media, see if I can get a sense of scale.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:14 PM on January 27, 2011

I think the idea with ham in a situation like this is security through obscurity. They will be so busy shutting down twitter they will forget about old school communication technology.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:19 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm under the impression Egypt has gone black-out: no communications except mouth to ear and whatever samizdat press as exists.

Landlines to some areas are still working. Many people don't have landlines (mobile phones are very popular) though. Apparently some news channels have satellite phones or whatever you call them that are still working.

It's about 7:20 am in Egypt right now, on Friday, the first day of the weekend. And Egyptians aren't exactly known as early risers. So it might be a while before folks are stirring and we can get more news. But certainly many people seem cut off--my expat friends who I'd expect to be online now are not.

Prayers are at noon, so in about five hours, with the big protest expected to follow.
posted by bluedaisy at 9:20 PM on January 27, 2011 [4 favorites]

Yeah, it has been pre-planned to happen after the prayers. Communication stayed up long enough to establish that, what happens after is anyone's guess but the media should be awake and broadcasting at that time.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:22 PM on January 27, 2011

Also, Al Jazeera has some good coverage.
posted by bluedaisy at 9:22 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

If the Internet were to shutdown because of civil unrest in the us, unwound take that as a sure fire sign that The Shit is about to Hit The Fan and as I would basically be unemployed at that point, I would mosey on over to the home of whichever of my friends that has the largest gun collection to wait out the apocalypse.
posted by empath at 9:23 PM on January 27, 2011

Unwound=I would. Yay autocorrect
posted by empath at 9:23 PM on January 27, 2011

If you cut off the WoW nerds the revolution would happen Tuesday morning.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:27 PM on January 27, 2011 [7 favorites]

I agree with that assessment, Empath. I'm surprised that Egypt did this - governments usually try to keep up appearances of stability when unrest appears. The Egyptian government has just told every citizen of the country in language they can't possibly ignore that they have a precarious hold on power. Plus, they've done a huge amount of damage to their economy and their international reputation. They must really believe that this constitutes a real threat.
posted by Mitrovarr at 9:29 PM on January 27, 2011 [5 favorites]

Don't the have a ton of satellite tvs in Egypt? They'll still be able to get Al Jazeera, right?
posted by empath at 9:30 PM on January 27, 2011

Satellite TV is what makes Al Jazeera what it is: local governments are powerless to stop it. It's a key instance of innovative new communications channels bypassing government power.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:38 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

Is their stock market open today? It's going to be complete chaos after Friday prayers.
posted by empath at 9:40 PM on January 27, 2011

Right, but if Al Jazeera is having a hard time getting news out, there might not be as much news for Egyptians to watch. Also, protesters want to be on the streets, not at home watching tv.
posted by bluedaisy at 9:40 PM on January 27, 2011

The other side, of course, is that Al Jazeera is ultimately still a broadcast medium, with correspondents and reporting outposts that are quite vulnerable to government attack, as we saw in the Gulf War and during the last big crackdown in Palestine. Conversely, the internet provides a distributed communications platform, but - as we're now seeing - can be subject to bottlenecks and government take-down.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:41 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

Empath, no, it's Friday, so I don't think the stock market is open (the work week in Egypt is Sunday to Thursday).
posted by bluedaisy at 9:43 PM on January 27, 2011

I have a terrible fear that I know what's going to happen: tomorrow the security forces are going to be shooting live ammunition. There's going to be an appalling blood bath; at least a thousand dead.

The reason for the communications blackout is to prevent word getting out to the wider world until after it's all over.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 9:44 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

The Atlantic has translated and published some of the Activists Action Plan that was supposed to be kept off the internet as long as possible.
posted by saucysault at 9:48 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

Question: I'm not super familiar with BGP. If this was done by no longer advertising BGP routes and not by cutting cables, couldn't ISP's outside Egypt simply hard code the routes back in to restore service?
posted by empath at 9:48 PM on January 27, 2011

@Alshaheeed, about 3 hours ago: "RT ALJAZEERA: government-hired thugs r pouring petrol over cars & will charge through the streets with swords http://goo.gl/B4TVP #JAN25"
posted by tapesonthefloor at 9:48 PM on January 27, 2011

I have a terrible fear that I know what's going to happen: tomorrow the security forces are going to be shooting live ammunition. There's going to be an appalling blood bath; at least a thousand dead.

I'd hope that would mean that the US would completely withdraw support at that point. I'd fucking revolt here if it didn't.
posted by empath at 9:49 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

Good luck out there today, people of Egypt.
posted by wander at 9:51 PM on January 27, 2011 [13 favorites]

They don't care if people watch the news, they don't want the net to be used to coordinate protests.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:52 PM on January 27, 2011 [4 favorites]

Question: I'm not super familiar with BGP. If this was done by no longer advertising BGP routes and not by cutting cables, couldn't ISP's outside Egypt simply hard code the routes back in to restore service?

This is not a rhetorical question, btw. I work at an ISP and have access to our BGP routing tables.
posted by empath at 9:53 PM on January 27, 2011

I have a terrible fear that I know what's going to happen: tomorrow the security forces are going to be shooting live ammunition. There's going to be an appalling blood bath; at least a thousand dead.

The reason for the communications blackout is to prevent word getting out to the wider world until after it's all over.

I agree with this. But I'm not going to favorite it.
posted by jsturgill at 9:54 PM on January 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

*things as simple as avoid this street or this square can make all the difference in riot control. If the police have communication and the protesters don't they will be contained.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:54 PM on January 27, 2011

US protests in support of Egypt.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:58 PM on January 27, 2011

empath: Question: I'm not super familiar with BGP. If this was done by no longer advertising BGP routes and not by cutting cables, couldn't ISP's outside Egypt simply hard code the routes back in to restore service?

This is not a rhetorical question, btw. I work at an ISP and have access to our BGP routing tables.

I'm curious too, but my guess is that it wouldn't work. I think the problem would be that you'd have to manually configure the border routers, not just any router. Right now, the border routers that used to connect to Egypt don't have the routes anymore - you might be able to manually route packets to those routers, but all they're going to do is throw their hands up and return them as undeliverable. If the router that handles the WAN link doesn't know what's on the other side, it'll never route anything that way.

Plus, I'd guess that the BGP routes from Egypt aren't being advertised anymore because the border routers are either disabled or off, not just because they aren't advertising their routes.

However, I have to admit that my knowledge of BGP was fragmentary at best and is years out of date, so I could be wrong. I'm curious to see if anyone who knows more about it answers.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:17 PM on January 27, 2011

i guess that's probably more likely, that they actually physically turned off the edge routers.
posted by empath at 10:19 PM on January 27, 2011

June 2009:

I will participate in the demonstrations tomorrow.  Maybe they will turn violent.  Maybe I will be one of the people who is going to get killed. ... I have to call my friends as well to say goodbye. ... I wrote these random sentences for the next generation so they know we were not just emotional and under peer pressure.  So they know that we did everything we could to create a better future for them.  So they know that our ancestors surrendered to Arabs and Mongols but did not surrender to despotism.
posted by Joe Beese at 10:22 PM on January 27, 2011 [15 favorites]

empath: i guess that's probably more likely, that they actually physically turned off the edge routers.

Actually, now that I think about it, if I were to do something like this, I wouldn't shut down the border routers. WAN links can be a huge pain (and potentially expensive) to bring back up. What I would do is either turn off IP routing on them, or perhaps shut down the port (or pull the cable) that connects the border router to the main routers that run Egypt's local networks. That could potentially explain live WAN links that don't advertise any routes - the border routers are live but aren't hooked up to anything, so they don't advertise anything.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:26 PM on January 27, 2011

Question: I'm not super familiar with BGP. If this was done by no longer advertising BGP routes and not by cutting cables, couldn't ISP's outside Egypt simply hard code the routes back in to restore service?
Sure you could staticly route to the old peers, but then just as easily you could null route everything if you were in charge of the peering routers.

In a country with limited NAPS and limited links across the boarder it's reasonably easy to knock out the links if you have access to the facilities physically or the routers logically.

Just as an FYI, the internet kill switch idea in the states is a far fetched idea by a bunch of people who don't understand political, technical or financial realities. There is no way congress or the president is going to be allowed to shut down the internet; it's an enormous technical challenge to do in any meaningful way in the states, it's politically about the surest way to get people to flip the fuck out when their smartphones stop working, and no one wants to fuck with the sweet sweet money pipe that is the internet.
posted by iamabot at 10:35 PM on January 27, 2011

The key is what the army decide. Nobody knows that. The US are making noises that essentially say they support both side as nobody knows how this pans out.

I interviewed James Wolfensohn last week and he made a point about the region:

You’ve got 105 million kids in the region, between the ages of 15 and 29 and you’ve got 120 million under 15. They need 5 million jobs a year and they’re getting between 2 and 2.5 million. That varies by country throughout the Arab region, but it means that you have a build up of frustrated young people, who are educated.

The experts I'm speaking to all agree on one point. This current unrest in several countries may be quelled, but the pressure will continue to build as the forces behind people's anger will not go away.
posted by quarsan at 10:37 PM on January 27, 2011 [6 favorites]

@Empath - you would need the help of the ISPs in Egypt. Since nothing seems to be coming out, it is safe to assume that they are unable to provide that. Currently, if you hardcoded your BGP tables, and you were directly connected to Egyptian routers, you might be able to send UDP packets one-way, but never know if anyone was listening.

In order to send traffic from a source to a destination, every ISP (actually autonomous system, but that's splitting hairs) on the AS-PATH needs to know some way of reaching the destination address. So in order to get one-way communications going, you will need to get everyone on a communication path between you and Egypt to hard-code the relevant routes. Even if you have done that, it is highly likely nobody is listening. To what address would you send your UDP packets?

You can't get a conversation going without bi-directional communication, and getting a reverse path requires an Egyptian ISP to go against government orders. No reverse path means no bi-directional communications, and even no TCP because ACKs could never arrive (never mind the impossibility of setting up the 3-way handshake in the first place). The Internet is highly robust to physical destruction, but regional chunks of it seem to be very non-resilient to autocratic governments. The Internet can be destroyed politically, even though a nuclear attack would only slow it down for a matter of minutes.
posted by pmb at 10:40 PM on January 27, 2011 [4 favorites]

Actually, now that I think about it, if I were to do something like this, I wouldn't shut down the border routers. WAN links can be a huge pain (and potentially expensive) to bring back up. What I would do is either turn off IP routing on them, or perhaps shut down the port (or pull the cable) that connects the border router to the main routers that run Egypt's local networks. That could potentially explain live WAN links that don't advertise any routes - the border routers are live but aren't hooked up to anything, so they don't advertise anything.

You dom't need to do anything, just update your route-map and filter incoming announcements. Easy. You don't change the announcement, you just filter inbound announcements or still announce the prefixes but dump them to null0 at the border routers or elsewhere... this is trivial stuff really.
posted by iamabot at 10:47 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

I wouldn't shut down the border routers. WAN links can be a huge pain (and potentially expensive) to bring back up.

When the government is facing an existential crisis, they won't give a damn about how expensive it will be to restore internet communications.

Turning them completely off is easy and foolproof.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 11:02 PM on January 27, 2011 [1 favorite]

It absolutely amazes me that it's possible to shut down even wireless networks but I guess they need towers and those can be disabled.

All you need to do is order Vodafone to help you. Which they did.

Large corporations; tyranny's favourite friend. How much did Ford make from the Nazis, again?
posted by rodgerd at 11:11 PM on January 27, 2011 [5 favorites]

Just to give a sense of how big a deal this is for Egypt, here's a map of Africa showing how Internet-connected its countries are. Egypt's at the top of the list with 3780 AS networks; the next contender is South Africa with 1702. Israel (not shown) has 3973. Internet is a big part of Egypt's infrastructure. Even assuming they're only blocking Internet at the borders & haven't shut it down entirely, it's still a very big deal for them, it will be felt throughout the country's economic system.
posted by scalefree at 11:14 PM on January 27, 2011 [3 favorites]

God, I love anonymous.
posted by empath at 11:17 PM on January 27, 2011 [19 favorites]

All you need to do is order Vodafone to help you. Which they did.

I believe that Vodafone is going to be targetted by Anon tomorrow, but I doubt they can do much to them.
posted by empath at 11:22 PM on January 27, 2011

Motherfuck. My brother, his wife, and their two- and five-year-old daughters are holed up in their apartment in Cairo today.

Word to the revolution, it's over-fucking-due, but I hope there's minimal damage to... well, everyone.
posted by stet at 11:55 PM on January 27, 2011 [14 favorites]

There was mention above of someone planning on broadcasting Ham over Icecast. If anyone out there discovers this is happening, please post it here.
posted by Jimbob at 11:56 PM on January 27, 2011

All you need to do is order Vodafone to help you. Which they did.

Large corporations; tyranny's favourite friend. How much did Ford make from the Nazis, again?

It's not like Vodafone had any choice in the matter. What else could they have done? If they had tried to resist, they would only be putting their Egyptian employees in danger.

It's quite a difference between Vodafone being forced to shut down their Egyptian network and Ford voluntarily profiting from associating with the Nazi regime and it's unfair to equivocate the two.
posted by gyc at 12:11 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

People set themselves on fire; thousands march; they are shot down; journalists are captured and tortured; one man confronts a water tank head on ... and the world ignores them. Turn off the internet and the world is alert and outraged.

This internet censorship may just save the protesters.

Ironically, the decision to shut the internet off could just have been a big blundering misunderstanding of technology:

Hosni Mubarak is 82 years old. He has been Egypt’s absolute ruler for three decades. He is America’s biggest ally in the Middle East. He has probably never really learned how to use a computer. I cannot imagine that he tweets or even fully comprehends how this most omnipresent of social networks works.
The Revolution Will Not be Tweeted?

It is ten am in Cairo now ... two hours till Prayers.

Friday is the holiest day of the Islamic week. It is also the beginning of the weekend in Egypt where Sunday is the first day of the workweek.

Mubarak has never really paraded his Islamic credentials. I wonder if he feels any sense of impending doom on his Judgment day for potentially ordering the massacre of scores of believers, most good Muslims as they emerge from praying the one obligatory group worship required by Islam on its holiest day.
posted by Surfurrus at 12:15 AM on January 28, 2011

City-to-city becomes difficult.

Not necessarily - you can go 20 kilometers with directional, high-gain antenna's - and further if you are willing to "illegally" up your wattage past the factory defaults (sub 1-watt*). You would then need a series of relays to form an "alternet". The problem is - you would have wanted to set all this up prior to this type of event happening. (Many folks in the wifi-tinkering space have been thinking about this type of scenario/challenge for along time).

* (if you are a licensed HAM, you may be able to operate legally past those defaults)
posted by jkaczor at 12:18 AM on January 28, 2011

Is regular phone out, too? Can you still get a voice-line modem? A UUCP network would still work over normal phone service.
posted by ctmf at 12:47 AM on January 28, 2011

Oops - I am a bit dated - current active long-distance Wifi record is 304km - using un-modified, commerical-off-the-shelf equipment and from what I can see, no boosting of wattage.

So - as mentioned above, something like Witness.org would be a possible group to work with to "package" this concept (if cheap-enough, some of that "off-the-shelf" radio equipment is still very expensive) and provide an alternate backbone. (Satellites can be remotely messed-with by big-government-players as well)

But - enough of the internet/armchair pontificating - my thoughts truly go out to those brave people today/tomorrow, I wish you the best; I hope you are able to change things and I hope that few/none get hurt.
posted by jkaczor at 12:52 AM on January 28, 2011

ctmf - Last I saw on twitter, regular phone service (at least calls into/out-of Egypt) is down.
posted by jkaczor at 12:53 AM on January 28, 2011

Man, talk about the Striesand Effect in action… Mubarak has sealed his doom with this action, mark my words. They've legitimized rioters into genuine protesters (because protesters organize).
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:01 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is this information valid?? Can anyone confirm?

The US is sending troops to support Mubarak???

Connecticut National Guard Detachment 2, Company I, 185th Aviation Regiment of Groton has mobilized and will deploy to the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt, to support the Multinational Force and Observers.

The unit left Connecticut Jan. 15 for Fort Benning, Ga., for further training and validation. The unit operates C-23C Sherpa aircraft and has deployed three times in the last seven years in support of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The unit will provide an on-demand aviation asset to the Multinational Force and Observers commander to support its mission of supervising the security provisions of the Egypt/ Israel Peace Treaty.

http://www.theday.com/article/20110124/NWS09/301249955/-1/nws
posted by Surfurrus at 1:02 AM on January 28, 2011

They've legitimized rioters into genuine protesters (because protesters organize).

Except... The "easy" tools used to organize with have been removed - even basic phonecalls are useful, let alone text messages, email, facebook, twitter et all.

Basically all that is left now is word-of-mouth, foot-runners and note-passing - which is workable, but is not as fast or efficient.
posted by jkaczor at 1:13 AM on January 28, 2011

I believe that Vodafone is going to be targetted by Anon tomorrow, but I doubt they can do much to them.

I dunno. Vodafone Australia demonstrated their systems aren't exactly well-run. Of course, Anonymous may start running low on volunteers as we start to see mass arrests for use of the LOIC against anti-Wikileaks targets. Funny how we don't see anyone arrested for equally illegal attacks on pro-Wikileaks infrastructure. I guess that like fucking and arresting leftists while joining the BNP, it all depends on who the police consider the real enemy.
posted by rodgerd at 1:26 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

It's not like Vodafone had any choice in the matter. What else could they have done? If they had tried to resist, they would only be putting their Egyptian employees in danger.

It's quite a difference between Vodafone being forced to shut down their Egyptian network and Ford voluntarily profiting from associating with the Nazi regime and it's unfair to equivocate the two.

That's funny, because the excuse you're offering Vodafone is exactly the one ol' Henry used to keep all the money his European division made.
posted by rodgerd at 1:28 AM on January 28, 2011

Man, talk about the Striesand Effect in action… Mubarak has sealed his doom with this action, mark my words. They've legitimized rioters into genuine protesters (because protesters organize).

What makes you think that? If the army and police are still willing to rape, to torture, to kill, the Internet being off lets them do so with no fear of repercussion, ever.

The US is sending troops to support Mubarak???

I would read that as the US sending troops to make sure that the hard right in Israel don't see this as a chance to go seize the Sinai again, amongst other catastrophic possibilities.
posted by rodgerd at 1:31 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Tony Blair, having defended destroying Iraq and being responsible for tens of thousands of deaths for the "greater good" in front of the (hopelessly compromised) Chilcott Inquiry says:

"The challenges have been the same for these countries for a long period of time. The question is how they evolve and modernise, but do so with stability. The danger is if you open up a vacuum anything can happen.

"As Hillary Clinton was saying yesterday, the important thing is to engage in this process of modernisation, and improving systems of government, but do it in a way that keeps the order and stability of the country together."

Asked if Mubarak should stay in power, Blair said: "Well I think the decisions about how this is done is incredibly difficult. President Mubarak has been in power for 30 years. There's obviously in any event going to be an evolution and a change there. The question is how does that happen in the most stable way possible.

[...]

"This is not limited to one country in the region. It's all over the region. You have got to take account of the fact that when you unleash this process of reform, unless you are going to be very, very careful about how it's done and how it's staged, then you run risks as well."

Democracy is delivered by white people with guns, over your children's dead bodies. If your brutal dictator is a friend of Britain, well, suck it up.
posted by rodgerd at 1:42 AM on January 28, 2011 [16 favorites]

long distance [..] city-to-city [..] moon bounce

Please realize that entertaining the outside world is not the number one priority for the people on the ground. This isn't the Falklands where you just need to get a call out for help. The two key communications need right now are (1) rapid dissemination of local tactical information such as police movements and roadblocks, and (2) communicating to the local populace why this is happening and why they should support the movement / join the fight.

International communication and even city-to-city communication isn't as important as widely accessible local broadcast. Two-way conversation is not as important as a sense of solidarity and knowing that you are part of a much larger struggle. That is what gives people courage and the will to prolong the fight. The way to communicate this is with Pirate FM Radio.
posted by ryanrs at 1:43 AM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

Can someone who knows more about history tell me if protests against dictatorships are becoming more frequent in the last decade or so, or if we're just hearing about more of them because word gets out via the internet before they get shut down?

Good luck, Egyptian protestors.
posted by harriet vane at 1:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Keep in mind this is a popular uprising, not guerilla warfare or an underground resistance. Very different tactics. Secrecy and trust is not important. This will be won or lost on the strength of the rebellion's propaganda and momentum.
posted by ryanrs at 1:51 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

International communication and even city-to-city communication isn't as important as widely accessible local broadcast.

Creating pressure on Obama to move away from Clinton's tut-tutting the protestors is probably pretty important at the moment. So long as the people around Mubarak think the US will keep the money and guns flowing while criticising protestors and lecturing that "violence is not the answer", I imagine they'll feel free to use the tactics of torture and murder that have kept them in power for the last 30 years.
posted by rodgerd at 1:51 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

FFS, this isn't about the US. You really think those rock-throwing kids or the dictator commanding a brutal army give a shit what Clinton or Obama say? No, they don't. The situation on the ground is more immediate than that.
posted by ryanrs at 2:14 AM on January 28, 2011 [10 favorites]

What I'm saying is, Hillary Clinton is not what's giving these people the courage to fight. They are fighting for their own selves and their own future, and they are stronger for it.
posted by ryanrs at 2:21 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

ryanrs: Who else but the US could put the squeeze on Mubarak and tell him to call off his goons?
posted by Surfurrus at 2:22 AM on January 28, 2011

btw, don't romanticize a massacre; this isn't reality tv
posted by Surfurrus at 2:23 AM on January 28, 2011

The people pouring over the gates of his presidential palace. Nobody has ever evacuated their family because the US threatened trade sanctions.
posted by ryanrs at 2:24 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Actually ...

(repost)

It makes one wonder where the US schemers are ... we have always been so good at 'secretly removing' our pet dictators. Remember how Marcos was airlifted out of the EDSA revolution? And how we gave the Shah of Iran asylum ? How we downplayed Pinochet's human rights violations?

Maybe Egypt just needs the US to bring our man Mubarak home to the US and to a life of million dollar book deals.

Bring on the helicopters.
posted by Surfurrus at 2:37 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I believe that Vodafone is going to be targetted by Anon tomorrow, but I doubt they can do much to them.

The idea that an internet-based movement could have any noticeable effect on an ISP displays the radical naivete of most internet-based movements. I mean, even if Anonymous were partially successful, they cease to be effective as soon as they win. Way to bite the hand that feeds you, guys.

At best, the internet only grants an illusion of freedom. Communication on the internet is, always has been, and as far as I can tell always will be, at the sufferance of the government, depending as it does on highly specialized and concentrated infrastructure.
posted by valkyryn at 2:48 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Earlier today on PBS.

Jim Lehrer: Has the time come for president Mubarak of Egypt to go... to stand aside?

Joe Biden: No. I think the time has come for President Mubarak to begin to move in the direction that to be more responsive to some of the needs of people out there.

Video and Transcript.
posted by ryanrs at 2:53 AM on January 28, 2011

Does anyone know if Cairo Airport is affected at all?
posted by divabat at 2:54 AM on January 28, 2011

Someone tweeted earlier that foreign correspondents were being turned back at airport - no confirmation on that.
posted by Surfurrus at 3:16 AM on January 28, 2011

The bloodier this gets the more radicalized the outcome. The only option is for Mubarak and others to step down.
posted by humanfont at 3:35 AM on January 28, 2011

The Guardian's Middle East expert Brian Whitaker will be online at 1pm (GMT) for a live web chat on the unrest in the region...
posted by Auden at 3:36 AM on January 28, 2011

AlArabiya crew has been beaten; BBC reporter beaten; El Baradei has been arrested; tear gas and rubber bullets met the people leaving prayers at the mosques. Still they march on.
http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/
posted by Surfurrus at 3:49 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Ah, this sucks, I forgot that arabist.net is in Egypt. Hopefully that crew is doing what they need to do and I look forward to them coming back online.
posted by NoMich at 4:22 AM on January 28, 2011

I have to say, it's absolutely fascinating to hear the discussion of new technology (BGP, wifi ranges) and old (ham radio) in this thread.

As soon as light breaks here I'm going to set up my ham radio rig to see if I can talk to anyone there (or hear anything for that matter) on the HF bands.
posted by deadmessenger at 4:23 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

HOPEFUL sign:
tweet: policemen take off their uniforms and join protesters #Jan25 [via Al-Arabiya]
posted by Surfurrus at 4:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

The only option is for Mubarak and others to step down.

Really? Why's that? Mubarak seems to have decent control over both the police and the army, unlike Ben Ali.

At this point I'm seeing no credible evidence that suggests this is going to work out one way or the other. We've got massive civil unrest, true, but that doesn't actually require any particular outcome.
posted by valkyryn at 4:41 AM on January 28, 2011

You guys are all asleep, right?
posted by GeckoDundee at 4:52 AM on January 28, 2011

Sorry, I meant,

Al Jazeera is covering it.

The Daily News is worth a look.

Guardian is doing a liveblog thing too.
posted by GeckoDundee at 4:58 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Please realize that entertaining the outside world is not the number one priority for the people on the ground.... he two key communications need right now are (1) rapid dissemination of local tactical information such as police movements and roadblocks, and (2) communicating to the local populace why this is happening and why they should support the movement / join the fight.

Interesting article here about leaflets being distributed in Cairo with this information (well, (2) anyway).

Tragic to see this. I've got photos of central Cairo looking like some of those Guardian pics; but instead of protestors it was filled with football fans celebrating a famous last-minute victory over Algeria. I wonder how many of the people I met that night are protesting. Good luck to them.
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:06 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Guardian going through the Egyptian Wikileaks cables.

Guardian liveblog: "Jack Shenker in Cairo reports on signs that the police are siding with the protesters. He saw a senior police officer discard a teargas canister to signal to protesters that he was on their side."
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:10 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

The live stream from Al Jazeera is great.
posted by NoMich at 5:17 AM on January 28, 2011

The live stream from Al Jazeera is great.

Yes! - those films of thousands praying in the street -- chicken skin moment!
posted by Surfurrus at 5:20 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

That Al Jazeera stream is fantastic. I'm amazed at the, well, organized quality to the chaos. The protesters are all so intent and straightforward - there's violence, but it seems so focused. I hope it can be maintained.
posted by Mizu at 5:26 AM on January 28, 2011

I just saw the protestors push back on the bridge... this is incredible. They threw a molotov cocktail at the riot police who are firing back with rubber coated bullets and teargas.
posted by notion at 5:37 AM on January 28, 2011

With the police going after protesters in full view of Al Jazeera's headquarters, you've got to wonder what else they're doing out of sight of the cameras. Scary.
posted by orme at 5:38 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

What happens if Iraq rises up next?
posted by empath at 5:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is it just me, or do there not seem to be as many people in the streets as one would expect?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 5:42 AM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera -- better than any American news.
posted by empath at 5:43 AM on January 28, 2011

Is it just me, or do there not seem to be as many people in the streets as one would expect?

I guess it depends on where you are looking. They're trying to join up, but the police are stopping them.
posted by empath at 5:43 AM on January 28, 2011

In one area of Alexandria, the riot police have joined the protestors, and the injured riot police were carried to help by the protestors.
posted by notion at 5:43 AM on January 28, 2011

In one area of Alexandria, the riot police have joined the protestors, and the injured riot police were carried to help by the protestors.

From the Guardian Liveblog (1:12pm and 1:33pm):

Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch: We are in East Alexandria. Immediately after prayer, the people came out of mosque with banners and started marching, shouting 'we are peaceful, we are peaceful'. Security arrived and immediately began shooting teargas and rubber bullets at peaceful protesters, about 600. Then one-hour rock throwing clash, but police didn't advance more than one block and kept being pushed back. Then a massive column of protesters came from the other direction and blocked in police, holding up their hands and shouting we are peaceful. Right now police is held up in the yard of mosque and protesters all around, police can't move. They repeatedly ran out of teargas and begged protesters to stop, protesters telling them to join them.

(later) The police have now given up fighting the protesters. The police and protesters are now talking, with protesters bringing water and vinegar (for teargas) to the police. Afternoon prayer has just been called and hundreds are praying in front of the mosque in east Alexandria.

posted by memebake at 5:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [13 favorites]

Yeah that Al Jazeera feed is amazing... Cairo streets empty of cars! Who would have thought!
posted by Jimbob at 5:48 AM on January 28, 2011

Damn. The people in Cairo were totally corralled and pushed into disarray, breathing tear gas, and it's not 10 minutes later and they're all streaming back.
posted by Mizu at 5:51 AM on January 28, 2011

I hear much about police, but not of soldiers. What is the military doing right now?
posted by ryanrs at 5:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Basically all that is left now is word-of-mouth, foot-runners and note-passing - which is workable, but is not as fast or efficient.

Do not underestimate the power of momentum.

What makes you think that? If the army and police are still willing to rape, to torture, to kill, the Internet being off lets them do so with no fear of repercussion, ever.

The army and police are comprised of citizens. The amount of murder and mayhem people are willing to do to each other depends intrinsically on how much they feel they'll get away with. If the army and police start to believe the barricades are falling, they'll toss their uniforms into the fire and grab their pitchforks and it's over.

The only way for this to end is for Mubarak to step down and announce elections.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:55 AM on January 28, 2011

Probably waiting to see if the police can hold it.
posted by empath at 5:56 AM on January 28, 2011

The people have cars, too.... why can't they use them? I realize nobody wants to fuck up their ride, but it's a revolution, man...
posted by empath at 5:58 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

One of the correspondents a while back said that the part of the momentum is due to people not being able to contact each other on phone or online, so they go outside and end up involving themselves even more than they otherwise would have. I wonder how true that is?
posted by Mizu at 5:58 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

The only way for this to end is for Mubarak to step down and announce elections.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:55 AM on January 28 [+] [!]

eponysterical?
posted by Think_Long at 5:59 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Holy fuck have you seen what's going on in Alexandria?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:01 AM on January 28, 2011

Technically and depending on what resources are on the ground and how involved the army gets there are lots of avenues left for local communication. Simple walkie-talkies work fine unless they're being jammed but of course they're limited range and trivial to jam. You could also bootstrap some kind of mesh network, BATMAN seems to be the current front-runner and you ought to be able to repurpose many generic customer wifi routers. Then there's the great work being done to build a fully open-sourced GSM system, OpenBSC, OpenBTS etc have been used at the last two CCCs IIRC but they require specialized hardware to function at all. Maybe the next time this happens some forward-thinking opposition party will slap a few gsm nano cells and satellite uplinks onto the back of pickup trucks.
posted by Skorgu at 6:03 AM on January 28, 2011

I agree, empath... I hope they mass their vehicles to block in the riot vans.
posted by notion at 6:04 AM on January 28, 2011

"ILLEGITIMATE. ILLEGITIMATE."

Wow.
posted by notion at 6:05 AM on January 28, 2011

The only right thing for the US to do is stay the fuck out of the way. Not interfering in other countries affairs means just that - not interfering and not taking sides. Obviously, it's a despicable crime that we've been supporting dictators like Mubarack, and as so often, we reap what we sow. But the answer is not to now start to take sides in civil wars "but on the right side" - imposing our conception of "right" is still an imposition, and liable to backfire... how did our support of the "noble fighters of Afghanistan" work out? We have no idea about what forces may be unleashed, and interfering on either side is rarely appreciated by the societies affected. Much as I despise Bush, I would not appreciate Russia or China trying to restore the stolen election to Gore. So stay the fuck out. Yes, this side or that side in the conflict may try to get us involved, but we'd be wise to resist such temptations. The only exceptions are in cases of war and external invasions - WWII and aftermath, Kuwait etc. (even though the latter was tainted by prior interfering). Societies must resolve such things on their own, even sometimes at terrible cost - it would not have been good if f.ex. Britain took sides in our Civil War *as the South wanted* (again, it's wise not to let yourself be drawn into such conflicts); it would have been a disaster even if Britain supported the "good side" - the North - can you imagine the bitterness and *lack of feeling of resolution* if the South could argue that the result of the Civil War was externally imposed by outside powers? It would mean the war could flare up again, with the South feeling they could prevail without outside support for the North. It's a recipe for decades of instability... as in fact we've seen historically all over the world.

Again, we should resist the very instinct to interfere, and interfering on the side of the "good" (or what we imagine as such) is still interfering. We are not the arbiter of right and wrong, World Cop, and nobody appointed us judge jury and executioner. Let other countries decide their own fates, without the "blessing" of our instinct to interfere. Are we lacking for worthy targets for our moral energies here at home? The sooner we break with our addiction to meddling in other countries internal affairs, the better.
posted by VikingSword at 6:09 AM on January 28, 2011 [25 favorites]

The sooner we break with our addiction to meddling in other countries internal affairs, the better.

I follow a certain formally vocal but now missing right-wing Metafilter member on Twitter. Because he's a good bloke, really. But he's re tweeting a lot of stuff, and it has shocked me how the patriotic, "Freedom-loving" supporters of the "World's Greatest Democracy" are so fearful and anxious about people in other countries trying to achieve what they have. Oh noes the Moslem Brotherhood! Oh noes, what if Egypt stops being friendly with Israel?!

Give me a fucking break. Staying out of it is exactly the right thing to do. For once.
posted by Jimbob at 6:17 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor" Desmond Tutu
posted by Surfurrus at 6:21 AM on January 28, 2011 [31 favorites]

VikingSword has it exactly right.
posted by empath at 6:22 AM on January 28, 2011

This should be your "tear down this wall!" moment.

The world is waiting.
posted by GeckoDundee at 6:23 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

This should be your "tear down this wall!" moment.

All we have to do to make 'the wall' fall is to stop holding it up.
posted by empath at 6:29 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

I would read that as the US sending troops to make sure that the hard right in Israel don't see this as a chance to go seize the Sinai again

Now, that would be stupid. Really, really, really stupid.

I wouldn't put it past them, then...
posted by Skeptic at 6:30 AM on January 28, 2011

From The Guardian:

Currently, we're being told that large numbers of plainsclothes police officers and security officers are going through the streets covering parked cars with gasoline. The activists expect that the govt plans to light all the cars on fire, claim that the protesters were burning everything, and use that as a pretext to use severe violence to repress the protests, and eliminating all means for the people to relay the truth out of the country.

They are being told by sources within the regime that very large groups of govt-organized thugs, calling themselves "ikhwan al-Haq" [a group never heard of, roughly translated as "brotherhood of truth"], are going to be in the streets with knives, swords, etc..., attacking and killing protesters in the streets tomorrow [Friday]; they don't know whether this may be deliberately and falsely leaked to discourage demonstrators; but they do see evidence that these groups are being organized. they may also claim that these violent groups are the demonstrators as a pretext to use violence on the real demonstrators.

It worked for the TPS at the G20.
posted by tybeet at 6:31 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I would just read it as "let's have a presence here to make sure no one gets any crazy ideas here about crossing borders."
posted by proj at 6:32 AM on January 28, 2011

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor" Desmond Tutu

The US has to be extremely careful. Both the country and the people in the country can only agree with the objectives of the revolution without supporting outright (which at best would be considered opportunism and at worst backfire if the revolution fails). It's not our country, so we can't legitimize what basically amounts to a civil war right now. The easiest right thing to do would be to say nothing. This doesn't mean we're neutral though. The US better be playing up all the diplomatic channels it can to prevent not only bloodshed but to push Egypt to being a more just country to both their citizens and neighbors (yes, I said "should"). We can say things like, "The United States agrees that the protesters have legitimate grievences with the government of Egypt" because that sides things on an ideological as opposed to factional vein. We also don't want to legitimize what might be a governmental form that for all intents and purposes might be just as bad or worse than the previous one. Thus we can offer support for the broad objectives of the revolution, but we don't support factions that might turn out to be jackals.

Easiest thing is for us to say nothing. Put pressure on where we can. Express support for the people of Egypt.

And for the love of God, don't make this about us.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 6:32 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

VikingSword: Most of the weapons they are using to crush this uprising are made in the United States and given to the Egyptian government by ours. We pay Mubarak and his henchmen 1.2 billion dollars every year to keep popular movements repressed for our benefit. It's far too late to not take sides.

Obama himself should address the Egyptian people, and let them know that the Mubarak Regime will no longer receive American dollars and weapons. That's the right thing do to, and our government should do it now.
posted by notion at 6:32 AM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

this isn't about the US

it does involve the US tho and obama/biden/clinton have leverage by virtue of holding some of the purse strings: "Your money, in other words, is keeping Mubarak in power. That government is now doing this to its people."
posted by kliuless at 6:33 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Easiest thing is for us to say nothing. Put pressure on where we can. Express support for the people of Egypt.

By the way, I'm talking about the official US governmental response. All citizens of the US, go to town and support whichever faction you believe is right with all your heart.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 6:34 AM on January 28, 2011

And for the love of God, don't make this about us.

I'm afraid that boat left a long, long time ago. "We" (US as much as Europe) have been propping up truly despicable regimes in the area for decades, nominally to support "stability". Now the chicken are coming home to roost.

The funny thing (if you can call it "funny") is that:

a) despite this fools' bargain the area has been consistently among the least stable in the world;
b) at least since Iran's Islamic Revolution (or even the fall of Egypt's former monarchy!) we've known what the end result of this tactic is.

Of course, the reason for this is that, behind the alibi of "stability", hide solid business links between our oligarchs and theirs...
posted by Skeptic at 6:42 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Obama himself should address the Egyptian people, and let them know that the Mubarak Regime will no longer receive American dollars and weapons. That's the right thing do to, and our government should do it now.

No, it isn't. Because 1) that won't really change the fact that they've already got all the weapons they need to make this thing work, and 2) it would call explicit attention to that fact.

Let it be. And if there is a change in government, we can walk right back and work with the new guys. Yes, we have relations with the existing government. But this is an internal problem, and we need to let the Egyptians sort this one out themselves, especially if we want to be able to do business with whatever government is in existence next week.
posted by valkyryn at 6:45 AM on January 28, 2011

I can't believe that Obama wants to be on the wrong side of history here. Everyone knows Mubarak should go down. They have to be trying to figure out a way to make that happen with the minimum of bloodshed.
posted by empath at 6:46 AM on January 28, 2011

>I would read that as the US sending troops to make sure that the hard right in Israel don't see
>this as a chance to go seize the Sinai again

Before we twist history around too much let's remember that Israel only took the Sinai after a war was waged against them - they used it as a physical buffer against the people who waged war against them so they would not be invaded again.

And then some years later, in the interests of peace - they gave it back. Which is why Israel and Egypt have not been mortal enemies since the 70's.
posted by Poet_Lariat at 6:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I have a terrible fear that I know what's going to happen: tomorrow the security forces are going to be shooting live ammunition. There's going to be an appalling blood bath; at least a thousand dead.

I have a terrible fear that is going to happen, and also a terrible fear that the repercussions for Egypt will be as bad as, oh...what China faced after the Tiananmen Square massacre. Doesn't most of the world kind of act like that never happened?
posted by marxchivist at 6:49 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Your money... is keeping Mubarak in power.

Literally.

July 2007:

The Bush administration is expected to announce a massive series of arms deals in the Middle East tomorrow that are being seen as part of a diplomatic offensive against the growing influence of Iran in the volatile region. ... Egypt too will get a new 10-year deal, worth an estimated $13 billion.

The guns killing the protesters were Made in USA.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:50 AM on January 28, 2011

Wikileaks releases Egyptian cables
posted by empath at 6:51 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

empath: "I can't believe that Obama wants to be on the wrong side of history here. Everyone knows Mubarak should go down. They have to be trying to figure out a way to make that happen with the minimum of bloodshed"

I imagine this is a "always go with the winner" move, which is a bad sign for the protesters. We know what we've sold and given Egypt, we probably know what Mubarak is willing to do with those weapons to stay in power. The CIA has probably told him that Mubarak isn't going anywhere so he's sucking up beforehand. Disgusting and typical. Also a major problem if the intel turns out to be wrong - not only are all those tear gas canisters labeled "Made in the USA", but the President has given Mubarak vocal support.

And I doubt the Egyptian people will forget this. If they ever do throw off their shackles, we'll have another country that justifiably hates us.
posted by charred husk at 6:57 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

The CIA has probably told him that Mubarak isn't going anywhere so he's sucking up beforehand. Disgusting and typical. Also a major problem if the intel turns out to be wrong - not only are all those tear gas canisters labeled "Made in the USA", but the President has given Mubarak vocal support.

He has?
posted by empath at 6:59 AM on January 28, 2011

No, it isn't. Because 1) that won't really change the fact that they've already got all the weapons they need to make this thing work, and 2) it would call explicit attention to that fact.

Who doesn't know the US has been propping up the Mubarak Regime for the last 30 years?! Does putting our collective heads in the sand change reality? Are you more concerned about the paper thin facade of American impartiality than you are about the rights of the Egyptian people?

Sorry... I just can't wrap my head around this desire to pretend like we can just walk away now. Spending thirty billion to prop up a murderous dictatorship and then acting like we've got some dignity to save by pretending that it never happend is just insane. Immoral and insane.
posted by notion at 7:00 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I have a terrible fear that is going to happen, and also a terrible fear that the repercussions for Egypt will be as bad as, oh...what China faced after the Tiananmen Square massacre. Doesn't most of the world kind of act like that never happened?

True. But Egypt is not China. I think that that fear is definitely there, but right now it looks like hope, and humanity might be able to crush back oppression and the evil that slaying protesters brings. At least I hope so anyway. Down with tyranny!
posted by IvoShandor at 7:01 AM on January 28, 2011

Is there a way to see the Al-jazeera stream on a Mac? It's calling for Real Player, which I can't get to work.
posted by sugarfish at 7:01 AM on January 28, 2011

empath: "He has?"

Sorry, I consider "Mubarak is legitimate and not going anywhere" as taking a side in this. Maybe "vocal support" is too strong a word.
posted by charred husk at 7:02 AM on January 28, 2011

Well, let me say, first of all, that Egypt's been an ally of
ours on a lot of critical issues. They made peace with
Israel. President Mubarak has been very helpful on a range of tough
issues in the Middle East. But I've always said to him that making
sure that they're moving forward on reform -- political reform,
economic reform -- is absolutely critical to the long-term well-being
of Egypt.

And you can see these pent-up frustrations that are being displayed on
the streets. My main hope right now is that violence is not the answer
in solving these problems in Egypt, so the government has to be
careful about not resorting to violence, and the people on the streets
have to be careful about not resorting to violence.

And I think that it is very important that people have mechanisms in
order to express legitimate grievances. As I said in my State of the
Union speech, there are certain core values that we believe in as
Americans that we believe are universal -- freedom of speech, freedom
of expression, people being able to use social networking or any other
mechanisms to communicate with each other and express their
concerns. And that, I think, is -- is no less true in the Arab world
that it is here in the United States.

I think that's pretty neutral, honestly.

Remember what he said in Egypt two years ago:

I know -- I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But 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. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights. And that is why we will support them everywhere. (Applause.)
Now, there is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: Governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments -- provided they govern with respect for all their people.
This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they're out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. (Applause.) So no matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who would hold power: You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

Those are not the words of a man who wants to support Mubarak to the bitter end. He's in a tough spot, surely, but I honestly don't think whatever happens in Egypt will be necessarily be anti-American because of anything he's said.
posted by empath at 7:02 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Is there a way to see the Al-jazeera stream on a Mac? It's calling for Real Player, which I can't get to work.

I'm not using real player -- update flash, maybe?
posted by empath at 7:03 AM on January 28, 2011

Regarding amateur radio, and Earth-Moon bounce aside, hopefully the longest serving deployed squadron in the U.S. Air Force won't be doing the location work for the Egyptian government: the 763rd Expeditionary Reconnaissance Squadron and the Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joint (large photo). I was browsing this yesterday, so apologies for the tangent.
posted by HLD at 7:03 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

sugarfish, I'm watching this on my mac - it prompts me to install real player but the actual stream is flash.
posted by Mizu at 7:04 AM on January 28, 2011

Before we twist history around too much let's remember that Israel only took the Sinai after a war was waged against them - they used it as a physical buffer against the people who waged war against them so they would not be invaded again.

Speaking of twisting history, you somehow forget that Israel (with France and Britain) had already attempted to seize the Sinai and the Suez canal once before that.

In that area of the world (as in many others), finding a "legitimate" motive for territorial expansion is just a matter of searching long enough in the archives. So, better stay away from that, if you don't mind...
posted by Skeptic at 7:07 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Amazing.

The Army looks like it's joining the protestors in Cairo???
posted by empath at 7:08 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

The military, or at least a military armored vehicle, has just arrived in Cairo on the Al Jazeera feed. The protestors are cheering them, suggesting that they believe the Army may be taking their side.
posted by condour75 at 7:09 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Thanks, guys. It's working now.
posted by sugarfish at 7:10 AM on January 28, 2011

ElBaradei Under House Arrest: Egyptian security officials said Nobel Peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei is under house arrest, as tens of thousands of Egyptian antigovernment protesters clashed with police in Cairo.
posted by kliuless at 7:11 AM on January 28, 2011

1509 GMT: Al Arabiya claims that Syrian authorities have suspended all Internet services.
posted by empath at 7:11 AM on January 28, 2011

Wow, wow, wow ... I'm watching that too, empath!
posted by Surfurrus at 7:12 AM on January 28, 2011

The Al Jazeera feed just showed an army armored vehicle surrounded by protesters near a Hilton hotel in Cairo (I think), and there was clearly solidarity between the soldiers and the protesters. The protesters were jumping on the vehicle and cheering, and the soldiers were passive, occasionally waving at the crowd. The Al Jazeera announcer stated that the crowd had earlier been shouting, "Where is the army? Bring in the army to save us!" or something to that effect.

No idea if this indicates a wider movement toward unity between the army and the protesters, but if so, I think Mubarak better think of announcing free elections real soon.
posted by Marla Singer at 7:15 AM on January 28, 2011

If Mubarak falls, plenty of other Arab autocrats will be heading for the exits next. Now the question is whether this is going to be the Arab world's 1989 or 1848.
posted by Skeptic at 7:15 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Way behind on this thread, but I think it's bad fucking ass that people are throwing the tear gas canisters back and/or dumping water on them.
posted by NoMich at 7:15 AM on January 28, 2011

"This is an indication of a barbaric regime," Mr. ElBaradei said. "They are doomed."

He added: "By doing this they are insuring their destruction is at hand, I have been calling for a peaceful transition now, I think this opportunity is closing."
posted by empath at 7:15 AM on January 28, 2011

I can imagine that Iran is going to erupt again if Mubarak goes down. They are showing that it can be done.

I hope they know the American people, at least support them, even if our government doesn't.
posted by empath at 7:17 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

One thing I'm noticing, with the Al-Jazeera feed and with the video from yesterday with the "Tiannemen Square" moment -- it looks like the protesters are overwhelmingly male. Is this common?
posted by sugarfish at 7:17 AM on January 28, 2011

How firm is Mubarak's hold on the army? On Al Jazeera right now they're talking about the possibility of the army intervening on behalf of the people against the government police forces.
posted by codacorolla at 7:17 AM on January 28, 2011

How firm is Mubarak's hold on the army?

I imagine that the Army, being closely tied to and dependent on the US, isn't particularly tied to Mubarak. He's not the leader of a charismatic cult of personality. If they are hearing from the Americans that we support ElBaradei, then they'll probably switch sides.
posted by empath at 7:19 AM on January 28, 2011

empath: "Those are not the words of a man who wants to support Mubarak to the bitter end. He's in a tough spot, surely, but I honestly don't think whatever happens in Egypt will be necessarily be anti-American because of anything he's said."

I guess I'm conflating Obama's words with the words of some the people in his administration (Biden, Clinton etc). Words aside, I think the weapons will do more than enough talking for them even if it isn't something they would want to say.
posted by charred husk at 7:21 AM on January 28, 2011

One thing I'm noticing, with the Al-Jazeera feed and with the video from yesterday with the "Tiannemen Square" moment -- it looks like the protesters are overwhelmingly male. Is this common? sugarfish

Actually, most of the earlier shots showed many women - of all ages. In fact I saw a link on twitter that talked about how much they are involved in the organizing of the protest. (will look for it)
posted by Surfurrus at 7:21 AM on January 28, 2011

The US largely supports the Army and not the police. And I think the wikileaks showing that we were complaining about police brutality will speak well of our intentions.
posted by empath at 7:22 AM on January 28, 2011

And if the army comes in a saves the day I'll just shut the fuck up and bow out.
posted by charred husk at 7:22 AM on January 28, 2011

holy shit, they just set a cop on fire.
posted by empath at 7:23 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

And at least a few officers might look at the number of protesters and decide to not start a massacre.
posted by vrakatar at 7:24 AM on January 28, 2011

Twitter search, sugarfish

http://twitter.com/#!/search/women%20Egypt

Slate story
http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/women-are-substantial-part-egyptian-protests
posted by Surfurrus at 7:24 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

One thing I'm noticing, with the Al-Jazeera feed and with the video from yesterday with the "Tiannemen Square" moment -- it looks like the protesters are overwhelmingly male. Is this common?

The earlier protests seem to have had a lot more women. As it gets more violent, the women and old men are leaving and it's just young men. Which is pretty common, I think. As I was watching the hotel coverage a few minutes ago I noticed quite a few women sitting around. Then the tear gas cannisters started coming in, and the last video I saw was all men.
posted by Dojie at 7:24 AM on January 28, 2011

There's much movement on the Twitter for people to start contributing to the Tor cloud. While I like Tor, and have nothing against it; with the BGP routes down...the cloud isn't going to do any good, is it?
posted by dejah420 at 7:25 AM on January 28, 2011

I just heard a reporter on NPR who'd been on the scene earlier -- she said there were people driving around in cars picking up those who appeared to be struggling under the effects of tear gas, and giving them a chance to pull themselves together. While she was recovering from a tear gas attack she'd been picked up by just such a young man, who told her that his lungs weren't strong enough to withstand tear gas himself, so he was contributing by picking up stranded protesters.
posted by crackingdes at 7:26 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

1520 GMT: Al Jazeera and AFP are reporting that protestors have set Alexandria City Hall on fire.
posted by empath at 7:26 AM on January 28, 2011

Re Obama and Mubarak: Guardian has Wikileaks cables, says 'show close relationship' of the two.
posted by Infinite Jest at 7:27 AM on January 28, 2011

holy shit, they just set a cop on fire.

Just the top of the vehicle, dude dropped a Molotov or gas bomb or something right on it.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:27 AM on January 28, 2011

from msn: "Reuters and Al-Jazeera reported that the police had abandoned central areas of Suez, after they were unable to disperse the protesters. At least eight police trucks were left behind, Reuters said."
posted by vrakatar at 7:28 AM on January 28, 2011

Curfew declared for 6pm (in half an hour)? What does that even mean? How will they enforce such a thing?
posted by Mizu at 7:29 AM on January 28, 2011

How will they enforce such a thing?

With bullets, mainly.
posted by Skeptic at 7:30 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Guardian says Al Jazeera says protestors in control of most streets in Alexandria. (It's not a big town; but still....)
posted by Infinite Jest at 7:30 AM on January 28, 2011

So AlJazeera is now in the police zone. Will they be able to stay on air??
posted by Surfurrus at 7:31 AM on January 28, 2011

Burhanistan On one hand I'm happy that I'm not the only one to have immediately had that reaction. On the other hand...
posted by Skeptic at 7:31 AM on January 28, 2011

Al jazeera is about to be shut down.
posted by empath at 7:32 AM on January 28, 2011

Maghrib prayer.

Security forces about to shut down Al Jazeera?
posted by NoMich at 7:32 AM on January 28, 2011

State security entering the building where Al Jazeera and other media is broadcasting from. Directly outside protesters stopping for prayer, holy shit.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:32 AM on January 28, 2011

State Security is in Al-Jazeera's building in Cairo.
posted by sugarfish at 7:32 AM on January 28, 2011

shit
posted by Surfurrus at 7:32 AM on January 28, 2011

It was... guys, it was a hypothetical question, mostly because I didn't want to read the answer.
Would that they suddenly find the country has run out of bullets.
posted by Mizu at 7:32 AM on January 28, 2011

Let my people tweet!
posted by fatllama at 7:34 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

It sounds like the security forces were chasing some protesters into the hotel. That's probably the only reason they entered the hotel.

I am, of course, amazed that the government hasn't yet shut down this Al Jazeera operation.
posted by NoMich at 7:39 AM on January 28, 2011

State security entering the building where Al Jazeera and other media is broadcasting from. Directly outside protesters stopping for prayer, holy shit.

Protesters are reportedly in the building now as well, and they clearly outnumber the few dozen riot police Al Jazeera showed on the bridge. Things are calm for prayer now (which is surreal), but it looks as though protesters could take the bridge, and potentially the Cairo Hilton where Al Jazeera is, when things pick up again.
posted by Marla Singer at 7:39 AM on January 28, 2011

July 30, 2009 cable from Cairo Embassy, classified Secret:

NDP insider and former minister Dr. Ali El Deen Hilal Dessouki dismissed public and media speculation about succession. He said Egyptian military and security services would ensure a smooth transfer of power, even to a civilian.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:40 AM on January 28, 2011

I am, of course, amazed that the government hasn't yet shut down this Al Jazeera operation.

I'm sure they would if they could, but Al Jazeera probably has a satellite uplink on the roof.
posted by Marla Singer at 7:41 AM on January 28, 2011

They would close Al Jazeera if they could read one of the many emails from their embassys and agents warning them to do so. I believe delivery is pending for those emails, for some reason.
posted by CautionToTheWind at 7:43 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

How long does evening prayer last? It seems to have calmed things down on both sides at the moment.
posted by codacorolla at 7:43 AM on January 28, 2011

September 23, 2007 cable from Cairo Embassy, classified Confidential:

At the end of the day, and the end of their reigns, Sadat faced and Mubarak faces similar situations. But Mubarak seems to have managed the dilemma better in at least one key area: he has systematically and "legally" eliminated virtually all political opposition, leaving only the MB standing, having foresworn violence and politically emasculated. Mubarak's internal security apparatus, an estimated 1.4 million strong, is at least twice the size it was under Sadat. Its ubiquitous presence and monopoly of the legitimate use of armed power makes any kind of violent change of leader unlikely.

You've got to love the use of "legitmate" there.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

FWIW, I read the "let my people tweet" statement as dark, wry humor, and got a much-needed laugh out of it in a time of stress. You can read it as flippant or dismissive, but I didn't take it that way.
posted by Marla Singer at 7:48 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Al Jazeera appears to have been shut down.
posted by RedEmma at 7:50 AM on January 28, 2011

Shit, the police are on their way to the Al Jazeera offices now. Shit.
posted by NoMich at 7:50 AM on January 28, 2011

Guardian: Egyptian state TV says Mubarak has asked the army to take charge of security alongside the police. Looks like that is how he intends to impose the curfew, due to start in about 15 minutes.
posted by Infinite Jest at 7:51 AM on January 28, 2011

I hope it isn't indicating what I'm thinking, but that police line looks awfully like it is ready for a Roman legion locked push and the cameras are just being turned off before the 1800 curfew.
posted by jaduncan at 7:52 AM on January 28, 2011

Al-Jazeera had to move their cameras away from the action. Disgusting. The Al-Jazeera reporter in Cairo must be fucking terrified, but you can't tell from his voice.
posted by sugarfish at 7:53 AM on January 28, 2011

That's why you turn off the cameras. No witnesses to the atrocities that are coming.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 7:54 AM on January 28, 2011

Disgusting on the part of the police, I mean, not Al-Jazeera.
posted by sugarfish at 7:54 AM on January 28, 2011

Last post from AJ liveblog:

"5:50 pm - Al Jazeera's Ayman Mohyeldin is watching protesters gathered on the street outside our bureau, chanting that they want to live in "dignity and peace." Meanwhile, we hear police are approaching the front door of our office."
posted by Think_Long at 7:54 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Al Jazeera appears to have been shut down.

The reported for the English channel are still on the air, though they expect police to arrive at their room at any time.

http://www.livestation.com/channels/3-al_jazeera_english
posted by aught at 7:54 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I hope AJ point that camera down again if they hear screams.
posted by jaduncan at 7:55 AM on January 28, 2011

There's the army again.
posted by empath at 7:56 AM on January 28, 2011

Great. APCs.
posted by jaduncan at 7:56 AM on January 28, 2011

Main anchor woman really needs to stop talking over the dude in Cairo. Just let the sounds speak for themselves...
posted by Mizu at 7:57 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Army tanks just rolled by on the highway near the AJ English office on the live feed.
posted by codacorolla at 7:57 AM on January 28, 2011

The army has now been ordered by Mubarak to move in and provide back-up to the police forces in enforcing the curfew.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 7:58 AM on January 28, 2011

Army vehicles are all over now, being deployed to help police enforce the curfew when it goes into effect. But how cooperative will they be, I wonder?
posted by Marla Singer at 7:59 AM on January 28, 2011

I'm not convined those columns of light tanks and troop carrying trucks are there to support the protesters.
posted by vbfg at 8:00 AM on January 28, 2011

Army personnel vehicle (i.e. a big truck) also rolled and attacked with molotov cocktails.
posted by Marla Singer at 8:01 AM on January 28, 2011

Why is everyone saying that the revolution will spread to Iran? Iran is MUCH more stable than most all other middle eastern countries, and few people in Iran would want to overthrow the theocracy, because for all of the evils the theocracy commits, it at least makes sure that the US and other foreign powers stay the hell out of Iran. Most people in Iran don't want a revolution. They already had one, and it completed its objectives.
posted by Philipschall at 8:01 AM on January 28, 2011

Don't fault the ALJazeera reporters for anything ... they are being challenged, hassled and threatened. You can hear the police in the background. And they are hanging in there. Damn, this is unbelivable.
posted by Surfurrus at 8:02 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Another army armored vehicle in peaceful solidarity with protesters now. A protester cheering on top, and a soldier hanging out the door and waving. Yes!
posted by Marla Singer at 8:04 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

September 23, 2008 cable from Cairo Embassy, classified Secret:

A senior Cairo University political science professor... described the mid-level officer corps as generally disgruntled, and said that one can hear mid-level officers at MOD clubs around Cairo openly expressing disdain for [Defense Minister] Tantawi. These officers refer to Tantawi as "Mubarak's poodle," he said, and complain that "this incompetent Defense Minister" who reached his position only because of unwavering loyalty to Mubarak is "running the military into the ground." He opined that a culture of blind obedience pervades the MOD where the sole criteria for promotion is loyalty, and that the MOD leadership does not hesitate to fire officers it perceives as being "too competent" and who therefore potentially pose a threat to the regime.
posted by Joe Beese at 8:05 AM on January 28, 2011

"Don't fault the ALJazeera reporters for anything ... they are being challenged, hassled and threatened. You can hear the police in the background. And they are hanging in there. Damn, this is unbelivable."

They got a lot of the best of the BBC's ME team to set it up. These days, it appears to be somewhat better than the BBC.
posted by jaduncan at 8:06 AM on January 28, 2011

Another army armored vehicle in peaceful solidarity with protesters now. A protester cheering on top, and a soldier hanging out the door and waving. Yes!

The fulcrum here will be the link between the military leadership and the junior officers. Unlike Ben Ali, Mubarak is a former military man and can probably count on his generals. Anybody below colonel or 40...not so much.
posted by Skeptic at 8:07 AM on January 28, 2011

Brave, brave people.
posted by angrycat at 8:10 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Mubarak is about to make a statement.

Also, this al-jazeera feed is fucking amazing.

It's easy to forget what a "real" news organization does. No attempts to package and sell the crisis. No logos or cute names. It's a continual raw feed of what's happening with intelligent analysis overlaid. It's news, reported by journalists, commented on by analysts who know what the fuck they're talking about.
posted by Lord_Pall at 8:11 AM on January 28, 2011 [52 favorites]

I'm surprised the revolution is still being televised.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:12 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Mubarak is going to give a speech. He'll offer some concessions, but he's not going to call for open elections. And it will not be enough.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:13 AM on January 28, 2011

CNN has a live webcam feed of the same bridge as the Al-jazeera feed but from a different angle. Lots and lots of troop trucks massing.
posted by ChrisHartley at 8:13 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm not having any troubles with streaming via Al Jazeera iOS app. I'm sure there's similar for Android if someone can link it.
posted by nathan_teske at 8:18 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Finally able to watch Al Jazeera, thank you Lord_Pall for the link.

This is riveting. And despite my anxiety and concern for the safety of the protesters, it is truly stunning to observe in real life the strength & might of a people united in anger.
posted by crackingdes at 8:18 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's easy to forget what a "real" news organization does.

Seriously, a side-by-side comparison with our stuff is a humiliating experience.
posted by Joe Beese at 8:20 AM on January 28, 2011 [14 favorites]

Woah, NDP HQ is on fire.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:21 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

The ruling party's HQ building now on fire.
posted by NoMich at 8:21 AM on January 28, 2011

Fire officially in the National Democratic Party headquarters. Wow.
posted by sugarfish at 8:21 AM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera is now reporting that the NDP Party (Mubarak's ruling party) headquarters building is on fire.
posted by aught at 8:22 AM on January 28, 2011

NDP Headquarters is on fire. The same building where the senior leadership of the regime met yesterday.

Mubarak had better be promising his resignation. They can't cover up a missing headquarters tomorrow.
posted by notion at 8:22 AM on January 28, 2011

The ruling party's HQ building now on fire.

If true, that's usually a big clue for the ruler to start packing his bags...
posted by Skeptic at 8:24 AM on January 28, 2011

If Mubarak has a hand to play, he's rapidly running out of time to play it.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:26 AM on January 28, 2011

Sigh, my apolitical niece is chatting me on FB "What's it all about?" ... she is terrified of this idea that we could also lose the internet; she begins studying what is going on in Egypt ... watching live feed ... opening up to a new world ... the youth of the world.
posted by Surfurrus at 8:27 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Sounds of heavy gunfire coming from the cairo livefeed.
posted by Lord_Pall at 8:29 AM on January 28, 2011

Live ammo being used on protesters. I guess this is Mubarak's play. Game over, asshole.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:30 AM on January 28, 2011

Jesus, it sounds like a warzone. I mean, I guess in a way it is. Feeling very naive and ridiculous from my safe little house.
posted by sugarfish at 8:31 AM on January 28, 2011

are you sure it's live ammo?
posted by empath at 8:31 AM on January 28, 2011

I don't think there is confirmation of live ammo being used.
posted by ChrisHartley at 8:32 AM on January 28, 2011

I don't think there is confirmation of live ammo being used.

Yeah, they're shooting bullets made out of muffins and pillows.
posted by fuq at 8:34 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

I have a feeling the presidential speech isn't coming anytime soon.
posted by geoff. at 8:34 AM on January 28, 2011

Live ammo being used on protesters.

Shit.
posted by Marla Singer at 8:35 AM on January 28, 2011

Yeah, they're shooting bullets made out of muffins and pillows.

They were shooting rubber bullets earlier.
posted by Infinite Jest at 8:36 AM on January 28, 2011

I have a feeling the presidential speech isn't coming anytime soon.

No, it just sounds a lot like gunfire.
posted by Skeptic at 8:36 AM on January 28, 2011

Hide, Obama, hide!
posted by CautionToTheWind at 8:36 AM on January 28, 2011

They have been firing rubber bullets and tear gas all day. Sounded the same.
posted by Surfurrus at 8:37 AM on January 28, 2011

Sounded the same.

Wrong.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:38 AM on January 28, 2011

No this sounds different. This doesn't sound like a protest, it sounds like a war zone.
posted by arcolz at 8:39 AM on January 28, 2011

I wonder about the effect of turning off the internet and mobile networks - rather than quelling dissent, it might have encouraged people to go all out, in a 'this is the end' kind of way. Imagine getting your communication channels cut off, and then stepping outside and seeing the crowds.
posted by memebake at 8:40 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

Al Jazeera anchor just reported unconfirmed news that police HQ is also on fire.
posted by gompa at 8:40 AM on January 28, 2011

AJ feed also says some of the bigger explosion sounds could be car gas tanks caught on fire. Either way, incredibly dangerous. This Ayman Mohyeldin and the crew are serious hardasses.
posted by Mizu at 8:41 AM on January 28, 2011

White House press sec Gibbs: Very concerned about violence in Egypt - government must respect the rights of the Egyptian people & turn on social networking and internet
posted by raztaj at 8:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

And the rumor is that Mubarak is preparing to speak.
posted by koeselitz at 8:42 AM on January 28, 2011

"They have been firing rubber bullets and tear gas all day. Sounded the same."

Not quite, actually. The rubber bullets are more of a thowp (larger calibre, slow speed), the real bullets are more of a pop/bang.
posted by jaduncan at 8:42 AM on January 28, 2011

Memebake makes an incisive point. I remember many times when the power went out, whether in an apartment complex, dorm or neighborhood, suddenly everyone walks outside and begins talking to their neighbors, trying to get news. The lack of internet connection just might bring people out into the streets.
posted by crackingdes at 8:42 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

White House: Let thy people tweet.
posted by vbfg at 8:42 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Some of the "bang" sounds heard during daylight hours were attributed to stun grenades; there's a chance it could still be more of the same. I haven't heard anything so far that sounds like automatic weapons fire.
posted by Marla Singer at 8:43 AM on January 28, 2011

I think it's time for the UN (and Obama for that matter) to stop playing wishy washy "stop the violence" BS. It's time to step up and call for Mubarek to step aside. It's time to seize the moment.
posted by IvoShandor at 8:43 AM on January 28, 2011

I wonder about the effect of turning off the internet and mobile networks - rather than quelling dissent, it might have encouraged people to go all out,

Yeah, it's like the government said "Protests eh? Fine, we'll get serious about this shit!" and then the protesters were all like "Ok, we'll get serious too."
posted by fuq at 8:43 AM on January 28, 2011

Ayman Mohyeldin on wikipedia, if you, like me, had never heard of him before. Hardass, indeed.
posted by sugarfish at 8:44 AM on January 28, 2011

White House: Let thy people tweet.

Now that's pretty lame.
posted by fatllama at 8:44 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I haven't heard anything so far that sounds like automatic weapons fir

Sorry for the double comment, but what I've been hearing are pretty obvious semi-automatic rifle reports. Just my ex-U.S. military opinion, take it FWIW.
posted by IvoShandor at 8:44 AM on January 28, 2011

I wonder about the effect of turning off the internet and mobile networks - rather than quelling dissent, it might have encouraged people to go all out,

If you want to see how much organizing potential social networks have, shut them all down at once, after they've been buzzing for days.
posted by condour75 at 8:46 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I wonder also if the sounds are different at night. There is less traffic and other interfering noise. I don't doubt there is live ammo, just wouldn't say these sounds are very different from the day's.
posted by Surfurrus at 8:46 AM on January 28, 2011

Incredible al-Jazeera coverage, and great comments here. Thanks for posting the thread.

> Most people in Iran don't want a revolution. They already had one, and it completed its objectives.

Have you been paying attention to Iran at all the last couple of years?
posted by languagehat at 8:46 AM on January 28, 2011 [14 favorites]

Thank you for all these updates. I keep getting interrupted and have missed a few minutes of live feed.
posted by KathyK at 8:48 AM on January 28, 2011

From The Guardian: A downtown police station in Cairo, police cars and gas tanks outside the police station are on fire, which could account for the number of loud explosions being heard, al-Jazeera reports

Could be ammunition goin' up, which would explain why I hear what sounds like rifle reports.
posted by IvoShandor at 8:48 AM on January 28, 2011

Guardian: A downtown police station in Cairo, police cars and gas tanks outside the police station are on fire, which could account for the number of loud explosions being heard, al-Jazeera reports.

(Notwithstanding IvoShandor's comment)
posted by Infinite Jest at 8:50 AM on January 28, 2011

"Sorry for the double comment, but what I've been hearing are pretty obvious semi-automatic rifle reports. Just my ex-U.S. military opinion, take it FWIW."

Yes, I'm ex-British Army and agree. The shots sound a bit deeper than most Western weapons but they would; the ammunition is 7.62 rather than the smaller NATO rounds.
posted by jaduncan at 8:50 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Al Jazeera reporters pointing out that the NDP headquarters is next door to the National Antiquities museum that contains some of the country's most precious ancient artifacts. (Noting that no one is doing anything yet to put out the fire.)
posted by aught at 8:50 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

(Oops, I spent too long on preview).
posted by Infinite Jest at 8:50 AM on January 28, 2011

Last night I heard a girl on Canadian radio, Egyptian but educated abroad, and she said that they knew the internet shutdown was coming, and she had gotten an overseas phone for herself, and as many as she could for her friends.

I'm not certain if the overseas phones will continue working, but that, plus satellites, plus ham radios gives me hope that the Egyptian government cannot hide whatever they are planning to do to the protesters.
posted by Leta at 8:50 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

And, people can still use devices to record things - they just have to get the physical data somewhere where it can be uploaded later.
posted by Mizu at 8:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Joe Biden: No. I think the time has come for President Mubarak to begin to move in the direction that to be more responsive to some of the needs of people out there.

Give Me Liberty, Or Give Me . . . Slightly Less Tyranny. In, You Know, A Relatively Orderly Fashion That Doesn't Disrupt International Commodity And Exchange Markets In Any Serious Way. Economic Reforms Or Something. What Is They're After? Bread? Cake? Whatever. Some Of That.
posted by gompa at 8:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [22 favorites]

Al Jazeera: Fires in downtown Cairo could spread to National Museum

I can only think of V for Vendetta. is country needs more than a building right now. It needs hope.

It needs more than antiquities as well. These are just symbols. They mean nothing in the face of oppression. Or little, anyway.

Also, reporter at Al-Jazeera who has "been around gunfire" claims that the loud reports we're hearing are definitely "heavy gunfire".
posted by IvoShandor at 8:53 AM on January 28, 2011

Now the question is whether this is going to be the Arab world's 1989 or 1848.

i'm thinking 1789 or 1917 - a revolution that will have untold consequences for the world at large

there's just no telling how this is going to play out, but even if the current protests are suppressed, radical change is coming - and the more violent the suppression, the more radical the opposition will become
posted by pyramid termite at 8:54 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

And, people can still use devices to record things - they just have to get the physical data somewhere where it can be uploaded later.

Yeah, unless they leave the internet turned off forever, there's going to be plenty of amateur footage getting out eventually.
posted by memebake at 8:55 AM on January 28, 2011

the images of people lining up to pray is absoluetly stunning and nearly has me in tears.

I was about to say this. The image of thousands of livid, passionate, angry protesters suddenly stopping in peace and silence to honour their beliefs is unexpectedly powerful for me.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 8:55 AM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

The image of a mass of people kneeling on the street for the final evening prayer under roiling black smoke with the repeating sound of gunfire in the background gave me goosebumps. I am just amazed.
posted by Babblesort at 8:55 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Teargas canisters were lobbed directly at quiet, peaceful, prostrated protesters. They stood up, prayers over, grabbed the burning-hot canisters with their bare hands, and threw them back. Protest chants have begun anew.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 8:57 AM on January 28, 2011 [22 favorites]

> 1917 - a revolution that will have untold consequences for the world at large

The real revolution of 1917 (as opposed to the Bolshevik coup eight months later) was able to succeed because the military went over to the side of the protesters. That's what's going to have to happen here.
posted by languagehat at 8:57 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

That's gunfire. Period.
posted by IvoShandor at 8:58 AM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera reporters pointing out that the NDP headquarters is next door to the National Antiquities museum that contains some of the country's most precious ancient artifacts.

Having been there, I would re-state that slightly to say "many of the world's most precious ancient artifacts". It is quite incredible.

Also, there's an earlier Guardian photo of police cars burning outside a mosque in Alexandria, which if memory serves is quite close to the Library of Alexandria, another amazing building, both for its architecture and its content.
posted by Infinite Jest at 9:00 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I think it's time for the UN (and Obama for that matter) to stop playing wishy washy "stop the violence" BS. It's time to step up and call for Mubarek to step aside.

The one thing I've praised Obama for is sitting out (publicly, at least) the Iran uprising. However one viewed the moral imperatives or practical realities, there was no way - given our history there - that our involvement could have avoided making a bad situation worse.

But arguments about what he should do in aid of this uprising are moot. The Powers That Be - of which Obama is only one of the players, and not the most powerful - do not want it to succeed. The uncertainty it would introduce is bad for profits.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:01 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

There are troops in the carrier being swarmed on the CNN feed right now.
posted by ChrisHartley at 9:02 AM on January 28, 2011

Or, what gompa said.

[Unfortunately, I've hit my favorites limit for the day.]
posted by Joe Beese at 9:02 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

But arguments about what he should do in aid of this uprising are moot. The Powers That Be - of which Obama is only one of the players, and not the most powerful - do not want it to succeed. The uncertainty it would introduce is bad for profits.

You know I realize this Joe but it's not going to make me feel differently. This isn't Iran. This is different. It is. And regardless of geopolitical realities, this is a time for the UN and Obama to step up. Otherwise the lip service we pay democracy and freedom is the moot point. Fuck this. I'm so sick of this shit man. Go Egypt! Beat Army! Or something.
posted by IvoShandor at 9:03 AM on January 28, 2011

Ham radio is worth having. It's the same stuff as ran the comms of WWII, that let POWs listen to news, kept agents in touch with home, and did all the mainstream military work too. A little knowledge gives you a huge range of options, and with a bit of preparation and care you don't need mains electricity or vast amounts of kit.

I've got a backpack with a bunch of gear in it that I take out on hikes sometimes. Can talk all over the world, use satellites, data, slow-scan TV. You could, too.
posted by Devonian at 9:05 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

Seeing the protesters pray was amazing and had me in tears as well.

I hope the National Museum remains untouched. Tourism is big for Egypt and it's a beautiful building.
posted by zix at 9:05 AM on January 28, 2011

Otherwise the lip service we pay democracy and freedom is the moot point.

I've got no argument with that.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:06 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yeah, I'm sitting in my office with a coffee and I suppose I should do some work, but how can I?. Profound sense of watching history.
posted by jokeefe at 9:06 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

"The one thing I've praised Obama for is sitting out (publicly, at least) the Iran uprising. However one viewed the moral imperatives or practical realities, there was no way - given our history there - that our involvement could have avoided making a bad situation worse."

Joe:
a) This is another regime with a long history of US backing;
b) even considering that, this isn't about Obama. Please don't make this that.
posted by jaduncan at 9:06 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

The real revolution of 1917 (as opposed to the Bolshevik coup eight months later) was able to succeed because the military went over to the side of the protesters.

and if they hadn't? - i believe that an even more bloody revolution would have happened down the road

of course, i wonder too what kind of "bolsheviks" might eventually be able to effect a coup in this situation and what their goals might be, especially when it comes to relations with israel and the western world

the best scenario is that the government steps down quickly
posted by pyramid termite at 9:07 AM on January 28, 2011

The real revolution of 1917 (as opposed to the Bolshevik coup eight months later) was able to succeed because the military went over to the side of the protesters. That's what's going to have to happen here.

I think that even if the military continues to support Mubarak the revolution (can we call it the 2011 Revolution yet?) will have achieved it's major goal: the unmasking of the Mubarak goverment as a corrupt, illegitimate dictatorship which must use violence against it's own people to maintain power.

We always knew that, of course, but now the goverment has publicly admitted it by opening fire upon it's own people during their evening prayers. The Egyptian goverment has, esentially, lost. They may win the battle and crush the protestors, but they've still lost. The Egyptian people will never again be under any illusions as to the true nature of their state.

Win or loose, this is going to Change Things. Maybe for the better, maybe for the worse, but nothing in Egypt (and the wider Arab world) will be the same after this.

People talk about the "failed" revolutions of 1848, but they forget that 1848 set the stage for 1871, which in turn set the stage for 1914 and 1939. An omnious precident, perhaps, but an interesting turn of events for a civilization such as ours that is supposedly living "at the end of history".
posted by Avenger at 9:07 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

this is a time for the UN and Obama to step up

I hate to speak hastily from the heart and be all naïve about this, but we're at the point where Western leaders who do not step up immediately to support freedom of speech and of assembly in Egypt must be seen as unrepentantly complicit in the maintenance of this obviously unjust regime.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 9:08 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

this isn't about Obama

I never said it was.

But defending him against criticisms made by other commenters isn't something I get to do very often.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:08 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I'm glad this thread is here for the communal sense of historic change.
posted by angrycat at 9:09 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Clinton talking now...
posted by jokeefe at 9:09 AM on January 28, 2011

The US is doing exactly what it should: calling for peace and the rights for assembly

We can just go around willy-nilly advocating the overthrow of governments that don't meet our standards. It would put the US in an untennable position. All that can be done is to work with current governments while gently pushing for democracy.

Having the worlds largest military superpower tell another country to change its leadership is not wise IMHO.
posted by rosswald at 9:09 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Hells yes! Clinton calling for sane measures.
posted by Mizu at 9:09 AM on January 28, 2011

Hillary is calling for an end to the violence, so this whole thing should be wrapped up pretty soon.
posted by orme at 9:10 AM on January 28, 2011 [10 favorites]

I've got no argument with that.

I know you don't. I have an idea of what you believe, and I feel like your thinking and my thinking are probably pretty close on this. And I know it's idealistic. And I know it doesn't fit in the framework of U.S. foreign policy. But this is about people. Not what's best for the U.S., and I'm just so tired of that being a reason that we don't support the oppressed. We spend thousands of lives, American and otherwise, on nonsensical military operations. For once, we could at least step up and say something that is right. Just because it's the right thing to say, The UNs statement has pissed me off more than anything our govt has done here, but still.

Anyway, Hillary is now saying much the same thing the UN has been saying. "Protesters should also refrain from violence"

WTF?

It isn't the protesters that are hurling lead into crowds. Fuck this man, just fuck this.

I'm behind these protesters all the way, regardless of how the outcome effects the U.S.

Damn it man.
posted by IvoShandor at 9:11 AM on January 28, 2011 [10 favorites]

Secretary of State Clinton speaking now, calling for Egyptian government to refrain from violence, noting the legitimacy of the protesters' grievances, and urging them to restore the country's communications with the world. Urging "imperative for reform."
posted by aught at 9:11 AM on January 28, 2011

Another thing (as pyramid termite points out above): The 1917 Russian revolution was a long time coming and was probably unavoidable. The czarist state would have had to undergo major, fundamental changes if it was going to survive at all in the 20th century, or face a bloody revolution. There was no way that a czarist autocrat would have survived in Russia much beyond the early 20th century. Russian society was too brittle and the world was moving too quickly for that to be possible.

Mubarak's days (and hopefully the days of Arab autocrats themselves) are similary numbered.
posted by Avenger at 9:11 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Oh wait, spoke too soon. Egypt, seriously, you couldn't have a revolution during PST daylight hours? Making me fill in the Clinton blanks with positivity when there's not much there due to sleep deprivation...
posted by Mizu at 9:12 AM on January 28, 2011

I'm behind these protesters all the way, regardless of how the outcome effects the U.S.

Heartily seconded.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:12 AM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

"We support the universal rights of the Egyptian people."

Hillary to Mubarak: See ya, wouldn't want to be ya'.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:12 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Obama cannot step up, because he has no spine.
posted by CautionToTheWind at 9:13 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

It gets my motor running when Hillary plays "good cop".
posted by tapesonthefloor at 9:14 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I've been coming back to the computer all morning and am still just in awe. Every once in a while, I have to remind myself that this is actually happening.
posted by honeydew at 9:14 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

That's nice, tapesonthefloor, I'm sure we were all wondering. Oy.

The Al Jazeera stream is amazing. True journalism, analysis, calmly bearing witness and explaining events.
posted by jokeefe at 9:15 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Summary of Hillary Clinton's press conference (broadcast on Al Jazeera): "Violence solves nothing, people!" OK, so we'll be withdrawing all our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, and places they're not supposed to be like Pakistan and Yemen asap, right Hillary?
posted by Marla Singer at 9:15 AM on January 28, 2011 [16 favorites]

that al jazeera flash crashes every single browser on my system, argh
posted by mwhybark at 9:17 AM on January 28, 2011

Me too. Apparently Livestation.com is also airing it, but it keeps timing out on me.
posted by proj at 9:18 AM on January 28, 2011

OK, so we'll be withdrawing all our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, and places they're not supposed to be like Pakistan and Yemen asap, right Hillary?

Noted for emphasis.
posted by ColdChef at 9:18 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Al Jazeera's Alexandria reporter said that military armored vehicles are moving in place, giving protestors thumbs up, protestors are cheering.
posted by condour75 at 9:20 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Could be a ruse to get them into tactical positions. I really hope not, though.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:21 AM on January 28, 2011

Obama cannot step up, because he has no spine.

No, this is a complex diplomatic situation where a thin line must be walked to ensure that US interests are best protected while democracy is advanced and whichever eventual victor emerges, the U.S. keeps a stable ally in an important geographical location.

To blindly support one side or another would be to act as a poor president.
posted by Han Tzu at 9:23 AM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

To blindly support one side or another would be to act as a poor president.

Right, because standing up for human rights, political rights and civil liberties is so unamerican Fuckin' hippies.
posted by IvoShandor at 9:24 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Han Tzu, it was exactly the mentality of overlooking fundamental values like truth and human rights, in favour of short term stratetegic positioning, that created all these problems!
posted by CautionToTheWind at 9:24 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Guardian ME expert parses Clinton as follows:

"It looks to me as if Clinton is angling for a negotiated departure by Mubarak, accompanied by an increase in political freedom. I think the US is aiming to structure the solution in a way that would protect its key interests: the peace treaty with Israel, the Suez canal, and co-operation against terrorism."
posted by Infinite Jest at 9:26 AM on January 28, 2011

Only the American government can be trusted with spreading democracy with violence, at least according to the American government.

Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.
posted by notion at 9:26 AM on January 28, 2011

OK, so we'll be withdrawing all our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, and places they're not supposed to be like Pakistan and Yemen asap, right Hillary?

Seriously. You know, on the one hand, it'd be nice if our government officials would actually speak up for the right side of something. But on the other hand, maybe it'd also be nice if they just kept their fucking hypocrite mouths shut for a change.
posted by equalpants at 9:27 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

At the moment, the US reaction is predictably cautious, but I don't really care.

Personally, I would give large amounts of money to know what was said in the Friday sermons just before this happened. I'll bet it was damned interesting.
posted by koeselitz at 9:27 AM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera's Alexandria reporter said that military armored vehicles are moving in place, giving protestors thumbs up, protestors are cheering.

I think there may have been a military coup, and the gunfire in Cairo was between the Army and interior police/soldiers at the information ministry.
posted by ennui.bz at 9:27 AM on January 28, 2011

To blindly support one side or another would be to act as a poor president.

Supporting fundamental human rights without exception is not blindness. It's vision.
posted by notion at 9:28 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Marc Lynch, Foreign Policy:

Mubarak's regime has been wounded at its core, and even if he survives in the short run the regime will have to make major internal changes to regain any semblance of normality. An Egyptian regime which spends the next years in a state of military lockdown will hardly be a useful ally. ...

Accepting Mubarak's fierce gambit now would put an end to any claim the United States has of promoting democracy and reform for a generation, and alienating the rising youth generation on which the administration has placed so much emphasis. It would also make Cairo the graveyard of Obama's Cairo speech and efforts to rebuild relations with the Muslims of the world. The United States will be better positioned to push such changes in the right direction if it maintains a strong and principled position today -- regardless of whether Mubarak or someone else ends up in control. The cautious strategy right now is the same as the principled one, whether Mubarak falls or if he survives.

posted by Joe Beese at 9:28 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Today likely began with Mubarek negotiating with Obama for support. It will likely end with Mubarak pleading for an extraction team to stop taking their damned time.

Also, people of Egypt, may you succeed in your plight.
posted by clearly at 9:29 AM on January 28, 2011

mwhybark, it crashes my firefox and safari, too. Try this mirror: http://www.justin.tv/latd?#/w/806464832/2
posted by raztaj at 9:32 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

I think there may have been a military coup, and the gunfire in Cairo was between the Army and interior police/soldiers at the information ministry.

Interesting thought. But is it anything other than that? Have you heard something along these lines? I'm sure MeFites would be interested.
posted by IvoShandor at 9:32 AM on January 28, 2011

[Al-Jazeera's] English-language network is, today, mandatory viewing for anyone interested in the world-changing events currently happening in Egypt. The American networks barely qualify as an interesting supplement.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:33 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

I turned CNN on earlier today to see if they were running footage of it and they were covering "a suspicious package at Cowboys Stadium."
posted by proj at 9:34 AM on January 28, 2011

runs fine inside vista/vmware, who knows.
posted by mwhybark at 9:34 AM on January 28, 2011

You can "support fundamental human rights without exception" and "stand up for civil liberties" without, say, completely throwing your support over for one side. The Secretary of State is making a statement (which will probably be ignored, or completely unheard) that violence is not the answer and that change and reform are good. It looks measured policy that takes into account real world complexities while promoting 'fundamental human rights'.

What would you have Obama do? Throw all his support in with the protestors? What if they lose, then, and Egypt becomes hostile to American interests? Does that help America in any way?

And, of course, the other side is that if the protestors overthrow Mubarak, if America is seen as being too supportive of the regime, then whatever new power that comes to be may be less than kind.

Yes, human rights are certainly a good thing. But just as Obama is intelligent enough not to carelessly and meaninglessly ostracize China, I think it's intelligent for him, not spineless, to be measured in his response on the Egyptian situation.
posted by Han Tzu at 9:35 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I am mesmerized and planning to join a supporting protest after Friday prayers end.
posted by ChuraChura at 9:36 AM on January 28, 2011

Interesting thought. But is it anything other than that? Have you heard something along these lines? I'm sure MeFites would be interested.

just watching al jazeera: they report *no* police presence on the streets of cairo. it sounds like the mubarack government has fallen. where is he?
posted by ennui.bz at 9:36 AM on January 28, 2011

Burhanistan: “Most of the major mosques were ordered closed today. That's not to say the smaller neighborhood mosques didn't have charged sermons, though.”

Ah. Al-Jazeera was interviewing a fellow from the Muslim Brotherhood in a rural area who said the protests started "just after Friday sermons," but that's interesting to know.
posted by koeselitz at 9:36 AM on January 28, 2011

Twitter, so take it with a grain of salt: "Sheikh Karadawy": What is happening now in Egypt is what Islam orders us to do when the ruler doesn't follow the orders of Allah
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:37 AM on January 28, 2011

The difference between the al jazeera feed and the State news camera is astounding.
posted by dejah420 at 9:37 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Mubarak's silence is deafening here.
posted by proj at 9:38 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

No, this is a complex diplomatic situation where a thin line must be walked to ensure that US interests are best protected while democracy is advanced and whichever eventual victor emerges, the U.S. keeps a stable ally in an important geographical location.

.... words right out of the 'domino theory' that was used to justify the Vietnam War ... not to mention the Bushese (still alive and used) to justify the Iraq war ...

... probably could go back further, but just too disgusted ...
posted by Surfurrus at 9:40 AM on January 28, 2011

Whatever happens with Mubarack tonight, I reckon the Egyptian protesters have definitely done enough to persuade some further countries to give this a go.
posted by memebake at 9:41 AM on January 28, 2011

Boutros Boutros-Ghali being interviewed on the BBC just now is giving it a pretty grotesque pro-regime bleat--"Problem of looting... Inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood, who want to be like Hamas... Most people happy with current regime..."

Yuck.

This link may not work outside the UK. After 6pm GMT, I think it should go to a 'listen again', though I could be wrong.

Hmm, Reuters just reporting that the curfew has been extended to all cities.

Also, (phew!) BBC now interviewing someone from the Quilliam Foundation who is taking Boutros-Ghali's claims apart--"A typical defence tactic that will be used by the President in his upcoming speech... None of these young people want the Muslim Brotherhood in power."
posted by lapsangsouchong at 9:41 AM on January 28, 2011

Shit, tanks on the streets of Cairo - I hope the military here has the same response as in Alexandria.
posted by ChuraChura at 9:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Nearly 45% our of current web traffic to our @AJEnglish Egypt coverage is coming from America http://english.aljazeera.net
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:43 AM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

It looked like there were soldiers waving flags in each of those tanks.
posted by proj at 9:43 AM on January 28, 2011

Just saw on AJ a convoy of military vehicles, with soldiers standing and waving flags in response to protesters on the street. Speechless.
posted by jokeefe at 9:43 AM on January 28, 2011

.... words right out of the 'domino theory' that was used to justify the Vietnam War ... not to mention the Bushese (still alive and used) to justify the Iraq war ...

... probably could go back further, but just too disgusted ...

I certainly disagree with the Iraq war; I don't think this line of reasoning justifies that at all. According to what you write though, is international diplomacy simply a matter of saying 'human rights good, boo dictators'?
posted by Han Tzu at 9:43 AM on January 28, 2011

holy shit look at those tanks rolling in. is that it? has there been a coup?
posted by angrycat at 9:44 AM on January 28, 2011

Unconfirmed reports that the army is fighting the police.
posted by elizardbits at 9:45 AM on January 28, 2011

Reports of army engaging with the police. Looks like a coup in action to me.
posted by jokeefe at 9:45 AM on January 28, 2011

where is he?

Remember back in high school when you had that big term paper, and you put off doing it for weeks until finally, one class before you have to hand it in you're scrambling to put a bunch of shit down on paper?

That's Mubarak.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:45 AM on January 28, 2011

Suez police firing towards military and protestors - but it may not be the police in control of the station.
posted by ChuraChura at 9:46 AM on January 28, 2011

It's starting to look like Mubarak will be lucky if he isn't on a meathook by daylight.
posted by Babblesort at 9:46 AM on January 28, 2011

Boutros Boutros-Ghali being interviewed on the BBC just now is giving it a pretty grotesque pro-regime bleat

He says Mubarak is "beloved" of the Egyptians. [French-language link]

The Angry Arab notes that this means Boutros-Ghali is "officially senile".
posted by Joe Beese at 9:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

A politico friend once told me that in these situations, the Army often refuse to fire on their own citizens, whereas the Police end up being the last pillar to prop up a despised leader. He put it down to a difference in psychology between Army and Police. I haven't combed through the relevant history to check if this holds true, but I'll put it out here as something to ponder.
posted by memebake at 9:48 AM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

If a coup is in fact developing -- is there a faction of the army that might be taking control? Or is it simply grassroots mutiny?
posted by crackingdes at 9:49 AM on January 28, 2011

al jazeera gmap: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/01/2011128144656558818.html
posted by mwhybark at 9:49 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

A mob initially referred to as "protestors" is now being referred to as "the people."

This warms my heart.
posted by clearly at 9:49 AM on January 28, 2011 [13 favorites]

By the way the protesters are responding the military, and the military reciprocity of warm greetings; I'm willing to bet that a military coup is happening.
posted by dejah420 at 9:50 AM on January 28, 2011

Military coups have not been friendly to democracy in Egypt's history, it's worth noting.
posted by proj at 9:51 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

I am certainly no expert on Egypt, but I find it fascinating how easily many jump on the "yeah, more power to the people" argument here, when there is a good chance that this is just one group of currently undeserved people trying to gain power so they can be in power and oppress another group of people.

Of course, the liberal, slightly anti-authoritarian bones in me would love to cheer for revolution as well, but whenever I hear people complain that the US should support "democracy", I am reminded of the fact that democracy on its own only means that a majority of people get to decide how to make the rules, potentially at the cost of the minorities. And while I don't want to Godwin this thread (and don't want to oversimplify), that Austrian guy with the funny beard actually gained power by completely democratic means.

In the case of Egypt, in my view, there are quite a few scary outcomes this can lead to, and very few positive outcomes. What value would democracy have there, if the existing government is overthrown with minimal violence, "free, democratic" elections are being held, the Muslim Brotherhood wins, and Sharia law starts penetrating the constitution. Are we then saying "well, sorry women of Egypt, but these new leaders were elected democratically, so you should be perfectly happy...?"
posted by CaffeineFree at 9:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Indeed, many of the places we are seeing clashes in are named for events of the Free Officer's Revolution.
posted by proj at 9:54 AM on January 28, 2011

... is international diplomacy simply a matter of saying 'human rights good, boo dictators'?

No, the way it is used, it is not. THAT is (part of) the problem.

When did 'diplomacy' become a dirty word?
posted by Surfurrus at 9:55 AM on January 28, 2011

but I find it fascinating how easily many jump on the "yeah, more power to the people" argument here, when there is a good chance that this is just one group of currently undeserved people trying to gain power so they can be in power and oppress another group of people.

But if there's any chance that things are going to get better, I'm all in on "more power to the people".
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:56 AM on January 28, 2011

I certainly disagree with the Iraq war; I don't think this line of reasoning justifies that at all. According to what you write though, is international diplomacy simply a matter of saying 'human rights good, boo dictators'?

Wait, wait, wait... do you want the United States to cheer dictators? What the hell?

Look, we don't need any more Kissingers formulating policies to accept the death of millions and deprivation of fundamental rights for tens of millions of people in exchange for temporary and unsustainable stability. The suppression of public will can only survive in places like North Korea.

If you want a world full of North Koreas, I hope you are alone in that opinion.
posted by notion at 9:56 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

proj: "Military coups have not been friendly to democracy in Egypt's history, it's worth noting"

I think, with few exceptions, that statement could be missing the word "Egypt", and still be a true statement. But I'm watching the Egyptian people waving flags and cheering the military troop carriers, none the less.
posted by dejah420 at 9:56 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

And, of course, the other side is that if the protestors overthrow Mubarak, if America is seen as being too supportive of the regime, then whatever new power that comes to be may be less than kind.

See: Iran, 1970's. (I suspect that privately the name Jimmy Carter is being repeated a lot around the White House this week.)
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:56 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

CaffeineFree: “In the case of Egypt, in my view, there are quite a few scary outcomes this can lead to, and very few positive outcomes. What value would democracy have there, if the existing government is overthrown with minimal violence, "free, democratic" elections are being held, the Muslim Brotherhood wins, and Sharia law starts penetrating the constitution. Are we then saying ‘well, sorry women of Egypt, but these new leaders were elected democratically, so you should be perfectly happy...?’”

No. You don't know what's been going on in the Islamic world in the past few years.

Here, I should note that the most popular successor to Mubarak is Mohamed Elbaradei, who is not known for his hardline conservatism. I think a regime under his presidency would actually be a fine thing for democracy. And I concur with the experts on Al Jazeera (who are much more learned than I) that he might be the most likely to take power at the end of all this.
posted by koeselitz at 9:57 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

What value would democracy have there, if the existing government is overthrown with minimal violence, "free, democratic" elections are being held, the Muslim Brotherhood wins, and Sharia law starts penetrating the constitution. Are we then saying "well, sorry women of Egypt, but these new leaders were elected democratically, so you should be perfectly happy...?"

I agree, we should never support change if it can't be perfect immediately.
posted by empath at 9:59 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

How much support do the Muslim Brotherhood have out there? My (brief) reading of Egypt is that its fairly secular, and integrated into the world (via tourism, etc) in a way that would prevent any swing to hardline Islamic government.
posted by memebake at 9:59 AM on January 28, 2011

Public opinion data puts the average Egyptian as highly religious.
posted by proj at 10:00 AM on January 28, 2011

"Highly religious" and "supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood" are very, very different things, it should be noted. Some might even say contradictory things.
posted by koeselitz at 10:01 AM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

Here, I should note that the most popular successor to Mubarak is Mohamed Elbaradei, who is not known for his hardline conservatism.

He's an Ivy League college professor.
posted by empath at 10:02 AM on January 28, 2011

Seconding koeselitz. This is not an uneducated tribal area. Egypt is a largely secular society in comparison to the rest of the Middle East, just as Iraq was before 2003. The only thing that can send it spiraling downward would be a total breakdown of security.
posted by notion at 10:02 AM on January 28, 2011

Whoah, the Arabist is back online.
posted by NoMich at 10:02 AM on January 28, 2011

Mod note: Please make a basic effort not to start fights in here.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:02 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

How much support do the Muslim Brotherhood have out there?

From what I understand, this completely took them by surprise.
posted by empath at 10:02 AM on January 28, 2011

What value would democracy have there, if the existing government is overthrown with minimal violence, "free, democratic" elections are being held, the Muslim Brotherhood wins, and Sharia law starts penetrating the constitution. Are we then saying "well, sorry women of Egypt, but these new leaders were elected democratically, so you should be perfectly happy...?"

So, let me get this straight: we don't the people of Egypt are responsible enough for democracy because they are Islamic? Or is it just because they're brown people?

That is a TREMENDOUS grar-y deraill, fuq.

I just don't like the tacit racism in people's skepticism about the benefits of democracy in Egypt.
posted by fuq at 10:03 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

[Please make a basic effort not to start fights in here.]

[tosses rock at Cortex]
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:03 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

In the case of Egypt, in my view, there are quite a few scary outcomes this can lead to, and very few positive outcomes.

actually, i think the scariest outcome is that if there is real regime change in Egypt with corresponding change of the balance of power wrt to Israel, then you might be looking at another Arab-Israeli war. Not that the Egyptians would attack Israel but that the balance of power is already unstable and would become unsustainable. I would guess it would be most likely started by something like an Israeli attack on Hezbollah/Lebanon.
posted by ennui.bz at 10:04 AM on January 28, 2011

[my bunx. I'll drop it]
posted by fuq at 10:05 AM on January 28, 2011

"The most depressing and even frightening part of the tepid US response to the protests across the region is the lack of appreciation of what kind of gift the US, and West more broadly, are being handed by these movements. Their very existence is bringing unprecedented levels of hope and productive activism to a region and as such constitutes a direct rebuttal to the power and prestige of al-Qaeda.

Instead of embracing the push for real democratic change, however, surface reforms that would preserve the system intact are all that's recommended. Instead of declaring loud and clear a support for a real democracy agenda, the president speaks only of "disrupting plots and securing our cities and skies" and "tak[ing] the fight to al-Qaeda and their allies", as he declared in his State of the Union address.

Obama doesn't seem to understand that the US doesn't need to "take the fight" to al-Qaeda, or even fire a single shot, to score its greatest victory in the "war on terror"..."

Mark LeVine of UC Irvine, on Aljazeera English

Which is, I suppose, a reply to the "Oh but the Muslim Brotherhood might take over!" line of argument. To those who are making that argument: I take your [over-stated] point, but you are parrotting the same line that Boutros-Ghali just parrotted on behalf of the regime--"If it's not me, with my dyed hair and facelifts, my kleptocracy, my brutal security forces, my 30 years in power, my permanent state of emergency... then it will be MUSLIMS!"
posted by lapsangsouchong at 10:07 AM on January 28, 2011 [25 favorites]

"How much support do the Muslim Brotherhood have out there? My (brief) reading of Egypt is that its fairly secular, and integrated into the world (via tourism, etc) in a way that would prevent any swing to hardline Islamic government."

Yeah. It's religious in the Turkish rather than the Saudi style.
posted by jaduncan at 10:07 AM on January 28, 2011

"Let me give you the four scariest words I can't pronounce in Arabic: Egypt after Hosni Mubarak."
(Five year old "Esquire" article)
posted by ColdChef at 10:10 AM on January 28, 2011

You would think Metafilter would understand the danger of religious conservatives with political power.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:11 AM on January 28, 2011

furiousxgeorge: “You would think Metafilter would understand the danger of religious conservatives with political power.”

You're right, furiousxgeorge. There's no hope here. We may as well pack up and forget about it. The people of Egypt are too religious to be self-determining and democratic.

Those protesters, the ones that kneeled in a square filled with gunfire and shouting in order to pray, with more bravery than I'll ever know – how misled they are.

Fuck.
posted by koeselitz at 10:13 AM on January 28, 2011 [12 favorites]

Sorry, I have to go with fuq here. Just look at what's happening across the Arab world right now.

1) Western occupation of Iraq.
2) Western occupation of Afganistan.
3) Western backed dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen.

When Western troops are dropping bombs and firing their M-16s, there is virtually no discussion of the merits of their actions. When unarmed protests erupt for democracy, people openly wonder if it's a good idea.

And this dude on Al Jazeera right now... "Egypt are our friends... but we also have our principles."

Newsflash: you cannot "also" have principles.
posted by notion at 10:14 AM on January 28, 2011 [9 favorites]

Here, I should note that the most popular successor to Mubarak is Mohamed Elbaradei, who is not known for his hardline conservatism

Elbaradei is reportedly under house arrest following his statements on the current government's prospects.
posted by Prince_of_Cups at 10:14 AM on January 28, 2011

Oof. The US sounds painfully misguided and foolish right now. Platitude after platitude. The Al-Jazeera reporter sounds as frustrated as I am.
posted by ChuraChura at 10:14 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yes, that is PRECISELY what I said and meant Koeselitz.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:15 AM on January 28, 2011

furiousxgeorge: “You would think Metafilter would understand the danger of religious conservatives with political power.”

I volunteered for Obama. But if 5 years from now he declares himself dictator for life, I'll gladly take to the streets.
posted by crackingdes at 10:15 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

ColdChef: there's a reason he can't pronounce those words in Arabic.
posted by notion at 10:15 AM on January 28, 2011

This hour's anchor on Al Jazeera is terribad compared to the past six hours.
posted by amuseDetachment at 10:18 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

"It's way too early to say that we'll see some kind of hardline authoritarian Ayatollah-esque leadership coming in to fill the power vacuum if Mubarak is ousted."

It's almost impossible to imagine due to the fact it's Turkey Mk2. The army almost certainly wouldn't allow the state to become theocratic in Egypt.
posted by jaduncan at 10:19 AM on January 28, 2011

The Muslim Brotherhood made a statement a while back basically saying they were staying out of this.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:19 AM on January 28, 2011

furiousxgeorge: “Yes, that is PRECISELY what I said and meant Koeselitz.”

I'm sorry; this is a heady time, so I might have misunderstood. What did you mean? You were drawing a parallel between Bush and Palin on the one hand and "religious conservatives" in Egypt on the other. I guess I'm confused about whom you were drawing the parallel to. I'd still like to know. What did you mean?
posted by koeselitz at 10:19 AM on January 28, 2011

“You would think Metafilter would understand the danger of religious conservatives with political power.”

You would think Metafilter would know the difference between Islam, Muslims and "religious conservatives".
posted by Surfurrus at 10:20 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

What did you mean?

That dangerous religious conservatives can do well in Democratic systems and it is a real concern for Egypt.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:21 AM on January 28, 2011

When Western troops are dropping bombs and firing their M-16s, there is virtually no discussion of the merits of their actions.

Are you new here?
posted by Jahaza at 10:23 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

For what it's worth, the AIS receivers along the canal and at Port Said are still somehow transmitting data (I just checked). We do have our own bird, but as I understand it, that's only for bluewater tracking.

Not sure how that's relevant; maybe another potential way to get data out?
posted by digitalprimate at 10:26 AM on January 28, 2011

I just don't like the tacit racism in people's skepticism about the benefits of democracy in Egypt.

[Please make a basic effort not to start fights in here.]

Sorry, that was my fault. Reading my comments over a second time, I probably should have worded my argument more carefully. I suppose, in my inner dialogue, some of the questions I am trying to answer for myself are: "How would democracy in Egypt likely look like? And what's the likelihood of that occurring in the first place, given the historic, political and economic realities of the region?"
posted by CaffeineFree at 10:26 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I've been to Cairo. Its huge. If you count the outskirts, it has about 18 million inhabitants. Its pretty much the largest urban area in Africa, and the 11th largest in the world. Al-Jazeera reports 'tens of thousands' of protesters. Lets say 50,000, then out of the population of Cairo thats still only 1 person in 360 out on the streets protesting. I'm pointing this out for two reasons: (a) In the right conditions, those protester numbers could potentially swell to hundreds of thousands, and then we're really talking ... and ... (b) if we aren't reaching those numbers so far, is it possible that we (and Al-Jazeera) are 'wishing' this into something bigger than it really is?

I mean, about (b), I hope not. But I'm wondering.
posted by memebake at 10:26 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

That dangerous religious conservatives can do well in Democratic systems and it is a real concern for Egypt.

For Egypt yes, but what about for us? Saving democracy for our little brown brothers by cancelling democracy every time they don't elect the right people doesn't quite work see: Algeria, Gaza/Palestine, Lebanon.

“You would think Metafilter would understand the danger of religious conservatives with political power.”

Which is why when George Bush was elected and launched a "holy war" we advocated for a foreign military to sponsor a coup in the US?
posted by ennui.bz at 10:27 AM on January 28, 2011

Another cable, from March 2009... said. "President Mubarak and military leaders view our military assistance programme as the cornerstone of our mil-mil relationship and consider the $1.3 billion in annual [foreign military finance] as 'untouchable compensation' for making and maintaining peace with Israel.

Nice little client state you have there. It would be a shame if anything happened to it...
posted by Joe Beese at 10:27 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Guys, what I said I said is all I said.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:28 AM on January 28, 2011

That dangerous religious conservatives can do well in Democratic systems and it is a real concern for Egypt.

Perhaps you are in agreement: dangerous fundamentalism is bad for democracy, but that doesn't mean that Egyptians don't deserve the choice.
posted by notion at 10:30 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

That's fine, furiousxgeorge. Sorry for making more of it than it was. What has happened continues to happen, and that's more important than petty squabbles here.
posted by koeselitz at 10:30 AM on January 28, 2011

ah, into the overnights looks like. time to do something else for a bit.
posted by mwhybark at 10:31 AM on January 28, 2011

Al Arabiya is reporting that Syria has now disconnected from the Internet.
posted by workerant at 10:31 AM on January 28, 2011

Perhaps you are in agreement: dangerous fundamentalism is bad for democracy, but that doesn't mean that Egyptians don't deserve the choice.

Correct.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:32 AM on January 28, 2011

Are you new here?

MetaFilter is about as liberal (or reality-based, if you prefer) as it gets in the United States. You certainly didn't hear anything like that from any major media about Afghanistan, and not until years after the Iraq War dragged on.
posted by notion at 10:34 AM on January 28, 2011

curious as to why npr hasn't mentioned the army/police face off yet
posted by angrycat at 10:36 AM on January 28, 2011

I wish the west had more real news channels. We need AJ as much as anyone.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:36 AM on January 28, 2011

Guessing it has to do with being extra careful about delivering only confirmed info after they got mixed up in reporting Gabrielle Giffords' death.
posted by proj at 10:37 AM on January 28, 2011

BGPMon has another post on how the Internet shutdown was achieved.
posted by mkb at 10:38 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

curious as to why npr hasn't mentioned the army/police face off yet

Not getting any clear read on this from Al-Jazeera and the Guardian. A minute ago Al-Jazeera said the army was protecting the state-tv station from the protesters. But they also show pictures of protesters cheering the tanks as they roll in.
posted by memebake at 10:38 AM on January 28, 2011

memebake: I heard an estimate earlier on Al Jazeera of the number of protesters in Cairo being 50,000, and I actually wondered if it was an underestimate. I mean, they've mentioned that streets all over the city are teeming with people, but 50,000 is only about a baseball stadium full. But I have no idea.
posted by Marla Singer at 10:39 AM on January 28, 2011

>memebake, sensible question. We'll see what happens.

However, it's worth mentioning that in a country that has an enormous and well-funded security state, an intimidated (and largely pauperized) population, a state of emergency that has lasted without interruption for thirty years and for much of the decades before that, having tens of thousands of people out on the streets already counts as 'big'. Having them disregard a now country-wide curfew is even bigger.

Also, as you said, Cairo is huge--and there are protests in (it seems) many other cities and towns as well. There are only so many journalists out there, and they're naturally congregating around the landmarks. It's impossible to know right now how many people are out on the streets, since the only people who are in a position to make an educated guess are the Egyptian security forces.
posted by lapsangsouchong at 10:39 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

I don't think the report on Syria is true. No problem accessing Syrian government sites or the US Embassy in Damascus. This was not the case in Egypt.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:40 AM on January 28, 2011

"U.S President Obama is said to have a received a 40-page briefing on Egypt protests"
Right-click on thread, Print.
posted by memebake at 10:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

I hope that disconnecting the populace from the internet becomes forever recognized as the hallmark of a despotic and illegitimate regime.
posted by mullingitover at 10:42 AM on January 28, 2011 [31 favorites]

Oh that's rich. The school where I am blocks Al Arabiya.

So I guess that goes to show that the flow of information in the US is just hunky dory. Never mind if you're a teenager in Duluth.
posted by RedEmma at 10:44 AM on January 28, 2011

Marla Singer: “memebake: I heard an estimate earlier on Al Jazeera of the number of protesters in Cairo being 50,000, and I actually wondered if it was an underestimate. I mean, they've mentioned that streets all over the city are teeming with people, but 50,000 is only about a baseball stadium full. But I have no idea.”

I heard that estimate, too, but it wasn't for Cairo. It was for a more rural area – wish I'd caught which. Cairo almost certainly has many more protesters than that.
posted by koeselitz at 10:46 AM on January 28, 2011

Uh, that link is to Al Arabiya's twitter page, and twitter is pretty understandably blocked by the school I work at as well. Things are crazy enough without adding hyperbole and misinformation into the mix - I had no problems pulling up both the AJ and CNN feeds on the Promethean Board for my class.
posted by absalom at 10:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I hope that disconnecting the populace from the internet becomes forever recognized as the hallmark of a despotic and illegitimate regime.

it's been the hallmark of Comcast for years.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 10:47 AM on January 28, 2011 [19 favorites]

mullingitover: "I hope that disconnecting the populace from the internet becomes forever recognized as the hallmark of a despotic and illegitimate regime."

Recently, Bob Jones University and SurfClear have released a unique web filtering system that is more conservative than the average Internet filter.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 10:50 AM on January 28, 2011

Oh, another point for those who are scared of, or perhaps scare-mongering about, the Muslim Brotherhood.

An Egyptian friend of mine was out on the streets yesterday and was planning to be out there again today. She attended the American University in Cairo. She is entirely secular. At the age of 13, when her mother (like many Egyptian women then and since) decided to start wearing the veil, she refused to follow suit. She is hardly a poster-girl for the Muslim Brothers.

Here's a blog post she wrote yesterday.
posted by lapsangsouchong at 10:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [11 favorites]

I heard that estimate, too, but it wasn't for Cairo. It was for a more rural area – wish I'd caught which. Cairo almost certainly has many more protesters than that.

Oh, OK. I was actually away from the computer at the time, grabbing a cup of coffee, so I was probably mistaken.
posted by Marla Singer at 10:52 AM on January 28, 2011

Egypt turns off internet, Lieberman wants same option for US
posted by homunculus at 10:53 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

re: protester numbers: thanks for your thoughts.

Al-Jazeera keeps using 'tens of thousands' to describe the size of the protests. I guess without press helicopters (and they definitely aint got none of those) its hard to get any estimate on the numbers. Perhaps they're sticking with 'tens of thousands' because thats all they can see from the top of their building.
posted by memebake at 10:58 AM on January 28, 2011

If I had Al-Jazeera on my television, I might actually watch TV news again. I had forgotten how not-terrible it could be.
posted by sugarfish at 10:58 AM on January 28, 2011

In my mind, there is a big difference between a single election/overthrow-of -a-dictator and Democracy. Whats most important is democratic institutions, and the real chance for a 2nd election to follow the first. I don't know which way Egypt would go, or even if Murbarak will fall, but Murbarak's falling isn't synonmous with Democracy (though it obviously raises the chances).

I hope it works out best for Democracy and human safety.
posted by rosswald at 11:00 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Curfew? Shit shit shit. Partner and his family are in Egypt right now, supposed to be making their way to Cairo as I write, flying back to Australia Sat arvo Cairo time. :( :( :(
posted by divabat at 11:08 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Just read we are financing both sides, the pro democracy orgs to the tune of 135m in the last two years--which pissed off Mubarak. Source wikileaks cables.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:08 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

I hope that disconnecting the populace from the internet becomes forever recognized as the hallmark of a despotic and illegitimate regime.

Two things: One, I suspect it had as much or more to do with cell phones being shut down. I actually know a significant number of people (in the US) with no computer, but they all have cell phones - and from what I understand, cell phones are far more common than computers worldwide.

Two, the internet can still be censored outright or split into payment tiers, and as long as it still sort of works, people don't seem to mind. Witness China's extreme censorship, or the lack of general interest in net neutrality among US residents.
posted by Marla Singer at 11:09 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Al J is really showing up the American press. I remember a time when CNN didn't suck so bad. Or did I just not know better back then?
posted by vibrotronica at 11:09 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Also, do they hace the TV station? Just got texted that.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:10 AM on January 28, 2011

If I had Al-Jazeera on my television, I might actually watch TV news again. I had forgotten how not-terrible it could be.

You can watch Al Jazeera English on Link TV (Dish Network channel 9410, the same channel that shows Democracy Now.)
posted by homunculus at 11:11 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

In my mind, there is a big difference between a single election/overthrow-of -a-dictator and Democracy.

Agreed that a future democratic government is far from assured at this point, but this does seem to be a truly populist uprising, and so far they seem to have a lot of momentum, which in and of itself is an amazing thing.
posted by snofoam at 11:13 AM on January 28, 2011

I hope the National Museum remains untouched. Tourism is big for Egypt and it's a beautiful building.

I hope a cruicial part of human history remains untouched. Egypt is one of the world's oldest continuous civilisations.

To blindly support one side or another would be to act as a poor president.

The US already pours billions a year into propping up Mubarak. Tut-tutting protestors is supporting one side. The wrong one.

What would you have Obama do? Throw all his support in with the protestors?

Signal to the Army and security interests that continued support for Egypt is contingent on meaningful moves to reform. Mubarak would off to whereever it is dictators hole up these days with however many billions he's looted before the day was out.

What if they lose, then, and Egypt becomes hostile to American interests? Does that help America in any way?

Oh, you're one of those people. Fuck your national interests.

But if the US government and its cheerleaders of brutality had brains to go with their spines, they'd remember that unconditional support for the Shah was a key factor in radicalising the Iranian revolution from one whose aim was to throw out a vile dictator to one that established an Islamic republic. The longer the US supports Mubarak - and that's what it's doing - the more likely that the endgame in Egypt will be Iran rather than Turkey.

that Austrian guy with the funny beard actually gained power by completely democratic means.

You know, if you're going to pontificate upon history, it would help to not sound entirely ignorant of it.

Reports that a BBC reporter has been seized and tortured, then released. Egypt state TV spins. While Hilary and Biden offer tacit support clothed in claims of neutrality, Egyptians get the message about who Obama really supports.

Hope that the army are with the protesters, not against them.

(Good luck for those with family and friends in Egypt right now.)

Al J is really showing up the American press.

It has been for years. They've creamed off many of the best UK and US correspondants around the world for the best part of a decade, because they like getting to do real reporting; there's a reason the Frost/Pratchett interview I saw most recently was on Al-J.
posted by rodgerd at 11:17 AM on January 28, 2011 [11 favorites]

Oh no. Seeing (unconfirmed) twitter reports of looting at Nat'l Museum of Antiquities, which is right next to the burning (definitely confirmed) ND party building. People, put that fire out!
posted by tingting at 11:18 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

The State Department has released this:

In recent days, we expressed our hopes that all parties in Egypt, but especially the Mubarak administration, would act with restraint and show full respect for the peaceful expression of political opinion. We are saddened at the loss of life. We wish to express our solidarity with the Egyptian people and look forward to working with all democratic forces in Egypt to ensure the full exercise of democratic rights. The Egyptian military commendably refused to fire on peaceful demonstrators, and the media valiantly kept the Egyptian public informed."

Actually, that was our statement on the failed Venezuelan coup in 2002 (with the Dictator and State switched out). But when you're looking for real statement of support for Egyptian democracy, it should read something like that.
posted by notion at 11:19 AM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

To be more clear, Link TV shows a half-hour broadcast of Al Jazeera every weeknight at 7:00 PM, but right now they've interrupted their regular programing and are carrying Al Jazeera English's feed, so you can watch it on TV now if you get Link TV.
posted by homunculus at 11:19 AM on January 28, 2011

divabat: “Curfew? Shit shit shit. Partner and his family are in Egypt right now, supposed to be making their way to Cairo as I write, flying back to Australia Sat arvo Cairo time. :( :( :(”

My thoughts and prayers are with your partner and his family, divabat. I hope they're okay. Please keep us posted.
posted by koeselitz at 11:20 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

[T]he extraordinary scenes from Egypt [are] filling America's TV screens – even if the early morning bulletins were more interested in Charlie Sheen's hernia.

The exception has been Fox News, where coverage has been more muted. "You probably don't give a lot of time thinking about Egypt," a Fox News presenter suggested about an hour ago, before explaining that "groups linked to al-Qaida" were in danger of taking over the government in Cairo.

Guardian Live Blog, 19:04

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
posted by Grangousier at 11:21 AM on January 28, 2011

From the Guardian's live coverage:

The main US cable news networks had given Egypt minimal coverage so far this week, partly because of the time difference but also because of the president's state of the union address on Tuesday night absorbing so much energy.

That has all changed today, with the the extraordinary scenes from Egypt filling America's TV screens – even if the early morning bulletins were more interested in Charlie Sheen's hernia.

The exception has been Fox News, where coverage has been more muted. "You probably don't give a lot of time thinking about Egypt," a Fox News presenter suggested about an hour ago, before explaining that "groups linked to al-Qaida" were in danger of taking over the government in Cairo.

So far I haven't had much to say about the protests (beyond "holy shit wow!") but I will say this: Fuck you Fox News, fuck yyyyyyyoooooouuuuuu...
posted by Kattullus at 11:22 AM on January 28, 2011 [13 favorites]

I know it's terrible of me, but I'm more worried about the contents of that marvelous and astounding museum than the protesters. Then again, I'm still upset about the Taliban blowing up the Bamyan buddhas.
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:24 AM on January 28, 2011

Actually, that was our statement on the failed Venezuelan coup in 2002 (with the Dictator and State switched out).

I understand your intent but I think posting apparent quotes that actually aren't is a really foolish thing to do in a fast moving discussion of political upheaval.
posted by Babblesort at 11:24 AM on January 28, 2011 [10 favorites]

From the Guardian:

7.15pm GMT: The White House has just announced that it is postponing its planned press conference on the situation in Egypt. There's some speculation that may be because Obama himself wants to make a statement personally, but in any case it has been postponed for the time being.

Wonder if they're getting new info...
posted by proj at 11:26 AM on January 28, 2011

I wouldn't rely on the Guardian to report accurately on the content of Fox News broadcasts.
posted by Jahaza at 11:28 AM on January 28, 2011

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, says he's "not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process." Can someone who understands the Middle East better explain this hesitance? I thought Israel would be more enthusiastic about the prospect of a democratic neighbour.
posted by diogenetic at 11:29 AM on January 28, 2011

Thanks, Babblesort... mods, kill it if you wish. I don't want to spread disinformation. I do think it's interesting that the legitimacy of a democracy has little influence on the opinion of the State Department.
posted by notion at 11:29 AM on January 28, 2011

I know it's terrible of me, but I'm more worried about the contents of that marvelous and astounding museum than the protesters. Then again, I'm still upset about the Taliban blowing up the Bamyan buddhas.

I'm ephemeral. I will be forgotten in a couple of generations. My death would be a tragedy for me and those around me, but nothing more. The loss of the works of our civilisations is a tragedy that eclipses the death of any one person.

I wouldn't rely on the Guardian to report accurately on the content of Fox News broadcasts.

Clearly defending the honour of Fox News is the most important part of this story Jahaza.
posted by rodgerd at 11:33 AM on January 28, 2011

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, says he's "not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process." Can someone who understands the Middle East better explain this hesitance? I thought Israel would be more enthusiastic about the prospect of a democratic neighbour.
posted by diogenetic at 11:29 AM on January 28 [+] [!]

Netanyahu is essentially concerned that the democratic process in the region will a) produce Islamist states, b) undermine the patron-client relationships that these states have with the US and, by proxy, with Israel, and c) that popular support for war with Israel will come out of democracies. He is also using the "democratic process" as shorthand for popular insurrection that may embolden Palestinians to rise up against Israeli occupation.
posted by proj at 11:34 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

diogenetic: Israel largely doesn't care about democracy. They care about survival. From what I gather, there's a hawkish old guard which fears any instability and prefers US backed dictatorships and occupation of Palestine, and a movement of younger Israelis who believe that democracy should be available to all people, including Palestinians.

Basically, Netanyahu believes in the realpolitik of violent repression for everyone else, just as the United States does.
posted by notion at 11:36 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Routing around censorship: Ham radio, good old dial-up.
posted by rodgerd at 11:37 AM on January 28, 2011

This is not what a revolution of religious bigots would look like.
posted by rodgerd at 11:38 AM on January 28, 2011 [9 favorites]

rodgerd: But if the US government and its cheerleaders of brutality had brains to go with their spines,...

Please don't hijack this moment to dump 22-line axe grinding comments, K? Thx muchly
posted by msalt at 11:39 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

And it gets more interesting... From the Guardian again:

7.35pm GMT: There is a White House briefing on Egypt promised shortly, but the Associated Press has this bombshell – that the Obama administration is using US aid to Egypt as leverage over the Mubarak regime:

An Obama administration official says the US will review its $1.5bn in aid to Egypt based on events unfolding in the country, where the authoritarian government is struggling to extinguish huge and growing street protests.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the situation. Egypt has been a key US ally in the volatile region. US officials are now increasing calls on President Hosni Mubarak, the target of the protesters, to respond with restraint and reverse steps taken to cut off the protesters' ability to communicate.

The decision to review assistance to Egypt is a significant step as the US seeks to balance the desire to maintain stability in the region with a recognition of the unexpected scope and uncertain outcome of the protests.

posted by proj at 11:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Please don't hijack this moment

A comment direct to the history of revolutionary movements and US support of dictators in the Middle East and North Africa is neither a hijack nor axe-grinding.
posted by rodgerd at 11:41 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, says he's "not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process."

And I say Benjamin Netanyahu can go fuck himself.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:43 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

7.35pm GMT: There is a White House briefing on Egypt promised shortly, but the Associated Press has this bombshell – that the Obama administration is using US aid to Egypt as leverage over the Mubarak regime:

That will be fantastic if it happens.
posted by rodgerd at 11:43 AM on January 28, 2011

There's still a chance for the USG to do the right thing. I hope we get to see the 2006 edition of Obama, if only for one day.
posted by notion at 11:44 AM on January 28, 2011

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But 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.

ah the Cairo speech. so sweet the sound our great orator mouths.
posted by Shit Parade at 11:44 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

divabat: According to Wikileaks' twitter feed, activists are sending mass faxes into Egypt. I hit Google news for info, and came up eventually with this list of fax numbers for hotels in Egypt, and for Cairo University. If you have no other way to communicate, you might try sending a fax. Best wishes to your partner and family.
posted by Marla Singer at 11:44 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I thought Israel would be more enthusiastic about the prospect of a democratic neighbour.

The Egyptians in power currently have tried very, very hard to perpetuate the idea that a democratic Egypt means Muslim Brotherhood or at least an Islamic state. They have a point, when Europe left the shackles of monarchies they pretty readily leaped to populist movements (Communism and Fascism) which did not bode well for Jews or minorities and saw the rise of nationalism that tried to unite countries into a single, large super-power.

If you look at Israel's neighbors and you figure that a bunch of democratic Arab states, with rising nationalism even without the factor of Islam, will look at Israel and see it as a country full of recent immigrants and decidedly very un-Arabic. Given Israel's relationship with its neighbors, in particular Egypt, it is easy to see how this would happen.

Of course the Middle East now is not 19th c Europe. There is no reason to believe that democracy is going to lead to rah-rah populism that lead to the Monroe doctrine, the unification of German states, etc. Sure it is a possibility, but it is the one of many. Obviously, Soviet states exited fairly peacefully and African states just became mired in internal conflicts after the loss of colonialism. I think this is more likely to happen, as we forget that Europe had a very, very long history of militarism and being in a state of conflict for a very long time. You really don't have this in the Middle East. Instead, you have a collection of states that were cobbled together after WWI. You don't see Egyptians rising up to unite all of Egypt, but instead to kick out a corrupt ruler.

Finally the Middle East isn't just coming out of feudalism. There's not a large, rural class of peasants who go to bed hungry after laboring in the field all day. You have large urban areas, with a lot of nothing in between. There are significant population and demographic differences that just won't let you translate European revolutions with what is going on now.
posted by geoff. at 11:45 AM on January 28, 2011

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, says he's "not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process."

And I say Benjamin Netanyahu can go fuck himself.

To be fair, TIME is reporting that this quote did not come fron Netanyahu, but a minister in his government. That said, that guy can go fuck himself.
posted by ofthestrait at 11:47 AM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera now saying to interesting things: protesters formed a human shield around the Egyptian Museum to defend it from looters; Egyptian Minister of Defense Mohamed Hussein Tantawi is a possible successor to Mubarak; White House briefing imminent.
posted by aught at 11:49 AM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

Reports from al-Jazeera that protestors are forming a human chain around the Cairo museum to protect it.
posted by rodgerd at 11:50 AM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

to -> three (whew)
posted by aught at 11:50 AM on January 28, 2011

For those responding to diogenetic's Yahoo/Time story on Israel's reaction:

Your expression of Netanyahu's position may be accurate, but note that the entire article is quoting an unnamed minister in Netanyahu's administration, not Netanyahu himself. It appears to be less official than from the head of state.
posted by BlackPebble at 11:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Marla Singer: Thank you, I have sent a fax to their Cairo hotel, hoping for a positive response.
posted by divabat at 11:52 AM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Al Jazeera just reported as many as 150k people were protesting at one place. So the 50k number is certainly not Cairo, nor all of Egypt.
posted by gofargogo at 11:53 AM on January 28, 2011

Protest pictures; some graphic.
posted by rodgerd at 11:53 AM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

(missed ofthestrait on preview. sorry!)
posted by BlackPebble at 11:53 AM on January 28, 2011

rodgerd: "Reports from al-Jazeera that protestors are forming a human chain around the Cairo museum to protect it"

Between this, the way Egyptians came together after the bombing of a Christian church and the great stories my fiance had about her travels there, I hereby declare Egyptians to be the awsomest people on Earth.
posted by charred husk at 11:54 AM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

Candidate for iconic picture: protester kisses a riot cop
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:56 AM on January 28, 2011 [37 favorites]

Clearly defending the honour of Fox News is the most important part of this story Jahaza.

Hoist by your own petard rogerd. If the story is so important that my defending Fox News somehow impedes it, your comment is just as much a distraction.
posted by Jahaza at 11:56 AM on January 28, 2011

Have there been any updates on Elbaradei? Last I heard he was under house arrest.
posted by sugarfish at 11:58 AM on January 28, 2011

That photograph is beautiful. Thank you CunningLinguist.
posted by notion at 11:58 AM on January 28, 2011

Summary of Hillary Clinton's press conference (broadcast on Al Jazeera): "Violence solves nothing, people!" OK, so we'll be withdrawing all our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, and places they're not supposed to be like Pakistan and Yemen asap, right Hillary?

How will withdrawing our soldiers lead to a decrease in violence. Right now we've decreased troops in Iraq and violence has risen. Same thing happened in Somalia.
posted by humanfont at 11:59 AM on January 28, 2011

CNN's Ben Wedeman, who is in Cairo, claims that protests have died down because the military and police have retreated, and there is no more government to protest. Waiting for the White House briefing.
posted by msali at 12:00 PM on January 28, 2011

WH Press Briefing about to start on CNN.com.
posted by proj at 12:01 PM on January 28, 2011

Almost everyone is seated which is usually a good sign for time frame.
posted by proj at 12:03 PM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera says protesters have form a human shield around the museum to prevent looting. No details yet. They reported earlier that a fire truck had showed up.

The Guardian says Egyptian state television has started showing footage of protests.
posted by nangar at 12:03 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Link has gone back to their regular programming. Bleh. Disregard what I said above.
posted by homunculus at 12:05 PM on January 28, 2011

rodgerd: A comment direct to the history of revolutionary movements and US support of dictators in the Middle East and North Africa is neither a hijack nor axe-grinding.

OFFS. Call it what you will. This is a fast moving, live-blogging type thread. Please save your history lectures and ideology for another day.
posted by msalt at 12:08 PM on January 28, 2011

Mubarak may be headed to TV station.
posted by CunningLinguist at 12:09 PM on January 28, 2011

According to Twitter: @evanchill Al Jazeera Arabic reports that thousands of youth protesters have assembled to try to protect the national museum in Cairo. #jan25

The live AJ stream keeps freezing up on me, but @AJEnglish is tweeting regularly.
posted by catlet at 12:10 PM on January 28, 2011

Gibbs, boo.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:11 PM on January 28, 2011

What's that thing on Gibbs' upper lip?
posted by Joe Beese at 12:11 PM on January 28, 2011

Please save your history lectures and ideology for another day.

I'm sorry context and knowledge offend you.
posted by rodgerd at 12:12 PM on January 28, 2011

Cut it out, you two.
posted by cortex at 12:12 PM on January 28, 2011 [11 favorites]

Gibbs looks on EDGE.
posted by proj at 12:14 PM on January 28, 2011

Gibbs looks on EDGE.

This is last really big day he'll have in this job.
posted by Joe Beese at 12:14 PM on January 28, 2011

How will withdrawing our soldiers lead to a decrease in violence. Right now we've decreased troops in Iraq and violence has risen. Same thing happened in Somalia.

How about we don't unleash violence in the first place? There was a heck of a lot less violence, before we violently invaded Iraq. So first we invade, destroy all native security infrastructure and then go "whelp, there is no security, we can't leave now". Fuck that shit, and I can't believe I got trolled into responding to this idiocy.
posted by VikingSword at 12:16 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Seems like they sent Gibbs in front of the press corps without answers to any of the questions that were sure to be asked first.
posted by Babblesort at 12:16 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

What's that thing on Gibbs' upper lip?

prevaricatus melanocytes. it keeps growing for some reason.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 12:17 PM on January 28, 2011

The cognitive dissonance between whatever's going on in Gibb's head and the words coming from his mouth is just painful to watch
posted by crayz at 12:17 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

"Reviewing our assistance posture based on events in the coming days"

Translation: Hosni, find a way to vent some pressure before the pot explodes. We pay for results.
posted by Joe Beese at 12:18 PM on January 28, 2011

VikingSword, we had to destroy the village country to save it.
posted by Justinian at 12:18 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

White House spokesperson is a thankless job.
posted by proj at 12:18 PM on January 28, 2011

Shorter Gibbs: 'We are monitoring the situation.' I can smell his flop-sweat from here.

Aaaaand al-Jazeera cuts away.
posted by sugarfish at 12:19 PM on January 28, 2011

He is clearly very certain that the situation is fast paced and that it is being monitored.
posted by Babblesort at 12:21 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Gibbs looks on EDGE.

"We are monitoring a fluid situation..."
"We are monitoring a dynamic situation..."
"We will review our position based on..."

I have no why I expected anything resembling a stance from the White House.

"President Obama has not spoken to President Mubarak."
posted by clearly at 12:21 PM on January 28, 2011

He really has nothing to say. I haven't heard so many "Uh's" since high school.
posted by Shit Parade at 12:21 PM on January 28, 2011

Listen, I'm not going to say that the administration response is correct or whatever, but when everyone is watching your every word for some crazy nuanced signal of a diplomatic position and questions are being asked in real time, you do your best to stick to your memorized message. If you deviate and do it wrong, you are de facto engaging in foreign policy.
posted by proj at 12:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

You guys, don't listen to what he's saying. Listen to what he's not saying.
posted by CunningLinguist at 12:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [16 favorites]

i really like that AJ is keeping GIbbs as a talking head and having images/video on the other 2/3 of the screen.

Earlier, when Hillary was obviously not saying anything meaningful, they cut her off and went to a British AJ anchor: "Yea. Rooooight. That was uh, Hillary Clinton..."
posted by clearly at 12:24 PM on January 28, 2011

Man. It squicks me out that facebook (and to a lesser extent twitter) are tools of revolution. I guess the neck beard in me wished there was a decentralized, non-corporarte/advertising based social network system in place.
posted by gofargogo at 12:24 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

What's that thing on Gibbs' upper lip?

Looks like a bad (and likely painful) cold sore to me. He's had it for at least a few days, from clips I've seen on evening news this week. But Abreva is so expensive even the White House might have trouble buying some out of petty cash.
posted by aught at 12:25 PM on January 28, 2011

They cut off Hillary because she moved on to talk about Colombia or something.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:27 PM on January 28, 2011

"Reviewing our assistance posture based on events in the coming days"

Isn't that politico-speech for "we're going to be reconsidering our foreign aid to Egypt," which was discussed as a good way to put pressure on Mubarak to step down peacefully back here?
posted by saulgoodman at 12:27 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Has anyone seen Murbarak in the last 24 hours?
posted by gofargogo at 12:29 PM on January 28, 2011

I don't think Washington wants Mubarak to step down. I think Washington wants him to loosen his iron fist just enough to keep from being overthrown.
posted by Joe Beese at 12:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

Isn't that politico-speech for "we're going to be reconsidering our foreign aid to Egypt," which was discussed as a good way to put pressure on Mubarak to step down peacefully back here?

Yes. I'm sure it seemed like an amazing idea until someone in the Obama administration started talking about it, then it totally became a strategy of the imperial overlords and inherently suspect.
posted by aught at 12:33 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Washington is basically whispering "Hey! Psst, Mubarak! Stop making us look like dicks!" through gritted teeth.
posted by dunkadunc at 12:38 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Ah, that's a good one. "That's all I would talk about publicly, anyway." Cue a huge line to get source quotes following the briefing.
posted by proj at 12:42 PM on January 28, 2011

Mubarak hasn't been seen; it's reported "the family" left for London last night.
posted by thinkpiece at 12:42 PM on January 28, 2011

Dip not thy toe into the pool of generalization, Bob.
posted by cortex at 12:43 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

"This pool isn't very deep, but it's quite wide."
posted by proj at 12:43 PM on January 28, 2011

Another first-hand account of the January 25 protests, by Yasmine El Rashidi, a Cairo-based writer and journalist.

William Pfaff discusses the current political situation in Tunisia.
posted by russilwvong at 12:44 PM on January 28, 2011

The old man (Mubarak) is 82 -- he isn't going to stand much longer anyway. It is way too far in the game to find another dictator successor (the son fled) ... this is the end.
posted by Surfurrus at 12:44 PM on January 28, 2011

Suspect Mubarak is busy perusing brochures for the Idi Amin Memorial Retirement home in Riyadh.
posted by Abiezer at 12:45 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

I bet Davos is fascinating right now.
posted by CunningLinguist at 12:46 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Interesting context from the Guardian, take what you will from it:

8.43pm GMT: While Robert Gibbs is saying as little as possible ("this is a fluid situation") in a baroque manner, al-Jazeera reports that "intense gunfire heard near key govt buildings in the Egyptian capital".

Very unusually, Gibbs is taking questions from foreign journalists. That almost never happens at a White House press briefing.

posted by proj at 12:48 PM on January 28, 2011

AJ saying 11 dead and 150 injured in Suez, tweets calling for blood donors.
posted by Abiezer at 12:52 PM on January 28, 2011

I know this is a fast-paced liveblogging type thread, so feel free to skip this comment.

I am stunned that this is happening now for the third time (Iran, Tunisia, and now Egypt), and most governments don't get what is happening or why these demonstrations are suddenly so effective when in generations past they were not. The mating of social networking technology with masses of the dispossessed is giving rise to what Gilles Deleuze called a "war machine", but don't be put off by that phrase. A war machine is a spontaneously emerging, flowing, evolving social force that deactivates the powers of State from within it's own geographic borders in response to prolonged marginalization of a group of people by the State:

"Either the State has at its disposal a violence that is not channeled through war; either it uses police officers and jailers in place of warriors...preventing all combat or, the State acquires an army, but in a way that presupposes a juridical integration of war and the organization of a military function. As for the war machine in itself, it seems to be irreducible to the State apparatus, to be outside its sovereignty and prior to its law: it comes from elsewhere...

...The State has no war machine of its own; it can only appropriate one in the form of a military institution, one that will continually cause it problems.

The law of the State is not the law of All or Nothing (State societies or counter-State societies) but that of interior and exterior. The State is sovereignty. But sovereignty only reigns over what it is capable of internalizing, of appropriating locally. Not only is there no universal State, but the outside of States cannot be reduced to "foreign policy," that is, to a set of relations among States. The outside appears simultaneously in two directions... but also the local mechanisms of bands, margins, minorities, which continue to affirm the rights of segmentary societies in opposition to the organs of State power...

But the war machine's form of exteriority is such that it exists only in its own metamorphoses; it exists in an industrial innovation as well as in a technological invention, in a commercial circuit as well as in a religious creation, in all flows and currents that only secondarily allow themselves to be appropriated by the State.

[E]ach time there is an operation against the State: insubordination, rioting, guerrilla warfare, or revolution as act, it can be said that a war machine has revived, that a new nomadic potential has appeared, accompanied by the reconstitution of a smooth space or a manner of being in space as though it were smooth (Virilio discusses the importance of the riot or revolutionary theme of "holding the street"). It is in this sense that the response of the State against all that threatens to move beyond it is to striate space...when a State does not succeed in striating its interior or neighboring space, the flows traversing that State necessarily adopt the stance of a war machine directed against it, deployed in a hostile or rebellious smooth space"

-assorted excerpts from A Thousand Plateaus, "Treatise on Nomadology--The War Machine", emphasis mine.

In my eyes this book is a vital text for decoding what has happened, and what will happen, in the 21st century.
posted by Pastabagel at 12:52 PM on January 28, 2011 [13 favorites]

"We are monitoring a fluid situation [in President Hosni Mubarak's pants]."
posted by lapsangsouchong at 12:53 PM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Tanks in Cairo on the move again. Unclear where they are going.
posted by CunningLinguist at 12:54 PM on January 28, 2011

The pool of generalization is a fluid that is being watched by a robust host.
posted by cortex at 12:55 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

In my eyes this book is a vital text for decoding what has happened

OK. So, how can I decode the book?
posted by msalt at 12:55 PM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

the Idi Amin Memorial Retirement home in Riyadh

I've always wondered about this...

What does Saudi Arabia get out of these arrangements? Or do they just have a soft spot for despots who are down on their luck?
posted by Joe Beese at 12:56 PM on January 28, 2011

cortex: Any idea as to how much site bandwidth goes up during threads like this one? I, for one, am constantly reloading for updates.
posted by dunkadunc at 12:57 PM on January 28, 2011

pb or Matt would be able to answer that, I don't really look directly at the analytics stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a significant bump but how significant I can't say.
posted by cortex at 12:59 PM on January 28, 2011

Probably a lot, but since MeFi is practically all text I doubt it would ever be a major issue.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:59 PM on January 28, 2011

Those are armored personnel carriers, not tanks

Indeed. This is powerful force being shuttled into place in advance of a major move. My belief is that soldiers were advised beforehand to appear friendly and to not antagonize protesters. In the timeless words of Chief Wiggum, "this is going to get worse before it gets better."

I hope I'm wrong.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 1:00 PM on January 28, 2011

Reading the wikileak on police brutality:

Some middle-class Egyptians did not report thefts from their apartment blocks because they knew the police would immediately go and torture "all of the doormen", the cable added. It cited one source who said the police would use routinely electric shocks against suspected criminals, and would beat up human rights lawyers who enter police stations to defend their clients. Women detainees allegedly faced sexual abuse. Demoralised officers felt solving crimes justified brutal interrogation methods, with some believing that Islamic law also sanctioned torture, the cable said.

One can see why the protestors might call on the army to protect them from the cops, as has been reported.
posted by rodgerd at 1:00 PM on January 28, 2011

There was definitely at least one tank in that line as well.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:01 PM on January 28, 2011

Burhanistan, about those armored personnel carriers - about 90 minutes ago on AJ, someone noted that those vehicles were likely part of the Presidential Guard. The speaker made it clear that the Guard was part of neither the army nor the police. Not sure whether that's the same situation now (AJ keeps crashing) but it sounded like there were three separate armed forces moving through Cairo's streets.
posted by catlet at 1:01 PM on January 28, 2011

Jazeera footage of protesters swarming onto the army vehicles is extraordinary
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:02 PM on January 28, 2011

Internet traffic to and from egypt
posted by condour75 at 1:03 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

three separate armed forces moving through Cairo's streets.

4 if you count the protesters themselves. They've proven themselves to be pretty fucking hard.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 1:05 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

> Candidate for iconic picture: protester kisses a riot cop

This one seems happier about it.
posted by jonesor at 1:05 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

Jazeera footage of protesters swarming onto the army vehicles is extraordinary

It's worth noting that (in the shots just showing on AJ English) the protesters climbing onto the tanks are kissing and shaking the hands of the soldiers, not attacking them. The text crawl on the site says the Army has not declared support either for Mubarak or the protesters, but those shots did not show a confrontation at least.
posted by aught at 1:05 PM on January 28, 2011

4 if you count the protesters themselves

All we need now are the Eagles, then we'll have a real battle.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 1:06 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

MeTa.
posted by IvoShandor at 1:07 PM on January 28, 2011

The AJ anchor probably should quit repeating that the NDP HQ was razed to the ground over live footage of flames coming out of its second floor.

Reports of members of the country's elite are fleeing the country.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:07 PM on January 28, 2011

sio42: One of the things we can probably be thankful for in the event of a transition is that the bureaucratic tradition is very, very strong in Egypt. I would not be surprised if some Stasi-esque records are unearthed, thus creating work for a generation of graduate students.
posted by proj at 1:09 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

what are some of the things people are chanting for those of us who don't speak arabic?

Earlier today, during the AJ English footage of the protests on the 6th of October Bridge in front of the Hilton hotel, the crowds were chanting pretty standard things like "Down, down with Mubarak" and "God is Great." It was actually sort of a curious thing to hear the woman who was translating discreetly whispering (well, not quite discreetly enough, I guess, because she was still faintly audible) the the translations to the reporter. I was sort of surprised, also, because I thought the AJ-E reporters were all bilingual in Arabic and English, but maybe there are differences in Egyptian Arabic that made it difficult for them to understand the crowd?
posted by aught at 1:12 PM on January 28, 2011

Some translations of slogans.
posted by dustyasymptotes at 1:13 PM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

those vehicles were likely part of the Presidential Guard. The speaker made it clear that the Guard was part of neither the army nor the police.

A convoy shuttling Mubarak out of the country? /optimism
posted by msalt at 1:13 PM on January 28, 2011

It's nonsensical to talk about being "fluent in Arabic" as Arabic is diglossic. There is a classical form (الفصحى), a colloquial form that varies within and between countries (العامية) and a Modern Standard (MSA) that is a variant of the classical form. Many people can read, write, and speak MSA but may not speak or understand the colloquial form. There are high costs in learning a colloquial variant and, depending on which you learn, you may not be able to understand the dialect in another country.
posted by proj at 1:15 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Burhanistan: “Those are armored personnel carriers, not tanks”

tapesonthefloor: “Indeed. This is powerful force being shuttled into place in advance of a major move. My belief is that soldiers were advised beforehand to appear friendly and to not antagonize protesters. In the timeless words of Chief Wiggum, "this is going to get worse before it gets better." I hope I'm wrong.”

I don't know how much credence to give to anything, of course, but a fellow who runs an Arab news agency based in London was speaking on Al-Jazeera a little while ago and saying we shouldn't even call those the "Egyptian army." His claim was that they're so poorly-paid and alienated from Mubarak himself that their sympathies are likely with the protesters, and not with him. His argument was that the only armed force that can be counted on by Mubarak is his personal police force, the force responsible for the beatings we'd been hearing about before everything really blew up. And his verdict was that this is flatly over.

Again, I don't know anything about the true facts, but that was an interesting perspective, to say the least.
posted by koeselitz at 1:16 PM on January 28, 2011

defleminecon: Yes. I realize it's kinda ridiculous, but my emotional reaction is the same.
posted by gofargogo at 1:18 PM on January 28, 2011

> Internet traffic to and from egypt

Also a couple of interesting graphs at renesys.com -- prefixes withdrawn, and networks not reachable by provider.
posted by jfuller at 1:18 PM on January 28, 2011

divabat: What I hear from my family in Cairo is that downtown is bad but not apocolyptic, brother's wife's mother lives three stories up and is unconcerned so long as she doesn't need to leave her apartment. No-one they know without a landline has been able to get through, but it's not because of an infrastructure-destroying event. It's like an entire nation forgot to pay the bill for their mobile.

On the upside, my brother and his wife and kids live on the outskirts of Cairo. There's no cars on the roads so the kids can play in the streets in front of their apartment for the first time ever.
posted by stet at 1:18 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Tweet from @bencnn (A CNN Reporter) Teenager showed me teargas canister "made in USA". Saw the same thing in Tunisia. Time to reconsider US exports?
posted by jonesor at 1:23 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Woah woah guy on Al Jazeera, comparing Mubarak to a Nazi? Now this whole thing just looks uncivil.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:23 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Internet traffic to and from egypt

I'm starting to wonder if any of the telecom companies will have the nerve to throw the switch back on, now that things have gone against the authorities who told them to unplug.
posted by aught at 1:23 PM on January 28, 2011

Rumours seem to be getting stronger that Mubarak has left:
Egypt25Jan: #jan25 #egypt News coming in about Mubarak fleeing with his family on a private jet from Almazah Airport
posted by Abiezer at 1:25 PM on January 28, 2011

furiousxgeorge: Woah woah guy on Al Jazeera, comparing Mubarak to a Nazi? Now this whole thing just looks uncivil.

Yeah, that's Fox News's job!
posted by mkultra at 1:26 PM on January 28, 2011

Two pro-west governments overturned in Africa in the space of a month? What comes in to fill them? I have to assume that the state department is sweating bullets right now.
posted by codacorolla at 1:28 PM on January 28, 2011

I'm starting to wonder if any of the telecom companies will have the nerve to throw the switch back on, now that things have gone against the authorities who told them to unplug.
posted by aught at 4:23 PM on January 28

I thought that the ISP serving the stock exchange was still up? I wonder if that's so govt cronies can loot the treasury and wire the money out of the country.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:29 PM on January 28, 2011

Yeah, and what's the deal with Syria? Who's next in the region?
posted by dunkadunc at 1:30 PM on January 28, 2011

Two pro-west governments overturned in Africa in the space of a month? What comes in to fill them? I have to assume that the state department is sweating bullets right now.

They should be sweating bullets. You cant tacitly (or openly) support corrupt dictatorships around the world and expect the subjects of those dictatorships to be okay with it.

Blowback is a bitch.
posted by Avenger at 1:31 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Who's next in the region?

Jordon?
posted by bonehead at 1:33 PM on January 28, 2011

"You cant tacitly (or openly) support corrupt dictatorships"

Yeah, $1.3bn a year in military aid is pretty open. It's also not like people didn't know what it was paying for:

Vincent Cannistraro, the CIA's former counterterrorism director, spoke to Newsday about a high-level al-Qaeda suspect taken from Guantanamo Bay to Egypt after refusing to cooperate with interrogators. “They promptly tore his fingernails out and he started to tell things,” Cannistraro said.

"If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear -- never to see them again -- you send them to Egypt," former CIA agent Bob Baer told The New Statesman.
posted by jaduncan at 1:34 PM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

التلفزيون المصري: رئيس مجلس الشعب يقول إن امرا مهما سيتم إعلانه في غضون وقت قصير

This is on Aljazeera's Arabic site news ticker: "Egyptian TV: the speaker of parliament says an important matter will be announced shortly."

Hmmm.
posted by lapsangsouchong at 1:35 PM on January 28, 2011

Why is everyone saying that the revolution will spread to Iran? Iran is MUCH more stable than most all other middle eastern countries, and few people in Iran would want to overthrow the theocracy, because for all of the evils the theocracy commits, it at least makes sure that the US and other foreign powers stay the hell out of Iran. Most people in Iran don't want a revolution. They already had one, and it completed its objectives.

Uh, were you paying attention in 2009?

But yeah shutting down the Internet and phone service is probably the worst way to keep people off the streets. They'll have nowhere else to go.

The idea that we should be 'neutral' in this doesn't make that much sense. Simply publicly withdrawing support for Mubarak could have a profound effect.

We always knew that, of course, but now the goverment has publicly admitted it by opening fire upon it's own people during their evening prayers. The Egyptian goverment has, esentially, lost. They may win the battle and crush the protestors, but they've still lost. The Egyptian people will never again be under any illusions as to the true nature of their state.

I don't think they were under any illusions. But now they'll know the government isn't as powerful as they thought, and that by acting together they can really fuck things up.

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, says he's "not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process." Can someone who understands the Middle East better explain this hesitance? I thought Israel would be more enthusiastic about the prospect of a democratic neighbour.

Lol. Egypt under Mubarak has been a pretty good ally of Israel, against the will of the people (i.e. assisting the blockade of Gaza), so a democratic Egypt would be less support of Israel then it currently is, probably.
posted by delmoi at 1:36 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Basically I'm curious whether or not fundamentalist theocracies will take up the space left by what seemed to be (mostly irreligious) kleptocracies, like what happened in Iran. That seems maybe as bad as the previous system, at least to my western point of view.
posted by codacorolla at 1:37 PM on January 28, 2011

I would be very surprised if Syria is next - the structure of the country is very different.
here's hoping both Egypt & Tunisia's revolution will actually end well - this is just the beginning
posted by motdiem2 at 1:38 PM on January 28, 2011

Incidentally, the Aljazeera Arabic site is automatically going through to the mobile version, though I'm accessing it on a laptop. Presumably they're having bandwidth issues...
posted by lapsangsouchong at 1:39 PM on January 28, 2011

"Basically I'm curious whether or not fundamentalist theocracies will take up the space left by what seemed to be (mostly irreligious) kleptocracies, like what happened in Iran. That seems maybe as bad as the previous system, at least to my western point of view."

The Iranian revolution was a lot more religiously lead, and the infrastructure of the priests was more fully developed. The army in Egypt is also secular, so surely Turkey Mk2. It's not that people are demanding theocracy.
posted by jaduncan at 1:39 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

who controls the army? is it one guy who makes decisions or do they have a pentagon-like structure or what?
posted by angrycat at 1:39 PM on January 28, 2011

His argument was that the only armed force that can be counted on by Mubarak is his personal police force, the force responsible for the beatings we'd been hearing about before everything really blew up. And his verdict was that this is flatly over.

In whose favor? I'm not following his reasoning.
posted by Joe Beese at 1:40 PM on January 28, 2011

Grangousier: "

"You probably don't give a lot of time thinking about Egypt," a Fox News presenter suggested about an hour ago, before explaining that "groups linked to al-Qaida" were in danger of taking over the government in Cairo."
Guardian Live Blog, 19:04

I'd like to say that I'm concerned that groups with links to Kevin Bacon Charlie Sheen's hernia might take power.
posted by symbioid at 1:40 PM on January 28, 2011

damn you poorly edited comment *shakesfistatself*
posted by symbioid at 1:41 PM on January 28, 2011

alright, that was definitely a tank in the rerun of the earlier footage of the APCs.
posted by mwhybark at 1:41 PM on January 28, 2011

"who controls the army? is it one guy who makes decisions or do they have a pentagon-like structure or what?"

Chiefs of staff, fully backed up by a military administrative centre (as one would expect). Army nominally in charge of all three services, but they are a bit fractious. One wouldn't expect the Air Force and Navy to matter much in this situation though.

The bigger split is the interior and defence ministry.
posted by jaduncan at 1:44 PM on January 28, 2011

Thousands protest in Jordan
posted by Avenger at 1:50 PM on January 28, 2011

Basically I'm curious whether or not fundamentalist theocracies will take up the space left by what seemed to be (mostly irreligious) kleptocracies, like what happened in Iran. That seems maybe as bad as the previous system, at least to my western point of view.

If you want a fundamentalist Islamic regime in the middle east, all you have to do is invade. It would be the same in the United States: once there is some external force that is vastly superior to your own, and you are completely denied your free will and security, religion is often the first comfort people turn to. This has been happening since the Israelites prophesied the destruction of Babylon.

Egypt has a long history in the civilized world, has a fairly literate population, and is just as terrified of sectarian violence as any other middle eastern nation. They will not turn to militant Islamism unless they aren't given a choice.

Hezbollah, Hamas, the Iraqi resistance, and the Taliban all arose out of the pressure cooker of foreign invasion, imposed poverty, and a total loss of security. As our president once quipped, I think we can understand (even if we don't agree) why they would cling to their guns and their holy books. But the longer we fund dictatorships to rule with impunity, the better and better violent fundamentalism will look to that country's youth.
posted by notion at 1:50 PM on January 28, 2011 [18 favorites]

a lot of hardware

The last quality manufacturing still done in America.
posted by Joe Beese at 1:50 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Who's next in the region?

Yemen?
posted by marxchivist at 1:52 PM on January 28, 2011

Twitter says Israeli TV reporting that Mubarak has left the country on a private jet.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:52 PM on January 28, 2011

Thousands of Jordanians march to press for reform
posted by bonehead at 1:54 PM on January 28, 2011

Twitter says Israeli TV reporting that Mubarak has left the country on a private jet.

For good or for his own immediate safety?
posted by Sticherbeast at 1:54 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

There's also an uprising in Yemen.

Citizens in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia are protesting against poor service during a catastrophic flood that occurred there.
posted by symbioid at 1:55 PM on January 28, 2011

I think it's significant that when the military was called in to back up the police and enforce the curfew, they basically didn't. It's now the middle of the night there, and curfew - what curfew? The army is driving their big scary vehicles around while the protesters climb aboard or hang on for a ride. This is a huge change from how things were six hours ago when the protesters were being attacked by the police - who have all but disappeared, incidentally. I'm daring to hope for the best.
posted by Marla Singer at 2:04 PM on January 28, 2011

AJ was just showing scenes of protesters in Alexandria coming to the aid of the military personnel that were torn from their vehicles by the angry crowds, protecting them from the mob, giving them water. Can you imagine standing your ground and pleading clemency in front of an angry mob? Fucking stirring. Show us how it's done, Egypt.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 2:08 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

I've been glued to Al Jazeera on television all day. Absolutely fascinating.

Also interesting to see Kuwait buying off its own people.
posted by knapah at 2:08 PM on January 28, 2011

From @mohamed (Mohamed Nanabhay, head of online for Al Jazeera English):
"We're about to release some of todays @AJEnglish Egypt footage under a Creative Commons license. Check cc.aljazeera.net later tonight"

And from The Onion:
"Hosni Mubarak Reaches Out To Twitter Followers For Ideas On How To Keep Regime Intact"
posted by Asparagirl at 2:09 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

apparently the speaker of the Egyptian Parliament is going to make an announcement soon.

This is amazing.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:09 PM on January 28, 2011

sio42: "if there's not much looting going on, that is yet another remarkable thing to add to the wonders of the egyptian people (christians protecting muslims, muslims praying earlier while be fired upon with tear gas, protection of the museum)"

This reminds me that a few weeks ago, there was a group of Muslims who encircled a group of praying Christians in support/protection due to an earlier attack upon Christians from extremists.
posted by symbioid at 2:12 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mubarak on AJ right now!
posted by delmoi at 2:17 PM on January 28, 2011

Mubarek looking haggard on Al Jazeera. Ass covering.
posted by maudlin at 2:18 PM on January 28, 2011

"These protests couldn't have happened without the great space for freedom of expression..."

Hmm...
posted by knapah at 2:19 PM on January 28, 2011

Rioting is a sign that Egyptians have buttloads of freedoms. QED.
posted by cortex at 2:19 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I thought Mubarak stepping down now would be too easy. Sadly.
posted by immlass at 2:19 PM on January 28, 2011

Honestly, he looks pretty good for 82.
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:20 PM on January 28, 2011

Mubarak says he regrets the violence on both sides. No. You don't get to send riot police out with rubber-coated steel bullets and tear gas and then say that. You don't have them open fire on their own people.
posted by cmyk at 2:20 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

"These demonstrations would not have taken place without freedoms"? Cheek.
posted by maudlin at 2:20 PM on January 28, 2011

I'm daring to hope for the best.

Me, too.

As one pundit noted on NPR, Tunisia, Egypt, and a lot of other countries that have recently seen these kinds of populist uprisings all seem to be characterized by massive and growing income divides--essentially, they're nations with no middle class or a rapidly shrinking middle class that seem to think police force is a suitable stand-in for economic justice. Maybe the powers that be abroad, and here at home, will finally get the message.
posted by saulgoodman at 2:21 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

To not appear on TV while declaring a nationwide curfew would make him look weak.


I find the suddeness of his appearance fascinating
posted by banal evil at 2:21 PM on January 28, 2011

Honestly, he looks pretty good for 82.

Plastic surgery. Despots are always vain.
posted by mr_roboto at 2:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Wow, this Mubarak speech is typical Statist, exculpatory PR bullshit. Christ.
posted by symbioid at 2:22 PM on January 28, 2011

This is starting to look pretty good.

And I think the kind of subtle pressure that the Obama administration is rumored to have been putting on Mubarak is exactly the right thing to have done. By using our support of Egypt as a bargaining chip with the old regime we can continue to use it with the new one, but because we didn't take overt action to topple the old regime, the new one doesn't have reason to distrust us.

Here's hoping we can open immediate relations with whoever is in power tomorrow.
posted by valkyryn at 2:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mubarak on AJ right now!


Also streaming at BBC.com.
posted by modernnomad at 2:22 PM on January 28, 2011

Shutting down the internet and cell phones = freedom. Uh huh.
posted by Marla Singer at 2:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Mubarak keeps leading up to statements where it sounds like he's about to step down, like his talk of vesting the power of the constitution in the people, except that at the last moment he always fakes out with a non-sequitor about reforms.
posted by klangklangston at 2:23 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

He's talking about their great social programmes and plans.... not sure this sounds like someone who is about to step down.
posted by modernnomad at 2:24 PM on January 28, 2011

I think he just threw gasoline on the fire.
posted by empath at 2:25 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I GAVE YOU THE BEST YEARS OF MY LIFE
posted by cortex at 2:25 PM on January 28, 2011 [23 favorites]

I GAVE YOU THE BEST YEARS OF MY LIFE

LOL
posted by Ironmouth at 2:26 PM on January 28, 2011

Damn. So he didn't just say "uncle"? (Can't watch the feed right now, so I really appreciate this thread.) Well, the choice may be out of his hands anyway, if the military is aligned against him.
posted by saulgoodman at 2:26 PM on January 28, 2011

He's leaning hard on promises about taking care of the poor. Hrm.
posted by koeselitz at 2:26 PM on January 28, 2011

the key is what he says for tomorrow.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:26 PM on January 28, 2011

He's in Egypt, right? He didn't bail out with the other elites?
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:27 PM on January 28, 2011

WHOA - He just said he's stepping down!
posted by koeselitz at 2:27 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

BINGO, he said it, he said it!
posted by zix at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011

That was surprising.
posted by empath at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011

WHOA - He just said he's stepping down!

Sounded more like he said he was firing the government, and appointing new ones.
posted by knapah at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

ZING!
posted by Marla Singer at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011

He's telling the guv to step down today, new gov tomorrow, but it's not clear at all that that that is meant to include him. Hoom.
posted by cortex at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011

apparently dissolving parliament.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011

I'm confused. What did he just say?
posted by empath at 2:28 PM on January 28, 2011

Wow. wonder how long he will remain in power after *firing the entire government*?? wtf.
posted by crackingdes at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

Al Jazeera - "I'm not going anywhere, new government tomorrow."

Last roll of the dice?
posted by knapah at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

So did he just say "tomorrow I'll have more details about how we're going to deal with this?"

Oddly reminds me of that episode of the Office where Michael faces the shareholders and in the face of their revolt he says "ok, we'll be back in a bit with a plan.. a 45 point plan!"
posted by modernnomad at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

Shorter Mubarak: "No, YOU go first."
posted by maudlin at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

No, he's not going anywhere, but he's asking "the government" to step down, and he'll reform a new government tomorrow.
posted by klangklangston at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

I think he just roundly scolded everyone and told them to go home.

Does he have any idea what is going on over there?
posted by cmyk at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Like, "folks, I heard you loud and clear, this government is a sham! Let's get rid of it, together! Man, those guys, they sucked!"
posted by cortex at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011 [18 favorites]

I don't think he's stepping down.

He did play both sides. Dunno what will happen. Trying to ride the storm. Not sure it will work. If you make yourself the only ruler, when things go wrong, you are the focus.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

It looks like he's still in charge, but he's firing everyone else.
posted by gofargogo at 2:29 PM on January 28, 2011

He said he is firing the government, basically. He is not stepping down.
posted by rollbiz at 2:30 PM on January 28, 2011

The Al Jazeera English live video feed keeps crashing on me, not sure if the problem is on their end or mine.

I'm working right now so I only need audio, not video -- does anyone know of an online radio station that's rebroadcasting their audio? Or another good online source for continuous live radio coverage? I assumed that the BBC would be covering but the first few stations I tried weren't.
posted by Jacqueline at 2:30 PM on January 28, 2011

It sounded to me like the emperor has dissolved the senate and the last remnants of the old republic have been swept away.
posted by cmfletcher at 2:31 PM on January 28, 2011 [16 favorites]

Dodgy move from my perspective unless he's very confident of the support of the military. He just fired the Minister of Defence, the Minister of the Interior etc. If they still have any power and can command the police / troops, he's going to be in some trouble.
posted by knapah at 2:31 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

stet: ack, they're on their way to cairo now, so on the road! hopefully they'll be able to get in touch one way or another.

the "you have freedoms to protest!!" line is very oddly familiar (hey, malaysia).
posted by divabat at 2:31 PM on January 28, 2011

via Twitter: @AJElive: Mubarak: I have ordered the government to step down and I will name a new government tomorrow
posted by catlet at 2:31 PM on January 28, 2011

Mubarak is the state. He's just firing his employees.
posted by Avenger at 2:31 PM on January 28, 2011

Yeah, it sounds like he's not stepping down. He spent a lot of time trying to act as though he identifies with the protesters, and then he seems to have put this off on the government, blaming them.
posted by koeselitz at 2:32 PM on January 28, 2011

It looks like he's still in charge, but he's firing everyone else.

The buck stops everywhere else!
posted by mr_roboto at 2:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

AJ commentator is pointing this out for the sham it is: claims the parliament has no real power, while the president has control. Accurate assessment, or did I misunderstand?
posted by maudlin at 2:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

looks pretty good for 82

You know how in The Lord of the Rings, the evil of the Ring gives Gollum "unnatural long life"?

There's something about political power that works the same way.

Look at Dick Cheney.
posted by Joe Beese at 2:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

(Oh and I would prefer to listen to live coverage that is focused on broadcasts from reporters within the country, not just Western pundits pontificating from the safety of their offices in London, DC, New York, etc.)
posted by Jacqueline at 2:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Al Jazeera now pointing out that Ministers of Defence and Interior are likely to be in the new Cabinet, thus calming that potential storm.
posted by knapah at 2:33 PM on January 28, 2011

This would mean Minister of Defense and Interior Minister fired. Wonder what will happen tomorrow. Will they turn the internet back on?
posted by Ironmouth at 2:33 PM on January 28, 2011

looks pretty good for 82

You know how in The Lord of the Rings, the evil of the Ring gives Gollum "unnatural long life"?

There's something about political power that works the same way.

Look at Dick Chene

Think its just hair dye, actually.

Cheney has lost a lot of weight. Even creepier now.

Never forget a 2-hour convo with the ABC White House correspondent. Described Cheney as a "madman."
posted by Ironmouth at 2:35 PM on January 28, 2011

Tomorrow the protesters should do some sort of all-black, silent protest shit unless opened fire upon.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:36 PM on January 28, 2011

old Dick is looking a bit gaunt now

Did you notice how Bilbo looked after he gave up the Ring?
posted by Joe Beese at 2:37 PM on January 28, 2011 [13 favorites]

Looks like the US Government will cut 1.5 billion in aid if he opens up on the protesters. that's a big club.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:38 PM on January 28, 2011

-- does anyone know of an online radio station that's rebroadcasting their audio?

the BBC is streaming live coverage too
posted by rubyrudy at 2:39 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I know it's the National Post (which is right up there with FOX?), but, supposedly one of the instigators of the protests had American training

(seems pretty stupid/typical conspiracy mongering, to me, but eh... interesting if true).
posted by symbioid at 2:40 PM on January 28, 2011

Looks like the US Government will cut 1.5 billion in aid if he opens up on the protesters. that's a big club.

Cite?
posted by rollbiz at 2:40 PM on January 28, 2011

Egypt has a long history in the civilized world

That has to be the understatement of a lifetime.
posted by Bonzai at 2:41 PM on January 28, 2011 [26 favorites]

Cite?

Here's one from earlier in this thread.
posted by saulgoodman at 2:43 PM on January 28, 2011

Looks like the US Government will cut 1.5 billion in aid if he opens up on the protesters. that's a big club.

Cite?

Dude on Al Jazeera.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:45 PM on January 28, 2011

From AJ's streaming coverage, after Mubarak's speech the protesters on the street started shouting "Down down with Mubarak".
posted by antinomia at 2:45 PM on January 28, 2011

I know it's the National Post (which is right up there with FOX?), but, supposedly one of the instigators of the protests had American training


It's not even from the National Post -- that article is just a word for word reprint of a Daily Telegraph (UK) story.
posted by modernnomad at 2:46 PM on January 28, 2011

There's an AskMe on Middle East streaming coverage.

Otherwise, the video stream from AJ uses Flash 10, if that helps.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:46 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

(seems pretty stupid/typical conspiracy mongering, to me, but eh... interesting if true).

I don't think so. This is following the Open Society model of the Color Revolutions. The flyer that was distributed is basically straight from the same manual they used in eastern europe.
posted by empath at 2:47 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Just want to say thanks to everyone updating this thread; I am following this entirely through your live updates here.
posted by LobsterMitten at 2:48 PM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

It's pretty hilarious how Mubarak was all like, "Yeah, I know, the government totally sucks! I'm with you protesters! It's the incredibly weak parliament and cabinet who's to blame! Those guys are dicks!"
posted by klangklangston at 2:48 PM on January 28, 2011

Does Mubarak really expect "Meet the new boss (me!), same as the old boss (me!)" to fly? Al Jazeera showed one group of protesters break out in renewed chants of "Down with Mubarak!" although I have no idea how widespread that might be. If he doesn't turn the cell phones back on pronto, I wouldn't be surprised to see the people turn to a new target.
posted by Marla Singer at 2:48 PM on January 28, 2011

I know it's the National Post (which is right up there with FOX?), but, supposedly one of the instigators of the protests had American training


It's not even from the National Post -- that article is just a word for word reprint of a Daily Telegraph (UK) story.

We have apparently given 135 million to pro-democracy groups over the last 2 years. So, like terrorism, we are again financing both sides.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:49 PM on January 28, 2011

Yep, very 'the king's bad advisers must go!'
posted by Abiezer at 2:50 PM on January 28, 2011

I suppose Mubarak is hoping that this will break the momentum of the uprising while getting Washington off his back?
posted by Joe Beese at 2:50 PM on January 28, 2011

Eerily similar speech given by the Shah before he fled Iran . Via twitter oxfordgirl & tehranbureau
posted by tingting at 2:51 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

I suppose Mubarak is hoping that this will break the momentum of the uprising while getting Washington off his back?

I think that is exactly what he's trying to do. Wonder what his plan is for tomorrow. That's where it is all going to get figured out. If nobody shows up, its over. If everyone shows up, its all beginning.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:54 PM on January 28, 2011

Yeah, Hosni could be buying time to set up his family, protect his wealth, and get a good deal somewhere.
posted by vrakatar at 2:54 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mubarak attempts to shoop self to head of protests?
posted by progosk at 2:55 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Hah, Al Jazeera just said he doesn't really have another throw of the dice if the people don't buy this. Good to know I'm ahead of the game!
posted by knapah at 2:56 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

No, he's saying he'll replace his cabinet.
posted by delmoi at 2:57 PM on January 28, 2011

I have not seen the video but is there any indication if it was live or not?
posted by proj at 2:58 PM on January 28, 2011

The Al Jazeera anchor quoting Mubarak's speech verbatim while showing video of the police firing tear gas at protesters was a brilliantly poignant moment.
posted by auto-correct at 2:58 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I think Mubarak's putting too much stock in the 19th-century view that Egyptians were too lazy and diverse to be ruled by anyone but a strongman (a philosophy Nassar embraced). I wish I could find my Mideast Development poli-sci books because they were full of hilarious shit like that, always with an arch, "these views no longer reflect political science consensus" or some such. Said laid into them in Orientalism too.
posted by klangklangston at 2:59 PM on January 28, 2011

No, he's saying he'll replace his cabinet.

Er, I was replying to koeselitz
posted by delmoi at 3:01 PM on January 28, 2011

Can you even imagine a US television reporter asking, "Well what exactly was that supposed to mean?" and calling out a politician's latest speech or press conference as being basically nonsense? Yet that's what Al Jazeera just did, not only after Mubarak's speech, but earlier after both White House press conferences. Why can't we have journalists like that?
posted by Marla Singer at 3:01 PM on January 28, 2011 [30 favorites]

The tools of any revolution, whether they speeches, rocks, bottles or 140 character blurbs, will never be without imperfection.

Rocks aren't perfect, but it would still be terrible for a revolution to depend on a supply of them shipped from overseas.
posted by cdward at 3:02 PM on January 28, 2011

Wow. The AJ anchors and interviewees are *really* laying into that speech.
posted by jaduncan at 3:05 PM on January 28, 2011

Wow, the woman on Al Jazeera right now (from New York) is not mincing words.
posted by rollbiz at 3:05 PM on January 28, 2011

because of this thread I'm watching Al Jazeera and not whatever crap that TV would foist on me
posted by desjardins at 3:08 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

The woman anchoring the show now seems not quite ready for the moment.
posted by Joe Beese at 3:08 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

The woman anchoring the show now seems not quite ready for the moment.

She also seems to be angling for that Everyone in the streets=Muslim Brotherhood fallacy.
posted by rollbiz at 3:10 PM on January 28, 2011

Tanks have taken control of Tahir Square, apparently. Don't like this.
posted by Abiezer at 3:14 PM on January 28, 2011

The woman anchoring the show now seems not quite ready for the moment.

She came off kind of dismissive of the Egyptian woman in NY, as if she felt the woman's passion was uncalled for or inappropriate, or something. Don't like her.
posted by zarah at 3:16 PM on January 28, 2011

I fear this is going to end badly for all concerned. I'm praying for a free and democratic Egypt, but I'm expecting the Muslim Brotherhood hardliners to prevail. Just as the same as the Mullahs in 1979 in Iran and the Reds in Moscow in 1917. I need a Stella.
posted by humanfont at 3:18 PM on January 28, 2011

It's fuck all like Iran - where's the charismatic religious leader in exile waiting to return?
posted by Abiezer at 3:19 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

One thing that's very, very important to remember. In 20th century revolutions, the ultimate power holders are very rarely the primary opposition during the initial upheaval. This is why we had so many countries in the 20th century that underwent so-called democratic revolutions and ended up equally undemocratic or less democratic than prior to the revolution. The manner of transition is hugely important.
posted by proj at 3:20 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I wonder if Qatar will fall as well. It is Al Jazeeras patron.
posted by humanfont at 3:21 PM on January 28, 2011

It's fuck all like Iran - where's the charismatic religious leader in exile waiting to return?

Here.

Am I doing it wrong?
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 3:21 PM on January 28, 2011

Can you even imagine a US television reporter asking, "Well what exactly was that supposed to mean?" and calling out a politician's latest speech or press conference as being basically nonsense? Yet that's what Al Jazeera just did, not only after Mubarak's speech, but earlier after both White House press conferences. Why can't we have journalists like that?

Does anyone else remember, oh say 7 years ago, when Al Jazeera was a nonjournalistic al queda sympathizing bunch of muslims?

If the spread of the internet has played a part in opening the eyes of the Arab world and hastening the downfall of these archaic regimes, I can't help but feel some western populaces and countries aren't so far removed from the same phenomena
posted by crayz at 3:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [9 favorites]

Is anyone else getting that occasional repeat on the occasional repeat on the Al Jazeera feed?
posted by tapesonthefloor at 3:22 PM on January 28, 2011

He's my guess as the eventual 'winner', but he's a pro-West liberal, no?
posted by Abiezer at 3:22 PM on January 28, 2011

It's fuck all like Iran - where's the charismatic religious leader in exile waiting to return?

Yeah, it seems like would be Mohamed Elbaradei, who is a Nobel Laureate. But we don't really know who will end up in control.
posted by delmoi at 3:23 PM on January 28, 2011

The mentioned possible prime minister, Rachid Mohamed Rachid.
posted by Ironmouth at 3:24 PM on January 28, 2011

Yeah, it seems like would be Mohamed Elbaradei, who is a Nobel Laureate. But we don't really know who will end up in control.

Don't think he is a religious leader, however. He's a technocrat.
posted by Ironmouth at 3:25 PM on January 28, 2011

Obama will be speaking soon.
posted by delmoi at 3:28 PM on January 28, 2011

Obama up shortly it sounds like.
posted by cortex at 3:28 PM on January 28, 2011

Is the BBC feed on a break right now? I only see a message saying coverage will return soon.
posted by cell divide at 3:28 PM on January 28, 2011

Never mind, it's back now. Sorry.
posted by cell divide at 3:30 PM on January 28, 2011

Love how the AJ anchor just cold cuts John Kerry off when he starts with the rambling platitudes.
posted by auto-correct at 3:30 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Why can't we have journalists like that?

To be fair, we do. But they only become journalists when they see someone really off the reservation, and of the opposite party. Fox grills Democrats, MSNBC and CNN grill Republicans... Anderson Cooper seems to step up the most, but then again, I don't watch much TV.

But, on the whole for the breadth of coverage when I do watch, American media is toothless, dumb, and they seem to prefer celebrity gossip to actual news.
posted by notion at 3:31 PM on January 28, 2011

Cook was just on PBS. Perhaps a revamped 'Egyptian Revolutionary Command Council' might pop up.
posted by clavdivs at 3:32 PM on January 28, 2011

Is it just me or is Kerry trying to sell us on the idea that Mubarak remaining in power need not mean a defeat for reform?
posted by Joe Beese at 3:33 PM on January 28, 2011

Obama calling for the Egyptians to restore the internet.
posted by delmoi at 3:34 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is it just me or is Obama tacitly endorsing Mubarak?
posted by auto-correct at 3:35 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

"Violence and destruction will not lead to the reforms they seek."

I'll remember this for the next surge. grumble grumble
posted by notion at 3:35 PM on January 28, 2011 [9 favorites]

"Meaningful dialgoue"

Uh huh.
posted by Joe Beese at 3:36 PM on January 28, 2011

Indeed. The US is still supporting Mubarak.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 3:36 PM on January 28, 2011

Pretty weak stuff. Was hoping to see some balls from Obama there.
posted by auto-correct at 3:38 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Will the protesters challenge the military?
posted by kuatto at 3:38 PM on January 28, 2011

The CIA doesn't want to lose Egypt as a place to disappear people.
posted by Marla Singer at 3:39 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Disappointing.
posted by empath at 3:40 PM on January 28, 2011

No mention of the claimed threat to remove aid if Egypt don't play ball, I notice.
posted by jaduncan at 3:40 PM on January 28, 2011

Well, that's the textbook US response to this kind of thing. Or should I say, more of the same.
posted by knapah at 3:40 PM on January 28, 2011

That seemed entirely staged. It was not an accident that Mubarak spoke, and Obama spoke right after despite the time difference.
posted by notion at 3:41 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Of course Mubarak said what he said. He's in de Nile.



sorry! someone had to do it!
posted by Asparagirl at 3:41 PM on January 28, 2011 [14 favorites]

Yep, vacillating. You can't work with the Egyptian government to advance the aspiration of the Egyptian people if what they want if for that government to go.
posted by Abiezer at 3:42 PM on January 28, 2011

Disgusting. These people are not shouting in the streets for vague "reforms", and behaving as if they are is an insult. They want Mubarak out, and that is their right.
posted by vorfeed at 3:43 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

If the AJ guy went on CNN and gave that explanation that the Egyptians hate the US for giving Mubarak the power to tyrannize them, I suspect the producers would physically attack him on air.
posted by Joe Beese at 3:44 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Does anyone else remember, oh say 7 years ago, when Al Jazeera was a nonjournalistic al queda sympathizing bunch of muslims?

Eh? Maybe in your neck of the woods. Seems to me AJ had real (and big name) journalists from the get-go.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:49 PM on January 28, 2011

I mean, I don't really blame Obama and Clinton for their talking points. I get that if he goes all in against Mubarak and the revolution doesn't stick, then the US gov interests in the middle east are fucked.

I just kind of wish Obama could just say "fuck it, this matters". I really, really hate to compare Obama to Reagan like this but, but "Mr Gorbachev, please work towards reforms and respect your citizens' rights" doesn't really have the same ring to it.
posted by auto-correct at 3:49 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

I really, really hate to compare Obama to Reagan

The apt comparison here is to Carter.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 3:50 PM on January 28, 2011

We can't ignore Israel in all this. I have Jewish friends telling me that Israel is in a state of panic right now.
posted by empath at 3:51 PM on January 28, 2011

"Mr Gorbachev, please work towards reforms and respect your citizens' rights"

In fairness to Obama, Egypt isn't a long-standing enemy of the U.S. It was a lot easier for Reagan to take that confrontational a line against Gorbachev and the Soviet Union.
posted by fatbird at 3:52 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

This New Yorker piece is worth reading in full:

The future of the Mubarak family’s grip on Egypt now appears to be a matter for the Egyptian Army to decide. ...

... the generals could decide, as other Arab generals in their position have before, to level their guns in defense of the status quo. The People’s Liberation Army did that at Tiananmen Square, of course. ... The students and the urban workers who had persuaded themselves that they were near victory were also stunned by the Army’s indiscriminate, decisive violence. They seemed to expect until the last hours that the military would stand with them. We can hope, at least, for something better in Egypt during the days ahead. Its Army officers have lived in a much wider world than the P.L.A.’s commanders had known. Many of Egypt’s generals have probably learned by now to think for themselves. They may not be democrats, but they will not likely wish to act merely as bodyguards for a despot.

posted by Joe Beese at 3:52 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Five fresh fish, i took that comment as AJ was perceived to be nonjournalistic, al queda sympathizing etc...I know it was spun that way, and discussed that way by many in my (very liberal) neck of the woods. Unfair and untrue, but that's how some people saw it then.
posted by gofargogo at 3:55 PM on January 28, 2011

It was a lot easier for Reagan to take that confrontational a line against Gorbachev and the Soviet Union.

Yeah, I agree, and probably a bad comparison on my part. Just wished he'd said something with meaning.
posted by auto-correct at 3:56 PM on January 28, 2011

I really wish there was a better way for people around the world to talk to each other regularly without going through the media. I'd love to hear what average Egyptians are thinking right now (and Jordanians and Yemeni's, etc).

A few have been posting on Reddit recently, but I wish there were a way to keep an ongoing conversation going. The more friends that everyone has in other countries, the less likely war is going to happen again. It's one thing to bomb 'abdul in baghdad', and quite another to bomb 'abdul, my twitter follower'.

Iran says they need nuclear weapons to protect themselves from us? No, they just need facebook.
posted by empath at 3:57 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

"I really wish there was a better way for people around the world to talk to each other regularly without going through the media. I'd love to hear what average Egyptians are thinking right now (and Jordanians and Yemeni's, etc)."

There is. The Egyptians made sure it was cut off.
posted by jaduncan at 3:59 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Unconfirmed reports on Twitter say that Israeli TV news is saying that Mubarak is in actually in Switzerland right now, which means the speech was either pre-taped in Egypt or taped in Switzerland for broadcast. Surely there's some way for the media to find out the origin of the feed?
posted by Asparagirl at 4:01 PM on January 28, 2011

I have Jewish friends telling me that Israel is in a state of panic right now.

When you brought this up, I realized that I had gone all day without thinking about how today's events will affect Israel.
posted by Joe Beese at 4:01 PM on January 28, 2011 [7 favorites]

I mean, I don't really blame Obama and Clinton for their talking points. I get that if he goes all in against Mubarak and the revolution doesn't stick, then the US gov interests in the middle east are fucked.

Really now. That $1.5 billion in annual aid wouldn't buy us any continuing influence if Mubarak stays in power?
posted by crayz at 4:06 PM on January 28, 2011

jebus, they are putting fig leafs on the Sphinx here.
posted by clavdivs at 4:10 PM on January 28, 2011

Joe Beese: "I have Jewish friends telling me that Israel is in a state of panic right now.

When you brought this up, I realized that I had gone all day without thinking about how today's events will affect Israel"

The funny thing is, I only thought about this in context with Israel when it came to what it meant to the US. Funny that.
posted by symbioid at 4:10 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

The countries do share a border, and have engaged in war before. Perhaps you guys would have more fun with another mis-attributed quote so you can really get the hate rolling.
posted by rosswald at 4:21 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

John Kerry, disappointing me immensely as my senior senator, yet again...
posted by rollbiz at 4:26 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

That $1.5 billion in annual aid wouldn't buy us any continuing influence if Mubarak stays in power?

There are degrees of influence, and degrees of trust that such an influential relationship will continue.
posted by fatbird at 4:26 PM on January 28, 2011

MSNBC: Mobile phone service and internet service have reportedly been restored in Egypt.
posted by orthogonality at 4:31 PM on January 28, 2011

I can get to the web site of the U.S. embassy in Cairo. Supposedly that was impossible before.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 4:34 PM on January 28, 2011

That seemed entirely staged. It was not an accident that Mubarak spoke, and Obama spoke right after despite the time difference.

That's doesn't require a conspiracy, just common sense. Obama had a statement scheduled, then delayed it when word came out that Mubarak was going to speak. It would be stupid to make a big statement before he knew what Mubarak was going to say.
posted by msalt at 4:39 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Hosni Mubarak: "The countries do share a border, and have engaged in war before. Perhaps you guys would have more fun with another mis-attributed quote so you can really get the hate rolling"*

;)

(and you can thank my** "mefiquote" greasemonkey script, combined w/a non-attributed quote in my quote for my "misquote")

No, but seriously, of course they do, and that had that nasty little war in 1967 which led to things kinda changing the landscape in 1967, and which is WHY the whole Israel issue and US support of Egypt as one of the few allies of Israel in the Middle East does come up. If you read hate into it, well that's your issue, not mine. I was merely talking about the context of how/when Israel came into it for me. I am not, after all, an Israeli citizen, but an American citizen, which means (despite me wishing for considering myself a "world citizen") the impact I analyze it as, is one who is dealing with the current US policy in the Middle East, which, as I said, goes towards one of the key figures in the region... and if you think that I'm trying to say the US is eeeeeeeeevil or Israel is Nazi Germany, think again. I disagree with a lot of Israeli policies, but that's not what this thread is about. It's about Egypt, and the power structure, and potential ramifications of that change. Which, as an American means that the political calculations have to do with the delicate balance in the alignment of Middle East alliances.

But hey, thanks for thinking I'm just another anti-zionist who hate all Jews or whatever it is that was running through your head.

*Original quote by rosswald, not Hosni Mubarak.
**My in the sense that I have it installed, not My in the sense of creation -- that would be, IIRC, Plutor's baby.
posted by symbioid at 4:39 PM on January 28, 2011

Heh. While former 'bassador Bolton raised a fair point (Hamas), I love that Jazeera's willing to call bullshit on him, and that their very first analyst immediately starts talking about Bolton's hypocrisy.
posted by klangklangston at 4:41 PM on January 28, 2011

MSNBC: Mobile phone service and internet service have reportedly been restored in Egypt

---

Egypt's government must return Internet access to the country by Monday or perhaps suffer massive economic damage, as banks and other economic institutions return to work without the ability to conduct commerce. ... Not only would it impact government holdings, but it's sure to hit those investors, businesses and middle-class citizens who may support the status quo of the Mubarak administration.
posted by Joe Beese at 4:44 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Five fresh fish, i took that comment as AJ was perceived to be nonjournalistic, al queda sympathizing etc...I know it was spun that way, and discussed that way by many in my (very liberal) neck of the woods. Unfair and untrue, but that's how some people saw it then.

A lot of us had our eyes opened in 2004 when Control Room came out. I know I did.
posted by marsha56 at 4:46 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

"But hey, thanks for thinking I'm just another anti-zionist who hate all Jews or whatever it is that was running through your head."

Not what I said, and not what I meant. Thanks though.
posted by rosswald at 4:46 PM on January 28, 2011

Six words - Don't you think he looks tired?
posted by warbaby at 4:54 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

cmyk: "I think he just roundly scolded everyone and told them to go home. Does he have any idea what is going on over there?"

cortex: "Like, "folks, I heard you loud and clear, this government is a sham! Let's get rid of it, together! Man, those guys, they sucked!""

Hosni Mubarak: the Eric Cartman of Middle Eastern dictators.
posted by Rhaomi at 4:55 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

This thread is fantastic. I haven't been able to get in front of a tv, but reading the comments in here is so informative.
posted by cashman at 5:00 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

It's 3am in Cairo, and people are still out in the streets.
posted by dejah420 at 5:03 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

rosswald: ""But hey, thanks for thinking I'm just another anti-zionist who hate all Jews or whatever it is that was running through your head."

Not what I said, and not what I meant. Thanks though"

Apologies for reading into your comment about getting "the hate rolling" then, especially when in conjunction with the very touchy topic if Israel. I just wanted to make sure that my stance wasn't misunderstood. That said, enough of the derail. Misunderstandings and all that!
posted by symbioid at 5:03 PM on January 28, 2011

Did they just say on AJ that the protesters are now turning towards the US and British embassies? I was momentarily distracted.
posted by Marla Singer at 5:04 PM on January 28, 2011

My heart is struck and still by the dignity of the Egyptian people. I keep thinking of Yeats:

"Too long a sacrifice
Can make a stone of the heart.
O when may it suffice?
That is Heaven's part, our part
To murmur name upon name,
As a mother names her child
When sleep at last has come
On limbs that had run wild.
What is it but nightfall?
No, no, not night but death;
Was it needless death after all?
For England may keep faith
For all that is done and said.
We know their dream; enough
To know they dreamed and are dead;
And what if excess of love
Bewildered them till they died?
I write it out in a verse -
MacDonagh and MacBride
And Connolly and Pearse
Now and in time to be,
Wherever green is worn,
Are changed, changed utterly:
A terrible beauty is born."

1916 of course, was not enough; and what came after was bitter as much as as it was triumph. A sloppy sort of glory, and there's yet much to hope for that Egypt's may turn out better. I hope it shall. But the similarity, it seems to me in this: The shock of seeing such strength in everyday people, and the shock of the knowledge that from this moment, everything must change. Luck and hope to you, Egypt.
posted by Diablevert at 5:04 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

And how come I haven't seen Fire in Cairo linked yet!
posted by symbioid at 5:05 PM on January 28, 2011

It just occurred to me that I haven't heard the phrase "the Arab street" at all.
posted by nevercalm at 5:05 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Been popping in and out all day, so I keep missing things. Do we know what happened to the AJ broadcasters/reporters in Cairo? Last I heard the police were searching through the building but hadn't got to them yet.
posted by cmyk at 5:14 PM on January 28, 2011

January 15, 2009 cable from Cairo Embassy, classified Confidential:

Torture and police brutality in Egypt are endemic and widespread. The police use brutal methods mostly against common criminals to extract confessions, but also against demonstrators, certain political prisoners and unfortunate bystanders. ...

Another contact at a human rights NGO told us that her friends do not report thefts from their apartments because they do not want to subject “all the doormen” in the vicinity to police beatings. She told us that the police’s use of force has pervaded Egyptian culture to the extent that one popular television soap opera recently featured a police detective hero who beats up suspects to collect evidence.

posted by Joe Beese at 5:18 PM on January 28, 2011

Nice little photoessay on Egypt's political bloggers.
posted by Joe Beese at 5:27 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mohammad Badi'e leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. Very conservative, but has expressed a commitment to non-violence and democracy. CV and other details courtesy of AFP. He is the first leader of that group to be elected after a previous leader voluntarily stepped down.

Official English translation of his acceptance speech.
posted by humanfont at 5:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

"God, I love anonymous"

Anonymous 2006: Habbo Hotel raids.

Anonymous 2011: Mass-faxing Wikileaks cables to Egypt so its oppressed citizens can still be informed despite their tyrannical government cutting off their internet communications with the outside world.

Aw, they're so grown-up and mature now! :)
posted by Jacqueline at 5:37 PM on January 28, 2011 [8 favorites]

Re-tweets From the Guardian Liveblog, from CNN's Ben Wedeman:
Teenager showed me teargas canister "made in USA". Saw the same thing in Tunisia. Time to reconsider US exports?

One man said he graduated from college 4 years ago, hasn't worked a day since. Has been in streets since Tuesday protesting.


These attach nicely to two observations: Widespread unemployment makes for a ready class of protesters. Alternately, if people are so discouraged in their current work (due to, say massive and insurmountable wealth disparities), they'll be much more ready to skip out on existing jobs to march.

Secondly, it's worth noting that Iran's religious revolution was largely a response to the sheer excess of the US supported regime of the Shah, who used the US backing to maintain conspicuous and truly over-the-top decadence amongst a people who were struggling to eat, and furthermore made brutal use of US-manufactured weapons to keep his people in line. There was a strong pro-democracy, technocratic contingent in Iran at the time of the revolution, which had been quite active during the nationalization of the oil industry in the 50's... But in the end, the fundamentalists won out. A big part of this, I think, was that the US had so thoroughly subverted the process in the 1950's, which really made it hard to take seriously people who wanted a Western-style liberal democracy. People looked and saw that it was the West building the weapons, doing all of the oppressing, and wondered how that could be a viable model for their society.

(In fact, the wikipedia page on the Iranian revolution is probably worth a read.)

It's going to be fascinating to see how this plays out, whether the today's Egyptians carry the same level of cynicism towards Western-style government as the Iranians in the 80's... And one wonders if they'll look to Iran, and reject the oppressiveness of one-leader religious rule.
posted by kaibutsu at 5:39 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Do we know what happened to the AJ broadcasters/reporters in Cairo? Last I heard the police were searching through the building but hadn't got to them yet.

You didn't miss anything; there wasn't any explicit reporting about it (that I'm aware of). Here's the way it appeared to happen, to me: State security did reach Al Jazeera at one point, right around twilight (and prayer time) in Cairo, and they interfered for a while with Al Jazeera's reporting, although they didn't shut it down entirely - they just prevented them from getting certain camera shots. Protesters reportedly followed close behind state security into the building, but to what effect is unclear.

Prayer time ended and dusk fell quickly, at which time the military rolled out onto the streets, with the announcement that a curfew was being imposed and that the military would be backing up police to enforce it. However, the protesters welcomed the military, there was no real effort to enforce the curfew; police forces seemed to quietly disappear and Al Jazeera's Cairo team began filming freely again. There was never any mention (that I'm aware of) of State security leaving the hotel, but it appears that they did.
posted by Marla Singer at 5:44 PM on January 28, 2011

The interview on Al Jazeera right now is phenomenal. Does anyone know if it's prerecorded? I'm looking for a link...
posted by notion at 5:47 PM on January 28, 2011

It seems like it was prerecorded; one of the panelists (if we're watching the same thing) referred to the Friday protests in the future. I think. The first episode on the Inside Story page is the episode from Jan. 26. The one that just finished is probably from the 27th.
posted by scdjpowell at 6:03 PM on January 28, 2011

notion: "The interview on Al Jazeera right now is phenomenal. Does anyone know if it's prerecorded? I'm looking for a link.."

I was noticing the same thing. The interviewees were talking about how they had totally lost faith in the ability of the Mubarak government to provide a lawful society.

They sounded very much like my wife's parents when they remember they way they felt about the Cuban revolutionary moment. They had lost faith in the pre-Castro regime and hoped that the revolution would bring positive change. In hindsight, it did *not* work out in the manner that they had hoped, although I got a wife and beloved family out of the deal.
posted by mwhybark at 6:04 PM on January 28, 2011

It was not an accident that Mubarak spoke, and Obama spoke right after despite the time difference.

Hope and change, baby. Hope. And. Change.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 6:05 PM on January 28, 2011

Great, I shut the AJ feed off because I got tired of hearing the same recaps over and over, so I missed this phenomenal interview. I hope you find a link.
posted by Marla Singer at 6:07 PM on January 28, 2011

     - W A L K -
LIKE AN EGYPTIAN

(via)
posted by Rhaomi at 6:17 PM on January 28, 2011 [16 favorites]

Anonymous has also reported around 40 raids of their members today over their DOS attacks on credit card companies over Wikileaks.
posted by klangklangston at 6:19 PM on January 28, 2011

The interview on Al Jazeera right now is phenomenal. Does anyone know if it's prerecorded? I'm looking for a link...

Al Jazeera has a YouTube channel.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:19 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

i get why people want Obama to get all stern on Egypt, but here's something to consider that I heard somewhere on NPR -- one good reason to not get fire and brimstone right now is that keeping the channels open might help stabilize any ending of his regime -- i.e., we put him up with some sweet housing a la Marcos.
posted by angrycat at 6:26 PM on January 28, 2011

one good reason to not get fire and brimstone right now is that keeping the channels open might help stabilize any ending of his regime

Is any brimstone necessary?

Just get word to the generals that the $1,300,000,000 annual payments can go up or they can go way, way down.

They'll take it from there.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:38 PM on January 28, 2011 [4 favorites]

Take it easy folks, your Vice President says Mubarek isn't a dictator
posted by wallstreet1929 at 6:51 PM on January 28, 2011

Two hours until sunrise in Cairo. I hope the day is as peaceful and successful for those seeking a more just society.
posted by gofargogo at 6:52 PM on January 28, 2011

Take it easy folks, your Vice President says Mubarek isn't a dictator

Eh, getting angry at Biden for saying something stupid is like getting angry at a puppy for piddling in the house.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:59 PM on January 28, 2011 [10 favorites]

The best thing the Obama administration could do right now is to say none-too-subtly that the $1.5 billion in annual aid will continue no matter who's in charge after this.
posted by fatbird at 7:05 PM on January 28, 2011

wallstreet1929: "Take it easy folks, your Vice President says Mubarek isn't a dictator"

Every time I see Joe Biden's face, I puke a little in my mouth.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:06 PM on January 28, 2011

Everytime someone uses the phrase "throw up a little in my mouth" or "puke a little in my mouth", I projectile vomit gallons of vile, half-digested swill. And then I reminisce about 2006.
posted by msalt at 7:13 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Yet another one of those wonderful protester kissing a riot cop photos.
posted by gman at 7:14 PM on January 28, 2011 [6 favorites]

Fingers crossed.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:16 PM on January 28, 2011

damn. you know, I don't even know if i'd have the stones to kiss a riot cop. To say nothing of braving fists, tear gas, etc
posted by angrycat at 7:19 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Ugh. Every time I decide to give up on helping anon, they end up doing something fucking noble again.

Working on psyops is just too damn fun.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:22 PM on January 28, 2011

Joe Biden is the voice of what THEY really beleive not Obama and Clinton necessarily but the power elite behind the scenes. None of them want to recognize that Mubarak is a bad guy. Misguided and old school like some immigrant father, but not really evil. I mean here is a guy who came to power when his boss was killed right in front of him. He backed us a critical moments and helped the peace process. Same thing happened with the Shah. Carter was quietly pushing him to reform, but toasting him as a pillar of stability. No one thought the Shah would fall and afterwards when he fell, the Embassy thing was just supposed to be youth blowing off steam. A short crisis before the inevitable march to forgiveness of the USA and a triumph of democracy. We ignored the reality of the brutality of the security services until it was too late.
posted by humanfont at 7:28 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

So where does Mubarak go, if he chooses to flee? France? Turkey? Detroit? I don't think the UK would take him. The Swiss may be his only option.
posted by vrakatar at 7:30 PM on January 28, 2011

Well, Libya may be an option, for now.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:32 PM on January 28, 2011

Are you kidding?

Biden and his ilk know exactly how bad Mubarak is. They just don't give a shit as long as he's strategically helpful and doesn't make them look too bad.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:32 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

What I've been really happy about thus far (and I doubt the right wing media is mentioning - because it's not as "interesting" as protests with burning U.S. flags) is that the protests aren't anti-U.S. or anti-Israel, they're pro-democracy.
posted by gman at 7:58 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Biden and his ilk know exactly how bad Mubarak is. They just don't give a shit as long as he's strategically helpful and doesn't make them look too bad.

"Of course he's a sonofabitch. But he's our sonofabitch."
posted by scody at 7:59 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

America's secret backing of rebel leaders.
posted by empath at 7:59 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

the protests aren't anti-U.S. or anti-Israel, they're pro-democracy.

Yes, but it's getting to the point where being pro-democracy means being anti-US and anti-Israel by default. We are --->this<--- close to being the Soviet Union Evil Empire of the 21st century -- at least as far as the Muslim world is concerned.

Hell we've already invaded Afghanistan so why not?
posted by Avenger at 8:11 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Avenger, I'm not sure if you're engaging in hyperbole or what, but do you know what the USSR was, at least in the bad old days (meaning Stalinist Russia).

Because, if you think we're equivalent societies, damn, dude. That's deeply cynical.
posted by angrycat at 8:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Mubarak dismisses government...

"We don't care if the government resigns, we want him to resign," Khaled, a 22-year-old demonstrator, said, in the Mediterranean port city of Alexandria.
posted by -t at 8:24 PM on January 28, 2011

I hope this starts a worldwide trend of kissing riot cops.
posted by desjardins at 8:24 PM on January 28, 2011 [11 favorites]

It's hardly surprising that the US leadership would value realpolitik international issues over internal human rights.

The realpolitik of the North African and Middle Eastern scene has been that the longer the US supports brutal dictators against their own people, the greater the chance that the people will become radicalized in favour of extremist responses. That's exactly what happened in Iran - opposition to the Shah didn't start out as explicitly religious, but it became that way as people became more and more desperate for change.

Another thought that occurred to me is this: Nasser wasn't exactly Mr Cuddly, but at least he dumped a decent amount of the aid he blackmailed out of his cold war sponsors into developing Egypt in ways that tended to benefit ordinary people (electricity projects and so on). Mubarak seems to be more your classic kleptocracy.
posted by rodgerd at 8:31 PM on January 28, 2011

We will not be silenced, whether you're a Christian or a Muslim,

whether you're an atheist, you will demand your god damned rights,

and we will have our rights, one way or the other! We will never

be silenced!
posted by empath at 8:36 PM on January 28, 2011 [5 favorites]

Indeed. The US is still supporting Mubarak.

Okay, without any editorial, I didn't see the president's statements, so someone who did, please clue me in. Is the above comment from upthread literally true? Did the President make a statement saying the US stands behind the Mubarak administration, or words to that effect? Please no reading between the lines (I know how to do that for myself), just facts. Is there a transcript of the President's statement anywhere out there?
posted by saulgoodman at 8:54 PM on January 28, 2011

Working on psyops is just too damn fun.posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 10:22 PM on January 28 [!]

A benchmark of good work is keeping the flower shops open.
Do you know what it took to get those tanks on the streets, the silly water cannon was one thing but tanks.
posted by clavdivs at 8:56 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

saulgoodman
The President said "Hosni, baby, your on your own here"
posted by clavdivs at 8:58 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening, everybody. My administration has been closely monitoring the situation in Egypt, and I know that we will be learning more tomorrow when day breaks. As the situation continues to unfold, our first concern is preventing injury or loss of life. So I want to be very clear in calling upon the Egyptian authorities to refrain from any violence against peaceful protestors.

The people of Egypt have rights that are universal. That includes the right to peaceful assembly and association, the right to free speech, and the ability to determine their own destiny. These are human rights. And the United States will stand up for them everywhere.

I also call upon the Egyptian government to reverse the actions that they've taken to interfere with access to the Internet, to cell phone service and to social networks that do so much to connect people in the 21st century.

At the same time, those protesting in the streets have a responsibility to express themselves peacefully. Violence and destruction will not lead to the reforms that they seek.

Now, going forward, this moment of volatility has to be turned into a moment of promise. The United States has a close partnership with Egypt and we've cooperated on many issues, including working together to advance a more peaceful region. But we've also been clear that there must be reform -- political, social, and economic reforms that meet the aspirations of the Egyptian people.

In the absence of these reforms, grievances have built up over time. When President Mubarak addressed the Egyptian people tonight, he pledged a better democracy and greater economic opportunity. I just spoke to him after his speech and I told him he has a responsibility to give meaning to those words, to take concrete steps and actions that deliver on that promise.

Violence will not address the grievances of the Egyptian people. And suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. What's needed right now are concrete steps that advance the rights of the Egyptian people: a meaningful dialogue between the government and its citizens, and a path of political change that leads to a future of greater freedom and greater opportunity and justice for the Egyptian people.

Now, ultimately the future of Egypt will be determined by the Egyptian people. And I believe that the Egyptian people want the same things that we all want -- a better life for ourselves and our children, and a government that is fair and just and responsive. Put simply, the Egyptian people want a future that befits the heirs to a great and ancient civilization.

The United States always will be a partner in pursuit of that future. And we are committed to working with the Egyptian government and the Egyptian people -- all quarters -- to achieve it.

Around the world governments have an obligation to respond to their citizens. That's true here in the United States; that's true in Asia; it is true in Europe; it is true in Africa; and it's certainly true in the Arab world, where a new generation of citizens has the right to be heard.

When I was in Cairo, shortly after I was elected President, I said that all governments must maintain power through consent, not coercion. That is the single standard by which the people of Egypt will achieve the future they deserve.

Surely there will be difficult days to come. But the United States will continue to stand up for the rights of the Egyptian people and work with their government in pursuit of a future that is more just, more free, and more hopeful.

Thank you very much.

posted by empath at 8:58 PM on January 28, 2011 [12 favorites]

Ach, thank goodness. Now, there are a lot of things I can forgive anybody stuck with the ungodly, thankless task of governing a mess like contemporary America, but an immediate statement of unconditional support for Mubarak would have been a deal-breaker for me.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:05 PM on January 28, 2011

The crowd included Christian men with keyrings of the cross swinging from their pockets and young men dressed in fast-food restaurant uniforms.

There is a poem in that line somewhere.
posted by vrakatar at 9:13 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Mubarak still not on meathook, still not in helicopter, that is a shame but there is still time.
posted by Meatbomb at 9:15 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

http://i.imgur.com/ApxEj.jpg
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 9:16 PM on January 28, 2011

always bet both sides and none.
he who controls the gold?
posted by clavdivs at 9:19 PM on January 28, 2011

Anonymous should take credit where it's due, not where it isn't.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:19 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

Anonymous should take credit where it's due, not where it isn't.

I don't think they're trying to take credit for this. I lurked a few IRC channels earlier and everybody just wants to know if there is anything they can do to help. PSYOPS is always going to be braggy, that's just part of the game.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 9:22 PM on January 28, 2011

I hope this starts a worldwide trend of kissing riot cops.


I hope it starts a world wide trend of riot cops NOT waling on protesters who have legitimate grievances against a tyranical government
posted by Redhush at 9:25 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I hope it starts a world wide trend of riot cops NOT waling on protesters who have legitimate grievances against a tyranical government

That would be nice.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 9:28 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

Mubarak still not on meathook, still not in helicopter, that is a shame but there is still time.

I would just like to take this opportunity to point out that I totally called it.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:15 PM on January 28, 2011 [3 favorites]

I would just like to take this opportunity to point out that I totally called it.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 10:22 PM on January 28, 2011 [2 favorites]

It's now 8:30 am in Egypt, though worth noting is that Egyptians aren't exactly known for being early risers. But this is a big day--will protesters return to the streets or will they wait for word on Mubarak's 'new' government? Will internet come back?

The NY Times has a good op-ed up now about Egypt.

And, really, is Mubarak even in Egypt anymore? Let's hope he's fled.
posted by bluedaisy at 10:29 PM on January 28, 2011

It's now 8:30 am in Egypt, though worth noting is that Egyptians aren't exactly known for being early risers. But this is a big day--will protesters return to the streets or will they wait for word on Mubarak's 'new' government? Will internet come back?

They will be on the streets. Internet may come back.

And, really, is Mubarak even in Egypt anymore? Let's hope he's fled.

Most people don't think that he is. I'm going to stay awake a bit longer to see how this pans out.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 10:38 PM on January 28, 2011

Go Army!
posted by KokuRyu at 10:40 PM on January 28, 2011

Given what we know about how they cut off internet and SMS and phones, would it be pretty easy to restore it? I suspect the phones and SMS would be easy--that'd be a matter of calling Vodafone and other Egyptian mobile companies. But what about the internet?
posted by bluedaisy at 10:42 PM on January 28, 2011

I hope Mubarak has fled to London, or New York. But I've done more than hope. I've written it into a new palindrome:

O, Hosni Mubarak - Arab, um, in Soho?
posted by msalt at 10:45 PM on January 28, 2011 [42 favorites]

No way he'd go to the US. I just don't see it.
posted by bluedaisy at 10:47 PM on January 28, 2011

I wonder why Al Jazeera stopped updating their live blog at 6:38 am?
posted by taz at 10:52 PM on January 28, 2011

Go Army!

Be cautious about this sentiment. Appearing friendly to the protestors has allowed the army to secure a lot of crucial points and map out exactly where they congregate. If they're planning a crackdown today, they'll be in a very advantageous position.
posted by fatbird at 10:52 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

I wonder why Al Jazeera stopped updating their live blog at 6:38 am?

They're asleep. (Not entirely joking.)

Also, some interesting news about Al Jazeera in Cairo (via the NY Times):

Al Jazeera kept up its coverage despite serious obstacles. The broadcaster’s separate live channel was removed from its satellite platform by the Egyptian government on Friday morning, its Cairo bureau had its telephones cut and its main news channel also faced signal interference, according to a statement released by the station. The director of the live channel issued an appeal to the Egyptian government to allow it to broadcast freely.
posted by bluedaisy at 10:56 PM on January 28, 2011

Burhanistan, I don't think so. Last I heard the army and protesters were sharing food in Tahrir Square. And I've been watching Twitter feeds and various other sources for the last few hours.
posted by bluedaisy at 11:05 PM on January 28, 2011

that'd be a matter of calling Vodafone and other Egyptian mobile companies

I've been seeing that one of the local comms companies stayed up in defiance of the order for a while. I hope they win a lot of business from Vodafone...
posted by rodgerd at 11:07 PM on January 28, 2011

maybe that APC was used to push a burning barricade or vehicle out of the way since it only looks a bit singed.

Is that new footage? I thought that was from much earlier, say just after dark in Cairo, so Friday morning in the US. I can't keep up.
posted by bluedaisy at 11:13 PM on January 28, 2011

Hmm. It's not even clear if that's Alex or Cairo or Suez.
posted by bluedaisy at 11:17 PM on January 28, 2011

Huge balls on Al-Jazeera, and the BBC have managed to keep some reporting happening. It appears US networks no longer send reporters anywhere unless they're part of a US millitary unit.
posted by rodgerd at 11:39 PM on January 28, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mostly true, except CNN has Ben Waldemen in Cairo and Nic Roberston in Alex.
posted by bluedaisy at 11:44 PM on January 28, 2011

Amr El Beleidy in Cairo is reporting that his Vodafone mobile is working.
posted by bluedaisy at 12:08 AM on January 29, 2011

But is it completely wrong to ask, well, what would happen if Egypt fell apart? could the geopolitical realities outweigh our desire for other people to enjoy the rights that we have?

Haven't read the thread yet but this early comment is so in line with something I read yesterday from William Burroughs (speaking in 1976), I felt compelled to share it:

"Nobody's busting into your apartment at three in the morning, are they? Well, then don't worry about what they're doing in South Korea and places like that. It's like the standard of living. Are you content to achieve your higher standard of living at the expense of people all over the world who've got a lower standard of living? Most Americans would say yes. Now we ask the question, are you content to enjoy your political freedom at the expense of people who are less free? I think they would also say yes."

from "With William Burroughs -- A Report From the Bunker"

Now I've got some reading to do
posted by philip-random at 12:15 AM on January 29, 2011 [15 favorites]

Al Jazeera says protesters have returned to Cairo's streets.
posted by bluedaisy at 12:41 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Re philip-random's post just above: there the idea from William James and Dostoevsky that Le Guin used as a starting point in her short story, "The ones who walked away from Omelas."

"Imagine that you are creating a fabric of human destiny with the object of making men happy in the end, giving them peace and rest at last, but that it was essential and inevitable to torture to death only one tiny creature -- that baby beating its breast with its fist, for instance -- and to found that edifice on its unavenged tears, would you consent to be the architect on those conditions? (Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, New York: Vintage, 1950, translated by Constance Garnett, page 291)"

Apologies if this has already been quoted in a very large thread.
posted by goofyfoot at 1:47 AM on January 29, 2011 [6 favorites]

coup de fil
posted by clavdivs at 1:57 AM on January 29, 2011

The one Egyptian mobile number I have (no idea which provider) was ringing, though no one was picking up. Would it ring if the mobile connections were still cut off?
posted by divabat at 2:01 AM on January 29, 2011

Mubarak was able to cut off Internet for 24 hours. It looks like the Army and the Policeare still loyal. He spoke with Obama did he also call Hu in China. Are the Saudis going to throw him a lifeline just to make Egypt the firewall. I said in a prior thread I have heard on pretty good authority that Mubarak believes the Shahs mistake was not being decisive against the protesters.
posted by humanfont at 2:18 AM on January 29, 2011

I didn't catch exactly what was said but Al Jazeera mentioned a senior military figure having said anonymously (to Al Jazeera or some other media?) that he considers the only solution to be for Mubarak to resign.
posted by Anything at 2:35 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Spotted a comment over on Reddit that, without internet or communications, the country should really be called Gypt.
posted by Malor at 2:37 AM on January 29, 2011 [15 favorites]

(Slight derails)

I'm very struck by the fact that I'm watching this on Al Jazeera on the internet on my TV - when things like this happen I notice the way that technological and communication development has incremented since the last time, the time before that and so forth (when I was a child it was days-old 16mm film flown in from the country in question, often the same piece of film from one day to the next).

Very impressed by Al Jazeera - behind the curve, but this is the first time I've watched it over a long period. Are all the people with English accents BBC-trained? The reporting seems very BBC in style. The woman currently presenting does the BBC-news "Well..." wonderfully (she quoted Mubarak's speech totally straight, then left a pause, then said "Well..." then carried on, allowing the viewers to fill in the pause themselves. That "Well...' carries a lot more scepticism than words could). Perhaps newsreaders on other channels do it, but I've not noticed. That said, I wish the BBC could lambast the government as uncompromisingly as the woman currently on Al Jazeera did.

And there was a camera swoop across the studio, and it was a real, huge studio - on all the other channels, it's green screen.

It seems like a very positive force. I know it's bankrolled by Qatar (?) but the dedication to finding stuff and showing it rather than just endless editorialising and conjecture. Is the middle-east channel the same?
/derail

Interesting that the representative of the ruling party uses the same anti-protester lies and prevarications (Criminals! Looters! How dare they attack our valiant security forces!) as the Tories.

It all kicks off again in 15 minutes.
posted by Grangousier at 2:46 AM on January 29, 2011 [13 favorites]

AJ: live ammo on protesters in Alexandria
posted by Anything at 3:01 AM on January 29, 2011

Also, is this the first time that one would go first to a local news organisation (even if only nominally local) for information rather than that from one's own country? For example, I certainly wouldn't have gone to ABC or CNN for news on Katrina, rather than the BBC. Perhaps I'm just feeling smug and comfortable because they've mostly got English accents.
posted by Grangousier at 3:13 AM on January 29, 2011

A very worrisome post was made over on the Angry Arab. I'm hoping it's just BS disinformation/psyops, but it's worrisome all the same:

The source wants to stay anonymous but I cant evaluate the credibility of the source: "A source from within the Presidential Guard has claimed to my friends in Cairo that the army intends to end the protests on Sunday, by any means necessary even if it meant violence and bloodshed. Junta goons are causing chaos in Cairo to claim an unstable situation which will extend until Saturday. Then under the guise of bringing back order, they will "crush them with any amount of force needed!". The sources are unsure of the American role but believe the Americans will go with it."

I really hope this is wrong. I hope memebake's friend was right about there being a psychological difference between the police and the military, and that the military will refuse to fire on their own citizens.

If Mubarak were to name El Baradei head of his new cabinet and then take a back seat from here on out, to essentially step down without stepping down, maybe there could be a peaceful resolution to all of this.
posted by Marla Singer at 3:17 AM on January 29, 2011

Al Jazeera mentioned civilians protecting businesses from looters in Suez.
posted by Anything at 3:21 AM on January 29, 2011

Supposedly there are no police on the streets of Cairo, only soldiers. Is the military going to enforce the curfew (from 4pm onwards)? The soldiers seem to have been very friendly with protesters from everything I've seen so far.
posted by Anything at 3:30 AM on January 29, 2011

Massive protests taking place again now. One Al Jazeera reporter made an interesting comment: he noted that these protests are all technically illegal, since the protesters don't have permits. I snorted at the absurdity of that, then realized that permits are required to protest here, too, in spite of our Constitutional guarantee of freedom of assembly.
posted by Marla Singer at 3:36 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

Did I just see the 'LIVE CAIRO' tag on the corner of the AJ screen being moved out of the way to show an old-timey horse-drawn buggy among the cars and the crowd.
posted by Anything at 3:45 AM on January 29, 2011

Al Jazeera mentioned civilians protecting businesses from looters in Suez.

Actually that was probably Alexandria.
posted by Anything at 4:01 AM on January 29, 2011

There's now a curious picture of a burnt-out APC. Did the protesters clash with the army overnight?

Here is another picture (via the BBC) of a burnt out APC beside a tank, but no clear sign of why it is burnt out. It would be good if someone could translate any of the graffiti scratched into the scorch marks on the side.
posted by knapah at 4:02 AM on January 29, 2011

Rawya Rageh on AJ: in Alexandria all uniformed police has disappeared from the streets, even traffic ops, so people are directing traffic themselves, and apprehending looters.
Also, reports of long queue at an ATM machine, presumably withdrawing money for
posted by progosk at 4:03 AM on January 29, 2011

AJ is also reporting 95 dead in these protests, and possibly as high as 108. The correspondent on right now is saying some of those may be attributed to looters and vandals being killed in addition to protesters.
posted by gc at 4:05 AM on January 29, 2011

And that would have been Rawya Rageh, same as progosk's post.
posted by gc at 4:06 AM on January 29, 2011

There's also some speculation that half the reported dead are actually police.
posted by Marla Singer at 4:11 AM on January 29, 2011

There's also some speculation that half the reported dead are actually police.

Although I've only heard that claim from a single ruling party representative.
posted by Anything at 4:15 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Ayman Mohyeldin on AJ now: no Interior Ministry-dependent security forces on the streets in Cairo either, only the Army, very non-confrontationally.
posted by progosk at 4:17 AM on January 29, 2011

No police presence in Alexandria either, reportedly.
posted by Anything at 4:42 AM on January 29, 2011

Blogger (missed his name) on AJ: in terms of which single force has been instrumental in lending their identity to the protest, rather than any political group, the most important have been the football fan associations, the so-called "ultras".
Also: rather than the specific concern with who will be the next leader (ElBaradei or others), a first concrete objective/demand is for an interim national unity government who can bring the country to hold real elections, with a view to a lengthy process of "re-invention" of a free Egypt.
posted by progosk at 5:00 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm sorry, I missed most of the final comment by the AJ correspondent about 'no more vandalism'. Did someone catch what she said, specifically?
posted by Anything at 5:05 AM on January 29, 2011

(better phrased: instrumental in coalesceing the protesters)
posted by progosk at 5:07 AM on January 29, 2011

A middle-aged man holding a "Israel to head for death" sign in Cairo. Was someone arguing with him?
posted by Anything at 5:07 AM on January 29, 2011

There was a short scene from Alexandria (I think) which I felt was quite heartening. There was a tank in the middle of a sea of protesters. Soldiers were up on the tank and a civilian clambered up on the tank and stood on top of it, beaming with happiness. One of the soldiers went and spoke to him, motioning him off the tank. I think the conversation went something like this.

Civilian: I'M ON A TANK!
Soldier: Please step down from off the tank, sir.
Civilian: I'M ON A TANK!
Soldier: Please, sir, remove yourself from the tank.
Civilian: I'M ON A TANK!
Soldier: Sir, get off the tank.
Civilian: I'M ON A TANK!
Soldier: Get off my tank!
Civilian: I'M ON A TANK!
Soldier: GET OFF MY GODDAMN TANK!
Civilian: I'M ON A TANK!

...and so on.
posted by Kattullus at 5:08 AM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

Tomorrow is the 39th anniversary of Bloody Sunday in Derry, where 14 civilians were shot by British Paratroopers. When the Army arrived in Northern Ireland in 1969, they were initially welcomed.

The proximity of that anniversary is making me feel rather uneasy (not because of any causal link, just an emotional one).
posted by knapah at 5:19 AM on January 29, 2011

The protesters have taken to directing traffic, since all of the police officers have disappeared. AJ just showed some civilians directing cars away from high protest zones.

All this talk about if the regime will shoot the protesters en masse is making me really nervous, though.
posted by gc at 5:21 AM on January 29, 2011

I don't put much stock in rumors that the army is being friendly as a ploy to get into position. You don't send a bunch of soldiers out to be friendly, wave to the protesters, mingle, and then crush them the next day. Unlike the police, soldiers are trained to have a very patriotic bond to their country and their fellow citizens. Those people are not the people they have been trained to attack. If you want Egyptian soldiers to fire upon other Egyptians, then you must keep the soldiers very separated from their targets; isolated from the people until the moment of battle. If the soldiers are out among the crowd smiling and waving and sharing meals, then you cannot expect them to fire their weapons on those same people later that day.
posted by ryanrs at 5:24 AM on January 29, 2011 [17 favorites]

Leftist coalition calling for/organising a general strike. Asked how they are organising it, given that internet and mobiel phones are down, the representative quipped: Egyptian workers and employees do not use/need the internet and phones for this.
posted by progosk at 5:28 AM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

I wonder if AJ's interpretation of what was going on with the traffic and the military vehicles is correct? They're saying that the civilians are telling the military where to go.
posted by Anything at 5:34 AM on January 29, 2011

The protesters are now routing the military around the 8th of December bridge, and the military seems game to go along with it.

Sorry, I love it when people do this. By which I mean take control of a city to make sure it functions in absence of authority.
posted by gc at 5:35 AM on January 29, 2011

AJ live feed: is that huge crowd gathering purposely right under the AJ cameras?
posted by progosk at 5:39 AM on January 29, 2011

To answer myself: they're specifically addressing the camera, holding signs (also in English: "The People Have Spoken"), and chanting to camera. Fascinating...
posted by progosk at 5:46 AM on January 29, 2011

I'd be much more worried if the army had massed their forces outside the city or in the desert, then moved in to take position in the early morning.

In regards to the psychology of police and the army, you have to consider the "us vs. them" dynamic. Police are trained to be suspicious of ordinary Egyptians. Day-to-day police work fosters a cynicism and contempt for their countrymen. The police are used to seeing ordinary Egyptians as the "bad guys".

The army, on the other hand, must be trained to love their country and their people. There cannot be any cynicism about it. Your average 18-year-old infantryman must really, really, believe it. Otherwise he is not going to charge up the hill and attack the machine gun nest. The army must lay on the patriotism very thick to convince its soldiers to give up their lives. The police do not receive the same conditioning.
posted by ryanrs at 6:02 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Some curfew.
posted by Anything at 6:05 AM on January 29, 2011

Just waking up here. I so, so hope that the protestors continue to push on today. Things seem to be off to a slower start but this is a critical moment. Mubarak has had all night to coordinate his response today.
posted by proj at 6:21 AM on January 29, 2011

> Biden and his ilk know exactly how bad Mubarak is.

No they don't. I know what you mean, but they don't think of it as "bad" in the way you and I do. If they did, they wouldn't be where they are today.
posted by languagehat at 6:28 AM on January 29, 2011

Great on-the-ground video from Reddit
posted by Lord_Pall at 6:29 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

> That man has tortured and murdered thousands of people to stay in power. I will not be saddened to see him publicly executed.

That would give you and a bunch of Egyptians a moment of nasty glee at the price of setting a terrible example. Look how wonderfully Romania has flourished since they murdered Ceauşescu. (To quote Wikipedia: "he and his wife were executed following a televised and hastily organised two-hour court session. One of the executioners later said: 'it wasn’t a trial, it was a political assassination in the middle of a revolution.'")
posted by languagehat at 6:31 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

The video I mentioned last night is up. It features activist Gigi Ibrahim, actor Amr Waked, activist Wael Khalil and Tunisian student and activist Fida Al Hammami.

It's so amazing I really think it deserves an FPP, but I will leave that for someone else to decide.

"The great demand on the street on Tuesday and on all the past days were three demands: bread, freedom, and human dignity." -Wael Khalil

"The Egyptian citizen is not safe in this regime. My brother walks the street. He gets kidnapped. With no sign why. With no phone call to anyone. For 48 hours no one knows where he is. You ask anyone, they will not tell you... I live in a country where I can be taken from the street without any prior order. If I am taken from the street, my parents will never know where I am. This is Mubarak's regime. This is what America supports. This is going to an end very soon." -Amr Waked

"I think the American people have a lot to do as well, because this is their tax money that's going towards a dictatorship like Mubarak. And I have a lot of American friends, they support me, they support a lot of activists and they have really shown through solidarity, through the social networks, or even through phone calls that they want a free Egypt and they want Egyptians to live a humane life. So, who is really backstabbing us all?" -Gigi Ibrahim
posted by notion at 6:33 AM on January 29, 2011 [14 favorites]

At least three protestors killed trying to enter interior ministry? By interior ministry forces or by the military?
posted by Anything at 6:40 AM on January 29, 2011

Just in case anyone is not aware, the Interior Ministry holds special significance as they oversee the mukhabarat -- the secret/state police that are tasked with spying on the citizenry.
posted by proj at 6:43 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm still struggling to understand how this started. I understand the relevance of Khalid Saeed's murder... but that was back in June. And I understand that this was inspired by the events in Tunisia... But how did the protests actually start? Doesn't there usually have to be some sort of event right then that symbolizes all the injustices in the system and gets people so upset they go out in the streets to express their anger? Is it really the case that, seeing Tunisia, thousands upon thousands of Egyptians just realized, "Hey, now we can finally do this too"?
posted by meese at 6:48 AM on January 29, 2011

No they don't. I know what you mean, but they don't think of it as "bad" in the way you and I do. If they did, they wouldn't be where they are today.

languagehat: read some of the wikileaks cables released yesterday. They very clearly lay out the problems, and it turns out that the U.S. was actually secretly working with pro-democracy groups trying to undermine Mubarak. Now, it may well be that the U.S. only wanted Egypt to be "more democratic" only to make it more stable and to prevent an Iran style backlash. But they were definitely aware of the problem and actually working towards solving it.

But beyond that, why assume that if they believed Mubarak was bad they wouldn't support him? Cynicism is a sufficient explanation.
posted by delmoi at 6:52 AM on January 29, 2011

But how did the protests actually start?

They created a facebook event.
posted by delmoi at 6:53 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Al Jazeera just saying that shots being heard fired in the prison

And apparently the national mint seems to be under attack by a group protesters, I guess someone has figured out how to make a profit once all this is over...
posted by xqwzts at 6:58 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is it really the case that, seeing Tunisia, thousands upon thousands of Egyptians just realized, "Hey, now we can finally do this too"?

From Gigi's Twitter feed: "I want to thank every Tunisian for liberating Egypt as well."

They created a facebook event.

Yes, they did. And then they attended it.
posted by notion at 7:01 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Interesting lesson too. If you turn off all communication and internet to quell a protest, you will make it "worse".

Because everyone goes outside to see what's going on.
posted by Lord_Pall at 7:03 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Wow.
posted by meese at 7:06 AM on January 29, 2011

A few photos on the ground of the protests, and some signs with translations. On Flickr, by Ramy Raoof
posted by raztaj at 7:10 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sandmonkey is an Egyptian blogger now tweeting live from the streets.
posted by warbaby at 7:21 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

Muslim Brotherhood just said they aren't going to run a candidate for president.
posted by empath at 7:21 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Can anyone recommend a well-curated Twitter list? I can't see the forest for the trees. (Someone should build an app to find quality/popular Twitter lists for a topic.)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:25 AM on January 29, 2011

Is it really the case that, seeing Tunisia, thousands upon thousands of Egyptians just realized, "Hey, now we can finally do this too"?

The elections were scheduled for October and thats when everyone expected things to blow up if Mubarak re-elects himself or has his son elected.

The events in Tunis gave the people hope and I suppose the idea was to take advantage of the momentum while it was still there. Jan 25 is National Police Day and that was chosen as a fitting day to protest.

Things just rolled on from there.
posted by xqwzts at 7:26 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

I wonder if Saudi Arabia could fall?
posted by empath at 7:32 AM on January 29, 2011

via Twitter: @AJEnglish Omar Suleiman is now Vice President of #Egypt. Live coverage: http://aje.me/ajelive #hosni mubarak #jan25 #egypt
posted by catlet at 7:35 AM on January 29, 2011

AJFilter: Former general Omar Suleiman, the director of Egypt's intelligence service, sworn in as Vice-President, a figure that apparently did not exist previously.
posted by progosk at 7:37 AM on January 29, 2011

AJ now: new attempts to storm the Ministry of the Interior confirmed...
posted by progosk at 7:38 AM on January 29, 2011

Telegraph profile of Omar Suleiman.
posted by progosk at 7:41 AM on January 29, 2011

AJE grilling a member of the ruling party now is really a thing of beauty.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:48 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

Absurd Boutros Ghali being interviewed on AJ now...
posted by progosk at 7:49 AM on January 29, 2011

So, the tweets and uploaded photos — are these being conveyed via cellphone to people on the outside to post? Egyptian internet access has not been reestablished, right?
posted by taz at 7:49 AM on January 29, 2011

sorry, not Ghali, but a Boutros member of ruling party, alleging that looting mobs are leading the protesters. Striking cognitive dissonance caused by pictures of peaceful crowds currently in Cairo streets. AJ host firmly, blankly disagreeing with and belying the politician.
posted by progosk at 7:53 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

I have read that some of the more esoteric connections have not been cut... and there are some people with satphone data options, so as long as they have power, they are able to broadcast and receive. Everyone who is communicating basically has said they can't say how they are reaching the net, lest the government plug the hole.
posted by notion at 7:55 AM on January 29, 2011

For those worried about the museum:

5:13am The Egyptian army secured Cairo's famed antiquities museum early on Saturday, protecting thousands of priceless artifacts, including the gold mask of King Tutankhamun, from looters.

6:04am Al Jazeera's Jane Dutton, reporting from Cairo, says the National Museum in the capital has not been damaged by the fire that destroyed the neighboring office of the National Democratic Party last night.

[via Al Jazeera live-blog]

posted by ryanrs at 7:57 AM on January 29, 2011

"Mubarak is an elected official! He's been elected! How dare this mob try to disrupt our democracy!" That guy was a hoot.
posted by meese at 7:57 AM on January 29, 2011

I wonder if Saudi Arabia could fall?

Does Saudi Arabia even have disaffected youth? I've always pictured a handful of indolent Saudis floating upon a vast sea of oil money and foreign workers.
posted by ryanrs at 8:01 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

AJ: 8 prisoners killed in clashes with prison guards after attempts to break out, in Cairo.

Also, Ahmad Shafiq, former aviation minister, named new prime minister.
posted by progosk at 8:01 AM on January 29, 2011

Omar Suleiman, director of intelligence? Wow. Somewhere in an alternate universe circa 1989, Gorbachev appointed the head of the KGB as his successor and everything worked out... just peachy.
posted by Marla Singer at 8:02 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

BBC confirming that Mubarak's sons are now in London.
posted by proj at 8:03 AM on January 29, 2011

Wow, Mubarak is just shuffling people around the administration. I can't say that I'm shocked, but...wow.
posted by rollbiz at 8:05 AM on January 29, 2011

>Go Army!

Be cautious about this sentiment. Appearing friendly to the protestors has allowed the army to secure a lot of crucial points and map out exactly where they congregate. If they're planning a crackdown today, they'll be in a very advantageous position.

Probably what I should have said was "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Until countries like Egypt and Tunisia and Pakistan and Iran (all with more than 50% of the population under 30 years old) start being able to create jobs (which would require economic growth rates similar to those of China over the past 15 years), nothing is going to change.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:07 AM on January 29, 2011

The fact that there are still hundreds is thousands of people still on the streets is awe inspiring.
posted by dejah420 at 8:08 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

US State Department spokesmen on Twitter:

The #Egyptian government can't reshuffle the deck and then stand pat. President #Mubarak's words pledging reform must be followed by action.

posted by proj at 8:10 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

In reaction to the Egyptian government crackdown on the Internet, the French non-profit ISP French Data Network set up a dial-up Internet access. This way, anyone in Egypt who has access to a analog phone line and can call France is able to connect to the network using the following number: [phone] (login: toto, password: toto). (via)
posted by jeffburdges at 8:14 AM on January 29, 2011

Ramy Raoof tweeting that those attacking shops and destroying cars are working with the police...
posted by raztaj at 8:15 AM on January 29, 2011

Sandmonkey tweets: street war in action. On nuzha street with 200 people protecting the streets from drive-by shooters. It's same all over Cairo #Jan25

(this will not end well...?)
posted by progosk at 8:24 AM on January 29, 2011

Until countries like Egypt and Tunisia and Pakistan and Iran (all with more than 50% of the population under 30 years old) start being able to create jobs (which would require economic growth rates similar to those of China over the past 15 years), nothing is going to change.

Dust off the old Nasser United Arab Republic. Roll over the border to Libya cross the red sea and take Saudi and Kuwait in the name of pan Arabism. Blame Tehran for your internal troubles. It's the model of Napoleon. Maybe the west just sits it out this time tired of fighting in the sandbox (so long as the oil flows who cares). You arnt unemployed when you are in the army.
posted by humanfont at 8:30 AM on January 29, 2011

Hilarious. Mubarak is changing every element except the one that matters.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:35 AM on January 29, 2011

Al Jazeera reports Israel has pulled its diplomats. I think that's reasonable enough, given the circumstances. But if the Israelis have any sense at all, they'll keep their mouths shut for the time being.
posted by ryanrs at 8:35 AM on January 29, 2011

> languagehat: read some of the wikileaks cables released yesterday. They very clearly lay out the problems, and it turns out that the U.S. was actually secretly working with pro-democracy groups trying to undermine Mubarak. Now, it may well be that the U.S. only wanted Egypt to be "more democratic" only to make it more stable and to prevent an Iran style backlash. But they were definitely aware of the problem and actually working towards solving it.

But beyond that, why assume that if they believed Mubarak was bad they wouldn't support him? Cynicism is a sufficient explanation.

I don't think you're quite getting what I'm saying. Of course they don't think Mubarak is a great leader or a fine, upstanding person, and it makes sense that they've been secretly working with pro-democracy groups, if only to cover their ass. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that the visceral disgust you and I and most people here feel when thinking of brutal thugs like Mubarak is not felt by people in power. There are at least two reasons for this: 1) Just as surgeons have to become inured to the sight of blood, politicians have to become inured to thugs in power; it's a professional necessity. 2) More importantly (for me as an anarchist), they are all essentially thugs in power; it's just a matter of degree. American politicians, with the cushion of a historically quiescent body politic, bought off by (rapidly decreasing, of course) widespread quasi-middle-class comforts and at least a minimal safety net, can allow themselves the luxury of sneering at low-class foreign dictators who are always calling out the security forces on their own people, but deep down they know that if push came to shove, if their own position of sweet, sweet power and privilege was in any way threatened, they wouldn't hesitate to call out the troops themselves, and they would justify it in exactly the same way (need for order, danger of disruption, radical menace, etc.). So no, they don't really think Mubarak is bad; he's just making a bad job of what they do so much more suavely.
posted by languagehat at 8:36 AM on January 29, 2011 [37 favorites]

There could be last ditch efforts this weekend by Mubarak to try to stay in power. False flag operations and provocateurs are common tactics of crumbling regimes.
posted by notion at 8:36 AM on January 29, 2011

Al-Jazeera showing damage at the National Museum. Absolutely heartbreaking.
posted by rollbiz at 8:42 AM on January 29, 2011

Sherif Boraie on AJ now: sadly Cairo has turned into a madhouse; on the periphery there is a lot of looting, lot of teargas, we don't know who they are; there is no police presence...

Mona Souef, activist: Army is standing by passively, even during violence resulting in deaths in front of Ministry of Interior. Looting attempts at Cairo museum prevented [pictures of damage in museum being shown in parallel... armed security forces patrolling the museum's corridors... very disturbingly juxtaposition]. Live ammo injuries in many areas in CAiro yesterday.
posted by progosk at 8:43 AM on January 29, 2011

BBC World Service says no police anywhere near the burning party HQ which is still on fire. If the police have dissolved into out-of-uniform armed bands of looters and drive-by shooters, then the army will have to take complete control of civil order. If this is what is happening, the last prop of Mubarak is gone. It's not clear that this is really what is going on, but the reports are widespread about the collapse of the police.

The army can join the people because with universal military service, the army is the people. The police, on the other hand, are the interface between the ruling elites and crime.
posted by warbaby at 8:44 AM on January 29, 2011

Oh man, one of the cases containing delicate funeral boats was just trashed. Fucking hell.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:46 AM on January 29, 2011

Eyewitness report from Cairo: Thieves, possibly escaped from prison, took weapons from abandoned police stations, and are running free, looting and threatening; no police, and no military either, so populace are only self-protected, trying to defend buildings. Shopping centres have been emptied by now, they are now turning to private residences.
posted by progosk at 8:50 AM on January 29, 2011

Fawaz Gerges, professor of Middle Eastern politics and international relations at the London School of Economics: This is the Arab world's Berlin moment. The authoritarian wall has fallen – and that's regardless of whether Mubarak survives or not. It goes beyond Mubarak. The barrier of fear has been removed. It is really the beginning of the end of the status quo in the region. (The Guardian)
posted by Infinite Jest at 8:56 AM on January 29, 2011 [6 favorites]

progosk: "Rawya Rageh on AJ: in Alexandria all uniformed police has disappeared from the streets, even traffic ops, so people are directing traffic themselves, and apprehending looters.
Also, reports of long queue at an ATM machine, presumably withdrawing money fo"

Fuck the police - we'll do it ourselves! THAT is fucking democracy!
posted by symbioid at 8:56 AM on January 29, 2011

"Cairo children's cancer hospital requesting protection from looters"
posted by xqwzts at 8:59 AM on January 29, 2011

report from Suez on AJ: Army's passivity is starting to cause friction with protesters, especially since looters are becoming rampant, due to complete absence of police.
posted by progosk at 9:03 AM on January 29, 2011

proj: "US State Department spokesmen on Twitter:

The #Egyptian government can't reshuffle the deck and then stand pat. President #Mubarak's words pledging reform must be followed by action."

And your words, too, Mr. State Dept. must be followed by action.
posted by symbioid at 9:06 AM on January 29, 2011

If the army takes on the looters it will look like they are shooting protestors, it's just too much confusion for this to turn out otherwise. Mubarak has to step down so the innocent people can get off the streets and order can be restored.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:07 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

4.25pm: Army vehicles have been deployed to protect residents in wealthy compounds in Cairo suburbs, Reuters reports. Witnesses say the action was taken after they heard gunshots and accounts of looting.

Army vehicles have also been deployed to protect five-star hotels, according to the news agency.

Some things are transcend nations and ideologies.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:09 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Does Saudi Arabia even have disaffected youth? I've always pictured a handful of indolent Saudis floating upon a vast sea of oil money and foreign workers.


Saudi Arabia is not the UAE, it has a huge population, 38% of which is under 15. Poverty does exist.
posted by xqwzts at 9:10 AM on January 29, 2011

Omar Suleiman, director of intelligence? Wow. Somewhere in an alternate universe circa 1989, Gorbachev appointed the head of the KGB as his successor and everything worked out... just peachy.

What? You don't trust this guy?
posted by Joe Beese at 9:12 AM on January 29, 2011 [8 favorites]

Mubarak is burning down the house on the way out the door.
posted by vibrotronica at 9:12 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Oh man, one of the cases containing delicate funeral boats was just trashed. Fucking hell.

While I have no interest in mindless destruction, if the cost of giving tens of millions of Egyptians a better future is property destruction and the loss of some artifacts, or even all of them, it will be well worth it.

Let's keep in mind that so far the Egyptian protestors have done a much better job protecting that museum than the US military in protecting Baghdad's artifacts.
posted by notion at 9:12 AM on January 29, 2011 [8 favorites]

Saudi Arabia is not the UAE, it has a huge population, 38% of which is under 15.

More than half of Egyptians have never known an Egypt not ruled by Hosni Mubarak.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:15 AM on January 29, 2011

Mubarak is not an idiot. I'm very afraid that he will purposefully create instability in order to force the protestors back to defend their homes. If the security deteriorates enough, he can offer to send the police and military back out to restore order. It's a risk only for the future of Egypt, and the future stability of the Middle East.

I hope there are some wonks in the State Department who at least care about that.
posted by notion at 9:20 AM on January 29, 2011

Some things are transcend nations and ideologies.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:09 AM on January 29 [1 favorite +] [!]

Tourism is absolutely massive in Egypt and if foreigners stop coming to see the country, the present economy will look absolutely rosy.
posted by proj at 9:22 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Updates from my brother as of three hours ago. Still calm outside of downtown. Residents are patrolling the neighborhood and my brother was able to stop at his office and purchase groceries, so that's good. The airport is open but they speculate it could get sketchy as Mubarak et al flee the country.

Which is basically what everyone else has said but there you have it. Except for the speculation that the airport could become sketchy as the regime flees. That had not occurred to me.
posted by stet at 9:24 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

In my comic book fueled imagination.

Right now a panicked Israeli Cabinet is gathered at Sharon's bedside screaming, Arik Oorah to have him to wake up and give council. Omar Sharif is riding with an army of 10,000 Bedouin out of Sinai to liberate Suez and then onto Cairo. Mummies walk from the Valley of the Kings to grab Mubarak and drag him into a long prepared sarcophagus. He silt held back at Aswan yearns to flood the upper Nile and bring vitality to the dry dusty land. The bushes in St. Katharines monastery burn and the voice of God is heard to let the people of Egypt go. A top the Mountain a still small voice announcers the return of Elijah. The ghost of Hussien leads prayers at the Grand Mosque. Cleopatra's boat is sailing up the Nile. And the light of Ra shines down upon the great pyramid, the earth quakes. Dr. Zahi Hawass rides the Great Sphynx to defend the nations treasures and antiquities.

Will we see the plagues return, the Nile turn to blood? As the fires burn will we hear a mourning song from Um Kalthoum.
posted by humanfont at 9:25 AM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

Paraphrasing AJ: the civilian patrol of their own neighborhoods, setting up roadblocks to check cars and people coming into their areas, is beginning to resemble what happened in Tunisia.
posted by notion at 9:28 AM on January 29, 2011

And the light of Ra shines down upon the great pyramid, the earth quakes.

Right, like a Goa'uld slave state is gonna be a step up.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:30 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Mubarak names a Vice President for the first time

An old Egyptian joke (from before today). Nasser feared overthrow, so he searched for a man of less talent than he to serve as his vice president. After many years he found Sadat. Sadat became president and followed the old president's custom and search many years for a man of less talents than he to be his Vice President. After many years he found Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak has been searching for 30 years, but so far he has yet to find a vice president.
posted by humanfont at 9:34 AM on January 29, 2011 [35 favorites]

AJ is saying the police are looting.
posted by empath at 9:37 AM on January 29, 2011

AJ is saying the police are looting.
Read same thing from various sources - it's plain-clothes special police and agents provocateur on the rampage by and large.
posted by Abiezer at 9:42 AM on January 29, 2011

if the cost of giving tens of millions of Egyptians a better future is property destruction and the loss of some artifacts, or even all of them, it will be well worth it.

If the Egyptian Museum is looted, it will go like the Baghdad Museum looting-- black-market antiquities dealers will be richer, some artifacts will be sold to the kinds of creeps who buy antiquities on the black market, and some will be destroyed forever. I can't even think of a single American site whose destruction would be so catastrophic to our national heritage, sense of history, and, yes, tourism. There's no way in hell that the destruction of the Egyptian Museum could actually help the cause of the protesters, and from the earlier civilian attempts to protect the museum, it seems like the majority of Egyptians know that. As a human being, I sincerely hope that Egypt has a brighter, richer, more open future, and as a historian I am terrified about the museum and its contents.
posted by oinopaponton at 9:43 AM on January 29, 2011 [10 favorites]

[just to note: what a singular feeling, to literally be watching history being made.]

Very eloquent interview with ElBaradei right now on AJ.
posted by progosk at 9:46 AM on January 29, 2011

(actually, it's a rebroadcast, I believe, not sure who's doing the interviewing.)
posted by progosk at 9:47 AM on January 29, 2011

Did anybody else see the soldier with the megaphone telling people that he'd take off his uniform and join them if they cleared off the streets for the night?

What was up with that?
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 9:48 AM on January 29, 2011

(AJ-Arabic, it was.)
posted by progosk at 9:49 AM on January 29, 2011

Did anybody else see the soldier with the megaphone telling people that he'd take off his uniform and join them if they cleared off the streets for the night?

What was up with that?

He was arguing that he supports the uprising, but that it is difficult in the heat of the moment to discern protesters from looters, so that the protesters should clear the streets at night in order that the Army can easily identify and stop the looters. (Who we are hearing may be plainclothes policemen.)
posted by manguero at 9:51 AM on January 29, 2011

thsmchnekllsfascists, I took that as a sincere plea by a soldier sympathetic to the protest, that he is with them, but that there would be no way for the army to secure the city from the looters if protesters remained everywhere. It sounds like the situation is just looking too confusing, and the army is in the tightest spot.
posted by progosk at 9:52 AM on January 29, 2011

List of protesters demands/intentions, from activist Ramy Raoof.
posted by progosk at 9:58 AM on January 29, 2011

Images of destruction at the Museum so far.
posted by oinopaponton at 10:00 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

There's no way in hell that the destruction of the Egyptian Museum could actually help the cause of the protesters, and from the earlier civilian attempts to protect the museum, it seems like the majority of Egyptians know that. As a human being, I sincerely hope that Egypt has a brighter, richer, more open future, and as a historian I am terrified about the museum and its contents.

I agree. This is not a minor point. Egypt's antiquities are responsible for startling revenues in the form of tourism, internationally funded research projects, international museum loans, and the like. This isn't just an objects vs. people debate - Egypt's material cultural heritage is an important basis for the country's economic future. I hope that it can be protected to the extent possible. I've seen intense pride I've experienced on the part of Egyptian scholars and hope that this is shared widely among the populace.
posted by Miko at 10:02 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Sharif Kouddous is tweeting from downtown Cairo, he's apparently a democracy now producer, so it should be legit. I'm not sure how, though.

That's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that the visceral disgust you and I and most people here feel when thinking of brutal thugs like Mubarak is not felt by people in power.

Well, you're talking about how they feel not what they think, there's quite a difference.

Anyway, what I meant was that they have access to the same information we do and probably drew the same conclusions, I don't know what emotional value judgments they came too about those conclusions. That said I'm not sure I really think all politicians are 'sociopathic'. Certainly some are (John Bolton). But there are other ways to avoid cognitive dissonance. Simply not thinking about it one way, believing that you're doing net good is another way, and will do a lot of mental gymnastics to avoid confronting what they're really doing. Being stupid is another possibility.

Tourism is absolutely massive in Egypt and if foreigners stop coming to see the country, the present economy will look absolutely rosy.

They're not blowing up the pyramids.
posted by delmoi at 10:03 AM on January 29, 2011

People don't come only to see the pyramids. They are not unimportant but the artifacts are no longer in the pyramids. People come to see the funerary artifacts, which are in museums.
posted by Miko at 10:05 AM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

I'm not sure how, though.

There are mobile satellite downlink units that journalists use. That's probably how. Too bad there aren't a few more of those out there, but most outlets don't seem to want to send journalists in.
posted by Miko at 10:08 AM on January 29, 2011

They're not blowing up the pyramids.

You're so quick to snark that you're missing the point. The original comment was about how the five-star hotels are being guarded and someone snarked about that and I made the point that tourism is important. If people don't feel safe in their hotels, they won't visit. I know you have a quick-posting style, but seriously, no one intimated they're blowing up the pyramids.
posted by proj at 10:11 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Even in the best of times, The Museum of Egyptian Antiquities is the most poorly kept museum of that calibre that I've ever seen. Makes me wanna cry every time.
posted by gman at 10:12 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

gman -- Have you been to the national museum in Naples? There were literally windows open there the last time I was there with rain blowing in.
posted by proj at 10:13 AM on January 29, 2011

AJ is saying the police are looting.
Read same thing from various sources - it's plain-clothes special police and agents provocateur on the rampage by and large.

Which, unfortunately, is pretty much what the anonymous source quoted by the Angry Arab said was the regime's plan - and the rest of the plan is for the military to be "forced" to crack down on these agents provocateur.
posted by Marla Singer at 10:13 AM on January 29, 2011

if foreigners stop coming to see the country, the present economy will look absolutely rosy

That's a very good point. [I'm thinking of Mother Beese's visit there last year.]

But I think its importance rests less on what people go to see than how fearful they are they they'll be killed going to see it. Unless there's reason to suspect that rich tourists will be targeted, it would make much more sense to station the army outside the museums than the 5-start hotels.

Either way, the wealthy suburbs are not a priority.
posted by Joe Beese at 10:13 AM on January 29, 2011

AP by way of the Guardian:

Residents reported gangs of youths, some on motorbikes, roaming the streets, looting supermarkets, shopping malls and shops

I'm a layman when it comes to Egyptian affairs, but when I think of young men on motorcycles causing mayhem during a popular uprising I am reminded of the Basij. This is an honest question and I have no idea whether it is warranted, but is there any chance these are just NDP-aligned thugs?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:17 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Of what use are the artifacts in Egypt if there are no free Egyptians?
posted by notion at 10:17 AM on January 29, 2011

Of what use are the artifacts in Egypt if there are no free Egyptians?

Even if the worst-case scenario, their use is rebuilding an economy, providing jobs, feeding people, and curing illness so they can live another day to continue pressing for freedom.
posted by Miko at 10:19 AM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

Another point about the Antiquaries Museum - they're building/planning to build a new one, out in Giza (near the Pyramids). This would presumably provide jobs for the people of Giza City, and help the local economy - and it sure as hell needs it. So those objects are going to provide a very real benefit for the locals, a benefit that will be diminished if the money has to go on repairing damage to the artefacts/current museum.
posted by Infinite Jest at 10:22 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

So the police forces, who are emerging as the clear bad guy in all of this, why are they still doing this? Executing the orders of a leader who is clearly on the way out, not even in the country any more? Are their identities generally known? Aren't they going to face reprisals when the dust settles? Are they not Egyptian, too?
posted by danny the boy at 10:23 AM on January 29, 2011

If people don't feel safe in their hotels, they won't visit.

Well fine, fuck it. Call the whole thing off. We can't forget our priorities here
posted by crayz at 10:23 AM on January 29, 2011

Of what use are the artifacts in Egypt if there are no free Egyptians?

If you don't believe in the importance of shared cultural heritage, then "only" the lucrative tourism draw. But the human race at large would be measurably poorer without this collection. Two mummies have already been destroyed. If, as has been suggested, the looters are agents provocateur or plainclothes policemen, then this looting is actually hurting the protesters' cause. Please don't make it a dusty old antiques vs. living breathing humans debate; it's much more complicated than that.
posted by oinopaponton at 10:25 AM on January 29, 2011 [15 favorites]

20% of the foreign dollars taken in by the Egyptian economy come from tourism
. Egypt is the #1 tourist destination on the African continent and the 23rd most popular destination worldwide. Tourism is the #1 foreign currency earner and produces $11% of the country's GDP. Approximately 12% of the Egyptian workforce is employed in the tourism sector.


I'm certainly sympathetic with the idea that in a hypothetical human-object standoff, the human should certainly be the one to survive. However, when uprisings destroy cultural heritage, the impact over the long term can be as detrimental as burning farms or tearing apart factories. The people will need a way to make money, regardless of what political structure the next regime, whatever it is, will implement.
posted by Miko at 10:27 AM on January 29, 2011 [8 favorites]

Of what use are the artifacts in Egypt if there are no free Egyptians?

Use? Well, I guess you can look at them.

But value — the preservation of historical objects is, to many people, a goal in and of itself, as they provide a bridge for modern and future people to the world of the past, and tell us something about the development of civilizations and cultures.

This has no bearing on peoples' right of self-determination, of course, but yeah, I'd say there is good reason to keep old-timey stuff around regardless of anything going on around it.

Because what's the alternative? Smash them, return to the sociopolitical status quo and be the same oppressed people but now without historical artifacts? I imagine you wouldn't think that were to be preferred.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:27 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

"7:38pm Ayman Mohyeldin reports that eyewitnesses have said "party thugs" associated with the Egyptian regime's Central Security Services - in plainclothes but bearing government-issued weapons - have been looting in Cairo. Ayman says the reports started off as isolated accounts but are now growing in number." - AJ live blog
posted by Abiezer at 10:30 AM on January 29, 2011

Well fine, fuck it. Call the whole thing off. We can't forget our priorities here
posted by crayz at 10:23 AM on January 29 [+] [!]

Stop trying to set up strawmen false dichotomies in what is otherwise a very informative and nuanced discussion.
posted by proj at 10:32 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

So the police forces, who are emerging as the clear bad guy in all of this, why are they still doing this?

I'm guessing that they're the ones with the most to lose if the current regime goes down, better thought of as gangbangers with badges (ie: legal thugs) than what most North Americans imagine a police force to be.

Again I'm reminded of how pernicious the pro-cop propaganda is that most of us are raised on (those tens of thousands of hours of TV cop shows we've seen by the time we're adults). Not saying all cops are bad. They're not. But give a man the power of arrest and you're contributing toward his potential corruption. This is something most of the world instantly understands but not, it seems, the bulk of us here in good ole North America.
posted by philip-random at 10:34 AM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

So the police forces, who are emerging as the clear bad guy in all of this, why are they still doing this? Executing the orders of a leader who is clearly on the way out, not even in the country any more? Are their identities generally known? Aren't they going to face reprisals when the dust settles? Are they not Egyptian, too?
posted by danny the boy at 10:23 AM on January 29 [+] [!]

Well there is the obvious reason that they are trying to sow chaos as ordered, but the less obvious reason that, if the regime falls, they will be the losers and they are trying to "get theirs" while they can. The police are very poor as well.
posted by proj at 10:34 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

And the economic argument is only one aspect of value, as oinopaponton wisely said. Human history is rife with incidents in which peoples were separated from their own history and disempowered by having their tangible heritage, text and object, destroyed, sold, or hidden. It happened to the ancient Maya, it happens in China, it happened to Native Americans. In the long term, the quality of a people's existence is informed and supported by the knowledge and protection of its past. People are their stories. That seems less important in moments of violence, but the very cultural power of these artifacts (in addition to their market value) is precisely the reason people target them in times of political stress. Because they are important.
posted by Miko at 10:34 AM on January 29, 2011 [13 favorites]

With respect, the Egyptian people are willing to die, and have died, to earn their freedom. I do not accept the premise that human life is worth less than any material object. To further pretend that the only national asset they have are museums, and to pretend that Egypt hasn't been looted before for the better part of it's history is just slightly over the top.

Again, I hope no more damage is done to their historical artifacts. This is obviously a false dichotomy, but if there is a choice between living under a murderous dictatorship and keeping their museums intact, I believe the choice is clear.
posted by notion at 10:34 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

So the police forces, who are emerging as the clear bad guy in all of this, why are they still doing this? Executing the orders of a leader who is clearly on the way out, not even in the country any more? Are their identities generally known? Aren't they going to face reprisals when the dust settles? Are they not Egyptian, too?

They're torturers and murderers already, they might as well be thieves.
posted by empath at 10:35 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

As a human being, I sincerely hope that Egypt has a brighter, richer, more open future, and as a historian I am terrified about the museum and its contents.

I wonder what effect all of this will have on the repatriation of artefacts, both Egyptian and generally. It would make for an easy excuse for Western museums to hold onto their loot on the basis that the artefacts are safer there than in their country of origin.

Not that this is important at the present moment.
posted by Capt. Renault at 10:35 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Stop trying to set up strawmen false dichotomies in what is otherwise a very informative and nuanced discussion.

I don't understand what this argument is about. No one is in favor of destroying millenia-old cultural heritage. To the extent that it's happening, what are you suggesting be done about it? If a discussion of people wresting control of their own destinies from a decades-long dictatorship turns into a discussion of the collateral damage that causes, it begins to seem like some are suggesting the damage outweighs the benefits

This is a revolution, not afternoon tea. Can we document the downsides without obsessing over them?
posted by crayz at 10:37 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Al Jazeera is saying that the reports of museum looting are only coming from the one source of state tv, and has not been confirmed. Until it is confirmed, it should be treated as suspect information.
posted by Capt. Renault at 10:39 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

We're just discussing why it might be important to protect the tourism industry. Your own read is that "it begins to seem like some are suggesting the damage outweighs the benefits" though no one has suggested that but you. If you don't like what we're talking about, talk about something else without snarking.
posted by proj at 10:39 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

UNCONFIRMED RUMOR: Stratfor is saying that the Gaza blockaed has been dropped and Hamas is flowing into Egypt.
posted by empath at 10:41 AM on January 29, 2011

A reasonable guess is the upper levels of the military are trying to sort out who's in with Mubarak and who's with the people. At the highest levels, they will be trying to keep the old regime. In the streets, well, that's another story.

But ultimately, it's going to be the military that decides, not Mubarak and the security police.
posted by warbaby at 10:44 AM on January 29, 2011

if there is a choice between living under a murderous dictatorship and keeping their museums intact, I believe the choice is clear.

There's no such choice. The destruction of artifacts is not necessary to the securing of freedom.

With respect, the Egyptian people are willing to die, and have died, to earn their freedom.

Isn't that an argument that, if asked, they might not say their cultural heritage is worth less than their lives?

To further pretend that the only national asset they have are museums, and to pretend that Egypt hasn't been looted before for the better part of it's history is just slightly over the top.

Nobody's pretending that it's the only national asset. Given the 11% of GDP figure, it is as important an economic sector as manufacturing is in the US, and twice as productive as retail sales are in the US, but it's not the largest contributer, it's only in the top four. Still, that's big. Also, nobody's asserting that human life is worth "more" or "less" than anything else in your abstract formulation. You're setting up straw men in a situation in which there is not a choice and in which we have no ability to impact events anyway.

It's reasonable to mourn damage to irreplaceable cultural heritage just as it is to mourn damage to life. They are not mutually exclusive and there are serious implications to both. There's no reason to condemn the expression of this view.
posted by Miko at 10:45 AM on January 29, 2011 [15 favorites]

With respect, the Egyptian people are willing to die, and have died, to earn their freedom. I do not accept the premise that human life is worth less than any material object. To further pretend that the only national asset they have are museums, and to pretend that Egypt hasn't been looted before for the better part of it's history is just slightly over the top.

I don't see anyone making those statements (though this is clearly a fast-moving thread and I may have missed them). Obviously people are far more important, but destruction or looting of these artefacts is an additional tragedy.
posted by Infinite Jest at 10:46 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Of what use are the artifacts in Egypt if there are no free Egyptians?

Of what use is freedom if getting it results in being enslaved by poverty rather than government?

I don't understand what this argument is about. No one is in favor of destroying millenia-old cultural heritage. To the extent that it's happening, what are you suggesting be done about it?

Protect it. Form a human ring around the museum, or let the army devote some small portion of its resources to securing it. You're constructing a false dilemma, crayz: obtain freedom while letting the museum burn, or protect the status quo along with the museum.

So far the Egyptians have done a pretty good job of pushing hard for democratic change without burning down the whole country and everything valuable in it. It's not counter-revolutionary to observe that there's a tomorrow after the revolution.
posted by fatbird at 10:48 AM on January 29, 2011

UNCONFIRMED RUMOR: Stratfor is saying that the Gaza blockaed has been dropped and Hamas is flowing into Egypt.

That would be... bad.
posted by rodgerd at 10:48 AM on January 29, 2011

Al Jazeera is saying that the reports of museum looting are only coming from the one source of state tv, and has not been confirmed. Until it is confirmed, it should be treated as suspect information.

That doesn't grok with the pictures/video Al Jazeera has been showing from the museum interior with protective glass broken and artifacts strewn on the floor.

They also show armed military personnel patrolling within the museum and say the looting occurred before the army got get there...
posted by xqwzts at 10:49 AM on January 29, 2011

My latest update is that the army have taken over in a good way. Soldiers are being posted in residential areas. My relatives are feeling "secure and optimistic." And, apparently, international phone calls are going through.
posted by stet at 10:49 AM on January 29, 2011 [13 favorites]

That would be... bad

Assuming it's true, i think it would mean a bunch of weapons flowing to protesters in egypt and a bunch of money and food flowing towards Gaza.
posted by empath at 10:50 AM on January 29, 2011

Here is the link for that. I dunno if I trust these Stratfor guys, are they reliable?

The following is a report from a STRATFOR source in Hamas. Hamas, which formed in Gaza as an outgrowth of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (MB), has an interest in exaggerating its role and coordination with the MB in this crisis. The following information has not been confirmed.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:56 AM on January 29, 2011

I was just wondering the same thing furiousxgeorge. Anyone care to enlighten me on Stratfor? Background, bias, funding sources?
posted by gofargogo at 10:59 AM on January 29, 2011

empath: I'd be more worried about Hamas trying to hijack the revolution to more millitant/Islamist ends, or trying to seize control of border towns and cities, leading to the sort of mess/invasion pretexts you see in Lebanon's south.
posted by rodgerd at 10:59 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Stratfor are a "global intelligence" company that prepare intelligence briefings for companies. I wouldn't say they are a straight-forward ideological outfit but they tend to hew towards Council on Foreign Affairs-style insights on geopolitics. They also have publish a lot of unconfirmed reports.
posted by proj at 11:00 AM on January 29, 2011

Hamas is having a hard enough time governing Gaza to try and export a revolution.
posted by proj at 11:00 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Stratfor has a very mixed record. So treat it as just another unconfirmed rumor. If true, it will start showing up on other sources with confirming details.
posted by warbaby at 11:03 AM on January 29, 2011

i don't think they'd try exporting a revolution - i do think they'd be very interested in importing whatever they can get their hands on
posted by pyramid termite at 11:04 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

empath: I'd be more worried about Hamas trying to hijack the revolution to more millitant/Islamist ends, or trying to seize control of border towns and cities, leading to the sort of mess/invasion pretexts you see in Lebanon's south.

If anyone was going to do that the Muslim Brotherhood would have done it days ago. Hamas is tiny compared to MB and inconsequential in Egypt.
posted by xqwzts at 11:04 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

There's no such choice. The destruction of artifacts is not necessary to the securing of freedom.

To clarify, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that if the revolution puts the museums in additional danger, it's well worth it.

It's reasonable to mourn damage to irreplaceable cultural heritage just as it is to mourn damage to life. They are not mutually exclusive and there are serious implications to both. There's no reason to condemn the expression of this view.

I'm often guilty of getting this argument stuck sideways in my head. From the West's history of destroying democracies to preserve profit, I always get more than a little sensitive when I feel like a similar argument is being made.

On preview: according to AJ, the damage was caused two or three people entered through the top of the museum. Compare that to the damage in Baghdad.
posted by notion at 11:06 AM on January 29, 2011

jerusalem post report of problems in rafah
posted by pyramid termite at 11:07 AM on January 29, 2011

I never trust Stratfor. Their reports invariably have a ideological spin and, it seems to me, almost always turn out later to have been wrong. In fact, I was just listening to Al Jazeera English report about 30 minutes ago that Hamas has instructed West Bank Palestinians to stay away from the border with Egypt and had strengthened patrols on their side. And the Muslim Brotherhood isn't playing a big role in this thing, it's more populist and generalized than them from what I'm reading and hearing. OTOH, it does look like the Egyptian security forces are creating a looting panic on the ground, setting the stage for a "justified" military crackdown.
posted by Auden at 11:07 AM on January 29, 2011

The West Bank doesn't share a border with Egypt.
posted by proj at 11:08 AM on January 29, 2011

(I meant Gaza, what a dumb mistake to type. duh...)
posted by Auden at 11:11 AM on January 29, 2011

That doesn't grok with the pictures/video Al Jazeera has been showing from the museum interior with protective glass broken and artifacts strewn on the floor.

They're showing that on the stream right now. It was a different story earlier. Apologies for the confusion.
posted by Capt. Renault at 11:12 AM on January 29, 2011

Can someone verify that the Al Jazeera magazine (HQ in Saudi Arabia; aljazeera.com) is not the same as Al Jazeera TV/radio (HQ Qatar; aljazeera.net? This morning, the magazine was claiming that Mubarak was going to be taken in by Israel after Saudi Arabia rejected him.
posted by catlet at 11:15 AM on January 29, 2011

It's not the same.
posted by proj at 11:17 AM on January 29, 2011

> This is obviously a false dichotomy

Then why do you keep insisting on it? You seem determined to come across as someone who thinks culture is worthless.
posted by languagehat at 11:20 AM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

That's what I thought. I spent some time looking through the site and felt like I was reading someone's official party line. Thanks for the confirmation.
posted by catlet at 11:22 AM on January 29, 2011

if the revolution puts the museums in additional danger, it's well worth it.

I think that's utterly dependent on the outcome of this revolutions. Not all revolutions are "well worth it."

Compare that to the damage in Baghdad.

The damage done in Baghdad will never be fully undone. It's a tragedy of its own kind and its repercussions will be felt for centuries at the least. I'd like to see similar, future tragedies prevented. In this revolution, there is still the opportunity for those involved to prevent it. I hope that they do. Is this still controversial for you?
posted by Miko at 11:23 AM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

Then why do you keep insisting on it? You seem determined to come across as someone who thinks culture is worthless.

It's precisely the opposite. Objects are not culture without people to enjoy the works of their ancestors and the freedom to create new art. People are required to form a culture. Antiquities are important, but they are not necessary.
posted by notion at 11:26 AM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

What a dumb derail.

Whether or not the museum gets destroyed has nothing to do with the revolution. It's just assholes taking advantage of chaos.
posted by empath at 11:34 AM on January 29, 2011 [14 favorites]

Lots of goodies here.
posted by vrakatar at 11:34 AM on January 29, 2011

It's precisely the opposite. Objects are not culture without people to enjoy the works of their ancestors and the freedom to create new art. People are required to form a culture.

Who has proposed doing away with people?
posted by Miko at 11:38 AM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

I sure hope the library at Alexandria has sprinklers these days.
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:45 AM on January 29, 2011

The interview on AJ with Maajid Nawaz is very interesting. If I caught it correctly, he's spoken with a close associate of the appointed vice president, who said the VP is committed to a transition to democracy.
posted by Anything at 11:47 AM on January 29, 2011

Egyptian Unrest Map. The map incorporates recent social media feeds related to the unrest. Full page version.
posted by NoMich at 11:48 AM on January 29, 2011

Re Muslim Brotherhood -- inspiring tweet from Sharif Kouddous a few hours ago: "Muslim Brotherhood chanting Allah Akbar. Crowd stopped them chanting louder: Muslim, Christian, we're all Egyptian."
posted by scody at 11:53 AM on January 29, 2011 [12 favorites]

The only part that I disagree with is this statement:

I think that's utterly dependent on the outcome of this revolutions. Not all revolutions are "well worth it."

The only option besides democratic action is totalitarianism of one form or another. I believe the Egyptian protests are clearly democratic. In our transitions from the monarchies and theocracies of the past, there has been tremendous progress towards open governments and truer freedom for minorities, women, and even the LGBT community. Yes, it's also led to awful results like Stalin's USSR, but if you examine the post WWII world it is largely fairer and more free and peaceful than at any other time in history.

To say the revolutions of the past, even the ones that ended in horrifying tragedy, were not "well worth it" I think ignores the amazing progress realized in the last ten years. For the first time in history in 2003, the whole world protested a war before it even began. For the first time in world history there are true democracies emerging in North Africa and the Middle East. And there are people who have never met in person expressing solidarity with each other in the pursuit of fundamental human rights, irregardless of their race, religion, and nationality. I submit again that damage to Egyptian culture caused by a continued slide into a repressed feudal society is far worse than any damage to their historical artifacts, even if the revolution fails.
posted by notion at 11:57 AM on January 29, 2011

Why didn't we (USA) do this to Bush & co? Props to Egyptians for both solidarity and common sense. /still bitter.
posted by HyperBlue at 12:04 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

I don't disagree with your historical argument about democracy, in general, though there are important exceptions to this worldwide march toward democracy that you perceive in recent decades. I'm merely suggesting that damage to historical artifacts is not a minor bourgeois concern, but a serious one, and that such damage is not a necessary part of any revolutionary activity, though it is frequently the outcome of political struggle of all kinds.
posted by Miko at 12:06 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

People, the Museum has been secure for a day at least, secured by the army. Relax.
posted by delmoi at 12:13 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Why didn't we (USA) do this to Bush & co? Props to Egyptians for both solidarity and common sense. /still bitter.

Because we could vote them out.
posted by delmoi at 12:14 PM on January 29, 2011 [9 favorites]

And our lives are materially no where close to as bad.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:15 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

What about the gift shop?! Is the gift shop protected?
posted by geoff. at 12:16 PM on January 29, 2011 [13 favorites]

Just got a phone call from a friend in the Mohadeseen area:

The men in the neighbourhood have barricaded the [narrow] road and put checkpoints. They're under sporadic attacks from drive-bys and cars trying to ram their way through... seem to be dealing with them rather heavy-handidly. Says one of the cars they stopped had plainsclothes policemen in it and "stolen stuff". Says there is no military presence in the area.

They plan on staying in the street for the rest of the night, but have no idea how long they can last if this goes on beyond tomorrow. [in the sense of exhaustion and if the attacks become more organized]
posted by xqwzts at 12:23 PM on January 29, 2011 [12 favorites]

This sort of false flag vandalism and robbery is one of the most disgusting things I know.
posted by Anything at 12:31 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

To say the revolutions of the past, even the ones that ended in horrifying tragedy, were not "well worth it" I think ignores the amazing progress realized in the last ten years. For the first time in history in 2003, the whole world protested a war before it even began.

For all the good it did.... [/bitter forever]
posted by jokeefe at 12:53 PM on January 29, 2011 [12 favorites]

The museum is still at risk. As per AJ, there's a big fire in a neighboring building.
posted by angrycat at 1:01 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJ just has an on the street interview with an English speaking Egyptian manning a roadblock with people from the neighborhood, complaining about the chaos. Seems to care a lot more about protecting his home than the politics.

They stop each car and see if they are people from the neighborhood and not troublemakers. They have bats and a few guns.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:10 PM on January 29, 2011

interesting comment by another participant in the local neighborhood-watch groups on AJ: looters do not do drive-by shootings, which is what they were dealing with, so these are provocateurs at work; and: the solidarity shown by members of each neighborhood is proving to be a strong bonding experience, giving them very practical sense of further unity and great pride in effectively securing their own country.
posted by progosk at 1:24 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

there's a big fire in a neighboring building

That was 24+ hours ago. I imagine it's largely finished burning by now.
posted by ryanrs at 1:32 PM on January 29, 2011

(the current AJ anchor is noticeably superficial/unengaged in what she is presenting; it's a distinct difference in tone and demeanor that sets her apart from the general tone of their livestream channel. Is it just me, or does she come across as though she has learned her mannerisms from US cable news? Admittedly: nothing I would have noticed had I not been watching this stuff all day...)
posted by progosk at 1:34 PM on January 29, 2011

no. the earlier building was the official party building (?) and this is a new building: the something something council building. it's really burning

also, AJ is talking about how the new top three cabinet (?) members have strong military ties. In addition, people are getting pissed because the army is not protecting neighborhoods. folks are making do with neighborhood militias
posted by angrycat at 1:35 PM on January 29, 2011

ryanrs, there's now a fire in the Press Club building that's just behind the one that was burning yesterday.
posted by progosk at 1:36 PM on January 29, 2011

has been searching for 30 years, but so far he has yet to find a vice president.


Rule number 16#: Do not appoint the Intelligence people to succeed you.

Omar Suleiman
-15th Director of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate
Incumbent

-Vice President of Egypt
Incumbent
January 29, 2011


The Museum is being used as a hostage. It is a bargining tool and buyer of time. (and a nice collection)
posted by clavdivs at 1:39 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Interesting side note: China appears to be aggressively managing mentions of Egypt, limiting media coverage and blocking search of "Egypt" in their Twitter-like service.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:42 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

I wonder how the events have been reported in Iran.
posted by Anything at 1:47 PM on January 29, 2011

Why didn't we (USA) do this to Bush & co? Props to Egyptians for both solidarity and common sense. /still bitter.

Because we could vote them out.
posted by delmoi at 2:14 PM on 1/29

Assuming you truly believe "we" voted them in to begin with, that is.
posted by HyperBlue at 1:48 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Egypt's corrupt and anti-citizen police force is going to be a huge challenge. Especially now they've gone plainclothes.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:52 PM on January 29, 2011

AJ is interviewing tourists right now. There was an American couple who decided to check out some of the sites today "We went to the citadel today and it was fine!" and a British couple got turned away from some pyramid.
posted by delmoi at 1:56 PM on January 29, 2011

Interesting side note
Yep, there's still stories up on the main portals but they're not being updated as promptly as earlier or those about Tunisia during the uprising there. Comments are pretty much all closed from what I've seen, and they were indeed being used to make subtle and not-so-subtle comparisons to the domestic situation, as well as express support for the peoples of Tunisia and Egypt.
posted by Abiezer at 1:59 PM on January 29, 2011

How so? They have lost their political power, supporting infrastructure, and internal organization. Small bands of them are fucking shit up in the neighborhoods, but that's not a viable platform to take over a nation.
posted by ryanrs at 2:01 PM on January 29, 2011

above was re: corrupt and anti-citizen police force
posted by ryanrs at 2:02 PM on January 29, 2011

Mubarak is going to have to say something soon, or the army will. I'd love to know what is being said on state radio, or any local stations that might still be broadcasting. Or pirate stations. I have a strange love for AM radio.
posted by vrakatar at 2:05 PM on January 29, 2011

Made in U.S.A.

Thirteen Senses - Into the Fire
posted by jeffburdges at 2:06 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

(ack - this AJ lady is excruciating!)
posted by progosk at 2:11 PM on January 29, 2011

Washington Post curated list of Egypt twitterers
posted by desjardins at 2:12 PM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

five fresh fish: "Egypt's corrupt and anti-citizen police force is going to be a huge challenge. Especially now they've gone plainclothes."

Honestly, I have no idea if this has been posted up-thread, but here's raw footage of what appears to be the military preventing clashes between the police and the protesters.
posted by gman at 2:22 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

via desjardins excellent link, via Mona Eltahawy: Cairo residents form human chain to protect the national museum.

"Once more: Mubarak regime thugs are looting and causing mayhem. Egyptian revolutionaries want to fix their country, not destroy it. Egyptians love our antiquities and we want them back from Europe - Nefertiti bust. We treasure them, not destroy them. Mubarak regime neglected the #Egyptian Museum. He's been responsible. His regime left it under dust and mess."
posted by scody at 2:29 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

AJ: 19 private planes from Egypt have just arrived in Dubai...
posted by progosk at 2:33 PM on January 29, 2011

argh - serves me right for giving any credit to this vacuous anchor - that's actually apparently 19 businessmen, not planes...
posted by progosk at 2:36 PM on January 29, 2011

progosk -- I almost posted that, too. She's looking for a story, and her analyst that's with her brushed it off when he learned it was just business men. "Yes, they are pro-regime, so they probably wanted to get out."
posted by gc at 2:37 PM on January 29, 2011

oinopaponton: "Two mummies have already been destroyed. If, as has been suggested, the looters are agents provocateur or plainclothes policemen, then this looting is actually hurting the protesters' cause."

Yeah, what kind of a "looters" ransack a museum in order to destroy a couple mummies when there's a plethora of gold which they could literally pocket?
posted by gman at 2:38 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

AJ: 19 private planes from Egypt have just arrived in Dubai...

If true... this is what the beginning of the end looks like.
posted by jokeefe at 2:41 PM on January 29, 2011

via Mona Eltahawy

I'm pretty sure it was Eltahawy who was giving that ass-kicking interview on AJ around 6 PM Eastern time yesterday.
posted by maudlin at 2:41 PM on January 29, 2011

And it's not apparently true. Nevermind.
posted by jokeefe at 2:42 PM on January 29, 2011

She's looking for a story

More than that, she seems permanently unable to get over the fact that OMG I'm a newsanchor on TV, whatdoIsaynext!!?
posted by progosk at 2:43 PM on January 29, 2011

What the fuck is he waiting for? He's 82, does he think he's going to rule another 20 years? JUST FLEE YOU OLD RATBAG.
posted by vrakatar at 2:44 PM on January 29, 2011 [11 favorites]

People out again in Algeria and saw reports that Morocco is redeploying troops from Sahara to cities.
posted by Abiezer at 2:45 PM on January 29, 2011

Why didn't we (USA) do this to Bush & co? Props to Egyptians for both solidarity and common sense. /still bitter.


Lets not forget, we didn't have the solidarity that the Egyptians do. Plenty of heavily armed americans were more than satisfied with gbush's asinine foreign "policy"
posted by Redhush at 2:48 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

From the WaPo twitter feed:

and what's with all these baseball bats in egypt, who the hell plays baseball in egypt? must be a cia conspiracy #Jan25

He's joking. He goes by alaa.
posted by vrakatar at 2:56 PM on January 29, 2011

JUST FLEE YOU OLD RATBAG.

See, that's what I don't get. I assume that despots have a Plan B worked out for decades -- Swiss bank accounts, a friendly country to go to, and a jet to get you there. Sure, that life of exile isn't as great as the gig you have going now, but it's still pretty sweet. All the luxury and none of the responsibility.

But there's something in this guy that says I can still turn this around. I can still fix this. And for what? Ten years? Extra statues of himself in the main square? Job security for his kid?

At some point, when there's that much heat on you, you say "enh, I've had a good run", leave your cronies to fend for themselves, and fly off into the sunset to your new life of champagne breakfasts and Swedish massages and stories of the good ol' days.
posted by Capt. Renault at 2:57 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Spotted a cricket bat at another citizen checkpoint, so MI6 are up to no good as well.
posted by Abiezer at 2:58 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

It's hard to watch this interview with Waseem Wagdi, an Egyptian in London, without tearing up a bit.
posted by Kattullus at 2:58 PM on January 29, 2011 [14 favorites]

As well as worrying about friends in Egypt, and hoping for the future of the country, I've been absolutely devastated to see the destruction in the Egyptian Museum. As an Egyptologist, I've been able to identify a number of the objects shown damaged on Al Jazeera tv, including a number of statues from the tomb of Tutankhamun, others over 4000 years old. If people are interested (sorry for the self-reference), I've compiled some images showing the artefacts involved on my blog. I've been frantically looking them up, as if by being able to identify the artefacts, I might be able to restore them to their former existence. But I can't do that.

At least in terms of the wooden models of daily life, there is consolation in the fact that many of them were actually found in a highly damaged state and managed to be put back together. But what is stolen may never be recovered, and sometimes destruction can be absolute, not only of objects as something for tourists to look at, but as a source of knowledge for future generations. I'm currently working on my PhD and I was surprised when I couldn't figure out the current location of a few of the models I'm investigating for my thesis. Then I found out that they don't have a location anymore. They were originally housed in the museum at Liverpool, and during the war they were destroyed in the bombing. Now all I have to work with is a couple of insufficient photos for some of them, others are gone with no trace left whatsoever.

People often think that once something's been found and put in a museum, that's it's purposed fulfilled. Someone must have recorded it, studied it at some point, right? Wrong. There are so many artefacts, discovered in such a short space of time, that many of them have barely been looked at. Even the treasures of Tutankhamun, which I expect people will assume are some of the best known artefacts from Egypt, many of them have not yet been published at all. Perhaps this event will shock Egyptologists out of their complacency, not wanting to study Tut objects as being too 'populist', or preferring to rush off to find the next big discovery rather than studying what we already have.

What is especially frightening is that the records at the museum in Cairo are not the greatest and they could potentially not even be able to fully identify what has been lost.

The loss will affect the Egyptian people immensely- both financially and psychologically. The tourism industry is a vital component of the economy, but the people there are also very proud of their heritage. But this goes beyond Egypt, beyond any of us… if these precious objects are gone, the knowledge that they hold is gone for all future generations.
posted by Kirjava at 3:05 PM on January 29, 2011 [50 favorites]

Thanks, Kattullus.
posted by Capt. Renault at 3:05 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Why didn't we (USA) do this to Bush & co? Props to Egyptians for both solidarity and common sense. /still bitter.

As much as I hate Bush and consider the results of the 2000 and 2004 elections to be fraudulent, it's sort of foolish to ask why Egypt (which has 35+% youth unemployment and has been under the same blatantly tyrannical regime for thirty years) erupted and we didn't.

Check back when we, too, have nothing left to lose.
posted by vorfeed at 3:07 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

But there's something in this guy that says I can still turn this around. I can still fix this. And for what? Ten years? Extra statues of himself in the main square? Job security for his kid?

I think the psychology of the despot is often broader than mere kleptocrat. In Mubarak's case, and many others, there is a patriotism at work and an internalization of the Great Man theory of history, such that they are the Necessary Man to save the country from whatever ills assail it. "History will vindicate me!" "Après moi, le déluge." &c.
posted by dhartung at 3:20 PM on January 29, 2011 [6 favorites]

Bush would not have lasted three decades if he tried.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:23 PM on January 29, 2011

"Hawass said now that the Egyptian Museum's collection is secure from thieves, the greatest threat to the collection inside is posed by the torched ruling party headquarters building next door."
posted by clavdivs at 3:23 PM on January 29, 2011

If, as has been suggested, the looters are agents provocateur or plainclothes policemen, then this looting is actually hurting the protesters' cause.

Wait, what? Is this a typo? Because if the looters are agents provocateur or plainclothes policemen, then that should hurt Mubarak, not the protesters - as long as everyone is aware of the fact. And it looks like it's becoming pretty well known. I read somewhere (no link, sorry) that some of these impromptu neighborhood watches had managed to capture some of the looters and drive-by shooters and they found state security ID on them.

the motherfuckers
posted by Marla Singer at 3:27 PM on January 29, 2011

I think the psychology of the despot is often broader than mere kleptocrat.

Indeed.

- Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What could you buy that you can't already afford?

- The future, Mr. Gittes! The future!
posted by Joe Beese at 3:28 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Military Prevents Confrontation Between Police and Protesters (via).
posted by EvaDestruction at 3:36 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

Wait, what? Is this a typo? Because if the looters are agents provocateur or plainclothes policemen, then that should hurt Mubarak, not the protesters - as long as everyone is aware of the fact.

It actually doesn't matter who is doing it. What matters is what the people believe. And right now, they won't believe anything the regime says.
posted by empath at 3:38 PM on January 29, 2011

Secret audio leaked from Mubarak's HQ
posted by Marla Singer at 3:39 PM on January 29, 2011

Where is the Mubarak Downfall video?
posted by empath at 3:42 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

What matters is what the people believe. And right now, they won't believe anything the regime says.

Yes, and that's a good thing. Naturally, the regime is going to claim that the looters are rank-and-file Egyptians, not plainclothes policemen, and it's good for the people to see through that and recognize that the looters are actually Mubarak's goons.
posted by Marla Singer at 3:49 PM on January 29, 2011

See, that's what I don't get. I assume that despots have a Plan B worked out for decades -- Swiss bank accounts, a friendly country to go to, and a jet to get you there. Sure, that life of exile isn't as great as the gig you have going now, but it's still pretty sweet. All the luxury and none of the responsibility.

But there's something in this guy that says I can still turn this around. I can still fix this. And for what? Ten years? Extra statues of himself in the main square? Job security for his kid?

Mubarak doesn't see himself as the villain. He's like Nixon.
posted by humanfont at 3:49 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Wait, what? Is this a typo? Because if the looters are agents provocateur or plainclothes policemen, then that should hurt Mubarak, not the protesters - as long as everyone is aware of the fact.

Right, if the consensus is that this was done at Mubarak's orders. When I wrote my comment, the agent provocateur vandalism was just an unsubstantiated rumor in US-available news outlets, and it looked like the destruction could have been pinned on the protesters, in which case the violence against the museum could have been a successful tool used to delegitimize the protesters. Not a typo.
posted by oinopaponton at 3:51 PM on January 29, 2011

Where is the Mubarak Downfall video?

In the making, I hope.
posted by Marla Singer at 4:00 PM on January 29, 2011

oinopaponton: Fair enough, our sources differ. From what I've gathered, it's fairly well known among the Egyptian populace that Mubarak's men are pulling all kinds of shenanigans, and I would expect that they know better than to believe that the Museum damage was done by their own people. YMMV.
posted by Marla Singer at 4:05 PM on January 29, 2011

Fascinatingly, the phrase GAME OVER [MUBARAK] is becoming emblematic of the protests:
[1 2 3 4]

Called, of course, by our own eponysterical Civil_Disobedient
posted by dhartung at 4:07 PM on January 29, 2011 [5 favorites]

I've seen the 'Mubark' spelling quite a few times. Is it a legitimate transliteration, mockery or just a spelling error?
posted by Anything at 4:15 PM on January 29, 2011

I've seen the 'Mubark' spelling quite a few times. Is it a legitimate transliteration, mockery or just a spelling error?

Probably just a different transliteration. I know folks who transliterate their own name differently at different times.
posted by bluedaisy at 4:19 PM on January 29, 2011

It's a legitimate transliteration but not the standard one. His name is مبارك, so there is a long alif after the baa but not after the ra. So, if you're not transliterating short vowels, you could do Mubark. Of course, then you'd actually want to do Mbark to be consistent, but you see where that's going.
posted by proj at 4:31 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Previously
posted by empath at 4:40 PM on January 29, 2011

GAME OVER

INSERT NEW PRESIDENT TO CONTINUE
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 4:42 PM on January 29, 2011 [19 favorites]

Where is the Mubarak Downfall video?

It wouldn't be funny; the whole lulz of the Downfall videos lies in the contrast between the terribly serious and the banal. A Downfall video about Muburak would just look like a documentary outtake.
posted by jokeefe at 4:47 PM on January 29, 2011 [6 favorites]

Wow, the interviewee on AJ right now--he's saying things that no one in the media does, but everyone knows.
posted by manguero at 4:47 PM on January 29, 2011

Anybody know what the politics in Qatar are like (the home of Al Jazeera)?
posted by empath at 4:48 PM on January 29, 2011

More reports re agents provocateurs: Eyewitnesses Say State Sponsoring Vandalism

Ayman Nour, opposition leader and head of the Ghad Party, told Al-Masry Al-Youm that his fellow party members have caught several thugs who work for the Interior Ministry. After capturing them in downtown Cairo and Heliopolis, Nour's followers found ministry of interior IDs on them, Nour said.

“The regime is trying to project the worst image possible to make it clear to people that they have only one of two alternatives: either the existing order or chaos,” he said.

posted by scody at 4:49 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

manguero, what's he saying? (short version)
posted by LobsterMitten at 4:50 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

manguero, what's he saying? (short version)

Sorry. In addition to what Burhanistan said, he also said that the U.S. is not concerned with Egypt's sovereignty, only with alliance to Israel, which he called a "terrorist state." He warned that the Egyptian people will not necessarily support a new government supportive of the U.S., contrary to what an earlier interviewee (a US citizen protesting in LA) said.
posted by manguero at 5:00 PM on January 29, 2011

there's a big fire in a neighboring building

That was 24+ hours ago. I imagine it's largely finished burning by now.

I believe that a different building was burned, maybe the Supreme Press building.

Also from an AJ article on looting in Cairo is this:

Zahi Hawass, the Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, said the would-be looters only managed to vandalise two mummies, ripping their heads off. They also cleared out the museum gift shop.

He said the museum's prized King Tutankhamun exhibit, which includes the boy pharaoh's gold death mask, had not been damaged and was safe.

However, the museum's contents could still be damaged by the potential collapse of a neighbouring building gutted by fire, Hawass said.

posted by ZeusHumms at 5:01 PM on January 29, 2011

Anything: "I've seen the 'Mubark' spelling quite a few times. Is it a legitimate transliteration, mockery or just a spelling error"

"What is the sound of one dog barking?"

"Mu...bark"
posted by symbioid at 5:03 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Robert Fisk is reporting from Cairo.

Indeed, Obama's own response – about the need for reforms and an end to such violence – was an exact copy of all the lies Mubarak has been using to defend his regime for three decades. It was deeply amusing to Egyptians that Obama – in Cairo itself, after his election – had urged Arabs to grasp freedom and democracy. These aspirations disappeared entirely when he gave his tacit if uncomfortable support to the Egyptian president on Friday. The problem is the usual one: the lines of power and the lines of morality in Washington fail to intersect when US presidents have to deal with the Middle East. Moral leadership in America ceases to exist when the Arab and Israeli worlds have to be confronted.

posted by gman at 5:21 PM on January 29, 2011 [9 favorites]

As usual, the United States will stand on the right side of history once it's become history
posted by crayz at 5:40 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

There are less than 1 million Qataris, and they are exceedingly well off. There really isn't much in the way of politics there other than a mostly benevolent dictatorship.

That's only 40% of the population though. There are lots of guest workers and servants. Their lives are a bit different. Also people tend to want to run their own stuff after a while. No one likes being governed by corrupt despots
posted by humanfont at 5:46 PM on January 29, 2011

The guest workers are from all over though, and not all of them are poor or servants. I can see rioting but not the unity for a revolution.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:52 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Why is America So Afraid?

I'm as thrilled as anyone by what I see in the Cairo streets, but when I turn on American television I see only grim faces. Robert Gibbs looked frightened during his delayed press briefing yesterday afternoon; he didn't know what to say. Obama's comments last night were equivocal and opaque: I'm with Mubarak, for now. This is his 9/11 -- the day Arabs blindsided a president.

I thought this is what he wanted for the Arab world: democracy! But the market dropped, and the cable shows are filled with mistrust of the Arab street. Our talking heads can't stop talking about the Islamists. [...]We are seeing a dictator dissolve before our eyes. These are the events we cherished in history books; let us embrace the Egyptian movement.

Why is America so afraid?

Because we are seeing a giant leap in Arab power, in which the people of the largest Arab nation demand that they be allowed to fulfill their potential. This change portends a huge shift in the balance of power in the region. For the U.S. has played only a negative role in the Egyptian advance, supplying the teargas, and it seems inevitable that Egypt will cease to be a client state to the U.S. And thereby threaten the order of the last 30 years.

posted by scody at 6:01 PM on January 29, 2011 [9 favorites]

Everything I need to know about RedState.com was summed up by their threads on the Egyptian situation, which boiled down to "OMG, the Islamofascists are taking over, this is Iran all over again" and "Mubarak has a legal right to maintain public order by controlling rioters". I wish I were joking.
posted by jokeefe at 6:09 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

America is afraid because we're heading into a multi-polar world.

We'll lose our dominance of world politics, but on the other hand, we'll save a lot of money on defense spending, if we don't have to protect the whole world from, uh.. whatever we're protecting them from.

Everyone keeps talking about a new caliphate as if it would be a terrible thing for the world. The Ottoman Empire ruled that whole region for centuries and all it did was bring civilization back to Europe. There's no reason that an arab bloc would have to be dictatorial, just because the Ottoman empire was. It could very well take the form of something like the European Union.
posted by empath at 6:13 PM on January 29, 2011

There's no reason that an arab bloc would have to be dictatorial, just because the Ottoman empire was. It could very well take the form of something like the European Union.

I don't think the past 30 years of Middle East history are on your side on this one.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 6:17 PM on January 29, 2011

Egypt is not Somalia. Radical Islamists will make their move but they do not have broad support. There is/was a strong, well-educated middle class that would probably not want to live in a stone age theocracy. If the people have anything to say about it, the new Egypt will be informed but not dominated by Islam.
posted by vrakatar at 6:25 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

I imagine there is a huge difference between dying in office and being thrown out by your own people.
posted by rosswald at 6:35 PM on January 29, 2011

jokeefe: "Everything I need to know about RedState.com was summed up by their threads on the Egyptian situation, which boiled down to "OMG, the Islamofascists are taking over, this is Iran all over again" and "Mubarak has a legal right to maintain public order by controlling rioters". I wish I were joking."

Or FreeRepublic, where Obama was simultaneously a dithering weakling incapable of responding to a crisis and a Machiavellian mastermind single-handedly engineering an Islamic fundamentalist state.
posted by Rhaomi at 6:59 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Radical Islamists will make their move but they do not have broad support.

Broad support isn't always necessary.

There is/was a strong, well-educated middle class that would probably not want to live in a stone age theocracy.

Probably or definitely? It makes a difference.

If the people have anything to say about it, the new Egypt will be informed but not dominated by Islam.

If...
posted by Jahaza at 7:04 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Jon Jensen reporting from Cairo - raw feed: Showdown with police in Cairo
Updates: @jonjensen
posted by madamjujujive at 7:04 PM on January 29, 2011 [3 favorites]

I don't think the past 30 years of Middle East history are on your side on this one.

And what about the past 1000 years of European history? One empire and kingdom and dictatorship after another, for centuries.
posted by empath at 7:05 PM on January 29, 2011 [8 favorites]

Or FreeRepublic, where Obama was simultaneously a dithering weakling incapable of responding to a crisis and a Machiavellian mastermind single-handedly engineering an Islamic fundamentalist state.

Gateway Pundit and Pamela Gellar are similarly idiotic. It's actually an interesting split on the right-wing about this. Hardcore neo-conservatives are pro-Mubarak because he was a loyal ally of Israel. Hardcore Christianists like Free Republic just really hate Muslims.

The economic conservatives and a big chunk of tea partiers, on the other hand, seem to be on the right side of history, here. The comments sections on conservative bulletin boards are full of delicious rage right now.

As wishy-washy and moderate as Obama has been on this, I can't even imagine how McCain-Palin would have responded.

I don't even want to think about it.
posted by empath at 7:13 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

On the left wing, the only split seems to be between people who are pro-revolution, and people who are anti-revolution because of fears for Israel, but feel guilty about it.
posted by empath at 7:14 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Who said America is afraid, we planned this didnt we, no. ok, an extra 1.3 billion a year for us then and eygpt can just raise the ticket prices at the museum, if there is one left.
posted by clavdivs at 7:18 PM on January 29, 2011

"Obama's own response – about the need for reforms and an end to such violence – was an exact copy of all the lies Mubarak has been using to defend his regime for three decades. It was deeply amusing to Egyptians that Obama – in Cairo itself, after his election – had urged Arabs to grasp freedom and democracy." Robert Fisk is now reporting for the Independent.
posted by warbaby at 7:21 PM on January 29, 2011

curse you gman...
posted by warbaby at 7:23 PM on January 29, 2011

> manguero, what's he saying? (short version)

Basically, the US is the biggest terrorist in the world.

Welp, you can't really argue with that.
posted by Marla Singer at 7:26 PM on January 29, 2011

The Ottoman Empire ruled that whole region for centuries and all it did was bring civilization back to Europe.

Yes, but the Ottoman Empire was Islamic the way the British Empire was Christian. A new caliphate would be serious about religion.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:44 PM on January 29, 2011

biggest terrorist
Paul Bunyan with a stachel charge and soda machine strapped to his belt loop.
posted by clavdivs at 7:49 PM on January 29, 2011

Yes, but the Ottoman Empire was Islamic the way the British Empire was Christian. A new caliphate would be serious about religion.

OBVIOUSLY. You just can't trust those muslins.
posted by delmoi at 7:53 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

There seems to be a lot of interesting breaking news on this twitter account, including a reference to this statement from US Asst Secretary of State P J Crowley:

The Egyptian government can't reshuffle the deck and then stand pat. President Mubarak's words pledging reform must be followed by action.

This is not the sort of wholehearted endorsement that Mubarak was probably hoping for.
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:07 PM on January 29, 2011

So that story on Gdańsk was great. I loved when I visited there, wish I had had more time.

Apparently Sunday is the first day of the work week, AJ just came back to live coverage.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:03 PM on January 29, 2011

The America-bashing here is pretty predictable and trite. Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?
posted by msalt at 9:04 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Part of American exceptionalism is, in theory, holding ourselves to a higher standard.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:06 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

Well, like many Americans, I think American exceptionalism is a bunch of crap.
posted by msalt at 9:16 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

There are good parts, like the higher standard.

Curfew set to be lifted at 8 am local time in Egypt, 1 am EST.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:19 PM on January 29, 2011

America is afraid because we're heading into a multi-polar world.
We'll lose our dominance of world politics, but on the other hand, we'll save a lot of money on defense spending, if we don't have to protect the whole world from, uh.. whatever we're protecting them from.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha you are kidding with this part yes?
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:19 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

The America-bashing here is pretty predictable and trite. Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?

Yes, ours is a problem endemic to all major powers.
posted by manguero at 9:20 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

Curfew set to be lifted at 8 am local time in Egypt, 1 am EST.

Bit meaningless, this gesture, isn't it?

Does anyone know where Mubarak actually is?
posted by fatbird at 9:20 PM on January 29, 2011

I do like that other nations don't seem to invade other countries to support Democracy!
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:21 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Bit meaningless, this gesture, isn't it?

People apparently are taking it a bit more seriously, the army pleaded with them to clear the streets so they could handle the looters.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:22 PM on January 29, 2011

Checking that jonjensen twitter feed reminds me that a Muslim city is especially well-equipped for decentralized crisis response - he says the local mosque is doing neighborhood announcements over their loudspeaker, eg telling neighborhood residents to go to place x to help with defending the neighborhood.
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:30 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

(change "Muslim city" to "city with a lot of neighborhood mosques" if that's more precise.)
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:32 PM on January 29, 2011

The America-bashing here is pretty predictable and trite. Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?

Rea life isn't graded on a curve. Part of being the Greatest Country on Earth is having a higher standard than totalitarians and the French.
posted by dirigibleman at 9:49 PM on January 29, 2011 [4 favorites]

Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?

Actually, China's a very interesting example. The government's treatment of its own citizens is vile, yet as far as their influence abroad goes, since the Korean war, compared to the US their methods of achieving influence* have been almost entirely via aid and trade.

You don't get to be a major power by being nice. Of course. And in the unlikely event that we New Zealanders achieve world domination (probably after the climate change disaster has rooted everywhere else) we'll probably unleash terrors you've never dreamed of as the lust for empire drives us mad.

But I feel it's still worth pointing out from time to time that the US shares this characteristic of major powers to a reasonable degree.

*I'll stipulate it's largely not a beneficial influence in the countries where it's exerted.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 9:59 PM on January 29, 2011

There is/was a strong, well-educated middle class that would probably not want to live in a stone age theocracy.

Sounds like Persia.
posted by Meatbomb at 9:59 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

The America-bashing here is pretty predictable and trite. Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?

Just had a long talk with my ex-brother-in-law who's a high end mining guy currently working out of Africa (Sierra Leone to be specific). He's also done a lot of work in the far north of Canada (Inuit First Nations land). For what it's worth, he had grudging respect for how the Chinese companies dealt with the various indigenous peoples in these areas and none at all for the Americans. As for Canadians, well we didn't stack up so hot either.
posted by philip-random at 10:04 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Radical Islamists will make their move but they do not have broad support.

Broad support isn't always necessary.

There is/was a strong, well-educated middle class that would probably not want to live in a stone age theocracy.

Probably or definitely? It makes a difference.

If the people have anything to say about it, the new Egypt will be informed but not dominated by Islam.

If...
posted by Jahaza at 10:04 PM on January 29 [+] [!]

Are you in favor of reinstating the totalitarian, ant-democratic, anti-Liberty dictator Hosni Mubarak. Are you in favor of letting the People decide their own fate, even if it's opposed to your own interests, or are you in favor of allowing a tyrant to terrorize his own population for his own monetary gain because it supports your country's short term interests?

Are you in favor of liberty, or in favor of liberty only for white Christian Americans?
posted by dirigibleman at 10:07 PM on January 29, 2011

Such issues will be explored soon enough. In the meantime, we demand that all normal communications be restored to the people of Egypt by January 29th, 12:00 midnight, Eastern Standard Time. That we have occasion to make such a demand in the first place should be enough to convince all good men that the world needs revolution. That we have made it in full view of all men should be enough to convince them that we now have the means to back it up - not just against this regime, but against any and all parties that continue to prop it up even after it has conceded that the truth is its enemy.

We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not Forgive.
We do not Forget.

Fresh psyops press release. not sure how it's going to take in the larger anon community, but I hope that the kids take this to heart and swing our way.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 10:08 PM on January 29, 2011

Americans vote for their OWN president based on the lesser of two evils, of course they are able to rationalize away someone else's president.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:10 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

Actually, China's a very interesting example. The government's treatment of its own citizens is vile, yet as far as their influence abroad goes, since the Korean war, compared to the US their methods of achieving influence* have been almost entirely via aid and trade.

Aside from invading Tibet (1959, continuing) and Vietnam (1979), you mean?. China's influence in North Korea hasn't really been that admirable either. And of course they have undermined pretty much every principled attempt to put pressure on evil regimes (e.g. Sudan/Janjaweed) in order to make money.

I would put American way ahead of China by any standard of human rights, at home or abroad. Honestly is there a single example of China promoting human rights abroad, anywhere, ever?
posted by msalt at 10:13 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Are you in favor of liberty, or in favor of liberty only for white Christian Americans?

In fairness, when America profits, it's not just white Christians who profit. That's what makes the whole thing so diabolical. To quote one of my favorite movies:

"Shit - we're all in it together."
posted by philip-random at 10:13 PM on January 29, 2011

Does anyone know where Mubarak actually is?

Where ever he is, he's probably not amused at SNL making fun of him on last night's Weekend Update.
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:15 PM on January 29, 2011 [1 favorite]

msalt: I'll yield on Tibet, point out the absence of troops in Vietnam, and giggle quietly at "of course they have undermined pretty much every principled attempt to put pressure on evil regimes (e.g. Sudan/Janjaweed) in order to make money."
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 10:18 PM on January 29, 2011

Oh, man. I got a good cry on this morning (morning here now, and in Egypt): Waseem Wagdi, Egyptian protester. Egyptian Embassy, London. 29.1.11
posted by taz at 10:21 PM on January 29, 2011 [7 favorites]

joe's spleen: I'll yield on Tibet, point out the absence of troops in Vietnam, and giggle quietly at "of course they have undermined pretty much every principled attempt to put pressure on evil regimes (e.g. Sudan/Janjaweed) in order to make money."

China was wise enough to remove their invading troops from Vietnam quickly, but they certain did invade. I don't get your giggles, though. I may well have forgotten an occasion where China stood up for human rights somewhere -- please remind me if so. You will concede that the U.S. has, on occasion, made actual stands for human rights, yes?
posted by msalt at 10:27 PM on January 29, 2011

I predict that nothing Anonymous does will make any difference on anything at all.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:30 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Off topic: China has done lots of dirty under the table things over the years, like supporting Maoist guerrilla movements in Nepal and India. All the great powers have skeletons in their closets.

On topic: Hooray for Egypt! It's sad that so many have died, but its thrilling to see the beginning of what could be a real democratic revolution. And the second one in a month! Shades of the 90s come again.

Here's hoping the pressure keeps building on Muburak until he's forced to step down.
posted by Kevin Street at 10:36 PM on January 29, 2011

I would put American way ahead of China by any standard of human rights, at home or abroad. Honestly is there a single example of China promoting human rights abroad, anywhere, ever?

At home, sure, but then we're grading on a curve again.

Abroad? We're not better. Vietnam was us supporting a corrupt, despotic regime that happened to be opposed to the Soviets. Egypt is us supporting a corrupt, despotic regime that was opposed to the Soviets Islamists. Pakistan was us supporting a corrupt, desoptic regime that was opposed to the Soviets Islamists. Iraq (pre-1990) was us supporting a corrupt, despotic regime that was opposed to the Soviets Islamists. Iran was us supporting a corrupt, despotic regime that was opposed to the Soviets. Chile was us supporting a corrupt, despotic coup over the democratically-elected government that wasn't sufficiently pro-American*. Venezuela 2002 was us supporting a coup against the democratically-elected government that wasn't sufficiently pro-American*. Torture camps in Guantanamo, Egypt, and elsewhere, predator drones killing innocent civilians by the thousands. China wishes they had the military might to project the misery and suffering we have inflicted over the last half a century.


*Pro-American generally meaning pro-American oil company or fruit corporation
posted by dirigibleman at 10:44 PM on January 29, 2011 [6 favorites]

Honestly is there a single example of China promoting human rights abroad, anywhere, ever?
They helped feed a lot of poor people in the global south through infrastructure projects, sent many technicians, medical workers and other experts to poor nations and educated hundreds of persons from those countries in those skills while not having much money themselves.
They provided a lot of materiel to support the Vietnamese during their conflict with the US despite knowing full well the former were in a Soviet camp that was hostile. Trained a fair few of the guerillas who helped defeat the armies of apartheid in Angola too.
Of course this wasn't done under the rubric of 'human rights' but socialist internationalism. How cynical it was is an exercise for the reader, but for my money there's several cases where the likeliest explanation is that at some level they simply subscribed to those values.
posted by Abiezer at 10:44 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

b1trot - point taken, though even taking China's word for why they invaded Tibet (which I certainly don't) puts them in the same boat as America's invasion of Iraq, and I assume we all agree that was horrible. In case it's not clear, I'm pretty solidly against invading other countries except in the most extreme circumstances, and am very skeptical of human rights justifications for doing so.

That said, there are some -- Rwanda, maybe, perhaps Sudan, Germany in WW2. I still wrestle with Kosovo; feels like it was done for the right reasons, and with relatively little collateral damage. But I'm not 100% convinced it was justified.
posted by msalt at 10:51 PM on January 29, 2011

So in addition to Egypt, Al Jazeera has taught me about drug law in Singapore (RAGE INDUCING) and abortion law in Thailand. I may have to keep watching after this crisis is over.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:58 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Thanks Taz. That was good. It reminds me this once was a country started (theoretically) by the common folk rising up to refuse to take any more shit. As one meaningless voice, my vote is to support whatever the Egyptian people want to decide their own future to be. My national interests be damned. So sick of seeing my nation crumble beneath the weight of illegitimate empire, sick of the rot at our own core projected onto others with righteous rage at our duplicity. Sad that the new boss IS just like the old boss after hopes raised so high. Lead on, Egypt. Remind us how it's done. It's sucks how blinding and soul destroying complaceny is. Maybe when our infrastructere caves in from neglect, and basic survival is in doubt, then we too might get out from the flat screen god, pull together and find some better priorities. Maybe a common enemy is the only thing that can cause cooperation.
posted by Redhush at 11:02 PM on January 29, 2011 [2 favorites]

Jon Jensen (in Cairo) tweets:
Woke up to this SMS from Vodafone: "Egypt's army urges faithful Egyptian men to stand up against traitors & criminals & protect our people, our honor, and our beloved Egypt." This to prevent looters.

So the army called up Vodafone and told them to mass SMS everyone. The army's idea, or from the higher ups? "Stand up against traitors" can be read either in a pro-protester sense (stand against the secret police) or anti-protester sense (stand against the protesters). Seems like the pro-protester sense is the more natural reading, but maybe I'm just seeing what I want to see?
posted by LobsterMitten at 11:18 PM on January 29, 2011

I get the sense the army, either on orders not to make a bigger PR disaster for Mubarak or all on their own, are doing their best not to harm the protesters in any way. They are honestly trying to just take on the looters and maintain order.

They are telling people to protect their neighborhoods and stay off the streets at night, but are leaving protests alone.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:25 PM on January 29, 2011

This means stand up to who ever fires upon you (armed forces)
classic tactic. scatter your secret police, use regular police as a thin blue line and have the army as back up. If the TBL falls, you have the army. Interspersing all three elements is key. If these break down, the army will step in and decide who leds, most likely until elections.
posted by clavdivs at 11:36 PM on January 29, 2011

Al Jazeera detailing Olbermann situation...Oh my, wonder if he sent in a job application. :P
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:45 PM on January 29, 2011

Man Al Jazeera is fascinating. I'm so used to American news, where you have the "meat" (politics usually), with a bunch of crime and human interest type stories that I frankly don't care much about. So far from what I've watched on AJ though, everything is interesting. It's as if they are reporting on important goings-on worldwide in an informed way. You might call it news.
posted by manguero at 11:56 PM on January 29, 2011 [10 favorites]

b1tr0t, there was a similar insider-conspiracy angle in a Pakistani source:

An uprising spurting from within the centre of power clearly indicates that a powerful faction from within the leadership is either guiding or managing the outbreak. It isn’t a revolution but a war of succession. In all probability, a powerful faction very close to the centre of power disagrees with Hosni Mubarak’s plans of gifting the presidency to Gamal and the entire upheaval is being stage managed to bring about the desired result.

I also thought this was a remarkable insight: Interestingly, protesters were all [sic] without guns.

China. I'm not sure why we just had that whole China debate, but surely everyone realizes that China does not have a global military presence, and thus they must -- as a second-tier superpower -- necessarily focus on what is called soft power, like agricultural aid. It does seem benign, but of course a Chinese naval base would be something altogether more alarming (even if they had a navy that could use it). So they do the benign thing. The US, on the other hand, while thinking highly of itself as a soft-power dealer, has a pretty ugly hard-power history, a lot of it connected with the Middle East and that sticky, gummy stuff in the ground.

Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy.

msalt, your naivete is appalling, unless my sarcasm meter is broken. Tell me, on which will we be judged -- by what we say, or what we do? What have we done for Egyptian democracy and human rights during Mubarak's regime? Details, please. I can tell you for certain that the Egyptian people know exactly where we stand. That UN veto, for example, has been exercised on behalf of Israel more times than for any other issue. We support democracy when and where our dominant national interest allows us to, or where it indeed furthers our national interest. It's principled, all right -- the US comes first, the other country gets democracy if it will help us and a dictator if it won't. Really, now, you don't want me to start listing dictators.
posted by dhartung at 11:58 PM on January 29, 2011 [8 favorites]

AJ and Twitter are reporting a stronger military presence today with roadblocks (to keep traffic away from Tahrir Square?). There seems to be a tenser atmosphere between the troops and protesters. More demonstrations are still expected regardless.
posted by manguero at 12:04 AM on January 30, 2011

manguero: "Man Al Jazeera is fascinating. I'm so used to American news, where you have the "meat" (politics usually), with a bunch of crime and human interest type stories that I frankly don't care much about. So far from what I've watched on AJ though, everything is interesting. It's as if they are reporting on important goings-on worldwide in an informed way. You might call it news"

And the "meat" of politics in US news is utter shite, for the most part.
posted by symbioid at 12:05 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

but actually Mubarak's wish that his son inherit his power vs. the military wanting to place another one of their own on the seat of power when Mubarak retires or kicks the bucket. In this scenario, the entire civil unrest is a deeply orchestrated sham designed to convince the US and Europe that the new guy is supported by the people.

Based on the current evidence, Mubarak's supporters are behaving far worse than the military. So sham or not, I know who I'd vote for.
posted by philip-random at 12:13 AM on January 30, 2011

AJ: Egypt military entering Sharm El-Sheikh to maintain order because police can't handle it. Forbidden by treaty with Israel, must have been approved by them. Twitter rumors Mubarak is there.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:20 AM on January 30, 2011

Good: found wall of streaming tweets on various relevant search terms.

Bad: there's a rumor that Al Jazeera's licence is revoked and their Cairo office is being shut down.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:56 AM on January 30, 2011

dhartung: I may be naive, but I'm still waiting for someone to name a major power with a better record. What seems odd to me is the large number of people here criticizing America for its foreign interventions and also complaining that the U.S. is not doing enough to help the protestors.

Reminds me of all the Republicans who say that Obama is expanding the government's role dangerously, and why hasn't he solved unemployment yet?
posted by msalt at 1:03 AM on January 30, 2011

People are saying that if you are going to be interventionist you should do it in the right way for the right reasons.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:06 AM on January 30, 2011

Here's an interesting article on CNN: Experts: Egypt's fate rests in hands of popular, powerful military

According to the article, every Egyptian male between the ages of 18 and 30 has to serve one to three years in the military. So there may be a hard limit on how much violence the rank and file soldiers are willing to employ against the demonstrators, since they are themselves members of society on temporary duty, and not career army. If the upper levels of the officer corps did do something to set all this off, they're playing a dangerous game, and may not be able to stop the demonstrations without risking a rebellion in the military itself.
posted by Kevin Street at 1:07 AM on January 30, 2011

Al Jazeera shut down in Egypt.
posted by telstar at 1:12 AM on January 30, 2011

People are saying that if you are going to be interventionist you should do it in the right way for the right reasons.

What would that look like in this situation? What should Obama and his administration be doing that they're not? Serious question -- I know a lot of people are not happy with their statements so far, but how far should they go? Call for open elections? Immediately withdraw all aid until Mubarak is gone? Send in the troops?
posted by one_bean at 1:16 AM on January 30, 2011

In my personal opinion, it is time to call for Mubarak to step down considering the country is being reduced to chaos and he has not done anything but shuffle the deck, which the state department expressly tweeted is not enough.

His leadership has clearly failed.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:33 AM on January 30, 2011

Oh God, I can't watch this Singapore story again, turning off AJ now.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:35 AM on January 30, 2011

Sod the wittering about Islamists under the bed, here's a view on who one of the main driving forces behind the protests are:

Alaa Abd El Fattah, a prominent Egyptian blogger who was interviewed on Al Jazeera today, made the interesting observation that the uprising’s most effective organizational strength comes from a quarter that has been ignored by most of the media: soccer fans known as ultras.

“The ultras — the football fan associations — have played a more significant role than any political group on the ground at this moment,” Alaa said. “Maybe we should get the ultras to rule the country,” he joked.

The beautiful game!
posted by Abiezer at 1:48 AM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

AJ live-blog is down. (Their producer Evan Hill and reporter Dan Nolan tweet.)
posted by progosk at 2:11 AM on January 30, 2011

Evan Hill just tweeted: Al Jazeera is still broadcasting live despite apparent shutdown order. No one knows who would enforce it.
Their live-stream is still up. (The live-blog was previously here.)
posted by progosk at 2:20 AM on January 30, 2011

I'm still waiting for someone to name a major power with a better record.

Just out of curiosity, would you be referring to the U.S.'s record in Iran or Indonesia or East Timor or Chile or Iraq or Argentina or Nicaragua or Paraguay or Cuba or Haiti or Panama or El Salvador or Saudi Arabia or Zaire?

It's an incomplete list, but perhaps you can start there.
posted by scody at 2:35 AM on January 30, 2011 [10 favorites]

other AJ tweeters: Ayman Mohyeldin (in Cairo) and Rawya Rageh (in Alexandria yesterday)
posted by progosk at 2:36 AM on January 30, 2011

AJ's got a list of their staff's twitters following the protests.
posted by Mizu at 2:43 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm concerned about Mohamed ElBaradei -- haven't heard anything about him since Friday, when it was reported he was under "house arrest."

So I wrote this palindrome in his honor. Apparently, Ed is calling on Egyptians to protest ElBaradei's detention, despite the controversy over the Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed.

"Despite Dane, resist if sad ElBaradei rots. Storied Arab led, as fits. I serenade," tips Ed.
posted by msalt at 3:10 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

AJ's Evan Hill tweets: Al Jazeera English is now off the air in Egypt. TV is picking up no signal.

In parallel, AJ is has a reporter from Suez describing a controlled but tense situation, with off-the-record remarks from army officials that the one line they draw is if they are ordered to shoot on the protesters they will refuse to do so.
posted by progosk at 3:15 AM on January 30, 2011

Just out of curiosity, would you be referring to the U.S.'s record in Iran or Indonesia or East Timor or Chile or Iraq or Argentina or Nicaragua or Paraguay or Cuba or Haiti or Panama or El Salvador or Saudi Arabia or Zaire?

I'm sorry, I read through your comment carefully and just couldn't find your answer to my question. What did you say was the major power with a better record?
posted by msalt at 3:17 AM on January 30, 2011

I'm concerned about Mohamed El Baradei

He is fine, heard a long interview with him yesterday on AJ. Arrest rumors were false.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:20 AM on January 30, 2011

According to Ayman M, live on the phone to AJ, there are again crowds in Tahrir Square this morning (3 to 5 thousand), and the solidarity between people and army was reaffirmed when the army stepped in to order a suspicious fire-truck (= possible water cannon) back away from the square, helping the people who had blocked it first. Live rounds were fired into the air by the army to keep teh situation from getting out of hand; after the truck tracked back an left, the crowds broke into elated cheers for the army.
posted by progosk at 3:21 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

People who have a better record are not major powers, since people with good records mind their own business.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:24 AM on January 30, 2011 [5 favorites]

Egyptian Flags at Jaffa Rally (hat tip)
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:40 AM on January 30, 2011

though AJ CAiro bureau has been shut down after visit by "plain-clothes government security" (via reporter Dan Nolan's latest tweets), their live-stream is currently showing live pictures from a calm Tahrir square full of people.
posted by progosk at 4:27 AM on January 30, 2011

And what about the past 1000 years of European history? One empire and kingdom and dictatorship after another, for centuries.

No doubt. Your point?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 4:55 AM on January 30, 2011

Egypt shuts down Al Jazeera bureau
Network's licences cancelled and accreditation of staff in Cairo withdrawn by order of information minister. Guardian still live blogging.
posted by adamvasco at 5:14 AM on January 30, 2011

Security forces (not army) entered the office and demanded filming permits and press IDs. Aljazeera live blog
posted by adamvasco at 5:17 AM on January 30, 2011

An 8 Year old Saudi girls' thoughts on Mubarak and the current protests.
posted by gman at 5:20 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Apparently M1A1 tanks are being deployed to Tahrir Square for the first time. These are serious destruction machines, not APCs. Looks like Mubarak may be trying to close the press down before the serious crackdown begins. Important moments for the protesters.
posted by proj at 5:24 AM on January 30, 2011

From BBC:

1.21pm: "At first we trusted the army, but we don't trust them any more," protester Mohamed Ali tells Peter Beaumont as a new tank unit moves into Tahrir Square.

posted by proj at 5:26 AM on January 30, 2011

Sorry, that was from the Guardian. Too many tabs.
posted by proj at 5:26 AM on January 30, 2011

dhartung: I may be naive, but I'm still waiting for someone to name a major power with a better record. What seems odd to me is the large number of people here criticizing America for its foreign interventions and also complaining that the U.S. is not doing enough to help the protestors.

No one would be criticizing America for it's open support of democracy if they were doing that. The fact is that in Egypt, for 30 years, we have chosen corruption, dictatorship, kidnapping, and murder of the the Egyptian people. To the tune of tens of billions of dollars. To put that in perspective, we give Egypt three times the amount we give the UN every year. So, we've already been interfering for 30 years, and all of the sudden we have respect for Egyptian sovereignty?

This is one of the reasons America is losing its last shreds of credibility. If this pan Arab nationalism is successful, it won't be forgotten that we didn't welcome the development of democracy, and only cared enough to pay it lip service.

Reminds me of all the Republicans who say that Obama is expanding the government's role dangerously, and why hasn't he solved unemployment yet?

Trying to bring up unemployment is not the same thing as arming a dictatorship. And in this instance, we are not giving money to the people with the signs begging for their freedom. We are giving teargas, guns, and tanks to the other side. The good intent is not for the people of Egypt, but for the cynical geopolitical equations that are good for business and good for American hegemony.
posted by notion at 5:51 AM on January 30, 2011 [5 favorites]

US position: Bush and Obama both pushed Egypt to repeal its emergency law and hold free elections. Obama threatened to hold back aid bring the Internet was restored and demanded people be given their right to peaceably assemble.

Chinese Position: blocked access to the word Egypt on Internet search sites, blocked media coverage.

Yet somehow America is the villain in your mind.
posted by humanfont at 5:54 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Great compilation video of street action in Cairo (I don't think this has been posted...).

Fighter jets and helicopters are buzzing Tahrir Square now... only a couple minutes before curfew now. I'm very frightened about what will happen tonight.
posted by taz at 5:57 AM on January 30, 2011

Fighter jets + tank + media shutoff = A completely new kind of night ahead, I think.
posted by proj at 5:59 AM on January 30, 2011

Low jet fly-overs in Cairo (via Evan Hill)... also "By many accounts, some kind of confrontation seems likely tonight, probably in Tahrir Square".

Officialdom seems stalled, but latest army moves are sounding ominous. Current completest source is Guardian liveblog mentioned by adamvasco.
posted by progosk at 5:59 AM on January 30, 2011

AJ is reporting that the air force is flying over the crowd with jet fighters and helicopters. Every time they buzz the square, the protestors shout "Get out. Get out." A protestor: "They break the sound barrer above the people, but the people are not scared."

If the USG doesn't support these people today, American values will finally mean absolutely fuck all.
posted by notion at 6:01 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

US position: Bush and Obama both pushed Egypt to repeal its emergency law and hold free elections. Obama threatened to hold back aid bring the Internet was restored and demanded people be given their right to peaceably assemble.

Chinese Position: blocked access to the word Egypt on Internet search sites, blocked media coverage.

Yet somehow America is the villain in your mind.

They may have 'pushed', but didn't actually DO anything. They've had the ability to withdraw aid in their hands for decades, yet they haven't. Instead the US has colluded in sending terrorist suspects to Egypt for torture.

Just because China is shit doesn't mean America is great. Wooo, we're better than an authoritarian regime! WOOO!

The US is the world's preeminent democracy, a glorious shining beacon of freedom to the world (ahem), and yet... it supports dictators when it serves US strategic interests. At least China aren't hypocrites.

I don't give a fuck whether the US or China is worst, let's just say the international community could do better.
posted by knapah at 6:02 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Tahrir Square is trending on twitter. The sounds from AJ's live camera are like a combo superbowl/air show, but in arabic with extra tanks. They're chanting "get out, get out".
posted by Mizu at 6:05 AM on January 30, 2011

humanfont, that is absolute horseshit.

US response to democratic movements in Egypt for thirty fucking years: pay Mubarak's regime tens of billions of dollars to kidnap and kill Egyptians to maintain control. Oh, and pay some empty lip service to these words "democracy" and "human rights" to cover their ass when their puppet looks weak.

Chinese response to democratic revolution in Egypt: block the news so no Chinese are inspired by Egyptian bravery.

The Chinese government may not be a democracy, but they have far more legitimacy in China than we have in Egypt.
posted by notion at 6:05 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

US position: Bush and Obama both pushed Egypt to repeal its emergency law and hold free elections. Obama threatened to hold back aid bring the Internet was restored and demanded people be given their right to peaceably assemble.

Chinese Position: blocked access to the word Egypt on Internet search sites, blocked media coverage.

I wasn't aware the Chinese were funding the Mubarak regime to the tune of $1.2 billion per year. The Chinese might not be doing anything [positive] about it, but they aren't directly responsible for it either.
posted by xqwzts at 6:10 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Report from Tahrir Square that for the last five minutes or so the jets have stopped buzzing crowd.
posted by marsha56 at 6:18 AM on January 30, 2011

Chinese response to democratic revolution in Egypt: block the news so no Chinese are inspired by Egyptian bravery.

FAUX news response to democratic revolution in Egypt: distort the news so Americans don't get inspired by Egyptian bravery.
posted by Surfurrus at 6:40 AM on January 30, 2011

A Presidential helicopter is flying low over Tahrir Square and circling the crowd. It came around at least twice.

People now lying down on the ground and trying to spell something to the helicopter should it come back again.

These badass protesters aren't intimidated at all.
posted by raztaj at 6:45 AM on January 30, 2011 [6 favorites]

There seems to be a shift in US position -- the US now calling for a "peaceful transition" and 'free and fair elections as an outcome of current events.'
posted by proj at 6:47 AM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Guardian quotes someone from Human Rights Watch in Tahrir Sq, says the crowd are cheering the jets. People chanting "we will not leave until he leaves" and "long live the crescent together with the cross."

But more importantly, five groups have backed calls for "national salvation govt". "Sensational political developments in Cairo, with reports that five opposition movements, including the key Muslim Brotherhood, have mandated Mohammed ElBaradei to negotiate over the formation of a temporary "national salvation government."
posted by Infinite Jest at 6:48 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

"Witness tells Al JAzeera: one army commander appeased protesters in Tahrir Square that army would not turn against them"
posted by taz at 6:49 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Via AJ: Report of someone within the army saying "we will not go against the people."
posted by raztaj at 6:49 AM on January 30, 2011

I've got a bad feeling in my stomach about what's going to happen in that square.
posted by angrycat at 7:10 AM on January 30, 2011

“Walk Like an Egyptian” poster.
posted by joeclark at 7:11 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

Infinite Jest's link is fascinating - Muslim Brotherhood taking a coalition stance, supporting El Baradei.

Osama Ghazlai Harb of the National Democrsatic Front told BBC Arabic that this would be a transitional administration that would oversee the cancellation of the emergency laws and the release of all political prisoners.

The powerful Muslim Brotherhood, which has kept a low profile so far, said it was backing the demand along with other four groups.

Wonder who the other three groups are - I hope this serves as a strong countermove to support what is happening in Tahrir Square.

I want Al Jazeera option on my cable. They give me Fox for free - I'd pay hugely to get AJ.
posted by catlet at 7:13 AM on January 30, 2011

Also from the Guardian blog: "Mohammed ElBaradei is planning to join the protest this afternoon, his wife just told the Guardian's Jack Shenker."
posted by catlet at 7:15 AM on January 30, 2011

The next update said that he's not going to join the protests after all.
posted by proj at 7:18 AM on January 30, 2011

I'd like to know what's going through the fighter pilots' minds.
posted by Anything at 7:19 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Brookings Institute: - Don't Fear Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood (who have a breaking news page).
posted by adamvasco at 7:20 AM on January 30, 2011

I want Al Jazeera option on my cable. They give me Fox for free - I'd pay hugely to get AJ.

Seriously. Before now, I didn't really know much about AJ, and what I did hear about it was in the Bush-era context of fearing/hating anything that could even possibly be associated with Muslims. But its coverage has been fantastic. And I have not once yet felt like anyone on it has tried to prove themselves right by yelling louder.

When Obama gave his comments about the situation, and they then discussed it, I felt this refreshing, invigorating wave come over me... It took me a while to realize what caused this: an entire discuss about Obama and US policy without any mentions of 2012 elections, Sarah Palin, or approval polls.

They've got a really tough job right now, and, for many of their reporters, it is also a very dangerous job. But they're doing it, and they're doing it admirably.
posted by meese at 7:22 AM on January 30, 2011 [13 favorites]

um what, what? Mother Jones is saying: "But perhaps most important is the news (via Al Hurra, the US-backed Arab satellite channel/Al Jazeera rival) that the Army has arrested Habib Al Adly, the widely despised Interior Minister. (scroll all the way to the bottom)

I'm not seeing this elsewhere... ???????
posted by taz at 7:22 AM on January 30, 2011

taz: Egypt Snap Analysis: Sorting Rumours --- Will the Army Fire? Has Interior Minister Been Arrested?
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 7:25 AM on January 30, 2011

Re: China - a consequence with China's overall aid to African countries is that Taiwan has lost diplomatic ties with Senegal, Chad and Malawi. I don't believe that was China's main goal but it's a convenient side "benefit".
posted by zix at 7:26 AM on January 30, 2011

> The America-bashing here is pretty predictable and trite. Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?

I don't understand your point. Because other powers are just as bad, we shouldn't criticize our own government? You prefer an attitude of cynical detachment?
posted by languagehat at 7:27 AM on January 30, 2011 [6 favorites]

I'd like to know what's going through the fighter pilots' minds.

This is why solidarity and strength in numbers works so well, even in regimes like this. If it was just a few hundred, the pilot could dismiss orders to fire as, "Yeah, these troublemakers will get what's coming to them."

Since the crowds are so huge, even if he is against any change in the regime, he's got to be thinking: "I wonder if my brother is down there. I wonder if my friends are down there." And thanks to the loss of communications nationwide, it's probably very difficult to find that out.

I don't think the uncertainty introduced by eliminating mobile and internet access has been successful at all, from a Machiavellian point of view. If Mubarak is ousted, I hope the lesson is learned throughout the world is that cutting communication may quicken the revolution. That way, future revolutions can be more peaceful and rely more on sustained pressure.

I really think this revolution will set many benchmarks on how future reforms are handled. Egypt one of the most populous and culturally vital nations in the world, let alone in the Middle East, so the results there will overshadow Tunisia.
posted by notion at 7:30 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

From taz's link:

There were stories yesterday of a serious split between the civilian leadership in the Government and the military over whether to use live fire. And today it is notable that some have said el Adly was the Minister preparing the order to shoot.

Wow, if true, this is wonderful news.

Note: If not clear, Adly is the Interior Minister who has reportedly been arrested by the military.
posted by marsha56 at 7:33 AM on January 30, 2011

The images of the prayer (last one of the day?) are absolutely stunning.
posted by notion at 7:35 AM on January 30, 2011

Women of Egypt Facebook album.
posted by Dojie at 7:40 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Interesting thought on Op Ed News Egypt secures the Western border of Gaza. Israel will not be able to stop traffic there should Mubarak fall.
posted by adamvasco at 7:41 AM on January 30, 2011

thx, (arsenio). I like the sound of this tweet: "Jazeera: Army guards #Tahrir Square, let protesters go onto tanks and write "Mubarak Down" onto them"
posted by taz at 7:42 AM on January 30, 2011

ElBaradei changes his mind again. Joining the protest now.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 7:45 AM on January 30, 2011

Protests in Sudan.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 7:46 AM on January 30, 2011

I don't understand your point. Because other powers are just as bad, we shouldn't criticize our own government? You prefer an attitude of cynical detachment?

Q: [People] often attack you as a political commentator for focusing your criticism against the activities of the United States, and not so much against the old Soviet Union, or Vietnam, or Cuba. . . I'd like to know what you think about that kind of criticism?

A: . . . I focus my efforts against the terror and violence of my own state for really two main reasons. First of all, in my case the actions of my state happen to make up the main component of international violence in the world. But much more importantly than that, it's because American actions are the things that I can do something about. So even if the United States were causing only a tiny fraction of the repression and violence in the world. . . that tiny fraction would still be what I'm responsible for, and what I should focus my efforts against.

. . . Again, it's a very simple ethical point: you are responsible for the predictable consequences of your actions; you're not responsible for the predictable consequences of somebody else's actions.

I'll leave out who said that, because the idea is far more important than the messenger.
posted by notion at 7:47 AM on January 30, 2011 [6 favorites]

Downer alert: there's updated conjecture in Kirjava's blog post that the two damaged mummies are Yuya and Tjuyu.
posted by oinopaponton at 7:50 AM on January 30, 2011

PS: I know it seems like I'm grinding an axe, but similarly, I think a serious discussion about democracy in the Ukraine requires discussing the influence of Russia.
posted by notion at 7:54 AM on January 30, 2011

Al Jazeera was just showing footage from Cairo. Huge crowd, chanting. I'm in tears, worried about what's going to happen tonight in Egypt.
posted by dejah420 at 7:59 AM on January 30, 2011

AlArabiya_Eng Elbaradei going to Cairo's Tahrir square to speak to protesters:#alarabiya #egypt #cairo #jan25 #jan28 #Internet
posted by madamjujujive at 8:02 AM on January 30, 2011

AJ also just said "to protect our reporters, we're not saying where they are...." and then went on with a called in report. Still showing live footage of the square.
posted by dejah420 at 8:02 AM on January 30, 2011

Al Jazeera and Reuters are reporting that Elbaradei is heading to Tahrir Square to join protesters.
posted by marsha56 at 8:03 AM on January 30, 2011

"Al Jazeera reports that there are massive protests in Alexandria, Mahalla, Mansoura, Suez, and Ismailia in addition to Cairo.

The channel confirms information that opposition groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood and the 6 April Movement, have endorsed Mohamed ElBaradei to lead the challenge to the Government. Its correspondent says ElBaradei will be joining the Tahrir Square protest within 30 minutes."
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 8:09 AM on January 30, 2011

I am so scared for all of these people right now, but especially ElBaradei. It's like watching a powder keg.
posted by sugarfish at 8:10 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

NYT says "President Obama’s [Saturday] decision to stop short, at least for now, of calling for Hosni Mubarak’s resignation was driven by the administration’s concern that it could lose all leverage over the Egyptian president, and because it feared creating a power vacuum inside the country, according to administration officials involved in the debate."

This policy of steering for the middle ground is less risky in the very short term, but incredibly dangerous if a breakdown in command spreads from the security police to the military.

Obama's signals can only be read as encouraging Mubarak to retain power. The buzzing by air force jets is a sign the air force is still supporting Mubarak (as he was a top air force commander) and that the military is at least symbolically escalating pressure against the protesters. Evidently, the top leadership in the Army is still standing by Mubarak. These are bad signs and point to a crisis in which the critical issue will be if army units in the streets will follow orders to attack the protesters. It is becoming evident that the upper levels of the military are trying to retain Mubarak in power.

The constitutional route appears to be the speaker of parliament is the next in line should the president be unable to serve. I have not been able to find any discussion of this being considered by the national leadership.
posted by warbaby at 8:13 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Could the one-by-one loss of communication with AJE correspondents be any more ominous? Yikes.
posted by oinopaponton at 8:15 AM on January 30, 2011

US response to democratic movements in Egypt for thirty fucking years: pay Mubarak's regime tens of billions of dollars to kidnap and kill Egyptians to maintain control. Oh, and pay some empty lip service to these words "democracy" and "human rights" to cover their ass when their puppet looks weak.

We did not spend billions to kidnap and kill. We spent billions in compliance with our obligations under the Camp David accords. Mubarak's governmen has been an ally, not a puppet. We've done more than lip service, but there's are practical limits on what we can do. We need Suez open. We don't want another Egyptian-Israeli war. We needed help in Sudan, Libya and Chad. Egypt holds many cards, we hold very few. So we make the least shitty deal.
posted by humanfont at 8:19 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

ELBaradei is reportedly bringing his family with him to the square, where he will speak
posted by angrycat at 8:20 AM on January 30, 2011

Obama's signals can only be read as encouraging Mubarak to retain power.

Your concept of 'only' is strange. There are many reports that American policy makers have communicated directly and clearly to the current Egyptian government that no violence must be used against protesters. Also, the interpretation of the Americans' response of yesterday is already dated - every day does and should include a change in perspective and approach.

As of now it appears that Mubarak is not even remotely in control anymore. The two factions who will battle (hopefully not violently, but battle nonetheless) for control seem to be those represented by Suleiman and ElBaradei. The entrenched power and military establishment versus the entirety of the opposition forces in Egypt, including the Muslim Brotherhood but all other groups, as well. Best case scenario, in my very limited understanding of the situation, is a joining of forces, the military and the opposition, perhaps symbolically kicking Mubarak out. What is needed more than a new leader is a strong government (even if not truly "democratic") that quickly establishes a political system, a national constitution, and sets a date for elections.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 8:22 AM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Nick Baumann tweets: Follow @arabist who is in a building with a great view over Tahrir Square in Cairo.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:24 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

11:27 a.m. EST / 7:27 p.m. Cairo Mohamed ElBaraei has arrived in Tahrir Square and is expected to make a statement to the crowd soon. Al Jazeera reports that ElBaradei's statement will include a plea for the military to align itself with the protest movement.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 8:28 AM on January 30, 2011

AJ correspondent reporting breakdown in food supply to Cairo.
posted by catlet at 8:29 AM on January 30, 2011

Msalt, I hear what you're saying (I think) and should probably stay out of it, but maybe since everything we touch turns to shit, maybe it's time to stop touching things
posted by Redhush at 8:29 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

How would one go about compiling a list of businesses linked to Mubarak, the NDP, the central security forces and others in order to begin organizing boycotts if the repression continues?
posted by Anything at 8:31 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mubarak and his apparatus control large swaths of the Egyptian economy, with some estimates being that the army control up to 50% of the domestic economy. Due to secrecy, however, we don't really know.
posted by proj at 8:36 AM on January 30, 2011

CBC's "Sunday Edition" had an excellent interview with Rashid Kalidi this morning. Prof. Kalidi wouldn't/couldn't predict how this would end, but made it clear that the regime is dying -- but whether that happens tonight or in another few years is unknown. American investment in this regime is, then, futile in the long run. The U.S. needs to foster a state which has a relationship to its neighbours as Turkey does -- clearly independent, and occasionally problematically so, but ultimately peaceful.

The only way for the Mubarak government to survive these protests is by killing lots of people, which makes the question if it can find enough people to fire on the crowds. Given the sheer sizes of the population, the army and the police, this is entirely possible, he said.

Podcast is hopefully up soon. Well worth a listen.
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:42 AM on January 30, 2011

We did not spend billions to kidnap and kill.

So did the kidnapping and killing cost extra or did Mubarak throw it in on the house to sweeten the deal?
posted by Grangousier at 8:45 AM on January 30, 2011 [10 favorites]

Multiple Twitter reports that El Baradei has support of all opposition groups, incl Muslim Brotherhood; supposedly he will appeal to the military; reports say he has no mic, but media will be given priority access

Some rumors that he has been designated as interim president:
@muiz RT by @TheAtlantic: BREAKING: all opposition parties delegate Mohamed ElBaradei as Interim President - heading to Tahrir Sq now

I have an Egypt Twitter list compiled from various journalists and their contacts, if anyone is interested. It's pretty fast moving right now.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:55 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

I've been following this thread and Al Jazeera English with fascination the last couple days. The U.S. vs China Who is More Evil debate, not so much.
posted by marxchivist at 9:01 AM on January 30, 2011 [18 favorites]

What is needed more than a new leader is a strong government (even if not truly "democratic") ...

There's something about Americans saying that what an Islamic people need is a strong, even if not quite "democratic", government that gives me an "uh oh" feeling.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:03 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

Thanks for operating in good faith, Joe, and leaving off the rest of the sentence. Great contribution to the thread.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 9:05 AM on January 30, 2011 [5 favorites]

To further expand on my point. It would be impossible to have a true democracy in Egypt tomorrow, or in the next week, or the next month. How do you hold elections in a country without an established government? It would be impossible. Who are you electing? Representatives? Ministers? Governors? Mayors? For what district? What are the districts? To claim that the alternative is dictatorship or democracy is silly. What is needed is a trusted interim government - and of course that won't be an elected government. It must also be strong and able to provide security to citizens. But what the interim government must immediately do is establish a political system, a constitution, and begin the process of establishing a way for Egyptians to elect their political leaders.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 9:09 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Languagehat: I don't understand your point. Because other powers are just as bad, we shouldn't criticize our own government? You prefer an attitude of cynical detachment?

I'm sorry to fuel a derail at such a critical moment, but, no. I am finding it hypocritical for people to say "America does so much crap around the world, and why haven't they fixed this yet?"

Being the world's policeman inevitably forces you into all sorts of realpolitik decisions, some which probably really did save many lives by backing dictators, many which pretend to do that but serve venal interests to no good end. I prefer an attitude of humble minding-our-own-goddamn business, plus as much advocacy of peace, democracy and human rights as we think we can afford (but without waving bombs and troops around while we do it.)

Or, as redhush said, maybe since everything we touch turns to shit, maybe it's time to stop touching things. Exactly!!
posted by msalt at 9:11 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Good point, marxchivist, and a few others. You're right. I will leave the axe alone for the rest of this thread and focus on the news.

Democracy Now correspondant Sharif Abdel Kouddous has a page up and is on twitter.

At one point, a rumor spread through Tahrir Square that Mubarak had fled the country. A massive cheer rippled through the crowd. People began jumping up and down in joy. One man wept uncontrollably. When it turned out not to be true, the cheers quickly ended but it provided a brief glimpse of the sheer raw desire for Mubarak’s ouster. Reports now indicate that Mubarak’s two sons and his wife, Suzanne, have fled Egypt, as have some of his closest business cronies. Many people believe that is a sign that Hosni will not be far behind.

posted by notion at 9:13 AM on January 30, 2011

This is why a free press is so important.
posted by madamjujujive at 9:14 AM on January 30, 2011 [8 favorites]

Great news about ElBaradei, thanks! That's what makes this thread so valuable. Also, see? Palindromes are very powerful.
posted by msalt at 9:15 AM on January 30, 2011

humanfont: "US position: Bush and Obama both pushed Egypt to repeal its emergency law and hold free elections. Obama threatened to hold back aid bring the Internet was restored and demanded people be given their right to peaceably assemble.

Chinese Position: blocked access to the word Egypt on Internet search sites, blocked media coverage.

Yet somehow America is the villain in your mind"

You guys keep making it sound like it's a zero sum game. They can BOTH be bad guys. No-one is saying China is some great bringer of Democracy.
posted by symbioid at 9:17 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

spitbull: "And the "meat" of politics in US news is utter shite, for the most part.
posted by symbioid a

They get it from Taco Bell"

Tread lightly my friend, this ex-Bell employee still has fond memories of his days of glory there.
posted by symbioid at 9:18 AM on January 30, 2011

languagehat: "> The America-bashing here is pretty predictable and trite. Remind me which major power (say, which country with a UN veto) has a more principled stand supporting democracy. France? Russia? Perhaps you like China's approach better?

I don't understand your point. Because other powers are just as bad, we shouldn't criticize our own government? You prefer an attitude of cynical detachment"

I believe it's less "cynical detachment" and more "delusional idealism". If you're already "right" (apparently a very binary yes/no is how this all works) how can you be "more right"?
posted by symbioid at 9:26 AM on January 30, 2011

People saying Baradei fainted or something and went home. People standing up and leaving disappointed. #Egypt

Strange.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 9:28 AM on January 30, 2011

(props to notion for starting this fpp off with 6 paragraphs of context, even though it probably would have been a popular thread without it.)
posted by memebake at 9:29 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

People saying Baradei fainted or something and went home. People standing up and leaving disappointed. #Egypt

Strange.

Might just be a rumour. Al Jazeera has recent footage of him adressing the crowd with a megaphone. There'll be lots of people at the back who didn't hear or see him though, and are trying to guess whats going on, maybe?
posted by memebake at 9:35 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

nolanjazeera Don't worry jazeera is used to being shut down by govt's. We'll find a way to get this out to you #Egypt #Jan25 48 minutes ago
posted by M Edward at 9:38 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

What memebake said -- I'm watching ElBaradei right now on AJ's live feed
http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/
posted by msalt at 9:39 AM on January 30, 2011

Al Jazeera has recent footage of him adressing the crowd with a megaphone.

It seems to be a very short clip that they're looping. I wonder why they don't have more of his speech.
posted by zerbinetta at 9:39 AM on January 30, 2011

El Baradei has been speaking to the crowds in Tahrir, but with TV and radio still off, only the people standing in earshot can hear what is being said.

Feels strange to be sat on the outside, immersed in information that ordinary Egyptians are being denied. Really hits home the critical importance of maintaining a free press and free access to information. Without that, we too would be limited to ear-shot range and rumour.
posted by Acey at 9:41 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Apparently, people are calling on social media for protests in Syria on #feb05. This Facebook page looks related, take it with a grain of salt for now as I can't read Arabic and I can't machine-translate it somehow.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:42 AM on January 30, 2011

Sidenote: When I go to Twitter and search, say #jan25 or #Tahrir Square, why aren't the tweets in reverse chronological order? I can't find a setting to make it so. I'm getting
1 hour ago
2 hours ago
25 minutes ago
4 hours ago
17 minutes ago
etc.
posted by msalt at 9:42 AM on January 30, 2011

NYT:

A possible successor — and a sign of how closely the military is intertwined with the ruling party — is Omar Suleiman, the intelligence chief and a former general, who was sworn in as the new vice president. Mr. Suleiman is considered Mr. Mubarak’s closest confidant and a hard-liner, although Obama administration officials say they consider him someone they can work with. In meetings with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, they say, he has shown substance and an ability to deliver on promises.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:44 AM on January 30, 2011

BBC Arabic: Martin Indyk former US Ambassador to Israel & Brookings VP says that it seems the US government is leaning to ElBaradei.

Would be interesting and make sense, if true. Points to a secular interim government that could hopefully appease both the military and opposition groups. If able to set up the process to democracy, would be wonderful for the people of Egypt. Curious to hear what kind of government others would like to see instead. I am but an American who wishes the best for the Egyptians, so take my comments with a grain of salt and snark away.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 9:44 AM on January 30, 2011

Yeah, it is a short clip that AJ are showing, doesn't look like he said much. Although he does seem to be in the middle of a chaotic hunded-photographer moshpit, which might explain the brevity.
posted by memebake at 9:44 AM on January 30, 2011

You can see how handy a balcony and a PA system would be in this situation.
posted by memebake at 9:44 AM on January 30, 2011

Rumors that ElBaradei felt ill and left early seem to be true: 1735 GMT: An Al Jazeera reporter says Mohamed ElBaradei was not feeling well and had to leave Tahrir Square without giving a speech beyond his brief statement to an audience around him.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 9:47 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

msalt, I'm guessing you're getting "Top Tweets" at the top, that is recent tweets with lots of retweets. Below those are recent tweets in reverse-chronological order. Just a guess, but that is how Twitter search works for me, for popular queries at least.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:48 AM on January 30, 2011

Rumors that ElBaradei felt ill and left early seem to be true: 1735 GMT: An Al Jazeera reporter says Mohamed ElBaradei was not feeling well and had to leave Tahrir Square without giving a speech beyond his brief statement to an audience around him.

Was this AJ's first hand information or were they quoting Sharif Kouddos or someone else?
posted by Anything at 9:52 AM on January 30, 2011

BTW I probably owe the Metafilter server a nice cold beer by now.
posted by Anything at 9:58 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Rumors that ElBaradei felt ill and left early seem to be true

Huh, well thats a shame if its true. Might be the least well timed sickie ever.
posted by memebake at 9:59 AM on January 30, 2011

Certainly doesn't do a lot for an image of a strong opposition leader.
posted by proj at 10:00 AM on January 30, 2011

Re ElBaradei's speech, if you go to AJ's Live Blog, the most recent post to mention him was about an hour ago. (Below) No mention of illness, leaving. Live video report just now quoted him as saying "This regime must end, today", nothing about illness.

6:59pm ElBaradei is addressing the protesters with bold remarks:

You have taken back your rights and what we have begun cannot go back...We have one main demand -- the end of the regime and the beginning of a new stage, a new Egypt...I bow to the people of Egypt in respect. I ask of you patience, change is coming in the next few days...
posted by msalt at 10:03 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

There's been fairly continuous burning cars, buildings, and tear-gas in the area. I imagine it isn't easy on an anyone's lungs. Especially an elderly academic.
posted by Babblesort at 10:06 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

"I'll leave out who said that, because the idea is far more important than the messenger."

Please, if you are going to quote someone, then quote them. In any discussion (but especially a fast moving discussion like this one), I think we should all be as clear as possible. It just helps when trying to have a good faith discussion. No biggie tho :)
posted by rosswald at 10:09 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Asthma is also a HUGE problem in Egypt (though of course, I have not seen El B's medical record)
posted by rosswald at 10:14 AM on January 30, 2011

I don't see it mentioned yet, but the Egyptology blog has frequent updates on the museum and antiquities looting. Also this news via a archaeology listserv:

"Verified by Mohammad Megahed: Immense damages to Abusir and Saqqara, all magazines and tombs which were sealed were entered last night. Only Imhotep Museum and adjacent central magazines protected by the military. In Abusir all tombs opened. large gangs digging day and night everywhere"

The damage is *vast*.

It seems that some of the storage magazines at South Saqqara and Abusir have been looted-hard to say how much was taken and the extent of the robbing. SCA representatives are only today able to check on the museums/storage magazines, but early reports suggest major looting. If you all could please contact anyone who can help and put them on "high alert" for Old Kingdom remains and Egyptian antiquities in general, and please spread the word to law enforcement officials worldwide. Egyptian looters (who may be encouraged by outside Egypt entities) may try to use the general confusion to get things out of the country.
posted by Rumple at 10:14 AM on January 30, 2011 [5 favorites]

rosswald: Please, if you are going to quote someone, then quote them.

I second notion's reasons for leaving the name off - it just would have been a distraction from the point he was trying to make. But, if you want a spoiler: Vg jnf pubzfxl, boivbhfyl.
posted by memebake at 10:18 AM on January 30, 2011

Salon:

Why is America so afraid? Because we are seeing a giant leap in Arab power, in which the people of the largest Arab nation demand that they be allowed to fulfill their potential. This change portends a huge shift in the balance of power in the region. ... Whatever government replaces the current one in Egypt, it will not serve American interests, which have been largely defined by Israel... The danger to America and Israel is that the Egyptian revolution will destroy this false choice of secular dictator-or-crazy Islamists by showing that Arabs are smart articulate people who can handle real democracy if they get to make it themselves.
posted by Joe Beese at 10:24 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

> I am finding it hypocritical for people to say "America does so much crap around the world, and why haven't they fixed this yet?"

Is anybody saying this?

I prefer an attitude of humble minding-our-own-goddamn business, plus as much advocacy of peace, democracy and human rights as we think we can afford (but without waving bombs and troops around while we do it.)

So do I.

> Please, if you are going to quote someone, then quote them. In any discussion (but especially a fast moving discussion like this one), I think we should all be as clear as possible.

It was Chomsky, and I think the decision to omit the name was the right one, because Chomsky is a tremendously polarizing person and the point should be the idea, not who said it. What was "unclear" about the comment as it stood?
posted by languagehat at 10:26 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

From today's protests in Tahrir Sq -- the Egyptian military seems pretty ok with anti-Mubarak graffiti on their tanks. I so hope they don't turn on their people, from this sweetness; according to the photographer, the little girl was shouting "Freedom! Freedom!"
posted by raztaj at 10:28 AM on January 30, 2011

Not trying to derail, but we are all here trying to have a conversation. If I wanted to reply directly to notion's comment, having the name of the quote (to give it context) would be important (at least for me crafting my response). I get yalls reasoning, but it smacks of paternalism to me. If you can't attach the name to the quote, then find another quote.

Also, its nice like Chomsky hasn't comeup nine times in this and the other thread.
posted by rosswald at 10:30 AM on January 30, 2011

not like
posted by rosswald at 10:30 AM on January 30, 2011

Take it to Meta, quit derailing the thread.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:40 AM on January 30, 2011 [6 favorites]

The New Yorker:

... since 1993 Suleiman has headed the feared Egyptian general intelligence service. In that capacity, he was the C.I.A.’s point man in Egypt for renditions—the covert program in which the C.I.A. snatched terror suspects from around the world and returned them to Egypt and elsewhere for interrogation, often under brutal circumstances.

... Edward S. Walker, Jr., a former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, described 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.”

posted by Joe Beese at 10:43 AM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

If ElBaradei did get ill and leave, and Al-Jazeera and the other reporters are holding off from mentioning it because its a bit of a downer, then thats a bad sign.
posted by memebake at 10:43 AM on January 30, 2011

BBC reporting that the police have redeployed in Cairo. Guardian saying that a tank has joined a protest in Alexandria.
posted by proj at 10:46 AM on January 30, 2011

I'm sorry, I read through your comment carefully and just couldn't find your answer to my question. What did you say was the major power with a better record?

msalt, I mentioned my ex-brother-in-law's comments earlier (concerning how he's seen the Chinese go about their mining business in distant lands, and how, to his mind they behaved better than Americans, and Canadians). So, currently, in two places at least, in pursuit of external affairs, it seems that the Chinese have the better record.

Historically, I think you're right. Of all the major empires (and wannabe empires) that we've seen, America, for all its transgressions, is probably the most benevolent. But right now, maybe not.

Also worth noting, the William Burroughs quote I dropped a while back. It seems that maybe America's approach is to treat its own people comparatively well while making a mess of things abroad, while China chooses an opposite approach. Does this make one better or worse than the other, or just different?
posted by philip-random at 10:48 AM on January 30, 2011

I don't get what the appeal of being a dictator is, honestly. Why not just resign and take your money and retire? Why be evil?
posted by empath at 10:51 AM on January 30, 2011

languagehat: Is anybody saying this? ["America does so much crap around the world, and why haven't they fixed this yet?"]

Yes, repeatedly.
knapah, 4 hours ago: "They may have 'pushed' [Egypt to lift emergency rule], but didn't actually DO anything."
Warbaby, 2 hours ago: Obama's signals ["steering for the middle ground] can only be read as encouraging Mubarak to retain power."
dhartung, at midnight: Tell me, on which will we be judged -- by what we say, or what we do? What have we done for Egyptian democracy and human rights during Mubarak's regime? Details, please.
etc. etc.
posted by msalt at 10:53 AM on January 30, 2011

I don't get what the appeal of being a dictator is, honestly.

I think it has to be the power. You'll notice that any dictator sets up their entire family (in many cases widely extended family) and friends with positions of influence, power and wealth. That has to be a hard thing to give up.
posted by davey_darling at 10:55 AM on January 30, 2011

Not to mention it's never clear if you'll be tried or killed when you leave. The idea that you can wait it out is a powerful one.
posted by proj at 10:56 AM on January 30, 2011

phillip-random: interesting points. well-taken. It's an interesting discussion (I used to live in China) but I don't want to keep derailing. Memail? Maybe another thread?
posted by msalt at 11:00 AM on January 30, 2011

Good roundtable discussion at Foreign Policy. Consensus is Mubarak's toast and the US is very much behind the curve on events.

ElBaradei made it clear that the Mubarak regime is not going to be allowed to dictate the transition. Furthermore, some opposition members, specifically one from the Muslim Brotherhood, have explicitly called for the complete exclusion of the NDP from any national unity government.

This suggests the resolution will not be a negotiated gradual transition, but will be a complete rupture. When and how this will happen is not at all clear, nor is a more orderly transition impossible, just not possible if the only players are the Mubarak regime and the disenfranchised opposition. A constitutional transition is difficult to imagine, since the NDP totally controls the legal government.
posted by warbaby at 11:00 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm quite curious as to what is going on with El Baradei behind the scenes. Earlier his wife told the Guardian he would be speaking in Tahrir Square, then retracted that, saying he would not be speaking, and then finally said that he would again.

I wonder if anyone is pressurising him behind the scenes to take a more central role in this than he is perhaps comfortable with.
posted by knapah at 11:04 AM on January 30, 2011

ElBaradei urges US to abandon Mubarak
posted by msalt at 11:07 AM on January 30, 2011

msalt, I mentioned my ex-brother-in-law's comments earlier (concerning how he's seen the Chinese go about their mining business in distant lands, and how, to his mind they behaved better than Americans, and Canadians). So, currently, in two places at least, in pursuit of external affairs, it seems that the Chinese have the better record.

Citing an ex-brother in laws anecdotal observations is not very convincing. Take a look at Myanmar and consider if the Chinese mining companies are doing a good job there.
posted by humanfont at 11:07 AM on January 30, 2011

Can we move the discussion of which countries are the most evil to another tread, and reserve this for news of events on the ground in Egypt? The China/America/etc. discussion is really a side discussion.
posted by antinomia at 11:13 AM on January 30, 2011 [15 favorites]

Seriously. Take this shit elsewhere.
posted by proj at 11:13 AM on January 30, 2011 [6 favorites]

humanfront, I take your point and don't personally have a strong opinion one way or the other as to which is the better empire; just felt that some doubt as to America's "betterness" is not necessarily a bad thing.

Beyond this, I'm with msalt. This thread is not the place to pursue this potentially loaded conversation.
posted by philip-random at 11:14 AM on January 30, 2011

on preview - I apologize. The Egyptian people are my faves right now.
posted by philip-random at 11:15 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

The latest I've heard is that the embassy is arranging charter flights for us citizens and residents. My brother's friend at Egypt air says that the airport and the flight he and his family have booked for tomorrow should be fine, insh'allah.
posted by stet at 11:15 AM on January 30, 2011

Via Twitter, so I can't verify provenance, but it is funny: Which one is Egypt again?
posted by cmyk at 11:16 AM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

This Mubarak apologist is unbelievable, "millions supports the President" Anchor, "So where are they then?" "They don't need to protest, they support the President".

Sounds like the anti-Iraq war marches aftermath. "One million people marched in London against this war" Govt: "Well, 59 million didn't, hah!"
posted by knapah at 11:17 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

When discussing the role of "the military" in Egypt, one should consider that it isn't a monolith. Right now, what we probably have is a number of individual commanders mostly hedging their bets and trying their utmost to prevent the sort of violent confrontation between protesters and government which would force them to choose sides in what could easily turn into a civil war. They know that, if ordered to shoot against the protesters, the conscripts may easily turn their guns against their COs, and they also know that, if they join the insurrection, they may run against a loyalist barracks next door. So they're probably procrastinating, asking the protectors to keep their calm, while dropping subtle hints to Mubarak to fuck off, or else...
Add to this the fact that the communications shutdown is affecting everybody, loyalists and neutrals just as much as the protesters, and you have a recipe for unpredictable chaos...
posted by Skeptic at 11:25 AM on January 30, 2011 [5 favorites]

New images from the chaos in Alexandria on AJ live feed.
posted by dejah420 at 11:28 AM on January 30, 2011

This Mubarak apologist is unbelievable, "millions supports the President" Anchor, "So where are they then?" "They don't need to protest, they support the President".

Sounds like the anti-Iraq war marches aftermath. "One million people marched in London against this war" Govt: "Well, 59 million didn't, hah!"

Or Nixon's "silent majority."
posted by nevercalm at 11:30 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Meet two American companies helping repress the people of Egypt.
posted by dejah420 at 11:42 AM on January 30, 2011

Hillary Clinton via NYT: calls for orderly transition. Stopped short of asking President Hosni Mubarak to resign, but laid the groundwork for his departure.
posted by msalt at 11:43 AM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Inifnite Jest already posted the fact that the Guardian is going through the latest batch of Egypt-related Wikileaks cables, of which one posting of particular note is that the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten has also released several cables, but...man, some of the content is really, really repugnant on the part of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), and I wanted to quote some choice extracts.

09CAIRO1468, "NDP INSIDER: MILITARY WILL ENSURE TRANSFER OF POWER", 30th July 2009:

Widespread politically-motivated unrest, he said, was not likely because it was not part of the "Egyptian mentality." Threats to daily survival, not politics, were the only thing to bring Egyptians to the streets en masse. [NDP insider and former minister Dr. Ali El Deen Hilal] Dessouki said the NDP focus on economic reform would continue up to the elections and after any transition of power. He added that Egypt was moving towards democracy, but that a transition from a "pharoanic" political system would take a long time.

That quote just...really gets me going. What a patronising prick.

10CAIRO213, "SUBJECT: ACTIVIST URGES U.S DIPLOMATIC APPROACH TO THE GOE ON TORTURE", 17th February 2010:

5. (C) According to XXXXXXXXXXXX, the worst police torture takes place during murder investigations. He said that his brother-in-law who is a police officer in the Delta Governorate of Kafr El-Sheikh described "unrelenting pressure" from superiors to solve murder cases by any means necessary. XXXXXXXXXXX said human rights lawyers and XXXXXXXXXXXX have told him that to conduct murder investigations, police will round up 40 to 50 suspects from a neighborhood and hang them by their arms from the ceiling for weeks until someone confesses.

I don't want to keep copy/pasting cables interspersed with outrage, I'm sure everyone else is capable of reading about the utter moral bankruptcy of the Egyptian NDP and its repressive appendages. I certainly hope there's no "gradual transition" as the US State Department is hoping for; tear all of them out. Hosni Mubarak is just the tin-pot dictator at the top of an equally corrupt party.
posted by asymptotic at 11:54 AM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Stopped short of asking President Hosni Mubarak to resign, but laid the groundwork for his departure.

Which is, you know, pretty much exactly what America (or any other country) should do. This is Egypt's moment. Don't get in their way. Do allow it to happen in as positive a manner as possible.
posted by philip-random at 11:55 AM on January 30, 2011

Hillary Clinton via NYT: calls for orderly transition. Stopped short of asking President Hosni Mubarak to resign, but laid the groundwork for his departure.

William Easterly:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced today a new US government position on Egypt, calling for a ‘transition to a democratic regime.’ This was also the old US government position on Egypt.
posted by Joe Beese at 11:59 AM on January 30, 2011

The arabist has an amazing flickr stream.
posted by dejah420 at 12:09 PM on January 30, 2011

Syrian journalist Danny Ramadan in Cairo posting some great photos on his twitter stream.
posted by taz at 12:12 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Tweets of global support for Egypt and Egyptians flooding in to Mona Eltahawy; many like this one "The People of USA are with the People of #Egypt #Jan25. Pay no mind to US govt/media."
posted by taz at 12:27 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

The military fly-by with jets could be a two fold message. The air force has not been discussed (here) and will take a quiet yet decisive roll in these events. Jets drown out noise and scare but they also serve as a symbol to those in power who wish to grind away the military in needless civil war. They also can serve a rallying cry. The presidential helicopter was flying? Could be bait for heavy weapons. IMO the Egyptian people have thought a lot of this protest through. They CANNOT incur the wraith of the army and having the military “fold in “ with the protest will not happen. Mubarak must know he cannot regain his leadership without some sort of plan that includes mass repression. It will not stand. This is a waiting game. Infrastructure, supply line disruption., fatigue will all play for the military. The Prisoner escape was the thing that bothered me. IMO, this will play out in 72 hours. If Hosni gets freaked out and wants to stay, he might rush a few brigades to the Suez.
The best case is have him address the people and bow out.
posted by clavdivs at 12:40 PM on January 30, 2011

Via Twitter, so I can't verify provenance, but it is funny: Which one is Egypt again?

cmyk, MediaMatters wrote about that FoxNews map with Egypt in the wrong place in July 2009.
posted by mediareport at 12:45 PM on January 30, 2011

NY Times: A possible successor — and a sign of how closely the military is intertwined with the ruling party — is Omar Suleiman, the intelligence chief and a former general, who was sworn in as the new vice president. Mr. Suleiman is considered Mr. Mubarak’s closest confidant and a hard-liner, although Obama administration officials say they consider him someone they can work with. In meetings with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, they say, he has shown substance and an ability to deliver on promises.

Sharif Kouddous: Omar Suleiman ran #Egypt's US-backed torture program. He is unacceptable. [...] Chanting against Omar Suleiman and Ahmed Shafik calling them collaborators with US.

Ah, realpolitik.
posted by scody at 12:46 PM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

(and by that of course I meant it's the US engaging in its usual realpolitik, not the protesters. "The Egyptians want someone new in charge? Fine. What about the head of the torture program? He's always played ball with us!")
posted by scody at 12:58 PM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

(and by that of course I meant it's the US engaging in its usual realpolitik, not the protesters. "The Egyptians want someone new in charge? Fine. What about the head of the torture program? He's always played ball with us!")

Diplomacy: taking the "real" out of "realpolitik" at least since Caius Varus.
posted by Skeptic at 1:20 PM on January 30, 2011

I'm guessing you're getting "Top Tweets" at the top, that is recent tweets with lots of retweets. Below those are recent tweets in reverse-chronological order. Just a guess, but that is how Twitter search works for me, for popular queries at least.

No, I know about that. And Al Jazeera presumably is paying for their top listing.
This is randomness further down. It looks like, hmm, 60-70% are reverse chron but many from hours or even days ago are inserted among them. I though Twitter was simply reverse-chron by nature. Anyone else see this? Is there some setting I can tweak?
posted by msalt at 1:34 PM on January 30, 2011

The NYT's Nick Kristof is tweeting from Tahrir


Sample: "Fabulous, giddy mood at Tahrir. Love the campfires. But 1 troubling thought: Tiananmen was the same before the shooting."
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:35 PM on January 30, 2011

yes, Varus was a friend of Caeser, so was his son.
posted by clavdivs at 1:44 PM on January 30, 2011

Also from Nick Kristoff: "Interviewed many folks at Tahrir. They see US as still supporting Mubarak. They plead for US to remove that support."
posted by scody at 1:45 PM on January 30, 2011

Maybe we can help the Egyptians by pressing our politicians to call for Mubarek's resignation.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:50 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

The Egyptian people are fighting, not only to end the 30-year reign of dictator Mubarak, but for democracy. So far, our government has continued its de facto support for the Mubarak regime by paying lip service to the need for "reform" at the same time that it lauds Mubarak as an ally and source of "stability" in the Middle East. President Obama and his spokespeople have carefully avoided the fundamental issue. The Egyptian people are not asking their government to reform itself. They are demanding an end to the entire autocratic and kleptocratic regime they have endured for even longer than Mubarak’s rule. [emphasis mine] They want democracy.

...So far, President Obama has spoken out for free expression in Egypt and has called for restraint by both sides – as though an unarmed populace, demanding democracy, were the physical or moral equivalent of a brutal state security apparatus. But our president has remained silent about the demonstrators’ goal: a democratic Egypt. In his June 2009 Cairo speech, when nothing was immediately at stake, President Obama uttered eloquent words of support for democracy. If he spoke out forcefully in support of the Egyptian people, as he did for the Tunisian people in his State of the Union address, he could tip events in a direction that would earn America the gratitude of the Egyptian people.

This would go far to undoing the damage to America’s standing in the Arab and Muslim world created by the catastrophically wrong-headed foreign policies of the George W. Bush era. It would also do more to undermine al-Qaeda’s international campaign of hatred and terrorism than has been achieved by two wars and over a trillion dollars in military spending.

Personally, I don't know if it would actually go far in undoing the damage, but at least it would be one step in the right fucking direction.
posted by scody at 1:53 PM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

(I have started a MetaTalk for all of the USA vs China vs Democracy ideas. I wish I could participate more substantially, but I have work to finish... the gist is to keep this thread about Egypt now, and not about American foreign policy then, especially when it's not in Egypt.)
posted by notion at 1:55 PM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

We did not spend billions to kidnap and kill. We spent billions in compliance with our obligations under the Camp David accords.

I can't believe this point has not been made more often and as forcefully. We aren't throwing money at Egypt for no reason or because Mubarak is "our dictator" in the way that we've done at times in the past. The USA negotated and signed "side-letters" of agreement with both Israel and Egypt in order to bring relative peace to a region which had seen war after war after war between Israel and her neighbors. One of the things the US agreed to in order to secure that agreement was yearly aid to both Israel and Egypt.

You know what evil dictator-backing scumbag signed this for the USA? Was it Bush? Nixon? No, it was that well-known friend of tyranny and Metafilter favorite, Jimmy Carter. The money we pay to Egypt is a result of a treaty witnessed and agreed to by Jimmy Carter in order to stop recurring wars in the region. There were a bunch of Nobel Peace Prizes associated with this agreement, and it was widely hailed as a triumph.

Perhaps the Camp David Accords have outlived their usefulness. Maybe peace would be maintained in the absence of the aid Jimmy Carter agreed to. I'm not sure. But that's a reasonable discussion. But the sheer fuckin' ignorance being spouted in this thread about the USA's aid to Egypt is astounding.
posted by Justinian at 2:00 PM on January 30, 2011 [18 favorites]

msalt, tweets out of order are most likely "retweets" (using the Official Retweet Button) which appear in the order they were retweeted, but still have the original timestamp attached. Which is why I don't usually use the Official Retweet button myself.
posted by oneswellfoop at 2:01 PM on January 30, 2011

Justinian: The Camp David Accords were signed before Mubarak took power. Sadat may have been worse then Mubarak, but you can't say that somehow our agreement was with Mubarak directly, initially. But, we've continued to support him for years.

Of course, could we have gotten out of those agreements, or used them as leverage to get better civil rights in the country? Did we go over and above what was required in order to keep things copacetic with Mubarak? Who knows.

But realistically, having these cozy relationships with dictators is a recipe for disaster, since local populations will hate us.
posted by delmoi at 2:09 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Perhaps the Camp David Accords have outlived their usefulness.
They certainly long outlived the Egyptian ruler who signed them, Anwar Sadat. And the legitimacy of succession on the Egyptian side is somewhat less than on the constitutionally-democratic Israeli side. But then, I suspect America's believers in "realpolitik" don't like democracy that much, seeing how it can cause changes in leadership we have no control over while keeping our obligations intact, and may even point to Israel as a troublesome example.
posted by oneswellfoop at 2:11 PM on January 30, 2011

Agreed enough on US and Egyptian relations. We can't change the past the only thing that matters is what we do going forward. On a separate sidebar. Will the Egyptian and Tunisian protests spread back to Europe. Greece, Italy, Ireland France and the UK. I believe there is an emerging global middle class student. These students cross national boundaries and talk over facebook and twitter. Everywhere these students are under preessure from austerity programs and cutbacks. They are unemployed and angry. Are we about to seer something like 89 when the wall fell and every communist regime and many others simply collapsed? What of the United States. Is this the year of the tea party counter revolution?
posted by humanfont at 2:12 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

It occurs to me that any future moanings by MeFites about the inanity of twitter shall have this thread rubbed in their faces
posted by danny the boy at 2:13 PM on January 30, 2011

Mubarak has ordered his new PM to control inflation, keep subsidies and cut prices.

So, hey everybody, if that doesn't happen, you know who to blame. We cool now?
posted by Capt. Renault at 2:19 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

It occurs to me that any future moanings by MeFites about the inanity of twitter shall have this thread rubbed in their faces

how dare you expect us to learn from things. this is the internets.
posted by elizardbits at 2:24 PM on January 30, 2011

I believe there is an emerging global middle class student. These students cross national boundaries and talk over facebook and twitter. Everywhere these students are under pressure from austerity programs and cutbacks. They are unemployed and angry.

humanfront, I think you are right about this.
posted by Leta at 2:28 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Maybe we can help the Egyptians by pressing our politicians to call for Mubarek's resignation.

Actually, this is in fact an excellent opportunity for some Track II foreign policy, where members of Congress make noises in support of a democratic transition, while not actually stepping on administration requirements for careful and incremental nudges to policy.

The money we pay to Egypt is a result of a treaty

Actually, I don't believe the accords or the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty specify any aid at all. It is, however, widely understood that US aid was a quid pro quo here.

Anyway, waxing poetic about the nobility of this effort sort of falls flat when you consider that for all the peace it bought Israel, the Egyptian people paid the price of living under a subsidized despot. That's the point where foreign policy Realism (realpolitik) starts to resemble ends-justifying-the-means morality. Sure, we created the perfect Socialist state, the kulaks were just in the way, right? If we get blowback for this, no matter how good our intentions were, and no matter how well this served our interests at the time, we damned well deserve it. We are, in fact, completely concerned this very moment at what the public will of the Egyptian people is going to be toward the Accords and Treaty, which are the lynchpin of most of our foreign policy in the region. Guess what? They don't care that we did it for Israel. It is, in fact, a bug rather than a feature. That billion dollars we shovel their way every year -- ten dollars from every household in America -- they don't see it; it goes to the security state that tortured their cousin, and flows into the kleptocracy that keeps 1/3 of the adult male population jobless. Finally, adding injury to insult, the other side of that aid coin goes to a regime viewed by the Arab public as criminal and an even greater human rights violator in the occupied territories.

Do you really, honestly, think you can look an Egyptian-on-the-street in the eye and tell them, "Gosh, it was the right thing to do at the time"? That's like going to the father of the daughter you ran over in the road and telling him "It's a sweet little machine and I got a great deal on it. What can I say?"

The realpolitik of this moment demands that we recognize the grievances of the Egyptian people and start asking them to not be mad at us for what we've done, because, well, not for any of the hypocritical bullshit that they'll spit on the ground when we start with it, but because maybe now a civilian-run democratic government can start spending some of that US money on improving the lot of the average Egyptian. Somehow, we've got to get their democratic interests aligned with ours, by open and transparent bribery if possible.

I can't imagine starting over in the region from scratch. Can you?
posted by dhartung at 2:32 PM on January 30, 2011 [13 favorites]

I believe there is an emerging global middle class student.

Middle class students have protests, not revolutions.

The student demonstrations in the UK and France are a reaction to cuts by the democratic governments of those countries. Those cuts are indication of the students' weakness, not strength.

Are we about to seer something like 89 when the wall fell and every communist regime and many others simply collapsed?

You mean by angry students in "Greece, Italy, Ireland France and the UK?" Uh, no.

What of the United States. Is this the year of the tea party counter revolution?

I'm not even sure what this means.
posted by ryanrs at 2:43 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Sorry if I missed this upthread: Libya issues state of emergency.
posted by scody at 2:55 PM on January 30, 2011

Is this the year of the tea party counter revolution?

That reminds me, have the Tea Party or Sarah Palin got anything to say about this extremely complicated geopolitical issue with a half-century of history behind it and a direct bearing on the freedom and security of millions of people?
posted by memebake at 2:59 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

I believe there is an emerging global middle class student. These students cross national boundaries and talk over facebook and twitter. Everywhere these students are under pressure from austerity programs and cutbacks. They are unemployed and angry.

Whoa there, Nelly. In no ways is the current situation in Egypt like that. These people are attempting a full-scale revolution, a total change of not only the people in government, but the nature of the government itself. Greece, Italy, Ireland, France, and the UK are all democracies. They have mechanisms in place, and however imperfect they may be, a revolution would not make them better. There are protests about student rates, but that's to convince the powers that be to shift policy. The are not trying to remove the powers that be directly.

If there's any "It could spread!" possibility, it's much more likely in the other despotic regimes where the whole population (not just middle class students) is unhappy: Yemen, Jordan, Syria, etc. China would be a long shot, of course, but even they are frightened about it spreading (and thus are keeping information about Egypt locked down).

So, no, student protests about rates and governmental policy are a far cry away from an honest-to-God revolution.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 3:03 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

It occurs to me that any future moanings by MeFites about the inanity of twitter shall have this thread rubbed in their faces

They're only following following the lead of America's Most Trusted Pseudo-Journalist.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:07 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Saying that the Camp David accords were signed with Sadat, not Mubarak, seems a bit nit-picky since Sadat was assassinated for joining our peace efforts and signing that accord. We'd have been pretty big assholes to renege based on that excuse.
posted by msalt at 3:07 PM on January 30, 2011

That reminds me, have the Tea Party or Sarah Palin got anything to say about this extremely complicated geopolitical issue with a half-century of history behind it and a direct bearing on the freedom and security of millions of people?

Those lovers of liberty at Christwire are pondering that very question:

On message boards, social networking sites and the web pages of leftwing groups across the nation, young Americans are voicing interest in similar riots taking place on our very soil. Socialists, liberals and eco-terrorists are fully behind the violence in Egypt. Their talk of a coup d’etat in the U.S. is dangerous, possibly treasonous, and threatens our greatest traditions of moral primacy.

This dilemma does have a silver lining, however. It offers Sarah Palin an incredible opportunity. Stung after the events in Tucson, where leftwing activists tried to blame her for the acts of a mentally disturbed occultist, she could rise to the occasion and show off her credentials on the international stage. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been slow to discuss what is happening in Egypt. In truth, they are playing a sickening balancing act of recalcitrant diplomacy, ultimately toying with the safety and future of the United States in ways they do not seem to appreciate.

Governor Palin needs to speak out publicly and forcibly for an American-led invasion to protect our interests in North Africa. As the largest recipient of foreign aid next to Israel, the United States has a tremendous investment in keeping Egypt stable and relatively terrorist-free.

Of course, this presumes that Palin and the Tea Party aren't getting geography lessons from Fox.
posted by scody at 3:13 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

Other Egypt-related Wikileaks cables have been mentioned, but two more, summarizing Feb 2010 meetings between John Kerry and the Prime Minister and Amir of Qatar, are worth a look. They present Qatar's view that the position of Egypt in the Palestinian/Israeli negotiations isn't essential at all, and that in fact Egypt "has no end game" and only wants to keep negotiations alive as long as possible to keep the US interested in Mubarak:

According to [the prime minister], Egypt -- the broker -- has a vested interest in dragging out the talks for as long as possible. Egypt "has no end game; serving as broker of the talks is Egypt's only business interest with the U.S." HBJ likened the situation to a physician who has only one patient to treat in the hospital. If that is your only business, "the physician is going to keep the patient alive but in the hospital for as long as possible."

...Returning to his theme that "peace brokers" act in their own self-interest, HBJ observed that President Mubarak of Egypt is thinking about how his son can take his place and how to stave off the growing strength of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Egyptian government, said HBJ, has jailed 10,000 Muslim Brotherhood members without bringing court cases against them. The Egyptian "people blame America" now for their plight. The shift in mood on the ground is "mostly because of Mubarak and his close ties" to the United States. His only utility to the U.S. is brokering peace between Palestinians and Israelis, so he has no interest in taking himself out of the one game he has, underscored HBJ...

And from the meeting with the Amir:

The Egyptians have not delivered, said Senator Kerry. The Amir said the Egyptians' goal is to stay in the game and maintain their relationship with the U.S., which is built around brokering Middle East peace, for as long as possible.

Can't know how much in the cables is spin or Qatar jockeying for position, but it's still interesting stuff.
posted by mediareport at 3:16 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

scody, that Fox map is a year and a half old.
posted by mediareport at 3:17 PM on January 30, 2011

> We'd have been pretty big assholes to renege based on that excuse.

And we would be pretty big assholes to continue supporting Mubarak based on that excuse.
posted by languagehat at 3:19 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

I realize that. My point was to retain its utility as a punchline, given the relationship between Fox, Palin, and her rather well-known grasp (or lack thereof) of geography.
posted by scody at 3:21 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Governor Palin needs to speak out publicly and forcibly for an American-led invasion to protect our interests in North Africa.

No desert until you clean your plate.
posted by Capt. Renault at 3:22 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Thanks scody ... I .... I think I wish I hadn't asked now.
posted by memebake at 3:25 PM on January 30, 2011

I think I wish I hadn't asked now.

I don't know whether it's likely to cheer you up or make you feel worse to know that the author of that brilliant foreign relations think piece bills himself as "an Investigative Journalist, Motivational Children's Party Entertainer and Antique Soda Bottle Collector all in one special, blessed package!"
posted by scody at 3:31 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mindblowing idiocy from scody's link:
Do we truly need another 84 million enemies of Christianity? Sarah Palin can head off this possibility in Egypt if she moves swiftly.

Ah yes, because invading Middle Eastern countries normally goes so well...
posted by knapah at 3:34 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

And we would be pretty big assholes to continue supporting Mubarak based on that excuse.

Not so clear cut to me. If we make a peace deal with a nation, and a vicious dictator assumes power but abides by our deal, are we justified in saying "No, you violated unrelated human rights standards, so we're not bound by the deal any more?"

Since the U.S. government alternates between arguably very different parties every 8 years or so, I'm not sure we want to establish this precedent. I hated Bush's torture policies as much as anyone. I sure wouldn't have wanted our various peace treaties to be disavowed because of that. Peace is a pretty big human rights issue to, with the now blowing people up and such.
posted by msalt at 3:35 PM on January 30, 2011

Christwire is a satirical site.
posted by BeerFilter at 3:37 PM on January 30, 2011 [3 favorites]

arggh! NOT blowing people up and such
posted by msalt at 3:38 PM on January 30, 2011

Christwire is a satirical site.

HAH! They're eerily good, then. Consider me with some blessed egg on my face, also.
posted by scody at 3:40 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

If we make a peace deal with a nation, and a vicious dictator assumes power but abides by our deal, are we justified in saying [..]

That's beside the point. The real question was, "Do we want to maintain peace between Egypt and Israel Y/N?"
posted by ryanrs at 3:40 PM on January 30, 2011

Christwire is a satirical site.

Hah, sign of good satire is believability. I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that stuff from some sections of the US far right.

Satire 1, me 0.
posted by knapah at 3:41 PM on January 30, 2011

The real question was, "Do we want to maintain peace between Egypt and Israel Y/N?"

Is there debate on this point?
posted by msalt at 3:42 PM on January 30, 2011

Christwire is a satirical site.

The sad thing is when satire is indiscernible from sincerity.
posted by manguero at 3:45 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Why the hell are people talking about these treaties as if they're personal obligations of the dudes holding the pens? Those men aren't party to the treaty. They sign on behalf of their respective countries.
posted by ryanrs at 3:46 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

http://www.accuracy.org/an-open-letter-to-president-barack-obama/
posted by dejah420 at 3:49 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Someone is having fun. These are adjacent headlines in Slate right now:

# Change Is Good
The stability we have embraced and encouraged in the Arab world isn't really stability—it's repression
Anne Applebaum | Jan. 30, 2011

# "Ukraine Has Never Had a More Stable Situation Than It Has Today"
An interview with President Viktor Yanukovych.
Lally Weymouth | Jan. 28, 2011
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:56 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Christwire is a satirical site.

Oh man, that article was too believable. If you view their front page, the satire is a little more obvious.
posted by memebake at 3:57 PM on January 30, 2011

Message from Cairo. Perhaps we can chastise them for "anti-American bullshit", too.

Map of Gini coefficients worldwide, which makes me wonder if some of the economic explanations aren't over-empasised. If that was all it was down to, I ought to be able to see a revolution out my window.
posted by rodgerd at 4:11 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

warbaby: "...The buzzing by air force jets is a sign the air force is still supporting Mubarak (as he was a top air force commander) and that the military is at least symbolically escalating pressure against the protesters. Evidently, the top leadership in the Army is still standing by Mubarak. These are bad signs and point to a crisis in which the critical issue will be if army units in the streets will follow orders to attack the protesters. It is becoming evident that the upper levels of the military are trying to retain Mubarak in power."

Pardon me for the Kreskin imitation, but I think there's going to be a resurgence of the security forces. The missing police will reform and mount a serious attempt to clear out the demonstrators in Tahrir square and elsewhere. (That's seems to have been the goal all day for Mubarak's people. Presumably they'll get it together eventually.) The big question is what the army will do then. Will they stand back and watch as people are gunned down, or will they intervene?
posted by Kevin Street at 4:19 PM on January 30, 2011

This isn't about the US role in Egypt for the last 50 years. This is about what the Egyptians want today and how the US can work with them to achieve it. There is a great danger that nationalist and anti-western / anti-secular forces will foment anti-ameicanism to further their power in the new governing coalition of Egypt. Now is the time for the US President to take q clear stand with the Egyptian people.
posted by humanfont at 4:20 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Press release from trade union movement:

Today, representatives of the of the Egyptian labor movement, made up of the independent Egyptian trade unions of workers in real estate tax collection, the retirees, the technical health professionals and representatives of the important industrial areas in Egypt: Helwan, Mahalla al-Kubra, the tenth of Ramadan city, Sadat City and workers from the various industrial and economic sectors such as: garment & textiles, metals industry, pharmaceuticals, chemical industry, government employees, iron and steel, automotive, etc… And they agreed to hold a press conference at 3:30pm this afternoon in Tahrir Square next to Omar Effendi Company store in downtown Cairo to announce the organization of the new Federation of Egyptian Trade Unions and to announce the formation of committees in all factories and enterprises to protect, defend them and to set a date for a general strike...

Great news.
posted by Abiezer at 4:24 PM on January 30, 2011 [5 favorites]

Amr Shalakany's op ed on the Guardian:

.... I am sorry, the man tells me, but I hate your president. What is this speech he gives? Why can't he support us? He says we can have human rights but he gives us no political rights? To America, we are monkeys, monkeys, monkeys. We Egyptians don't deserve a constitution, don't deserve freedom, don't deserve democracy.

... We want new elections to set up a committee to write a new constitution. We want clean elections; once we have a new constitution, we can elect a new government. We are not less than South Africa. Tell the Americans we are not less than South Africa ....
posted by nangar at 4:30 PM on January 30, 2011 [9 favorites]

makes me wonder if some of the economic explanations aren't over-empasised. If that was all it was down to, I ought to be able to see a revolution out my window.

I don't think economic explanations are overemphasized, but I do think it's an oversimplification to expect that higher levels of poverty/economic inequality will automatically lead to revolutions. You have to factor in the nature of the state in question (e.g., totalitarian regime vs. industrialized democracy), the existence (or lack thereof) of opposition parties or movements, the general demographics (is there a sizeable middle class and if so, what are its politics? Is there an organized, independent labor movement? Is there a large population of students and young people?), employment statistics, the state of public services and institutions, etc., etc. None of these various factors exist independently of economic factors, and they all play a role in determining the potential for grassroots political and social upheaval in any particular society.

Regarding Egypt, Juan Cole has a good overview of its class politics since Nasser and how they relate the current situation.
posted by scody at 4:42 PM on January 30, 2011

Whoa there, Nelly. In no ways is the current situation in Egypt like that. These people are attempting a full-scale revolution, a total change of not only the people in government, but the nature of the government itself. Greece, Italy, Ireland, France, and the UK are all democracies. They have mechanisms in place, and however imperfect they may be, a revolution would not make them better. There are protests about student rates, but that's to convince the powers that be to shift policy. The are not trying to remove the powers that be directly.

So was the Weimar Republic. At the root of this is the governing coalitions cannot deliver on the basic expectations of the people they govern. A new political coalition must rise up to meet the challenges. Failing this people will search for more and more desperate remedies. Students are at the core of this because they have the least political power, and are most affected by economic calamity. These young people who had expectations of what their life would be, are suddenly left deeply uncertain of how they will meet their basic needs.
posted by humanfont at 4:53 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sorry guys, was posting from phone earlier, and didn't realize my html got wonked.

An Open Letter to President Obama, from leading academics and foreign policy experts with a focus on the middle east.
posted by dejah420 at 5:20 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

Map of Gini coefficients worldwide, which makes me wonder if some of the economic explanations aren't over-empasised. If that was all it was down to, I ought to be able to see a revolution out my window.

The GDP (PPP) per capita of Egypt is 6,000 per year. At least half of the country lives on $2 a day, or less than $800 per year. I could not find any data on income brackets, as somewhat ironically, the sis.gov.eg is down. Whatever the GINI coefficient is, the fact that Egyptian people are risking their lives to get rid of their current government is a pretty good sign that they are suffering.
posted by notion at 5:31 PM on January 30, 2011

The Camp David Accords were signed before Mubarak took power. [...] They certainly long outlived the Egyptian ruler who signed them, Anwar Sadat.

Are you guys serious? You're positing that treaties or other agreements are between the current heads of state of the parties involved?

There were some arms control agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union. You're really arguing that those agreements did not outlive the General Secretary of the Communist Part of the USSR who was in office at the time? Would you consider it a violation of some sort of the United States or Russia started building as many damn nukes as they wanted because the leaders in charge have changed?

Agreements between nations are almost always understood to be agreements between those nations, not the specific personalities involved. That is a fundamental tenet of international diplomacy. If every treaty or agreement was rendered null and void when the head of government changed the world would be an even nastier place than it is.

I honestly don't think you guys even believe what you just argued, which makes me wonder why you argued it.

Actually, I don't believe the accords or the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty specify any aid at all. It is, however, widely understood that US aid was a quid pro quo here.

That's true, which is why I made sure to refer to the aid as something the USA negotiated in order to secure the Camp David Accords etc rather than as a part of the Egypt-Israel treaty itself. But there is no doubt that the US aid to Israel and Egypt post Accords was part of the agreement between the states involved, that breaking the peace treaty would be seen by the USA as grounds for terminating aid. and that halting aid would be seen by either Egypt or Israel (depending on who lost the money) as nullifying the treaty.

As I said, maybe that's something we should do and bribing Egypt into not invading Israel repeatedly in the space of a very short span of years has become of net negative for the world at large. But that's a much more nuanced argument than GRAR GRAR GIVING MONEY TO EVIL DICTATOR GRAR EVIL USA GRAR. Not that I'm accusing you of that argument by any means, but it's put in appearances in the thread. USA aid to Egypt is a complicated affair which can't be reduced to a bumper sticker.
posted by Justinian at 5:49 PM on January 30, 2011 [9 favorites]

announce the formation of committees in all factories and enterprises to protect, defend them…

…from the thugs that constitute Egypt's police force, as I read between the lines.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:05 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

This is a police state, these are autocratic thugs, and we should let Mubarak fall flat on his face. This is not out of our control. The history of who is bribing what for why reasons is irrelevant. The fact stands that we must choose whether to help Mubarak and the forces that torture and mutilate, or we fight on the side of Democracy and Liberty, or we do nothing and hope the Egyptian army sorts things out. We can maintain our treaty obligations and we will. In the past we had motherfuckers like John Yoo to sort the legalities out. Now, when we have a crystal clear obligation to Justice, now when the we hear the strangled cry for Democracy, we hesitate because the situation is too complex to act? Fuck That; We can act, we must act, or we are doomed to that special place in hell reserved for those who stand unwilling to act in the face of cruel injustice.
posted by kuatto at 6:41 PM on January 30, 2011

There were some arms control agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union. You're really arguing that those agreements did not outlive the General Secretary of the Communist Part of the USSR who was in office at the time?

That would be silly.

If every treaty or agreement was rendered null and void when the head of government changed the world would be an even nastier place than it is.

But are we changing heads of states or creating a new government? I don't think an entirely new Democratic government should necessarily be held to the agreements that were made against the will of the people during a time of dictatorship.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:42 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

I don't think an entirely new Democratic government should necessarily be held to the agreements that were made against the will of the people during a time of dictatorship.

It's generally the case that they are, as are debts incurred. Though nations are generally willing to renegotiate if facts on the ground change.
posted by empath at 6:48 PM on January 30, 2011

Archaeologist Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, reports that several of the country's museums have been attacked by looters taking advantage of the political turmoil in the country. Via National Geographic blog

On twitter, there appears to be a movement to create a Million Egyptian March on Tuesday. @EgyptFreedomNow: The Million Egyptian March This Tuesday 1st of February from Tahrir Square in Cairo to Republic Palace! 4:00 PM

Live From Egypt: The Rebellion Grows Stronger - By Sharif Abdel Kouddous
posted by dejah420 at 7:19 PM on January 30, 2011

Front page of CNN: "Egyptian President Mubarak urges dialogue" followed by "Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak urged leaders of his new government to engage in dialogue with all political parties to help achieve 'a democratic civil society,' state-run Nile TV reported."

Then they provide two links below to Al Aribaya (which is in all Arabic) and Nile TV. Is there any legitimate reason why they don't link to Al Jazeera English?
posted by notion at 7:20 PM on January 30, 2011

Egypt subsidizes food and fuel to its citizens (food subsidies are apparently means tested, fuel is not). An article I read suggested historically the government has subsidised fuel by 75%. This was fine while Egypt was a major oil exporter, but production is flat to declining and internal use has grown so fast that Egypt will soon be a net importer of oil, making food and fuel subsidies unsustainable.
The Oil Drum has an article.
posted by bystander at 7:27 PM on January 30, 2011 [2 favorites]

Stop torturing me with the Singapore death penalty story AJ. :(
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:33 PM on January 30, 2011

While following links on another subject, I encountered an interesting alternate viewpoint from an Internet Entrepreneur building "Digital Nile", an 'Internet conglomerate' for 'the Arab market' (not scare quotes, just making clear where I'm using his words, not mine). While I'm quite skeptical of a lot he says, apparently one strategy of Digital Nile, to build a decentralized, distributed network, has proved valuable during Egypt's Great Unplugging. And his words "the modernizing elite... vs. the Islamist opposition" sounds almost chillingly like Iran in the 1970s.
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:54 PM on January 30, 2011

I don't think an entirely new Democratic government should necessarily be held to the agreements that were made against the will of the people during a time of dictatorship.

Except that they are, mostly. I return to the point about the USSR which you called silly; your position seems to be that Russia is not bound by any treaties the USSR signed. Russia's government may currently be a corrupt oligarchy but there is no denying that there was a sharp break after the fall of the USSR, so either Russia is bound by the USSR's arms treaties or it isn't. And I suggest that pretty much the entire world would take a very dim view of Russia repudiating any arms control agreements it is currently bound by on the basis that Putin's regime was not party to them.

In any case, whether or not a new democratic government should be held to the agreements a prior less democratic government signed is kind of a moot point with Egypt since we're talking about Mubarak succeeding Sadat.
posted by Justinian at 8:26 PM on January 30, 2011

The question of whether governments after a revolution should be held to the treaties of the prior governments is an interesting one. On the one hand, the international consensus is that they should honor past agreements. On the other hand, if the prior governments had sold the country down the river in exchange for the enrichment of the ruling class, fucking over the populace en masse in exchange for a few billion dollars and some assurance of safe harbor when the shit hits the fan, it's hard to see how those international expectations are anything other than the many conspiring to keep down the poor, the unlucky, and the truly fucked bottom billion of the world, to continue profiting off the agreements of unscrupulous leaders past.

So yeah, on the one hand, I can understand that countries want some assurance that their treaties will be as good in ten years as they were yesterday.

On the other hand, sometimes that's fucked.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:00 PM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

The payments made to Israel and Egypt in consequence of the Camp David Accords don't make sense if you think of them as being designed to avoid war. After all, both Israel and Egypt have troops on their other borders and nobody suggests that Jordan, Lebanon and Syria be paid to maintain peace with Israel. Furthermore, the international force monitoring the demilitarised Sinai is very small (a few hundred troops) - it would be totally ineffective if genuine hostilities broke out. So why does the US pay around $4,000,000,000 a year just to ensure that Israel and Egypt
respect the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty?

I believe that US strategy is aimed at maintaining the neutrality of the Suez Canal. It's a reaction to the lessons learned from the Suez Crisis (everybody would like to control the Canal); the Six Day War (the UN will not protect the Canal); the Yom Kippur War (the Canal is not a good international border); and the Egyptian blockade of the Canal from 1967-1975.

The US solution was to play Israel and Egypt off each other. Egypt gets to own the Canal as long as the Canal remains neutral. Egypt can't successfully blockade the Canal without moving troops into its vicinity, which would break the peace treaty and risk a response from Israel. On the other hand, Israel would need to cross the Sinai peninsula and establish a long and vulnerable supply chain if it wanted to conquer the Canal. The US avoids the financial and diplomatic cost of using its own troops to enforce Canal neutrality and it gets credit for preventing war between Israel and Egypt. It's a really brilliant strategy and Carter deserved his Nobel Peace Prize for implementing it.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:16 PM on January 30, 2011 [21 favorites]

Courage and a sense of humour these folks!
posted by Abiezer at 9:30 PM on January 30, 2011 [4 favorites]

Well, here's something curious: a post from the Arabist about a military officer throwing in with protestors, with a photo of a newspaper (Al-Masry Al-Youm) featuring an obviously laudatory front page shot of the officer. With everything shut down and seemingly only state news channels allowed to operate, I wonder how this newspaper is allowed to publish?

Here is the Wikipedia page about Al-Masry Al-Youm; it's not some small publication likely to be overlooked.
posted by taz at 10:10 PM on January 30, 2011 [1 favorite]

I think Al Jazeera is available throughout Canada. Locally, but both Shaw and Telus added it to their lineups last year.
posted by Kevin Street at 10:40 PM on January 30, 2011

I know that AJ plays sometimes on Comcast here in the PNW, but I can't for the life of me remember what channel and when. It's hopelessly obscure.
posted by Mizu at 11:15 PM on January 30, 2011

Joe, from what I understand, that solution happened because one of the four states we chose to suppress democracy and independent dictatorships in the region fell to democratic forces. This was part of the Nixon doctrine, and if you look at the amount of aid to the Middle East from the late 1960s to the present, the recipients have changed but the dollars have been fairly consistent.

I'm not sure if choosing Egypt as the best replacement "pillar" is Nobel material.
posted by notion at 11:39 PM on January 30, 2011

Notion, I don't think I understand your point. Can you elaborate?
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:13 AM on January 31, 2011

Are you guys serious? You're positing that treaties or other agreements are between the current heads of state of the parties involved?

There were some arms control agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union. You're really arguing that those agreements did not outlive the General Secretary of the Communist Part of the USSR who was in office at the time? Would you consider it a violation of some sort of the United States or Russia started building as many damn nukes as they wanted because the leaders in charge have changed?

What are you talking about? I was just pointing out that the treaties has nothing to do with Mubarak, and do not require that we support him, in particular.
posted by delmoi at 12:14 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

But realistically, having these cozy relationships with dictators is a recipe for disaster, since local populations will hate us.

Even peace treaties? Talk about hard to please. I understand their complaint, but sheesh!
posted by ryanrs at 1:18 AM on January 31, 2011

Human Rights Watch appeal to the Egyptian armed forces directly:

We urge you to reflect on the fact that the current crisis in Egypt and the rest of the region is in great part the result of years of corrupt and abusive government and unlawful torture and repression by its security forces, against which the people are now in open revolt. The solution to this crisis is not further repression, but a swift and orderly transition to a new democratic order in which the basic rights and freedoms of the people of the region are respected. We urge you to shoulder your historic responsibility and to assist in bringing about this transition.

Israel appears to be arguing for the status quo or a Foxian sky is falling position.

Are you guys serious? You're positing that treaties or other agreements are between the current heads of state of the parties involved?

No, people are positing that treaties are between nations, and there's no particular reason to back Mubarak written into the Camp David accords; moreover, that since aid doesn't appear to be part of the actual formal treaty, shoving billions to Mubarak - that is, taking sides in favour of the dictatorship - is bad for the US as well as bad for Egypt Egyptians.

Even if the US ignored them, what's Egypt going to do? Invade Israel? Past history would suggest that won't go too well, and Israel has aquired nuclear weapons since then. I doubt anyone in the Egyptian millitary is going to agree to a course of action that could see Cairo dissapear from the face of the earth.
posted by rodgerd at 1:37 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

But realistically, having these cozy relationships with dictators is a recipe for disaster, since local populations will hate us.

Even peace treaties? Talk about hard to please. I understand their complaint, but sheesh!

Yeah, I guess spending your life under a dictatorship where torture and murder by the the "security forces" should be asmall price you're happy to pay to guarantee the security of some other country. Sounds very reasonable to me.
posted by rodgerd at 1:39 AM on January 31, 2011

No, people are positing that treaties are between nations, and there's no particular reason to back Mubarak written into the Camp David accords

That's a pretty tendentious reading of a lot of the comments in this thread, many of which have decried the aid itself as morally bankrupt.
posted by Justinian at 2:04 AM on January 31, 2011

NPR quoting الى طغاة العالم "To the Tyrants of World" by أبو القاسم الشابي Abu al Qasim al Shabi / Abou el Kacem Echebbi:

Opressive tyrant,
lover of darkness, enemy of light,
you have ridiculed the size of the weak people;
your palm is soaked with their blood.
You deformed the magic of existence
and planted the seeds of sorrow in the fields.

...

Arabic text with French translation here. Via Al Jazeera's live blog.
posted by nangar at 3:08 AM on January 31, 2011 [3 favorites]

After all, both Israel and Egypt have troops on their other borders and nobody suggests that Jordan, Lebanon and Syria be paid to maintain peace with Israel.

Jordan is the other Arab country with a peace treaty with Israel they also get ton of US aid. So in fact that is exactly the offer.
posted by humanfont at 3:19 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Jordan is the other Arab country with a peace treaty with Israel they also get ton of US aid. So in fact that is exactly the offer.

Hey, they also got a CIA-trained security force, tight press-control, and generally-despotic rulers. I guess its a package deal.
posted by xqwzts at 3:59 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

5 AJ people arrested.
things are looking worrisome
posted by angrycat at 4:15 AM on January 31, 2011

military and police on streets; helicopters circling the square. people flocking to the square
posted by angrycat at 4:17 AM on January 31, 2011

Hey, they also got a CIA-trained security force, tight press-control, and generally-despotic rulers. I guess its a package deal.

Don't forget the Star Trek Voyager Cameo.
posted by humanfont at 5:15 AM on January 31, 2011

Do we truly need another 84 million enemies of Christianity? Sarah Palin can head off this possibility in Egypt if she moves swiftly.

The American right is like Fred Sanford, staggering up from his easy chair in front of the TV while clutching his chest and yelling out yet again that "this is the big one...I'm comin' to see you Jesus!". To them, everything that happens in the middle east is a priori a prelude to the rapture in that these fundies see every major event in the region as a chance to lead an apocalyptic army into the "holy land" and make the prophecies in the trashy books they read come true.
posted by telstar at 5:30 AM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

The AJ reporters have had their equipment seized, but the people themselves have been released.
posted by Mizu at 5:46 AM on January 31, 2011

Those barricades... I can't think of a good reason to use them. Am I missing something?
posted by sugarfish at 5:50 AM on January 31, 2011

Haaretz has some interesting reading: Israel urges world to curb criticism of Egypt's Mubarak (who is blaming the rioting on the Islamists)
posted by adamvasco at 5:58 AM on January 31, 2011

telstar: That ChristWire site is satire. Hilarious and scary satire which I'd recommend reading (especially the comments), but satire nonetheless.

Which also means my earlier question still stands.
posted by memebake at 6:01 AM on January 31, 2011

A wonderful collection of photographs of the Women Of The Egyptian Revolution, since commenters earlier were wondering where they were.
posted by Mizu at 6:04 AM on January 31, 2011

re: last night, when ElBaradei apparently turned up in the square, spoke for a short while, then fainted and went home ill ...

I'm a little bothered by this not getting reported (assuming its true). The Guardian and Al-Jazeera are just running with 'he went to the square and spoke' and showing that short clip of him with the megaphone. If he did leave unexpectedly, its definitely newsworthy and should be reported. It certainly doesn't look like he spoke for long. What happened? Are any of the other networks saying anything (I've only watched the Guardian and AJ).

(See also my comment a few days ago about crowd numbers)

I can only think of one reason for Al-Jazeera and the other networks to skim over this: That the media are aware that they are buoying the protesters along, and they want to encourage the movement to keep going etc. Thats all very well, but they have a duty to accurately report whats going on.

Al-Jazeera deserve plaudits for staying on air and for their brave journalists, but I don't know if we should trust them any more than we'd trust any other big news network in terms of spin. (see also this New York Times article about Al-Jazeera). When the spin is in a direction that you like, its even more important to be aware of it.
posted by memebake at 6:19 AM on January 31, 2011 [9 favorites]

This is fantastic: SpeakToTweet It's a service set up in Egypt to allow people to call in via landline and leave a tweet message.
posted by dejah420 at 6:23 AM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

xqwzts: Hey, they also got a CIA-trained security force, tight press-control, and generally-despotic rulers. I guess its a package deal.

Jordan is probably the "freest" country in the region, other than Israel. They have a Parliament that actually does things, opposition parties that aren't regularly beat up, and a (relatively) decent human rights record.

Where are you getting your information from?
posted by mkultra at 6:23 AM on January 31, 2011

Re: membake's comment

After reading that New York Times piece of work, it is very worthwhile reading the comments.
posted by Mister Bijou at 6:35 AM on January 31, 2011 [4 favorites]

Mister Bijou After reading that New York Times piece of work, it is very worthwhile reading the comments.

Well, yeah, I wouldn't necessarily trust the NYT that much either. One thing I've learned from those comments is that Al Jazeera English is run as a separate channel to Al Jazeera - i.e. its not just a translation of what the arabic-langauge Al Jazeera is carrying. Worth bearing in mind.
posted by memebake at 6:56 AM on January 31, 2011

memebake's point about trying to be particularly aware of biases and spin when they agree with your own is important. But when I saw that NYT hit piece on Al Jazeera damn did I laugh. I mean, here's the NYT seriously noting "There is little doubt that Al Jazeera takes sides in the Palestinian dispute" without a hint of self-awareness, apparently expecting us not to recall its own side-taking. That's pretty hilarious. So is the NYT pointing out as if it's necessarily a *bad* thing that protests tend to have more of an impact when they're reported by a media outlet.

But it's also worth noting that in one of the Wikileaks cables from Qatar, the Prime Minister of Qatar [HBJ below] reportedly told John Kerry the following:

Mubarak, continued HBJ, says Al Jazeera is the source of Egypt's problems. This is an excuse. HBJ had told Mubarak "we would stop Al Jazeera for a year" if he agreed in that span of time to deliver a lasting settlement for the Palestinians. Mubarak said nothing in response, according to HBJ.

Which is interesting in light of the claim in the NYT article about Egyptian citizens' skepticism about Al Jazeera's initial slowness to report the protests:

On Tuesday afternoon, as the street protests in Egypt were heating up, Al Jazeera was uncharacteristically slow to report them, airing a culture documentary, a sports show and more of its “Palestine Papers” coverage of the leaked documents.

Many Egyptians felt betrayed, and Facebook and Twitter were full of rumors about a deal between Qatar — the Persian Gulf emirate whose emir, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, founded Al Jazeera in 1996 — and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, who visited the emir in Doha last month. Within a day, Al Jazeera was reporting from the streets in Cairo in its usual manic style.

So yeah, reminders to keep in mind that Al Jazeera is a large media outlet with its own biases and imperatives will always be valuable.
posted by mediareport at 6:58 AM on January 31, 2011 [5 favorites]

The internets may be down, but traditional print media continues to publish in Egypt. Here's the front pages and analysis from the Economist.
posted by dejah420 at 6:59 AM on January 31, 2011 [6 favorites]

The internets may be down, but traditional print media continues to publish in Egypt. Here's the front pages and analysis from the Economist.

Cool, this reminds me of a Marshall McLuhanism I recall reading many moons ago; that a fresh new medium always displaces an established one, oft-times rather emphatically, but that this displacement is not all bad, because with the new medium suddenly attracting all the spotlight (and its related fear and loathing and calls for censorship etc), the older medium is suddenly freer to do what it does best.

Come to think of it, McLuhan's analysis actually goes a lot deeper than this, as there are, of course, more than just two media in the mix. The new one tends to supplant the current cock-of-the-walk (ie: internet undermines television's unquestioned power), while simultaneously allowing an older, relatively moribund one to slip back into relevance, but always as a sort of mutation of its former self (print media becomes less the fallback means to "what's happening" that it once was before TV came along, and more an emergency backup system, kind of like an insurance policy on "free" flow of information).

Or more to the point. I wonder how much the story of the past few days in Egypt (since this thread began with the shutting down of the internet) becomes a cautionary tale regarding how much of baby we've tossed out with the bathwater in our mad embrace of the world wide web, regardless of ramifications; we NEED that faster, sexier, more convenient means toward contacting friends and accessing concert tix, music and porn, damn the torpedoes, we NEED IT NOW!?!?
posted by philip-random at 7:35 AM on January 31, 2011 [4 favorites]

Which is interesting in light of the claim in the NYT article about Egyptian citizens' skepticism about Al Jazeera's initial slowness to report the protests:

Marc Lynch wrote about this on the 25th.
posted by NoMich at 7:44 AM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

From the Arabist:
Image of weapons the police use v. the weapons that the people have been using.
I hate seeing that USA stamp on the big tear gas canister on the left.
posted by NoMich at 7:54 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Take heart. No doubt weapons manufacturers across the country are now discussing ways to brand their products with a less conspicuous Made In USA label.

I didn't mean my statement in the context of PR.
posted by NoMich at 8:08 AM on January 31, 2011

I understand. But I was making a joke about something that is probably happening anyway.

More than likely.
posted by NoMich at 8:16 AM on January 31, 2011

For those interested in the situation at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, as well as other sites and museums in Egypt, this site appears to have information and photos.
posted by gudrun at 9:06 AM on January 31, 2011

Joe: I'll post a couple links over at Meta.
posted by notion at 9:34 AM on January 31, 2011

Who Profited From Arming Egypt?
posted by homunculus at 9:55 AM on January 31, 2011

All Egypt Air flights are canceled. The plane my brother and family were waiting for simply didn't arrive, it was after that the flights were canceled (Serves me right for saying "insh'allah" non-ironically). So that's the status of the airport. Haven't heard anything firstish-hand about violence in Heliopolis or near the airport.

For those following my familial story, my brother, his wife, and their kids are now scheduled for a flight on Etihad Airways the day after tomorrow. They're not on an embassy flight on account of wife's mother isn't US Citizen/resident so there's no way to be certain that she could get on an embassy flight and she's in no shape to travel on her own. The embassy says "immediate family" of citizens/residents can be evacked but defines that as spouses and children not parents.

WARNING! IN-JOKE IMMINENT!! OTOH, if folks with US papers take the metafilter approach, they can spouse the shit out of every random person they meet and get everyone out. The US officially recognizes MeFi contacts, right?
posted by stet at 9:56 AM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Marvelous detail from an Economist correspondent in Cairo:

"I KNEW it was truly over when I came home to find a neighbour in a panic. He had smelled a fire nearby. We traced its source soon enough, after climbing to the roof of my building. Smoke drifted from the garden of the villa next door, where workers had recently been digging a peculiarly deep hole, as if for a swimming pool. In a far corner of the garden stood rows of cardboard boxes spilling over with freshly shredded paper, and next to them a smouldering fire.
More intriguingly, a group of ordinary looking young men sat on the lawn, next to the hole. More boxes surrounded them, and from these the men extracted, one by one, what looked like cassette tapes and compact discs. After carefully smashing each of these with hammers, they tossed them into the pit. Down at its bottom another man shovelled wet cement onto the broken bits of plastic. More boxes kept appearing, and their labours continued all afternoon.
The villa, surrounded by high walls, is always silent. Cars, mostly unobtrusive Fiats and Ladas, slip in and out of its automatic security gates at odd hours, and fluorescent light peeps through shuttered windows late in the night. This happens to be an unmarked branch office of one of the Mubarak regime's top security agencies. It seems that someone had given the order to destroy their records. Whatever secrets were on those tapes and in those papers are now gone forever."
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:14 AM on January 31, 2011 [25 favorites]

Most of the discussion I've seen on the issue of US aid to Egypt has focused on whether or not US intends to continue aid if Mubarak (or his appointed successor) holds onto power.

The converse: What's the US position on continuing aid if the Mubarak regime is overthrown? For all I know, the policy might well be that aid to the army in particular will be unconditionally withdrawn if that happens. Would the army, in that case, have any sort of motive for taking decisive action in support of the opposition (regardless of what would happen to the aid if Mubarak stays)? If this is the US position, I will have a very hard time defending the US foreign policy in the future -- and I've done that quite a lot in the past.
posted by Anything at 10:19 AM on January 31, 2011

(count the other branches of the military in there as well)
posted by Anything at 10:23 AM on January 31, 2011

just an update: Boyfriend and family returned home safe. Good timing too; in the papers yesterday Julia Gillard urged all Australians to evacuate and put Egypt in the "do not travel" list. They didn't see any of the chaos, but they did end up leaving for the airport early and staying there because of it.
posted by divabat at 10:37 AM on January 31, 2011 [5 favorites]

Would the army, in that case, have any sort of motive for taking decisive action in support of the opposition (regardless of what would happen to the aid if Mubarak stays)? If this is the US position, I will have a very hard time defending the US foreign policy in the future -- and I've done that quite a lot in the past.

Extremely unlikely. The USA's horse in this race is Israel's security, and they will want to maintain a positive relationship with whatever new incarnation of government materializes. And even after a democratic revolution, the military will remain the military. Terminating miltary aid would probably result in an extremely unstable situation, some very angry commanders, a possible military coup, and god knows what after that. Egypt's military's current cool, hands-off approach (relatively speaking) bespeaks their awareness of the USA's decision-making process here - they know that whatever happens to the civilian leadership, they can just continue on business as usual.
posted by mek at 10:46 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

More on the museum angle: The American Association of Museums' Facebook page is providing a handful of interesting updates, among them a statement from Zahi Hawass, Secretary General for the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt, apparently sent by fax to friends outside the country who posted it for him, and a statement of emergency from the US Committee of the Blue Shield, a "charitable nonprofit organization committed to the protection of cultural property worldwide during armed conflict."
posted by Miko at 10:52 AM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

From the Guardian liveblog:

6.49pm GMT: Now Reuters confirms earlier reports about the Egyptian army's stance, and the army's statement that it would not use force against Egyptians staging protests demanding that Mubarak step down: According to Reuters:

It said "freedom of expression" was guaranteed to all citizens using peaceful means.

It was the first such explicit confirmation by the army that it would not fire at demonstrators who have taken to the streets of Egypt since last week to try to force Mubarak to quit.

"The presence of the army in the streets is for your sake and to ensure your safety and wellbeing. The armed forces will not resort to use of force against our great people," the army statement said.

"Your armed forces, who are aware of the legitimacy of your demands and are keen to assume their responsibility in protecting the nation and the citizens, affirms that freedom of expression through peaceful means is guaranteed to everybody."
It urged people not resort to acts of sabotage that violate security and destroy public and private property. It warned that it would not allow outlaws and to loot, attack and "terrorise citizens".

6.46pm GMT: The breaking news, according to al-Jazeera and other outlets, the Egyptian army is reported as says it "won't use violence against citizens staging protests against President Hosni Mubarak".

6.28pm GMT: Now al-Jazeera has the statement from the Egyptian army (although who or which part isn't clear), saying "We are aware and acknowledge the demands of our honourable citizens"

Are we seeing a turning point right here? These appear to be the first official army announcements in support of the protesters.
posted by Devils Rancher at 10:55 AM on January 31, 2011 [8 favorites]

Christopher Hitchens suggests that the catalyst for the Egyptian unrising may have been Mubarak's insult to their intelligence.
posted by Joe Beese at 11:01 AM on January 31, 2011

Is it sad that I have a feeling the Egyptian Army more concern for the Egyptian people than the US Army would have for American citizens? It's really sad that that's the feeling I have. The way the army reacted has stunned me, quite frankly. This is one reason I wonder if this is more like Turkey than Iran. In 2008 the military in Turkey came out in defense of a secular State against the push by the Prime Minister towards further religious intrusion into the public sector. I have a feeling and hope that Egypt takes a similar stance. So far, this restraint has been quite heartening. One can question ulterior motives (will they, after Mubarak is toppled, foment a coup? Will they end up working with MB?) but for now, at least, it's a positive sign.
posted by symbioid at 11:02 AM on January 31, 2011

Anything, I doubt that the US has any sort of IF this THEN that policy binding its actions (those are the sorts of things you find in treaties, not policies). What you want as a diplomat is instead options. But the US would almost certainly be willing to work with a military junta as long as they agreed to uphold Camp David -- this is one reason for the caution in their statements, as they want to avoid a serious climbdown in the event that the army selects a new strongman.

But that's how realpolitik works: the primary driver is your national interests. Stability is almost always in our national interest, and that can be a huge liability for any democracy movement. It's a very useful way to understand the actions of states, but it can -- especially in an era much more democratic than when Morgenthau put forth the idea -- make states appear to be sociopathic when placed side by side with the interests or needs of a people itself.

they did end up leaving for the airport early and staying there because of it

The State Department just tweeted this morning that anyone going to the airport should bring food, water, and any medications they need, as they could face a very long wait.

Which also means my earlier question still stands.

memebake, will this do?
posted by dhartung at 11:10 AM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

"Cable companies: Add Al Jazeera Englidh *now*".

BTW, Link TV is again alternating between their regular programming and Al Jazeera English, so you can still watch AJ on television there.
posted by homunculus at 11:22 AM on January 31, 2011

Media may be largely silenced in Tahrir Square, but protesters have developed their own "media camp" - pooling videos and photos to post online, connecting those without connectivity, to those who can post.
posted by raztaj at 11:26 AM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

9:26pm Protesters remain camped out in Tahrir Square from a variety of political and demographic groups. Despite the insecurity and danger prevalent in Egypt's capital, an Al Jazeera correspondent on the ground says that the sense of community feels like a "giant sleepover in the square in the middle of Cairo".

posted by dejah420 at 11:56 AM on January 31, 2011

symbioid, that's a bizarre statement; it's been a long time since the US Army was asked to fire on American citizens, and the current professionalism of the Egyptian Army will be largely a result of US training.

As to Turkey, you have to understand that the secular Atatürk is the father of the nation, and the military following that secularism is a form of nationalism. Every time the military has taken control of Turkey (several in the 20th century), it was to forestall a greater political role for Islam. Egypt has no such secular tradition. But then the protesters are not Islamists, either (some of them surely), it is a broad -- seemingly universal -- swathe of the population, and it is about the cruelty and corruption of the regime, not its secularism. In Iran many were appalled at the autocracy of the Shah, but also by his modernness and secularism, such as his wife wearing Western fashions and not covering her head. It was common enough in those days among the urban population, but it was such things that infuriated the religious rural population. That dichotomy is not present in Egypt; the protests began in Cairo and Alex, two of the most urban and modern places in the Arab world.

Christopher Hitchens suggests that the catalyst for the Egyptian unrising may have been Mubarak's insult to their intelligence.

His line: The whole lumbering apparatus of the Egyptian state conspired to make itself appear humorless and thuggish and to convince its people that they were being held as serfs by fools. Again, the sense of insult ran very deep, and Mubarak's bullies were too dense to understand their own mistake.

It reminds me of a news story about an anti-government protest in, I think, Belgrade against the Serbian nationalist government, when people filled the capital with their cars, stopped them, and took out the keys, preventing all traffic. A person was quoted: "This is a very stupid regime. They have no concept of irony."

it's a good thing the US gave egypt rubber bullets and tear gas otherwise it would have been live ammo the whole time

Nonsense. Egypt bought its non-lethal arms from the US because they are our client state and we gave them the money. The only way this makes sense is that they were probably not permitted to use any US aid to buy lethal arms for the internal security forces. But it has little to do with whether they chose to use non-lethal arms in the first place, and you can get tear gas and rubber bullets more places than the US. These are quite common crowd control measures, and patting ourselves on the back because the Egyptians used them is a weird way of self-justifying.
posted by dhartung at 12:05 PM on January 31, 2011 [3 favorites]

it's a good thing the US gave egypt rubber bullets and tear gas otherwise it would have been live ammo the whole time

Well, that's nonsense of course. The Egyptians could have bought that stuff from anywhere, but they bought it from us because we gave them the money. This military aide is more like store credit, we give it to you and you buy from us. And that way it ends up back in the pockets of military contractors.

And of course we gave them all kinds of real weapons too.
posted by delmoi at 12:14 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

it's a good thing the US gave egypt rubber bullets and tear gas otherwise it would have been live ammo the whole time.

If the United States hadn't given Mubarak's regime over 30 billion dollars during his rule, it probably would have been much shorter. The teargas and rubber bullets and tanks and fighter jets allowed Mubarak to get away with murder for 30 years. I flatly reject any rationalizations to the contrary.
posted by notion at 12:15 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sultan Al Qassemi tweets that Omar Suleiman on TV right now:
"The decisions of the constitutional court in Egypt will be respected. And those who were affected will be compensated"
"We will fight corruption and unemployment. The contested election circles will be addressed immediately."
"Elections will be held once again in contested districts in Egypt in the coming weeks"
"I have been asked by the President to contact all the political parties about constitutional reform"
posted by scody at 12:16 PM on January 31, 2011

So basically Mubarek & Co. are still offering a few concessions. I somehow think that it's a bit late for that...
posted by scody at 12:19 PM on January 31, 2011

Azmi Bshara, Political Analyst on Al Jazeera Arabic: "President Mubarak seems to always be two steps behind his people's demands."
posted by scody at 12:24 PM on January 31, 2011

dhartung : it's been a long time since the US Army was asked to fire on American citizens, and the current professionalism of the Egyptian Army will be largely a result of US training.

I can't find a cite for the Egyptian Army being trained by the US. But even if they are, I think the 'bond' between the Army and People is more to do with Egypt's army being a conscript army, made up of the people, and the people seeing the Army as genuine defenders of their safety.

I have a hunch that most Armies are less likely to fire on their own citizens than Police forces are.
posted by memebake at 12:29 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Scody: So basically Mubarek & Co. are still offering a few concessions. I somehow think that it's a bit late for that...

I think Mubarek might just be playing theatre while lots of documents get shredded.

Also, this afternoon (before those Army announcements) "Protesters have said the army must choose to take the people's side by Thursday or else demonstrators will march on the presidential palace in Heliopolis after Friday prayers." (Guardian, 3:55pm update). That was quite a smart move.

Hopefully we're in a fairly orderly endgame now.
posted by memebake at 12:38 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

From AJ's tweets:

10:13pm Twitter reports from this evening say that four large screens have been installed by protesters in central Cairo to show Al Jazeera Arabic and Al Jazeera Mubasher (Live) to the crowds gathering around.

posted by ZeusHumms at 12:45 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

"Protesters have said the army must choose to take the people's side by Thursday or else demonstrators will march on the presidential palace in Heliopolis after Friday prayers."

Oh lovely, that's where my people are waiting for their flight. Of course, does anyone doubt what side the military are on?
posted by stet at 12:59 PM on January 31, 2011

Can anyone comment on the differences in coverage between Al Jazeera Arabic and English, if any?
posted by empath at 1:01 PM on January 31, 2011

So basically Mubarek & Co. are still offering a few concessions. I somehow think that it's a bit late for that...

He's working through the 5 Stages of Grief. He's already done denial & anger, now he's involved in bargaining. It doesn't look like that's going to work, so next up is depression & finally acceptance & then he's gone.
posted by scalefree at 1:15 PM on January 31, 2011 [12 favorites]

does anyone doubt what side the military are on?

The generals? Or the guys who pull the triggers?

I imagine those two groups see things quite differently.
posted by Joe Beese at 1:15 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

"Speaking on military cooperation between the Egypt and the United States, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has said, “Our own military has benefited from the interaction with the Egyptian armed forces, one of the most professional and capable in the region"
posted by clavdivs at 1:16 PM on January 31, 2011

Can anyone comment on the differences in coverage between Al Jazeera Arabic and English, if any?

I think they're rather different. I was looking into this earlier. He's an BBC article from when Al-Jazeera English launched:

Sue Phillips, its London bureau chief, says the new channel will build on the independent traditions of the Arabic al-Jazeera, but it will have a different culture.

"We have very strict journalism guidelines," she says.

"We come under the UK media regulator Ofcom, we will adhere to Western broadcasting standards, we will report accurately, impartially and objectively - and we will be controversial where necessary."

She says al-Jazeera Arabic is culturally different, which helps explain its use of footage that was condemned in the West.

The difference party explains that New York Times article about Al-Jazeera that we discussed earlier. While I don't necessarily trust the NYT to be unbiased, their report is about Al-Jazeera Arabic, most of the people defending Al-Jazeera in the comments are talking about Al-Jazeera English.

Does anyone here have the language skills to compare the two channels?

Here's Al-Jazeera Arabic, btw, and here's a Google Translate of it
posted by memebake at 1:29 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

My theory: He's looking for a pilot ballsy enough to fly out a load of gold bullion.
posted by dunkadunc at 1:37 PM on January 31, 2011

My theory: He's looking for a pilot ballsy enough to fly out a load of gold bullion.

My theory is that he's already out of the country, and so is his gold.
posted by delmoi at 1:43 PM on January 31, 2011

One take on why the West wants Suleiman, Egypt's hardline intelligence chief, leading any post-Mubarak Egypt:

The event was not for attribution and thus I cannot quote him, even though his blunt words made me drop my biscuit. Suffice it to say he does not have a high opinion of Islam in politics, and is not shy about telling Western audiences the lengths he will go to allow his security services to keep the Muslim Brotherhood and their offshoots at bay...

For me, President Mubarak's appointment of Suleiman is a way of messaging assurances to a wary state of Israel and US congress. But it also speaks the unspoken to Egypt's Islamic parties: don't even think about it.
posted by mediareport at 1:43 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

A top member of the Arab league has thrown his support behind the protestors. The end is nigh. Now let's see if the United States will interfere at the last moment, or allow the Egyptian people to determine their own destiny.
posted by notion at 1:44 PM on January 31, 2011

Never mind what social media and motivated protesters can do for democracy, the important question is how does it effect global outsourcing?
posted by the duck by the oboe at 1:45 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

the lengths he will go to allow his security services to keep the Muslim Brotherhood and their offshoots at bay

Lest there be any misunderstanding , he means these kinds of lengths:

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.

In other words: the kind of man who can get things done for Washington.
posted by Joe Beese at 2:03 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Joe Beese wrote: The generals? Or the guys who pull the triggers? I imagine those two groups see things quite differently.

I think it would be a mistake to assume that the generals are on Mubarak's side. They have their own power base and they probably want to preserve it. This is, frankly, why most revolutions turn to crap: the new regime ends up incorporating bits of the old regime because it can't fight every battle. This is why Russia is now run by a KGB graduate.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:14 PM on January 31, 2011

Salon:

Pro-Israeli groups and individuals in Congress and the rest of the American political elite have worked hard, for decades now, to demean and marginalize the work of anyone who seeks to understand trends in the Arab world on their own terms. They sowed the wind of our government’s current, stunningly evident impotence regarding events in Egypt. Now we are reaping the whirlwind. ...

Israel, in short, has been of no use whatsoever to President Obama as he has tried to figure out how to respond to this fast-moving uprising that is far and away the most significant development in the geopolitics of the Middle East since Bush’s invasion of Iraq. But Israel’s situation is now revealed as worse than that. It is not just that it is of no use to Washington. Its actions over the past 40 years, and those of its many cheerleaders inside the U.S. body politic, are now clearly revealed as having undercut our country’s ability to pursue a reasonable, peaceable and rights-based policy throughout the region.

And without having an Egyptian president who is ready and able to act as Israel's shield and spear, both Israel and the United States are now going to have to look at the whole of the remaining "Arab-Israeli question" in a completely new way.

posted by Joe Beese at 2:37 PM on January 31, 2011 [4 favorites]

Notion wrote: A top member of the Arab league has thrown his support behind the protestors. The end is nigh.

It wasn't a member of the Arab League: it was the Secretary General, Amr Moussa. It would have been much more significant if the Arab League or one of its constituent states had made that declaration. Amr Moussa is an Egyptian and (was formerly?) a potential successor to Mubarak, so anything he says will be treated as an attempt to position himself in the new order.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:46 PM on January 31, 2011

It should also be noted that the Arab League has pretty much never done anything worthwhile.
posted by proj at 2:47 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is it sad that I have a feeling the Egyptian Army more concern for the Egyptian people than the US Army would have for American citizens?

A lot of people are wondering about the role of the army in this conflict, and there seems to be some news that suggests the army is not willing to stnad in the way of the demonstrations.

There seem to be at least four "forces" operating in Egypt right now: The regime, the police, the military, and the people. You can subdivide these further into groups (people could be divided into secular, islamist, muslim brotherhood, etc), but these four seem to be the ones affecting the conditions on the ground.

We know where the regime stands, and where the people stand relative to it. The forces that affect the dynamic are the military and the police. The army, if it is comprised of conscripts, 18yr olds serving mandatory service, then we should expect them to be less willing to impose order. Remember, the army defends the state, not the regime that happens to be the head of the state.

The police do the dirty work of the regime. They are the force that disappears dissidents, beats demonstrators, guards the regime flacks, takes the bribes, and generally imposes the will of the regime in the street.

The test of this revolution will be what happens when the army clashes with the police, or what happens to the police if the army makes it clear that it wants Mubarak to go.

A couple of things are important to me to note. First, the west and the US has gotten schooled on what the arab street really is, educated, enlightened, honest, and progressive--the opposite of everything the right has been saying for 20 years.

Second, a reaffirmation of the idea that everyone in the world wants exactly the same things--life, liberty, peace, and happiness. If I were a psychoanalyst, I would say that we are seeing what happens when the people who once were able to reach the top of Maslow's hierarchy of needs get kicked back down all the way to the bottom. If I were an economist I would say this is what happens when commodity prices end up pricing out and entire section of the populations of nation-states. But it doesn't matter--in the end the egyptian people are exactly like us, and when we get starved or excluded, we take to the streets to. This idea should be driving the resetting of foreign policy in DC, but it won't because DC cares about CNN and Fox, not the Egyptian street.

Third, technology is a catalyst for change. If the events have showed the tech community anything, it's that facebook and twitter, and the internet proper, aren't decentralized enough. If your service requires some logically centralized system to negotiate communication among users, it can be interrupted. We need some ultra-decentralized version of these networking tools. Like what gnutella and bittorrent did to Napster, we need to do with Twitter and facebook. Fully Peer-to-peer, with the servers distributed among the users.

Fourth, and forgive me for being naive, philosophy matters. In an immediate and practical sense. Way way up-thread I quoted the book A Thousand Plateaus. I've been re-reading sections of that since Tunisia, and I am stunned by how accurately it described how events like these unfold. Reading that book and watching Al-Jazeera, you can almost see the regime being dissolved out of the state in real-time, like acid etching stone. I feel very strongly that the ideas in that book, despite their obtuse presentation, are invaluable to understanding events now. Certain technologies have unblocked "flows," --exchanges of ideas, sentiments, cultures--that were long blocked simply by encapsulating events into "stories" that were then compartmentalized as "international news" or "foreign policy" and ignored.

As these ideas and sentiments flow simultaneously among people worldwide without filter or interruption these events are unleashed in their true form. The riots in egypt are actually happening here. Not to the same degree of course, but they are happening. The stones crashed into the Nile and the ripples extend to LA and London and NYC; the ripples are softened only by distance, which in the modern/post-modern world is nearly irrelevant.

In threads like this and on twitter etc, we are echoing to a muted degree the feelings of the people in the streets in Cairo. We are very back back in the crowd, far enough to be totally safe, but we are in the crowd nonetheless. We are so far back that we are facing the other way, facing our own local "regimes". We are not simply lending them our support, we are staging a much quieter riot here against or own governments, and the message is "We are like them. If you don't support them, it means you wouldn't support us." But worldwide this is one event--an interrelated continuous series of actions taking place locally in time--and not a news report, a thing that is static and contextualized as remote and past.

Obama's response to the uprising in Egypt is a domestic issue, not a foreign relations one. His statements about Egypt address Americans, implicate his relationship to the American people.
posted by Pastabagel at 2:54 PM on January 31, 2011 [52 favorites]

WSJ: Last working Egyptian ISP (Noor) goes down.

AJ is hearing rumors that mobile phone service will be shut down, and the train service into Cairo is already being suspended. It looks like Mubarak is trying everything to disrupt the protests on Tuesday, no matter what the cost to Egypt's economy.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:59 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Joe in Australia: "Joe Beese wrote: The generals? Or the guys who pull the triggers? I imagine those two groups see things quite differently.

I think it would be a mistake to assume that the generals are on Mubarak's side. They have their own power base and they probably want to preserve it. This is, frankly, why most revolutions turn to crap: the new regime ends up incorporating bits of the old regime because it can't fight every battle..."

Thanks for explaining Obama! (I did it, so you don't have to, Joe ;))
posted by symbioid at 3:04 PM on January 31, 2011

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.
posted by saulgoodman at 3:05 PM on January 31, 2011 [3 favorites]

It should also be noted that the Arab League has pretty much never done anything worthwhile.

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. But I guess attempting dialogue among neighbors to combat colonialism, founding ALESCO, and supporting worker's rights, minority religious rights, women's rights, and attempting to raise awareness of the value of Arab culture isn't worthwhile to some people.

Yes, it's factionalized. Yes, they have failed to achieve real cohesion in their economic and foreign policy. But that couldn't possibly be because someone is spending tens of billions of dollars every year to subvert those goals, could it?
posted by notion at 3:06 PM on January 31, 2011

*ALECSO
posted by notion at 3:07 PM on January 31, 2011

Pastabagel, that was awesome.
posted by notion at 3:10 PM on January 31, 2011

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. But I guess attempting dialogue among neighbors to combat colonialism, founding ALESCO, and supporting worker's rights, minority religious rights, women's rights, and attempting to raise awareness of the value of Arab culture isn't worthwhile to some people.

Yes, it's factionalized. Yes, they have failed to achieve real cohesion in their economic and foreign policy. But that couldn't possibly be because someone is spending tens of billions of dollars every year to subvert those goals, could it?

I am not going to get into an argument with you as I have no desire to engage in yet another meta-derail with you, but I submit that we have different definitions of accomplishment. I do not think awareness-raising or dialogue-attempting are accomplishments. You apparently do.
posted by proj at 3:15 PM on January 31, 2011

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.

A stupid and evil action, but not at all surprising.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:19 PM on January 31, 2011

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.

And Mike Huckabee!
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 3:25 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.

Fuck. All right, Obama, it's go time. Is the US government going to be on the side of democracy and justice, or is Israel really pulling the strings just like the worst of the conspiracy theorists have been saying?
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:27 PM on January 31, 2011

Sorry if someone else has already posted this, but I heard on NPR that Netanyahu has been telling the U.S. state department that Mubarak must be supported at all costs.

Grar.
posted by Leta at 3:27 PM on January 31, 2011

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.

A stupid and evil action, but not at all surprising.

From an interview with Khaled Hamza, editor of the Muslim Brotherhood's official website:

What about relations with Israel? What would the Brotherhood do regarding the situation between Israel and Palestine?

We think Israel is an occupation force and is not fair to the Palestinians. We do not believe in negotiation with Israel. As the Muslim Brotherhood, we must resist all this. They are an occupation force and we must resist this. Did you see what they do in Gaza, on the flotilla? Israel is a very dangerous force and we must resist. Resistance is the only way, negotiation is not useful at all.

So would the Muslim Brotherhood, if in a position of government, help groups like Hamas?

Yes, sure.

Do you recognize Israel as a state?

No.

If I was Israel I'd pick Mubarak over that any day of the week.
posted by scalefree at 3:33 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.

And Mike Huckabee!

What? They're backing Huckabee now, too? What depths shall they sink to next?
posted by philip-random at 3:37 PM on January 31, 2011 [6 favorites]

I understand seeing Israel as a dangerous occupation force that must be resisted.

I don't understand not recognizing them as a state. They're in the UN and everything.

Does the MB feel that recognition of Israeli statehood weakens their bargaining position or something?
posted by Joe Beese at 3:43 PM on January 31, 2011

Yeah, that was poorly worded. Meant to say that Huckabee has also expressed his support for Mubarak.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 3:43 PM on January 31, 2011

This revolution is definitely Internet enabled. Here's a Newsweek article about the Facebook activists (already mentioned in the OP's top post) who provided the spark that set it off: The Mysterious “Anonymous” Behind Egypt’s Revolt

I can't find it now, but there was another interesting Newsweek column recently that profiled Omar Suleiman. It painted him as a sort of Egyptian J. Edgar Hoover, with extensive blackmail files compiled on all the senior officers in the military. He knows each of them intimately, and makes sure that no at the top ever expresses even slight disloyalty towards the government.
posted by Kevin Street at 3:48 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

After the bravery of the Egyptian people, I fear they're going to be shortchanged somewhat. It certainly looks like Mubarak is on the way out, but due to the importance of the Egypt-Israel relationship, Suez and the general importance of 'stability' in the region so oil can keep flowing (as ever) ... I can't see that Egypt is going to be left to sort itself out without lots of outside meddling and string pulling.

This is going to become a high stakes geopolitical poker game, that no-one expected to be playing a month ago so they come to the table scrambling for strategies. Also, there may be a subtle shadow cast on the proceedings by Wikileaks (and Palestine Papers) - its like a high stakes poker game but with the past strategies used by the main players laid out on paper for all the other players to see.

Interesting times. I hope the Egyptian people get the state they deserve.
posted by memebake at 3:59 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Does the MB feel that recognition of Israeli statehood weakens their bargaining position or something?

Recognition of statehood grants legitimacy, many Palestinians and Palestinian sympathisers view Israel as an illegitimate occupying force - and as the UN established it, well... who cares about them being in the UN?
posted by knapah at 4:03 PM on January 31, 2011

"Does the MB feel that recognition of Israeli statehood weakens their bargaining position or something?"

?

I mean this position existed in '48, and still exists in many people's minds today.
posted by rosswald at 4:13 PM on January 31, 2011

56 hours.
posted by clavdivs at 4:17 PM on January 31, 2011

I'm sorry, that was a Time Magazine article: The One Person Who May Know What Egypt's Generals Will Do

"Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak appointed his intelligence chief Omar Suleiman as Vice President not because Suleiman had any sway with the Egyptian street but rather because the new Veep knows the military better than anyone. A former general, Suleiman has spent his career helping keep Egypt's officers in line. He learned by heart the biographies of every officer, and is uncannily capable of predicting who is loyal and who isn't...."
posted by Kevin Street at 4:23 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

From an interview with Nathan Brown, director of the George Washington University's Institute for Middle East Studies, regarding the Muslim Brotherhood:

Let's say at some point there's a new government in Egypt in which the Brotherhood has a voice. How would they change the foreign policy of Egypt on Israel or relations with the U.S.?

They're clearly suspicious of the United States, and you'll hear some anti-American slogans from them -- but no more so than from any other place in the Egyptian political spectrum. They don't stand out there, and there are probably more anti-American people in the committee of opposition leaders.

With regard to Israel it's a little bit different. Israel is unpopular in Egypt. And the Brotherhood since the 1930s has a very strong history of backing the Palestinian cause. They are critics of the Camp David accords and the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. Those are all popular stands. That said, no one in Egypt wants a war with Israel right now. So the Brotherhood tries to finesse this by saying, 'This treaty really needs to be put up for a referendum." If they were in the government, I think they would be in an embarrassing position. This is an international treaty that was ratified -- are you willing to abide by the state of Egypt's international treaty obligations or not?

If it was a broad-based coalition government in which the majority clearly favored maintaining the current peace treaty, I think the Brotherhood would say: "We don't like this, we're not in favor it. But we're willing to accept the results of a legitimate political process." That's my guess.

Is the Brotherhood something that should be a source of fear in the way it's being talked about by many people?

We've got a big headache in Egypt. The regime in its current form is toast. Our regional policy has been based on a very close working relationship with the Egyptian government since 1974, so we've got fundamental rethinking to do. The Brotherhood is part of that headache. It's not the biggest part. Is there cause for concern? Yes. Is there cause for fearful reaction? Absolutely not.

posted by scody at 4:23 PM on January 31, 2011 [6 favorites]

I certainly hope a war between Egypt and Isreal is averted. I hope Nathan Brown is right. A headache is a small price to pay for a more democratic Egypt.
posted by Green With You at 4:27 PM on January 31, 2011

scalefree: in the short term that makes sense, but how long can Israel deny the success of any democracy in their vicinity that has factions within it that dislike their occupation of Palestine?

The longer you suppress the will of these states, the more radical the factions are going to get, as proved by the rise of the Ayatollah in Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and even Hamas in Palestine. Societies rarely allow some outside force to hijack their government without severe blowback. Sure, Israel has the military capability to handle the situation now, but there is point at which their continued military aggression and dismissive attitude towards Arab nationalism will be responded to en masse by all of its neighbors, regardless of how much money the United States is paying out. Israel is even starting to lose Turkey after their special ops raid of the flotilla that was headed for Gaza.

Israel could gain a lot of credibility in the region by supporting democratic reforms, but now they are only adding to their long standing history of preserving their own security at the expense of Arab liberty. And that's bad news for everyone.
posted by notion at 4:42 PM on January 31, 2011 [11 favorites]

Al Jazeera added a live feed to their YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/aljazeeraenglish .
posted by ZeusHumms at 4:46 PM on January 31, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/aljazeeraenglish
posted by ZeusHumms at 4:47 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Does the MB feel that recognition of Israeli statehood weakens their bargaining position or something?

To build on what knapah said there are multiple objections to Israel within the MB:
-Theological objections about the geographic area which must be governed by Islamic Law.legitimacy
-A view that the history of modern 1880s-present Jewish settlement is based on illegal land acquisition and colonialism. Thus all Jews have no right to live in former British occupied Palestine.
-Objections to the notion of a "Jewish" state ie Zionism equals racism

Under these concepts they refuse to extend formal diplomatic recognition to the State of Israel. Hamas has floated the idea of a long term truce. This concept is obviously not acceptable to Israeli negotiators, nor is it consistent with UN resolutions.
posted by humanfont at 5:02 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

That live feed goes right back to Al Jazeera's site, though.

True. I was thinking that YouTube might be more accessible then Al Jazeera's site for some.
posted by ZeusHumms at 5:07 PM on January 31, 2011

But the YouTube is optimized for mobile. At least I can get that to work on my android, but the feed @ AJ doesn't.
posted by dejah420 at 5:28 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Third, technology is a catalyst for change. If the events have showed the tech community anything, it's that facebook and twitter, and the internet proper, aren't decentralized enough. If your service requires some logically centralized system to negotiate communication among users, it can be interrupted. We need some ultra-decentralized version of these networking tools. Like what gnutella and bittorrent did to Napster, we need to do with Twitter and facebook. Fully Peer-to-peer, with the servers distributed among the users.

Also, wireless mesh networking.

---

Also, has anyone else in this thread pointed out how the army has officially said they won't stand in the way of protesters? They're planning a million person march now, and a general strike. Omar Suleiman asking for negotiations between all groups and a new election.
posted by delmoi at 6:02 PM on January 31, 2011

Someone on Al Jazeera just said: "The internet is alive with the sound of revolution"
posted by delmoi at 6:32 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Also, has anyone else in this thread pointed out how the army has officially said they won't stand in the way of protesters?

It would sort of suggest it's game over, unless Mubarak and suporters decide to pull a Nero Decree or somesuch. Otherwise the police will be trying to shoot civilians who are intersperesed amongst tanks, who may not take too kindly to such behaviour.
posted by rodgerd at 6:42 PM on January 31, 2011

Google exec Wael Ghonim disappeared a few days ago, after tweeting that he was going to the demonstrations. This video has been making the rounds of twitter, suggesting that it is Wael being arrested at the 1:04 mark. Does anyone know his face well enough to be able to verify this rumor?
posted by dejah420 at 6:49 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Google sets up a speak-to-tweet service for those Egyptians without Internet service.
posted by dirigibleman at 7:06 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

dejah's link also has some riot police thug action in HD if you haven't seen what those goons do to regular people yet.
posted by notion at 7:08 PM on January 31, 2011

Notion, responding to Scalefree: how long can Israel deny the success of any democracy in their vicinity that has factions within it that dislike their occupation of Palestine?

The "leading voice of moderation" Scalefree quoted says that the wouldn't recognise Israel even if it were to "completely withdraw from the West Bank, a Palestinian state were established, and Jerusalem became a shared capitol." He says that "Resistance is the only way, negotiation is not useful at all."

If this accurately characterises their beliefs then a Brotherhood-led Egyptian government would almost inevitably be at war with Israel.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:33 PM on January 31, 2011

We need some ultra-decentralized version of these networking tools

They already do, to a large extent. They just aren't very popular because, e.g. maintaining your own Jabber and identi.ca server federated into the overall networks isn't very convenient, and for most people the convenience outweighs that.

Pretty much every time this sort of question (open protocols, freedom from centralised control, skepticism about walled gardens and so on) people are pretty free with insults about paranoid nerd neckbeards who need to meet ladies.
posted by rodgerd at 7:36 PM on January 31, 2011 [3 favorites]

Tomorrow is going to be very scary. I hope that there are peaceful protests and that cooler heads prevail with a peaceful transition to a national unity government and Mubarak's orderly departure. My fear though is that a bomb will go off in the square, some mob will storm the presidential palace, or some other act of passion/violence will overtake events resulting in a great human tragedy. I see various factions Qods agents from Iran, Israeli Mossad, CIA, etc running the scenarios right now and trying to figure out if there is some provocative act that could tilt things in their favor. Pay some students to try to take over an Embassy, organize a mob to storm the Presidential palace, plant a bomb on the marchers route. Remember the Haymarket Riot. There are too many actors and factions who might try too much crazy shit. Already there have been allegations of provocateurs in the crowd from the police smashing museums, etc. Basically I'm praying for the Egyptian people.
posted by humanfont at 7:40 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

"Monasosh" from Cairo leaves a voice message about Feb. 1 demo tomorrow.
posted by telstar at 7:42 PM on January 31, 2011 [8 favorites]

Otherwise the police will be trying to shoot civilians who are intersperesed amongst tanks, who may not take too kindly to such behaviour.

So the military protected the civilians by moving themselves into the protest. Smart crowd, welcoming the tanks with love.

And we think our police are bad.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:57 PM on January 31, 2011

My theory: He's looking for a pilot ballsy enough to fly out a load of gold bullion.

For a moment there, I had this vision of Mubarak leading a ragtag band of bandits, zooming around Cairo in three APCs, and then stuck teetering on the side of a step pyramid. "Hang on, lads -- I've got a great idea!"

THE EGYPTIAN JOB With Omar Sharif as Noel Coward!
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:06 PM on January 31, 2011 [2 favorites]

Noam Chomsky gave a lecture on Jan25, with some comments on Egypt and the beginning of the revolution.
posted by dejah420 at 8:11 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

Bibliotheca Alexandrina

Are Egypt's youth the most awesome people on earth or what? The amount of peace and sanity in their revolution is amazing.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:33 PM on January 31, 2011 [7 favorites]

If this accurately characterises their beliefs then a Brotherhood-led Egyptian government would almost inevitably be at war with Israel.

Joe: Obviously their fear is real, but it is doubtful that a political group, once in power, would risk everything they have gained for to take the chance at defeating the best military in the region that is backed by the world's most powerful military. The only people in the world really who resort to suicide missions are those with no hope for improving their situation, or people who are just crazy fundamentalists, like the Saudi Wahaabists. (Al Qaeda is a fringe case for two reasons: it's made up of middle class terrorists, and they have no state or self interest to negotiate with. They're like violent members of the Westboro Baptist Church.) This theory of an MB led Egypt also presupposes that the other 80% of the country would risk having such an obvious bullseye on their legitimate chance at democracy. It's sort of weird to say that we can negotiate with Mubarak to murder his citizens into compliance, but we aren't so sure about negotiating with a political group that has been far more peaceful, despite the fact that they are regularly persecuted.

Reza Aslan has a good piece on the Muslim Brotherhood and the revolution:

For Huckabee and Santorum, as well as for a large segment of the American public, these two polls present a contradiction. How could Egyptians want both a democracy and a role for religion in their government? After all, in the United States it is axiomatic that Islam is inherently opposed to democracy and that Muslims are incapable of reconciling democratic and Islamic values. Never mind that the same people who scoff at the notion that religion could play no role in the emerging democracies in the Middle East are the same people who demand that religion must play a role in America's democracy. Ironically, one of the most vocal proponent of religious activism in politics is Mike Huckabee himself, who has repeatedly called Americans to "take this nation back for Christ" and who, while running for president, proudly declared that "what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards."

In fact, when it comes to the role of religion in society, Americans and Egyptians are pretty well in agreement. An August 2010 Pew poll found that 43 percent of Americans believe that churches should express political views and play an active role in politics, while 61 percent agreed that "it is important that members of Congress have strong religious beliefs."

This is illustrates biggest issue I have with anyone trying to deny Egyptians of their basic human rights. Who are we to say that the only people with the right to have crazy religious fundamentalists in their democracy are nations with Christians and Jews? Israel has it's fair share of ultra hawks demanding that Israel destroy Palestine, and it wasn't a Muslim that said "Blow them away in the name of the Lord." And though we weren't motivated by religion, the bombs started falling anyway.

Even ignoring basic morality, there is solid reasoning that suggests that the first step in introducing violent religious behavior is to deprive the youth of a good education, a job, and a chance at making a better life for themselves. As evidenced by all accounts, Mubarak and his cronies are keeping all of the money for themselves, and trying to keep a lid on the discontent with violence. That's a situation that we can either pressurize by supporting the dictatorship, or support democratic values. Again, I see no reason why anyone assumes that a legitimate Egyptian government will have no interest in self-preservation.

Finally, I think this is an important analog to consider:

We cannot trust Muslims with self-governance.
We cannot trust Indians with self-governance.
We cannot trust Irish with self-governance.

I believe history has spoken quite clearly on the legitimacy of that sort of reasoning. All people are potentially dangerous when they have self-determination and a vote, but they deserve one anyway.
posted by notion at 8:47 PM on January 31, 2011 [48 favorites]

notion, I wish I could favorite that comment harder. I've been making the same arguments (albeit less eloquently) on facebook for a couple of days.
posted by manguero at 9:04 PM on January 31, 2011

That "speak to tweet" thing is pretty great.
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:10 PM on January 31, 2011

It's impossible to say what kind of stance a hypothetical future government in Egypt would have towards Israel, since there haven't even been elections yet. Mubarak is still very much in charge, and could remain so.

But having said that, any hypothetical new government would probably have its hands full dealing with economic problems and rewriting the laws, at least for a while. Remember what the current protests are about. If they did anything different with respect to Israel, it would probably be a relaxation of the Gaza blockade, since that would be a fairly low cost initiative on the Egyptian side.
posted by Kevin Street at 9:10 PM on January 31, 2011

"Monasosh" from Cairo leaves a voice message about Feb. 1 demo tomorrow.

This should be sidebarred. I am speechless and nearly in tears.
posted by notion at 9:10 PM on January 31, 2011

Mona Eltahawy on CNN: "This is not about the Muslim Brotherhood. This is not about Islamists. This is not about Al Quada. This is about Egyptians from every walk of life saying to a tyrant of 30 years: 'We hate you. We want you gone.' The Muslim Brotherhood is not taking part as a movement; members of the Muslim Brotherhood are taking part as Egyptians because every Egyptian has suffered under 30 years of Hosni Mubarek."
posted by scody at 9:15 PM on January 31, 2011 [9 favorites]

I think it's pretty rich for Israel, whose last peace-making leader was murdered by a religious extermist, and whose subsequent right-wing governments have been propped up by extremist religious parties who dictate both domestic and international stances, to be throwing rocks about overmuch influence of religion in democratic governments.

And, as I posted upthread: Israel is a nuclear power. There may be Arab Muslim groups who still dream of "pushing Israel into the sea", but the Egyptian army is all too aware that the fruits of that victory, in the unlikely event that Israel's conventional forces failed in a way they haven't in 60 years, would be the total annihilation of Egypt's major cities, at a minimum. It's not going to happen.
posted by rodgerd at 9:21 PM on January 31, 2011

Wa Po says US has settled on course of (behind the scenes) encouraging Egyptians to push Mubarak out:

"It's not so much about sending a message to Mubarak - they don't think he will listen, anyway," [one of nearly two dozen outside experts invited to an off-the-record meeting with White House officials Monday] said. "The message," he said, is one of urgency to "those who would push [Mubarak] out. If you want to see a new Egypt, and want your place in it, here's your chance." [...]

So far, the administration acknowledged, no senior U.S. official has made contact with Mohamed El Baradei, the former Egyptian diplomat who now heads a loose opposition coalition. The administration official cited the difficulty of phone connections with and in Egypt, and said that U.S. Ambassador Margaret Scobey was "working overtime to meet with as many people as she possibly can."

The official said that while the administration was concerned about "some elements" of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood and other non-secular groups participating in the demonstrations, it was "not ruling out their legitimacy" and place in a future government.

posted by LobsterMitten at 9:24 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

First word out of my wife's mouth when I told her about Israel on Mubarak:

"Jesus, don't they ever want to be on the right side of anything?"
posted by saulgoodman at 9:29 PM on January 31, 2011

Holy shit. And for once the US is on the right side!
posted by saulgoodman at 9:31 PM on January 31, 2011

...Which means, this early comment, now takes on a certain irony.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:37 PM on January 31, 2011

heh
posted by clavdivs at 9:38 PM on January 31, 2011

Notion: brilliant! and this
"there is solid reasoning that suggests that the first step in introducing violent religious behavior is to deprive the youth of a good education, a job, and a chance at making a better life for themselves."
makes me think of the direction where we in the US have been heading for some time (though I realize we have not gotten anywhere near what the youth of Egypt have been put through, at least if you are white).
posted by gofargogo at 9:42 PM on January 31, 2011

That's good news, LobsterMitten.
posted by rodgerd at 9:54 PM on January 31, 2011

Where the money goes; US aid breakdowns to Egypt.

No. Defense Secretary Gates stated in 2009 that foreign military financing “should be without conditions.”

Gates prefaced that comment by saying that the Obama administration, like other U.S. administrations, is “always supportive of human rights.”

The administration of former president George W. Bush had threatened to link military assistance to Egypt’s human rights progress, but it didn’t follow through. When exiled Egyptian dissident, Saad Eddin Ibrahim, called on the U.S. government to attach conditions to aid to Egypt, U.S. officials dismissed the idea as unrealistic.

posted by rodgerd at 9:57 PM on January 31, 2011

I can't find a cite for the Egyptian Army being trained by the US.

C'mon, you don't think we give away $4000 a minute without some sense of how it's going to be used, do you? (And try to imagine how it would go if we just tossed them the keys to an M1A1 -- or something more aloft.) The Office of Military Cooperation - Egypt [a division of CENTCOM whose website actually resolves to a currently dead Cairo IP address] "is the second largest US security assistance organization in the world.... established to help facilitate the peace and military cooperation which was achieved at the hsitoric Camp David talks.... The OMC serves as a key player on the Ambassador's country team, directing the sizeable U.S. security assistance and defense cooperation efforts.... composed of the following sections: Land Forces, Sea Forces, Aviation, Military Cooperation, Administration and Training. There are 27 US military personnel assigned to the SAO (the level is established by Congress), 9 US civilians and 18 Foreign Service nationals. In addition, all the US Security Assistance Teams (SATs) working in Egypt fall under the authority of the Chief, OMC (currently Maj. Gen. Kip Ward) for unity of effort. OMC's goals are to facilitate the modernization and training of the Egyptian Armed Forces and to coordinate all aspects of military cooperation between Egypt and the US. Some of the key defense programs are the M1A1 Tank Coproduction, HAWK Air Defense Missile System, AH64A Apache helicopter, F-16 aircraft and Perry class Frigates. OMC personnel work hand-in-hand with their Egyptian counterparts thus ensuring complete understanding and cooperation with the program." That's a while back (1998) but right off the .mil domain. I bet the average Egyptian officer gets more face time with American military personnel than the average NATO member.

Anyway, my point was less about their relationship with the Egyptian people -- pretty much all armies are conscript and native -- and more about how the military is structured to provide professionalism and meritocratic advancement versus toadying to the powers that be, and the attendant mediocrity of the resulting officer corps. The US military has its flaws, but it has fully internalized the necessity of being a depoliticized force.

All right, Obama, it's go time. Is the US government going to be on the side of democracy and justice, or is Israel really pulling the strings

This is the crucial problem. The US does not want to be perceived as pulling any strings. It makes them both more responsible in retrospect for the abuses of the Mubarak regime and delegitimizes whomever the US backs going forward.

Israel has now officially thrown its support behind Mubarak.

...and now you can see why. I wouldn't be surprised if when the George Packer piece on this is written, he'll claim Israel issued the kiss of death on Washington's request.

My theory is that he's already out of the country, and so is his gold.

No, it doesn't work that way. First of all, laundered Swiss bank accounts, my boy. Second, the moment his plane crosses the border nobody back home has any cause to carry his water. Somebody might for a few hours, half a day at most, but that's when someone else will make a significant and unmistakable move. (Look back to the time Musharraf was fired while airborne ... and similarly himself deposed Nawaz Sharif.) No, he's probably at Sharm, and Israel let him bunker there with a personally picked force (why else would they allow it?). It's an isolated resort city perfectly inaccessible to wild demonstration, and it's frequented by European and even Israeli tourists which means it has great security.
posted by dhartung at 10:01 PM on January 31, 2011 [5 favorites]

About the role of US training of the military - another quote from that Wa Po article:

Administration officials were palpably relieved when the Egyptian army announced that it would respect demonstrators' rights and would not interfere - provided they remained peaceful - but denied reports that they had requested that the military issue the statement.

The message delivered by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a conversation Sunday with his Egyptian counterpart, Lt. Gen. Sami Enan, was more subtle, a military official said. Mullen "thanked them for their professionalism" up to now, and emphasized "that's the kind of behavior we'd like to see."

"There was no finger-wagging, no asking them to put out a statement," the official said. "It wasn't necessary to do so. The general understands."

posted by LobsterMitten at 10:15 PM on January 31, 2011

Iconic photo.
posted by telstar at 10:26 PM on January 31, 2011 [4 favorites]

Still a stalemate on the ground? No new statement from Hosni? This is dragging on, which could be bad. The army seems to be biding its time, waiting for either Mubarak to flee or something else. Is the regime hoping that the protesters will run out go steam? I am ready for a new Egypt, and the Egyptians seem to be as well, so what is the fracking holdup?
posted by vrakatar at 10:31 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

The overwhelming consensus is “long overdue”.
An analogy, like getting Nixon out of the White House without the country coming apart. The parallels are interesting but have faded as this will not stop until Mubarak relinquishes power and control of the military. The real question everyone is asking; How does this effect other countries concerning internal politics. Ask yourself that question and you might not like the answer, some of us won't at least. {Thank you Dr. Franklin and the Revettes}
So, who is next?
posted by clavdivs at 11:05 PM on January 31, 2011 [1 favorite]

9:30 a.m. in Egypt and cell networks are still up, according to tweets from Cairo and Alexandria as people head out to assemble for today's marches.

Seeing some rumors that a 24-hour curfew is supposedly going to be imposed starting Thursday (wishful thinking on Mubarek's part?).
posted by scody at 11:30 PM on January 31, 2011

New York times via the Al Jazeera live feed: U.S. Official With Egypt Ties to Meet With Mubarak

If there's going to be a massacre today, it would be an odd time to meet with a US diplomat. But who knows. Maybe the march will be peaceful and unopposed.
posted by Kevin Street at 11:52 PM on January 31, 2011

Thousands still pouring in to Tahrir Square, despite trains being shut down. Indications are that cell service may not last much longer. "Web, then phones, then trains - Mubarak is turning off progress in reverse order. It ends with him banning pottery, or agriculture."
posted by scody at 12:10 AM on February 1, 2011 [10 favorites]

To be honest, with that many people in one location, cell service would be kind of hard to keep up without putting up a lot of temp towers.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:13 AM on February 1, 2011

The Best Egypt Protest Signs From Around The World
posted by telstar at 12:19 AM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Say, has there yet been any official justification for the continued Internet/SMS/Cell Network shutdown? With Suleiman reaching out (supposed) olive branches to opposition parties and generally making palliative noises, I'm curious as to what the gov't line is re: the suppression of communication with the outside world. It's like they're not even trying to fit into their sheep costumes.
posted by mumkin at 12:55 AM on February 1, 2011

Tony Blair on religion in Europe:

“[Europeans] face an aggressive secular attack from without. We face the threat of extremism from within.” Arguing that there was “no hope” from atheists who scorn God, he said the best way to confront the secularist agenda was for all faiths to unite against it.

Tony Blair on religion in Egypt, today:

Tony Blair, the Middle East peace envoy, warned that Egypt might take a backward step "into a very reactionary form of religious autocracy"

I guess religion should be mandatory for white people, but not OK for brown people.

("Middle-East Peace Envoy"? On a par with giving Kissinger the Nobel. I didn't think I'd see a British PM I loathed more than Thatcher...)

And you'll have to forgive me, but I have a hard time seeing this woman as a harbinger of fundamentalist Muslim autocracy.

Say, has there yet been any official justification for the continued Internet/SMS/Cell Network shutdown?

Twitter has scattered reports that the cells are coming back on.
posted by rodgerd at 1:16 AM on February 1, 2011 [5 favorites]

AJE is showing another documentary now, on China. They're a good network, but maybe there are limits to how much coverage they can do when the government shuts down modern telecoms infrastructure. Their Arabic counterpart isnt much better off. And often times, there's not much going on.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:55 AM on February 1, 2011

Right now AJE's got a live feed on Tahrir Square. Trusty "we can't name him for security reasons" correspondent guy said that a little while ago someone got on a loud speaker and said there were a million people present. From the camera feed it certainly seems like it could be the truth.

But yes, it seems like people, having settled in for the long-haul, aren't making for the most riveting news. The wonky sound coverage of late yesterday seems to be mostly resolved though. Mark one for technological proficiency!
posted by Mizu at 2:48 AM on February 1, 2011

Dear President Obama: As political scientists, historians, and researchers in related fields who have studied the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy, we the undersigned believe you have a chance to move beyond rhetoric to support the democratic movement sweeping over Egypt. As citizens, we expect our president to uphold those values.

For thirty years, our government has spent billions of dollars to help build and sustain the system the Egyptian people are now trying to dismantle. Continued....
posted by telstar at 2:57 AM on February 1, 2011

ZeusHumms: I've been really impressed by most of the Al Jazeera documentaries I've seen in the past year or so [on both channels].
posted by xqwzts at 3:23 AM on February 1, 2011

Oh, good — I was wondering if this would happen at all: State TV presenter who resigned hours ago in protest of bias now raised on the shoulders of protestors in TahrirSq. I couldn't imagine how it would be to be standing up broadcasting complete shit from the state TV station — the streets are clear, protestors are looters, real people are demonstrating in support of Mubarek, etc.
posted by taz at 3:34 AM on February 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

I can't watch footage of protesters volunteering to keep the streets clean without getting tears in my eye. That kind of civic pride is hard-won.
posted by meese at 4:49 AM on February 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

AJE is claiming that they've reached the 1M mark, and the current "breaking news" flash says that there are up to 2M in and around the square [On the audio they just said "believe it's very accurate" and "it's hard to count large numbers of people in areas like this. Safely talk in hundreds of thousands" . Army seems to be doing checkpoint security to make sure no infiltrators with weapons come into the square.
posted by Lemurrhea at 5:09 AM on February 1, 2011

On the one hand, the guy from AJE who is eyeballing the crowd at 1 million is an experienced reporter who has been in and among crowds of confirmed millions in similar spaces before. But on the other hand, he's been one of the most vocally optimistic and opinionated reporters since this thing began. I don't doubt the veracity of his claims, and he definitely has the chops to back himself up, but at this point, after a week of being pretty much stuck in the same place, I take everything he says with an eye towards moderation.
posted by Mizu at 5:17 AM on February 1, 2011

It took me 2 days, but I have read almost every one of the 1700 comments here. I really appreciate and adore the MeFi community for providing the perspectives, links, updates and even the derails – it all culminates in what I consider to be time well spent investing in understanding an issue in a memorable and contextually-rich way. Just wanted to place my marker in the discussion here and say thanks.
posted by iamkimiam at 5:31 AM on February 1, 2011 [14 favorites]

From The Guardian's live feed:

Jordan's King Abdullah has responded to the gathering pace of pro-democracy protests in the Middle East by dismissing his government and appointing a new prime minister. (12.45pm)

Breathtaking, epic point-missing.
posted by Grangousier at 5:56 AM on February 1, 2011 [7 favorites]

> On the one hand, the guy from AJE who is eyeballing the crowd at 1 million is an experienced reporter who has been in and among crowds of confirmed millions in similar spaces before. But on the other hand, he's been one of the most vocally optimistic and opinionated reporters since this thing began. I don't doubt the veracity of his claims

If you mean the truth of his claims, I certainly do; no one, however experienced, can eyeball a crowd and accurately state that it contains a million people rather than 800,000. I'm sure he believes his own claims, but as you say, he's not disinterested. Let's just say there's a hell of a lot of people, far too many for anyone to dismiss as a few malcontents.

And I join iamkimiam in thanking everyone here for making this such an informative and thought-provoking thread.
posted by languagehat at 6:20 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

This whole thing has got me realizing what an American I really am, and how much I believe in democracy. I can't imagine being Mubarak, trying to hang on to power when it's clear that the people don't want him as a leader.

Rachel Maddow talked about the Bush II administration pushing for the Palestinian Authority to have free elections, and then they elected Hamas, after which state department employee Liz Cheney said something asinine about how that was not the outcome of democracy that the U.S. hoped for. To which Maddow responded, "Democracy isn't an outcome, it's a process."

This isn't about the U.S. and it's not about Israel. It's about people, even those scary, scary Muslims, deserving a right to self determination that includes government.

I consider myself a supporter of Israel. I think Israel deserves to exist, and to do so in peace. But that does not and cannot outweigh the rights of the rest of the Middle East to the democracy that they clearly want.

The bravery and tenacity of the Egyptian people is breathtaking.
posted by Leta at 6:30 AM on February 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

I've been wondering about all the protest signs and graffiti written in English. Is English really that universal a language in Egypt, or is it being done for the benefit of international observers? Or is it just bias, and the English signs we've seen photos of are only a tiny minority?
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:34 AM on February 1, 2011

And for once the US is on the right side!

There's a difference between abandoning a partner in crime once he's outlived his usefulness and gaining a newfound respect for the law.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:40 AM on February 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

Tweeted: Something amazing just happened. Various Arabic channels including Al Hewar started broadcasting Al Jazeera Arabic on their own frequencies.
posted by taz at 6:56 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

tl;dr thread update:
John Kerry has asked Mubarak to step down.
President Hosni Mubarak must accept that the stability of his country hinges on his willingness to step aside gracefully to make way for a new political structure. One of the toughest jobs that a leader under siege can perform is to engineer a peaceful transition. But Egyptians have made clear they will settle for nothing less than greater democracy and more economic opportunities.
posted by NoMich at 7:00 AM on February 1, 2011

I've been wondering about all the protest signs and graffiti written in English.

Try imagining that your mother tongue is not English. That you are participating in an event that has turned into something tumultuous. That with each passing day, more of the outside world is becoming more and more interested in you and what is happening. That you studied in the USA or UK. Or, failing that, you learned English at school and like Radiohead. That you go to the cinema and watch blockbuster American action movies. That you work in import/export or a transnational company. That you learned some English just because you wanted to. That you know English is the world's lingua franca. Wouldn't you want to make some signs or do graffiti in English, too?
posted by Mister Bijou at 7:00 AM on February 1, 2011

Yeah, but they're taking a position that directly contradicts the Israeli position. In the current power structure, that's huge!

That must be the first time in like 50 years the US has done that. Hell, in the recent past, we didn't even take much issue with it when Israel deliberately sank one of our own naval ships!
posted by saulgoodman at 7:02 AM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

sorry, that was for joe up here.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:03 AM on February 1, 2011

Regarding the crowd counts, hopefully we'll get satellite imagery, as we did in the wake of Obama's inauguration.
posted by mwhybark at 7:13 AM on February 1, 2011

Watching the huge crowds in Tahrir Square. I wish I were there. I was in Germany when the Wall fell, and the vibe seems so similar. My admiration for the Egyptian people is so off the charts it's impossible to measure. People taking care of each other; showing up with water and food and acting like a real society. I'm in tears, I'm in such awe.
posted by dejah420 at 7:23 AM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Tweeted: Something amazing just happened. Various Arabic channels including Al Hewar started broadcasting Al Jazeera Arabic on their own frequencies.

Wow. Just about every other Arabic channel is a state network.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:28 AM on February 1, 2011

Channel 4 (UK) journalist tweeting rumours that Mubarak has gone to Bahrain.

On the language: Tahrir Square is in a main tourist area, and close to the American University. I met a lot of people in that area who spoke good English (and most everyone seems to know at least a few phrases). So I'm not surprised that there are signs in English.
posted by Infinite Jest at 7:37 AM on February 1, 2011

Britain was the dominant political power in Egypt for most of a century - it stands to reason that English would have gained a linguistic foothold there during its time under the empire, though my history is vague. Just hazarding a guess, but consider how prevalent English is in India and other former colonies.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:45 AM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Why we shouldn't fear the Muslim Brotherhood
posted by NoMich at 7:51 AM on February 1, 2011

My impression is that Mubarak is attempting to wage a war of attrition now with the protesters.

Well that's pretty much it then. He couldn't possibly pull that off at this point.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:06 AM on February 1, 2011

Yeah, but they're taking a position that directly contradicts the Israeli position. In the current power structure, that's huge!
This may verge on the conspiraloon, or at least ultra-cynical, but my guess is that the differing US and Israeli positions may be co-ordinated. After all, support from Israel is a poison chalice for an Arab leader, so they may in fact be helping push him now that the decision is he's past his sell-out-by-date.
posted by Abiezer at 8:13 AM on February 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

The military won't let this go on for another week. I'm guessing that before friday, Mubarak will step down, the Suleiman will take power and will announce elections, including the Muslim Brotherhood, in 6 months.
posted by empath at 8:20 AM on February 1, 2011

Suleiman will take power and will announce elections, including the Muslim Brotherhood, in 6 months

What's the halal equivalent of "pig in a poke"?
posted by Joe Beese at 8:33 AM on February 1, 2011

From the Guardian:

Meanwhile, Channel 4's Jonathan Rugman, who earlier suggested Mubarak might already have gone, has just tweeted:


V reliable source tells me US Ambassador spoke to Mubarak today - and that he said he wasn't leaving. #jan25 #feb01 #egypt #c4news

posted by proj at 8:45 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Britain was the dominant political power in Egypt for most of a century - it stands to reason that English would have gained a linguistic foothold there during its time under the empire, though my history is vague. Just hazarding a guess, but consider how prevalent English is in India and other former colonies.

Oh yes, that too.

US state department tweeting "As part of our public outreach to convey support for orderly transition in #Egypt, Ambassador Scobey spoke today with Mohammed #ElBaradei"
posted by Infinite Jest at 8:55 AM on February 1, 2011

It's weird that major news is being broken via twitter.
posted by empath at 8:58 AM on February 1, 2011

There are US Embassy staff at the airport providing information about evacuation.
posted by stet at 9:07 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

I caught about five minutes of CNN extolling the virtues of the Egyptian police, who'd been returned to the streets and were "restoring order," or some other nonsense. Not a single mention of the plainclothes police looters, or the routine violence they've been perpetrating for years. Just, Cops = Order. The spin gave me whiplash.
posted by cmyk at 9:09 AM on February 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

NPR's coverage is pathetic with its tone of "oh noes! what about the violent protesters!"

Their reporter on the scene chuckled with embarrassment, "They're chanting things that aren't very friendly to the US, heh heh..."

Naturally, no explanation of why that might be.
posted by Joe Beese at 9:14 AM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

The movement transcends cross-class and goes cross-species.
posted by Abiezer at 9:18 AM on February 1, 2011 [5 favorites]

Oh for the love of christ, what hath 4chan wrought?

via telstar.
posted by stet at 9:33 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yeah, the PBS coverage of this almost made me ask for my membership drive donations back. Absurd spin, especially if you've been watching AJ nonstop for almost a week.
posted by dejah420 at 9:43 AM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Heh. A Guide: How Not To Say Stupid Stuff About Egypt
posted by taz at 10:22 AM on February 1, 2011 [8 favorites]

I caught a single mention on CNN (I think) of the "rumor" that plainclothes police were looting. But the general cluelessness of it all is painful. It blows my mind that reporters who are in Egypt, in a crowd of protesters, seem to spend all their time blathering to the camera while the people who are the story are jostling to get on film and begging to be heard. I know there are editors paring down what airs, but come on. The only substantial protestor interview I saw featured a woman in a hijab who punctuated her statement with "Israel is our enemy!" CNN: Fair & Balanced. Anderson Cooper tends to be a sane exception.
posted by zennie at 10:36 AM on February 1, 2011

but my guess is that the differing US and Israeli positions may be co-ordinated.

After how Israel responded to the US calls for them to halt settlement expansion and resume peace negotiations (which they basically scuttled with malice), resuming settlement construction on the very day one of our top officials visited them to reinforce the call, I doubt it.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:54 AM on February 1, 2011

According to Al Jazeera Mubarak is going to speak soon to offer a solution.
posted by cmfletcher at 11:04 AM on February 1, 2011

Apparently he's going to offer to not run again but stay in office until September.
posted by proj at 11:06 AM on February 1, 2011

Guy on Al Jazeera is saying that protesters don't want to negotiate and want the end of the regime.
posted by delmoi at 11:09 AM on February 1, 2011

Man, Mubarak just isn't getting it, is he?
posted by symbioid at 11:10 AM on February 1, 2011

Heh. A Guide: How Not To Say Stupid Stuff About Egypt

Taz, if you posed that as an FPP, I'd show up in the inevitable post deletion META to vainly rail against the decision.

Good stuff.
posted by philip-random at 11:11 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

My favorite thought right now is that democracy, real democracy, is actually on the move in the middle east. And it's not being attempted by westerners with guns, but accomplished by people with ideas.
posted by notion at 11:13 AM on February 1, 2011 [15 favorites]

I caught a single mention on CNN (I think) of the "rumor" that plainclothes police were looting. But the general cluelessness of it all is painful. It blows my mind that reporters who are in Egypt, in a crowd of protesters, seem to spend all their time blathering to the camera while the people who are the story are jostling to get on film and begging to be heard.

Even more baffling in this case is that CNN's Ben Wedeman, who's lived in Cairo for a decade, has been filing fantastic street-level reporting on Twitter for days, repeating insightful and revealing stuff he's seen and been told about on the metro, on the street, in his neighbourhood. That one Twitter feed's given me more of a sense of what Cairo feels like beyond the protest scenes than any other coverage I've come across. (Among other things, Wedeman's tweeted repeatedly about violence and destruction perpetrated by off-duty, out-of-uniform police.)

I haven't been watching CNN's TV coverage, but by the sound of it the network's being out-performed by one of its correspondents' Twitter feeds. Which says quite a bit about what's wrong with the mainstream news business these days.
posted by gompa at 11:24 AM on February 1, 2011 [12 favorites]

AJ: According to diplomatic sources, Obama has told Mubarak not to run for office in September.
posted by delmoi at 11:25 AM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJ: According to diplomatic sources, Obama has told Mubarak not to run for office in September.

Change We Can Believe In
Same Old Bullshit
posted by notion at 11:41 AM on February 1, 2011

WTF?
posted by saulgoodman at 11:44 AM on February 1, 2011

Same Old Bullshit

You have, like, zero sense of proportion, don't you?
posted by fatbird at 11:56 AM on February 1, 2011

Let's not do that derail again.
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:59 AM on February 1, 2011 [6 favorites]

I switched to AJE's you-tube stream rather then their watchnow streaming. Mubarak's statement is supposed to be coming soon. He's going to to "release" one, it doesn't say whether or not he's going to be making it himself.

I think if Mubarak tries to say he won't run, it will just embolden the protesters, which is what happened in Tunisia.

I wonder, if the protesters succeed, how exactly they'll transition to democratic system. It will be interesting to see.
posted by delmoi at 11:59 AM on February 1, 2011

That effectively means Mubarak won't be a part of any interim government during the transition process, doesn't it? There has to be an election regardless. The statement says Mubarak shouldn't expect to be able to play any role in that election or whatever form the next democratically elected government takes. I'm having a hard time squinting hard enough to say how the statement from the White House isn't a positive step.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:00 PM on February 1, 2011

A peaceful transition based on elections would be an incredible win for Obama. This isn't the same old BS. This is actually a fantastic outcome. A open and fair election in Egypt with multiple candidates and a peaceful transition of power based on a constitutional framework would amazing progress. The alternative is Mubarak leaves in the middle of the night, a coalition government is thrown together quickly with people working back room deals and deciding who the next president is before a ballot is cast.
posted by humanfont at 12:01 PM on February 1, 2011

Even Washington had to be elected. There have to be elections to establish the new government, don't there?
posted by saulgoodman at 12:02 PM on February 1, 2011

gompa, I was just going to say the same thing re: Ben Wedeman. His coverage has been amazing, not just for the clarity of what's happening on the ground but also because he's been calling out mainstream coverage for missing the real story and being so locked into their preconceived narrative.
posted by scody at 12:04 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm picturing Obama giving a televised address from the Oval Office, telling the protesters that they should accept Mubarak's offer to leave on his own 7 months from now.

It's amusing.
posted by Joe Beese at 12:06 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Get your Slavoj Žižek on! Why Fear the Arab Revolutionary Spirit?

In the best secular democratic tradition, people simply revolted against an oppressive regime, its corruption and poverty, and demanded freedom and economic hope. The cynical wisdom of western liberals, according to which, in Arab countries, genuine democratic sense is limited to narrow liberal elites while the vast majority can only be mobilised through religious fundamentalism or nationalism, has been proven wrong.

[...] Stable change in Egypt today can mean only a compromise with the Mubarak forces by way of slightly enlarging the ruling circle. This is why to talk about peaceful transition now is an obscenity: by squashing the opposition, Mubarak himself made this impossible. After Mubarak sent the army against the protesters, the choice became clear: either a cosmetic change in which something changes so that everything stays the same, or a true break.

Here, then, is the moment of truth: one cannot claim, as in the case of Algeria a decade ago, that allowing truly free elections equals delivering power to Muslim fundamentalists. Another liberal worry is that there is no organised political power to take over if Mubarak goes. Of course there is not; Mubarak took care of that by reducing all opposition to marginal ornaments, so that the result is like the title of the famous Agatha Christie novel, And Then There Were None. The argument for Mubarak – it's either him or chaos – is an argument against him.

The hypocrisy of western liberals is breathtaking: they publicly supported democracy, and now, when the people revolt against the tyrants on behalf of secular freedom and justice, not on behalf of religion, they are all deeply concerned. Why concern, why not joy that freedom is given a chance?

posted by scody at 12:12 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

I switched to AJE's you-tube stream rather then their watchnow streaming.

I did too, but mostly because the YouTube stream was lower bandwidth. Otherewise, exact same content. I used to have BBC News' live update page up too, but their video feed kept playing when I didn't want it to.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:29 PM on February 1, 2011

gompa, I was just going to say the same thing re: Ben Wedeman. His coverage has been amazing, not just for the clarity of what's happening on the ground but also because he's been calling out mainstream coverage for missing the real story and being so locked into their preconceived narrative.

Preconceived narratives seem to be the main product of mainstream American media, rather than actual reporting and journalism. What Ben Wedeman and Al Jazeera prove is that there's nothing like actually having boots on the ground well before anything happens in order to properly report on the big events when they happen.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:35 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Apologies for the derail, but I believe would be naive to think that the delayed ouster of Mubarak is designed to serve any other purpose than to attempt to subvert and compromise the new government to maintain the status quo, especially since Netanyahu is calling to prop up Mubarak at all costs. And yes, it pisses me off.

If you want to take me up on it, the Meta is still open.
posted by notion at 12:36 PM on February 1, 2011

ZeusHumms: Also, as far as intellect is concerned, all of the AJ telecasters have been well versed in actual history instead of reliant on talking points and the preconceived narratives, as you point out.

Just watch a clip of any US morning news show after a good dose of AJ, and you'll get the same sinking feeling about the state of our democracy.
posted by notion at 12:40 PM on February 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

Also, I had wondered why Mubarak hadn't declared a state of martial law, until I looked it up in Wikipedia and found that they've been in near-permanent martial law since Sadat's assassination.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:41 PM on February 1, 2011

Re: preconceived narratives and the "product" of news... And "We're just giving people what they want" (which, funny, I didn't know what news was supposed to be). Let me paraphrase Immortal Technique:

I would like to send a message to all the [newscasters] out there
The time has come to realize your net worth in a market
and stop being a fucking commodity
And if you didn't understand what I've just said then you already waiting to get fucked
...
And to all these bitchass [marketing departments] who are too lazy to come up with a way to [report news]
That they keep recycling marketing schemes and imagery
C'mon..
There is a market for everything man
There is a market for pet psychologists.. There is a market for twisted
shitfetish video's. For nipplerings, for riverdancing, for chocolate covered roaches..
But you can't find one for [honest, unbiased reporting]?

posted by symbioid at 12:46 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm not so much interested in the "WTF did Obama just say?" derail, but I am interested a lot in the immediate question your response raises in my mind, and I don't think it's a derail.

What should happen next, if not elections, in your opinion? There's going to have to be an interim government of some kind in place--I don't think the Egyptians will tolerate Mubarak being part of it and haven't seen anyone suggesting he should be. But eventually, there will have to be elections, right? Presumably ElBaradei's the man. He's not under house arrest anymore, is he? And reports are that the US has started talks with him.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:50 PM on February 1, 2011

Mubarak is on!
posted by delmoi at 12:57 PM on February 1, 2011

Thanks for the tip on Ben Wedeman. Good stuff.
posted by zennie at 12:58 PM on February 1, 2011

God, what a scumbag. Yes, those peaceful people I'm watching WITH MY OWN EYES in Tahrir Square are acting out violently.
posted by sugarfish at 12:59 PM on February 1, 2011

There needs to be a mashup of Mubarak speaking with the crowd response from Tahrir Square.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:01 PM on February 1, 2011

Mubarak is calling the protests violent, and wants to "restore" order. The undercover saboteurs have done their dirty work.

Any US politician who continues to support this thug beyond this despicable, empty speech loses my vote. Including Obama.
posted by notion at 1:01 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Mubarak: "The protesters and "political groups" all suck, also I never even planned on running in September, honest!

Also you need me provide security for the election, since I've always done such a good job of it!"
posted by delmoi at 1:04 PM on February 1, 2011

Mubarak: "I never sought power or influence"
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 1:05 PM on February 1, 2011

He want's even more dicatorial powers?
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:06 PM on February 1, 2011

Mubarak: "I demand the power to arrest the outlaws"
posted by delmoi at 1:06 PM on February 1, 2011

"dictatorial"
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:07 PM on February 1, 2011

Mubarak: "I will die on the soil of Egypt"
posted by delmoi at 1:07 PM on February 1, 2011

Elmo wants to stay President!
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 1:08 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

"I will die on the soil of Egypt."

Be careful what you wish for.
posted by Joe Beese at 1:08 PM on February 1, 2011 [14 favorites]

Short version : - I´m not going anywhere and I´m still in charge.
posted by adamvasco at 1:08 PM on February 1, 2011

That does not sound like a happy crowd..
posted by ashirys at 1:09 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJ truly is amazing. I'm watching Mubarak both on AJ online and on BBC World News. BBC has only him, while AJ is showing him only on 1/3 of the screen and the live feed of Tahrir Square on the other 2/3. The juxtaposition is brilliant.

Also, let me echo some of the thanks from further up. I haven't been able to post that much, but I've been reading and watching as everything has unfolded, and I'm very grateful to everyone here for sharing their thoughts.
posted by dcheeno at 1:10 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

I wonder if he still thinks he can hand off Egypt to one of his sons.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:10 PM on February 1, 2011

Stubborn, delusional bastard. Potentially stubborn, delusional, DEAD bastard.

Who is this chick on AJ calling him "clever"? Am I missing something?
posted by maudlin at 1:11 PM on February 1, 2011

Did he even bother to read the statement from the Egyptian army earlier today? Based on the live blogging in this thread, it sounds like he doesn't have a clue what a weak position he's in.
posted by saulgoodman at 1:13 PM on February 1, 2011

Also, is it me or was Mubarak's speech timed for western/U.S. consumption?
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:14 PM on February 1, 2011

Yikes, this does not sound good. I'm an atheist, and I don't pray, but I can hope.

Does anyone know if those concrete barricades are still set up outside Tahrir Square? It's ripe for a stampede situation if people can't get away easily.
posted by sugarfish at 1:14 PM on February 1, 2011

They should play that speech on 3rd down at football games. I've never heard a crowd get that loud that fast.
posted by cmfletcher at 1:16 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

He does not even understand, I think, how much he insults 'his' people.
posted by meese at 1:16 PM on February 1, 2011

Who is this chick on AJ calling him "clever"? Am I missing something?

His speech played on resonant themes of "security" and "stability", two things lacking in the past week.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:17 PM on February 1, 2011

People of Egypt have godwinned this debate, Mubarak wins.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:17 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Interesting detail: Moroccan-Dutch politician notes on Twitter that Mubarak spoke in Classical Arabic as opposed to the Egyptian dialect. I can't gauge the veracity of this observation.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 1:17 PM on February 1, 2011

it sounds like he doesn't have a clue what a weak position he's in

The problem with retreating to a bunker is that you can't see what's going on outside.
posted by Joe Beese at 1:18 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Who is this chick on AJ calling him "clever"? Am I missing something?

I wouldn't discount Mubarak entirely. Holding on to power for 30 years in the middle east is quite a feat. But the idealism of his youth has given way to solipsism and his narcissism as "the one" who can save his people. I don't doubt that he truly believes that he has sacrificed his life for his people, and it may be impossible for him to believe that his people truly want him to leave.

But the longer he holds on to power, the more likely the protests will turn violent, and his nation will be vulnerable to societal breakdown. The Egyptian people will accept nothing less than his ouster from office. Whether it's escorted by the military or in a box doesn't make much difference to them.
posted by notion at 1:18 PM on February 1, 2011

At this point, I suspect a likely outcome is for the generals watching this to decide that the only smooth way forward is to arrest and hang Mubarak, allow an interim government to be formed to carry Egypt to elections in September, and let the U.N. monitor it.

It was vaguely possible before Mubarak's speech for him to say "Okay, I hear the people loud and clear. I won't run in September, and I'll work with my VP to ensure an orderly transition to a new government openly elected." That might have satisfied the army who seems, in Turkish fashion, to have appointed themselves the guardians of state but not the government. I don't think that's possible anymore. It wouldn't surprise me to find the Obama administration telling the generals that they'll look the other way while the generals take care of Mubarak, and the aid will continue if open elections are held.
posted by fatbird at 1:19 PM on February 1, 2011

People of Egypt have godwinned this debate, Mubarak wins.

See picture here.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:20 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Presumably ElBaradei's the man.

Not at all presumably. It's a stretch to presume that a functionary of the international order (and I mean that in the nicest possible way), only recently returned to his home country, would have broad popular support. His role is most likely to be fulfilled as an appointed consensus interim President acceptable to the West, and he'll have an uphill battle if he wants to seek re-election amid years of pent-up non-democracy.

See this Reuters rundown for some of the individuals and factions who will undoubtedly want to play. Godwin alert for accompanying photo.

John Kerry has asked Mubarak to step down.

This is the Track II diplomacy I mentioned above. It almost certainly indicates that the Obama administration (with whom it's safe to assume a senior same-party Senator is in close communication) is trying to stay on top of things after some days of being behind the curve. This suggests strongly to Mubarak that the White House has lost any faith he will survive.

my guess is that the differing US and Israeli positions may be co-ordinated

I wondered that too, above, although more sardonically than seriously. In truth, it's an example of Netanyahu II being even more behind the curve and tone-deaf, and -- borrowing a phrase applied to the Palestinians -- never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

As to English, we notoriously monolingual Americans especially seem unaware of the extent to which it's become an international lingua franca, partly due to our economic power, and partly due to (related) the diffusion of our pop culture -- and more recently, the internet. I would imagine sign-friendly levels of English to be fairly common in any given major city in the world these days, but particularly so in a former British protectorate.
posted by dhartung at 1:26 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Not at all presumably.

I meant for the interim gov't, but you make a good point. Is there any sense for how popular, outside the opposition movements (which I understand have already signed on to the idea of Elbaradei as an interim President), is Elbaradei in Egypt?
posted by saulgoodman at 1:33 PM on February 1, 2011

If the protesters accept Mubarak's statement and go home, the arrests and judicial murders will start tomorrow.
posted by Pallas Athena at 1:35 PM on February 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

How long can these people hold out in the square? They've got to need food, if nothing else.
posted by angrycat at 1:36 PM on February 1, 2011

At this point, I suspect a likely outcome is for the generals watching this to decide that the only smooth way forward is to arrest and hang Mubarak

There's no chance of this happening.
posted by empath at 1:37 PM on February 1, 2011

AJ: "What was your response to Mubarak's statement that he will die on the soil of egypt?"

Protester: "Heh, heh, well, maybe some are wishing a quick death"
posted by delmoi at 1:37 PM on February 1, 2011

How long can these people hold out in the square? They've got to need food, if nothing else.

The protester they just interviewed said people are bringing food, and water, and even cleaning the streets.
posted by delmoi at 1:39 PM on February 1, 2011

Saulgoodman,
Elbaradei is in Cairo and spoke to the Tahrir crowd yesterday. He's also in contact with the US ambassador Scobey.
posted by cmfletcher at 1:39 PM on February 1, 2011

A peaceful transition based on elections would be an incredible win for Obama.

It's always about the USA, isn't it? Egyptian citizens peacefully overthrow the dictatorship and it's Obama's win. Uh-huh. Right.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:40 PM on February 1, 2011 [8 favorites]

what a weak position he's in

He probably has cards we're not seeing - if he's smart he kept bloody videos etc as evidence of what the US has authorized him to do to black site detainees, records of backroom deals, etc. And even beyond that, he can credibly threaten to kill thousands of protesters before anybody could stop him. So I imagine in his discussions with the US, even if the US said "we want you gone, we've booked a nice flight for you and your gold", he has cards he can play for more time to accomplish whatever mop-up (destruction of evidence, looting of treasuries, etc) he wants to do.

Maybe he thinks if he waits, he can get El Baradei or other credible non-Islamist unifying figures killed, so the west won't have an option but to back whoever's left standing that's non-Islamist.
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:44 PM on February 1, 2011

AJ commentator saying that Egyptians have repeatedly heard all these same promises before, and they have no reason to believe Mubarak this time.
posted by telstar at 1:45 PM on February 1, 2011

empath: I was just curious on your reasoning for saying that the military wouldn't oust Mubarak. Or do you just mean they will tell him to leave instead of handing him over to a mob?
posted by notion at 1:47 PM on February 1, 2011

Yeah, hanging Mubarak is probably a little too much to hope for. But I'll bet there's at least a few generals thinking it would be a really good way to 1) get rid of Mubarak, 2) satisfy the demands of the crowd, and 3) make a very clean break from their past support of him.
posted by fatbird at 1:59 PM on February 1, 2011

Internet's absence fueling the protests.
posted by jeffburdges at 2:06 PM on February 1, 2011

The same commentator telstar quoted also said (more or less) that a key consideration over the coming days will be whether the protesters can keep up sufficient pressure on the regime to make military and other leaders judge that it costs more to keep Mubarak in power than to yield to the will of the people.

In the immediate aftermath of the speech, reported reactions in both Cairo and Alexandria were that the crowds were spurred on by the speech, but AJ also had a phone interview with a protester in Tahrir Square who sounded uncertain about the course of events over the next few days - he expressed concern about whether the president's speech and the concessions extended would undercut popular support for the protests. He said that he was wondering himself whether it was time to accept the concessions - but affirmed that he would be staying in Tahrir Square himself overnight.

AJ reporter in Alexandria is reporting possible (unconfirmed) pro-Mubarak protesters in the streets.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:09 PM on February 1, 2011

empath: I was just curious on your reasoning for saying that the military wouldn't oust Mubarak. Or do you just mean they will tell him to leave instead of handing him over to a mob?

They aren't going to hang him.
posted by empath at 2:11 PM on February 1, 2011

Correspondent in the crowd at Tahrir says that the mood in the square has gone to anger, some chants are calling on the army to remove Mubarak.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:13 PM on February 1, 2011

Tank rolling through crowds in Alexandria. Not aggressively it seems...but moving.
posted by dejah420 at 2:15 PM on February 1, 2011

AJ correspondent in Alexandria confirming a pro-Mubarak protest, protesters chanting "go ahead with your reforms, we are with you." No violence, but the anti-Mubarak protesters tried to prevent the pro-crowd from accessing the square, which prompted the army to put a tank in place to keep things civil.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:16 PM on February 1, 2011

"Maybe he thinks if he waits, he can get El Baradei or other credible non-Islamist unifying figures killed, so the west won't have an option but to back whoever's left standing that's non-Islamist."

Oh, absolutely. Killed, jailed, or exiled. Giving Mubarak six more months means he can get through this crisis the same way Ahmadinejad got through the protests in Iran. It gives him time to marshal his allies and dispose of his enemies. Even if he steps down before the election, that extra time might be enough for him to shape events enough to get a chosen successor elected.
posted by Kevin Street at 2:18 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

From Twitter -

Protesters in Tahrir have organized a football tournament with the Army.
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:18 PM on February 1, 2011 [8 favorites]

notion, see my remarks about the professionalism of the Egyptian military above. That sort of thing happens when the military itself is the basis for the revolution or coup. For the Egyptian people now, it would be a very alarming move quite in the opposite direction from establishing a constitutional democracy under the rule of law. The army may have slightly different aims than Mubarak's own service, the air force, but they are not the ones seeking to take political control and have taken pains to date to preserve their own legitimacy.

I think Mubarak is going to have to climb down on his never leaving Egypt stance and seek a quiet retirement in e.g. Saudi Arabia. The hunger of the crowd is probably going to turn to criminal investigations once political power is won, and if he stays he will end up in prison. The ugliness of the prosecution -- not to mention the embarassment of the investigations -- would be something the US would not want to see, so we'll make every effort to speed his way abroad.

A peaceful transition based on elections would be an incredible win for Obama.

That's daft. A transition to democracy in Egypt has been a maybe-someday thing for the US foreign policy establishment until about, maybe, noon on Sunday. They're just trying to salvage what they can here. The outcome is going to mean tremendous difficulty for US entanglement with Egypt. There will likely be a huge scaling back of the US relationship and aid, and assuming that the new government does declare allegiance to the Camp David and Oslo process, it's going to take a much mroe aggressive and active role in working for real improvements in Palestinian human rights. In other words, daily headaches for the White House, probably for the next 15-20 years. The US situation in the region per se is tremendously damaged even with optimal outcomes. There hasn't even been a great US popular interest in Egypt until maybe Friday, so it's not exactly something that the public has been calling for in any way, shape, or form.
posted by dhartung at 2:20 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Fights breaking out in Alexandria's square.
posted by delmoi at 2:20 PM on February 1, 2011

Alexandria - human chain forming around the square attempting to block pro-Mubarak protesters, people throwing things at each other, tank on the move again. Confrontations and a clear sense of panic, says the AJ correspondent.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:20 PM on February 1, 2011

Gunshots in Alexandria
posted by delmoi at 2:21 PM on February 1, 2011

Gunfire in Alexandria.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:21 PM on February 1, 2011

Pro Mubarak demonstrators starting riots. Gunfire. rapid shot gunfire.
posted by dejah420 at 2:21 PM on February 1, 2011

And I about jumped out of my skin when the gunshots went off. This is nerve-wracking.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:23 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

No more gunfire.... hopefully just warning shots to break up the two fighting groups?
posted by auto-correct at 2:25 PM on February 1, 2011

AJ says tanks are firing in the air in Alexandria, not at protestors.
posted by maudlin at 2:26 PM on February 1, 2011

Alexandria correspondent saying that the army is clearly firing into the air, not at the protesters.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:26 PM on February 1, 2011

The tank appears to be firing in the air, not at anyone in particular.
posted by gc at 2:26 PM on February 1, 2011

AJ reports they were firing into the air to keep each side apart.
posted by cmfletcher at 2:26 PM on February 1, 2011

Obama to speak tonight, says CNN.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 2:27 PM on February 1, 2011

Firing in the air isn't good if they're using live rounds - those things still pack a punch when they come down.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:27 PM on February 1, 2011

Burhanistan: "Man, just let them have their counter protest for goodness sake. This is disheartening"

I suspect this wasn't a counter protest, so much as it was an intentional disruption to a peaceful rally in order to turn it into a riot. That's why (IMHO) the demonstrators were linking arms to keep them out of the gardens section.
posted by dejah420 at 2:27 PM on February 1, 2011 [8 favorites]

Some different points of view on the role of the internet. From an Egyptian man named Yousry, talking to Parvez Sharma:

So how and why is this whole narrative evolving?

O: You mean all this internet stuff…well before he shut us out on Thursday…there was vibrant communication between a certain and very small class of society in terms of relative numbers…this is the class of people who have ALWAYS been absent and apathetic from the suffering of the Egyptian majority…the poor people…you know that was good…so maybe a little bit through twitter and all the apathetic students and professional class started communicating for the first time…

Me: True..I have been saying that---someone in Zamalek is not tweeting at a Zabaleen you know…they tweet to each other…in their nice apartments with AC and stuff…

O: yes true…but I know it played a good role for maybe the first day and half of Thursday…but if you are saying that it is pivotal to the revolution or the lifeline of the revolution then you are not doing justice to Egyptian people, man or even to the functionality of this specific tool…its like calling a hammer a screwdriver and this is a huge danger for the future…because in other Arab countries for example…you will misinform people about this twitter/Facebook tool—you will overstate its importance…and misguide people who want change in other places and its biggest weakness is that it can be cut off—and you are saying Mubarak is doing that even more tonight, right…so there you have it…if anything dictators like Mubarak use all the publicity about this twitter nonsense to say OK lets cut off the internet…Talking about tweeting all the fucking time gives him the perfect excuse for shutting off the internet even though the majority of Egyptians would not be online even if there was a f-ing internet…

and one from a PHD student, who just flew out of Cairo (and whose entire blog is worth reading):

It's amazing to me that despite the fact that the internet blackout here is near-total, people on the news are still asking if this, too, is a Twitter Revolution ™ , leading me to wonder if there's anything talking heads and e-literati do not think is a Twitter Revolution. In the early stages, sure, lots of people were communicating by facebook, but the major action happened after the internet went out. Much of the protesting was organized the old-fashioned way, by word of mouth, and, once service came back on, by phone. I'm not sure if it's an irony, or a straightforward rebuttal to the people who think that technology is an agent rather than a tool, that Egypt, among the most social media-savvy of Arab countries, finally rose up after the internet went dark.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:28 PM on February 1, 2011 [8 favorites]

Very interesting footage from Alexandria. At least on one entrance to the square, it looks like there's a solid contingent of protesters trying to calm things down and get people into a deep human chain. Emotions are clearly running high. I do not envy the people who are clearly trying to keep things peaceful out there.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:33 PM on February 1, 2011

The Arab world has seen enough political transitions built on blood. The result of hanging Mubarak would not be a victory for democracy. Egypt needs and end to political violence. Processes like a truth and reconciliation commission chimed with amnesties and targeted criminal trials would be better. Mubarak is the head of the largest political party in a country with a huge patronage and social welfare system. Even now he has his supporters. Simply storming the Presidential palace may force those folks to take more aggressive actions as they fear disenfranchisement
posted by humanfont at 2:35 PM on February 1, 2011

He probably has cards we're not seeing - if he's smart he kept bloody videos etc as evidence of what the US has authorized him to do to black site detainees, records of backroom deals, etc.

The smartest thing Mubarak has done so far, from a maintaining-power perspective, is appointing Suleiman his VP. He has an iron grip on the army because he's spent his career studying the personalities, strengths, weaknesses, skeletons, etc. of the Generals & pretty much has all of them in his pocket. He makes Mubarak leaving a much less attractive option - "If you think I'm bad, do you really want him in charge?". And he keeps the US relatively passive because of his central role in Black sites & renditions. Given his rapidly weakening hand it was a very canny move.
posted by scalefree at 2:36 PM on February 1, 2011

"This particular [APC] has the graffiti: "Down with Mubarak" on it" heh.
posted by delmoi at 2:36 PM on February 1, 2011

Crowds are stopping a tank with held up arms and sticks. An armored carrier just showed up. but moved on. Tank is surrounded.
posted by dejah420 at 2:36 PM on February 1, 2011

part of crowd chanting "we want Mubarack"
posted by angrycat at 2:41 PM on February 1, 2011

Crowds outside the main square are chanting "We want Mubarak".
posted by auto-correct at 2:43 PM on February 1, 2011

Wow, AJ anchor just reported something as fact that didn't seem to be at all what I saw...
posted by dejah420 at 2:44 PM on February 1, 2011

I missed that, dejah, what was it?
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:46 PM on February 1, 2011

She said the protesters were throwing rocks at the security forces. It appeared to me that the two groups of Pro Vs. Anti were throwing rocks at each other...not at the military.
posted by dejah420 at 2:48 PM on February 1, 2011

A male voice is claiming that people are now calm and talking in Alexandria after tanks separated them, but I see sticks being swung and rocks being thrown.

And more shots. Fuck.
posted by maudlin at 2:48 PM on February 1, 2011

Yes, they're at each other, not the military, from what I can see.
posted by maudlin at 2:49 PM on February 1, 2011

Cars coming to Tahrir in Cairo with pro-mubarak people.
posted by delmoi at 2:50 PM on February 1, 2011

I missed her saying that. That's weird. None of the footage looked to me like the military were the target, although there were some shots that looked like protesters were throwing stones past the military at each other.
posted by EvaDestruction at 2:50 PM on February 1, 2011

300 or so pro-mubarak people in Tahrir, on motorcycles and with sticks(?)
posted by delmoi at 2:52 PM on February 1, 2011

Military vehicles have raised the "red flag" of high alert, according to correspondent on AJ from Cairo.
posted by dejah420 at 2:53 PM on February 1, 2011

I would be willing to bet a significant sum that the pro-mubarak folks are all secret police.
posted by dejah420 at 2:54 PM on February 1, 2011 [12 favorites]

Heh. Wanna watch al jazeera from the command line?

mplayer $(wget -q -O - "http://europarse.real.com/hurl/gratishurl.ram?pid=eu_aljazeera&file=al_jazeera_en_lo.rm" | sed -e 's#lo.rm#hi.rm#')
posted by kaibutsu at 2:57 PM on February 1, 2011 [10 favorites]

I wouldn't be so sure. Mubarak has existed for as long as he has through intricate patronage politics. There is a large body of academic work that studies how the NDP is so successful at managing itself -- largely through the personal enrichment of its members. A lot of people have a lot at stake in the survival of the regime.
posted by proj at 2:58 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's curious that they pro-Mubarak people showed up in both Cairo and Alexandria within short spaces of time.

Not to mention only an hour of so after Mubarak makes a speech that was obviously intended to bring the protests to an end. I would be shocked if the counter-protesters aren't getting orders from up above.
posted by auto-correct at 2:58 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

> The Arab world has seen enough political transitions built on blood. The result of hanging Mubarak would not be a victory for democracy.

Amen.
posted by languagehat at 3:01 PM on February 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

It's curious that they pro-Mubarak people showed up in both Cairo and Alexandria within short spaces of time.

I think they were directed there ahead of time. There was a tweet from one of the journalists saying that they recognized plain clothes policemen in the crowds.
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:04 PM on February 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

A lot of people have a lot at stake in the survival of the regime.

True, but given the prevailing mood and the obstacles to communication, I would've thought that ordinary people would take a bit more time to work up both the nerve and the organization to get out on the streets and counterprotest, unless someone at least tipped them off to the timing of the speech. Maybe it's not wholly orchestrated from above, but the speed of the response looks suspicious.
posted by EvaDestruction at 3:06 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

It is, indeed, fairly common practice for a regime to round up a supportive mob... Likely participants are:
* Paid goons,
* Those with the greatest stakes in the current regime,
* Those afraid of what inquiries might be made of the police forces in light of a new government.

Which is to say, I expect that the counter protest groups include a lot of police. Kudos to the protestors for keeping it together in the face of these violent thugs.
posted by kaibutsu at 3:19 PM on February 1, 2011

Robert Fisk interviews Mohamed ElBaradei.
posted by Rumple at 3:42 PM on February 1, 2011

Egypt has one of the largest public sector economies in the world. Bread is available in government bakeries at a penny per loaf. Keep in mind that after 30 years in power Mubarak has lots of favors to call in. He's weak but not powerless. This may be the best deal the opposition can get.
posted by humanfont at 3:46 PM on February 1, 2011

Obama: Transformation "must begin now"
posted by delmoi at 3:47 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Obama: "[Transition] must be meaningful.."

hmm
posted by kuatto at 3:47 PM on February 1, 2011

Obama speaking. No violence, yay army for not shooting, please army, remain peaceful. 1st amendment rights for Egyptian people. Transition needs to occur now.
posted by angrycat at 3:49 PM on February 1, 2011

Obama: It's not the place of the US or any other country to determine Egypt's fate.
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:50 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Delaying until September would give Mubarak massive input into the outcome of the elections, be it by disappearing strategic figures or otherwise controlling who can appear on the ballot. It would also give Mubarak six months at the helm of the secret police to go around digging up 'violent' protesters. For the same reason that those police interrogators will want Mubarak to stick around, it seems unlikely that leaders in the protest movement - or even just those with messages appearing in their cell phones - will be happy with anything other than removal of Mubarak and immediate movement into a transition government.

Indeed, it occurs to me that the protest movement could gain a great deal by reaching across and promising amnesty to those who aid the movement to remove Mubarak.
posted by kaibutsu at 3:57 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

kalibutsu: Definitely, though the protest movement is a disparate one, so it would be hard to find any one person who could promise amnesty on their behalf.

Likewise, the protesters would be fools to go home before they see promises of amnesty *on camera* from both Mubarak and Suleiman.
posted by Pallas Athena at 4:18 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Nothing like consensus decision making in the midst of a massive protest.... It kinda-works for Berkeley student protesters and it could kinda-work for you! (It's also a great way to piss of cops, though that side-effect seems unnecessary, given how cozy the relations between the protesters and the military have been.)

Honestly, though, I feel like this is why the groups involved were getting behind Mohamed ElBaradei as a transition leader; it gives them a known representative who can work out negotiations, insofar as the existing regime is willing to negotiate.
posted by kaibutsu at 4:29 PM on February 1, 2011

As seen on Sullivan:
This is what democracy looks like.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:44 PM on February 1, 2011 [9 favorites]

Is the Al Jazeera stream still up? I can't get it here, but not sure if it's a local problem or not.
posted by jokeefe at 4:46 PM on February 1, 2011

Sorry, nevermind.
posted by jokeefe at 4:49 PM on February 1, 2011

Take a step back and consider the bigger problems Egypt faces. There is an oversized public sector, which the government can't afford. They are not producing enough wheat domestically and are very dependent upon foreign markets, which have been highly vulnerable. Oil production which had previously supported state subsidies and allowed them to be a slight exporter has declined and they are now dependent upon fuel imports. There are no new jobs in the public sector, there is no money for a big stimulus, opportunities for educated Egyptians to go to the Gulf or Saudia Arabia have diminished. There are few factory and semi-skilled jobs. Tourism makes up 20% of the economy and its in real trouble. Not to mention that piracy off Yemen and Somalia have reduced the earning power of the Suez canal. On the border you have Sudan, Libya and Gaza. This is a very challenging environment for whoever takes over. With a young population and limited economic prospects Egypt may be heading into a period of extended civil unrest. The transition we see in the immediate future may not be the last.
posted by humanfont at 5:06 PM on February 1, 2011 [5 favorites]

They are not producing enough wheat domestically

And they were the breadbasket of the Mediterranean during the roman empire.
posted by empath at 5:10 PM on February 1, 2011

And they were the breadbasket of the Mediterranean during the roman empire.

I know this is a little pedantic of me to point out, but the Nile Valley was much more fertile before the construction of the Aswan Dam stopped annual flooding. It was a very different and more productive agricultural situation.
posted by oinopaponton at 5:27 PM on February 1, 2011 [6 favorites]

Just got done with the Obama speech. I wish it had come several days sooner, but it was actually pretty good. It established that 1) Egypt has the right to change its government, 2) Mubaruk serves at the pleasure of his people, 3) the US will continue to partner with Egypt and so there shouldn't be a fear that suddenly aid will fly away if the wrong people get elected, 4) the Egyptian people have been amazing through out all of this.

It was actually pretty good to finally hear some official confirmation of the amazing work done by both the Army and the rank and file citizens in policing their streets and protecting their history. For the first couple of days, all the US could think about was, "Oh, noes! Riots! Islam!" I can't think of a better textbook way for a country to attempt a revolution. The people have been righteously angry and assertive, but they haven't been wantonly violent. They've been spontaneous, but they have also been organized. They've been passionate, but they've also been focused. I don't say that because it's some how a surprise that Egyptians have acted this way; I say this because it's a surprise humans have acted this way.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 5:33 PM on February 1, 2011 [7 favorites]

"We Shall Overcome" is playing in my head. I think it's justified.
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:44 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

I know this is a little pedantic of me to point out, but the Nile Valley was much more fertile before the construction of the Aswan Dam stopped annual flooding. It was a very different and more productive agricultural situation.

There are a number of problems in Egyptian agriculture. Land reform and inheritance rules have created smaller, less productive farms. There is also a focus on cotton for export and hard currency earnings over domestic food production (a trend pushed by Europe in the US in the last round of global trade negotations as Bill Clinton has pointed out). Population growth has also lead to water shortages, which has had a negative impact on production. The role of the Aswan High Dam is much more complicated. The reduction of the annual floods has reduced the fertility of the soil, but this has been offset by modern cultivation practices and the green revolution. The electricity produced and end of the flooding have also been net positives for human health.
posted by humanfont at 5:54 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

If Mubarek's and cronies are not eliminated from power this week, the Egyptian people lose the game. It will be *impossible* for them to get a fair democratic government if the existing powers are allowed to re-group.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:56 PM on February 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

Sharif Kouddous's latest report on Democracy Now. "I have spoken to Egyptians from all walks of life... they have all come here to speak with one voice to call for democracy."
posted by scody at 5:59 PM on February 1, 2011

It will be *impossible* for them to get a fair democratic government if the existing powers are allowed to re-group.

The pessimist in me would bet on Suleiman taking official charge sometime this week, throwing one head to the mob to buy himself some time, and then putting his special talents to work. [Washington will consider it a lucky break; we already have a productive working relationship with him.]

But then the pessimist in me thought the rifles would have been fired by now. So what does he know.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:35 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

I stepped out, and haven't seen the Obama speech, but the Wa Po report on the White House position tonight makes me relieved. Earlier today I was sickened to think that the White House had thought a September timetable was reasonable (after the more-promising report yesterday), so I assumed Mubarak must have used some terrible leverage against them to buy himself time. It sounds like just good old selective hearing instead?:

Obama's message to Mubarak had been conveyed earlier in the day by special envoy Frank G. Wisner during a meeting in Cairo. While Wisner said it would be useful if Mubarak made clear that he had no plans to run in the scheduled September election, officials said, the bulk of the meeting was spent urging Mubarak to turn over control far sooner.

While Mubarak appeared to understand the first part of the message, it was not clear to the White House until his speech was broadcast that he had dismissed the second part. In Cairo, protesters greeted the speech with continued demands that Mubarak leave office immediately.

posted by LobsterMitten at 7:09 PM on February 1, 2011

Complete speculation based on this:

"On its soil I will die. History will judge me and all of us."

Suppose Mubarak knows something we don't know about his health. Maybe he's sick, and so feels he has nothing to lose, and/or is just going on ego-fumes.
posted by vrakatar at 7:26 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

I just called my parents and mentioned Egypt. My dad, of course, brings up the point that "You know who predicted this? G W Bush."

Priorities? What priorities?

I pretty much had to change the subject after that. I don't know what I was thinking, even starting the discussion. Should've stuck to complaining about my brother and laughing at their east coast snow troubles.
posted by Mizu at 7:27 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

The New York Times can still do some things well.

Good photo gallery here.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:35 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

dad, of course, brings up the point that "You know who predicted this? G W Bush."

Not like Bush was prescient on this issue. Everybody predicted it. Despite this being a right wing talking point today, "the benefits of democracy in the Middle East were not a point of contention between Bush supporters and Bush detractors".
posted by Miko at 7:47 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Journalist Ashraf khalil, tweeting from Tahrir Square, reports that a group of Pro-Mubarak supporters are gathered, and when they see the camera lights of a western news crew, they go running over there to get in front of the camera.
posted by dejah420 at 7:49 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

AH ha! Hosni had gallbladder surgery last March:
Link.

Paging herr doktor!
posted by vrakatar at 7:54 PM on February 1, 2011

From a Guardian article on how Mubarak's speech tonight was received:

Karim Medhat Ennarah, a 27-year-old worker, said: "I watched this speech in a coffee house downtown where everybody was winding down after a long day's protest but when the speech ended the whole coffee house rose as one and began marching back to Tahrir Square. He's a man trying to bargain without realising that he has nothing left to bargain with."

posted by ZeusHumms at 7:56 PM on February 1, 2011 [5 favorites]

Further tweet from Ashraf Khalil: "Only reason for pro Mubarak protestors at this hour is to get in background of U.S. primetime broadcasts.Somebody is being clever. "
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:59 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Better link about that gallbladder.
posted by vrakatar at 8:00 PM on February 1, 2011

how Mubarak's speech tonight was received

They gave him the shoe.

That's bad.
posted by Joe Beese at 8:03 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

You know what else George W Bush saw coming? That's right. The Shoe.
posted by kaibutsu at 8:13 PM on February 1, 2011 [5 favorites]

Bush v. Al Jazeera. I didn't realize it got that bad.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:24 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

The pessimist in me would bet on Suleiman taking official charge sometime this week

Is the Egyptian public/youth aware of how dangerous it is to allow him power? I should hope they are equally determined to not accept his regime.

They need to push this to the point where they can have a third party run the country while preparing monitored elections.

Or just suspend government altogether. The ONLY thing that matters is that they have regulated, monitored, known fair elections.

Every other option is a losing situation. For the majority things literally can't get worse: Egypt is determined to die trying for democracy and freedom.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:26 PM on February 1, 2011

My kid brother (that dumbass), his wife, their kids, and her mother are presumably on a plane to meet family in the emirates. Last I heard, they were on a bus on the tarmac to meet the plane. I can now resume calling him a dumbass as he and his family are safe, that dumbass. His dumbassedness has nothing to do, of course, with moving to Cairo.

And now that his decidedly not-dumbass kids are safe, I have un-fucking-mitigated joy for Egypt. Good on all y'all, Egyptians!
posted by stet at 8:26 PM on February 1, 2011 [6 favorites]

I expect that within my lifetime the masses are going to revolt, and there will be two outcomes: "Chinas" and "Denmarks."

You either have a society that provides full freedoms and social support, and thus almost everyone not only lives well, but also enjoys it.

Or a society where a vast majority have limited freedoms and little social support, and while many live well enough, it's not with any real sense of securit;, and one works to excess and has few breaks for just enjoying life.

Several of our Western Democracies lean more to the China model than the Nordic model.

I really think our goals as democracies and as citizens of a nation, should be toward a society of social kindness and support, and a culture of learning and honest work, and an eye toward improving our long-term future.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:40 PM on February 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

five fresh fish: You realize that China has far lower income inequality then the U.S, right?
posted by delmoi at 9:47 PM on February 1, 2011

Hmm, checking wikipedia the numbers are actually pretty close for the U.S and China in terms of the metrics they use, which are the richest 10% vs poorest 10%, richest 20% vs poorest 20% and two different Gini indexes. But in the U.S. you have a lot of the wealth concentrated at the very top, with the bottom being kind of flat. Hmm.
posted by delmoi at 9:58 PM on February 1, 2011

Not only are China and the US close, but according to both the UN and the CIA's data, China is more unequal generally than the US.
posted by Sticherbeast at 10:03 PM on February 1, 2011

Wikipedia's list of countries by income equality.
posted by Sticherbeast at 10:03 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

The Egyptians could probably do worse than El Baradei in terms of a transitional head of state. Nobel Laureate, international law expert, connections to the UN and if the wiki entry is accurate, his governmental service in Egypt was pretty early in Mubarak's presidency so he doesn't have the taint of being a long time associate. I'm curious what the popular sentiment about his being away from the country for so long. Hopefully he's not the Egyptian Achmed Chalabi.
posted by electroboy at 10:37 PM on February 1, 2011

You realize that China has far lower income inequality then the U.S, right?

Easy to do when almost everyone is poor.
posted by empath at 10:47 PM on February 1, 2011

I'm not scolding, but I'm genuinely puzzled why this thread keeps keeps turning into a discussion about China? People can talk about whatever they want to, of course, and I'd be happy to learn a lot more about China (because I'm pretty much totally ignorant, except for basic background) but maybe there can be some sort of China post for that? Maybe a project for the new Drafts and Collaborations part of the Wiki?
posted by taz at 11:01 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

five fresh fish: Illiberal democracy.

why this thread keeps keeps turning into a discussion about China?

It's big.

Hosni had gallbladder surgery last March

Gall bladder, schmall bladder. He's 83.
posted by dhartung at 11:55 PM on February 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

The former director (up until only a month ago, apparently) of the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities says that the museums are not insured (!!!), and believes that the museum guards were responsible for at least part of the looting that did occur:

A different take on events was offered by Wafaa El-Saddik, former director of the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities, who told the German magazine Die Zeit that museum guards were responsible for the looting. El-Saddik — who led the museum until just a month ago — said that the disgruntled guards were very badly paid, earning about 250 Egyptian pounds per month (about $42), or sometimes even less, and that she had tried to obtain higher pay for them without success. According to El-Saddik, Egypt's culture ministry — where Hawass is vice minister — was more concerned "with expensive projects and receptions."

See also here.
posted by taz at 11:59 PM on February 1, 2011

Mod note: via the NY Daily News (in an article about Google employee Wael Ghonim, still missing):

The reports of missing people prompted two Twitter users in Lebanaon [sic] and Canada to create an online spreadsheet listing the names and information of the missing.

As of Tuesday afternoon, 8 people were listed as "found" on the document, while 12, including Ghonim, were still missing.
posted by taz (staff) at 12:11 AM on February 2, 2011

aaaaand ... Egypt is back online. Wael Abbas: shit i have 4043 emails waiting in my inbox
posted by taz at 2:50 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Here's an interesting first person account with very different conclusions. I suppose we'll know the truth in a week or so.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:21 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

AJ reports counter-revolution has begun as large-scale clashes break out between pro and anti-gov't demonstrators in Tahrir square.
posted by telstar at 4:33 AM on February 2, 2011

Here's an interesting first person account with very different conclusions. I suppose we'll know the truth in a week or so.

Oh man, the comments in that article break my brain.
posted by Lemurrhea at 4:33 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJ live stream now showing the bully boys and thugs of Mubarak regime have gone on the offensive in Tahir Square.
posted by Mister Bijou at 4:37 AM on February 2, 2011

Mubarak makes enough concessions that people stop protesting as much, appears to be abiding by foreign powers' wishes, then cranks up the repression again. This is classic release-valve authoritarian politics. I just hope it doesn't work as well as it usually does.
posted by proj at 4:39 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

This is getting fucking scary. Pro-Mubarak men on horses, just saw some of them pulled off their mounts kicking and screaming.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:00 AM on February 2, 2011

A friend of mine in academia forwarded this e-mail to me from an Egyptian student whose good sense he vouches for.

"First person" means what you think it means.
posted by absalom at 5:13 AM on February 2, 2011

Uses the word "I"?
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:15 AM on February 2, 2011

So much for the army being on the side of the people, too, as all accounts place them as watching as pro-Mubarak thugs attack anti-Mubarak protestors. They stopped screening for weapons, pulled back their positions, and are now watching as Mubarak runs the next play in the playbook.
posted by proj at 5:15 AM on February 2, 2011

Anderson Cooper punched 10 times in the head as pro-Mubarak mob surrounds him and his crew at Cairo rally - CNN manager
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:26 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Renesys: Egypt Returns to the Internet

Not totally, but it looks like the major ISPs are back online. Later today we'll see if anyone is still getting blocked.
posted by ZeusHumms at 5:31 AM on February 2, 2011

AJE is reporting some of the pro-Mubarak men have police IDs.
posted by ZeusHumms at 5:42 AM on February 2, 2011

Well, now that the internet is back we can all stop caring and go back to business as usual.

I mean he did promise elections by the end of the year, and hes giving them back their internet, sounds like such a reasonable guy... what more do these people expect.
posted by xqwzts at 6:03 AM on February 2, 2011

Yemen's Saleh agrees not to run again. Is that good enough for protesters?

Yemen's President Ali Abdullah Saleh declared Wednesday that he would not seek reelection in 2013, but protesters plan to keep on demonstrating.

Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh announced today in an emergency parliamentary meeting that he would not run again in Yemen’s upcoming presidential election in 2013. The move is being seen as a major concession to Yemen’s political opposition after Tunisia-inspired protests have broken out across the country over the past two weeks.

“President Ali Abdullah Saleh announced that he would freeze the draft constitutional amendments that are before Parliament denying allegations that there is an intention for hereditary rule in Yemen,” reads a statement from the official Saba news agency in reference to proposed legislation that would abolish presidential term limits and speculation that the Mr. Saleh is going to hand the presidency over to his son Ahmed Saleh.

He added that he will not seek another presidential term in 2013.
posted by scalefree at 6:08 AM on February 2, 2011

Can't get the AJE livestream to work anymore. Fuck. Any alts?
posted by Lord_Pall at 6:15 AM on February 2, 2011

This morning, Al Jazeera is on my Roku box (under the Newscaster channel) for the first time ever. So that's an alternative for other geeks out there.
posted by Leta at 6:19 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Also, Al Jazeera English has a livestream at http://www.youtube.com/aljazeeraenglish , their channel page.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:21 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

I wonder if this was timed to make US morning news.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:22 AM on February 2, 2011

The YouTube live feed of AJE is the most reliable, trouble-free one I've found so far. Note: The live feed is the second video window on the page. The first window is just the latest featured recorded video.
posted by marsha56 at 6:35 AM on February 2, 2011

Here's an interesting first person account with very different conclusions. I suppose we'll know the truth in a week or so.

I've heard of CSI:Miami & NCIS:LA, but when did they announce Tea Party:Egypt? Seriously, this piece has been stuffed with every Right Wing trope imaginable. All it's missing is an exciting theme song yanked from a 70s rock supergroup.
posted by scalefree at 6:48 AM on February 2, 2011

Can we get something of a running list of the ripple effects of this revolution?

1. Iran - Green revolution
2. Tunisia - 2 governments overthrown in as many days
3. Egypt
4. Jordan - King tosses out PM and government
5. Yemen - President will not run for re-election

Live streams:

1. Aljazeera English: http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/
2. CNN Live: http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3&hpt=C1
3. BBC Middle East (this looks like a slightly wider shot of the raw feed from aljazeera): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698
posted by Pastabagel at 6:49 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Can someone explain this to me? How the hell does it help Mubarak's position for his supporters to be violent?

I understood plain-clothes police officers pretending to be "looters." That led to chaos and pain which, theoretically, wasn't supposed to be linked back to the government -- "Oh no, all these protests are hurting us all!" But, now, I'm not seeing any pretense that these thugs aren't just pro-Mubarak groups. "The protesters were peaceful, but Mubarak's supporters are violent and scary!"

Is it just a very transparent attempt to intimidate? Am I mistaken and the reports that this is all instigated by pro-Mubarak supporters are unreliable? Because, from what little I understand about human psychology, this sure doesn't seem like a good way to make the populace willing to quiet down and accept Mubarak again.
posted by meese at 6:56 AM on February 2, 2011

Can we get something of a running list of the ripple effects of this revolution?

In this morning's "Won't someone please think of the Israelis!" story on NPR, they mentioned how a new Egyptian government might require Israel to increase military spending to defend the border.

Ka-ching!
posted by Joe Beese at 6:57 AM on February 2, 2011

meese, maybe they're hoping to provoke fights to make the army step in?
posted by harriet vane at 7:17 AM on February 2, 2011

Live Streams:

1a. Al Jazeera English (YouTube livestream, midpage) http://www.youtube.com/aljazeeraenglish
1b. Al Jazeera English, Newsmakers channel, Roku settop box.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:26 AM on February 2, 2011

Can someone explain this to me? How the hell does it help Mubarak's position for his supporters to be violent?

He's painted the protesters as violent thugs and looters, trying to scare Cairenes into allowing him to stay for the next few months to keep the transition stable and secure. This certainly plays right into those security fears.

Some of you have sneered at that alternative perspective that Joe In Australia posted, but I think it expresses some legitimate fears of the middle and upper classes, who are seeing their homes looted, their bank accounts threatened and the political and economic future of their country suddenly thrown into doubt. It's freaking scary when there is suddenly no security.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:29 AM on February 2, 2011

Can someone explain this to me? How the hell does it help Mubarak's position for his supporters to be violent?

He could claim that the possibility of his leaving has unhinged a part of the populace unwilling to accept life without him.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:29 AM on February 2, 2011

Soldiers are saying that they have no orders, so they aren't going to do anything.
posted by ashirys at 7:30 AM on February 2, 2011

Aren't the middle classes behind the protests in the first place?
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:31 AM on February 2, 2011

meese, they're just trying to create more chaotic scenes to reduce support for the protests. This has two effects: first and primary is that it will reduce support from moderate Egyptians who want change, but may be willing to give Mubarak another opportunity. Second, this can also reduce international support if power players believe the revolution will lead to a power vacuum instead of a peaceful transition.

The only way I could imagine accepting Mubarak's rule until September is if he disbanded all of his plainclothes police units and outlawed torture, but I don't think there is a soul left in Egypt who believes he would do so.
posted by notion at 7:36 AM on February 2, 2011

Fuck me. The museum is on fire.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:38 AM on February 2, 2011

I don't think the plainclothes police would survive without Mubarak, not without going underground or getting out of the country.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:41 AM on February 2, 2011

The museum is on fire.

I don't think so. Watching AJ, there was some smoke coming from the street in front the museum. It could have been tear gas. Other than that, pro-Mubarak thugs have been throwing the occasional Molotov cocktail.
posted by Mister Bijou at 7:49 AM on February 2, 2011

Some of you have sneered at that alternative perspective that Joe In Australia posted, but I think it expresses some legitimate fears of the middle and upper classes, who are seeing their homes looted, their bank accounts threatened and the political and economic future of their country suddenly thrown into doubt. It's freaking scary when there is suddenly no security.

First of all, that narrative smells like crass propaganda. I haven't seen anyone besides your standard whinging Fox anchor describe the Muslim Brotherhood as "the only real force in Egyptian politics".

Second, having your wealth and security threatened beats being one of the forty million Egyptians living on $2 a day getting tortured any time one of the middle class files a complaint in which they are a potential suspect.
posted by notion at 7:57 AM on February 2, 2011

Honestly, you'd think the pro-mubarak agitators would want to avoid using tear-gas. If there was any doubt before about whether they're police or not, it's gone now.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:58 AM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

notion: As someone who studies Middle Eastern politics for a living, I can assure you that the Brotherhood is the only real organized political opposition in Egypt. That doesn't mean that there isn't the potential for more opposition (Wafd, etc.) but the Brotherhood are really the only people with the organizational structure in place to act as an opposition party. I'm not saying this for fear mongering (I don't fear them) or anything, but it is hardly a Fox news talking point.
posted by proj at 7:59 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Molotovs and water cannons right now.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:01 AM on February 2, 2011

Wow, some flaming somethings being thrown back and forth...
posted by rollbiz at 8:05 AM on February 2, 2011

They erupt when they hit, so I'm thinking molotovs.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:08 AM on February 2, 2011

notion, not everything that doesn't fit your preferred narrative is propaganda. People can legitimately have different views of the same situation. There are millions of perfectly nice Egyptians with college degrees and washing machines and DVD collections who haven't tortured anyone and who might freak out if fires break out on their blocks or they can't get their kid to a hospital if need be.
Also, many of those people are very wary of the Muslim Brotherhood. I know this from hanging out with them. Fox didn't make that up.


also, threadsitting is unnecessary
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:08 AM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

For once, I'm really happy to see water cannons at a protest!
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:09 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Honestly, you'd think the pro-mubarak agitators would want to avoid using tear-gas.

I think it was the Army using tear gas to try to break up the clashes.
posted by dirigibleman at 8:11 AM on February 2, 2011

There are millions of perfectly nice Egyptians with college degrees and washing machines and DVD collections who haven't tortured anyone and who might freak out if fires break out on their blocks or they can't get their kid to a hospital if need be. Also, many of those people are very wary of the Muslim Brotherhood. I know this from hanging out with them. Fox didn't make that up.

My cousin is married to an Egyptian Coptic Christian, and I can say this is 100% true and may summarize his family's perspective (they are all there). And if it were happening here, many of us might feel on edge and unsure as well, regardless of whether we supported a change of government.
posted by Miko at 8:20 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

The inaction of the army is ominous. For the last few days, the army has been keeping order in Tahrir Square and making certain that the anti-government protesters weren't armed. This was ostensibly to make sure the crowd was not infiltrated by armed provocateurs. This was organized and they were following orders. Now, when organized attacks on the protesters take place, the soldiers say they have no orders to maintain order.

the security police and the gangs they use as enforcers have strong motives to attack the protesters and create chaos: the chance the army will intervene to restore order that favors the status quo ante. In a sense, they have nothing to lose and it's the only strategy available to them. If the protesters gain power, particularly the power to maintain public order, the security police and their criminal allies will be in grave danger. So it is in the best interest of the security police that public order break down.

They are gambling that the army's neutrality can be undermined by violent disorder and that the army will support the old regime and not the protesters.

This is a very risky gamble, but the thugs have no choice. They have to bet the house.

As a measure of how dangerous this situation is, imagine if some of the army units in Tahrir Square had broken ranks and fired upon the thugs attacking the protesters and some of the other units had panicked and began firing into the crowd. This is what the thugs want to threaten the army with: support us or the country goes up in flames.

As the situation escalates, the army (either at the top or by mutiny from the bottom) is going to decide the situation. The most unlikely, but most peaceful, transition would be for the army leadership to decide to restrain the security police.

It's much more likely that things are going to degenerate into violent chaos because the controls put in place long ago to prevent the army from staging a coup.

When Mubarak said he was staying until September, that also meant the security police (and their criminal allies) would also be staying until September also.
posted by warbaby at 8:27 AM on February 2, 2011 [10 favorites]

Nicholas Kristof: The View From Tahrir
posted by homunculus at 8:36 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Tiananmen 2?
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:38 AM on February 2, 2011

Having local police take over any army equipment sounds downright idiotic for their side.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:43 AM on February 2, 2011

It's been said before, but Al Jazeera is fucking amazing. Hard to watch right now, but this is real journalism.
posted by oinopaponton at 8:48 AM on February 2, 2011

Call in report on Al Jazeera reports hundreds injured in Tahrir Square, no access to medical treatment.
posted by rollbiz at 8:51 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

A point, from the BBC's Live feed page:

1656: The BBC's Magdi Abdelhadi in Cairo says: "It is virtually impossible to know the extent of support for Mr Mubarak in Egyptian society. Throughout his long time in office there have never been free and fair elections by international standards and opinion polls designed to measure the president's popularity are banned. This leaves most people with guesstimates. There is no doubt, however, that there is a genuine Mubarak constituency - those who stand to lose influence or money. What complicates the picture further is that there is a tradition of paying the poor and the not so politically aware to come out and demonstrate or vote. There is also what you may call the emotional constituency - equally difficult to quantify. In a conservative patriarchal culture like Egypt, there will be those who see Mr Mubarak as a father figure and will mourn his demise. One young man told me it was unacceptable to humiliate a man of his age, let alone the father of a nation."

posted by ZeusHumms at 9:00 AM on February 2, 2011

Several pro-Mubarak "supporters" are being detained by the crowd and are being photographed with their police IDs. One was then treated by a protestor for head wounds.
posted by rollbiz at 9:12 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Egyptian military calls for end to demonstrations

"The Egyptian military called Wednesday for an end to more than a week of demonstrations against President Hosni Mubarak, throwing its support behind his embattled regime hours after he defiantly rejected demands to step down immediately and said he would serve out his term in office..."
posted by Kevin Street at 9:19 AM on February 2, 2011

Some posts at the Guardian's live blog speak to how orchestrated the pro-Mubarak sides are, how the Egyptian Army played into that, and how the violence encompassed everyone.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:27 AM on February 2, 2011

Christ, this looks like it's going to be a massacre.
posted by empath at 9:31 AM on February 2, 2011

Egyptian military calls for end to demonstrations

More specifically, the Defense Ministry.
posted by zennie at 9:33 AM on February 2, 2011

In any case, it seems clear that the army won't stand against the police, uniformed or otherwise. They're going to stand back and wait this out.
posted by Kevin Street at 9:40 AM on February 2, 2011

Can someone explain this to me? How the hell does it help Mubarak's position for his supporters to be violent?

The majority of the protesters have shown that they have no plans to be violent, mubarak setting his cronies loose on the streets seems like an attempt to intimidate the large portion who don't have the stomach for it. Keep them at home.

Its much easier to sell to the international cameras the need to crackdown on a small brawling crowd than a large group of ordinary families/elderly/schoolchildren. When things turn violent the pretty faces hide.


also, threadsitting is unnecessary

After 1990 comments this isn't anyones thread to be sat.
posted by xqwzts at 9:51 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

It may be that the pro-Mubarak people commandeered that tank?

More likely that the Molytov cocktail was thrown by one of the Mubarak goons in an attempt to incite a military response that kills innocent protesters and inflames military/protester conflict.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:54 AM on February 2, 2011

I think the idea on the government side is that the protests should be over. Mubarak's not running again, you won, go home. Anyone who's still protesting must be a violent minority, there's no need for ordinary Egyptians to join them. Let's get back to work. Then, when everybody's turned their attention to other things, the opposition gets purged.
posted by Kevin Street at 9:59 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

There are crowd dynamics at work here the goons are likely trying to exploit. Big crowds of people are easily provoked into panicking and overreacting to conflicts. They're just trying to make the scene so ugly there's more external and internal pressure to put an end to the protests by any means necessary. I think that's more the immediate goal than intimidation; erode public support for the protest movement by making the situation as ugly as possible on the ground. That's why these guys are in plain clothes: so the military, the media and the public have a hard time distinguishing between the goons and the protesters. They're trying to discredit the protests from within. Assholes.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:59 AM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

Twitter: BloggerSeif

"Genocide? This is a Mubarak Holocaust, this is a Mubarak murder, this will be a massacre"

":'( omg I have someones child, I have a child. 2 yrs max, green eyes, says his name mahmoud. Tweet it for me"

"He doesn't know his patensts naems, he's 2 yrs max. Sarah has ggirl and rushdi calling ppl to come our way to omar makram"

"Just outside tahrir now... There will be a massacre in the square now. Something burning, dunno what building"
posted by anastasiav at 10:06 AM on February 2, 2011

CNN's Ben Wedeman tweeted: "The only way out of Tahrir is thru army lines to the right of the mosque next to the Mogamaa." (The Mogamaa is a building that houses the Interior Ministry.) "People in Tahrir square begging Obama to intervene. They are terrified a bloodbath is about to occur." - 5:50pm Cairo, CNN live blog.

Ganzeer from Cairo tweets: "Military&Mubarak against people - Glorious Egyptian Military personnel have confiscated my camera&deleted all images" - 5:08pm Cairo, BBC live blog.

Al Jazeera's producer in Cairo is reporting that the Hilton Hotel staff are checking all the rooms for cameras and then the security is confiscating them. - 6:17pm Cairo, Al Jazeera live blog.

Talk about ominous.
posted by zennie at 10:12 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Obama administration says the transition must begin now and include opposition voices.
posted by empath at 10:15 AM on February 2, 2011

Gibbs echoing Cameron's "if the government is involved in clash bullshit, that's bad" line, re-upping "start now", but not putting out specific actions beyond "violence needs to stop".
posted by cortex at 10:15 AM on February 2, 2011

Fluids present and accounted for.
posted by cortex at 10:16 AM on February 2, 2011

Al Jazeera Arabic just putting a profile of the Mubaraks:

Hosni: $10 billion in swiss banks and another $15 billion in stocks+real estate.
Suzanne: $3-$5 billion.
Gamal: $17 billion mostly in two Swiss bank accounts.
Ala': $8 billion [$1 billion in real estate in NY].

That totals out to about $50 billion.

billion.
posted by xqwzts at 10:18 AM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

That totals out to about $50 billion.

In a sane and just world that money would never be allowed into their hands. Send it back to Egypt to feed orphans.
posted by Meatbomb at 10:22 AM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Why don't we freeze the bank accounts until he leaves?
posted by empath at 10:24 AM on February 2, 2011

Who's "we"?
posted by zennie at 10:24 AM on February 2, 2011

to compare: on Abdel Nasser's death his bank account only contained his paychecks. And his most expensive possession was his car. [this is off a hazy memory... I remember reading a while ago a detailed account of all his possessions upon his death]
posted by xqwzts at 10:25 AM on February 2, 2011

That totals out to about $50 billion.

But keeping a nation under one's boot heel: Priceless.
posted by Joe Beese at 10:25 AM on February 2, 2011

Why don't we freeze the bank accounts until he leaves?

Don't go setting precedents.
posted by philip-random at 10:26 AM on February 2, 2011

Who's "we"?

The international community who has called for Mubarak to step down?
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 10:27 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Why isn't Sweden taking measures right now to freeze Mubarak's assets?
posted by saulgoodman at 10:35 AM on February 2, 2011

Why isn't Sweden taking measures right now to freeze Mubarak's assets?

Because they're in Switzerland?
posted by mr_roboto at 10:38 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Why isn't Sweden taking measures right now to freeze Mubarak's assets?

Because his money is in Switzerland.
posted by one_bean at 10:39 AM on February 2, 2011

D'oh. Okay then. Fair enough. Switzerland. (I guess I free-associated my way to Sweden from Switzerland, but you get the idea...)
posted by saulgoodman at 10:41 AM on February 2, 2011

To play devil's advocate (literally), what basis would Switzerland have for freezing his assets?

Certainly not that he sent goons into the square to beat up protesters. So what? He's been torturing them for decades.
posted by Joe Beese at 10:46 AM on February 2, 2011

cut the chatter
posted by clavdivs at 10:49 AM on February 2, 2011

Because it would be the right thing to do. (I know. That doesn't qualify as a reason anymore.) It wouldn't be the first time a deposed dictator's assets were frozen. The international community hasn't ordered it, as far as I know, but there's good reason to believe those assets are criminal in origin to start with. I'm just saying, put me in charge of a Swiss bank full of Mubarak's blood money, and consequences be damned, that's what I'd do.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:51 AM on February 2, 2011

There's a new Swiss law that just went into effect yesterday that is meant to make it easier for the Swiss government to seize assets like these. It's called the Restitution of Illicit Assets Act but is also known as the "Duvalier Law" because it was put into place as a reaction against a court ruling saying that Switzerland had to release assets to Baby Doc Duvalier. The pending enactment of the law was seen as a possible motivation for his weird visit to Haiti last month.

Some See a Cash Motive in Duvalier’s Return
Swiss ‘Duvalier Law’ Eases Rules on Seizure of Dictators’ Assets
Swiss law takes effect, blocks Duvalier's assets
posted by yarrow at 11:05 AM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

CNN iReporter Hunter Moore, 26, is an American teacher in Cairo who is certified in CPR and first aid, and has been working with doctors and other volunteers to provide medical aid to injured protesters outside Tahrir Square. He says they are only treating the anti-government protesters; the pro-Mubarak protesters are getting so badly injured that they're being sent directly to the army for treatment. - 7:31pm Cairo CNN live blog

BBC world affairs editor John Simpson, in Cairo, says: "Within the last half hour, the heavy battle outside the Egyptian museum between pro- and anti-government demonstrators has ended. Rather unexpectedly, the confrontation seems to have been won by the pro-democracy protesters. All through the day they have been under attack by supporters of President Mubarak, and this represents an important turnaround in the situation. The opposition has now regained control of Tahrir Square, the centre of the last nine days of protests." - 8:11pm Cairo, BBC live blog

I can imagine that any of those who were paid to participate didn't stick around for too long once the camel show was over and things got really dangerous. Also, I am not inclined to trust the statement that pro-Mubarak supporters were all more grievously injured.
posted by zennie at 11:12 AM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

cut the chatter
posted by clavdivs at 1:49 PM on February 2

This is hilarious, considering the source.
posted by rollbiz at 11:15 AM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

saulgoodman: I'm just saying, put me in charge of a Swiss bank full of Mubarak's blood money, and consequences be damned, that's what I'd do.

The whole idea of the "Swiss bank" is that people who think like that aren't allowed anywhere near the money.
posted by mkultra at 11:21 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

The BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes says: "Heliopolis is not like the rest of Cairo. It has grand houses and leafy boulevards. Here the police are still welcomed on the streets. This is the home of Egypt's ruling elite - people like Dr Magid Boutros - a close adviser to Mr Mubarak. He says the president is now determined to stand and fight: 'He's an army man. Military commanders, if they abandon their posts, they are shot.' Outside on the street I was confronted by members of Egypt's ruling class - educated, articulate and angry. As we returned from Heliopolis our car was forced of the road by another group of angry men. They handed us over to the dreaded Mukhabarat - the secret police in their brown leather jackets. We were handcuffed and blindfolded and taken to an interrogation cell. Three hours later we were released onto a remote backstreet. The regime is hardening its attitude to the protestors and to the foreign media. Egypt's ruling class is fighting back." - 9:04pm Cairo, BBC live blog

Taken for a ride. These people all aced Intimidation Tactics 101.
posted by zennie at 11:23 AM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

Twitter reports saying pro-Mubarek thugs throwing molotov cocktails at Cairo museum.
posted by scody at 12:18 PM on February 2, 2011

Class warfare with paid proxies. Classy.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:20 PM on February 2, 2011

Now reports that army is firing into the air to disperse pro-Mubarek crowd as fire outside museum seems to be coming under control.
posted by scody at 12:23 PM on February 2, 2011

Bizarre, powerful photograph.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:24 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Also, amusingly true cartoon.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:25 PM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

If museum employee underpayment was justification for looting there wouldn't be an intact collection on earth.
posted by Scram at 12:26 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

So the police forces are even conspicuously riding camels to play to Western stereotypes about those backwards Arabs? Despicable.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:26 PM on February 2, 2011

Camels were quite easily found in Cairo when I was there some years back, because tourists want camel rides. The camels being used by the provocateurs have the same kind of decorative trappings as the ones I saw, and given the lack of tourists, might not be difficult to hire (with or without driver) right now. They would have the same utility as horses - something large, mobile, and unpredictable in crowds, and therefore intimidating to people on foot. Playing into orientalist stereotypes wouldn't necessarily have to come into it, although maybe someone behind the scenes is thinking along those lines, since it does make for an attention-getting image.
posted by EvaDestruction at 12:43 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Another photo of the same event with a different view, along with this commentary on Wired:

Josh Leffler, a 25-year-old student attending the American University in Cairo, who has participated in the protests for the past three days, said he believes the restoration of internet access just as the protests turned violent for the first time was not a coincidence. “This is obviously an extremely clever way of trying to manipulate the flow of information to reflect poorly on the protesters,” he wrote in an e-mail to Wired, in which he also confirmed internet access has been restored in Cairo.

posted by saulgoodman at 12:50 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Tweets from Evan Hill (al-Jazeera onling producer) indicate Tahrir demonstrators have shields/barricades, seemingly holding ground against pro-govt thugs and now outnumbering them at the museum.
posted by scody at 12:52 PM on February 2, 2011

Fair enough Burhanistan; but the fact that Mubarak's forces are playing these kinds of games (if not that specific one) seems not to be going unnoticed on the ground by the protesters, as alluded to in the quoted passage above.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:55 PM on February 2, 2011

i just turned on al jazeera again -- what's going on with the firebombs going back and forth -- who is who?
posted by empath at 1:21 PM on February 2, 2011

Not super clear. I think we're looking at demonstrators on the ground, pro-Mubarak whatevertheyares up on a building and on that bridge? Seems like molotovs and rocks ahve been going back and forth in flurries for a while now.

Pretty sure I've seen a couple people briefly on fire but managing to get it put out. Ugh.
posted by cortex at 1:25 PM on February 2, 2011

Should qualify that from the lack of big splashes in a lot of the the thrown-flaming-object instances, people may be lighting shit from existing fires and chucking those less-potent things around. There's a sort of pointless, almost idle-seeming dodgeball-standoff feeling about it as time stretches on and nothing really changes.
posted by cortex at 1:29 PM on February 2, 2011

A friend of mine (African-American living in Cairo with her young daughter) gives a personal perspective of being in Cairo during the protests.
posted by divabat at 1:34 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

I guess this is what they are talking about when they say "man the barricades!".
posted by empath at 1:47 PM on February 2, 2011

The throwing Molotov back and forth is one of the weirdest things I've seen.
posted by delmoi at 1:53 PM on February 2, 2011

I'm still kind of hoping it was just a glow in the dark frisbee.
posted by elizardbits at 1:57 PM on February 2, 2011

cortex: Should qualify that from the lack of big splashes in a lot of the the thrown-flaming-object instances, people may be lighting shit from existing fires and chucking those less-potent things around. There's a sort of pointless, almost idle-seeming dodgeball-standoff feeling about it as time stretches on and nothing really changes.

I think at least some of those are molotov cocktails that aren't breaking on impact. I've seen a few of those thrown, land without breaking, only to be picked up by the original targets and lobbed back where they came from.
posted by syzygy at 2:03 PM on February 2, 2011

The latest AJE live blog begins here.
posted by TheNewWazoo at 2:04 PM on February 2, 2011

Cross-posted from the other thread: Rights NGO claims that Israeli planes carrying crowd dispersal weapons have arrived in Egypt

Huzzah, U.S. tax dollars at work!

Speaking of the other thread... since this one has 2000+ comments, would it be reasonable to migrate the discussion over there? (Sorry if this is inappropriate modding by a non-moderator; just trying to go easy on my computer, which is starting to groan audibly every time I refresh this thread.)
posted by scody at 2:09 PM on February 2, 2011

Can someone explain this to me? How the hell does it help Mubarak's position for his supporters to be violent?
People are looking at this too much like a Sunday morning talk show "how does this help his position?" You forget that if Mubarak uses enough violence he can kill most of his opponents, and intimidate the rest.
posted by wuwei at 2:18 PM on February 2, 2011

Heya, Nick Spicer, I'm pretty sure "It's time for Mubarak to come" is not what folks have been saying.
posted by cortex at 2:23 PM on February 2, 2011

Mubarak is know plying a vicious game of delay. The re-opening of internet connection if thus far is true should be an indication of who controls certain events. My guess, the Air force. The pro-Mubarak/presidential guard faction wants the army to protect them and the police. Not good. “People seem to be milling around” -AJ anchor. 26 hours.
posted by clavdivs at 2:23 PM on February 2, 2011

How the hell does it help Mubarak's position for his supporters to be violent?

Not a flippant answer: It's helped him for decades -- why wouldn't he believe it would help him now? His thugs have long used intimidation, brutality, and even rape to keep dissenters (and the population in general) in line. There is neither the ideological nor the personal framework that exists inside any tyrant's head (and, more to the point, within his state apparatus) that would allow him to see the question in anything even remotely approaching the same moral or political terms that we would see it.
posted by scody at 2:28 PM on February 2, 2011

What are you counting down to, clavd?
posted by BeerFilter at 2:29 PM on February 2, 2011

I think the air force has left the building folks, this could be it, deployed of air mobile forces are not what any sane military person would do. This could be it.
posted by clavdivs at 2:32 PM on February 2, 2011

Are you saying that Murburak is deploying the air force against the demonstrators? Do you have a link, clav?
posted by jokeefe at 2:43 PM on February 2, 2011

Frankly with two crowds of civilians fighting each other in running battles it would be pretty fucking difficult to gun down the "right" crowd from the air.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 2:51 PM on February 2, 2011

The re-opening of internet connection if thus far is true

I started receiving emails from Egypt about 12hrs ago [noon-1pm Egypt time] which is the same time people here/elsewhere posted that the internet was back.

The throwing Molotov back and forth is one of the weirdest things I've seen.

Building-to-building molotov lobbing. You don't expect to see that every day.
posted by xqwzts at 3:01 PM on February 2, 2011

Speaking of the other thread... since this one has 2000+ comments, would it be reasonable to migrate the discussion over there?

Youngsters today.... Used to be we didn't complain about thread length until the 4000 comment mark.
posted by kaibutsu at 3:01 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Something to think about: Mubarak fired his cabinet. He announced he's stepping down in September. The pro-Mubarak supporters may not actually be acting for Mubarak at all, and may be acting in the interests of people who want power in the aftermath of his resignation.
posted by empath at 3:08 PM on February 2, 2011

State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said that Clinton condemned the violence. But, incredibly, Crowley also said: "We don't know who's responsible for the violence,"

If the US State Department really can't work that one out, they should probably be replaced with people capable of doing thei jobs.

Tony Blair: Mubarak a courageous and a force for good.

Twitter claims that Vodaphone is bulk-sending pro-Mubarak SMS messages, but not delivering any customer SMSes.
posted by rodgerd at 3:15 PM on February 2, 2011

WSJ sheds some light on Friday's disappearing police:

At 4 p.m. [Fri], the battles appeared to tip decisively in the protesters' favor. An order came down from Mr. Mubarak to the Minister of Interior, Habib al-Adly to use live ammunition to put down the protests, according to a person familiar with the situation.

Mr. al-Adly passed on the order to his top lieutenant, Gen. Ahmed Ramzy—but Mr. Ramzy refused, according to this person.

"It was a poor assessment of what [orders] his generals would take from him," this person said.

When Mr. Mubarak saw that Mr. Adly wouldn't get the job done, he gave the order for the army to deploy, this person said. Mr. Adly was furious, according to the person. Mr. Adly then gave a sweeping order to pull all police from the streets, from lowly traffic monitors, to prison guards, to the vast armies of truncheon-wielding riot police that had been a ubiquitous presence around Egypt for decades.

"That withdrawal was a disastrous mistake," said Fuad Allam, a former commander of the country's internal security forces. "You just can't do that."

The deployment orders caught the military by surprise, according to soldiers.

"No one expected it," a junior officer said on Monday. "The order came and four hours later we were on the streets."

Though the article doesn't go into it, this scenario supports the notion of the police being involved in the looting and violence that began after they were pulled from the streets.

Joe Spork of Human Rights Watch concurs in this analysis here on the FP blog.
posted by warbaby at 3:17 PM on February 2, 2011 [8 favorites]

That's Joe Stork...
posted by warbaby at 3:17 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Here's a lovely, bloody chunk of red meat for ya. Malcolm Gladwell's NYer blog entry "Does Egypt Need Twitter? It's evident he hasn't been reading Tweets from Egypt.

The responses when this was posted on FaceBook began with "Do we need Malcolm Gladwell?"
posted by Miko at 3:46 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJE reporting streetlights being shot or otherwise knocked out so Tahrir Square is dark, pro-Mubarek gangs "putting on balaclavas," "something about to happen."
posted by oinopaponton at 3:51 PM on February 2, 2011

I have a terrible feeling in the pit of my stomach.
posted by empath at 3:52 PM on February 2, 2011

Who's Tony Blair again? I thought he had reached up and grabbed Bush's coat to follow him out of office years ago.
posted by notion at 3:59 PM on February 2, 2011

In an effort to provide monetary compensation to the Egyptian president for three decades of faithful service, U.S. officials opened negotiations with Hosni Mubarak Tuesday, offering him a severance package worth $20 million upon termination of his employment. ... Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also reportedly offered to write Mubarak a letter of recommendation in case he wishes to apply for any dictatorship jobs with U.S. allies in the future.
posted by Joe Beese at 4:08 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Malcolm Gladwell's NYer blog entry "Does Egypt Need Twitter? It's evident he hasn't been reading Tweets from Egypt.

Well, it would be kind of hard to do that given the internet was down for most of the critical period.

Seriously, the fact that some of the protests were organized on facebook doesn't mean that twitter is important. Facebook is actually designed to help people organize events and so on.

Tony Blair: Mubarak a courageous and a force for good.

Christ. Can there be any doubt about that guy's mendacity at this point?
posted by delmoi at 4:08 PM on February 2, 2011

so Tahrir Square is dark

Not necessarily Tahrir Square. Probably, I imagine, part of a road near it or leading into it. I myself am still confused about the geography of what I'm seeing on AJE, I checked Google Maps but didn't get much wiser. The map the Guardian posted helps a little.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:09 PM on February 2, 2011

Malcolm Gladwell is an absolute moron. Even if Twitter/Facebook didn't contribute directly to the planning of the Egyptian protests (which seems absolutely ridiculous), the technology has affected and is affecting millions of people. Jesus Christ, I'm reading madamjujujive's Egypt twitter list and it is freaking me the fuck out. Half a world away, people are preparing to get slaughtered. When in the course of history have such monumental events been delivered so immediately, so clearly, and so personally? Obviously never. As the street lamps break and a hush falls over the crowd, as the thugs don their masks and ready their weapons, some dude types what is happening into his phone and it goes out to the entire internet. In a way, it's perverse. I'm watching a college basketball and eating ice cream cake.

And the point is, yeah I'm just some guy in America. But those people in Egypt were reading what was happening in Tunisia. And right now some kids in Tehran are reading what is happening in Egypt. And in Amman. And in Israel. Everywhere. Immediately. Are you kidding me, Gladwell? The fast flow of communication and the ability to connect with people from all over the world has absolutely contributed to what is happening in Egypt. And what is happening in Egypt, and the ability of the people there to tell their stories and connect with the rest of the world on an emotional level - that is absolutely going to affect what happens in Sudan, and Algeria, and wherever else this flame of independence rages next.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 4:16 PM on February 2, 2011 [9 favorites]

I really wish Obama would hold a press conference where he rips off his suit to reveal Superman's outfit, then flies off to Egypt, and takes Mubarak into custody.

I know, I know: there's some gross jingoistic bullshit in that fantasy... I'm just scared for them, and it's wrong how impotent everyone seems to be to stop this. Mubarak and Egypt have failed them, but the protesters deserve better at least from the world at large. There are meant to be superheroes for situations like this. Justice should be easier.
posted by meese at 4:17 PM on February 2, 2011

Blair was appointed the US & EU Middle East Peace Envoy, notion.
posted by rodgerd at 4:18 PM on February 2, 2011

Tony Blair: Mubarak a courageous and a force for good.

Wow. I might actually respect Blair less than Kissinger.

I thought I had a base level of contempt, but then Tony squeezed right in there.
posted by Capt. Renault at 4:23 PM on February 2, 2011

Well, it would be kind of hard to do that given the internet was down for most of the critical perio

1. I'm not sure you have the exclusive definition of "the critical period"

2. The internet was down, but journalists, among others, had direct uplink access, and people could tweet information being heard via phone from friends
posted by Miko at 4:28 PM on February 2, 2011

(It's also clear by your comment that you haven't been reading them, delmoi).
posted by Miko at 4:29 PM on February 2, 2011

Tony Blair is finished as representative of the quartet on the Middle East.
posted by humanfont at 4:33 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Malcolm Gladwell is an absolute moron. Even if Twitter/Facebook didn't contribute directly to the planning of the Egyptian protests (which seems absolutely ridiculous), the technology has affected and is affecting millions of people. Jesus Christ, I'm reading madamjujujive's Egypt twitter list and it is freaking me the fuck out. Half a world away, people are preparing to get slaughtered. When in the course of history have such monumental events been delivered so immediately, so clearly, and so personally? Obviously never.

I think the people in Egypt felt it pretty personally even when the Internet was down. What I've heard from actual Egyptians they seem kind of annoyed by the idea that their revolution is based on tweets.

While you raise an interesting point about These things going from country to country, remember, they are also watching this stuff on Al Jazeera.
posted by delmoi at 4:34 PM on February 2, 2011

When in the course of history have such monumental events been delivered so immediately, so clearly, and so personally?

I keep thinking about how-- as scary and sad as this has been for us watching, not to mention the people on the ground-- future historians are going to have a field day with all the primary sources coming out of this (interestingly, mostly digital: tweets, photos, video). This is going to be written about and taught so differently from any major uprising (can we call it a revolution yet?) that I can think of.
posted by oinopaponton at 4:34 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

(It's also clear by your comment that you haven't been reading them, delmoi).

No I haven't. How many of the protesters down on the street do you think are reading them? How many were when the internet was down? It might be a good way to keep up to date on what's going on on the outside, and facebook might have been used to organize the initial rallies (but again facebook != twitter)
posted by delmoi at 4:36 PM on February 2, 2011

...he rips off his suit to reveal Superman's outfit, then flies off to Egypt, and takes Mubarak into custody.

He sent Frank.
posted by clavdivs at 4:40 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

What I've heard from actual Egyptians they seem kind of annoyed by the idea that their revolution is based on tweets.

Who ever said that? Most people seem to be saying that social networking sites and the ability to share information freely and quickly has absolutely affected what is happening in Egypt. To suggest otherwise seems preposterous. I mean, even the pro-Mubarak demonstrators supposedly got their orders (or were encouraged) to take to the streets today through SMS.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 4:40 PM on February 2, 2011

remember, they are also watching this stuff on Al Jazeera.

oh okay thx i forgot

By the way, have you noticed how on Al Jazeera (at least the English language version), they keep flashing tweets they're getting from protesters and journalists on the ground?
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 4:43 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

The NYT (registration req) reports that the U.S. State Department is scrambling to evaluate ElBaradei as a possible replacement. To reassure them, I wrote this new palindrome:

Red? No. Pilloried Arab led! ElBaradei, roll! I ponder.
posted by msalt at 4:56 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

> Here's an interesting first person account with very different conclusions.

Interesting indeed; thanks, Joe. There are a number of knee-jerk pushback comments (oh no, this text is not yet another rah-rah celebration! I might have to think/learn!), but though it has a point of view (what doesn't?), it tells me things I didn't know and have an obvious bearing on the situation. Example:

The Egyptian economy under the Nazif government showed unprecedented growth. The currency was devalued, investment was pouring in, and exports were growing. Even the economic crisis did not dramatically effect Egypt. The real disaster in all of this however is that no one actually rationalized or defended those policies to the Egyptian public. The country was moving towards a full capitalist system but no explained why that was needed or why it was ultimately beneficial. While such restructuring is naturally painful for a population that was dependent on the government for all its needs, the people were fed the same socialist rhetoric nonetheless. It mattered very little that the country was improving economically, people did not see that. ...

Businessmen greatly benefited from the economic improvement. Business was good and political aspirations started to emerge for them. First it was a Parliament seat that they desired. It offered immunity from prosecution after all. With Gamal however, they suddenly had a higher opportunity. Gamal wanted to recreate the ruling NDP party. The NDP, never actually a real party and more of a mass valueless organization of state operation was suddenly turning into a real party. Businessmen like Ahmed Ezz, the steel tycoon saw a golden opportunity. They took full control with Gamal of the party and with it power.

The army never liked Gamal or his friends. Gamal had never served in the military. To add insult to injury his friends were threatening the dominance of the army. The technocrat's neo-liberal policies were threatening the army's dominance of the closed economy and the party was becoming step by step an actual organization that competes with the army officers in filling administrative positions. Suddenly the doors to power in Egypt were not a military career but a party ID card.

posted by languagehat at 4:59 PM on February 2, 2011

O: F--k the Internet! I have not seen it since Thursday, and I am not missing it. I don’t need it. No one in Tahrir Square needs it. No one in Suez needs it…Go tell Mubarak that the people’s revolution does not need his damn Internet!

Me: Ha-ha! You just gave me a possible title for the piece, my friend…

---


O: Before he shut us out on Thursday…there was vibrant communication between a certain and very small class of society in terms of relative numbers…. This is the class of people who have always been absent and apathetic toward the suffering of the Egyptian majority…the poor people…. You know, that was good…, so maybe a little bit through Twitter and all the apathetic students and professional class started communicating for the first time…

Me: True. I have been saying that---someone in Zamalek is not tweeting at a Zabaleen you know. They tweet to each other in their nice apartments with AC and stuff.

O: Yes, true…, but I know it played a good role for maybe the first day-and-a-half…. But if you are saying that it is pivotal to the revolution or the lifeline of the revolution, then you are not doing justice to Egyptian people, man, or even to the functionality of this specific tool. This is a huge danger for the future…because in other Arab countries for example…you will misinform people about this Twitter/Facebook tool—you will overstate its importance…, and misguide people, who want change in other places. Its biggest weakness is that it can be cut off.

posted by delmoi at 5:00 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Some other map stuff posted above, but I just ran across this link in GMaps with several different layers of protest-related kml overlays.

Once I turned several on I was able to figure out that this is the intersection with the overpass that we've been watching so much these last few hours. The AJE camera is shooting from the northwest, from behind the overpass. That building immediately to the right of the barricaded area is part of the museum complex, perhaps the main museum building itself.
posted by BeerFilter at 5:04 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

I think you fundamentally misunderstand what some of us are saying.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:04 PM on February 2, 2011

Oh god in heaven, this interview with the woman trapped in the center of Tahrir square on AJE is heartbreaking.
posted by dejah420 at 5:14 PM on February 2, 2011

"We are trapped in here. We have nothing, we have cans and they have guns." God. I hope she'll be okay.
posted by cmyk at 5:17 PM on February 2, 2011

AJE Liveblog

3:15 am Anti-government protesters are collecting rocks at a couple of the entrances to Tahrir Square in preparation to an attack. One of our Web producers reports that almost everyone in the square seems injured, is bandaged and limping. The mood there is "pretty fatalistic" with the anti-government protesters certain that the pro-Mubarak forces are "there to eliminate them".
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 5:24 PM on February 2, 2011

Placeholder
posted by five fresh fish at 5:28 PM on February 2, 2011

AJ has a documentary on bloggers right now. Who has decent live coverage?
posted by maudlin at 5:34 PM on February 2, 2011

Sorry, I was an idiot: I can see they're live blogging on this page.
posted by maudlin at 5:35 PM on February 2, 2011

Capt. Renault wrote: I might actually respect Blair less than Kissinger.

His assessment of Mubarak sounds a bit diplomatic to me and I don't agree that the West was meaningfully urging change in Egypt while working with Mubarak over the peace process.

On the other hand, he's spot-on when he says that

[The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt] are extremely well-organised and well-funded whereas those people who are out on the street at the moment, many of them will be extremely well-intentioned people but they're not organised in political parties yet. So one of the issues in the transition is to give time for those political parties to get themselves properly organised ....

I don't want Egypt to be run by a clericist paramilitary group descended from fascist sympathisers, so where are the alternative parties? How can they be persuaded to come forward? I suspect that "free and fair" election can't be held under the old laws, so who will be responsible for writing the new election laws? That is, will it be the existing Egyptian legislature or some external authority? I don't suggest that an Egyptian revolution be put on hold while all those things are sorted out, but my point is that it will take some time after the revolution to do all this, and the day-to-day business of government has to keep working in the mean time.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:39 PM on February 2, 2011

Feb. 3 is Day of Anger in Yemen. Just hours away.
posted by klue at 5:59 PM on February 2, 2011

I think you fundamentally misunderstand what some of us are saying.

Isn't what you said "Malcolm Gladwell is an absolute moron"? The answer is yes.
posted by delmoi at 6:05 PM on February 2, 2011

so where are the alternative parties?

Shut down by Mubarak at every opportunity? But apparently he didn't do that to the Muslim Brotherhood for some reason. I wonder what that could be.
posted by delmoi at 6:07 PM on February 2, 2011

AJ reports that government thugs opened fire.
posted by empath at 6:17 PM on February 2, 2011

Shut down by Mubarak at every opportunity? But apparently he didn't do that to the Muslim Brotherhood for some reason.

I really don't understand what you're saying here. The Muslim Brotherhood is banned in Egypt and many of its leaders have been arrested and imprisoned as a result of their involvement with the group.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 6:17 PM on February 2, 2011

Tanks are moving.
posted by empath at 6:22 PM on February 2, 2011

There's gunfire all over the place now. AJ says it's military firing into the air.
posted by empath at 6:23 PM on February 2, 2011

Whatever rules the new election are held under are likely to be ratified by the existing parliament (which is a rubber stamp for the regime). There will be negotiations about the elections mostly involving various Egyptian factions and probably observed by the US. On TV a bunch of old guys with mustaches will go into a conference room. They will represent the trade unions, the NDP, the military, the police, the Wafd, the MB, El Baradi and various opposition groups. They will mostly smoke Marlborough cigarettes and drink Egyptian (turkish) coffees for several days while yelling at each other. After all US diplomatic observers turn AskMe green from the smoke and coffee an agreement will be reached. Afterwards there will be an announcement followed by arguments about the specifics of the agreement and lots of additional yelling. Then there will be elections. The MB will get about 20-30% of the vote and play a significant role in the new parliament. The Coptic Christians will also play a role as they represent almost 10% of the population and will likely vote in a block. There will be other groups as well. A coalition government will be formed. Much like Christian evangelicals play a role in American politics, the MB will play a large role in Egyptian politics. There is no getting around this as they represent a significant political faction and this is what democracy looks like. It may make things difficult for the Israelis. Perhaps they should have listened to the United States, frozen the settlements and cut a deal with the Palestinians sometime in the last 40 years.
posted by humanfont at 6:24 PM on February 2, 2011

Jesus christ.
posted by empath at 6:24 PM on February 2, 2011

There's lots of gunfire now. This sounds like a massacre.
posted by empath at 6:25 PM on February 2, 2011

Hey, anchor, why don't you keep interrupting the correspondent reporting on the ground and tryi to string narrative instead, that's definitely a lot more interesting.
posted by cortex at 6:25 PM on February 2, 2011

(it might be military vs police)
posted by empath at 6:26 PM on February 2, 2011

"I'm too tired to be terrified." -Woman in the middle of Tahrir Square
posted by notion at 6:31 PM on February 2, 2011

I think a lot of the scary-sounding gunfire is into the air. That was true earlier.
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:33 PM on February 2, 2011

"We cannot trust a government that sends thugs to kill us." --Same woman.
posted by meese at 6:33 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

This is all just so strange to watch.
posted by empath at 6:33 PM on February 2, 2011

Her name's Salma Eltarzi, age 33, "never known democracy."
posted by oinopaponton at 6:33 PM on February 2, 2011

Is anyone recording this? Every major network should carrying the words of Salma Eltanzi.
posted by notion at 6:34 PM on February 2, 2011

This anchor is terrible.
posted by empath at 6:34 PM on February 2, 2011

When is dawn?
posted by empath at 6:37 PM on February 2, 2011

Two hours until daybreak.
posted by empath at 6:38 PM on February 2, 2011

Are they singing? What's that sound?
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:46 PM on February 2, 2011

Brief thoughts on the "Muslim Brotherhood".

1) They made a statement the other day saying, if I recall, "Religious intentions needs to be put aside for in the interests of freedom in Egypt." I don't think I've ever heard any Islamists saying anything like that, before.

2) The political "distance" between my favourite political party, the Australian Greens, and the US Republicans, is about the same as the "distance" between the Republicans and the Muslim Brotherhood, as far as I can see. I respect the right for Americans to make a fool of themselves and vote for Sarah Palin. The least they can do is show the same respect for the rights of Egyptians.
posted by Jimbob at 6:48 PM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

Anyone know what's going on in Alexandria right now? AJ's (rightfully) focusing on Cairo.
posted by oinopaponton at 6:48 PM on February 2, 2011

Reporters saying that the tanks have left the square, only a couple of armored carriers left. This is going to be very ugly. Army has abandoned the demonstrators.
posted by dejah420 at 6:50 PM on February 2, 2011

I'm watching a live feed on the Rachel Maddow show. If the reporters' interpretations are correct, the cavalry may have just saved some pro--democracy protestors, who has been encircled and pinned down by Mubarak supporters.

I saw a tank zoom in between groups like a bat out of hell, laying down a smoke trail which the reporters said was designed to help people disperse under cover, and now it looks as if most or all of the Mubarak thugs are gone. How did this play out and get interpreted elsewhere? Why would a threatening majority about to crush the opposition choose to leave?
posted by maudlin at 6:52 PM on February 2, 2011

...he rips off his suit to reveal Superman's outfit, then flies off to Egypt, and takes Mubarak into custody.

He sent Frank.

Jesus. From the article:

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak heard the U.S. message that it was time to go from a retired American diplomat, Frank Wisner, who has deep ties to Egypt’s political, military and economic sectors. . . Wisner met with Mubarak on Jan. 31, carrying Obama’s message that the Egyptian leader’s time in office was nearing an end, an administration official familiar with Wisner’s visit said yesterday.
. . .
Wisner also has ties to some of the largest U.S. corporations, including a previous stint on the board of American International Group Inc. of New York. He served as a director from 1997 to 2003 and later held the position of vice chairman of external affairs until February 2009.

He continues to serve on the boards of Houston, Texas-based EOG Resources Inc., formerly Enron Oil & Gas Co., as well as Ethan Allen Interiors Inc., the Danbury, Connecticut-based furniture maker.

It's a small, fucked up world.
posted by notion at 7:02 PM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

Are there any other cameras in Cairo besides the one that Al Jazeera has?
posted by empath at 7:08 PM on February 2, 2011

What I've heard from actual Egyptians they seem kind of annoyed by the idea that their revolution is based on tweets.

No one has advanced the thesis that their revolution is "based on Tweets." However, it's true that they are using it to talk to one another and people outside. It's fascinating to read and contains content you won't find anywhere else. Also, as you'll note, you have no monopoly on talking to "actual Egyptians."
posted by Miko at 7:09 PM on February 2, 2011

AJ reports via AFP second death in recent gunfire. Conflicting report says 6 people killed.

Potential positive development: two eyewitness reports say that anti-govt demonstrators have taken back the bridge from pro-Mubarek forces.
posted by scody at 7:10 PM on February 2, 2011

State tweets:
All remaining U.S. citizens who wish to depart #Egypt on a USG flight should report to airport immediately. Further delay is not advisable.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:14 PM on February 2, 2011

Frank is not the problem that is why he was sent. This sounds like harassing fire, perhaps pinning fire. Isolated pockets of gunmen. IMO, harrassing fire to start a clash before morning prayer.
posted by clavdivs at 7:15 PM on February 2, 2011

0310 GMT: Hillary Clinton in a call to Egyptian Vice President described the shooting on democracy protesters in Tahrir Square in Cairo as 'shocking'. Gunfire continues.
posted by empath at 7:20 PM on February 2, 2011

Anderson Cooper (who has been doing some great on the street journalism) and his crew were attacked in Egypt by pro-Mubarak forces.
posted by dejah420 at 7:23 PM on February 2, 2011

On AJE live feed there's automatic weapon fire in the background right now. I hope everyone's okay.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:34 PM on February 2, 2011

FUCK this is heartbreaking.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:36 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Richard Engel and Brian Williams of NBC reporting from the square (amid irritating intrusions from the moron anchor) that basically it seems to be winding down.

"It will look like a war zone when the sun comes up here."
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:37 PM on February 2, 2011

God, listening to this woman talk is heartbreaking.
posted by ashirys at 7:38 PM on February 2, 2011

Fuck, I wish I could do something.
posted by empath at 7:40 PM on February 2, 2011

Woman activist/eyewitness on AJE: "We will keep fighting, we can't leave, they will just hunt us down. We've been through this before.... I just don't understand, what more does the world need to help us? Why isn't the army stopping it?... Our message is that we are not leaving until Mubarek leaves. There are only two options for the world's leaders. Either you stick with Mubarek... or you stick with us and give us a chance at a good life."
posted by scody at 7:40 PM on February 2, 2011 [16 favorites]

I am personally going to fly to Qatar, and smack the stupid out of that AJE anchor.
posted by dejah420 at 7:42 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

That was Salma Eltarzi again. She's been reporting from the scene all day. I don't know if she drinks, but I would really like to buy her a beer.
posted by oinopaponton at 7:42 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

She also said if you stick with mubarak you'll have to rename this from liberation square to massacre square.
posted by empath at 7:42 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

That needs to go out on every newscast everywhere. She was emotional, exhausted, under fire, terrified, watching people be hurt all around her, and still refusing to give in. Incredible.
posted by cmyk at 7:44 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

There are people dragging corpses through the streets of one of the oldest cities on the planet.

UGH.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:46 PM on February 2, 2011

Agreed. I wish I could do something. I want so much to help her and all the others.
posted by dejah420 at 7:47 PM on February 2, 2011

what's everyone watching right now? I'm tuned to MSNBC.
posted by unSane at 7:48 PM on February 2, 2011

Al Jazeera English live feed.
posted by oinopaponton at 7:49 PM on February 2, 2011

AJ anchor almost broke. I have broken. My money has bought those bullets. My government has waited too long to break with their dictator to maintain the status quo.

Fuck the State Department. And fuck the Obama Administration. Too little, too late, and now more people are dead.

And come to think about it, fuck US journalism for not covering Afghanistan and Iraq like this. Fuck the Bush Administration for spending trillions of our dollars to cause this sort of carnage in communities that have never done anything to an American citizen. And fuck me for not doing more and going about my life as if I haven't got very much to do with it. The most depressing and enraging thing is knowing that while they are willing to die for the chance of democracy, I am too apathetic to meaningfully participate in mine.
posted by notion at 7:52 PM on February 2, 2011 [13 favorites]

Fuck the State Department. And fuck the Obama Administration. Too little, too late, and now more people are dead.

I want a day of rage. Here.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:53 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Read some Naguib Mahfouz and cry. There is nothing more that can be done.
posted by humanfont at 7:57 PM on February 2, 2011

i've been away from AJ when horrible things happened; can anybody say if the military was firing or was it the police
posted by angrycat at 7:57 PM on February 2, 2011

Or you could, you know, vote, maybe donate some money to a candidate. It's easier than getting shot.
posted by empath at 7:57 PM on February 2, 2011

I think that if anything, watching these events unfold should show you that rage is not a way to express a desirable position, conviction is.

Today has left me feeling strung out. I truly can't understand how anybody can have a mindset, in this century, where violence is the way to show superiority. I suppose I should be grateful that I live a life where that is not the case. I wish there was a way to get that idea through to the people in Egypt.
posted by Mizu at 7:59 PM on February 2, 2011

I want a day of rage. Here.

Sometimes, all you can do is bear witness.
posted by philip-random at 7:59 PM on February 2, 2011 [7 favorites]

Today has left me feeling strung out. I truly can't understand how anybody can have a mindset, in this century, where violence is the way to show superiority. I suppose I should be grateful that I live a life where that is not the case. I wish there was a way to get that idea through to the people in Egypt.

That's what made me so hopeful about this revolution from the beginning. Everything was relatively peaceful after the riot cops were called off. Now that the thug-squad has been called in, of course there are going to be clashes. That's their goal. It's not the anti-mubarak protesters fault that pro-mubarak supporters were dropping FUCKING FIREBOMBS from the roof-tops on them.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:02 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I truly can't understand how anybody can have a mindset, in this century, where violence is the way to show superiority. I suppose I should be grateful that I live a life where that is not the case. I wish there was a way to get that idea through to the people in Egypt.

Which people of Egypt are you referring to -- the ones doing the shooting or the ones getting shot?
posted by scody at 8:03 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I assume this is your first revolution notion. It is natural, everyone feels that way when we watch from a safe distance. popping smoke, the gunman must be pulling back.
posted by clavdivs at 8:03 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Are there any other cameras in Cairo besides the one that Al Jazeera has?

I think that the [hideous emotional vampire] newsreader anchoring AJE said that this was a Reuter's camera feed they were running, actually.

Salma Eltarzi should have streets named for her.
posted by mumkin at 8:03 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

ah. the army withdrew as the guns began
grief. i feel grief.
posted by angrycat at 8:04 PM on February 2, 2011

Or you could, you know, vote, maybe donate some money to a candidate. It's easier than getting shot.

Mubarak has been in power for 8 consecutive presidential administrations. Maybe we're voting for two sides of the same coin.
posted by notion at 8:04 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Eyewitness: Child shot at Tahrir Square in Cairo looked to be 8 or 9 years old, sustained wound to the head
posted by scody at 8:06 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's not the anti-mubarak protesters fault that pro-mubarak supporters were dropping FUCKING FIREBOMBS from the roof-tops on them.

But I suspect they know the evil they're up against. The card they're playing is to call The World to account. "Please help us anyway you can." (or words to that effect).
posted by philip-random at 8:08 PM on February 2, 2011

Man, this Daily Show bit seems pretty tasteless after what I've been watching.
posted by davey_darling at 8:08 PM on February 2, 2011

The AJ live blog is talking about a handful of fatalities among the protestors, 4-6, which is terrible but not as bad as some of these accounts were hinting at.
posted by msalt at 8:10 PM on February 2, 2011

So the Army withdrew so the police could slaughter the crowd from the rooftops? Shit.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:12 PM on February 2, 2011

"Please help us anyway you can." (or words to that effect).

And I want to. I just don't know what I can do.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:12 PM on February 2, 2011

I just don't know what I can do.

The protestors want us to pressure our governments, and we can do that. You can call or write your senators and reps. The difficulty with that is that this is geopolitically so complicated that it's not as simple as input ---> output. We can express our support, and at least it will become clearer and clearer that we want to see strong statements, if not action; and maybe if this continues a long time we can lend humanitarian support through private or NGO channels, but it's going to have to get worked out in Egypt. I am sure there is a lot going on behind the scenes, and that there's not really all that much we can do other than continue to care, continue to watch, and continue to ask questions.
posted by Miko at 8:16 PM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

So many trillions of dollars and so many lives spent to promote democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, well, we'll see how that turns out.

Just cutting a tyrant loose -- that's too much to ask for.

Jeebus. If the universal values we hold dear are to mean anything, fuck, it means supporting them when it's inconvenient. These are the same values that Americans fought for and hold dear themselves.

I get the realpolitik argument, I do. But I can't help thinking that this is an opportunity squandered, that the U.S. could have helped people who were clearly asking for it, who are clearly asking for the same rights that we already have, and maybe that would serve us better in the long run. And these people have been turned down flat, for some nebulous interpretation of 'national security', for more of the status quo, no matter what it means for the people actually having to deal with the shitend of that stick.

'Change', my eye. Guantanamo, external renditions, supporting dictators who give us the reach-around -- it's business as fucking usual. And it makes me fucking sick.

No matter how many times I've seen this -- it makes me fucking sick.
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:16 PM on February 2, 2011

Egyptian Revolution: Molotov cocktail dropped on pro-democracy protestors
posted by clavdivs at 8:17 PM on February 2, 2011

Which people of Egypt are you referring to -- the ones doing the shooting or the ones getting shot?

All of them! The people who have been living in fear of violence for so long, so that they can try their damnedest not to respond in kind, to see themselves as better than their attackers. And the people doing the shooting, of course, of course I'd like them to see that what they are doing isn't right and isn't the way to win in the end. It's very idealistic of me, I know. But it's how I feel and thank the secular powers that be that I can actually grow up with that mindset and not be considered weak for it.
posted by Mizu at 8:17 PM on February 2, 2011

Brian Williams "Goofy and surreal"
posted by clavdivs at 8:19 PM on February 2, 2011

Egyptian Revolution: Molotov cocktail dropped on pro-democracy protestors

That is fucking despicable.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:20 PM on February 2, 2011

What do you want Obama to do? Let's say Obama goes out tomorrow and says Mubarak must resign.

Mubarak says no -- do we invade?

If simply we cut off aid and his government doesn't fall. then we have another situation like Saddam, a rogue state that we have no influence over.

If you want a good result, you need to be sure that when you push, the government will fall. I assure you that very smart people at the State Department are trying to figure out when they can best push.
posted by empath at 8:21 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

I'd hope that we we're working back channels in the military to have them intervene and install a coalition government with El Baradei and others, and organize elections. But the negotiations have got to be immensely difficult, and we need to be sure that we don't just have a simple military coup.
posted by empath at 8:22 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Global politics is like weather. Once there's a storm brewing, there's not much that 99.9999999 percent of the humans on earth can do to stop it, or even mitigate it. So the thing to do is not be the toxic butterfly that sets the next storm in motion. Be kind. Get organized. Take your tiny piece of responsibility for what's currently going down, own it, and like many have said before you:

"Never again."
posted by philip-random at 8:22 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Al Jazeera: "Aren't you afraid you will get shot?

Tamir Al Saeed: "I don't care. I don't care. I would rather get shot than live under this regime."
posted by notion at 8:23 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

dawn in 15 minutes. I hope the people of cairo come to relieve them.
posted by empath at 8:24 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

dawn in 15 minutes. I hope the people of cairo come to relieve them.

If the past few days have been any indication, they will.

I hope. I really, really hope.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:27 PM on February 2, 2011

All of them! The people who have been living in fear of violence for so long, so that they can try their damnedest not to respond in kind, to see themselves as better than their attackers.

There is nothing inherently wrong with self-defense. Taking some abstract position of the supposed moral superiority of pacifism will not help the demonstrators strategically in holding the square or the bridge or the museum.
posted by scody at 8:31 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

The time for the US to 'fix' Egypt was 30 fucking years ago. Right now we're making the best of a bad situation.

I find it maddening that people expected Obama to go into DC and clean house overnight. That isn't how the US has ever worked, and moreover, it isn't how it should work. You want stability and gradual change. Nobody wants chaos.

At the end of the day, Obama and the west will welcome the new government with open arms and will continue aid to the new government. They may resent us a bit for not doing enough, but billions of dollars in aid buys a lot of good will.

The end result will be that instead of a dictatorial regime, we'll be supporting a democratic one. And the take-away will be that while the US may not overtly help their revolution, we will no longer stand in the way of freedom in the middle east.
posted by empath at 8:32 PM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

And I want to. I just don't know what I can do.

Quite possibly the best thing any of us can do is to become more politically active in lobbying for positive change.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:33 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

What do you want Obama to do?

I suggest that Mubarak's ability to stay in power is greatly dependent upon U.S. support, or more accurately, acquiescence. The money stream is one thing, but international tacit approval perhaps more important.

But I agree that there are no easy answers. But that the future would be difficult is no reason to settle for the status quo. If things were handled better, the U.S. could be dealing with a state like Turkey -- 'rogue' in the sense of assertively independent, and not without presenting its own set of problems, surely, and occasionally difficult -- but much better for us and them than this.

Cutting Mubarak loose was the very least Obama could have done -- non-interference in its most absolute sense.
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:33 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

And if the US uses the Muslim Brotherhood boogieman as an excuse to stop aid to Egypt, I'll be right up there on the barricades with you. But I think we won't.
posted by empath at 8:35 PM on February 2, 2011

I get the realpolitik argument, too.

But I cannot believe that the U.S. can do nothing to help the people of Egypt.

I've felt that the Obama Administration has been pretty unjustly criticized, and, because I'm a pragmatist, I always say, "C'mon, who else am I gonna vote for?" But if this goes unchecked, if we do nothing at all... I can see myself writing somebody in.
posted by Leta at 8:38 PM on February 2, 2011

This is horrific. I don't understand the complexities of the politicsl situation between Egypt, Israel, and the US, but is so, so, wrong that the US has been "fighting for democracy" in Iraq and Afghanistan, while financially supporting a totalitarian regime. Think of what those billions could be doing to help the people of Egypt, if they weren't stashed in Mubarak's Swiss bank accounts. (I'm making an assumption that he has siphoned away at least some of that money.)

Incidentally, and if I remember correctly, the statue of Naguib Mahfouz is very close to Tahrir Square.
posted by apricot at 8:40 PM on February 2, 2011

If you want a good result, you need to be sure that when you push, the government will fall. I assure you that very smart people at the State Department are trying to figure out when they can best push.

The "very smart people" the State Department described Mubarak's government as stable five days ago. The "very smart people" are "shocked" that Mubarak would use his secret police normally used to torture and kill Egyptian citizens to torture and kill Egyptian citizens.

I mean, for fuck's sake. Before the US prodded Saddam into the Iran-Iraq war, were these "very smart people" happy about the million deaths they were going to cause? When they decided to strangle Iraq with sanctions after Saddam stopped taking orders, were these "very smart people" happy about the millions of children that would suffer for it?

Stop with the fucking empty rhetoric. An American has no fucking business telling an Egyptian what to do. And these "very smart people" only give a shit because of Egypt's geopolitical value. For reference, thirty thousand children die every day a few states away, and a little further south, millions of people have been slaughtered in the DRC and Rwanda with little more than lip service from these "very smart people."

Count me as a person super fucking tired of "very smart people" pretending like they have right or the ability to direct international affairs from their well appointed offices in Washington, DC.
posted by notion at 8:42 PM on February 2, 2011 [14 favorites]

I don't know what else to say, other than to be thankful that Al Jazeera is doing such an incredible job of broadcasting genuine journalism. I'm so glad I'm not having to watch this through the lenses of CNN et al. If nothing else, Al Jazeera is bearing witness, and the world can't deny what is happening in Cairo.
posted by jokeefe at 8:43 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

*placeholder* ...

Thank you mefi, for tolerating me.


I wish only the best for all the protestors, and I'll be here, following intently, while I'm at work.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 8:51 PM on February 2, 2011

The "very smart people" the State Department described Mubarak's government as stable five days ago. The "very smart people" are "shocked" that Mubarak would use his secret police normally used to torture and kill Egyptian citizens to torture and kill Egyptian citizens.

Oh come on, you read wikileaks. You should know full well that the public statements of officials have nothing to do with what they really think.
posted by empath at 8:53 PM on February 2, 2011

The US is doing things to support the protesters, but it may not be doing everything it can, even within the bounds of realpolitik. We only know what is currently in the public record and it is my view that the response has been too slow and muted. It is very frustrating to watch things unfold. At the same time it is unlikely anything else we could have done would have resulted in any different outcome. There is also a certain pacing to these things within the diplomatic world. You can't just go from friends to GTFO in 24 hours. You don't want your other allies to think that you are an unreliable partner who will change direction with the wind. So far we've matched escalation by Mubarak with escalation of our demands. This latest move by Mubarak's force is a major escalation and will require a significant response from the administration.
posted by humanfont at 8:55 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I checked in here first thing this morning (it is dawn in Cairo now) - I thank you mefites as well. I appreciate you bearing witness as these things are happening. And I also feel frustrated, terrified and angry. I'm trying to remember that line in 'The Year of Living Dangerously' -- What then must we do?
posted by Surfurrus at 8:56 PM on February 2, 2011

Another first person account, from an Atlantic contributing editor, Graeme Wood.
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:58 PM on February 2, 2011

MSNBC is running a live, non-commentated camera feed from Tahrir Square.
posted by dejah420 at 9:00 PM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

Count me as a person super fucking tired of "very smart people" pretending like they have right or the ability to direct international affairs from their well appointed offices in Washington, DC.

notion, I share the emotion and respect what you've done throughout this thread (and related META) ... but you gotta be a little careful with the word choice. I realize you're just throwing someone else's words back at them, but dismissal of "very smart people" is scarily remindful of the time honored fascist-trick of "disappearing the intellectuals". Yes they can be annoying, but they are smart and contribute significantly to the the fabric of the culture.

Keep on rockin' in the free world.
posted by philip-random at 9:01 PM on February 2, 2011

I also would like to see the administration do more, but I don't know what we can do that wouldn't backfire. I mean if we said: Mubarak must resign, El Baradei must be in charge, they must have elections on such and such a date -- who is to say that the people of Egypt wouldn't resent that?

I think they are waiting for an excuse to cut aid and take direct action, and the violence of last night is probably a good one.

How would Americans have felt, if, say, France decided to cut relationships and trade with the US over the Iraq War, and torture and the millions of protestors in the streets? Or if Putin said that Obama should resign because of the Tea Party protests?

The government has to do something to delegitimize itself. It can't just be widespread dissatistisfaction.
posted by empath at 9:02 PM on February 2, 2011

This is such a frightening, surreal thing. Al Jazeera is bearing witness, and so are we, and the people they keep interviewing say that's important, that the world needs to know what's going on. People are dying in that square, and I can see it, but not them because the little video box on a webpage is too small for the details.

I know it's not the place of the US to decide what happens in Egypt. I know they have to do this on their own. But it hurts to see people fighting and dying - like one of you said upthread - for freedoms we take so much for granted that we ignore them sometimes.

I don't have it in me to be angry, just heartsick.
posted by cmyk at 9:11 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Remember, the Mubarak plants in the crowds yesterday were trying to delegitimize the protests by claiming they were a foreign plot. I hope today's events were enough to ensure that Mubarak's gone tomorrow, but I don't see what Obama or the State Department could have done earlier in the week that wouldn't have just made things messier.
posted by oinopaponton at 9:17 PM on February 2, 2011

The US is doing exactly what they should do. Expressing support for the protestors and that's it. This is Egypt's fight. If self determination costs five lives, I'd say they got it cheap. We get five murders a week here for nothing.
posted by electroboy at 9:19 PM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

I like this guy.
posted by empath at 9:19 PM on February 2, 2011

Interesting that The Guardian just changed their headline after running the same thing for at least three hours: 3 DEAD IN CAIRO RIOTING

Now it's "Heavy gunfire as dawn breaks in Cairo." No additional deaths reported.
posted by philip-random at 9:23 PM on February 2, 2011

I mean if we said: Mubarak must resign, El Baradei must be in charge, they must have elections on such and such a date -- who is to say that the people of Egypt wouldn't resent that?

It seems obvious to me that the Egyptian people should get to choose all that.

Our nations' roles should be in support of helping the Egyptian public have a free and fair election.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:28 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

How would Americans have felt, if, say, France decided to cut relationships and trade with the US over the Iraq War

empath: I WOULD LOVE IT.

Or if Putin said that Obama should resign because of the Tea Party protests?

If Obama was torturing citizens to death in secret prisons, I'd probably be in the Tea Party, but we're not really comparing the two, are we?

The government has to do something to delegitimize itself. It can't just be widespread dissatistisfaction.

empath. Brother. Comrade. Please tell me that you aren't calling the Mubarak dictatorship legitimate. My head will explode.
posted by notion at 9:29 PM on February 2, 2011

philip: I would never call for violence against anyone. I would just rather have the "very smart people" doing good things, like working diplomatically to build hospitals and schools to foster economic and democratic progress instead of paying people like Mubarak to act as our local henchman.
posted by notion at 9:33 PM on February 2, 2011

empath. Brother. Comrade. Please tell me that you aren't calling the Mubarak dictatorship legitimate.

They were a week ago.
posted by philip-random at 9:35 PM on February 2, 2011

According to the State Department... not according to anyone with a conscience in the past twenty years.
posted by notion at 9:39 PM on February 2, 2011

empath. Brother. Comrade. Please tell me that you aren't calling the Mubarak dictatorship legitimate.

There's legitimate in the sense of "this is a government that's legitimate by our standards" and there's the sense of "this is the guy who's actually in charge and he's who we have to deal with". Mubarak has always been the latter. The wikileaks release of diplomatic cables makes it clear, at least, that U.S. diplomats have no illusions about the world.
posted by fatbird at 9:43 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

empath. Brother. Comrade. Please tell me that you aren't calling the Mubarak dictatorship legitimate.

philip-random They were a week ago.

Legitimate: a regime that supports "US regional interests" (examples: legitimate=Mubarak illegitimate=Hamas)
posted by Surfurrus at 9:45 PM on February 2, 2011

empath: I WOULD LOVE IT.

I didn't ask about you, I asked about Americans in general. I can assure you, a significant majority of them would have scoffed at it.

If Obama was torturing citizens to death in secret prisons, I'd probably be in the Tea Party, but we're not really comparing the two, are we?

Bush was. Also, Obama is torturing a political prisoner in an army prison right now.

empath. Brother. Comrade. Please tell me that you aren't calling the Mubarak dictatorship legitimate. My head will explode

Egypt is nominally a democracy. There are lots of quasi-democracies that are 'legitimate enough' in that they respond to the needs of the people on some level and have some popular support -- Iran is another example that is right on the edge. Mubarak has some popular support. I'm no expert on Egypt, so I don't know how much. I don't know how many people support his immediate ouster via a military coup, either. It may be that a significant majority might be happy with a slow transition, instead. I don't know. The situation is too chaotic and they haven't done any polling, obviously.

What I'm saying is that it's not as simple as just snapping your fingers and doing the right thing. The US has gotten into one shitty situation after another, just because we've chosen the wrong side -- for the right reasons or the wrong reasons, but we keep putting our thumbs on the scale, and it keeps turning out badly and we keep getting blamed for it.

I'd prefer to see how things unfold and be deliberate and careful, and as much as possible, let the Egyptians decide this for themselves. The only actual action I'd support whole-heartedly is an immediate suspension of military aid to egypt, something we should have done a long time ago.
posted by empath at 9:45 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I didn't catch her name originally, so just wanted to mention here: the activist I quoted upthread is Mona Seif.
posted by scody at 9:47 PM on February 2, 2011

(But my opinion on what the US Government should do aside-- personally, I'm 100% in the camp of the anti-Mubarak protesters, and I hope that they can bring this thing to a conclusion on friday).
posted by empath at 9:49 PM on February 2, 2011

Why is AJ not running live? I have a raw stream from MSNBC, but BBC is on loop as well.

Anyone else have a stream?
posted by notion at 9:56 PM on February 2, 2011

At this point I want the Obama administration to announce the immediate suspension of all aid until Mubarak steps down and a transition government that is acceptable to the protestors is put in place to take them to the September elections. The unspoken threat there is to the army, which is the most direct recipient of U.S. aid. If forced to choose between money and access to U.S. hardware, and Mubarak, I suspect the choice will go the way we want it to. This also has the benefit of the U.S. not dictating to Egypt what it will do, only what the U.S. will co-operate in.
posted by fatbird at 9:59 PM on February 2, 2011

Why is AJ not running live?

The live feed is back after a story on the shebba farms.
posted by AElfwine Evenstar at 10:01 PM on February 2, 2011

Again, that's choosing sides. How about a suspension of aid until they complete free and fair elections and there is a peaceful succession. Then we won't be in a position of supporting what would essentially be a coup, no matter how well intentioned.
posted by empath at 10:01 PM on February 2, 2011

Again, that's choosing sides.

I did say "a transition government acceptable to the protestors". Presumably that means elBaradei would be heavily involved.

The U.S. can choose sides to the extent that their support makes them liable for the actions of the government being supported. The whole reason that Egyptians are suspicious of U.S. involvement is just because I mean, this is how it works behind the scenes anyway, it'd just be nice to see it out in the open. They've already threatened continued aid publicly by announcing a "review" of it.
posted by fatbird at 10:04 PM on February 2, 2011

Empath: it's true that we're a little pot and kettle with torture, but the least I can say is that US torture, in the medieval sense and not the psychological torture we still tolerate, has only existed since our whole executive branch went batshit insane in 2001. The CIA has always been a lowly, violent, stupid, and unconstitutional organization that should have been disbanded decades ago. We need an intelligence service, but one that collects intelligence instead of engaging in it's own brand of worldwide terrorism.

And I also agree that we shouldn't be seen as ordering anyone around in Egypt. Our statement should be basically: "We are with the Egyptian people and their desire for democracy. We will no longer provide financial assistance to the Mubarak regime, or to any government in Egypt until they hold free and fair elections."
posted by notion at 10:04 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Empath: it's true that we're a little pot and kettle with torture, but the least I can say is that US torture, in the medieval sense and not the psychological torture we still tolerate, has only existed since our whole executive branch went batshit insane in 2001.

If only. How do you think Mubarak's thugs learned to do it? And Pinochet, etc? We ran torture training schools, for God's sake.
posted by empath at 10:07 PM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

Our statement should be basically: "We are with the Egyptian people and their desire for democracy. We will no longer provide financial assistance to the Mubarak regime, or to any government in Egypt until they hold free and fair elections."

I agree with this much. I suspect we'll see something like that today. The US has urged all Americans to leave Egypt today, already.
posted by empath at 10:08 PM on February 2, 2011

Interview with Mona Seif that aired earlier on Al Jazeera.

"If everyone is concerned, why is Mubarak still there, when we are losing people every minute that passes by, why is he still there?"
posted by cmyk at 10:16 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Hypothetically you are POTUS and while you are considering suspending aid to Egypt with your senior advisors at 1 in the morning as reports are coming in from Cairo and Alexandria, CIA director tells you if you suspend aid to Egypt they will stop sharing their intel on Al Qaeda. Their intel happens to be especially good because there happen to be a few guys like Al Masri and Zawahiri who are Egyptian and high ranking members of Al Qaeda; so they've got stuff from various family members and extended contacts, as well as insider agents. There has been a lot of suspicious chatter coming in and gosh we really need that intel if we are going to stop this rumored attack on Valentines day. It's a shame because we're really close to figuring out if its Chicago, DC or LA. Might just be the Egyptians messing with us. Anyway Speaker Boehner will be happy to investigate you should you turn out to be wrong.....
posted by humanfont at 10:29 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Again, that's choosing sides. How about a suspension of aid until they complete free and fair elections and there is a peaceful succession. Then we won't be in a position of supporting what would essentially be a coup, no matter how well intentioned.

It's just like the run up to World War II again; here we are taking a tour of Spain, where we musn't pick sides between Franco and the Republicans.
posted by rodgerd at 10:32 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

If only. How do you think Mubarak's thugs learned to do it?

Egypt is one of the places torture was invented. I mean come on, our little republic is 200 years old, their civilization goes back to the dawn of history. We didn't teach them anything they didn't already know.
posted by humanfont at 10:33 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

telstar's post featuring a hopeful and determined "Mona" earlier features the same Mona cmyk refers to.
posted by mwhybark at 10:36 PM on February 2, 2011

CIA director tells you if you suspend aid to Egypt they will stop sharing their intel on Al Qaeda.

The scenario you paint isn't actually that compelling a reason to avoid doing the better thing. But to play along, I suspect that the Egyptians threatening to withhold intel will have a fairly direct conversation with a general who will explain the cost in parts and ammunition for their M1 Abrams tanks and their F-16s, and how the suspension of 2 billion in military aid will come at a time when they're really not ready to pay for their own maintenance. It may also be mentioned how much the Egyptian military has benefited from the officer exchange programs that have been going on for the last 30 years. On the other hand, the Americans have hinted that the level of aid could be increased if they played along...

Yes, there are a multitude of concerns beyond doing the right thing, but the U.S. is not powerless or stupid here. It's not a binary choice between doing the right thing and maintaining the status quo. Quid pro quo has two sides.
posted by fatbird at 10:41 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

And as for Speaker Boehner, Obama can pointedly observe that the U.S. helped the emergence of a real democracy in the Middle East without a trillion dollar invasion.
posted by fatbird at 10:44 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Capt. Renault: "No matter how many times I've seen this -- it makes me fucking sick."

Shocked to find gambling going in this establishment, as it were? (I kid)
posted by mwhybark at 10:50 PM on February 2, 2011

There has been a lot of suspicious chatter coming in and gosh we really need that intel if we are going to stop this rumored attack on Valentines day. It's a shame because we're really close to figuring out if its Chicago, DC or LA. Might just be the Egyptians messing with us. Anyway Speaker Boehner will be happy to investigate you should you turn out to be wrong...

humanfont... this is not 24. The CIA missed the collapse of the Soviet Union, the terrorist attacks in 93, 98, and 9/11, and we'll probably find out that they had no idea that the Egyptian or Tunisian governments were unstable.

I wouldn't trust them to tell me if it was raining outside.
posted by notion at 10:58 PM on February 2, 2011 [9 favorites]

It's just like the run up to World War II again; here we are taking a tour of Spain, where we musn't pick sides between Franco and the Republicans.

Or, you know, deciding on whether to take out Saddam, who was undoubtedly a brutal, murderous, dangerous tyrant.
posted by empath at 11:04 PM on February 2, 2011

Egypt is one of the places torture was invented. I mean come on, our little republic is 200 years old, their civilization goes back to the dawn of history. We didn't teach them anything they didn't already know.

We organized the Egyptian security forces with help from ex-Nazis in the 1950s. The institutionalization of torture was done with help from the CIA.
posted by empath at 11:19 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is the Army just trying to make the protestors feel unsafe during the curfew? I'm really not understanding their position.
posted by notion at 12:00 AM on February 3, 2011

The Regime Lashes Back. Excellent, detailed eye witness report from Cairo from Ahmed Shawki, including info about actions/demonstrations in neighborhoods beyond Tahrir Sqaure, the ideological components of the backlash, and some chilling details about the brutality that I haven't seen elsewhere (e.g., targeted attacks on medical personnel in addition to journalists).
posted by scody at 12:08 AM on February 3, 2011

No... make sure you're on the full page. The tiny window on the homescreen rarely works. They also have a youtube stream up here.
posted by notion at 12:19 AM on February 3, 2011

Here in Toronto, connection took a little longer and the audio on some live feeds is awful, but the studio sounds OK and the visuals are clear.

You can also check today's live blog for some running text and links if video is lousy for you.
posted by maudlin at 12:19 AM on February 3, 2011

Thanks, scody. Excellent report and analysis, indeed.
posted by Mister Bijou at 12:20 AM on February 3, 2011

Homepage... not homescreen. I should probably sleep. Damn my bourgeois protest ethic.
posted by notion at 12:23 AM on February 3, 2011

Is the Army just trying to make the protestors feel unsafe during the curfew? I'm really not understanding their position.

In Cairo, Joe Stark of Human Right Watch just said on AJ, "the army's position has been very ambiguous and passive up till now".
posted by Mister Bijou at 12:47 AM on February 3, 2011

Oh, by the way, Guardian's news blog is back up and doing live updates

This one reports (yes, I realize it's a retired general): "A retired Egyptian general told the BBC that the troops stand ready to fire at pro-Mubarak supporters, if they attack protesters today. This seems to confirm what Peter Beaumont has been seeing on the ground. The general claimed the army could turn on Mubarak as early as tomorrow. . . ."
posted by Mister Bijou at 1:01 AM on February 3, 2011

Re: the army -- from Ahmed Shawki's report upthread:

One big question now is about the army. It's clear that the army was introduced last week because the police force could no longer maintain order, and throughout the last week, there were some examples of fraternization between demonstrators and the soldiers.

But now, the police have reappeared. Officially, they've returned not in Tahrir Square, but mainly in middle-class neighborhoods like Mohandiseen, where they joined the community cordons that patrol the areas. And there's no doubt whatsoever from any media source that many of the people who were assaulting demonstrators were agents of the state--police in plain clothes.

And in this context, the army determined that it would stay "above the fray." At one stage today, I saw soldiers shoot in the air to push back some of the pro-Mubarak supporters from the square, because there was an outcry beginning to build against the attack on what was such a united and peaceful demonstration. But there's also no doubt that the army allowed the violence to take place against the demonstrators.

Spokespeople for the army have been saying for several days now that the time for demonstrating is over, and that message was accentuated on Wednesday. The same phrase gets repeated over and over--that the army is "above the fray" and "above politics." But that's obviously not the case. In the history of Egypt, the army plays a very important role.

People are in shock at the degree of violence that's been unleashed, and so there's a kind of context where the army can be brought in to save the day. But it will be a complicated question, because everyone knows that the call for demonstrations on Friday will probably produce a bigger turnout than ever.

posted by scody at 1:08 AM on February 3, 2011

I well aware of the diiference between 24 and the real world. The Egyptians provide us with a lot of counter terroism intelligence. Despite your points about the uneven track record of the CIA, there will be a voice from one of our intelligence officials worrying about the impact this crisis is having on this ongoing sharing of information. It may not be as dramatic as Leon Paneta sharing concerns about chatter about some 9-11 sequel, it might just be David Ptreaus on a video link concenred about some specific operation. The thing to understand is that Mubarak has some leverage and it isn't all Israel, or the threat of radicals seizing power. There will be difficult choices to make in the hours and days ahead.

Regarding the US role in Egypt in the 1950s. It is true that there was involvement with Nassar and the young officers who threw out the old king. Nassar was known to mock the US and talk about how he'd played us. Iirc they called the Cairo officers club the CIA palace since it was paid for with American funds. As soon as we stopped paying, he just marched over to the Soviet embassy and they underwote the Aswan High Dam and sent weapons. Since they were officially non-aligned we kept up some military exchanges, including some training for a young intelligence office named Hosni Mubarak in the 1960s.

Anyway between the pharaohs, the Greeks, the romans, the Ottomans, the British, and King Farouk no one needed to teach the Egyptians much about secret police forces and torture, there was a lot of institutional knowledge. They did enjoy mocking us for our simple and unimaginative methods, squeamishness and concerns about the level of violence. Hopefully those days are ending.
posted by humanfont at 1:12 AM on February 3, 2011

From Guardian's live updates, comments:
"Mubarak and his secret police and advisers are on board of his plane out of Cairo today. Mubarak brings out $1,000 and asks how he could use the money to make Egyptians happier. One adviser suggests throwing it out of the window in one bundle to make an Egyptian happy. A second adviser suggests throwing it out loose and throwing it out of the window to buy many Egyptians bread. The third adviser suggests that Mubarak puts the money in his pocket and jumps out of the window to make all Egyptians happy."
posted by Mister Bijou at 1:12 AM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

The Guardian's live blog is reporting, based apparently on Peter Beaumont's tweets, that the army is clearing pro-Mubarak forces out of Tahrir Square. Wow. At the least, this shows pretty severe discord between the different arms of official authority.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:18 AM on February 3, 2011

Whoops. . . here it is, guardian live blog
posted by Mister Bijou at 1:23 AM on February 3, 2011

They are shouting "Illegitimate, Illegitimate" again, and now I can sleep.

You brave motherfuckers. I love you.
posted by notion at 1:26 AM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

in the meantime... reports from Yemen say that more than 20,000 protesters have assembled in the capital, Sanaa, to demand an immediate change in government a day after Ali Abdullah Saleh's promise not to run for "reelection" in 2013.
posted by scody at 1:29 AM on February 3, 2011

WTF? AJ reports that the Prime Minister (not Mubarak) is apologizing for the violence, that he will have a cabinet meeting, and that cameras will be allowed in there? President ordering a probe into the deaths? Potemkin posturing. I don't think anyone will be taken in by it.

And now AJE switches over to a documentary on Latvia.
posted by maudlin at 1:34 AM on February 3, 2011

AJ liveblog:

11:35am Egyptian soldiers separated pro-democracy supporters and Mubarak loyalists in central Cairo, deploying infantry to create a buffer zone in an attempt to halt violence between them.

A Reuters journalist at the scene says the opposing camps are separated by a distance of some 80 metres. It is the first time the army acts decisively to halt the violence.

Guardian liveblog:

9.34am [i.e., 11:34 am local time in Egypt]: Rapid political manoeuvring: Egypt's Vice President Omar Suleiman has held a dialogue with the country's political parties and national forces in a bid to end the protests, according to Reuters.

Oppostion leader Mohamed ElBaradei is refusing to take part until Mubarak resigns.

posted by scody at 1:45 AM on February 3, 2011

Oh, and one more update from AJ liveblog before I go to bed -- this one a bit of comedy:

11:39 am Egypt's cabinet denies that it had a role in mobilising Mubarak loyalists against pro-democracy protesters in Cairo's Tahrir Square and said it would investigate those behind violence. Cabinet spokesman Magdy Rady said: "To accuse the government of mobilising this is a real fiction. That would defeat our object of restoring the calm. We were surprised with all these actions."

"We're shocked, shocked, to find that there's brutality going on here!"
posted by scody at 1:51 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Okay, now I can go to bed after reading this:

Pro-government thugs at Tahrir Square used clubs, machetes, swords and straight razors on Wednesday to try to crush Egypt’s democracy movement, but, for me, the most memorable moment of a sickening day was one of inspiration: watching two women stand up to a mob.

May a million Minnas and Amals stand up again, today and tomorrow and the day after.
posted by scody at 2:03 AM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

AJ reports anti-gov's building barricades in Tahrir square as bands of pro-gov's armed with knives and sticks move toward the square. Tensions are said to be high.
posted by telstar at 2:13 AM on February 3, 2011

Police ID cards take from the pro-Mubarak 'demonstrators'.
posted by Abiezer at 2:32 AM on February 3, 2011

Alright but why would the "demonstrators" keep the ID cards on their persons?? They know enough not to do it in uniform, why do they not put the IDs to the side as well?
posted by Mizu at 2:53 AM on February 3, 2011

Alright but why would the "demonstrators" keep the ID cards on their persons??

Maybe because they thought they were going to completely trash the pro-democracy people and didn't anticipate getting captured,
posted by Mister Bijou at 3:04 AM on February 3, 2011

Alright but why would the "demonstrators" keep the ID cards on their persons??

Perhaps because they thought they might get arrested?
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:31 AM on February 3, 2011

From the Guardian liveblog:

11.10am: The British telecommunications company Vodafone is being accused of sending out text messages urging pro-Mubarak supporters to "confront" protesters.

According to this Flickr gallery, put together by Riham Nabil, this is what some of them said.

The Armed Forces asks Egypt's honest and loyal men to confront the traitors and criminals and protect our people and honor and our precious Egypt.

Youth of Egypt, beware rumors and listen to the sound of reason - Egypt is above all so preserve it.

To every mother-father-sister-brother, to every honest citizen preserve this country as the nation is forever.

The Armed Forces cares for your safety and well being and will not resort to using force against this great nation.

Unless I'm missing something, those are all ambiguous enough that they could be referring to the pro- or anti- government sides, right?
posted by EndsOfInvention at 3:35 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

EndsOfInvention, I disagree, because:

- It refers to 'loyal men'. pro-Democracy protestors aren't loyal, and many are women.
- some pro-Democracy protestors are traitors to the regime
- it suggests "this country" is at risk. Only the current regime has anything to gain from conflating the country and the government
- its appeal to a central authority is typical of the current regime
- it is sent from a central authority with access to Vodaphone etc.

Can anyone comment on the original arabic?
posted by anthill at 4:55 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Hmm, I see your point. I still think there's some ambiguity (there's no direct mentions of Mubarak or the government, referring to "the nation" and "Egypt" could equally mean "the government" or "the people of Egypt"), but that may well be down to the translation.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:05 AM on February 3, 2011

from the Guardian liveblog:

12.05pm: More on those Vodafone texts. In a statement the company said they were powerless to prevent these "unacceptable" texts being sent out.

Under the emergency powers provisions of the Telecoms Act, the Egyptian authorities can instruct the mobile networks of Mobinil, Etisalat and Vodafone to send messages to the people of Egypt. They have used this since the start of the protests. These messages are not scripted by any of the mobile network operators and we do not have the ability to respond to the authorities on their content.

Vodafone Group has protested to the authorities that the current situation regarding these messages is unacceptable. We have made clear that all messages should be transparent and clearly attributable to the originator.

posted by xqwzts at 5:24 AM on February 3, 2011

Hm, from here:
http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/ is now down.
http://www.aljazeera.net/english is also down.
Is anyone else seeing the same behaviour?
That said, live stream continues via youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/aljazeeraenglish?blend=1&ob=4
posted by Mister Bijou at 5:32 AM on February 3, 2011

I'm watching al jazeera english right now online.
posted by empath at 5:35 AM on February 3, 2011

But not on the website, which seems to be down. Interesting. Watch here.
posted by empath at 5:37 AM on February 3, 2011

Here's two more:
Livestation via Daily Motion. Don't know if it's been posted yet - http://www.dailymotion.com/livestation#videoId=xg7hrs
Al Jazeera added a live stream to their facebook page http://www.facebook.com/aljazeera?v=app_7146470109
posted by raztaj at 5:39 AM on February 3, 2011

Some very bad news coming out of Guardian newsblog: "Egyptian national TV has been broadcasting that there are Israeli spies disguised as western journalists . . .; blogger and activist sandmonkey had been arrested. Now his blog has been taken offline; Journalists are being rounded up for their own safety, the Associated Press news agency suggests. . . "
posted by Mister Bijou at 5:42 AM on February 3, 2011

BBC: "Marwa Elnaggar tweets: Ahmad Shafiq = good cop, Mubarak = bad cop. Old routine. Don't fall for it, ppl! #jan25 #Tahrir."
posted by notion at 6:10 AM on February 3, 2011

I dunno... the IP of sandmonkey.org is 209.59.165.18 is http://hyscience.org/ which is based in the United States. He's probably just over his quota somewhere, but who knows.
posted by notion at 6:15 AM on February 3, 2011

AJ interview with activist "Omar" in the square, "for 50 years the only time people have been able to open their mouths is at the dentist".
posted by Mister Bijou at 6:22 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

My traceroute to english.aljazeera.net is stopping at 12.122.134.61 which is an AT&T address inside the United States. Traceroute to aljazeera.net is stopping at 75.149.228.86 on the Comcast network.

Are there any real engineers who have some sort of explanation?
posted by notion at 6:25 AM on February 3, 2011

They are saying now that the former interior minister is being detained, as are some top members of the NDP.
posted by empath at 6:27 AM on February 3, 2011

My traceroute to english.aljazeera.net is stopping at 12.122.134.61 which is an AT&T address inside the United States. Traceroute to aljazeera.net is stopping at 75.149.228.86 on the Comcast network.

Are there any real engineers who have some sort of explanation?

It's up for me now. I suspect that their server just crashed.
posted by empath at 6:28 AM on February 3, 2011

Yes, the AJEnglish Twitter feed just posted: "Our website is coming back online."

Disturbing to hear this morning of journalists going missing.
posted by sugarfish at 6:36 AM on February 3, 2011

The problem is that if the "west" pulls it's funding, mubarak can try the Saddam model of an independent dictator without foreign support. It worked for Saddam for a long time. But that's impossible if the army doesn't support him.

That's what made me so hopeful about this revolution from the beginning. Everything was relatively peaceful after the riot cops were called off. Now that the thug-squad has been called in...

They're the same people, just with different outfits.
posted by delmoi at 6:37 AM on February 3, 2011

AJ Breaking news: Egyptian Attorney General has detained and is questioning Habib al-Adl, the previous Minister of Interior (the one who ordered the police off the streets on Friday night). Ahmed Ezz of NDP and four prominent businessmen are ordered not to leave the country and their accounts frozen.
posted by Mister Bijou at 6:40 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

duh! accounts? make that: assets.
posted by Mister Bijou at 6:41 AM on February 3, 2011

> Presumably that means elBaradei would be heavily involved.

I would rein in the enthusiasm for ElBaradei if I were you. He seems like a good guy, but we have no idea what the majority of the protesters think about him, he's been out of the country, and he may turn out to be irrelevant to the situation.

I'd like to thank (once again) everyone here for providing all these updates and analyses. MeFi at its best.
posted by languagehat at 6:47 AM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

@sandmonkey tweeted a couple of days ago that he was phoning a friend in Jordan who was typing his tweets for him.

I couldn't come back to this thread last night after listening to Mona Seif on AJE and seeing the first footage of people being dragged across the bridge (hoping to the ambulances - has there been further information about that?).

Re-mentioning from upthread (via Leta): if you have a Roku set-top box, Al Jazeera English has been added to the Roku Newscaster channel (free from the Channel Store). It's the same feed as the Web site, but it is a lot more stable for me.
posted by catlet at 6:49 AM on February 3, 2011

Via AJE blogs:

Ahmad Shafiq, the Egyptian prime minister, has apologised for the violence in the capital's Tahrir Square, and vowed that it will not be allowed to recur.

He made the comments on Thursday, after violent clashes in central Cairo between pro-democracy protesters and loyalists of Hosni Mubarak, the president, claimed at least seven lives and injured more than 800.

He added that an investigation will be launched into the violence.

posted by catlet at 6:55 AM on February 3, 2011

Yeah, he also said he was ""surprised" to see camels but they must have come from the Pyramids complex and it could have been camel owners upset about the effect of the protests on tourism.". Uh, yeah, and I'm sure the guys wielding baseball bats were just disgruntled sporting goods salesmen.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 7:06 AM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

the guys wielding baseball bats were just disgruntled sporting goods salesmen

Plus plain-clothes 'security' goons, Maburak's NPD party members, muscle recruited in the poorest banlieues, vagrants, idle taxi-drivers, alcoholics, and the workaday bored.
posted by Mister Bijou at 7:22 AM on February 3, 2011

AJ: 19 year "state of emergency" in Algeria to be lifted.
posted by delmoi at 7:23 AM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'd like to thank (once again) everyone here for providing all these updates and analyses. MeFi at its best.
Agreed - this thread is a great resource.
posted by tizzie at 7:27 AM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

I love the Brooklyn accent on this guy on AJ right now.
posted by delmoi at 7:29 AM on February 3, 2011

What do you want Obama to do? Let's say Obama goes out tomorrow and says Mubarak must resign.

We don't have to imagine it. They've already said it. Yesterday, as I've cited before, Gibbs stated to the press on the administration's position:

ET: Mubarak has said he will remain in power until after an election in September. Is the Obama administration, which says the time for a transition is "now," satisfied with that?

September is not now, Gibbs says.

Then, as clavdius pointed out upthread, yesterday, a former US diplomat visited Mubarak to deliver the message that Mubarak must step down immediately to make way for a transitional government.

So we've said it. We've said, go now, Mubarak. What do we do next? Behind the scenes pressure (over aid money to the military is one thing). Possibly seizing Mubarak's assets (if we could) might be another. But the US can't inject itself, personally, into this too much, or the whole enterprise becomes suspect. For good reason. And we absolutely shouldn't send troops or intervene militarily, IMO, so beyond continuing to support the opposition publicly and privately, I'm not sure what more we can do right now, apart from condemning Mubarak and continuing to push for his speedy departure.

I mean, if you think the US should do more right now, any specific suggestions?
posted by saulgoodman at 7:36 AM on February 3, 2011

Actually, never mind. This thread really should remain primarily about live-blogging the news. Ignore that last side-rail/derail.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:39 AM on February 3, 2011

"I mean, if you think the US should do more right now, any specific suggestions?"

Given the newly active stance of the army I suspect that a quiet word about military aid and expected levels of protection for civilians may have gone on.
posted by jaduncan at 7:50 AM on February 3, 2011

It has become very important that "someone" take Egyptian state TV off the air. (But leave AJE and the rest up). State TV is his sole remaining means for projecting power; the military has effectively reduced the state police apparatus down to the level of the demonstrators, and while they are still committing acts of violence, those acts don't rise to the level of a crackdown. He's got no friends internationally to advocate for him (except Israel, irony of ironies).

You take away the TV stations, an Mubarak is silenced. Once he's out of touch with his supporters, they've fade in to the background. Without the propaganda apparatus, he's reduced to an 80-yr old man who dyes his hair sitting alone in a palace (or bunker) which the army and the people riot outside.

Take state TV off the air and Mubarak is gone in less than 24 hours.
posted by Pastabagel at 8:12 AM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Sandmonkey is free.

I am ok. I got out. I was ambushed & beaten by the police, my phone confiscated , my car ripped apar& supplies taken #jan25
web • 2/3/11 10:51 AM

https://twitter.com/sandmonkey/status/33190789722935296
posted by apricot at 8:17 AM on February 3, 2011

Vodafone. Make the most of NOW.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:37 AM on February 3, 2011

Well, who is going to do this?

The people, united, can never be defeated.
posted by mrgrimm at 8:38 AM on February 3, 2011

: AJ Breaking news: Egyptian Attorney General has detained and is questioning Habib al-Adl, the previous Minister of Interior (the one who ordered the police off the streets on Friday night). Ahmed Ezz of NDP and four prominent businessmen are ordered not to leave the country and their assets frozen.

If true, this has military influence written all over it.
posted by zennie at 8:51 AM on February 3, 2011

Cops running over protesters. (at 0:48)
posted by Joe Beese at 8:55 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is this long-ass interview with Suleiman on State TV live, I presume?
posted by cortex at 8:59 AM on February 3, 2011

If true, this has military influence written all over it.

Or, splits in the ruling elite, the regime turning on elements within.
posted by Mister Bijou at 9:03 AM on February 3, 2011

I believe the interview is live. I was only half paying attention when it was announced. I've muted it now - I can only stand so much mendacity.
posted by EvaDestruction at 9:03 AM on February 3, 2011

From Sandmonkey's blog:

A veiled girl with a blurred face went on Mehwer TV claiming to have received funding by Americans to go to the US and took courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews. She claimed that AlJazeera is lying, and that the only people in Tahrir square now were Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. State TV started issuing statements on how the people arrested Israelis all over Cairo engaged in creating mayhem and causing chaos.

posted by Joe in Australia at 9:06 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Or, splits in the ruling elite, the regime turning on elements within.

This. The elite left in charge recognize that Mubarak's regime is over one way or another, and are now jockeying for position with the uncertainty that they don't know what balance of democracy and military guaranteed autocracy will come.

TPM says "[Yesterday]'s clashes were probably not the regime's final death rattle, but rather the beginning of the struggle to determine who emerges on top in the post-Mubarak era. "
posted by fatbird at 9:08 AM on February 3, 2011

A veiled girl with a blurred face went on Mehwer TV claiming to have received funding by Americans to go to the US and took courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews.

So, terror baby or sleeper cell?

You can do it, Egyptians. You're an inspiration to us all.
posted by stet at 9:18 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Washington Post journalists arrested:

"We have heard from multiple witnesses that Leila Fadel, our Cairo bureau chief, and Linda Davidson, a photographer, were among two dozen journalists arrested this morning by the Egyptian Interior Ministry."
posted by mrgrimm at 9:26 AM on February 3, 2011

From Sandmonkey's blog:

"This account has been suspended"
posted by dirigibleman at 9:29 AM on February 3, 2011

The New York Times, rightly I think, calls the journalist arrests "an apparent effort to remove witnesses to the battle with antigovernment protesters."
posted by Miko at 9:32 AM on February 3, 2011

From the Globe + Mail:

When the Canadian reporters asked why they were being detained, they were told it was because the military was planning a large operation, Ms. Verma said.

No indication as to what the operation shall entail. In fact, earlier in the Globe article, it's suggested that the journos may have been arrested to protect them from pro-Mubaruk thugs. What is it they say about "the fog of war"?
posted by philip-random at 9:38 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Also, as there seems to be a comparative lull in effect right now, this bit of analysis (posted to MeFi yesterday) is worth spending some time with (in case you haven't already).

Many international media commentators are having a hard time understanding the complexity of forces driving and responding to these momentous events. This confusion is driven by the binary “good guys versus bad guys” lenses most use to view this uprising. Such perspectives obscure more than they illuminate ...

And so on ...
posted by philip-random at 9:42 AM on February 3, 2011

A veiled girl with a blurred face went on Mehwer TV claiming to have received funding by Americans to go to the US and took courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews.

This might be literally true. There are plenty of courses like this out there, some funded by the government, some by NGOs. This is a good thing.

I probably already linked this before, but the opposition have been following this manual pretty closely.

It's the model for all the color revolutions. It's simple, it's easily understood and communicated, and its effective.
posted by empath at 9:42 AM on February 3, 2011

I think all you have to have for a successful revolution is enough people who are operating off of the same play book. If everyone understands the tactics and does their part, there's no way for a tyranny to stand. It's too easy to shut down the economy.

You stop working, you fill public squares, block the roads, you proclaim loudly that you support police and non violence, you hug the army and police when you can, film and record everything and you stand your fucking ground.

As long as your cause is just, and you have enough popular support, you will eventually win. The hard part, of course, is gaining that support, but most dictatorships will force the people there eventually.
posted by empath at 9:46 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

(err.. support PEACE and non violence)
posted by empath at 9:47 AM on February 3, 2011

Middle East correspondents from the Guardian, Der Spiegel and Le Monde report from around the region on reaction to protests in Egypt; audio reports from correspondents for the three papers in Cairo, Sana'a, Tunis and Beirut.
posted by adamvasco at 9:47 AM on February 3, 2011

Charlie Sheen weighs in:

"BTW, two wars are in an endless state of sorrow. Egypt about burned to the ground, and all you people care about is my bullsh*t?"
posted by philip-random at 9:48 AM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

So Yemen is having their Day of Rage (report says 20k showed up). Though it looks like pro-gov supporters there are ahead of the game. Syria is bracing, as well.

I'm starting to worry about Egypt, though. What's going down. Something is up. And it's not pretty. Is the military starting to shift, or will they continue to show restraint? Is the new VP dude the instigator of all this? Or rather, his appointment and control? I have a feeling that's the key there.
posted by symbioid at 9:50 AM on February 3, 2011

Charlie should know by now. It's much easier to mock him for being human than it is to deal with the reality that our government is morally bankrupt.
posted by notion at 9:53 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

You can listen to a recorded interview with Sandmonkey here.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:54 AM on February 3, 2011

Reports and backgrounds of the individuals killed at Tahrir Square have been coming in and it's awfully depressing.
posted by mrgrimm at 9:54 AM on February 3, 2011

Empath wrote: This might be literally true.

Let me highlight part of that interview: ... courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews.

Why do you think the State broadcaster alleges that the teachers of some heretofore-unknown course are Jewish?
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:07 AM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

From Lindsey Hilsum, reporting for Britain's Channel Four:

We retreated down the street to our car. A group of young men approached, armed with baseball bats, sticks and machetes. They were the neighbourhood Popular Committee.

For the past few days, these groups have been smiling and friendly to us but this lot started shouting and banging on the roof of our car. They demanded to see our passports.

I think I know why. Last night and today, Egyptian state TV had been broadcasting of Israeli spies disguised as western journalists roaming the country.

It’s a wicked rumour to spread because it puts any westerner – or any Egyptian working with westerners – at risk of a beating or worse. It’s cynical to say the least.

This government did a deal with Israel, but it still stirs up anti-Zionist feelings when it suits and that’s one reason so many journalists have been attacked in Cairo today.
posted by philip-random at 10:10 AM on February 3, 2011

Sandmonkey's blog has been taken down. Here's Google's cache of it - I recommend that anyone interested save a copy.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:12 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Guardian's round-up of the lunatic asylum's reactions. I have no words.

Let me highlight part of that interview: "... courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews."

Juxtaposes amusingly with the Israeli government's support of Mubarak as a great friend.
posted by rodgerd at 10:13 AM on February 3, 2011

Let me highlight part of that interview: ... courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews.

It's not inconceivable. I mean, I'm not stupid, I know why they're saying it. But, it might be true.
posted by empath at 10:16 AM on February 3, 2011

Sandmonkey's blog has been taken down. Here's Google's cache of it - I recommend that anyone interested save a copy.

Wierdly enough it's hosted by US company, not, say, an Egyptian ISP. Wonder what the motivation is, and how they can be persuaded to get it back online. Anonymous, anyone?
posted by rodgerd at 10:17 AM on February 3, 2011

Juxtaposes amusingly with the Israeli government's support of Mubarak as a great friend.

Feels like the rats are cornered, so it's not about rational anything anymore, it's about the WORST they have to offer.
posted by philip-random at 10:18 AM on February 3, 2011

our government is morally bankrupt

This phrasing is exceedingly common, and belies a fundamental ignorance about governance.

Please take note:

1. Humans are moral (or not).
2. Institutions are amoral.

Hence, institutions cannot be morally "bankrupt", as they have no moral coffers to fill.
posted by perspicio at 10:18 AM on February 3, 2011

Fantastic interview with Robert Fisk on this morning's Democracy Now!
posted by RogerB at 10:19 AM on February 3, 2011

The End is near. I have no illusions about this regime or its leader, and how he will pluck us and hunt us down one by one till we are over and done with and 8 months from now will pay people to stage fake protests urging him not to leave power, and he will stay "because he has to acquiesce to the voice of the people". This is a losing battle and they have all the weapons, but we will continue fighting until we can't. I am heading to Tahrir right now with supplies for the hundreds injured, knowing that today the attacks will intensify, because they can't allow us to stay there come Friday, which is supposed to be the game changer. We are bringing everybody out, and we will refuse to be anything else than peaceful. If you are in Egypt, I am calling on all of you to head down to Tahrir today and Friday. It is imperative to show them that the battle for the soul of Egypt isn't over and done with. I am calling you to bring your friends, to bring medical supplies, to go and see what Mubarak's gurantees look like in real life. Egypt needs you. Be Heroes.
posted by empath at 10:21 AM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

Charlie Sheen weighs in:

Just for once, can we not make this thread a referendum on Charlie Sheen?

/heh

notion: I'm so sympathetic to your moral indignation about US past involvement in the region. I also understand that you might not be prepared to accept the US's latest moves on Egypt as sufficient to compensate for many years of bad policy extending even up to the recent past--but could you (and for that matter others who share your perspective) please just once acknowledge that, by using diplomatic measures to pressure Mubarak to step down quickly and peacefully (which, as covered elsewhere in this thread, has been happening steadily for a couple days now), coupled with official public statements to the effect that a September departure such as Mubarak proposed is not acceptable to the US, whose position is that the power transition must begin now, the US is actually acting more honorably for once in this matter.

Even over the opposition of Israel who's stated its support for Mubarak.

The current policy is a significant improvement. I understand the cries for "more than words." But hinting that US military aid may be at stake if the military engages civilian protesters is "more than words," as is sending a delegate directly to Mubarak to tell him point blank that the gig is up.

It might not be enough from where you sit, but it deserves some praise, no matter how qualified. When we don't acknowledge the improvements in policy, unlike the problems, they tend to disappear.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:28 AM on February 3, 2011 [9 favorites]

Oh, that was responding to this.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:30 AM on February 3, 2011

perspicio: "

our government is morally bankrupt

This phrasing is exceedingly common, and belies a fundamental ignorance about governance.

Please take note:

1. Humans are moral (or not).
2. Institutions are amoral.

Hence, institutions cannot be morally "bankrupt", as they have no moral coffers to fill."

You're a capitalist, aren't you?
posted by symbioid at 10:33 AM on February 3, 2011

BBC is live from Cairo atm.
posted by dejah420 at 10:37 AM on February 3, 2011

erm... of course, 'jigs' are the things that go up. 'gigs,' on the other hand, just pay in free beer.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:38 AM on February 3, 2011

Juxtaposes amusingly with the Israeli government's support of Mubarak as a great friend.

I haven't seen anything from the Israelis suggesting that he is a great friend - or any other sort of friend. They just said that they'd rather have a cold peace with Mubarak than a war with the Muslim Brotherhood - an eminently reasonable position. It might well be that the MB wouldn't control a new Egyptian government, but I don't see why they ought to welcome the possibility.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:40 AM on February 3, 2011

You're a capitalist, aren't you?

I'm interested in how things are. I don't choose to cloud my vision with a particular philosophy of how they ought to be.
posted by perspicio at 10:46 AM on February 3, 2011

Thanks for the Robert Fisk interview RogerB; He reckons the army is against the dictatorship and will come out against Mubarak within 24 hrs. Friday will be the critical day.
He is rightfully heavily critical of US State department.
posted by adamvasco at 11:04 AM on February 3, 2011

really disturbing video of a police van purposefully running over a protester:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsPBA-bEuEQ

I cannot believe this kind of shit. How is there any claim to legitimacy on the side of the police? Knowing this kind of behavior is coming from them, I would be afraid for my life and violently resist.
posted by kuatto at 11:18 AM on February 3, 2011

(Re: my earlier comment)... That being said, it's true that individuals may attempt to craft or influence governments so that they attend to the needs of the people within their borders. But no government will retain that characteristic of its own accord - in contrast to individuals, whose morality causes them to do precisely that.

As far as the US's current behavior with respect to Egypt, I also hold that saulgoodman's comment that "the US is actually acting more honorably for once in this matter" overstates the case - although I do think it is possible for a government to acquire at least the semblance of an honorable character, as opposed to a moral one. However, I think the most I would say in this instance is that the individuals operating the levers of US foreign policy at this point in time have made a calculated effort to adopt a stance that they hope will be perceived as satisfactorily honorable by the denizens of consequence in the region, with some nuanced tuning so as to appeal especially to those who they believe are most likely to be the eventual victors in the conflict, while preserving interpretive wiggle room in case their guess is incorrect. All for the purpose of serving US interests in the region.

I think most of us understand that's the calculus, even if we lose sight of it now & then because we want to see our government behave as a righteous extension of ourselves.

@kuatto: Holy shit!
posted by perspicio at 11:28 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

list of journalists who have been in some way threatened, attacked or detained while reporting in Egypt.
posted by adamvasco at 11:39 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

From the Beeb:

1935: ABC reporter Christiane Amanpour has just interviewed President Mubarak, and she tweets: "I asked Mubarak if he was ready to leave office. He said: I am fed up. After 62 yrs in public service I have had enough. I want to go."

Let it be true.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:43 AM on February 3, 2011 [6 favorites]

He's blaming the violence on the Muslim Brotherhood. Oh, man. He also told Obama that he doesn't understand Egyptian culture.
posted by proj at 11:54 AM on February 3, 2011

Mubarak Defies a Humiliated America, Emulating Netanyahu - Juan Cole
posted by adamvasco at 12:06 PM on February 3, 2011

BBC Arabic Correspondent Khaled Ezzelarab says military police have arrested representatives of both Amnesty International, OxFam and Human Rights Watch.
posted by dejah420 at 12:06 PM on February 3, 2011

He also told Obama that he doesn't understand Egyptian culture.

I'm assuming it's Obama who allegedly doesn't understand. I do find this phrasing revealing. Mubaruk who, no doubt when he looks himself in the mirror in the morning, imagines himself an honorable man, likely decided long ago that Egyptian culture is essentially brutal and venal. And as such, he's built his career (and fortune) on guiding this culture the only way it can be guided (via a higher, more committed and organized brutality and venality).

One can only imagine the cognitive dissonance that these essentially peaceful protesters are inflicting on this poor man's worldview.
posted by philip-random at 12:07 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

The role the internet has played in this revolution has been a revolution in itself. The way it was denied for so many days has only emphasised how critical it is, particularly now that it has returned. Those that are trying to cling to power in Egypt undoubtedly recognise how important free information is, as they have demonstrated by their actions against journalists today.
posted by Acey at 12:32 PM on February 3, 2011

Mubarak is virtually identical by almost any meaningful metric to the typical members of the politically determinative elite of any country. Only the particulars of his situation are different.

Mubaruk who, no doubt when he looks himself in the mirror in the morning, imagines himself an honorable man, likely decided long ago that Egyptian culture is essentially brutal and venal. And as such, he's built his career (and fortune) on guiding this culture the only way it can be guided (via a higher, more committed and organized brutality and venality).

Maybe. Or maybe he recognized long ago that regardless of other cultural strains, brutal and venal culture is determinative in this era of realpolitik. As the leader of a nation, to adhere to a moral or ideological code that disregards that is to make oneself and one's nation vulnerable to those who are not so starry-eyed. Maybe he had grand visions of an equitable society when he began, and lost them over time as he compromised repeatedly with power brokers who had, shall we say, less universal interests. I'm not saying this is what happened. I'm saying the result would likely be much the same either way.
posted by perspicio at 12:37 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Thank you Mods. The new "SHOW" feature makes this thread so much easier to keep up with now.
posted by Jumpin Jack Flash at 12:39 PM on February 3, 2011 [28 favorites]

I was just thinking that JJF! :)
posted by symbioid at 12:41 PM on February 3, 2011

must...resist....urge to refresh manually...
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:41 PM on February 3, 2011 [7 favorites]

The new "SHOW" feature makes this thread so much easier to keep up with now.

YES! Informational awesomeness in action.
posted by scody at 12:42 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Egyptian Christians link hands to protect Muslims at prayer from attackers.
posted by dejah420 at 12:45 PM on February 3, 2011 [12 favorites]

Thank you Mods. The new "SHOW" feature makes this thread so much easier to keep up with now.

What with this, and obsessively checking the Guardian liveblog all week, the internet is feeling a lot more "live" lately.
posted by Acey at 12:45 PM on February 3, 2011

Yah, I don't expect that feature was created for this thread, but man is it ever a timely pony. Thanks!
posted by absalom at 12:45 PM on February 3, 2011

Load New Meta.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:48 PM on February 3, 2011

What with this, and obsessively checking the Guardian liveblog all week, the internet is feeling a lot more "live" lately.

And my productivity here at work has fucking PLUMMETED.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 12:48 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Hillary Clinton is speaking now about the situation, and is specifically condemning the targeting of journalists.

She looks like she hasn't had any sleep in days.
posted by dcheeno at 12:49 PM on February 3, 2011

Yes, it's too soon to make Twitter jokes about Cairo to sell shoes
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:49 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yah, I don't expect that feature was created for this thread, but man is it ever a timely pony.

Also worth noting, as stet pointed out a long time ago in this thread ...

"Has anyone else been noticing that the epic threads load pretty much flawlessly nowadays? Tip of the hat to pb and the gang on that one."
posted by philip-random at 12:49 PM on February 3, 2011

And my productivity here at work has fucking PLUMMETED.

History trumps productivity, I think.
posted by Acey at 12:50 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sorry if someone mentioned this upthread but

Secretary Clinton in 2009: "I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family"
posted by unSane at 12:53 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Hillary Clinton is speaking now about the situation, and is specifically condemning the targeting of journalists.

More journalists are getting arrested, and the harassment is getting stronger. It's getting fairly invasive, and probably well coordinated as well.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:54 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Gee, I bet it's awful to not have any sleep. I wonder if she's also been set on fire, run over, or shot at. was about to vent some hyperbole, but on second thought I think I'll just bite my tongue.

FTFY
posted by perspicio at 12:59 PM on February 3, 2011 [8 favorites]

I only hope you'd do the same to for me.
posted by perspicio at 1:06 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Knock it off.
posted by proj at 1:08 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Egyptian protesters' makeshift helmets
posted by EvaDestruction at 1:10 PM on February 3, 2011 [11 favorites]

The role the internet has played in this revolution has been a revolution in itself. The way it was denied for so many days has only emphasised how criticaldangerous it is, particularly now that it has returned. Those that are trying to cling to power in Egypt undoubtedly recognise how criticaldangerous free information is, as they have demonstrated by their actions against journalists today.
posted by mkultra at 1:14 PM on February 3, 2011

#5 makeshift helmet... what better for taking on a tin-pot dictator?
posted by Jumpin Jack Flash at 1:16 PM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

Why did the powers that be go with attacking journalists (or instigating) instead of just revoking visas and shuttling them out of the country. Someone is using an outdated playbook?


Egyptian protesters' makeshift helmets

I was just thinking about how things could be a little different with construction hats. :(


Knock it off.

I have also not been set on fire, run over, or shot at in the past few days, and hopefully neither have you.
posted by zennie at 1:18 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sorry to have set that off; I just noticed that she looked extremely tired, and hope that she's working the diplomatic backchannels as hard as it looks like she is.
posted by dcheeno at 1:20 PM on February 3, 2011

The ABC interview with Christiane Amanpour : Mubarak: 'If I Resign Today There Will Be Chaos'

In an Exclusive Interview, Egypt's President Says He's Fed Up and Wants to Resign, "But Cannot for Fear of the Country Falling into Chaos."

...

He told me that he is troubled by the violence we have seen in Tahrir Square over the last few days but that his government is not responsible for it. Instead, he blamed the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned political party here in Egypt.

I guess the interview or excerpts will be broadcast tonight on Nightline. Neatly packaged for American consumption. Not sure anyone here would buy it. Incidentally his son Gamal is there.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:27 PM on February 3, 2011

Incidentally his son Gamal is there.

Where?
posted by mr_roboto at 1:29 PM on February 3, 2011

Cairo.
posted by proj at 1:31 PM on February 3, 2011

Zogby Poll: On the role of clergy in government: 65% agreed with a statement that "clergy must play a greater role in our political system."
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:33 PM on February 3, 2011

He told me, "I never intended to run again. I never intended Gamal to be President after me."

...it was just that I set him up in positions of increasingly senior policy-setting leadership and connected him with the business elite that would make people think that.
posted by jaduncan at 1:34 PM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

Zogby Poll: On the role of clergy in government: 65% agreed with a statement that "clergy must play a greater role in our political system."

Eh, I can imagine 65% of Americans agreeing with that poll.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 1:38 PM on February 3, 2011 [8 favorites]

Yes, the problem with a lot of these questions (survey researcher here) is that the context is highly important. In a country where parts of the religious establishment are seen as independent and less corrupt, many people say they want the clergy to play more important roles in governing. Also, as stated above, many Americans agree with the statement (paraphrased) that 'the Ten Commandments should be the basis of law.'
posted by proj at 1:42 PM on February 3, 2011

"Zogby Poll: On the role of clergy in government: 65% agreed with a statement that "clergy must play a greater role in our political system.""

And that is a democratic choice they have the right to make. Even if they were to vote in the Brotherhood instantly, it's their democratic choice, and their absolute right to set their country up as they wish.
posted by jaduncan at 1:45 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yes, it's too soon to make Twitter jokes about Cairo to sell shoes.

Why Should Kenneth Cole Limit His Crass Tweets to Egypt?
posted by ericb at 1:52 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Zogby Poll: On the role of clergy in government: 65% agreed with a statement that "clergy must play a greater role in our political system."

Most poorly worded poll question ever? This gives no insight into how much power the average Egyptian wants the clergy to have, what type of government they want to represent them, or who exactly they have in mind when they say clergy. "Greater power" - could that be any more ambiguous?
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 1:52 PM on February 3, 2011

Egypt's President Says He's Fed Up and Wants to Resign, "But Cannot for Fear of the Country Falling into Chaos."

This is the most appalling load of crap I've witnessed since the time I spent a week camped out in a Taco Bell bathroom.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:56 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Via TalkingPointsMemo

As a crackdown on journalists intensifies -- including reports that police and others have raided journalists' hotel rooms around Tahrir Square -- The Ramses Hilton has asked journalists not to film from hotel balconies.

From the Hilton Twitter feed:

Due to the gravity, immediacy and dynamic nature of the situation in Cairo, our hotel is implementing measures to ensure the safety
and security of our guests and employees, as this remains our highest priority. These measures include a request not to film

from the property due to the threat this poses to the reporters themselves as well as others on property.

We appreciate your understanding and support during these challenging circumstances.

Security forces were reportedly watching the hotel through binoculars for camera equipment on hotel balconies, then radioing their location to raiding parties in the hotel.

posted by ZeusHumms at 2:02 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Deputy Head of Nile TV quits, does want to be part of the propaganda machine anymore. (SLTumblrPost)
posted by gc at 2:05 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Another thanks for the SHOW feature--it makes such a huge difference.
posted by gingerbeer at 2:14 PM on February 3, 2011

Another video of a car running through protestors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cWOK0Lfh7w

What. THe. **FUCK**. These people are evil.
posted by kuatto at 2:19 PM on February 3, 2011

Egypt's President Says He's Fed Up and Wants to Resign, "But Cannot for Fear of the Country Falling into Chaos."

This is the most appalling load of crap I've witnessed since the time I spent a week camped out in a Taco Bell bathroom.

Is it? Who would take his place?
posted by schmod at 2:28 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is it? Who would take his place?

Presumably an interim care taker government followed by a democratically elected regime, maybe even after a false start or two.
posted by jedicus at 2:33 PM on February 3, 2011 [11 favorites]

Who would take his place?

From reading this analysis in a South African newspaper, I'd guess it's not so much the individual that matters as much as the power center, and it looks like the military is angling to remain the major force in the government, regardless of who the next president is.

The article also says that Mubarak is very ill, and likely won't live to see September. Has anyone else read anything like that?
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:36 PM on February 3, 2011

Is it? Who would take his place?

First, take a look at the premise that Egypt isn't ALREADY in chaos.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 2:39 PM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

"The article also says that Mubarak is very ill, and likely won't live to see September. Has anyone else read anything like that?"

Nope, I haven't. I have to doubt that some random SA paper would have the scoop on that, although it would lend an interesting spin to the 'I will die in Egypt' comment.
posted by jaduncan at 2:41 PM on February 3, 2011

A teacher, a student, a diplomat's son, and more... Meet 10 protesters in Tahrir Square.
posted by scody at 2:44 PM on February 3, 2011

There have been persistent reports for quite a while now that he is dying.
Personally, I've rarely seen an 82-year-old look so well.
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:48 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Rumors of Mubarak's wealth range in the tens of billions of dollars. Between that and being President of Egypt, I think he can get any health care/cosmetic surgery he wants.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:51 PM on February 3, 2011

He's fed up and wants to resign, I think that is a sign he's gone by the weekend. They've thrown everything at this crowd and they've stood their ground bravely. Unlike the Iranian Greens who were swept away by the Basiji militias, the Egyptians seem to be made of firmer stuff. I'm very impressed by the discipline and determination of these protesters.
posted by humanfont at 2:51 PM on February 3, 2011

Unlike the Iranian Greens who were swept away by the Basiji militias, the Egyptians seem to be made of firmer stuff.

I don't know that that's really fair to the Iranian demonstrators. The Basij are established, well-organized militias with perhaps millions of members. The pro-Mubarak forces of the past several days, as brutal as they may be, are simply not comparable.
posted by scody at 3:00 PM on February 3, 2011 [8 favorites]

That comparison is really obnoxious. The Basiji were a whole order of magnitude from yesterday's camel riders and half-assed firebombers. So was the death toll, by the way.
If you watched any of what happened in Tehran, you would know the fault was not the protesters' want of heart or balls.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:01 PM on February 3, 2011 [6 favorites]

Unlike the Iranian Greens who were swept away by the Basiji militias, the Egyptians seem to be made of firmer stuff.

Christ. The Iranians were getting mowed down. The fact that they did not succeed in overthrowing the government has fuck all to do with their bravery or lack thereof.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 3:02 PM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

I should just let scody post for me.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:02 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Egypt just cares about world opinion a bit more and wasn't as good at shutting out the media. If they wanted to take the violent suppression route like Iran I think they could have pulled it off. Probably too late now though.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:02 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

They've thrown everything at this crowd and they've stood their ground bravely. Unlike the Iranian Greens who were swept away by the Basiji militias, the Egyptians seem to be made of firmer stuff.

They were using live ammo from the start, there, with the full acquiescence of all divisions of the security forces. Here the army has stayed notably neutral, occasionally intervening to separate the thugs and the protesters. For these reasons the situations are quite different, and it seems to me in my own place of safety a trifle callous to question the bravery of those on the streets of Tehran last spring. Of course I agree with you entirely on the bravery those who've held the sq have shown.

What remains to be seen is whether it can be exceeded tomorrow, as it needs must be, by millions upon millions, in order for this revolution to succeed....
posted by Diablevert at 3:03 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yes, the Iranians were heavily armed and didn't care about how many they killed. The Egyptian state has actually been really quite restrained compared to Iran.
posted by jaduncan at 3:09 PM on February 3, 2011

Gangs Hunt Journalists and Rights Workers - There is nobody showing live footage from Tahrir Square any more. After the Hilton raid, there are no cameras left.
posted by dejah420 at 3:11 PM on February 3, 2011

The Boston Globe's Big Picture blog has posted a gallery of images from over the past week. They also posted a gallery last week with early images of the uprising (it also includes pictures from Tunisia and Lebanon).
posted by dcheeno at 3:26 PM on February 3, 2011

*pushes Show button*

Oh... I'm... I'm in some real trouble here, aren't I.
posted by notion at 3:32 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Mapped near-realtime tweets about protests in Egypt. Choose region(s) of origin: Middle East, East or West US, Europe.
posted by perspicio at 3:37 PM on February 3, 2011

There is a new thread up. (For now at least)
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:38 PM on February 3, 2011

Just saw a tweet that BBC Arabic is reporting that the army is cordoning off Tahrir with barbed wire. Combined with the campaign against journalists and the coming demonstration on Friday, this is damn chilling if true. Can anyone confirm?
posted by scody at 3:40 PM on February 3, 2011

(For now at least)

I've explicitly commented in that thread that it's sticking around.
posted by cortex at 3:43 PM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

I've explicitly commented in that thread that it's sticking around.

Makes sense on the level that someone checking the site for the first time in a couple of days would think we were ignoring what's going down.
posted by philip-random at 3:47 PM on February 3, 2011

If they are trying to prevent broadcast footage of what's happening at Tahrir Square, US Govt should run spy satellite footage of it.
posted by LobsterMitten at 3:50 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Query: Are flower shops or stalls still open in Central Cairo.
solution: Army arrests police not active in "night jobs", neutralize/scatter presidental guard then run the country for 3 days then an interim gov't then elections. Sueliman thinks he can hold certain people 'hostage' with his files but the dirt in the files will be nothing compared to the blood on HIS hands.

Protestors + Army = V
posted by clavdivs at 3:54 PM on February 3, 2011

Shall we all move to the new thread? This one is crazy big and I don't want to check two threads at once.
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:00 PM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

"Protestors + Army = V"

I'd be a little cautious about the + Army, given that they have already

a) failed to protect people from a cavalry charge and molotov cocktails;
b) are apparently currently surrounding the square with barbed wire, and;
c) all of the senior military leadership know that the VP has blackmail files on them.
posted by jaduncan at 4:02 PM on February 3, 2011

Shall we all move to the new thread? This one is crazy big and I don't want to check two threads at once.

It seems like that thread is more specifically about journalists in Egypt. This should likely be the main thread for the revolution. \o/
posted by mrgrimm at 4:08 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

With the new "show" feature it isn't so hard to keep up with this thread. You just have to stay logged in and keep the tab open. Not sure how it works with phones, though.

As for the Egyptian government, they're just not as organized or practiced at evil thuggery as Iran. There's a bit of a learning curve, but they'll get to the same place eventually, if they have time.

Hopefully there'll be massive, peaceful demonstrations on Friday, and the sheer number of citizens will convince the security services that it's better to leave them alone.
posted by Kevin Street at 4:13 PM on February 3, 2011

I wish I hadn't read this.

David Asman: "President Mubarak sent a message by camel to President Obama today ... Mubarak was telling Obama to mind his own business, that he will leave on his own terms, not on terms or timetables dictated by the White House. . .

The administration's inability to have any sway there is what happens when you desert your allies and try to apply Robert's rules of order to the raw power plays of the Middle East. We saw the same thing happen with the Carter administration's mishandling of Iran in 1979 and we are shocked that this administration thinks the same lofty ideals will have better luck in Egypt. It is a fairyland, it is an academic view of the world that frankly tracks very closely with this administration's views on the economy. Take healthcare, for example ..."

And here's the same guy in 2002 talking about how Czech Intelligence proves that Iraq was responsible for 9/11, Iraq has WMDs because Bush says so, etc, trying to discredit Scott Ritter, former Marine, weapons inspector, and a person with a thousand times more integrity than that piece of shit David Asman.

I'm gonna take a little lie down.
posted by notion at 4:14 PM on February 3, 2011

With the new "show" feature it isn't so hard to keep up with this thread.

I was just about to say that's damn good timing.
posted by mrgrimm at 4:17 PM on February 3, 2011

mrgrimm: "Shall we all move to the new thread? This one is crazy big and I don't want to check two threads at once.

It seems like that thread is more specifically about journalists in Egypt. This should likely be the main thread for the revolution. \o/"

I didn't know Steve Holt was involved.
posted by symbioid at 4:28 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

I didn't know Steve Holt was involved.

\o/ = lol, i'm drowning.
posted by mrgrimm at 4:38 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Personally, I think we should all go to the circumcision thread. That's some impending violence we could do something about.
posted by philip-random at 4:50 PM on February 3, 2011

Senate passes resolution calling on Hosni Mubarak to begin transfer of power in Egypt
posted by dejah420 at 5:13 PM on February 3, 2011

I wish I hadn't read this.

I can't fathom why you bothered. The URL alone tells everything worth knowing about the article. Anyway, since you've gone ahead and exposed yourself to diseased rhetoric, here's an immunity booster if you need it.
posted by perspicio at 5:13 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

NYT: White House, Egypt Discusses Plan for Mubarak’s Exit

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for President Hosni Mubarak to resign immediately, turning over power to a transitional government headed by Vice President Omar Suleiman with the support of the Egyptian military, administration officials and Arab diplomats said Thursday.

Even though Mr. Mubarak has balked, so far, at leaving now, officials from both governments are continuing talks about a plan in which, Mr. Suleiman, backed by Sami Enan, chief of the Egyptian armed forces, and Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the Defense Minister, would immediately begin a process of constitutional reform.

The proposal also calls for the transitional government to invite members from a broad range of opposition groups, including the banned Muslim Brotherhood, to begin work to open up the country’s electoral system in an effort to bring about free and fair elections in September, the officials said.

Senior administration officials said that the proposal is one of several options under discussion with high-level Egyptian officials around Mr. Mubarak, though not him directly, in an effort to convince him to step down now.

So nothing changes except he leaves. I suppose the fine details include how much of his money he gets to keep, what country he goes to exile in, and what happens to his kids.
posted by ZeusHumms at 5:21 PM on February 3, 2011

Sorry, Immunity Booster, take 2.
posted by perspicio at 5:23 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Wow, that NYT article was rushed to publication, wasn't it?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 5:26 PM on February 3, 2011

Was just about to post my doom-mongering fears of this evening, but then I see the Times piece linked to...that's hope, and masterful diplomacy. I wasn't sure if the purse would be enough, but maybe the Senate scared them....
posted by Diablevert at 5:26 PM on February 3, 2011

Now that's bizarre...even after reloading the page, the Times link I see points directly back here (same as my 1st "immunity booster" link attempt, which is why I made another). Are you saying it points to the actual NYT website in your browser?
posted by perspicio at 5:33 PM on February 3, 2011

Are you saying it points to the actual NYT website in your browser?

It did the first time. Not any more though. Here's the direct link, just in case (no HTML just in case):

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/world/middleeast/04diplomacy.html
posted by ZeusHumms at 5:45 PM on February 3, 2011

I withdraw my comment regarding the Egyptian protesters as inarticulate. I was trying to praise their poise in the face of serious armed force but I have clearly come across as defaming the honor of the revolutionaries in Iran. I did not intend to state that, merely that other protesters could learn from admire their spirit of active but minimally violent resistance.
posted by humanfont at 5:46 PM on February 3, 2011

Nah, link's busted, I just googled the article title and went there....although having a moment to digest the full piece, it still seems to be a near thing ---- no named sources, really. This is the administration effectively dropping a big fucking hint, but not coming right out, and the Egyptian officials quoted seem to think they can ride it out and have it their way, still....which means unless there is a massive, massive, massive yet peaceful protest tomorrow it may still all go to shit and the White House will be left swinging in the wind.

People seem scared, and who wouldn't be...knowing nothing, really, and being halfway around the world as I am...while I hope that they'll get that groundswell of support, if I had to bet on it now I'm not sure they will....unless they can surpass the numbers earlier this week, I think the regime will hold on. And the feeling has changed...ordinary people seem scared now, and more than half-believing in "Aprês moi, le deluge" which Mubarak wants them to believe and the Army is content to let them believe. If people stay home tomorrow, then Mubarak stays until September and is replaced by Suliman, and then another general...Meet the Old Boss. That feels like the likely scenario, at the moment. Of course it could all go wrong yet...
posted by Diablevert at 5:47 PM on February 3, 2011

Al Jazeera and VBS.tv are my go-to channels now. Network and cable news, you're dead to me.
posted by notion at 5:51 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

The program on AJ right now is excellent.

"Bloggers are not saying that they are the revolution, but they are an important part of it. This revolution is about the Egyptian people."
posted by notion at 5:56 PM on February 3, 2011

From the New York Times:

And on Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called King Abdullah of Jordan to say the United States looked forward to working with his new Cabinet—recently announced--and to underline the importance of the relationship between Jordan and the United States.

Philip J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman, declined to say whether Mrs. Clinton had enlisted him in an effort to ease out Mr. Mubarak. But he praised the king for responding to the unrest in Jordan. He’s doing his best to respond to this growing aspiration, Mr. Crowley said. And we appreciate the leadership he’s shown.

posted by Joe in Australia at 5:57 PM on February 3, 2011

Al Jazeera and VBS.tv are my go-to channels now.

May I also suggest:

LinkTV
The Real News
MEMRI TV
Voxalead News

(some overlap amongst them)
posted by perspicio at 6:10 PM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

Rule of Thumb: if you throw a revolution, don't stop until the old guard is gone or you are dead. If you go half-measures, you'll wind up right back where you.

Suliman = Mubarak = same shit, different bucket.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:18 PM on February 3, 2011

if you throw a revolution, don't stop until the old guard is gone or you are dead.

Because if you do, you and your friends will end up black-bagged and have alligator clamps hooked to your unit.

I know that these kids aren't dumb. They're going to succeed or go down fighting.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 6:32 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

There are several examples such as Spain, South Africa and Chile where total removal of the old gaurd was not necessary to ensure a transition to democracy. In fact a negotiated process most often turns out better for all involved.
posted by humanfont at 6:41 PM on February 3, 2011

Are y'all making a joke about the "show" button? Sorry if I'm being dumb, but that sounds like a handy thing and I'm hoping it's real.
posted by Miko at 6:43 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Are y'all making a joke about the "show" button? Sorry if I'm being dumb, but that sounds like a handy thing and I'm hoping it's real.

No joke. It's real, and extremely handy. AJAX loads up new posts without refreshing the whole thread. Javascript needs to be enabled. What browser are you using?
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 6:45 PM on February 3, 2011

Chrome. Are you just talking about the ("new") link?
posted by Miko at 6:49 PM on February 3, 2011

Oh wow. Oddly, for the first time, I just noticed it. I think I refresh the page so antsily and hop around so much that I just never saw it pop up. Thanks, never mind, carry on!
posted by Miko at 6:52 PM on February 3, 2011

It makes the discussion a lot more 'real-timey'
posted by delmoi at 6:53 PM on February 3, 2011

There are several examples such as Spain, South Africa and Chile where total removal of the old gaurd was not necessary to ensure a transition to democracy. In fact a negotiated process most often turns out better for all involved.

Can't argue with that, but for it to work you need a certain amount of exhaustion and capitulation by at least the leadership of the old guard. A sense that while they could fight it out for some considerable time yet, the days of wine and roses ain't coming back no matter what so better to use what power you yet have to gild your parachute. (And those of your class or cadre.)

In the early days of this revolution, the fact that the army was holding back suggested that this might be possible, but I can't say that seems to have been the read lately. They showed their hand when they told people to go home yesterday morning: The Army got what it wanted when Mubarak promised not to run again and not to push Gamal, and as far as they were concerned the protests could end. That's why they didn't stop the goons --- it was no longer necessary to do their "Proud Protectors of the Egyptian People" bit, and while firing up the Kalashnikov would have been too abrupt a volte-face, they were perfectly willing to look the other way when the thugs rushed in to crack heads if that would get the job done. The only minor wrinkle is that it turned out the thugs weren't enough to clear the square. Must have been extremely irritating for the high command.

But none of this suggests capitulation, yet. If everybody goes home pretty soon, they can still regain the status quo, with but little altered. And unless the protest is renewed and refreshed with a huge new wave of folks tomorrow, everybody will go home pretty soon...
posted by Diablevert at 6:59 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Rule of Thumb: if you throw a revolution, don't stop until the old guard is gone or you are dead.

you are as wrong as blunday fishy and I won't take the time to squash that.
posted by clavdivs at 6:59 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

human font will.
Man, you don't want the brothers hitting the streets with AKs and death lists.
I'll call it. PIKE!
posted by clavdivs at 7:03 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

you are as wrong as blunday fishy and I won't take the time to squash that.


human font will.
Man, you don't want the brothers hitting the streets with AKs and death lists.
I'll call it. PIKE!

I have never, ever, known what you are trying to say. And I like that. Keep being the absurd white-noise that gives metafilter its texture.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:05 PM on February 3, 2011 [11 favorites]

I SAID PIKE!
thats clear as a bell, im going to kick my firewood now.
posted by clavdivs at 7:08 PM on February 3, 2011 [7 favorites]

NYT: The Obama administration is discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for President Hosni Mubarak to resign immediately...

The military is sort of paralyzed for a couple of reasons: 1) it is likely that troops will not follow orders to commit a massacre and issuing those type of orders could cause troops to mutiny; 2) the leadership of the military has a separate power base from the regime and could weather the fall of Mubarak but might not be able to weather an unsuccessful coup de etat by the military (the counter-coup mechanisms put in place by Nasser are very much part of the military organization.)

I wish I knew more about the balance of power within the military, but it seems likely that too strong a move by anything less than a unanimous military leadership could lead to infighting. This balance makes the military a limited force for stability.

What does matter is where the fissures develop in the power structure. So far we have seen the minister of interior (who started the chaos by pulling the police back when the military was called up) and a few members of the clique of businessmen surrounding Gamal Mubarak. Gamal's faction is not supported by the military leadership; they are not friends. this is currently being signaled by the regime trying to pin the violence on the former minister of interior and Gamal's cronies.

In one sense, the regime's turning on this clique is a very quiet sort of counter coup. One possible explanation for the violence is that it was partly an attempt by the expelled plutocrats to force a violent end to the revolution. Having failed, they placed the regime in very immediate danger. So they got thrown out of the sleigh...

The regime has factions and the state is not monolithic.
posted by warbaby at 7:18 PM on February 3, 2011 [4 favorites]

Leaders of the Egyptian opposition party Wafd are joining the demonstrators in Tahrir square. Wafd refuses to meet with government leaders until the government cracks down on pro-Mubarak gangs, and "demands that Mubarak resign immediately, begin the process of drafting a new constitution, cancel the state of emergency, and dissolve parliament with a view toward preparing new elections."
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:23 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

the counter-coup mechanisms put in place by Nasser are very much part of the military organization

???
posted by fatbird at 7:28 PM on February 3, 2011

See this article about the restructuring after the Amer coup attempt:

Addressing the Void Between Military and Civil Authority

The reforms were implemented immediately after the Field Marshal Amer affair. First, a civilian would occupy the post of Defense Minister, he would be responsible for preparing the nation’s war effort, financing and procurement. The Army Chief of Staff would take on the responsibility of organizing, training and preparing the specific armed forces units for war. A Minister for War was created to be the chief military advisor to the president and was given the title General in Chief of all armed forces. His job primarily was to advise the president and commander-in-chief as well as the Majlis (legislature) on military threats and the state of preparedness of the armed forces....

Authority is spread around in the military to prevent a group like the Free Officers forming. I think this could inhibit the military from making a coup like the one Field Marsha Amer attempted against Nasser.
posted by warbaby at 8:02 PM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

addem.
'Nasser did use his brief time as Prime Minister to “purge... pro-Naguib elements in the army”, and over the duration of the RCC he gradually forced Naguib from power. Finally, in October 1954, Nasser formally removed Naguib from power and established himself as the effective leader of Egypt. Nasser remained in power over Egypt for the next fifteen years with no major domestic challenges to his power. When Nasser seized poThus, on July 24, 1954, the Council dissolved itself and announced the end of the Egyptian revolution.wer in Egypt, he decided to abolish the Council. '
posted by clavdivs at 8:04 PM on February 3, 2011

Guardian: Egypt evacuations ease; some arriving come armed

Some of those few passengers arriving in Cairo fell afoul of the law because they came braced for the worst.

A group of Chinese journalists was detained after customs officials discovered bulletproof vests and more than 20 satellite phones and walkie-talkies in their baggage, airport officials said. The journalists were released after the items in question — which require government permits or are banned altogether — were confiscated.

Why would China send journalists if they're filtering out 'Egypt' from web searches and such?
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:32 PM on February 3, 2011 [3 favorites]

Why would China send journalists if they're filtering out 'Egypt' from web searches and such?

Because they're covering it. I imagine they just don't want individual citizens to be doing their own research.
posted by philip-random at 9:56 PM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

Wael Hassan, a dentist who has been delivering medical supplies in central Cairo, tells BBC World: "Tahrir Square is all sealed now, there's only the main entrance open. I see long queues of people waiting to get in, but the army is not letting anyone - they don't know if they are protesters or government thugs." He also said that the understanding today is that government thugs will go inside and try to blend in with protesters and then attack from within.

Also from the BBC: The British-Egyptian actor Khalid Abdalla, who's been in Tahrir Square in recent days, has told the BBC that the there are more opposition protesters than ever, even though state TV has been turning people against the demonstrators: "The propaganda that's coming from state television seems to be doing a lot of work and... people here are finding it very hard to get information which is true. People in the square are getting calls from people outside the square who they know, saying 'what are you doing here?' There are even reports we're receiving five star food from the hotels around us, and Kentucky Fried Chicken are giving us all sorts of things, that we are in the pay and get fifty dollars a day from God knows who."
posted by dejah420 at 11:38 PM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

Stratfor: A Breakdown of Egyptian Opposition Groups. (Scribd version).
posted by adamvasco at 11:45 PM on February 3, 2011

El Baradei will have a news conference this morning, according to one twitterer in madamjujujive's list of egypt twitterers.
posted by LobsterMitten at 12:18 AM on February 4, 2011

adamvasco: Thats the same Stratfor that a few days ago claimed Hamas was pouring into Egypt to lead the Muslim Brotherhood in an all-out Islamic revolution.

[ctrl+f "stratfor" in this thread to see it and the debunking]

I wouldn't trust their opinion on anything related to this.
posted by xqwzts at 12:34 AM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

I haven't heard any news about this, but my Egyptian friends' facebook accounts seem to have all disappeared... anything confirmed on this front?
posted by xqwzts at 12:39 AM on February 4, 2011

One of the twitterers, monasosh, posts a brief story of how her parents decided to have a baby when they knew her dad would have to go to prison for belonging to an opposition political party - this morning she's in Tahrir and says "My mom is wt me, my dad is arrested we don't know where, thought I'd share this bit abt them". (I believe she did this "speak to tweet" voice message several days ago too.)
posted by LobsterMitten at 12:41 AM on February 4, 2011

Meanwhile, Malaysians are protesting on behalf of Egypt - and get a water cannon shot at them.
posted by divabat at 1:08 AM on February 4, 2011

Meanwhile, Malaysians are protesting on behalf of Egypt - and get a water cannon shot at them.

Just perfect, I am boarding a plane for there right now.
posted by Meatbomb at 1:11 AM on February 4, 2011

Oh it's nothing new - be vaguely anti-Government (and having people from the Opposition parties count), get water-cannoned. I wonder what the Government position is on this though, haven't heard much there.
posted by divabat at 1:34 AM on February 4, 2011

Just spotted a great comment over on Gamers With Jobs, passing along a friend-of-a-friend email. It seemed worth posting here in its entirety:

I don’t know how to start writing this. I have been battling fatigue for not sleeping properly for the past 10 days, moving from one’s friend house to another friend’s house, almost never spending a night in my home, facing a very well funded and well organized ruthless regime that views me as nothing but an annoying bug that its time to squash will come. The situation here is bleak to say the least.

It didn’t start out that way. On Tuesday Jan 25 it all started peacefully, and against all odds, we succeeded to gather hundreds of thousands and get them into Tahrir Square, despite being attacked by Anti-Riot Police who are using sticks, tear gas and rubber bullets against us. We managed to break all of their barricades and situated ourselves in Tahrir. The government responded by shutting down all cell communication in Tahrir square, a move which purpose was understood later when after midnight they went in with all of their might and attacked the protesters and evacuated the Square. The next day we were back at it again, and the day after. Then came Friday and we braved their communication blackout, their thugs, their tear gas and their bullets and we retook the square. We have been fighting to keep it ever since.

That night the government announced a military curfew, which kept getting shorter by the day, until it became from 8 am to 3 pm. People couldn’t go to work, gas was running out quickly and so were essential goods and money, since the banks were not allowed to operate and people were not able to collect their salary. The internet continued to be blocked, which affected all businesses in Egypt and will cause an economic meltdown the moment they allow the banks to operate again. We were being collectively punished for daring to say that we deserve democracy and rights, and to keep it up, they withdrew the police, and then sent them out dressed as civilians to terrorize our neighborhoods. I was shot at twice that day, one of which with a semi-automatic by a dude in a car that we the people took joy in pummeling. The government announced that all prisons were breached, and that the prisoners somehow managed to get weapons and do nothing but randomly attack people. One day we had organized thugs in uniforms firing at us and the next day they disappeared and were replaced by organized thugs without uniforms firing at us. Somehow the people never made the connection.

Despite it all, we braved it. We believed we are doing what’s right and were encouraged by all those around us who couldn’t believe what was happening to their country. What he did galvanized the people, and on Tuesday, despite shutting down all major roads leading into Cairo, we managed to get over 2 million protesters in Cairo alone and 3 million all over Egypt to come out and demand Mubarak’s departure. Those are people who stood up to the regime’s ruthlessness and anger and declared that they were free, and were refusing to live in the Mubarak dictatorship for one more day. That night, he showed up on TV, and gave a very emotional speech about how he intends to step down at the end of his term and how he wants to die in Egypt, the country he loved and served. To me, and to everyone else at the protests this wasn’t nearly enough, for we wanted him gone now. Others started asking that we give him a chance, and that change takes time and other such poppycock. Hell, some people and family members cried when they saw his speech. People felt sorry for him for failing to be our dictator for the rest of his life and inheriting us to his Son. It was an amalgam of Stockholm syndrome coupled with slave mentality in a malevolent combination that we never saw before. And the Regime capitalized on it today.

Today, they brought back the internet, and started having people calling on TV and writing on facebook on how they support Mubarak and his call for stability and peacefull change in 8 months. They hung on to the words of the newly appointed government would never harm the protesters, whom they believe to be good patriotic youth who have a few bad apples amongst them. We started getting calls asking people to stop protesting because “we got what we wanted” and “we need the country to start working again”. People were complaining that they miss their lives. That they miss going out at night, and ordering Home Delivery. That they need us to stop so they can resume whatever existence they had before all of this. All was forgiven, the past week never happened and it’s time for Unity under Mubarak’s rule right now.

To all of those people I say: NEVER! I am sorry that your lives and businesses are disrupted, but this wasn’t caused by the Protesters. The Protesters aren’t the ones who shut down the internet that has paralyzed your businesses and banks: The government did. The Protesters weren’t the ones who initiated the military curfew that limited your movement and allowed goods to disappear off market shelves and gas to disappear: The government did. The Protesters weren’t the ones who ordered the police to withdraw and claimed the prisons were breached and unleashed thugs that terrorized your neighborhoods: The government did. The same government that you wish to give a second chance to, as if 30 years of dictatorship and utter failure in every sector of government wasn’t enough for you. The Slaves were ready to forgive their master, and blame his cruelty on those who dared to defy him in order to ensure a better Egypt for all of its citizens and their children. After all, he gave us his word, and it’s not like he ever broke his promises for reform before or anything.

Then Mubarak made his move and showed them what useful idiots they all were.

You watched on TV as “Pro-Mubarak Protesters” – thugs who were paid money by NDP members by admission of High NDP officials- started attacking the peaceful unarmed protesters in Tahrir square. They attacked them with sticks, threw stones at them, brought in men riding horses and camels- in what must be the most surreal scene ever shown on TV- and carrying whips to beat up the protesters. And then the Bullets started getting fired and Molotov cocktails started getting thrown at the Anti-Mubarak Protesters as the Army standing idly by, allowing it all to happen and not doing anything about it. Dozens were killed, hundreds injured, and there was no help sent by ambulances. The Police never showed up to stop those attacking because the ones who were captured by the Anti-mubarak people had police ID’s on them. They were the police and they were there to shoot and kill people and even tried to set the Egyptian Museum on Fire. The Aim was clear: Use the clashes as pretext to ban such demonstrations under pretexts of concern for public safety and order, and to prevent disunity amongst the people of Egypt. But their plans ultimately failed, by those resilient brave souls who wouldn’t give up the ground they freed of Egypt, no matter how many live bullets or firebombs were hurled at them. They know, like we all do, that this regime no longer cares to put on a moderate mask. That they have shown their true nature. That Mubarak will never step down, and that he would rather burn Egypt to the ground than even contemplate that possibility.

In the meantime, State-owned and affiliated TV channels were showing coverage of Peaceful Mubarak Protests all over Egypt and showing recorded footage of Tahrir Square protest from the night before and claiming it’s the situation there at the moment. Hundreds of calls by public figures and actors started calling the channels saying that they are with Mubarak, and that he is our Father and we should support him on the road to democracy. A veiled girl with a blurred face went on Mehwer TV claiming to have received funding by Americans to go to the US and took courses on how to bring down the Egyptian government through protests which were taught by Jews. She claimed that AlJazeera is lying, and that the only people in Tahrir square now were Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. State TV started issuing statements on how the people arrested Israelis all over Cairo engaged in creating mayhem and causing chaos. For those of you who are counting this is an American-Israeli-Qatari-Muslim Brotherhood-Iranian-Hamas conspiracy. Imagine that. And MANY PEOPLE BOUGHT IT. I recall telling a friend of mine that the only good thing about what happened today was that it made clear to us who were the idiots amongst our friends. Now we know.

Now, just in case this isn’t clear: This protest is not one made or sustained by the Muslim Brotherhood, it’s one that had people from all social classes and religious background in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood only showed up on Tuesday, and even then they were not the majority of people there by a long shot. We tolerated them there since we won’t say no to fellow Egyptians who wanted to stand with us, but neither the Muslims Brotherhood not any of the Opposition leaders have the ability to turn out one tenth of the numbers of Protesters that were in Tahrir on Tuesday. This is a revolution without leaders. Three Million individuals choosing hope instead of fear and braving death on hourly basis to keep their dream of freedom alive. Imagine that.

The End is near. I have no illusions about this regime or its leader, and how he will pluck us and hunt us down one by one till we are over and done with and 8 months from now will pay people to stage fake protests urging him not to leave power, and he will stay “because he has to acquiesce to the voice of the people”. This is a losing battle and they have all the weapons, but we will continue fighting until we can’t. I am heading to Tahrir right now with supplies for the hundreds injured, knowing that today the attacks will intensify, because they can’t allow us to stay there come Friday, which is supposed to be the game changer. We are bringing everybody out, and we will refuse to be anything else than peaceful. If you are in Egypt, I am calling on all of you to head down to Tahrir today and Friday. It is imperative to show them that the battle for the soul of Egypt isn’t over and done with. I am calling you to bring your friends, to bring medical supplies, to go and see what Mubarak’s guarantees look like in real life. Egypt needs you. Be Heroes.

posted by Malor at 1:44 AM on February 4, 2011 [21 favorites]

Meanwhile, Malaysians are protesting on behalf of Egypt - and get a water cannon shot at them.

Malaysia is the democracy where people who get too many votes and aren't on the same pages as the ruling party end up in prison because they're apparently gay rapists. So I wouldn't, you know, expect too much vis-a-vis respect for civil liberties.
posted by rodgerd at 1:50 AM on February 4, 2011

A couple of things: Friday prayers have just ended. AJ is reporting that Egyptians of other religions were forming a human shield around the protesters as they prayed. This is absolutely beautiful, and it gives me such faith in mankind.

Second, they've been showing in the square vs. what Egyptian national television is showing. Compared to the fervor that's going on in the square that AJ is showing, Cairo looks quite peaceful on national television.
posted by gc at 2:56 AM on February 4, 2011

Nile TV (via CNN) is showing Liberation Square now. Not sure what's being said.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:59 AM on February 4, 2011

Fight in Alexandria, post prayer. Seems to have quickly ended, but still disturbing.
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:05 AM on February 4, 2011

Al Jazeera: 1:14pm: Our correspondent in Cairo says pro-Mubarak gangs are not visible at all in the streets and that the army has taken extensive measures to secure the demonstration. She says imams, speaking in mosques today, have called for calm and praised the role of the army as it is working to prevent violence.
posted by Infinite Jest at 3:27 AM on February 4, 2011

Guardian liveblog says:

ITV's Mark Austin is sending some interesting tweets from Cairo:

An Egyptian friend has phoned me to say no pro Mubarak demos today because Mubarak can't afford to keep paying them

Ha!
posted by EndsOfInvention at 4:41 AM on February 4, 2011 [4 favorites]

The al Jazeera liveblog hasn't shown any updates in quite a while. Am I just failing at the internet, or have they stopped updating it?
posted by meese at 4:46 AM on February 4, 2011

I can't get AJE's live feed on either their website or YouTube.

The Guardian's reported:

Al-Jazeera is investigating the hacking of its news website. The channel says the hacking was carried out "apparently by opponents of the pro-democracy movement in Egypt". The channel says its website has been under "relentless attack" since the Egyptian uprising began.

Don't know if it's related.
posted by nangar at 5:04 AM on February 4, 2011

Guardian saying hundreds of thousands in Tahrir Sq, mood "relaxed". No sign of pro-Mubarak men. Egyptian army supposedly told to protect journalists.

Eyewitnesses claim "the Catholic Cardinal in Egypt was witnessed hand in hand with a Muslim cleric, both in their religious dress with the pro-democracy demonstrators. He was speaking about national unity, stating that the myth of sectarian strife is only made by the failing government security apparatus and urge people to unite as Egyptians. The Muslim cleric also stated the same."

Guardian Beirut correspondent quoted "Massive waves of euphoria are sweeping through the region now, my friends in Baghdad, Sanaa, Beirut and Damascus tell me as they sit glued to their TV screens.

Tunisia was the start but Tunisia was far away, people said; it's small and relatively educated compared to the rest of the Arab world – but Egypt is something else. For almost two centuries Egypt was the heart of the Arab world, influencing it with cinema, music, journalism and ideology."

Al Jazeera: "100,000 protesters have gathered in Damanhour, about 100 miles north west of Cairo, to demand that Mubarak resigns"
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:17 AM on February 4, 2011 [5 favorites]

AJE's live feed is back.
posted by nangar at 5:50 AM on February 4, 2011

Data Point from Vienna, Austria: AJE's live feed has been up and running, without interruption, for the past 6 hours here.
posted by syzygy at 6:07 AM on February 4, 2011

AJE is doing a bit of a Daily Show take on the white house reactions.
posted by empath at 6:31 AM on February 4, 2011

AJE is doing a bit of a Daily Show take on the white house reactions.
posted by empath at 6:31 AM on February 4 [+] [!]

As much as I like to see hypocrisy exposed, I find these kinds of take downs a bit damaging. It encourages charges of "flip-flopper" and is one of the reasons we find politicians clinging rigidly to positions long after the available information has exposed their shortcomings. We should be glad that officials are ready to change their positions. Of course, there will always be a certain amount of political handwaving in the form of "Well, I've always said y..." when the evidence clearly shows x was said. However, better to do this and change to a better position than just rigidly stick to x.
posted by proj at 6:39 AM on February 4, 2011 [2 favorites]

AJ's Cairo office has been burned along with the equipment inside it.
Live Blog running fine
posted by adamvasco at 6:42 AM on February 4, 2011

question:

How many successful armed popular revolutions (as opposed to military coups) have there been in the past 30 years?

How many successful non-violent revolutions have there been?
posted by empath at 6:51 AM on February 4, 2011

zennie: I was just thinking about how things could be a little different with construction hats. :(

"Many ppl wear construction helmets today, also some motorbike helmets, to protect against any danger of flying rocks"
posted by EvaDestruction at 6:52 AM on February 4, 2011

Malor, that letter was from Sandmonkey. Cntl-F to find it on this thread from a day or two ago. It's been making the rounds of the interwebs since he was arrested.
posted by dejah420 at 6:55 AM on February 4, 2011 [2 favorites]

@Proj: Politicians cause their own downfall there because they refuse to admit they changed their minds or explain why, do that and The Daily Show won't run those clips.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:57 AM on February 4, 2011

twitter messages are going around that the crowd is about to move towards the presidential palace.
posted by empath at 7:05 AM on February 4, 2011

Al Jazeera's Live Stream is showing that the massive crowd in Tehrir Square has erupted in huge cheers. They are reporting that the cause for this isn't totally clear, but calls have been made for the crowd to move to the presidental palace.
posted by arcolz at 7:07 AM on February 4, 2011

Ah, apparently the crowd was reacting to a (false) rumor that Mubarak had stepped down.
posted by arcolz at 7:15 AM on February 4, 2011

I think because of the title of this thread, I've had Yeats's Second Coming rattling around in my head for the last day or so. Not helping with the sense of foreboding but I have to keep reminding myself that "the best lack all conviction" very very clearly does not apply here.
posted by yarrow at 7:36 AM on February 4, 2011 [2 favorites]

Last night at the pub, the muted TV was showing footage of the Cairo street, as a CD changer shuffled through classic rock. Somehow, "We'll be fighting in the streets..." popped up.

From the reports, though, it sounds like a fair number have been fooled again. I love sandmonkey's quote: "the only good thing about what happened today was that it made clear to us who were the idiots amongst our friends".
posted by anthill at 8:00 AM on February 4, 2011

Reading that sandmonkey post, and him talking about the so-called foreign influence, I heard that the other night on the BBC when the newly appointed VP (I haven't been following close enough to catch his name sadly) was interviewed (IIRC), and he kept mentioning "foreign influences". And of course, in my mind I'm hearing "Jews" (i.e. from their perspective), and then, of course, knowing he was speaking to western media trying to influence us, he said "Iran".

Of course, the facade is so fucking transparent. Say "foreigners" as a nice vague generic enemy, and insert the context when giving a foreign interview (if talking to the US/Israel - say "Iran", if talking to Arab media, say "Israel"), while letting the domestic listener form their own prejudiced opinion (if one is so inclined to support the government and believe what it's saying).
posted by symbioid at 8:10 AM on February 4, 2011

Sounds like Mubarak will be headed to Montenegro in the very near future, possibly late tonight or later this weekend.
posted by humanfont at 8:23 AM on February 4, 2011

Why do you say that?
posted by empath at 8:26 AM on February 4, 2011

Why do you say that?

6:01pm Media in Montenegro is reporting that Hosni Mubarak may find exile in their country, and that his son and close personal friends are preparing things for him to arrive there. Montenegro is where deposed Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, sought refuge.
posted by Devils Rancher at 8:38 AM on February 4, 2011

interesting. I am skeptical, tho
posted by empath at 8:39 AM on February 4, 2011

What's special about Montenegro? Do they do special visas for deposed dictators or something?
posted by EndsOfInvention at 8:39 AM on February 4, 2011

Maybe Montenegro media are trolling. Either that, or they looked at his bank balance.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:44 AM on February 4, 2011

I've had Yeats's Second Coming rattling around in my head for the last day or so

Great piece of poetry and all but Yeats did write it at the dawn of the 20th century which, it's worth pointing out, makes it damned accurate, certainly for Europe (1914-45). If those years weren't apocalyptic, I wonder what is.
posted by philip-random at 9:11 AM on February 4, 2011

Malor's letter is indeed Sandmonkey, whose site is back up (presumably after resolving a bandwidth charge); although some media noted the account was suspended, it could not have been an Egyptian government action, as the host is in the US.

What's special about Montenegro? Do they do special visas for deposed dictators or something?

No extradition, apparently even if it joins the EU.
posted by dhartung at 9:13 AM on February 4, 2011 [2 favorites]

Malor's letter is indeed Sandmonkey, whose site is back up (presumably after resolving a bandwidth charge); although some media noted the account was suspended, it could not have been an Egyptian government action, as the host is in the US.

Thanks for the heads up. I just took down my mirror.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 9:15 AM on February 4, 2011

NO YOU CAN'T
posted by raztaj at 9:15 AM on February 4, 2011 [10 favorites]

stalemate at the moment. My time clock ran out yesterday, though the desired outcome failed-hosni gone or retired (exile) it stands as a benchmark. Today is. Momentum is being lost by the hour and angry protest cannot be a Bastille day like situation.
Mubarak is not running the show I believe. This will break, there is an option of massive street protest, 5X the numbers now and just gang press but this will be chaotic. If the Military can convince the people to go home and promise change will come- perhaps, but this will not happen.

One side needs to melt into the other to contain the CSR and paid thugs.
Mubarak could resolve this by calling in 20 protestors and have a talk; one camera- 20 people and their president. Just start talking, then everyone will start dialouge. Hosni could use his exile as a powerchip to all powerful elements. Stand down or i will join the people...

(who the heck am I fooling)
posted by clavdivs at 11:52 AM on February 4, 2011

'CSF', all 400, 000 of them.
posted by clavdivs at 11:56 AM on February 4, 2011

Washington's role in arming Egypt.
posted by adamvasco at 12:48 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

For all the HURF DURF USA SUX here, it's pretty clear that the army has been the force that has stopped (major) bloodletting against the protestors, and restrained Mubarak's violence.

The US has spent a lot of time training them, and I think can fairly take some of the credit for their professionalism and restraint.
posted by msalt at 1:16 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

I guess who ever is in charge wants a peaceful seige.
This picture/1001 words.
posted by clavdivs at 1:41 PM on February 4, 2011

Trebuchet!
posted by the duck by the oboe at 3:39 PM on February 4, 2011 [3 favorites]

My friends and I used to call those "Tree Buckets" when we played Age of Empires...
posted by empath at 3:56 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

msalt, the army stood by on Thursday night while people were dying on the front lines in Tahrir. They are a pawn in the political process now, and if they are convinced Mubarak can maintain power, they will accept more deaths to keep him there. Praising the institution that allowed Mubarak to destroy his people's future for thirty years through torture and murder is a little rich for my taste.

I don't imagine you would also praise the Chinese for backing the DPRK for these sixty years and gushing over their effectiveness in keeping their population in check, would you?
posted by notion at 4:07 PM on February 4, 2011

Fox News: "Assassination Attempt on Egyptian VP Kills Two Bodyguards, Sources Tell Fox News "
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:13 PM on February 4, 2011

Praising the institution that allowed Mubarak to destroy his people's future for thirty years through torture and murder is a little rich for my taste.

Has the Army ever really been implicated in that, though? From comments upthread, I was under the impression that it was almost all the secret police. It was claimed that the police in Egypt are very strong, and the military is relatively weak, although they have the kickass hardware.
posted by Malor at 4:19 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

(well, and non-secret police, too. :-) )
posted by Malor at 4:19 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

Malor: I'm talking about the fact that Mubarak's US funded army gave him legitimacy. If he were unable to keep the peace in the region, and keep his population under control, we would have become suddenly shocked at his treatment of his own people and thrown him out, like Saddam Hussein.
posted by notion at 4:22 PM on February 4, 2011

msalt, the army stood by on Thursday night while people were dying on the front lines in Tahrir.

It looked to me like they were taken by surprise by that mob. They came in quickly out of nowhere from all points and charged the square before there was time for any real action to stop them. The only option at that point would have been to shoot. By the next day they were in position to secure the square with more troops.

They have turned their guns on neither side, and are trying to secure the whole city against looters, not just protect the square.

It is my inclination to trust whoever is giving the orders, unless it turns out to have been Mubarak all along.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:25 PM on February 4, 2011

The day before they had secured the entrances and helped provide security for the square. When they abandoned their post and retreated into the Museum, the fighting started.
posted by notion at 4:40 PM on February 4, 2011

They have turned their guns on neither side, and are trying to secure the whole city against looters, not just protect the square.

Exactly. That's what a professional army would do -- including, most importantly, refuse to obey orders from Mubarak to attack the protestors. I mean, I'm not suggesting the US trained the army as a million-man secret subversive pro-democracy cabal, that would be ridiculous. But training them to follow their mission and stay out of politics is a huge plus for Egypt. Mubarak has systematically destroyed every other institution that might resist his domination.
posted by msalt at 4:49 PM on February 4, 2011

notion: I'm talking about the fact that Mubarak's US funded army gave him legitimacy. If he were unable to keep the peace in the region, and keep his population under control, we would have become suddenly shocked at his treatment of his own people and thrown him out, like Saddam Hussein.

What gave him legitimacy was that he was the Vice President in Egypt's most democratic government ever when the president (Sadat) was assassinated. It has nothing to do with US funding for Egypt's army, which predated Mubarak and will survive his regime. I doubt that many Egyptians (who grant legitimacy) care that much.

You think Bush invaded Iraq because of Saddam's human rights record? That's absurd. Bush didn't even claim that. But neither did the US force Saddam or Mubarak to repress their people. America is not the root of all despotism, even if it cynically abides by it too often.
posted by msalt at 4:56 PM on February 4, 2011

The day before they had secured the entrances and helped provide security for the square. When they abandoned their post and retreated into the Museum, the fighting started.

They had enough people there to frisk as protestors came in, for the most part. You can't ask the camel cavalry and mob to slow down for a sec.

What I have seen from them is a reactionary attempt to do their best in an impossible situation. Once they made the mistake at the square, the next day they had it handled. After the campaign against journalists went into full swing, they stepped up protection today and the journos are saying they feel safer. There was a while there where ALL the cameras on the square were dead.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:56 PM on February 4, 2011

War Nerd: Spartacus Live on Al Jazeera!
posted by telstar at 4:59 PM on February 4, 2011

US training may play a part, hell if I know. I'm getting the vibe it is more about patriotism though, and the fact that the protestors immediately embraced them as soon as they rolled in instead of tossing rocks and shit and just treating them like Police 2.0.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:02 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

You think Bush invaded Iraq because of Saddam's human rights record? That's absurd. Bush didn't even claim that. But neither did the US force Saddam or Mubarak to repress their people. America is not the root of all despotism, even if it cynically abides by it too often.

Name one dictatorship in the middle east not funded by the United States.

PS: Iran has more democratic freedoms than Saudi Arabia.
posted by notion at 5:09 PM on February 4, 2011

That War Nerd article is pretty un-PC, but also interesting. I have to admit I was fascinated by the mechanics of watching that battle go down. It's something modern audiences have never seen since media is rarely that on the spot and guns and police usually don't leave the equation.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:21 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

The protestors were really fucking smart to embrace the army from the get go. One other reason why it's impossible to not root for the demonstrators -- they've been smart as well as (for the most part) peaceful
posted by angrycat at 6:03 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

Name one dictatorship in the middle east not funded by the United States.

Libya? Syria? Sudan? UAE? Qatar? Kuwait? Oman?

I think there are a bunch.
posted by mr_roboto at 6:12 PM on February 4, 2011

Notion, to me your world- view seems overly simplistic.

Its basically like saying that if someone on Welfare commits a crime, that they are "funded by the United States." The US foreign aide system is largely based on what was established during the Cold War.

I just wish you would evaluate the alternate universe that you wish existed. The Soviet empire had a much more ideologically based intervention scheme, and it was pretty terrible.

(To me) it seems that you are advocating for a world where the US should have went around after WW2 and just kicked out or forced out the leadership of 1/3 of the world's countries.

The US most definitely has been complicit to a degree. but not responsible. If you despise the US as the world's police force, then advocating for the US to be the world's nanny seems equally strange.
posted by rosswald at 6:22 PM on February 4, 2011 [4 favorites]

GDP of Egypt in 2009: $188.41 billion
Estimated Mubarak Family Fortune: $70 billion
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:35 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

NYT: Egypt Officials Seek to Ease Mubarak Out. They specifically name VP Suleiman and "other top military officials."
posted by msalt at 7:04 PM on February 4, 2011

Iran has more democratic freedoms than Saudi Arabia.

Yeah, and George W. Bush was less machiavellian than Dick Cheney, but that's nothing to put on your resume.
posted by msalt at 7:06 PM on February 4, 2011

A five year old leads the protesters.
posted by empath at 9:54 PM on February 4, 2011 [2 favorites]

(To me) it seems that you are advocating for a world where the US should have went around after WW2 and just kicked out or forced out the leadership of 1/3 of the world's countries.

The US most definitely has been complicit to a degree. but not responsible. If you despise the US as the world's police force, then advocating for the US to be the world's nanny seems equally strange.

This is the same tired argument I have been hearing forever. Tell you what: if the United States government was giving poor people automatic weapons and tanks to run around in their neighborhood, I'd absolutely blame them for making their neighborhood a more dangerous place. We aren't handing out candy canes and books. We're handing out weapons designed to kill people to achieve specific goals. In the case of Egypt, it's to bribe their government to keep the Suez canal operational, and to pretend to be at peace with our other military installation in Israel.

Now, if America did want to spread peace and democracy across the world, we should build schools and hospitals, and not dole out fleets of fighter jets and automatic weapons. I've got no problem with actual financial support of democratic reforms. The problem I have in Egypt is that we have been guaranteeing suppression of democracy. I don't want the United States to do anything apart from stopping our wholesale support of dictatorships and publicly announce our support for democracy. And yes, given the choice between continuing to be the world's leading supplier of arms to anti-democratic regimes or shutting the fuck up, I'd like the United States to keep their mouth shut.

The typical response of, "Wait! What if someone else bribes the Egyptian government and gets that stuff?" is frankly pathetic. Implicit in this response is that we will be "better" than the other State doing the bribing. Well, at the moment, we are by far taking home the gold for dead civilians this decade, not only for our terrorism suspects tortured to death by us, not only the dissidents murdered by our friend Mubarak, but the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and Afghanis who have had their lives snatched away from them so we can maintain the illusion of security for ourselves thousands of miles away.

It's a fucking coward's gamble. It's immoral. It's unjust. And I will never support it, nor will I ever support the sad attempts to rationalize away our accountability.
posted by notion at 9:56 PM on February 4, 2011 [4 favorites]

Keep in mind that the dominant political system for all of human history was autocracy or dictatorship. The US didn't invent it. For much of American history it would have been suicidal to refuse to deal with despots. It's really only been since the collapse of the Soviet Union that democracy everywhere has been a possibility.

Which is not to say that the US hasn't been guilty of putting dictatorships in place and keeping them in power, but it hasn't always been a choice between a democracy and a dictatorship.

All things considered, I'd rather the US just be agnostic about the form of government of the countries we deal with.

Yes, dictatorships are horrible, awful things, but meddling in a another country's internal affairs is still meddling whether or not we have good intentions.
posted by empath at 10:18 PM on February 4, 2011

Noam Chomsky: It's not radical Islam that worries the US – it's independence.
posted by adamvasco at 10:26 PM on February 4, 2011 [2 favorites]

A five year old leads the protesters.

Wow. With all of the videos, but with this one especially, I've felt like you don't need to understand what they're saying to understand what they're saying.
posted by dcheeno at 10:51 PM on February 4, 2011

Robert Fisk: 25 political personalities to negotiate for a new political leadership and a new constitution to replace Mubarak's crumbling regime.
posted by adamvasco at 10:59 PM on February 4, 2011

sounds like a reality show.
posted by philip-random at 11:08 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJ is reporting that the gas line in the north Sinai has been blown up. From what I gather it supplies 40% of Israel's gas supply.
posted by notion at 11:43 PM on February 4, 2011

The Struggle Surges Ahead. Latest eyewitness report from Ahmed Shawki, with more details of life inside Tahrir Square over the past few days, plus an analysis of what the most recent events may mean:

In my estimation, the Tahrir Square demonstration was even bigger today than it was last Tuesday, when across Egypt, between 6 million and 8 million people protested, according to estimates. As the hour for curfew came and went tonight, thousands of people were still arriving to demonstrate. In Alexandria, an estimated 1 million people also turned out.

Everywhere, people were united around the slogan that Mubarak must go now. In Tahrir Square, there was an echo of the old civil rights slogan in the U.S. "We shall not be moved"--hundreds of thousands of people were chanting, "He should go! We will not move." Then there was my favorite slogan of the day: "Ya Mubarak, sahi el noum, inaharda akher youm!" It sounds better in Arabic because it rhymes, but it translates roughly into English as: "Wakey, wakey, Mubarak, today is the last day!

[...] the first thing that has to be grasped about the uprising [is] that this is a movement that seeks fundamental democratic rights. As a friend of mine put it a few days ago, it's the 1789 of Egypt--similar to the opening of the French Revolution in that way.

I think the second aspect that became certain today is that this is no longer the Egypt that existed prior to January 25--and there's no turning back, however much violence the regime tries to organize. A tipping point has been reached in terms of the willingness of masses of people to put themselves on the line and defy the existing order, and that's a genie that will be very difficult to put back in the bottle.

The third aspect apparent today was, as I described earlier, the enormous self-organization of the movement in the face of horrendous violence and repression--most especially, the attacks that took place over the past few days.

The fourth point is broader--about what happens next. You now have a movement that has emerged in a most explosive fashion and is present in every Egyptian town and city, which is the product of many, many years of injustice, including around economic questions of unemployment and dispossession. But it's also an expression of the rise of a number of social struggles in Egypt, including the strikes of the last few years and the riots over rising food prices.

Right now, the movement is united around the political aim of getting rid of Hosni Mubarak. But hopefully, once Mubarak is unseated, the political questions will then mesh with social questions that still remain unresolved.

posted by scody at 11:54 PM on February 4, 2011 [1 favorite]

"United States government was giving poor people automatic weapons and tanks to run around in their neighborhood"

I would say this a gross mischaracterization of both the intent, and the actual results.

"case of Egypt, it's to bribe their government to keep the Suez canal operational, and to pretend to be at peace with our other military installation in Israel."

And what does the closing of the Suez entail? How would that scenario play out? How would the millions of people who rely on that energy for heat, transportation, clean water feel about this (and not just Americans)?

And would it have been better for the US to not bribe I and E to peace deal? It put us in a horrible position, but it was probably the most rational decision at the time. If you have a different POV, I'd love to hear it, but most people seem to say that it was worth it for the wars that were avoided.

"Now, if America did want to spread peace and democracy across the world, we should build schools and hospitals, and not dole out fleets of fighter jets and automatic weapons"

I mean, I agree with this in the elementary school sense. Who wouldn't? Love is better than war... I think we can all agree on that here.

"we are by far taking home the gold for dead civilians this decade"

And what is the overall rate of civilian deaths for each decade over the past 30 years? 50 years? 100 years? How many lives were saved over the past decade? The past 100?

I regret each loss of life, and I can't defend Iraq especially. My point isn't to whitewash or deny anything, but to put things in perspective. I'm not trying to defend past actions, I just choose to view them as clumsy steps in the right direction.
posted by rosswald at 11:58 PM on February 4, 2011

Egypt VP Target of Assassination Attempt That Killed Two Bodyguards, Sources Tell Fox News

Ah. This would, assuming it's true and not disinformation, be a clear indication of a power struggle among the elite. It's rather telling that this wasn't a "bloody shirt" moment used against the protesters.
posted by dhartung at 11:59 PM on February 4, 2011

Dhartung, I heard that rumor several hours ago and no one but Fox reported it. I'm pretty sure it's disinformation.
posted by bluedaisy at 12:04 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

"just rather have the "very smart people" doing good things, like working diplomatically to build hospitals and schools to foster economic and democratic progress instead of paying people like Mubarak to act as our local henchman."

The cookie pushers get a bad rap no matter what they do it seems. The US Foreign Service does a surprising amount of good work. I would argue the Foreign Agricultural Service is more aggressive and exploitative and dangerous.

"if America did want to spread peace and democracy across the world, we should build schools and hospitals, and not dole out fleets of fighter jets and automatic weapons."

The schools and hospitals tend to get shot up and looted and shut down without some armed support. Countless examples in even recent history. You need a military strong enough to make the streets safe for the police.
Military aid is a tough thing to have to deal with and it can get misused. In this case the military aid was part of a peace and security package so Egypt and Israel stopped duking it out. Peace treaties are good, no?
On top of that, in 1975, and on after the little fracas out there, USAID was giving Egypt $28 billion for local agriculture, educate, increase health - schools, hospitals, and farms.
Regional economic integration was encouraged by allowing stuff to be imported from Egypt without tariffs (under some conditions) and 10 1/2 percent of the inputs of those products come from Israel.
The idea being if your business depends on working with a guy you're not likely to attack him openly.

A good solution to stability in the region I thought.
Hundreds of millions of dollars lately in financing going to trade programs, utilities, education, family planning, governance, all supported by the Middle East Partnership Initiative. Current programs focus on trade and investment; utilities; education; healthier, planned families; natural resources; democracy and governance; and other programs supported by the Middle East Partnership Initiative (maybe they're cookie pushers as well, but they do encourage particpatory politics).

That said, Bushco glad-handing the regime bricks of no strings attached cash was not a good policy, no.
But the U.S. does, in fact, want to spread peace and democracy across the world. And does spend a hell of a lot of time, money and effort on it.

Of course, there are more than a few viewpoints on how to do that. And of course, the folks that feel that whatever is right for their own personal bottom line, must be right for America too (as they so totally are America *sniff* sorry, bit weepy there, 'cos they love America so). And that's excepting the 'just plain failure' inherent in any complex equation.

But ending the open warfare between Egypt and the increasingly nuke mcdroppy Israel, not such a bad thing for the price.

As for Mubarak, it would be a real shame if he got hit by an ambulance or something.

No one is being reasonable though. Being right doesn't mean a plan will naturally flow from circumstances. The country has some very serious issues and DXing one guy and/or his family won't change the structure or the economy of the current government.

I don't agree with the hands off concept. It doesn't have to be done at the point of a sword (although there are always a few who force the issue), but we should engage (economically, diplomatically, NGOs, foster internal communication, etc) and bring the MEPI countries into it.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:57 AM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

Robert Fisk: Exhausted, scared and trapped, protesters put forward plan for future: Independent

. . . most of the protesters fear that if they leave the square they will immediately be arrested, along with their families, by Mubarak's cruel state security apparatus.

Already, there are dark reports of demonstrators who dared to return home and disappeared. The Egyptian writer Mohamed Fadel Fahmy, who is involved in the committee discussions, is fearful for himself. "We're safe as long as we have the square," he said to me yesterday, urging me to publish his name as a symbol of the freedom he demands. "If we lose the square, Mubarak will arrest all the opposition groups – and there will be police rule as never before. That's why we are fighting for our lives."

The state security police now have long lists of names of protesters who have given television interviews or been quoted in newspapers, Facebook postings and tweets.

posted by Mister Bijou at 2:45 AM on February 5, 2011

More from that same article by Robert Fisk:

Indeed, yesterday morning, to the shock of all of us standing on the western side of the square, a convoy of 4x4s with blackened windows suddenly emerged from the gardens of the neighbouring Egyptian Museum, slithered to a halt in front of us and was immediately surrounded by a praetorian guard of red-bereted soldiers and massive – truly gigantic – security guards in shades and holding rifles with telescopic sights. Then, from the middle vehicle emerged the diminutive, bespectacled figure of Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, the chief of staff of the Egyptian army and a lifelong friend of Mubarak, wearing a soft green military kepi and general's cross-swords insignia on his shoulders.

Here was a visitor to take the breath away, waving briefly to the protesters who crowded the military cordon to witness this extraordinary arrival . . .

posted by Mister Bijou at 2:57 AM on February 5, 2011

"The region is facing a perfect storm", said the representative of one of the chief cloud seeders.
posted by telstar at 4:06 AM on February 5, 2011

BBC: At the time of writing, the "Day of Departure" rally is being filmed by state TV from a distant rooftop, described by the Orwellian caption "Demonstrations to support stability".
posted by adamvasco at 4:38 AM on February 5, 2011

"Official sources deny attempt on life of VP"
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 5:51 AM on February 5, 2011

Arabist:

Many Egyptian human rights activists arrested in the last few days remain in detention. A list of those detained follows after the jump. There are probably hundreds if not thousands of others that are also being detained, interrogated and tortured right now. Frightening as the attacks on foreign journalists have been, most of our colleagues have emerged relatively unscathed. It's the Egyptians being rounded up by police and intelligence that I truly fear for.

posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 6:22 AM on February 5, 2011

German diplomat retracts claim of Suleiman assassination attempt
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 6:27 AM on February 5, 2011

What happened to a Sudan-based contract journalist for Bloomberg News returning to Cairo for vacation: bloomberg news

Having a policeman say he wanted to kill me wasn’t my most frightening moment yesterday in Cairo. That came when police and civilians smashed our car windows -- with the five of us inside it -- jumped up and down on the roof, spat on us, pulled my hair, beat my friends and dragged us into a police van.

posted by Mister Bijou at 6:53 AM on February 5, 2011

Mark Mardell: Why does the US so often back the bad guys?
posted by adamvasco at 7:10 AM on February 5, 2011

Because there's a lot of bad guys in the world?

Anyway, I'm just curious on this spurious assassination story. Fox News seemed to be the only people reporting it (and they still are).
posted by Lord Chancellor at 7:19 AM on February 5, 2011

>>I would say this a gross mischaracterization of both the intent, and the actual results.

Then set me straight. What was the intent of giving the vast majority of 60 billion dollars, mostly in the form of military aid, to a regime with worse human rights records than Venezuela? Even according to the State Department, Venezuela looks like a nation of laws with corruption problems, while Egypt reads like the totalitarian hell hole that it is. And yet, when Venezuela's democratically elected government was ousted in 2002, the State Department wasted no time expressing solidarity with the people:

We wish to express our solidarity with the Venezuelan people and look forward to working with all democratic forces in Venezuela to ensure the full exercise of democratic rights. The Venezuelan military commendably refused to fire on peaceful demonstrators, and the media valiantly kept the Venezuelan public informed.

Yesterday's events in Venezuela resulted in a transitional government until new elections can be held. Though details are still unclear, undemocratic actions committed or encouraged by the Chavez administration provoked yesterday's crisis in Venezuela.

And in this case, Chavez had been elected by free and fair elections, in contrast to Mubarak, who has not participated in a fair election in 30 years. Of course the other difference is that Chavez has been promoting Latin American independence, and Mubarak has been a loyal dog from the beginning.

>>And what does the closing of the Suez entail? How would that scenario play out? How would the millions of people who rely on that energy for heat, transportation, clean water feel about this (and not just Americans)?

No one depends on the Suez canal. They depend on the canal to lower shipping costs and speed delivery times. Marginal savings in cost and freight time to deny Egyptians universal human rights is more than a compromise on certain values, but a complete abandonment of values for a marginal return in savings for business interests.

>>And would it have been better for the US to not bribe I and E to peace deal? It put us in a horrible position, but it was probably the most rational decision at the time. If you have a different POV, I'd love to hear it, but most people seem to say that it was worth it for the wars that were avoided.

Everything hinges on Palestine. Until Israel withdraws from the territory beyond the 1967 borders and recognizes a Palestinian state that is allowed to trade freely with their neighbors, war is inevitable.

>>I mean, I agree with this in the elementary school sense. Who wouldn't? Love is better than war... I think we can all agree on that here.

Unless it interferes with American hegemony. Which by all of your previous comments, seems to be the reason God created the earth.

And what is the overall rate of civilian deaths for each decade over the past 30 years? 50 years? 100 years? How many lives were saved over the past decade? The past 100?

After WWII, we are the leader, bar none. And in terms of lives saved, you'll have to explain what you're talking about.

>>I regret each loss of life, and I can't defend Iraq especially. My point isn't to whitewash or deny anything, but to put things in perspective. I'm not trying to defend past actions, I just choose to view them as clumsy steps in the right direction.

I really think it's impossible to describe 30 years of material support for dictatorship as "clumsy steps in the right direction." But to each his own.
posted by notion at 7:39 AM on February 5, 2011

Anyway, I'm just curious on this spurious assassination story. Fox News seemed to be the only people reporting it (and they still are).

Fox's job is to discredit all movements that threaten American business interests.
posted by notion at 7:45 AM on February 5, 2011 [3 favorites]

Slavoj Zizek and Tariq Ramadan: Freedom is universal.
posted by notion at 8:11 AM on February 5, 2011

Chavez had been elected by free and fair elections

Given that his first attempt at coming to power was spectacularly undemocratic, Hugo Chavez should not be your poster boy for democracy. Chavez will prove his allegiance to democracy by actually leaving office when then Venezuelan people ask him to.
posted by ambrosia at 8:16 AM on February 5, 2011

After WWII, we are the leader, bar none.

This is, frankly, delusional. Communists were responsible for 10s of millions of deaths after WWII. We're short of that by orders of magnitude.
posted by empath at 8:19 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Given that his first attempt at coming to power was spectacularly undemocratic, Hugo Chavez should not be your poster boy for democracy. Chavez will prove his allegiance to democracy by actually leaving office when then Venezuelan people ask him to.

Chavez has been elected 13 times. No one disputes that they were free and fair elections, except for the people who don't like him and disregard the findings of OAS and the State Department.
posted by notion at 8:30 AM on February 5, 2011

This is, frankly, delusional. Communists were responsible for 10s of millions of deaths after WWII. We're short of that by orders of magnitude.

Total nonsense. What countries did they invade, and how many died in each conflict?
posted by notion at 8:33 AM on February 5, 2011

We're short of that by orders of magnitude.

We're probably short of that, but by no more than one order, and it's quite possible we're in the SAME order. A LOT of people have died, worldwide, from the wars we've fought and the governments we've overthrown and/or supported.

The major difference is that the Communists and the Nazi killed tens of millions of their own people, where our death toll is largely foreign.
posted by Malor at 8:36 AM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

Nazis* ... and they're actually kind of irrelevant to a post-WW2 discussion anyway. :)
posted by Malor at 8:37 AM on February 5, 2011

We should move this over to the Meta.
posted by notion at 8:38 AM on February 5, 2011

Total nonsense. What countries did they invade, and how many died in each conflict?

Seriously? Take a class in world history. This is basic stuff.
posted by empath at 8:39 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

List of military casualties, all casualities, in 20th Century wars.
posted by Kattullus at 8:40 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Seriously? Take a class in world history. This is basic stuff.

Hey... I had no idea repeated assertions meant something.

Let's start with 2 million dead in Vietnam. What communist nation invaded another country and killed more people? We can add Laos and Cambodia once you crest the 2 million mark.
posted by notion at 8:52 AM on February 5, 2011

So Mubarak has resigned as head of the NDP -- what does that mean?
posted by sugarfish at 8:59 AM on February 5, 2011

Let me understand you. You drop a turd in this thread like the US is responsible for more deaths in the world since WWII than any other country, and then you start a metatalk thread about derails? I'm done with that topic in this thread, and you should be too.
posted by empath at 9:00 AM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

So Mubarak has resigned as head of the NDP -- what does that mean?

Nothing, really.
posted by empath at 9:02 AM on February 5, 2011

The meta has been open for days. I've posted your assertion and my response, if you care to back your assertions with any facts.
posted by notion at 9:09 AM on February 5, 2011

"What communist nation invaded another country and killed more people?"

Uh, North Korea? (Since you're using total numbers for Vietnam, might as well use total numbers for Korea).

Could you at least be a little less belligerent when you don't know what you're talking about?

And limiting it to invasions seems pretty specious, since the claim was simply killing people past WWII, and both China and Russia easily best two million when their own civilians are considered.
posted by klangklangston at 9:15 AM on February 5, 2011 [4 favorites]

By kicking himself and his son out of the party. hes trying to show he is serious about not being re-elected.
posted by rosswald at 9:15 AM on February 5, 2011

The report that Mubarak resigned as head of the National Democratic Party has been retracted, according to The Guardian.
posted by Kattullus at 9:34 AM on February 5, 2011

I don't want to play in notion's sandbox anymore. Can we have a new thread that won't be poster-moderated?
posted by dhartung at 9:35 AM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

notion you already started a meta-talk for this derail. Take it back over there.
posted by humanfont at 9:51 AM on February 5, 2011

notion, if this thread was a functional democracy, I suspect you'd be out by now.
posted by philip-random at 9:59 AM on February 5, 2011 [3 favorites]

The Middle East is like a bowl of soup.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:14 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Ex ambassador Frank Wisner the US envoy sent to Egypt has said in a video link to the Munich security conferance "I believe that President Mubarak's continued leadership is crucial it's his chance to write his own legacy".
So the US doesn't really want Mubarak to go. The US does not want change and those in Tahrir square who have freely given their identities will be toast.
posted by adamvasco at 10:20 AM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

The Middle East is like a bowl of soup.

Sorry Arabs... no vote for you!
posted by notion at 10:26 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

"I believe that President Mubarak's continued leadership is crucial it's his chance to write his own legacy"

I am going to bet that the full speech makes that sound less stupid.
posted by empath at 10:26 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Behind the Scenes the Arabist blog questions the source of this fascinating article in CounterPunch.
Police Gen. Mahmoud Wagdy, who as the former head of the prison system, is also a torture expert asked Mubarak to give him a week to take care of the demonstrators who have been occupying major squares around the country for about a week
posted by adamvasco at 10:33 AM on February 5, 2011

That's the same Frank Wisner who has been apologizing for Mubarak's power for decades. He even praised the 2005 election, widely known to be fraudulent, as "an historic day" for Egypt.

“A page was turned. A first important step was taken,” says Wisner, vice chairman for external affairs at American International Group. “There will be many steps in the future. How Egypt manages those steps—this first one having been taken responsibly by the president and opposition—[will determine] what happens next. That’s really going to matter a great deal to us.”
. . .
I think it’s worth remembering, as far as we Americans are concerned, that what happens in Egypt is extremely important. This is the nation we have had the strongest possible ties with for nearly thirty years. It is a nation that has been key to peace-making in the Middle East. It’s a nation that is critical to the future of the Palestinian-Israeli equation. It’s a nation with influence in what happens in the months ahead in Iraq and inside of Arab councils in how Iraq is seen. Egypt is still, despite its more relative power, a center of Arab thinking, Arab culture, and Arab considerations of reform. (source)

His goal is obvious: keep as much of the existing power structure in place as is possible. The only limiting factor is the ability of the security state to continue repressing demands for real democratic change.
posted by notion at 10:52 AM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Awesome photo of protesters charging phones.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 11:14 AM on February 5, 2011

In New York’s Little Egypt, the Young Get a New Awareness
posted by notion at 11:15 AM on February 5, 2011

Nption asked: What was the intent of giving the vast majority of 60 billion dollars, mostly in the form of military aid ...

The intent was presumably to allow the USA to influence Egypt's army. Which appears to have been a good thing, as the army has been conspicuously neutral. Also, that figure is the sum of thirty years' worth of donations. To put that into perspective, Mubarak's family fortune has been estimated at around seventy billion dollars.
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:40 AM on February 5, 2011

I am going to bet that the full speech makes that sound less stupid.

No, I just saw more of it. It's pretty stupid and tone deaf. Obama should fire him.
posted by empath at 11:42 AM on February 5, 2011

Anyway, I'm just curious on this spurious assassination story. Fox News seemed to be the only people reporting it (and they still are).

Fox's job is to discredit all movements that threaten American business interests.

I'm aware of the dubious nature of Fox News. I'm just interested in that the reporting that the VP of a country has had an attempt made on his life is news in and of itself, even if it's wrong. Why has no other network reported on Fox Reporting such a strong claim?
posted by Lord Chancellor at 11:45 AM on February 5, 2011

LA Times: The French prime minister's office has confirmed that France has suspended sales of arms and tear gas to Egypt.
posted by scody at 12:51 PM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

Obama should fire him.

The thing is, while the wording may have been way at the fawning/Arabist end of the rhetoric bell curve, his position is being backed by the US and other major countries at the Munich Security Conference. The US has abruptly adopted a paternalist position backing a Suleiman-led transition where Mubarak retains his title, but the US considers him "sidelined". They have "100%" backing from Turkey on this, and Cameron and Merkel are supporting the general idea as well, fearing chaos or a new autocrat we can't control.

The cynical spook in me has to wonder whether all the attacks on journalists Thursday were an orchestrated signal, one that allowed Suleiman to prove he could call off the dogs ... or sic them at will. And I probably won't be the only one always wondering if the pipeline explosion was another deliberate signal, given that Clinton actually mentioned it as an example of things the US considered. Both interpretations point to a certain ruthlessness by this Putin-like personally-supervising-torture ex-spy.

I think the conversation about outcomes is now effectively over.

Why has no other network reported on Fox Reporting such a strong claim?

See same article. It appears the responsible party wasn't Fox, but the organizer of the security conference, who's retracted the claim. There's plenty of discussion of the rumor being reported if you check Google News.
posted by dhartung at 12:54 PM on February 5, 2011

Just changing generals is not freedom.
American and Israeli politicians and media commentators, for the most part with only some exceptions, are more concerned about the rights of Israelis to live in security than the rights of Egyptians to live in freedom.
posted by adamvasco at 1:27 PM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

The US State Department has reportedly called Frank Wisner's remarks about Mubarak staying in power as remarks by a private citizen. It is now also being reported that he was never an envoy, but on an official mission nonetheless.
posted by empath at 1:45 PM on February 5, 2011

Adamvasco wrote: American and Israeli politicians and media commentators, for the most part with only some exceptions, are more concerned about the rights of Israelis to live in security than the rights of Egyptians to live in freedom.

Of course Israelis are worried that Egypt may abrogate its peace treaty. Why would you think this is sinister? I think it's much more alarming that so many Egyptians support a party which advocates a war with Israel.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:11 PM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

A senior U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic sensitivity of the issue, said later that Wisner was no longer acting on behalf of the administration and that his comments were personal. Wisner is no longer an envoy for the Obama administration, after his first trip yielded little progress. [WaPo]

The US position seemed to solidify in the presence of a split within the opposition on whether to insist Mubarak quit before any talks took place. The Muslim Brotherhood and Mohammed el Baradei did not attend talks between Suleiman and opposition parties including Wafd. But tensions remained both on the street and within the government, particularly the relationship of the regime with the army, which was uneasy about the continued protests.
posted by dhartung at 2:31 PM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Rule number 4 in D.C., do not play with Frank. Hosni will not leave without him controlling his departure, Frank nows this and it will be Hosnis' undoing, his statement mirrors the current U.S. postion. Frank and the u.s-ettes aint the problem, Hosni is and there is little or nothing we can do s to get this Mubarak out. This is a seige now and it will play out on way or another with Hosni gone.
(I agree with dhartung on all points, esp. how the leadership is using concessions and benevolence as a tool of manupulation or something in-between.)
posted by clavdivs at 2:32 PM on February 5, 2011

Fear will keep the local systems in line.
posted by dhartung at 3:11 PM on February 5, 2011

The assassination story from Fox serves the purpose of providing moral relativism to the US right. The thinking is something like "see those Muslims are violent. Yes, we had a assassination attempt here, but it was a leftist on drugs, who was crazy anyway. In those evil, violent Muslim places the assassinations are REAL." Matters not a whit if the story has any truth to it whatsoever.
posted by telstar at 3:44 PM on February 5, 2011

A video claiming to capture Egyptian plain clothes officers dragging Google executive Wael Ghonim away is starting to gain some traction on Youtube. Ghonim, missing for over a week, was a supporter of the April 5 youth opposition group. We can't verify if the man being dragged off, in plain daylight, is Ghonim. But the fact that it happened before a crowd of people who noticed - but could not or would not intervene - says much about the situation in Egypt. - Al Jazeera 11:37pm Feb 5 live blog
posted by warbaby at 3:57 PM on February 5, 2011

This is a like a West Wing Episode. The President faced with a crisis, Leo pulls the name of an old pro from the State Department out of his rolex and they send him to deliver the message and things look like they are about to improve. Then CJ rushes in with news that the "special envoy" has said something crazy in Germany apparently unaware it would be picked up on Cable news and the Internet. Later Josh and Donna have a discussion about the Internet and Cable news and how these old guys don't get it. Toby is upset about the lack of moral clarity in our position.
posted by humanfont at 5:35 PM on February 5, 2011 [7 favorites]

Grand Moff Frank: “...would you prefer another palace…a military palace, then name the price. Hosni, I grow tired of this line of questioning for the rebel base is outside your door”

give the old guy some dignatis and he may go
or maybe Hosni is not running things, a loud message for those that are


posted by clavdivs at 5:54 PM on February 5, 2011

warbaby: " Egyptian plain clothes officers dragging Google executive Wael Ghonim"

Somehow, that doesn't strike me as very... wise.
posted by dunkadunc at 6:02 PM on February 5, 2011

" Egyptian plain clothes officers dragging Google executive Wael Ghonim"

Somehow, that doesn't strike me as very... wise.

They're arresting New York Times reporters. I don't think 'wise' is what they're worried about.
posted by bluedaisy at 7:27 PM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

File under things you won't see on Fox News:

waelkhairy88 Wael Khairy
Christians will pray in Tahrir tomorrow and we shall circle them and protect them as they have protected us.

waelkhairy88 Wael Khairy
Confirmed Time: The "Sunday of Martyrs" mass will be held at 1 p.m. in Tahrir Square.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:35 PM on February 5, 2011 [2 favorites]

People don't know this, but Coptic Christians in Egypt welcomed the Muslim invaders as liberators from the despotic regime of the Byzantine Empire, and have had mostly friendly relations with them for over a thousand years. This is not something new or particularly remarkable.
posted by empath at 9:35 PM on February 5, 2011 [1 favorite]

Hell, I barely knew the Coptic Orthodox Church existed until I became Egypt obsessed since the protests have been going on.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:44 PM on February 5, 2011

have had mostly friendly relations with them for over a thousand years

This mostly definitely needs some explanation.

Folks wanting to know more about Christians in Cairo should learn about the Zebaleen and particularly how they suffered during H1N1 panic in Cairo.

The New York Times article talks about the "tense relations between Egypt’s majority Muslims and its Coptic Christians.
posted by bluedaisy at 10:16 PM on February 5, 2011

Folks wanting to know more about Christians in Cairo should learn about the Zebaleen and particularly how they suffered during H1N1 panic in Cairo.

1000 years is a long time.
posted by empath at 12:26 AM on February 6, 2011

Empath, when I hear people going on about how swell things were for Jews in Muslim countries I get quite irritated - I know a number of Jews from places like Iraq and Egypt and they've got lots of stories about official discrimination, about being forced to swallow insults, about hiding from mobs and so forth. They miss their home but they're glad they now live in a safe country. My point is that unless you've actually got some basis for speaking on behalf of Coptic Christians you might ease up on the "things were so good for them" rhetoric, particularly since a Google News search shows story after story about Egyptian violence and discrimination against them.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:19 AM on February 6, 2011

From an op ed in the Observer:

One of the defining features of western reaction to the abrupt upheaval in Egypt is sheer ignorance. The vast majority of diplomats, politicians and journalists failed to anticipate it and lack a sufficiently textured understanding of Egyptian society to forecast what might happen next ....

posted by nangar at 6:10 AM on February 6, 2011

On air, Al Jazeera English is calling for release of correspondent Ayman Mohyeldin. A tweet went up an hour ago: Al Jazeera
posted by Mister Bijou at 7:24 AM on February 6, 2011

If you guys haven't been listening to Democracy Now's broadcasts, you're missing some fantastic reporting.
posted by dejah420 at 7:56 AM on February 6, 2011

The talks were later joined by both the Muslim Brotherhood and the El Baradei camp, although it's still not clear who is and is not represented in terms of street protest organizers, and some significant concessions were granted. In particular, there will be a constitutional reform committee -- possibly the same group of leaders mentioned in the Fisk article linked above -- allowed to present amendments, although they have a March 1 deadline and no clear mandate to have anything passed. In many ways this is both more and less than what the US position came to be. Suleiman is representing the government in these talks, but is holding firm that he is not taking over for Mubarak.

As to the Coptics, many Egyptians were horrified at the December church bombing, with Muslims forming human shields around Christian churches during Christmas services (in January on the Coptic calendar). It is also true that there are intolerant Muslims in Egypt, and they are a minority that has often faced popular and official discrimination even though Egypt is nominally secular. I don't think there's any simplistic way to describe the relationship.
posted by dhartung at 8:27 AM on February 6, 2011 [1 favorite]

Does anyone have any understanding of the documents Wael Abbas posted? They seem to describe bonds to the tune of 620bn USD.

I have no idea where to start here. What are the chances the docs are legit? If they are, what do they mean?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:36 AM on February 6, 2011

Okay, here are the docs.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:58 AM on February 6, 2011

o_O That's a lot of dinars. It's more than the annual GDP of Egypt. It's several times a recently reported estimate of his wealth.

Let's play assume they're legit. If so it means somebody on the inside leaked these to taint Mubarak. That means there are sympathizers within the government -- or at least someone making a power play. Suleiman doubtless has the capability, the question is whether anyone else would.

On the other hand it's interesting because the bond interest alone would dwarf American aid. It certainly paints a picture of an economy bled bone dry. If that were a sovereign wealth fund ...

On the gripping hand, though, it hardly seems possible. The ten largest banks in the world only have assets ranging from basically USD 2 to 3 trillion. Caledonian is not among them. It also seems unlikely that a kleptocrat would put all his assets in one place so obviously and easily traced to him. More likely you'd want a thicket of companies and trusts controlled by various family members and so on. I'm having a hard time believing this is real for those reasons.
posted by dhartung at 9:09 AM on February 6, 2011

Having looked at the Wael Abbas documents . . .

The Caledonian Banking is an "unathorised internet bank". Source: UK's government Finacial Services Authority

A quick google reveals there is a company Kyss International at the address stated: see here

That page also states that the company's business is "Mergers And Aquisition Brokers And Commodity Brokering".

Google: no Sir Peter Squires.

But google does bring up Sir Peter Squire (no 's' at the end).

Google listings show he is a retired senior Royal Air Force person and currently Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Imperial War Museum and the Vice-Chairman of the Board of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission.

Given the purported amount of money involved, that none of the google listing show that Sir Peter Squire has any business interests, that the purported amount is humongous, and the nature of the bank, I am inclined to treat the document with more than with a tad of suspicion.
posted by Mister Bijou at 9:15 AM on February 6, 2011

That would make Mubarak the richest man in the world.
posted by snofoam at 9:16 AM on February 6, 2011

Maybe Sir Peter Squires asked for Mubarak's help with getting the $620 billion out of Nigeria.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:20 AM on February 6, 2011 [5 favorites]

Strike the reference to Caledonian as an "unorthorised interent bank". Not relevant. There are lots of well known names on that list.
posted by Mister Bijou at 9:20 AM on February 6, 2011

unathorised? unorthorised? It's well past time bedtime. Nighty, night.
posted by Mister Bijou at 9:22 AM on February 6, 2011

Suleiman is representing the government in these talks, but is holding firm that he is not taking over for Mubarak.

This is laying the groundwork for a typical authoritarian dodge that I call "too soon, too late". Whenever you plan to do something unpopular that you can't afford to have shut down by negative publicity, you just keep saying you don't plan on doing that thing, nobody's talking about doing that thing, it's too early to even discuss that thing, right up to the moment you actually go ahead & do that thing. And then you instantly switch your message to "the thing is done, it's too late to complain about it now". The most famous example of course is the Iraq war. It was always too early to even think about going to war until suddenly the decision was already made & it was too late to take it back. Suleiman is a very canny fellow, he'll be a worthy successor to Mubarak.
posted by scalefree at 10:24 AM on February 6, 2011 [7 favorites]

Does anyone know where these names for each day, like "Day of Departure", "March of Millions", actually come from?
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 10:50 AM on February 6, 2011

Egypt: I ask Myself Why
posted by homunculus at 10:53 AM on February 6, 2011

Mister Bijou: "On air, Al Jazeera English is calling for release of correspondent Ayman Mohyeldin. A tweet went up an hour ago: Al Jazeera."

I did not realize he was one of the detained reporters. He was notably good during the coverage, I thought.
posted by mwhybark at 11:33 AM on February 6, 2011

620,000,000,000$?
take about "Neckerized"
posted by clavdivs at 12:20 PM on February 6, 2011

West Backs Gradual Egypt Transition

Instead of loosening its grip, the existing government appeared to be consolidating its power: The prime minister said police forces were returning to the streets, and an army general urged protesters to scale back their occupation of Tahrir Square.

Protesters interpreted the simultaneous moves by the Western leaders and Mr. Suleiman as a rebuff to their demands for an end to the dictatorship led for almost three decades by Mr. Mubarak, a pivotal American ally and pillar of the existing order in the Middle East.

Just days after President Obama demanded publicly that change in Egypt must begin right away, many in the streets accused the Obama administration of sacrificing concrete steps toward genuine change in favor of a familiar stability.

“America doesn’t understand,” said Ibrahim Mustafa, 42, who was waiting to enter Tahrir Square. “The people know it is supporting an illegitimate regime.”

No, America understands. That's the sad part.
posted by notion at 12:21 PM on February 6, 2011 [1 favorite]

This is the best on-the-ground video I have seen so far. [warning: scenes of violence]
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:42 PM on February 6, 2011

Actually, all of Jason N. Parkinson's Egypt stuff on Vimeo is really insightful. It gives me much more of an idea what it was like on the ground during those riots than what I've seen on AJE, however good their coverage.

It's still confusing as all hell though: wait, what's on fire? These people like the army? But not always? Who's shooting?

Still difficult to make sense of as an outsider.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:52 PM on February 6, 2011

Spiegel interview with ElBaradei.
posted by Rumple at 9:14 PM on February 6, 2011

US Diplomacy at work !
US envoy's business link to Egypt.
Frank Wisner, President Barack Obama's envoy to Cairo who infuriated the White House this weekend by urging Hosni Mubarak to remain President of Egypt, works for a New York and Washington law firm which works for the dictator's own Egyptian government.
posted by adamvasco at 12:12 AM on February 7, 2011 [3 favorites]

Songs of Solidarity. . . Khalas Mixtape Vol 1 . . . a mixtape of North African hip hop artists from Algeria, Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. To listen and/or download (zip): enoughgaddafi,com
posted by Mister Bijou at 1:53 AM on February 7, 2011

damn, borked the link. Here: enoughgaddafi.com
posted by Mister Bijou at 1:57 AM on February 7, 2011

Thanks for that video link goodnews...like being there.
posted by telstar at 3:47 AM on February 7, 2011

Frank Wisner, President Barack Obama's envoy to Cairo who infuriated the White House this weekend by urging Hosni Mubarak to remain President of Egypt, works for a New York and Washington law firm which works for the dictator's own Egyptian government.

Oh, for fuck's sake.
posted by notion at 4:52 AM on February 7, 2011

From a leaked diplomatic cable in 2007:

Egyptian intelligence chief and Mubarak consigliere, in past years Soliman was often cited as likely to be named to the long-vacant vice-presidential post. In the past two years, Soliman has stepped out of the shadows, and allowed himself to be photographed, and his meetings with foreign leaders reported. Many of our contacts believe that Soliman, because of his military background, would at the least have to figure in any succession scenario for Gamal, possibly as a transitional figure. Soliman himself adamantly denies any personal ambitions, but his interest and dedication to national service is obvious. His loyalty to Bubarak seems rock-solid. At age 71, he could be attractive to the ruling apparatus and the public at large as a reliable figure unlikely to harbor ambitions for another multi-decade presidency. A key unanswered question is how he would respond to a Gamal presidency once Mubarak is dead. An alleged personal friend of soliman tells us that Soliman "detests" the idea of Gamal as president, and that he also was "deeply personally hurt" by Mubarak, who promised to name him vice-president several years ago, but then reneged.

(Soliman = Suleiman)
posted by notion at 8:17 AM on February 7, 2011

Fisk: Frank Wisner's business link to Egypt
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:33 AM on February 7, 2011

Huh, AJE says Wael Ghonim "built El-Baradei's website". Didn't know that.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:34 AM on February 7, 2011

Wisner also has links to AIG and Enron. He is just a total smorgasbord of fail.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:11 AM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Der Spiegel speculates that Mubarak could visit Germany for a medical check-up, thus allowing his graceful exit from the presidency. (German) For what it's worth.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:40 AM on February 7, 2011

Slate summarizes the report in English.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:42 AM on February 7, 2011

Ack, sorry about the delmoiesque commenting, but here's the Spiegel report in English.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:44 AM on February 7, 2011

Google's Ghonim is out and tweeting.
posted by dejah420 at 10:53 AM on February 7, 2011

Counterpunch on Frank Wisner
posted by adamvasco at 12:16 PM on February 7, 2011

If you're gonna do deli-mosque commenting, I hope it's Halal!
posted by symbioid at 12:31 PM on February 7, 2011

Fareed Zakaria: How Democracy Can Work in the Middle East
posted by kliuless at 1:23 PM on February 7, 2011

God forbid he might actually be for allowing the Egyptians to decide their own government.

um: "For five decades the Middle East has been force-fed a political discourse based on grand ideologies. For the Iranian protesters, America was not just a country or even a superpower but the 'Great Satan.' What is happening in Egypt and Tunisia might be a return to a more normal politics, fueled by the realities of the modern world, rooted in each country's conditions. In this sense, these might be the Middle East's first post-American revolutions."

Sigh, my apolitical niece is chatting me on FB "What's it all about?" ... she is terrified of this idea that we could also lose the internet; she begins studying what is going on in Egypt ... watching live feed ... opening up to a new world ... the youth of the world.

also i was just thinking, and sorry if this sounds flippant given the circumstances, but isn't this the premise of the best-selling YA series 'the hunger games' -- the next 'harry potter'/'twilight'? thousands (millions?) of children i think can relate...
posted by kliuless at 1:49 PM on February 7, 2011

i guess i'm biased, but theocracy doesn't really appeal to me either, but then neither does capitalism; social democracy ftw...
posted by kliuless at 1:56 PM on February 7, 2011

well then, at the end of the day, we all have our say; so say we all...
posted by kliuless at 2:02 PM on February 7, 2011

so say we all...
posted by kliuless at 2:11 PM on February 7, 2011

It's weird to see people fetishizing democracy uncritically. Just because an outcome is democratic doesn't mean that it's the best one, or that theocracy and autocracy aren't very real risks in the longer term, especially from unstable democracies.
posted by klangklangston at 2:13 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

if i may quote zakaria again: "I remain convinced that fears of an Egyptian theocracy are vastly overblown. Shi'ite Iran is a model for no country — certainly not a Sunni Arab society like Egypt. The nation has seen both Mubarak and Iran's mullahs and wants neither. More likely is the prospect of an 'illiberal democracy...' "

viz. "If democratists would like a more up-to-date version of the warning about the potential dangers of rapid democratization and economic liberalization, they can consult World on Fire." (that would be amy "why chinese mothers are superior" chua's first book ;)

cheers!
posted by kliuless at 2:34 PM on February 7, 2011

The internets are abuzz with talk of an emotional interview Wael Ghonim has given upon his release to an Egyptian broadcaster. I hope translated video shows up soon. In the meantime, the Guardian calls it a "tour de force of calm but explosive political passion" and quotes:

"Anyone with good intentions is the traitor because being evil is the norm," he said. "If I was a traitor, I would have stayed in my villa in the Emirates and made good money and said like others, let this country go to hell. But we are not traitors," added Ghonim, an Egyptian who oversees Google's marketing in the Middle East and Africa from Dubai.

posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 2:35 PM on February 7, 2011 [3 favorites]

Quick translated quotes by Sultan Al Qassemi in his Twitter feed. Apparently AJE is working on translations and editing.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 2:39 PM on February 7, 2011

Picture of Ghonim breaking down during the interview.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 2:41 PM on February 7, 2011

I don't think Wisner was necessarily a bad choice: he was formerly a diplomat and his firm had connections with the Egyptian government. These are exactly the sort of things you want from a top-level messenger. What I'm wondering is, did he really go off-message (which would be extraordinary in someone with his background) or was he just hung out to dry after the administration saw that their position was unacceptable?
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:42 PM on February 7, 2011

It's weird to see people fetishizing democracy uncritically. Just because an outcome is democratic doesn't mean that it's the best one, or that theocracy and autocracy aren't very real risks in the longer term, especially from unstable democracies.

So? That doesn't mean you or other external agents get to make the call. Countries mess up democracy sometimes, and then come back to it. Historically things have rarely been improved by keeping a country politically infantilised, but even if this were not true it is their right to determine their own form of government.
posted by jaduncan at 2:47 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

His first interview after release, with subtitles. Not the one mentioned above.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 2:48 PM on February 7, 2011

Well, the concept of illiberal democracy is pretty much one that Zakaria named and popularized, so it's hardly surprising that he turns to it repeatedly. But you must understand that writing for Newsweek (as formerly) and TIME means that your audience is the U.S. establishment (God knows hardly anyone reads the magazines themselves anymore unless trapped in a waiting room). The U.S. establishment is necessarily concerned with what the outcome of any change in Egypt means for them. This may not be a viewpoint you like, but it is a valid viewpoint. He certainly isn't paid to be a cheerleader for street protest movements. At any rate, he is himself a Muslim, born in India, so he understands something about the interplay of faith and democracy.

These are exactly the sort of things you want from a top-level messenger.

Exactly -- it was classic Track II Diplomacy. He knows Mubarak far better than the Ambassador, and whatever the Ambassador says in private could still come back to bite them in the Glaspie. Sending an unofficial envoy allows a level of deniability for both sides. His business connections with the GOE are, in fact, exactly why he was selected.

I agree it would be unlikely for someone with his long record of service in the foreign policy theater to go off-message. I almost wonder if it was an intentional way of making the US-backed outcome look better than it does. That would be a weird way of going about things, though, for the Clinton State Department. The Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld State Department (I hear the spokesperson was someone named Condi) delighted in strategic ambiguity, as if we might choose to attack any given country at any given time, so watch out.
posted by dhartung at 3:09 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's weird to see people fetishizing democracy uncritically. Just because an outcome is democratic doesn't mean that it's the best one, or that theocracy and autocracy aren't very real risks in the longer term, especially from unstable democracies.

This makes absolutely no sense. "We should keep the autocracy that's murdering dissidents in place, because if it turns into an unstable democracy, it could end up as an unjust form of government."

The mind boggles.
posted by notion at 3:28 PM on February 7, 2011 [3 favorites]

Not unjust, worse. It's a legitimate fear for Egypt. The survey results are schizophrenic:

When the Pew Research Center surveyed the Arab world last April, it found that Egyptians have views that would strike the modern Western eye as extreme. Pew found that 82% of Egyptians support stoning as a punishment for adultery, 84% favor the death penalty for Muslims who leave the religion, and in the struggle between "modernizers" and "fundamentalists," 59% identify with fundamentalists.

That's enough to make one worry about the rise of an Iranian-style regime. Except that this is not all the Pew surveys show. A 2007 poll found that 90% of Egyptians support freedom of religion, 88% an impartial judiciary and 80% free speech; 75% are opposed to censorship, and, according to the 2010 report, a large majority believes that democracy is preferable to any other kind of government.

You still have to take a shot though, if the choice is between bad or maybe good/maybe worse.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:43 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

"This makes absolutely no sense. "We should keep the autocracy that's murdering dissidents in place, because if it turns into an unstable democracy, it could end up as an unjust form of government."

The mind boggles."

Well, see, the problem is that you're assuming a premise that's fundamentally stupid, then complaining that the outcome is "mind-boggling."

What if — now, I know this is stretching your poor, overtaxed comprehension gland — what if the assumption isn't that we should keep the current government, but rather that we should be concerned about making sure these protests don't end up with someone just as bad at the helm?

I mean, that's a fair interpretation of what I said, without getting your stupid all over it. In the future, you can prevent that by not assuming some straw man make-believe and instead actually engaging with what's written. Hint: That rarely involves making up quotes to mischaracterize those you aren't bright enough to understand.
posted by klangklangston at 3:46 PM on February 7, 2011

Not unjust, worse. It's a legitimate fear for Egypt.

Some of us, who live in real liberal democracies, have legitimate fears for the US, given the kind of survey results showing how people in the US feel about things like guns, the death penalty, science, freedom of religion.

Doesn't mean I've got any right to bitch about the internal affairs of the United States. Would be nice if you showed Egyptians the same respect.
posted by Jimbob at 3:48 PM on February 7, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm...pretty sure I did?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:49 PM on February 7, 2011

I'm...pretty sure I did?

Ah. Fair call. I thought I'd seen some "Oh Noes! Muslim Brotherhood!" comments from you somewhere up above but it must have been someone else. My mistake. Carry on.
posted by Jimbob at 3:52 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

I linked another survey along those lines without comment and when I got back there were a bunch of comments about it, but yeah, I agree Democracy is the way to go. I just think people should prepare for the possibility of the worst happening too because it isn't as unlikely as some commentators are making it out.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:03 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

The Atlantic via the Guardian:

[A] few protesters just decided to spend the night curled in among sprockets and treads of the tank, their bodies interlaced so that even a slight movement would grind up their bodies. At four in the morning, the protesters with their bodies in the tank were snoring. The tanks haven't been turned on since.

I'm incredibly impressed with this, if only because I could never as a Dutch person in 2011 imagine circumstances in which I would have or want to do anything like it.

Here's a picture of a man appearing to sleep in a tank's track. Here's a BBC video report on the phenomenon of protesters blocking tanks in this manner.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:14 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm uncritically fetishising the factory committees, if that's any help to anyone's case.
posted by Abiezer at 5:03 PM on February 7, 2011 [3 favorites]

klangklangston: "That rarely involves making up quotes to mischaracterize those you aren't bright enough to understand."

Direct quote, presented without interpretation.
posted by mwhybark at 5:17 PM on February 7, 2011

but rather that we should be concerned about making sure these protests don't end up with someone just as bad at the helm?

That's not for America to decide.

When your "comprehension gland" or "brain" can wrap itself around this statement, you may begin to understand the word democracy.
posted by notion at 7:09 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

furiousxgeorge: thanks for the fear mongering Pew polls. I'd like to remind everyone that 2/3 of Americans support capital punishment. Our nation also has the world's largest prison population, both in terms of raw numbers and by per capita measurements. We've also recently started two wars that have killed hundreds of thousand of people and displaced millions, and the majority of that carnage came about because of "bad" intelligence. (Whoops). Even though much of the civilized world sees these facts as barbaric, that does not give them the right to decide who our next President is.

When this nation became independent, slavery was legal and we were regularly massacring indigenous people to make more room for ourselves. That didn't give the right to any other government to try to influence our revolution.

The current government we prop up has kept much of the nation in poverty and denied them a good education. So, we can either keep them like animals penned up in a cage and hope nothing ever goes wrong, or allow them to choose their own way and support their independence, ready to respond with our military if they invade another nation.

We're allowed to fight along side another nation if they invite us to do so, but we are not allowed to deny free will because we're too afraid to fight. We shouldn't choose the coward's way out of standing up for our principles. Otherwise they are just useful hypocrisies for invading resource rich nations.
posted by notion at 7:28 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Tariq Almohayed asks an interesting question:

Is it conceivable that an Egyptian protestor was struggling to return to his house, whilst detained Hamas members managed to flee at such speed to Gaza, from the middle of Egypt? It is even more surprising that escaped Hezbollah members arrived in Beirut’s southern suburbs, or anywhere in Lebanon for that matter, at such a speed, especially considering that there are no adjacent borders between Egypt and Lebanon!

posted by Joe in Australia at 8:27 PM on February 7, 2011

"The thing I don't like about Zakaria is that he's all for democracy, as long as it's US-sactioned democracy."

This isn't a coherent phrasing, and misrepresents Zakaria. His piece is mostly explanatory; descriptive rather than normative. He describes concerns within the US, but it takes imputing a bias to Zakaria that he doesn't state.

It's also simplistically inaccurate. In the first place, Obama's foreign policy, as noted by Zakaria, has been far less aggressive. Bush had a crusading view toward democracy, and was ends-focused, where he loudly denounced human rights abuses from Arab governments in order to undermine opposition to his military campaigns, and also because the neoconservative viewpoint was a shift within conservatism to move away from isolationism and toward a global, rightist conception of policy. This also meant that he defined democracy as a system that produced America, rather than as a process.

The problem with Bush wasn't necessarily the values that he espoused, but rather the hypocrisy he embodied. Bush often touted liberal values — think of his emphasis on "freedom," — but made the actions hollow through venal self-interest and an abject contempt for government as a whole, and he lacked the moral power necessary to persuade elites as well as masses.

Obama's policy has been notably different in tone, if not always in action, being much more reserved (to the dismay of people who want a bold declaration on the side of the protesters) and much more pragmatic. Which means that describing someone as all for US-sanctioned democracy when pretty much every outcome will be "sanctioned" by the US government save brutal crackdown is pretty meaningless as a premise.

"God forbid he might actually be for allowing the Egyptians to decide their own government."

Are you confused by his description? Both this and your later comment where you accuse Zakaria of "waving the red flag" over Islamist government seem to imply that you don't understand that you don't understand what he's getting at, nor why he mentions Russia — in many ways, Russia is worse now than it was under the waning days of Communism.

The best analogy might be when your sibling starts dating someone — you can both want to let them make their own decisions, and not have them dating that asshole. (And yeah, if you want to carry the analogy to the absurd, America used to like Egypt's old boyfriend, despite the fact that he was abusive, and he was kinda getting better a little bit anyway, but then America went away to college, and when America came back, she could tell Mubarak was a total asshole, but Egypt was living with him, so they want to be supportive but not have this backfire, and she's paying part of Mubarak's rent, but she's not going to pay the new guy's rent if he's an asshole… Anyway, it's complicated.)

"Doesn't mean I've got any right to bitch about the internal affairs of the United States. Would be nice if you showed Egyptians the same respect."

This is crazy talk. I mean, how far on your comments page do you think you'd have to go before you hit a comment critical of US politics or policy? And not only that — it's fine to have the world bitch about our policies. It's fine to have them advocate for their own interests! Whether those interests coincide with mine is something I get to decide; likewise anyone on earth gets to decide whether US interests coincide with theirs. Arguing that it's disrespectful for Americans to impose their values is the same rhetoric that Middle Eastern dictators use (it's what Mubarak used to deflect criticisms during the Bush administration). If you seriously argue that countries shouldn't impose their values on others, then you've got to scrap the whole idea of the UN, the whole idea of any sort of international human rights enforcement. It's an isolationist position that's untenable.

That's why the left is incoherent right now, with vacillations between "Do nothing!" (America is fatally corrupt) and "Do everything!" (International solidarity). Liberals are optimistic but cautious. Conservatives are all over the map too, since Mubarak was a socialist but stable.
posted by klangklangston at 8:44 PM on February 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

The Librarian of Alexandria
posted by burningmountain at 9:13 PM on February 7, 2011

furiousxgeorge: thanks for the fear mongering Pew polls

Pretty sure I linked polls that support both sides. Reality has some potentially fearfull outcomes for Egypt, it does, sorry.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:24 PM on February 7, 2011 [2 favorites]

notion wrote: we can either keep them like animals penned up in a cage and hope nothing ever goes wrong, or allow them to choose their own way and support their independence, ready to respond with our military if they invade another nation.

Or we could, you know, support free elections and at the same time make it clear that the interests of their country and the world depend upon them adhering to their nation's commitments - by which I mean not only the Egypt-Israel peace treaty and the Constantinople Convention, but also the UN Charter, particularly Chapter VI.

Incidentally, members of the UN aren't obliged to wait until they're actually invaded: they can act in self defense. This would probably include an Israeli reaction to a re-militarised Sinai Peninsula, or a US/European response to a blockade of the Suez Canal.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:07 PM on February 7, 2011

Al Aribiya reports that the Interior Ministry was behind the attacks on Coptic Christians.
posted by empath at 11:10 PM on February 7, 2011 [2 favorites]

Wael Ghonim's interview with English subtitles. Wow.

Part 2 is the heart of it, 15 incredible emotional minutes.
Part 3 is where they show the pictures of protesters who've been killed and he breaks down and then leaves the set. Only a couple minutes long, good luck holding back the tears...
(Part 1 is just the interviewer's intro, very skippable.)

And this is the Facebook page that apparently translates to something like "We authorize Wael Ghonim to speak on behalf of the Egyptian revolution." Just hit 100,000 members and climbing at a rather remarkable rate every time you refresh the page.
posted by EmilyClimbs at 12:07 AM on February 8, 2011 [6 favorites]

Arguing that it's disrespectful for Americans to impose their values is the same rhetoric that Middle Eastern dictators use (it's what Mubarak used to deflect criticisms during the Bush administration).

Imposing your values through bribery and subversion of popular will in a nation six thousand miles away is far different than dismissing criticism from the government doing the corrupting.

If you seriously argue that countries shouldn't impose their values on others, then you've got to scrap the whole idea of the UN, the whole idea of any sort of international human rights enforcement. It's an isolationist position that's untenable.

America is not meddling in the affairs of Egypt to protect basic human rights. It's knowingly increasing state violence in order to protect its business interests. Hopefully you can see the difference between the two.

That's why the left is incoherent right now, with vacillations between "Do nothing!" (America is fatally corrupt) and "Do everything!" (International solidarity). Liberals are optimistic but cautious. Conservatives are all over the map too, since Mubarak was a socialist but stable.

I don't know about "the left", but to me there is such a simple difference between these two statements. The American government is fatally corrupt, so it should stop paying Mubarak to murder people. And yes, there should be international solidarity, but that doesn't mean it has to have a thing to do with any government, and almost certainly not the United States.
posted by notion at 10:28 AM on February 8, 2011

"America is not meddling in the affairs of Egypt to protect basic human rights. It's knowingly increasing state violence in order to protect its business interests. Hopefully you can see the difference between the two."

This is inane sloganeering for a false dichotomy. Arguing that America's current policy is "knowingly increasing state violence" is obviously false, given both the public statements made in favor of the protestors, as well as the tacit support of the army's non-intervention. Not only that, but increasing state violence now would harm business interests, as increasing state violence would destabilize rather than stabilize.

"I don't know about "the left", but to me there is such a simple difference between these two statements. The American government is fatally corrupt, so it should stop paying Mubarak to murder people. And yes, there should be international solidarity, but that doesn't mean it has to have a thing to do with any government, and almost certainly not the United States."

Yeah, see, by arguing that America is fatally corrupt, you really betray yourself as having an insurmountable bias that won't allow you to make rational statements on the situation. By arguing that America is fatally corrupt, you both necessarily imply that America should remove all aid to Egypt (which would be horrendous for a huge number of people throughout the Middle East) and that as there is no possibility for moral action to occur, you give no alternative to immoral action, thus undercutting any normative case you could make.

It's like arguing that the outcome of the financial crisis should be letting all the banks fail — it's an ideological approach that would make everything worse in order to satisfy a fringe constituency that's still going to be unsatisfied no matter what.

So, your proposed course of action would have a tremendous practical downside with virtually no upside. You can argue that the current course of action isn't represented by public statements on behalf of the administration, but because you've already pretty much declared that you're going to see every bit of evidence as support for your bias that America is fatally corrupt, it's not like you're going to give a fair consideration to competing narratives or try to think about things in any other context.

Oh, and PS:

Shit like this: "When this nation became independent, slavery was legal and we were regularly massacring indigenous people to make more room for ourselves. That didn't give the right to any other government to try to influence our revolution." is pretty hilariously historically ignorant. The American revolution couldn't have survived without French intervention. One of the consistent themes in looking at the history of revolutions — and why there are so many more failed ones than successful ones — is that it is incredibly rare for a revolution to succeed without being at least tacitly condoned by foreign powers, and generally successful ones are overtly aided.
posted by klangklangston at 11:29 AM on February 8, 2011 [7 favorites]

Yeah, there are gray areas all over this stuff. I posted way above (or maybe other thread) and no one addressed it...If you could massively improve the situation in NK, end their nuclear program, get a peace treaty, open the economy, open it up for journalists, start bringing in aid...would it be worth it if you still couldn't overthrow Kim Jong-il?

Obviously Egypt is not in the same situation, but there are parallels, this isn't just about US business interests. A foreign policy based only on working with Democracies won't work.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:40 AM on February 8, 2011

I'm getting "Firefox can't find the server at egypt.alive.in." on EmilyClimb's links...is anyone else having the issue or has my router gone weird?
posted by dejah420 at 12:12 PM on February 8, 2011

They work fine for me.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:14 PM on February 8, 2011

I'm getting "Firefox can't find the server at egypt.alive.in." on EmilyClimb's links...

The same interviews are available on YouTube if you're having trouble with egypt.alive.in.
posted by nangar at 12:41 PM on February 8, 2011

Tonight NPR's All Things Considered had some audio from some of the unfortunates involved with that horse and camel cavalry charge. The Australian appears to have spoken to one of the same men. They do appear to have been workers and animals from the Pyramids.
posted by mwhybark at 5:21 PM on February 8, 2011

his is inane sloganeering for a false dichotomy. Arguing that America's current policy is "knowingly increasing state violence" is obviously false, given both the public statements made in favor of the protestors, as well as the tacit support of the army's non-intervention.

Why are you duped by the handful of weak supportive remarks we've made in the last week when we have been giving billions in weapons for 30 years to a known dictatorship? Just look at the statements... it's fairly obvious that the USG has no interest in helping the protestors reach their political goals unless they have no other choice. Oh, and, "Hey guys! Nice job not murdering more citizens in public with those American weapons... that would have been terrible PR. Keep in on the down low, you've been doing great for 30 years."

Not only that, but increasing state violence now would harm business interests, as increasing state violence would destabilize rather than stabilize.

The current state guarantees access to use Egypt's resources for America's benefit. And there are many contractors who currently sell to the security state, not to mention all of the US corporations that have shares in Egyptian businesses. If Egypt ends up in a nationalistic left leaning mood, Egypt will kick the corporations out just like Iran did. Which is what they're really afraid of.

By arguing that America is fatally corrupt, you both necessarily imply that America should remove all aid to Egypt (which would be horrendous for a huge number of people throughout the Middle East)

All aid used to prop up the State, yes...

and that as there is no possibility for moral action to occur, you give no alternative to immoral action, thus undercutting any normative case you could make.

Of course there are possible moral actions. The United States could stop selling tanks and fighter jets to the dictatorship. That would be a pretty good start. And that fits in with these crazy "normatives" I have like, "Don't sell weapons to regimes that murder their citizens."

It's like arguing that the outcome of the financial crisis should be letting all the banks fail — it's an ideological approach that would make everything worse in order to satisfy a fringe constituency that's still going to be unsatisfied no matter what.

That's a worthless analogy. In this case the "fringe constituency" is tens of millions of people in Egypt. Or, it's nationalizing the banks and hauling half of wall street to court, and then hopefully to prison.

So, your proposed course of action would have a tremendous practical downside with virtually no upside.

Wow. There is no upside to stop arming a dictatorship. That's some strongpolitik, my friend.

You can argue that the current course of action isn't represented by public statements on behalf of the administration, but because you've already pretty much declared that you're going to see every bit of evidence as support for your bias that America is fatally corrupt, it's not like you're going to give a fair consideration to competing narratives or try to think about things in any other context.

I was waiting. I waited until after Mubarak gave his bullshit speech and said he wouldn't resign, and then Clinton was "shocked" that our ally that has been killing civilians killed more civilians. I waited through two Obama statements, empty, meaningless talking points from PJ Crowley and Biden and Gibbs. But yes, I have come to the conclusion that the Obama Administration will only support democratic forces if they have no other options, for the simple reason that democracies are harder to control than autocrats with a good grip on state violence. Countless thousands are dead over thirty years of torture, and hundreds dead this week for daring to speak out. But until public protests hit the news, there was't a peep from anyone in the Obama Administration about democracy in Egypt. No news was good news. So, am I going to forget 30 years of history, because Obama made some oblique statements of support? Or even two years of the Obama Administration over one week of being forced to deal with the issue?

Yeah, extraordinary claims require some extraordinary evidence. So it would have to be one hell of an action, because speeches don't cut it. Not after hearing a woman begging for her life while she was being fired upon, pleading for America to stop our support of Mubarak.

One of the consistent themes in looking at the history of revolutions — and why there are so many more failed ones than successful ones — is that it is incredibly rare for a revolution to succeed without being at least tacitly condoned by foreign powers, and generally successful ones are overtly aided.

This isn't news to anyone. What I'm saying is that anyone could have tried to crush our democracy because of our moral failures at the time, and it would have been undemocratic.

In fact, I said nothing regarding Franco-American relations in the 18th Century -- though Egypt-American relations in 2011 are just slightly different -- but now you're on opposite sides of the argument. You're saying that revolutions aren't successful without being "tacitly condoned" and often need to be "overtly aided." Yet you say earlier that removing aid from Mubarak "would have a tremendous practical downside with virtually no upside." As if Britain could have told it's forces in India that they no longer have British support, and it would have made no difference.

Which argument am I to believe? Because right now I feel like I'm not the one suffering from bias.
posted by notion at 7:38 PM on February 8, 2011 [3 favorites]

The egypt.alive link worked now, I think it may have just been overloaded earlier.

The interview was tear inducing, but I agree with one of the comments over there, I think this was just in really bad form. That was a terrible thing for that interviewer to do to someone who had just been released after two weeks with the secret police. It was just cruel, and deliberately designed to make him break down.
posted by dejah420 at 8:08 PM on February 8, 2011 [2 favorites]

Beautiful photos from Tahrir.
posted by notion at 10:42 PM on February 8, 2011 [1 favorite]

"Why are you duped by the handful of weak supportive remarks we've made in the last week when we have been giving billions in weapons for 30 years to a known dictatorship? Just look at the statements... it's fairly obvious that the USG has no interest in helping the protestors reach their political goals unless they have no other choice. Oh, and, "Hey guys! Nice job not murdering more citizens in public with those American weapons... that would have been terrible PR. Keep in on the down low, you've been doing great for 30 years.""

Like I said, inane sloganeering. You've got sarcasm, you've got that great rhetorical sleight-of-hand of declaring things "fairly obvious" in order to assert an opinion, and you're resorting to oversimplifications because you don't have anything of substance to say. Hey, guess what? The army that's restraining the police? Both are armed with American weapons and both have significant training links to the US military.

"The current state guarantees access to use Egypt's resources for America's benefit. And there are many contractors who currently sell to the security state, not to mention all of the US corporations that have shares in Egyptian businesses. If Egypt ends up in a nationalistic left leaning mood, Egypt will kick the corporations out just like Iran did. Which is what they're really afraid of."

The US does more business with Angola than it does with Egypt. Egypt already nationalized corporations back under Nasser, and the army makes nearly everything there. Egypt's never had a real resource-extraction model to its colonial history, and no matter who ends up in charge, they're not going to mess with the Suez canal. The US and Egypt aren't major trade partners with each other, with Egypt's exports mainly going to Europe. While it's reasonable to assume that business interests prefer stability and have made their bones with Mubarak, it's unreasonable to assume that this is a major driver of US policy with regard to Egypt, especially in the face of more obvious political concerns.

"All aid used to prop up the State, yes..."

All aid "props up the state." Politics is largely the distribution of limited resources.

"But until public protests hit the news, there was't a peep from anyone in the Obama Administration about democracy in Egypt."

I know that you woke up in a world with Egypt in it just this last week, but Obama spoke in Egypt about democracy to Egyptians in July. So perhaps just because you don't know about something doesn't mean it didn't happen?

"This isn't news to anyone. What I'm saying is that anyone could have tried to crush our democracy because of our moral failures at the time, and it would have been undemocratic."

Well, not really. Which of these great powers had outlawed slavery at the time of the American revolution? Judging the past by contemporary morals is naive and can only lead to simplistic dudgeon about the sins of our fathers. But more to the point, the French did intervene, and they intervened on our behalf. If you believe the outcome of America as an independent country was better than having America remain a colony, which from your repeated invocation of "democratic," you seem to think is true, then you're arguing that France's intercession was the wrong thing to do.

"In fact, I said nothing regarding Franco-American relations in the 18th Century -- though Egypt-American relations in 2011 are just slightly different -- but now you're on opposite sides of the argument. You're saying that revolutions aren't successful without being "tacitly condoned" and often need to be "overtly aided." Yet you say earlier that removing aid from Mubarak "would have a tremendous practical downside with virtually no upside." As if Britain could have told it's forces in India that they no longer have British support, and it would have made no difference."

No, I've stayed pretty consistent, actually: The US government is tacitly condoning, and likely aiding through backchannels, the current Egyptian revolt. That they are is good. This does not mean that they should use every and all possible aids. The Egyptian protests are more likely to succeed because of the actions of the American government, and nattering on about shadowy business interests is silly. Publicly stating that American military aid is conditional on how the Egyptian army behaves, in diplomat speak, is more important than a shallow declaration that they're cutting off military aid entirely. Stating earnestly that relations between Egypt and America now are different than France and America in the late 1700s, and then trying to analogize the US to England and Egypt to India is hilarious in two ways, as the first is unnecessary and the second is wildly inaccurate.
posted by klangklangston at 1:52 AM on February 9, 2011 [6 favorites]

The revolt shaking Cairo didn't start in Cairo. It began in this city of textile mills and choking pollution set amid the cotton and vegetable fields of the Nile Delta.

In a country where labor unrest was long thought to be a bigger threat than the demands of the urbanites now flooding the capital's Tahrir Square, El Mahalla el Kubra has long been a source of concern among officials. The 32,000 employees at government textile mills and tens of thousands more at smaller private factories are the soul of the Egyptian labor movement...

Interesting backgrounder/report on the labour movement in El Mahalla, from today's LA Times.
posted by Abiezer at 4:34 AM on February 9, 2011 [1 favorite]

Rick Richman asks: Did anyone read the Egyptian constitution?

Apparently Mubarak's resignation will trigger an election that must be held within 60 days, and the US State Department doesn't think this is feasible. They're probably right - even if it were feasible, it's probably not enough time to reverse the stifling effect of decades of "emergency" political suppression. On the other hand, I can't see any alternative - replacing Mubarak's rule by some sort of semi-constitutional emergency rule won't help anybody. Better to have elections within the 60-day period, accept that it will allow some bad actors to come forward, and keep monitoring the situation to make sure that the next elections take place when they should.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:30 AM on February 9, 2011 [2 favorites]

Anderson Cooper Calls Egypt VP Suleiman Out On His Lies

Do you honestly believe that these people who simply want what we all have, does the Vice President really believe they are insulting Egypt, belittling it? Those are the words of a man who believes his regime is Egypt and it is not.

That is the message of these protesters. Egypt is not a government, it is not a dictator, it is not a regime. It is a proud country and a proud country and millions of them are calling for change even though the Vice President says the Egyptians aren't ready for democracy.

posted by scalefree at 10:54 AM on February 9, 2011 [3 favorites]

The army that's restraining the police? Both are armed with American weapons and both have significant training links to the US military.

And if they had stayed loyal to Mubarak, you'd be saying, "We gave them weapons. It's not like we could tell them what to do with them." The United States armed them to the teeth, knowingly increasing the possibility of state violence, and has so far been lucky. Hopefully we'll have the same luck when Pakistan tires of our meddling, since they have nukes and some crazy fundamentalists. And if the democratic movement is successfully repressed by American and Israeli interest, we'll not be dealing with a weak nation with a small number of Soviet era weapons when they finally kick us out. We'll be dealing with an army that has American weapons and American training. But I suppose we'll still let America off the hook -- who could have imagined that we'd be fighting an old ally again?

The US does more business with Angola than it does with Egypt.

The United States does not care about appliance sales. It cares about gas and oil. Since Egypt represents 10% of the global output of BP, just to name a single company, the assertion that we have no business interests in Egypt is totally false. Just take a look at the official company page gushing over the value of natural resources there.

And once you stop ignoring the Suez, the reality becomes even more stark. There are three vitally important sea routes in the world. We have funded dictatorships in charge of all three: Suharto in Indonesia (the Strait of Malacca), Noriega in Panama (Panama Canal), and of course, the Suez. According to Marisec, just the freight value charged of what passes through the Suez is about 30 billion per year, as the Suez carried 7.5% of all sea trade. I would imagine the value of the freight itself is in the hundreds of billions, if not the trillions. Even the head of CENTCOM has already talking about the "m" word if Egypt restricts access to the Suez:

Were it to happen, obviously we would have to deal with it diplomatically, economically, militarily — but that to me is hypothetical.

All aid "props up the state." Politics is largely the distribution of limited resources.

Read that sentence a second time. You're saying if America was giving intelligence, diplomatic support and money to the opposition parties in Egypt that it would "prop up the State?" Just because you follow it with nice sounding platitudes of non-sequitors doesn't mean anything at all. Really.

I know that you woke up in a world with Egypt in it just this last week, but Obama spoke in Egypt about democracy to Egyptians in July. So perhaps just because you don't know about something doesn't mean it didn't happen?

What a nice try. I've been aware for a while:

Egypt is a totalitarian dictatorship, with a terrible human rights record, a history of anti-democratic practices, and a political big brother that provides them with the means to continue oppressing their population. They have recently extended the permanent state of emergency that allows them to outlaw political parties, jail people (mostly journalists and dissidents) without trials, and beat protestors at their whim. -9/17/2010

It's true; Obama gave a great speech in 2009. And then he did next to nothing in regards to changing policy:

One year after President Obama's speech in Cairo, Arab human rights activists have little good to say about the US government's record in the region. No-one doubts the President's good intentions, but American actions speak a different language, explains Bahey el Din Hassan, director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.

And if the Americans are not in a position to do good deeds, they should at least refrain from doing harm, he continues, citing two examples: America's unconditional support for the bloody regime in Yemen and its recognition of the Egyptian government's official definition of NGOs, which severely limits the freedom of movement of members of civil society organisations. "It's just dreadful," he says.

The journalist Kamel Labidi is also calling for the public denunciation of human rights abuses. He now lives in the USA, but often travels to Arab countries and last May visited his native Tunisia, where a law has been enacted that prohibits human rights activists from making contact with foreign organisations. He is disappointed with the response of many governments to this law. "It is regrettable that European countries as well as the USA have remained silent on this issue." He goes on to say that the United States has even praised the Tunisian regime for its supposed progress on human rights, while completely ignoring its abuses.

Even after their sham elections in 2010, the Administration said this:

The United States is disappointed with the conduct during and leading up to Egypt’s November 28 legislative elections. While we are continuing to assess reports from a variety of sources, the numerous reported irregularities at the polls, the lack of international monitors and the many problems encountered by domestic monitors, and the restrictions on the basic freedoms of association, speech and press in the run-up to the elections are worrying. That being said, the United States commends those Egyptians who participated in the parliamentary elections on Sunday — as candidates, campaigners, voters and election monitors. The United States has a longstanding partnership with the people of Egypt, rooted in common interests and shared values. We look forward to continuing to work with the Egyptian Government and Egypt’s vibrant civil society to help Egypt achieve its political, social, and economic aspirations consistent with international standards.

I'm afraid to get all colloquial in the midst of these lovely words, but money talks and bullshit diplomatic jargon walks. Your projection of my position is yours, not mine. Only if you cover your eyes and ears for modern recorded history, and then pretend that the "fluid" position of the USG represents support of democracy does your position make any sense.

In reality, the USG response is due to a total intelligence failure followed by desperation to stay politically relevant, and keep as much as the establishment intact as they can. They know a democratic Egypt will be under no false pretenses about the Camp David and Oslo Accords. Israel has failed to keep it's part of the agreement -- there are now hundreds of thousands of settlers in the West Bank, instead of just 10,000 -- and a reduction of US projections of force, combined with the worst foreign policy mistake in history (Iraq) could permanently reduce our access to oil, to the Suez canal, and to general power politics in the region.

I mean, the Administration has backed a transition directed by Suleiman:

In October 2001, Habib was seized from a bus by Pakistani security forces. While detained in Pakistan, at the behest of American agents, he was suspended from a hook and electrocuted repeatedly. He was then turned over to the CIA, and in the process of transporting him to Egypt he endured the usual treatment: his clothes were cut off, a suppository was stuffed in his anus, he was put into a diaper - and 'wrapped up like a spring roll'.

In Egypt, as Habib recounts in his memoir, My Story: The Tale of a Terrorist Who Wasn’t, he was repeatedly subjected to electric shocks, immersed in water up to his nostrils and beaten. His fingers were broken and he was hung from metal hooks. At one point, his interrogator slapped him so hard that his blindfold was dislodged, revealing the identity of his tormentor: Suleiman.
...
A far more infamous torture case, in which Suleiman also is directly implicated, is that of Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi. Unlike Habib, who was innocent of any ties to terror or militancy, al-Libi was allegedly a trainer at al-Khaldan camp in Afghanistan. He was captured by the Pakistanis while fleeing across the border in November 2001. He was sent to Bagram, and questioned by the FBI. But the CIA wanted to take over, which they did, and he was transported to a black site on the USS Bataan in the Arabian Sea, then extraordinarily rendered to Egypt. Under torture there, al-Libi "confessed" knowledge about an al-Qaeda–Saddam connection, claiming that two al-Qaeda operatives had received training in Iraq for use in chemical and biological weapons. In early 2003, this was exactly the kind of information that the Bush administration was seeking to justify attacking Iraq and to persuade reluctant allies to go along. Indeed, al-Libi’s "confession" was one the central pieces of "evidence" presented at the United Nations by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell to make the case for war.

Look, klang: I have no idea why you're so credulous when it comes to America's support of democracy in Egypt. Three weeks of words do not equal two years worth of actions and weak statements of "concern" and even emptier speeches, and frankly pale in comparison to our long history of paying lip service to democratic movements throughout the region. Supporting a transition of power from President to Vice President, which is the way it's been done in Egypt for decades, is nothing new. Picking a virtual CIA asset to lord over the transition doesn't fill me with hope, especially when he's one of the most reviled men in his country, and has been the head of the intelligence services that have been doing the torturing and murdering for two decades.

And then to give America an A+ for changing our answer after the protests gained steam? It really is quite something to behold. It's the same as it ever was, like Churchill said: "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing... after they have exhausted all other possibilities."

I wish it wasn't so. I wanted the Obama I voted for. I was ready to witness some concrete support for democracy in Egypt. But the US has delivered nothing but rhetoric, and rhetoric that only changed in tone after the reality of democratic movements in Egypt could no longer be ignored and swept under the heaping, stinking rug of "national interest".
posted by notion at 11:38 AM on February 9, 2011 [9 favorites]

You are ruining this thread for me. That is all.
posted by proj at 11:57 AM on February 9, 2011 [6 favorites]

I agree with proj. This thread could be a useful resource, but while my moral position is not that different from yours, notion, your desire to morally harangue others has been getting on my nerves for days. We get it. You don't need to keep saying it.
posted by dhartung at 12:09 PM on February 9, 2011 [8 favorites]

Thirding this.

This thread has been full of great updates from a dizzying array of sources, interspersed with you declaiming and haranguing in long screeds that I expect most of us have been skipping. Here's another user asking you to please cut it out.
posted by CunningLinguist at 12:57 PM on February 9, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'd say to start a metatalk thread about it, but he already started a metatalk thread about the thread he is currently ruining.
posted by empath at 1:10 PM on February 9, 2011 [5 favorites]

The economic trends behind the wave of political unrest currently sweeping the Arab world?
FT chart of the week.
A striking trend is that the two countries suffering from the worst unrest in recent weeks – Tunisia and Egypt – experienced rapid price rises last year. Inflation hit 4.5 per cent in Tunisia and an astronomical 11.7 per cent in Egypt, the highest level in the region.
posted by adamvasco at 1:42 PM on February 9, 2011

Mods, can you delete everything I wrote in the thread after this? It was my fault for taking the bait and not shutting up.
posted by notion at 1:54 PM on February 9, 2011

notion, I think it's too late for that sort of request, given that folks have been responding to you all along. Let the record stand and hopefully learn something from it.

I do thank you for posting this thread in the first place (as I've noted before, it's the single media item that finally got me taking the Egyptian situation as seriously as I should have been), but man (woman?), your presence has become analogous to something-or-other: the individual who starts something with the most virtuous of intentions ends up getting voted off the island.

Sloppy metaphor but I just had a big lunch.
posted by philip-random at 2:02 PM on February 9, 2011

Nixing stuff after the fact like that would be pretty out of the norm. Let's call it even and just leave what's there there and maybe not so much of that going forward, eh?
posted by cortex at 2:06 PM on February 9, 2011 [3 favorites]

Wael Ghonim's Egypt
Everything I hear suggests the army will not fire on its own people. Mubarak does not dare order them to shoot for fear of the response....

If the army won’t shoot, the protesters won’t disperse, leaving the stand-off: Until he goes, they remain.

With each day of impasse the economy sinks further. There are strikes in Cairo and Suez. The days of a dictatorship that won’t — or can’t — use brutality in crisis are probably numbered....

American values and interests do not always coincide — perhaps they rarely coincide. Diplomacy comes down to juggling them. That U.S. values are embodied on Tahrir Square is as clear as the lines of the pyramids. I say its interests, on balance, lie there too: in the establishment of a participatory society that would return Egypt to its pivotal place in the Arab world and give the young hope....

The credibility of Mubarak in guiding a democratic transition is zero. He is an antidemocrat by formation and temperament. Everything offered so far — from amnesties to constitutional reform committees — has screamed: We can run down the clock on this.

Ghonim electrified Egypt's revolution

White House gives Egypt a to-do list

Can Obama maintain his Egypt tightrope act?
posted by dhartung at 3:21 PM on February 9, 2011 [4 favorites]

Chiming in that I also would rather have this thread be more facts about what's going on now in the immediate situation, not debate over what's gone on in the past. (Even though what's gone on in the past is important, generally speaking.)

Also, I am impressed -- this has happened a few times in this thread, that we come close to a derail, and someone says civilly "please stop derailing" and the derailer says civilly "ok, I will stop" and then we get back to the good stuff. So thanks and cheers to everyone for that.
posted by LobsterMitten at 3:26 PM on February 9, 2011 [1 favorite]

The BBC reports that protesters are blocking the People's Assembly building (i.e., the legislative building). The report mentions another thing that should be obvious but I hadn't thought about: the last elections were blatantly rigged, as well as being inherently unfair. Egypt really doesn't have a representative legislature to govern once Mubarak resigns. It will just be replacing a near-dictator with his appointees, at least until fresh elections can be held.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:40 PM on February 9, 2011 [1 favorite]

Though I disagree with his assertion that the uprising "feels post-ideological" (whatever that could possibly mean), Thomas L. Friedman's editorial has some useful info to counter the kneejerk OH NOES THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD sentiment:

One of the best insights into what is happening here is provided by a 2009 book called “Generation in Waiting,” edited by Navtej Dhillon and Tarik Yousef, which examined how young people are coming of age in eight Arab countries. It contends that the great game that is unfolding in the Arab world today is not related to political Islam but is a “generational game” in which more than 100 million young Arabs are pressing against stifling economic and political structures that have stripped all their freedoms and given them in return one of the poorest education systems in the world, highest unemployment rates and biggest income gaps.

posted by scody at 3:44 PM on February 9, 2011 [5 favorites]

Nina explains the situation in Egypt. Turns out the president has lots of money, and the normal people don't.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 5:06 PM on February 9, 2011

Mubarak still has North Korea's support.
posted by Sticherbeast at 6:16 PM on February 9, 2011

Wait a minute, is North Korea the one on our side?
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:48 PM on February 9, 2011

The shaping of a New World Order

Interesting take from Michael LeVine:

As this dynamic of nonviolent resistance against entrenched regime violence plays out, it is worth noting that so far, Osama bin Laden and his Egyptian deputy, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, have had little - if anything - of substance to say about the revolution in Egypt. What they've failed to ignite with an ideology of a return to a mythical and pure beginning - and a strategy of human bombs, IEDs, and planes turned into missiles - a disciplined, forward-thinking yet amorphous group of young activists and their more experienced comrades, "secular" and "religious" together (to the extent these terms are even relevant anymore), have succeeded in setting a fire with a universal discourse of freedom, democracy and human values - and a strategy of increasingly calibrated chaos aimed at uprooting one of the world's longest serving dictators.

As one chant in Egypt put it succinctly, playing on the longstanding chants of Islamists that "Islam is the solution", with protesters shouting: "Tunisia is the solution."

posted by notion at 8:14 PM on February 9, 2011 [1 favorite]

UPI : Egyptian labor unrest spreads Looks as if Egypt is now heading towards a General Strike. If Suez starts to be affected that will be the nail in the coffin of the Mubarak regime. Also next week schools and universities are back from spring break so expect more coordinated protests there.
Asam El-Amin has an article on Egypt's Future Leaders who are young, educated, technically savvy and committed.
posted by adamvasco at 12:22 AM on February 10, 2011

Breaking news: Mubarak To Step Down -- "Egypt's vice president to take control, sources tell NBC News."
posted by ericb at 7:37 AM on February 10, 2011

*RIOTOUS CHEERS*

Hope this works out in the long-run. I'm all fuzzy with the people power, right now.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:44 AM on February 10, 2011

ericb's NBC link says suleiman is taking over. Is that true?
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 7:55 AM on February 10, 2011

It's damned significant that the protesters wrung this concession from the rulers, but Suleiman = meet the new boss. I hope the Egyptians don't relax too much, and continue to demand that people they trust be integral to the talks and processes to come. Otherwise, the result will be just a transfer of power rather than a transformation of the power structure.
posted by perspicio at 7:59 AM on February 10, 2011

It's not clear that the handover (if it happens) is going to be to Suleiman or to the army. Either way, it seems like something very big is happening. Various snippets from the Guardian:

4.01pm: Reuters is reporting a CIA official as saying that Mubarak is strongly likely to step down tonight.

An Egyptian official has told the news agency Mubarak's fate will be decided in a matter of hours and "most probably" he will step down.

Interviewer: "Wasn't the protesters' message clear for President Mubarak to step down and pass his responsibilities to vice-president Omar Suleiman?"

Shafiq: "What you say is being discussed now. Whether it is positive or negative, this will be clarified soon."

3.45pm: To sum up: Hosni Mubarak will meet the demands of protesters, officials from the military and the ruling NDP party have told various news organisations. The protesters' key demand is that Mubarak stand down as president.

The military's supreme council has been meeting today, without Mubarak, who is the commander in chief, and announced on state TV its "support of the legitimate demands of the people".

A spokesman said the council was in permanent session "to explore what measures and arrangements could be made to safeguard the nation, its achievements and the ambitions of its great people".

General Hassan al-Roueini, the military commander for the Cairo area, told thousands of protesters in central Tahrir Square: "All your demands will be met today."

posted by proj at 8:06 AM on February 10, 2011 [1 favorite]

http://www.youtube.com/user/AlJazeeraEnglish
posted by Mister Bijou at 8:07 AM on February 10, 2011

Matthew Cassel (@justimage) tweets: Rainbow over Tahrir http://yfrog.com/h0jzngjj
posted by BeerFilter at 8:07 AM on February 10, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJE just said that the army stopped Mubarak from making a speech handing over power to Suleiman.
posted by BeerFilter at 8:10 AM on February 10, 2011 [1 favorite]

AJE is reporting that the military has stepped in to "Safeguard the country."
posted by notion at 10:33 AM on February 10, 2011

Here is the complete (5-part) Dream TV interview with Wael Ghonim, including English subtitles: 1 2 3 4 5
(Only parts 1, 2 and 5 were linked above.)
posted by metaplectic at 11:56 AM on February 10, 2011 [4 favorites]

Looks like I'll be milling around this thread awhile longer.
posted by notion at 12:52 PM on February 10, 2011

I know that you woke up in a world with Egypt in it just this last week, but Obama spoke in Egypt about democracy to Egyptians in July. So perhaps just because you don't know about something doesn't mean it didn't happen?

Wow, talk about being both insulting and wrong. Obama never said people in Egypt, specifically, should have a democracy or criticized Mubarak until the uprising. Do you seriously think no one in this thread has been aware of the oppressive nature of the Egyptian government until the past few weeks? WTF?
posted by delmoi at 10:36 PM on February 10, 2011

CNN is reporting that Mubarak has gone to Sharm el-Sheik, and the tanks in front of the palace have turned their turrets away from protestors.
posted by notion at 7:46 AM on February 11, 2011

He's gone. Fucking beautiful, Egypt. Fucking beautiful.
posted by notion at 8:03 AM on February 11, 2011

Yub Nub.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:56 AM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

ismubarakstillpresident.com :D

End of the beginning...
posted by Abiezer at 9:01 AM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

This thread has been an epic live blogging metafilter watch on the revolution. We did this very well. I'm so filled with joy and hope for the Egyptians, and I'm so glad that we have a community like ours that we could share and document this moment in history. Go Egypt!
posted by dejah420 at 9:26 AM on February 11, 2011 [6 favorites]

This thread has been an epic live blogging metafilter watch on the revolution. We did this very well. I'm so filled with joy and hope for the Egyptians, and I'm so glad that we have a community like ours that we could share and document this moment in history. Go Egypt!

score of -0.5
modappeal

i keed
posted by saturday_morning at 1:45 PM on February 11, 2011

I too have to step in and bid a fond farewell to this thread which stayed open on my browser the whole time. Except for crashes (hello eleventy billion Egypt links and twitterings and streaming streams of streamy stuff). It was right here that I first witnessed the glory of the new MeFi "load comments" function, and not a minute too soon!

It was intense, 99979; we gasped, we trembled, we laughed, we cried. I'll miss you.

And Egypt, you're AMAZING. (gah, crying again.)
posted by taz at 2:23 AM on February 12, 2011 [1 favorite]

Comic describing the experience of watching the revolution in Egypt via the internet from the US by Domitille Collardey and Sarah Glidden.
posted by LobsterMitten at 7:24 PM on February 12, 2011 [1 favorite]

Democracy Now:

AHDAD SOUEIF: I am just completely, completely overwhelmed and I’m just trying to kind of, you know, write my copy for tomorrow, my article, but I can hardly breathe... You know, you can – you can hear all the joy cries, the phones – the phones just won’t stop ringing, people just saying congratulations.

You know what I first thought? I thought I have seen two women in Tahrir Square fully pregnant and waiting to deliver, and they’ve been saying, you know, ‘When it comes, when it comes,’ and ‘I will call my daughter Liberty,’ and I – my thought was that they can now have their babies.

She's at 55 minutes in or so. And that's all I have to say about that.
posted by notion at 10:20 AM on February 13, 2011 [2 favorites]

The senior Egyptian army officers currently ruling Egypt as a military dictatorship ordered the wholesale slaughter of the thousands of protesters in Tahrir Square.

Robert Fisk writes that "Mubarak ordered the Egyptian Third Army to crush the demonstrators in Tahrir Square with their tanks after flying F-16 fighter bombers at low level over the protesters [on 30 January]", but when tank commanders on the ground received the orders from senior military officers they instead called their own families for advice. "Fathers who had spent their lives serving the Egyptian army told their sons to disobey, that they must never kill their own people."

I'd thought about making an fpp about this topic, but I guess the Algeria and Bahrain threads suffice for now, and we'll likely rehash this issue next week when they propose the new constitution for Egypt.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:56 AM on February 15, 2011

I have much respect for Fisk in certain areas, but I have to call BS on that utterly unsourced story. It just has so many unanswered questions.

* So the Egyptian Army, to a man, refused to follow orders?
* The commanders prepared for this wholesale slaughter in the following ways:
** Placing tanks in the middle of a civilian demonstration for days on end, which allowed:
*** Close relationships to develop between protesters and soldiers
*** Relaxation of operational protocols and readiness
*** Elimination of any useful tactical formation
** Not recalling commanders for any operational planning or briefing beforehand
** Using a fly-by to no operational purpose
* The tank commanders received their orders en masse? From the now-junta? Or from a company-level commander who must have been present himself on the square and himself passed on the order without himself playing call-daddy-first? What about the unseen echelons in between?
* No single group of tankers or infantry or even Mubarak's own air force (he was a fighter pilot) was loyal enough to even throw out some wild cover fire? Every unit demonstrated complete unit cohesion in refusing orders, without showing any disarray? No unit departed the field or was charged with desertion? When this failed no other units appeared to fulfill the mission parameters, whatever they may have been?
* No military-veteran fathers disagreed with this dereliction of duty and urged their sons to carry out orders? Not even one?

Fisk has previously (during e.g. Afghanistan) demonstrated some obtuseness regarding military strategy and tactics. Sometimes he wants to show brutality for brutality's sake, other times he sympathizes with the misuse of troops for political ends, but generally he doesn't seem to delve into these questions deeply compared with his political and cultural understanding.

* Airplanes (fighter-bombers, as he claims) have very limited utility in urban warfare
* Tanks are a tool almost exclusively best used against other tanks or hardened ground targets
* Tanks look extremely menacing but have limited anti-personnel capability
* Tanks and APCs are often confused by members of the press, but in this case both were present
* In either case there are specific tactical approaches to use in anti-personnel situations; sitting in the middle of a crowd and firing randomly is not one of these tactics and would quickly allow the "armored" vehicles to become sitting ducks enveloped by molotov cocktails with their treads disabled by debris -- a suicide mission

Really, none of what he's saying was ordered makes any sense unless the people giving the orders are damned fools. Given actual combat experience in three hard-fought wars as well as decades of peacetime doctrinal training courtesy of the US, I can't see how this would pass muster as a proposal. It's a given that you don't give a task to a military unit that you are unsure will carry out the task.

In China, Tiananmen was crushed using rural conscript troops rather than the army units accustomed to urban Beijing, troops who were held in tactical staging areas outside the city until the night they were brought in. The troops that had been in the square had demonstrated themselves restraint, e.g. the infamous Tank Man episode. These troops would not be entrusted with a massacre.

I'm not saying nothing happened. Fisk may well have observed or heard second-hand something. But the way he describes it, mostly by implication, is very unlikely to have happened. All the indications from diplomatic sources are that the top levels of the military were, although generally quite conservative, unwilling to be Mubarak's thugs. If they ordered a massacre and their troops effectively rebelled against these orders, we would have seen an entirely different outcome to events, with the supreme military council itself exposed as impotent and the Army in disarray and politically sidelined. This is the sort of situation that leads to a junior officers' rebellion. All signs point instead to a cohesive military not riven by dissent in the ranks.
posted by dhartung at 1:11 PM on February 16, 2011 [9 favorites]

Dhartung: I agree with your scepticism. It can't have been a grass-roots rebellion against Mubarak's orders or there would have been a lot more chaos. The commanders may have been sitting on the fence to see what would develop or (the sceptic in me says) they may plan to be Egypt's next military junta. I suppose we'll know in six months.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:33 PM on February 16, 2011

hm, I was wondering if there would be longboat tomfoolery over here but I guess not. I suppose that is an appropriate and respectful gesture.
posted by mwhybark at 7:32 PM on February 20, 2011