Situation in Egypt

[crazyinsane105]

Egypt: Internet down, police counterterror unit up

AP

 

Egyptian protesters clash with riot police in Suez, Egypt Thursday, Jan. 27, 2011. Egyptian activists protested for a third day as social networking s AP – Egyptian protesters clash with riot police in Suez, Egypt Thursday, Jan. 27, 2011. Egyptian activists …

By HAMZA HENDAWI and SARAH EL DEEB, Associated Press Hamza Hendawi And Sarah El Deeb, Associated Press – 27 mins ago

 

CAIRO – Internet service in Egypt was disrupted and the government deployed an elite special operations force in Cairo on Friday, hours before an anticipated new wave of anti-government protests.

 

The developments were a sign that President Hosni Mubarak's regime was toughening its crackdown following the biggest protests in years against his nearly 30-year rule.

 

The counter-terror force, rarely seen on the streets, took up positions in strategic locations, including central Tahrir Square, site of the biggest demonstrations this week.

 

Facebook and Twitter have helped drive this week's protests. But by Thursday evening, those sites were disrupted, along with cell phone text messaging and BlackBerry Messenger services. Then the Internet went down.

 

Earlier, the grass-roots movement got a double boost — the return of Nobel Peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei and the backing of the biggest opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

The real test will be whether Egypt's fragmented opposition can come together, with Friday's rallies expected to be some of the biggest so far.

 

Social networking sites were abuzz that the gatherings called after Friday prayers could attract huge numbers of protesters demanding the ouster of Mubarak. Millions gather at mosques across the city on Fridays, giving organizers a vast pool of people to tap into.

 

The 82-year-old Mubarak has not been seen in public or heard from since the protests began Tuesday with tens of thousands marching in Cairo and a string of other cities. While he may still have a chance to ride out this latest challenge, his choices are limited, and all are likely to lead to a loosening of his grip on power.

 

Violence escalated on Thursday at protests outside the capital. In the flashpoint city of Suez, along the strategic Suez Canal, protesters torched a fire station and looted weapons that they then turned on police.

 

In the northern Sinai area of Sheik Zuweid, several hundred Bedouins and police exchanged gunfire, killing a 17-year-old man. About 300 protesters surrounded a police station from rooftops of nearby buildings and fired two RPGs at it, damaging the walls.

 

The United States, Mubarak's main Western backer, has been publicly counseling reform and an end to the use of violence against protesters, signs the Egyptian leader may no longer be enjoying Washington's full backing.

 

In an interview broadcast live on YouTube, President Barack Obama said the anti-government protests filling the streets show the frustrations of Egypt's citizens. "It is very important that people have mechanisms in order to express their grievances," Obama said.

 

Noting that Mubarak has been "an ally of ours on a lot of critical issues," Obama added: "I've always said to him that making sure that they're moving forward on reform, political reform and 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," Obama said.

 

In a move likely to help swell the numbers on the streets, the Muslim Brotherhood ended days of inaction to throw its support behind the demonstrations. On its website, the outlawed group said it would join "with all the national Egyptian forces, the Egyptian people, so that this coming Friday will be the general day of rage for the Egyptian nation."

 

However, Internet disruptions were reported by a major service provider for Egypt. Italy-based Seabone said there was no Internet traffic going into or out of the country after 12:30 a.m. local time Friday.

 

For the Brotherhood, still smarting from their recent defeat in a parliamentary election marred by fraud, the protests offer a rare opportunity to seize on what is increasingly shaping up as the best shot at regime change since Mubarak came to office in 1981.

 

The Brotherhood's support and the return of ElBaradei were likely to energize a largely youth-led protest movement that, by sustaining unrest over days, has shaken assumptions that Mubarak's security apparatus can keep a tight lid on popular unrest.

 

ElBaradei, the former head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog and a leading Mubarak opponent, has sought to recreate himself as a pro-democracy campaigner in his homeland. He is viewed by some supporters as a figure capable of uniting the country's fractious opposition and providing the movement with a road map for the future.

 

For ElBaradei, it is a chance to shake off his image as an elitist who is out of touch after years of living abroad, first as an Egyptian diplomat and later with the United Nations.

 

Speaking to reporters Thursday before his departure for Cairo, ElBaradei said: "If people, in particular young people, ... want me to lead the transition, I will not let them down. My priority right now ... is to see a new regime and to see a new Egypt through peaceful transition."

 

Once on Egyptian soil, he struck a conciliatory note.

 

"We're still reaching out to the regime to work with them for the process of change. Every Egyptian doesn't want to see the country going into violence," he said. "Our hand is outstretched."

 

"I wish that we didn't have to go to the streets to impress on the regime that they need to change," ElBaradei said. "There is no going back. I hope the regime stops the violence, stops detaining people, stops torturing people."

 

With Mubarak out of sight, the ruling National Democratic Party said Thursday it was ready for a dialogue with the public but offered no concessions to address demands for a solution to rampant poverty, unemployment and political change.

 

Safwat El-Sherif, the party's secretary general and a longtime confidant of Mubarak, was dismissive of the protests at the first news conference by a senior ruling party figure since the unrest began.

 

"We are confident of our ability to listen. The NDP is ready for a dialogue with the public, youth and legal parties," he said. "But democracy has its rules and process. The minority does not force its will on the majority."

 

El-Sharif's comments were likely to reinforce the belief held by many protesters that Mubarak's regime is incapable, or unwilling, to introduce reforms that will meet their demands. That could give opposition parties an opening to win popular support if they close ranks and promise changes sought by the youths at the forefront of the unrest.

 

Mubarak has not said yet whether he will stand for another six-year term as president in elections this year. He has never appointed a deputy and is thought to be grooming his son Gamal to succeed him despite popular opposition. According to leaked U.S. memos, hereditary succession also does not meet with the approval of the powerful military.

 

Mubarak has seen to it that no viable alternative to him has been allowed to emerge. Constitutional amendments adopted in 2005 by the NDP-dominated parliament has made it virtually impossible for independents like ElBaradei to run for president.

 

Continuing the heavy-handed methods used by the security forces the past three days would probably buy his regime a little time but could strengthen the resolve of the protesters and win them popular sympathy.

 

The alternative is to introduce a package of political and economic reforms that would end his party's monopoly on power and ensure that the economic liberalization policies engineered by his son and heir apparent Gamal over the past decade benefit the country's poor majority.

 

He could also lift the emergency laws in force since 1981, loosen restrictions on the formation of political parties and publicly state whether he will stand for another six-year term in elections this year.

 

Mubarak's regime suffered another serious blow Thursday when the stock market's benchmark index fell more than 10 percent by close, its biggest drop in more two years on the back of a 6 percent fall a day earlier.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_egypt_protest

[crazyinsane105]

Before people start celebrating, do realize that because our foreign policy pretty much kept the guy in power (the tremendous amount of aid we gave to prop up Moubarak, if it wasn't for that, the country would've collapsed long ago), the next government will be much more anti-American and anti-Israeli most likely...

[Doug Kibbey]

Before people start celebrating, do realize that because our foreign policy pretty much kept the guy in power (the tremendous amount of aid we gave to prop up Moubarak, if it wasn't for that, the country would've collapsed long ago), the next government will be much more anti-American and anti-Israeli most likely...

 

Not to worry, we'll just send in Jimmy Carter.

[Jeff]

It's all our fault.

[NickM]

It's all our fault.

 

Yeah...typical: "Don't support the Israelis; support the Arabs equally" becomes "don't support corrupt dictatorial Arab governments(like there are any other kind?)" becomes "Get out of the Mid East altogether"; So Insane-o...IF we dump all dictatorial governments in the M/E who are we left with??? Ironically only Israel.

 

NM

[M1Buck]

After living in Egypt for a year, the people are starving for freedom and true democracy. They currently live in a repressive military dictatorship and the corruption is outrageous. For Egyptians to recognize their true potential, they need a government that is freely elected (if they like us or not) and as free from the corruption that plagues the majority of the 3rd world. I also think they know that despite their historical issues with Israel, Israel is the 800lb economic gorilla that can be more of a help than an enemy. They are very industrious and energetic and with the right assistance, can be again a valuable ally.

[Paul in Qatar]

One of our guys, a real-live Texas oilman, lives in Egypt with his Egyptian wife. He just got from a break and reports are things are not as bad or widespread as the media is reporting.

 

We will see I suppose.

[crazyinsane105]

Yeah...typical: "Don't support the Israelis; support the Arabs equally" becomes "don't support corrupt dictatorial Arab governments(like there are any other kind?)" becomes "Get out of the Mid East altogether"; So Insane-o...IF we dump all dictatorial governments in the M/E who are we left with??? Ironically only Israel.

 

NM

 

Why do we even bother supporting any country over there in the first place?

 

 

One of the Senate's newest members has settled upon an idea to reduce American debt that's likely to come off as highly controversial in the halls of power: ending all foreign aid, including the tens of billions dedicated to Israel.

 

Israel has been, by far, the largest recipient of US foreign aid anywhere in the world. Since the inception of Israel's close diplomatic relationship with the US all the way through 2008, Americans gave Israel over $103 billion, according to the American Educational Trust.

 

President Barack Obama in late 2009 approved an additional $2.77 billion for Israeli foreign aid in 2010, and another $30 billion over the next decade.

 

That's got to stop, according to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who told CNN host Wolf Blitzer recently that with such a crushing economic picture in the US, "we just can't do it anymore."

 

"What I'm concerned about," Paul said, is that "if we do nothing -- if we coast along as we've been coasting -- entitlements and interest will consume the whole debt within a decade; will consume the whole budget. There will be nothing left for anything else. My fear is we could have a precipitous calamity where nobody gets any checks from government, so security fails, Medicare fails, unless we start making the difficult decisions now.

 

"I'm gonna propose a solution before we have a calamity," he said.

 

In a recent proposal by Paul, a total of $500 billion would be slashed from the budget within a year, undercutting food stamps, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the National Endowment for the Arts and other programs that many held dear.

 

It would also take five percent from the defense budget, chopping $16 billion out of funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently announced two significant budget cuts at the Defense Department, starting with a $78 billion cut in spending over the next five years. The figure nearly topped the first-year maximum cuts proposed by House Republicans during the 2010 mid-term elections.

 

But even that was a mere "pin-prick" to a behemoth military-industrial complex that must drastically shrink for the good of the republic, a former Reagan administration budget director recently told Raw Story.

 

"It amounts to a failed opportunity to recognize that we are now at a historical inflection point at which the time has arrived for a classic post-war demobilization of the entire military establishment," David Stockman said in an exclusive interview.

 

He warned that without massive cuts to the defense budget, reducing elective spending a bit here and a bit there would be "too little, too late."

 

Short of that, he suggested, the United States had "reached the point of no return" with its artificial creation of wealth, and would eventually face a sharp economic decline.

 

Sen. Paul has been a leading conservative advocate of defense cuts, but his position was largely unsupported by fellow Republicans.

 

A Democrat-created commission dedicated to studying defense cuts recommended last year that up to $1 trillion be removed from the military's budget. Recommendations from the Sustainable Defense Task Force, formed by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and supported by Sen. Paul's father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), were seen as largely unworkable, with Republicans standing nearly in unanimous opposition to cutting America's defense budget.

 

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), the highest ranking Jewish member of Congress, played down any talk of cutting foreign aid payments to Israel.

 

"I've always said that any aid to foreign countries should pass the test of whether it helps support the security of the United States," he recently told AFP.

 

Cantor added that it was "very clear" Israel was waging "the same war against radical Islam that we are in," and therefore passed his test.

 

Cantor came under heavy criticism in November when, as House Minority Whip, he reached out to Israel's prime minister and promised that Republicans would "serve as a check on the [Obama] administration" when talks turned to Israeli policy. When former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) traveled to Syria in 2007, Cantor suggested she'd committed a felony by violating the Logan Act, which prohibits conducting unauthorized diplomacy with a foreign country.

 

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=726_1296144092

 

 

Better yet, why are we even financially supporting Israel? They are a technologically advanced country that can probably do very well without our aid and their enemies for the most part are dumber than rocks at times. That aid money would be better spent in, I dunno, upgrading this country's deteriorating infrastructure, student loan forgiveness, etc. etc. So its not just about Jordan, Egypt, or Israel. Just stop all aid to all countries and let them deal with their own internal problems. The only country that I probably want to see receiving aid would be Iraq and that's because we pretty much invaded them.

[NickM]

Israel is more or less a 'Western Country' that actually has something going...kinda like comparing Singapore to Burma and Bangladesh;

 

AND You're comparing the (overall) piddling dollars we give to Israel to the stuff we waste 'updating infrastructure'? Tell ya what--if you can tell me how much the annual amount the States 'allocate' to 'infrastructure' but secretly blow on 'social programs' I might give your idea a thought---but you might want to kick the asses of the pols who divert said funds from fixing shit to buying votes.

 

nm

[Ivanhoe]

Why do we even bother supporting any country over there in the first place?

 

In that particular area of Over There, supporting Egypt with the proviso that Egypt has to remain at peace with Israel means the Suez Canal stays open. We take that for granted these days, but it wouldn't take much to close the Canal. Which would have a substantial financial impact all over the place.

 

With Egypt off the team, Israel's remaining neighbors don't have enough mass to think about Yom Kippur 2.

[Corinthian]

I am clueless so need edumacation...

 

Assuming the current government in Egypt falls, what's the chance that a more radical (read: Islamic), anti-Israel, anti-West government will replace it? Who are these protesters? What are their religious affiliations? (i.e., are they moderate, freedom-loving, democracy-yearning, large middle class people? Or are many of them the radical religious types?)

[Sikkiyn]

After living in Egypt for a year, the people are starving for freedom and true democracy. They currently live in a repressive military dictatorship and the corruption is outrageous. For Egyptians to recognize their true potential, they need a government that is freely elected (if they like us or not) and as free from the corruption that plagues the majority of the 3rd world.

 

The Muslim Brotherhood wouldn't be for that, and now that they are in play, to some extent, I am waiting to see how interesting it becomes; popcorn anyone?

 

I also think they know that despite their historical issues with Israel, Israel is the 800lb economic gorilla that can be more of a help than an enemy. They are very industrious and energetic and with the right assistance, can be again a valuable ally.

 

Radicalize them a little and they honestly won't care.

[Sikkiyn]

In that particular area of Over There, supporting Egypt with the proviso that Egypt has to remain at peace with Israel means the Suez Canal stays open. We take that for granted these days, but it wouldn't take much to close the Canal. Which would have a substantial financial impact all over the place.

 

With Egypt off the team, Israel's remaining neighbors don't have enough mass to think about Yom Kippur 2.

 

Jordan doesn't want any part of a part 2, not sure Syria does either. The Hez and their ilk don't have the moxi, and Egypt couldn't do it alone, regardless of any radical future they may or may not posses...wouldn't stop them from trying if they go pure bat-carp around the bend.

 

If they closed the canal I'm sure it wouldn't take much for us to bribe it back open, or baring that, (and a showing of some nuts,) have a global TF force it open. It is too strategically important to too many countries/nations to let anyone close it, and I'm sure Egypt doesn't care to have the plague of nations come crashing down on their heads; they having a history of plagues being the harbinger of a lot worse things to come.

[Soren Ras]

 

Reopening the Suez canal, we tried that in 1956, and it ended up creating more problems than it solved. Not only do you have to take it, you have to keep it open. That would require an armed camp of several thousand men all across the canal zone, subject to terrorist attacks. It would probably turn out to be cheaper to go the long way round, and tell them to use their canal as a marina for pedelos.

 

I am pretty sure it would be a lot cheaper to avoid sending in a posse to take, (possibly repair), and keep open the Suez.

 

Also, if things get bad enough that the Canal is closed, then Egypt would basically drop off the economic map. At that point there would no longer be any tourists going to Egypt, so how will they get money? The Canal nets Egypt, what, appx $5 Billion? Foreign investments would probably dry up at about that time as well. So, I guess the remittances from Egyptians abroad would be the only major source of hard currency left. Good luck with that.

 

Besides, going around Cape of Good Hope is already an increasingly attractive way to avoid dealing with Somalian pirates and the larger ships can't even use the Canal to begin with.

 

--

Soren

[Marek Tucan]

Besides, going around Cape of Good Hope is already an increasingly attractive way to avoid dealing with Somalian pirates and the larger ships can't even use the Canal to begin with.

 

--

Soren

 

Plus the weather is less of a threat to ships than it was back when Suez was built.

[BansheeOne]

Mohamed el-Baradei is reported to have been arrested shortly after his arrival in Egypt. What a surprise.

 

I hope he is smarter than this looks and tries to gain standing with the popular movement (many of whom apparently have no idea he even exists) by jumping consciously into the lion's den.

[mnm]

Besides, going around Cape of Good Hope is already an increasingly attractive way ...

 

Are you nuts? What about the sharks?!

[swerve]

Mohamed el-Baradei is reported to have been arrested shortly after his arrival in Egypt. What a surprise.

 

I hope he is smarter than this looks and tries to gain standing with the popular movement (many of whom apparently have no idea he even exists) by jumping consciously into the lion's den.

I think he is. He made sure that his return was widely publicised, so that everyone would know what happened to him.

[Cyber_Ghost]

Most of the financial aid given to us is spent on buying U.S equipment, so it flows back into the american economy. Also,lowering aid to Israel means lowering aid to Egypt. Until now, the Egyptian army had no pressing need to go to war anywhere, they could sit on their asses, do some exercises, look cool and get American aid. Take the aid from them and you either have a downsizing of the army (10% of the population in Egypt get their paycheck from the military) or you need to create and enemy, either way not a good way.

The problem is that the arab street isn't ready for Democracy. I can hardly think of many examples of states going dictatorial -> democratic in a single generation. The only true democratic countries are those that got their democratic ideals from the UK, where roots for representation were hunders of years old, look what happened in Germany, Spain and Russia for example.

 

Whoever turns out to be in power in Egypt, it's won't be good.

[swerve]

Also, if things get bad enough that the Canal is closed, then Egypt would basically drop off the economic map. At that point there would no longer be any tourists going to Egypt, so how will they get money? The Canal nets Egypt, what, appx $5 Billion? Foreign investments would probably dry up at about that time as well. So, I guess the remittances from Egyptians abroad would be the only major source of hard currency left.

 

--

Soren

Egypt covers about 55% of its imports with merchandise exports, the rest with tourism, remittances, & canal fees - in that order. The canal & tourists bring in 30% of hard currency earnings. Losing that would be a disaster, but the lights would stay on, & there'd be enough money to import essentials such as food.

[Soren Ras]

Egypt covers about 55% of its imports with merchandise exports, the rest with tourism, remittances, & canal fees - in that order. The canal & tourists bring in 30% of hard currency earnings. Losing that would be a disaster, but the lights would stay on, & there'd be enough money to import essentials such as food.

 

Okay. Thanks for the numbers.

 

--

Soren

[Paul in Qatar]

In the last 30 minutes or so, CNN is reporting the police backing down in some cities. Consider the source.

 

==eta==

 

The guy who lives in Egypt is saying the vehicles now being shown on the streets are army-only. His wife's cell phone is down, landlines are still up.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Paul in Qatar

[Jeff]

After living in Egypt for a year, the people are starving for freedom and true democracy. They currently live in a repressive military dictatorship and the corruption is outrageous. For Egyptians to recognize their true potential, they need a government that is freely elected (if they like us or not) and as free from the corruption that plagues the majority of the 3rd world. I also think they know that despite their historical issues with Israel, Israel is the 800lb economic gorilla that can be more of a help than an enemy. They are very industrious and energetic and with the right assistance, can be again a valuable ally.

Everyone deserves a freely elected government free from corruption, the question is how do you get there. This looks like another shit sandwich choice of a dictatorship that has been amenable to the West and a rational actor internationally or a one vote, one time "democracy" for the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk who will then become another dictatorship, only this one will be Islamist and hostile to the West and not rational.

[Jeff]

Why do we even bother supporting any country over there in the first place?

 

 

Better yet, why are we even financially supporting Israel? They are a technologically advanced country that can probably do very well without our aid and their enemies for the most part are dumber than rocks at times. That aid money would be better spent in, I dunno, upgrading this country's deteriorating infrastructure, student loan forgiveness, etc. etc. So its not just about Jordan, Egypt, or Israel. Just stop all aid to all countries and let them deal with their own internal problems. The only country that I probably want to see receiving aid would be Iraq and that's because we pretty much invaded them.

A topic about Egyptian unrest becomes an excuse to poke Israel?

[Paul in Qatar]

President Mubaruk will address the nation in a few minutes.