The Last Pharaoh?

-

Hosni-Mubarak.jpg
Mubarak has given up his powers to the military. In the eyes of the Egyptian public, this counts as resignation. Now the tough part really begins.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

42 comments on “The Last Pharaoh?

  1. Paul Norheim says:

    I did, and I read the article. Events unfold so fast now that it’s difficult to analyze them. I’m not
    sure, but it looks like Suleiman is out of the game now. In my view, you put too much trust in
    the old hands. We’ll see what happens.
    Commenters like you and WigWag etc warn about the dangers of “Islamofascism”. My concerns
    are essentially of an entirely different nature: the unpredictable chain of events if the domino
    bricks fall too fast. We’re in for surprises in any case, because this is a “tectonic” shift, as you
    notice. I’ve said it before here, but perhaps even the Israelis may be pleased if this also results
    in a regime change in Iran – resulting in a weakening of Hezbullah, Hamas, and the rulers in
    Syria. Right now, it’s anybody’s guess – with plenty of reasons both for hope and fear.
    BTW, the black letters on a white background is much more readable.

    Reply

  2. kotzabasis says:

    Yes Paul, I have. If you wish to read it click on my name.

    Reply

  3. Paul Norheim says:

    Kotz,
    have you finished your article?

    Reply

  4. kotzabasis says:

    The political toddlers of TWN playing revolution under the watchful eyes and expert care of their baby-sitter Dan Kervick who has already, in his precipitous euphoria, downgraded his middle-age

    Reply

  5. Paul Norheim says:

    Nadine,
    a week ago I asked you to please ignore my presence here; and you’ve done so most of the time. Thanks!
    It’s highly appreciated. I herby request another week where you pretend that I don’t exist, because this has
    been such a wonderful time, trying to evaluate the unfolding events in a calm and free manner, arguing
    peacefully with fellow commenters about fresh and often unexpected twists and turns, without the all too
    familiar and worn out polemical points and accusations signed “nadine” every damned time I write a post.
    I’m familiar with your views – so familiar that I could effortlessly express them myself under your name; but
    I’m so sick of reading the same old points and accusations and insults again and again – even during world
    shaking events with lots of new and surprising elements – so please let’s continue this excellent
    arrangement:
    I’ll not refer to you in my comments; and you’ll not comment on what I write here.
    OK?

    Reply

  6. Cee says:

    The Founding Fathers Would Be Proud of the People of Egypt … And Disgusted With the People of America
    America’s founding fathers stood up for their freedom, winning it from the British (with the help of the French).
    The Egyptian people have stood up for their freedom, winning it from the Mubarak dictatorship (with the help of the army, which refused to fire a shot at the people, and may even have helped convince Mubarak to leave. See this and this).
    The Egyptian people found their courage even when Mubarak’s thugs flew fighter jets low over their heads, beat and murdered protesters, and otherwise threatened violence.
    But the American people today have been cowed into passivity by an irrational fear of terrorism, laziness and mindlessness.
    http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/
    The courage of the Egyptian protesters – even in the face of extreme police brutality – is obviously a large part of why the Egyptians succeeded in kicking Mubarak out of office.
    Indeed, I think that the Egyptians adopted the tactics of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr., to great effect. They were peaceful in the face of murder and brutality by Mubarak’s thugs, which discredited Mubarak in the eyes of the world.
    Had the protesters fought back, the regime would have successfully used that as an excuse to crack down and brutally break up the protest movement. The world would have just averted its eyes, and all would have been lost.
    As I wrote last week:
    This is just like when the British police attacked the non-violent protesters led by Gandhi, or the police in towns in the South of the United States attacked the peaceful protesters led by Martin Luther King, Jr.
    Exposing the “false flag” attacks by agents provocateur was also critical, since failure to expose such deception would have allowed Mubarak to stay in power.
    But it is important to acknowledge that Mubarak didn’t actually agree to leave until the Egyptian people started striking.
    Before the strikes, Mubarak said he would not run for reelection in September, but would hang on until then.
    Egyptians started a nationwide strike only two days ago … 48 hours later, Mubarak is gone.
    While the regime and the military paid lip service to “hearing” the protesters and agreeing to meet their demands, it wasn’t until the people started hurting the powers-that-be in their wallets – through strikes – that anything actually changed.
    This shows that protests are not enough anymore. Not in Egypt … not in the West.
    People throughout the world living in tyrannical conditions need to engage in strikes and other active (but peaceful) forms of civil disobedience which hit the tyrants and their supporters in their pocketbook before we can take our countries back.
    As Karl Denninger writes today:
    All persons in all nations should be aware of the fundamental fact that their government, no matter how oppressive, no matter how ugly, no matter how allegedly-free or representative (or not) exists only because you rise from your bed each day and go to work.
    The day you stop, along with a sizable fraction of your neighbors and friends, and instead wave signs and demand change, thereby shutting down the engine of commerce is the day you remove through peaceful and lawful means the fuel that the government requires to operate.
    Our “protests” in Washington and elsewhere fail to provide results because the “or else” has not been provided along with the protest. We come, we wave signs, and the next day we go home and go to work. If instead any sizable fraction of the population … were to appear, wave signs, and go on strike until and unless the change demanded was made… [then we would win.]
    And see George Orwell’s insights into violent revolution and technology.

    Reply

  7. Cee says:

    POA,
    You know it. I just saw Paul Wolfowitz on CNN throwing his support to Suleiman.
    Carroll,
    Some info on the army
    State TV showed Defense Minister Hussein Tantawi presiding over a table seating some two dozen stern faced generals in combat fatigues – but no sign of commander in chief Mubarak. His newly appointed vice president, former army general and intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, was not there either – indicating a rift between the civilian and military leadership.
    A statement, tellingly referred to as “communique number 1” – phrasing that in the Arab world suggests a coup – made no mention of Mubarak or Suleiman.
    The council, it said, met to “discuss what measures and arrangements could be taken to safeguard the homeland and its achievements and the aspirations of the great Egyptian people.”
    Translation: The generals are in charge, not Mubarak, not Suleiman nor the Cabinet.

    Reply

  8. Paul Norheim says:

    To Obama’s credit – here’s from a Haaretz/Reuters report about Mubarak’s reaction to Obama’s pressure just before the Egyptian president left
    the scene:
    “Hosni Mubarak had harsh words for the United States and what he described as its misguided quest for democracy in the Middle East in a
    telephone call with an Israeli lawmaker a day before he quit as Egypt’s president.
    The legislator, former cabinet minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, said on TV Friday that he came away from the 20-minute conversation on
    Thursday with the feeling the 82-year-old leader realized “it was the end of the Mubarak era”.
    “He had very tough things to say about the United States,” said Ben-Eliezer, a member of the Labor Party who has held talks with Mubarak on
    numerous occasions while serving in various Israeli coalition governments.
    “He gave me a lesson in democracy and said: ‘We see the democracy the United States spearheaded in Iran and with Hamas, in Gaza, and
    that’s the fate of the Middle East,'” Ben-Eliezer said.
    “‘They may be talking about democracy but they don’t know what they’re talking about and the result will be extremism and radical Islam,'” he
    quoted Mubarak as saying.
    (…)
    Ben-Eliezer said Mubarak expanded in the telephone call on “what he expects will happen in the Middle East after his fall”.
    “He contended the snowball (of civil unrest) won’t stop in Egypt and it wouldn’t skip any Arab country in the Middle East and in the Gulf.
    “He said ‘I won’t be surprised if in the future you see more extremism and radical Islam and more disturbances — dramatic changes and
    upheavals,” Ben-Eliezer added.”
    More here:
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/mubarak-slammed-u-s-in-phone-call-with-israeli-mk-before-resignation-1.342831
    I think this – as well as the angry reaction of the Egyptian Foreign Minister in the interview Steve posted yesterday – shows that the White
    House said much more to Mubarak in private conversations than in public statements.

    Reply

  9. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Yes, now the hard work begins….”
    Yeah, I can just picture all those sweaty brows on CIA and Mossad operatives, working feverishly to rig an Egyptian election.
    The puppet show is on. I’ll take butter on my popcorn.

    Reply

  10. Paul Norheim says:

    Marc Lynch, who was among the few experts who immediately realized that
    the Tunisian revolt could spread to other countries in the region in a
    pivotal way, praises Obama in the following excerpt. He doesn’t mention
    the apparent split between Clinton’s State Department and the White House
    – and the resulting confusion and contradictions in the communication
    from the US administration. There may also be some stuff going on behind
    the scene that we don’t know yet. But basically, I tend to agree with what
    Lynch says here (after giving due praise to the Egyptian protest movement):
    “The Obama administration also deserves a great deal of credit, which it
    probably won’t receive. It understood immediately and intuitively that it
    should not attempt to lead a protest movement which had mobilized itself
    without American guidance, and consistently deferred to the Egyptian
    people.
    Despite the avalanche of criticism from protestors and pundits, in fact
    Obama and his key aides — including Ben Rhodes and Samantha Power
    and many others — backed the Egyptian protest movement far more
    quickly than anyone should have expected.
    Their steadily mounting pressure on the Mubarak regime took time to
    succeed, causing enormous heartburn along the way, but now can claim
    vindication. By working carefully and closely with the Egyptian military, it
    helped restrain the worst violence and prevent Tiananmen on the Tahrir —
    which, it is easy to forget today, could very easily have happened. No
    bombs, no shock and awe, no soaring declarations of American
    exceptionalism, and no taking credit for a tidal wave which was entirely of
    the making of the Egyptian people — just the steadily mounting public and
    private pressure on the top of the regime which was necessary for the
    protestors to succeed.
    The Obama administration also understood from the start, and has
    consistently said, that removing Mubarak would not be enough. It has
    rejected “faux democracy,” and pushed hard for fundamental systemic
    reforms. Over the coming days and weeks, it should push for specific
    changes on a clear timetable: lifting the emergency reform, amending the
    Constitution, appointing a credible and nonpartisan commission to oversee
    elections, securing a guarantee from whoever acts as the interim head of
    state that he will not run for re-election, preventing retaliation against
    protestors, ensuring the inclusion of opposition figures in the process, and
    more.
    The outcome will be judged on what emerges over months and years to
    come, not only by today’s exhilerating turn of events.
    I hope that everyone thrilled by the downfall of the dictator remains
    attentive and committed to helping bring about the democratic
    transformation which Egyptians deserve, which serves real American
    interests, and which could help change the entire region.
    By the way, for those keeping score in the “peacefully removing Arab
    dictators” game, it’s now Obama 2, Bush 0.
    The administration has been subjected to an enormous amount of criticism
    over the last two weeks for its handling of Egypt, including by people
    inspired by or who worked on the previous administration’s Freedom
    Agenda. It was also attacked sharply from the left, by activists and
    academics who assumed that the administration was supporting Mubarak
    and didn’t want democratic change.
    In the end, Obama’s strategy worked. Perhaps this should earn it some
    praise, and even some benefit of the doubt going forward.”
    More here:
    http://lynch.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/02/11/mubarak_leaves_at_last

    Reply

  11. Daniel Nona says:

    President Obama’s speech was a well-crafted statement
    that offered a congratulatory and celebratory message to
    the Egyptian people on behalf of the American people. Of
    course, as we all know, the next steps for the Egyptians
    constitute continuing and great challenges. Hopefully, the
    words of the president will be found to be a constructive
    backdrop to these challenges.
    As the Egyptians go about addressing the challenges
    facing them, they will surely consider a range of advice
    and counsel in so doing. However, I would caution them
    of the perils of the Beltway line emerging by such experts
    as Ken Pollack (who is about as good at getting it wrong
    as William Kristol) that changes desired will take time and
    elections do not equate with democracy.
    It seems to me that the benefits of moving rapidly and
    striking while the iron is hot outweigh those of overly
    cautious plodding and status quo foot dragging. Just as
    experts argued, after the fall of the Berlin wall, for a long
    engagement before marriage of East and West Germany,
    the German peoples decided to elope. Mom and Dad were
    upset, it was not a perfect honeymoon, but the outcome
    was satisfactory.

    Reply

  12. Carroll says:

    Crowds in Tahrir Square await military’s next move
    Published 1 hour 29 minutes
    HUSSEIN MALLA/AP
    Associated Press
    CAIRO

    Reply

  13. Matthew says:

    Actually, Carroll, the Iranian system is a cunundrum. It’s both deeply unpopular and popular. Kind of a red state/blue state phenomenon. They actually have large competing demonstrations. In contrast, look how few people came out for Mubarak.
    So when our commentariat claims that we speak for anyone, I say, “Can our Arab allies (read: despots) field as many supporters as our Iranian adversaries?”
    The Iranian system is deeply flawed. But is really more deeply flawed than the Kingdom of Horrors on the other side of the Persian Gulf? You know, the “moderate” regime that denies women drivers licences.

    Reply

  14. Carroll says:

    Another thing I am fed up with is the Israelis in the US congress going on and on about how we are
    hypocritical about Iran in regard to Egypt.
    When the fact is Iran’s “revolt” was not a ‘popular’ uprising.
    It was a slick, well organized protest
    complete with color coordinated t-shirts
    and mass produced protest signs financed by one man and his group who were seeking to install themselves in power thru a youth revolt.
    That’s a big difference.
    If Iranians ever get millions from all sectors
    of their society into a protest…then that might mean something.

    Reply

  15. Carroll says:

    Well, now the naysayers are angling on it taking ‘years and years” for Egypt to get democracy. And one expert/pundit was stupid enough to say they needed a ‘roadmap”..a roadmap!…yea like the I/P roadmap.
    Now that Egyptians are going to be negotiating with the military we will see where the US comes in. The protesters can always take to the streets again if they see they are getting the shaft…and then it would be, will the military squash them or not?
    I am really tired of the MSM going on and on as if Egypt didn’t have highly educated lawyers and professionals in their population who could work on Egypt’s transition. As if no one in the opposition has given any thought to how to work around the military’s co-op business interest with the elites. They almost act like Mubarak, assuming the Egyptians are children who just threw a temper tantrum in the square and aren’t capable of and haven’t considered what comes afterward.
    I am pretty certain the Egyptians know that the most critical and treacherous time is ahead of them.
    The chattering class could allow them at least one day of celebrating.

    Reply

  16. Carroll says:

    Published 05:14 11.02.11
    Latest update 05:14 11.02.11
    Egypt unrest could improve Israel ties
    Israel’s strategic environment – notably the capacity it provides to avoid making choices and to disguise the status quo as progress – is about to change.
    By Daniel Levy
    Despite the fluidity and uncertainty surrounding the political situation in Egypt, one thing seems clear: Egypt and indeed the Middle East will not be the same after January 2011. This will apply even if those in Israel and elsewhere who are pushing for continued military, as opposed to civilian control, and for “democracy with exceptions” – i.e., Islamists not allowed – manage to carry the day. (One hopes they will not .) Those governing Egypt will henceforth have to be more responsive to the public will.
    The package of regional policies pursued by the Mubarak regime lacked popular legitimacy. This included the closure imposed on Gaza, support for the Iraq war and for heightened bellicosity toward Iran, and playing ceremonial chaperone to a peace process that became farcical and discredited. Part of the democracy deficit is also a dignity deficit, as these policies appeared undignified to the Egyptian public.
    Insisting on Egyptian adherence to the peace treaty with Israel is a legitimate position, has international support, and also accords with both Israeli and Egyptian interests. The treaty has saved lives on both sides, neither of which relishes the prospect of renewed military conflagration. The Israeli-Egyptian peace has neutralized any serious Arab military option vis-a-vis Israel, although the same cannot be said in reverse. Since signing the accord with Egypt, Israel has conducted several large-scale military campaigns against Lebanon and against the Palestinians, launched bombing raids against Syria and Iraq, and conducted high-profile assassinations in Jordan and the UAE – and that is only a partial list.
    To the 1978 Camp David Accords was attached an annex entitled “A Framework for Peace in the Middle East,” which included a commitment to withdrawal from the Palestinian territories and to negotiating final status within five years. That of course never happened. What did happen is that the 10,000 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank when that accord was signed have become over 300,000 today.
    Indeed, whether by design or not, the peace treaty with Egypt ushered in the era of the Israeli “free hand” in the region. Even though it has not delivered real security and has encouraged an Israeli hubris that can be both dangerous and self-destructive, that era of hegemony is something that Israelis are instinctively uncomfortable about losing. It is equally understandable why such a regional disequilibrium, one that became more deeply rooted under Mubarak’s Egypt, would be both unpopular and unacceptable to a majority of Arab public opinion.
    Maintaining the peace treaty has morphed over time into maintaining a peace process that has ultimately entrenched occupation and settlements and made a mockery of its Arab participants. Post-transition Egypt is unlikely to continue playing this game. And without Mubarak’s enthusiastic endorsement, the process itself is likely to further unravel. It is hard to imagine other Arab states leaping into this breach, or the Palestinians accepting 20 more years of peace-process humiliation, or indeed Syria adopting the Egyptian model and signing a stand-alone peace agreement with Israel. Israel’s strategic environment – notably the capacity it provides to avoid making choices and to disguise the status quo as progress – is about to change.
    Continued at:
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/egypt-unrest-could-improve-israel-ties-1.342648
    Daniel Levy directs the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation and is an editor of the Middle East Channel at foreignpolicy.com

    Reply

  17. Paul Norheim says:

    “8.18pm GMT: NBC’s Richard Engel, who has done a brilliant
    job reporting from Egypt, gets the reaction to Obama’s
    words live from Tahrir Square, where he is mobbed by
    young men chanting Obama’s name.” (The Guardian)

    Reply

  18. Carroll says:

    Carter mentions Sulieman…but this was two weeks ago…don’t know what his opinion is after Sulieman’s performance for Mubarak…may have changed or not.
    Ex-President Carter: Political unrest in Egypt ‘earth-shaking’, Mubarak likely must step down
    Associated Press
    Last update: January 30, 2011 – 3:39 PM
    PLAINS, Ga. – Former President Jimmy Carter, who brokered a peace accord between Israel and Egypt in 1978, on Sunday called the political unrest and rioting in Egypt earth-shaking and said that President Hosni Mubarak probably will have to step down.
    Carter told a Sunday school class that he teaches that the unrest is “the most profound situation in the Middle East” since he left office in 1981. He said he thinks the unrest will ease in the next week, but his “guess is Mubarak will have to leave.”
    The Columbus Ledger-Enquirer reported Carter’s remarks made at Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains and his spokeswoman confirmed them.
    “The United States wants Mubarak to stay in power, but the people have decided,” Carter said.
    His spokeswoman, Deanna Congileo, said no further statement would be issued.
    Carter brought Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin together for the peace accord signed in Washington, D.C. Sadat and Begin shared the Nobel Peace Prize for the treaty.
    Mubarak was vice president at the time and became president in 1981 when Sadat was assassinated by opponents of the agreement.
    Carter said that as Mubarak’s 30-year rule has continued, the Egyptian leader has become more politically corrupt. “He has perpetuated himself in office,” Carter said.
    Mubarak has appointed Omar Suleiman, the country’s intelligence chief, as vice president. “He’s an intelligent man whom I like very much,” Carter said of Suleiman, with whom he says he has maintained a relationship.
    “In the last four or five years when I go to Egypt, I don’t go to talk to Mubarak, who talks like a politician,” Carter said. “If I want to know what is going on in the Middle East, I talk to Suleiman. And as far as I know, he has always told me the truth.”

    Reply

  19. John Waring says:

    From time to time we need to remind ourselves of the American creed.
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    Reply

  20. Carroll says:

    Source: TIME
    U.S. Preparing Aid Package For Egypt Opposition
    By Massimo Calabresi Thursday, Feb. 10, 2011
    As Hosni Mubarak clings to power in Egypt, President Barack Obama and his foreign policy aides face two problems. First, with diminishing influence over Mubarak, they have to try to ensure the dictator fully relinquishes control. Obama took a stab at this problem Thursday evening after Mubarak’s oblique and seemingly insufficient declaration that he was transferring some power to his vice president Omar Suleiman. In a statement from the White House, Obama called on Egypt’s leaders to make it ‘clear that this transition is immediate, meaningful sufficient.’
    The second challenge is harder. Washington has publicly called for a transition to democracy, which Egypt has never known. To avoid a continuation of dictatorial rule under a new strong man or a dangerous power vacuum as weaker players try to seize control, Egypt will need to see the lightning-fast development of long-suppressed political parties. So the US is preparing a new package of assistance to Egyptian opposition groups designed to help with constitutional reform, democratic development and election organizing, State department officials tell TIME. The package is still being formulated, and the officials declined to say how much it would be worth or to which groups it would be directed. (Watch TIME’s video “In Tahrir Square, Strong Reaction to Mubarak’s Speech.”)
    White House officials declined to say whether any of the new money would go directly or indirectly to the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s most prominent Islamic party.
    The Obama administration cut democracy and governance aid to Egyptian opposition groups in its first two years in office from $45 million in George W. Bush’s last budget to $25 million for the 2010 and 2011 fiscal years. The Obama administration also stopped providing aid to groups that had not registered with the Egyptian government, drawing criticism from human rights organizations. The administration has had conversations with Egyptian government officials, including the Egyptian envoy to the US, Amb. Sameh Shoukry, about the provision of new aid, sources tell TIME.

    Reply

  21. Carroll says:

    Posted by Warren Metzler, Feb 11 2011, 1:24PM – Link
    Yet Mubarak turned over the reigns of government to the armed forces. Does anyone have any information if this is significant, and if Suleiman is out of the picture (other than his personal influence over all the other generals)?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I wondered about Sulieman also. He may be sidelined for practical purposes.
    I heard but can’t confirm that the army has or will dismiss the parliment and the president’s cabinet. “If” that is so, then it means the army does have full control, that Sulieman, has been by-passed…unless Sulieman is directing them which I doubt because Sulieman is said to be a different ‘wing’ of Egyptian authority, part of the security wing, not close to the army.
    If you see anything on him post it here.

    Reply

  22. questions says:

    Paul, I will echo and ditto your remarks at 1:56 pm. And I will toss in the contagion effects are likely real.
    This non-violent, non-panicked, non-theocratic, youthful and eventually fully supported revolution is quite likely exportable, copyable, contagious, and will be the new model for change.
    If suicide terror had its decade of depredation and wickedness, so people power might very well have its own decade.

    Reply

  23. questions says:

    The NYT reports that the speeches Mubarak and Suleiman delivered last night were not approved, that communique number 2 was an attempt to avoid a major conflict.
    Looks like Panetta wasn’t as far off as it seemed at the time. Perhaps he’s already been rehabilitated! That was quick.
    http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/latest-updates-on-day-18-of-egypt-protests/?hp
    12:44 pm update.

    Reply

  24. Paul Norheim says:

    DonS, I have to say that it’s been great discussing the
    unfolding events with you and others here. And despite
    claims to the contrary, the atmosphere in the threads has
    actually been surprisingly good – lots of disagreement, but
    not much resentment, ad hominem and internal fighting. I
    hope it will continue like that. This is probably not the last
    revolution in the ME (although probably the most important
    one), and there will be lots of further event to analyze and
    discuss from the peanut gallery.

    Reply

  25. DonS says:

    Full text link to the Cobban post referenced above (with obvious connection to the new Lebovich just posted newly at TWN)
    http://justworldnews.org/archives/004159.html

    Reply

  26. DonS says:

    JWN, from yesterday, excellent analysis of the situation with implications all around. Includes embedded link to L A Times story on the internal conflicts within the US administration — also worth a read.
    “The ruling circles in Washington and Cairo are now each in their own way (but also, jointly) engaged in a dance of resistance to the wave of massive political change unleashed by the democratic revolution in Egypt.”
    We know the partial outcome to one side of that equation. The lessons Washington might take from it are another matter since it require huge amounts of humility, including the rejection of military force as the de facto way forward, not to mention needing present unwinding.
    http://justworldnews.org/archives/cat_egypt_2011.html

    Reply

  27. Paul Norheim says:

    Saying that the young Egyptian demonstrators gave the
    “Arab Street” a new meaning, is an understatement. They
    gave us in the West a lesson. This must be a moment of
    immense pride, inspiration and joy for millions of Arabs
    outside Egypt too.
    I salute the Arab Street!

    Reply

  28. questions says:

    Away from my computer for a few hours, and I missed the best!
    Good luck Egypt.
    Now the real work begins.
    Citizens, start your committees.

    Reply

  29. Dan Kervick says:

    As the parent of a 20-year old, I’m hoping this kind of change will help to fire the imaginations, idealism and optimism of the younger generation. If people organize themselves and stick together, they can defeat brute force, corruption and oppression.
    I feel ten years younger myself today.

    Reply

  30. DonS says:

    I’ve got a bottled chilled Paul, but this virtual reality has some limitations. I’ve appreciated what you and others have done following and posting events so far.

    Reply

  31. Warren Metzler says:

    A thought just occurred to me, and I wondered if anyone has information regarding this issue. Mubarak made a big deal about appointing Suleiman as his vice-president, who constitutionally is supposed to take over upon the president’s resignation or incapacitation. Yet Mubarak turned over the reigns of government to the armed forces. Does anyone have any information if this is significant, and if Suleiman is out of the picture (other than his personal influence over all the other generals)?
    And I forgot to ask Wigwag, are you interested in change in Israel as well as Saudi Arabia; and why not worry about fanatic Islamists there? Those people are far more fanatic than the Egyptian Brotherhood.

    Reply

  32. Paul Norheim says:

    Time for some champagne!

    Reply

  33. Carroll says:

    YaY!..the Egyptians!
    Yes, now the hard work begins –and they will have to be on guard.
    I heard on the news that Switzerland has frozen Mubarak’s accounts on deposit with them.

    Reply

  34. Kathleen says:

    Al Jazeera live feed. They must be going on overload

    Reply

  35. Kathleen says:

    Mubarak and it sounds like Soiledman (350 people dead or dissappeared Human rights groups) out…military in. Hopefully the Egyptian people can not only get rid of the U.S. and Israeli supported dictator but get rid of the dictatorship.
    Carter has a great one up over at the Elders site
    “Credible elections” Hope the Egyptian people will give us permission for supporting Carters group coming in to help with credible elections.
    Hopefully the Republican party is not recruiting Mubarak for their 2012 Presidential spot.

    Reply

  36. non-hater says:

    Congratulations to the Egyptian people!

    Reply

  37. Warren Metzler says:

    I concur. Hallelujah! Right on Maw!
    I assume the Richter scale detection devices all over the world are detecting great tremors, from all the illicit leaders of the Arab world (from Morocco to Iran

    Reply

  38. DonS says:

    . . . and (re: regimes having dirt on US), all those dirty secrets about US rendition and torture are still safe within the Egyptian military apparatus.

    Reply

  39. DonS says:

    “I can’t see Yankee allowing that to happen though . . .” (bag)
    Never can tell. Hillary (and Bibi) did everything they could to prop up Mubarak.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *