Sign of the Times Middle East Style

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

More signs of the times. Looks like a coming insurrection for Libya. That danged Google/Soros/Leftist/Islamist/Boogeyman coalition must be licking its evul NWO chops.

After forty-one years of brutality, Gaddafi needs to take his billions and his little green book, and take a permanent vacation.

William,

I surprised to see you framing all this stuff in a manner that would do SLOP proud (except with them, it would be from the other end): yer either fer me or agin me--thar ain't no other way.

You don't like Beck and think his theory of collusion between ultimately conflicting interests is misguided. OK. (The New York Times is now on board with it, though. And other Beck-unfriendly people are gradually looking into it.)

But here's the thing. Taking out a bloody dictator is a good thing. I say this. You say this. Beck says this. Everyone I know says this.

But what if if an even greater dictator has his finger in it and is waiting in the wings to take over? How good is it then? And what if there is more than one "even greater aspiring dictator" lending a friendly helping hand? If one is good, does more make it better?

I personally don't support the idea that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. On a small scale I guess it works. Back when I was part of the underworld in São Paulo, they had a saying: When two bandits fight, the only one who wins is the police. But on a large scale: who are the police? All I see in the present hostilities is bandits running amok and selling one hell of a bill of goods to young people--some of whom will be tomorrow's dictators.

There is so much happening in the shadows with all these uprisings that I believe caution--not rigidity--is advised. That goes when looking at all players.

One thing is for certain. There is a butt-load of stuff happening in the shadows. These things are too well organized. That is unless anyone believes that all these things are just happening at the same time in the same manner by coincidence.

Have you ever lived under a dictatorship? Or have you lived in Canada all your life? I don't know much about Canada except for what I read. I don't imagine there is much of an issue with secret police and clandestine organizations that could lead to violent uprisings, but I might be mistaken.

I have lived under a dictatorship. It's livable, I suppose. I didn't like the constant generalized fear whenever shadows stuff got near, though. I also didn't like the constant "put it to 'em" practice of the government making a special tax or another "financial index" or another "compulsory loan" or something like that in secret, then enacting it quietly during Carnaval, Christmas, The World Cup, or any other major public diversion. I detested having to get Censor Authorizations for stuff I produced.

And I didn't expect to get much from the justice system when I was wronged, so I never bothered suing anyone. On the contrary, I learned quickly that you had to bribe officials if you wanted to redress grievances or need anything from the government. It worked pretty well, too. Not all the time. Just most of the time (if you knew the right people).

As always, thunder comes with rain. I kinda learned the hard way that it didn't just work for me. It also worked for people who didn't like me too much.

Michael

[william.scherk]

I surprised to see you framing all this stuff in a manner that would do SLOP proud (except with them, it would be from the other end): yer either fer me or agin me--thar ain't no other way.

I don't want to misunderstand you, Michael. Are you saying that my last two posts in this thread are framed the way SLOP (Lindsay Perigo's hate site) frames Middle East signs -- but in the opposite manner, as in a mirror?

I want to make sure that you find my posts on Bahrain and Libya (each of which are in the news today) to be framed badly, or wrongly.

But here's the thing. Taking out a bloody dictator is a good thing. . . . But what if if an even greater dictator has his finger in it and is waiting in the wings to take over?

It's a matter of identification, and asking questions, checking premises. It seems to me (please correct me if I get this wrong) that you firmly believe correct identification is the best heuristic -- first correctly identify what you are examining, understand something correctly before evaluating it, or put "cognitive before normative."

If this is more or less your preferred approach, I think I agree. Sometimes we see folks approach things incorrectly, as you noted elsewhere, "with a notion of what they want to condemn or defend, then . . . go looking for facts or comments for corroboration."

I think this is why we each share an antipathy to the way Wiig looks at the Middle East/North African situation.

You have noted the times when you are in 'identification mode,' making connections, considering ideas, that you get an odd reaction: the reaction of, "if you think Side A is that way, then you are solidly on the side of Side B."

So, I am puzzled by your opening. You claim one side (SOLO) frames the Middle East/North Africa incorrectly -- purely in terms of Islamist menace (which is true), and then you claim my frame is solidly on the other side. I don't understand which 'side' you think I am on, or even what you take issue with.

I will take a guess, though. I think you take issue with my questioning of a Google/Soros/Leftist/Islamist/Boogeyman, and that you identify my questions with blindness, a complete evasion, an inability to assess or consider the 'open society' values derived from Popper, an inability to consider leftist forces, a blank spot in my mind with regard to the harshest aspects of political Islam.

In other words, if Wiig sets the SOLO line that Islam=fascist autocracy, then I set the anti-SOLO line that Islam=democratic wonderland. That's what I get from your opening here.

I invite you to consider that my questioning of the 'coalition' trope is just that, a critical examination of that trope. I invite you to not fall into the trap you have identified, of too easily seeing only opposing poles. I invite you to assess my contribution to discussion, to at least consider that I operate on good faith, with common tools of critical inquiry.

If you can understand that I accept your fundamentals of 'correct identification,' and if you can accept that I operate in good faith, then we can have a productive exchange on the subject of this thread -- signs of the times in the Middle East.

I will take up your questions pertaining to Bahrain and Libya in a later post.

Edited February 17, 2011 by william.scherk

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

William,

The SLOP thing might have been over the line. After all, there was not profanity in the quote I referenced.

I'm just taking issue with the characterization of "that danged Google/Soros/Leftist/Islamist/Boogeyman coalition."

It's colorful, I have to admit that.

But, yes, I like correct identification before evaluation.

Do you think you correctly identified in this instance?

Or is this just slant presented as humor? It sounds like it could have been borrowed from The Guardian or maybe Keith Olbermann, but I know you well enough to know you do your own texts.

EDIT: Actually, that's not fair to The Guardian. Those folks slant real hard to the left, but they sometime produce excellent articles with facts and investigation that are not presented elsewhere in the mainstream.

Michael

[Selene]

well, Jimma has spoken.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7cv_s01y64

Adam

who voted for this buffoon

[Selene]

Key leadership of Iran Opposition in peril

A main leader of Iran’s opposition was reported missing on Thursday and both the opposition “green movement” and Iran’s hardliners issued calls for street rallies, escalating tensions after the reemergence of street protests and their brutal suppression on Monday.

Multimedia

The daughters of the missing opposition leader, Mir Hussein Moussavi, told an opposition Web site that they had had no word from either of their parents since Tuesday and feared they had been detained. Security forces have surrounded their home, and all communications have been cut.

Additionally, there is concern for Rafsanjani, whose son is in exile and has an arrest warrant out for him.

Adam

[william.scherk]

Additionally, there is concern for Rafsanjani, whose son is in exile and has an arrest warrant out for him.

For those who don't quite remember Rafsanjani, he is the former President of Iran, an ayatollah and a 'reformer' in the strange bizarro-world of Iranian politics. Adam's note is correct : in addition, the first public calls for Rafsanjani's death have been heard. What is strange about this is that he changed his mind a couple of days ago and deemed opposition protests 'haram.' I can't make sense of the seeming contradiction . . . maybe it is just his time for the gallows.

It is a dire, gruesome, insane situation. My heart goes out to Iranians who live under such a monstrous regime.

For news of the calls for Rafsanjani's death, and for reasonably good updates on Iran see PBS's reports from its Tehran bureau.

Rafsanjani:

[william.scherk]

More signs of the times. Looks like a coming insurrection for Libya. That danged Google/Soros/Leftist/Islamist/Boogeyman coalition must be licking its evul NWO chops.

After forty-one years of brutality, Gaddafi needs to take his billions and his little green book, and take a permanent vacation.

What I don't get about the situation in Libya (which, besides its state media, does have, oddly, an independent site apparently run by one of Gadhafi's eighty-seven sons) is the WEAK response of the USA and the UK. What kind of deal was made with him and his regime when he renounced the export of terror and the end of chemical nuclear weapons development and all that shit? What else was on offer besides the reopening of diplomatic relationships and a promise to 'open up' Libya to Western investment?

I can understand the reluctance of the US and the UK to ratchet up pressure on the King of Bahrain, given the history and the military value of that asset, and the insane regime across the strait -- Bahrain is a puny little place of half a million. Yemen, too, a snarl of tribes and barely re-constituted civil war factions and al-Qaeda yahoos and blah blah detail blah, but what is the deal with Libya?

Here are a couple of snippets from ye old fair and balanced network, under the headline Libyan Unrest Highlights Uneasy U.S. Alliance.

After his visit to Tripoli in December, Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, who heads the State Department's Bureau of Economic, Energy and Business Affairs, told reporters he "couldn't have had a better response" from Libyan officials eager to attract Western capital.

"They actually have created a Center for Entrepreneurship, on their own, even before we got there," said Fernandez in a briefing on Dec. 9, "to support new companies in the technology sector, new companies in women's entrepreneurship…Frankly, it was quite encouraging. It was really good."

Still, the State Department's official country profile lists Libya as an "authoritarian state," and Qaddafi's record is ranked among the worst by non-governmental organizations that track human rights abuses.

[ . . . ]

Asked by a FOX News reporter at a briefing on Wednesday if Qaddafi is a dictator, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley remained silent and looked for another question to answer.

"Are you stumped?" the reporter asked Crowley.

"I'm not stumped," Crowley shot back.

"So what's your answer to the question? Is he a dictator?"

"I don't think he came to office through a democratic process," Crowley finally responded.

The reluctance Crowley displayed exemplified the dilemma facing the United States with respect to Libya. While top policymakers in Washington have long wished for regime change in Tripoli, and for Libyans to attain more freedoms, any expression of support by the Obama administration for the protesters in Thursday's Day of Rage actions could jeopardize the United states' burgeoning relationship with the mercurial Qaddafi.

And here is news directly from Libyan sources, Libya Alyoum (via Google Translate). And from the Libyan newspaper owned by Gadhafi's son Saif al-Islam (also translated).

-- and one more dumb question. Why do Gadhafi (68), Ben Ali (74), and Mubarak (83) all have such fine black hair?

Edited February 18, 2011 by william.scherk

[BaalChatzaf]

-- and one more dumb question. Why do Gadhafi (68), Ben Ali (74), and Mubarak (83) all have such fine black hair?

Their willingness to dye for Allah.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[william.scherk]

-- and one more dumb question. Why do Gadhafi (68), Ben Ali (74), and Mubarak (83) all have such fine black hair?

Their willingness to dye for Allah.

Badabing.

-- both of the deposed leaders are said to be sick, Ben Ali in a coma in Saudia Arabia, and Mubarak off his meds, depressed and fainting at a walled compound in Sharm el-Sheikh.

[william.scherk]

Egypt's news outlet Al Masry Al Youm reports on an Al-Jazeera interview tith Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Though al-Qaradawi has refused official ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, he has a wide following in the Middle East, as broadcaster/Islamist ideologue/religious authority. He is also banned from entering the US. MSK has noted al-Qaradawi several times on OL, notably in this post.

Al-Qaradawi has returned to lead prayers in Egypt's Revolution Square, speaking to a crowd estimated at 250,000 (FoxNews) or more than a million (New York Times). FoxNews report gave only two sentences to Qaradawi. The New York Times reported more extensive remarks. I am making a direct comparison between the politically correct** Fox and the leftist NYT. Why does Fox make no mention of the details of the sermon, and why does Fox News make no mention of the Iranian warships in the Suez?

FoxNews: Cairo Parties as the Economy Struggles

New York Times: After Long Exile, Sunni Cleric Takes Role in Egypt

Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an influential Sunni cleric who is banned from the United States and Britain for supporting violence against Israel and American forces in Iraq, delivered his first public sermon here in 50 years on Friday, emerging as a powerful voice in the struggle to shape what kind of Egyptian state emerges from the uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak.

A quarter of a million Egyptians poured into Cairo’s Tahrir Square to attend a victory celebration one week after Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign. More people crammed into the square and nearby streets than at any time during the 18 days of protests that ultimately brought down the government.

It also allowed two Iranian Navy ships to pass through the Suez Canal — a first since the 1979 Iranian revolution and a move that some Israeli officials called a provocation. Egyptian officials reportedly said the ships did not contain weapons.

The overwhelming majority of demonstrators were in festive mood. Parents took pictures of their kids on army tanks and a block-long flag was unfurled and snaked through the square. The crowd roared with approval when a military helicopter flew overhead. An army band played patriotic music. It seemed that everyone waived an Egyptian flag or was selling them at the cost of about a dollar apiece.

Sheik Qaradawi, a popular television cleric whose program reaches an audience of tens of millions worldwide, addressed a rapt audience of more than a million Egyptians gathered in Tahrir Square to celebrate the uprising and honor those who died.

“Don’t fight history,” he urged his listeners in Egypt and across the Arab world, where his remarks were televised. “You can’t delay the day when it starts. The Arab world has changed.”

A makeshift memorial with photos of some of the more than 300 protesters killed during the demonstrations stood in the square. A controversial religious leader and member of the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, called for the military council now ruling Egypt to release all political prisoners. Qaradawi also said Egypt’s sealed border with Gaza should be reopened.

Many of those in attendance still seemed uncomfortable with their newly won freedom. A number of celebrants fearful of Mubarak-era reprisals were reluctant to speak with journalists. An 18-year-old student from outside Cairo hesitantly talked about freeing political prisoners, as a friend whispered, “Don’t be scared, there is nothing to be scared of.”

On Friday, he struck themes of democracy and pluralism, long hallmarks of his writing and preaching. He began his sermon by saying that he was discarding the customary opening “Oh Muslims,” in favor of “Oh Muslims and Copts,” referring to Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority. He praised Muslims and Christians for standing together in Egypt’s revolution and even lauded the Coptic Christian “martyrs” who once fought the Romans and Byzantines. “I invite you to bow down in prayer together,” he said.

He urged the military officers governing Egypt to deliver on their promises of turning over power to “a civil government” founded on principles of pluralism, democracy and freedom. And he called on the army to immediately release all political prisoners and rid the cabinet of its dominance by officials of the old Mubarak government.

“We demand from the Egyptian Army to free us from the government that was appointed by Mubarak,” Sheik Qaradawi declared. “We want a new government without any of these faces whom people can no longer stand.” And he urged the young people who led the uprising to continue their revolution. “Protect it,” he said. “Don’t you dare let anyone steal it from you.”

Despite the countrywide party, Egypt’s economy remains in turmoil with strikes affecting virtually all industries. The ruling military council has urged that unless people return to work there will be serious economic consequences. A Cairo marketing manager, Sayed Hamed, agreed and said, “I think there shouldn’t be protests because we need to develop the economy. Whatever we achieved was a dream. We should get back working."

Samah Mohammad, who described herself as a house wife, also said the labor protests should end. On her way to the square to celebrate she said, "These protests have halted services in the country for a long time. There are so many government offices that are closed.” After being closed since the protests began, Egypt’s Central Bank plans to reopen on Sunday.

_____________________________

** I have always hated the term 'politically correct' since the first time I read it in about 1994 or so. I hate the way that it is used as a weasel word, and has long since lost its original (bad/good/neutral/ironic) connotation of Party Line adherence to become attached to 'the left' and ridiculous speech-codes and stifling conventions on discourse. I use it here as a slightly jarring poke at the notion that some reporting is generally suspect because it comes from a political pole -- as if the only shoddy and/or biased reports come from a certain pole, as if only one pole's productions need critical evaluation, as if a 'pole' determines the global credibility of any given report.

Is there a Party Line at OL that only 'trusted sources' are credible? No, of course not. But there has been a few comments lately in this thread that sneer at reports from supposed leftist/suspect sources -- without detailing which specific information is wrong or suspect or badly reported or otherwise in doubt. I hate that kind of murkily -premised applied heuristic. It doesn't do any useful work in discerning truth or accuracy . . .

So, is FoxNews to be trusted simply because it is correct in its general politics? Nope. Is the New York Times to be mistrusted simply because it is incorrect in its general politics? Nope again, by my lights. Do shadowy forces implicitly impose an ideological slant on news? Not necessarily. Can a slant be demonstrated by handwaving, or sarcasm, or implicit taint? No. No and no.

That said, it could be fun to insert 'politically correct' before each news story that I cite from a supposed 'right wing' media source each time a supposedly 'left wing' story is rather vaguely implied to be suspect!

Edited February 19, 2011 by william.scherk

[william.scherk]

More hideous news from Libya, with the latest from the BBC.

Libya protests: Reports of intense Benghazi violence

Libyan troops have opened fire with machine-guns and large-calibre weapons on anti-government protesters in the second city Benghazi, witnesses say.

An unknown number of people, including children, are said to have been killed.

Witnesses described scenes of chaos as snipers shot from the roofs of buildings and demonstrators fought back against troops on the ground.

The BBC's Bridget Kendall reports.

[caroljane]

More hideous news from Libya, with the latest from the BBC.

Libya protests: Reports of intense Benghazi violence

Libyan troops have opened fire with machine-guns and large-calibre weapons on anti-government protesters in the second city Benghazi, witnesses say.

An unknown number of people, including children, are said to have been killed.

Witnesses described scenes of chaos as snipers shot from the roofs of buildings and demonstrators fought back against troops on the ground.

The BBC's Bridget Kendall reports.

No, no. I have never wanted to live in times so interesting, when I feel an earthquake deep below my feet, and can only hope and pray that the beloved buried are not the blood of those I know, and love.

[Selene]

As long as you keep your bias filters on,

Apparently [unconfirmed at this time], a funeral procession was "opened up on" by Libyan "security forces" with 50 caliber machine guns and other heavy weapons. One report by Amnesty International claims over hundred (100) Amnesty International killed so far.

[william.scherk]

Things are moving fast. A prediction on BBC this moment suggests that armed forces and police (elements of) have joined the rebels. Correspondents in Tripoli report control tipping to the rebels. Unconfirmed . . . but the monster regime will be coming to an end within days if not hours.

See also the rather less breathless live updates at Al Jazeera online and at the Guardian online.

Overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrations in Morocco.

Edited February 21, 2011 by william.scherk

[Selene]

Al Jazeera has been suffering interference on its Arabsat satellite frequency. During jamming Al Jazeera English can be watched on Hotbird 13E Frequency: 11034 Vertical FEC: 3/4 Symbol rate: 27500; on Badr4/Eurobird 2 (26East) Frequency: 11680.8 Horizontal; SR: 27.5: FEC: 3/4; and on Nilesat/ Atlantic Bird4A (7West) Frequency: 11393 Vertical; SR:27.5; FEC: 3/4. Al Jazeera Arabic can be watched on Nilesat 7W Frequency: 11555 Vertical FEC: 3/4 Symbol rate: 27500.

[anthony]

"Moroccans want to *reign* in royal powers", would be a fine pun, if it were deliberate!

They (Moroccans) have been a model in many ways to the Arab world, and in protest are no different it seems.

Tony

[william.scherk]

More signs of the times from the past week, in no particular order, as I amass them. The most significant news from Tunisia is that the secret police are to be disbanded (following on an earlier abolishing of the Ministry of Communications). In Egypt, many small steps and incidents and items suggest that a new era of openness and debate is taking shape.

Tunisia interim leaders dissolve secret police agency

Tunisia's interior ministry has announced it is dissolving the country's secret police service.

The agency had been widely accused of committing human rights abuses during the rule of President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, who was ousted on 14 January.

Interim Prime Minister Caid Essebsi has also announced a new government, which includes no members of the old regime.

Tunisia's press revels in new freedom

TUNIS, Tunisia — Since the overthrow of President Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali on Jan. 14, Tunisians have been waking up everyday with a taste of freedom and that includes the country's newly free press.

Despite the new Tunisia's general atmosphere of slight anarchy and economic problems, people are joyful, proud and optimistic about the outcome of their revolution. After 23 years of dictatorship, they are discovering the stimulation of an independent press.

NATO starts 24/7 surveillance of Libya

NATO has launched around-the-clock surveillance flights of Libya as it considers various options for dealing with escalating violence in the war-torn country, America's ambassador to the organization told reporters Monday.

Representatives of key Western powers also highlighted the possibility of establishing a no-fly zone in Libya -- part of growing campaign to break strongman Moammar Gadhafi's grip on power.

British, French and U.S. officials were working on a draft text that includes language on a no-fly zone, diplomatic sources at the United Nations told CNN.

Secret archives leaked, Egypt military wants them returned

After state security allegedly tried to burn secret archives, Egyptians managed to save and post some on Facebook. Military seeks them returned for national security’s sake

Armed forces promise to rebuild torched church in original site

Amid continuing protests inCairo, Egypt's Armed Forces has promised to rebuild the torched Helwan church in its original location, according to state TV.

Prime Minister Essam Sharaf is currently meeting with the protesters and discussing their demand that the governor of Helwan (south Cairo) be replaced.

The church was set ablaze by a group of Muslims following a dispute between two families over the romance between their Muslim daughter and Christian son. As the church blazed, Muslims rescued the church clerks and sheltered them.

67 officers and policemen detained

The South Giza prosecution has decided to detain 67 officers and policemen for burning documents and damaging public buildings.

The group will be detained for four days pending investigation.

Egypt's prime minister delivers inclusive message

Prime Minister Essam Sharaf called Monday on Egypt's youth, who have been credited for spearheading the movement that led to the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak, to contribute to the new government.

"The clean youth, the real members of the revolution, not those from outside, we ask them to contribute effectively, socially and economically to the political process," Sharaf said on national television.

In a signal that he plans to create a government representative of segments of society that had previously been given scant power, he vowed to increase the representation of women in the parliament and asked for those Egyptians who are living abroad to contribute to the new political process.

Sharaf reiterated the government's commitment to stand by its international agreements, which include the 1979 Camp David Accords with Israel.

Egypt's prime minister meets Christian protesters

Prime Minister Essam Sharaf joined some 1,000 Christian protesters on Monday evening, who welcomed him but refused to talk to him before the Helwan governor resigns.

Egyptian Christians protested on Monday after a church was set on fire on the outskirts of Cairo, the latest sectarian flare-up in a country already facing political turmoil.

The army vowed to rebuild the church before Easter holidays, but the protestors say the governor of Helwan (south of Cairo) refuses to rebuild the church in its original location, and suggests another site outside the village.

Christians oppose this suggestion.

"We demand the resignation of Helwan governor," said one of the protestors gathered in front of the state TV building.

Some Muslims also joined the crowd who gathered outside the state television building in central Cairo. Banners called for a unified law for worship buildings. Protestors say they won't leave before our demands are met.

Million Woman March scheduled for Tuesday

The Million Woman March will mark the beginning of a stretch devoted to the advancement of women's rights in Egypt, an ongoing cause punctuated by International Women's Day as well as Egyptian Women's Day (16 March) and Mother's Day (22 March). The march is being organized on Facebook.

Constitutional amendments: Agreements and concerns

The Armed Forces set 19 March as the date for a national referendum on the constitutional amendments drafted by a committee of experts, a statement said on Friday.

The referendum will be held on the amendment of seven articles of the current constitution, the abrogation of Article 179, which grants the government the right to infringe upon human and personal rights under the pretext of combating terror and the addition of a paragraph to Article 189, which allows the parliament to amend the constitution.

If they are approved by the referendum, the changes will provide a crucial framework for the next parliamentary and presidential elections.

Edited March 7, 2011 by william.scherk

[Richard Wiig]

If the womens protest can get article two changed it would be great. What do you think their chances are?

[Richard Wiig]

The trouble with muslim womens rightists is that they try to live with the source of their problems while denying that it is the source of their problems.

Egyptian women's rights protest marred by hecklers

(AP) – 10 hours ago

CAIRO (AP) — A protest by hundreds of Egyptian women demanding equal rights and an end to sexual harassment turned violent Tuesday when crowds of men heckled and shoved the demonstrators, telling them to go home where they belong.

The women — some in headscarves and flowing robes, others in jeans — had marched to Cairo's central Tahrir Square to celebrate International Women's Day. But crowds of men soon outnumbered them and chased them out.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jA0lTCLBfPISCkbcDhbjgma1OOJQ?docId=e75dbfdfaf294cbd9ee5ebd557c9887e

Edited March 9, 2011 by Infidel

[Peter]

Tracinski wrote in yesterdays Intellectual Activist Online:

One report speculates that the US has asked Saudi Arabia to send arms to the Libyan rebels. This is somewhat implausible (the Saudis have no interest in encouraging a wave of revolutions) and would be a bad idea (the Saudis would be likely to funnel the aid to the most religious elements in the Libyan uprising). But the report is from Robert Fisk, a wild-eyed British anti-war leftist, so I'm not taking it too seriously.

More plausible is a report that Egyptian special forces are operating in Libya.

Wearing civilian clothes, the hundred or so Egyptian commandos are officially not there, but are providing crucial skills and experience to help the rebels cope with the largely irregular, and mercenary, force still controlled by the Kadaffi clan.

The commandos are supposedly from Egypt's elite Unit 777, which has previously been used for anti-terrorism operations against al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

But such an operation is very sensitive because the Libyan oil fields are located uncomfortably close to the Egyptian border. As this report notes:

While the two countries fought a three day war in 1977, the real cause of tension is the fact that for thousands of years, most of Libya was considered part of Egypt. Given the fact that Libya has all that oil, and less than a tenth of the population of Egypt, well, then, you can figure out the rest. But for the moment, everyone is a revolutionary brother.

End quote

Wow. If Egypt annexes Libyan oil I doubt we will intervene even though Obama is acting more like the far-seeing George W. Bush, these days. (Iraq with a working, democratically elected government will foment revolution in other Arab countries.)

Tracinski also wrote:

. . . To do that, I think you need the ideological perspective Bush introduced with the Forward Strategy of Freedom: that the spread of liberty and representative government is inevitable and in our long-term interests, so we should attempt to promote this trend and shape it in a way that is most compatible with our interests in the short term . . . We can't put the genie back in the bottle and keep propping up the geriatric friendly dictators. No one is going to die to put Mubarak back in power. So what we need to do is to go on the offensive, to make the change sweeping the Middle East work in our favor, to ensure that the wave of revolutions also takes down the totalitarian, anti-American regimes.

Libya is the test of whether we are willing to do that. That's what is at stake, and that is why it is worth a very substantial commitment of our military resources.—RWT

Amen, though I think one small guided missle dropped on someone's head would do the trick.

Peter

[william.scherk]

More plausible is a report that Egyptian special forces are operating in Libya.

Wearing civilian clothes, the hundred or so Egyptian commandos are officially not there, but are providing crucial skills and experience to help the rebels cope with the largely irregular, and mercenary, force still controlled by the Kadaffi clan.

Peter, you have mixed in some excerpts from two reports. One is behind a paywall or via email subscription, the other is from where? Can you please mark off what are your own words and which are borrowed?

Robert Fisk reports on a purported secret Saudi arms connection in the Independent.

The only press report of Egyptian special forces in Libya I can find comes from the UK Daily Mirror. Should we give more credence to the Mirror than to the Independent?

[william.scherk]

Some of the most interesting, detailed and compelling reports on Egypt come from the state-owned Al-Ahram newspaper, which seems to be finding its journalistic chops since the revolution. Here is a sample from today's Al-Ahram.

• Libyan official flies to Egypt with Gaddafi message
  
• Activists see state security's hidden hands behind attacks on Egypt's Copts
  
• 'Friday of National Unity' march planned after sectarian clashes
  
• Egyptian political activists to visit Soul today
  
• Why the counter-revolution targets women and Copts?
  
• Egyptian million woman march ends with a gunshot
  
• Muslim brotherhood asks people to support Army and Government: Brotherhood leader condemns those inciting sectarianism in Egypt

[Peter]

William wrote:

Peter, you have mixed in some excerpts from two reports.

Sorry. I don't feel like going back to find out which is which. One excerpt was indented when I cut and pasted it. Tracinski also wondered which sources we should trust, so it is the thought that counts.

If Egypt "managed" Pan-Egyptian oil and put Kaddafi's head on a stick, I don't think we would complain. The similarities between this prospect and Saddam's invasion of Kuwait are striking, but still I think we might speculate that it is in our interest, and go with the flow )

Peter

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

There is one thing you don't get too much in the mainstream media here in the USA.

Mubarak was a recipient of USA funds.

Gaddafi has been a source. He has spread a lot of Libya's wealth around in the USA. I saw the other day he even has a group of Harvard professors on his dole.

Obama certainly knew who he is. He went with Farrakhan a few decades ago to meet the great dictator. Nobody's saying anything about money between Gaddafi and Obama, but look how Obama acted regarding Mubarak and look how he has acted regarding Gaddafi. Hell, he wouldn't even say Gaddafi's name in talking about Libyan protests until just a few days ago, but he was all over Mubarak from day one.

I don't support Gaddafi, but this fairy-tale the mainstream media has been promoting has nothing to do with what he is and what he is capable of doing.

This dude ain't the same animal as normal run-of-the-mill USA puppet dictators. On the contrary, that puppet thing looks like it goes the other way around in the present administration. He is also nuts enough to blow up all of his oilfields if push comes to shove. And Obama knows that if that happens, the ensuing oil prices would sink any chance he has of reelection.

If anyone wants to understand Gaddafi, they need to start with the local tribes over there, not with talking heads on TV (including Fox) or the NYT. Then they will understand why he has kept his power all these years, and why he is likely to keep it for many more years.

Michael

[Selene]

Yep.

Reverend Wright and Farrakhan went over to see the man in 1984.

"Jeremiah Wright, former pastor of Obama’s longtime Chicago church, went with Farrakhan to visit Gadhafi in 1984.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Wright himself noted the trip could cause problems for Obama.

“When [Obama's] enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli to visit [Gadhafi] with Farrakhan, a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.”

Farrakhan, a close friend and associate of Wright, has been financed by Gadhafi, including with a $5 million interest-free loan in 1985.

If the Ivy League geniuses in the White House can’t spell Libya, or can’t even be bothered to spell-check it, it’s not really that important, I guess. From The Blaze:"