, , , , , , , , , ,

Egypt Foreign Minister Warns of Military Intervention – NYTimes.com.

For anyone interested – this entire article is well worth reading. The second page has a list of the labour strikes and where those have happened during the day there (over the course of the night here.)

It says Sharm al-Sheikh is closed. And, notes that there are vast scores of people by the thousands now participating across Egypt.

This part is actually pretty amazing –

There were signs that the police, under the jurisdiction of the hated Interior Ministry, were trying to remake their image. The authorities have announced in recent days that prosecutors are weighing charges against Habib el-Adly, recently removed as interior minister. The charges, including murder, are related to the killing of protesters by security officers during the unrest.

On Wednesday, some cellphone customers in Egypt received the equivalent of marketing messages from the new minister, Mahmoud Wagdy. One read, “From the Ministry of Interior: The police will do nothing but serve and protect the people.” Another said, “Starting today, we will only deal through truthfulness, honesty and rule of law.”

Beyond all else, it shows that the Egyptian government leaders are embracing the fact that something is amiss. But, there is every indication that the staunchly entrenched and enriched Mubarak / Suleiman government members are unpredictable and unstable in what they might do next.

On CNN last night, a couple segments really caught my attention. Once on Parker Spitzer when there was Ron Suskind speaking about what things are in context. And later as a lady from a pro-women’s group who had grown up under Islamic Sharia law (in Algiers, maybe) was describing on AC360 that the Muslim Brotherhood is the only political group with a head start and political resources in place.

All of her points were accurate – that is a very good interview to see. She appeared with intel guy adding pertinent info – but her points were valid. It will take sustained efforts efficiently made for Egypt’s protesters to quickly develop the organized political parties that could participate in an election and forward their own candidates, or there would be only one party doing so – the Muslim Brotherhood who already having backing and resources in place.

It still so floors me that the State Department and others in European governments would state publicly that Suleiman is a good answer, when he is responsible for much of the violence and oppressive tactics that have been used against Egypt’s people for decades. I don’t get that part. It doesn’t make sense. Why would they have nothing better to say at this point? They would have to know the kind of man his strong-arm style of dictatorship would indicate, just as much as Mubarak – if not more so. I don’t get it.

I’ll look up those video clips and see if they are available by a link here or find the portions of the transcripts that include them. They are really an amazing look at the in-depth picture and the US role in it over many, many years (and five presidents.)

– cricketdiane


And, I do want to note – that Egyptian government leaders telling our national security team, our vice president, our state department, our president, the UK government leaders, the UN and the entire 27 nations of the EU’s leaders that it is none of their business is unacceptable.

Not only have they used our resources and depend on them even now to stay in power, but the Egyptian government has called on our specialists in the region that we (and all of the above named leadership resources) are supporting every time they wanted to do a business deal or had some concern that they wanted fixed within the region. At their beckon call over thirty years – and now they say its no one’s business what they do?


No. And, it is probably going to take what the entire world can do from the Arab world to the European and US / Canadian world, Russia, China, Japan and half of South America to help Egypt’s people have the freedom and democracy they want with fair and open elections and a substantial number of political parties available from which to choose while maintaining some transitional period to do it.