Not surprising at all.

No doubt most of you have already seen this, but in case you have not, there is a considerable amount of mob confrontation between pro-Mubarak supporters and anti-Mubarak groups going on in Cairo this morning and the army is just watching.

There is way too much negativism about the ability of an emerging middle class in Egypt to make some of the right choices. The choice for decades had been limited to Mubarak or the Brotherhood, now there are more options.

Although Iraq is not yet Denmark, it is way better than Saddam and his Sons ruling for life. Iraq is the model, that can be done in Tunisia and Egypt if ordinary citizens fight for it and we help them a bit with their core economic problems which is what is driving change (the Islamists are not driving this).

The pro-government demonstrators are now showing the anti-government protesters what democracy is all about.

Civil disobedience is a wonderful thing until someone in the opposition runs you over with a camel or hits you on the head with a rock.

After about 3 weeks with no job, food,
or water, most protesters will go home,
Ask Obama/USA for stimulus,
and watch the internet..

Everybody is fooling themselves that Iraq and any of the Muslim countries are on roads to democracy. Theocracies,yes.
Sharia law is not compatible with democracy.

"Democracy doesn't work without strong civil rights". Thomas Paine

Silly question of the day:

I see masses of people protesting with nary room to swing a cat, yet I have yet to see a porta-potty. After 8 hot days, do you think there would be a smell in the air?

Just askin'

Islam, is not compatible with democracy. It does appear that some islamic countries have had a democracy, but then the choices available to these people are limited by the religion and cultural shackles chosen for them by their parents, with no real alternatives available. Was life under Mubarck difficult? oh well.

If democracy comes to Egypt, what happens when a majority votes for idiocy?

First - kate - nice photoshoped picture. Except you used a hebrew font for your words- a bit strange.

I agree with nomdeblog - 'there is way too much negativity about the ability of the Egyptian people to make some right choices'. It's incredible, the view that so many here hold of these people - rather akin to the view held long ago of jews, blacks and women...all 'unfit for democracy and needing to be constrained by authority'.

And, also, the core causality is not Islam- it's the economic situation in Egypt and the ME.

Now - just as what some of the protesters were worried about - Mubarak is fighting back. He's sending his thugs into the streets to foment violence. The original anti-Mubarak demonstrations were incredibly peaceful. But Mubarak is attempting to foment violence so that he can call for military rule..and continue his totalitarianism. After all- he's ruled by edict for 30 years, and the so-called parliament has been suspended for a year over the last..ah..elections.

CNN reported that some of the pro-Mubarak protesters said that they were, as public employees, forced to demonstrate for Mubarak. And that's what Mubarak is planning to do; foment riots and crush the people.

Like Texas Canuck, I have also noticed the lack of washroom facilities. All I can say is I am glad I am not in the middle of that. It must be a horribly smelly place.

Where did you get this picture, Kate? There's no indication of who took it or when. It looks like a photoshop product to me.

Texas Canuck

I was thinking the very exact same thing, just didn't have the temerity to express the thought in print.

Obviously revolution is a good way to start a democracy. It worked in England, well except that the round heads were hated and driven out and the king brought back. It worked in the US, well except for that nasty bit of driving the UEL up into Canada. It worked in France, well if you don't mind all the beheadings and stuff and that little guy who thought he was an emperor and set out to get and empire. It worked well in Russia, well if you don't mind the untold suffering and deaths of millions imposed by Papa Joe and his heirs. It worked well in Iran. Well except for all the people being killed and such and the people fleeing the country. But other than that revolution is a great way to....

"It's incredible, the view that so many here hold of these people - rather akin to the view held long ago of jews, blacks and women...all 'unfit for democracy and needing to be constrained by authority'.

So if we voice any concern about what's going on we are now Nazi's or KKK members? I think the concern about Muslim rule is based on other country's that have Muslim rule. To try and have a conversation about Egypt right now and not mention Sharia law or the Muslim Brotherhood would border on the moronic.

Texas Canuck...... They would never notice a change in the stink.

It might not be photo-shopped. Could be those Egyptian youths are regular SDA readers who appreciate Kate's sense of humor...No?

ET, I see from your photoshop comment that you're a bit more sophisticated than I, and I say that with respect. I do, however, disagree with your optimism regarding Egypt's "emerging middle class". I think this affair will end in a partnership between the Egyptian military and Islamic theocrats, and Israel will be the scapegoat for the resulting economic failures. But we shall see.

Texas Canuck and others who are commenting on the lack of rest room facilities in the Arab world.

I doubt there are many in their homes either. Perhaps that is the problem with Muslims, their pants are full of crap.

They all need to have their diapers changed.

By the way ... there is no emerging middle class in the Middle East. That would require some sort of free enterprise capitalist society where educated men and women are free to create businesses and advertise etc. That does not happen there. Religion and death happen there.

Over here are experiencing a submerging economy because we are giving too much money people who don't work to millions who don't event live here.

RSP - my points are objective; that is, I'm looking at societies as 'organic systems'.

The system consists of: (a) the material productive capacities (resources, soil, climate, water)and population size. Then, (b) a social organizational structure emerges to mould all this together...so that the population has both metabolic and reproductive strength; that is, the people live well and continue into the future. They develop (c) a set of normative beliefs and behaviour that validate and confirm both b and a.

Parts a and b and c are intimately entwined. Most people focus only on 'c', and consider that what drives the society is simply 'c'...the ideology. No....you have to consider the whole complex structure.

So, my view is that when part a, the population, reaches a critical threshold in the multimillions, and when the economy must be industrial to support that size..then, the political branch must enable that economy to be productive.

The only political mode that can promote an industrial economy that is 'growth-oriented'...is democracy. Because it empowers the productive part of the population, the middle class, who are engaged in private businesses.

So- given these basic axioms - I conclude that democracy is not a choice in the ME but a necessity. Others here on this blog reject this conclusion. They focus only on part c, the ideology, and insist that it is the causal agent of societal structures..and consider that Islam prevents a democratic system from emerging.

Certainly Islam is anti-democratic; its axioms are based around a tribal rather than civic structure, it rejects individualism in favour of the group; it rejects reason, science...and is actually a basic ideology of all tribal/feudal societies.

But the West moved out of tribalism - it took over 400 very violent years - but the West had, also, no choice. Its population had moved beyond the carrying capacity of a tribal organization. It had to intellectually reject the old two-class system, reject its own rejection of reason, permit the devt of an educated middle class..etc.

So- my view is that it must occur in the ME. Again, democracy is not a choice. It's a necessity when your population reaches a certain size and when your economy is industrial. It doesn't happen in the nanoseconds that TV events do; it takes time and friction. And Islam, dogma as it is, will have to change.

But, to view the arab/persian peoples of the ME, as we used to view blacks, jews, women..as beings incapable of reason and self-government, well, I think that view on our part has to change.

My concern now, is how Mubarak, that thug, is moving in his thugs to foment violence on the streets, so that he can move in the army and take over and crush the demonstrations. Sure, he says he'll leave in September; but he was planning to anyway. The probleml is, he's planning to set up a dynastic successor whom he'll continue to control. The key now - is the army. Who will they support - Mubarak or the people?

Thank God Iraq isn't Denmark! It's hardly a model of freedom, unless you think the nanny state is the answer.

MSM's narrative seems to be the exact opposite of what the people think, watching videos at various Non-MSM outlets it's clear the people do not want the Muslim Brotherhood in charge in fact they call Alwhateva "The US's puppet". So we in the west think the MB is acting on behalf of Iran and in Egypt the people think they are acting on behalf of the US. Be nice if the MSM told us the truth instead of what they deem to be the truth.

RSP, it can’t “end” that way. A theocracy cannot feed and employ 80 million people, so a theocracy or totalitarian regime will keep collapsing until the Egyptians get it right. This is an economic driven problem of a Middle East population explosion still trying to govern itself with tribalism; as if they were small nomadic groups herding goats.

This is about economics and demographics; it is not about Islamists who are simply like our own parasitical progressives attached to a host. When the host collapses so do the parasites.

Abe “Religion and death happen there”. Actually not much death does happen there. At the beginning of WWII, Egypt was 16 million people, now it is 80 million. That is the problem throughout the region. There are too many people for tribalism; it will not work without empowering a middle class and a governance system that offers some kind of capitalism to create jobs.

This could get really ugly before it gets better but there is no way Islamists can control this.

Well, I for one always thought Turkey was going to be the first to go. Just goes to show how hard these things are to predict. It is going to be Islamic Republics all the way from Malaysia to the Mediterranean.

But the West moved out of tribalism - it took over 400 very violent years...

Well, yes, ET. But we're not speculating on what will happen 400 years from now. We're trying to anticipate the next 2-3 years, no?

Mohammed's Boys in the 'hood.

The death of AlMoh's brothers.

Murder he wrote.

Murder your brothers.

Now, pray.

Mohammedanism: a death cult.

Al-Reuters:

"Yet pockets of peace remained -- including around small groups who, amid the violence, dropped to their knees and faced Mecca. The time had come for daily prayers."

"Click to play".

Egyptian Mohammed (9/11) Atta's ghost:

"They are all Egyptians."

...-

"A scene of violent chaos in Cairo"

"Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- It started with verbal abuse, and then -- perhaps inevitably -- it got physical.

Supporters of Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak flooded into Cairo's Tahrir Square Wednesday after the president's opponents dominated the scene for more than a week.

Separated at first by barriers, the rival demonstrators exchanged insults, then began throwing anything they could find at each other, including shoes, rocks and sticks.

Suddenly the barriers fell. People surged toward each other in a chaotic scene that conjured images of a revolution.

Some injured protesters fell. Others stumbled through the crowd. Blood streamed down one man's face.

The wounded were carried away, bleeding from gashes. It was impossible to tell from visits to a makeshift clinic which side was faring worse, CNN's Ben Wedeman said. He said simply: "They are all Egyptians."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/02/egypt.protests.scene/

Ditto to nomdeblog.

ET, I was a bit surprised by your comments. You have a lot of knowledge about the political and economics of the ME but your understanding of the depths of the religious nature of the Muslims is what is missing in your narratives.

You don't seem to understand that the establishment of a hard-line Muslim theocracy is the goal here, not an economic one. Democracy is not the goal, it is a code words which the Muslims are using as western double-speak to say the majority of people have spoken and then bring in the very repressive and brutal Shia for of Islam. Just like letting asking the devil in for tea and he walks in with his suitcase.

These people don't realize what they are asking for. Slavery!

And neither do you.

Rob C
[........Texas Canuck...... They would never notice a change in the stink......]

Pretty much.....the ME is like India and Pakistan.....the sights and SMELLs.....usually raw sewage.

I have little or no confidence in any:

"emerging middle class". in Eygpt.

90% iliteracy....

The army has strived hard to establish some sort of literacy in it's ranks...out of necessity....illiterates cannot operate and maintain modern weapon sytems....without the ability to read manuals.

This sets up a de facto caste system....the Air Force is the most literate.....resulting in a more or less feudal society rather than tribal.
Feudal with the military elite occupying the upper levels.....still a 2 class society with little or no middle class, mostly civil servants.
The literate are above the salt.....

For those who believe Islamic fundamentalists and democracy can co-exist, check out this Pew poll and see how incompatible they are.

http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

glacierman - the people are not asking for a theocracy. There is absolutely no evidence for it; those demonstrations aren't asking the govt to install hard-line Islam. They are asking for freedom.
Most certainly there are hardliners in Egypt, just as there are in our own nation. But that doesn't mean that the people want such a rule over them.

You insist that the people demonstrating for freedom are actually not doing so; they are 'speaking in code' and really want a hardline theocracy. Prove it. Why on earth should they speak in code - if that theocracy is what they all want???

Yes - I agree with nomdeblog. And note that not only is there this exponential rise in the population in a few decades but the current median age is only 24! Where is the economic infrastructure to support them?

RSP - yes, it will happen much faster in the ME than the West's 400 years! That's because democracy, as an intellectual set of ideas and also, as an operational model, already exists in many places around the world. No need to 'invent the wheel' again, so to speak.

sasquatch - are you serious? Only 10% of the Egyptian population is literate? Odd. The CIA World Factbook says that 71% are literate. Where did you get your data?

Oh - and as for the raw sewage - what does this say about a government that hasn't developed the infrastructure to deal with it? Where is all their money going - the billions from the US, the income from the Canal, tourism, ...the high taxes certainly aren't going into social infrastructures.

Oh, and just an interesting snippet. Canada has the second highest oil reserves in the world, behind Saudi Arabia and higher than Iran or Iraq (3 and 4). The US is 14th, just after China.

ET wrote: But, to view the arab/persian peoples of the ME, as we used to view blacks, jews, women..as beings incapable of reason and self-government, well, I think that view on our part has to change.

End quote:---------

So you are losing the debate thus you throw out the usual race bating lingo. The only person bringing race into this debate is you ET time after time after time. Political Islam is the opposite side of the coin of Nazism, it has no race only creed and tyranny.

ET "
You insist that the people demonstrating for freedom are actually not doing so; they are 'speaking in code' and really want a hardline theocracy. Prove it."

The removal of the Shah of Iran in the '70's and the festering cesspool that Iran now is, spreading their hate and rule of Sharia law.

Now you prove to me that your reasoning in a purely economic one!!!

glacierman “your understanding of the depths of the religious nature of the Muslims is what is missing in your narratives. “

I think ET is bang on and the point you are missing is that religion is derived from ecology and economics not the other way around. The Islamists are from a nomadic background, their pastoral economic way of life led to their religion/culture not the other way around.

The whole ME would have collapsed by now under Islamic/tribalism but we in the West prop it up with Oil funding. Or in the case of Egypt, it could not possibly have arrived at 80 million people under a thugocracy but we prop it up from the outside with $2 billion in aid, our ships funding the Suez, tourism.

If we simply stop propping up bad ideas in the ME and instead start to “ drill drill drill for ourselves”, then the Islamists will collapse. As would the parasites on the CBC and the Bloc both collapse, if we were to stop funding them with our capitalist success.

People are equal, all are capable of democracy, but cultures are not equal. We need to stop the Kumbayah cultural relativist crap and let some cultures die out, including some right here at home.

The fact is that 100’s of millions of people cannot support themselves unless capitalism is allowed to happen and capitalism can’t happen in an Islamist state.

On the bright side, Anderson Cooper was punched in the head 10 times (he counted!) although I don't know if he called anyone in the crowd "teabagger" to spur the attack.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/anderson-cooper-attacked-mob-egypt-95628

A commenter at Ace's posted this just yesterday. (I think it was "iknowtheleft".)

That's arab culture. The reason 90% of the muslim world is like this is because islam is the formalization of desert arab culture and forces these attitudes on those who submit to islam. You have to understand the nature of tribalism/shame/revenge cultures, which totally escapes most Westerners, as our cultures are Individualism/Guilt/Atonement based, where these sorts of attitudes are integral parts.

Guilt is an individualistic notion that is private in nature, where the power is fully in the hands of the individual. I cannot be made to feel guilt because of someone else's actions, only my thoughts and actions can lead to my guilt (though this guilt response has gone awry in Western liberals). Further, only I need to know what I did to feel guilty. It is a private notion.

Shame, on the other hand, is a purely public, collectivist notion. The individual has no control over shame. He can be shamed by the actions of others--even if they didn't intend to shame his tribe/group. Further, shame is a totally public notion. One cannot be shamed unless others know about it.

When we feel guilt, we alleviate it through atonement. When a tribalist feels shame, he alleviates it through revenge. The shame society has no control over itself, but is always subject to the whims and actions of others.

This problem that you describe has nothing to do with democracy or people's ability to freely express themselves. It is cultural.

Bloodless & Deathless in Cairo.

Mohammed's rapture: Deathless.

AlMoh's Boys in the 'hood.

No deaths: leftist MSM reports.

The corpses have been raptured, swept up to AlMoh's paradise.

Egypt's Mohammedans: Paving the Way to a Mohammedan totalitarian theocracy.

...-

"Violence in Cairo"

"Mubarak Supporters Clash with Opposition Movement"
Violence in Cairo: Mubarak Supporters Clash with Opposition Movement

Streetfighting has broken out in Cairo between Mubarak supporters and opposition protesters. Dozens of people have been injured and there are reports of shots being fired."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,743191,00.html

To illustrate to friends who'd never spent time in the M.E. I used to relate this fantasy:

Suppose you're talking about gravity, and as an example of its effects you hold a 5lb weight in one hand and then release if - "I know, I know" shouts one member of the audience, "It flies up to the sky!"

"No, no" you start to say, but you're drowned out by numerous voices shouting "Yes, yes, I have myself seen this happen".

(Up is down and down is up.)

Release IT, not release if.

rose - when commenters talk about a whole set of people as a homogeneous set, all alike, and all 'ignorant, brutes, thugs, incapable of reason and democracy' - then, such comments are indeed racist. So I'm justified in using that analogy about the comments here. How else would you describe a situation when people describe a whole set as homogeneous - and all - essentially degenerates? Hmmm?

It doesn't mean I'm losing the debate, for no-one debates on the key issues of: the economy and the population and the societal structure. It's all about: 'they are all ignorant brutes'.

glacierman - I don't see how the removal of the shah in Iran..and current state of Iran, means that the people in Egypt, right now, are 'speaking in code' and really want instead of Mubarak, a theocracy. By the way - how would you describe the green movement and demonstrations in Iran of a year ago - a desire for more theocracy?

My reasoning is economic and demographic. I've given my outline above. The Egyptian population, as nomdeblog also pointed out, is the fastest growing in the region, and has morphed from 33 million in 1970 to over 80 million now. In 1980 it was 42 million..and has doubled since Mubarak took over. And has the govt set up the economic infrastructure to support this massive change? No.

Housing, waste management, education, job infrastructure - are all below necessary levels.
The country has few reserves; its production of oil and gas serve primarily for its own needs. It imports twice as much consumer goods as it exports; that is, it is unable to feed its population and has not developed a middle class service economy that can provide funds to import more goods.

The govt, instead of promoting small and medium businesses, focused on energy sources, Suez Canal tolls and tourism and massive aid from other countries. Oh, and its defense industry is very large. Notice that these are all public rather than private economic systems, filled with waste, corruption..and..out of reach of the majority of the population. Besides the CIA facts, you might be interested in the link below.

http://countrystudies.us/egypt/3.htm

Essentially, this economic agenda has left the majority of the population - and it's a young population, in poverty and above all, with no future.

Well at least the women are all at safe at home, because I see only men in the saquare.

Could it be the smart young men are at home as well?

Typo - square

Interesting discussion.

FKA Gord hits it for me. If Egyptians do not somehow vote for government with strong civil rights then what they'll end up with is something like Iran or Pakistan.

The MB area dead set to make sharia the law of the Egypt, and sharia is the antithesis of personal freedom. The very worse thing that can happen is giving the MB even greater power.

But, like the West Bank-Gaza Arabs voting for Hamas, if the Egyptians vote for MB then they will have to live with them. If they do then I will not have the slightest pity for them as the MB turns Egypt into an even bigger shyte hole.

andy canuck - yes, that's a nice analysis of the difference between a culture focused around the individual and one focused around the group (personal guilt vs collective shame). The West moved into the ideology of 'sin' and it is indeed, an individual responsibility.

However, the point is, ideology and cultures are not genetic. They are intellectual constructs, made by man and changeable by man. The West changed from its focus on collectivism and shame into individual responsibility...and so can the current set of collectivist cultures.

But - what is the base of such a set of beliefs? It's the economy. The West had to change and enable individualism, because its technology and ways of life could not support its own massive population increases in the 13th-16th centuries. It had to allow innovation and individual entrepreneurship. So too, the same problem is now the situation in the ME.

And, as nomdeblog points out, we in the west have enabled them to remain frozen in the old tribal ways, by our constant aid. We've been helping them stay frozen, and thus, we've even been partners in their move to fundamentalism. After all, fundamentalism is an attempt to 'get us out of this current mess'..It's a mistaken belief that If Only We Were Pure, then, everything will get better. So - instead of sending our billions to the ME for them to 'stay the same'...we ought to let them realize that their current economic mode...is disastrous and the people need freedom to be capitalists.

Have you all seen the video of the attack by the horses and camels? This is just strange. A year from now, will Egyptians generally feel better about their lives or worse?

Democracy and civil freedom is wasted on some people.

Apparently ET doesn't want to look at the Pew Poll that was done last year.

http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

So here is a snippet....

"Among Muslims who see a struggle between modernizers and Islamic fundamentalists, majorities in Lebanon (84%), Turkey (74%), Pakistan (61%) and Indonesia (54%) side with those who want to modernize their countries; a plurality of Jordanian Muslims who say there is a struggle in their country also side with the modernizers (48%). In Egypt and Nigeria, however, most Muslims who see a struggle in their countries say they identify with Islamic fundamentalists (59% and 58%, respectively)."

"About eight-in-ten Muslims in Egypt and Pakistan (82% each) endorse the stoning of people who commit adultery; 70% of Muslims in Jordan and 56% of Nigerian Muslims share this view. Muslims in Pakistan and Egypt are also the most supportive of whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery; 82% in Pakistan and 77% in Egypt favor making this type of punishment the law in their countries, as do 65% of Muslims in Nigeria and 58% in Jordan.

When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they would favor making it the law."

Yeah....the makings of a "robust" democracy. Who are you trying to kid, ET?

"Essentially, this economic agenda has left the majority of the population - and it's a young population, in poverty and above all, with no future."
Posted by: ET at February 2, 2011 11:51 AM

Which makes the populace ripe to be exploited by the MB to take over the country, like the Bolshevicks in Russia, the Mullahs in Iran .

You can't ignore politics and history in the equation ET. ET Fail.

The only "organic" part of the events in Egypt is that this still holds true "ashes to ashes, dust to dust", the rioters on either side end up as the compost to fertilize the furor of their respective political masters.

Question for all.

When did you become such experts on Egypt?

Question for all.

When did you become such experts on Egypt?

Posted by: set you free
................

Not 'experts' perhaps, but some of us HAVE spent time in the M.E., and have exposure to the thought patterns.

Some of y'all should cut ET some slack, she's probably going to be right in the long run.

But, in the short run let's not forget the bloody, bloody history of Europe. We are right now living in the longest stretch of European peace (outside the Balkans anyway) that there has been in five or six hundred years.

There are some extremely rich people pouring money and arms into the Middle East to achieve the new Caliphate. They are fundamentalists, they are driven, they are without a care in the world other than their goal which is a unified Muslim world.

That's the side in this Egypt business that is getting zero mention, the Muslim Brotherhood side.

The vast majority of Egypt is staying home right now. They don't have a dog in the fight yet. If the fundies get some traction, the vast majority will go for them.

People think if its the mosque, Allah will keep them honest right? Who would tempt the Almighty by cheating? That's what ignorant peasants think. That's what they thought in Europe in the Middle Ages when the Church had all the money, and that's what Arabs think now. Better the mosque than the corrupt a-holes like Saddam and Mubarak and whatever wankers are it in Syria.

ET is right, a unified Caliphate under Sharia would be an economic -disaster- just like the USSR, India under the Ghandis, China (which I still think is the mother of all bubbles and heading for a pin) or any other fully formed top-down centrally planned state.

Problem is, it'll take 40-80 years, at least one major war most likely with nukes in it, and maybe a billion lives for these goofs to figure it out.

It would be nice if somebody like George Soros could read this handwriting on the wall and maybe kick Barry O in the @ss a couple real hard ones in the right direction, but I don't see it happening. They've all drank the frickin' Hate America bong water for too long.

Joke is, it wouldn't matter if America -was- evil, a Middle East and Turkey ruled by Sharia under a new Caliphate would be SO much worse. Talk about imperialism, try a new Ottoman Empire on for size.

joey - I've seen and commented several times on that PEW poll - and I strongly question its validity. The poll is filled with contradictions, and gives no indication of the size nor demographic nature of the respondents (rural/urban; age; education; economics etc) nor of the questions asked. I taught methodology for years - and thus, would question both the validity and reliability of the poll.

How about such discrepancies as:
Role of Islam in politics: large
Egypt 48%

Islam's influence in politics: positive
Egypt 85%

Now, those two questions are similar and yet yield drastically different results. Hmm.

And how about cultural identification:
Pakistan: modernization 61%
fundamentalists: 28%

Egypt: modernization 27%
fundamentalists: 59%

Now, the above ratios don't make any sense when you consider actual realities on the ground in those two countries.

So- I don't accept the PEW polls as valid or reliable.

Al the fish - no, given those same actualities of a young impoverished population - they can opt for economic challenges and freedom.

You don’t have to be an “expert on Egypt and Middle East” to understand universal truths that ecology and economics drives the kind of government we need in order to adapt to our physical reality and that the kind of culture and religion we choose to help us better adapt to our economic reality will have a bearing on our success.

Nor do we have to be anthological experts to understand the concept of hosts and parasites. A much bigger problem for us than the Middle East, which will either reform or implode and kill off the excess population; is right here at home. Why are we conservatives propping up the failed ideas of the CBC, the socialism of the Separatists in Quebec, the Nanny Care and Climate Shaft ideas of the progressive Librano$?

The Librano$ are simply a milder form of parasites than the Islamists, living off the host of successful capitalism so they can set up a 2-class system of rulers and peasants. If allowed to do so, how would that differ from what has happened in the ME?

Why do we prop up bad ideas? That is the issue. Are we any smarter than the poor slobs in the Middle East who are under the thumb of thugs? We have the option to Black Flag the parasites, yet we let them feed on the host. The progressives right here at home are a bigger threat to our well being than a bunch of Islamist camel drivers.

"When did you become such experts on Egypt?"

This is the internet. People express opinions and many are very insightful. Is this okay with you?

This is why I now must believe in aliens;

No way had the Egyptians built the pyramids. No way at all.........

Did anybody look closely at the clip of Anderson Cooper describing the "attack" on his crew? Punched 10 times in the head but no blood flowing and not a mark that I could see. What a rotten, lying s.o.b.!

I'm horrified by the percentage of Egyptians who favour the death penalty for apostates, stoning for adultry etc. The few Egyptians who I know seem like nice, normal people. Do we really live in the 21st century?

Oh, we're talking about Egypt! I thought those people holding the banner were ACORN activists supporting Obama.

Egypt hasn't had the necessary rule of law in place for the development of capital since the British were in charge, if ever. The same can be said for the rest of the Arab Muslim world. All industrial development has come from non Muslim nations. Go short on Egypt, long on Ordnance for the Israeli market.

ET, your oil reserve numbers didn't consider the US oil shales which, if developed in combination with synthetic oil from coal could leave America free of any need from the retrograde Arab Muslim world. The Saudis currently "reinvest" $4,000,000,000 annually in the US, spreading their toxic Wahhabism. Without a US market their next customers might not be as tolerant or as suicidally protective of the House of Saud.

To paraphrase George Jonas in today's National Post, history shows it's hard to nurture a democracy in a changing political landscape when there are few democrats: France and Napolean, Russia and Lenin, Germany and Hitler.

And he quoted Roosevelt referring to some nasty but pro US leader in South America at the time: "He may be a son-of-a-bit*h, but at least he's our son of a bit*h" Same could be said for Mubarek.

phantom - george soros wants his own global caliphate - a socialist, statist global world. Ruled by..him? Certainly, his agenda is to disable and remove a middle class and its political powers in a democratic legislature.

What is going on in the ME now is a tectonic shift from an ancient tribal infrastructure, kept in place long past its 'best before date' by oil and by, as nomdeblog points out - billions in aid from the West. Make no mistake: we've assisted this sclerotic dysfunctional set of dictatorships to maintain power...and this means, we are party to the collapse of their economy and the rise of Islamic fascism.

Why? Because Islamic fascism is the poor man's way out of poverty and powerlessness. It's their Hope and Change - and we saw what that very mantra did in the US. Islamic fascism says that IF we all, and I mean all, become homogeneous and pure (as defined by our beliefs and behaviour), THEN, everything will be OK..and god will look after us and there'll be food and housing and so on.

This is pure fiction, it exists only within thoughts held in the mind. It has no ability to transform thoughts into acts. It can't grow food, it can't set up waste treatment plants, it can't build roads, it can't come up with new medicines to treat new diseases, it can't innovate a new energy system. Nothing.

It's purely parasitic on the innovations and work of others. You can pray umpteen times a day and insist that women stay in the home..and still, the germs will come and the water will be polluted and there won't be any food. And because it doesn't work, rage and anger is the result. After all, you are under the illusion that in order for it to work, everyone..everyone, must all be the same. No deviations.

It's like freaking out over the single crystal of sugar forming...once that deviant crystal forms, there goes your batch of candy.

So, my view is that fundamentalism of any type can't work in an industrial multimillion size population. You have to have a middle class of private small to medium businesses. No nation's raw resources or Suez canal tolls etc..are enough to maintain that size of population. You must set up a dynamic capitalist economic base. That's what is going on in the ME right now..and as nomdeblog also points out - it's not an easy fight.

After all, hope and change is easier to do than the risks of being a businessman. But, hope and change makes everyone a slave, and I think the people of the ME have had enough of that.

@ET

"young impoverished population - they can opt for economic challenges and freedom"

You mean like the green revolt succeded in Iran last year? The revolution in Iran that started as a people's revolution in 1979?

/sarc off

Canada's National Brotherhood Broadcaster has broken the leftist MSM ranks.

Scoop for Peter tonight: "1 dead".

That's "1 dead" polar bear, right? In Cairo's Zoo.
(H/T Goreacle> Who knew It was in Egypt.)

...-

"Egyptian clashes leave 1 dead, hundreds hurt
CBC.ca"

al the fish - and note that the people in Iran didn't, themselves, opt for totalitarian Islam. That's the agenda of the tribal rulers who run the country - remember them? The ones that Obama supported, rather than supporting the people?

john chittick - yes, you are exactly right. That's the whole point - the ME hasn't enabled the devt of capital. They've relied on their oil revenues and foreign aid. That's parasitic economics. They are an empty shell of an economy.
Thanks for bringing in that data on the US oil shales. ...that Obama is repressing.

philm - that's quite the cynical view. And short-sighted. It's our support for Mubarak that has enabled him, and other dictators like him, to repress the populations in the ME, deprive them of any active participation in the economy and in the government, and thus, drive them to the 'hope and change' rhetoric of a fundamentalist ideology.

Those of us who disagree with many of the commenters here, and believe instead that classical liberalism is not the natural state of man---that it will not spring, unaided, from the state of nature, but requires, instead, the careful nurturing of classical liberal ideas of individuality, the value of individual freedom, and the sentiments that go with those ideas, and believe as well that all these unnatural ideas will flourish only within a classically liberal culture with its institutions of private property, education, morality, science, poilitcs and law---, will find much to agree with in Daniel Pipes' piece at NRO this morning. E.g.:

"… understanding that democratization is a decades-long process that requires the inculcation of counter-intuitive ideas about elections, freedom of speech, and the rule of law."

Democracy is bad enough in cultures that are increasingly illiberal. It is a positive poison in more barbaric cultures steeped in the ideas and values of a barbaric religion.

And, as nomdeblog points out, we in the west have enabled them to remain frozen in the old tribal ways, by our constant aid. We've been helping them stay frozen, and thus, we've even been partners in their move to fundamentalism. After all, fundamentalism is an attempt to 'get us out of this current mess'..It's a mistaken belief that If Only We Were Pure, then, everything will get better. So - instead of sending our billions to the ME for them to 'stay the same'...we ought to let them realize that their current economic mode...is disastrous and the people need freedom to be capitalists..
- Who Else?

That, ET, is IT. This is exactly the view I've come to in recent months through a review and purification of my own Austro-Libertarian leanings. No more AID, no more US military bases; the US doesn't need to "protect their interests"; the ME oil producers need us as much as we need them. More. There's absolutely no basis for supply interruptions absent our meddling in the ME.

AND for that reason I also say, sure let them have their Muslim Brotherhood governance, let them see and experience the utter economic disaster that will flow from that.

This quote may not be a perfect fit, but:

“However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.”
— Winston Churchill

"So - instead of sending our billions to the ME for them to 'stay the same'...we ought to let them realize that their current economic mode...is disastrous and the people need freedom to be capitalists."

Interestingly enough, the very first thing I heard on the news regarding the White House's response to the 'protests' was that the United States was to "cut-off aid" to Egypt. Now, TOTUS & Co. appear to have had a change of heart on this matter. Perhaps upon reading ET's economic analysis eh? Regardless of the differing points of view on this subject, I think it's fair to say that most all of us here support 'cutting-off' such aid. So even though we come to the same solution from different directions, we come to the same solution none the less. Am I wrong?

It seems to me that regardless of what any of us might think about this issue; our leaders are only capable of half-measures in which either/or will be expensive and ineffective. This is why I hold-out hope for Sarah Palin, because I feel she is the only person who won't do things 'halfway'; and, who is actually within reach of being able to do something.JMO

With regard to the link to American Thinker provided by kate, I saw that yesterday, and tend to discount a fair bit of it. Contrary to this one young person's account that "the Egyptian masses are not demonstrating anymore", the demonstrations continue and are indeed continuing. Nor is the army in control. Nor does the MB 'dominate the scene'.

My concern, as I've said, is Mubarak. He's behind the thugs who are now out in the streets, the 'pro-Mubarak crowd', some of whom told CNN that they, as public employees, had been ordered to go out and demonstrate in favour of Mubarak.

And Mubarak is behind the violence and the looting. He wants to create a scenario of violence - the anti-Mubarak demonstrators warned the media repeatedly that they expected him to do just this. He wants to move into military control and remain as a dynasty.

Remember, this is not a battle between Mubarak-the-secular, and the People-the-Fundamentalists. That's nowhere in evidence. It's a battle between a dictator and oligarchy - and a people's desire for freedom.

nick - democracy doesn't emerge in 'barbaric cultures', for barbaric societies actually, never last beyond a generation. Democracy also doesn't operate in tribal cultures, which can be functional in small to medium populations, no growth economies.

Democracy is a particular political mode that must emerge when populations are in the multimillions and the economy is industrial. Certainly, dictators will try to prevent it - as we see in the ME - but, it will come.

me no dhimmi - right, I agree. Let them sink or swim on their own. It would be very rapidly shown that their tribal infrastructure is disastrous in such a large population. And - no fundamentalist ideology can operate except as a parasite on real economies.

No I think aid should be cut off, a better question is why are we giving Egypt aid in the first place?

Interesting chart detailing Egypt's past history regarding employing Nazis, the brohood won't have much problem stirring up the Joo hatred.

Link: http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/where.html

Maybe some more of our Moslem Murder Cult devotees can head over to Eygpt for a little mayhem. That is all they are good for anyway.

ET...you aren't there. You don't know.

Afraid to read this, are you?

http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

All this talk about cutting aid is getting me excited. But, if we're going to cut off aid to Egypt, then let us also cut it to the entire continent in which sits.

Just a thought for those who advocate letting them have the MB take over, how long would it take before all those lovely little jets that Mubarak bought took off for a strafing run on Israel? Jordan may be next to fall and Israel will be surrounded. The danger is growing hourly. Just saw a former Israeli ambassador to the UN on Fox criticizing the O for cutting Mubarak loose. And the mobs have firebombed the museums in Cairo. Chaos.

Little PeterCBC left in the lurch.

300 "feared dead". 300 ?

Betcha it's AlMoh's Boys in the 'hood who'll "claim responsibility(niceMSM words)".

The Way to the Egyptian totalitarian theocracy.
(H/T Mullahs Iran).

AlMoh's "bloodbath" gets worser:

Here's David: "David Akin: Violence in Tahrir Square as some protest continued protests"

...-

"Daily Mail: Egypt in flames: 300 feared dead and 500 injured as revolution descends into bloodbath"

http://www.newswatchcanada.ca/

AND for that reason I also say, sure let them have their Muslim Brotherhood governance, let them see and experience the utter economic disaster that will flow from that.
Posted by: Me No Dhimmi
....................

What happens when/if the shut down the Suez?

AND for that reason I also say, sure let them have their Muslim Brotherhood governance, let them see and experience the utter economic disaster that will flow from that.
Posted by: Me No Dhimmi
....................

What happens when/if the Muslim Brotherhood government shuts down the Suez?

"Machine guns fired into Cairo's Tahrir Square"

"one killed".

Jerusalem Post - Melanie Lidman - ‎42 minutes ago‎
600 reported injured, one killed in clashes; Pro-Mubarak rioters hurl Molotov Cocktails, rocks at opposition from surrounding buildings; protesters target Egyptian Museum."

(googlenews)

...-

>>> Mohammedanism (Islam) destroys cultures.

>>> "protesters target Egyptian Museum."

"2 Comments
Budd | January 20, 2004 9:30 AM

Ibn Warraq speaks about this issue in "Why I Am Not A Muslim". In the West, the French are castigated for being 'imperialist colonizers' of Algeria, but who raped Algeria and Morocco first? The Arabs, who, through Islam destroys cultures.

History must stop speaking of the 'glorious Muslim conquests' (or expansion) and tell it likes it is/was."

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2004/01/anti-dhimmitude-among-the-berbers.html

Update: Liberal Iggy's O'Harvard buddy.

Belmont Club: O's the Man From NUANCE.

O'narcissist has taken lessons from ex-Liberal MP Bill Graham, the original NUANCE, the other narcissist with the feathers.

It's a PR problem.

...-

"The words of Gilbert and Sullivan come to mind, slightly altered.

I am the very model of a modern Media-General,
I’ve talking points on any subject liberal,
I know the hosts of talk shows, and claim mandates historical
From Roe to Wade, in order categorical;
I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters economical,
I understand printing money is rarely problematical,
About Alaskan natives I’ve definite enlightened views
With reasons why ladies shouldn’t hunt the wilder moose.
And though my practical knowledge is both spottily and scantily,
Enlivened but with anecdotes from the 8th to 19th century;
But still, in matters rhetorical and political,
I am the very model of a modern Media-General."

"No Holes Barred Diplomacy"

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2011/02/02/no-holes-barred/#comments

Thanks for the article in the American Thinker Kate. It adds another dimension. It appears the people who are revolting right now are doing it for the wrong reason: opposition to decreases in government aid as a result of increases in capitalism that is a threat to the military. Just as I suspected, the MB is using the call for democracy in an effort to position themselves as a dominate viable political alternative. From what I have gleaned from the article, the Egyptians seem to know better and that is a good thing. At any rate, this is all good discussion.

ET: Always appreciate your take on issues such as this. I wonder though...

@10:29 you state "....democracy is not a choice. It's a necessity when your population reaches a certain size and when your economy is industrial."

How then, do you explain China? Admittedly, some baby steps are being taken, but it is far, far from a democracy.

China's a democracy?

Whaaat!

Indiana Homez “Regardless of the differing points of view on this subject, I think it's fair to say that most all of us here support 'cutting-off' such aid. So even though we come to the same solution from different directions, we come to the same solution none the less. Am I wrong?”

Ahhh … good question, here comes the hard part. Yes, the goal is to stop propping up the bad guys.

To achieve that, we need the locals to police themselves. To do that, ordinary people need to be feed and strong enough to fight for freedom; they are going to need food, which was the immediate cause of the crisis, ie lack of food. I believe we should help with that …for awhile. Not just for their sake, but because it is in our interest to try and make sure this uprising starts to move in a democratic direction because we want the Suez kept open. We don’t want oil to have to travel 10,000 miles around South Africa, that will drive the cost of oil up. That is a de facto tax. Again we need to keep analysing the economics here instead of just assuming decisions are made around a defunct religion/culture.

Some will correctly argue this food aid would set us up on a slippery slope to perpetually propping up again. Ask our soldiers in Afghanistan if that’s what they slipped into…it is indeed debateable.

snagglepuss - agreed, China is not yet a democracy but the steps are there.

What is happening now is the emergence of a, may I call it, a rabid middle class, devoted to only one thing: money.
China has initiated private property rights, and small and medium businesses are being set up in great numbers. Chinese people work 7 days a week; vacations are unheard of; construction goes on for 24 hours in three shifts..

As for the govt, what most counts is the local authorities and they operate by bribes. Most people ignore the central government. People who work in govt, I'm told, have little to do, spend a great deal of time on meals and playing cards (hmm, sounds like a lot of govt bureaucracies). The vitality is in the private business sector.

So, democracy will come because the economy is changing 'from the bottom up'; a middle class is developing and they will demand political control over their own lives.

"Essentially, this economic agenda has left the majority of the population - and it's a young population, in poverty and above all, with no future."

That is the same recipe that England found herself in and it lead to colonial expansion as all that youth went into the army & navy.

Israel just moved their military draft call from May to March.

IMO, a wise move, Indeed.

Cliff notes for the IDF... point Dr. No to:


30 03 N 31 15 E


33 20 N 44 26 E


24 39 N 46 46 E

Snagglepus: "How then, do you explain China?"

One word buddy: bubble. Really, -really- big bubble. Its amazing what you can do with absolute power and zero scruples.

First of all, I'm for stiff(no pun intended) penalties, perhaps criminal, for adultery, though I think 'stoning' goes a bit far. That said, their may be some aggrieved spouses who'd disagree.

Phantom said:
"Joke is, it wouldn't matter if America -was- evil, a Middle East and Turkey ruled by Sharia under a new Caliphate would be SO much worse."

Bingo! That's how we know the anti-America stuff is BS.

Phantom also said:
"Problem is, it'll take 40-80 years, at least one major war most likely with nukes in it, and maybe a billion lives for these goofs to figure it out."

And ET and MND seem to agree about this:
"me no dhimmi - right, I agree. Let them sink or swim on their own."

So my question remains (perhaps you three would address this): Should we not try and mitigate the potential for nuclear war?

I see where MND and ET are coming from; and in my own uninformed way I agree with them. That said, whether it takes 400 years for democracy and liberty to take hold in Egypt, or an optimistic 10 years as some might suggest; it's the 'what happens in that 10-400 years?' that concerns me.

Now...I'm not saying that we can even prevent such an event. Perhaps we are too ambitious, and we should go on the defensive as I perceive ET and MND's position to be; but, I still believe we have an obligation to do what we can. Even when it's hard, and it challenges our convictions.

Also, has anyone considered what Israel's reaction might be if certain scenarios play-out? Isn't it likely that if things go bad we will find ourselves DIRECTLY involved anyways? After all, Israel is an Allie right?

Once again, our objective IMO should be to attempt to foster the most peaceful solution to the overall issues in the ME; and, we can't lose sight that Egypt IS an allie. It is not our responsibility to be concerned for populous sentiment towards the west, especially under threat. It is our responsibility to ensure that bad things don't happen because of the Egyptian people's inability to handle internal affairs, regardless of our so called short comings. Those short comings being purchasing their goods and giving them charity.

And ET, it can be argued that you're belief that the MEers are and have been unable to progress due to the aforementioned commerce and charity is racist also. Now lets be clear, I'm NOT making such an argument, but that's the door you opened.

What happens when/if the Muslim Brotherhood government shuts down the Suez?
Posted by: nemo2 at February 2, 2011 3:30 PM

Nemo2, for what purpose? For what benefit? This would be seriously counter-productive, would harm Egyptians and could seriously undermine their hold on power, which after all always depends on a certain level of consent!

In my view (and I'm fairly new to it) the ME hates the US not for it's freedoms nor for its wealth, but because of its interminable, condescending, paternalistic interventions, however well-intentioned some of these may be.

Maybe I'm naive, but absent all this meddling, all those military boots on the ground over there, I can't see any reason why ME nations would want to shut down vital trade routes.

Be clear, tho, Nemo2, I loathe and despise the Muslim Brotherhood and am terrified of the progress they're making on our own shores.

BUT, if they did, that would be a valid casus belli, don't you think? And it would not be a exclusive US concern.

The problem as I see it is the use of the term "democracy" which has a completely different meaning in the west as it does in Muslim belief dominated ME countries.

Democracy to a Muslim means the freedom to enforce Sharia Law on all Muslims whether they like it or not. Given this definition, yes the ME will have a democracy.

I'm with Kate on this one.

One can not view what is happening in Egypt from a purely economic or even political point of view. Doing so is akin to viewing human beings as having only bodies and minds while completely ignoring the concept or reality of the soul/spirit.

The fact is that this is a multi-dimensional issue. Ignoring the reality of religion in this uprising is short sighted at best, yet I can certainly understand why atheists would choose to do so since belief systems are not their forte and considered insignificant in the grand political-economic picture.

All this talk about cutting aid is getting me excited. But, if we're going to cut off aid to Egypt, then let us also cut it to the entire continent in which sits.
Posted by: Mark at February 2, 2011 3:08 PM

Swallowing hard here Mark, but, gulp, aid to Israel too probably.

ET's thesis of our aid FREEZING the status quo, is brilliant. It has many applications:

1. UNRWA -- clearly this rotten UN institution bears the chief responsbility for the extended "refugee" crisis. "Palestinians" are the ONLY group in history to receive refugee status beyond the first generation.

2. PLO/Fatah, and indirectly, Hamas. Without the enormous US, EU subsidies -- and actual military training from the US -- this conflict would have been settled long ago. These bums would be nobodies -- municipal politicians at most, dealing with garbage, sewer and streets -- not the oh-so-chic international terror celebrities they are now.

Me No Dhimmi:

As I attempted to indicate through my fable on 'gravity', from my own personal observations in the M.E. what we in the West consider rational does not necessarily coincide with that of 'extremist' Muslims, which I believe the MB to be.

If the MB takes control of Egypt and decides that a return to Koranic basics is 'required', regardless of the economic calamity it would generate, they COULD (not saying they will, but contingency plans would, I believe, be made by Western powers), decide to shut 'er down......a couple sunk ships would do the job.

indiana homez - no, my argument that the West has been propping up dictators in the ME and thus, has enabled the rise of utopian fascism, is hardly racist. Such an argument is valid for any population. Repress a population with force, and they will start to dream of 'magical remedies', where, if they are Pure, then..wonderful results will occur.

We've been helping those dictators repress their people...because, we felt that those dictators were 'friendly' to us. That's shortsighted. We have to take 'the long view'..

I recommend the analyses of Zudhi Jasser, president of the American Institute for Islamic Democracy. He is saying that the West cannot expect that a people, repressed for generations, will, in one day, be a functional democracy. He says it takes time, BUT - that 'these people are the same as us (ie, as we westerners)'..and what must be enabled by us, is the promotion of an environment where these different ideas can be debated - freely, not by means of force - and that he, a Muslim, considers that Muslims will reject radicalism in favour of freedom.

http://www.aifdemocracy.org/

By the way - it is vital to note that the violence, the Molotov cocktails etc..are all from Mubarak's thugs. All paid to do this. Not grassroots, but, govt paid.

He is saying that the West has to allow the ME to go through this 'test and debate period'; that the West cannot retreat into 'support the Dictator because he's on our side'. He's saying, as I am, that the West's support for dictators has actually enabled the emergence and spread of radical fundamentalism.

Me No Dhimmi:

Further to......I guess basically what I'm saying is never, ever, think "Naah, they wouldn't do THAT" about anything in the M.E.

While I agree that to a significant degree that support for dictators has indeed enabled radical Islam, the deed is done and can not be undone - radical Islam is alive and well and how it garnered its strength is a moot point (irrelevant)at this stage.

The fact remains that Muslim belief dominated countries are moving towards fundamentalism and not away from it. I do not see any strategies nor indications that this trend is in anyway abating. Sharia law rules in countries where it is "technically" frowned upon.

I share ET's optimism about the outcome.

There are Egyptian bloggers like sandmonkey (hasn't posted since late November) who embody the spirit of freedom that's within every human being.

Dubya was correct in his 2005 State of the Union address that human beings all over the world have the same aspiration for self-determination.

Wanna continue the sky is falling mantra about the Muslim Brotherhood, go ahead. The best they've ever polled in the Egyptian elections is 10%.

thanks for that ET.

no-one - the Islamic nations are moving towards fundamentalism as a 'hope and change' mental and emotional ideology...because they live, in actual fact, within tribal dictatorships...and they have no power to change that dictatorship. So, they dream of magical remedies, where, if they do such and such..then..wonderful results will occur.

This trend will abate when the magic-of-purity is no longer needed, when your actions in your daily life will have direct positive results. You won't need obedience to an authoritative code.

And I'm not ignoring the role of religion, despite my being an atheist - for religion is not equivalent to fundamentalist Islamic fascism. The latter is hardly a religion and is instead a militant totalitarianism. Nothing to do with the individual's contact with God or Nature.

nemo2 - that fact that extremists could shut down the Suez Canal isn't the point. It's the results of such an action - and the massive loss of income would weaken their control over the population. They'd be ousted in a day.

Meanwhile, Mubarak's paid thugs are attacking the anti-Mubarak demonstrators. Remember, the demonstrations were completely non-violent..until Mubarak's thugs, paid public employees, were told to move in and attack. He wants to create riots so that he can declare martial law. But, I think it's too late..and I don't think the army will support him.

I hate to break your bubble ET but there were deaths and injured people before the pro-government factions showed up when it was deemed a "Peaceful" protest and don't forget the rioting and looting. Can't rewrite history buttercup.

A lot of these folks where calling for war on Israel from day one. Thats all I need to know. The article was good in that its shows the normal populations perceptions to this. Than again there not the ones who will take up power.
The Army to win over the majority has to do something that lifts them up in the publics eye. I wonder what that could be?
JMO

Jasser and Spencer on Glenn Beck discussing Egypt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6Kk2ogpJrY&feature=player_embedded

Interesting chain of discussion, but what has been missed is that these demonstrations did not occur spontantiously. The rallies in Washington last year took months of preparation so how did all of these Egyptians get the same idea at the same time to down tools and assemble in the 'town' square, and don't tell me they tweeted each other? Somebody orchestrated this, and it wasn't the resident community organizer, this was performed as the opening act for a power play, much like the Beer Hall Putsch. The alienated youth that everyone above is alluding to couldn't organize a piss-up at a brewery. All past revolutions have been organized by people a lot older than what is shown on the newsclips and u-tube!!!

ET

The middle class segment of Egypt is relatively small compared to the illiterate masses the end result of a democratic vote would have those people presumably vote the muslim brotherhood into power. Just because the current protesters want "freedom" doesn't mean they will be the driving force in the "free" Egypt. It's just like Iran, Ahmadinejhad's base is the rural populace not the protesting urbanites. Hell look at Lebanon, they ousted Syria only to be ruled by a Persian-Syrian proxy. It was all for naught.

I'm not even sure what they mean by "freedom" and "democracy". I doubt it means a pluralistic society where they stop blowing up Coptic Christians. I think there's always a danger of imposing our idea of "good life" onto other people who's idea of a good life may just be to club an assyrian. Every ideology wants to be free but does it mean free from government intervention? inequality? jews? or some other grievance?

Just because European society evolved the way it has doesn't mean it is repeatable. They may find a whole new way of organizing their society. One that alleviates the stresses of society whilst remaining wholly unpalatable to us. That would be the worst case scenario. More than likely they'll just start a war with Israel.

The evolution of Islamic society is essentially a moot point because in they transition period they would almost certainly at odds with our slowly dying one. I doubt our society can stave off a collapse anyways at the rate we're going so maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe one day they'll adopt a nice and free society but by then our children will already have been impaled by swords and/or other things. :P

Iraq has made real progress, but remember US armed forces played a crucial part in eliminating Al Qaeda in Iraq, and in many ways making it abundantly clear that an Islamist state would not/will not be tolerated.

Would Iraq have made its progress without the US forces? Will Egypt acquire a stable, non-threatening government to replace Mubarak? Only if the Egyptian army is willing to suppress the Muslim Brotherhood, and other Islamist groups. Of course, if the MB is part of the new government, how likely is it that the army will be permitted such latitude?

If the MB is part of any new government, in any way, it is much more likely that Egypt will become the next terrorist state in the Middle East, with El Baradei ( himself a very aggressive protector of Iran against the US, when he headed IAEA ) serving mereley as an acceptable ( to Barry ) figurehead. The students in the street will be no match for the ruthlessness of the Muslim Brotherhood, and their wishes are essentially meaningless in a post-Mubarak Egypt.

Well well Albaradei is threatening the President, the guy has lived outside of Egypt for thirty years and now he's acting like Dear Leader.

Story here: http://weaselzippers.us/2011/02/02/elbaradei-warns-mubarak-leave-country-by-friday-or-youll-be-a-dead-man-walking/

Snippet: Egyptian uprising idol Mohammed ElBaradei has ordered Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave the country by Friday – or he will be a “dead man walking” and not just a lame-duck president.

The aging Egyptian leader, reportedly suffering from cancer, insists he will remain in power. He said Tuesday night, “This dear country is my country … and I will die on its land.”

Mubarak dramatically announced

rose - the looting wasn't, to my knowledge, carried out by the demonstrators but by Mubarak thugs - and - the prisoners released from the prisons. What rioting? Those were demonstrations.

The demonstrators formed a human shield around the museums to prevent looting and damage; they formed Neighbourhood Police in their own neighbourhoods to check everyone coming in (the corrupt police had left); they even checked all who came into the demonstration square for weapons. OK?

And don't move into the silly names, buttercup.
Stick to the issues. Think. The violence now, is due to Mubarak's thugs, paid public employees, who are bringing in molotovs and rocks. OK?

Antenor - your suppositions about the 'alienated youth' etc - remain your suppositions. I disagree; the internet, tweet, phone etc, played a significant role. I know you are trying to suggest some nefarious Agent, but, there's no proof or evidence of this.

Again, this isn't an Either-Or situation. Either Mubarak The Dictator or the Muslim Brotherhood. There's something else - the Egyptian people - and don't assume that they want either totalitarian system ruling them.

M - what 'illiterate masses'? The literacy rate is 70% in Egypt. The masses did not elect the Iranian govt; it's a theocratic dictatorship. And freedom for these people doesn't mean to 'club another person'.

I disagree with you about the types of societal structure. There's no other type besides a democracy and capitalism if you require a growth economy.
And no, our society is not dying, although you obviously enjoy thoughts of its demise.

small c conservative - if the MB is part of the new govt, does not mean that it controls the new govt.

The point of these tectonic changes in the ME is that with the majority of the people gaining political and economic power...Islamic fascism will wither away.

"no, my argument that the West has been propping up dictators in the ME and thus, has enabled the rise of utopian fascism, is hardly racist. Such an argument is valid for any population. Repress a population with force, and they will start to dream of 'magical remedies', where, if they are Pure, then..wonderful results will occur.
We've been helping those dictators repress their people...because, we felt that those dictators were 'friendly' to us. That's shortsighted. We have to take 'the long view'.."
ET at February 2, 2011 5:32 PM

Taking a long view back to the late 1970's, I noticed that the West was turfed out of Iran and now Iran has a patron in Russia.
(and did before the "people's revolution)
I think we will see the same thing happen in Egypt, Tunisia, and Lebanon.
(other Arab nations will fall like dominos)

Iran will be a be the front man for Russia and Russia will be seen doing in those nations what they are doing for Iran.

Western governments have been urging, with carrots, these middle eastern thugocracies for decades, but the Great Satan can't use a big stick or the Left shreiks and complains.
Additionally these thugocracies have always had the option to turn to Russia as a patron all along.

I predict the Muslim Brotherhood will take power and Egypt will be worse off with nobody to blame but themselves.
Russia has zero problem with protests against it's government, unlike western nations.

The Muslim Brotherhood and Hizballah government in Lebanon will crack down on dissidents with impunity and these nations will be stuck in the beds they have made for themselves.

set you free - The Bolsheviks got 0% - the provisional government put them in power. Likewise, why do you believe voting will determine who rules Egypt? It certainly didn't in Iran.

ET said "nemo2 - that fact that extremists could shut down the Suez Canal isn't the point. It's the results of such an action - and the massive loss of income would weaken their control over the population. They'd be ousted in a day."

Ah, but if it was all blamed on Der Choos?

"This trend will abate when the magic-of-purity is no longer needed, when your actions in your daily life will have direct positive results. You won't need obedience to an authoritative code."

ET: Essentially what you are describing as a remedy is cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) which is what reinforcement of behaviors with either positive or negative results in direct relation to actions taken is termed and is often referred to as conditioning.

The MB will condition the population to accept the natural consequences of its ideology in the guise of religious duty. The west is not willing to play therapist nor would it have enough time to condition the country to accept a "Jefferson" definition of democracy so that the populace can experience the positive reinforcement you speak of.

However, I do agree what could work is "for a transitional govt to set up, with a clear time frame and limits on what they can do, to reform the constitution and set up free elections." The problem with this is who will ensure this is enforced if their own military fails?

The MB has a ready made infrastructure for the Egyptians to adopt - there is no other political party that can compete with that. Also, I think there is a real possibility that the Suez Canal could experience interruption problems which would inevitably result in an even more desperate Egyptian population - hunger motivates people to do things they would not do otherwise. If such a scenario with the canal should happen, the MB could rush in as savior using their already in place infrastructure for food distribution and medical aid.

Yes, we all want self-determination and freedom,but wishing for it is one thing. The reality is that freedom and western democracy is unlikely to happen for Egypt because the west will not intervene until it is too late, if at all and at this point in our history, considering the degree of hatred towards Israel, the short-term solution for Egypt is of critical consequence for us all.

Egyptian uprising idol Mohammed ElBaradei - Rose

Ha, ha! You nailed it, Rose. And the judges were the MSM and other Western leftists.

Just like old times for the MSM - they believe they are the vanguard of a world reborn, forming public opinion: suddenly relevant. However, if you look at their historical track record in these revolutionaly situations, they reliably indicate the wise course by trumpeting the opposite one. Or have Iran, Vietnam and Cambodia all enjoyed happy endings.

The chattering class never learns.

"rose - the looting wasn't, to my knowledge, carried out by the demonstrators but by Mubarak thugs - and - the prisoners released from the prisons. What rioting? Those were demonstrations.

The demonstrators formed a human shield around the museums to prevent looting and damage; they formed Neighbourhood Police in their own neighbourhoods to check everyone coming in (the corrupt police had left); they even checked all who came into the demonstration square for weapons. OK?

And don't move into the silly names, buttercup.
Stick to the issues. Think. The violence now, is due to Mubarak's thugs, paid public employees, who are bringing in molotovs and rocks. OK?"

ET: You've been posting a fair amount on this issue over the past few days; some of what you say makes sense and some does not. Regarding the above - where are you getting this information from (ie links) or is this just your personal interpretation of events?

Oz- Russia will sell arms etc to Iran as long as Iran doesn't meddle with Russia's own fight against Islamists - in Chechnya, Georgia and other parts of Russia.

This is from Business Week:

Mohamed El-Erian, CEO of PIMCO, in California, who is from Egypt, said: "The uproar stems from “a mixture of high youth unemployment, soaring food prices and low per capita income,”. Note - it isn't a desire for the MB.

"We are seeing a paradigm shift in Egypt right now,” El- Erian, 52, said. “We are seeing people demanding change.” He noted that Egypt is unlikely to follow the same path as Iran toward a theocracy. “A better historical example would be the Philippines, rather than Iran,”.

So, someone experienced in Egypt says, no, the MB will not take control of the country. And no-one, I disagree that the MB has a 'ready made infrastructure'. Local assistance, which they do provide (health care, food, etc) is not the same as running a nation.

Again, my concern is Mubarak's thuggish agenda, his use of hired violent rioters...and the fact that Obama is standing back and doing nothing. I think he ought to tell Mubarak to leave. Now. And, assist or have a coalition of nations, assist in setting up a limited term transitional govt to change the constitution and arrange early elections.

Antenor @ 7:11, exactly. It is too much to believe that all these uprisings, in what is it now seven countries, are spontaneous.

ElBaradei is just a front man for the Muslim Brotherhood.

If the MB is a part of a new government in Egypt, or elsewhere in the ME, the end result will be similar to what happened in Czechoslovakia in the late 1940s. A coalition of various parties which included a few Communist front parties. As is almost always the case, the radical parties undermined the liberal ones and took control. We are being naive in the extreme if we think the MB will allow the formation of a genuine form of or a transition to a democratic form of government.

By dying I mean rapidly aging. The only growth we have comes from insourcing foreign people. With zero growth on our end bringing in large numbers of people is bound to change the character of the country for good or for ill.

I was only being slightly facetious with my clubbing comment. The truth is that no one has any idea what a free Egypt will be. What kind of freedoms are they asking for? It sounds like they have mainly economic grievances yet the protests are largely centered around Mumbarak. So its not clear how many will coalesce around a secular figure or a fundamentalist figure after the president's oustre. Whoever comes to power it would be naïve to assume that the MB can't win through at the end. Just as Hizbollah, Hamas and the Ayahtollahs did. Its not clear either whether or not political freedoms are even at the heart of the issue. Would they be happy with jobs and real estate? Hard to say.

Capitalism is required for a growth economy yes but 3rd world countries are having limited success because they don't have the basic fundamentals that make capitalism possible such as safety and property rights. I think however that so long as growth is good and people aren't too repressed that a society may not necessarily need democracy. The bourgeoisie may want self determination but there's no reason why they cannot join the ruling elite. The Canadian west was largely unhappy for decades but we were never near revolt. What is the Roman saying? That people just need food and a show?

Political science is not a hard science simply because things can never be repeated in a vacuum. This is not Cromwellian England I'm open to the fact that truisms can change.

ET,

"I disagree that the MB has a 'ready made infrastructure'. Local assistance, which they do provide (health care, food, etc) is not the same as running a nation."

Neither is being a community organizer the same as running a nation, yet we both know who is running a once super power nation with those qualifications despite the obvious contradiction/distinction.

M - well said. I agree wholeheartedly.

I think a clean election in Egypt is a long-shot, given what happened recently in Iran and, some would argue, the US.

Believe it or not, there is a large percentage of the world's population that rank ideological success above economic success: especially when the latter seems highly unlikely.

no-one - right about Obama. And the result? He lost the House to the GOP, who are ready to take down his 'signature' health care act, and to take charge of him. In a genuine democracy, the checks and balances..and limited terms..constrain, even though they don't prevent - stupidity.

m - agreed; security and property rights are basic to capitalism. And so is a governance that empowers a middle class to start up small and medium businesses, and be in charge of the laws around these businesses. The rest of your post about 'the bourgeoisie' etc... I don't get. And no, people don't survive just by 'food and a show'.

No-one - your statement of 'ideological success' vs 'economic success'...is an either-or situation, and I reject that. I can certainly accept that people want, ideologically, a democracy and a just society...as well as economically, a robust economy. That's both!

Silly question of the day:

I see masses of people protesting with nary room to swing a cat, yet I have yet to see a porta-potty. After 8 hot days, do you think there would be a smell in the air?

Just askin'

cairo is a sewer. large open ditches run down to the nile , piles of trash, open sewers 30 ft wide. the smell is beyond belief.

cal2

That very query was brought up earlier on this thread. Thing is that's the least of the sh!t cleanup that could be involved with this chapter of middle eastern inferiorism.

Time will tell when it comes to both Egypt and Obama.

Israel is in very real danger and they know it.

The violence is not over yet in Egypt and as others stated, there was violence from the beginning. The assertion that the protests were pure and peaceful at first is false.

Here's another silly question:
Where are the trolls?

Union meeting?

Trolls run away when the argument goes in our direction. Its what makes them trolls.

ET

Q52 How much of a role do you think Islam plays in the political life of our country – a very large role, a fairly large role, a fairly small role, or a very small role?
48% Egyptians say it plays large/medium large role.
But majority think that influence of Islam in politics is positive.
Is there a discrepancy - NO. Simple result shows that Islam should play larger role in politics because it still do not play a major role but its influence is positive.
Why it is so difficult for you to understand?

The second set of questions - it seems that you did not read it properly. The questions were
Q94 ASK MUSLIMS ONLY: Do you think there is a struggle in our country between groups who want to modernize the country and Islamic fundamentalists or don’t you think so?
(Egypt) = 61% NO there is no struggle
(Pakistan) 44% - yes, there is struggle, 12% no, 44% refused .
Now it is somewhat strange that 61% identify with modernizers, but you forgot that it is 61% of 44% so in reality it is only 26.8% who identify with modernizers. Also for many Pakistani modernizers are people like Muslim Brotherhood. Fundamentalists are Taliban or jihadists. Further PEW said that in Pakistan sample design was "Disproportionately urban"

SYF

SandMonkey is on twitter, everyday. But SM is with demonstrators and it is for him very subjective, very personal.

Shhhhh - mentioning them calls them forth! But come to think of it, it is a bit surprising that a certain incomprehensible person of no fixed name hasn't got any insight on this particular subject.

What happens when/if the Muslim Brotherhood government shuts down the Suez?

Posted by: nemo2 at February 2, 2011 3:30 PM

Worse, have you Ballon Heads considered what might happen if they close the Panama Canal?

John Chittick>

Good point.

I though we've been watching re-run’s of a French New Year’s celebration myself.

Who knew?

No-One
I tend to think that the protests were not violent at the start. I suspect that even now there is less violence than TV says. (al Jazeera or CNN). It is difficult to find what is real because some MSM and particularly al Jazeera have their own agenda. Further, the twitter messages are very personal - people often post what they think is happening and not what really is happening (re: how many people are killed/wounded, how many people are on demonstrations and so on.)

ET

Sorry I was trying to recall what you said about how democracies evolve. Something about how the capitalists eventually want political power commensurate with their economic ones?

I think the problem that I have is that you believe a secular democracy is destiny. It doesn't have to be though. You just need some kind of structure where there is some form of free market. Democracy is how we chose to structure our society but it's not without its costs. Someone else can do some accounting and feel that maybe some other kind of political structure and its associated costs are more worthwhile. Even if we assume that democracy is the optimal choice, we often make decisions that are sub-optimal. That's neither here nor there though. That's all nothing personal or anything.

The issue in Egypt is that you can probably institute pro-growth economic reforms in Egypt without removing Mumbarak. So far the focus of the animus is towards the president so in a sense the protesters are grasping at a solution which doesn't really address their problem. So after Mumbarak leaves then what?

The thing about the American Revolution is that the revolutionaries had a pretty good idea of what they wanted. When you have revolutions like the French or a lot of other ones who weren't really that sure of their endgame, like the Egyptian one now, that energy then lends itself to those best able to harness it. So I'm extremely skeptical about those who say the MB won't take over. Though I think they will. They've been really cool about it all so far. I wonder what inTrade is saying?

ella - the question was:

94-95, whether the respondents acknowledged a struggle between modernizers and fundamentalists, and then, whether the respondent identified with the modernizers or fundamentalists.

As I said, it is interesting that in Pakistan, 44% agreed there was a struggle and 61% identified with modernization...and only 28% with fundamentalists. The reality on the ground is the opposite.

Meanwhile, in Egypt, only 31% acknowledge a struggle according to the chart, and identified with fundamentalists at 59% rather than modernizers at 27%. Again, this belies the reality on the ground.

As for Q 52, 53 - it is contradictory. The report even admits this: "Respondents who had a positive view of Islam's influence included both those who said Islam was playing a large role in their country's political life and saw this as a good thing and those who said Islam was playing a small role and saw this as a bad thing. "

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1874/egypt-protests-democracy-islam-influence-politics-islamic-extremism

And some other problems: Read this from the PEW report:
"Asked whether there is a struggle in their nations between those who want to modernize their country and Islamic fundamentalists, a 61%-majority of Muslims in Egypt said they did not see a struggle. Just 31% of Egyptian Muslims saw a struggle between modernizers and fundamentialists in their country". Maybe you don't see this as contradictory, but I do.

And, a large number of Egyptians were very and somewhat concerned about Islamic extremism 40 and 30. But again, these ratios don't jibe with the other questions - eg, the 59% who identify with fundamentalists. And even this contradicts a later paragraph which says: "In each of these nations, though, a majority of those seeing a conflict sided with the modernizers."

As I said, I'd have to see the questions asked, the demographics of the respondents. Just from what I've seen, I consider the data without validity and without reliability.

validity and without reliability.

0xymoron or not...

m - no, I'm not saying that democracy is destiny. Absolutely not. I'm saying that IF you have a population in the multimillions and IF you have an industrial economy, THEN...your political system must be democratic. It is not a choice. It is a necessity. The economic, political and legal systems are all entwined and must work as a cohesive whole.

What this means is that, in all societies, the political system must empower the sector of the population that is most productive. In the case of an industrial economy, that sector is a middle class. A middle class is that set of the population who are engaged in small to medium private businesses. This class, in an industrial economy, ought to comprise the majority of citizens.

The political system that empowers this class is 'democracy'. Why? Because it operates as an elected set of representatives, constrained in their decision making powers by a constitution, limited terms and the rule of law. This keeps the govt firmly in the control of the middle class.

It isn't simpy an issue of removing Mubarak; it's removing the political system that he runs. He runs a 'two-class system'. There's the elite set, he and his cronies, whom he appoints. They have total authority. Then, there's the rest of the population.. who have no power. There is no middle class.

To make reforms, you have to enable the devt of a strong middle class, people who set up and run small to medium private businesses. Not who are just the employees of a massive state run industry or govt employees. And you have to politically empower them - with democracy. Mubarak and his dictatorship rejects a middle class and he certainly won't give up power to them.

Right now, you have Mubarak trying to retain power by having his thugs go out into the streets and create violent scenes. The anti-Mubarak demonstrators were carefully non-violent. Mubarak is trying to foment violence so he can declare martial law.

And Obama is greatly harming the situation, with his narcissistic insistence that he is somehow behind Mubarak's statement that he'll step down..This removes the sense of power from the Egyptian people; it's 'The Americans' telling us what to do again.
And - Obama isn't insisting that Mubarak stop the violence. Obama is, frankly, setting up a disastrous situation.

As for the MB taking over, I disagree, for all the points I've already pointed out in other posts - and see El-Erian's comments above as well.

syncrodox - actually, the terms 'validity' and 'reliability' when used in data analysis are both used and mean different things.

Reliability means 'the extent to which, in repeated measures, an indicator will yield similar readings'. That is, if you ask a question about one topic in a number of ways, you'll get answers that are correlated and similar. That's what bothered me about the PEW poll; it asked several questions about the same issue and came up with different percentages.

Validity means 'the extent that a measure reflects the concept'. That is, what you want to find out and the answers have to be directly linked. So, if you want to measure the respect an individual has in a community, and your questions deal with their income or their age...well, your analysis lacks validity. After all, is income or age a direct indicator of the respect other people have for them?

M and ET

Theoretical considerations aside...What's the next move?

I'm not at all surprised that the definition of validity and reliability are questionable in academia....sadly i suspected it.

"El-Erian, 52, said. “We are seeing people demanding change.” He noted that Egypt is unlikely to follow the same path as Iran toward a theocracy."
~ET

Mohamed (the Aryan)el-Erian says that Egyptians are unlikely to follow the path of Iran(Land of the Aryans)
Well that's good enough for me, since there is absolutely no chance that he has any connection to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Just wondering, though, does anyone know if Mohamed Al-Arian is related to Essam Al-Arian the national spokesman for the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood?

"I think he[Obama] ought to tell Mubarak to leave. Now. And, assist or have a coalition of nations, assist in setting up a limited term transitional govt to change the constitution and arrange early elections."
~ET

I think that Arabs in the Middle East are fed up with western and particularly American interference.
However there are only 3 big players in the region.
(America, Russia, Iran)

Just which countries, ET, do you think Egyptians and other Middle Easterners will allow to come in and dictate to them?
And yes I said "dictate" because they are going to be armed guarantors of the new government, but just who is going to write their constitution and who has the right to ask these foreign powers, whoever they may be, to enter into Egypt?

Do you think the Egyptian Army(10th largest in the world) is going to invite foreign powers in?
How do you think that would play in an honour culture like they have in Egypt and most Middle Eastern countries?

The political system that empowers this class is 'democracy'. Why? Because it operates as an elected set of representatives, constrained in their decision making powers by a constitution, limited terms and the rule of law. This keeps the govt firmly in the control of the middle class. Posted by: ET at February 2, 2011 11:49 PM

ET, what really keeps and makes a democracy work is the equality of men as a God-given right. This is what most atheists don't like and don't get. The respect of life given by God is the basis and strength of every successful democracy, at its core. That is why the United States has been so successful for over 200 years. We see it unraveling because of the loss of the authority of the Word of God in its society, brought about by the secular humanists, which you belong. You are living in the benefits of a secure society because of the great respect of human life which is brought about by these beliefs.

That being said, the tragedy in Egypt (and Tunisia) which we see unfolding will only get worse as there is a vacuum which will be filled. The prize will go to the strongest and the most willing to fight to gain the power and control. With a very large Muslim population in Egypt, my money is on the MB, as they have the blessing of many of the poor, as they are becoming more hungry and desperate for leadership with every passing hour. The Imams in the country have far more control than the politicians and they will seize this opportunity and pounce on the weak, promising them the world, just for the price of their soul and some food and security.

You are smart in many areas of human behavior, but you do not understand the spiritual side of this conflict. As you are unwilling to believe in God, this part of the equation is blurry to you, as you do not see the unseen battles and what this fight is really all about.

But I feel my words will be wasted, so enough for now.

oz - because two people have the same last name does not mean that they are related and, as well, that they even share beliefs. Try insisting that all people whose last name is Johnson or Smith or Reagan or McDonnell...are all related and all think in similar fashion.

I suggest you google Mohamed El-Erian and PIMCO. Read what he says. I'm sure you aren't one of those who will say, 'oh, all arabs are alike and even though they say something different, they are all alike...'.

And I'm not suggesting that any foreign nation dictate to Egypt. Nor bring in their military. The Egyptian military is well able to look after things. And the Egyptian people are well able to rewrite their constitution and remove any articles that enable dictators.

My point is that Obama, rather than supporting Mubarak's leaving in the fall, which he did publicly the other day, ought to speak out about the need for change, now. And privately, tell him to leave now.

glacierman - I don't need to accept that the equality of men exists only by virtue of it being a 'god-given right'. I consider that the equality of men exists as a natural right, and I come to this conclusion by virtue of reason.

Do you consider that I can't believe that all men are equal because I don't link it to god? That would be quite the fundamentalist viewpoint.

Are you seriously suggesting that my being an atheist is a cause of the weakening of the US? And that only if one believes in god, will a nation be strong? Again, sounds rather fundamentalist...and the key fundamentalists who ought to worry us, are the Islamists. They also insist that one must believe in god and reject individual reason.

syncrodox - the two terms, validity and reliability, aren't academic fluff. They have two different meanings and are quite important in ensuring that surveys don't come up with false analyses. W. Jackson's 'Research Methods' is a great book on that.

ET there is no logical reason for an atheist to believe in the 'equality of man'. All the empirical evidence points to the inequality of man. What's more there is no need for the concept of the 'equality of man' in a purely atheistic world view. If you take the time to observe social animals in their native settings there is great inequality displayed. Now I know that you as an atheist are free to borrow concepts for theism and claim them as your own when you do so you are being extremely disingenuous.