Today's Questions : Will the Peoples Revolution In Egypt Be Squashed by The USA and the West.
2. Why do Western Nations including the US and Britain believe that the citizens of other nations must be ruled over by leaders who favor America's or Western Interests over their own.
3. Is this just another form of disguised Colonialism?
It occurs to some that it is interesting that the Obama administration was seriously and honestly shocked by the Uprising and revolution in Egypt
Did they miss Tunisia as well
are they slipping since the days two years ago when they were able to take care of the Honduran crisis in which the People rose up against a military Coup backed by the USA.
The President Zelaya wanted to have a referendum to allow for constitutional changes like the US amendments to its constituion'
But the Honduran constitution was written or at least vetted thoroughly by the USA
It was a foreigner's a colonial powers dictated constitution to insure American interests.
They even help train their Death Squads and torture techniques
Isn't it strange that the USA which came about through a violent revolution against the British Empire has over and over again squashed popular governments and popular uprisings and revolutions.
Isn't it uncanny how Obama and Hillary Clinton sound more and more like Bush and Cheney
Odd how Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Fox News and Hillary Clinton and President Obama are using variations on the same "Talking Points" about the revolution in Egypt.
* Mubarak is our friend
* Mubarak has a good human rights record
*The Muslim Brotherhood is part of this conspiracy to unseat Mubarak
*The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamic extremists who will kill all the Christians in Egypt and then attack Israel with all those war toys and gadgets made in America against Israeli Military's War Toys also made in America
* Arabs and Egyptians like the natives of the rest of Africa are a bit backward, retarded, stupid , lazy , superstitious , prone to violence
* Egypt is needed as a buffer for Israel against its enemies which they claim include all the Middle East North African, Asia , most of Europe and anybody who criticizes Israel because they argue only anti-Semites would dare the Utopian state of Israel. And Americans in general believe any outsiders who criticize America are anti-American and pro-terrorists and a Nazi/Fascist/Communist/ anti-Christian idolaters etc.
They don't publicly speak the truth that they like Egypt because Egypt likes torture
or Egypt is also trying to control the ungrateful liberal anti-Government media
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
First a word about America once again trying their best to Bully other nations to do whatever the USA wants- "Enough is Enough"
The quote below lays bare the real reasons why the US wants to shape the transition in Egypt in order to put another puppet in.
At the heart of American support for such autocrats is a false opposition between chaos and order, with many in Washington arguing that the only way to avoid pervasive regional violence is to maintain the status quo. But rather than calling for stasis, the United States now has a chance both to vindicate its rhetoric of democracy and in the process to produce a more lasting and stable regional peace. The events of the recent weeks underscore that long-term stability can neither be provided from the outside nor afforded to regimes that are best characterized by their willingness to advance Western preferences at the expense of repressing the preferences of their own citizens. If U.S. interests lie with a stable regional order, such a goal actually requires realigning American goals with those of local players deemed legitimate by their own people. This might mean building strategies around allies that cannot always be counted on to toe an American line.
This shift would require abandoning a vision of Pax-Americana. But it would nonetheless produce a region better able to serve as a partner over the coming decades. In other words, democracy for the Middle East need not be thought of as incompatible with order and synonymous with extremist violence. Rather, a region of democratic regimes that enjoy domestic legitimacy is likely the only viable method of ensuring that governments do not replay a continuous cycle of repression, entrenchment, and collapse.
from article via CommonDreams.orgUS 'Orderly Transition' in Egypt Really 'Business as Usual' in Disguise The Fake Moderation of America's Moderate Mideast Allies by Asli Bali and Aziz Rana,Feb. 4, 2011
When people join together to fight tyranny this is the moment at which all our other differences melt away.
What the people of Egypt want is a true democracy but the USA and other Western Nations once again are anti-Democracy anti-the will of the people.
They claim there are only two alternatives autocrat secular regimes ie Tyrants or an Islamic Theocracy.
If America was so concerned about human rights or especially women's rights than the USA would be vocally fiercely criticizing the Saudis for their disregard for human rights.
Of course as I have argued America is not or no longer if it ever was a promoter of democracy and human rights. They have ridiculous two party system in which there is little real difference between the two parties which the Obama administration has proven over and over again.
via CommonDreams February 5, 2011 by Riz Khan / Al Jazeera Egypt: Tariq Ramadan & Slavoj Zizek
The Muslim scholar and philosopher discuss the power of popular dissent and the limits of peaceful protest.
The revolutionary chants on the streets of Egypt have resonated around the world, but with a popular uprising without a clear direction and an unpopular leader refusing to concede, Egypt's future hangs in the balance.
On Thursday's Riz Khan we speak with Muslim scholar Tariq Ramadan and Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek about the power of popular dissent, the limits of peaceful protest and the future of Egyptian politics.
This episode aired on Thursday, February 3, 2011.
And here's a great article on the BS rhetoric and talking points of the Obama administration in regards to the Egyptian Revolution -
US 'Orderly Transition' in Egypt Really 'Business as Usual' in Disguise The Fake Moderation of America's Moderate Mideast Allies by Asli Bali and Aziz Rana, via CommonDreams.org,Feb. 4, 2011
As the Mubarak regime turns to violence in a vain attempt to repress the peaceful protests that have swept Egypt's streets for over ten days, the risks associated with current U.S. strategy for Egypt and the wider region continue to grow. In its response to the events, the Obama administration has subtly shifted its message, incrementally increasing pressure on the regime over the last week. But the more important story is the remarkable continuities reflected in the administration's approach.and so it goes,
Indeed, Washington's response has departed little from its original script. This script involves repeatedly invoking the language of "moderation" and order and stability. Such language defends a wait-and-see approach and encourages protesters to accept incremental reforms in place of the peaceful democratic revolution that ordinary Egyptians have created and, against all odds, sustained. The call for orderly transition and managed reform is, in fact, a call for more of the same.
This approach - including any U.S. backed effort to remove Mubarak while retaining the larger regime through the new Vice President Omar Suleiman - is no longer viable. Nor is a belated demand for an end to violence sufficient. A definitive break from the scripts of stability and moderation and a reorientation of American policy toward Egypt -and the broader region - around the democratic aspirations of protesters is the only way forward.
A Familiar Story
Resort to the language of order, stability, incrementalism, and moderation is hardly new and existed well before the events of last week. Not only is it consistent with the basic stance that the Obama administration has taken toward the Middle East from the very outset, but it reflects the long trajectory of American practices in the region, which have depended on shoring up Arab authoritarians who are willing to serve in an American "axis of moderation." The members of this axis -- Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan -- have displayed little in common other than a commitment to sustaining current U.S. foreign policy priorities - on Israel/Palestine, the containment of Iran, and access to oil. What they pointedly do not share is any tangible commitment to actual moderation - understood as an internal project of democratization or political openness. This latter fact has been powerfully exposed by the nonviolent demonstrations across the region, and, as in the case of Egypt, the increasingly brutal response such protest has elicited from "moderate" allies.
At the heart of American support for such autocrats is a false opposition between chaos and order, with many in Washington arguing that the only way to avoid pervasive regional violence is to maintain the status quo. But rather than calling for stasis, the United States now has a chance both to vindicate its rhetoric of democracy and in the process to produce a more lasting and stable regional peace. The events of the recent weeks underscore that long-term stability can neither be provided from the outside nor afforded to regimes that are best characterized by their willingness to advance Western preferences at the expense of repressing the preferences of their own citizens. If U.S. interests lie with a stable regional order, such a goal actually requires realigning American goals with those of local players deemed legitimate by their own people. This might mean building strategies around allies that cannot always be counted on to toe an American line.
This shift would require abandoning a vision of Pax-Americana. But it would nonetheless produce a region better able to serve as a partner over the coming decades. In other words, democracy for the Middle East need not be thought of as incompatible with order and synonymous with extremist violence. Rather, a region of democratic regimes that enjoy domestic legitimacy is likely the only viable method of ensuring that governments do not replay a continuous cycle of repression, entrenchment, and collapse.
GORD.
No comments:
Post a Comment