Egypt: Shaking up the Middle East and Suppressing Freedom of Speech

     There is little  doubt at Incoming BYTES  that the last 12 days of revolution offer serious implications reaching far beyond Egypt's dusty borders.   With President Hosni Mubarak defiantly clings to power, warning of "chaos" if he steps down.  Perhaps Hosni not been paying attention,  or is he  suffering from  shock or delusion?  Most citizens in real life  have experienced,  felt the pain, and observed the chaos he has already created and  sanctioned in the last two weeks. 
Mubarak  still stubbornly resisting removal in spite of massive protests by anti-government demonstrators, and  deaths, mayhem, whipping  and destruction  by pro-Mubarak forces,  Mubarak has  yet to  step  down,  has no intention to do so,  and there is no clear transfer of power to any transitional opposition  occurring as recommended by foreign governments world-wide.  


     Repercussions of the revolution continue as saboteurs blew up a gas line to Israel,  France has suspended all sales of arms to Egypt, and the whole world is unsettled as it anticipates a "new regime" yet to be decided,  if it is formed at all. 
Will the Muslim Brotherhood,  learned clerics,  or even religious fanatic factions  influence, participate in, or even form the next Egyptian government? Will the next government of Egypt fashion itself in the image of Iran?  Should the free world sanction a "new Egyptian government" that could,  in the extreme of fanaticism,  be "sworn to destroy Israel"?   I think not.  All human beings have a right to exist in peace.
      How is the world to know what is happening as journalists are attacked, beaten, detained, and harassed as their equipment is smashed?  One Egyptian journalist, Ahmed Mohammed Mahmud,  shot by a sniper  during the melee between opposing forces  has  already died.   Many foreign journalists have been  beaten badly,  arrested, interrogated, and ordered detained in their hotels  as Mr. Mubarak's government  "protects" them.   Do tell. 
Therein lies the root of skepticism as a  lack of credibility is clearly demonstrated. 


      How should the world  react if  freedom of speech is not clearly restored ?  Is the true intent of Mubarak's regime  to remain hidden or disguised? In spite of the blood shed in this revolution, is there any genuine intent by the Egyptian government  to initiate a peaceful transition other than superficial changes made in the thin veneer of deceit ?
There are many questions that must be answered.
 

Egypt's Mubarak to Remain: Bloodshed in EGYPT

Can  Egypt's president Hosni Mubarak be trusted  by anyone from this point in Egypt's revolution? There has now been bloodshed in Egypt's revolution.  
Why should any independent  observer  expect anything other otherwise?    President Hosni Mubarak, after orchestrating a massive and brutal pro-government rally to intimidate,  beat and even kill anti-government protestors,  has now decided not to step down. 
Let us paraphrase President Mubarak's  unbelievable excuse and comment:    "( He)  cannot step down because it might bring  CHAOS to  Egypt. "  
      Has total lunacy set in?  Does anyone actually believe that highly questionable assessment of the unstable status quo?
     Surely the existing deaths and total CHAOS  are already the product of his deceit and orchestration. 
    No fewer than 10 people were shot dead,  and as many as 300 people may  have been killed and 800 wounded  in the violent conflict between pro-Mubarak thugs and anti-government demonstrators that had, been, at least up to the time the loyalists attacked them,  been patiently demonstrating in a relatively peaceful manner.
    Mubarak has also  ordered the roundup of western and other foreign journalists, some  of whom had already been attacked,  stabbed and beaten,  undoubtedly to prevent them from observing what his thugs are doing.  How better to  stifle  the voice of democracy and free speech, than under the "GUISE OF PROTECTION"? 
     He will now conveniently extend his tenure to the end of his term to "prevent CHAOS"  and his son Gamal "will not"  take his place.   Do his empty words mean anything at all?  Anti-government protesters think not.  The governments of Spain, Italy, Great Britain, France, Germany and the United States of America  think not. 
Why should the reader at Incoming BYTES  imagine otherwise?
     Clearly Mubarak's unbelievable method of choice   is to use blunt force if necessary,  and pretend  innocence  while conveniently "allocating" the  blame and brutality necessary to murderous thugs, camel-riding,   whip-wielding lunatics  and  Molotov cocktail-rock-throwing loyalists do his bidding.

      Proof  of his method  lies in the fact that his  paid military army  stood by doing NOTHING  while loyalists viciously attacked, wounded and killed anti-government demonstrators.  

     This brutality and murder of innocent people   is unacceptable by any civilized standard. Mr. Mubarak.  
If you wish to continue to run a brutal, corrupt dictatorship,  at the very least be HONEST enough to say so.
      Mr. Mubarak, perhaps you are right, the west  may not "understand" your culture, but we do understand murder, deception, dishonesty, and lies.

Egyptian President "Steps Down" : Are Words Enough?

 Is the revolution in Egypt formally  bearing fruit?  Is the light returning to Egypt, the heart of the Arab world? Are words enough?  Are  "stepping aside" or "stepping down"  merely words to placate the Egyptian people? 
" I will pursue the transfer of power in a way that will fulfill the people's demands and that this new government will fulfill the people's demands and their hopes for political, economic and social progress...."   (1)  Such were the (translated)  words of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak  on February 1st, 2011  at 16:17 ET  as he announced he would be "stepping down".

Does "stepping down" and "transferring power" really equate  the demands of the people of Egypt?  Is Mubarak giving up power, or has he hauled out some very ancient smoke and mirrors,  the way of the deceiver? 
  At Incoming BYTES,  every reader is aware that in Canada, the United States, or any other democracy,  "shuffling the cabinet" means little and is usually a political maneuver designed to deceive. Musical chairs, but far more formal and expensive to play, usually resulting in little if any real change.
I believe  that if Mr. Mubarak transfers the power to anyone associated with the old regime, a major deception is already in progress.   Who has designed the "new regime"?  In the same speech, he stated 

"I will work very hard to carry out all the necessary measures to transfer power to the "authorized legitimate."     and  
" I ask of the parliament to commit to -- to speed up the elections." (1)
 Who are the "authorized legitimate" in the opinion of Hosni Mubarak?   Someone authorized by Mr. Mubarak and his inner circle? 
How about:
"Commit to--to speed up " the elections? 
 Worrisome words.  Not necessarily to HOLD elections, just to "speed them up".   
The pointed question "When?" comes to mind.
In the  favourite phrase of  a good friend of mine,  "We shall see what we shall see" 
..... I  know he  keeps HIS word,   but will Mr. Mubarak?  

The world will be watching. 


(1) Quotation courtesy of : Politics Daily, Transcript of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's Remarks,   CQ  Transcriptions (c)2011 Congressional Quarterly Inc.

Egyptian Revolution: A Sign That Democracy is Not Dead

                                     Brilliant 1                                         Photo r.a. kukkee

     Being a relatively peaceful individual and living in relatively peaceful Canada,   I do not like to hear of chaos,  violence,  shootings,  or society on the rampage and out of control anywhere,   but in this ever-changing world,  once again it is happening.  The quiet, dusty world of sleeping mummies and  the Great Pyramids  is being  rudely awakened by violent uprising.
      For several days now there have been massive demonstrations in Egypt. A veritable revolution is being held with  chanting crowds on the rampage, looting, arson and shootings.  Troops are using rubber bullets  and tear gas on demonstrators.  Blood is being spilled.  Thousands of inmates have escaped jails, including Muslim militants.  Police have reportedly disappeared from the streets.
      Deaths and more major confrontations  will most likely continue  in Cairo and other major centers.   Demonstrators will continue to demand the removal of Mubarak's authoritarian dictatorship until that change has been achieved.  Egyptians are voicing angry dissent and unhappiness with the corrupt status quo with much vigour.
   
     Mubarak's reign is supported by the  United States, and Hosni  has   ruled Egypt with an iron fist for over 30 years.  In response to the contemporary  revolution,  he has ordered troops and tanks into the streets to shoot at demonstrators.    
     A 6:00 pm curfew has been established;  citizens are no longer free to stroll  amicably in the streets of  Cairo, shop in the markets,  conduct any assembly of persons,  or wander down the street to visit with momma, poppa  and grandchildren.  
     In an almost unheard of move, the Internet has been shut down, and armed  F16 fighter jets are  flying over downtown Cairo to instill  fear in the population.
Why?
     I wonder what Mr.  Hosni Mubarak  is  so deathly afraid of? Shoppers?  Visiting children?  Political reform?   
No. 
      He is afraid of losing power and control,  but more  likely,  he is afraid of losing  his collected fortunes, his treasures, and any access to his spoiled,  premium, obscenely rich and luxurious lifestyle. 
    Most civilized people know  that power corrupts just surely as wealth is concentrated by greed.  We must conclude  it unlikely Mr. Mubarak  is any different from any other control freak or  greedy opportunist that has held power for a very long term.  In the face of poverty, unemployment and anger in the general populace, he  doesn't want to give it up. 
     The fact is,  as history teaches repetitively,  change must be made willingly, or it will eventually be established by  demonstration, force, or civil war. 
     Should peace-loving  people instead  resign to their fate of oppression and poverty silently?   Is the revolution merely another example  of collective human insanity unleashed,  or is it a genuine sign  that  democracy is not dead?
How is the reader to interpret what is happening?  I think the inevitable  must prevail.  Nothing remains the same. Change is inevitable.   Change WILL happen simply because democracy is not dead.  

Transition to democracy will occur, one way or the other if only for the fact that Mubarak, unless he is totally brain-dead,  must recognize that his  vicious,  iron-fisted response to the demonstrations,  and his subsequent misuse of the military,  abuse of  authority and  suppression of expression of speech  are the  most blatant  condemnations of the rule he has practiced. 
Perhaps  he does not recognize the fact that truth always comes out regardless of how well hidden it may be.  Perhaps he is vicious enough to be certain of  his power and will continue to tighten the grip on Egyptian society for a while, but in doing so  he is  merely offering more proof  that his reign  is  decadent and requires termination.

In  the aggregate opinion of  democratic peoples world wide,  the principle of stifling free speech is unacceptable.   The inexcusable action of  using national troops and armaments viciously  against the citizens of their own country is criminal.
 In spite of the shut-down internet, EGYPT is as visible as any 3D picture of your dusty old  Pyramids.   The world is watching,  so at the very minimum,  surrender your corrupt regime with a modicum of dignity,  Mr. Mubarak.
In the eyes of the world, Egypt is not much different than any other aspiring nation;  so let the people speak, -or  carefully stand aside, for change IS inevitable, and soon.