Egyptians protesting across the country

[Phantasee]

Al Jazeera

Three dead in Egypt protests
Police disperse crowd of thousands in Cairo at night, while two protesters and a police officer have died.
Last Modified: 25 Jan 2011 23:48 GMT

Two civilians and a police officer have died after a wave of unusually large anti-government demonstrations swept across Egypt, calling for the ouster of longtime president Hosni Mubarak.

In central Cairo, crowds numbering in the thousands protested and clashed with police throughout the day. Shortly after midnight on Wednesday morning, security forces violently dispersed those who remained in Tahrir Square, the heart of the city, Al Jazeera's Adam Makary reported.

Security officers fired tear gas, water cannons and rubber bullets to drive the protesters from the square, where they had chosen to remain throughout the night in protest. An Al Jazeera cameraman was shot with rubber bullets several times, including once in the face, Makary said.

Telephone communication with people in central Cairo was nearly impossible, but Makary reported that the crowds, which had been peaceful, had been forced to escape the police, who fired dozens of tear gas canisters.

Deadly protests

The protests in Cairo were reportedly the largest in the country on Tuesday, a date chosen by activists to emulate the recent uprising in nearby Tunisia.

But demonstrations occurred throughout Egypt.

Two civilians died in the eastern city of Suez, according to an interior ministry offical. One, who had respiratory problems, died after inhaling tear gas; the other died after being hit with a rock thrown during a protest, the official said.

In Cairo, a police officer died after being hit in the head with a rock during earlier protests in Tahrir Square, the official said.

The demonstrations were reportedly the largest in years, rivaling those held against the Iraq War in 2003 and in favor of free elections and civil society reforms in 2005.

On Tuesday night, hours after the countrywide protests began, the interior ministry issued a statement blaming the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's technically banned but largest opposition party, for fomenting the unrest.

But the Brotherhood denied the accusation and had earlier stated its intention to stay out of the protest; indeed, some observers noted the lack of Brotherhood mobilization on Tuesday.

Inspired by events in Tunisia, thousands of protesters gathered in Cairo and elsewhere, calling for reforms and demanding an end to Mubarak's presidency, which has now lasted for nearly three decades.

The scale of the demonstrations prompted US secretary of state Hillary Clinton to assert during a press conference that "Egypt's government is stable."

Water cannons and tear gas

Some protesters in downtown Cairo hurled rocks and climbed atop an armoured police truck.

Police responded to the demonstrators with blasts from a water cannon and set upon crowds with batons and acrid clouds of tear gas.

Amateur video posted on YouTube showed crowds of Egyptians pushing against and breaking through police cordons.

Police have also used rubber bullets against protesters, resulting in some injuries, reported Rawya Rageh, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Cairo.

Clinton urged all sides in Egypt to exercise restraint following the street protests, saying she believed the government was looking for ways to respond to its populations concerns.

But at least 30 people are already reported to have been arrested in Cairo, official sources said.

More protests

Protests also broke out in the Mediterranean city of Alexandria, the Nile Delta cities of Mansura and Tanta, and in the southern cities of Aswan and Assiut, witnesses reported.

The rallies had been promoted online by groups saying they speak for young Egyptians frustrated by the kind of poverty and oppression which triggered the overthrow of Tunisia's president. Over 80,000 people signed a Facebook group saying they would participate in the protests.

Egyptian blogger Hossam El Hamalawy told Al Jazeera that new media had been important in facilitating "the domino effect" needed for demonstrations like this one to progress, but he noted that it was the people in the street making the difference.

"We want a functioning government, we want Mubarak to step down, we don't want emergency law, we don't want to live under this kind of oppression anymore," Mamdouh Khayrat, a 23-year-old man who travelled from the governorate of Qalubiya to attend the protests, told Al Jazeera's Makary in Cairo. "Enough is enough, things have to change and if Tunisia can do it, why can't we?"

El Hamalawy told Al Jazeera the protests were necessary "to send a message to the Egyptian regime that Mubarak is no different than Ben Ali and we want him to leave too."

A day of revolution

Black-clad riot police, backed by armoured vehicles and fire engines, were deployed in a massive security operation in Cairo. They were said to concentrate on a few likely flashpoints, including the Cairo University campus, Tahrir Square, and a main courthouse.

Coinciding with a national holiday in honour of the police, a key force in keeping president Mubarak in power for 30 years, the outcome in Egypt on Tuesday was seen as a test of whether vibrant Web activism can translate into street action.

Organisers have called for a "day of revolution against torture, poverty, corruption and unemployment".

"Activists said they wanted to use this particular day to highlight the irony of celebrating Egypt's police at a time when police brutality is making headlines," Al Jazeera's Rageh reported.

Banned demonstrations

The Egyptian government had earlier warned protesters.

"The security apparatus will deal firmly and decisively with any attempt to break the law," the government's director for security in Cairo said in a statement released ahead of the protests.

Since Egypt bans demonstrations without prior permission, and opposition groups say they have been denied such permits, any protesters may be detained.

Habib el-Adli, the interior minister, had earlier issued orders to "arrest any persons expressing their views illegally."

"Beginning of the end"

Activists have been relying heavily on social networks to organise the protests.

"Our protest on the 25th is the beginning of the end," the organisers of the Facebook protest group wrote.

"People are fed up of Mubarak and of his dictatorship and of his torture chambers and of his failed economic policies. If Mubarak is not overthrown tomorrow then it will be the day after. If its not the day after its going to be next week," El Hamalawy told Al Jazeera.

Rights watchdog Amnesty International has urged Egypt's authorities "to allow peaceful protests".

Protests in Egypt, the biggest Arab state and a keystone Western ally in the Middle East, tend to be poorly attended and are often quashed swiftly by the police, who prevent marching.

At this rate the North Africa of 2011 is going to look very different from the North Africa of 2010. Protesters dead in Suez, they've got a "Tienanmen moment" with a lone protester standing up to a water cannon truck, President's sons said to have fled the country to London, live ammunition reportedly used against protesters. Army units reportedly moving towards the cities; I don't know enough about the country to guess whether the army will side with the government or the people, like in Tunisia.

[spartasman]

The Tunisian army was substantially smaller than the Egyptian one. I'm not sure whether or not the Egyptian military is a more conservative establishment than it's neighbors, but I would think the military would want to keep the current state of affairs in order.

[Talhe]

Another article describing the scene: http://www.theatlantic.com/internationa ... ion/70191/

Scenes From Egypt's Would-Be Revolution
JAN 25 2011, 5:09 PM ET
Mubarak's notorious police stood down, but only for a few hours

CAIRO, Egypt -- It is too soon to know whether the stunning demonstrations that have rocked Egypt today, with tens of thousands of protesters descending on cities throughout the country and overtaking Cairo's central square in an effort to reproduce Tunisia's recent uprising, will succeed in forcing change. But a telling comment came just after cannons, shooting gas-infused water, dispersed crowds along one major Cairo thoroughfare, when a man turned to me and said, "We want a revolution. We don't want Hosni Mubarak."

That man was a police captain.

To be sure, today's protests have been marked with instances of shocking, even if sadly predictable, regime violence. Riot police fired tear gas and rubber bullets; government-hired thugs beat protesters in the streets; and many - including my own roommate - were arrested. But perhaps the most surprising aspect of today's "day of rage" was that, for the first few hours, Egypt's notorious security forces stood down.

The day began with uncertainty. Although many Egyptians had been inundated with text messages and Facebook alerts informing them of today's protests, most seemed determined to stay on the sidelines. Some said they preferred the security of a police state to the chaos of political change and, in any event, they had to go to work. Meanwhile, Egypt's many opposition groups divided over where to hold the protests and at what time. By noon, one opposition group leader said his group was considering scrapping all of the proposed venues because of the heavy security presences. The center of downtown Cairo, Tahrir Square, had been totally shut down by hundreds of riot police and the much-hyped January 25th protests seemed to be just another anti-totalitarian tease.

Around 1:30, a protest erupted suddenly at the Lawyers Syndicate, a hotbed of opposition political activists one mile north of Tahrir Square, where about 200 activists began pushing onto the streets. Rows of riot police quickly pushed back, hoping to contain them within the syndicate's gates. Soon after, a second crowd gathered across the street. As riot police scrambled, protest leaders began appealing to nearby pedestrians to join in, and some did, boxing in the police. Meanwhile, a group of former opposition parliamentarians held a third protest on the steps of the nearby high court, shouting demands for the end of Mubarak's reign. This group quickly gained strength and converged with the second crowd, overwhelming the riot police. The three demonstrations became one and began their push towards Tahrir Square.

Initially, riot police formed rows of human chains blocking off the square. But when the marching protesters met the ranks of police, a strange thing happened. The chains broke at every point, allowing the demonstrators to pass through. The police, it seemed, were simply unwilling to hold. At these edges of the square, and in the square itself, confrontations between protesters and security officials were few and far between. Jubilation was in the air as the ever-growing crowd passed the Egyptian Museum and took Tahrir Square with the astounding acquiescence of the police.

"I think the police are helping us," said Ghad party youth leader Moshira Ahmed Mohasseb, who led chants on the march toward Tahrir. "They're tired. Everyday they're fighting another strike in another place, and I think they're starting to think again."

As the crowd grew, a police officer, who might in the past have responded with his baton, instead took out a camera and snapped a photo. Whatever was happening, he wanted to record it rather than to stop it."

Things went on this way, with the crowd rapidly growing as the news spread, until it pushed beyond Tahrir Square, up Kasr el-Eini Street towards the Ministers Assembly, where protesters tried to break through the gates. Finally, riot police raised their batons. An armored vehicle, which had previously sat still, let out a burst of gas-infused water near the crowd in an apparent threat. The protesters paused. A pocket of them formed in lines for afternoon Asr prayers. When they were finished, they rose, screamed, "Allahu akbar" and charged en masse towards the riot police.

That was the moment any relative peace ended. Protesters threw shoes and rocks; government-hired, plain-clothes thugs beat protesters; police fired tear gas and shot water cannons. People ran wildly along Kasr el-Eini Street, taking refuge in side-streets as the police cordoned off the area in front of the Ministers Assembly and Parliament. Meanwhile, Mobinil cell phone service was terminated, and Twitter was blocked.

But the crackdown may have come too late. By 5 p.m., tens of thousands of Egyptians - some in Cairo estimated hundreds of thousands - had gathered in Tahrir Square, with additional protests in neighborhoods all over the city, and in cities all over the country. The presence of armored police-transport trucks along nearly every major Cairo avenue merely confirmed to most people that something big - something unprecedented - had just taken place.

The implications of these protests are impossible to predict. Officially, opposition leaders have three demands: the resignation of Interior Minister Habib al-Adly, new elections, and raising the minimum wage. Yet these longtime activists represent only a minority of the protesters that came out today. Beyond demanding "change, justice, and social equality," as many shouted today, their desires are somewhat nebulous.

So Egypt's future will be determined on some other day. But, in a way they have not done in decades, ordinary Egyptians are demanding a stake in it.

Twitter and other social network sites might have been shutdown: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cacc5a06-28ad ... z1C6EQfmU4

Hard to say what's going to happen so far; Egypt has some similarities to Tunisia, such as an authoritarian government, high birthrate and unemployment, corruption, ect ect. There have been large-scale protests in Egypt before, though, so Egypt might be able to suppress them. And so far, the Muslim Brotherhood has remained quiet.

[His Divine Shadow]

Going there in a few weeks, hope it doesn't turn into a warzone.

[Sarevok]

So is this thing a real countrywide movement involving all sections of society ? Or a "Twitter revolution" like Iran where a bunch of yuppies break stuff on the streets ?

[Talhe]

An article by ElBaradei, who's returned to Egypt and become involved with the opposition.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- ... mainpromo1

Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei is headed back to Egypt despite direct threats against his life. On the eve of his return, the former U.N. official who is the Mubarak regime's most high-profile opponent shared his thoughts with Newsweek’s Christopher Dickey about the young people who’ve taken to the streets, political Islam, and the role of the United States.

When Egypt had parliamentary elections only two months ago, they were completely rigged. The party of President Hosni Mubarak left the opposition with only 3 percent of the seats. Imagine that. And the American government said that it was “dismayed.” Well, frankly, I was dismayed that all it could say is that it was dismayed. The word was hardly adequate to express the way the Egyptian people felt.

Then, as protests built in the streets of Egypt following the overthrow of Tunisia’s dictator, I heard Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s assessment that the government in Egypt is “stable” and “looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people”. I was flabbergasted—and I was puzzled. What did she mean by stable, and at what price? Is it the stability of 29 years of “emergency” laws, a president with imperial power for 30 years, a parliament that is almost a mockery, a judiciary that is not independent? Is that what you call stability? I am sure not. And I am positive that it is not the standard you apply to other countries. What we see in Egypt is pseudo-stability, because real stability only comes with a democratically elected government.
We are staring at social disintegration, economic stagnation, political repression, and we do not hear anything from you, the Americans, or for that matter from the Europeans

If you would like to know why the United States does not have credibility in the Middle East, that is precisely the answer. People were absolutely disappointed in the way you reacted to Egypt’s last election. You reaffirmed their belief that you are applying a double standard for your friends, and siding with an authoritarian regime just because you think it represents your interests. We are staring at social disintegration, economic stagnation, political repression, and we do not hear anything from you, the Americans, or for that matter from the Europeans.
So when you say the Egyptian government is looking for ways to respond to the needs of the Egyptian people, I feel like saying, “Well, it’s too late!” This isn’t even good realpolitik. We have seen what happened in Tunisia, and before that in Iran. That should teach people there is no stability except when you have government freely chosen by its own people.

Of course, you in the West have been sold the idea that the only options in the Arab world are between authoritarian regimes and Islamic jihadists. That’s obviously bogus. If we are talking about Egypt, there is a whole rainbow variety of people who are secular, liberal, market-oriented, and if you give them a chance they will organize themselves to elect a government that is modern and moderate. They want desperately to catch up with the rest of the world.

Instead of equating political Islam with Al Qaeda all the time, take a closer look. Historically, Islam was hijacked about 20 or 30 years after the Prophet and interpreted in such a way that the ruler has absolute power and is accountable only to God. That, of course, was a very convenient interpretation for whoever was the ruler. Only a few weeks ago, the leader of a group of ultra-conservative Muslims in Egypt issued a fatwa, or religious edict, calling for me to “repent” for inciting public opposition to President Hosni Mubarak, and declaring the ruler has a right to kill me, if I do not desist. This sort of thing moves us toward the dark ages. But did we hear a single word of protest or denunciation from the Egyptian government? No.

Despite all of this, I have hoped to find a way toward change through peaceful means. In a country like Egypt, it’s not easy to get people to put down their names and government ID numbers on a document calling for fundamental democratic reforms, yet a million people have done just that. The regime, like the monkey that sees nothing and hears nothing, simply ignored us.

As a result, the young people of Egypt have lost patience, and what you’ve seen in the streets these last few days has all been organized by them. I have been out of Egypt because that is the only way I can be heard. I have been totally cut off from the local media when I am there. But I am going back to Cairo, and back onto the streets because, really, there is no choice. You go out there with this massive number of people, and you hope things will not turn ugly, but so far, the regime does not seem to have gotten that message.

Each day it gets harder to work with Mubarak’s government, even for a transition, and for many of the people you talk to in Egypt, that is no longer an option. They think he has been there 30 years, he is 83 years old, and it is time for a change. For them, the only option is a new beginning.

How long this can go on, I don’t know. In Egypt, as in Tunisia, there are other forces than just the president and the people. The army has been quite neutral so far, and I would expect it to remain that way. The soldiers and officers are part of the Egyptian people. They know the frustrations. They want to protect the nation.
But this week the Egyptian people broke the barrier of fear, and once that is broken, there is no stopping them.

[Tanasinn]

So is this thing a real countrywide movement involving all sections of society ? Or a "Twitter revolution" like Iran where a bunch of yuppies break stuff on the streets ?

Those so-called Twitter yuppies were willing to lay down their lives in street protests where government thugs and foreign mercenaries beat and occasionally murdered them for daring to oppose a blatantly falsified election.

[Artemas]

foreign mercenaries?

[K. A. Pital]

Twitter yuppies? Grow the fuck up, fuckheads. 40% of Egypt's population lives on less than $2 a day, unemployment among the youth is around 90%. And even then, I've seen old bearded faces among the protestors quite often. What sort of "yuppie" could there be in teeth-grinding poverty ridden Third World shithole that is Egypt?

Any of you fucktards ever been on a demonstration of protest, I wonder?

Seriously - I wouldn't mind Egypt's president going the way of the Tunisian asshole. And neither would most of Egypt. As far as I gathered, they hate him. And why wouldn't they? In the last 30 years the rich-poor gap in Egypt only increased.

Or do we have here some band of Pinochetian libertarians, who think that any dictatorship is justified so as long as the GDP is growing in the hands of the Tunisian Egyptian oligarchs?

[Tanasinn]

foreign mercenaries?

Iran's government called in foreigners during protest suppression to do some of the violence committed.

[Shroom Man 777]

Maybe Sarevok mistook the Iranian protesters for Twitter yuppies because the computer screen they used to read tweets had clear glass canopies, and because news helicopters are VTOL. Am I right?


Weren't Mubarak's kids in that crowd of Muslims that defended the Coptic Christian mass? I just hope this would-be revolution doesn't get hijacked by extremists and fundamentalists, as we have seen in other places.

I hope that Nobel laureate guy is right in saying that: "Of course, you in the West have been sold the idea that the only options in the Arab world are between authoritarian regimes and Islamic jihadists. That’s obviously bogus."

It sucks to see that Egypt is another US-backed regime, just like the Philippines during the Marcos era, and just like so many other shitty nations. Fuck them. I hope the Egyptians get what they want and kick those bastards, and the American fucks who support them, out of their goddamn country. Dislodge American "foreign interests" and make the world a better place.

[K. A. Pital]

I don't see any truth to the so-called "dilemma" between Islamic jihadists and authoritarian regimes. One of the main US client states, Saudi Arabia, is an authoritarian theocracy which sponsors Jihad. Ouch.

[Guardsman Bass]

Weren't Mubarak's kids in that crowd of Muslims that defended the Coptic Christian mass? I just hope this would-be revolution doesn't get hijacked by extremists and fundamentalists, as we have seen in other places.

Fundamentalists is certainly possible, considering the size of the Muslim Brotherhood in the country. They're going to be a major player in any elected Egyptian government.

Fuck them. I hope the Egyptians get what they want and kick those bastards, and the American fucks who support them, out of their goddamn country. Dislodge American "foreign interests" and make the world a better place.

You'd prefer a greater chance of war and conflict in the area between Egypt and Israel? That's what the US is actually afraid of - that a new Egyptian regime will cut off diplomatic relations with Israel. The peace treaty has never been popular (even though they got the Sinai peninsula back).

I'm not sorry to see Mubarak go (assuming he does - he's much more entrenched in Egypt's security forces, particularly its military), but I don't particularly look forward to some of the instability that would follow it.

[K. A. Pital]

Fundamentalists is certainly possible, considering the size of the Muslim Brotherhood in the country. They're going to be a major player in any elected Egyptian government.

They are the largest organized opposition organization, but it doesn't mean they're the top dog in all the opposition. Thing is, the current opposition is vast and - as it seems - is more of an ad-hoc thing than an organized revolt. Which means this is an ousting. The real power struggle is ahead. And I believe there'll be plenty of politicians to lead these masses.

You'd prefer a greater chance of war and conflict in the area between Egypt and Israel?

Oh please. The US is not that afraid of war in the Middle East. The US has been one of the main instigators of war and violence in the Middle East. The US had glee when Iraq and Iran were massacring each other. The US had fun when Israel and the Arabs were fighting. Or when the Israelis and Palestinians were. The US is not, despite weak and pathetic false statements to the contrary, really desiring any lasting IvP peace, as practice has shown, because it is not willng to take any decisive measures.

I would not believe anything the US says about the new Egyptian power. After all, we have not seen the post-Mubarak Egypt at all to speak a word on it. And yet, the US is bold enough to 'fear' something? Of course, it's hand-fed, pet dictator was more "predictable", I bet it is much better to fill the whole Third world with lapdogs - Sukhartos, Pinochets, Putins, Duvaliers, Mubaraks - after all, they're so much more predictable, controllable and so much more willing to serve the USA. Because a lapdog can't bite the hand which feeds them, eh? Well, they can, like Saddam, but then - see Iraq. After all, the US gives Egypt money and arms. All to keep them under control.

The US truly fears that other nations will not be controlled by it. And then it says: "Yeah look, if they start behaving independent and all, they MIGHT do something bad". In the minds of right-wing nationalists MIGHT changes to WILL as soon as it enters their tiny brain.

And lo - whatever rebellion is already BAD, no matter that we haven't yet seen the result.

[Guardsman Bass]

Fundamentalists is certainly possible, considering the size of the Muslim Brotherhood in the country. They're going to be a major player in any elected Egyptian government.

They are the largest organized opposition organization, but it doesn't mean they're the top dog in all the opposition. Thing is, the current opposition is vast and - as it seems - is more of an ad-hoc thing than an organized revolt. Which means this is an ousting. The real power struggle is ahead. And I believe there'll be plenty of politicians to lead these masses.

They are the largest political organization that's not more or less intertwined with the Mubarak regime, which means that they are going to be an important player in the politics after Mubarak.

You'd prefer a greater chance of war and conflict in the area between Egypt and Israel?

Oh please. The US is not that afraid of war in the Middle East. The US has been one of the main instigators of war and violence in the Middle East. The US had glee when Iraq and Iran were massacring each other. The US had fun when Israel and the Arabs were fighting. Or when the Israelis and Palestinians were. The US is not, despite weak and pathetic false statements to the contrary, really desiring any lasting IvP peace, as practice has shown, because it is not willng to take any decisive measures.

This isn't just about Israel vs Palestine, and the US is definitely concerned about conflict between Egypt and Israel. The last time a major war happened between them (1973), the US was extremely active in bringing it to an armistice, along with the efforts to establish a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt.

I would not believe anything the US says about the new Egyptian power. After all, we have not seen the post-Mubarak Egypt at all to speak a word on it. And yet, the US is bold enough to 'fear' something? Of course, it's hand-fed, pet dictator was more "predictable", I bet it is much better to fill the whole Third world with lapdogs - Sukhartos, Pinochets, Putins, Duvaliers, Mubaraks - after all, they're so much more predictable, controllable and so much more willing to serve the USA. Because a lapdog can't bite the hand which feeds them, eh? Well, they can, like Saddam, but then - see Iraq. After all, the US gives Egypt money and arms. All to keep them under control.

And to keep them abiding by the peace treaty with Israel.

I don't particularly care to get into another debate over "the US supports dictators who share its interests!", but I will point out that the US didn't install Mubarak into power, nor his predecessor Anwar Sadat. Rather, they set up a partnership with the existing regime, using monetary aid as influence. Or do you think it's immoral for a country to use monetary aid to develop better relations with the internationally recognized regime of a country? Would you prefer that we meddled in their sovereignty to try and create a "more democratic" outcome?

I find your lack of concern over the possibility of Islamic fundamentalists taking power rather striking, considering all the trouble they've given Russia in places like Chechnya.

[Stravo]

If you would like to know why the United States does not have credibility in the Middle East, that is precisely the answer. People were absolutely disappointed in the way you reacted to Egypt’s last election. You reaffirmed their belief that you are applying a double standard for your friends, and siding with an authoritarian regime just because you think it represents your interests. We are staring at social disintegration, economic stagnation, political repression, and we do not hear anything from you, the Americans, or for that matter from the Europeans.

From the interview of Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei posted earlier this resonates so strongly. Whenever we talk about how "they hate America" and the Arab Street are the great unwashed masses you really need to wake the fuck up. There are many reasons why they hate us and it's not because we're Christians or we have mom and apple pie. They hate us because we keep fucking with them. We help set up or support these regimes that keep stepping on them then act shocked when the younger men get caught up with extremist who promise to help them hurt us.

We are feeding into the system that helps churn out jihadists. What are we afraid of exactly? The voice of the people being heard? Well I heard from a credible source this week the following: "And we saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people."

[Pelranius]

Weren't Mubarak's kids in that crowd of Muslims that defended the Coptic Christian mass? I just hope this would-be revolution doesn't get hijacked by extremists and fundamentalists, as we have seen in other places.

I hope that Nobel laureate guy is right in saying that: "Of course, you in the West have been sold the idea that the only options in the Arab world are between authoritarian regimes and Islamic jihadists. That’s obviously bogus."

A lot of the protesters are Christians as well. I think that the Muslim Brotherhood's slow response to the protests is going to hurt its influence in any post Mubarak set up (and the Army sure as hell isn't going to let them do anything dramatic, Mubarak or no Mubarak).

[Raj Ahten]

If anyone wants to fret about Islamists Yemen would be the place to do it instead of Egypt. There you have militants controlling sections of the countryside and a far weaker government institutions that would curb their power. Protests are occurring there as well but I haven't heard too much about them to judge if they are significant or not.

I do find it amazing how fast the protests are spreading and how impotent these regimes appear in the face of them. The idealist in me is being nurtured by these popular movements. I just hope my inner cynic doesn't come out to play once we see what the post protest governments actually end up looking like.

[Guardsman Bass]

A couple of sources (AOL News, BBC News) are saying that the Muslim Brotherhood will be joining tomorrow's protests. It should be very interesting to see what comes of it.

[Broomstick]

We are feeding into the system that helps churn out jihadists. What are we afraid of exactly? The voice of the people being heard?

I think there's an element of the US government that is deeply afraid of loss of influence and control.

I recently saw a documentary where Condoleeza Rice was discussing how the US government feared the dissolution of NATO at one point because it was the primary means of projecting American force and influence in Europe. My thought was "why do we need to be forcing and influencing Europe?" Even if at one time American force was welcomed in Europe (1940's) I can certainly see where we've overstayed our welcome. Why the hell does America need to be involved in Europe if Europe is uniting and sorting out their own problems and basically don't need us.

That's the thing. Sure we want to be liked (though often we aren't) but I think the biggest fear is that we will no longer be needed. Also, that the US can't control things. Horrors.

Personally, I'd be more than happy to stop fucking with other countries and concentrate on some of our own problems, which are many and desperately need attention.

So yes, there are concerns about the Eqypt/Israel peace treaty, and not wanting war (though I suspect some Americans secretly do want war in the Middle East). Probably best to keep one's reaction low-key when there's massive civil unrest and/or upheaval in a foreign country. It's not the "voice of the people" that's feared, it's the loss of certainty and control. The US knows how to deal with the current regime in Egypt. If it doesn't know who will running the place next month then it sure as hell won't know how to approach or deal with that new entity. Oh, horrors!

The stupid thing, of course, is all this crap and string-pulling used to maintain "order" and "peace" and the current situation is actually making us (and others) less safe, and fueling the unrest the US government finds so disturbing.

[Phantasee]

I'm hearing that the internet has been 'disconnected' in Egypt. I'm looking for news stories right now.

EDIT: AFP

Egypt internet disrupted, SMS down

(AFP)

CAIRO — Internet service was disrupted in Egypt early Friday as cell phone text messaging appeared to be down, hours before activists who used both to organise large anti-government protests planned further actions.

The interior ministry had said in a statement late Thursday it would take "decisive measures" against dissidents who planned protests after Friday noon prayers, saying the activists "sent messages to citizens to gather in a number of mosques in the provinces during Friday prayers."

Tens of thousands protested around the country on Tuesday in the largest anti-government demonstrations in decades.

The protests continued on Wednesday and Thursday, killing five demonstrators and two policemen in clashes.

Mobile phone services went down on Tuesday in a downtown Cairo area where most of the protesters were gathered, and the social networking site Twitter said its services were also blocked that day.

In Cairo, internet users said they could not access the web, with some saying access was slow and intermittent, starting late Thursday. Text messaging was also unavailable.

[Steven Snyder]

I don't mean to make light of this...as this situation is deadly serious. But does cutting off the Internet put more angry people on the streets?

[Broomstick]

It certainly means it will be harder for protesters to organize, but there were street protests before the internet so I don't expect it to stop people from going into the streets.

More ominously, it makes it MUCH harder for people to get out images and information regarding government opposition to such protests which could become quite, quite bloody and nasty. Quite a bit of unpleasantness on both sides could go entirely undocumented.

[Steven Snyder]

As I understand it, their interwebs went down minutes after the AP put out a video of a protester being gunned down.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Mubarak has to remember the fate of the Shah, who was ousted in no small part because he wouldn't crack down on the protests against him with the full strength of the army as he was pressured by Carter not to do so, allowing them to build to a tipping part. The reason the protests in Tunisia succeeded is because the army refused to obey orders from the President to fire on the protestors. If the Egyptian army is prepared to obey such orders, the only thing Mubarak has to fear is Obama demanding he not use extensive violence in the same way Carter did with the Shah--well, out of sight, out of mind, so if they can totally clamp down on information leaving Egypt, then they can fire artillery down open sights point-blank into crowds of thousands and if word doesn't get out until a few weeks later, it's good and done and he's won.