Middle East Revolutions: Current Bahrain protests getting violent

[Cantih]

Speaking of which I haven't heard much about Tunisia lately.

Nobody has, I've asked a shitload of times.

[Cadsuane]

A democratic revolution in Iran would solve 9 tenths of everyone's foreign policy problems in the mid east, but I wouldn't hold my breath:

Cable Indicates the Green Movement May Not Be Capable of Launching Uprising

On the twenty-fifth of Bahman on the Iranian calendar or February 14, the Green Path Opposition (GPO) or “Green Wave” plans to mobilize people and hold demonstrations in Iran. Organizers inspired by recent events in Egypt and Tunisia are hoping to see many turn out and defy an Iranian regime that has rhetorically indicated its support for the Egypt revolution but yet refused for some time to permit public demonstrations in Iran.

The upcoming day is something WL Central has been following closely. On February 10, WL Central looked at plans for the upcoming “Day of Rage,” the Iranian regime’s pre-emptive crackdown on activists planning demonstrations, and how Iran was jamming BBC’s Persian TV so Iranians could not witness what was happening in Egypt.

February 12 WL Central covered the arrests and detentions of journalist and dissidents, how “Iran’s telecommunications company” was filtering out the word “Bahman” ahead of the planned “Day of Rage,” the house arrest of Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi (two political leaders urging demonstrations), and the simultaneous celebration of the 32nd anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in the midst of state repression designed to prevent something similar to events in Tunisia or Egypt from unfolding.

Hours away from the beginning of demonstrations, the key question is whether the GPO will have a huge demonstration and whether the people of Iran have truly been moved by what has unfolded in Tunisia and Egypt. The Tehranbureau, based in the US, reports, “It is interesting to note that beyond the publicly announced goal of solidarity with the Egyptian people, there is no other specific demand. There are a number of slogans for on the web, but beyond that there is no goal, at least no publicly stated goal. Right now it seems the question is not what the strategy is, it is if the crowds will gather in the streets of Tehran on Monday.”

Many within the Green opposition believe their actions in 2009 in the aftermath of what was largely regarded as a fixed election have been part of what has moved people to act in countries like Tunisia and Egypt. Spokesman for the former presidential candidates Mousavi and Karroubi, Amir-Arjomand, according to The Guardian said, “The green movement influenced the movements in Egypt and Tunisia, and now we can learn from their movements, this shows that there is a historical desire for democracy in our region.” But, that may not be accurate. Most of the unrest was came from the escalation of food prices coupled with increased unemployment.

Cables from the Iran Regional Press Office (IRPO), which were released when WikiLeaks and news organizations first began to publish the US Embassy Cables, show reason to the GPO might not have what it takes to turn out demonstrators. A cable specifically focused on “Iran Domestic Politics” as they pertain to the GPO from January 2010 indicates the regime has an unwavering commitment to “using force and repression against the GPO as necessary to both incapacitate its first- and second-tier leadership (primarily through detention) and its rank and file (through detention and violence, to include deadly force).”

The regime is described as having a strategy of a “pre-emptive ‘rolling round-up’ of not just active GPO elements but also sympathizers.” Reformist reporters, feminists, human rights advocates, labor organizers, aging “National Front” sympathizers, and others not active in GPO are targets. The strategy likely means thousands if not tens of thousands of people have been detained since 2009.

Furthermore, the cable describes how the regime is working to make it possible for “broader use of lethal force at the popular level” and what the impact of state repression is on the media press environment:

Indications are that the regime is laying the groundwork for using even more violence, to include the broader use of lethal force at the popular level if necessary. This could include executions of those found guilty of 'warring against God,' a term which the regime is prone to define somewhat expansively. And while there is certainly a limit to the regime's willingness to use violence against its own people, there are no indications that it is anywhere near it. One former IRGC officer told an Iranwatcher that the IRGC wants to avoid killing more than a 'few dozen' protestors in any one location on any one day, partially to avoid associations with 'Black Friday' -September 8, 1978 - when mass fatalities in a demonstration turned many against the Shah). The Ashura-day murder of Mousavi's nephew, in addition to the January 7 incident where security officials seemed to have coordinated shots being fired at a car carrying Karrubi [sic] indicate a regime intent to calibrate its level of violence to intimidate the opposition and its leadership.

The media press environment is also expected to become far more restrictive, with one prominent reformist newsman telling IRPO that he expects all reformist papers to be shut down in the short-term. The regime continues to block 'subversive' websites, while also stepping up it jamming of satellite broadcasts from both VOA and BBC.

The Tehranbureau notes that the government is a “fast learner.” When the GPO “called for demonstrations on the anniversary of the Revolution last year, government forces were well prepared to prevent crowds from assembling. In many cases, people were dispersed as they exited metro stations. Any small gathering was attacked and the mass demonstration did not take place.”

A Washington Post shows the Iranian government is fulfilling expectations. The country has opened a prosecutor’s office “for offenses related to media and culture.” The move will make it possible to further restrict journalists and artists in Iran and deter them from fueling unrest like they did during protests in 2009.

The entire cable provides a key illumination of the GPO. There are more excerpts worth citing, but the most key section is likely the following:

No one knows or can know what will happen next. While Iran is not North Korea, since June 12 and the subsequent crackdown it has become harder to follow significant events there, both at the popular and elite level. Foreign media presence has been severely curtailed and domestic media is increasingly censored. And Iran's hardline intelligence-security cabal's 'soft overthrow' fixation has reduced the number and type of Iranians willing to talk frankly to the press (and to Iranwatchers) about domestic events.

Against that backdrop one must note the 'selective perception' bias that tends to over-emphasize the GPO's potency. Some pro-GPO bias stems from their being the (relative) 'good guys' in this drama, to the extent that their agenda encompasses principles dear to Western democracies. Additionally, Western media's Iran contacts tend to be pro-reformist, with Western press quoting pro-GPO activists and analysts almost exclusively. Also USG officials' interactions with Iranians tend to be largely limited to Iranians willing and able to talk with us, with a disproportionate number of them being those seeking USG assistance in helping fight the regime. Finally and in many ways most importantly 'if it bleeds it leads,' so there are no 'Youtube' uploads on demonstration days of the millions of ordinary Iranians who are going about their business.

Although the GPO will, as they have done prior to previous days of protest, cite Article 27 of the Constitution to remind Iranians the demonstrations should be permitted or allowed, there is no guarantee the Iranian population will be out to protest. The GPO does not have a vision, it lacks plans, which isn’t entirely different than Egypt, but, unlike the Mubarak regime, the Iranian government seems to be much more prepared for an uprising.

The GPO will be working to escalate opposition to the Iranian government weeks before the fifth birthday of Twitter. The protests in the aftermath of the 2009 election became known in many reports on the events as something that was part of a “Twitter Revolution.” The GPO is a group that has worked to use services like Twitter to expand efforts to, as the aforementioned cable says, “create a virtual space in which it can disseminate information to Iranians inside Iran.”

But, this “cyber-utopianism” is often hyperbolically emphasized in Western media. Evgeny Morozov, author of The Net Delusion points out, “There were only 19,235 registered Twitter accounts in Iran (0.027% of the population) on the eve of the protests. The biggest night of protests in Egypt came amid an internet blackout after the government pulled the plug for most users.” He adds, “Social media works as well for tech-savvy dictators and government spooks as for pro-democracy advocates. The Twitter revolution in Iran ended in a violent crackdown and 2,000 new political prisoners.”

Thus, it seems it is imperative for those planning the demonstrations to actually get millions into the streets tomorrow and show they have been inspired. They cannot rely on a social media presence or sympathetic coverage from news media. If they do not get a huge portion of the population out, a portion that is willing to return periodically over the next days and face a crackdown from the regime, there may be little chance of a revolution picking up momentum as the revolution did in Egypt.

[Mistress Stowastiq]

Nobody has, I've asked a shitload of times.

Al Jazeera English has hourly coverage on all of the anti gov protests going on right now in the Middle East. They go from moderate to deep coverage but it is nothing as wide as the Egypt coverage, lots of shakey home videos and one correspondent on the phone who had to stop talking out of fear for his life because he walked by police.

Tunisia's refugees are fleeing to an Italian island, the regular population on the island is smaller than the amount of protester/refugees arriving so it is causing a major state of emergency there. One person died in a boat ride up there. So Italy got the UN [I think its UN] to deliver aid to get the people off of the island and I am uncertain where they are taking them to but there are disputes as to how to handle it.

They are trying to make some arrangements to handle the impact of their arrival. The Island's aid is way over maxed from the arrival.

I meant to check and see if there are other threads here regarding the other uprisings because I was not sure if it was appropriate to post in this thread. I can post up on it but I should ask a mod first.




Back to Egypt,
Something creeps me out about the police protesting and getting a double pay raise just like that. Some of them are vowing to turn over a new leaf but I doubt the people will ever trust them. Protests are erupting all over Egypt for people demanding different kinds of rights. I fear that the military has no choice but to crack down and they said that they will and this is not even mentioning the people still clinging to Tahrir, it is all over the place now.

The special complaints web site for the Egyptian people to the Gov appears to be in English but I saw it on the news so I a not sure of the addy. I'm curious as to what else is on the web site.

There is a video of inside of the State TV building where the employees chased the head boss down a hall and the army had to protect him by shoving him into a room.

It made me ponder on what exactly would 'good' State TV be like without corruption/propaganda? Would it be like CSPAN? or like Fox? Perhaps like KQED or PBS? Would it be like the videos on the WH web site? It was odd seeing the State TV, with these long feel-good commercials, nothing like CSPAN but I am trying to figure out what they expect from Government-run television.

If free press was allowed I suppose the right to show bullshit news would be allowed too but the fact that it is television sponsored and produced by the state would exempt them from the freedom to make fake or biased news. Perhaps a democratic government would negate the need for State TV in general. Ah the whole thing blows my mind

[Obev]

It made me ponder on what exactly would 'good' State TV be like without corruption/propaganda? Would it be like CSPAN? or like Fox? Perhaps like KQED or PBS? Would it be like the videos on the WH web site? It was odd seeing the State TV, with these long feel-good commercials, nothing like CSPAN but I am trying to figure out what they expect from Government-run television.

BBC or Al Jazeera are your examples of non-bullshit non-propaganda state public service broadcasters. Of course, they're not really "state" television channels, being indirectly funded by the UK and Qatari governments rather than controlled by them, but that's necessary to allow for relatively unbiased reporting in my opinion.

Of course there's still bias; the BBC has a distinctly England-centred view on its reporting of the UK, and Al Jazeera doesn't really report on any Qatari political dilemmas. Still, it's not too bad, especially considering AJ was founded by a royal decree in an absolute monarchy.

[Cadsuane]

I would say most western states own a national broadcaster that generally perform bang up journalism. US is the odd one out in that regard.

[Mistress Stowastiq]

BBC or Al Jazeera are your examples of non-bullshit non-propaganda state public service broadcasters. Of course, they're not really "state" television channels, being indirectly funded by the UK and Qatari governments rather than controlled by them, but that's necessary to allow for relatively unbiased reporting in my opinion.

Of course there's still bias; the BBC has a distinctly England-centred view on its reporting of the UK, and Al Jazeera doesn't really report on any Qatari political dilemmas. Still, it's not too bad, especially considering AJ was founded by a royal decree in an absolute monarchy.

Wow I forgot BBC. Thank you for the perspective. Yes, all I see about Qatar on Al Jazeera is it makes me want to fucking go there bad and I know I need assloads of cash to do so. The commercials are to a rich demographic, that is rather clear.

I watch Sky TV and wonder all the time what is the US equivalent to it as far as content, knowing Murdoch has something to do with it. I know an MP got into big trouble for saying on a hidden reporter's camera that he planned to sabotage Murdoch buying shares of Sky's network.

I learned from their own media,[the "we are an imperfect network" or something relating to their reporting being imperfect - statement] that ALJazeera had some kind of connection to royalty or authorities but I did not know exactly what. Thanks for more info on that.

I enjoy looking at all kinds of international news because the perspectives blow my mind. Al Jaz's coverage of American politics is interesting as hell because I am so used to hearing it from left or right or faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar liberal lol. [I don't like fox so I cannot input too much on their tv news outside of the obvious].


Egypt:
Al Jazeera just said that their Tahrir sq camera got shut down by the army and they later got their equipment back so they no longer have a live shot of Tahrir. I messaged Richard Engel about it, wondering if theirs is taken down too. Watching my twitter for info. This concerned me. It makes me think they will do some bad crackdowns on the Sq and don't want people to see it. They [AJ] are in another window now, where they can show the bridge overpass thing leading to Tahrir at least. If there is gunfire on the SQ they will be able to record it.

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-ea...egypt-protests

2:40pm Protests have halted traffic in Tahrir. We're not able to transmit any live pictures because the army has ordered us and other international media outlets to stop filming in the square.

Some of the objects from Egyptian Museum were just found on the museum lawn in a bag???? I heard this a moment ago on AJ, need to get more info obviously.


Journalists angry over the commission of journalism
By Glenn Greenwald [spoilered for size]

Spoiler: show

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/gl...ism/index.html
Monday, Feb 14, 2011 06:15 ET

Journalists angry over the commission of journalism
By Glenn Greenwald

*

Over the weekend, The Los Angeles' Times James Rainey mocked CNN's Anderson Cooper for repeatedly using the word "lie" to describe the factually false statements of Egyptian leaders. Though Rainey ultimately concluded that "it's hard to find fault with what Cooper had to say" -- meaning that everything Cooper identified as a "lie" was, in fact, a "lie" -- the bulk of Rainey's column derided the CNN anchor for his statements ("Cooper's accusations of 'lies' and 'lying' got so thick on Wednesday's show that the host seemed to be channeling comic (and now U.S. Sen.) Al Franken’s 2003 book, 'Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them'"). Rainey also suggested that the harsh denunciations of Mubarak's false statements was merely part "Cooper's pronounced shift toward more opinion-making in recent months . . . trying to adopt the more commentary-heavy approach of [CNN's] higher-rated competitors, Fox and MSNBC." To Rainey, when a journalist calls a government lie a "lie," that's veering into "commentary-heavy opinion-making" rather than objective journalism (h/t Mediaite).

Yesterday, Cooper's CNN colleague, media critic Howard Kurtz, sounded the same criticism but went even further. On his Reliable Sources program, Kurtz showed a video clip of Cooper and then posed the following question to guest Christopher Dickey of Newsweek:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN: What we heard were the same lies we've heard from [Mubarak] and his regime for more than two weeks now. What we heard is a man who clearly believes that he is Egypt. He kept repeating this lie that this is all some sort of foreign interference.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KURTZ: Chris Dickey, Anderson Cooper repeatedly using the word lies. Now I think most journalists would agree with him, perhaps most Americans would agree with him. But should an anchor and correspondent be taking sides on this kind of story?

To Kurtz, when a journalist accurately points out that a powerful political leader is lying, that's "taking sides," a departure from journalistic objectivity, something improper. In reply, Dickey agreed with that assessment, noting that "part of the soul of [Cooper's] show is to take sides" and be "committed to a certain vision of the story." Like Rainey, Dickey was forced to acknowledge that all of the statements Cooper identified as "lies" were actually lies, and thus magnanimously decreed: "I think Anderson can be forgiven for using that word in that context." Kurtz then patronizingly noted: "And of course, Anderson Cooper was repeatedly punched in the head when he was covering the demonstrations" -- as though his departure from good journalistic objectivity can at least be understood here (though of course not justified) because of the emotional trauma he suffered.

Rainey, Kurtz and Dickey all have this exactly backwards. Identifying lies told by powerful political leaders -- and describing them as such -- is what good journalists do, by definition. It's the crux of adversarial journalism, of a "watchdog" press. "Objectivity" does not require refraining from pointing out the falsity of government claims. The opposite is true; objectivity requires that a journalist do exactly that: treat factually false statements as false. "Objectivity" is breached not when a journalist calls a lie a "lie," but when they refuse to do so, when they treat lies told by powerful political officials as though they're viable, reasonable interpretations of subjective questions. The very idea that a journalist is engaged in "opinion-making" or is "taking sides" by calling a lie a "lie" is ludicrous; the only "side" such a journalist is taking is with facts, with the truth. It's when a journalist fails to identify a false statement as such that they are "taking sides" -- they're siding with those in power by deceitfully depicting their demonstrably false statements as something other than lies.

This warped reasoning is one of the prime diseases plaguing establishment political journalism in the U.S. Most establishment journalists are perfectly willing to use the word "lie" for powerless, demonized or marginalized people, but they genuinely believe that it is an improper breach of journalistic objectivity to point out when powerful political officials are lying. They adamantly believe that such an activity -- which is a core purpose of political journalism -- is outside the purview of their function. The one who put this best was NBC News' David Gregory when he vigorously defended the American media from criticisms (voiced at the time by former Bush Press Secretary Scott McClellan) that they failed to do their job in the run-up to the Iraq War:

I think there are a lot of critics who think that . . . . if we did not stand up and say this is bogus, and you're a liar, and why are you doing this, that we didn't do our job. I respectfully disagree. It's not our role.

That these establishment journalists believe that pointing out the lies of powerful political leaders is "not their role" -- indeed, is a violation of the rules that govern what they do -- explains a large part of the failings of both America's media class and its political class. Ironically, David Gregory is ultimately right that doing this is "not his role"; he's not paid by NBC News and its owners to alert the American citizenry to lies told by the U.S. Government (i.e., he's not paid to be an adversarial journalist). He's there to do the opposite: to vest those lies with respect and depict them as reasonable statements to be subjectively considered along with the truth. But it's in these moments when they are so candid about what their actual role is -- or when they attack people like Cooper for the rare commission of actual journalism -- that they are at their most (unintentionally) informative.

All this said, I'd be much more impressed with Cooper if he used such language for the lies told by American political leaders (rather than reviled, weakened Middle East dictators on their way out of power). As journalist and Communications Professor Marc Cooper told Rainey:

But it begs a monster question: Is CNN permitted to call only foreign leaders liars? How refreshing it would be to see that same piercing candor directed at American politicians when they overtly lie.

Had Anderson Cooper used such harsh language to describe the statements of someone universally despised in American mainstream political circles (an American Enemy -- such as, say, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Hugo Chavez), it would likely have gone unnoticed. But here, Cooper used such language to condemn one of America's closest and most cherished allies, and it was thus gently deemed a departure from journalistic propriety. But had Cooper said such things about a leading American political official, then a true journalistic scandal would have erupted. Declaring the statements of an American political leader to be a lie is one of the most rigidly enforced taboos in American journalism. That this hallmark of real journalism is strictly prohibited -- "It's not our role," explained the Meet the Press host -- tells one all there is to know about the function which most establishment journalists fulfill.

[BardonGaruda]

Wow I forgot BBC. Thank you for the perspective. Yes, all I see about Qatar on Al Jazeera is it makes me want to fucking go there bad and I know I need assloads of cash to do so. The commercials are to a rich demographic, that is rather clear.

I watch Sky TV and wonder all the time what is the US equivalent to it as far as content, knowing Murdoch has something to do with it. I know an MP got into big trouble for saying on a hidden reporter's camera that he planned to sabotage Murdoch buying shares of Sky's network.

I learned from their own media,[the "we are an imperfect network" or something relating to their reporting being imperfect - statement] that ALJazeera had some kind of connection to royalty or authorities but I did not know exactly what. Thanks for more info on that.

I enjoy looking at all kinds of international news because the perspectives blow my mind. Al Jaz's coverage of American politics is interesting as hell because I am so used to hearing it from left or right or faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar liberal lol. [I don't like fox so I cannot input too much on their tv news outside of the obvious].


Egypt:
Al Jazeera just said that their Tahrir sq camera got shut down by the army and they later got their equipment back so they no longer have a live shot of Tahrir. I messaged Richard Engel about it, wondering if theirs is taken down too. Watching my twitter for info. This concerned me. It makes me think they will do some bad crackdowns on the Sq and don't want people to see it. They [AJ] are in another window now, where they can show the bridge overpass thing leading to Tahrir at least. If there is gunfire on the SQ they will be able to record it.

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-ea...egypt-protests




Some of the objects from Egyptian Museum were just found on the museum lawn in a bag???? I heard this a moment ago on AJ, need to get more info obviously.


Journalists angry over the commission of journalism
By Glenn Greenwald [spoilered for size]

Spoiler: show

State broadcaster here in Ireland Radio Telefis Eireann (RTE) do a great job at reporting on things like this too. But due to size of the country they don't have a 24hr news station just news shows about 3-4 times a day. Also we had the first fatal plane crash in many many years last week, so that understandably has been the main news item.

On the Sky thing, ppl hear Murdoch and immediately associate it with Fox. But having watched Sky you'll know they're nothing like each other. Don't know enough about US News channels to say exactly what it's like, but a more mainstream channel would be a better fit. There is no doubt on some issues they lean to the right and it really depends who's covering the story. Like with Egypt the reporters on the ground were just telling the story as it happened. But Tim Marshall the foreign affairs editor is very right wing so I normally switch channels if he's on as you're likely to hear the words terrorist, islamist or other such words out of his mouth. I believe that even if they sent him to cover something on the pope he's squeeze those in somewhere.

When Sky started first they tried the Fox format of some news reporting and a whole host of 1 hour shows similar to the O'Reilly Factor with UK ppl that had extreme right wing views. But the company that exists as Sky today is a result of a merger between Sky and British Satellite Broadcasting which was just a main stream broadcaster. As a result those shows had to be toned down and eventually dropped so that they have their current format of anchors, studio and field reporters and no special interest shows.

On the not trusting the police issue. In Northern Ireland after the Good Friday agreement they reformed the policing service as the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) as the previous incarnation, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) was not trusted by the Catholics. The RUC had a history of abuse, unlawful detainment etc. against Catholics and was mainly made up of Protestants. The new force actively recruited Catholics and implemented a host of changes recommended by Patten.

It took a few years for the new force to be accepted, especially by Sinn Fein, as police practices and peoples opinions don't change overnight. But as it was seen that the Patten recommendations were being implemented the PSNI gained more and more acceptance. Not saying it's a perfect police force but it's a hell of a lot better than the RUC was. Maybe this is something they could do in Egypt also.

[Ashmada]

Speaking of which I haven't heard much about Tunisia lately.

The sentiment in Tunisia is that Ben Ali's party is still very much in control, despite his departure, so the daily protests are still happening.
While freedom of speech has progressed, the economic situation hasn't improved one bit, so many Tunisians are fleeing the country, unhappy with the lack of change and arriving in droves in the small Italian island of Lampedusa: over 5000 migrants in a week.
Italy's panicking, to the point that they now want to send troops in Tunisia to block migrants at the source.
In Tunisia, the foreign affairs minister decided to fuck off and go home.

Sauce:
http://video.rtlinfo.be/video/275493.aspx?
http://video.rtlinfo.be/video/275490.aspx?

I would say most western states own a national broadcaster that generally perform bang up journalism. US is the odd one out in that regard.

"Bang-up journalism" is a bit ambitious (failing to the research is frequent*), but we tend to like our biased journalism in privately-owned media and our national broadcasters to at least pretend to neutrality, on this side of the Atlantic.

*Hilarious example: a few years back, the french national broadcaster announced that thousands of japanese had committed suicide with giant bras at the news of a delay in the release of a Dead or Alive game.
Of course, it was BS, but they just copied an article from a paper that itself just copied the article from a gaming magazine, unfamiliar with the style of jokes used in those publications, so what started as a jest to announce said delay ended up being read very seriously on national TV by a genuinely shocked newsreader.

[Kuya]

I would say most western states own a national broadcaster that generally perform bang up journalism. US is the odd one out in that regard.

The fantastic thing about this is: it doesn't have to.

Self-censorship is a godsend.

[Faris]

tunisia, egypt, yemen, and now bahrain.....didnt know revolting can be a trend.

on other news, the syrian have lifted the ban from facebook in the country...LOL; they're trying to calm the people before they revolt too

[Faris]

ok how true is this??



the dude is saying there is a american / israeli fleets closing in egypt...etc, etc,

no english version, ksandra can translate, im too lazy

[Correction]

tags: egypt talk baseball defence speech sports commentary garderning football

Neither speaker is identified in English, or the source of the news feed. could you at least do that for us?

[Cadsuane]

"Bang-up journalism" is a bit ambitious (failing to the research is frequent*), but we tend to like our biased journalism in privately-owned media and our national broadcasters to at least pretend to neutrality, on this side of the Atlantic.

Canada, and the CBC, are also on this side of the Atlantic.

[Ksandra]

ok how true is this??



the dude is saying there is a american / israeli fleets closing in egypt...etc, etc,

no english version, ksandra can translate, im too lazy

Unless they are telling you to clean up your room, then I can't translate. (I only know the shit my dad was yelling at me LOL).

[Mistress Stowastiq]

President Obama statement [sorry for odd formatting, fixing it]

http://govne.ws/item/Readout-of-the-...iscuss-Egypt-2

Readout of the President's Calls to Discuss Egypt

Barack Obama's White House Presidential Office (D) posted a Press Release on February 12, 2011 | 3:41 pm - Original Item - Comments (View)

Release Time:
For Immediate Release

The President made a number of calls to foreign leaders today to continue his consultations with counterparts on the latest developments in Egypt.

He spoke to Prime Minister Cameron of the United Kingdom, King Abdullah of Jordan, and Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey.

The President welcomed the historic change that has been made by the Egyptian people, and reaffirmed his admiration for their efforts.

He also welcomed the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces’ announcement today that it is committed to a democratic civilian transition, and will stand by Egypt’s international obligations.

The President emphasized his conviction that democracy will bring more – not less – stability to the region.

He also stressed the U.S. commitment to provide the support that is necessary and requested by the Egyptian people to pursue a credible and orderly transition to democracy, including by working with international partners to provide financial support.

The leaders agreed on the importance of a peaceful transition to a democratic government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people, and agreed to work closely together going forward.

The President reaffirmed the United States’ strong commitment to supporting a more peaceful and prosperous Middle East in close consultation with all our regional partners.

Tunisia news: [spoilered for size]

Spoiler: show

AL Jazeera: video also at link

http://english.aljazeera.net/video/a...653175984.html

Italy struggles with Tunisia influx

Rome calls on European Union for help after 6,000 Tunisians flee to tiny island following political upheaval.
Last Modified: 14 Feb 2011 16:27 GMT


Italy is struggling to cope with a flood of refugees escaping political upheaval in Tunisia, with around 6,000 crossing the sea to the tiny island of Lampedusa in the last week.

The Italian government has appealed to the European Union for aid after declaring a humanitarian crisis over the weekend, and is hoping that Frontex, the EU border agency, will get involved.

At least 2,000 refugees have been ferried to Sicily where their fate is yet to be decided. Another 2,000 remain on the tiny outcrop, which lies in between Africa and Italy, housed in a re-opened holding centre.

Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy chief, is currently visiting Tunisia to discuss the issue. On Monday she expressed support for the country's interim administration, installed following the ousting of president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.

"The European Union is committed to supporting Tunisia economically and to supporting civil society in order to have free elections," she said in Tunis, the capital.

Diplomatic row

But Angela Merkel, Germany's chancellor, said "not everyone who does not want to be in Tunisia can come to Europe".
"Rather, we need to talk to each other how we can strengthen the rule of law in Tunisia again and whether Europe can be of help," she said.

The crisis sparked a brief row between Tunis and Rome, after an Italian minister suggested sending police to the north African country in an attempt to stem the tide of migrants.

Roberto Maroni, the interior minister and a member of the anti-immigrant Northern League, said the turmoil in Tunisia had triggered a "biblical exodus" to the island.

"I will ask the Tunisian foreign minister for authorisation so an Italian contingent can intervene to block the influx. The Tunisian system is collapsing," he said on Sunday.

The Tunisian foreign ministry said it was prepared to work with Italy and other partners to find an appropriate solution, but said it "categorically rejects any interference in its internal affairs or any infringement of its sovereignty".

Italy's foreign minister has since said that the two countries share a "common interest" in curbing the traffic, and offered "logistical help in terms of police and equipment".

"Until now the system of patrolling the coasts of Northern African has worked and we want to re-establish the technique, which had reduced illegal immigration to zero until a month ago," Franco Frattini said.

Tunisia said later on Monday its troops were patrolling southern fishing ports in a bid to halt the exodus, and several checkpoints have been erected in coastal towns.

"The port is well guarded, we are doing everything to block the smugglers," an army officer told the AFP news agency.

The International Organisation for Migration said on Monday that no new boats carrying Tunisians had been sighted.

'Grinding poverty'

Since Tunisia's January uprising the caretaker government has been making faltering steps towards stability. But the economic situation in the country remains dire.

Laurence Lee, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Lampedusa, said the refugees he spoke to have endured abysmal conditions in their home country "We spoke to about 10 young men and they all had exactly the same story. There was no work in Tunisia, they were living in grinding poverty. Some of them said they had to sell their mothers' jewellery to pay up to 1,500 euros for the voyage over here.

"They were prepared to work anywhere in Europe. Anything will do, just to get some money to send back to their families.
He added that economically the migrants had little hope for Tunisia, despite the political change.

"It is a sobering thought that despite all the euphoria over the political reforms in Tunisia the legacy there is grinding poverty."
However the problem now facing the refugees is that as they qualify as economic migrants, and none of them have a specific job offer, Italy has the right to send them home.

[Faris]

the dude in the video says the following:

is egypt is now exposed to both internal and external dangers. The people in Tahrir square are unaware of this; the external dangers are in the form that the united states -something- general Mullen, or Merlin stated that it is essential to secure the naval route in the suez canal.

This resulted in 2 air carriers (or something) that left the gulf bases. one headed to the south entrance of the suez canal (the carriers have 50 chopers) and the other carrier is "Enterprise" which is carrying around 80 fighter jets...

there are also threats from Israel to attack the eastern region of suez. All this, the revolting youth is unaware of but the high council of the egyptian armed forces is fully aware of this. especially the israeli threats, which fear that egypt will fall under a radical islamic regime. they fear this will disrupt the agreement of -something-

all this is all on stand by to attack, and who dont believe this, please with Muhammad Fadhil will confirm everything that ive said here.


i dont know how true is this...no other news agent have covered such thing. I fear this will be an invasion which will send us back 10 years, and the revoluion will backfire on us.

end.

[Ksandra]

the dude in the video says the following:

is egypt is now exposed to both internal and external dangers. The people in Tahrir square are unaware of this; the external dangers are in the form that the united states -something- general Mullen, or Merlin stated that it is essential to secure the naval route in the suez canal.

This resulted in 2 air carriers (or something) that left the gulf bases. one headed to the south entrance of the suez canal (the carriers have 50 chopers) and the other carrier is "Enterprise" which is carrying around 80 fighter jets...

there are also threats from Israel to attack the eastern region of suez. All this, the revolting youth is unaware of but the high council of the egyptian armed forces is fully aware of this. especially the israeli threats, which fear that egypt will fall under a radical islamic regime. they fear this will disrupt the agreement of -something-

all this is all on stand by to attack, and who dont believe this, please with Muhammad Fadhil will confirm everything that ive said here.


i dont know how true is this...no other news agent have covered such thing. I fear this will be an invasion which will send us back 10 years, and the revoluion will backfire on us.

end.

I can't believe Isreal is all ready to attack egypt, sounds like a lot of fear mongering. For what reason, not sure. Maybe other countries are starting rumors so people won't protest.

[Mistress Stowastiq]

Hilary Clinton is going to be on Al Jaz English soon, looking for a video of it.

10:00pm Al Jazeera's Abderrahim Foukara sat down to speak with Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, who reiterated the US committment to the Egyptian people. Our producer sent in updates from the interview, to be aired soon.
"Eveyone has to recognise this transition has a long to-do list and needs a lot of energy," Clinton said. "We must be supportive but not presume we know best what needs to be done.
"The hard work of putting reforms in place must begin."

State Dept Twitter in Farsi
http://twitter.com/#!/USAdarFarsi

Thank you for the translation Firas.

[quannum]

.

(Reuters) - Egypt's new military rulers have given indications of new moves to share power with civilians and rapidly to amend the constitution by popular referendum, opposition activists and a British minister said on Monday.

Wael Ghonim, a Google executive detained then released for his part in the uprising that overthrew President Hosni Mubarak, said members of the military council had told him a referendum would be held on constitutional amendments in two months.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik had told him that he would reshuffle his cabinet in the coming week to bring opposition figures into the line-up appointed by Mubarak last month.

Also posted on Twitter and Facebook were reports that Mir Hossein Mousavi and his wife, Zahrah Rahnavard, had joined one of the marches.

The other prominent opposition leader, Mehdi Karroubi, is still under house arrest.

Al Jazeera was unable to confirm whether Mousavi and Rahnavard joined the protest, and at last report, Kaleme.com, a pro-reformist website, said that security forces had prevented the couple from leaving their home.

As night fell in Iran, the BBC reported that city lights were being turned off and that security forces were attacking protesters in the dark.

[Mistress Stowastiq]

State broadcaster here in Ireland Radio Telefis Eireann (RTE) do a great job at reporting on things like this too. But due to size of the country they don't have a 24hr news station just news shows about 3-4 times a day. Also we had the first fatal plane crash in many many years last week, so that understandably has been the main news item.

On the Sky thing, ppl hear Murdoch and immediately associate it with Fox. But having watched Sky you'll know they're nothing like each other. Don't know enough about US News channels to say exactly what it's like, but a more mainstream channel would be a better fit. There is no doubt on some issues they lean to the right and it really depends who's covering the story. Like with Egypt the reporters on the ground were just telling the story as it happened. But Tim Marshall the foreign affairs editor is very right wing so I normally switch channels if he's on as you're likely to hear the words terrorist, islamist or other such words out of his mouth. I believe that even if they sent him to cover something on the pope he's squeeze those in somewhere.

When Sky started first they tried the Fox format of some news reporting and a whole host of 1 hour shows similar to the O'Reilly Factor with UK ppl that had extreme right wing views. But the company that exists as Sky today is a result of a merger between Sky and British Satellite Broadcasting which was just a main stream broadcaster. As a result those shows had to be toned down and eventually dropped so that they have their current format of anchors, studio and field reporters and no special interest shows.

On the not trusting the police issue. In Northern Ireland after the Good Friday agreement they reformed the policing service as the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) as the previous incarnation, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) was not trusted by the Catholics. The RUC had a history of abuse, unlawful detainment etc. against Catholics and was mainly made up of Protestants. The new force actively recruited Catholics and implemented a host of changes recommended by Patten.

It took a few years for the new force to be accepted, especially by Sinn Fein, as police practices and peoples opinions don't change overnight. But as it was seen that the Patten recommendations were being implemented the PSNI gained more and more acceptance. Not saying it's a perfect police force but it's a hell of a lot better than the RUC was. Maybe this is something they could do in Egypt also.

Very informative, much appreciated perspective. I like Sky News just wasn't sure because I spend a lot of the time translating the meaning of words like "row", Liberal Democrat's and MP when it comes to politics. I can only get their 24 hour free web channel because I am in the states, it is in HD but no volume controls and I Cntrl+ to full screen it on my computer.

Egypt News:
This NYT blog is very thick with you tube vids. It is on several mid east potential uprisings currently going on. Not sure of their validity in perspective yet.
The Google translated minutes of the meeting with Generals was pretty interesting.

Here is a couple of the posts: [spoilers for size]

Spoiler: show

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/201...ed-on-facebook
February 14, 2011, 1:01 pm
Latest Updates on Middle East Protests
By ROBERT MACKEY

The Lede is following protests in Iran, Bahrain and Yemen on Monday, as well as developments in Egypt, just days into the post-Mubarak era. Updates below mix alerts on breaking news with reports from bloggers and journalists on the ground. A stream of Twitter updates on regional protests is in this blog’s right column.

Sunday in Morocco?

Youtube link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_LF0...layer_embedded

Issandr El Amrani, a Moroccan-American journalist who blogs from Cairo as The Arabist, posted the video embedded above on Monday, explaining that it is "part of a viral campaign to encourage people to protest in Morocco on February 20."

He adds:

The call to protest was initially put out by the center-left PSU party, but it is also backed by civil society movements. Many are skeptical that this movement will end up very far: unlike Egypt or Tunisia, Morocco has not been ruled by the same man for over two decades (Muhammad VI became king in 1999).

But there are similarities with these countries: over the last five years or so, Morocco has regressed after initially showing promise. Freedom of expression is at the lowest since the late 1990s, with independent voices shut out by campaigns of intimidation and libel lawsuits. Political life has been hijacked by a party run by the king's closest friend.

Economic life is being suffocated by the palace, with the king's economic interests now harming entrepreneurship with its anti-competitive measures. There is also still no new constitution making Morocco into a real constitutional monarchy, with Muhammad VI effectively an absolute ruler.

The Makhzen - the state and business elite that runs the country - acts with ever more impunity. Rule of law suffers, notably because people close to the royal family can get away with anything - including, a few years ago, shooting a police officer.

Moroccans deserve better. We need rule of law and a monarchy that respects citizenship and political life.

5:37 P.M. Meeting With Generals Summarized on Facebook

A photograph posted on Facebook shows a group of Egyptian Internet activists saluting protesters killed in the uprising, in imitation of a military spokesman who did so on state television.

As my colleagues David Kirkpatrick and Anthony Shadid report from Cairo, "two generals sat down Sunday night to talk about their country's future with seven of the revolution's young organizers - including the Google marketing executive Wael Ghonim - and the young activists posted their notes on the meeting directly to the Internet for the Egyptian public to see."

Arabic-speaking readers can read the minutes of the meeting, written by Mr. Ghonim and Amr Salama, on the We Are All Khaled Said Facebook page (which now has more than 800,000 fans). Among the other young activists at the meeting were Ahmad Maher and Asmaa' Mahfouz, from the April 6 Youth movement, and Abdul Rahman Samir, a supporter of Mohamed ElBaradei.

In a post on The Arabist blog on Monday, "The Facebook Kids Meet the Generals," Ursula Lindsey translated "some highlights from the minutes.

She wrote:

The meeting is described in very positive terms: "We noticed an absence of paternalism in the conversation ('You don't know your own interest, son.') For the first time we sat with an Egyptian official who listened more than he spoke." Although the young participants did tell the military they should have a better media communications strategy (please! enough with these cryptic SMS messages).


This is what the military had to say:

- The military does not want power and thinks a civilian government is the only path towards progress. They only want to safeguard the gains of the revolution.

- Keeping the current government is place is necessary but only until it can carry out the needed changes.

- The military wants to see corruption pursued and prosecuted.

- A constitutional committee will be formed during the next 10 days; a new constitution will be voted on in a referendum in 2 months.

- The military encourages the people to take steps towards forming new political parties.

- The military will be holding meetings with representatives of all political forces.

- They military will supervise a campaign to raise 100 billion pounds in donations repair the damages of the revolution.

- Egyptians need to go back to work, put their money back in the stock market, and attract tourists again.

- Voting in the constitutional referendum and the presidential elections will be just with the national ID card.

Ms. Lindsey added:

Ghonim and Salama take all this at face value and say they are convinced of the military's sincerity. There are some promising commitments here, but I am skeptical of several things: how deeply will the military, which controls enormous portions of the Egyptian economy, look into corruption? Why do they get to run a revolution relief fund (with which they will presumably contract themselves to rebuild the country's police stations, etc.)? {...]

Last but not least: The military is taking meetings--that's good--but when are we going to see a truly consultative and democratic process put in place?

4:40 P.M. Undercover Filming in Tehran and Protests After

These two clips, apparently shot on Monday in Tehran by supporters of Iran's opposition who wanted to conceal the fact that they were recording video, give a sense of how sever the restrictions are on independent reporting of any kind in Iran now.


This clip, apparently shot from a bus by someone who concealed the camera in a coat, seems to show a large number of protesters marching past a police car on a Tehran street: Youtube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NnIC...layer_embedded


That video was posted, along with more than a dozen new clips, on a YouTube channel associated with Rahesabz.net, community news site for Iran's opposition protesters. (Rah-e Sabz is Persian for "the Green Path.")
This video, said to show members of Iran's paramilitary Basij militia patrolling Tehran on motorcycles, also seems to have been shot from a bus: Youtube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugnEn...layer_embedded


That video was uploaded to the Freedommessanger20 YouTube channel, along with more than 50 more clips all apparently shot on Monday.

Among the other clips on the channel is this one, of protesters making far less of an effort to conceal their political leanings, loudly banging on makeshift drums and chanting "Azadi!" – "Freedom!" – on a Tehran street on Monday night: Youtube Link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N38my...layer_embedded



4:02 P.M. |Egyptian State TV News Editor Chased From His Office


Here is video of a remarkable post-revolutionary scene: the head of news for Egyptian state television being chased from his office by angry workers on Sunday: Youtube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C4AP...layer_embedded