There goes Egypt: The Muslim Brotherhood is now in full control

Spread the love

Loading

Barry Rubin @ Rubin Reports:

So can you write “Arab Spring,” “free elections,” “democracy in Egypt,” and such things 100 times? This just might be somewhat in contradiction to the fact that:

Muslim Brotherhood President al-Mursi has just removed the two commanding generals of the Egyptian military. Does he have a right to do this? Who knows?There’s no constitution. That means all we were told about not having to worry because the generals would restrain the Brotherhood was false. Moreover, the idea that the army, and hence the government, may fear to act lest they lose U.S. aid will also be false. There is no parliament at present  He is now the democratically elected dictator of Egypt. True, he picked another career officer but he has now put forward the principle: he decides who runs the army. The generals can still advise Mursi. He can choose to listen to them or not. But there is no more dual power in Egypt but only one leader.  The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces which has run Egypt since February 2011 is gone. Only Mursi remains and Egypt is now at his mercy.

Oh and to put the icing on the cake, Mursi will apparently decide who will be on the commission that writes the new Consttitution.

Behind the scenes note: Would Mursi dared have done this if he thought Obama would come down on him like a ton of bricks? Would the army give up if they thought America was behind it? No on both counts.

This is a coup. Mursi is bound by no constitution. He can do as he pleases unless someone is going to stop him. And the only candidate–the military–is fading fast, far faster than even we pessimists would have predicted.

Muslim Brotherhood President al-Mursi has also  just named the editors of the top Egyptian newspaper and other media outlets. They are state-owned, you know, and there are a half-dozen good little independent newspapers.

But one of them, al-Destour (ironically meaning “The Constitution”),  has just had a full issue seized on charges of “fueling sedition” and “harming the president through phrases and wording punishable by law.” We know this through a report in the Middle East News Agency, the state-owned monopoly.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

64 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Mike O’Malley:

However, if Ivan knows better it would be best if he would clearly explain what he thinks we should know. Evidence in support of his claims would be helpful.

Please see link at post #50.

The documents released by WikiLeaks reveal US Embassy officials were in regular contact with the activist throughout 2008 and 2009, considering him one of their most reliable sources for information about human rights abuses.

Obviously, to all but a few here at FA, the US was behind Mubarak’s overthrow.

@Ivan:

The document you reference is not conclusive to your conspiracy claims. If you follow the link to what the released and partially redacted “Wiki” document says; what you have is a report by the Embassy, is the allegations made to Embassy personnel by the self proclaimed democratic activist. What is notable is what the Embassy says about his unsubstantiated claims:

…He described how State Security (SSIS) detained him at the Cairo airport upon his return and confiscated his notes for his summit presentation calling for democratic change in Egypt, and his schedule for his Congressional meetings. xxxxxxxxxxxx contended that the GOE will never undertake significant reform, and therefore, Egyptians need to replace the current regime with a parliamentary democracy. He alleged that several opposition parties and movements have accepted an unwritten plan for democratic transition by 2011; we are doubtful of this claim.

This is all “he said.” There is no indication that the Embassy supports his claims as truthful or accurate.

xxxxxxxxxxxx said that although SSIS recently released two April 6 activists, it also arrested three additional group members. We have pressed the MFA for the release of these April 6 activists. April 6’s stated goal of replacing the current regime with a parliamentary democracy prior to the 2011 presidential elections is highly unrealistic, and is not supported by the mainstream opposition. End summary and comment.

That an Embassy has pressed for release of dissidents is nothing new and indeed is common place among their interactions with many host governments. Nor does that indicate a conspiracy with the Embassy and said activists.

xxxxxxxxxxxx asserted that this plan is so sensitive it cannot be written down. (Comment: We have no information to corroborate that these parties and movements have agreed to the unrealistic plan xxxxxxxxxxxx has outlined. Per ref C, xxxxxxxxxxxx previously told us that this plan was publicly available on the internet. End comment.)

So the Ambassador is taking this information with a big grain of salt.

8. (C) Comment: xxxxxxxxxxxx offered no roadmap of concrete steps toward April 6’s highly unrealistic goal of replacing the current regime with a parliamentary democracy prior to the 2011 presidential elections. Most opposition parties and independent NGOs work toward achieving tangible, incremental reform within the current political context, even if they may be pessimistic about their chances of success. xxxxxxxxxxxx wholesale rejection of such an approach places him outside this mainstream of opposition politicians and activists.

Again, clearly the Embassy had serious doubts that the informant was personally involved in the movement. Additionally they are skeptical that a regime change was even realistic. That is an observation of the facts, not an admission that the USG is involved in the plan for Egyptian regime change.

The documents released by WikiLeaks reveal US Embassy officials were in regular contact with the activist throughout 2008 and 2009, considering him one of their most reliable sources for information about human rights abuses.

What do we glean from all this? Ambassador Scobey is clearly skeptical towards this source/activist’s statements regarding his meetings with USG officials and his claims to be involved with Egyptian resistance leaders. Having said all that, the US State Department did indeed arrange Alliance of Youth Movements Summits. The purpose of these summits are expressively to “explore ways to advance grassroots movements seeking positive social change through 21st century technology and tools.” Nowhere does this prove that the purpose of these summits is US backed regime change:

Participants in the summit will discuss a variety of practical topics, including politics, resisting violence, and technology; sustainability and long-term planning; and the use of viral video in social movements.

None of this is evidence that the US Government State Dept. was supporting the overthrow of the Egyptian government. Nor does it indicate involvement of the CIA as your conspiracy theory claims.

Ditto
if they did help underneath a secret move, of course they who participated have the order to silence and
denial, you get exactly what we are reading on your comment,

Ditto
you have to connect the dots now after all the COUNTRIES FELL UNDER THE PRESSURE OF THE BROTHERHOOD, THEY ARE OUT TO CLOSE THE CIRCLE,
EVEN THAT IT WAS PREDICTED HERE BY AUTHORS AND COMMENTS BEFORE THEY BEGUN

@ilovebeeswarzone:

The question Bees that Ivan raises is not about the factions (including the Muslim Brotherhood). It is whether the US was secretly directly involved in the overthrow of the regime (with boots on the ground, CIA or otherwise). The Wiki memos only point to the State Department holding conferences teaching social change through activism, and that the Embassy was using local informants to obtain information to pass on upstairs to the State Department.

Ditto
I must also say that ; quite often here I hear some post and comment, saying something
that will happen because of the thread from the post being commented by other,
and that person give his deduction and prediction, which always amaze me, and that is not only happening by one but many FLOPPING ACES regulars on this group,
it always capture my attention, because I’m curious to see if it will happen,
and most of them turn out to be right on the spot at a future time, could be close or later,
I always find it quite special when it come concrete as it was predicted.
bye

Ditto
would you think that OBAMA could have been an activist with his friends at the UNIVERSITY,
where many conspiracies are fun to enjoy conversation among foreign students, this which brought him to go to PAKISTAN ON THE DOLE OF GROUP INTERESTED IN HIS GIFT OF ORGANIZING what they where conspiring of, and one activist with a group you keep the contact with each other, and if one is getting in power he will bring his trusted friends with him, where the conspiracy will become a reality with
all the group be it foreigner or AMERICAN WILL PLAY A MAJOR ROLE, using their power positions, TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR COLLECTIVE WISHES, WITH THAT PARTICULAR WISH BE TO DEPOSE THE LEADER OF MUSLIM COUNTRIES ONE AT THE TIME LIKE A BEAST GETTING BIGGER EVERY TIME IT SUCCEED,
THEN BECOMING UNABLE TO STOP,

@ilovebeeswarzone:

Bees, I haven’t really delved into Obama’s “college activism” days. The Chicago Tribune goes into his two years at Occidental College. However I haven’t found anything yet on whether he continued extra-curricular activism protests while at Columbia or Harvard. Considering his radical community organizing past, it may well be that he continued at the other two universities, but it’s hard to say. No one seems to remember much about him at either of the latter institutions, (which is unusual considering how he was supposedly “popular” at Occidental,) and his college records are as we know, sealed. Neither have I found out anything about his religious affiliation (if any) at the time.

Hi…long-time lurker here.

Obviously, one would be hard-pressed to find a document signed “Done by CIA”. That isn’t how the Agency works. It’s pretty much taken at face-value that if the State Department was working with agitators the CIA would also be working hand-in-glove with the SD in helping bring about the overthrow of the Murbarak government.

The idea that the SD would be working NOT in conjunction with the CIA is far-fetched.

I have to side with Ivan, a usually annoying prick, on this one.

BradyBinks
hi,
and same for LYBIA, AND NOW SYRIA,?
BYE

@BradyBinks:

That isn’t how the Agency works. It’s pretty much taken at face-value that if the State Department was working with agitators the CIA would also be working hand-in-glove with the SD in helping bring about the overthrow of the Murbarak government.

The idea that the SD would be working NOT in conjunction with the CIA is far-fetched.

Why? Why is the idea that the SD would be working NOT in conjunction with the CIA far-fetched? CIA often works at cross purposes to DoD. DoD oft works at cross purposes with State. FBI worked at cross purposes with CIA (that is in part how 9/11 happened) DoJ presently works at cross purposes with CIA, DoJ works at cross purposes with DoD Each of these departments and agencies constantly works at cross purposes internally with itself to some degree. For example, in 1968 Secretary of Defense Clark Clifford worked at cross-purposes to both Pres. Johnson and Pres. Johnson’s commandeer in South Vietnam, Gen. Abrams. Why is the idea that the SD would be working NOT in conjunction with the CIA far-fetched?

It seems likely that CIA and State could be working at cross purposes. Who was in charge o State and who was in charge of CIA at the time?

Why is the idea that the SD would be working NOT in conjunction with the CIA far-fetched?

@Mike O’Malley: Well, while I was in Iraq, I saw everyone working at cross purposes. They were all trying to pad their resumes for future opportunities often at the cost to the ultimate mission.

@Randy:

As one might expect given human nature and history. 😉

War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism, by Douglas Feith is an excellent resource for study of the inevitable friction in human endeavor and the liberation of Iraq in particular.

In fact it seems rather silly to me not to anticipate that CIA and State could be working at cross purposes in Egypt today.