Blog de KingShamus

"When an entire nation thirsted to break free from PC…Andrew Breitbart opened a big bar."–Chris Muir

Posts Tagged ‘Egypt’

Good Thing We Got Mean Old Egyptian Dictator Hosni Mubarak To Relinquish Power

Posted by KingShamus on November 24, 2012

Because newly-minted Egyptian dictator Muhammad Morsi is totally not becoming the new dictator of Egypt.

With a constitutional assembly on the brink of collapse and protesters battling the police in the streets over the slow pace of change, President Mohamed Morsi issued a decree on Thursday granting himself broad powers above any court as the guardian of Egypt’s revolution, and used his new authority to order the retrial of Hosni Mubarak.

Mr. Morsi, an Islamist and Egypt’s first elected president, portrayed his decree as an attempt to fulfill popular demands for justice and protect the transition to a constitutional democracy. But the unexpected breadth of the powers he seized raised immediate fears that he might become a new strongman.

B-b-b-but…youth and revolution and Facebook and stuff.

This  #ArabSpringFail has been brought to you by President Barack Obama, who insisted that the relatively reliable American ally Hosni Mubarak get the hell out of Dodge.  Why?  Because he wasn’t down with the new-fangled 7th century Koran-thumper lingo those Islamofacist hep-cats are all jazzed up about these days.

But hey, maybe we should see how this Egyptian Dictatorship Version 2.0 thing works out before we judge it.  I mean, what democratic reform movement doesn’t start out with numerous charges of sexual assault carried out against women counter-protesters and end with legalized female circumcision?  That’s how George Washington did it when he wrote the Constitution all by himself back in 1492.  And if you dispute that fact, you hate the Founding Fathers.  Why are you chugging the anti-American haterade, hater?

I wonder what Mona Eltahawy, the brave defender of free speech when it lines up with her brand of delicate soft-focus socialism, thinks of the enlightened Egyptian autocrats sanctioning genital mutilation for Egyptian girls.  It’s sad that full-time PLO apologist and part-time Columbia University professor Edward Said isn’t alive today.  He could’ve written a beautiful 20,000 word propaganda piece about why the Muslim Brotherhood was completely justified in sending out the rape-squads to deal with those lippy female protesters at Tahrir Square.

At least President Barack Obama finally recognizes his error in supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and is now doing everything he can to stop the creation of a new dictatorship in a vital part of the Middle East.


UPDATE:  Linked by the great Bob Belvedere!  He asks a very good question:

How long will the pyramids last?

I’d say it all depends.  Does Not-Dictator Morsi value tourist dollars?  The only reason anybody outside the Middle East gives a shit about Egypt is the archaeology.  World opinion–and a lot of cold hard cash–would turn very heavily against the Muslim Bothering Brothers if they vaporized the Sphinx in a fit of Islamodouche pique.

On the other hand, the Taliban turned the Bamiyan Buddhas into piles of rubble.  Nobody cared.  Sure, there were some weak outcries and some concern troll pooh-poohing over the loss of priceless works of megalithic art.  But that was pretty much it. There are plenty of  wackos in the MB who want to finish the job of cleansing Egypt of it’s pre-Islamic history the same way the Taliban did in their country.

Egypt is more connected to the world than Afghanistan was or is today.  That means there might be enough relatively sane Islamists who know just how valuable the Pyramids are to the nation.  Hopefully that is enough to save Egypt’s national treasures.

Posted in Foreign doings, Politicians behaving badly | Tagged: , , , | 5 Comments »

Lara Logan, Egypt & Feminist Sob Sister Idiocy

Posted by KingShamus on February 16, 2011

Pray for Lara Logan.

On Friday, Feb. 11, the day Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak stepped down, CBS chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan was covering the jubilation in Tahrir Square for a “60 Minutes” story when she and her team and their security were surrounded by a dangerous element amidst the celebration. It was a mob of more than 200 people whipped into frenzy.

In the crush of the mob, she was separated from her crew. She was surrounded and suffered a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating before being saved by a group of women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers. She reconnected with the CBS team, returned to her hotel and returned to the United States on the first flight the next morning. She is currently in the hospital recovering.

Read the rest of Pundette’s piece; you’ll get a taste of a particularly vile left-wingers exceedingly nasty attack on Ms. Logan.

As for the attack, sustained sexual assault sounds an awful lot like ‘rape’. Being that this horrific act was perpetrated during a lawless clusterfuck means there is probably very little chance that the scumbags who did this can be identified. Being that this happened to a western female reporter, there probably wasn’t going to be much of an investigation in the first place. You can’t tell me that in a country where an estimated 96% of married women are…“cut”…there will be much effort made on behalf of one American media personality.

This incident brings a few things into sharp relief. I’ve heard more than a few people call CBS the Tiffany Network. Supposedly they have the highest ratings of any broadcast channel. Ummmm, how’s about spending some of that money on better security for your reporters? I don’t know what kind of safety infrastructure the network had in place for Ms. Logan. Frankly, I don’t care because it clearly wasn’t good enough.

The counter-argument to that is, “Well, she’s a reporter, that’s her job, she knew the risks.” I get all that. It’s a valid train of thought. However, just because Ms. Logan was cool risking her neck by going into Tahrir Square doesn’t mean that maybe somebody higher up the food chain could’ve put her in a safer location from which to make her reports. Like, maybe someplace other than a choke point ripe for an ambush.

To be perfectly frank, CBS dropped the ball on this one. They need to take a good hard look at themselves and their security procedures. If I was a foreign correspondent, I’d be very nervous about just how much the news bureau actually cares about my safety after this episode.

Meanwhile, The Other McCain finds a feminist sob-sister in high–or is that low?–dudgeon.

Echidne begins her discussion of insensitive comments by threatening to cast into outer darkness anyone who might be tempted to see the crime against Lara Logan as having a distinct cultural component. That would categorize you as the “loathsome” type who “describes Muslims or Arabs as animals and so on.” Scroll through the comments at I Own The World and you can see that these “loathsome” sentiments are actually quite common. To be counted among the bien-pensants, however, you can’t think of such things. No, says Echidne, you must ignore the specific context of this crime — a blonde American woman raped by Egyptians during a revolutionary demonstration — and instead focus all your wrath on the terrible sexism and insensitivity of anonymous people leaving crude comments on a Web site.

Because sexism and insensitivity are the real problems, you see.

What an amazing act of intellectual prestidigitation! And if you call attention to the element of distraction involved in Echidne’s magic trick, if you describe what she is actually doing as opposed to what she claims to be doing, your criticism will be cited as further proof of the looming menace posed by insensitive sexists. And constant vigilance against that menace is the raison d’etre of feminism.

The mind magic on display here is a particularly common species of progressive thought.  It’s the cognitive clash that happens when two or more of Left’s grievance groups are in conflict. In this case, it’s bed-wetting multicultural feel-goodism versus strident man-hating Vagina Monologuing feminist moral preening.

Take note who wins that battle. The feminist blogger Echidne is more worried about the feelings of Muslims who might get their delicate sensitivities mildly bruised because somebody got a little rough on an internet forum.  Where does Ms. Logan–the only real victim in all of this–fit into Echidne’s story? Hell if I know.

So I guess multi-culti bullshit beats grrrl-power nonsense in this go-round.  I wonder why that’s the case here.  Maybe it’s because Muslims have proven so adept at using violence to answer their critics.  It’s not like anyone fears feminist terrorism beyond the horrifying wardrobe malfunctions.

Beyond the cowardice of the self-styled brave truth tellers, Echidne’s epic fail here is a failure of priorities.  I don’t have a problem with left-wingers having a hierarchy of political goals and interests.  Conservatives of different stripes do the same thing.  If a lib wants to value ethnic grievance groups over feminism, that’s entirely up to them.

But if you’re going to call yourself a feminist and make a big show of caring about women, you should…you know…at least pretend to give a rat’s ass about a female rape victim before you go off on a moralistic tirade against a figment of your ideology.

Update:  Angel over at Woman Honor Thyself has some words.

And while all compassionate humans no doubt pray for Lara’s physical, emotional, and spiritual healing…Will someone dare ask if hers’ or others’ eyes have now been opened to the belief system that motivated these attacks against her?

….. Will she or others speak on her behalf of the the truth about this ideology in all it’s horror.

Or will we be insulted yet again with the “lone” wolves theory…. who of course—don’t represent Izlam— being the perps?

All hundreds of them.

How many lone wolves make a pack?

Maybe that should be a valid question, rather than the PC hand wringing we get from the left’s representatives.

Posted in Foreign doings | Tagged: , , , , , | 12 Comments »

Egypt, Foreign Policy and A Possible Pro-War Left

Posted by KingShamus on February 10, 2011

This is pretty amazing, even by the “Brainless Obamaton” Standard.

…we were supposed to trust Leon Panetta and his group at the CIA, despite their horrible record on Egypt. We were supposed to listen to the administration’s mouthpieces, despite Director of National Intelligence Clapper’s insane insistence before Congress today that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was a violence-eschewing, largely secular organization that really means us no harm.

Hit me with that one more time, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

“The term Muslim Brotherhood is an umbrella term for a variety of movements. In the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried al-Qaeda as a perversion of Islam,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told a congressional hearing today.


If the Muslim Brotherhood is largely secular than the KKK is just an innocent collective of community organizers looking to spread awareness about racial issues.

In any case, we see just how little the Obama Administration actually gives a shit about the foreign policy aspect of the presidency.  It’s not just Obama’s actions; dithering in Afghanistan, ambivalence over the Iraq War victory and pissing on American allies are just the most egregious examples of St. Barry’s boredom with the outside world.  The clearest signs that this president could not care less about international affairs are his personnel choices.  James Clapper,  Hilary Clinton and Leon Panetta are a pack of hacky lawyers and useless politicos with no business running a Peace Corps away team much less having real power and influence in American foreign policy. 

If Obambi was actually engaged in foreign policy, he would make better–or least less bad–choices when it came to who was running his State Department and his intelligence services.  Instead he chooses absolutely unserious people to helm these positions.  Hill-Dawg at State doesn’t make any sense unless Obama was just throwing his 2008 primary political rival a bone.  Madame Clinton is many things, but a foreign policy guru with loads of experience dealing with international affairs ain’t one of them.

Furthermore:  What has been the animating thrust of the Obama presidency?  Impressing a soft creeping statism on the American domestic sphere.  He’s worked hard on it, he’s taken massive political losses because of it and he’s all but announced his determination not to deviate from it.  Obama is a man of the Left, but he is a man most concerned with implementing nanny-state socialism in America. 

What happens when a President Obama is faced with a situation where America absolutely has to go to war?  Part of me wants to say that Obama will curl up and surrender.  I certainly wouldn’t be surprised.  He’s thrown far more harsh rhetoric at his Republican opponents than he has at actual factual enemies of the United States.  Obama also has played up his Kumbaya bona fides an awful lot, which makes me think he might just be the sort of candy ass Jimmah Cawtah version 2.o dweeb a lot of people think he is. 

But another part of me thinks that if Barack Obama were confronted by circumstance with the necessity of using military force, he just might unleash absolute hell upon the antagonist in question. 

Think about it in the context of Obama’s ultimate desires.  His mission is to turn America into a corporate socialist paradise with a big government bureaucracy overseeing it all.  Lets say some feckless foreign jerkoff regime interrupts Barry’s quest for statism by forcing the US into a war. Obama is so intent on his hopey-changey agenda that he might not be able to tolerate such a rude intrusion on his pinko parade.  In response to an outside threat, the President could possibly decide to simply and swiftly obliterate the opponent rather than go the nation-building/hearts-n-minds route taken by George Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Besides the notion that war helps to grow the power of the government, which is in Obama’s interest, an all-out no-holds-barred conflict would probably annihilate all but the most powerful foreign militaries.   A relatively quick decisive victory would not only buck up Obama’s domestic political standing, it would also free up the President to pursue his ultimate socialist goals for America.  

This is why I think that a pro-war Left, while unlikely, isn’t impossible either.  It seems crazy to think that the modern liberal movement, with it’s multicultural delusions and constant thumbsucking over American imperialism, could ever embrace war.  However, eventually someone on the Left will realize that a violent US response to an outside threat is a necessity for the advancement of the American statist project.  Under the right circumstances and against the right sort of enemy, President Obama could lead many elements of the American Left into a pro-war ideological stance.

I’m basically thinking out loud here.  It may very well be that the American socialist crowd can never be swayed from their peacenik bona fides.  At the same time, I can’t help but think that the possibility of a rabid pro-war liberalism could be right around the corner.

Posted in Domestic Happenings, Foreign doings, Politicians behaving badly | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 9 Comments »

The Simplicity Of Egypt As An Outright Enemy

Posted by KingShamus on January 31, 2011

I’ve been a little nervous about just how crappy the Egyptian revolt is likely to turn out. I’ve been sorta encouraged–although I dunno if that’s the right word–by the optimistic view taken by Donald Douglas over at American Power.

But folks need to get a grip. Nostalgia for Mubarak is exceedingly misplaced. Yeah, he’s our guy and all that. But he’s been a disaster for Egypt’s development, and in an age of increasingly rapid global communications, the regime’s failures are exponentially multiplied by the day. Victor Davis Hanson points out that the roots of radicalism in Egypt have more to do with Mubarak’s rule than anything found in Israel or the United States, “What’s the Matter with Egypt?”

VDH-What’s next? “Finger-in-the-wind” diplomacy may work for a while, but it requires deftness that follows conditions on the street in a nanosecond to avoid appearing purely cynical (a skill beyond Hillary, Biden, and Obama). I think in this bad/worse choice scenario we might as well support supposedly democratic reformers, with the expectation that they could either fail in removing Mubarak or be nudged out by those far worse than Mubarak. Contrary to popular opinion, I think Bush was right to support elections in Gaza “one time” (only of course). The Gazans got what they wanted, we are done with them, and they have to live with the results, happy in their thuggish misery, with a prosperous Israel and better-off West Bank to remind them of their stupidity. All bad, but an honest bad and preferable to the lie that there were thousands of Jeffersonians in Gaza thwarted by the U.S.

There is much to agree with regarding Douglas’ and Hanson’s assertions.

First, it’s important to note a few things.  I think most people in the West want the Egyptian uprising to end in a democratic government that respects free speech, the rule of law, property rights, religious pluralism, free elections and all the other happy horse shit that goes along with a functional sane nation.

One problem: What happens when the populace of a country–you know, the folks that actually live there–wants something completely anathema to democracy?

A majority of Muslims around the world welcome a significant role for Islam in their countries’ political life, according to a new poll from the Pew Research Center, but have mixed feelings toward militant religious groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

According to the survey, majorities in Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan and Nigeria would favor changing current laws to allow stoning as a punishment for adultery, hand amputation for theft and death for those who convert from Islam to another religion.

Big ups to Bunkerville for finding the survey in question.

In the meantime go ahead and click the link.  Unpack the data and take it for a drive around the block once or twice. Is there anything in there that suggests a place like Egypt is prepared for a democracy that won’t immediately get swallowed up the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas?  A democratic Egypt would almost surely result in a Muslim Brotherhood victory.  The MB would promptly end all elections, install a sharia-based thugocracy and commence with the ooey-gooey Islamofascism.

So, barring a miracle, a real Egyptian democracy is probably out of the question.

On the other hand, a continuation of the secular military government might not be so great either.  We’ve paid Egypt about $50 billion since 1979 to play nice in the sandbox with Israel and the rest of her neighbors.  What exactly has the United States government bought for that hefty price tag?  The Egyptian regime either can’t or won’t neuter the Muslim Brotherhood, which has ties to Hamas, al-Qaeda and the very terrorist-friendly Iranian theocracy.  For fifty billion dollars, Egypt should’ve stomped the MB into a pile of fertilizer while simultaneously singing “The Star-Spangled Banner” in perfect eight-part harmony on a continuous loop since the Carter era.

What we’ve gotten for our money is a frenemy.  A stab us in the back, anti-Semitism supporting, wink-and-a-nod to terrorists frenemy.  I don’t know about you, but I think we probably could’ve gotten that for a whole lot less cheddar and a whole lot less trouble. 

Having Egypt go rogue would remove a lot of the ambiguity to her relationship to America, Israel and the West.  Instead of the current situation, which amounts to Egypt giving us a handshake with their right hand with stabbing us with their left, it would be abundantly clear that the Egyptian government just hated us, full stop.  That’s not great, but it does make it easier when and if we have to kick their ass back into the Old Kingdom

The only snag to a Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt is the Suez Canal being used as a club to beat the West into submission.  To be sure, that’s a mighty big problem.  It’s an issue that would have to be addressed with either incredibly deft diplomacy or military intervention.  As Hanson has noted, the Obama Admenstruation has proven itself incapable of smart foreign relations.  Nothing in St. Barry’s paper-thin resume suggests he’s willing to use the US armed forces in that manner. 

So yeah, the Suez is a tough nut.  But it isn’t the most difficult problem America has ever had to deal with.  The Cold War presented far greater challenges across a far longer timeframe and on a far larger geopolitical playing field.  Better still, I don’t think a President Palin will have any qualms about laying the smack-down on any Muslim Brotherhood jag-offs that might take over the Egyptian state.

I don’t know.  Maybe this is a glib read on the Egyptian revolt.  I think perhaps I’m trying to put a decent spin on an otherwise craptastic situation.

Posted in Foreign doings | Tagged: , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

So I guess Egypt is shitting the mattress

Posted by KingShamus on January 28, 2011

Let’s listen to the most intelligent sentient moustache ever and his human host, John Bolton.

I think what’s clearly happened today [in  Egypt] is that the Muslim Brotherhood, the radical Islamist party in Egypt has called it’s supporters into the street. I don’t think it was present on the first two or three days. 

I think after the Friday prayers the Brotherhood brought its people out. That’s why the protests are even more extensive today. That constitutes no doubt about it a direct threat to the military government, and I think the failure of the other security forces to bring the demonstrations under control also now explains the presence of the military. 

Let me be clear here, this is not just the Mubarak-family government. The military has ruled Egypt since Gamal Nasser and they over through King Farook. 

It’s the military that is the real government and they are not going to go peacefully. 

…I think the question is whether and to what extent the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Islamists have infiltrated the leadership. If the military holds firm it’s entirely possible, although bloody, that the government can hold onto power. That doesn’t necessarily mean Mubarak will be in power, but the military will be, and I think that is why this contrast makes it so important for people to understand, this is not a choice between the Mubarak government on one hand, and sweetness and light, Jeffersonian democracy on the other.

That’s whats at stake here folks.

More than likely, there are no reform-minded democrats in Egypt in a position to take the reins of this revolution.

That means we have no good options. 


Once again, we are confronted by the thinness of possibility.  In our dreams, anything can happen.  Time travel, mental telepathy, Weezer putting out a listenable album in the 21st century; lots of crazy unbelievable shit can happen in an ideal world. 

In the real world, most of the time we get only a few choices and none of them are good.  I would love for there to be a vibrant democracy movement in Egypt.  I’d also love to own a McLaren F1.  Neither one are gonna happen.

Why?  Because in both cases, nobody has created the conditions for those things to exist.  In Egypt, the American government hasn’t done enough to foster real live democrats. Neither has anyone else for that matter.   Of course the Mubarak regime hasn’t lifted a finger to help create a democratic tradition.  Has the United Nations encouraged an Egyptian democracy?  Please.

Until we start investing time, manpower, resources and money in promoting rad shit like the rule of law, property rights, limited government and natural rights, we’re always going to be stuck with bad options.  We’ll either have to cozy up to vile scumbags like Hosni Mubarak and try to scour off his stank-ass stench or we’ll have to give implicit thumbs up to local jag-off movements that hate us.         

Instead of being proactive we watch as nations go into violent revolt,  then grab our rabbits’ foot and wish for things to work out.  “Oh please, make Egypt a happy little Mediterranean republic.  Hell, I’d take a semi-functioning constitutional monarchy. Pretty Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeze?”

Bolton’s right.  This could be a little hiccup in Mubarak’s reign of douche.  The Egyptian military could put this little unpleasantness down and it’ll all be over.  On the other hand, the Muslim Brotherhood could finally cream their jeans and snag themselves an Egypt trophy for the terrorist cave mantlepiece.

Whatever happens in Egypt, we’ll probably still be wishing for a more fair government instead of actually doing what we can to make that happen.

Posted in Foreign doings | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,373 other followers

%d bloggers like this: