Gibbs on Egypt: Violence against protesters is deplorable, transition must begin “immediately”

posted at 4:16 pm on February 2, 2011 by Allahpundit

With this, we’re now officially past the “orderly transition” phase of nudge-nudging.

Last night, Obama issued a brief public statement that included just one line about a prospective deadline for Mubarak’s exit from power: “My belief is that an orderly transition must be meaningful, must be peaceful and it must begin now,” Obama said.

But White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was more explicit Wednesday.

“‘Now’ means ‘yesterday,’” Gibbs explained. “When we said ‘now,’ we meant ‘yesterday’… that’s what the people of Egypt want to see,” Gibbs said, adding that a process that begins one week, one month, or many months from now won’t suffice.

That’s fine, but there’s no going back from it. If Mubarak cracks heads and clings to power, we have no option now but to cut him loose and continue to politely pound (tap?) the table in the name of reform. In fact, if the crackdown is bad enough, replete with uniformed Egyptian troops shooting at protesters, Obama will have little choice but to cancel U.S. foreign aid. Listen carefully at the beginning of the clip below and you’ll find Gibbsy trying to leave a tiny bit of space to maneuver on that point, condemning the violence today as “outrageous” but suggesting, preposterously, that he’s not sure if the government is behind it. That’s necessary spin, I guess, but it’s pathetic all the same. Nicholas Kristof, who’s on the scene in Tahrir Square, says there’s no doubt:

The pro-democracy protesters are unarmed and have been peaceful at every step. But the pro-Mubarak thugs are arriving in buses and are armed — and they’re using their weapons.

In my area of Tahrir, the thugs were armed with machetes, straight razors, clubs and stones. And they all had the same chants, the same slogans and the same hostility to journalists. They clearly had been organized and briefed. So the idea that this is some spontaneous outpouring of pro-Mubarak supporters, both in Cairo and in Alexandria, who happen to end up clashing with other side — that is preposterous. It’s difficult to know what is happening, and I’m only one observer, but to me these seem to be organized thugs sent in to crack heads, chase out journalists, intimidate the pro-democracy forces and perhaps create a pretext for an even harsher crackdown.

Some of the Mubarak goons are probably the Egyptian equivalent of Iran’s basij, i.e. young thugs supported and brainwashed by the regime and sent into the streets terrorize political enemies, especially at moments of unrest. Think of them as a plainclothes version of the SA. But maybe not all of them are so amateur: According to Al Jazeera, at least one thug captured by the demonstrators is an Egyptian military officer. No doubt there are state police in the mix too, as they make their living doing this sort of thing. The reason the uniforms are off is precisely because it gives Mubarak the sort of plausible deniability being used by Gibbs below. If the protesters go home tomorrow and Hosni holds on, the White House spin, I’m sure, will be that we’ll never really know who those “pro-Mubarak demonstrators” were in Tahrir Square. Sad. Even the Onion can’t quite make it funny.

One other note. Our anchor inside Egypt through all of this has been the military, since they’re the only institution left (except possibly Al Jazeera) that still commands respect among the public. Will that change after today’s thuggery, though? Rumblings from Time magazine:

As volleys of stones rained down across the pro-Mubarak and anti-Mubarak lines in the square, frantic protesters expressed their shock and horror that the army was not intervening to stop the violence. “The thugs are hitting us from every direction right now,” says Mahmoud Afifi, an activist with the 6th of April youth movement, who spoke from the midst of the clashes. “The National Democratic Party paid them money to come in here and attack us. And we don’t know why the army didn’t stop them. We are very angry at the army now.”…

What’s happening now is a dramatic polarization of the streets between pro- and anti-regime forces. And with this backdrop, the army’s reputation for neutrality has become a device for political drama and maneuvering. “I think that the regime is using everything to maintain its continuity in power,” says Hala Mustafa, editor in chief of the Al Ahram Quarterly Democracy Review, which is published by the government-funded Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies. “And the neutrality of the army could be used from the regime to stay in power.” It provides the regime with a way of denying the advantage of the streets to the protesters while keeping control of it. Says Mustafa: “As we saw, the army was neutral in the morning when they saw the other crowd arriving armed and on camels and everything. And they paved the way for them. And after that, they stayed neutral even as the battle turned bloody and finished.”

The army’s spin on this is that they’re staying neutral between “anti- and pro-government demonstrators,” which is tantamount to saying that while they refuse to fire on the crowd themselves (at least while in uniform!), they’re happy to stand by while other branches of the state’s fascist apparatus do so. And the U.S. response to this? Quoth NBC: “[T]he officials said the Egyptians have not said exactly what, if any, action they intend to take against demonstrators — and U.S. officials have not asked.” There’s some distressing plausible deniability in that too, although as noted above, the die is already cast here. The U.S. position is that Mubarak must go “immediately” and that violence mustn’t be used against the crowd; once it becomes impossible to deny that the regime intends to ignore us on both counts, we’ll have to distance ourselves somehow. Exit quotation: “Mubarak has the initiative, and appears inclined to use it.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Why is Gibbs criticizing Mubarak’s implementation of the Obama Doctrine?

malclave on February 2, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I cannot help but wonder if maybe the U.S. administration should just go off line, and keep its mouth shut for a few days. ??

jake-the-goose on February 2, 2011 at 4:18 PM

“‘Now’ means ‘yesterday,’” Gibbs explained. “When we said ‘now,’ we meant ‘yesterday’… that’s what the people of Egypt want to see,” Gibbs said, adding that a process that begins one week, one month, or many months from now won’t suffice.

Now Obama better hope Mubarak falls. Because if he somehow manages to suppress the outrage and stays in power…awkward.

amerpundit on February 2, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Baghdad Gibbs… at it again.

upinak on February 2, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Now Obama better hope Mubarak falls. Because if he somehow manages to suppress the outrage and stays in power…awkward.

amerpundit on February 2, 2011 at 4:20 PM

It will be OK, since we will have President Huckabee in a few years. I kid! I kid!.

No Huckabee

Oil Can on February 2, 2011 at 4:22 PM

I thought Gibbs was retiring…

OmahaConservative on February 2, 2011 at 4:22 PM

I cannot help but wonder if maybe the U.S. administration should just go off line, and keep its mouth shut for a few days. ??

jake-the-goose on February 2, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Not possible, Obama must have his mug on TV everyday even if he says absolutely nothing relevant like his statement about Egypt last night.

davek70 on February 2, 2011 at 4:23 PM

CK is right, they should lock Gibbs up.
Smart Power and WTF. There really is no other description.

ORconservative on February 2, 2011 at 4:23 PM

The pro-democracy protesters are unarmed and have been peaceful at every step.

So, we aren’t counting the mobs that sacked the police stations, staged armed assaults on the prisons, and looted the business districts as “pro-democracy protesters”?

Count to 10 on February 2, 2011 at 4:25 PM

“‘Now’ means ‘yesterday,’” Gibbs explained. “When we said ‘now,’ we meant ‘yesterday’… that’s what the people of Egypt want to see,” Gibbs said, adding that a process that begins one week, one month, or many months from now won’t suffice.

Is the administration part of Egypt now, if it’s what the people of Egypt want why use the term “we”?

Bishop on February 2, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Now Obama better hope Mubarak falls. Because if he somehow manages to suppress the outrage and stays in power…awkward.

amerpundit on February 2, 2011 at 4:20 PM

No, not really. In fact, this is how I imagine the conversation would start:

0Bama: “So, Hosni, can your people get with my people about implementing an Internet Kill-switch? That was one nifty move, Akhi!”

dmh0667 on February 2, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Earlier, Anderson Cooper got a hands-on lesson in what the real world is like.

He got the crap beat out of him…because he’s an American. I wonder if that’ll get an investigative story on his own show.

“But..I’m a reporter for CNN for christs sake!”

Smack! Smack-smack! “Die infidel!”

BobMbx on February 2, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Not possible, Obama must have his mug on TV everyday even if he says absolutely nothing relevant like his statement about Egypt last night.

davek70 on February 2, 2011 at 4:23 PM

I do understand that sentiment.

jake-the-goose on February 2, 2011 at 4:28 PM

The U.S. position is that Mubarak must go “immediately” and that violence mustn’t be used against the crowd

I don’t see it this way. They are saying that the transition must begin immediately. Has the President, Gibbs, or anyone in the administration said that Mubarak must leave office immediately?

Mark1971 on February 2, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Obama says that “transition” must begin “now” — putting himself at the head of the angry mob — and it’s understandable that he’s unhappy that they took his order literally. But saying “‘now’ means ‘yesterday’” is only doubling down. Who can doubt that Obama is inciting and egging on the violence? If only he had called for patience and civility instead of immediate confrontation…

joe_doufu on February 2, 2011 at 4:28 PM

When is Gibbs leaving again?

Emily M. on February 2, 2011 at 4:30 PM

“‘Now’ means ‘yesterday,’” …. “When we said ‘now,’ we meant ‘yesterday’

Reminds me of SpaceBalls – “When will then be now?…Soon.”

Electrongod on February 2, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Could it be a god cop bad cop layup. Mubarak clings to power to give Obama a chance to “stand with the people”.

the_nile on February 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM

I don’t see it this way. They are saying that the transition must begin immediately. Has the President, Gibbs, or anyone in the administration said that Mubarak must leave office immediately?

Well, yes and no. As I said in the headline, they’re technically talking about “transition,” but the rhetoric has become more urgent in the past day or two. They obviously want this guy out ASAP. A month-long process where Mubarak gradually hands over power isn’t what they have in mind, clearly.

Allahpundit on February 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM

jake-the-goose on February 2, 2011 at 4:18 PM

This. Why has he made himself the face of this? Have other world leaders been sticking their noses in this and I’ve just missed it? Our president sure is proud of himself and his opinions but I think he’s in a distinct minority on this view.

Cindy Munford on February 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Bishop on February 2, 2011 at 4:26 PM

‘We’ means the Muslim Brotherhood, whom the Left is whitewashing as usual, and his boss who so perfectly combines the two ideologies.

Fortunata on February 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Why would the government break out the violence AFTER mubarak agreed to step down? 7 more months that important?
I also dont recall the anti-mubarak protesters being that peaceful. I recall seeing burning cars and the what not.

Zaggs on February 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Allahpundit on February 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM

And what would their preferred transition look like?

Cindy Munford on February 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM

So, we aren’t counting the mobs that sacked the police stations, staged armed assaults on the prisons, and looted the business districts as “pro-democracy protesters”?

Count to 10 on February 2, 2011 at 4:25 PM

I’m pretty sure they’re just right-wing extremists riled up by something Sarah Palin posted on Facebook.

I’d ask Dana Milbank about it, but I understand he’s in rehab this month.

malclave on February 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM

If a million Tea Partiers descend on DC, calling for the haloed one to resign, will he?

xkaydet65 on February 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM

We’re getting the Party Line from all sides, aren’t we? Nick Kristof and Time magazine?

I expect lies and support for the Islamic rioters from the White House, but when HA puts up lefty radicals as “sources” for anything even remotely close to the truth, that’s just getting into major weirdness.

MrScribbler on February 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Fortunata on February 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Exactly. They see this slipping away.

ORconservative on February 2, 2011 at 4:35 PM

I cannot help but wonder if maybe the U.S. administration should just go off line, and keep its mouth shut for a few days. ??

jake-the-goose on February 2, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I’m inclined to agree.

jeanie on February 2, 2011 at 4:36 PM

I especially enjoyed Gibbs statement that “there is no acceptable excuse for not turning back on the internet” in Egypt.

And nobody said ANYTHING about the FCC wanting an Internet “kill switch”.

Nethicus on February 2, 2011 at 4:38 PM

I expect lies and support for the Islamic rioters from the White House, but when HA puts up lefty radicals as “sources” for anything even remotely close to the truth, that’s just getting into major weirdness.

MrScribbler on February 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Ditto. So does HA support the Muslim Brotherhood now?

Redneck Woman on February 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM

So, we aren’t counting the mobs that sacked the police stations, staged armed assaults on the prisons, and looted the business districts as “pro-democracy protesters”?

Count to 10 on February 2, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Hmmmmm , true.

the_nile on February 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM

If a million Tea Partiers descend on DC, calling for the haloed one to resign, will he?

xkaydet65 on February 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Ahhh..no. He only has an ear to certain foreign crowds, not domestic ones.

Electrongod on February 2, 2011 at 4:40 PM

What if O’s call for immediate changes prompted Mubarak to send in the goons because he wants more time to bring about changes (for whatever reason)? Rush was saying something along these lines today if I heard it correctly-wasn’t listening closely due to working on something at that time). Also, what if the changes do happen immediately and the Muslim Brotherhood ends up running the country and hindsight shows that with more time it could have been avoided letting them get control? You own it Barry. Nice work if that happens. IMO, a more measured statement would have been better. Now or never set ups don’t usually have positive outcomes. But hey, what could we expect from the man who provided the argument for the demise of his own signature legislation? (Can’t house everyone by ordering them to buy houses) The WH = Clusterfark

JimP on February 2, 2011 at 4:40 PM

‘Must begin immediately’….

Why do I get the picture of Barry as PeeWee Herman dancing in those platform shoes?

Limerick on February 2, 2011 at 4:41 PM

So, AP knows as a fact that the MB could not organize and arm its goons to foment this violence?
Obama better butt out, which I am sure his ego will not allow. Scenario: Obama decides cutts off aid to Egypt, then the Egyptian army pulls away from protecting the US Embassy, and then the Americans in the embassy are taken hostage. Hello Jimmy Carter.

GaltBlvnAtty on February 2, 2011 at 4:41 PM

I cannot help but wonder if maybe the U.S. administration should just go off line, and keep its mouth shut for a few days. ??

jake-the-goose on February 2, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I’m inclined to agree.

jeanie on February 2, 2011 at 4:36 PM

Ahh, what is life without our frivolous dreams.

pugwriter on February 2, 2011 at 4:43 PM

I think this was smart.

What a shock this must have been, everyone thought Egypt was stable until this week.

petunia on February 2, 2011 at 4:43 PM

“Because like, we’re in charge of Egypt and all,” -Bobby Gibbs.

Akzed on February 2, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Yesterday’s waffling didn’t do so well in the focus groups.

pedestrian on February 2, 2011 at 4:44 PM

They clearly had been organized and briefed.

I didn’t realize SEIU had chapters in Egypt.

csdeven on February 2, 2011 at 4:46 PM

I especially enjoyed Gibbs statement that “there is no acceptable excuse for not turning back on the internet” in Egypt.

And nobody said ANYTHING about the FCC wanting an Internet “kill switch”.

Nethicus on February 2, 2011 at 4:38 PM

The irony has been locked at defcon 1 for a long time with this bunch.

the_nile on February 2, 2011 at 4:49 PM

obama to Egyptian Army: Remove Mubarak now, start transition

ConservativePartyNow on February 2, 2011 at 4:51 PM

“Now means yesterday” means the people Democrats here want to take over Egypt are in place and ready to take over, and they don’t want enough time to elapse to put anybody else in competition with them.

Timing is everything, what the majority of Egyptians want in their form of government means very little.

Speakup on February 2, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Egyptian uprising idol Mohammed ElBaradei has ordered Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave the country by Friday – or he will be a “dead man walking” and not just a lame-duck president.

ORconservative on February 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Earlier, Anderson Cooper got a hands-on lesson in what the real world is like.
He got the crap beat out of him…because he’s an American. I wonder if that’ll get an investigative story on his own show.
“But..I’m a reporter for CNN for christs sake!”
Smack! Smack-smack! “Die infidel!”
BobMbx on February 2, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Maybe he’ll have an epiphany, become conservative and take Shep Smith’s place at Fox.

*snicker*

Yeah, I don’t think so either.

turfmann on February 2, 2011 at 4:54 PM

A month-long process where Mubarak gradually hands over power isn’t what they have in mind, clearly.
Allahpundit on February 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Why not? Let’s pretend it’s yesterday and they aren’t on the brink of Civil War. Why the urgency? What did transition look like?

So many questions. What motive does Mubarak have to cause more chaos? Surely he doesn’t think the police can win against the military (assuming they’re working against each other) or that he can reverse course and hang on to power forever.

So, we aren’t counting the mobs that sacked the police stations, staged armed assaults on the prisons, and looted the business districts as “pro-democracy protesters”?
Count to 10 on February 2, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Exactly. All the sources at this thread say it’s Mubarak’s thugs at work but how can we be sure? Are we to take Nicholas Kristof’s word? Call me skeptical for now. I’m ready to be convinced but need more evidence.

Buy Danish on February 2, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Transition must begin immediately

A day late and a dollar short, again.

JIMV on February 2, 2011 at 4:55 PM

“My belief is that an orderly transition must be meaningful, must be peaceful and it must begin now,” Obama said.”

The child speaks…

…not thinking of who might replace him.

Seven Percent Solution on February 2, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Oh wait! Maybe Obama feels the fierce urgency of now because it’s a distraction and prevents him from implementing Utopia here at home?

Buy Danish on February 2, 2011 at 4:59 PM

“‘Now’ means ‘yesterday,’” Gibbs explained. “When we said ‘now,’ we meant ‘yesterday’

Not too long ago we were told that these sorts of things are internal matters and how dare the U.S. intervene in any way.

Things have certainly changed since 2008.

Bishop on February 2, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Why would Mubarak’s supporters come out now? Why not outside forces that have just taken a while to get there? It’s not like it’s unheard of in the ME.

Cindy Munford on February 2, 2011 at 5:03 PM

I’m confused. Which side are we cheering for? The dictator or the jihadists?

angryed on February 2, 2011 at 5:06 PM

I refuse to buy into the b.s. that all the Mubarek supporters are goons. If they are trying to stop people from burning down buildings and looting, does that make them a goon?

Blake on February 2, 2011 at 5:06 PM

I’m confused. Which side are we cheering for? The dictator or the jihadists?

angryed on February 2, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Remember that 52% here went for a combination dictator/jihadist.

You do the math.

MrScribbler on February 2, 2011 at 5:07 PM

I’d like to echo again the previous violence during the “peaceful pro-democracy” demonstrations as well as the fact that we have no concrete evidence (that I’ve seen anyhow) that Murabak “bussed in” the pro-Murabak protesters. Also, how do we know the “pro-democracy” protesters didn’t bring weapons at all? Last I heard they couldn’t even count all the protesters and there is chaos everywhere.

Pattosensei on February 2, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Earlier, Anderson Cooper got a hands-on lesson in what the real world is like.
He got the crap beat out of him…because he’s an American. I wonder if that’ll get an investigative story on his own show.
“But..I’m a reporter for CNN for christs sake!”
Smack! Smack-smack! “Die infidel!”
BobMbx on February 2, 2011 at 4:27 PM

It wasn’t very culturally sensitive of him to mention the infidel’s saviour.

Hit him again Mahmoud!

/

Lily on February 2, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Bishop on February 2, 2011 at 4:59 PM

How silly you are – when BO decides who is going to be the winner no other route is acceptable. Meddling is only allowed when his Oneness thinks
he knows what eveyone should be doing. It’s bad meddling if proposed by a Republican or doesn’t serve the Dem agenda. The idea of STFU escapes the Obama Administration.

katiejane on February 2, 2011 at 5:09 PM

I refuse to buy into the b.s. that all the Mubarek supporters are goons. If they are trying to stop people from burning down buildings and looting, does that make them a goon?

Blake on February 2, 2011 at 5:06 PM

WTO protesters are not goons– they protest the reach of the WTO and oppressive practices by smashing the windows of a Mom & Pop sewing store.

TEA party activists are goons by wearing patriotic hats.

Mubarak’s guys aren’t protesting the oppressive practices of the Wealthy, so they are goons.

Nethicus on February 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Notice anything odd about many of these anti-Mubarak signs?

pugwriter on February 2, 2011 at 5:12 PM

At least Scooter is consistent about his inconsistency.

kingsjester on February 2, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Mr. Gibbs,

May we also ask for a smooth and non-violent transition for your boss to remove himself—like yesterday! ???

Rovin on February 2, 2011 at 5:15 PM

The Obie Administration is a total ship of fools..

Dire Straits on February 2, 2011 at 5:16 PM

If Mubarack puts down the rebellion, what will Obama do about it?

Cancel U.S. aide? Hello, Putin.

He’ll do nothing but talk while the protesters are left to fend for themselves, and that’s what they and everyone else in the Middle East will take away from this.

Obama wants to own a new Middle East success. What he’s going to own is another foreign policy failure. This time it’s a really big one.

On the other hand, Obama will finally get that $8.00/gallon gasoline he wants so badly.

SlaveDog on February 2, 2011 at 5:17 PM

Here’s an interesting blog post from Am Thinker. Gives good background and on the ground intel. Was posted last night. Source is apparently credible.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/02/the_story_of_the_egyptian_revo.html

JimP on February 2, 2011 at 5:17 PM

On the other hand, Obama will finally get that $8.00/gallon gasoline he wants so badly.
SlaveDog on February 2, 2011 at 5:17 PM

Which might just have Mubarak reacting to American riots and demanding that the transition process must start now and PBHO should step down before things really get out of hand.

Bishop on February 2, 2011 at 5:21 PM

As for Mubarack and the goon thing, you try ruling Animal Farm.

Limerick on February 2, 2011 at 5:22 PM

Which might just have Mubarak reacting to American riots and demanding that the transition process must start now and PBHO should step down before things really get out of hand.

Bishop on February 2, 2011 at 5:21 PM

Heh. I like the way you think.

SlaveDog on February 2, 2011 at 5:27 PM

The more Obama stirs the pot, the more determined Mubarak is to hold on. That’s some great statesmanship right there.

I WANT IT NOW!

Skandia Recluse on February 2, 2011 at 5:32 PM

In other words, Obama has no stones, Maureen Dowd.

Schadenfreude on February 2, 2011 at 5:37 PM

Meanwhile, our open borders policy continues to make our own country safer. Perhaps Mubarak would comment on how we handle our own affairs.
http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2011/02/fbi-targets-mexican-cartels-in-nm.html

a capella on February 2, 2011 at 5:49 PM

This is not even a popular revolt. The instigators (besides the usual suspects) are disaffected (male) youth, and some who see the chance to feather their own nest.

The numbers are microscopic, the chants infantile, and yet a long-standing regime is supposed to just roll over and die.

Practice what you preach, Obama.

OldEnglish on February 2, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Do we know with any degree of certainty who started the violence? It is not beyond reason that the original demonstrators feel they have a franchise on change. They number about 3/10ths a percent of the Egyptian population. Perhaps the Mubarak contingent represents a more significant percentage of the population? Have we not seen here in the US fringe groups trying to antagonize or imflame the Tea Party. We know that SEIU, and other leftists groups have staged violent actions against the Tea Party.
Now without facts in hand the administration is decrying Mubarak and his government and demanding he turn Egypt over to an unknown mob, with unknown intentions. It is a fact that the Muslim Brotherhood is involved in the anti Mubarak demonstartions as well as el Baradei who is sympathetic to the Brotherhood. I have heard that a number of demonstrators are calling for the elimination of Israel. Obama is earning his title Jimmy II. God help us.

chicken thief on February 2, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Obama is far worse than Chamberlain. Chamberlain naively tried to appease the Nazis, he did not actually support them as Obama is doing with the Muslim Brotherhood. If the Joint Chiefs of Staff have any loyalty to America and it’s constitution, they need to arrest the Kenyan Psychopath immediately.

Murphy9 on February 2, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Why would Mubarak’s supporters come out now? Why not outside forces that have just taken a while to get there? It’s not like it’s unheard of in the ME.
Cindy Munford on February 2, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Good question. This doesn’t make sense to me.

we have no concrete evidence (that I’ve seen anyhow) that Murabak “bussed in” the pro-Murabak protesters.
Pattosensei on February 2, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Yep. How do we know they’re not some of the recently sprung prisoners and al qaeda types stirring the pot? It would seem to me that they would benefit more from chaos than Mubarak at this point.

Buy Danish on February 2, 2011 at 6:18 PM

chicken thief on February 2, 2011 at 5:58 PM

The original demonstrators were primarily peaceful middle class Egyptians. Then El-Baradei inserted himself into the situation, and on Friday things ratcheted up after Friday prayers at the mosque. Here’s a timeline (scroll to the right).

Buy Danish on February 2, 2011 at 6:22 PM

So the NYT says Thugs are the bad guys and are bashing Heads…. I should believe them cause they was so honest in the past…. The repercussions of be’n spin misters as opposed to journalist..makes believing anything they say useless… welcome to the age of American Pravda…

I’ll have more popcorn and watch da show.

roflmao

donabernathy on February 2, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Obama is far worse than Chamberlain. Chamberlain naively tried to appease the Nazis, he did not actually support them as Obama is doing with the Muslim Brotherhood. If the Joint Chiefs of Staff have any loyalty to America and it’s constitution, they need to arrest the Kenyan Psychopath immediately.

Murphy9 on February 2, 2011 at 6:16 PM

There’s been an alliance between the extreme left in America and Europe, and radical islam for years now. We saw it this week with protests in the US in favor of the exile of Mubarak that were organized by socialist groups like ANSWER and the Socialist Workers Party. Don’t know which is the greater fool.

slickwillie2001 on February 2, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Some of the Mubarak goons are probably the Egyptian equivalent of Iran’s basij, i.e. young thugs supported and brainwashed by the regime and sent into the streets terrorize political enemies, especially at moments of unrest. Think of them as a plainclothes version of the SA

Comparing Mubarak and his regime to the Iranian Theocrats and the Nazis is really overheated nonsense.

And ironic, considering that the Muslim Brotherhood, by all reliable accounts, now the real force behind the anti-government protests, had actual links to the Nazis during World War Two.

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=11146

Oh but don’t worry, they’re cool now.

Dreadnought on February 2, 2011 at 9:44 PM

Why would Mubarak’s supporters come out now? Why not outside forces that have just taken a while to get there? It’s not like it’s unheard of in the ME.

Cindy Munford on February 2, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Supposedly a lot of Mubarak’s support is in the rural areas of Egypt. Probably took awhile for those people to get to Cairo.

How many city folk in Egypt know how to ride horses and camels?

Dreadnought on February 2, 2011 at 9:48 PM

The problem with seeking a transition “now,” is that by hurrying this process up, you are unable to cultivate a durable democratic group that can support the ideals of freedom. Currently, despite the calls for freedom from the general population, no organized pro-freedom/democratic group exists within Egypt. What this then causes is for the most organized group, whether in support of democracy or not, to come forward months down the road to grasp power-The Muslim Brotherhood. What makes this worst is that news agencies are reporting that the Obama White House is fully willing to engage in conditional talks with the MB. Between the potential for talks existing between the MB and the U.S. (which is essentially the same as the U.S. speaking to Ayatollah Khomeini) and the U.S. welcoming a “rushed” process where we overthrow Mubarak ASAP, the odds of this ending well and ending with a democratic group diminish GREATLY!

I fear for the land of Israel.

Indy82 on February 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Won’t Gibbs look silly when Mubarak survives this. Well…sillier.

curved space on February 3, 2011 at 6:01 AM

Yeah the sooner the progressive/communist Obomination administration can get the muslim brotherhood in control of egypt the sooner we can get $5 or $6 a gallon gasoline and end global warming. Friggin morons.

TrickyDick on February 3, 2011 at 1:35 PM