Not Welcome

As a sign of the messed up times we live in, the egyptian leftist activist scene is arranging a protest against Bush's visit to Egypt on Monday:

وقفة إحتجاجية بنقابة الصحفيين

تدعو لجنة الحريات بنقابة الصحفيين كل القوى الوطنية و الناشطين لوقفة إحتجاجية
يوم الإثنين 14 يناير 2008 الساعة الخامسة مساءا بنقابة الصحفيين
من الأجل الإحتجاج على زيارة الرئيس الأمريكي جورج بوش لمصر و الإحتجاج على السياسة الأمريكية و الإحتلال الأمريكي للعراق

The committee of freedom at the Syndicate of Journalism call all Egyptians and activists for a protest
Monday 14 January 2008 at 5 PM at the Syndicate of Journalism
to protest against the visit of the American president Bush and to the American occupation of Iraq

Not to be outdone, the Muslim Brotherhood issued their own statement condemning the visit:  

S President George W. Bush, due to visit
Egypt on Wednesday as part of his Middle East tour, was branded a
murderer not welcome in the country by the main opposition party on
Sunday.

‘We
say to Bush Junior—whose hands are not just bloodstained but soaked in
our blood—that neither you or your American administration assistants
are welcome in our land or under our skies,’ the Muslim Brotherhood
said.

A
statement, entitled ‘No welcome for the murderers’, quoted the
movement’s supreme guide, Mohammed Mehdi Akef, and said that
destruction and devastation followed Bush.

Akef
said Bush was unwelcome because he incited Ethiopia to occupy Somalia,
supported Israel, stirred up disagreement among the different political
factions in Lebanon and was responsible for the destruction of
Afghanistan and the occupation of Iraq.

He also was after me lucky charms. Damn this Bush. 

I for one will miss him when he is gone. Hate him or love him, the man shook up the region with his push for democracy in arab countries, especially Egypt. The fact that the people making the so called "opposition" hate the US too much to ever give him credit, let alone capitalize on the pressure he provided, well, that just tells you why they are politically insignificant.

Oh well…

0 comment on Not Welcome

  1. Adam
    January 13, 2008 at 4:36 pm

    Other men who “shook up” the Middle East include Ariel Sharon and Gamal Abd El Nasser. I’m not so sure we should remember their contributions so fondly…

    Reply
  2. Twosret
    January 13, 2008 at 4:45 pm

    I hope someone will miss the 500,000 Iraqis that died too.

    Reply
  3. Craig
    January 13, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    I’ve never seen you comment on an Iraqi blog, Twosret. And I’ve been a regular on them for several years. I’ve never even seen you mention Iraq, except when you are attacking the US. And I’ve been reading most the blogs you frequent, for years.

    Just an observation.

    By the way:

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/50736cec-bf1d-11dc-8c61-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1

    I got that info from an Iraqi blog. One of the ones you never read.

    http://iraqimojo.blogspot.com/

    I realize you will probably use whatever numbers best suit your anti-US agenda, but the actual number of Iraqis killed since 2003 seems to be about 150,000.

    Reply
  4. Tom I
    January 13, 2008 at 7:27 pm

    @Craig
    I’m not sure that the best measure of whether you know about a country is if you comment on blogs from that country.

    I’m also not sure that the best way to defend Bush is to brag that the number of Iraqi dead is ONLY 150,000.

    That said, I don’t see why we can’t condemn Bush for the war in Iraq (or, for those in favor of the idea of it, the horrible execution of the war) while applauding the pressure put on regional governments to open up politically.

    Reply
  5. Alice Redd
    January 13, 2008 at 7:40 pm

    Craig,
    I never comment on the Iraqi blogs,sometimes I don’t know what to say to those people. An observation that someone doesn’t read Iraqi blogs is hasty. I saw on yahoo two days ago the number Twsoret is referring to. Being anti-war doesn’t necessarily mean being anti-US.

    Reply
  6. Uchuck the Tuchuck
    January 13, 2008 at 8:10 pm

    “Akef said Bush was unwelcome because he incited Ethiopia to occupy Somalia,”

    Huh. I was under the impression that Ethiopia occupied Somalia after the Somalis invaded Ethiopia.

    Reply
  7. Craig
    January 13, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    Tom,

    I’m not sure that the best measure of whether you know about a country is if you comment on blogs from that country.

    I have no doubt Twosret knows more about Iraq than I do. She may have even been there, and I haven’t been. She’s an Arab, she speaks Arabic and she’s lived in Arab countries. Those credentials alone are superior to mine when it comes to knowledge about Iraq. But Twosret didn’t say anything about “knowledge” – she specifically mentioned “caring”. Twosret is a regular on some of the most militant Palestinian blogs, and she maintains one herself. I think in her case, her participation on blogs is a pretty good measure of where her heart is. And that obviously isn’t Iraq.

    I’m also not sure that the best way to defend Bush is to brag that the number of Iraqi dead is ONLY 150,000.

    My purpose in putting up the latest data wasn’t to defend Bush. It was to correct a mis-statement of fact.

    That said, I don’t see why we can’t condemn Bush for the war in Iraq (or, for those in favor of the idea of it, the horrible execution of the war) while applauding the pressure put on regional governments to open up politically.

    Neither do I. Do you believe that’s Twosret’s intent? I have to admit, I’ve had quite a number of unpleasant encounters with her in the past and I don’t have an open mind when it comes to her commentary. I always see an agenda that I find repugnant, in everything she says.

    Reply
  8. Craig
    January 13, 2008 at 8:25 pm

    Alice,

    I never comment on the Iraqi blogs,sometimes I don’t know what to say to those people.

    I don’t know what to say a lot of the time, either. Especially when it comes to the bloggers I like. Sometimes I just post a simple “Thanks for the post” to let them know people are reading, and that people care.

    But there are a LOT of Iraqi blogs, and until recently they were quite active. Sandmonkey’s blog was the only one that competed with some of the Iraqi blogs, when it comes to the amount of traffic they used to get. And when it comes to the opinions of the blogger, I’m sure Twosret could have found at least a few Iraqi bloggers that she could relate to.

    An observation that someone doesn’t read Iraqi blogs is hasty. I saw on yahoo two days ago the number Twsoret is referring to. Being anti-war doesn’t necessarily mean being anti-US.

    The number Twosret is referring to comes from the Lancet report 2 years ago, and those numbers were in dispute even then. The latest numbers are considered much more accurate, and are endorsed by some pretty prestigious international organizations. I believe even the authors of the Lancet report have praised the methodologies used in the latest study.

    I don’t think I’m being hasty when it comes to Twosret. I’ve been encountering her on this blog and others for years. I’m well aware of what her opinions are.

    Reply
  9. tedders
    January 13, 2008 at 8:59 pm

    Craig, I’ve been debating with Twosret for years, I’ve never seen her “attack” the United States. Just because someone is pro Palestinian or politically liberal doesn’t mean they can’t be a good, law abiding, tax paying American. While I’m certainly to the right of Twosret beliefs I don’t see her as anti American at all neither should you.

    Tom, the war was not horribly executed, that’s a liberal myth. The Iraq war has been the most efficiently executed military operation in the history of warfare. Whether it was right or wrong is another matter altogether you and I will have to wait a while to judge that. From the initial invasion to the battle of Falluja to todays routing of al qaeda, military strategist will be studying this conflict for many years on how to successfully complete a military operation. With that said, there were mistakes made, no successful military operation in history has been without mistakes and with the benefit of hindsight they become very apparent. Many people including myself didn’t “like” the war but the future benefits are going to outweigh the negatives just give it some time.

    By the way, the 151,000 deaths mentioned in the study are post invasion. These deaths are overwhelmingly from Sunni vs, Shia violence, not to mention AQ and other terrorists when it comes to murdered innocent civilians. I don’t think anyone here thinks that the demons who perpetuate the violence deserve any less than what the current Iraqi and Coalition Armed Forces deal out to them. The only thing the Iraq and coalition military had to do with that number was helping keep it lower than it could have been.

    The sum of people killed from the Iraq/Iran war, the Kuwait invasion and the number of Kurds and Iraqis killed by Saddam makes the 151,000 quantity pale in comparison.

    Reply
  10. Alice Redd
    January 13, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    Craig,

    This is the beauty of America we all should be free to practice our political rights. Give her some space maybe?

    Reply
  11. Charlie
    January 13, 2008 at 9:41 pm

    I think the Brotherhood are better writers than the journalists in making announcements of which the Brotherhood are better writers than the journalists.

    Reply
  12. Tom I
    January 14, 2008 at 12:10 am

    @tedders

    I think the crystal ball is still a bit cloudy on whether Iraq will turn out all hunky dory as you seem to suggest or whether it will continue to descend into a DRC-like mess once the surge starts to phase out. Given that, my problem with the whole war is that it is a huge roll of the dice on the part of one country where the ante is the population of another country. Saddam was bad, really really bad. Most liberals don’t harp on that enough, but that doesn’t change the fact that the result of the invasion has been 150,000-600,000 deaths and a still uncertain future.

    I sort of agree with your point about the poor execution of the war being a myth. I think the war was not horribly executed (or at least not more horribly executed than most wars), but I think this misses the point. As a liberal, I feel that the problem with the “they executed the war poorly” argument is that it leads us to draw the wrong lessons. The lesson if poor execution is to blame is bushies are dumb, let’s do it better next time. The lesson if the whole effort fails and poor execution was not a factor is that military invasion regime change is inherently a bad idea. A successful result in Iraq 5 years down the line probably wouldn’t change my mind on this – just as a lucky win in roulette wouldn’t convince me to give up my day job and become a gambler.

    @craig

    Thanks for the clarifications. I was reacting purely to your statements and cannot speak for Twosret’s intent since I have not interacted with her previously. The only further bone I have to pick is your characterization of the 150,000 figure as “fact”. Face it, these are all estimates. Some may be better than others, but none of them are fact. While the Lancet study did come under fire when it was published, the (fairly intelligent) critique was mostly from the right, while the left rose to its (again, fairly intelligent) defense. This makes me suspect that partisanship was the motive on both sides, not the actual accuracy of the various numbers.

    Reply
  13. Twosret
    January 14, 2008 at 12:46 am

    Tom,

    In the last year I have read very little about politics, I wasn’t active in blogs to the point that I forgot the password to my own blog. The last I read was this number and I haven’t seen much T.V. or heard any political news except for very few headlines here and there in the past few days.

    As Alice said I read a new article last week on yahoo about a new study that suggests as much as 500,000 people died since the Iraq war.

    I have always opposed violence and war and please don’t read all the lies written above as this evil man above has been harassing me for the past three years on blogs.

    Tedders,

    Thank you for your comment.

    Reply
  14. Twosret
    January 14, 2008 at 12:52 am

    Oh and I truly wish that the numbers I’m reading are off for sure as I wish no innocent citizen of any country should die due to war.

    Reply
  15. Alice Redd
    January 14, 2008 at 12:56 am

    @Twosret

    Is your blog name cheztwosret?

    Reply
  16. tedders
    January 14, 2008 at 1:29 am

    Well said Tom and Twosret, I agree with your last posts. I can only hope that all does turn out “hunky dory” (is that latin? where did that come from? LOL) time will tell. You’re absolutely right about the, “or at least not more horribly executed than most wars”, all wars and killing are horrible, we all deserve better, people who have fought in wars know that, thank goodness, because of them, most of us will never have to experience it. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t evil people in the world that will abuse and kill entire populations, military strength is an unfortunate necessity.

    Reply
  17. brooklynjon
    January 14, 2008 at 7:24 am

    1) I believe Hunky Dory is a mispronunciation of the Japanese word or phrase for main street (or street leading to the docks), which is derivative from slang used by US sailors during another war which was heavily protested, which led to a prolonged occupation (it’s still going on!), and which was characterized by a death rate that far, far exceeds anything that we’ve seen lately, incidentally.

    2) Twosret is one of my favorite people to disagree with vehemently yet civilly. I doubt we could agree on the weather, but I’d still join her for a cup of tea.

    3) It’s unclear if Iraq has been all that fantastically executed. What is clear is that military medicine has become astoundingly good. It’s also really hard to stabilize a country while fighting an insurgency against a nihilistic enemy that has no qualms about using innocents as unwitting weapons and is so proud of teaching kids how to decapitate that it posts videos of them on the internet. We’ve been lying with dogs big time, and it amazes me that we have picked up as few fleas as we have.

    4) Saddam was a bad man. But it may take a bad man to maintain some semblance of order in Iraq. Frankly, it is a racist thing to say, but it may be true. It was my big hesitation about the war in 2003, and it still is. That and that whole “democracy first” thing. Nuts! What country has had an effectively governing, stable democracy in place before having a well-established culture of freedom? I’ll answer that. None of them.

    Reply
  18. Twosret
    January 15, 2008 at 2:40 am

    Alice,

    Yes that is my blog but I am very busy now to keep up with blogging.

    bJ,

    Oh thank you! a cup of tea will be great we might disagree about the drink too :)

    Reply
  19. hany
    January 15, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    Twosret,
    I don’t think he’s evil, he’s just brainwashed and actually he and the blogger deserve each other. Although i would guess that in real life this brainwashed cutie would never be friends with a sandmonkey.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>