Linking the Arab Spring with Occupy

Writer Ahdaf Soueif, who wrote Cairo: My City, Our Revolution thinks that young Egyptians should be connected with the Occupy movement: If institutions like the British Council want to remain relevant, the best way to do this is provide a platform to connect young people and artists from the Middle East with their international peers, most obviously with the Occupy movement. Yes, most obviously Adhaf. Good idea, let’s get the 99%ers, the hippies, and Egyptian artists together. Sounds like a fun party. . .

7 thoughts on “Linking the Arab Spring with Occupy”

  1. Clark: Let’s send them there! Everyone will be happy.
    EB: Great article and analysis. We cannot remake the region into a mini-West.

  2. And you have to admit a theocracy closely resembles a dictatorship in many aspects…we’ve watched Iran very closely over the years…I see aspects of the French Revolution and its Reign of Terror that bears the marks of the and has influenced the ‘Occupy’ movement…looks like we have a great many political hacks who think they’re above the law and it is permissible to incite violence much as those who did it back in 1780 – 1790 in France…and it is unacceptable no matter where it comes from…

  3. Hosni Mubarak was the military dictator of Egypt, and was an ally of the U.S. It is noteworthy that he kept the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad and el Qaeda and all the other bloodthirstry fanatics out of power. Obama ordered him to step down (no doubt with threats about not supplying the over a billion $$ a year, and maybe with our own secret agents helping to push him out). He did step down, and is being tried by the fanatics. Result: Egypt now has a Muslim Brotherhood Government. This bodes ill for the US. and for the allies of U.S. (Jordan, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf states). Why did Obama do this?

    Col. Qaddafi had ruled Libya for decades. Yes, he is responsible for the deaths of Americans decades ago. But since Pres. Reagan bombed him, he has been, if not our ally, at least neutral. Yet, in a sense an ally rather than neutral, since he too kept Islamic Jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood and el Qaeda away from any power. Obama bombs the hell out of Qaddafi’s military and orders him to step down. Again, it has actually been said that we had special ops people on the ground too. Qaddafi was sadistically murdered. At present, we don’t know who is running Libya, and there seems to be a divide between West Libya (Tripolitania, capital: Tripoli) and East Libya (Cyrenaica, capital: Benghazi). This was easily predicted by anyone who follows the news. Why did Obama do it?

    The only protesters he did not help in either word or deed were the pro-Western demonstrators in Iran, who wanted to be rid of the fanatical, hate-filled Mullahs. This was at a time when our troops in Afghanistan on the eastern border of Iran and our troops in Iraq on the western border had Iran surrounded and could have had a powerful influence. (During the war in Iraq, we know that Iran was furnishing explosive devices that pierced armor, even the armor of our Abrams tanks. They were instrumental in killing U.S. troops.) Our President could have told the Mullocracy that they needed to step down, just as he told Mubarak and Qaddafi. He also could have given weapons, intelligence and undercover military aid to the pro-Western protesters. He did nothing in word or deed. Why is that?

    Our diplomats in Libya were sent from Tripoli to stay in Benghazi, a hotbed of fanatical Islamist anti-Western activity. For months they begged for more security, more protection, instead, the security was actually cut back! This, knowing the Consulate had already been attacked several times in the preceding months (one attack blew a big hole in the wall). The British and other western consulates had already pulled their people out of Benghazi because it was so dangerous. Even the Red Cross and U.N. had pulled out for the same reason. Yet our president, knowing this, would not pull our people out, would not increase protection, actually reduced the security!

    And then, during the whole 8-hour siege of the Consulate, when they were beggiong for immediate help, no help was sent. The murders could have been avoided, but were not. After that, the American people were actively lied to about what happened there. Then, We were promised the perpetrators of the killings of our people would be hunted and punished. Nothing has happened. Why is that?

    One gets the impression that our people in Benghazi were set up and hung out to dry. It looks like we the (US Govt) wanted them to be murdered. Perhaps they had information that would have been damaging to the Democratic party. Why else would matters have proceeded in that manner?

    There’s a great deal more to say, but I’ll sign off now.

Comments are closed.