Sunday, February 13, 2011

What Does Egypt Mean for US Democracy?

People have been partaking in well deserved celebrating in Egypt. The relief and joy have brought tears to many... tears and smiles.

Yet I must confess a bit of foreboding, as in a great novel, which is what we are living. Some have begun putting it into words. I paraphrase, "Egypt could move forward and simply become a liberal democracy, like the United States, dominated by corporate institutions and beholden to moneyed masters with debt and other ropes tying the hands of the people. Paying for the financial sins of past dictators."

Part of this money can be clawed back from accounts in Switzerland and via the sale of ill gotten properties. But it's not just the accumulated wealth of Mubarak's family, but of many National Democratic Party operatives AND many former military officers.

Beyond that, what occurs to me is that it doesn't stop at Egypt, or stop at the other blatant authoritarian regimes in the middle east. And in the United States we have our own privileged class that has increasingly abused wealth and the power of corporations to corrupt our electoral and legislative system. The decision making process in the United States is rigged toward those with money and positions of power.

For the revolution in Egypt to be fully successful, we must root out the undemocratic corruption in the United States. Egypt has exposed the hypocrisy and undemocratic behavior by the United States over the years regardless of political party in power. This behavior reflects the wishes of a privileged establishment that must be challenged if we are to aspire to honest democracy.


gdaeman_scroll_small

Saturday, February 12, 2011

AP Removes Reference to "Establishment" from Musharraf Article

I recently emailed an AP article to myself on the subject of former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf being linked to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. I was particularly interested in the following reference describing a United Nations investigation of Bhutto's killing:

The U.N. officials were not tasked with finding out who the exact culprits behind the killing were. But they identified two main threats facing Bhutto — Islamist extremists like al-Qaida and the Taliban who opposed her links to the West and secular outlook, and members of the "Pakistani Establishment," the term used locally to refer to a powerful and shady network of military, intelligence, political and business leaders said to actually control the country.

When I went back to the article the reference was gone. Of course, Musharraf was part of that "establishment." Not to loose the main point of my interest, we in the United States have our own "establishment" that strongly influences both major political parties.

It's been a preoccupation of mine very recently; as Egypt was ousting Mubarak a gnawing thought kept surfacing. The ouster of Mubarak doesn't really matter unless they also challenge the broader establishment's hold on power.

Something else that was removed from the AP article was a reference to Baitullah Mehsud, the late leader of the Pakistani Taliban:

"A joint investigation team in its report to the court has found Musharraf guilty of being involved in the conspiracy and abetting to kill Benazir Bhutto," said Zulfikar Ali Chaudhry, the lead prosecutor.

He said the probe has evidence that Musharraf was "completely involved" through Baitullah Mehsud, the late leader of the Pakistani Taliban, and that prosecutors are seeking a murder trial. He did not elaborate.

Musharraf has always denied any role in Bhutto's death and scoffed at critics who said he did not do enough to protect her. Mehsud, who was killed in a U.S. missile strike in 2009, also denied targeting Bhutto.

It struck me as convenient that Mehsud is no longer around to testify.

I found the full original article saved elsewhere (February 12, 2011):

ISLAMABAD (AP) — A Pakistani court issued an arrest warrant Saturday for former President Pervez Musharraf in connection with the assassination of ex-premier Benazir Bhutto, while government investigators accused the retired general of involvement in the slaying.

Though he does not yet face any charges, the developments mark a major escalation of legal troubles for Musharraf, a one-time U.S. ally who went into self-exile in Britain in 2008 after being forced out of the presidency he secured in a 1999 military coup.

The accusations of a role in Bhutto's death were leveled by a government now run by Musharaff's rivals. They make it nearly impossible for him to fulfill pleges to return to Pakistan and lead a new political party.

Bhutto was killed Dec. 27, 2007, in a gun and suicide bomb attack after returning to Pakistan to campaign in elections Musharraf agreed to allow after months of domestic and international pressure. Musharraf blamed the Pakistani Taliban, an al-Qaida affiliated group, for the attack, but government prosecutors now allege he was part of the plot to kill the popular former premier.

"A joint investigation team in its report to the court has found Musharraf guilty of being involved in the conspiracy and abetting to kill Benazir Bhutto," said Zulfikar Ali Chaudhry, the lead prosecutor.

He said the probe has evidence that Musharraf was "completely involved" through Baitullah Mehsud, the late leader of the Pakistani Taliban, and that prosecutors are seeking a murder trial. He did not elaborate.

Musharraf has always denied any role in Bhutto's death and scoffed at critics who said he did not do enough to protect her. Mehsud, who was killed in a U.S. missile strike in 2009, also denied targeting Bhutto.

Musharraf's lawyer, Mohammad Ali Saif, said his client was innocent of any allegations but had no plans to contest them in court, where he's been ordered to appear on Feb. 19.

"This is just a drama. It is all politics," Saif told The Associated Press. He said Pakistani investigators never tried to reach Musharraf about the case, whose proceedings are closed to the public.

The new accusations and arrest warrant stem from a case against two security officials accused of being derelict in their duties to protect Bhutto. Musharraf has not been indicted, but the court is conducting preliminary hearings about the accusations against him, and he will have an opportunity to defend himself.

A U.N. investigation into the assassination said Musharraf's government didn't do enough to ensure Bhutto's security and criticized steps taken by investigators after her death, including hosing down the crime scene and failing to perform an autopsy.

The U.N. officials were not tasked with finding out who the exact culprits behind the killing were. But they identified two main threats facing Bhutto — Islamist extremists like al-Qaida and the Taliban who opposed her links to the West and secular outlook, and members of the "Pakistani Establishment," the term used locally to refer to a powerful and shady network of military, intelligence, political and business leaders said to actually control the country.

After her death, Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party rode a wave of public sympathy to garner the most seats in the February 2008 elections. Months later, the party forced Musharraf to quit the presidency by threatening impeachment. He later left for London, and has since spent a good deal of time on the lecture circuit, including in the United States.

Britain does not have an extradition treaty with Pakistan, but the British government can decide to extradite those accused of crimes on a case by case basis.

Federal Information Minister Firdous Ashiq Awan said if the court requests it, the government will contact Interpol about bringing Musharraf in.

The U.S. backed Musharraf for much of his military rule because he was, at least officially, an ally in the American-led war on global terrorism, and provided Washington assistance in pursuing militants who used Pakistan's soil as a hideout to prepare attacks in neighboring Afghanistan.

But many in Pakistan resented his alliance with the U.S., and his domestic missteps, including attempts to fire the chief justice of the Supreme Court, pummeled his popularity, leading to mass protests that ultimately forced Musharraf to bend and allow fresh elections.

The new Pakistani president and head of the ruling People's Party is Asif Ali Zardari, Bhutto's widower. He also supports the U.S. and has backed offensives against militants on Pakistani territory.

Also Saturday, a man detonated explosives as army troops prepared to storm his hideout in northwest Pakistan, killing himself and wounding at least three soldiers, a senior army official said.

The blast occurred outside the town of Bhat Khela in Khyber Pakhtunkwa province after troops acting on a tip from residents surrounded a militant hideout, Brig. Saeed Ullah said. Soldiers killed a second militant in the shootout that followed the explosion.

Ullah said security forces detained five men from the area on suspicion of sheltering the militants, who he said were planning a suicide attack in the Swat Valley. Bhat Khela is located about 30 miles (50 kilometers) west of Mingora, the main town in Swat.

The Pakistani army launched a major anti-Taliban offensive in 2009 in Swat, a one-time tourist haven largely overrun by militants beginning in 2007.

Though the monthslong offensive was hailed a success, militant activity is still reported in the picturesque region and concerns are growing that the insurgents could rise again.

gdaeman_scroll_small

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Egypt: Ghonim and Said

Friends of mine, even politically aware friends, ask what's up with the Egyptian "revolution"? Why are they revolting? Most of my friends aren't aware of what is meant by "brutal dictatorship". Khaled Said is the unfortunate classic example.


Khalid Said

On June 18, 2010, the Christian Science Monitor (CSM) reported that:

Egyptian businessman Khalid Said died during what witnesses say was a brutal public beating by police officers on June 6 in Alexandria, [Egypt].

He was described as "an affable, middle-class man." The CSM reported that:

The government’s first official autopsy report claimed that Said died from asphyxiation after swallowing a plastic bag of narcotics when he was approached by police. Said’s family and witnesses at the Internet cafe where police apprehended him tell a different story, saying police began the abuse in the cafe, then dragged him outside, where they beat him to death.

Said was reportedly targeted because he intended to make public a video that allegedly shows police officers dividing the spoils of a drug bust. Graphic pictures of the injuries that killed Said, coupled with the public nature of his beating death ... have propelled his tragic case to prominence, largely through posts on social-networking sites and blogs.

The following photo of Said, prominently displayed on a Facebook site, drives home the word "brutal."



Another Facebook website entitled "We are all Khalid Said" is credited with promoting the uprisings widely said to have begun January 25, 2010. Until recently, the initiator of "We are all Khalid Said" website was unknown.

What was known, however, was that Wael Ghonim was snatched from the streets of Egypt by plain-clothed police. He was widely described on Tweets in late January as a "Google Executive"People of Egypt feared the worst as the days passed with no word on the fate of @Ghonim, as he was known on Twitter. Video of Ghonim being snatched chilled people who understood what the word "brutal" means in the phrase "brutal dictatorship".[1]



Arrest widely said to be Google Exec Wael Ghonim

Then, on February 7, 2012, Wael Ghonim was released. Egyptian blogger @Sandmonkey and @ SultanAlQassemi tweeted the some of the first translations of an interview with Wael Ghonim with Dream TV. Some of Ghonim's statements, roughly translated & tweeted by SultanAlQassemi follow (not originally tweeted in this order):

I was taking a taxi, suddenly four people surrounded the car, I yelled "Help me, Help me" I was blindfolded then taken away. [Doesn't fit with video above, but see link to video with English subscripts below]

They wanted details, information. "Are the people who planned this outsiders?" We didn't do anything wrong, this was an appeal

The interrogators wanted to know if outsiders were involved. I convinced them this was a purely Egyptian movement.

The treatment was very good, they knew I was a good Egyptian. I was blindfolded for 12 days, I didn't see their faces.

I kept thinking "are people thinking of me?" I was wondering if my family knew where I was, my wife, dad, mother.

I can't claim I know what happened when I was inside. I didn't know anything until one day before I left.

I met with the Minister of Interior today. He was sat like any other citizen. He spoke to me like an equal. I respected that

I told the Interior Minister if I stripped naked & told people that I was beaten even without marks they would believe me.

I told the Interior Minister we have two problems 1- we don't talk to each other, this must be solved, 2- There is no trust

There were several men in the room with me & the Minister of Interior. I asked him if I can speak about this he said as u wish

The youth on the streets made Dr Hossam Badrawi (General Secretary of NDP [Mubarak's political party]) drive me to my house today

I am not a hero. I was only used the keyboard, the real heroes are the ones on the ground. Those I can't name.

I spent all my time on computer working for my country. I wasn't optimistic on the 25th but now I can't believe it

The DreamTV interview with Wael Ghonim, with subtitles, the day he was released.

[1] The film repeats, the second time in slow motion. Notice a point in the film in which three police are walking @Ghonim away when fourth police comes in from the right of the screen and lifts off one of his feet as he violently grabs @Ghonim's by the hair, yanking his head down.

gdaeman_scroll_small

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Egypt and Twitter

I've been closely following the Egyptian revolution... mostly via Twitter.

The near-real-time information out of Egypt was almost addictive. Then there is the ability to effectively chat with people in the midst of the revolution. I've had exchanges with a hand full of people in Egypt, asking questions, sending good will, and even a get well for someone fighting the flu in the midst of it all.

Will keep this short.

Find me at http://twitter.com/GDAEman

Or if you want to start following me on Twitter, Click below:
make money blogginggdaeman_scroll_small

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Two Years of Bush Officials Looking Over their Shoulders

Before I get started I have to say that Obama's choice of Daley for his Chief of Staff is it. $#^!& Obama. He just shot himself in the foot.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Remember two years ago, when Obama was coming into office, we wondered if the new administration would hold Bush administration officials accountable for their crimes? Crimes like illegal wiretapping and surveillance, placing Republican Party operatives into US attorney positions in line for future federal judge positions, various instances of obstructing justice and misleading Congress, like intentionally under estimating the cost of the prescription drug law? Oh yea, starting a war of aggression on false pretext, again misleading Congress, renditions, torture. The only one we ever hear about these days is torture as if all the other supposedly 269 broken laws are just too petty to deal with.

All of the above citations are from the Jan/Feb 2009 issue of Mother Jones. Karen Greenberg wrote an article called "The People vs. Dick Cheney," that raised the question and the options for "bringing the Bushies to account."

Just to look back a little, here are the ways Greenberg identified Bush could be brought to account:

  • A Rouge District Attorney: Based on a legal strategy by the famous prosecutor, Vincent Bugliosi, any county of the approximately 2,700 district attorneys, at any time in the future (multiply 2,700 by 10 as different individuals are cycled thru over the coming years) could prosecute Bush for the deaths of soldiers in the DA's county that died in Iraq.
  • Ticked-off Lawyers: Bush administration lawyers, John Yoo, David Addington, Alberto Gonzolez, Jay Bybee brought shame to the profession. Many in the legal community would like to re-establish the credibility of the profession. If they can't make criminal charges stick, they can seek to have Bush lawyers de-barred, and in the case of Jay Bybee, impeached from the federal judgeship he currently holds.
  • The United Nations: Secretary General Kofi Annan said, explicitly, the Iraq war was illegal. The UN could find crimes were committed, as it did in the case of US dirty war against Nicaragua (mining its harbors); however, enforcement of the findings lies with the UN Security Council. Still, it's a way of bringing out the facts.
  • International Criminal Court: Another long shot, but it is a potential forum.
  • The Garzon Factor: Spanish judge Baltizar Garzon went after Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, having him arrested in Britain. The same could occur some day to various Bush officials. We saw the gears of that process start turning on CIA agents involved in renditions and Guantanamo torture, only to be stopped under intense political pressure according to recently leaked State Department cables.


Many of these avenues don't require Obama to do anything except stay out of the way. A gutsy local DA, a determined foreign judge could start a legal process. Each simple, incremental step would stand on its own merits, leading to its own logical conclusion, taking on a life of its own. Bush officials know this, which is why they've hired lawyers, bought legal insurance, etcetera. They will live the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders.

gdaeman_scroll_small

Monday, January 3, 2011

Pakistan's Inflation

I'm not claiming to know enough about how Pakistan's economy is linked to the rest of the global economy to say what it's inflation problem means for the US, but it apparently has an inflation problem. According to the Associated Press:

The Muttahida Quami Movement, the second largest party in the ruling coalition, said Sunday it would join the opposition because of fuel price hikes, inflation and the Ruling Pakistan People's Party's general poor performance.

Charles Goyette, conservative libertarian noted for his strong anti-war views, has a New York Times best-selling book out now called The Dollar Meltdown. In an interview last week he said that by Spring 2011 we can expect to see TV news crews standing outside of grocery stores doing the story on how much less your dollar can buy.

Not sure I trust the timing of his prediction, but it does prompt me to get going on locking down a loan for some home improvement work I'm planning... one without an adjustable rate.

gdaeman_scroll_small

Saturday, January 1, 2011

Who Rules in the World?

Reading the intro to Robert McChesney's "Communications Revolution"* today I was reminded of the following quote. It's from "The Revolt of the Masses" by Ortega y Gasset*, chapter 14 entitled, "Who Rules in the World?":

"It is necessary to distinguish between a process of aggression and a state of rule. Rule is the normal exercise of authority, and is always based on public opinion, today as a thousand years ago, amongst the English as amongst the bushmen. Never has anyone ruled on this earth by basing his rule essentially on any other thing than public opinion."

Not sure I buy much else written by Ortega y Gasset, but this resonated.

McChesney observes that the communications system is going through a transition that we can influence. In simple terms, the outcome of that transition will a media system that either "emphasizes democratic values" or "corporate profits." The default will be greater corporate domination, or "rule," over every facet of our lives and the future of our republic.

McChesney calls on us to seize "an unprecedented opportunity in the coming generation..."

... to create a communication system that will be a powerful imptus to a dramatically more egalitarian, humane, sustainable, and creative society, where justice and self-government are the order of the day.

He warns that

This window of opportunity -- what I call "a critical juncture" -- will not be open for long. We will be opposed by very powerful entrenched corporate and political interests. We will need all hands on deck to win the fight.

If we fail, the outcome of "who rules in the world" is predictable.

Sources:

Communications Revolution: Critical Junctures and the Future of Media, Robert M. McChesney, the New Press, (2007).

gdaeman_scroll_small