A Leauki's Writings

I have read western news reports about Egypt and noticed the lack of similar reports about Iran. The media have chosen sides again, as did our politicians who called on Mubarak to step down but won't openly point out the complete illegitimacy of the Iranian regime.

Here is some information on current events that everyone might find useful. My sources are this poll: washingtoninstitute.org…pollock-Egyptpoll.pdf and friends and acquaintances that could confirm the poll and tell me more.

Here it goes.


1. El-Baradei is celebrated by the western media as a leader of the Egyptian opposition. In reality he is an Islamist, almost unknown in Egypt and not very popular. [Former president] Mubarak and [former secret service head] Suleiman are more popular.

2. Only 15% of Egyptians approve of the Muslim Brotherhood, practically noone supports the Muslim Brotherhood leaders.

3. 37% support the peace treaty with Israel, 22% oppose it. Only 5% think the protests were about Mubarak being too pro-Israel.

3. Ironically the US fares less well among Egyptians. 36% vs 29% think that Egypt should have good vs bad relations with the US. And 8% think the protests were about Mubarak being too pro-US. Note that these were the same people asked, i.e. more Egyptians want good relations with Israel than with the US and Mubarak was seen as too pro-US by more people than he was seen as too pro-Israel. The US have lost trust in the ME in the last few years!

4. Only 18% of Egyptians support Hamas or Iran. (Most of the remaining support the PLO. But I guarantee that this will end once they find out what the PLO are actually doing.)

All of the above are based on the poll confirmed by talking to friends. I.e. I myself also found that of 10 Egyptians about 4 support peace with Israel while 2 are against it. I have also seen them complain more about the US than about Israel. I had Egyptian friends introduce me to Egyptians who as a pro-Israeli Jew I wouldn't have met otherwise, so there is little selection bias. Plus I accidentally started a fight between pro and anti-Mubarak Egyptians last week, before Mubarak stepped down. I explained to the anti-Mubarak guy that if he wants to shout at me he either has to speak English or very very slow Arabic.

5. There are major protests in Iran. The BBC are lying when they speak of a "few thousand".

6. Bibi Netanyahu is an idiot. (In case that wasn't yet obvious to everyone.)

7. Ariel Sharon remains well-respected among Egyptians, including among those who dislike Israel.

8. There is a crisis in Jordan between "West-Bankers" (native Palestinians) and "East-Bankers" (Bedouins who support the king). Palestinians are 92% of Jordan's population and the king has begun to strip them of citizenship. Queen Rania is loved by the west but hated by Palestinians (even though she is Palestinian). I hear stories about shopping sprees etc.. Perhaps surprisingly the Palestinians of Jordan are less conservative than the Bedouins and tend to vote Islamists out of parliament when given a chance. But the voting system in Jordan gives fewer seats to cities (where Palestinians live) and comparatively more seats to the countryside (where East-Bankers live). The West-Bank has Jordanian citizens but no Bedouins or country side.

9. There are Kurdish protests in Syria that nobody is reporting.

10. There are protests in Bahrain and Yemen which are not heavily reported.

11. Thousands of Tunisians are fleeing the country. This is perhaps widely reported now.

12. Egyptians are on massive strikes. Egypt needs economic aid and lots of it. This is the moment for the US to shine!

13. Both Hamas and the PLO have prohibited protests supporting the Egyptians against Mubarak. The PLO has also defended Mubarak together with Israel to the last minute. This hasn't cost Israel but it will cost the PLO.

14. There was a protest planned for Syria but nothing came of it (except for the Kurdish protests).

15. There are protests coming in Gaza.


There you go. What the media don't tell you.



Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Feb 16, 2011

My retarded mule is more informed than the Media!

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha..........

I have some thoughts on Egypt but no time right now.


on Feb 16, 2011

I don't see any likely outcome that will be 'good' for the Egyptians.  Looks to be shaping up as Iran2, though you're not hearing that from our press.

on Feb 16, 2011

I don't see any likely outcome that will be 'good' for the Egyptians.  Looks to be shaping up as Iran2, though you're not hearing that from our press.

Actually, you are hearing about it all the time.

Ever since the beginning of the protests western media were busy claiming that the main opposition group were the Muslim Brotherhood and that the Muslim Brotherhood had peaceful and democratic goals, preparing the west for a takeover by the Brotherhood. They also celebrated El-Baradei, the spokesperson for the Brotherhood, as a "leader" of the opposition even though he is virtually unknown in Egypt.

The Brotherhood, meanwhile, has not participated in the protests much.

The stark contrast with Iran is that the media forgot to celebrate the fanatics before the revolution and then tried to celebrate them after it began without paying attention to whether they were even involved.


on Feb 16, 2011

Well, Jimmeh Cottah says they're OK guys (the BroHood) so I'm sure it will all work out fine if they get involved now.

on Feb 16, 2011

Well, Jimmeh Cottah says they're OK guys (the BroHood) so I'm sure it will all work out fine if they get involved now.

Khomeni was a swell guy too - just ask peanut brain.

And Leauki, while the press is not "ignoring" the parallel, they are poo-pooing it.  Or, in the case of the state run media here, are parroting the administration line of "they are non-secular good guys" (The administration REALLY said that!).

on Feb 16, 2011


I read this article, http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/news.aspx/142364

and while the warship aspect is the point of the story, it makes me wonder a little bit about the Suez Canal. 

Won't the destabilization in Egypt affect its security?  Ya know, whoever controls the canal, controls the oil, controls the world.  (Well not really, but adding 6,000 miles onto a tanker's journey will certainly raise the cost of the oil it carries.)

I think if we get involved, overtly involved, it will likely have something to do with the fact "2.4m barrels of oil are shipped through the canal each day while the SuMed pipeline carries 2.5m a day. That's around 5.5% of world output.."

(The SuMed pipeline runs close to the canal, connecting the Ain Sukhna terminal on the Gulf of Suez to Sidi Kerir on the coast of the Mediterranean, and is just as important as the canal. SuMed transports oil, partly from very large tankers that need to offload some of their cargo before they can fit into the canal.)

Actually the following link has a pretty good discussion on the world impact.  I think this will play a role in how much we decide to help.



on Feb 16, 2011

The Egyptian army won't allow a closure of the canal.

As for the warships, anyone can pass through the canal. I wonder what the warships want. I haven't heard anything except what Arutz Sheva (Israel National News) have reported. I have no sources that could tell me anything about warships, I'm afraid.

You have more military experience than I. You tell me what two warships can do.


on Feb 16, 2011

As for the warships, anyone can pass through the canal.

Iranian officials have announced plans to deploy warships to areas near Israel and to dock at a Syrian port for a year. Such a move would be a "serious provocation," a senior official said. There is no justification for Iran to deploy its battleships to the Mediterranean Sea.~taken from 1st article linked above

It appears provocation is the goal.

As usual.

on Feb 17, 2011

Maybe the warships are meant to protect the next blockade runner?

I hope Lieberman is prepared.

on Feb 17, 2011

Never mind. Egypt didn't let the ships pass.

on Feb 17, 2011

Violent reaction against protests in Bahrain. Police and tanks.

on Apr 01, 2011

Here is a look at Egypt from an  Interview With Cardinal Antonios Naguib

By Marie Al-Sameen

CAIRO, Egypt, MARCH 31, 2011 (Zenit.org).- The patriarch of Egypt's Coptic Catholic Church says his country -- some six weeks after the Feb. 11 resignation of President Hosni Mubarak -- "lacks clarity" and citizens are expecting "rapid change toward stability, work, productivity and security."

ZENIT's Arabic edition spoke with Cardinal Antonios Naguib, patriarch of Alexandria, to discuss the situation in Egypt after the people's revolt that brought about the resignation of the president.

He offers his outlook on the political situation, the Church's mission, and the need to "prioritize national interests over private interests" since "Egypt needs her faithful children."

ZENIT: How do you see the present situation in Egypt?

Patriarch Naguib: The situation in Egypt lacks clarity. The result of the referendum for constitutional reform was in favor of change, with a percentage of 77.2%. All the political forces will now commit themselves to prepare and carry out parliamentary and presidential elections, based on the constitutional plan, which will be presented by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. After the elections, the commission that will prepare the nation's new Constitution will be established. This is the situation from the political point of view.

From the point of view of the internal life of the country, we very much appreciate the work that is being done by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and the Transport Ministry, which are carrying things forward in this phase of change. Despite this, the delicate economic, administrative and social situation that the nation is going through is evident to everyone. Hence, we expect rapid change toward stability, work, productivity and security.

ZENIT: Are there ecclesiastical initiatives for greater awareness of the political and cultural role that Christians can have in Egypt?

Patriarch Naguib: Yes, there are many initiatives in many churches to increase cultural and political awareness in Christians in Egypt, and this is happening in all the churches and in parishes and institutions of the Church, in order to encourage Christians to develop their national role, for the good of our beloved nation. This was evidenced, both in the spirit that existed in collecting the electoral cards and in the active participation in the last referendum.

It is necessary to point out here that the Church does not engage in political work, being a religious institution. However, Christians, being also citizens, participate in social life and work with all others to build their country.

ZENIT: The Church, in all her confessions, has rejected the idea of Christian political parties. Can you explain why?

Patriarch Naguib: The Catholic Church does not promote the institution of parties with a religious base, but she calls Christians to participate in political life insofar as they are citizens. She invites them to enter politics on the basis of the principles and programs that guarantee human, moral and national values, the integral rights of man, among which must be pointed out religious liberty, namely liberty of worship and the right to be able to choose one's religion.

The institution of parties on a religious basis constitutes a confusion between what is religious and what is political, that is, between what is absolute and what is relative. This situation would help neither religion nor politics, because it would lead inevitably to the politicization of religion and to the religious instrumentalization of politics. What really matters is that every citizen, Christian and Muslim, positively comply with his duty with a national and free commitment, a commitment that comes from one's conscience and convictions for the common good.

ZENIT: Is there really a counter-revolution?

Patriarch Naguib: I cannot say with certainty that it is a counter-revolution. And I prefer to speak of the "movement of change," rather than "revolution." I believe, however, that every thought, every behavior and every act that contradicts the principles and objectives that caused the movement of change can be considered a counter-revolution, regardless of who initiates such behavior or thought. The movement of change was born for social justice, for liberty, for the elimination of corruption, and to institute a modern and democratic Egyptian state, for Egyptian national security, to reform education, the economy and the other sectors of the national life. Hence, every initiative that goes against these principles and values acts, in fact, against the movement and can be considered a counter-revolution.

ZENIT: The general guide of Muslim brothers has had a positive initiative, meeting with a group of Christian young people, as a sign of the unity of the country, and has responded to different questions posed by Christian young people with respect for the principles of the Muslim brothers. What do you think of this?

Patriarch Naguib: As a beginning, the Church receives warmly every opening to dialogue and to reciprocal respect, and she doesn't exclude anyone. Every man has the right to engage in dialogue with another, and he has the right to express his own opinion and to explain his own perspective. The Church is open to all the intellectual, political and social currents present in society. On one hand, she listens and, on the other, she looks at the works. Man is an enemy of what he does not know, and that is why it is essential to know one another mutually. We hope for a social dialogue that embraces all sides and political, cultural and social components in Egypt, to discuss together the questions of our society, to arrive at a better vision and more adequate style to work in the development and progress of our nation and to remodel Egypt on the basis of a correct democracy.

ZENIT: As a member of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers, do you support the transfer of peoples from one country to another in search of a better life?

Patriarch Naguib: The liberty to move in search of a better life is one of the rights of man; it is sanctioned and protected by international constitutions for the rights of man, and the Church accepts it without hesitation. However, the Church always wants to call the attention of her faithful to the need to study the reason for movement and migrations, to know the positive and negatives sides, so that immigrants are not surprised by difficult situations in the countries to which they emigrate and, being unprepared, find themselves in unenviable situations. The Church invites her children to think in-depth also on the meaning of their presence in their countries of origin, and the spiritual significance of persevering in their own countries, because it is better that they remain in their nations; it is better for them as well as for their nations.

ZENIT: Is there a plan for an official press conference that will clarify the Church's directives in this important phase of the history of Egypt?

Patriarch Naguib: The idea is good and can be considered. I think it is necessary to wait until the perspective is clarified on the present situation. We believe there are several realities that are still not clear. And the Church expresses her opinion through public statements, which are issued every now and then, when there is need.

We call attention above all to the fact that in this period it is necessary to prioritize national interests over private interests, and this is applicable to all the parties and all the political, cultural, social and religious orientations. Egypt is going though a very delicate period and exacts from every Egyptian who considers himself a genuine citizen that he put the common good in the first place, and that he think about how to look after Egypt and help it to come out of this situation of transition with its head high and stronger than before.

We must dedicate our attention to urgent and sensible questions such as the reform of education, the reform of the economy, Egypt's national security, Egypt's waters, Egypt's relations with Arab and non-Arab countries, its historic pioneer role and, culturally, care of the citizen who for a long time has sacrificed his freedom of expression, religion and of conscience, peace and tranquility for the future, health rights, the right to work and have a fitting life, the right to the future for persons and their children.

All this should be on the agenda of every Egyptian and nationalist, no matter what party he belongs to, whether he is a Christian or a Muslim. Our national membership must precede any other membership in this phase, because Egypt needs her faithful children.



2 Pages1 2