cognitively dissonant: Cairo 2011 = Tehran 1979 NOT Berlin 1989
- From: bodhi <psychedelictourist@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 11:31:54 -0800 (PST)
Today marks the 32nd anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution when
students overthrew an American puppet and installed a Islamic
that was bad.
Today is the day when students in Egypt overthrew an American puppet
and are currently installing an Islamic fundamentalist regime.
and that's good.
read on ....
Misconception or Betrayal? The U.S., Egypt, and Iran
February 08, 2011
The similarities between Iran and Egypt concerning U.S. policy are
disconcerting. Is Egypt repeating the 1979 Iranian revolution, led by
religious preaching against authoritarian friend of the U.S., the
shah, resulting in an Islamic theocracy? Will the Islamic theocracy
led by the Muslim Brotherhood win, or will the military keep its
At the beginning, the U.S. supported the shah in Iran and Mubarak in
Egypt overtly, but pressured them to democratize and liberalize the
regimes covertly. Both the shah and Mubarak declined, claiming of
outside (the communists) and inside (the Muslim Brotherhood) threats,
The politics of Islamic disguise (Taqiyah)
Both branches of the Muslim Brotherhood brilliantly practiced Islamic
Taqiyah to hide their real intentions and political ambitions amidst
the mass uprisings. During his exile, when Khomeini was under the
glare of the international media, his declarations were mild and non-
aggressive. He understood what the U.S. wanted to hear, and promised
a more responsive democratic government. Not once before his return
to Iran did he mention his ideology and perceptions, and the media and
political leaders, led by a policy of ignorance, found him appealing
The U.S. ambassador, William Sullivan, wrote that Khomeini would work
well with army officers. Professor Richard Falk in the New York Times
argued that Khomeini, surrounded by moderate politicians, had a
"notable record of concern for human rights."
This is exactly the situation in Egypt concerning the MB words and
activities [i]. Its step-by-step plan, as developed by its Charter
[ii], is phony moderation, a pragmatic facade, which will vanish as
its power increases. Its acceptance of the existing situation will be
replaced by Muslim rule whose foreign policy is based on jihad.
However, "experts" in the media have concertedly representing the MB
as benign, unpopular, and marginal. The MB's tactical absence from
the protests in the streets of Cairo has been widely misread as proof
of their lack of political ambition and marginality. Indeed, this is
the best Taqiyah. The MB are the most powerful organized political
group in Egypt, dedicated and committed to death-cult jihad: the
Egyptian people "should be prepared for war against Israel ... the
peace treaty must be cancelled," said Muhammad Ghanem[iii]. This
attitude reiterated by Mahdi Akef, former MB Supreme Guide [iv], and
Rashad al-Bayoumi, MB deputy [v]. For Muhammad Badi, "the improvement
and change the Muslim nation seeks can only be attained through Jihad
and sacrifice, by raising a Jihadi generation that pursues death, just
as the enemies pursue life"[vi].
The U.S. perspective
The climax of U.S. failures in the Middle East was Carter's policy in
Iran in 1979. He described Khomeini as Gandhi, as a human rights
reformer, and gave him millions of dollars. In contrast, he tossed
out the shah like a plague corpse or a dead rat. Yet, the U.S. does
not learn even from its own failures. Obama's betrayal of Mubarak is
even worse. If the Egyptian military regime falls, Obama will bear
the major responsibility for the chaos in Egypt and the whole Middle
East. His appeasing and apologizing policy has deteriorated U.S.
prestige and image in the world, and invites radical players with
expansionist agendas like Iran's to fill the vacuum.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs issued an implicit threat
that the Egyptian government had to address the "legitimate
grievances" of the Egyptian people immediately otherwise, the U.S.
will be reviewing its foreign aid. Obama demands that Mubarak step
aside, without clear insight into who will assume power in Egypt. The
White House staff members "made clear that they did not rule out
engagement with the MB as part of an orderly process." A secret
document sent from the U.S. Embassy in Cairo discloses the extent of
American support for the protesters [vii]. Like the shah, Mubarak is
considered a "dead man walking," and is expected to fly into exile.
Outcomes: the reversal
In Iran, leftist and other secular forces were duped and then
outflanked by Islamist supporters of Komeini. Ambassador Sullivan
recommended working with Mehdi Bazargan, Khomeini's candidate as prime
minister, instead of Shaphur Bakhtiar, the shah's appointee. Within
eight months, Khomeini threw out Bazargan, and appointed a new
government more reflected the Islamic revolution.
In Egypt, the West sees Mohamed ElBaradei, as an interim president to
replace Mubarak. However, without popular support, he could easily be
toppled by the MB once it is more securely in power.
What Mubarak and the shah both failed to understand is never to make
concessions when one is weak, because it just increases the appetite
for more concessions. What the U.S. has not understood is that its
pressures are disastrous, since they encourage the opposition to
believe that the regime has lost its legitimacy and support on the
international arena. The most dangerous analogy between Iran in 1979
and Egypt in 2011 is how the dangers of a new radical Islamic regime
are deeply misunderstood. Cairo 2011 is more likely to become Tehran
1979 than Berlin 1989, and the big question remains: would Obama even
care if Egypt becomes another Iran?
- Prev by Date: Re: worth repeating hat are you teaching your kids? Why screw up somebodies life?
- Next by Date: Re: worth repeating hat are you teaching your kids? Why screw up somebodies life?
- Previous by thread: Yes we can,
- Next by thread: The Egypt thang