Egypt is anti-Obama and anti-Moris his puppet

[Ry]

hell yes finally a we are winning in the psych warfare.
The most populated Arab country is telling the Obama regiem and their sock puppet Muslism Brotherhood to go fly a kite.
No more will they stand for leaders who kiss the ring of Israel.

This is the best 4th of July in my life. This movement could spread. I hope it spreads to Turkey next.
This is 1979 all over again only better.

[Phys]

Obama and Egypt's Crisis
http://www.mei.edu/content/obama-and-egypts-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Over the past two days, millions of Egyptians have taken to the streets, most of them calling for early presidential elections with the aim of ousting Mohamed Morsi. June 30 marked Morsi’s one-year anniversary as president, and while he was elected democratically in 2012, his actions since have been more in the authoritarian style of a Mubarak than a reformer with the demands of the Egyptian street in mind. From giving himself sweeping powers in a presidential decree to rushing a flawed and highly ideological constitution, the president has not presented a figure desiring of democratic change or respectful of the myriad opinions and practices of the populace.

The Obama administration in the early days of the Tahrir Square uprising took a principled stand shoulder to shoulder with the Egyptian people in urging the removal of Mubarak. Since then the White House has tried to walk a fine line with Morsi, his Muslim Brotherhood, and the political arm of the Brotherhood, the Freedom and Justice Party, on the grounds that Morsi was chosen in a free and fair election. The administration has been careful to work with a government that was not its dream choice, thus diverging from previous responses to elections in which the winners were not to U.S. liking, such as the victory of Hamas in 2006 or Algerian Islamists in 1992. This time around, the Obama administration congratulated Morsi on his win and engaged with him and his government—however tense those engagements were at times.

But while U.S. support for democratically elected leaders has not budged over President Morsi’s first year, Morsi’s steady march to ideological authoritarianism has evolved quickly.

Regrettably, today the people of Egypt widely perceive the United States as a supporter, even enabler, of an increasingly repressive government.

This may be a bum rap for Obama, but Egyptian politics can often be treacherous for an American president. During a press conference yesterday in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, Obama repeated well-worn words that the United States does not support a particular individual or party, but rather the democratic process. He noted that Egypt went through a legitimate election process, which produced Morsi as president, and that the U.S. attitude has been to deal with this democratically elected government.

In fairness, Obama also noted that the United States believes democracy is not only about elections but about how an elected leader works with an opposition and treats minority groups. Still, protestors read his words as another declaration of support for Morsi as an elected leader, no matter that leader’s actions after taking office.

A few hours later, Obama called Morsi, in part to toughen his message. According to a statement from the White House, Obama told Morsi that the voices of all Egyptians must be heard. While Obama reiterated his earlier statement of support for democratic elections, this time he did so in a way that implied criticism of Morsi. “The United States does not support any single party or group,” he said, meaning the Freedom and Justice Party.

The Egyptian presidency was quick to exploit President Obama’s call. It released a statement in Arabic claiming that Obama had called Morsi to “express his administration’s support for the elected leadership by the Egyptian people and its support for the democratic transition in Egypt.” Thus, despite an attempt to harden his earlier statements, Obama’s call to Morsi served only to again alienate the Egyptian street from the United States.

As difficult as it may seem, this is not a no-win situation. The Egyptian people would welcome a clear American stance supporting the millions of Egyptians who reject Morsi’s power grab just as President Obama stood with reformers against Mubarak in 2011. But the real problem with the Obama administration’s dealings with the Egyptian government may not ultimately lie in its ambivalence about the Muslim Brotherhood, but its distrust of the Egyptian military.

The Obama administration has consistently and strongly opposed a return to military rule in Egypt. Some reports even indicate that Pentagon officials warned the Egyptian military that a coup would trigger U.S. legislation that would cut U.S. aid to Egypt, which totals approximately $1.5 billion annually.

The military warned Morsi yesterday that it would intervene if he failed to meet the demands of the people within 48 hours, saying that it would step in to draw up an inclusive road map for the future. The road map, it was announced today, includes early presidential elections and the rewriting of the constitution—the exact goals that the U.S. government is gunning for. Again, the Egyptian presidency dismissed the Army and the people by insisting it would continue on its own path.

Now, with the military backing the protestors’ as well as U.S. aims, the Obama administration must rethink its position. The army has a proven track record of relinquishing power to civilians. Moreover, millions of Egyptians are in the streets demanding that the army restore stability and public safety, which are the bedrock of any democracy. Egypt’s military enjoys a 94 percent positive rating among Egyptians, according to a recent poll conducted by Zogby International, and a popular chant during the protests has been, “The people and the army are one hand.”

Obama’s good democratic instincts that aligned with the Egyptian people in 2011 who demanded the removal of a dictator must again lead him to support the majority of Egyptians who call for Morsi’s removal as no less of an autocrat. Essentially, the United States must take a stance that shores up the Egyptian street and puts Egypt on a path that will continue the democratic process in order to bring real power back to the people. The army could be a bridge to allow people-powered democratic institutions to emerge.

[Bender]

Obama and Egypt's Crisis
http://www.mei.edu/content/obama-and-egypts-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Over the past two days, millions of Egyptians have taken to the streets, most of them calling for early presidential elections with the aim of ousting Mohamed Morsi. June 30 marked Morsi’s one-year anniversary as president, and while he was elected democratically in 2012, his actions since have been more in the authoritarian style of a Mubarak than a reformer with the demands of the Egyptian street in mind. From giving himself sweeping powers in a presidential decree to rushing a flawed and highly ideological constitution, the president has not presented a figure desiring of democratic change or respectful of the myriad opinions and practices of the populace.

The Obama administration in the early days of the Tahrir Square uprising took a principled stand shoulder to shoulder with the Egyptian people in urging the removal of Mubarak. Since then the White House has tried to walk a fine line with Morsi, his Muslim Brotherhood, and the political arm of the Brotherhood, the Freedom and Justice Party, on the grounds that Morsi was chosen in a free and fair election. The administration has been careful to work with a government that was not its dream choice, thus diverging from previous responses to elections in which the winners were not to U.S. liking, such as the victory of Hamas in 2006 or Algerian Islamists in 1992. This time around, the Obama administration congratulated Morsi on his win and engaged with him and his government—however tense those engagements were at times.

But while U.S. support for democratically elected leaders has not budged over President Morsi’s first year, Morsi’s steady march to ideological authoritarianism has evolved quickly.

Regrettably, today the people of Egypt widely perceive the United States as a supporter, even enabler, of an increasingly repressive government.

This may be a bum rap for Obama, but Egyptian politics can often be treacherous for an American president. During a press conference yesterday in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, Obama repeated well-worn words that the United States does not support a particular individual or party, but rather the democratic process. He noted that Egypt went through a legitimate election process, which produced Morsi as president, and that the U.S. attitude has been to deal with this democratically elected government.

In fairness, Obama also noted that the United States believes democracy is not only about elections but about how an elected leader works with an opposition and treats minority groups. Still, protestors read his words as another declaration of support for Morsi as an elected leader, no matter that leader’s actions after taking office.

A few hours later, Obama called Morsi, in part to toughen his message. According to a statement from the White House, Obama told Morsi that the voices of all Egyptians must be heard. While Obama reiterated his earlier statement of support for democratic elections, this time he did so in a way that implied criticism of Morsi. “The United States does not support any single party or group,” he said, meaning the Freedom and Justice Party.

The Egyptian presidency was quick to exploit President Obama’s call. It released a statement in Arabic claiming that Obama had called Morsi to “express his administration’s support for the elected leadership by the Egyptian people and its support for the democratic transition in Egypt.” Thus, despite an attempt to harden his earlier statements, Obama’s call to Morsi served only to again alienate the Egyptian street from the United States.

As difficult as it may seem, this is not a no-win situation. The Egyptian people would welcome a clear American stance supporting the millions of Egyptians who reject Morsi’s power grab just as President Obama stood with reformers against Mubarak in 2011. But the real problem with the Obama administration’s dealings with the Egyptian government may not ultimately lie in its ambivalence about the Muslim Brotherhood, but its distrust of the Egyptian military.

The Obama administration has consistently and strongly opposed a return to military rule in Egypt. Some reports even indicate that Pentagon officials warned the Egyptian military that a coup would trigger U.S. legislation that would cut U.S. aid to Egypt, which totals approximately $1.5 billion annually.

The military warned Morsi yesterday that it would intervene if he failed to meet the demands of the people within 48 hours, saying that it would step in to draw up an inclusive road map for the future. The road map, it was announced today, includes early presidential elections and the rewriting of the constitution—the exact goals that the U.S. government is gunning for. Again, the Egyptian presidency dismissed the Army and the people by insisting it would continue on its own path.

Now, with the military backing the protestors’ as well as U.S. aims, the Obama administration must rethink its position. The army has a proven track record of relinquishing power to civilians. Moreover, millions of Egyptians are in the streets demanding that the army restore stability and public safety, which are the bedrock of any democracy. Egypt’s military enjoys a 94 percent positive rating among Egyptians, according to a recent poll conducted by Zogby International, and a popular chant during the protests has been, “The people and the army are one hand.”

Obama’s good democratic instincts that aligned with the Egyptian people in 2011 who demanded the removal of a dictator must again lead him to support the majority of Egyptians who call for Morsi’s removal as no less of an autocrat. Essentially, the United States must take a stance that shores up the Egyptian street and puts Egypt on a path that will continue the democratic process in order to bring real power back to the people. The army could be a bridge to allow people-powered democratic institutions to emerge.

So, will the egyptians get whats good for obama or whats good for egypt?

[trelelnd]

Obama and Egypt's Crisis
http://www.mei.edu/content/obama-and-egypts-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How can you be taken seriously with these wacked out profile photos and obvious liberal bias?

[Phys]

Obama and Egypt's Crisis
http://www.mei.edu/content/obama-and-egypts-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How can you be taken seriously with these wacked out profile photos and obvious liberal bias?

Says the "guy", through his own declaration is attracted to alcoholic abusive women. Also quoted as saying he has no self-confidence. I do have self-confidence and no profile pix I've posted are "wacked out". You should've seen some of the ones before and by other posters even mods and admins. It's really okay.

As for my liberal bias, that has no bearing on the truth or the facts. Just as someones conservative or republican bias (ie Ry), doesnt affect my ability to weigh each statement on its own merit. If you cannot do that, that is your issue and you may want to add that to your personal list of things to work on.

[Ry]

lol im conservative / republican


Phys supported Obama enough said but hey he could sing and dance. She is the epitomy of a brainless liberal.

I am as socially liberal as a person can be. I dont give a fuck what any one does with anyone or anything. Im for legalizing all drugs prostitution etc, i dont give a fuck who marries who, im pro choice, im against the income tax and corporate welfare, im a race mixing anti-war atheist with universal haelthcare who has never owned a gun, I made a three hour movie condemning Bush and Cheney for their wars and lies and started Anti-Neocns and I believe in evolution, eactly what value do I have or hold that is Republican or Conservative? ps all rape is legitimate rape.

Oh wait on economics, I don't want any bailouts for anyone, am anti-foreign aid, and I see 99% of government subsidies as nothing more than mecantilism, im anti-nafta anti-tpp, would like to abolish the NSA, the CIA, and the DHS.


The problem is when you pick on a liberal they assume you HAVE TO be a conservatiove and vice versa.

exactly how is that a Republican bias? the only typwe that could see me as a conservative republican would be a communist.

[Phys]

BTW, what is generating these comments by you Ry? and in this section? I didn't even make a liberal statement here. I have plenty of other comments that are very liberal. To be clear again, I would define myself as a libertarian marxist. Who is trelelnd, Ry?

I never supported Obama. That is a lie.

She is the epitomy of a brainless liberal

That is also a lie and acting like a dick to someone who has supported you is an asshole thing to do.
Anyone who reads my post can see I'm not brainless. You are the one whom acts stupid when you cannot debate the issues or have an emotional response to something vs thinking with your head.

I called you republican because you told me you were a republican. I am also not the only person you have said that too. You have even made that declaration several times on your comments section to other youtubers.

Just as someones conservative or republican bias (ie Ry),

This was an OR statement. Only one side has to be true for the statement to still be valid. Through you own admission you claim to be republican.

Have you changed your mind now? If you claim you never said that, that is another lie.
So do you understand now? I called you a republican because you said you were one and I wasnt using that statement as a defense. So again you are wrong. I was saying that I can judge a statment on its merits not just dismiss it because of bias a particular person may have. Even stupid people can get it right. Why are you so defensive about being called republican?

My initial statement still stands:
As for my liberal bias, that has no bearing on the truth or the facts. Just as someones conservative or republican bias (ie Ry), doesnt affect my ability to weigh each statement on its own merit. If you cannot do that, that is your issue and you may want to add that to your personal list of things to work on.

You may want to work on that too Ry.

[Ry]

You did support Obama and John Edwards too. And you said I had a conservative bias in this same thread.
I'm not being a dick I'm calling someone out on their bullshit which in this case is you.

As for my liberal bias, that has no bearing on the truth or the facts. Just as someones conservative or republican bias (ie Ry), doesnt affect my ability to weigh each statement on its own merit. If you cannot do that, that is your issue and you may want to add that to your personal list of things to work on.

I've never been a Republican Phys I just registered as one to vote Ron Paul in the Primaries. For the record I registered back to a Libertarian after that. I don't have anything in common issuewise with any Republican. Other than Ron Paul who we all know is actually a libertarian I have never supported any Republican for office. I've supported three Democrats, McKenny, Kucinich, and Gravel. How on earth could you claim I have a conservative/Republican bias? On WHAT issue? I'm like the antithesis of a conservative Republican.

The only tax I agree with would be on churches. I'd like god removed form our money. I'd like to close all the foreign bases. I think and say guns are for pussies all the time. I would like to kill every police officer I've ever met. No TSA, no DHS, you really all these things apply to liberal democrats too because on foreign and monetary policies there is no difference between the two the only differences re on social issues where the religious right is by far the worse of the two.

[Phys]

Just think were we would have been if John Edwards would have won the dem nomination in 2008 against Hillary and Obama? He wouldnt be president.

I did not support Obama. I gave money to Ron Paul and campaigned for Ron Paul until he quit. I have said this so many times you can search this site for that sentence.

You didn’t say to me and others, I’m a registered republican. You said, “I’m a republican so what.” And a bunch of other variations of same, you are just a lying now. I’m glad you are moving away from this position.

This statement can be heighted, enlarged, and underlined but it won’t change what it means.
Just as someones conservative or republican bias (ie Ry),
I didn’t call you conservative; I said you’re a republican by your own admission.

You are either dense or dumb. I thought you were a philosophy major. Maybe you are just one of those bachelors of Arts philosophy students. No even those people take logic.



Notice that the above statement was an “or” statement you can be a republican and NOT be conservative.
Just so you understand "1" is true and "0" is false.
"A" can equal consevative
"B" can equal republican

I didn’t call you conservative; I said you’re a republican by your own admission.
If you were a conservative republican, I could see why you wouldnt want that label.

[Phys]

I changed my profile pic, trelelnd.
My "liberal bias" will likely not change.