Egypt 101

At the end of one Cairo protest, led by a young girl, the crowd shouts, "Gamal Mubarak-null and void".

As you are probably aware, Gamal (which is the Egyptian version of Jamal; Egyptian Arabic pronounces the "j" sound as a "g") is Mubarak senior's son. He is said to be in London which is not surprising given the close ties Britain, like the USA, has with the Mubarak regime. This Al-Jazeera clip shows a reporter trying to track him down:
Where in the world is Gamal Mubarak?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKWGOXMnTRk


It's been mentioned that Obama might go down in history as the president who lost Egypt. It is correct to speak in terms of Egypt being an American satellite because the Egyptian presidency, in return for massive amounts of "aid" (in effect, bribes that have gone straight to the Mubaraks), has ensured the safety and continuation of Israel (an American concern).

Mubarak sealed, with a concrete fence, reaching 20 metres into the ground, the Egyptian border with Palestine, thus ensuring that aid (like that which George Galloway's group were trying to take to the Palestinians) didn't reach the embattled Palestinians. Additionally, it has meant that Palestinian refugeees have been unable to flee to Egypt during the Israeli incursions. The intention being to break the morale of the Palestinians.

As an aside, it's odd that the Americans saw fit to remove Saddam but financed and been on very cordial terms with Mubarak. Saddam refused to kow-tow to the Americans, indeed he was the only Arab leader who spoke out against "the Jewish entity" ie Israel and showed support for the Palestinians. The Americans have turned a blind eye to Mubarak's excesses against his people (which are well documented). The truth is that Saddam had to go because he was a threat to American interests (Israel) and because of the American desire to liberate Iraq of its oil. Contrast the situation in Egypt where in spite of years of tyraany, the Americans would rather see "reforms", meaning a few superficial changes but a retention of the existing regime. The existing regime serves American interests very well and, if Mubarak were to be forced out, Americans would like to see another puppet, ideally Gamal Mubarak in his place. If Mubarak is forced out, it will spell the end of the Mubarak dynasty and so they would likely support (covertly) for anyone willing to sellout or who shared their concerns. Muhammed El Baradei, who worked alongside he Americans in the lead up to the Iraq war and probabbly fabricated evidence to allow for the invasion of Iraq recently returned to Egypt. Although, he posits himself as an opposition leader, his past history of helping the Americans suggest that, if he were to fill the power vacuum in a post-Mubarak Egypt, he would likely continue Mubarak's work of serving Israeli and American interests which would defeat the whole point of the protests.
Anyway, here's a youtube video quite cleverly shows, what Hilary Clinton was really thinking when she gave her speech a couple of days back. (note the way she tries to present the protestors as violent, thus trying to discredit them):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBuMuzhvYeA&feature=player_embedded
And lastly, a powerful speech by an American Muslim imam, at a rally in support of Egypt,slams Obama's hypocrisy and suggests that even the USA, after witnessing events in Egypt recently, might fear a revolution on their own territory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdIyYCq2zeM