Adonis Diaries

Archive for July 14th, 2013

Egypt is turmoil: And Obama goes golfing, and Kerry goes fishing?

Truth about Egypt slips out: New York Times shocker

Have you noticed the silence, the casual indifference, of the Obama administration since the Egyptian army shoved President Mohammad Morsi from office in a military coup that gets bloodier by the day?
That is what you are supposed to notice. Barack Obama goes golfing as Cairo descends into violence. Secretary of State John Kerry goes sailing in Nantucket. Neither has anything of importance to say about the events in Egypt — the chaos engulfing the nation.
We’re just bystanders, and those poor Egyptians — we hope they can sort themselves out. These guys play a pretty fair hand a lot of the time, but they have overplayed this one.
Anyone who thinks the U.S. is not complicit up to its eyebrows in the Egyptian army’s unlawful coup needs a refresher in our history.
Enlarge David Brooks, Thomas Friedman   (Credit: AP/Nam Y. Huh/Zsolt Szigetvary/Reuters/Carlo Allegri)
It is now common currency to say that Morsi, who served just a year after he was legitimately elected in June 2012, failed some kind of democracy test. He did no such thing.
There was a test, but the failure belongs to Washington. (Not a failure, but a decision to fail the Moslem Brotherhood experience)
The US professes to like democracies all over the planet, but it cannot yet abide one that may not reflect America’s will. I have not written anything new just now.
Just in some of our lifetimes we have Italy’s elections in 1948 (corrupted) and many, many Japanese elections — generations of them. Then there’s the nastier stuff: Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, Lumumba in Congo, Sukarno in Indonesia, Allende in Chili, and so on.
But to say it is an old story is precisely what is so disturbing, not to say disgraceful, about the coup in Egypt and America’s part in it.
The Arab world (a quarter of which abides in Egypt) is struggling toward a kind of democracy that will arise from Islamic culture and civilization.
This is why the Arab Spring, as it commenced in early 2011, remains so promising. One embraces the prospect of something new. Morsi made a thousand mistakes.
There was political immaturity (hardly surprising after three decades of U.S.-backed dictators), there was the seeking of partisan advantage, there was sectarian exclusion, there was the defensiveness and overcompensating of the Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi’s party, after long years of persecution.
Egypt’s first properly elected government was bound to be something of a dog’s dinner, as the English say.
But search as one may, there is nothing on the list that warranted a military coup. And this accounts for the cat-ate-the-canary bit the Obama administration is asking us to accept.
What Washington truly does not want is an elected Islamic government, and this is written all over what the Obama administration has just taken part in.
There is nothing so honorable as a statement of policy — Where is Edward Snowden now that we really need him? — but there are footprints galore. There is the nomenclature, for instance. When is a coup not a coup? When it is against U.S. law to support one, and when the White House and Congress want to continue sending $1.5 billion in aid to the Egyptian military.
So Egypt has not had a coup, somehow — never mind that the law is being broken. Americans are actually invited to accept this, and many do. It makes you think P.T. Barnum had it right all along. Now you have to listen to Obama.
Here is all Obama has had to say since Morsi’s July 3 exit: Egypt’s army should move “quickly and responsibly” to restore “full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible.” (Lately, Morsi should be set free…) Can you believe it?
Not “the Morsi government,” which of course was civilian and democratically elected, but “a government.” You see where the White House is headed on this? Hacks like me call minute-to-minute accounts of events “tick-tocks,” and the New York Times did one from Cairo in its edition last Sunday, four days after Morsi’s ouster.
I wonder if the commissars are upset. Buried in the details is a plain and simple re-creation of the moments during which Washington gave the Egyptian army authorization to move against its government. I read it, shocked by the momentary honesty in the coverage, and said, “This is a mistake that will not be repeated,” and it has not been.
We ought not get started on the journalism, except that we already have. The media’s cooperation in mystifying the perfectly obvious is not short of stunning, and much or most of the blame must fall, sorry to say, to the Times.
Here is a Times correspondent publishing on July 5: “But the flurry of White House meetings and phone calls served to underscore the lack of leverage the U.S. has over Egypt, once a crucial strategic ally in the Middle East but lately just another headache.” How do these people hold their heads up? It is entirely a historical.
The media reported Hosni Mubarak’s fall the same way two years ago — as if the U.S. had just realized its 20-year client was in office. We must treat the man to the history text of his choosing. Now we read that the Morsi government and the Muslim Brotherhood are making “claims to legitimacy” (the Times, July 8).
This kind of phrasing is handled like radioactive material at the Times. (I know; I once worked there.) There are no accidents. This is part of how the U.S. intends to Not legitimize a legitimate government. There is nothing personal in this, but we have to end with a consideration of the shockingly bigoted column David Brooks published in the July 5 Times.
Morsi, you see, represented democratic process, which I had always thought was a pretty good thing. But no, we must judge leaders on the basis of “substance,” which is to say their values, and they have to match ours. That is how it works. Morsi came up short on substance. He had the values wrong. These kind of people need to be “investigated” before they are elected. (By whom is not noted.) You see, people holding Islamic beliefs are not capable of governing themselves. Egypt, for that matter, “lacks even the basic mental ingredients” to swing a democratic transition. Breathtaking.
In all probability I would not like Morsi personally. But I am for Morsi. I am for his Brothers. They represent the best thing the Arab Spring has yet achieved — the start of an essential process — and the U.S. had no business tearing it down, especially in so underhanded a fashion.
(I strongly doubt it that Egypt army would have fomented the coup if the people refused to go out on mass to demonstrate their displeasure over the Moslem Brotherhood experience and brand of democracy. The US would have not dared this time around to order a military coup without the acquiesce of the Egyptian people)
Note 2: Patrick Smith is the author of “Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century” was the International Herald Tribune’s bureau chief in Hong Kong and then Tokyo from 1985 to 1992.
During this time he also wrote “Letter from Tokyo” for the New Yorker. He is the author of four previous books and has contributed frequently to the New York Times, the Nation, the Washington Quarterly, and other publications.                            More Patrick L. Smith.            

Nazi armies Never crossed the French Maginot Lines in 1940

There is this lie, which was perpetrated by the Big Silence of French politicians and the military and believed by almost everyone, that the Nazi armies destroyed and penetrated the best defensive Maginot Lineslike slicing into butter“.

The German armies Never managed to cross the Maginot Lines, and not in any section of it.

Only 22,000 French troops on the lines defeated 240,000 Nazi troops in the Alsace and Lorraine.

About 85,000 French soldiers in the Lines vanquished over 650,000 combined German and Italian armies.

The French armies on Maginot Lines could withstand for months the repeated onslaughts without any external supplies in food, water or ammunition…

The 4 Maginot lines were dug 60 meters under ground, equipped with hospitals, plenty of supplies in every thing, air ventilation system that would filtrate any poisonous gas attacks as in WWI… 40 forts like Schoenenbourg were erected along the lines to link all the sections. Everything was underground, and you could barely notice a few iron domes…

The German had all the details and the French did not make a secret of it.

The Lines were planned to cover Belgium up north, but Belgium decided to rely on the illusory neutrality treaty for its defense.

Still, the French military had plans on how to defend the norther borders: They had enough tanks and artillery to check any German offensive, but they never received any order to counter attack.

The ensuing debacle did not affect the troops on the Maginot Lines. The troops there kept their grounds and prevented the Nazi armies from crossing the lines.

And guess what, the french troops on Maginot did not wait for an order to defend their lines, and they were not even given more than 12 days to prove their effectiveness when the new French government of Petain took power. The armistice of June 25, 1940 ordered the troops to get out and surrender to the enemy.

It was the persistent orders from the French High Command to surrender that broke the heart and spirit of the soldiers, and these soldiers were taken prisoners and they kept their silence till their death in despair and shame of how the French leaders gave up on defending their Homeland.

Andre Maginot was an officer who suffered from gas attacks in the trenches of Verdun in 1916. After the war was over, he pressured every deputy to agree on his strategic defensive line. And when he was minister of defense, Maginot started the construction of this unbelievable and titanic endeavor in 1929. He died a year later, and the military decided to increase the line to 4 lines for added protection.

The book of  Jean-Luc Seigle relate this infamy of the US military in France to deny the Black soldiers from celebrating victory. The US military locked the black soldiers in their barracks. and it was the French peasants who released them and allowed them to celebrate victory with them.

The French soldiers on Maginot lines were undefeated, and they have done their duties to defend their Fatherland.

France is still railing under this dishonor and over this infamy of not daring to tell the truth. Even De Gaule kept his silence in his Memoirs.

Note 1: An extract from the French book “By getting old, man cries” by Jean-Luc Seigle

Note 2: It is highly likely that Hitler would have not occupy Poland and force France to declare war, if Belgium decided to extend the Maginot Line along its borders with Germany




Blog Stats

  • 1,513,319 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 820 other followers
%d bloggers like this: