Terrorist acts today are TV events. Have you noticed? To make major political gains activists at one time had to make war. Folks like George Washington, Castro, Mao, and Stalin. It took resources and posed great risks to the activists. Now because of TV you just need acts of terror or intimidation. 911 was the granddaddy of them all. A handful of horrible people staged a TV event using a handful of deranged and brainwashed poeple and a minimum amount of cash and resources (mostly stolen).
Who would of thought it? Only two short weeks ago Egypt was ruled by an 82 year old, very ill man, who wanted his son to replace him in a position that VP Biden assured us was not a dictator. For some odd reason this guy was paranoid. After all he was only wounded when the Muslim Brotherhood killed Sadat. And OK, there were 7 additional attempts to assassinate him. Of course the Military who runs Egypt had no intention of letting the young Mubarak replace his Dad. And then what is being called no less than a miracle by the press happened. A 'leaderless' revolt of peaceful demonstrators who only set fires and threw firebombs and rocks demonstrated for TV cameras while facebooking and tweeting each other to cause this miracle revolution. The 82 year old was forced to step down now instead of on the scheduled departure date of September. Details of the miraculous event are compared below:
In Charge Council of Army Officers Council of Army Officers
Leader Field Marshall Tantawa Field Marshal Tantawa
Party National Democratic Party National Democratic Party
Threat Muslim Brotherhood Muslim Brotherhood
Election September, 2011 No Schedule
At a certain point, the opposition’s euphoria will subside and demands for elections will be voiced. Whether the military stays true to its commitment to hold elections on schedule in September remains to be seen. If elections are held, however, the military must have a political vehicle in place to counter opposition forces, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. Sustaining its hold on power while crafting a democratic government will be the biggest challenge for the military as it tries to avoid regime change while also dealing with a potential constitutional crisis.
What have we learned? In this day of TV Terrorism a non-event, with no leaders and no cause, can stand in the street and lead a non-movement to replace oppression with the status quo. This thing was so disorganized and confusing that Obama and his regime couldn't determine how to join the 'wrong side' because there didn't appear to be any sides. My gosh they tried though. You have to give them credit. Biden said Mubarak wasn't a dictator. Obama's top security chief, Clapper, said the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD wasn't a religious organization but 'secular'. Obama made daily announcements that only proved how irrelevant he is, and has made the US, to International Events. Does anyone have any idea what Obama said in any of his press releases? Do any world leaders care?
The potentially positive result is that there is an opportunity to turn this new TV Terrorism movement against real thugs like Iran, Syria, Palestine, Gaza, Libya, Cuba, Venezuela, and even China. If only we had a shred of competence in the White House and the CIA. If only our leaders had anything on their minds except the 2012 elections?
The potentially negative result is that the TV Terrorism might be co-opted by a combine made up of Muslims and Socialists targeting nations such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq under the banner of 'democracy'. Their ideas of democracy are one man, one vote, one time before the facists takeover as they did in Iran.
What will happen when we have our first post-revolution face off between Socialists and Muslims. Right now we would get even money on a bet as to which side Obama would support. It might be his best straddle yet.
On the other hand, how effective would a leader like Ronald Reagan be in today's world with people screaming for democratic values of liberty and freedom based on rights granted by our Creator? A leader who believed in the rule of law and gaining the consent of the governed? A leader who wanted government to get out of people's way? On the other hand why would these same people respond to a regime that violated their own Constitution in trying to enble the government to gain more control over their people's lives (talking healthcare, autos, and energy)? I just heard a Muslim cleric ask Hannity a good question, "Who do you trust to make your laws Allah or Obama?" The answer should be our rights come from our Creator and are protected by laws----not Obama. And unlike an Allah dominated theocracy, all people are guaranteed the same rights to worship as they please.
Think about it,