
Hosni Mubarak finally steps down - dzlobin
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/02/201121125158705862.html
======
goatforce5
Watching Al Jazeera's live stream and they had one of their journalists on the
phone from the square. She expressed excitement and delight that Mubarak was
gone. The host guy back in the studio pointed out the journalist on the phone
had been impartial up until now, and basically apologised for her expressing
her opinion.

I thought that was pretty classy.

~~~
bvi
He actually said something along the lines of "...do forgive her for her
reaction. She was 1 week old when Mubarak came into office."

Very cool.

~~~
zalew
Now it happened another time, and he was even more harsh, sth like "we are
sorry that some of our Egyptian correspondents express their private emotions
and opinions instead of only doing their proffession". That's what shows class
and a really PRO approach. In Poland, when the pope died or the plane crashed,
journalists of our local news stations started a crying/mourning contest - it
was disgusting and unbearable to watch, and nobody from tv even cared to think
that there was something extremely not proffessional about it.

~~~
asdfj843lkdjs
Everyone on TV crying sure seems like it would be super annoying. But I find
the notion that journalist should, or even indeed ever could, be 100%
objective and impartial - silly.

Silly and most prevalent in America. Curiously also in America we have Fox
news which clearly does not abide by objectivity even as it advertises itself
with it.

My point is simply that pure objectivity is an impossibility.

Attempting to reach pure objectivity can lead you down a wrong path, just look
at how American journalists contort themselves in order to be nautral, facts
and reality be damned.

In Europe it is much more prevalent that everyone has a bias, know what it is
and keep it in mind as you read, watch, or listen to them.

I'm hoping that Al Jazeera, which is accused of having copied the style of fox
news if not the substance, does not follow American journalism down the path
of a bias free utopia.

I hope Egyptian journalists who show any kind of emotion at this news, are
only jokingly reprimanded. As long as it doesn't turn into a soap opera, bias
ought to be expected of mere humans, even if they are journalists.

~~~
pjscott
An objective view is one where you focus on the facts of reality, without
trying to superimpose opinions on them. Trying to equally present all opinions
does not necessarily have anything at all to do with the facts, and is not
objective reporting. And though our models of reality are necessarily
imperfect, we can still try to get them to match reality as well as we can.
One of the big hazards to avoid is being emotionally entangled with the news
in a way that prevents you from reporting it neutrally.

Al Jazeera derives most of its fame from being the least biased news agency in
the Middle East, with satellites that let it broadcast to places that would
prefer for their citizens only to have access to the official state-run news.

------
michaelchisari
‎"The struggle for justice should never be abandoned because of the apparent
overwhelming power of those who seem invincible in their determination to hold
on to it. That apparent power has, again and again, proved vulnerable to human
qualities less measurable than bombs and dollars: moral fervor, determination,
unity, organization, sacrifice, wit, ingenuity, courage, patience."

 _\- Howard Zinn_

------
motters
The difficult part is always what comes after a revolution. Having the
military in charge isn't necessarily a good thing, and whether Egypt does get
a democratic government will now depend upon how the military behaves.

~~~
alex_c
Not to mention that a democratic government, in itself, doesn't guarantee
anything - large-scale corruption and incompetence are still a very real
possibility.

Still, hopefully a step in the right direction - more options are now
available to the Egyptian people.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Not just a real possibility, but a very likely one. I recall that in one
interview, a protester was complaining about the lack of economic opportunity.
"The supervisor hires all his nephews! Regular people can't get any hours!"
(Or something to that effect.)

No matter how awesome the new regime is, I doubt they can fix this. Sad fact:
many of Egypt's problems are inflicted by the people on themselves, not by
Mubarak.

~~~
MichaelSalib
Alas, I can't find it now, but I recall reading a Foreign Policy article a few
months ago which quoted one Egyptian as saying something like 'Mubarak is
problem, but the much bigger problem is that this country has a million little
Mubaraks, tiny totalitarians who rule their tiny fiefdoms with a tiny (iron)
fist'; it seems that getting rid of Mubarak will have been much easier than
displacing or reforming all the little Mubaraks.

~~~
michaelchisari
That seems similar to the situation in Tunisia, and I'd say it's a common
pattern that replicates itself whenever a country is under a dictatorship for
decades.

This is a really incredible success of the Egyptian people, but it's just the
first step of De-Mubarak-ification.

------
siculars
I am so happy for the people of Egypt. This is one for the history books. Our
kids will be reading about this revolution as an example of the peaceful power
of the people.

I have to congratulate AlJazeera for their tremendous coverage of unfolding
events. They have been very professional and fearless in their reporting.
Western media should take notes.

Who knows what tomorrow will bring but for now Egypt and the entire world can
smile wide and celebrate.

Mazal Tov to the people of Egypt!

~~~
ido

        Mazal Tov to the people of Egypt!
    

Why would you congratulate the people of Egypt in Hebrew?

~~~
fleitz
I'd suspect that after enduring 30 years of struggle against a dictator that
they wouldn't care what language they were cheered in. Most people just want
to live in peace, it's only those who have an axe to grind that incite things
by worrying what language someone is congratulated in.

~~~
ido
Hebrew is my mother-tongue, I have no axe to grind.

------
russnewcomer
Mubarak handing power to the army probably means that the regime lives on,
Mubarak's just not in charge of it anymore. Egypt's issues aren't settled now,
this is only a step and it remains to be seen if real, true, democratic change
is going to happen.

~~~
csomar
True. But there is an election coming up next. Now they have just began,
Tunisia has just began too. There is an opportunity here since media will be
opened (it already opened in Tunisia) and also the doors for true opponents.
It's time to guard the election and ensure that the right one is elected.

We have just began, and I hope everything will be fine.

~~~
bugsy
Many Egyptians were talking about having a constitutional convention to decide
what sort of government they want. Perhaps it will acknowledge inalienable
rights reserved to the people for example.

Hopefully that will be the next step, anything less than starting from scratch
with their government is going to leave the old system and those who gained
power from it in place.

~~~
_djo_
That would be the smartest thing that they could possibly do, especially if
they take the opportunity to define a constitution with strong protections for
negative rights. With enough care they'll constrain any future government,
protect fundamental freedoms and kill two birds with one stone by easing
Western fears about the Muslim Brotherhood assuming power.

They would do well to learn from South Africa's example in this. I honestly
believe that if it was not for the phased departure of apartheid from 1990 to
1994, combined with the constitutional convention and the preservation of the
national police and the military, South Africa's transition would have ended
in disaster. In the end the security forces played a massive role in creating
a stable enough environment for the vital negotiations to take place and
without the work of the military behind the scenes it's doubtful that the 1994
election would have happened at all.

So the biggest mistake now would be to rush this. Egyptians need to understand
that the steps they take next are going to set the stage for the next 30 years
and determine whether Mubarak will be followed by a true multi-party democracy
or by yet another group of thuggish oppressors. They had better make it count.

------
othello
And Mubarak's Wikipedia entry is already edited:

 _Muhammad Hosni Sayyid Mubarak was the President of Egypt from 1981 to 2011._
[1]

History unfolding live indeed.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak>

------
michaelty
Next time, don't take down your country's Internet.

~~~
zeteo
About the only comment thread on this story that has a claim of belonging on
HN.

~~~
tomjen3
Agreed. Sometimes people forget that this is "news for hackers" and not just
news, however wide they are spread.

------
eftpotrm
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12433045>

_The BBC's Jon Leyne in Cairo said the announcement caught everyone by
surprise, and all over the city drivers honked their horns and people fired
guns into the air.

But the army takeover looks very much like a military coup, our correspondent
adds.

The constitution has been breached, he says, because officially it should be
the speaker of parliament who takes over, not the army leadership._

Hope for the best, plan for the worst. So far the Egyptian military have been
on the right side of this situation but we have no guarantees what happens
next. This is the end of the beginning, not the end.

~~~
codebaobab
Stratfor is also calling this a coup:

[http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20110211-red-alert-
mubarak-...](http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20110211-red-alert-mubarak-
resigns-military-in-charge)

------
elvirs
I'm very happy for Egyptian people. People of Egypt deserve a better leader, a
better government. The guy who said 'I am ready to die' yesterday on CNN
almost made me cry. Thats the spirit, and that spirit deserved a victory which
they finally achieved. I hope the same happens for other nations that have
been held under dictatorship for decades.

~~~
csomar
Don't be very enthusiastic, especially for Egypt. They have got a very
sensible position. They are Israel neighbor, they have the Suez Canal, and
also the most populated Arabic country (They can become a power). That is, I
don't think that the U.S will give up that easily.

Also keep in mind, that the Arab nations want to unite. If you give the people
the power, you'll see tomorrow that most of the borders are removed, which let
the place for the building of a very strong and influential civilization.

As I said in my other thread, we have just began and it'll be a very long road
and will need a very long breath.

~~~
MichaelSalib
_If you give the people the power, you'll see tomorrow that most of the
borders are removed_

WTF? Have you ever spoken with an actual Arab?

If you had, you'd know that nationalism is alive and well. Egyptians are quite
cognizant of the differences between themselves and Syrians or Lebanese or
Jordanians. They have zero interest in abolishing borders and uniting with
other countries.

But what do I know, I'm only an Egyptian.

~~~
csomar
I really don't know about you. I'm not saying they want to form a one country
and become one nation; but make trade easier, one currency (may be in the
future). I was speaking from the financial side.

For their support for brothers countries like Palestine, may be you won't
support them, but the majority does.

And you being an Egyptian doesn't represent what the majority of Egyptians
think. Only the future will tell what their orientations will be.

~~~
NickPollard
Look at how difficult any of this similar co-operation has been for Europeans.

You seem to suggest that you can't extrapolate from one Egyptian to all
Egyptians, yet at the same time you seem to be talking about Arabs as some
monolithic mono-culture, which seems like a very backwards and ill-informed
view.

Sure, Egyptians and, say, Jordanians are both Arabs, but guess what, Brits
and, say, Austrians are both Germanic Caucasians, don't expect them to team up
anytime soon.

------
netmau5
[http://blogs.aljazeera.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/Fe...](http://blogs.aljazeera.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/FeaturedImagePost/images/jomaaa.jpg)

This is one of the better images I've seen showing the pure scale of the
protests. In the US, we had our "million man march" which questionably had so
many people. In Egypt, many millions have been involved over the course of far
longer than one day. With relation to their total population, the size of the
movement is pretty mind boggling.

~~~
larsberg
The only time I've seen this many people gathered in one place in the US... is
back when Chicago used to do a single, large fireworks display.

I don't know whether that's a good or bad thing.

------
yalforreca
Portugal had a revolution in 1974 that ended an dictatorship of more than 40
years. The Army was fed up with the colonial wars and persuaded by the left-
wing illegal parties, took control of the country. Democracy exists in
Portugal, but corruption and widespread cleptocracy by a small number of elite
families still rule. I hope Egypt avoids that.

------
BvS
Reminds of 1989 here in Germany! Congratulation Egypt!

~~~
zalew
Which began in 1980 in Poland

~~~
hcho
Checz had it even earlier.

~~~
jarek
Hungary '56. Let's not get into a contest here.

~~~
zalew
We could probably go back to the 50s and all the events all around the eastern
block during those times but that was not the point. Just that the events
around 1980 (Gdansk .pl, Velvet .cz.sk) started the domino effect which led to
dropping the Berlin Wall and eventually failure of the USSR. No contest here.

~~~
hcho
To be pedantic, it was the economic inefficiencies of the communist bloc that
started everything. Events were just inevitablities.

------
kilian
If you can, I urge you to get a look of the live stream at aljazeera:
<http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/> The Tahir square is absolutely
euphoric.

------
philsalesses
This is a side question and I'd like to get any/all opinions since I have yet
to find a suitable answer to this.

How do I, as an American citizen, minimize cognitive dissonance when the
following disparate events occur?

America's stance: democracy and 'freedom' are fundamental rights of all
people.

-and-

America's actions: refusing to recognize a democratically elected body because
the resulting will of the people is openly hostile towards America and Israel
(Hamas winning seats in Palestinian elections).

~~~
_djo_
The positions are not fundamentally opposed. You can believe that people have
the right to choose their own leaders while also believing both that they
should be accountable for that choice and that those leaders can be ignored or
shunned if they do not follow the rules of the international community.

In other words, the only legitimacy that being elected democratically confers
on leaders is that of being the authentic representatives of their people. The
greater legitimacy of a government as a member of the international community
of states might be influenced by whether it's democratic or not but is
determined mostly by that governments actions and stated intentions. Hamas has
refused to agree to steps, such as renouncing terrorism, that the US, EU and
Israel believe are fundamental to a government being a member of the
international community.

So they have accepted the results of the election, but they're under no
obligation to be friendly with the result.

With that said, like all great powers the US's foreign policy is at times
hypocritical to some extent. It will extol the virtues of rapid democratic
change in some countries while discouraging it in others. This seeming
mismatch in standards is the problem with a foreign policy with an idealistic
rhetoric but a realpolitik reality. The truth is that encouraging rapid
democratic change in all cases would be foolish and irresponsible, because it
could lead to far worse outcomes than the status quo. Some countries can
handle that kind of explosive change, others can't and need to be shepherded
towards it at a slower rate. I think Egypt falls into the latter category.

------
buro9
There's great live coverage on the BBC at the moment:
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698>

It looks like a carnival erupted at Tahrir Square when word got out. It was
pretty vibrant before, but euphoria is clearly evident.

~~~
Qz
The carnival has actually been there for days now...

~~~
buro9
Not like this, there's a reporter from the BBC tweeting how the streets going
to the square are all packed, and palpable joy is everywhere.

Watch the video stream if you can, it's uplifting to see. It's more than just
the anticipation of celebration, it's the pure and unadulterated celebration
and the carnival atmosphere associated with that.

Just put it into perspective, a dictator that most have lived under all their
lives, the fear that goes with it... it's all being released in one go.

It's really hard to watch these pictures and not feel that rub off, but down
on the ground this is probably the highest concentration of pure happiness and
elation on this planet.

Look, awesome is an over-used word and we're an extremely cynical bunch... but
this really is awesome.

~~~
Qz
Oh I've been watching it. I'm mainly referring to the tent city in the middle
of the square being there, but yes it's quite amazing overall. As happy as I
am, I'm still feeling a little unsettled. It's a victory yes, but what comes
next?

------
fourspace
Whatever outcome may result over time, I'm happy for the people of Egypt. Once
again, the desire to be free eventually overwhelms the arbitrary tyranny of a
dictator.

It will certainly be interesting to see if this leads to a domino effect in
the Middle East and how it affects US foreign policy.

------
jackolas
The swiss have frozen his assets:

[http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/11/us-swiss-
mubarak-i...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/11/us-swiss-mubarak-
idUSTRE71A58R20110211)

I'm glad to see this, its the first step to sending him to the Hague.

------
arepb
The live stream is just incredible to watch. Just inspiring to hear these
cheers <http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/>

------
xbryanx
When do we get to see who is really in power now? It's hilarious to me that
all the pictures of the 1-10 powers in Egypt are grainy screengrabs from old
TV programs.

------
jim_h
It's indeed been a roller-coaster.

2/10 morning - He's going to step down.

2/10 evening - He's not stepping down.

2/11 morning - He's really stepping down.

Hopefully the rest of the ride will be less bumpy and more pleasant.

------
xster
puppet out, puppet in

------
logjam
Another example of nonviolent action leading to real political change.

Now if the U.S. government gets on the ball, they will redirect some
substantial portion of the Egyptian ~$2 billion military aid and announce we
will help build science and technical schools, universities, and hospitals.

Thanks to those of you who have been hosting and continue to host Tor bridges
in support of emerging democracies:

<https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-doc-relay.html.en>

~~~
_djo_
Halting or redirecting the military aid would be the worst thing the US could
do, because it would force the military (the guys who are actually in charge
now) into a corner, remove any hope of being able to co-operate with it and
undermine the most important source of stability the country has.

In any case, Egypt's security requirements are not going anywhere and the
country will still have to maintain a sizable military in future, so cutting
the funding will just mean that the state will have to obtain replacement
funds from the national budget. Right now the $2 billion that the US gives to
the Egyptian military is $2 billion that's freed up for the state to spend on
other things like schools, universities and hospitals. That they don't do a
good enough job of that already is due more to corruption than to any actual
lack of funds.

------
shareme
the bad thing is that HM stole $50 billion from the citizens of Egypt..and the
USA does nothing and UN does nothing

~~~
ceejayoz
That $50 billion number seems to have been fished out of thin air. IIRC, the
US government estimates his fortune at closer to $2 billion. Large, yes, but
not at the same level.

~~~
beambot
Seriously? To me, the difference between $2B and $50B seems like diminishing
returns (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns>). If you disagree,
then I'd like to be you for a few days... ;-)

~~~
ceejayoz
For a person, yes - there's little you can't do with $2B that you can do with
$50B. For a country, though, it's the difference between a single shuttle
launch and three years of NASA's budget.

------
tybris
Meanwhile, Israel is probably polishing its tanks and nukes.

------
alain94040
Flagged per the guidelines: if it's on TV, it doesn't belong here :-)

~~~
koenigdavidmj
Enough users upvoted it to get it in spot #1 on the front page. The userbase
thus finds it relevant to them.

~~~
derleth
> Enough users upvoted it to get it in spot #1 on the front page.

Well, now I'm curious to see if pg manually shoves it off again, like he did
with the earlier Very Popular Egypt Submission.

~~~
ugh
That could have been a result of flagging. Flagging will push a submission
down.

------
mynameishere
Ok. We'll see what happens.

<http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB02Ak01.html>

 _In the most fundamental matters, President and Mrs Mubarak are incomparably
more enlightened than the Egyptian public._

~~~
MichaelSalib
So, does kidnapping innocent people off the streets, imprisoning them in
dungeons and torturing them by wiring car batteries to their genitals count as
"fundamental"? Or is that just one of those insignificant matters?

What about stealing billions of dollars from your people? Is that a sign of
enlightenment?

~~~
mynameishere
"We'll see what happens."

The discussions I've seen about Egypt seem to assume that it can be governed
like the countries we're familiar with. Most of the things that seem evil are
in fact cock-ups or unfortunate necessities. We learned about this after
ousting Saddam Hussein, and were forced into all sorts of brutalities that
indeed would not work well in the US or Britain.

~~~
MichaelSalib
Actually, I'm pretty sure that when you wire up a car battery to someone's
genitals, that IS evil. That's not an unfortunate necessity. And its not a
screwup.

 _We learned about this after ousting Saddam Hussein, and were forced into all
sorts of brutalities that indeed would not work well in the US or Britain._

What did History ever do to you that compelled you to slander and malign it
so?

~~~
mynameishere
_What did History ever do to you that compelled you to slander and malign it
so?_

Are you just completely irrational or does this mean something? I honestly
can't tell.

My point is simply that regime change doesn't automatically generate the
political equivilent of rainbow-shitting unicorns, which is what people seem
to be assuming. Governments tend to be molded by circumstances more than we
realize, and not the personality of such-and-such a strongman. "We'll see what
happens," is my final analysis but the best guess is always repetition.

~~~
MichaelSalib
_Are you just completely irrational or does this mean something? I honestly
can't tell._

I think your explanation of US behavior in post-Hussein Iraq is
ahistorical...to say the least.

 _Governments tend to be molded by circumstances more than we realize, and not
the personality of such-and-such a strongman._

Absolutely, I very much agree.

I'm still curious though: is child-rape enlightenment?

~~~
mynameishere
_is child-rape enlightenment?_

Okay, you're asking an imbecilic question, but I'll answer it because you're
basically setting yourself up: No, it isn't.

Now, is the mutilation of children, practiced by the Egyptian population in
general, enlightenment? Is it? Huh? I answered your bullshit question; do me
the favor of answering my real question.

Maybe you should read the original article I posted and think twice.

