Egypt

Are Egyptians the only ones who blunder?

Egyptians blunder often, no doubt about that. Their fiascos range from the embarrassing to the tragic. Once they fault though, Egyptians aren’t left to eat humble pie discreetly but are ridiculed and criticized by Egyptians and Non-Egyptians alike.

But are Egyptians the only ones who blunder?

Human beings at large err. This, in no way excuses Egyptians or gives them a carte blanche to continue to err. Quite the contrary, but it tells us that those we assume don’t err because they scandalize Egypt after every crisis are no better. At times, their own oversights are so bizarre if not so dreadful that they dim the faults Egyptians make in comparison. Let’s look at a few of these blunders.

Egypt issued a stamp commemorating the opening of the new Suez Canal. The designer used a Panama Canal photo instead of a Suez Canal one. A blunder? Absolutely, and a pretty bad one, too, which The Telegraph, The Huffington Post, and Al Arabeya, and The Blaze to name a mere few outlets found hilarious.

Now, when the US Republican Presidential candidate, Marco Rubio, featured a Canadian city, Vancouver, in his promotional ad for the presidency, only the Vancouver Press, and Steve Colbert, found it terribly amusing and worth ridicule."It's morning again in America," says the narrator in the ad, only it isn’t America; it’s Vancouver. On the screen a tug boat with a Canadian flag sails across the Inlet with the Vancouver skyline behind.

At the Miss Universe Pageant, the wrong contestant was crowned. The Miss Universe host declared the winner when she was actually the runner up. She had the crown placed on her head, and she waved the Colombian flag and smiled at the crowd only to be told that it was a mistake.

It isn’t a life-or-death error, but it is pretty damaging nonetheless. Egypt does not have similar pageants, but I bet if a similar mistake occurred in Egypt, media in Egypt and elsewhere would’ve joined hands in portraying Egypt as a dysfunctional society.

Serial killer, Robert Pickton, convicted of the murder of six women, whose bodies were found on his farm in Vancouver, Canada, managed to sneak a book he had written out of prison. Self-published, the book reached Amazon and was selling online for $20 to the grief of the victims’ families.

Who is at fault here? The system that allows a serial killer to profit while he is incarcerated? The self-publishing service that gave Pickton the opportunity to do just that? Or is it Amazon that really does not care much what it carries as long it profits? Amazon removed the book, but the damage was done already.

Spotlight, a movie nominated for several Oscars, is a true story about how a newspaper in the States uncovered the child molestation scandal and cover-up within the Catholic church. We are talking of hundreds of child abuse cases across the years, but more importantly, of the cardinals clear intention to sweep the guilt under the carpet.

Yes, Egypt has a downright messy religious umbrella, but in no way can the misdemeanours of the Egyptian religious sheikhs, who continuously blabber disdainfully, compare to the wrongful doings of the Catholic archbishops in the West.

The Egyptian Parliament, in spite of its many worthwhile members, can be loud, disorganized, and unkempt. One member, Tawfik Okasha, was expelled from a session after a brawl with the speaker. MPs voted to expel him, too. Well, in Korea, female members fist fight over bills. Ukraine parliamentarians do the same. In Israel, a politician threw water at a colleague in parliament. And in Argentina, one lawmaker slapped her colleague. Brawls seem to be the name of the game across parliaments. Egyptians are no better, but no worse.

Egypt has deep-rooted corruption in its core. But what do we call eBay when it sells Egyptian artifacts for thousands of dollars? If the artifacts were fake, they would have sold for dimes, but for eBay to know that they are stolen and sale pitch them for hundreds of thousands of dollars is unheard of. Again, the items were removed.

The Guantanamo Bay detention camp is a US base with a prison on Cuban soil. It i there to detain war criminals, and yet all 80 prisoners remaining, who have been detained for 15 years have not been charged or sentenced. They are mere detainees. And yet the Human Rights Watch discuss the detainees in Egyptians prisons but never question Guantanamo. This while both Donald Trump and Ted Cruze, the Republican candidates, respectively promise to expand and fill Guantanamo with more terrorists/detainees.

Egyptian policemen have shot and killed many an Egyptian—horrendous acts that flared anger across Egypt. Similarly, dozens of black unarmed men were murdered by policemen in the States in 2014 and 2015. In all these cases, no one called for the resignation of an official such as a mayor, a minister, or, heaven forbid, a president.

I suggest that if nothing else, the US learns from the single most glaring mistake Egyptians made: choosing ex-President Morsi. They may choose Republican nominee Donald Trump as the next US president. Isn’t there a resemblance here, too?

 

PV Magazine Mobil: Japan backs solar+storage project in Egypt with $89m loan

PV Magazine, by Ian Clover

Japanese funding and technical expertise will be lent to Egypt’s promising solar PV sector following the news that the Japanese government is loaning 10 billion yen ($89 million) to support the construction of a large-scale solar PV and storage project near to the city of Hurghada.

The project will comprise a 20 MW solar PV plant and a 30 MW storage facility, which will utilize several different types of battery technology, including lithium-ion and sodium-sulfur batteries.

For its part, Egypt’s government will hold a public tender for the project exclusively for Japanese companies that have demonstrable battery technologies ready to go. Sumitomo Electric Industries and NGK insulators are two such companies that are expected to vie for contracts, thus opening the floodgates for more Japanese investment in the growing MENA region.

A written agreement on the project is expected to be signed at next week’s PV Expo in Tokyo, when Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi is scheduled to visit Japan to discuss the project, which would be the first in Egypt to boast a large-scale storage facility.

Construction costs are expected to mount to around $92 million, and the two governments have established a low interest payback rate for the loan. Japan’s government has been eager to encourage its domestic companies to explore business opportunities in new and emerging markets, particularly in the field of advanced storage batteries – an official growth target announced in 2015 calls for Japanese companies to secure 500 billion yen in revenue for its storage technologies by 2020.

"We want to attract global attention with achievements in Egypt," a government official told The Japan News.

According to the Middle East Solar Industry Association (MESIA), Japan has targeted the correct country – a recent MESIA report says that Egypt could add up to 500 MW of PV in 2016. Meanwhile, government officials in the country are preparing tenders for 30 GW of energy projects, with renewables to the fore as the country seeks to drastically upgrade its energy market.

 

via m.pv-magazine.com

Today’s media world

Al Ahram Weekly, by Azza Radwan Sedky

The proliferation of media has brought tremendous change in social awareness, but has also led to distortions and fear, writes Azza Radwan Sedky

In the 1960s and 1970s, Egypt basically had two main TV channels (Channel One and Channel Two), two main radio channels (Al-Kahera and Sout Al-Arab) and two major newspapers (Al-Ahram and Al-Akhbar).

The landline — that black stationary device with a lengthy cord — was the basic means of communication. Most Egyptians didn’t even have landlines and paid 1.5 piastres to call from the nearest candy and cigarette kiosk. As for speaking to the outside world, it was a different ballgame altogether.

It meant sitting for an hour or two at the Central, then getting into a stall to speedily speak for the pricey allotted three minutes and quickly bid your family member goodbye as the operator hung up on you. This while snail mail, as we call it today, delivered written messages to loved ones around the world.

Life was different: slow-paced, noiseless and private.

Today, communication moves at a different pace. With satellites came thousands of TV and radio channels: the good, the mediocre and the affiliated. Though reading books is becoming more of a luxury, dozens of newspapers, some declaring allegiance to certain political groups, adorn newsstands. One doesn’t necessarily have to buy these newspapers. Online access is free. Also, with the Internet came a multitude of options: 24/7 news and, more often than not, nonessential and unnecessary information.

As there are almost more mobiles than there are Egyptians, the landline is slowly becoming obsolete. And to reach the outside world, with a slight finger movement on a smart phone, the caller views the other side across vast lands and oceans, and all free, too.

Life is different: fast-paced, overwhelming and public.

The positive element in all of this is indeed accessibility: news reaches us faster. And since the current speed and communication methods are here to stay, if not to get even faster and better, it is up to us as Egyptians to handle them appropriately and to gain instead of losing from accessibility.

As history tells us, it sometimes takes decades for the real story to surface. Today, in seconds, several underlying angles beget the real story, the concept of taking time to digest gone by the wayside. Consequently, the story and its ripple effect span the globe.

“Breaking,” a new word, lets us know that this story is still unfolding. From there the story moves across the various levels of communication. At the other far end, on Facebook and Twitter, anyone and everyone can and will comment. “Exclusive” is another new word that gives the story an edge in the current competitive environment.

Today, crises befall our beloved country regularly, and before we can put a crisis to rest another one emerges. Immediately, and to beat competition, talk shows analyse, newspapers dissect and social media befuddles. The poor layperson is blinded and deafened as the informed and uninformed offer opinions and make conclusions. The Doctors Syndicate’s protest, the shooting of the taxi driver Mohamed Ali, and the torture and murder of Giulio Regeni, the Italian PhD student, are all cases in point.

One can hardly pronounce a person dead and say, “Rest in peace,” before the deceased’s merits and demerits are probed into, condemning and hailing him simultaneously. Former UN secretary-general and Egyptian diplomat Boutros Boutros-Ghali and prominent journalist Mohamed Hassanein Heikal are two cases in point.

Once, certain topics were taboo and never discussed openly. It is not clear whether it was out of courtesy, culture or prohibition that a president’s health and his family’s goings and comings, for instance, were hardly mentioned in standard media. With freedom of speech reaching an ultimate level, nothing is sacred anymore. The second appearance of First Lady Intisar during President Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi’s formal speech to parliament was followed with a chain of yay and nay — is another case in point.

Today, nothing is censored; to speak out is a right. This is a positive change, but Egyptians need to pause, take a deep breath and assimilate carefully before they sound the alarm with each story. They should wait for official announcements, avoid making aggravating conclusions, and be smart about the whole media presence.

They also need to question the validity of all messages that cross their path: the good and the bad. A photo of a policeman guarding protestors was manipulated to fit several demonstrations. The only difference was in the sign that the protestor behind the policeman carried: the sign once breathed life into Morsi’s return, another time degraded the police force and, finally, incited doctors. Photoshop is a very dangerous tool. The innocent need to be aware of this.

Quotes can be taken out of context to mean the opposite and in the process wreak havoc. “I detest Cairo,” is not the same as, “I detest Cairo during sandstorms.” Words such as “allege” or “claim” are there to confuse. “The police allege that it was a mistake” implies that the police are lying. “He claims innocence” speaks to his deception. In all this, objectivity isn’t the name of the game, but intentional distortion is.

Brainwashing is also a successful tool for manipulation. The mere repetition of an idea, whether it is necessary or not, leaves its mark on the innocent. When Western media repeat “President Morsi, the first civilian president,” or “President Morsi, the first democratically elected leader” over and over again, the world at large succumbs to the theory that ex-president Morsi, since he is the first civilian president after all, is best for Egypt.

Some believe that criticism pays. It does, but only to an extent. If negative criticism persists, it backfires. And by highlighting the negative and dimming the positive Egyptians are left perturbed and worried. More importantly, by ridiculing or making fun of the good, nothing remains sacred. Media, across the board, should recognise this and act accordingly.

As for the Egyptians themselves, they should take media in general with a grain of salt. They should realise that as crises continue to befall Egypt and get discussed and brought to the fore, it doesn’t mean that each crisis will inspire or instigate a revolution. They need not worry: two revolutions in a span of two years is good enough.

Now let’s move on and build with what we have.

 

via weekly.ahram.org.eg

فيديو| إيهاب سمرة: الإعلام أثر بشكل سلبي على الاقتصاد المصري

دوت مصر

 

قال الخبير الاقتصادي إيهاب سمرة، إن الإعلام المصري في الفترة الأخيرة منذ أن تولى الرئيس عبدالفتاح السيسي، الحكم ارتكب العديد من الأخطاء، والتي أثرت بشكل سلبي على الاقتصاد المصري.

وأضاف خلال برنامج "أنا مصر" الذي يعرض عبر شاشات التلفزيون المصري، أمس الأربعاء: "الإعلام خلال المرحلة الأخيرة قام بدور مرعب في تخويف المصريين بالخارج من الوضع في مصر، وقام بوضع السم في العسل، ما ترتب عنه الأزمة الاقتصادية الحالية".

وتابع: "ذوي الأفكار المتطرفة بيتحركوا بحرية في كل دول الخليج، والمشكلة إن إحنا معملناش الترتيبات اللازمة عشان نصد التحديات الخارجية ولم نبتكر أي حلول لذلك الأمر".

via www.dotmsr.com

Why America Turned Off Al Jazeera

Surprisingly honest and objective, but it is so because its author is so. NY Times, by Hussein Ibish. Excerpt; read on here; Why America Turned Off Al Jazeera

WASHINGTON — The closing of Al Jazeera America, expected in April, is a sad conclusion to a project that was by turns uplifting and inspiring as well as troubling and depressing. Its demise offers a lesson in both the limitations of public diplomacy and the obstacles to providing high-quality television journalism.

Al Jazeera America was the latest, and perhaps most ambitious, branch of a media empire that the tiny but wealthy Gulf emirate of Qatar has used to project its influence, first regionally and then globally. The American-specific incarnation, begun in 2013, was partly an effort to rebrand for the United States the earlier iterations of the franchise, Al Jazeera Arabic and Al Jazeera English. But the American network was hobbled from the start by this very legacy.

Because Al Jazeera Arabic overtly promoted Doha’s foreign policy objectives, the network was controversial and disliked by virtually every other government in the region. The Arabic station introduced a freewheeling reporting style — except for avoiding any criticism of Qatar — that transfixed Arab audiences with previously unheard-of debates.

Impartial it was not: A hefty dose of old-fashioned Arab nationalism and a strong bias for the Muslim Brotherhood, which was supported by the Qatari government, were unmistakable. This ideological orientation led to exaggerated accusations in the United States, especially in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, that Al Jazeera served as a media affiliate of Al Qaeda.

Hyperbolic as such claims were, there was a distinctly anti-American bent to its reportage. The Iraq war, in particular, was portrayed virtually as a campaign of mass murder.

The real problem here was the Janus-faced nature of Qatari foreign policy, contradictory and ultimately unsustainable.

On one hand, the huge American military presence in Qatar is a key element of Qatari security strategy. Centcom largely ran the Iraq war out of its forward headquarters at the Udeid Air Base, which Qatar built to encourage a United States establishment there. On the other hand, Qatar gave a hugely influential platform on Al Jazeera to the Muslim Brotherhood cleric Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who elsewhere preached that “Americans in Iraq are all fighters and invaders” whether they were military or civilian, and that it was “a duty for all Muslims” to kill them. Thus Qatar was indispensable to the American war effort in Iraq and at the same time gave credence to one of the most influential Islamic propagandists against it.

 

via mobile.nytimes.com

الحنين الي القاهرة

(حقوق الناس, بقلم عزة رضوان صدقي (ترجمة هدايت عبد النبي

Cabbing in Cairo: Black, White, or Uber

Ahram Online, by Azza Radwan Sedky

 When someone out there decided to do away with Cairo’s black taxis, I had nostalgic feelings similar to those I have now as I watch workers pull the metro rails out around Heliopolis. The black taxi and the Heliopolis metro were standard features in our daily commutes.

As the black taxi vanished, the white taxi flourished. Now, as taxi companies emerge, the future of the white taxi is unknown -- or is it? Today we compare Cairenes' travelling options.

The black taxi had deteriorated into a terrible state. Though its black exterior made sense, since it hid the dents and hideous results of being on the streets of Cairo, the interior had crumbled. Today the black taxi suffers even further humiliation, its drivers as old and as decrepit as their vehicles.

When the white taxi arrived, Cairenes loved it. The taxis were clean and brand new, and their owners troubled themselves to keep them so. But the white taxi isn’t doing so well anymore. The first sign of age appears in the idle taxi meter. And the enthusiasm by which the owners handled their vehicles is long gone. It’s back to the old ways of the black taxi.

With that come new alternatives: Uber, London Cab, Taxi Careem, and even Pink Taxi. Will these new options remain accessible and clean as their counterparts were at one point in time? Or is it the Cairo way? Nothing stays clean and bright.

My personal experience is with Uber. I summon my personal driver; on my phone, I watch the car head towards my doorstep; a couple of minutes later, he notifies me upon arrival and takes me to my destination; I leave the vehicle having not touched a piaster—no tip, hassle free.

My driver is always groomed, respectful, and extremely pleasant. The radio is turned off. Though the outside may be a congested madhouse, sanity prevails inside. The air-conditioning in the car is in functioning order, the interior of the car intact. That is as far as the car, owner, and ride are concerned. The security factor and the free-from-harassment options are even more valuable.

In 2009, Uber ventured into many cities; it is now worth $40 billion. While some cities met it with open arms, others declined the invitation. It remains banned in Thailand and some regions in Japan and India. Cities such as New York and Vancouver have yet to join the bandwagon—their taxi drivers creating a conundrum. Similarly, Egyptian taxi drivers want such taxi companies banned.

I can see why such transportation means can be a threat to taxi companies in other cities, but not in Cairo. Since they cater to a certain calibre of Cairenes, these companies will never replace the multitudes of taxis roaming Cairo all day long.

Uber, for instance, serves those who enjoy the luxury of credit cards and being online. This leaves massive numbers of Egyptians to take the regular taxis. Besides, alhough Uber Cairo contracted around 2,000 drivers, most of these drivers are part-timers, taking this job as an extra money-maker. This will translate into a relatively minor impact on the taxi industry as a whole.

If anything, competition may help regular cab drivers get their acts together: clean their cars, fix the meters, and stop bombarding passengers with horrendous music. It may also get them to buckle their seats and not reply to phone calls while driving. And most of all, drive sanely.

Still, challenges exist. The GPS system serving Cairo has yet to understand Cairo better. New locales are not identified, and challenging routes are unreachable. As streets become one-way or closed off for installation of metro lines and infrastructure improvements, the GPS turns dumb. At that point, the passenger is at the mercy of a driver who doesn’t know where he is going.

Also drivers choose where they want to find work. In Heliopolis or Zamalek, for instance, their chances of finding passengers are higher. Hardly anyone in a poverty-stricken area would consider such taxi companies. So, drivers, though they are not very knowledgeable of these areas, opt to station themselves there. Again, this leaves the passenger at the mercy of a driver who doesn’t know where he is going.

More challenges exist. Uber caters for those willing to pay for the comfort. At peak hours, it ups its payment depending on need. At the 2.5 surge, its basic payment becomes 25 pounds instead of 10 pounds, and the 40-pound ride may end up costing 100 pounds. Not every Cairene will go that route.

Still, this is indeed a promising change in Cairo’s transportation options. But for these service companies to continue at this standard and not face the black taxi’s fate, quality control becomes mandatory, regular inspections of driver and car a top priority, and evaluations, with comments, taken seriously.

The writer is author of Cairo Rewind, the First Two Years of Egypt's Revolution

Search Keywords:

Insurance Shaping Up

Ahram Weekly, by Azza Radwan Sedky

The aim of the new healthcare law is to cover 100 per cent of the population under one insurance system, writes Azza Radwan Sedky

Egypt is about to begin a massive enterprise in the shape of the new comprehensive health insurance law, which has been in the making for almost two decades.

The law is set to fulfill the aspirations cited in Article 18 of the 2014 Constitution: “Every citizen has the right to health and to comprehensive health care that complies with quality standards ... The State shall establish a comprehensive health insurance system covering all diseases for all Egyptians; and the law shall regulate citizens’ contributions to or exemptions from its subscriptions based on income rates.”

This translates to health insurance that covers 100 per cent of the population under one umbrella. It will increase equitable access to high-calibre health services. Based on a solidarity scheme, under which the prosperous assist those who are less prosperous, the intention of the law is to reduce the medical care burden of Egyptian families.

The system that has been used thus far entails multiple scattered and fragmented insurance laws, each geared to serving a particular segment of society, be it students, workers or women. Though the current system covers 58 per cent of the population, only 10 to 15 per cent actually use it, according to Wagida Anwar, a professor of public health and a member of the High Committee for Drafting the Health Law.

It does not cover many segments of society, especially those working in the non-formal sector, and neither does it cover their families, accounting for the lack of health services for a huge segment of society.

According to a 2011 report, Egyptian families bear the brunt of such costs, or 60 per cent of the cost of treatment Egypt-wide. Meanwhile, many patients remain dissatisfied by the quality of the medical services they receive.

According to the new law, three separate organisations will form the new health system, being in charge of financing, provisioning and supervision. The financing organisation will be in charge of revenue collection and the pooling and purchasing of services. It will amass revenues from all sources, whether in the form of subscriptions, subsidies or revenues raised from taxed items such as tobacco. It will also provide expertise via the private and public sectors and universities in costing and purchasing.

The provisioning organisation is the service arm of the new system. It will include all Ministry of Health hospitals and health insurance organisation hospitals. Private hospitals, NGO facilities, civil society clinics and university hospitals will be contracted by the financing organisation as needed.

The third organisation is the supervision organisation, whose task is to evaluate and accredit services. It will guarantee that the various service arms are at par with the guidelines. In splitting the financing, provisioning and supervision of the new system, adequate levels of scrutiny and transparency will prevail.

The cost for individuals and families will be equitable. Formal-sector workers will pay one per cent of their salaries, while their employers will pay three per cent, making a four per cent levy. Workers will pay 2.5 per cent for their spouses covered by the scheme, and 0.75 per cent for each child or dependent. Pensioners will pay two per cent of their pensions, and those beneath the poverty line will make no payments.

For those working in the informal sector, depending on tax payments, they will pay four per cent of income. As a result, an average Egyptian household will pay up to five per cent of its income for health insurance, unless there is also a working spouse.

Much about the new law is pending final approval, including from the president, government and parliament. Once the law passes these stages, implementation will be staggered, first in the smaller governorates and then in the larger ones. The intention is to start with the governorates of Suez, Ismailia, North Sinai and South Sinai, and then move on from there.

The law is not without its challenges, however. For one thing, the cost is prohibitive at LE120 billion. However, much of this cost is being spent already in one form or another, since the National Health Accounting Organisation has estimated that 60 per cent of total healthcare costs are already coming out of people’s pockets, while the private sector already pays approximately LE30 billion for health services.

This is in addition to subscriptions and subsidies and taxes earmarked from various commodities and services such as cigarettes, tobacco, entertainment outlets, alcohol, car licences, nights spent by tourists in Egypt and much more, all of which will help support the new system.

However, even with such financial juggling, implementing the new health insurance law will definitely be an extra financial burden, primarily on the government and on both the public and the private sector.

Another challenge is how to include the informal sector under this health umbrella, for example the street traders, day workers and farm workers who form a large segment of society, at around 40 per cent of all labourers.

Though the Ministry of Social Solidarity will be responsible for providing a database of the informal sector, in cooperation with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of the Interior and others under the new law, keeping track of all these people’s payments will be a logistical nightmare. Nevertheless, a similar database was created and successfully implemented for the smart card rationing system.

The services sector is also not quite on board. Change is never accepted uncritically and is always looked upon with suspicion by those affected. Concerns over payments, salaries, and the roles of physicians and others, together with the accreditation of outlets, the implementation of the law itself, and the distinction between the private and public sectors are all disconcerting for the services sector.

According to Anwar, the private sector will not be excluded from the new system. If the private sector can reach the required accreditation level, the intention is to equate doctors in the private and public sectors across Egypt.

Other challenges exist. Opting out of the new system will not be an option, and every Egyptian will be covered. Yet, the able-to-pay will still expect the best treatment, doctors, and stays in hospital. Today, the calibre of healthcare services in Egypt ranges from the exceptional to the abysmal, and those who can afford the best will want to maintain the best. Will their needs be met? If so, will this create a two-tier system?

The average Egyptian may also have his doubts about the new system. He may be reluctant to pay approximately five per cent of the income he has earned towards a medical system that has not been proven. Will the final outcome of the law be what is proposed? Will the logistical nightmares expected from transforming the existing institutions, service facilities and regulations into one system be overcome?

Finally, people don’t yet know enough about the law. An awareness-raising campaign to inform people about the new law will help alleviate worries about the unknown. The fears of the services sector also need to be addressed, which could be realised via the open dialogue that the health minister has promised to partake in with all those concerned, particularly doctors. Together, they can close the loopholes and erase the wrinkles that may exist in the new law.

Most importantly, as a result of the new health insurance law, will health services in Egypt in general improve in terms of access, availability and quality? It remains to be seen.

 

To Mona Seif

Update, February 10. I stand corrected. It was Mona Seif's sister, Sana, who was imprisoned and who protested in Tahrir on January 25th. My apologies for the error. However, this doesn't change the gist of the post. Both sisters have mutual feelings towards the current regime, and both are full of anger. 

This is in response to your words pleading with foreigners not to come to Egypt “Coz this country is so blood thirsty it’s feeding on people’s lives,”

In a matter of seconds your words went viral on social media. The foreign press found it yet another opportunity to slander Egypt, while Egyptians fumed in anger at the thought that an Egyptian like them would utter such profoundly disturbing malice.

I’m a bit perplexed at your inability to see the consequences of your words. It is terribly simplistic on your part to send out such a message without realizing its repercussions. Better yet, since you aren’t simplistic, you must have known how such words will resonate across the world and with foreign media, and yet you still went ahead and uttered them. So, what was your aim exactly? More notoriety or Egypt’s destruction? Before we delve into such matters, let’s look at your perspective.

You have definitely suffered, imprisonment if nothing else. Your brother is serving a five-year sentence. Your nephew is growing having not known his father. Who wouldn’t be mad at those who caused the suffering? Who wouldn’t be mad at where she is?

Fair enough. Be mad. Cry out loud and tell the world it is not fair and that you and your loved ones deserve better. Call on justice to be served. Name the culprits and go after them. Go to Tahrir and become the lone protester; get your photo circulated around the world as the one and only person willing to protest a regime while the rest of us would have loved to, not true, and are afraid, and you aren’t. But.

But when you consciously and purposefully want to slander your country, when you knowingly go after your country’s welfare and your people’s livelihoods, when you hope to effect Egypt’s downfall, then you have gone beyond your rights.

Your words came after the Italian Ph.D. student, Giulio Regeni, was found dead having been tortured and stabbed. His tragedy is a terrible one, and our commiserations and condolences go out to his family.

However, neither your nor foreign media’s focus is on the terrible tragedy. It’s on accusing the security apparatus of the wrong doing. You say, “The majority of us think the security apparatus is behind this.”  Not true, the majority of us don’t believe that the security apparatus would’ve gone that route.

If your assumptions are true, then the security apparatus is dumber than dumb. Do you honestly believe that an officer, in his right mind, in today’s ambience, would be stupid enough to torture an Egyptian, let alone a foreigner? Does he not know that he will be causing a domestic crisis if not an international one? And what official in his limited but evil scope of vision would throw the body of a foreign student along the side road, after having removed nails and the tip of the victim's ear, and left cigarette butt burns on his body?

My dear Mona, this is the work of either someone who is trying hard to slander Egypt or the work of a lunatic of menacing brutality. Regular human beings, like you and me, don’t function that way. It could also be the work of an ISIS fanatic; haven’t we seen ten-year-olds kill? Haven’t we seen sons kill their mothers? And haven’t we seen dozens beheaded simultaneously? But you don’t want to let a crisis go to waste; you come out with your bizarre conclusions and hope that, according to the Egyptian saying, “The bullet that doesn’t hit its target makes a lot of noise,” and it has.

You realize, of course, that once you said these words, they were to immediately be used against Egypt. But maybe that’s what you are after. Let’s focus on one article: Betsy Heil's in TriLive. All what Hiel needed to do to slander Egypt was quote you and your family. She tells us that Giulio Regeni’s death chilled the expat community in Egypt, not because of the horror that he suffered but because who his abductees and murderers are.

Heil quotes you. “Egyptians [must] be more vocal and … tell the world how dangerous it really is in Egypt and to put up warning signs so people are more informed before they decide [to come to Egypt].” These are the words of a person who hates Egypt so much that she is willing to see it crumble under the pressure of lost resources and a destroyed tourism industry. You actually want to see Egypt rot, and that goes beyond anything a true Egyptian may say. You, by saying these words, branded yourself a-Egyptian.

Then you go on to say, “Even if security are not behind this, the fact that he faced that fate on that day — with the highest level of security preparations — shows a real deterioration of security,” she said. This is proof that you don’t know much; you are making up stories as you go along, and that the aim behind your attack is mere vindictiveness.

To the world out there, to expats in Egypt, and to tourists hoping to visit Egypt soon. Please don’t believe this immature, simplistic, void-of-any-sentiment-towards-her-country woman. She is angry and is slashing blinding unaware of the consequences and has no evidence to support her case.

Egypt is safe, and Egyptians love their country wholeheartedly, with its oddities and its disparities. Egyptians hate what happened to the young student, but they refuse to fall into the prejudiced blaming trap.

 

Is social media a destroyer or creator?: Thomas L. Friedman

Masslive.com, by Thomas Friedman

Egyptian Wael Ghonim, a Google Inc. marketing manager two days after the protests began, hugs the mother of Khaled Said, a young 28-year-old businessman who died in June, 2010, at the hands of undercover police, setting off months of protests against the hated police, at Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt, Tuesday, Feb.8, 2011. (AP Photo/Ahmed Ali)

Over the last few years we've been treated to a number of "Facebook revolutions," from the Arab Spring to Occupy Wall Street to the squares of Istanbul, Kiev and Hong Kong, all fueled by social media. But once the smoke cleared, most of these revolutions failed to build any sustainable new political order, in part because as so many voices got amplified, consensus-building became impossible.

Question: Does it turn out that social media is better at breaking things than at making things?

Last month an important voice answered this question with a big "yes." That voice was Wael Ghonim, the Egyptian Google employee whose anonymous Facebook page helped to launch the Tahrir Square revolution in early 2011 that toppled President Hosni Mubarak – but then failed to give birth to a true democratic alternative.

In December, Ghonim, who has since moved to Silicon Valley, posted a TED talk about what went wrong. It is worth watching and begins like this: "I once said, 'If you want to liberate a society, all you need is the Internet.' I was wrong. I said those words back in 2011, when a Facebook page I anonymously created helped spark the Egyptian revolution. The Arab Spring revealed social media's greatest potential, but it also exposed its greatest shortcomings. The same tool that united us to topple dictators eventually tore us apart."

In the early 2000s, Arabs were flocking to the Web, Ghonim explained: "Thirsty for knowledge, for opportunities, for connecting with the rest of the people around the globe, we escaped our frustrating political realities and lived a virtual, alternative life."

Question: Does it turn out that social media is better at breaking things than at making things?

And then in June 2010, he noted, the "Internet changed my life forever. While browsing Facebook, I saw a photo ... of a tortured, dead body of a young Egyptian guy. His name was Khaled Said. Khaled was a 29-year-old Alexandrian who was killed by police. I saw myself in his picture. ... I anonymously created a Facebook page and called it 'We Are All Khaled Said.' In just three days, the page had over 100,000 people, fellow Egyptians who shared the same concern."

Soon Ghonim and his friends used Facebook to crowdsource ideas, and "the page became the most followed page in the Arab world. ... Social media was crucial for this campaign. It helped a decentralized movement arise. It made people realize that they were not alone. And it made it impossible for the regime to stop it."

Ghonim was eventually tracked down in Cairo by Egyptian security services, beaten and then held incommunicado for 11 days. But three days after he was freed, the millions of protesters his Facebook posts helped to galvanize brought down Mubarak's regime.

Alas, the euphoria soon faded, said Ghonim, because "we failed to build consensus, and the political struggle led to intense polarization." Social media, he noted, "only amplified" the polarization "by facilitating the spread of misinformation, rumors, echo chambers and hate speech. The environment was purely toxic. My online world became a battleground filled with trolls, lies, hate speech."

Supporters of the army and the Islamists used social media to smear each other, while the democratic center, which Ghonim and so many others occupied, was marginalized. Their revolution was stolen by the Muslim Brotherhood and, when it failed, by the army, which then arrested many of the secular youths who first powered the revolution. The army has its own Facebook page to defend itself.

"It was a moment of defeat," said Ghonim. "I stayed silent for more than two years, and I used the time to reflect on everything that happened."

Here is what he concluded about social media today: "First, we don't know how to deal with rumors. Rumors that confirm people's biases are now believed and spread among millions of people." Second, "We tend to only communicate with people that we agree with, and thanks to social media, we can mute, unfollow and block everybody else. Third, online discussions quickly descend into angry mobs. ... It's as if we forget that the people behind screens are actually real people and not just avatars.

"And fourth, it became really hard to change our opinions. Because of the speed and brevity of social media, we are forced to jump to conclusions and write sharp opinions in 140 characters about complex world affairs. And once we do that, it lives forever on the Internet."

Fifth, and most crucial, he said, "today, our social media experiences are designed in a way that favors broadcasting over engagements, posts over discussions, shallow comments over deep conversations. ... It's as if we agreed that we are here to talk at each other instead of talking with each other."

Ghonim has not given up. He and a few friends recently started a website, Parlio.com, to host intelligent, civil conversations about controversial and often heated issues, with the aim of narrowing gaps, not widening them. (I participated in a debate on Parlio and found it engaging and substantive.)

"Five years ago," concluded Ghonim, "I said, 'If you want to liberate society, all you need is the Internet.' Today I believe if we want to liberate society, we first need to liberate the Internet." 

via www.masslive.com