Slashdot Mirror


Tens of Thousands Protest In Cairo, Twitter Blocked

Haffner writes "Protests in Cairo, Egypt have now reached the tens of thousands. Police have deployed water cannons and tear gas. I am writing this live from Cairo, where I witnessed a throng of 1000-3000 march towards Tahrir Square in downtown Cairo. I also witnessed 300-500 protesting on one of the bridges heading downtown. Most importantly, twitter has been blocked by many national carriers." Why Twitter? As reader pinkushun writes "Using Twitter and Facebook, the people instigated a series of fast-moving, rapidly shifting demos across half a dozen or more Egyptian cities. The police could not keep up – and predictably, resorted to violence. Sadly this has led to three known deaths thus far." Update: 01/26 02:05 GMT by T : Jake Appelbaum is tweeting up a storm about the state of the active filters.

41 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. Protesting.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Man, I know some people didn't like the Matrix sequels, but this is RIDICULOUS.

    1. Re:Protesting.. by Magic5Ball · · Score: 5, Informative

      Some friends in Cairo would like to bypass some of the online censorship measures. I've quickly suggested some things (below) to consider overnight. What have I missed?

      Anonymous connection:
      No:
      https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/help-eff-research-web-browser-tracking

      But:
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere/

      Also:
      http://www.hotspotshield.com/

      And services like:
      http://filesharefreak.com/2008/10/18/total-anonymity-a-list-of-vpn-service-providers/
      but verify on the ground.

      Only if they understand the tradeoffs:
      http://www.privoxy.org/
      https://techstdout.boum.org/TorDns/

      Avoid random lists of anonymous proxies or DNS servers.

      To secure the computer:
      Use a popular boot disk that leaves nothing behind, e.g.:
      http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop/get-ubuntu/download

      Remove metadata:
      http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/
      http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyId=144E54ED-D43E-42CA-BC7B-5446D34E5360&displaylang=en
      and similar for other files they may deal with.

      Delete/wipe files securely.

      Many uses:
      http://mailinator.com/
      http://www.hushmail.com/

      Consider:
      http://www.disconnectere.com/
      and its analogues

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
  2. I almost hate to ask... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    but what are they protesting? I didn't see it in the first link.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:I almost hate to ask... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2

      This is essentially the same deal as Tunisia. Corrupt monarchy, rising food prices, etc.

    2. Re:I almost hate to ask... by muindaur · · Score: 2

      I guess it has made the people in the middle east much braver. Go them!

    3. Re:I almost hate to ask... by Zedrick · · Score: 4, Informative

      Egypt is not a monarchy, it's a normal 20th century dictatorship ruled by a president.

    4. Re:I almost hate to ask... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2

      Whose son Gamal is in line to succeed him.

      Just like Syria and North Korea are not monarchies, nor was Iraq going to be one after Saddam died and Qusay took over for him.

    5. Re:I almost hate to ask... by blue+trane · · Score: 2

      Some research indicates the contrary is true, Egyptians seem to blame their govt for NOT providing a solution:

      From http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=53606:

      "A virus destroyed most of my summer harvest, which fell this year from the usual 50 tons per acre to only 10 tons," Mohamed Khairy, a tomato farmer in the Nile Delta province of Beheira, some 200 km north of Cairo, told IPS. "I tried to get assistance from the agriculture ministry, but my pleas fell on deaf ears."

      Critics further point out that shortages were exacerbated by exploitive merchants - and the government's seeming reluctance to regulate their activities.

      "Unscrupulous traders took advantage of the shortage to raise retail prices through the roof, allowing them to realise enormous profits," said Sami. "And the government has continued to allow them to get away with it."

      Abdelazim concurred, noting that Egypt's ruling regime was largely composed of businessmen and "monopolistic traders".

      "The regime, which is characterised by economic corruption and chaos, doesn't regulate the local market or move to break up monopolies - it merely looks on as consumers are exploited," he said. "Meanwhile, Egypt's limited civil society plays a negligible role in protecting the consumer."

      From http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/news/egypts-recurring-food-price-crisis :

      The Egyptian government, in close collaboration with USAID officials, began introducing a broad program of agricultural liberalization in the 1980s that aimed to limit state intervention--in the form of subsidies and controls on cropping patterns--and encourage a competitive market system based on private enterprise and export-led growth. These policies continued into the 1990s after Egypt concluded a structural adjustment agreement with the International Monetary Fund. A key component of these agrarian reforms was a new land law, known as Law 96, that revoked tenure rights for small peasants which had been in place for 40 years and allowed large landowners to charge market-based rents.

      For government critics, Egypt's food inflation must be seen against the backdrop of these broader economic policies.

      [...]

      Ayeb explains that in the 1950s and 1960s Egyptian agricultural policies sought to protect small farmers and provide them with a respectable income. “In the pseudo-socialist period there was the idea of living on the land and surviving from it there was a guarantee of national agricultural security.”

      Thus, as fertilizers and herbicides flooded the Egyptian market, the government provided subsidies to support small farmers and make food available locally.

      Since the late 1970s, government subsidies have gradually receded and chemical fertilizers have instead been sold on the open market. Moreover, today Egypt is one of the biggest importers of fertilizers in the world and this dependency has in turn affected local prices.

      “The state used to provide everything, from fertilizers to herbicides. Today, things have changed 180 degrees,” Haj Desouki reflects.

      Another failure of free markets. Food is too important to be left to the free market!

  3. So much focus on the protest, none on the topic by Josh+Triplett · · Score: 5, Informative

    The linked story talks about the reasons for the protest in Cairo (namely, wanting the current president of 29 years out, and wanting the 29-year "state of emergency" and corresponding suspension of rights to stop). The summary here just talks about the actions taken against the protesters, and the blocking of Twitter.

    1. Re:So much focus on the protest, none on the topic by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2

      Don't think of it as a state of emergency, think of it as a Patriot Act.

    2. Re:So much focus on the protest, none on the topic by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The linked story talks about the reasons for the protest in Cairo (namely, wanting the current president of 29 years out, and wanting the 29-year "state of emergency" and corresponding suspension of rights to stop). The summary here just talks about the actions taken against the protesters, and the blocking of Twitter.

      Have you been asleep?

      A revolution is happening in Tunisia. Protests similar to the beginnings there have been reported from Algeria. People are setting themselves on fire to make a statement. The Egyptian regime has been trying to control unrest by capping food and oil prices for the last few weeks.

      Is it really necessary to point out what the Egyptians are unhappy about?

      Yes. Not all of us live in Egypt.

      Isn't it obvious?

      No. Not all of us live in Egypt.

  4. Mubarak leaving soon by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Probably the fact that Mubarak has been effectively a dictator for the past few decades, with elections rigged to where he is the only true candidate and voting is monitored by thugs. The main opposition force in Egypt during Mubarak's reign, the Muslim Brotherhood, has had many of its leaders and some supporters arrested, killed, or run out of the country. On top of this, Mubarak is getting pretty old, and it is expected that he will not run in many more elections. So, essentially, the government is in a weakened and uncertain state, and many Egyptians see the chance for a real chance of democracy, instead of Mubarak simply naming his successor who would then run the country for another couple decades.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Similar to the problem to Malaysia then. Same party in power for decades but the main opposition are islamists and potentially a worse cure than the problem.

    2. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The main opposition force in Egypt during Mubarak's reign, the Muslim Brotherhood [...] and many Egyptians see the chance for a real chance of democracy

      Yeah that worked out so well for Iran...

    3. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, he probably means Malaysia. The islamists aren't a significant issue in Tunisia, although the former dictator of the country certainly did his best to make it seem like they could be whenever discussing the matter with western backers. "Yes, I'm a terrible person, but you wouldn't want the radical islamists to get power, would you?" It's a trick worth free billions and plenty of weapons to oppress the opposition^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hterrorists. It's an arrangement of convenience that, in the long run, is a bad deal.

      Good riddance. They're an oppressor and I have ZERO sympathy for them. When the west backs them it gives us a bad name. If it leads to more radical islamist regimes because that's what the people really want in their country, then too fricking bad. It's democracy: deal with it. But in reality it's not usually what the people want. The danger is that the extreme radicals manage to hijack the democratic process and become the new oppressors by grabbing complete power. While a genuine risk, the way forward is to encourage real democracy -- not overtly, or in a meddling sort of way, because that could be mistaken for interference and play into the hands of ultra-nationalists -- but simply by saying "Yeah, if you do set up a real, pluralistic democracy, of course we'll work with you just like any other democratic country. Go the path of a new authoritarian regime, and we won't."

    4. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by lennier · · Score: 2

      What if the "islamists" are the ones that people actually want? That in a fair and open election, they would be the people's first choice?

      Would that still be "curse"?

      Simple: Send In The Marines.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    5. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Well, DO they really want?

      Let's rewind history a little to the late 1970s, Iran. Ruled by Shah Reza Pahlavi, dictator by grace of the US and not reeeeeeally well liked by his people. Those who didn't sleep through their history class (well, if it was mentioned, it wasn't really something to brag about) know how it ended, well, take a look at the Iran and you'll know.

      Do you REALLY think that's what most people who stood up against the Shah wanted?

      The problem here is that the choice is not even douche or turd sammich. It's hanging or shooting.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      No, he probably means Malaysia. The islamists aren't a significant issue in Tunisia

      See, the interesting thing here is this. I don't know anything about politics of Tunisia, but I do read some forums where extremist Muslims hang out (you know, the kind where someone posts a beheading video and gets a dozen "Allahu akbar!" in response). And they all seem to be very excited about the events in Tunisia, and supportive of the revolution. Which kinda makes me wonder if the former dictator wasn't actually right on that particular point.

    7. Re:Mubarak leaving soon by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      What if the "islamists" are the ones that people actually want? That in a fair and open election, they would be the people's first choice? Would that still be "curse"?

      That depends on who's asking the question. If you're atheist or gay, then sure it would.

      Ultimately, it's just a specific instance of the more broad question, which is, "if the majority wants to do some nasty things to the minority - as expressed in free and fair elections - does that make it okay for them to do so?"

      I would hope that we've learned the answer from the German elections of 1932-33, and what followed.

  5. Re:Revolution is good by theaveng · · Score: 4, Informative

    The blood of patriots and tyrants waters the Tree of Liberty. It is its natural fertilizer.

    - Jefferson

    Jefferson later retracted his statement when he saw the 1786 French Terror. Revolution is good if it's moderated but too often it falls into a new tyranny worse than the original (fall of Rome to Dictatorship, fall of Russia to communism, fall of China to fascism, and so on).

    --
    FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
  6. wikileaks? by vasanth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    wonder if wikileaks was the proverbial flap of a butterfly's wing??

    1. Re:wikileaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/01/wikileaks-reveal-what-made-tunisians-revolt.html

      And several similar articles. Basically the leaked US Diplomatic cables weighted heavily in the recent democratic Tunisian uprising, which appears to now be spreading to neighboring countries.

    2. Re:wikileaks? by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      wonder if wikileaks was the proverbial flap of a butterfly's wing??

      More likely it was inspired by the resignation of the President of Tunisia over a similar situation.

  7. Technology knows no right from wrong by ugen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's the thing about technology - it serves all masters.

    The two forces at play in Egypt are Mubarak's official regime on one side and Muslim Brotherhood on another side. FWIW it's a choice between a rock and a hard place. Muslim brotherhood is your garden variety Islamic hard-liners who will no doubt build an oppressive society if ever in charge. Mubarak's regime is already oppressive. So, while the sides scuffle - there is little to expect externally except, perhaps, a more extremist regime should Mubarak fail.

    1. Re:Technology knows no right from wrong by Smiths · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Muslim Brotherhood has nothing to do with these protests. These are secular Egyptians from all around the country who for years have resented their leader whom is often a puppet to the US.

      All due respect but before spouting off about something as if youre an expert RTFA or research it on your own.

      http://mondoweiss.net/

    2. Re:Technology knows no right from wrong by voiceofworldcontrol · · Score: 2

      Secularists are losing ground in all Islamic countries. While they may be sincere they will be rapidly replaced by Islamists if Mubarak is forced from power. Islam is antithetically opposed to secularism. Look at what happened in Iran when people thought that a large secular movement could succeed. So whether it is done by the Muslim Brotherhood or not it will ultimately result in their gaining power.

    3. Re:Technology knows no right from wrong by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These are secular Egyptians from all around the country who for years have resented their leader whom is often a puppet to the US.

      Many people in Iran in 1979 thought so too. They figured that those bearded guys in shahada bandanas were just along for the ride, and anyway we can all settle it democratically like after we kick the bloody tyrant from power... right? right?

    4. Re:Technology knows no right from wrong by Keen+Anthony · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Don't be naive. But if you must, don't be insulting. It's not spouting off to point out the Muslim Brotherhood is a major rival, one with tremendous populist support, and one which could very easily destroy any secular movement. Nothing parent has said requires a stretch of the imagination. I'd wait until we see microblogging and vlogging activity from a large number of secularist rioters before I believe this is a pro-democracy rally à la Tiananmen Square.

  8. Foreign policy history by br00tus · · Score: 4, Informative
    For decades, the US (and Israel, and western Europe) saw Egypt as the biggest threat to their "national interests" in the Middle East. Which is why England and France attacked Egypt in 1956. Why is why Israel attacked Egypt and occupied the Sinai in 1967. Nasser was THE leading voice of pan-Arab nationalism - after all, many of the Arab states had their maps drawn by white westerners. Nasser even convinced other Arab leaders to have military alliances under joint command in battles against Israel.

    Then there was a significant peace proposal from Egypt in the early 1970s to Israel and diplomatic reach to the US. This was ignored, probably to everyone's eventual detriment. Egypt began arming, while Israel was full of some hubris due to its 1967 military victory. In 1973 Egypt sent its forces to regain the Sinai and Israel did very badly, the US had to bail out Israel to a large extent. This started the OPEC oil embargo, if anyone is old enough to remember the long gas lines in the 1970s in the US.

    At Camp David, Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty. Egypt turned from the USSR to the USA, and has been getting about $2 billion a year from the US up until a few years ago. Usually $700 million or more of that was economic aid up until a few years ago. In 2009, economic aid went down to $200 million or so. On top of those cuts, Egypt has been hit by the world economic slowdown as well. It is also under a ruthless dictatorship that the annual $1.3 billion in US military economic aid helps prop up. How many of the 9/11 hijackers were Egyptian? A number of them - and the cleric who was behind the first WTC bombing was Egyptian as well. Many Egyptians have been unhappy with the US meddling in the country for years - and recently, that $700 million in economic aid has been cut to almost nothing just as their economy began feeling the global economic slowdown.

    1. Re:Foreign policy history by Thing+1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I thought 15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia. So, how many of the remaining 4 were from Egypt? (Sincere question.) And, answered fairly quickly: exactly one of the hijackers was from Egypt (Mohammed Atta). (And yes, your statement is pedantically true; "one" is "a number".)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    2. Re:Foreign policy history by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 3, Informative

      > Which is why England and France attacked Egypt in 1956.
      ... which would be about the time Egypt nationalized the Suez canal, right?
          The Six-day war in 1967 where Israel saw troops massing on all sides.
          The Yom Kippur War in 1973 seeking to correct the 1967 'boundary changes' (and whatever else they could gain).
      The Camp David Accords in 1978, returning the Suez Canal to Egypt, and Egypt officially recognizing Israel as a state. Just so we're clear which national interests we're speaking of, instead of some nebulous "we want".

      > many of the Arab states had their maps drawn by white westerners.

      Many of the Arab states that had their maps drawn by white westerners weren't states (as we use the term) until those maps were drawn.

      It is a testament to the durability of bureaucracies that even though those "nations" have been self-governing for some time, they haven't altered their borders to reflect the social boundaries that exist. Sudan is only recently coming to the point where it can consider changing its borders, and that only through armed violence.

      Even Iraq didn't try a three-state solution (Sunni, Shia, Kurd), though I can't say how much of that was the negotiators meddling, and how much was the fear of Turkey, Iran, and the Saudis snatching up the pieces if they did so.

    3. Re:Foreign policy history by bogjobber · · Score: 2

      Not sure what GP meant by saying the "hijackers" were Egyptian, but many of al Qaeda's leadership are either Egyptian or were educated in Egypt. Most famously Ayman al-Zawahiri, who is the operational leader of al Qaeda. Bin Laden is the political and financial leader, but Zawahiri is really the one who runs al Qaeda on a functional level. Zawahiri's group Egyptian Islamic Jihad was very powerful in its own right, and merged with al-Qaeda before the 9/11 attacks.

      Egypt has historically been the center of Muslim intellectualism and fundamentalism (in modern times at least). It's one of the most populous countries in Africa and the most populous in the Middle East(depending on how you define the Middle East). It's a very well-educated country, and the population is almost entirely Muslim.

      The Muslim Brotherhood is the world's oldest Islamist political group, and certainly the most influential in Muslim countries. Al-Qaeda's philosophy can sort-of, kind-of, in an extremely simplistic way be described as a blend of the teachings of Hassan al-Banna and Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The teachings of al-Banna are generally given more credence from Muslim scholars, but the Saudis spend ridiculous amounts of money funding Wahhabist schools and are similarly influential. And many of the individuals who hold power in radical Islamist organizations around the Middle East and N. Africa were educated in madrassas devoted to these schools of thought. (If anybody's interested I can find some more specific references about individuals involved with al-Qaeda, but I'm at work right now and can't really look it up).

      So even though GP was misleading a little bit, he's still on to the right path. Egypt has as much to do with worldwide Islamist militarism as anybody, including the Saudis and the Pakistanis.

  9. Tunisia effect? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FWIW, some of the pundits were wondering aloud whether the Tunisian 'revolt' was going to spread throughout the region.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  10. Most importantly? by dangitman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Most importantly, twitter has been blocked by many national carriers."

    Those are some pretty odd priorities. I would have thought "tens of thousands protesting" is a little more important than some online service being blocked.

    News just in: Asteroid about to impact Earth, extinction event imminent, but more disturbingly, I can't log in to Slashdot!"

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
    1. Re:Most importantly? by jackbird · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think they mean "importantly," as in "the powers that be are recognizing the power of this tool for organizing protest, and are taking steps to counteract it rather than simply ignoring it." This is also why it's "news for nerds" rather than "geopolitics for wonks" (or "shit you really, really need to know for Egyptians," lest we gloss over the actual human element of the story).

  11. I use Tor, but people need to run more exit-nodes. by h00manist · · Score: 2

    Egypt is one of the countries that still routinely tortures people. So these people really need anonymity.
    http://www.torproject.org/ -- I use Tor most of the time. But it's terribly slow, there are few out-nodes.
    The best I have thought of is a prepaid cellphone, or any phone not in your name. I think it would be correct to try to put it in the name of someone important to make sure someone else is not punished instead of you, and make sure not to use it with any of your personal data, like making and receiving calls to your friends and family with it, and logging into your personal accounts with it. You also will need to get a different phone from your own, as the operator records the phone's IMEI as well as the GSM chip number and phone number. Taking the battery out before you get near your home with the phone is a good idea too. If you think you have legal cover to be able to run Tor as an EXIT node, it would be helpful to people in Egypt today to have more exit nodes.

    --
    Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
  12. Revolution is bad by artor3 · · Score: 2

    Don't put your trust in revolutions. They always come round again. That's why they're called revolutions.

    - Pratchett

    In all seriousness, the only reason the American Revolution worked out so well was because we had the enormous good fortune of A) having no nearby powers to take advantage and B) having technology at just the right point where we could win the war without having to deal with endless terrorist attacks afterward.

    It is no longer possible for an armed rebellion to end well. Technology has seen to it that armed rebellions don't end at all.

    1. Re:Revolution is bad by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having founders who embraced the principles of the Enlightenment didn't hurt either.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Revolution is bad by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      In all seriousness, the only reason the American Revolution worked out so well was because we had the enormous good fortune of A) having no nearby powers to take advantage and B) having technology at just the right point where we could win the war without having to deal with endless terrorist attacks afterward.

      No, the reason our revolution worked was that we had George Washington, who told his officers not to stage a military coup (and convinced them to do as he said), and then, when he was elected President, chose to run for re-election only once, then retire quietly.

      Unlike the assorted Presidents-for-Life that we saw from so many other revolutions....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    3. Re:Revolution is bad by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Informative

      The American "revolution" was not a revolution. It was a war of national liberation for a newborn nation. Revolution is when you oust the government and take their place while remaining the same state.

  13. Re:Mubarak leaving soon, Demoracy in Eygpy :) by Ghiora · · Score: 2

    Sure Egypt will have a real democracy in a day or two. Like the Hamas in Gaza. I am no supporter of the Arab regimes but it is much more likely that we will end up with some kind of Muslim dictatorship.