When an “Eminence Grise” starts doing things in public that
cause her to be injured, to look silly or to look pathetic, you know that the
graying lady has crossed a certain threshold, and is now operating in the
senile zone. This is what happened to the Gray Lady that is sometimes referred
to by the name New York Times.
Its editors published a piece in which they tell the world
how goosey they have become. They did it by adopting former President Carter's
concerns with regard to what is happening in Egypt at this time, and
deliberately misrepresented what he said. They then added their own dressing on
the concoction, making the whole thing look like a pile of dung such as that
created by wild animals, and seen when on a safari in Africa .
Under the title: “From Jimmy Carter, a Rebuke to Egypt,”
published on October 19, 2014, the editors of the Times describe a statement
issued by the Carter Center with regard to its operation in Egypt as being a
“withering judgment” and a “damning critique.” They go on to say that the
statement “sends two powerful messages to the Obama administration” with regard
to its dealings with Egypt .
They elaborate to make it sound like Carter was urging Obama to punish Egypt .
This is human dung like the stuff a senile lady would
produce when she soils herself in public. The fact is that the statement issued
by the Carter Center
is 2800 words long, a quarter of which (700 words) concerns the history of the
Center in Egypt
over its 3 years span. It tells what the Center did and what it saw. The rest
(2100 words) consists of recommendations to the Government of Egypt such as you
find in any Blue Ribbon or Royal Commission report.
The whole thing was written by a staff that does this sort
of work professionally for a living. The only time that the thoughts of
President Carter appeared in the statement is when he was quoted as expressing
the following 40 words: “The current environment in Egypt is not conducive to genuine
democratic elections and civic participation. I hope that Egyptian authorities
will reverse recent steps that limit the rights of association and assembly and
restrict operations of Egyptian civil society groups.”
Notice that he said “Egyptian civil society groups” and not
Egyptian as well as foreign groups. In fact, there is nothing, anywhere in the
statement that suggests Carter or the staff are asking Egypt to go back to a
system that the senile lady craves to see return to Egypt, now that: “Mr. Sisi
has amended the penal code so that anyone charged with receiving money or arms
from a foreign country or organizations could face a life sentence.”
Just imagine a graying dung-soiled lady from China , Russia ,
Zimbabwe or Venezuela telling America
to welcome the moving of money and arms across the border from Mexico into America
– activities that will be carried out by al-Qaeda and ISIS
operatives and similar characters. Piss on the gray-haired thing and flush her
down the toilet.
But why would the editors of an aging rag like the New York
Times want Egypt
to transform itself the way they describe? Here is the answer to that question:
“It would be helpful if Israel ,
which prides itself on its democracy, encouraged [Egypt ] to abandon the authoritarian
course.” Never mind that the same Carter who voiced just a little concern about
Egypt is the same Carter who personally accused Israel of bargaining in bad
faith, and personally wrote a book about it being an apartheid regime as well
as a murderous one – the editors of the New York Times still want Egypt to
become like Israel. Flabbergasting.
The trouble is that Egypt has a population of 94
million people. If it were to use American weapons or any weapons to kill as
many people as do the Israelis every couple of years in Gaza , it will have to kill something like
120,000 people each time. And this is something that Egypt or anyone who is not a Jew
will never do.
One more thing. Look at the map of Egypt and see
if it is possible to build an apartheid wall in that ancient republic of peace,
quiet, eternal optimism, and a glorious history that continues to make itself.
You will spot no such place because there is none.