-------- "This is the time for action not only words, use your God given gifts to develop this country, dont be afraid to speak up, and feel PROUD THAT U R EGYPTIAN." -------- Mohaly, Feb 2011

Friday, March 30, 2007

A More Objective "Jeddal" about electing "Jammal"!

Would you vote for Gamal Mubarak if he runs for presidency?

- Well educated.
- Exposed to the international community.
- Smart, and pro-development.
- Young (for a change).

- Doesn't know the majority of Egyptians (like most of us the upper class guys).
- Weak Speaker (too rigid).
- Obliged to inherit a lot of cons and keep it.
- Will sell the country (aw eli fadel men el country).

Let me hear your opinion, and if any more pros and cons.



Anonymous said...

-a civilian, young, and well educated person.

-carries the same last name that everybody hates by now.

omar said...

i think all of the comments will be anonymous in this post L:)

Anonymous said...

we don't hate the guy, he will definately make a change in ourpolitical life.

i didnt write my name , i dont wanna kiss asses!

Mohaly said...

why guys, we are discussing it objectively, we dont have anything for or against him. But if he is gonna be our next president, at least we wanna know what is his pros and cons.

Tamer Mokhtar said...

First I proud that I can see a post trying to explore this specific political topic.
I’m not happy with what’s happening in the last 5 years in politics, I feel we are going in the wrong direction “too many talks”.
I’m not into politics I’m like others decided be realistic & focus on worthy so I can touch results.
From the beginning I can say that I don’t expect a result at the end, maybe just sharing some pro & cons more which is good.
I feel that I’m limited in choices which shouldn’t be the case. I’m pro the change but not through election as we experienced.

What I’m really interesting to see successful Egyptian Kingdom.
Yes kingdom, unfortunately Egyptians not prepared or qualified to go into the election game “shame”.

An example:
Someone owns building (the king in this case) I assume he will be more willing into making it appealing & in good conditions.

Someone manages building, (you can easily assume).

In additions that if u asked the people they will just be dreaming to have the basics only without any hassle (food, home, work & family)

to answer ur Q ya mohaly, i'll say yes to the best option, Gamal or other.

p.s. this is my opinion & proud to say that r

Mohaly said...

That is a new point to look at it Tamer....enta ekta3i wala eih :)

Yasmine Ismail said...

from an outside point of view, I guess he will be less of dictator, isn't he?!

Yasmine Ismail said...

You always surprize me Tamer!!!


Tamer Mokhtar said...

Don't but i feel that it's more realistic, or maybe set the most right expectation to avoid being disappointed.

for sure it's not the ideal or utopia.

but maybe the right solution in egypt in this time.

who knows :)

Tamer Rezk said...

Well I think that Tamer got confused a bit when he was talking about Egypt becoming a kingdom once again. When you say "an owner of a building" means that he owns it, it's his money he's dealing with, but a kingdom doesn't belong to the king, he's just the head of that kingdom, but doesn't own the country. The point is, it doesn't make any difference if it was a republic or a kingdom as long as you have the right people in the right positions. For example, the biggest mistake done in Egypt was the change in economy from capitalism to communism(which proved to fail in the country of origin), so take for example the old businessmen who owned their businesses like Sammouha Pacha(can't remember his first name) who lived in Alexandria and bought the marshland area (smouha area now), back filled it, built a new residential area in an unused piece of land. The guy was Jewish, maybe he didn't care about the country, but he sure cared for his business which eventually was a benefit for the country. other examples were owners of other businesses, like Ommar Effendi, Hano, and salon vert, all of them were private businessmen(and jewish). they ran their own businesses and wanted them to nourish,(the funny fact that we Egyptians deny is that these people really believed they were egyptians, jewish being their faith but they loved Egypt. I met many jewish people who got expelled from Egypt, never went to Israel as it doesn't mean home to them and still proud of being Egyptians, I can give names upon request).
Back to the mail point the mistake is that the goals of the revolution deviated after a while, digging out men of trust and friends(mostly lower class citizens) which proved to be untrustworthy, exposing their weaknesses and their hunger for money and power openly.
And Mohaly, since you mentioned the "ekta3ism"(this is a hybrid term but sounds good), I can't see worse ekta3ism than the one existing in Egypt nowadays. At least the old businessmen had some ethics and they knew how to live and let live, not trying to kill anyone who tries to make a living out of the same business. And if ekta3ism was a disgrace and the Egyptian kingdom was rotting(as people say), then remember that an italian gold pound was worth 98 Egyptian piasters (during the dark ages of the Egyptian kingdom (late 40s)). I wont go anonymous this time because Omar thinks that people are afraid to mention their names, I had my own political blog when I was living in Egypt and I had a full profile including my street address,(in case they wanted to arrest me), I just don't write anymore as I've been living away for almost 2 years now, and I'm not really updated with everything that's going on in Egypt.
Mohaly, why don't you start a new post about the constitutional amendments?I know it was a disgrace.
Nice work mohaly, keep it up.
(sorry about the awkward posting time. I'm not a vampire I just live in australia)

Mohaly said...

Although I don't know Tamer Rezk and never met him before, but I can say that he is enrichment to this blog with his organized analysis -regardless of if i totally agree or not with what is said-. Welcome to the team :)

Regarding the ammendments, check out the post titled: Dastooour! posted on Friday 30/3, and you have the freedom to comment either for or against.

P.S. where is your blog, and it will be great if you signed with a profile in order to get to know you more (and without address :))


Fatiflower said...

I am against voting for Gamal just because he is son of the actual president. And this is very true because no one could hear talking about him if he were'nt son of Mubarak. I beleive that there are many high qualified people like or better than him in this rich country but unfortunately we will be unable to see them competing with Gamal because they are not sons of Mubarak.
By the way I am not Egyptian but I really love this country and this is how I see the situation from far.

Yasmine said...

One comment about Tamer Rezk's opinion. Egypt is (was, no is, no was... hard to tell what we are these days :) ) a socialist country ever since the revolution - big difference between socialism and communism.
Socialism didn't fail everywhere in the world, check out France. In my opinion, they've got one of the most successful - if not THE most successful - implementations of socialism.
Citizen rights are protected, government is monitored, freedom of speech is real, and public property is of real value and is protected.

As for Egypt, our eyes are bigger than our stomaches, and we have a serious identity crisis. We want to have everything and BE everything (religious, capitalists, socialists), yet we're being selective about what we should or shouldn't do, completely failing to put into consideration what we can actually do!
We're short-sighted, egotistic hypocrites, still living in Abdel Nasser's dream and false revolution glory (let's face it, it's been over 50 years, and a complete and utter failure).

As for your comparison Mohaly, I think it's pointless... too many contradicting elements in it to make it valid.
Well educated, sure, but who paid for his education? with what money?
In this situation I don't care about a person's education as much as I care about his values. What do we know about his values? NOTHING.
What do we know about his future plans and agenda for the country? NOTHING.
People say at least he's shab3an... ya far7eti! shab3an be eh? Starving poor people's food and money!!

Excuse my skepticism and/or pessimism, but I really don't think there are any pros for this choice, and we're all smart enough to realize that there's no "choice" in the first place, only a certainty (unless things happen differently by some divine interference, wallaho 3ala kol shay2en kadeer), everyone's starting to accept a "fait accompli", and we're simply readjusting our thinking and perception to make the hard reality more bearable.

Fatiflower said...

3afarem 3aliky ya Yassmine enty guebty men el akher :)

Mohaly said...

wow ya Yasmine, you really is 110% against the guy. I am not defending him, but there must be pros and cons in every person.

Yasmine said...

Not against the guy as much as i'm against the way the system is inducing him, and how we're taking it.
"he's not running for president" - right!
"the people will choose the president" - RIGHT!

And how are we dealing with it? "la walahi mesh we7esh, akid feeh mazaya bardo. He's the best option we have"
Those my friend, are the words of a person whose arm is being twisted behind his back, and is made to agree that the little box indeed contains an elephant :)
(no offense everyone)

Mohaly said...

I totally agree with you about the way of enforcing him. But again I want to be objective when I discuss it, not out of accepting reality, but coming out with a more rational opinion for or against him.

Although I agree with you that his values are vague, and it is important to know it, but education can't be set aside because of who paid for it.

I worked closely with that team of his companions, and quit after 9 months only, but because in whole 9 months i didnt see a clear vision. However, I just can't say the guy is bad we khalas.

And Fatima, being the son of the president is a fact that we cant change. We can't say he cant run for presidency because he is the son of the president, but I am for the opionion saying that he can't run for the term following his father's. There must be someone in the middle (like Bush & Clinton).


Fatiflower said...

I think that Mubarak should include in the latest changes of the legeslation (Destour in kan fih wahed men aslou) that son of president are not allowed to become president of the same country :)))))))

La2 esma7 ly ya Mohaly the fact that he is son of president is the core of the matter. I am against that a son of president becomes president because he will be using the power he or his father has to make pressure directly or indirectly on people to vote for him. as the first anonymous that he "carries the same last name that........"

This is a truth that nobody can hide, as a simple naive (but not stupid) citizen this is how I perceive it. Don't try all the time to analyse things in the way you learned in universities and read in magazines or newspapers or media (get rid of Dima3'ojiya) but how you feel them and live them on the daily basis try to avoid this implicit hypocracy you have inside and affect your lives without intention.

Mohaly said...

Just to explain the word Fatima used: Demajoujia

Demagogy (Demagoguery) (from Greek demos, "people", and agogos, "leading") refers to a political strategy for obtaining and gaining political power by appealing to the popular prejudices, fears and expectations of the public — typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalistic or populist themes.

Mohaly said...

Ya Fatima, it is unwritten rule in Egypt. The president can only be named either Mohamed or Gamal.

Mohamed Naguib
Gamal Abdel Nasser
Mohamed Anwar El Sadat
Mohamed Hosni Mubarak
then logic says:
Gamal Mubarak :)

Fatiflower said...

or Mohamed Aly ;)

Tamer Rezk said...

That argument is getting more and more exciting.
First thing I know the difference between communism and socialism, I used the inaccurate word, so excuse me for this, but what I know is that in Egypt both got mixed up and we produced a hybrid thing(socialism doesn't say,"reduce the differences between classes and reduce the differences in incomes" Egyptian constitution). god made us different and we all act accordingly. There's no way to put a rocket scientist and a house cleaner at the same level except in communist countries(that was my point). So now they cancelled the official titles (bek and pacha)which is fine, but they also gave the lowest employee 150 pounds a month and a rocket scientist gets paid 200 pounds a month. this will get the latter frustrated and the first lazy.
That's why we all work for the private section where you get paid according to your job and according to the effort, education and time involved in the job.

Yasmine said...

communism, socialism, capitalism... we have all three, and nothing.
both private and public sector are screwed up.

you work for the govt, you're paid peanuts, unless you're doing either honest or dishonest extra-curricular activities.

you work for the private sector, you're not always lucky to find a well paying job, and if you get picky, the line of eager employees is long, no one's gonna ask you twice, and the next candidate in line will take the job willingly, just to secure an income.

no laws, no rights, nothing protects the Egyptian citizen from opportunists, public or private.

Mohaly said...

The private is better but you are not paid for your time and the concept of overtime is part of the past now..

check my article:

Yasmine, ana khayef 3aleeky :)

Mohaly said...

by the way if u didnt notice: The initials of Gamal Mubarak are G.M. so he has leadership even in his name ;p