Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »

Fragrag: Aug 3, 2007; The Worst Admin Ever bashes You in the head with his banhammer. It is smashed into the body, an unrecognizable mass! You have been struck down.

El Anansi posted:

gently caress. One of my friends here worked with that dude--there was a rally in the UK the other week at the Libyan embassy pressing for news about him, as they had at least provided some confirmation about the other journalists that had been presumed captured.
He survived by two small children; wife.

Absolute bullshit that we have to discover now. He was wounded almost 2 months ago and the Libyan government kept reassuring the South African by saying he was still alive.

I dread looking Hammerl's work up. When I heard Hondros and Hetherington were killed, I looked them up and felt a knot in my stomach when I recognised a lot of their work.

# ? May 20, 2011 18:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 29, 2024 00:03

Lustful Man Hugs: Jul 18, 2010

King Dopplepopolos posted:

They might have had more success against the Iraq War if the media had given them the attention they give the Tea Party. Millions worldwide and hundreds of thousands here protested, and the only thing the media could say was, "heh, silly hippies " But a few thousand retards in tricorn hats are national news and are worth taking seriously.

Edit: not to mention how much the media loving cheerleaded for that war.

I remember reading something about how there was an anti-war rally with about 300 thousand people next to a pro-war rally with less than 300 people, and they both got roughly equal coverage.

Is it truly a democracy if the voices of so many people can be dismissed so easily?

# ? May 20, 2011 19:00

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Taerkar posted:

NPR's morning hour today with the BBC World Service had a bit on it with Syria. A BBC reporter was talking to Syrian refugees in Lebanon about what had happened, including a 70-year-old woman who was shot in the leg as she tried to cross the border.

A Syrian state official was interviewed afterwards and claimed that the reported shelling and shooting in the story were because of smugglers in the area and that there were no protests.

Edit: BBC World Service player link (Dunno if it'll work right): Full program here

Thanks for the link, he did a good job. Here's some pictures of them crossing into Lebanon. Unfortunately the Lebanese government has already turned some of them back over to Syria because of internal politics.

# ? May 20, 2011 19:07

IRQ: Sep 9, 2001; SUCK A DICK, DUMBSHITS!

Xandu posted:

Just heard that al-Jazeera cancelled most of their really good talk shows, notably Faisal al-Qassem's The Opposite Direction. Basically two guests get on and argue and sometimes almost attack each other.

There was an Al Jazeera version of Crossfire and I didn't know about it until it got canceled?

# ? May 20, 2011 19:20

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Here's one of the many provocative things said on that show.

http://www.arabglot.com/2010/12/arabic-debate-shows-serious-humour-no.html posted:

The constitutions of the Arab countries resemble a whore who is raped by the president and his entire entourage, whenever he feels like it....No one denies that the Arab rulers excel in coming up with innovative ways to annihilate their own peoples.

edit: I guess I should give a disclaimer, it is possible that al-Qassem resigned because he was uncomfortable with the Syria coverage, I'm not sure.

# ? May 20, 2011 19:29

Young Freud: Nov 26, 2006

Xandu posted:

Just heard that al-Jazeera cancelled most of their really good talk shows, notably Faisal al-Qassem's The Opposite Direction. Basically two guests get on and argue and sometimes almost attack each other.

Goddamn, that one guy white-knighting the late Saddam Hussein even after he executed his uncle. :psyduck:

I guess that's what the Horse's rear end was talking about people being caught up in their own ideology.

# ? May 20, 2011 20:00

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

ChaosSamusX posted:

I remember reading something about how there was an anti-war rally with about 300 thousand people next to a pro-war rally with less than 300 people, and they both got roughly equal coverage.

Is it truly a democracy if the voices of so many people can be dismissed so easily?

I remember seeing nearly a million people walk through the streets of London to protest the Iraq war. The only thing that happened was Parliament passing a law making it illegal to protest outside the commons.

# ? May 20, 2011 20:50

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

t3ch3 posted:

and the fact that Congress has not decided to force the President to respect the laws it has passed does not render those laws void.

The WPR does not, and cannot, change what powers the President has absent congressional approval. When you're discussing this you can't act as if the WPR determines the answer: the answer is determined by the constitution. Either the President has these powers absent congressional approval, or he doesn't even without the WPR. This is a constitutional issue, not a legislative issue, legislation can't change the division of power. The WPR, at best, provides a mechanism for pre-authorizing 60 day military action in emergencies, and lay out the precise mechanics of congressional approval.

# ? May 20, 2011 21:18

big fat retard: Nov 11, 2003; I AM AN IDIOT WITH A COMPULSIVE NEED TO TROLL EVERY THREAD I SEE!!!! PAY NO ATTENTION TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY!!!

King Dopplepopolos posted:

They might have had more success against the Iraq War if the media had given them the attention they give the Tea Party. Millions worldwide and hundreds of thousands here protested, and the only thing the media could say was, "heh, silly hippies " But a few thousand retards in tricorn hats are national news and are worth taking seriously.

Edit: not to mention how much the media loving cheerleaded for that war.

The "silly hippies :smug:

" thing has a large degree of truth to it. The media is a stupid creature driven by its desire to cover whatever will get them the most views or clicks. The media could care less about numbers, it's whether or not something is novel. Hundreds of thousands of antiwar demonstrators - many of them socialists and aging hippies - is boring and played out. A few thousand retards in tricorn hats are new, and thus worth more coverage in the media's eyes.

Now even the Tea Party is getting played out, because, like the anti-war movement, the Tea Party has worn off its novelty and played itself out.

If the anti-war movement wants the media to pay more attention to them, then they need to realize that Vietnam is over and it's not a good idea to have the retards and fanatics like ANSWER and Code Pink represent them. The same old slogans, the same ideology, same bullshit, the media wants something fresh, new and exciting.

And if you seriously think the media cheerleaded the war instead of merely being irresponsible and stupid, then YOU are part of the problem.

# ? May 20, 2011 22:14

Joementum: May 23, 2004; jesus christ

evilweasel posted:

The WPR, at best, provides a mechanism for pre-authorizing 60 day military action in emergencies, and lay out the precise mechanics of congressional approval.

Agreed. Its intention is to allow for quick action in the case of a defense emergency while blocking exactly the kind of thing that the President is currently doing (or about to do). If you want to assume that Qaddafi posed some type of defense threat to the US (which was what Obama claimed in his letter to Congress in March), then the President would be allowed through the WPR to use the military to protect the US from that threat for the last 60 days, during which time Congress can deliberate whether to authorize continued force, or not.

I agree with you that this silly game of chicken is going to continue between the Legislature and the President until the Supreme Court weighs in - which it will never do - or Congress tries to impeach the President over it - which is slightly more likely to happen, but not this time. Ideally, this should be clarified with a consitutional amendment that clarifies the executive's powers, or the US could go back to not operating a standing army, which Madison was clear it was their intention to avoid by phrasing those constitutional powers as they did.

# ? May 20, 2011 22:37

Chortles: Dec 29, 2008

Young Freud posted:

Goddamn, that one guy white-knighting the late Saddam Hussein even after he executed his uncle.

I guess that's what the Horse's rear end was talking about people being caught up in their own ideology

The fun part was watching the guy admit the contradiction, go into detail (adding that Saddam had executed more of his relatives than just his uncle), and then KEEP ON GOING where he left off... you know, before the "Iranian stooge" bit, that poo poo was hilarious.

Seriously, if I ever see such an argument on C-Span and then some "young" left protester try to be eloquent in "owning" the right-wing arguer, I'm going to hope for the arguers to knock 'er out just so that they can get back to yelling at each other.

Chortles fucked around with this message at 23:12 on May 20, 2011

# ? May 20, 2011 23:09

King Dopplepopolos: Aug 3, 2007; Give us a raise, loser!

THE HORSES rear end posted:

You seriously talk about your hate-boner for "leftists" in every single post you make, don't you?

ANSWER's not great, but at least they aren't trying to take us back to the Gilded Age or the antebellum period. And Code Pink seriously aren't as radical as ANSWER. And neither have an entire "news" network behind them.

# ? May 21, 2011 00:10

Joementum: May 23, 2004; jesus christ

King Dopplepopolos posted:

You seriously talk about your hate-boner for "leftists" in every single post you make, don't you?

That would be a new one. He usually posts about hating Muslims.

# ? May 21, 2011 00:19

big fat retard: Nov 11, 2003; I AM AN IDIOT WITH A COMPULSIVE NEED TO TROLL EVERY THREAD I SEE!!!! PAY NO ATTENTION TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY!!!

King Dopplepopolos posted:

You seriously talk about your hate-boner for "leftists" in every single post you make, don't you?

ANSWER's not great, but at least they aren't trying to take us back to the Gilded Age or the antebellum period. And Code Pink seriously aren't as radical as ANSWER. And neither have an entire "news" network behind them.

I don't hate "leftists" any more than I hate "conservatives". I hate dogmatic fundamentalists of all ideologies.

There are plenty of Leftists and many anti-war folk who don't have their heads up their asses. There are right wingers and conservatives who are also thoughtful and willing to reassess their views. I have nothing against these people.

Here are some Leftists who actually deserve to be taken seriously

http://eustonmanifesto.org/the-euston-manifesto/

Many other thoughtful leftists were posting in this very thread condemning and mocking the knee-jerk anti-American fanaticism of other posters.

# ? May 21, 2011 02:23

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Something positive from the NTC:

quote:

Today the NTC launched frontline guidelines on the fundamental rules which must be adhered to in times of conflict. Libya is a Party to all four 1949 Geneva Conventions and to both 1977 Additional Protocols. and they are bound by Common Article 3, the NTC says.

# ? May 21, 2011 12:32

Ballz: Dec 16, 2003; it's mario time

Cynthia McKinney opens her mouth, is still an idiot:

CNN posted:

A former U.S. congresswoman slammed U.S. policy on Libyan state TV late Saturday and stressed the "last thing we need to do is spend money on death, destruction and war."

The station is fiercely loyal to Moammar Gadhafi and her interview was spliced with what appeared to be rallies in support of the embattled Libyan leader.

"I think that it's very important that people understand what is happening here. And it's important that people all over the world see the truth. And that is why I am here ... to understand the truth," former Rep. Cynthia McKinney said during a live interview.

She said she was invited to Libya by the "nongovernmental organization for fact-finding," adding that she intends to bring more people to the country soon so that "they too can understand."

NATO warplanes have been pounding military targets since March after the U.N. Security Council approved a resolution to protect civilians by any means necessary as Gadhafi's forces try to quash a nearly three-month revolt against the leader's roughly 42 years of rule.

Gadhafi's government has repeatedly urged the international community to send fact-finding teams to Libya to report what's happening on the ground.

At one point during the interview, state TV cut to what it said were live airstrikes, hitting Gadhafi's compound.

"Is that a bomb?" McKinney asked.

"I want to say categorically and very clearly that these policies of war ... are not what the people of the United States stand for and it's not what African-Americans stand for," she told state TV.

The former Georgia representative also slammed the economic policies of U.S. President Barack Obama and said the government of the United States no longer represents the interests of the American people.

"Under the economic policies of the Obama administration, those who have the least are losing the most. And those who have the most are getting even more," she said. "The situation in the United States is becoming more dire for average ordinary Americans and the last thing we need to do is to spend money on death, destruction and war."

Separately, McKinney appeared on state-run Press TV this week in Iran. She was reported to be in Tehran attending the International Conference on Global Alliance Against Terrorism for a Just Peace.

# ? May 22, 2011 05:10

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Haha, who the hell invited her to Libya?

# ? May 22, 2011 06:04

Slantedfloors: Apr 29, 2008; Wait, What?

Xandu posted:

Haha, who the hell invited her to Libya?

I think she just magically teleports to wherever she can look the stupidest.

# ? May 22, 2011 06:53

Nckdictator: Sep 8, 2006; Just..someone

I'd have no problem with Cynthia McKinney if she didn't go on Gadhafi-run TV.

Why won't people like her realize that you can be against the intervention in Libya without supporting a despot like Gadhafi?

# ? May 22, 2011 07:12

Young Freud: Nov 26, 2006

Nckdictator posted:

Why won't people like her realize that you can be against the intervention in Libya without supporting a despot like Gadhafi?

When this poo poo is over, I want the rebels to show her, Landsberg-style, the corpses and graveyards of the people Qaddafi's men have killed, the women that they've raped, and the children that have been made orphans.

# ? May 22, 2011 07:45

Al-Saqr: Nov 11, 2007; One Day I Will Return To Your Side.

Meanwhile in Saudi Arabia, something significant is happening, a brave saudi woman has started actively and openly campaigning for the right to drive (including defiantly driving on video) and has captured the entire saudi internet sphere and some newspapers on fire:

It started when she posted this video Declaring a national day of women driving. Since then she and other saudi women have started posting driving vids of their own: Driving 1, Driving 2 . This has ingnited huge public interest and controversy and has been covered by both CNN and Aljazeera , the facebook page has recieved a huge amount of RSVP's and it's looking like june 17th is shaping up to be a really interesting day. lots of academics are backing this with vids of their own. and the saudi twitter sphere is going crazy in hype about this.

If alot of girls show up on that date it's the closest we're going to come to a real social revolution and youth activism movement that (probably) wont end up with mass murder and eternal imprisonment. While democracy and human rights will fly over the heads of most Saudi's (it's kinda like trying to convince a north Korean in north Korea that Kim Jong il isnt god. despite having modern communication methods). a small but fundamental issue like allowing women to drive is something that all young women and plenty of young men in Saudi share especially those who go and earn higher education abroad and come back to being worth nothing at home, and thankfully we're in the majority when it comes to that.

However, there are dark tides ahead. Shortly after posting that video the young woman was arrested by the religious police and is currently in jail.

Also, there is a very bad precedent for this kind of thing. Shortly after the gulf war (1991) there was a similar movement for women to drive, so they made a convoy of cars and drove around Riyadh for a little bit. The result? king Fahad gave the religious police carte blanche and ushered in the worst decade of social restriction ever seen in saudi, it was so bad that you could literally be arrested and flogged for no reason other than how you look. (today it's more of an arrest and only be held for an hour or so then they let you go. if you're saudi that is).

There is every bit of reason to assume this will happen again, The guy whose next in line for the throne is our good friend prince Nayef, this guy is the Darth Sidious of the religious police, he is also the head of the dreaded secret police. so if these women drive and he comes to power, then we're going to be quite hosed.

# ? May 22, 2011 11:37

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

Al-Saqr posted:

Women driving

I know from spending time in Bahrain a couple of years back, that the weekly exodus to the Sin City of the Middle East is an opportunity for the ladies to drive, which they jump at. Literally swapping seats as soon as they cross the border. A lovely example of the hypocrisy in Saudi. In Qatar we used to have loads of Saudis come to Doha for alcohol and hookers, then return come Sunday and go back to being holier than thou (let's not forget the hookers, booze and blow party mentioned in the Wikileaks documents, hosted by a Saudi Prince [did anything happen to him after that?]).
I hope that lady ends up ok, and any others that try to follow her example.
It's nothing more than a "bitches should know their place" law, although the people I've heard trying to justify it with "why would she need to drive? she has a driver" are almost as bad as the lawmakers.

I have a question since you're over there, and all I have is hearsay from epats who used to live there...is it true that there is a fairly large alcohol presence in Saudi regardless of the ban? Smuggling, speakeasies etc...

I presume you're going through a proxy to get here? I know SA is banned in Qatar, so I presume you found this site when abroad?

Jut fucked around with this message at 12:39 on May 22, 2011

# ? May 22, 2011 12:35

Al-Saqr: Nov 11, 2007; One Day I Will Return To Your Side.

Jut posted:

(let's not forget the hookers, booze and blow party mentioned in the Wikileaks documents, hosted by a Saudi Prince [did anything happen to him after that?]).

There's plenty of parties that are like that. God's law does not apply to you when you carry the whip.

it's kind of a contract, the religious establishment does with the citizens as they please in return for turning a blind eye to those with title and power.

quote:

It's nothing more than a "bitches should know their place" law, although the people I've heard trying to justify it with "why would she need to drive? she has a driver" are almost as bad as the lawmakers.

Actually there's no written law in the legal system banning women driving. but a religious edict was issued so it's just as potent. Also any person who says that clearly isnt a poor female teacher who has to drive 30 kilometers to get to her job.(since teaching positions are appointed by the ministry, not by the school itself)

quote:

I have a question since you're over there, and all I have is hearsay from epats who used to live there...is it true that there is a fairly large alcohol presence in Saudi regardless of the ban? Smuggling, speakeasies etc...

Yes. this is especially true if you're a person of influence of royalty. some people use their influence for the stuff you mentioned. but some of them would also use it for more benign purposes. e.g. There's a comedy show in town, mixed seating, but it will be held in a private golf course of someone royal. or for example the formula 3 and go kart race track 40 kilos outside of town that is open to both sexes that is also privately owned by royalty. if these were to be done in public spaces or places not owned by royalty, then legions of religious police would swoop in.

quote:

I presume you're going through a proxy to get here? I know SA is banned in Qatar, so I presume you found this site when abroad?

The forums were not banned until last year.

*EDIT*

THIS JUST IN: The facebook of the women driving campaign has been taken down, and the girl responsible has been transferred from detainment to FULL ON PRISON. also her brother was sent to detainment with the charge of encouraging his sister to do the deed. Detainment means that you hang around in a police department while prison is the hole in the ground with shivs and whatnot.

Link from Reuters

Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 13:32 on May 22, 2011

# ? May 22, 2011 13:02

Ham: Apr 30, 2009; You're BALD!

Al-Saqr posted:

THIS JUST IN: The facebook of the women driving campaign has been taken down, and the girl responsible has been transferred from detainment to FULL ON PRISON. also her brother was sent to detainment with the charge of encouraging his sister to do the deed. Detainment means that you hang around in a police department while prison is the hole in the ground with shivs and whatnot.

Link from Reuters

Does that seriously mean what I think it means? Saudi culture is hosed up, can't believe you have people who are actually against women driving (most of the saudi forums I see online are very much against it).

# ? May 22, 2011 15:07

TheOmegaWalrus: Feb 3, 2007; by Hand Knit

The censoring of Facebook, which so far has been an amazing catalyst for change in the region, is also unsettling.

# ? May 22, 2011 15:41

lipstick thespian: Sep 20, 2005; by Ozmaugh

TheOmegaWalrus posted:

The censoring of Facebook, which so far has been an amazing catalyst for change in the region, is also unsettling.

Facebook, being a corporate entity, really can't and shouldn't be relied upon to act in the interests of freedom or the right to speech. Them this or the british leftist protest pages is like the old parable with the scorpion and the frog. It's just their nature, and it does nobody any good to pretend otherwise.

# ? May 22, 2011 15:53

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

TheOmegaWalrus posted:

The censoring of Facebook, which so far has been an amazing catalyst for change in the region, is also unsettling.

They censor anything they feel like it. In the UAE, for a while anyway (I'm not sure about now), Skype was banned, as were any other VOIP services. If your site is deemed critical of the Government or someone important, then it's banned (https://www.qatarsucks.com for example), I think facebook may have been banned at one point in the UAE, but I'm not sure. It doesn't really matter anyway, most tech savvy people use a VPN like HTTP Tunnel to break through the firewall.

# ? May 22, 2011 15:54

lipstick thespian: Sep 20, 2005; by Ozmaugh

Jut posted:

They censor anything they feel like it. In the UAE, for a while anyway (I'm not sure about now), Skype was banned, as were any other VOIP services. If your site is deemed critical of the Government or someone important, then it's banned (https://www.qatarsucks.com for example), I think facebook may have been banned at one point in the UAE, but I'm not sure. It doesn't really matter anyway, most tech savvy people use a VPN like HTTP Tunnel to break through the firewall.

Facebook themselves, to my knowledge, also delete pages like this from time to time. There was some news item a while back with a bunch of british anti-corporate protest pages being deleted, which shouldn't be too suprising if true given that Facebook does pay all their taxes in the Cayman isles as far as I am aware (though I'm hardly an authority here).

I could be misremembering the details of that specific incident, but the takeaway is simply that one shouldn't be "disconcerted" by a corporate entity using a right to censorship they themselves have reserved to use according to their discretion. It's bound to happen, because that's their nature.

lipstick thespian fucked around with this message at 16:01 on May 22, 2011

# ? May 22, 2011 15:57

TheOmegaWalrus: Feb 3, 2007; by Hand Knit

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b3d_1306053762

NSFW

Syrian civilian casualties are getting to a point where refrigerated trucks are being brought in to store the dead.

It seems that Syria has only escalated the violence since Obama's speech.

# ? May 22, 2011 16:09

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

Al-Saqr posted:

Actually there's no written law in the legal system banning women driving. but a religious edict was issued so it's just as potent. Also any person who says that clearly isnt a poor female teacher who has to drive 30 kilometers to get to her job.(since teaching positions are appointed by the ministry, not by the school itself)

I know back in 2009, when I was working at the track in Qatar, there was a big thing about the FIA removing Saudi from the Baja Rally Championship because they refused to let one of the competitors race because she was a woman. I think this had knock-on effects regarding Saudis failed application to host the SBK championship.
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/no-female-drivers-allowed-in-baja-rally-championship-4172.html

quote:

Yes. this is especially true if you're a person of influence of royalty. some people use their influence for the stuff you mentioned. but some of them would also use it for more benign purposes. e.g. There's a comedy show in town, mixed seating, but it will be held in a private golf course of someone royal. or for example the formula 3 and go kart race track 40 kilos outside of town that is open to both sexes that is also privately owned by royalty. if these were to be done in public spaces or places not owned by royalty, then legions of religious police would swoop in.

So the religious police are not allowed on royal property?

quote:

THIS JUST IN: The facebook of the women driving campaign has been taken down, and the girl responsible has been transferred from detainment to FULL ON PRISON. also her brother was sent to detainment with the charge of encouraging his sister to do the deed. Detainment means that you hang around in a police department while prison is the hole in the ground with shivs and whatnot.

Link from Reuters

Well that sucks. Guess her sammich making days are over:( Any idea how long she's going to be in for?

# ? May 22, 2011 16:12

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

TheOmegaWalrus posted:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b3d_1306053762

NSFW

Syrian civilian casualties are getting to a point where refrigerated trucks are being brought in to store the dead.

It seems that Syria has only escalated the violence since Obama's speech.

No one who matters seems to give a poo poo I'm afraid. Syria along with Bahrain got a free ride.

# ? May 22, 2011 16:14

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Unsurprisingly, Saleh once again has refused to sign the GCC deal that would have him leave office. More suprisingly, his supporters have surrounded the UAE embassy in San'aa, trapping a bunch of foreign mediators and ambassadors.

quote:

CNN) -- The American, British and European Union ambassadors to Yemen are trapped in an embassy surrounded by gunmen angry about efforts by Arab mediators to ease President Ali Abdullah Saleh out of power, the American envoy told CNN.

U.S. Ambassador Gerald Feierstein said the ambassadors of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman and the United Arab Emirates are also being prevented from leaving the UAE embassy.

Feierstein has contacted his superiors to say he is fine, a State Department official told CNN.

The official believes the Yemeni government is behind the demonstration in Sanaa, the source said, declining to be named speaking about a sensitive ongoing situation.

The United Kingdom, European Union and Arab nations did not immediately confirm that their envoys were trapped.

Bahrain's Foreign Minister Khaled al-Khalifa said he was in touch with Gulf Cooperation Council Secretary-General Abdul Latif Zayani about the situation, calling it "volatile."

Saleh was originally expected to sign a deal Sunday brokered by Zayani, who is also at the UAE embassy.
But the Yemeni president raised a new obstacle earlier Sunday, refusing to recognize the opposition signature on it from the day before.

"President Saleh invited the JMP (opposition alliance) to sign the ... proposal at the presidential palace at 3 p.m. today. We hope the JMP accepts President Saleh's invitation," said Tareq Shami, a spokesman for Yemen's ruling party, the General People's Congress (GPC).

He insisted that the demand is not a complication, but rather common sense.

"Any agreement should never take place in closed-door meetings. This is commonly known and Saleh does not want to start the transition period in such a way," Shami said.

Thousands of Saleh supporters blocked roads leading to a building where Saleh was meeting with senior offcials from the ruling party Sunday, saying they would not let the president leave the compound and sign the proposal.

"We will not allow him to sign and step down in thirty days. The GCC proposal is against the will of the Yemeni people," said Sabri Ali, a Saleh supporter. "We will stand with Saleh against the criminals in the JMP and will not accept anyone to rule us expect Saleh."

Tribal leaders, meanwhile, put armed gunmen on main roads in anticipation of violence.

"Yemen is lawless today and our tribes are here to ensure that safety prevails in all circumstances," said Shaef Ali Arhabi, a tribal leader from Arhab region.

He supports the opposition, but pro-Saleh tribesman are on the streets as well.

Opposition officials rejected Saleh's proposal that they sign the agreement again on Sunday after putting their names on it Saturday.

"This is Saleh. His words are never trusted. No agreement is respected by him," said Mohammed Qahtan, a spokesman for the JMP.

An opposition youth leader accused Saleh of trying to weaken the JMP by making it "chase him from place to place" and predicted he would not sign in the end.

"The youth will not care if any signing takes place. Our demands are clear and Saleh will stand trial for all his crimes," activist Tawakkol Karman said.

Yemen, a key al Qaeda battleground and U.S. ally, has been roiled by protests for most of the year amid the background of anti-government demonstrations across much of the Arab world.
Saleh has ruled the country for 33 years.

Yemen's opposition signed the regionally brokered deal to result in his departure and end the country's grinding political crisis, opposition officials told CNN Saturday.

Previous attempts to reach a similar pact -- guided by GCC, the regional alliance -- have come close to being finished, only to fall through.

Saleh is unpopular in many quarters of the country, but he has been a stalwart U.S. ally against terrorism.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Saturday Yemen is in "trying times," with suppression and deaths of civilians.

"President Saleh needs to follow through on his commitment to transfer power. The government of Yemen must address the legitimate will of the people," she said in a statement.

Shami, the ruling party spokesman, said earlier that Saleh asked to delay the signing until Sunday because it's a national holiday.

"President Saleh will sign the GCC proposal and he asked.... days ago to delay the signing of the proposal until Sunday May 22, as this day is Yemen's unity holiday," Shami said.

edit: GCC will meet in a few hours (7pm local time) to discuss the situation in Yemen. Supposedly the US has been continuously on the phone to Saleh, but that's according to local Yemeni press.

edit2: the State department is acknowledging that Saleh is behind this, could lead to a change in diplomatic strategy and a move away from the terrible GCC plan.

Xandu fucked around with this message at 16:23 on May 22, 2011

# ? May 22, 2011 16:15

Pureauthor: Jul 8, 2010; ASK ME ABOUT KISSING A GHOST

What, exactly, is surrounding the embassy supposed to accomplish?

# ? May 22, 2011 16:41

Verizian: Dec 18, 2004; The spiky one.

Threatening foreign dignitaries not to butt in. Which might have the opposite effect.

# ? May 22, 2011 17:44

Pedrophile: Feb 25, 2011; by angerbot

Yeah holding embassy workers is pretty much a guarantee that Marines will be inbound, hopefully it doesn't become violent.

AJE has a video on the Saudi woman driver: http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2011/05/201152252517876892.html

Pedrophile fucked around with this message at 17:48 on May 22, 2011

# ? May 22, 2011 17:45

Verizian: Dec 18, 2004; The spiky one.

Hopefully for the people inside it doesn't become violent, for the people outside already getting shot up and tortured it would probably increase their chances significantly. Either way it's a lovely situation.

# ? May 22, 2011 17:48

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

They got flown out by a helicopter over to the presidential palace, where Saleh still refused to sign (citing some bullshit about the JMP also not signing), and then as far as I can tell, they all went home.

# ? May 22, 2011 17:55