Egypt to lift travel ban on U.S. democracy activists

[DJKeefy]

Egypt has decided to lift a travel ban preventing American pro-democracy activists from leaving the country, judicial sources said on Wednesday, a move that is likely to defuse a standoff that has plunged U.S.-Egyptian ties into a crisis.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she had no confirmation that the travel ban was lifted but also said she expected the row over the activities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to be resolved "in the very near future."

U.S. officials have said $1.3 billion in annual military aid has been put at risk by the case.

Washington's ties with Cairo have been a cornerstone of its Middle East policy since Egypt in 1979 became the first Arab state to sign a peace deal with Israel.

It was not immediately clear when any of the activists involved would leave the country. Sixteen of the 43 people facing charges are Americans. Seven Americans are in Egypt and some of those have sought refuge in the U.S. embassy.

Sources at Cairo's international airport said a U.S. military plane had arrived from Cyprus to take the Americans out of the country but it was not clear when or if they would go to the airport.

"The assistant to the attorney general, following a request from the investigating judges, has issued an order to lift the ban," a judicial source close to the proceedings told Reuters, adding the charges have not been dropped against any of those involved.

Judge Abdel Moez Ibrahim, head of the Cairo Appeals Court who appoints judges to the case, also confirmed to Reuters that a decision had been taken to lift the travel ban.

Asked for the nationalities of those affected by the decision, he said: "All of them are Americans."

FOREIGN FUNDS

The U.S. embassy had no immediate comment. The Egyptian military also had no comment on the case.

"We do not have confirmation that the travel ban has been lifted. We hope that it will be, and we will continue to work toward that," Clinton told U.S. lawmakers when asked. "The reporting is encouraging but we have no confirmation."

Earlier, she had said: "We believe we will resolve this issue concerning our NGOs in the very near future. That is my best assessment sitting here today."

The NGO workers also include Egyptians, Serbs, Norwegians and Germans. They have been accused of receiving foreign funds without the approval of the Egyptian authorities.

The workers are also alleged to have carried out political activities unrelated to their work and accused of failing to obtain necessary operating licenses.

The NGOs say they have long sought to register in Egypt and describe the crackdown as part of a wave of repression against civil society by the generals who took power after President Hosni Mubarak's overthrow last year.

Two of the groups involved, the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI), are loosely affiliated with the major U.S. political parties and one of the accused, IRI Egypt Director Sam LaHood, is the son of U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

The first session of the court took place on Sunday and was adjourned to April 26. That adjournment had raised hopes among activists' supporters that the case could be dropped to spare further damage to Egypt's ties with its ally.

A day before the decision to lift the travel ban, the Egyptian judge who had handled the trial resigned without giving any reasons.


Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/ ... G120120229

[Horus]

Foreign meddlers all of them.

[LovelyLadyLux]

What gets me about the entire thing is the actual complexity of 'who' supports 'who' and for what reasons with whatever amounts of financial aid attached. Seems to me we're lending money to countries that we borrow from only to lend it back.....

"WHERE" did any gov't official ever come to think or believe they could use MY TAX DOLLARS to give away to other nations for any reason?

[Morgita]

I don't believe that foreign aid is ever our tax dollars "given away". It's usually part of a complex system of purchasing political and/oreconomic influence. For example, I "give" you money to buy a dam and power station but as part of the package you have to "buy" them from me and allow me to run them for x number of years until I feel I have made enough profit to cover my initial generosity. Alternatively, I can "give" your army lots of money until you have a revolution and an election with an outcome I disapprove of. There is always a quid pro quo. No such thing as a free lunch you know!

[Horus]

They are all as bad LLL, they think it is their money to spend as they wish. I could not believe what I was hearing this morning on TV during the sports round up, there was a FOOTBAL CLUB asking the council in its local area for a £300,000 loan to keep it going until the end of the season! The money they would be using if it were approved is gathered from all residents in the form of a property tax to provide local services such as schools, libraries or waste collection etc. Now I don't know about you, but I don't want my hard earned money being loaned or whatever, to a bloody football club who will probably go bust anyway and more to the point, if the club is so important then let the supporters lend them the money, if I lived in that area I would be up in arms about it should it be approved.

[Morgita]

Would you rather it was deposited in a bank in Iceland and lost? You may not enjoy football but many do and most clubs have outreach programmes putting them right at the heart of their communities. Most weekends council parks are brimming with teams of all ages taking healthy exercise, learning the benefits of teamwork and creating a focal point for community pride and cooperation. They pay for their playing permits, they pay for the training facilities they use on weeknights. The community benefits from providing an outlet for all that youthful exuberance and energy. Isn't it better than congregating on street corners smoking or getting into drugs? I am a great advocate of community sport, football and athletics in particular. My interest is at grassroots level but the major clubs in any area provide a source of identity and bonding and something to aspire to for all the youngsters in any area. Everyone of the six year olds running about on a rainy Saturday morning sees themselves as playing for the local big name club. I know that the economic downturn makes for hard choices but if we lose regional and community facilities it will be much harder and more expensive to regain them in the future. I draw the line at giving money but loaning from reserves to shore up community resources can't surely be unacceptable?

[Horus]

Well it is to me Morgita, if football clubs can afford to pay stupid wages to players and charge people to come and watch then that is their choice. I am afraid I cannot make the connection in bailing out a commercial concern like a league club and the activities provided and paid for out of my rates for sports facilities for youngsters for which I don’t object. Football is a pastime like anything else and I fail to see why I should have to subsidise it just to stop a yob from being a yob, we all played football and cricket and numerous other games when we were kids and we didn’t get any special treatment, so what’s the problem with today’s youth apart from wanting everything on a plate? If we take league football in general it is probably responsible for more bad behaviour off the pitch than any real contribution it makes to society as a whole. I do not include in that the many dedicated people who give up their time and effort to run such events for kids, but I do not see how me having to bail out a private concern from going bust has any bearing on these people continuing to play football.