New York Times Editorial, "Egypt’s Democracy Interrupted": "Egyptians Wanted Real Change"

In "Egypt’s Democracy Interrupted" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/19/opinion/egypts-democracy-interrupted.html), the Editorial Board of The New York Times is given yet another opportunity to showcase its shallowness. You have to love their line:

"Egyptians wanted real change."

Is this in contradistinction to that other kind of "change" that Americans got when they elected Obama?

What, in fact, do Egyptians want? Some 84% of Egypt's Muslims believe that those abandoning Islam should be executed (see: http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/). But there should be no arguing with democracy.

The editorial concludes:

"American officials were right to warn the generals on Monday that they risk losing billions of dollars if they don’t swiftly transfer power to the president, ensure elections for a new Parliament and begin writing a new constitution with help from a broad range of Egyptians. The United States needs to work with Egypt to maintain the peace treaty and a stable border with Israel. But an undemocratic Egypt in perpetual turmoil is no help to its own people or Israel or the rest of the region."

Allow me to clue the Times into another less than well kept secret of the Nile: Egypt's generals and colonels control up to 40% of the Egyptian economy. Moreover, they couldn't give a fig if the US curtails its aid, given what they stand to lose if they are stripped of their business empire, which has wound its way into food, mineral water, gas stations, fertilizer, apparel, real estate and electronics goods.

Will Obama raise a ruckus over developments in Egypt, as he studiously avoids involvement in the Syrian civil war, and as we near November? Why do I have my doubts?