Investigation: Mitt Romney’s Offshore Accounts and Tax Loopholes

Investigation: Mitt Romney’s Offshore Accounts and Tax Loopholes

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/08/investigating-mitt-romney-offshore-accounts

Aug. 12, 2012

Where the Money Lives

For all Mitt Romney’s touting of his business record, when it comes to his own money the Republican nominee is remarkably shy about disclosing numbers and investments. Nicholas Shaxson delves into the murky world of offshore finance, revealing loopholes that allow the very wealthy to skirt tax laws, and investigating just how much of Romney’s fortune (with $30 million in Bain Capital funds in the Cayman Islands alone?) looks pretty strange for a presidential candidate.

By Nicholas Shaxson

A person who worked for Mitt Romney at the consulting firm Bain and Co. in 1977 remembers him with mixed feelings. “Mitt was … a really wonderful boss,” the former employee says. “He was nice, he was fair, he was logical, he said what he wanted … he was really encouraging.” But Bain and Co., the person recalls, pushed employees to find out secret revenue and sales data on its clients’ competitors. Romney, the person says, suggested “falsifying” who they were to get such information, by pretending to be a graduate student working on a proj­ect at Harvard. (The person, in fact, was a Harvard student, at Bain for the summer, but not working on any such proj­ects.) “Mitt said to me something like ‘We won’t ask you to lie. I am not going to tell you to do this, but [it is] a really good way to get the information.’ … I would not have had anything in my analysis if I had not pretended.
“It was a strange atmosphere. It did leave a bad taste in your mouth,” the former employee recalls.
This unsettling account suggests the young Romney—at that point only two years out of Harvard Business School—was willing to push into gray areas when it came to business. More than three dec­ades later, as he tried to nail down the Republican nomination for president of the United States, Romney’s gray areas were again an issue when he repeatedly resisted calls to release more details of his net worth, his tax returns, and the large investments and assets held by him and his wife, Ann. Finally the other Republican candidates forced him to do so, but only highly selective disclosures were forthcoming.
Even so, these provided a lavish smorgasbord for Romney’s critics. Particularly jarring were the Romneys’ many offshore accounts. As Newt Gingrich put it during the primary season, “I don’t know of any American president who has had a Swiss bank account.” But Romney has, as well as other interests in such tax havens as Bermuda and the Cayman Islands.
To give but one example, there is a Bermuda-based entity called Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd., which has been described in securities filings as “a Bermuda corporation wholly owned by W. Mitt Romney.” It could be that Sankaty is an old vehicle with little importance, but Romney appears to have treated it rather carefully. He set it up in 1997, then transferred it to his wife’s newly created blind trust on January 1, 2003, the day before he was inaugurated as Massachusetts’s governor. The director and president of this entity is R. Bradford Malt, the trustee of the blind trust and Romney’s personal lawyer. Romney failed to list this entity on several financial disclosures, even though such a closely held entity would not qualify as an “excepted investment fund” that would not need to be on his disclosure forms. He finally included it on his 2010 tax return. Even after examining that return, we have no idea what is in this company, but it could be valuable, meaning that it is possible Romney’s wealth is even greater than previous estimates. While the Romneys’ spokespeople insist that the couple has paid all the taxes required by law, investments in tax havens such as Bermuda raise many questions, because they are in “jurisdictions where there is virtually no tax and virtually no compliance,” as one Miami-based offshore lawyer put it.
That’s not the only money Romney has in tax havens. Because of his retirement deal with Bain Capital, his finances are still deeply entangled with the private-equity firm that he founded and spun off from Bain and Co. in 1984. Though he left the firm in 1999, Romney has continued to receive large payments from it—in early June he revealed more than $2 million in new Bain income. The firm today has at least 138 funds organized in the Cayman Islands, and Romney himself has personal interests in at least 12, worth as much as $30 million, hidden behind controversial confidentiality disclaimers. Again, the Romney campaign insists he saves no tax by using them, but there is no way to check this.
Bain Capital is the heart of Romney’s fortune: it was the financial engine that created it. The mantra of his campaign is that he was a businessman who created tens of thousands of jobs, and Bain certainly did bring useful operational skills to many companies it bought. But his critics point to several cases where Bain bought companies, loaded them with debt, and paid itself extravagant fees, thereby bankrupting the companies and destroying tens of thousands of jobs.
Come August, Romney, with an estimated net worth as high as $250 million (he won’t reveal the exact amount), will be one of the richest people ever to be nominated for president. Given his reticence to discuss his wealth, it’s only natural to wonder how he got it, how he invests it, and if he pays all his taxes on it.
Ironically, it was Mitt’s father, George Romney, who released 12 years of tax returns, in November 1967, just ahead of his presidential campaign, thereby setting a precedent that nearly every presidential candidate since has either willingly or unwillingly been subject to. George, then the governor of Michigan, explained why he was releasing so many years’ worth, saying, “One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show.”
But his son declined to release any returns through one unsuccessful race for the U.S. Senate, in 1994, one successful run for Massachusetts governor, in 2002, and an aborted bid for the Republican Party presidential nomination, in 2008. Just before the Iowa caucus last December, Mitt told MSNBC, “I don’t intend to release the tax returns. I don’t,” but finally, on January 24, 2012—after intense goading by fellow Republican candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry—he released his 2010 tax return and an estimate for 2011.
These, plus the mandatory financial disclosures filed with the Office of Government Ethics and released last August, raise many questions. A full 55 pages in his 2010 return are devoted to reporting his transactions with foreign entities. “What Romney does not get,” says Jack Blum, a veteran Washington lawyer and offshore expert, “is that this stuff is weird.”
The media soon noticed Romney’s familiarity with foreign tax havens. A $3 million Swiss bank account appeared in the 2010 returns, then winked out of existence in 2011 after the trustee closed it, as if to remind us of George Romney’s warning that one or two tax returns can provide a misleading picture. Ed Kleinbard, a professor of tax law at the University of Southern California, says the Swiss account “has political but not tax-policy resonance,” since it—like many other Romney investments—constituted a bet against the U.S. dollar, an odd thing for a presidential candidate to do. The Obama campaign provided a helpful world map pointing to the tax havens Bermuda, Luxembourg, and the Cayman Islands, where Romney and his family have assets, each with the tagline “Value: not disclosed in tax returns.”
Romney’s personal tax rate is a particular point of interest. In 2010 and 2011, Mitt and Ann paid $6.2 million in federal tax on $42.5 million in income, for an average tax rate just shy of 15 percent, substantially less than what most middle-income Americans pay. Romney manages this low rate because he takes his payments from Bain Capital as investment income, which is taxed at a maximum 15 percent, instead of the 35 percent he would pay on “ordinary” income, such as salaries and wages. Many tax experts argue that the form of remuneration he receives, known as carried interest, is really just a fee charged by investment managers, so it should instead be taxed at the 35 percent rate. Lee Sheppard, a contributing editor at the trade publication Tax Notes, whose often controversial articles are read widely by tax professionals, is nonplussed that the Obama campaign has been so listless on the issue of carried interest. “Romney is the poster boy, the best argument, for taxing this profit share as ordinary income,” says Sheppard.

In the face of such arguments, Romney’s defense is that he never broke the rules: if there is a problem, it is in the laws, not in his behavior. “I pay all the taxes that are legally required, not a dollar more,” he said. Even so. “When you are running for president, you might want to err on the side of overpaying your taxes, and not chase every tax gimmick that comes down the pike,” says Sheppard. “It kind of looks tacky.”

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 MY COMMENTARY:

A British Facebook pal of mine said, “Romney’s offshore accounts and his tax loopholes will devastate his already tenuous support from Tea Partisans. It is doubtful that he will gain any new support because of this and the Bain ads that the Obama campaign and the pro-Obama superpacs had put up, unless there really is some sort of "fix" in, Romneys poll numbers will stagnate or sink down. But no doubt, the media per se will not report it that way, since they are still looking forward to that Big Citizens’ United payback.”  ROMNEY IS ACTUALLY MYTH ROMNEY! He will surely be defeated in the coming US presidential election.

On Romney’s Plan To Create 17,000,000 Jobs

 

Romney is now altering his campaign-strategy. From attacking ‘Obamacare’ and putting up loud speeches favoring cut-taxes for wealthy people in America, Romney now has somehow outlined the things he will do if he becomes POTUS. But up to now he hasn’t yet announced how he will deal with such issues like immigration, AIDS epidemic, human trafficking, Iran’s nuclear program, drug cartels in Mexico, the Arab Spring, global warming, and even the bail-out plans. Why did it take so long for Romney to develop his so-called would-be policies when he knows he’s running for the US presidency? It seems that when he entered the race for the GOP nomination, his clear intention was just to ‘WIN’ the presidency without highlighting his would-be policies. That shows something about Romney’s mentality of taking over the reins of power with the simple reason of just wanting to win what he wants to win for himself. It’s like putting his ambitions first before having an intention of truly serving the American people. Romney’s ambitions outshine his desire of honestly doing public service.

Romney has just announced that he will create 17,000,000 jobs if he becomes president! I think Romney’s number one admirer today- Vegan Stephen would jump up, not jump out, from his seat upon hearing the news that Romney has already outlined his would-be policies as a presidential candidate. However, as I’ve pointed out from the first paragraph of this article, Romney has not yet worked out plans on how he would deal with major global and economic issues if he wins the US presidency. The problem with MYTH ROMNEY is that he has a long history of selling out his principles and ideals in exchange of political and business interests. Romney is basically a ‘profit-driven politician’ rather than the highly-principled public servant that a voter would dream of voting for in every election. Romney is not shy in expressing his pro-oligarchy sentiments and elitist behavior, and has even partnered with a politician who wants to curtail all welfare-programs for the less-fortunate people in America.

Since Romney is a profit-motivated politician, his economic plans can be summed up like this: ”Borrow a lot of money and then give tax cuts for mostly the rich. Pay for it 10 years from now when myself, MYTH ROMNEY, is no longer president and drill on federal lands for a short term gain.” Yes, short-term gain means fake opportunity because the desired long-term stability for America would not be pursued since fast money for big businesses, including those of Mitt, would be the main motivation of a would-be Romney presidency. Remember that during the primary, Romney stated “he will hire professionals to direct him on certain matters.” Obviously, Americans can just elect a professional like Obama or you can just hire professionals without Romney.

Mitt has been running for President for about four years now. I would have expected him to have strong positioning statements in June, July, or August - not just releasing them now in mid-September. Romney has said he will hike taxes on the middle class. Romney has stated that he wants to expand the tax base so that the 50% now not paying income taxes - currently considered too poor to pay income taxes - will begin paying income taxes. Since at least half of those are in the middle class, that's actually a “Romney tax increase” on the middle class - by his own words! Romney also has loudly stated his opposition to the ongoing talks about the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. I guess such stance would define his foreign policy if he becomes US president. He is rabidly pro-Neoconservatism when it comes to issues about the Middle East and the developing world.

Romney has said that “he will create 17,000,000 jobs if he becomes POTUS.” I don’t think that would be possible under a Romney admin! Most of Romney’s wealthy fund-raisers are fellows who supported his ‘shipping of jobs abroad’ in order to get easy money. Since corporate raiding is Romney’s game, I believe what he meant by job-creation is actually creating job opportunities outside of the USA, not inside America. Residents of Cayman Islands, China and Mexico are rejoicing with the upcoming job plans from Romney. Romney might give Mexico with 8,000,000 jobs and China with another 8,000,000 jobs. 500,000 jobs might be developed by Romney in Canada. The remaining 500,000 jobs will be open to both US and UK citizens. However, the available 250,000 jobs for Americans would only be given to them if they would relocate to the United Arab Emirates. That means Romney’s job-creation programs would surely benefit him and his friends, not America’s job-seekers.

On Charters That Can Help Curtail Slavery, Human Trafficking And Abuses Against Migrant Workers

Dear UNITED NATIONS,

Please help in the global campaign to end modern-day slavery and human trafficking. Since you’re a broadcast-journalist and writer, I know you can help in promoting 2 charters that peaceful activists from all over the world are advocating.

As a human-rights’ campaigner and cause-oriented blogger from the Philippines, I sincerely believe that the UN should establish 2 new international charters that can effectively curtail modern day slavery, human trafficking and stop the abuses against migrant workers, These 2 charters are the following:

1.) International Charter Against Modern-Day Slavery And Human Trafficking

2.) International Charter On The Protection Of Migrant Workers’ Rights

An international charter against modern-day slavery and human trafficking should ensure that every country in this world must have effective measures that would systematically curtail modern-day slavery and human trafficking. Such a charter can prevent children from being exploited and forced to do hard labor as well as protect women from being sold to sex-slavery.

The second one is an international charter against the abuses being done to migrant workers. There is really a necessity to establish a charter that will protect the rights of the migrant workers. Many migrant workers are being abused by their employers and somehow are forced to work as though they are slaves. Migrant workers easily become victims of human-rights’ violations. Hence, there is really a need to establish an international charter that will protect the rights of the migrant workers.

I have been advocating the necessity of an international charter that will protect and guarantee the rights of the migrant workers since the 1990s up to this present year of 2011. Many Filipino migrant workers had returned to the country with horrific stories of being abused by employers or treated like slaves under dangerous working conditions. I’m hoping that activist groups from all parts of this globe can make this dream become a reality soon.

The mentioned charters are necessary so that we can gauge how effective are the measures of every government on this planet in curtailing or preventing modern-day slavery, human trafficking and the abuses against migrant workers. I hope that non-governmental organizations, workers’ associations and civil-society groups would all unite in persuading the United Nations to establish the proposed international charters.

Please help us in campaigning for the said charters. Please click these links: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-603399 and http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-568656 ….. Thanks.

Sincerely,

Rupinera

RUMMEL PINERA

I HOPE WIKIPEDIA WOULD STOP USING THE WORD "MONGOLOID" AS A RACIAL LABEL FOR ASIANS.....

Dear Wikipedia,

Since I'm a Filipino, I do belong to the Yellow race. The Yellow race includes the Northeast Asians (e.g. Chinese, Koreans, Japanese), the Malays (Filipinos, Malaysians, Indonesians), Polynesians, Native Americans and the indigenous tribes of Siberia. I would rather prefer to be labeled racially as either Yellow or Beige. I wish to be called racially as either Light-Brown or Asian, not Mongoloid. The word 'Mongoloid' is politically incorrect when used to describe any member of the Yellow race. The said word makes you think that all members of the Asian race have a chromosomal condition called as the Down syndrome.

Since I'm an online activist, I have recently started an online campaign that would request to legitimate websites, blogs and online encyclopedias to stop using the word 'Mongoloid' in referring to any member of the Yellow race. The word 'Mongoloid' refers to a person who has Down syndrome. The word 'Mongoloid' is a degrading term for an Asian since it would suggest that all members of the Yellow race have Down syndrome. Since most inhabitants of Asia belong to the Yellow race, it is only proper to call members of the Yellow race as Asians. I think I can be labeled racially as either Light-Brown or Beige or Yellow. I don't want the label 'Mongoloid'. The term "Asiatics" is for all inhabitants of Asia- whether they're Whites, Blacks or Yellows. But since most inhabitants of Asia belong to the Yellow race, the term "Asian" is an appropriate racial label for any member of the Light-Brown or Yellow race. I hope your group can help in campaigning against the use of the word 'Mongoloid' in labeling any member of the Yellow race. Such term should not be used anymore in the international circles.

I'm requesting Wikipedia to delete the word "Mongoloid" as a racial label for all members of the Yellow race. The M-word is still listed on articles by Wikipedia regarding the 3 major racial divisions of humanity. The M-word is offensive to all members of the Yellow race. I would rather like to be labeled racially as Yellow or Asian. Other intellectuals suggested the word Asianic as an alternative term for a member of the Yellow race. I think the word Asianic is another acceptable racial label for any member of the Yellow race.

I hope that Wikipedia will really take action about this issue. Your group should be responsible enough in upholding racial equality in the whole globe.

Please search or click this link to know more about this advocacy of mine:

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-579584


..... Thanks.

Sincerely,

Rupinera

Rummel Pinera

The UN Must Endorse And Sponsor A Peace Agreement In Libya Now.....

The international community, through the UN Organization, is now effectively enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya. The role of NATO in Libya is to enforce a NO-FLY ZONE. It's the people of Libya who will have to create a democracy for their own country.


However, the international community can sponsor a peace agreement in Libya that will ensure a smooth transition of the country towards democracy. Col. Moammar Ghadaffi, being an international outlaw and a leader who has committed various crimes against humanity, should definitely exit away from Libyan governance. The armed oppositionists and the commanders of the Libyan Armed Forces should now hold dialogues that would pave the way for a peace negotiation towards national reconciliation and democratization. I'm sure that several generals of the Libyan Armed Forces don't want to see the Libyan military completely annihilated by air strikes from NATO forces and armed attacks from rebels. The international community can now push for and sponsor a peace agreement between the rational state officials, minus Ghadaffi, and the opposition leaders in Libya. Such negotiation should happen within the framework of the international`law and must accept the Libyan people's general will. Such negotiation should pave the way towards the creation of a legitimate constitution and the holding of democratic elections in Libya. The ultimate objective of such peace negotiation should be to establish a national consensus in Libya towards building democratic governance. I wish the Libyan people success in their efforts to have democratic governance for their nation.

THE MARCH OF DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM IN BOTH MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA…..

February 20, 2011

It is wrong to argue that the peace process between Israel and Palestine would be deleted if all the despotic regimes in the Middle East region and, also, in North Africa would be overthrown and replaced by democratically-elected governments. There is no connection between despotic leadership and the on-going peace process between Israel and Palestine. In fact, the despotic leaders in the Middle East region and North Africa are using the so-called peace process between Israel and Palestine as a leverage to gain concessions and protection from rich countries, so that their respective dictatorial machinery will be maintained and secured by allies and given a semblance of legitimacy from the international community. It is suffice to say that the peace process between Israel and Palestine would only succeed if both camps can reach a final agreement to settle the Palestinian question and Israeli sovereignty once and for all. It’s only the Palestinians and Israelis who can ultimately end the conflict and decide to become harmonious neighbors in the Middle East region. The citizens in the said region who are living under despotic regimes have the God-given gift to enjoy their human rights, responsible freedoms, and civil liberties. Such citizens have the God-given ability to freely elect their respective statesmen and stateswomen. Such citizens have the God-given knowledge to freely participate in nation-building and progress in every human endeavor. Why would such God-given rights be forsaken in order to build peace? Peacemaking is righteous! But building peace through protecting dictators and, therefore, ensuring that despotic regimes get shielded from the reach of justice is just opportunism pretending to be good and nice. Building peace at the expense of continuing the repression and oppression of peoples by their dictatorial and despotic leaders is an immoral form of peacemaking. Peace can only succeed when the peacemakers themselves do believe that all nations in this world should be free in pursuing life, liberty and happiness. Peace can only succeed when the peacemakers themselves will not deter or hinder humanity’s efforts to protect and secure human rights, responsible freedoms and civil liberties. Peace will only be successful if the peacemakers themselves believe that every nation on earth deserves liberty, democracy and freedom. Peacemaking is understanding that all of us human beings are children of the LORD GOD and, therefore, have the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. It is righteous for the citizens of the countries in both Middle East and North Africa to peacefully and lawfully struggle in order to gain democracy and freedom. The Obama administration should welcome such development in both regions.

EVERY NATION IN BOTH MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA SHOULD PEACEFULLY EMBRACE DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM!!!!! AMEN.

Mubarak resigns: A partial victory for the Tahrir Square Revolution

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/egypt/110210/mubarak-resigns

Mubarak resigns

By Jon Jensen — GlobalPost

Published: February 11, 2011 11:41 ET in Middle East

CAIRO, Egypt — Hundreds of thousands of protesters in Cairo erupted in celebration Friday after the country's new vice president, Omar Suleiman, announced on state television that Hosni Mubarak, after more than three decades in power, had finally stepped down.

Protesters dropped to their knees and chanted, "Egypt is free! Egypt is free!"

In Tahrir Square, the epicenter of the protest movement that has persisted for 18 days straight, there was a sense of relief after an uncertain few days.

“I can smell freedom for the first time in my life,” said Mohamed Qorny, 46, who, along with everyone else in the square, was hysterical, jumping and screaming in joy.

The announcement came not long after the military turned the turrets of its tanks away from protesters that had amassed in front of the presidential palace. Suleiman, who had been named vice president by Mubarak last week, said the military would assume power.

A military source told Reuters that Field Marshal Mohammed Hussein Tantawi, the defense minister and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, was the head of the Higher Military Council that has taken control in Egypt. It was unclear what role Suleiman would play in any future transition.

In response, the crowds chanted, “The army and the people are one.”

Demonstrators have long said they wanted not only the removal of Mubarak, but the entire regime.

Anti-government protesters flooded Tahrir Square early on Friday, frustrated a day after Mubarak defiantly announced that he would transfer his power to Suleiman, who is also his close confidant, but would not resign.

The protests quickly turned into the largest since they first began on Jan. 25. And for the first time they spread outside Tahrir Square to the presidential palace and the headquarters of the state television. Protests also reportedly erupted in the northern city of Alexandria.

Throughout the day, army soldiers and commanders began to mingle with the protesters, pointing to the dramatic change that would soon take place. Officials said before the announcement Friday that Mubarak had left Cairo and was said to be staying in the coastal tourist town of Sharm el-Sheikh.

The rumors that Mubarak would possibly announce his resignation began earlier Thursday afternoon when a senior Egyptian military official said to protesters through local media that, “All your demands will be met today.”

The rumor quickly gained steam around the world as international news organizations picked up on the story. NBC reported that two independent sources had confirmed that Mubarak would step down and that Suleiman would take over. CNN reported that CIA Director Leon Panetta also expected Mubarak to resign Thursday.

But in his defiant speech Thursday night, Mubarak caused widespread confusion with a rambling speech in which he talked about arcane laws, appearing completely out of touch with the demands of his people.

Robin Wright, a distinguished scholar at the U.S. Institute of Peace Wilson Center who has interviewed Mubarak several times, said Thursday that Mubarak's speech appeared to be a last, desperate attempt to save face.

"It was out of touch, and it’s one of the vainest political acts I’ve witnessed in my lifetime,” she said. “This is a man who is so self-absorbed that he’s not ready to recognize what has become incredibly clear over the last 17 days — that his reign is finished.”

Protesters, old and young, were hugging and crying Friday night as they celebrated their hard fought victory.

Om Alaa, 52, whose son died during clashes with the state security forces in late January, was dancing in the street.

“I feel such happiness that I can’t even describe,” she said. “My son was murdered just before his marriage and now I feel his blood didn’t go in vain.”

Demonstrators waved large Egyptian flags and several Tunisian flags. Egypt’s revolution was partly inspired by the uprising in Tunisia that forced out President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali after his 23-year reign.

A group of about 15 men stood on top of a burned out van that once belonged to the country’s feared security forces in a symbolic scene that demonstrated just how far the protesters had come since the first few days of demonstrations when police violently cracked down on the movement.

Protesters have long made it clear, however, that nothing short of a Western-style democracy would satisfy them, demanding the departure of the prime minister, the parliament, the president, vice president and refusing any system led by the military.

“We don’t want an army-led regime,” the crowd chanted at one point on Thursday.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RUMMEL PINERA'S COMMENTARY ON HOSNI MUBARAK'S RESIGNATION AS EGYPT'S STRONGMAN:

Finally, after more than 2 weeks of demonstrations in Egypt, the handsome dictator decided to resign as his country’s strongman. The peaceful Tahrir Square Revolution has abrogated the Mubarak regime. That means the Tahrir Square revolutionaries won about one-half of their main objective. Their main concern is to have an elected government that will really protect and secure their human rights, responsible freedoms, and civil liberties. The other half of such goal would be gained once Egyptians vote for their representatives and state leaders in September. But the current council of leaders that is now ruling Egypt should really appoint civilian leaders who will draft a temporary constitution, guard against human-rights’ violations and abuses from authorities, and ensure that the coming elections in Egypt would really be fair, clean and orderly. In other words, the Tahrir Square Revolution is not yet complete until a freely-elected government steps in to rule Egypt. Since Egypt became a republic in the 1950s, the country was ruled by a succession of military dictators and juntas. Now that the Egyptian people had successfully waged a peaceful revolution against an unpopular regime, the country has a big chance of having a civilian government that will defend the human rights and civil liberties of the citizens. But such prospect would only materialize if the current ruling council of the said country would really be serious in transferring political power to civilian rulers. Such council (read: temporary junta) has to appoint civilian leaders now in government positions to show its sincerity in giving way to democratic governance. Some opposition leaders who will not run for public office come September should be appointed to specific government positions by Egypt’s ruling military council. The ones who will draft a temporary constitution for Egypt should come from all sectors of the society. Such things should be undertaken by Egypt’s ruling council to show to the world and to its own citizens that the country is really on its way to actual democratic governance.

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE EGYPTIAN PEOPLE! WELL DONE!

EGYPT DESERVES DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM! AMEN.