Spanish police have seized more than $36.5 million in assets owned by former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, along with people close to him.

The decision came after Egypt made an international request to block the former president’s assets, including properties in Marbella beach and luxury cars, which are owned by 130 people associated with Mubarak’s rule, reports Al Jazeera.

Some of the properties seized include two houses in La Moraleja (an affluent Madrid neighborhood) and seven properties in the Mediterranean beach resort called Marbella. A Spanish government statement explained, according to The Telegraph:

“The assets could be the proceeds of crimes such as the embezzlement of public funds, corruption, or the illegal enrichment committed during his mandate.”

Mubarak’s rule ended when he was ousted in February of 2011. He has since been sentenced to life in prison for his role in the deaths of more than 800 anti-government protesters. He is currently being held in a military hospital, because of continued health problems.

Along with asking that assets in Spain be seized, Egypt has used the UN anti-corruption conventions to ask several other countries in Europe and elsewhere to locate and seize the assets of Hosni Mubarak, as well as people who are associated with him. Along with Spain’s response, Switzerland has also frozen assets worth up to $441 million, which have been linked to the former president.

Along with Mubarak and his family, assets of former members of the government and business people who are supposedly tied to the former Egyptian president were seized. It is not clear what authorities will be doing with the assets.

Spain Seizes Hosni Mubarak’s Assets is a post from: The Inquisitr

The US government had advance notice of impending violence in Egypt and Libya but the Obama administration failed to take appropriate security measures, according to a London newspaper exclusive.

The Independent insists that US officials were warned two days ahead of time about the impending crisis that took the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans:

“According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and ‘lockdown’, under which movement is severely restricted.”

The Independent also claims that the attackers have gained access to sensitive documents in Libya including the names of confidential informants. The newspaper also suggests that the violence was in retaliation for US drone attacks in Pakistan rather than from anger over the Innocence of Muslims video.

A U.S. official has denied the report, according to Politico, that the government did nothing to preempt the attack in Benghazi: “We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

There are now reports that the Marines protecting the US embassy in Cairo, Egypt, were prohibited from carrying live ammo.

Separately, the Jerusalem Post has reported that in a September 4 letter, “Egypt’s General Intelligence Service warned that a jihadi group is planning to launch terrorist attacks against the US and Israeli embassies in Cairo.”

Do you think the the claims that the US failed to take proper action in Cairo and Benghazi after being warned are plausible?

US Government Ignored Warnings About Embassy Attacks: Report is a post from: The Inquisitr

COMMENTARY | Rush Limbaugh, you are not helping.

After a string of horrifying US embassy attacks in the Middle East this week, politicians and pundits alike have been passing the gaffe-ball around, taking equal turns with it on the right and the left. Mitt Romney reacted emotionally: Too quickly, and without all the facts. President Obama reacted poorly: Lacking any meaningful criticism of the violence, instead directing his ire at the offensive film thought to have “provoked” the embassy attacks.

Of course, we’ve covered how the embassy attacks ought to have been handled here.

Enter Rush Limbaugh, full of opinions on the matter. We concede that the situation is not as clear cut as it seems, and that most media outlets are weakly paying lip service regarding a truly disturbing trend of incidents occurring abroad on-or-uncomfortably-close-to the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. But like Todd Akin’s opinion on tension in the Middle East, Limbaugh’s opinion on the matter politicizes the issue further and brings up a bunch of things that really don’t belong in the conversation:

“Do you think Al-Qaeda depends on Osama bin Laden anymore, or did? What was he doing there? They call it a mansion, but it was a pigsty. He was drinking Budweiser and watching porn.

He had a courier going back and forth, but Al-Qaeda was not depending on Osama bin Laden for operational leadership. His day had come and gone. So he’s expendable. He was near death anyway from diabetes or something. He needed dialysis. So they give him up; they give up his location. We go in and SEAL Team 6 gets him. Obama puffs up. ‘I killed Osama! I did it! I killed him!’

He gets instant credibility and gives himself some political capital.”

Yeah, Rush. The president does get instant credibility and political capital for taking out the most wanted man in the world. George Bush would have gotten it if he was sitting-POTUS, and whoever’s next would have gotten it if they had caught bin Laden instead of President Obama. But that’s not the point, and you are sorely missing it.

Now it’s my turn to be full of opinions on the matter.

These US embassy attacks are horrifying, disturbing, wantonly violent, and completely unjustifiable. If anything, it is now more important that ever to identify the problem of extremist Islam, consider where it is being enabled, honestly ask ourselves whether it is bigger than we originally thought, identify the moderate Muslims caught in the crossfire, lift them up as examples and empower them to speak out against the oppression they experience within their own religion.

We do need to put our foot down, draw a line, and condemn violent attacks against our people and property.

And we could…

…if voices on the right weren’t crying conspiracy and voices on the left would find the stones to call the attacks what they are instead of making contrived excuses for an admittedly offensive film that we have no national responsibility for.

Rush Limbaugh Talks US Embassy Attacks, Adds Nothing To The Discussion [Op-Ed] is a post from: The Inquisitr

U.S. Marines who attempted to protect the American embassy in Egypt were faced with a big problem, they were not given access to live ammunition.

In multiple reports, including posts on several USMC blogs collected by kforcegov.com, Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit U.S. Marine guards to carry live ammunition.” At least one report claims “She neutralized any U.S. military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”

When asked about the live ammunition situation Time magazine’s Battlefield blog reported:

“Senior U.S. officials late Wednesday declined to discuss in detail the security at either Cairo or Benghazi, so answers may be slow in coming.”

If correct the move would be directly against the goal of protecting US sovereign soil. According to the report:

“She did not defend U.S. sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office. She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines.”

It is the right of U.S. ambassadors to determine if US Marines carry live ammunition. A course with the GOP national security advisers office tells the Free Beacon:

“In the end, the ambassador of any country has the final call on what to do in a country. The buck stops with you. You make every decision.”

That same source says security protocols typically change from one locale to another.

The Cairo informant quickly noted that the attack on the US embassy in Cairo took eight hours to complete and it would be hard to believe that nobody during that time questioned the chain of commands decision against live ammunition.

Marines At US Embassy In Egypt Were Not Given Live Ammo, USMC Blogs Claim is a post from: The Inquisitr

The anti-Islam Mohammed film that sparked deadly riots in Libya and Egypt was destined to spur on violence, filmmaker Sam Bacile says — and the man behind the film, who is now in hiding, feels that the US is to blame for lax security as furor grows over the movie’s content.

Bacile’s anti-Islam Mohammed film has been the subject of intense scrutiny and much outrage in the Middle East after the movie’s most offensive and inflammatory clips have been playing in rotation on local media stations and further fueling anger over the unflattering depiction of the prophet Mohammed in the film.

Bacile, who has been holed up in a secret location since the release of the anti-Islam Mohammed film, was well aware that violence typically breaks out when Mohammed is even depicted in the media — much less in an unflattering light comparing him to a “child-lover” and as sexually deviant.

In an interview after the deadly attack in Benghazi yesterday, Bacile expressed he was sorry about the death of US ambassador J. Christopher Stevens in Libya, but that the American government should be more cautious. Bacile explains:

“I feel the security system [at the embassies] is no good … America should do something to change it.”

Consultant on the film Steve Klein, who warned Bacile he would “be the next Theo van Gogh” (an artist killed after depicting Mohammed back in 2004), also says that those who created the film anticipated a potentially deadly response to the controversial work — Klein said:

“We went into this knowing this was probably going to happen.”

Do you believe there will be more deaths following the anti-Islam Mohammed film?

Anti-Islam Mohammed Film Creator Blames US For Lax Embassy Security In Ambassador’s Death, Says Violence Was Inevitable is a post from: The Inquisitr

Sam Bacile, the maker of the movie which allegedly attacks the Islam prophet Mohammad, went into hiding after the protests in Egypt and Libya. US Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three Foreign Service staffers were killed when a rocket propelled grenade hit their vehicle. Protesters are allegedly upset about the film’s trailer, which was posted on YouTube, according to CNN.

Bacile addressed the press by phone from an undisclosed location on Tuesday. The 56-year-old filmmaker remained defiant in his opposition to Islam, referring to the religion as a cancer and noting his movie is intended to be a provocative political condemnation of the faith, Yahoo News reports. He also hopes the motion picture will expose what he considers Islam’s flaws to the world and help his native land in the process.

Sam Bacile had this to say about his anti-Islam movie:

“This is a political movie. The US lost a lot of money and a lot of people in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we’re fighting with ideas. Islam is a cancer, period.”

The controversial movie’s writer and director describes himself as an Israeli Jew; he is also a California real estate developer. The two-hour film is entitled Innocence of Muslims and cost $5 million to produce. Bacile claims that more than 100 Jewish donors contributed to the making of the political flick.

The US consulate in Libya burned to the ground after protestors took control of the complex, starting small fires and shooting into buildings with machine guns. Protestors in Cairo climbed over the consulate walls, tore down the American flag, and replaced it with an Islamic banner.

Update: The original photo used in this story and the current photo are simply stills from the movie and not pictures of Sam Bacile who has been in hiding.

‘Innocence Of Muslims’ Filmmaker Sam Bacile In Hiding After The Attack On The US Embassy In Libya [Video] is a post from: The Inquisitr

9:20 am UPDATE – The US State Department just released the name of one of the staffers killed in the Libya attack, accordng to Fox News. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith was a husband and father of two. He worked for the department for 10 years. The names of the other victims will not be released until their families are notified. President Barack Obama will host a Rose Garden press conference at approximately 10:35 am.

The US ambassador to Libya and three embassy staffers were killed by a rocket propelled grenade in Benghazi. J. Christopher Stevens, 52, is said to have suffocated in the attack. Protesters in both Cairo and Benghazi are said to have been upset about a video made about the Prophet Muhammed, according to BBC reports.

Unidentified men attacked the embassy, throwing homemade bombs and shooting into buildings on the compound. Ambassador Stevens was being relocated to a safer area when the deadly attack occurred, Reuters notes. The names of the staffers killed in the attack have not yet been released.

According to the BBC, a militia group known as the Ansar al-Sharia is believed to have been involved in the attac, but the group is currently denying the accusations. The gunman initiated their attack late Tuesday evening, setting small fires around the embassy complex. An American contractor working in Libya told CNN that he saw the bodies of Stevens and the staffers on the street early Wednesday morning before they were transferred to the Central Hospital. The US Embassy sent a military plane to fly the remains back home to the United States.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had this to say about the attack:

“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the internet. The United States deplores any international effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But let me be clear, there is never any justification for violent acts of this kind. As the conflict in Libya unfolded, Chris was one of the first Americans on the ground in Benghazi. He risked his own life to lend the Libyan people a helping hand to build the foundation for a new, free nation.”

The video, which is said to have prompted the protests in Cairo and Benghazi, was created by Sam Bacile, 52, from California and an Egyptian expatriate. The low-budget production was posted on YouTube and translated into Arabic.

The diplomat began serving at the consulate in May; he also held two earlier posts in the country. Stevens had prior assignments in Saudia Arabia, Syria, and Egypt. Before joining the Foreign Service in 1991, he worked as an international trade attorney, Voice of America reports. During the early 1980s, he taught English in Morocco as a Peace Corps volunteer.

US Ambassador To Libya Killed, J. Christopher Stevens And Three Staffers Hit By RPG [Video] is a post from: The Inquisitr

COMMENTARY | An attack on the US Embassy in Egypt by ultraconservative Islamist protestors today didn’t exactly shock the world, but it should. It inspired an axiomatic apology, but from the wrong people. It drew a political line in the sand, but between two groups that shouldn’t be enemies.

Angry protesters scaled the walls of the US Embassy in Cairo today, pulling down the American flag and tearing it to pieces. In its place, they raised a black flag bearing a Muslim declaration of faith: “There is no god but God and Muhammad is his prophet,” it reads. The flag, as the Associated Press noted, is similar to the banner used by terrorist group Al Qaeda. Protestors chanted “Islamic, Islamic. The right of our prophet will not die,” and “Worshipers of the Cross, leave the Prophet Muhammad alone.”

Let’s attempt to understand the motives of the protestors.

The showing was reportedly a response to a film that portrays the prophet Muhammad, the key figure in Islam, as a fraud. The film shows the prophet engaging in sexual intercourse and encouraging massacres. This film is being circulated on the internet by a handful of people, most notably, Morris Sadek, an Egyptian-born Christian in the US, through his website, but it is currently unknown who originally made the film. The attack on the US embassy was terrifying, but the response to the attack, thus far, has been far more disturbing.

The US Embassy in Cairo released a statement following the demonstration, in which they condemned “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims,” and condemned “efforts to offend believers of all religions.”

“Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy,” the statement said. “We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”

Fair enough. Sort of.

The statement is problematic because it looks to be an apology. Furthermore, it feigns responsibility for the actions of a small sect (smaller so far than even we seem comfortable admitting) of one anti-Islamic group. Yes, the film in question is offensive to Muslims, and we make no excuses for it. But that’s the point. We don’t have to. It wasn’t made by us.

The US has shown strong support for Egypt over the past several years. We ideologically supported the Egyptian Revolution, the Arab Spring elections, and even offered our own endorsement of President Morsi, the newly elected head of what is supposed to be a newly reformed Egypt.

We apologize for an unabashed attack on our embassy? When our nation has done nothing to provoke a response like that? The eye-for-an-eye response isn’t evenly balanced. Not by a long sight.

But this isn’t an indictment of the protestors that dragged our flag into the mud and ripped it to shreds today. They have a right to be offended. But they’re misguided, and they took out their aggression on the wrong target. The US Embassy can objectively denounce the anti-Islamic film being passed around on the internet. But they have to condemn such a violent attack as well. An attack that could be considered an act of war, which brings me to my next point.

Where is the Egyptian government? Where are the moderate Muslims?

The onus doesn’t fall to the protestors to apologize or explain their actions, and it doesn’t fall to the US Embassy or the US government to apologize for our presence in the highly volatile middle east. It falls to the Egyptian government to condemn the actions of the protestors and apologize for such a hateful act by their own people on an institution that has no horse in the race regarding that anti-Islamic film.

They should apologize to us.

Mohammed al-Zawahiri, the brother of Al Qaeda’s leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, said of the incident that “we called for the peaceful protest joined by different Islamic factions including the Islamic Jihad, Hazem Abu Ismael movement.”

“We were surprised to see the big numbers show up including the soccer Ultra fans,” he said. “I just want to say, how would the Americans feel if films insulting leading Christian figures like the pope or historical figures like Abraham Lincoln were produced?” continuing, “the film portrays the prophet in a very ugly manner, eluding to topics like sex, which is not acceptable.”

What do you call invading the US Embassy and tearing down the American flag? Furthermore, what would you say about Christians, Jews, Sikhs, etc. if the mockery of their deities and religious figures resulted in such an embarrassing and violent display? Should we have heeded the advice of some that called for the US to completely distance itself from Egyptian support of any kind?

We should care. We shouldn’t apologize. We can condemn that anti-Islamist film, but we can’t ignore that old maxim “two wrongs don’t make a right,” and until some proof magically emerges that the US government was behind that film, we as a nation are not responsible for it. The attack on the US Embassy in Cairo was completely unprovoked by our nation, a nation that has supported Egypt in its tumultuous transition. This attack was a slap in the face, and we shouldn’t be afraid to say so.

Egypt US Embassy Attack: Why We Should Care And Why We Shouldn’t Apologize [Op-Ed] is a post from: The Inquisitr

Islamist demonstrators in Cairo, Egypt climbed the walls of the US Embassy today, tearing down the American flag in a protest against an anti-Muhammad video that they think came from us.

Hundreds of ultraconservative protestors were incensed over a video that attacks Islam’s prophet Muhammad, and marched to the embassy in downtown Cairo, chanting against the movie outside the embassy walls. The film, which was reportedly produced in the United States, angered the protestors so much that dozens of them scaled the embassy walls, and took down the American flag from a pole. They replaced it with a black flag bearing a Muslim declaration of faith: “There is no god but God and Muhammad is his prophet,” (the flag is similar to one used by Al Qaeda, notes the AP).

The video that sparked the outrage argues that Muhammad is a fraud, and shows him engaging in sexual intercourse and encouraging mass murder. Though it is unknown at this time who made it, several anti-Islam outlets and figures are promoting it, including Morris Sadek, an Egyptian-born Christian in the US, who is getting the film attention through his website. He said the video “explains the problems of the Copts who suffer from Muslims,” blaming the Koran specifically.

The Egyptian media has been reporting on the video for days, blaming Sadek for it, and ultraconservative clerics have gone on the air to denounce the film. Coptic Christians in the area have attempted to distance themselves from Sadek and the film. “He is an extremist … We don’t go down this road. He has incited the people (in Egypt) against Copts,” said Medhat Klada, a representative of Coptic Christian organizations in Europe. “We refuse any attacks on religions because of a moral position.”

What do you think of the Islamist protest at the US Embassy in Egypt? In the words of one of the protestors, is it a “very simple reaction to harming our prophet,” or is it genuinely frightening? Sound off!

Protestors In Egypt Scale US Embassy Walls, Tear Down American Flag is a post from: The Inquisitr

Archaeologists rummaging around in an ancient Egyptian palace made a grisly discovery – a cache of severed human hands, dating back thousands of years, seemingly confirming the practice of an ancient ritual.

Sixteen severed right hands were discovered by archaeologists in front of a Hyksos palace at Avaris (in modern-day Tell el-Daba), according to LiveScience. The remains were buried in four pits, two of them located in front of what was believed to be a throne room. Each of the “throne room pits” contained one hand each, while the other two held the remaining 14. And by the way, you have been reading this correctly – there are no left hands, only right.

Archaeologists believe that the discovery is evidence confirming a gruesome ancient Egyptian ritual. The idea is this: the right hands would have been chopped off and presented to the king, or one of his subordinates, in exchange for gold. The discovery is the first archaeological evidence of such a practice. Rubbing elbows with history, the remains have been dated back 3,600 years, while the palace in question was occupied by King Khayan. Historians believe that the Hyksos originated from northern Canaan, that they controlled a part of Egypt, and that their capital resided at Avaris on the Nile Delta.

Additionally, the size of the hands discovered is noteworthy. “Most of the hands are quite large and some of them are very large,” project and field director of the excavations Manfred Bietak said. The choice of the right hand is also significant, as it helps count victims accurately, reports Newser. It also bears a pointed symbolic meaning – taking away an enemy’s strength. “You deprive him of his power eternally,” Bietak explained.

Archaeologists Find Severed Hands in Egypt, Evidence Of Ancient Ritual is a post from: The Inquisitr

Islamist Mohamed Morsi has won the election for Egypt’s president, a closely contested runoff election. Both candidates who competed claimed early victory, and the delay in the official announcement held the nation’s nervous attention until official results were announced Sunday, reports the AP.

Morsi became Egypt’s Islamist president after narrowly defeating Hosni Mubarak’s last Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq in what amounted to the freest election the country has ever seen. The closely contested race raised political tensions all across Egypt, with Al Jazeera’s Live Blog tracking reactions to the predictions and results via Twitter in real time.

Egypt has had four presidents in the last 60 years. All of them have come up through the military, so the election of Morsi is at least historically significant in that this is the first time Egypt will be lead by a freely elected Islamist citizen. “Dr. Mohamed Morsi has won the presidency, and a new era in Egypt and the Arab world has begun,” said the official Muslim Brotherhood Twitter account moments after the announcement of Morsi’s victory. Supporters of Morsi supporters gathered in Cairo’s Tahrir Square cheered and danced after hearing the results read on live TV. Doves were released with Morsi’s picture through the same square where Egypt’s revolutionaries ousted Mubarak last year, reports Yahoo!.

“We got to this moment because of the blood of the martyrs of the revolution,” said Morsi’s spokesman Ahmed Abdel-Attie. “Egypt will start a new phase in its history.”

The election commission said that Morsi won with 51.7% of the vote while Shafiq got 48.3%. Turnout was 51% approximately.

This outcome will not automatically solve the tensions between the Muslim Brotherhood and military leaders who took control after Mubarak, while the country was supposed to transition into a democratic system. Still, it’s an important step, with the election commissioner calling Morsi’s election “an important phase in the end of building our nascent democratic experience.”

Muslim Brotherhood Candidate Mohamed Morsi Wins Egypt Election is a post from: The Inquisitr

Remember the Google guy who went missing in Egypt shortly after he began participating in protests to remove the now former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak from office?

It turns out Ghonim was safe, but had been detained by authorities for 11 days. He was finally released on February 7th, and remained in Egypt to continue protesting alongside other demonstrators to demand Mubarak step down. When news broke today that Mubarak planned to vacate the office and turn control of the country over to the Egyptian army, Ghonim tweeted:

They lied at us. Told us Egypt died 30 years ago, but millions of Egyptians decided to search and they found their country in 18 days #Jan25

Ghonim spoke to CNN about the role of social media in the Egyptian revolution, saying:

I want to meet Mark Zuckerberg one day and thank him… I’m talking on behalf of Egypt. This revolution started online. This revolution started on Facebook. This revolution started in June 2010 when hundreds of thousands of Egyptians started collaborating content. We would post a video on Facebook that would be shared by 60,000 people on their walls within a few hours. I always said that if you want to liberate a society just give them the Internet…. The reason why is the Internet will help you fight a media war, which is something the Egyptian government regime played very well in 1970, 1980, 1990, and when the Internet came along they couldn’t play it. I plan to write a book called Revolution 2.0… that will highlight the role of social media.

Pop-prognosticator Malcolm Gladwell has been attracting a lot of heat in the wake of the Egyptian revolution due to comments he made late last year that social media isn’t sufficient to precipitate actual political change. Do you think this situation proves otherwise?

Freed Google exec Ghonim thanks Facebook for role in Egyptian revolution is a post from: The Inquisitr

Google’s head of marketing for the Middle East and North Africa, Wael Ghonim, remains missing in Cairo, his Twitter feed having gone silent on January 27th.

Ghonim has been tweeting about participating in demonstrations, even sleeping on the streets of Cairo, and relatives and colleagues fear for his safety. Ghonim tweeted:

I said 1year ago that Internet will change the political scene in#Egypt and some friends made fun of me #Jan25

Hey @Gladwell, #Jan25 proved you wrong. Revolution can be a #Facebook event that is liked, shared & tweeted.http://nyr.kr/bYKeLq

Pray for #Egypt. Very worried as it seems that government is planning a war crime tomorrow against people. We are all ready to die #Jan25

Heading to Tahrir square now. Sleeping on the streets of Cairo, trying to feel the pain of millions of my fellow Egyptians. #Jan25

Ghonim’s final tweet was in reply to a user asking how his tweets were going through in the absence of internet in Egypt, to which he replied “proxy servers.” Google released a statement earlier this week, confirming Ghonim’s disappearance, and pleading for help in locating him:

A Googler, Wael Ghonim, is missing in Egypt. He has not been seen since late Thursday evening in central Cairo. The safety of our employees is very important to Google, so if anyone has any information please call the following U.K. number: 44 20 7031 3008.

The last confirmed sighting of Ghonim was nearly a week ago- at 9 am on Friday morning.

Google Exec still missing after participating in Egyptian protests is a post from: The Inquisitr

Making use of unrelated trending topics on Twitter to promote your business or personal tweets is behavior anyone with any Twitter courtesy knows to be spammy.

Using Twitter to shamelessly self-promote? That’s not really too looked down upon, depending on the proportion of plugging to other content. Using a catastrophic event where people have died, and hashtags are even being used to coordinate locals involved in unrest or in the midst of a disaster? That’s a bit more… gross.

Kenneth Cole, both a designer and a brand, is probably looking for a new social media coordinator after the above tweet appeared in their timeline a few hours back. (Habitat UK, a home furnishings brand, fell into the same trap in the summer of 2009.)

The tweet reads:

Millions are in uproar in #Cairo. Rumor is they heard our new spring collection is now available online at http://bit.ly/KCairo -KC

If you’re not a Twitter user, what makes the practice so offensive is that it’s not just a tone deaf crack about current events, nor an insensitive joke about world politics. It’s an attempt to piggyback off the popularity of an event in which people have died and gotten injured, Anderson Goddamn Cooper has gotten hit in the face and shit has essentially gotten very real, merely because it is one of the hashtags or terms displayed on everyone’s main page.

The part where everyone is mad at Kenneth Cole, or Kenneth Cole’s social media person, is pretty much over- Twitter has moved on to satirizing the poor taste of the Kenneth Cole Cairo tweet with the account- of course- @KennethColePR.

Kenneth Cole’s social media person gives inadvertent lesson on how to suck at Twitter is a post from: The Inquisitr