Arab Uprisings are not non-violent--and I am not apologizing about that

There needs to be an article written on this.  How Western liberals projected their own harmful (politically) wishes on Arab political conduct in recent months.  They promoted the notion that Arab people were inspired by Gene Sharp or Martin Luther King and that they so strictly adhered to non-violence.  So untrue.  Comrade Hossam wrote on Egyptian case, how the revolt in Suez for example was an armed insurrection.  People in Tahrir square are still calling for execution of Mubarak and his cronies.  Look around the Arab world: where are the non-violent protests?  Some protests are non-violent--like in Yemen--but other elements of the opposition in Yemen have (and use) artillery pieces.   Arab peoples have decided to try to overthrow their governments, by all means necessary.  The notion that there is a firm belief in non-violence is folly, and I am not apologizing about it, because they believe that against the violence of Arab regimes, and Israel and its sponsors, violence against enemies can't be ruled out.   And notice that when Arabs use violence against regimes that US dislike (as in Libya), the US is impressed and is willing to lend a hand of violence. But when Hizbullah in May 6, 2008, revolted against a conspiracy by pro-Saudi March 14, the US screamed for months about the inappropriateness of violence in opposition.  Of course, the US is only fooling those who don't follow the news--i.e. Americans.