Egypt | Army Ousts Mursi govt, violence erupts | News & Discussions

[MooshMoosh]

Egyptian army fired live bullets and people stopped fled their prayers. They took it too far.

 

[MooshMoosh]

Kicked a Pro Morsi supporter out of the car with supplies for the supporters and burnt it.

 

[Imran Khan]

He is highly respected in Pakistan too.

yes largest mosque in pakistan king faysal mosque

he visit many visits to pakistan

in lahore

with ayoub khan

faysalabad pakistani city on his name

Faisal road karachi

 

[MooshMoosh]

A clear view

 

[Imran Khan]

A clear view

intolerant nation can't accept defeat in election and start war for results lolzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[kalu_miah]

A clear view

Thanks for the great videos.

What is the role of Coptic Christians in the recent protest and Army coup?

 

[kalu_miah]

Islam, democracy and soldiers: Egypt

Egypt’s tragedy

Muhammad Morsi was incompetent, but his ouster should be cause for regret, not celebration
Jul 6th 2013 |From the print edition

WHEN Muhammad Morsi was elected president of Egypt a year ago, this newspaper was wary. As fervent supporters of liberal democracy, we are uncomfortable with the belief of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mr Morsi’s party, that politics are subsidiary to religion, and are downright hostile to the attitudes towards women and minorities that pervade the Islamist movement. We would have preferred the secularists who led Egypt’s revolution to have won. Yet we recognised that Mr Morsi’s 52% of the vote—a stronger endorsement than Barack Obama got five months later—gave him the right to rule. And, most of all, we were delighted that after 30 years of dictatorship, Egypt was on its way to becoming a democracy.

That is why we regard the events of the past few days with trepidation. Mr Morsi’s ouster by a combination of street power and soldiers sets a dreadful precedent for the region. The army, which is in part responsible for the situation, must start Egypt on the path towards new elections as swiftly as possible, or the prospects for the country will be bleak.

Post-Morsem

Mr Morsi’s rule started unravelling when crowds massed in the streets of Egypt’s cities on June 30th, the first anniversary of his time in power. The protests turned violent; the Brotherhood’s headquarters were burned; 48 people have died. On July 1st, the army gave Mr Morsi 48 hours to resolve his dispute with his opponents. Mr Morsi responded by defending his legitimacy and refusing to step down. On July 3rd, the chief of army staff, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, announced that the constitution had been suspended. Mr Morsi was taken into military custody.

Most of the blame for the disaster that has befallen Egyptian democracy lies with Mr Morsi. The very size of the protests—some estimates claim that as many as 14m took to the streets—shows that his opponents were not a small bunch of discontents. Most of the country seems to have turned against him. One reason for that is his incompetence. He did nothing to rescue the economy from looming collapse. The Egyptian pound and foreign exchange reserves have both dwindled, inflation is rising and unemployment among those under 24 is more than 40%. The IMF has despaired of agreeing on a big loan that would have opened the way to others. In the broiling summer heat, electricity cuts have become maddeningly frequent. Queues for petrol have lengthened. Farmers are often not being paid for their wheat. Crime has soared—the murder rate has tripled since the revolution.

The Brothers’ failure to include a wide range of views in its first government was even more foolish. Egypt, at the best of times, is hard to govern because society is polarised. Secular-minded and better-educated Egyptians generally want the country to be dragged into a modern, pluralistic and outward-looking world. A more conservative and religious stratum looks to political Islam rather than socialism or capitalism as the answer to centuries of injustice, inequality and corruption. In addition, Egypt has a large and nervous minority of Christians, perhaps a tenth of the populace of 84m, along with a much smaller minority of Shia Muslims, both of whom have been rattled by an Islamist government.

Instead of trying to build up the independent institutions—the courts, the media, a neutral civil service, army and police—that check the power of government in mature democracies, Mr Morsi did his best to undermine them. He legislated through a senate that was elected by only 10% of the voters. He made false, inept or cowardly choices at every turn, finagling constitutional issues, pushing fellow Brothers into key appointments and feeding the secularists’ fears that his brethren were determined, by hook or by crook, to Islamise every aspect of society. He stayed silent when bigots and thugs threatened and attacked religious minorities. He allowed foreigners working for advocacy groups promoting human rights and democracy to be hounded, prosecuted and convicted (most of them in absentia) on patently false charges.

That so many Egyptians should wish to get rid of Mr Morsi is therefore entirely understandable. That they have succeeded in doing so could well turn out to be a disaster, and not just for Egypt.

The precedent that Mr Morsi’s ouster sets for other shaky democracies is a terrible one. It will encourage the disaffected to try to eject governments not by voting them out but by disrupting their rule. It will create an incentive for oppositions all over the Arab world to pursue their agendas on the streets, not in parliaments. It thus will reduce the chance of peace and prosperity across the region.

It also sends a dreadful message to Islamists everywhere. The conclusion they will draw from events in Egypt is that, if they win power in elections, their opponents will use non-democratic means to oust them. So if they are allowed to come to office, they will very likely do their damnedest to cement their power by fair means or foul. Crush your opponents could well be their motto.

How to make it less bad

That damage is done, and cannot be undone. But there are better, and worse, ways for the story to unfold. If the army holds on to power, then Egypt will be back where it was before Hosni Mubarak was ousted—but without the hope that prevails before revolution has been tried and has failed. If the army announces a timetable for elections and sticks to it, then Egypt has a chance. The soldiers will need to make credible promises to the Islamists that if they win (which, given their performance over the past year, the Brothers are unlikely to) they will be allowed to take power. Persuading them of that will be hard: holding an election quickly would help.

Egypt’s army played a pivotal role in the revolution, standing by while people power pushed Mr Mubarak out. It still has the trust of many Egyptians, who are still inclined to turn towards it in times of crisis. If the generals are to repay that trust, they must get the country back on the path towards democracy as swiftly as possible.

From the print edition: Leaders

 

[Frogman]

1) I hope you did take a look at the new constitution as approved by the 64% of the people. I did read the basics of the Constitution. It does assert human right to dignity, life, and pursuit of happiness in general.

64% out of 20% of 51 million registered voters. So basically Egypt got a constitution that was supported by just over 10% of the Egyptian public after a scandalous and disgraceful campaign not based upon the constitutions merits but on the (supposed) character and religions of those who oppose it.

Most of the clauses in the Egyptian constitution weren't that bad but there's a select few that could be left to the interpretation of governments. But, this still wasn't the greatest problem. The problem was that many religious factions and parties of differing ideologies left the constitutional assembly as a protest to how the constitution was being written (majority vote, ignoring the minority) and how the Islamist parties were dominating the assembly. So, to begin with the constitution was illegitimate. This lead to the constitutional court deciding that the constitutional assembly should be dissolved and a new one drafted. Dr. Morsi then decided to release the constitutional decree to stop this and push the constitution through while his minions (or the supreme guides minions) surrounded the constitutional court to delay the decision to dissolve the assembly.

2) You actually have evidence to show that Morsi ordered MB to surround the supreme court ?

The MB is a hierarchical organization, so, any decision to protest or surround any court is made by their leadership and not a spontaneous act. The same people who decided to surround the constitutional court are now those who fill some of Egypt's streets calling for Morsis return.

3) I don't recall reading any U.S sate department release noting that opponents are being put to jail by the thousands.
I will just add MB took the brunt of the Sadat and Mubarak regimes political tortures. They do have a few axes to grind.

Egypt: Activist faces jail sentence on bogus charges | Amnesty International

Egypt clamps down on well-known opposition figures | World news | guardian.co.uk

Egyptian activist arrested in Cairo after meeting with officials in Washington | FP Passport

There are many more. Most have not been publicized due to the image (how big they are) of some of the opposition.

The MB bore the brunt of a crackdown because they were the source of terrorist attacks that indiscriminately killed anyone in the attacks vicinity and famously killed a populist leader. Mubarak was afraid they were going to oust him and so he cracked down on them.

4) Violance between Copts and some Muslim in certain regions is nothing new. The guy does not have a magic wand to wave and solve the ills of the society.

Yes, but he does have the power to condemn these attacks and not be in the presence of clerics who call for sectarian violence (and say nothing) as he did in that farce of a conference that called for state sponsored Jihadis to go to Syria.

5) They are the most known and the biggest party. This is what they gained in return for torture and murder by the Mubarak like regimes for decades. They simply earned it. You gotta face'em politically to lessen their hold.

No, their political gains are a result of their organization and the ability to mobilize many as a result of their grass roots tactics.

They also failed to meet their social contract with the people. Such things as a government made up of many political and religious figures never materialized (only power grabs occurred) as did many other promises for an inclusive regime.The military spent six months trying to hold reconciliation talks the presidency refused all of them.

I was hoping you would point more specific examples, laws or statues that deemed so tyrannical in nature. What you wrote is very common in nascent democracy, this is how everywhere it starts.

The presidency itself didn't respect the constitution and common law or the judiciary. Would you expect the citizens of that nation to do the same. There was nothing tyrannical in nature, however, there was an absence of clauses that could prohibit tyranny. Basically, an absence of checks and balances on governmental power. There was also an absence of clauses which dealt with mass protests which withdraw the legitimacy from a president or government and then provide a constitutional process which can lead to a transitional phase or compromise.

You have no idea how the two ladies ( the PM and the opposition chief) in Bangladesh acts after being at it for more than two decades since the early 90s.

1) Hasina Govt just took down the trusted interim care-taking govt that serves between general elections against the wishes of the people.

2) She shuts down buses, trains or other public transportation so oppostion can't do what you did in Tahir square.

3) Her regimes just simply pick-up opposition leaders never to be seen again.

4) She recently killed hundreds of opposition activists using the state apparatuses.

I can go on and on. But thats just how it is in the Representative form Govt taking baby steps. It takes decades to build these institutions.

Re-valuate the principles of democracy and you would see that the movements in Egypt were democratic. Every nation is different, one nation may welcome a particular action while another may condemn it.

 

[kalu_miah]

64% out of 20% of 51 million registered voters. So basically Egypt got a constitution that was supported by just over 10% of the Egyptian public after a scandalous and disgraceful campaign not based upon the constitutions merits but on the (supposed) character and religions of those who oppose it.

Most of the clauses in the Egyptian constitution weren't that bad but there's a select few that could be left to the interpretation of governments. But, this still wasn't the greatest problem. The problem was that many religious factions and parties of differing ideologies left the constitutional assembly as a protest to how the constitution was being written (majority vote, ignoring the minority) and how the Islamist parties were dominating the assembly. So, to begin with the constitution was illegitimate. This lead to the constitutional court deciding that the constitutional assembly should be dissolved and a new one drafted. Dr. Morsi then decided to release the constitutional decree to stop this and push the constitution through while his minions (or the supreme guides minions) surrounded the constitutional court to delay the decision to dissolve the assembly.

The MB is a hierarchical organization, so, any decision to protest or surround any court is made by their leadership and not a spontaneous act. The same people who decided to surround the constitutional court are now those who fill some of Egypt's streets calling for Morsis return.

Egypt: Activist faces jail sentence on bogus charges | Amnesty International

Egypt clamps down on well-known opposition figures | World news | guardian.co.uk

Egyptian activist arrested in Cairo after meeting with officials in Washington | FP Passport

There are many more. Most have not been publicized due to the image (how big they are) of some of the opposition.

The MB bore the brunt of a crackdown because they were the source of terrorist attacks that indiscriminately killed anyone in the attacks vicinity and famously killed a populist leader. Mubarak was afraid they were going to oust him and so he cracked down on them.

Yes, but he does have the power to condemn these attacks and not be in the presence of clerics who call for sectarian violence (and say nothing) as he did in that farce of a conference that called for state sponsored Jihadis to go to Syria.

No, their political gains are a result of their organization and the ability to mobilize many as a result of their grass roots tactics.

They also failed to meet their social contract with the people. Such things as a government made up of many political and religious figures never materialized (only power grabs occurred) as did many other promises for an inclusive regime.The military spent six months trying to hold reconciliation talks the presidency refused all of them.

The presidency itself didn't respect the constitution and common law or the judiciary. Would you expect the citizens of that nation to do the same. There was nothing tyrannical in nature, however, there was an absence of clauses that could prohibit tyranny. Basically, an absence of checks and balances on governmental power. There was also an absence of clauses which dealt with mass protests which withdraw the legitimacy from a president or government and then provide a constitutional process which can lead to a transitional phase or compromise.

Re-valuate the principles of democracy and you would see that the movements in Egypt were democratic. Every nation is different, one nation may welcome a particular action while another may condemn it.

You cannot call a coup by Army a democratic step, that is true for any country in the world.

Egyptian constitutional referendum, 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unofficial results reported on 23 December 2012 found that 32.9% of the electorate voted and that the constitution was approved with 63.8% of the vote in favor over the two rounds of polling.[6]

Why did only 32.9% of electorate voted? If enough of the opposing side came to vote no, the constitution could easily be defeated and a new one could be worked on, no? That would be a proper democratic step, instead of this "protest" supporting and calling for a coup by the Army. Egyptian democracy has now become a joke, I am sorry to say.

 

[Frogman]

You cannot call a coup by Army a democratic step, that is true for any country in the world.

The MB had no intentions of building a democratic process in Egypt. To them democracy is an event that happens every four years not a continuous process.

The result still stands above ten-twenty percent of the Egyptian electorate, however, the constitution was illegitimate even before being put to a referendum.

The army did not act out of its own accord. It accepted the call of over 17+ million protesters calling for presidential elections and using their only standing democratic institution to call for this, the street. If the elected house of parliament was still standing then that could have been used to influence the government and the presidency, however, it isn't so what else did protesters have that they could use for their voices to be heard except the street.

Why did only 32.9% of electorate voted? If enough of the opposing side came to vote no, the constitution could easily be defeated and a new one could be worked on, no? That would be a proper democratic step, instead of this "protest" supporting and calling for a coup by the Army. Egyptian democracy has now become a joke.

A combination of voter fatigue and apathy as well as wide boycotts. The opposition in the streets over the past week were not only those who opposed the MB since Morsi was elected. The ordinary Egyptian man and woman who had no ideological beliefs or affiliations were what made these protests so big (many of whom voted for Morsi and were sympathetic to the MB). The presidency rejected any amendments(to the constitution) until the day before Morsi was removed (that in itself says something doesn't it).

Democracy is more than a ballot in plastic box.

 

[Jihad_]

Elbaradei appointed as Egypt's interim PM - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

"One of the protesters here said that the appointment of ElBaradei is a move directed at appeasing the United States and that he served them well, allowing for the invasion of Iraq when he was in the IAEA and will now be their puppet again - we all know he is a puppet.

"Another person said that ElBaradei was even too scared to nominate himself in the elections. That's how little support he has - he needed the army to put him in office. So to sum up the mood here: it is rejection, anger and dismissal," Elshayyal said.

 

[Devil Soul]

An Egyptian protester's body lays on the ground after being shot in front of the Republican Guards headquarters

A protester's body lays on the ground after being shot by the army in front of the Republican Guards

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Go to hell morsi

 

[kalu_miah]

The MB had no intentions of building a democratic process in Egypt. To them democracy is an event that happens every four years not a continuous process.

The result still stands above ten-twenty percent of the Egyptian electorate, however, the constitution was illegitimate even before being put to a referendum.

The army did not act out of its own accord. It accepted the call of over 17+ million protesters calling for presidential elections and using their only standing democratic institution to call for this, the street. If the elected house of parliament was still standing then that could have been used to influence the government and the presidency, however, it isn't so what else did protesters have that they could use for their voices to be heard except the street.

A combination of voter fatigue and apathy as well as wide boycotts. The opposition in the streets over the past week were not only those who opposed the MB since Morsi was elected. The ordinary Egyptian man and woman who had no ideological beliefs or affiliations were what made these protests so big (many of whom voted for Morsi and were sympathetic to the MB). The presidency rejected any amendments(to the constitution) until the day before Morsi was removed (that in itself says something doesn't it).

Democracy is more than a ballot in plastic box.

You are right Democracy is definitely more than a ballot box, it is all about empowering people and collectively deciding the future steps.

Lets analyze where things went wrong. Morsi made mistakes. Constitution referendum was boycotted by many people.

Now Army can take the following steps very quickly to restore civilian democratic rule:

1. Bring together all political parties and groups to write a new constitution, and make sure that constitution has a clause that referendum must have a minimum participation rate of lets say 67% (2/3) of the electorate

2. Another clause could be that of impeaching non-performing Presidents in a referendum, and according to this clause, a referendum could be held to impeach Morsi. If impeachment fails then Morsi would be reinstated

More than anything else, the basic fundamental covenant in a democracy is the constitution that at least 67% or two thirds majority (or higher) agree on and the Armed forces are duty bound to protect this constitution as their first loyalty, not any particular political party or religion.

 

[farag]

Pakistanis are so naive. If you grow beard and say Islam ummah, they will believe in you.