The Return to Authoritarianism in Egypt

19 December 2013 Last updated at 01:19

Egyptians fear return to authoritarianism

Egyptian protesters set fire to wood at Talaat Harb Square in Cairo at a protest against military trials for civilians (26 November 2013)

There is growing concern about a return to authoritarianism in Egypt, where the military-installed authorities have cracked down on freedom of speech, stifled protests, and arrested activists. Almost three years after the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, the BBC's Orla Guerin looks at what has become of the revolution.

Ahmad Harara is seldom seen without his Ray-Ban sunglasses. But for the 33-year old former dentist, they are not a style statement.

When he lifts them up, it is to reveal two unseeing eyes - the left one a prosthetic. It bears an inscription - "hurriya", the Arabic word for freedom.

It was the fight for freedom that cost him his sight, one eye at a time.

Mr Harara was shot in the face twice in 2011, both times by police he says.
Ahmad Harara In spite of his injuries, Ahmad Harara is determined to fight the military's "counter-revolution"

Shot-gun pellets destroyed his right eye on 28 January, a few days after the mass protests against Mr Mubarak began.

He lost his left eye to a sniper that November.
[The army] has ruled here since 1952 and doesn't see the need to change because some young people took to the streets”

"I am not the person who has paid the highest price," he says over Turkish coffee and cigarette at Cairo's Cafe Riche, where coffee and dissent have brewed for more than a century.

"There are others who had much more serious injuries," he adds, "and they are carrying on."

In spite of his injuries, he too is carrying on.

He is still fighting the regime that plunged him into darkness, which he says has not been overthrown yet.

"The system remains the same," he explains. "The army is maintaining its position. No-one holds it to account. No-one monitors it. On the contrary, it has taken more privileges."

"It has ruled here since 1952 and doesn't see the need to change because some young people took to the streets."

Youths are still taking to the streets here, braving tear gas, water cannon and the threat of deadly force, though these days the crowds are much smaller.

A draconian new law has all but banned demonstrations.

Human rights campaigners say it is at attempt to claw back one of the key gains of the revolution - the freedom to speak out.

Dozens of liberal activists have been arrested challenging the law, but many believe it is aimed mainly at supporters of the ousted president, Mohammed Morsi, and his Muslim Brotherhood.
Detentions

The revolution brought the Islamist organisation to power, but not for long.

Mr Morsi lasted only a year as Egypt's first freely-elected civilian president.

He was removed by the military in July in a popular-backed coup. Though officials still vehemently dispute that definition.
In August, the authorities violently dispersed two pro-Morsi sit-ins, killing hundreds of his supporters.
Since then, thousands more have been detained - including many senior leaders of the Brotherhood.
Brotherhood defiant
So many of the Brothers are behind bars that we turned to some of the Sisters.

We met a trio making house calls in the sprawling Cairo district of Nasr City.

They were led by Wafaa Hefny, a tall and chatty university professor who seemed unfazed by the current crackdown.
"I never give up," she said. "I get that from my grandfather."
It was her grandfather, Hassan al-Banna, who founded the Brotherhood in 1928.

Ms Hefny insisted the organisation was at its best in a crisis, and was adapting.
"The upper part, all of it is gone," she said.
"In every district the first level and the second level and some of the third level have gone, but everybody has been upgraded. We don't have any free positions," she added with a laugh.
We joined her on a visit to a young widow, Alshaimaa Abdallah, whose husband Mahmoud was killed in August during one of the sit-ins.

Ms Abdullah welcomed us, dressed head to toe in black.
She emphasised that her husband was not a member of the Brotherhood, just "a devoted Muslim, defending Islam". But she said she and her family would now be happy to join the Brotherhood.
Alshaimaa Abdallah and her children Alshaimaa Abdallah remains optimistic about Egypt and her children's futures
The articulate former teacher has become a lone parent of three.
Her son Abdul Rahman, who is nearly four, hovered by her chair. He still saves part of every meal for his father, who he thinks is away on a trip.
When I asked what kind of future she saw for Egypt, her response was a surprise.
"I'm really optimistic," she said firmly, insisting that the nation would not be divided.
"It's very hard to separate us. People in every neighbourhood are very close to each other, even if they are different politically."

Cult of Sisi

But a painful, scarring polarisation may be one of the clearest outcomes of the uprising in Egypt.
And it is no surprise that here, in the land of the pharaohs, there is hunger for stability and for a new strong leader.
Enter the coup hero, Gen Abdul Fattah al-Sisi - the army chief who removed an elected president and looks set to replace him.
A street vendor sells posters of Gen Abdul Fattah al-Sisi in Cairo (19 November 2013) Many Egyptians share the belief that Gen Abdul Fattah al-Sisi averted a civil war
If he runs for president next year - and the latest indications are that he will - the general can expect to win by a landslide.

In Tahrir Square, where crowds overthrew one military ruler, we met a group of demonstrators clamouring for another.
"We love you Sisi," they chanted, in the place where protestors demanded freedom and democracy in 2011.
"He is a crown on the heads of Egyptians," said an elderly man. "He helped us avoid seas of blood."
There are many here who share the belief that the general averted a civil war by removing Mr Morsi.
Such is the cult of Sisi that his face pops up on cooking oil bottles, pyjamas, take-away menus, and sweets.
Trays of Sisi chocolates get pride of place among the cupcakes and macaroons in the Kakao Chocolate Lounge, a cafe popular with diplomats. The owner says the bite-sized Sisis are a bestseller.

Diminishing hope

But for many who fought to end the long reign of Mr Mubarak, all this leaves a very bitter taste.
"The military regime is the counter-revolution," says Mr Harara. "They are still trying to control the country. They cheated us."
There is a real sense here that the revolution is unfinished business.

Though two presidents have been removed in three years, the old order has not been completely swept away.
The army remains the real power here, and much of the hope for a new Egypt has been erased.
The country is not much different from before the revolution, according to Tamara Alrifai of Human Rights Watch.
"Freedom of expression seems worse than before 2011," she says.
"There's very little space for opposition media, and there is a campaign of arrests and disappearances of anyone who dares to defy the current climate. It's disappointing to see that we are almost back where we started three years ago."

'Another Mubarak'

Elections are coming to the most populous Arab nation.
Next year Egyptians will vote for a new constitution, president and parliament.
That may look like progress towards democracy, but experts warn it may be anything but.
"Sisi controls the police, the army, the judiciary and the media," a seasoned Cairo analyst told me.
"He is popular and he will get votes," she said. "The fear is that once he is in power, he will never be out. He could be another Mubarak."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25433094


Well Irn, unfortunately exactly what we predicted, practically word for word. Very sad.

It's Egypt - nobody cares.

It's Egypt, lots of people care, just not you.

Well what is worse here an Islamic fundamentalist party that tried to send the country years backwards or a corrupt Military run country that is going to allow elections next year.

Very simple choice really to make really for the people of Egypt to make. They ousted the Muslim Brotherhood with good reason.

Rubbish, they ousted them because the military will not give up power.

Has the military administration set a definite date for elections?  

I do agree that you don't want an Islamic theocracy, as they have in Iran or the Taliban.  Or, Saudi Arabia, for that matter.  A theocracy can only be anti-democratic...you can't serve two masters.  It'd be like having the Westboro Baptist Church controlling Congress.

Haha...wait a minute, maybe that's what the US has.

Sassy wrote:Rubbish, they ousted them because the military will not give up power.

I thought the army ousted Mubarak did they not?

Was that wrong of them to do so?


I agree with Cambridge on you cannot have a theocracy as a democracy!

No the Army did not oust Mubarak, Murbarak was their man, the people ousted him.

So, you both agree coups are ok, even if a party has been properly elected, and you wouldn't mind Didge, if Cameron was ousted in a coup by people who don't like him, because there are more don't like him that do, and after all, you agree with coups.

That's the reason why you hold constitutional questions sacrosanct and inviolable over mere political ebb and flow.

Yes, if the in-power party is violating the constitution, they should be ousted.  In the US that is what impeachment is for regarding federal authority.  This debate has gone on before and is centuries old.  

In Egypt it falls to the military...which admittedly carries serious risk with it.  But, in the US, Eisenhower had to send the National Guard into the South to enforce the holdings of Brown v. Bd. of Education of Wichita, KS.   It's been done before.

Sassy wrote:No the Army did not oust Mubarak, Murbarak was their man, the people ousted him.

So, you both agree coups are ok, even if a party has been properly elected, and you wouldn't mind Didge, if Cameron was ousted in a coup by people who don't like him, because there are more don't like him that do, and after all, you agree with coups.

No the Army ousted him

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/egypt.html?_r=0

Were you fine with that?

CAIRO — An 18-day-old revolt led by the young people of Egypt ousted President Hosni Mubarak on Friday, shattering three decades of political stasis here and overturning the established order of the
Moises Saman for The New York Times

A group of Egyptians who said they had been staying near Tahrir Square in Cairo since Jan. 25, the first day of the uprising, reacted to the news of President Hosni Mubarak’s ouster on Friday.
Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Read All Comments (943) »

Shouts of “God is great” erupted from Tahrir Square at twilight as Mr. Mubarak’s vice president and longtime intelligence chief, Omar Suleiman, announced that Mr. Mubarak had passed all authority to a council of military leaders.

Tens of thousands who had bowed down for evening prayers leapt to their feet, bouncing and dancing in joy. “Lift your head high, you’re an Egyptian,” they cried. Revising the tense of the revolution’s rallying cry, they chanted, “The people, at last, have brought down the regime.”

“We can breathe fresh air, we can feel our freedom,” said Gamal Heshamt, a former independent member of Parliament. “After 30 years of absence from the world, Egypt is back.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/world/middleeast/12egypt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Still does not answer my question.

Were you fine with the army ousting Mubarak, as it was the army that did this ?

Sassy wrote:Rubbish, they ousted them because the military will not give up power.

They ousted them because of what they did in the short time they were in power, clearly in violation of all the promises they made to get elected. It was the people's wish to be rid of them - that's called democracy.

Semantic argument.  There were multiple causes.  The military delivered the final stroke.

Are we talking about Morsi or Hosni-Mubarak?

Veritas wrote:

Sassy wrote:Rubbish, they ousted them because the military will not give up power.

They ousted them because of what they did in the short time they were in power, clearly in violation of all the promises they made to get elected.  It was the people's wish to be rid of them - that's called democracy.

Oh good, coups are all right and I can arrange to have Cameron ousted and put in prison for his crimes against the poor and disabled. Whoopee!!!!!

Sassy wrote:

Veritas wrote:
They ousted them because of what they did in the short time they were in power, clearly in violation of all the promises they made to get elected.  It was the people's wish to be rid of them - that's called democracy.

Oh good, coups are all right and I can arrange to have Cameron ousted and put in prison for his crimes against the poor and disabled.   Whoopee!!!!!

If you have enough people, give it a go, though you might end up getting lots of people killed for starting a coup based on a lie.

No a lie, the total truth. Brilliant, lets give it a go.

Sassy wrote:No a lie, the total truth.   Brilliant, lets give it a go.

Really, what charges have been brought against him either by any of the populace or the UN?

Now many people think Blair is a war criminal, why did you not start a coup then?

Sassy wrote:

Veritas wrote:
They ousted them because of what they did in the short time they were in power, clearly in violation of all the promises they made to get elected.  It was the people's wish to be rid of them - that's called democracy.

Oh good, coups are all right and I can arrange to have Cameron ousted and put in prison for his crimes against the poor and disabled.   Whoopee!!!!!

Well that's pretty much what Morsi did as soon as he got in power:

"Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has sacked the entire leadership of the country's defense establishment....The Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi appears to be wasting no time in consolidating his hold over power at the expense of the military, which many hoped would be a moderating power over him. It remains to be seen how the military and the Egyptian street react to Morsi's moves. Al Jazeera said the president's spokesperson made the surprising announcement on state television. "All of this has happened very fast, and it was unexpected," said the station's correspondent..."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158831

He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election - there's a great difference between peacetime UK and wartime Egypt!

Sassy wrote:

Veritas wrote:
They ousted them because of what they did in the short time they were in power, clearly in violation of all the promises they made to get elected.  It was the people's wish to be rid of them - that's called democracy.

Oh good, coups are all right and I can arrange to have Cameron ousted and put in prison for his crimes against the poor and disabled.   Whoopee!!!!!

Are you claiming a constitutional status for mere legislation?  Serious question: Does Britain even have a constitution?

I think that's what is confusing Sassy. You have no experience with a constitution.

No, Britain doesn't have a constitution. How do you know what experience I have had with constitution. Don't pull the big I AM, it won't work.

Veritas wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Oh good, coups are all right and I can arrange to have Cameron ousted and put in prison for his crimes against the poor and disabled.   Whoopee!!!!!

Well that's pretty much what Morsi did as soon as he got in power:

"Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has sacked the entire leadership of the country's defense establishment....The Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi appears to be wasting no time in consolidating his hold over power at the expense of the military, which many hoped would be a moderating power over him.  It remains to be seen how the military and the Egyptian street react to Morsi's moves. Al Jazeera said the president's spokesperson made the surprising announcement on state television. "All of this has happened very fast, and it was unexpected," said the station's correspondent..."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158831

He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election - there's a great difference between peacetime UK and wartime Egypt!

He sacked them because they were all Murabak's men. You do realise the Morsi's power was very limited don't you?

Sassy wrote:

Veritas wrote:

Well that's pretty much what Morsi did as soon as he got in power:

"Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has sacked the entire leadership of the country's defense establishment....The Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi appears to be wasting no time in consolidating his hold over power at the expense of the military, which many hoped would be a moderating power over him.  It remains to be seen how the military and the Egyptian street react to Morsi's moves. Al Jazeera said the president's spokesperson made the surprising announcement on state television. "All of this has happened very fast, and it was unexpected," said the station's correspondent..."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158831

He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election - there's a great difference between peacetime UK and wartime Egypt!

He sacked them because they were all Murabak's men.   You do realise the Morsi's power was very limited don't you?

That makes it okay then?

I think you are missing the point of Morsi doing exactly the same.

One rule for one, another rule for someone else!

Limited did you say, was that why he tried to go above everyone and increase his powers over everyone and everything until the people again stood up?

What? Oh do learn about Egypt and the way it runs. Presidents do not have the same power and he was freely elected. You are the one saying its ok to oust someone who is freely elected. Murabak stood down.

Sassy wrote:

Veritas wrote:

Well that's pretty much what Morsi did as soon as he got in power:

"Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has sacked the entire leadership of the country's defense establishment....The Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi appears to be wasting no time in consolidating his hold over power at the expense of the military, which many hoped would be a moderating power over him.  It remains to be seen how the military and the Egyptian street react to Morsi's moves. Al Jazeera said the president's spokesperson made the surprising announcement on state television. "All of this has happened very fast, and it was unexpected," said the station's correspondent..."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158831

He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election - there's a great difference between peacetime UK and wartime Egypt!

He sacked them because they were all Murabak's men.   You do realise the Morsi's power was very limited don't you?

His time was limited because the people had had enough! A military coup is usually an autonomous action by the military - in this case it was done at with the wishes of the general populace. Big difference

Sassy wrote:What?   Oh do learn about Egypt and the way it runs.   Presidents do not have the same power and he was freely elected.   You are the one saying its ok to oust someone who is freely elected.   Murabak stood down.

I am very well versed in history which means I understand very well how systems run as well.
Try answering the points

Limited did you say, was that why he tried to go above everyone and increase his powers over everyone and everything until the people again stood up?

Morsi To Be Tried For International Conspiracy, Terrorist Acts - Could Face Death Penalty

Egypt’s top prosecutor Wednesday referred toppled Islamist president Mohammed Morsi to trial on charges he conspired with the Palestinian group Hamas, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and others to carry out a campaign of terrorist violence to destabilize the country after his ouster. The charges, which carry a potential death penalty, are the most sweeping and heaviest accusations yet in charges levelled against the Brotherhood.

The new trial of Mr. Morsi, the three top Brotherhood leaders and 32 others appeared aimed at decisively crippling the top echelons of the group that dominated Egypt’s politics during his one-year presidency.

http://news.yahoo.com/ousted-egypt-president-tried-conspiracy-160403173.html

PhilDidge wrote:Still does not answer my question.

Were you fine with the army ousting Mubarak, as it was the army that did this ?

The army were the people with the guns and it was the people that empowered them to throw Mubarak and his cronies out of power. If it wasn't for the people demonstrating then the army would have done nothing.

It was the peoples revolution and any suggestion that the army were the driving force behind removing Mubarak would be denying the people the given right to claim it was their actions that brought about the removal of the corrupt military rulers and their cronies.

And now it's been thrown back in their face. But that's life under the Egyptian military.

Sassy wrote:What?   Oh do learn about Egypt and the way it runs.   Presidents do not have the same power and he was freely elected.   You are the one saying its ok to oust someone who is freely elected.   Murabak stood down.

It's not the fact that he was elected, but the unconstitutional things he was doing afterwards. The roles and powers of the offices are not the issue. But violation of the powers is.

Veritas wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Oh good, coups are all right and I can arrange to have Cameron ousted and put in prison for his crimes against the poor and disabled.   Whoopee!!!!!

Well that's pretty much what Morsi did as soon as he got in power:

"Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has sacked the entire leadership of the country's defense establishment....The Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi appears to be wasting no time in consolidating his hold over power at the expense of the military, which many hoped would be a moderating power over him.  It remains to be seen how the military and the Egyptian street react to Morsi's moves. Al Jazeera said the president's spokesperson made the surprising announcement on state television. "All of this has happened very fast, and it was unexpected," said the station's correspondent..."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158831

He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election - there's a great difference between peacetime UK and wartime Egypt!

He sacked the military and much of the judiciary because they were absolutely corrupt and part of the problem why there was a revolution in the first place. And what did Morsi do after that? He appointed Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi the man who is now ruling the country.

And what information do you have that Morsi wouldn't allow fresh elections at the end of his term? If you've got it let's see it.

Irn Bru wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:Still does not answer my question.

Were you fine with the army ousting Mubarak, as it was the army that did this ?

The army were the people with the guns and it was the people that empowered them to throw Mubarak and his cronies out of power. If it wasn't for the people demonstrating then the army would have done nothing.

It was the peoples revolution and any suggestion that the army were the driving force behind removing Mubarak would be denying the people the given right to claim it was their actions that brought about the removal of the corrupt military rulers and their cronies.

And now it's been thrown back in their face. But that's life under the Egyptian military.

Hi Irn

How has it been thrown back in their faces when many took to the streets again to oust Morsi?

PhilDidge wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

The army were the people with the guns and it was the people that empowered them to throw Mubarak and his cronies out of power. If it wasn't for the people demonstrating then the army would have done nothing.

It was the peoples revolution and any suggestion that the army were the driving force behind removing Mubarak would be denying the people the given right to claim it was their actions that brought about the removal of the corrupt military rulers and their cronies.

And now it's been thrown back in their face. But that's life under the Egyptian military.

Hi Irn

How has it been thrown back in their faces when many took to the streets again to oust Morsi?

Evening Didge.

It's been thrown back in their face because the very people that were running the country prior to the revolution are back - The Military. The OP gives an insight into the current unrest in the country and I'd bet my house on the fact that the next president of Egypt will be a military man or a person appointed with their seal of approval.

The Egyptian military run the country and they're never going to give that up. Even Morsi recognised that by allowing the Egyptian Military Corporation to run their own affairs without interference. And don't forget that Morsi agreed to compromise on constitutional affairs prior to the coup but this was just too good a chance for military to get rid of him and put the military back in charge.

Irn Bru wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Hi Irn

How has it been thrown back in their faces when many took to the streets again to oust Morsi?

Evening Didge.

It's been thrown back in their face because the very people that were running the country prior to the revolution are back - The Military.  The OP gives an insight into the current unrest in the country and I'd bet my house on the fact that the next president of Egypt will be a military man or a person appointed with their seal of approval.

The Egyptian military run the country and they're never going to give that up. Even Morsi recognised that by allowing the Egyptian Military Corporation to run their own affairs without interference. And don't forget that Morsi agreed to compromise on constitutional affairs prior to the coup but this was just too good a chance for military to get rid of him and put the military back in charge.

I would rather as do many Egyptians that the military was in power than a theocracy and will await to see if there are elections. Lets get some reality to this, the Brotherhood and Morsi were trying to exceed their power once in and again I would rather have a military power in place than a religious theocracy. I think it would be prudent to wait and see if there are going to be elections, but I am thankful the Brotherhood was gone, many including myself gave them a chance for the truth to reveal what they were up to. They wanted to change and give themselves unlimited power.

Who runs the media in Egypt Didge? Who is putting journalists in prison for telling the truth. Who is putting protesters (NOT Morsi supporters) in prison. Who has stopped all protests unless they are ones they have organised. And much, much more. Never mind the thousand of civilians they have killed.

Irn Bru wrote:

Veritas wrote:

Well that's pretty much what Morsi did as soon as he got in power:

"Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has sacked the entire leadership of the country's defense establishment....The Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi appears to be wasting no time in consolidating his hold over power at the expense of the military, which many hoped would be a moderating power over him.  It remains to be seen how the military and the Egyptian street react to Morsi's moves. Al Jazeera said the president's spokesperson made the surprising announcement on state television. "All of this has happened very fast, and it was unexpected," said the station's correspondent..."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158831

He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election - there's a great difference between peacetime UK and wartime Egypt!

He sacked the military and much of the judiciary because they were absolutely corrupt and part of the problem why there was a revolution in the first place. And what did Morsi do after that? He appointed Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi the man who is now ruling the country.

And what information do you have that Morsi wouldn't allow fresh elections at the end of his term? If you've got it let's see it.

Sorry you've lost me. Where did I say he wouldn't allow fresh elections?

Sassy wrote:Who runs the media in Egypt Didge?   Who is putting journalists in prison for telling the truth.   Who is putting protesters (NOT Morsi supporters) in prison.   Who has stopped all protests unless they are ones they have organised.   And much, much more.   Never mind the thousand of civilians they have killed.

If people want to protest they can, if they really want to they will rise up again, that is nonsense sassy and you are feeding off also biased media stories. I am in contact and have been for a long time with some friends in Egypt and many especially in the cities are glad to be rid of Morsi. You can magic up links all you like, but it won't change the reality people do not want to live under a theocracy and thank goodness for that

PhilDidge wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Evening Didge.

It's been thrown back in their face because the very people that were running the country prior to the revolution are back - The Military.  The OP gives an insight into the current unrest in the country and I'd bet my house on the fact that the next president of Egypt will be a military man or a person appointed with their seal of approval.

The Egyptian military run the country and they're never going to give that up. Even Morsi recognised that by allowing the Egyptian Military Corporation to run their own affairs without interference. And don't forget that Morsi agreed to compromise on constitutional affairs prior to the coup but this was just too good a chance for military to get rid of him and put the military back in charge.

I would rather as do many Egyptians that the military was in power than a theocracy and will await to see if there are elections. Lets get some reality to this, the Brotherhood and Morsi were trying to exceed their power once in and again I would rather have a military power in place than a religious theocracy. I think it would be prudent to wait and see if there are going to be elections, but I am thankful the Brotherhood was gone, many including myself gave them a chance for the truth to reveal what they were up to. They wanted to change and give themselves unlimited power.  

You need to read this Didge about the Egytian military and the state police

The Newest Victims of the Egyptian Crackdown The generals take on the independent judges

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114506/egypt-military-cracks-down-judges-too

They're cruel, corupt and rotten to the core. Morsi's government were never any more extreme than than the Egyptian military in relation to Islamic law which underpinned the running of the country even under Mubarak's corupt government.

Veritas wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

He sacked the military and much of the judiciary because they were absolutely corrupt and part of the problem why there was a revolution in the first place. And what did Morsi do after that? He appointed Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi the man who is now ruling the country.

And what information do you have that Morsi wouldn't allow fresh elections at the end of his term? If you've got it let's see it.

Sorry you've lost me.  Where did I say he wouldn't allow fresh elections?

"He was hardly going to sit quietly in power until the next general election"

Explain what you meant then.

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:Who runs the media in Egypt Didge?   Who is putting journalists in prison for telling the truth.   Who is putting protesters (NOT Morsi supporters) in prison.   Who has stopped all protests unless they are ones they have organised.   And much, much more.   Never mind the thousand of civilians they have killed.

If people want to protest they can, if they really want to they will rise up again, that is nonsense sassy and you are feeding off also biased media stories. I am in contact and have been for a long time with some friends in Egypt and many especially in the cities are glad to be rid of Morsi. You can magic up links all you like, but it won't change the reality people do not want to live under a theocracy and thank goodness for that

If people want to protest they can? What planet are you living on?

24 Nov 2013

Reuters) - Egypt's president passed a law on Sunday making it illegal to hold demonstrations without the approval of the police and banning protests in places of worship, a move rights groups condemned as a blow to political freedom.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/24/us-egypt-protests-idUSBRE9AN09C20131124

As I said, only the protests they want, for their side.

Irn Bru wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

I would rather as do many Egyptians that the military was in power than a theocracy and will await to see if there are elections. Lets get some reality to this, the Brotherhood and Morsi were trying to exceed their power once in and again I would rather have a military power in place than a religious theocracy. I think it would be prudent to wait and see if there are going to be elections, but I am thankful the Brotherhood was gone, many including myself gave them a chance for the truth to reveal what they were up to. They wanted to change and give themselves unlimited power.  

You need to read this Didge about the Egytian military and the state police

The Newest Victims of the Egyptian Crackdown The generals take on the independent judges

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114506/egypt-military-cracks-down-judges-too

They're cruel, corupt and rotten to the core. Morsi's government were never any more extreme than than the Egyptian military in relation to Islamic law which underpinned the running of the country even under Mubarak's corupt government.

Irn, I do read many things and we could spend another debate here as before posting link, after counter link, after link, until everyone loses site what the debate was about in the first place because everyone is debating with what other people are saying and not ourselves.
Morsi wanted to bring in a theocracy and as well as I stand up for any Islamophobia against Muslims posted by, I wont defend allowing another theocracy that was trying to keep itself in power by as seen again trying to impose new laws without the wishes of the people. This caused them to be ousted and thankfully it did for the people. No place on earth should be ruled by a religion over the common decency of humanity

Didge, you do realise that Egypt has had Islamic law for many, many years, Morsi didn't bring it in, it was already part of the constitution.

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

If people want to protest they can, if they really want to they will rise up again, that is nonsense sassy and you are feeding off also biased media stories. I am in contact and have been for a long time with some friends in Egypt and many especially in the cities are glad to be rid of Morsi. You can magic up links all you like, but it won't change the reality people do not want to live under a theocracy and thank goodness for that

If people want to protest they can?   What planet are you living on?

24 Nov 2013

Reuters) - Egypt's president passed a law on Sunday making it illegal to hold demonstrations without the approval of the police and banning protests in places of worship, a move rights groups condemned as a blow to political freedom.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/24/us-egypt-protests-idUSBRE9AN09C20131124

As I said, only the protests they want, for their side.

And?

Did not Murabak try to do the same?

Did that work?

No

If people want to rise up, they will, as they have done twice before

Oh Jeez, isn't that exactly what they fought to stop.

And again, you did realise the constitution of Egypt had Islamic Law long before Morsi, didn't you? The constitution has always been based on Islam.

Sassy wrote:Oh Jeez, isn't that exactly what they fought to stop.

And again, you did realise the constitution of Egypt had Islamic Law long before Morsi, didn't you?    The constitution has always been based on Islam.

Not shariah though, it has had laws.
Why anyone would argue for a theocracy is beyond me, maybe you need to ask yourself that question!

Oh right, so it was ok when it was a theocracy before then? Based on Islam? Its laws have ALWAYS been Islamic. It's an islamic country.

Sassy wrote:Oh right, so it was ok when it was a theocracy before then? Based on Islam?   Its laws have ALWAYS been Islamic.   It's an islamic country.

It was never a theocracy under Murabak, it was a dictatorship.
You are again very misguided on its laws when under Murabak
Again you still have no answer why you want to back a theocracy?

I suggest you do some reading. The constitution has always been based on Islamic Law. Murabak was not a Dictator, he was elected by the Parliament, but not the people.

Sassy wrote:I suggest you do some reading.   The constitution has always been based on Islamic Law.   Murabak was not a Dictator, he was elected by the Parliament, but not the people.

You trying to teach me about history, good one.

He was a dictator, Hitler was elected, are you going to tell me he was not a dictator also?

Have a think before you answer

No Didge, you have a think, just because you know about history doesn't mean you know about Egypt.

PhilDidge wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

You need to read this Didge about the Egytian military and the state police

The Newest Victims of the Egyptian Crackdown The generals take on the independent judges

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114506/egypt-military-cracks-down-judges-too

They're cruel, corupt and rotten to the core. Morsi's government were never any more extreme than than the Egyptian military in relation to Islamic law which underpinned the running of the country even under Mubarak's corupt government.

Irn, I do read many things and we could spend another debate here as before posting link, after counter link, after link, until everyone loses site what the debate was about in the first place because everyone is debating with what other people are saying and not ourselves.
Morsi wanted to bring in a theocracy and as well as I stand up for any Islamophobia against Muslims posted by, I wont defend allowing another theocracy that was trying to keep itself in power by as seen again trying to impose new laws without the wishes of the people. This caused them to be ousted and thankfully it did for the people. No place on earth should be ruled by a religion over the common decency of humanity

I can see where you are coming from Didge but the fundamental point here is that a democratically elected president was pushed out of power by the military when it should have been the ballot box that did that

I have no wish to see an extremist islamic government in power either but there was no indication that they were going to be extremist to the extent that they were goiing to start stoning women or cutting pff people hands for theft.
I would think the next election would have seen the back of Mr Mori's government if that's what the people wanted and in that way democracisy would have been maintained. Now the military are back in power I seriously doubt that Egypt will ever see democracy in my lifetime.

I'm going to leave it at that because we are never going to agree and I'd rather not end up with a bruising argument that fractures a healthy working debate.