Slashdot Mirror
Egyptian President Overthrown, Constitution Suspended
Al Jazeera and other publications are reporting that Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi has been overthrown by the country's army. General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, head of the Egyptian armed forces, said in a televised announcement that Morsi had been removed from power, the Constitution had been suspended, and Adli al-Mansour, leader of Egypt's Supreme Constitutional Court, had been appointed to lead the country until elections can be held. "Sisi called for presidential and parliamentary elections, a panel to review the constitution and a national reconciliation committee that would include youth movements. He said the roadmap had been agreed by a range of political groups." According to the BBC's report, "General Sisi said on state TV that the armed forces could not stay silent and blind to the call of the Egyptian masses," and "The army is currently involved in a show of force, fanning out across Cairo and taking control of the capital."
Why is it that it's precisely in times where upholding the constitution is at it's most important (in times of turmoil), that so many countries do away with the constitution entirely and suspend it?!
Didn't the Egyptians just elect this guy a year ago?
Yep, they elected a Muslim Brotherhood guy who made election campaign statements like
'"The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal"
Now they found it shocking that the guy is just a tiny bit of an Islamic fanatic.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
yeah thats right baby
You do realize that the protests leading up to this overthrow were the most massive in human history?
The numbers bandied about were anywhere from 20-35 million in the streets. At least 22 million signed a petition denouncing Morsi.
With a population of 82M, that's anywhere from 25-40% of the country's populace. If even 1/10 of that number (much less %) got out on the streets in the USA, there'd be dozens of /. posts as it impacted the largest block of slashdotters on a daily basis.
Furthermore, Egypt is keyholder of the Suez canal. Instability in this country would be like instability in Panama - and impact world trade.
I'd say this is news for nerds.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I remember when the Constitution was a real Badge of Honor, not something Our Government Wipes its collective Ass on whenever they want.
I don't. I just remember when I was more ignorant of history.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Technocratic benevolent dictatorships are a lot more attractive on paper than they turn out to be in real life.
Nobody but you said anything about "benevolent dictatorship". The Egyption Army is using the phrase "technocratic" as a code word that means "non-Islamic". The current government in Egypt has no actual skills for government, other than "be fanatic Islamicists and use the Quran as the guide for all things", and I personally am dubious as to the value of that one.
And if the military intends to (again) establish a democracy, will the people just vote the Muslim Brotherhood back into power?
No, they won't. The uprising is because the government was a de-facto Islamic theocracy, and the majority of the people don't want that.
I may not like Morsi but he was the democratically elected leader, with no more than the usual level of shenanigans in the election.
The election had two candidates, one who was associated with the repressive Mubarak government, and Morsi. Morsi seemed the lesser danger, and to make himself more attractive he made a bunch of promises: he said "sure I'm the Islamic candidate, but I'll respect the rights of non-Islamic people." Then he broke his promises. Thus, the whole "technocratic" thing: the Army and the people are looking to install a secular government.
I have to admit; I got my initial impressions of my government from my Grandparents more from my Parents.
They lived thru a lot in the 30's and then the War; the government actually helped people that needed help, back then.
The Government back then put people under surveillance, but not everything they said or read or wrote.
I too, was extremely ignorant of a great deal of what happened in the LBJ/Nixon/Ford/Carter/Reagan years.
I'm totally amazed that I look back on Clinton as the best Pres so far, lol. I Did Not vote for him. :facepalm:
W. was Cheney/Rumsfeld's sockpuppet; You don't think He decided to land on an aircraft carrier at sea, do you? :)
Read about those guys' involvement in the Nixon era stuff, and the Regan/Iceland BS, Arsenals of Folly is a great book on some of that:
http://www.amazon.com/Arsenals-Folly-Making-Nuclear-Vintage/dp/0375713948
Hey, I'd rather have the Prez decorating some Chunky Ho's dress than Wiping Ass with the Constitution.
Maybe it's just me...
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
The Egyptian army does seem to be reflecting the will of the Egyptian people in this case.
Wag the dog... It's the same bit of manipulation as 'Arab Spring'... The 'will of the people' put Morsi (Mursi?) into office
There was precious little choice at the time.
They have learned their lesson, and for once it seems the average person in the street has had enough of 'Brotherhoodization" of their democracy.
For an Islamic majority country to take this step is a pretty positive note if you ask me.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
And if the military intends to (again) establish a democracy, will the people just vote the Muslim Brotherhood back into power?
The support for the Muslim Brotherhood dwindled as soon as they were in power and actually acted. That's when people saw that they were not as awesome as they thought. And the Muslim Brotherhood learned they are actually being held accountable for their governing.
I may not like Morsi but he was the democratically elected leader, with no more than the usual level of shenanigans in the election. (And given the shenanigans that show up in the US, I'm not going to throw too many stones. They're different, in both kind and degree, but we're hardly beyond reproach.)
Yes, you don't just overthrow a elected government by a coup just because you disagree with them. But if there is wide-spread violence from both sides, over a longer period of time, and you exhaust all other options including a ultimatum, it is the job of the army to step in and prevent a civil war.
A new election will be held. Egypt is new at this. Give them some time. The dedication of the Egyptian people is exemplary, they want a better state for themselves. It's a historic chance, but it is a process.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
I think you can say that about any religion or person that gives no peace, and Islam is certainly not a unique example of such attitudes for some of its more fanatical adherents. There are people with that attitude in all religions. But to say the religion itself is like that is ridiculous. Compared to what? Centuries of Christian religious war in Europe over sectarian differences, up to and including Northern Ireland's troubles? Buddhists in Myanmar violently attacking minority Muslims? I mean, there's a religion (Buddhism) with the reputation of being awfully peaceful overall, yet you've got some pretty violent fanatics in some places. Empirically, plenty of Muslims don't have the hateful attitude you claim, and same for any other religion you can name. Attitudes vary greatly. Fanatics exist in all of them. And most of the current protest in Egypt is between the more moderate muslims and copt christians not wanting to go in the more fanatical and exclusionary direction that Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood wanted to go. That's a sign that a lot of people do want to get along, both muslim and not.
All you are doing is tossing any and everyone adhering to a particular religion into one gigantic, "hateful" bin. What's the point of that? None of the religions actually work that simply. Assume the people adhering to a religion (or non-religion) are one big monolithic block and picking the worst to represent it all? Great idea. You're just the kind of bigot that creates the worst problems regardless of the specific religion chosen. Oh, it's "them". "They" are the problem. "They" are all "hateful" and "not peaceful". Thus the justification begins for first not listening to "them", and eventually justifying horrible things to solve "their" problem.
Look at yourself and what you're saying. You're not exactly a paragon of peace either. You're laying the foundation for a lot of hate. It doesn't even matter what your preferred religion is or if you don't have any at all. Your attitude is the real problem because you've blithely written off the adherents of an entire religion for dubious and nonsensical reasons.
If you want, you can now backtrack and say you didn't mean *everybody*. If that's the case, well, a lot of unnecessary ill blood and hatred has started for less stupid comments that people didn't really mean. Maybe you should engage your brain first. It could save people a lot of grief.
It is a secular document that embodies principles of government conceived by men of sublime genius on the heels of five hundred years of medieval religious terror. It embodies advanced philosophical principles of governance drawn carefully and thoughtfully from the ancients, the 'noble savages' as well as from new philosophies from the age of enlightenment itself (Rousseau). (We are still far from realizing its potential, but it DOES protect us. Mostly.)
The Ottoman Empire never experienced this critical cultural shift. Egypt was a part of it and locked in the middle age darkness until the 20th century. Secular Ba'athism was a half step forward, but it went out with Mubarak. The Army, ever the guardians of Ba'athist ideals, thought the time might be right for pluralism as a way to enter fully into the family of nations... and they hated Mubarak. They let the popular kettle boil, rolled the dice and came up with... Morsi. Feh! The "constitution" that Morsi rammed down the country's throat was an atavistic abomination that drew upon medieval juridical traditions that were outmoded by the 13th century. And which the Ba'athists hate with a passion. (Almost as much as the Jihadis hate the Ba'athists.) Witness that at long last, a hundred years after the last Sultan fell off the Sunni throne, that the former nations of the Ottomans are waking up. Morsi took a democratic ladder to the heights of power then clumsily pulled it up behind him and spat on those below. He now pays the price for his perfidy. The Army, essentially Ba'athist secularists and anathema to the jihadists, want a modern country. Had Morsi been as capable and cautious as Erdogan in Turkey it would have been a different story. But now he is toast. He was always there at their sufferance. They will hold new elections in a year or two and settle back to their barracks. But just as the Turkish army has been staunching the tide of medievalism for almost the last hundred years, so will the Egyptian Army continue to watch.
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
I have to admit; I got my initial impressions of my government from my Grandparents more from my Parents.
They lived thru a lot in the 30's and then the War; the government actually helped people that needed help, back then.
If you were white. If you weren't, then the 14th Amendment didn't really mean that much for you and thus neither did most of the rest of the Constitution. Nor did it mean much if you were otherwise "unfit," as the history of sterilization of the mentally retarded from that era shows.
It was a time period of conservative judicial activism known as the Lochner era in which laws establishing minimum wage or safe work conditions were struck down as unconstitutional under the dubious theory of "freedom of contract."
It was also a time period in which labor-leaders and other leftists were kept under surveillance by J. Edgar Hoover, who was prepared to round them up at a moment's notice. After all, this was a time period in which union members paid in blood for their views and the government turned a blind eye to private union-busting operations like the American Protective League and the Pinkerton Agency, who ran sabotage and intimidation against people exercising their rights, or just openly sanctioned killing striking workers.
Most of my views of American democracy were informed as a child by what we believed this nation should be. Very little of it was informed by what it actually was, then and now. I think most of us are the same.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
and that "breaking campaign promises" isn't sufficient to justify a coup.
He made a power grab. Created a constitutional declaration that gave himself unprecedented powers. That's a touch more egregious than "breaking campaign promises".
It had to be nipped in the bud before he made himself and the Muslim Brotherhood unassailable, which is what he was obviously doing. If he'd been a touch more subtle and patient about things it might have worked.
For me, concern for democracy would be better placed in the spirit of it than the letter, especially with a dodgy leader with a dodgy mandate making a dodgy power grab.
Well done the Egyptians I say. I hope they get the effective secular government that they've worked and sacrificed for.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
You are right, but there was no legal mechanism to force the ballot box in the time span it appeared to be needed so this happen to create one. I do not support military coups but I do believe this action stopped Egypt from becoming a Syria.
As for Egypt's military- I am more then impressed with them. In the last uprising, they positioned themselves between the government supporters with firearms and the protesters with sticks, stones, and signs. They stopped a lot of senseless bloodshed from happening and stopped the situation from entering a Syria type rebellion. The situation has rose to the top again and the Egyptian military is once again, fighting strongly to save lives. You may not agree with them, but For what it's worth, I salute them.
We also have a longer track record for being able to vote for who we want next election cycle than they do in Egypt. If we vote for some guy who says he's not going to spy on us, and he does, we say "Well, I'm not voting for him next time!" not "I'm going to support a military coup!" Because we know there WILL be a next election. Egyptian citizens on the other hand have much less reason to trust that their government won't say "Gee, we WERE going to hold elections as promised, but there's... uh... TERRORISTS that we have to deal with first." Or various other ways to prevent democracy.
This is not to say democracy in the US is perfect, just that voters have more faith in the process than they do in overriding the process, while Egyptians have more of a reason to trust protests and overthrowing the government than elections.