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?!
since we don't seem to be using right now I don't see any problem.
They also danced better.
While the Egyptian Army is certainly no paragon of freedom (or battle prowess, but that's another story...), at least there is a formidable power in Egypt that leans toward secular sanity and against Islamist lunacy. Egypt could again one day stand with Turkey (for all its troubles) and Jordan as examples of modern, stable states among the insane theocracies that surround them.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
I consider myself a nerd, and I find this news interesting. I support this article being here. If you do not, then please choose not to read that article. If you feel that there are too many such articles for you to enjoy the site, then please find another site.
The Egyptian army does seem to be reflecting the will of the Egyptian people in this case. Seems the recent theocracy wasn't actually any good at the nuts and bolts of running a country - and people to expect the government of a fairly modern country to provide basic services. Or at least that's how I interpret the army's statement that a "technocrat, capable national government will be formed" (quoting Al-Jaz).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
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
Question for me is, will they replace it with something more effective? Technocratic benevolent dictatorships are a lot more attractive on paper than they turn out to be in real life.
And if the military intends to (again) establish a democracy, will the people just vote the Muslim Brotherhood back into power? 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.)
There were laser pointers.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
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.
That seems to be the view echoed in this extensive post on CNN by a History professor in Cairo which interesting reading, but probably too long for the average slashdot-er.
TL:DR: he held his nose but hoped for the best when Morsy became President, but simply couldn't stand the "'Brotherhoodization" of the government. The Muslim Brotherhood had systematically replaced every level of government right down to School Principals with unqualified followers.
I'd been watching the stream for hours when cheering an fireworks broke out, and upon looking to Twitter found that the Army had replaced the Muslim Brotherhood leadership with a representative of the Supreme Court. Every military chopper that went overhead was also loudly cheered. Contrary to how CNN is presenting this, it is clearly a popular turn of events.
Egypt may have stepped back from the brink of becoming yet another Islamic Religious Dictatorship.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
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
seemed the lesser danger, and to make himself more attractive he made a bunch of promises ... Then he broke his promises.
I'm glad we don't tolerate that kind of crap in the good old US of A!
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.
Basically detest islam in the majority of its forms. But having looked at Egypt for a while, the level of abuse on women, organised or social rape, the deliberate and appalling levels of enforced FGM, and coming to a conclusion that as a people in a general sense, I feel only sorry for the victims, but generally regard most with a deep disdain.
As an aside, this looks to me to have civil war written all over it. But before that, an observation of my own on this. I have zero belief that Islam can fit into modern society. Into democracy. In secularism or into multiculturalism. I don't believe it deserves a seat at the table, nor do I think they actually want a seat unless it comes with all the usual preconditions and appalling islamic fundamentalism.
However, if a person like me - has a theory that I demand or expect islamics to adhere to modern standards, and to put aside some of their normal activities and behaviour and to fall into line and operate on a civil basis in society, take part in democracy, campaign for what they believe and if they can do so in the civil way, perhaps get a deserved place at the table of government - then things in Egypt don't provide any good news. And under normal circumstances I'd welcome the Muslim Brotherhood getting chewed up and spat out. But I can't have it both ways, even with my somewhat harsh line of thought. If they do put down the guns, and do put aside the bombs, and come to play a full part in the democratic processes, then what?
So, the context now is that they win an election (debate that as you see fit), and a number of months later, find the US supported and equipped Army deposes their chosen man and suspends the entire constitution. An awkward pause for me now occurs. If they get excluded and sidelined in this way, it seems to me that this is fuel in the tank for bad stuff. What is the point of elections now to Morsi and this brotherhood. Democracy by its nature has to be inclusive, even to forces or views I dislike. Thats almost the point.
In this instance, I find myself having a tiny amount of sympathy to bad people, whom I normally don't have any sympathy with, as there is an air of injustice and incorrectness about this. I detest Islam and its fundamentalism, BUT, if they put their guns and arms down and come to the table - something I may not like, but may well respect - then their part in it can't be cut off like this - at least thats a vague feeling I have. But I know that the Muslim Brotherhood are scum, and I know only idiots would vote for them. Bingo - look what happened. Idiots and then the MB got elected.
In the end tho, Its Egypt. Its a state where this is the picture across its society.
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/unkindest-cut-13yearolds-death-shines-spotlight-on-rise-of-fgm-in-egypt-8657104.html
There is no escape. The men are involved. The women. The mothers. There are no innocents in this appalling crime against humanity, and against women in particular. And against the young girls, often under age, who are forcably held down and have their sexual organs butchered in full 7th century barbarism. The fact that the women are often involved in the infliction of this crime only erodes all respect. Despicable, and beyond contempt. It doesn't matter who gets into Government over such people. Its very hard for me to find sympathy for these fucking people. Their behaviour is worse than animals. Their choice of 'leadership' is a reflection of the people as a whole. Normally it is said that to correct fundamental problems - in a society, the advancement of women is critical. I have no problem with that, ... but these women.. there is a black hole here where an education and care for their own siblings should be.
The calls for 'freedom' or 'democracy' really become meaningless. Human rights? Yeah - as if anyone a citizen of such a place t
We`re all equal
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.
Don't be naive. Short of installing Obama as the ruler of Egypt, we can hardly get any less involved in what's going on there.
Somehow I don't think "installing Obama as the ruler of Egypt" is the absolute least involved the U.S. could get.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
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
Because we don't only know things that we personally experience. For example, I have never seen an elephant and yet I know they are small, furry and good swimmers. I read it in a book.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Quick Q. Why are you defending a leader that by all accounts was bad at his job, and lied to get elected. Yes he "won" the election but his opponent was a puppet of the last regime. The turn out was only 33%. That means 2/3rds of the people did not like their choices. It sounds like the people already spoke once by boycotting the election.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
Overwhelmingly Approved? Are you DAFT?
(64% of voters approved of the referendum, but the turnout was only 33% of eligible voters.)
So that's two thirds of the one third that actually voted, or about 20%.
The Muslim brotherhood made sure it was "the right 20%" that got into the poling places.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Perhaps you were unaware that the Crusades were a reaction to invasion? Not a very well thought out reaction, although it turned out to be fairly effective overall (Muslim advances into Europe were halted and turned back over time, with the results of the Crusades leading to the Renaissance and to European nations becoming world dominant after being a back water for a long time).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
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.
That seems a pretty gross exaggeration of public sentiment in Egypt, the problem, at its core, is that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood cohorts won the slimmest of majorities (just over 51%), and instead of recognizing the somewhat tenuous situation they were in and moderating their activities, they basically went all out to seize control of the constitution, various local governments and the judiciary, with the clear intent of assuring a narrow islamist form of Shariah was the law of the land.
To many of the 2012 protesters, reformers, and most importantly there Egyptian Army, this was directly opposed to what they had intended. Many feared, and not entirely without justification that Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood were going to take a page from Ayatollah Khomeini's play book and use the reformist zeal to put in place a strongly theocratic and autocratic government.
I'll say this about it, when something like a third of any nation's populace signs a petition demanding the government reign, I would suggest to that government that it shelve more controversial policies and try to find a new accommodation with the oppositon., or one way or the other shit will hit the fan.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
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.
No it wouldn't have worked. Look at the economy. The reason they are having power cuts is because the country is just about out of money. When Mubark was overthrown, Egypt had 30 billion in foreign reserves. Those are dropping steadily, in one year they've been cut it in half AND at the same time they've reduced wheat stockpiles 3/4 and are at the point of begging Oman for fuel.
The wheat harvest should total out a couple percent higher than last year but it won't come close to meeting the needs of the subsidized bread the poor are dependent on. They'll burn through the remaining money in a matter of months buying wheat to meet those subsidies.
Without the subsidized bread (sold for about 0.08 cents) several million people will starve to death. People starving to death are generally very disruptive to society. During the last Egyptian bread riots they nearly ended up in a civil war.
To compound the matter tourism is dead, it was Egypts only serious generator of foreign cash and the Islamists destroyed it in short order. Hell Morisi appointed an Islamist that leads an organization that killed several dozen tourists to be the governor of the area where tourism is the biggest. The incompetence of the administration boggles the mind.
If something isn't done right now the country is going to disintegrate into some of the worst violence the country has ever seen due to the intersection of several major issues (bread, currency, fuel, etc). The problem is the Muslim Brotherhood is more interested in doing things to cement their own rule and institute their own moral view than to stabilize the country. It's unfortunate but if the Army didn't step in now it would end far worse than it will by forcing the Islamists out (and the resulting damage that will do, they comprise better than 1/5th of the population). It's a bad situation and the smart Egyptians with means are getting out of the country while they can.
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.