Is civil war in Egypt averted? 90% yes for new Constitution.

[NotfooledbyW]

@Alessan

Hey, I said I was in favor of Sissi. I just want you to admit that while the coup may have been justified, it wasn’t necessarily legal. It’s OK to break the rules sometimes to do the right thing - just don’t deny you’ve broken the rules.

I think the main point being argued is that the rules were not established enough to worry that the rules have been broken. It is still to this day more revolution than establishing a democratic state. There aren’t much rules for revolution except that
Personally see the Egyptian military as the catalyst for true change in Egypt because of its more moderate and perhaps more secularistic view of how a new Egypt must be governed. I have little faith that the Muslim Brotherhood can guide Egypt to where the more secular minded Egyptians want to go.

The secularists that want immediate democracy with all the secured human rights and freedoms that modern established democracies provide are in my opinion asking for too much too soon.

I say give Egyptians all the time they want and cut the demands for admitting things they have no reason to admit anything to us.

There are 80 million Egyptians, many of which have endured poverty because of wasted resources under the corrupt and oppressiveness of a huge ally of our democracy.

Id say we were breaking the rules democracy in our dealings with them. Perhaps you will admit that?

[NotfooledbyW]

@Marmite_Lover

One of the MB’s more famous propagandists is WSJ reporter Matt Bradley who feeds the MB propaganda to the West , one of today’s little nuggets:

“Morsi was in power for a year and never passed a single Islamist piece of legislation.”

That’s because the judges disbanded the Parliament to stop him bringing into law marriage to 6 year olds, or the destruction of the Churches etc.

Can you imagine what Egyptians feel when they read this trash from a WSJ reporter? Seriously???

The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch - on foreign policy matters the WSJ should be ignored or taken with a grain of salt just like Fox News. Many US journalists and pundits have lost all concept of what revolution and struggle is all about. Much of journalism today is about finding what the readers listeners and viewers want to hear. In this case they think Americans want to hear that Egyptians are incapable of developing a democracy such as ours. You know one that never had a drop of blood spilled or human rights violated along the way.

[Human_Action]

@Marmite_Lover

By the way you don’t seem to know who Strong Party are. The party who activists were arrested for the posters.

Strong Party head is Al Fotouh who was a life long MB member.

He was asked to resign from them when and wait for it!!! The MB said he wanted to run for president and that was against the MB policy and promise they made. The MB promised the people they would NOT run a presidential candidate but obviously lied because they then ran Al Shater who then had to drop out so they ran Morsi instead. They also promised they would not field more than 30% candidates for Parliament and that was also another lie.

When Fotouh left many Egyptians were actually fooled into voting for him. I was one of them. We believed him when he said he stopped being an MB brother.

BUT!!! it seems that the whole thing with Fotouh was to collect the moderate votes and after that align back up with the MB again.

Fotouhs Strong Party were traitors and Egyptians now realised they were fooled and those posters who were arrested were MB and are against just about everything like the MB now.

None of that comes remotely close to justifying arresting people for hanging political posters. Try to see this from a Western perspective, where these sorts of human rights abuses and naked fixing of a referendum simply don’t happen, because everyone playing by the rules (i.e., rule of law) is more important than my favored candidate winning or losing. I’ll put the outcomes of the Western model against the outcomes of the rest of the world any day of the week.

@Marmite_Lover

no one is asking to to believe anything

NotfooledbyW is. We were having a nice, civil debate, in fact. Nothing to do with you.

[QUOTE=Marmite Lover]
I will stop reading your posts now because you don’t have a clue about what is going on and are distorting facts fed to you by your media.

NotFooledBYW is the one who seems to be able to separate the fact from the fiction and thank God for that
[/QUOTE]

I’d stopped bothering with yours some time ago, once it became clear you had no interest in an actual discussion, but prefered using this thread as a blog to cheer-lead for your favored leader.

[Dissonance]

@Terr

It’s not “just symbolic”. There are concrete clauses in it that have concrete real life results. There are clauses that the Supreme Court has made “just symbolic” too.

In fact, the Constitution doesn’t prohibit (AFAIU) a general from becoming a President. It just, by implication, sets that being a President is a civilian position (since it doesn’t require any military training or rank), and that the President is the Commander in Chief of the military, so being a general as well as President is kinda redundant.

You’d do well to take some classes in basic logic. Civilian and military are mutually exclusive states of being, and the position of the president is a civilian position. There is nothing symbolic about it. As to the legal issues:

Because of legal issues related to holding a military rank while in a civilian office, Eisenhower had resigned his permanent commission as General of the Army before entering the office of President of the United States. Upon completion of his Presidential term, his commission was reactivated by Congress and Eisenhower again was commissioned a five-star general in the United States Army.

Going back to your original, erroneous post:

@Terr

To tell you the truth, I don’t understand the distinction. Eisenhower resigned - he just removed the title from himself. He was still the boss of the top general. And he was still the same person exactly that he was right before he resigned. So the difference was only symbolic, and did not affect anything. What if he didn’t resign - other than symbolism, what would have changed

Prior to his election to the presidency, a civilian position which required he not only retire from the military but resign his commission, something officers of general rank are ordinarily not even allowed to do, he wasn’t in charge of the army, much less of the entire military. He served at the pleasure of, and was under the command of the man who was by law the Commander in Chief and a civilian, i.e. the President, first Roosevelt, and then Truman. There was nothing symbolic about resigning his commission, and he was not the same person exactly that he was right before he had. Prior to resigning his commission he was a general and commissioned officer in the United States Army. After resigning his commission and assuming the presidency he was a civilian and Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces.

I think you’re also having trouble understanding the difference between retiring from active military service and resigning one’s commission as an officer. While a commissioned officer one is liable to be recalled to active service at your nation’s pleasure after retirement from active duty. This is why generals cannot ordinarily resign their commissions (note the words permanent commission in the above link); they are national assets and remain liable to recall to active duty if there is national need long after they have retired from the military.

[Dissonance]

@NotfooledbyW

No you still have it all wrong. The active disruption of government can get you arrested in Egypt right now. But reality has to be that the vast majority of non-voters were not denied the right to vote for disrupting the government because they were not denied at all. So I’m telling you directly right now that I am not in favor of Egyotians losing the right to vote just for peaceful non-disruptive peaceful protest of the government or for any peaceful ativity. You injected that position falsely into my argument so you ought to drop it.

Ah, no, you injected that position into your own argument by your poor word choice. You’re doing it again, by the way, by saying you’re against the removal of voting rights for peaceful non-disruptive protest of the government. What about disruptive peaceful protest of the government? Again, you’re missing the irony of wanting the MB disenfranchised when by your own rules those who disruptively protested the Morsi government should be disenfranchised of their right to vote as well.

@NotfooledbyW

My ‘Just like in any democracy’ was directed toward people who have the power to vote but did not use it last week. It is not directed to the military coup that rid the democracy of Morsi and his brotherhood that were hell bent on destroying democracy anyway.

No shit, that’s where the irony comes from. You realize that the military coup removed the democratically elected government of Morsi and have no problem with that at all, but have the audacity to tell the MB they only have themselves to blame for boycotting this vote. Where exactly did their last vote get them again anyway? Oh yeah, that’s right, being run out of power by the military after they won the election.

And the coup was not because the military didnt like the Morsi election it was because Morsi was acting in ways that were seen as averse to democracy. And popular support rose to very high levels that Morsi was hijacking a moderate and secular driven revolution and need to change or go. Morsi had to go and that part I do not compare at all to normal democracy.

That’s because it has nothing at all to do with democracy, ordinary or otherwise. Military coups are the antithesis of democracy. Why wasn’t your advice to the people of Egypt to sit down and STFU since they had a chance to vote and had voted in Morsi in free and fair elections? In functioning democracies this gets fixed at the next election, not by men in tanks telling the sitting president he’s being removed from office.

So try to get that right too. The coup was necessary to start the path to democracy over and it took violence to get that done.

I see, so the army needed to destroy the democracy in order to save it.

[John_Mace]

@Dissonance

I see, so the army needed to destroy the democracy in order to save it.

Exactly. They had Democracy before, but it was the wrong kind. Now that the undesirable people have been removed from the democratic process, they can have the right kind of democracy.

[Human_Action]

Y’know, like they did in Chile, Iran, and Spain. When the people vote for the wrong government, well, there’s nothing to do but have the military step in and run things for a while. You know how people are, always making the wrong choice of who should lead them.

And while I haven’t checked, I can only assume those three nations went right back to democracy after a short transitional period. It only stands to reason.

[Terr]

@Dissonance

You’d do well to take some classes in basic logic. Civilian and military are mutually exclusive states of being, and the position of the president is a civilian position.

“State of being”? Now we’re getting to some kind of new-age philosophical mumbo jumbo?

As to the legal issues:

Funny how it doesn’t say what the legal issues were. Can you expand on it?

Prior to his election to the presidency, a civilian position which required he not only retire from the military but resign his commission

Please cite the language of the law that requires that one retires from the military and resigns his commission before election to the presidency.

and he was not the same person exactly that he was right before he had.

I know, I know. There was this mystical “state of being”.

[Dissonance]

You are clearly not debating in good faith Terr.

@Terr

“State of being”? Now we’re getting to some kind of new-age philosophical mumbo jumbo?

This is basic logic; there is nothing new-age mumbo jumbo about it. I doubt anyone else is having trouble understanding what civilian and military being mutually exclusive states of being means. One can either be a civilian or military, one cannot be both.

Funny how it doesn’t say what the legal issues were. Can you expand on it?
Please cite the language of the law that requires that one retires from the military and resigns his commission before election to the presidency.

You are either too disingenuous or lazy to note that I already have. If you follow the link, it is cited.

217.Jump up ^ Post Presidential Years. Eisenhower Archives. “President Kennedy reactivated his commission as a five star general in the United States Army. With the exception of George Washington, Eisenhower is the only United States President with military service to reenter the Armed Forces after leaving the office of President.”
218.Jump up ^ “John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum, A Chronology from The New York Times, March 1961”. March 23, 1961. Retrieved May 30, 2009. “Mr. Kennedy signed into law the act of Congress restoring the five-star rank of General of the Army to his predecessor, Dwight D. Eisenhower. (15:5)”

[NotfooledbyW]

@Dissonance

Military coups are the antithesis of democracy. Why wasn’t your advice to the people of Egypt to sit down and STFU since they had a chance to vote and had voted in Morsi in free and fair elections? In functioning democracies this gets fixed at the next election, not by men in tanks telling the sitting president he’s being removed from office.

I see, so the army needed to destroy the democracy in order to save it.

No the Egyption Army did not destroy democracy. There was a first election after forty years of dictatorship, but no stable or effective democracy had been in place. The Army negated an election that followed a revolution that resulted in a new leader that was not a leader of the revolution. The army did not negate democracy, they negated an election. The leader that won the election was not aligned with the revolutionary vision and made false promises about moderation to win. Those lies negated the validity of the first election.

I don’t agree with all that Marmot Lover is telling us but his experience of what is going on inside Egypt matches the views of my friends and co-workers. M.Lover’s view that Morsi lied his way to victory is in line with my Egyptian friends views and its unanimous that Morsi and the MB had to be stopped and yes by outlawing MB activities.

Egyptians should not be required to live with a liar as first president just so observers in more established democracies can be satisfied that a democracy came into being with all the proper norms of democracy in place and living up to more established democratic and human rights standards.

[NotfooledbyW]

@NotfooledbyW

Is anyone trying to argue that the main reason a civil war is being avoided in Egypt over the deposing of the first elected government under President Morsi is that the Egyptian police and army have cracked down on pro-Morsi dissent?

Any replies?

[Shodan]

@NotfooledbyW

The army did not negate democracy, they negated an election.

I can do no better than to simply highlight this statement in all its preposterous glory.

Democracy is great, except for that part where people vote.

Regards,
Shodan

[Terr]

@Dissonance

You are clearly not debating in good faith Terr.This is basic logic; there is nothing new-age mumbo jumbo about it. I doubt anyone else is having trouble understanding what civilian and military being mutually exclusive states of being means. One can either be a civilian or military, one cannot be both.

One can either be employed or unemployed, one cannot be both. But you’re still the same exact person, whether employed or unemployed. There is no “state of being” there.

[Terr]

@Dissonance

You are either too disingenuous or lazy to note that I already have. If you follow the link, it is cited.

Your citations didn’t answer my question. Here it is again: “Please cite the language of the law that requires that one retires from the military and resigns his commission before election to the presidency.”

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

No the Egyption Army did not destroy democracy. There was a first election after forty years of dictatorship, but no stable or effective democracy had been in place. The Army negated an election that followed a revolution that resulted in a new leader that was not a leader of the revolution.

Then how did he get elected? The MB’s revolutionary bona fides certainly trump the military’s.

@NotfooledbyW

The army did not negate democracy, they negated an election.

That is how one goes about negating democracy.

@NotfooledbyW

The leader that won the election was not aligned with the revolutionary vision and made false promises about moderation to win. Those lies negated the validity of the first election.

What basis is there to believe that there’s a singular, official, revolutionary vision, as opposed to millions of them?

You certainly wouldn’t consent to live under a system where the army can remove the government if they think the president’s promised more than he was willing to deliver, why are you content to see 80 million fellow humans suffer under that system? I’m not prepared to accuse you of bigotry just yet, but you’re certainly flirting with the concept.

@NotfooledbyW

I don’t agree with all that Marmot Lover is telling us but his experience of what is going on inside Egypt matches the views of my friends and co-workers. M.Lover’s view that Morsi lied his way to victory is in line with my Egyptian friends views and its unanimous that Morsi and the MB had to be stopped and yes by outlawing MB activities.

Here’s a thought, since people have different views, we’ll have them all get together and vote on the leaders they want.

More irony for the pile here, as your paen for liberal democracy involves banning a political party.

@NotfooledbyW

Egyptians should not be required to live with a liar as first president just so observers in more established democracies can be satisfied that a democracy came into being with all the proper norms of democracy in place and living up to more established democratic and human rights standards.

Yeah, Egyptians shouldn’t practice democracy just so Westerners think they are practicing democracy, they should do it for its own sake.

We’ve had 43 liars as President, and the U.S. is doing just fine. That’s why you have separation of powers, which, hey, in a shocking twist, has been weakened under the 2014 constitution.

Do you have any basis, at all, to believe that authoritarian government will lead to democracy? It sure didn’t in Chile, Iran, or Spain.

@NotfooledbyW

Any replies?

If a civil war is avoided, the main reason will be the overwhelming superiority of arms enjoyed by one side.

[Marmite_Lover]

Obama to hold his first US-African summit and guess what

He does not invite Egypt

[Marmite_Lover]

For those of you who don’t know Egyptians have for a long time been battling US linked activists who have been working with the Western media against the ouster of Morsi.

This is the latest on them with video recording etc. They include Wael Ghoneim of Google.

**
Call Recordings Expose Egyptian Political Activists Spying On Egypt**

Albawaba News published more call recordings of Egyptian Political Activists who cooperated with Muslim Brotherhood Terrorists Organization in spying and conspiring with foreign Intelligence including CIA, received foreign funds from foreign NGOS like Freedom House and also received special training programs to destroy Egypt’s institutions.

All call recordings published so far by Albawaba News, have been officially reported by Abd Elrehim Aly Journalist to the General Prosecutor before he started publishing these recordings.

The recent call recordings published by Albawaba News in addition to other previous recordings are under investigation by the General prosecutor. Law suit number 250 for year 2011, raised by the Egyptian National security institution against 6 of April movement including Ahmed Maher and other political activists accused of storming the National Security building and have stolen classified documents relate to the Egyptian national security and received funds from foreign NGOS and got in direct contact with foreign Intelligence including CIA.

Call Recording between Asmaa Mahfouz and Souka political activists. Discussing whether or not to inform the Egyptian Authorities about Ahmed Maher after they stormed the National Security Building and found classified documents and call recording exposing foreign funds and spying. Also documents about Wael Ghoneim links with the CIA and foreign funds.

Souka: Ahmed Maher called me yesterday and told me that you are not answering his calls. I told him I have no idea.

Asmaa: Yes I know, he is unable to sleep. He sent me many messages. He tried to justify his position.

Souka: Good thing he is unable to sleep. If he is innocent, let us see how he is going to prove it in front of the General Prosecutor.

Asmaa: What are you saying? What prosecutor?

Souka: Listen, we are going to provide the General prosecutor with the documents we have against Maher.

Asmaa: No, you won’t.

Souka: I don’t know when we are going to do this, but we will. Especially after we found out about the big surprise. We have documents prove the money he received from Qatar, Sheikha Moza (the wife of the former prince of Qatar Hamad). He received sixty thousand Qatari Dinar. Maher received this money in return of 2 projects.

Asmaa: What projects? And how did you get such documents?

Souka: In return of accepting 2 Qatari projects.We don’t have the documents right now, but we eye-witnessed what the documents contain. Ahmed Maher, Israaa Abd Elfatah and Bassem Fathy are involved in taking foreign funds. There are other funds they received but we don’t know how much.

Asmaa: We know already what Israa and Bassem do for living, but I need to know what is the evidence you got. A guy like Maher, does it show that he was spending a lot of money lately? Maybe this is a new game.

Souka: Asmaa, I saw everything with my own eyes. I saw the document of 4 Million pounds.I’m telling you what I eye-witnessed. Foreign funds in relation to Maher and Amal. Other issues in relation to Wael Ghoneim.

Asmaa: Wael Ghoneim too? Is he involved in anything like that?

Souka: What I eye-witnessed in relation to Wael Ghoneim are disasters. His relations and links abroad and with CIA and issues like that.

Asmaa: I have to go now.

Souka: Don’t go near Tahrir now. Ok?

Asmaa: I won’t.

[levdrakon]

@Marmite_Lover

One of the MB’s more famous propagandists is WSJ reporter Matt Bradley who feeds the MB propaganda to the West , one of today’s little nuggets:

“Morsi was in power for a year and never passed a single Islamist piece of legislation.”

That’s because the judges disbanded the Parliament to stop him bringing into law marriage to 6 year olds, or the destruction of the Churches etc.

Can you imagine what Egyptians feel when they read this trash from a WSJ reporter? Seriously???

You know, you say Egyptians don’t care what America thinks but it seems to me they hang on every word, and a lot of what they read and hear is conspiracy theory. America supported Mubarak! America supported Morsi! If this Sisi guy turns into a military dictator the US will get the blame for that.

The US has no choice but to extend a tentative hand of friendship to whomever you guys put in power. But Egyptians put these people in power, not the US.

Morsi wouldn’t have gotten elected if a large portion of Egyptians weren’t sympathetic conservatives who want Egypt to retain a strongly Muslim, Arab, Islamic character. Article 2 of the new constitution still states:

Islam is the religion of the state, Arabic is its official language and the principles of Islamic Sharia are the main source of legislation.

That’s not going away, and while the Muslim Brotherhood is currently being suppressed and labeled terrorists, the essence of who they are is still there among Egyptians and you haven’t heard the last of it. Not the US’s fault.

[Marmite_Lover]

Part of the above

We need to separate the movement into two and immediately. I think it will be next Friday, right after the massacre.
Please Bassem, don’t trust anyone. And tell those son of bitches of Freedom House, that there are people from their side, are spreading and leaking documents.

what massacre??? they are talking about something that hasn’t happened yet!!!

This is Ahmed Maher!!

Leader of April 6th group that from beginning has had links to USA and US funding

[Marmite_Lover]

Bassem Fathy to Ahmed Maher April 6th Group

"I see you and me after 20 years from now like Gul and Erdogan, they are very strong and it is fine that they are fascists. "

They are also MB