DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on November 23, 2012, 02:02:09 PM
-
Hail Pharaoh!
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/382019_436675346379905_1728745102_n.jpg)
Protests Rock Egypt After Morsi Seizes Sweeping New Powers (Obama's Man)
Demonstrators stormed the Muslim Brotherhood HQ in Alexandria, pelt Port Said office with stones, and call for Egyptian president's ouster in Cairo after he is called "pharaoh," the new Mubarak for seizure of new powers.
Egyptians protest in the streets of Alexandria after realizing they were duped into trading one dictator, Murbarak, for a much worse one in Morsi.
Protesters stormed the headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood's party in Alexandria on Friday, throwing chairs and books into the street and setting them alight, after the Egyptian president granted himself sweeping new powers.
Supporters of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi and opponents also threw stones at each other near a mosque in the city, Egypt's second largest, a witness said.
Two cars had glass smashed as the clashes moved away from the area.
In Port Said, another port on the Mediterranean, hundreds of protesters gathered outside the Brotherhood?s Freedom and Justice party headquarters and pelted it with rocks. Some tried to storm it but did not enter, another witness said.
In Cairo, thousands demonstrated against the decree issued on Wednesday night.
Morsi called "pharaoh" for seizing new powers
Morsi's decree exempting all his decisions from legal challenge until a new parliament was elected caused fury amongst his opponents on Friday who accused him of being the new Hosni Mubarak and hijacking the revolution.
Morsi's aides said the decree was to speed up a protracted transition that has been hindered by legal obstacles but Morsi's rivals were quick to condemn him as a new autocratic pharaoh who wanted to impose his Islamist vision on Egypt.
"Morsi a "temporary dictator," was the headline in the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Youm and hundreds of protesters in Tahrir Square, the heart of the 2011 anti-Mubarak uprising, demanded Morsi quit, accusing him of launching a "coup".
Buoyed by accolades from around the world for mediating a truce between Hamas and Israel, Morsi on Thursday ordered that an Islamist-dominated assembly writing the new constitution could not be dissolved by legal challenges.
Morsi, an Islamist whose roots are in the Muslim Brotherhood party, also gave himself sweeping powers that allowed him to sack the unpopular general prosecutor and opened the door for a retrial for Mubarak and his aides.
The president's decree aimed to end the logjam and push Egypt, the Arab world's most populous nation, more quickly on its democratic path, the presidential spokesman said.
'President Morsi said we must go out of the bottleneck without breaking the bottle," Yasser Ali told Reuters.
The president said any decrees he issued while no parliament sat could not be challenged, moves that consolidated his powers but look set to polarize Egypt further, threatening more turbulence in a nation at the heart of the Arab Spring.
"The people want to bring down the regime", shouted protesters in Tahrir, echoing one of the chants that was used in the uprising that forced Mubarak to step down.
UN concerned Morsi hurting human rights
The decree is bound to worry Western allies, particularly the United States, a generous benefactor to Egypt's army, which effusively praised Egypt for its part in bringing Israelis and Palestinians to a ceasefire on Wednesday.
The West may become concerned about measures that, for example, undermine judicial independence. But one Western diplomat said it was too early to judge and his nation would watch how the decree was exercised in the coming days.
"We are very concerned about the possible huge ramifications of this declaration on human rights and the rule of law in Egypt," Rupert Colville, spokesman for the UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay, said at the United Nations in Geneva.
"The decree is basically a coup on state institutions and the rule of law that is likely to undermine the revolution and the transition to democracy," Mervat Ahmed, an independent activist in Tahrir protesting against the decree, said. ?I worry Morsi will be another dictator like the one before him.?
Leading liberal politician Mohamed ElBaradei, who joined other politicians on Thursday night to demand the decree was withdrawn, wrote on his Twitter account that Morsi had "usurped all state powers and appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh'.
(source: e-mail)
-
President Obama did not elect Morsi.
Mubarak was doomed and everyone knew it except perhaps Mubarak. Imagine a civil war in Egypt like the one in Syria.
You cannot blame President Obama for Morsi. That is IMBECILIC.
-
(http://www.renegruau.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/logo-Mail-Online1.jpg)
Mass protests in Eqypt as president awards himself 'powers of a pharoah'
Anger flares across country after President Mohammed Morsi issues decree which puts him 'above judicial oversight'
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/23/article-2237400-162E26D3000005DC-804_634x422.jpg)
Opponents respond by burning Brotherhood's offices across the country
Pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei said the decree is a 'major blow to the revolution'
By Richard Hartley-parkinson
23 November 2012
Thousands of protesters against the Eqyptian president clashed with police and set fire to the offices of the Muslim Brotherhood today in the biggest and most violent demonstratsions since Mohammed Morsi came to power.
The violence was sparked by the president's decision to give himself sweeping new 'pharoah' powers that put him above judicial oversight.
Mr Morsi's opponents threw molotov cocktails at a police van and set fire to Muslim Brotherhood offices in the Suez Canal cities of Suez, Port Said and Ismailia. Violence also erupted between rival factions across the country.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/23/article-2237400-162E3929000005DC-622_634x423.jpg)
A young man throws stones during a clash in the Mediterranean city of Alexandria
Computers and desks are among the being thrown out of windows at the offices of the Freedom and Justice Party
Critics of Morsi accused him of seizing dictatorial powers with the decrees that make him immune to judicial oversight and give him authority to take any steps against 'threats to the revolution' - rules that rights groups say are like 'emergency laws.'
The president spoke before a crowd of his supporters massed in front of his palace and said his edits were necessary to stop a 'minority' that was trying to block the goals of the revolution.
'There are weevils eating away at the nation of Egypt,' he said, pointing to old regime loyalists he accused of using money to fuel instability and to members of the judiciary who work under the 'umbrella' of the courts to 'harm the country'.
But the move has divided the country and people for and against the reforms made by the Islamist president have gathered in places such as Tahrir Square in Cairo and near the presidential palace.
In the Mediterranean city of Alexandria, anti-Morsi crowds attacked Brotherhood backers coming out of a mosque, raining stones and firecrackers on them.
The Brothers held up prayer rugs to protect themselves and the two sides pelted each other with stones and chunks of marble, leaving at least 15 injured. The protesters then stormed a nearby Brotherhood office.
In the capital Cairo, security forces pumped volleys of tear gas at thousands of pro-democracy protesters clashing with riot police on streets several blocks from Tahrir Square.
Tens of thousands of activists massed in Tahrir itself, angered at the decisions by Morsi. Many of them represent Egypt's upper-class, liberal elite, which have largely stayed out of protests in past months but were prominent in the streets during the anti-Muabrak uprising that began Jan. 25, 2011.
Protesters chanted, "Leave, leave" and "Morsi is Mubarak ... Revolution everywhere.'
'We are in a state of revolution. He is crazy of he thinks he can go back to one-man rule," one protester at Tahrir, Sara Khalil, said of Morsi. 'This decision shows how insecure and weak he is because he knows there is no consensus.'
'If the Brotherhood's slogan is "Islam is the solution" ours is "submission is not the solution",' said Khalil, a mass communications professor at the American University in Cairo. 'And this is Islamic because God does not call for submission to another man's will.'
President Mohammed Morsi was only elected to the top job a matter of months ago
Riding high on US and international praise for mediating a Gaza cease-fire, the president put himself above oversight and gave protection to the Islamist-led assembly - writing a new constitution from a looming threat of dissolution by court order.
But the move is likely to fuel growing public anger that he and the Muslim Brotherhood are seizing too much power. In what was interpreted by rights activists as a de facto declaration of emergency law, one of Mr Morsi's decrees gave him the power to take 'due measures and steps' to deal with any 'threat' to the revolution, national unity and safety or anything that obstructs the work of state institutions.
He framed his decisions as necessary to protect the revolution that toppled Hosni Mubarak nearly two years ago and to cement the nation's transition to democratic rule.
Many activists, including opponents of the Brotherhood, criticise the judiciary as packed with judges and prosecutors sympathetic to Mr Mubarak. Brotherhood supporters accuse the courts of trying to block their agenda.
'He had to act to save the country and protect the course of the revolution,' said one of Mr Morsi's aides, Pakinam al-Sharqawi, speaking on Al-Jazeera.
In a nod to revolutionary sentiment, Mr Morsi also ordered the retrial of Mr Mubarak and top aides on charges of killing protesters during the uprising.
He also created a new 'protection of the revolution' judicial body to swiftly carry out the prosecutions.
But he did not order retrials for lower-level police acquitted of such killings, another widespread popular demand that would disillusion the security forces if carried out.
Liberal politicians immediately criticised the decrees as dictatorial and destined to divide a nation already reeling from months of turmoil following Mr Mubarak's ousting. Some claim they exceeded the powers once enjoyed by the former president.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/23/article-2237400-162D99A5000005DC-941_634x441.jpg)
Mock-up: A poster depicts Morsi as a Pharaoh during a rally in Garden City, Cairo
Defences: Security forces sit at a blockade in a street leading to the Egyptian parliament and Tahrir Square
'Morsi today usurped all state powers & appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh,' pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on Twitter. 'A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences.'
Mr ElBaradei later addressed a news conference flanked by other prominent politicians from outside the Brotherhood - including two presidential candidates who ran against Mr Morsi - Amr Moussa and Hamdeen Sabahi.
Security and military forces were today deployed outside the key state institutions
They pledged to cooperate to force the president to rescind his assumption of greater powers.
They called for mass protests today to demand the dissolution of the declarations.
The prospect of large rival protests involving Mr Morsi's opponents and supporters in Cairo today raises the likelihood of clashes.
Thousands from the rival camps were already out on the streets of Cairo late yesterday in an increasingly charged atmosphere.
A crowd of Brotherhood supporters massed outside the Supreme Court building and offices of the prosecutor general - whom Mr Morsi removed in Thursday's edict.
In Tahrir Square, hundreds of demonstrators held a fourth straight day of protests against Morsi and the Brotherhood. 'Brotherhood is banned from entry,' declared a large banner at the protest.
The Egyptian leader decreed that all decisions he has made since taking office in June and until a new constitution is adopted and a new parliament is elected cannot be appealed in court or by any other authority. Parliamentary elections are not likely before next spring.
The decree also barred the courts from dissolving the controversy-plagued assembly writing the new constitution. Several courts have been looking into lawsuits demanding the panel be disbanded.
Critics fear Mr Morsi and the Brotherhood are trying to marginalise women and minority Christians, infringe on personal liberties and even give Muslim clerics a say in lawmaking.
Liberal and Christian members withdrew from the assembly during the past week to protest what they say is the hijacking of the process by Mr Morsi's allies.
The president has extended by two months, until February, the deadline for the assembly to produce a draft, apparently to give members more time to iron out their differences.
He also barred any court from dissolving the Islamist-led upper house of parliament, a largely toothless body that has also faced court cases.
Criticism: Former Egyptian presidential candidate, Hamdeen Sabahi, left, and Mohamed El Baradei (right), have criticised Mr Morsi's decrees
Fears: An Egyptian protester chants slogans and holds a cross and a Quran in Tahrir Square. Many Egyptian Christians fear being marginalised by the Muslim Brotherhood
Show of force: Protests were taking place today across Cairo after noon prayers had finished
The president made most of the changes on Thursday in a declaration amending an interim constitution that has been in effect since shortly after Mr Mubarak's fall.
The moves come as Mr Morsi basks in lavish praise from US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for mediating an end to eight days of fighting between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers.
Clinton was in Cairo on Wednesday, when she held extensive talks with Mr Morsi.
Mr Morsi not only holds executive power, he also has legislative authority after a previous court ruling just before he took office on June 30 dissolved the powerful lower house of parliament, which was led by the Brotherhood.
Thursday's decisions were read on state television by his spokesman, Yasser Ali. In a throwback to the days of the authoritarian President Mubarak and his predecessors Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the television followed up with a slew of nationalist songs.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237400/Muslim-Brotherhood-offices-set-Egypt-protest-presidents-new-powers-mean-law.html?ito=feeds-newsxml (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237400/Muslim-Brotherhood-offices-set-Egypt-protest-presidents-new-powers-mean-law.html?ito=feeds-newsxml)
-
This makes me appreciative of George Washington.
-
George Washington had that unpleasantness with the Whiskey Rebellion, didn't he?
Morsi will succeed or fail according to what happens when the new constitution is in place, I think.
Egypt is very unlike the US and is is silly to compare it to the US.
Egyptians are far less focused on relations with Israel(but most are probably opposed to them) than on the Egyptian economy, which is very heavily dependent on tourism.
-
Yes he did.
A few people thought that the revolution was going to releive them from taxation.
When they saw the regulars coming with George Washington in the lead some of them decided that taxes wern't so bad and some of them just moved west and south , hid their stills and are dodging the revenuers ever since.
But George Washington considered himself subject to the law, he had stills himself I suppose he paid his tax.
-
Tourism has collapsed as a result of the revolution. Tourists do not want to be caught up in a lawless place just to see some historical sites.
I would say that waiting for the new constitution to see what Morsi will do then would be prudent.It is only three months from now.
And blaming President Obama for the results of an Egyptian election is towering idiocy.
-
Lots of Egyptians are faithfull Muslims .
They are presently learning something that we could not have told them even though we know it right well.
You can't demand good religion from your government.
It was a lot of nasty experience that taught that to our founders, in Egypt this nasty experience is going on presently.
I think they have already learned that they don't want a paternalistic government , specially not a highly powered dictator, that is why they are getting loud.
The next iteration of elections will face a greater common knoledge.
-
They may want a government that you think is paternalistic, but the present problem is that Egypt has a huge number of jobless young people who are protesting because Morsy seems inclined to punish protesters from protesting.
Although I am certainly opposed to rule by decree, it is also true that Egyptians do not think like Americans, have a totally different history from Americans, and there is a chance that when the new constitution is put in place in February, things might quiet down. The main problem at present the Egyptian economy is in a terrible state because tourists have quit coming due to previous protests, and will not recover until the protests end.
Europeans are also in a sort of recession, and make up a large share of tourists to Egypt as well.
I do not think people elected Morsy to "demand good religion": many Muslims wanted an end to the persecution of the members of the Muslim Brotherhood. Christians want a continuation of government tolerance of Christianity, which they had under Mubarak.
Egypt is a very complex country and Egyptian culture is a mixture of many influences, some of which have been in opposition to one another for centuries: Muslim vs. Coptic Christian, Educated vs uneducated, city vs country, landlords vs tenants, very rich vs. very poor, young vs old,modern and technical vs.ancient and traditional. I hardly think it makes sense to claim that Egypt is a mess because President Obama did not keep 80 years old Mubarak in power. How could any US president do that in a country of 90 million people? How could President Obama have forced the election of Morsy? The answer is that all he did was to prevent a bloodier transition by seconding the views of the more enlightened members of the Egyptian Army that was keeping Morsy in power. It was the wise thing to do.
Morsy is President of Egyptians because more Egyptians chose him in what seem to have been the fairest elections in Egyptian history. I don't think I would support a guy like Morsy to lead my country, but I think that what we need to do is simply wait and see what the Egyptians choose to do. It is their country, after all.
The idea that a majority of Egyptians are likely to support a pro-Zionist,pro Netanyahu settlement in Palisrael is totally absurd.
-
Who gets Preaident Obamas approval right now?
Morsi just said that his improved power is temporary and the Muslim Brotherhood is planning a huge supportive rally on Tuesday.
There ought at least be a bit of chiding.
-
President Obama does not need to approve of anyone. At most, he should limit himself to advocating the release of dissidents that get arrested formerly protesting. It is best for the US to appear that it is not some sort of puppetmaster of anyone in Egypt. If after February things get oppressive, the policy can change.
Egypt needs peace, because Egypt needs tourists.
Egypt depends mostly on tourism for foreign exchange. Over the years, I have bought a very few Egyptian products. A couple of shirts, several bottles of fruit jam and a pair of suede chukka boots.
The shirts were cheap and comfortable, the jam was okay and edible, the boots disintegrated when I put them. The sole was black rubber and detached itself from the upper as I walked to my car. I am not sure that I can blame shoddy workmanship all that much,because I have no idea how old they were. I bought them used at the Hillel House Thrift Store, a Jewish charity. Still, shoes should not disintegrate.I think I paid $6.00 or so for them.
Egyptians,in my opinion, should take out ads in Cat Fancy magazine and push really nice statues of Bastet, the ancient cat god. Cat people really like stuff like that. They need Bastet cat food dishes, Bastet Tee shirts, personalized dishes with your cat's name in hieroglyphs,anything cat related. I suspect that they do not do this, because they oppose idolatry, and Islam dislikes images of people and animals.
If they don't do this, it is only a matter of time before someone in China does it.
-
Indeed, can there be copyright protection for anchient mythology figures?
These things will probly be made in China anyway , if they really sell.
-
I think that being authentically Egyptian would be pretty much essential in this case. I doubt that phony Egyptian statues made in China would sell very well.
No one wants to wave a US flag with a "Made in China" label,for the same reason.
-
Let me look.
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/middle-east-work/egyptian-artifacts-made-china (http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/middle-east-work/egyptian-artifacts-made-china)
The Author agrees with you that the authentic souvenier would be a local made article, but he found a lot of "Made in China" in the Cairo bazaar.
-
Actually I was talking about Bastet the Cat God statues to be sold here in the US. If I were in Egypt buying random souvenirs, I could buy a tiny pyramid, remove the sticker and give it to someone back home. If I were buying it from a magazine ad or online and discovered that it was NOT made in Egypt as promised (and they would have to promise this),I would get ticked off and return it, as would most cat fanciers and people buying gifts for them.
-
The idea is to work with these people not just pigion hole, or label, them and walk away.
BSB
The New York Times
Monday, November 26, 2012 -- 3:16 PM EST
-----
Egypt’s President Said to Limit Scope of Judicial Decree in Deal With Courts
President Mohamed Morsi agreed Monday to scale back a sweeping decree he had issued last week that raised his edicts above any judicial review, according to a report by a television network allied with his party.
The agreement, reached with top judicial authorities, would leave most of Mr. Morsi’s actions subject to review by the courts, but preserve a crucial power: protecting the constitutional council from being dissolved by the courts before it finishes its work.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/world/middleeast/egypts-president-said-to-limit-scope-of-judicial-decree.html?emc=na (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/world/middleeast/egypts-president-said-to-limit-scope-of-judicial-decree.html?emc=na)
-
That looks like good news , and perhaps we shold be supporting this process passively.
That the finished product is Egyptian made is important for having Egyptians accept it.
That the US be supportive is important because of the widespread opinion that the Mubarak regime was a sept of the US.
What a difficult balance! We stand a good chance of seeing good government emerge in Egypt for the first time since government was invented in Egypt, we also stand a good chance of paying a lot of money into a process that disolves into chaos and having a lot of hate return from all that money.
-
It is stupid to claim that President Obama appointed Morsi and that Morsi is an evil Muslim enemy. It hardly matters what "Christians" told anyone, since for him the only good Muslim is a bad Muslim that can be bought off, like Mubarak.
Mubarak was just like the Shah: a dying man with no chance of remaining in power who would have required a lot more force and many more deaths to remove had the US not told him to step down. Had President Obama not done this, the result would have been bloodier and the resulting replacement would have been someone that would have been far worse than Morsi.
President Obama has handled this quite well, as well as could have been expected.
-
since for him the only good Muslim is a bad Muslim that can be bought off, like Mubarak.
of course then there are actual facts...actual reality.
as I posted yesterday a story about a brave Muslim fighting IslamoNazis!
two of my best employees that I hired are Muslims.
i am going to Vegas with a Muslim in Feb or March
does reality even exist for some? are they lying?
or just making up what they want to think? are they delusional?
-
Then you should be more tolerant toward Morsi. If you were in his shoes, you would probably see things differently.
-
Try the "some of my best friends are black" act more often CU4homosexuals. Maybe we wouldn't be so hard on you. Maybe.
BSB
-
So, if I'm understanding the point being made here......because Cu4 happens to have a conservative ideology, he's not supposed to have any blacks or gays or Muslims as friends? Is that how it works?
-
No, I'm very, very, sorry, but you didn't get the point. Read my post again. If you still don't get it, sit in the corner with a dunce hat on, but only if you'd like.
BSB
-
Oooo, such a shining example of how to debate. So, how does it work?
-
"Christians" can go to Vegas with Muslims, Jews, Jains, Mormons, Tantric Buddhists or Two-Seed-in-the Spirit Predestinarian Baptists if he wishes. I just find his dumping on Morsi and blaming President Obama for Morsi's election to be more than a tad grotesque.
-
If I'm reading things right, as in logically, I don't think Cu4 is claiming that Obama directly got the latest Muslim dictator placed into power. More along the lines that Obama's inaction & piss-poor judgement, as it relates to foreign policy, in helping to facilitate the removal of a largely Ameirican allie, allowing for an even worse dictatorial outcome
-
Mubarak was certainly worse than Morsi for most Egyptians. More importantly, Mubarak never won a fair election,and Morsi did. Plus, defending ancient Mubarak was just plain stupid, he was doomed.
It would have been a major error for the US president to try to keep Mubarak in office. President Obama didprecisely the right thing. Of course, he did not put Morsi in office, nor should any US president be able to do so, any more than some Egyptian president should put a US president in office and support him.
The possibility of Egypt electing a pro-Zionist president is minuscule. Egyptians main concern at the moment is not Palestine, Gaza or Israel, though, but to for the Egyptian economy to improve.
-
Because a fella claiming he should have Pharaoh-like control is so much.......better for most Egyptians :o But at lease we can despense with the notion that Cu4 was claiming Obama directly put in place the latest Egyptian dictator
-
Again, it is best to see what happens after the new constitution is in place.
Morsi seems to be backing down,and some of those judges are Mubarak appointees. Americans do not understand Egypt or Egyptians all that well, and seeing everything in black and white terms is hardly going to result in any serious understanding.
-
It would have been a major error for the US president to try to keep Mubarak in office. President Obama didprecisely the right thing. Of course, he did not put Morsi in office, nor should any US president be able to do so, any more than some Egyptian president should put a US president in office and support him.
It's not nearly as "black and white" as you pretend or really just do not undertsand.
The US should and does....yes even Saint Obama...push American interests in these scenarios.
The US can not "not be involved" and just allow our enemies to influence situations.
Iran is trying to influence who runs Syria....
why should they, China, and Russia be the only one that have influence?
And we should sit by and allow only our enemies/competition to influence who runs countries?
You pretend "we shouldn't be involved" in picking other countries leaders...
But you had no problem with the US (Obama) basically making the decision Khadfi would
not lead the people of Libya any longer. We and our allies made that decision for Libyans.
I am sure there were Libyans that wanted to be able to choose Khadfi, but we (Obama)
did not allow them that choice.
-
It was pretty clear that Qaddaffi strafing citizens who were demonstrating against him were not in anyone's best interests. Morsi was elected by fellow Egyptians after decades of Mubarak, who never won a fair election in his life.
Which of our enemies were supporting Morsi, anyway?
Iran, China and Russia were uninvolved or involved very little in Egypt's succession,so it is bogus to say that we should try to support Mubarak, which seems to be what you wanted.
Again,President Obama did EXACTLY the right thing in this case. Supporting Mubarak was the alternative,and would have failed and made the US look both dictatorial and incompetent.
This is about the PROCESS of Egyptians choosing their own leaders, not about,as you seem to think, retaining obsolete toadies.
-
It was pretty clear that Qaddaffi strafing citizens who were demonstrating against him were not in anyone's best interests.
Saddam was using WMD's against his own people,
were you shouting for us to remove him at that point?
Hell no you weren't, because you have selective outrage.
It's ok to choose who does not run Libya, but it's a no-no in other places like Syria?
Or do you support Obama removing Assad basically "strafing citizens"?
Which of our enemies were supporting Morsi, anyway?
It remains to be seen....like I've said it's always "rah rah" in the beginning,
then in many cases gets progressively worse.
Iran, China and Russia were uninvolved or involved very little in Egypt's succession
Where did I say they were? Reading things that are not there again?
My point broadened the discussion about influencing who rules other countries.
And the US certianly needs to play a role.
But you have selective outrage on when we do and when we dont.
Again,President Obama did EXACTLY the right thing in this case.
That remains to be seen....just like in 1979 it was yea yea yea for the Mullahs
The Mullahs have proven to be a disaster and are obviously worse than the Shah.
The Shah was bad....the Mullahs are bad.
But there are big differences....The Shah did not export revolution and want to
wipe Israel off the map and point nuclear missles at lots of people.
Supporting Mubarak was the alternative,and would have failed and made the US look both dictatorial and incompetent.
Mubarak was hardly the only alternative.
This is about the PROCESS of Egyptians choosing their own leaders,
not about,as you seem to think, retaining obsolete toadies.
Ha Ha....and the Mullahs turned out to be quite the toadies!
Thats the problem....most of the time worse toads replace the former toads.
We'll see how the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood turnout....
I doubt it will be good.....that failed culture/philosophy has hardly shown brightly anywhere.
-
The US can do things that support or slow the processes of Egyptian politics , the US can criticise or praise.
But the will of the Egyptian people outranks other influences , and that is as it should be.
I am happy to see the people of Cairo demonstrating to defend democracy , I hope they get some democracy.
-
Saddam was using WMD's against his own people,
were you shouting for us to remove him at that point?
Hell no you weren't, because you have selective outrage.
===============================================
When Saddam was gassing Kurds, he was Rumsfeld's pal. No one in the US supported invading Iraq and deposing him. That happened in the1980's. The First Iraq War only sought to remove the Iraqi troops from Kuwait. Olebush did not try to remove Saddam then, either.
Only after 9-11,in which not a single Iraqi was involved, did the US decide that it was worth American lives to depose Saddam.
It is one thing to be opposed to a dictator, and quite another to want to send US troops overseas to fight a war to depose that dictator. If all the US had to do was snap its fingers and *poof!* cause Saddam to vanish,I was fine with that. We perhaps should do the same thing to Kim Jung Un as well, if it were possible.
I am opposed to Morsi taking on additional powers, but I hardly advocate sending troops to depose him,so we can impose a (chuckle) pro-Zionist ruler or whatever in Egypt.
Morsi can get away with this for as long as the Egyptian Army will support him, just like Mubarak. Once the new constitution is in place, he may or may not be want to and be able to keep his powers. This will clearly depend on the Army, how much the people demonstrating are willing to protest, and how willing the Army is to allow them to demonstrate. US Aid no doubt is one of several things that will have an impact here as well.
Morsi is better that Mubarak, because Mubarak could not quell the demonstrators without the Army's support,and he did not have the Army's support. Morsi was democratically elected, and he is certainly not perfect, but he is better than chaos.
You think that you are some kind of expert on Egypt, but you do not know diddly about it. I make no claims to be an expert, and therefore think that Egypt should sort out its own way by itself. President Obama did all he could to promote democracy.The US cannot send troops to impose a government you like on Egypt. That is not an option.
.
-
Only after 9-11,in which not a single Iraqi was involved, did the US decide that it was worth American lives to depose Saddam.
I think this an error ,didn't the 41st president invade Iraq?
Didn't the 42nd president bomb Iriqui military targets an hundred times?
-
Did 41 or 42 express a desire to invade Iraq with the express purpose of deposing Saddam?
No, neither did this.
Only Juniorbush
-
Did 41 or 42 express a desire to invade Iraq with the express purpose of deposing Saddam?
No, neither did this.
Only Juniorbush
Doesn't that make 43 the smarter of the three?
George Bush, President 41 invaded Iraq after rescuing Kuwait, hoping to avoid ownership of Iraq , he broke off attack and encouraged Iraqui uprising.
Unfortunately , this allowed Saddam to reconsolidate power and kill off his enemys , including most of the people who might have showered our troops with flowers .
Bill Clinton President 42 was content to smash Iriqui anti-aircraft guns , about one a week, and do nothing that really rescued the Iriqui people at all. Bill Clinton's time in power was hundreds of missed oppurtunitys , and in the case of Iraq , and unlanced boil allowed to fester.
-
You think that you are some kind of expert on Egypt,
Once again just making stuff up out of thin air!
Fantasy land......
The US cannot send troops to impose a government you like on Egypt. That is not an option.
No one on this website EVER advocated sending US Troops to Egypt.
But here you are once again implying something that is not reality.
Just sheer total fantasy land.
-
(http://www.foxwoodmaclean.co.uk/images/dailytelegraph-logo.jpg)
Is Egypt about to become the new Iran?
By Con Coughlin
November 28th, 2012
It is not only the anti-government protesters in Egypt's Tahrir Square who should be concerned about President Mohammed Morsi's audacious power grab. Mr Morsi's claim at the weekend that "God's will and elections made me the captain of this ship" has echoes of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's claim during the 1979 Iranian revolution that his mission to overthrow the Shah enjoyed divine guidance.
Since his announcement that he was granting himself sweeping new powers, Mr Morsi has been trying to reassure sceptical Egyptian voters that he has no ambition to become Egypt's new Pharaoh. But you only have to look at the violent scenes that have once again erupted in Tahrir Square to see that the majority of Egyptians remain unconvinced.
When Egyptian demonstrators first occupied Tahrir Square last year to call for the overthrow of Mr Morsi's predecessor, President Hosni Mubarak, they were calling for a secular, democratic system of government that would represent the interests of all Egyptians, and not just the corrupt clique of presidential supporters. Similar sentiments were expressed by Iranian demonstrators during the build-up to the Shah's overthrow in February 1979 as they sought to remove a similarly corrupt regime.
But as we now know to our cost, the worthy aspirations of the Iranian masses were hijacked by Khomeini's hardline Islamist agenda, and within months of the Shah's overthrow Iran had been transformed into an Islamic republic.
Mr Morsi says he has no desire to become a dictator, but his announcement that, henceforth, all presidential decrees will be immune from legal challenge does not bode well for Egypt's transition from military dictatorship to democracy.
I am sure I am not the only one wondering whether Mr Morsi is about to become the new Ayatollah Khomeini.
Certainly, unless Mr Morsi backs down, all those who sacrificed their lives in the cause of the Egyptian revolution will have died in vain.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/concoughlin/100191795/is-egypt-about-to-become-the-new-iran/ (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/concoughlin/100191795/is-egypt-about-to-become-the-new-iran/)
-
You think that you are some kind of expert on Egypt,
Once again just making stuff up out of thin air!
Fantasy land......
The US cannot send troops to impose a government you like on Egypt. That is not an option.
No one on this website EVER advocated sending US Troops to Egypt.
But here you are once again implying something that is not reality.
Just sheer total fantasy land.
When unable to further defend positions that are largely indefensible, or debunk points with the support of facts, it appears Xo's approach is to then argue points never made. Can't count how many times he'd done it with responses to me, although I also can't count how many times he's responded on how boring and *insert any derogatory term here* I supposedly am, yet still wants to respond. ;)
-
I also can't count how many times he's responded on how boring and *insert any derogatory term here*
========================
I haven't noticed that you are npot so good with math,anyway.
I supposedly am, yet still wants to respond. ;)
================================
And yet, you never cease to respond. You always have something to say, usually some snide asshole remark in which you attempt to change the topic to one that suits you better
The alternatives to Morsi being ELECTED were (1) keeping Mubarak in power.This was almost as unlikely as keeping the Shah in power, which was impossible, due to the Shah's being near death."Christians" was apparently all for that as well,and (2) rioting and chaos.
Now that Morsi has displeased "Christians" and apparently sirs as well, he is to be expunged by some nonspecified means.
I suggest that the Egyptians be permitted to run their own country, and that the judgment of Morsi's ability be postponed until the new constitution is implemented .
I hardly think that it can be assumed that the judges appointed by Mubarak can be assumed to be the last word on justice. The people of Egypt will demonstrate as well, and that will clearly have an impact as well.
-
Morsi has displeased "Christians" and apparently sirs as well,
More fantasy land.....more distraction BS
It's not me or SIRS....it's millions of Egyptians displeased with Morsi.
At least 200,000 people protested in Cairo's Tahrir square earlier this week against Morsi.
You pretend the Mubarak regime was soooooo unpopular,
but Morsi narrowly won a June vote against Mubarak's last prime minister.
A large secular & liberal opposition preferred Mubarak's prime minister over the Islamists.
-
I also can't count how many times he's responded on how boring and *insert any derogatory term here*
========================
I haven't noticed that you are npot so good with math,anyway.
Huh?? ???
I supposedly am, yet still wants to respond. ;)
================================
And yet, you never cease to respond.
LOL.......at least I make the effort to respond with substance vs producing the latest and greatest in leftist talking points
You always have something to say, usually some snide asshole remark in which you attempt to change the topic to one that suits you better
Only when recipricating, and rarely in trying to change the subject. That'd be your specialty, in argueing points never made
-
I do not submit myself to the points YOU expect me to make, sirs.
I am free to make any point I damn well choose.
You are simply snide.
Mubarak was lots more unpopular than Morsi, but he was also correctly viewed as a guy who could order the cops to beat you up more than Morsi. So Morsi might have the same number of protesters, or even more, and still be less unpopular.
I am all for the Egyptians deciding who runs Egypt, as opposed to "Christians" and you, for example.
-
I do not submit myself to the points YOU expect me to make, sirs.
I am free to make any point I damn well choose.
And even if they're completely irrelevent......lol.....who claimed you couldn't??
-
That would be YOU.
Most of what I have discussed here is the situation in Egypt.
Most of what you have done is carp about me.
-
Doesn't that make 43 the smarter of the three?
===================================
Yeah, sure it does.
If you forget about the 3000+ Americans who died in Iraq, the many more who were maimed for life, the millions of Iraqis rendered homeless and exiled.
The huge pile of money that was spent on this fool's errand.
If you lost a couple of arms and legs for this, I imagine that you would have occasional thoughts about how perhaps it was not actually worth the price. If you had lost a son, a brother, a father, perhaps you might think of Juniorbush as a genius less than eternally.
-
That would be YOU.
Nope, wrong again, as I never claimed you didn't have a right to type irrelevant nonsense & points not in question
-
Doesn't that make 43 the smarter of the three?
===================================
Yeah, sure it does.
If you forget about the 3000+ Americans who died in Iraq, the many more who were maimed for life, the millions of Iraqis rendered homeless and exiled.
The huge pile of money that was spent on this fool's errand.
If you lost a couple of arms and legs for this, I imagine that you would have occasional thoughts about how perhaps it was not actually worth the price. If you had lost a son, a brother, a father, perhaps you might think of Juniorbush as a genius less than eternally.
Saddam had a habit of killing , he would have killed more if left alone than he did when attacked.
Would your logic have applied diffrently in WWII?
The longer Saddam was left alone , the more Iriquis he would have killed , and the more he would have shaped Iraq to kill others.
-
Saddam had a habit of killing , he would have killed more if left alone than he did when attacked.
Would your logic have applied diffrently in WWII?
==========================================
The Kurds he gassed were in rebellion.
Of course ir=t was different that WWII, because Hitler had the desire and the ability to conquer Europe. Saddam, lacked the ability to hold on to Kuwait.
My argument is that Juniorbush mongered a war with a guy who presented zero threat to any American not in the Middle East, and it cost a huge number of lives, most of which were not American lives.
The US sat idly by and allowed tens of thousands more to be killed in the Congo. Keeping dictators from killing their people is not the major duty of the US. Juniorbush invaded Iraq unnecessarily, and without any sane plan about what to do when he won. He was the worst president, ever. And rightwing morons voted for him TWICE.
-
Obama racked up more debt in 1 term than Bush Jr in 2, unnecessarily more debt than all other presidents combined, and without any sane plan about what to do about it. He is the worst president, ever. And leftwing morons voted for him TWICE
-
That is bullcrap and you know it.
Obama had to run up debts because of the thorough mess that Juniorbush created by running the economy off a cliff. Food stamps, payments to laid off people, fewer taxes coming in because of unemployment ALL of it because of Juniorbush.
Damn, you are Stoooo pid.
-
Obama was not required to run up anything. What he had though is the perfect liberal storm....take a crisis that was largely controlled, and throw fire on it, exploding the economic crisis, and claiming even more gasoline was required. Obama himself claimed that the debt Bush ran up was "unpatriotic", and Obama managed to double it in less than 1 term
And left wing morons voted for him TWICE
-
Egyptian-American Writer Magdy Khalil:
"Morsi Has Accumulated Powers Just Like Hitler and Mussolini"
Al-Alam TV (Iran) - November 26, 2012
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/3649.htm (http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/3649.htm)
-
Saddam had a habit of killing , he would have killed more if left alone than he did when attacked.
Would your logic have applied diffrently in WWII?
==========================================
The Kurds he gassed were in rebellion.
Of course ir=t was different that WWII, because Hitler had the desire and the ability to conquer Europe. Saddam, lacked the ability to hold on to Kuwait.
My argument is that Juniorbush mongered a war with a guy who presented zero threat to any American not in the Middle East, and it cost a huge number of lives, most of which were not American lives.
The US sat idly by and allowed tens of thousands more to be killed in the Congo. Keeping dictators from killing their people is not the major duty of the US. Juniorbush invaded Iraq unnecessarily, and without any sane plan about what to do when he won. He was the worst president, ever. And rightwing morons voted for him TWICE.
Most of the people Saddam Hussein killed were in rebellion, I like to think that I would be the sort of person Saddam Hussein would need to kill.
How did Saddam Hussein present us greater threat than Hitler ?
More firepower than Hitler doesn't count ? more willingness to resort to infernal wepons than Hitler doesn't count?
George Bush had more people vote for him twice than Bill clinton did ever.
-
George Bush had more people vote for him twice than Bill clinton did ever.
Ouch!!
-
And yet, he was STILL the very, very worst president ever. There is a reason why he was not welcome or mentioned at the conventions after he screwed everything up. Not even his own party wanted to have anything to do with his sorry ass.
There is no ouch!
]
Sirs emits a DUH!
-
And yet, he was STILL the very, very worst president ever. There is a reason why he was not welcome or mentioned at the conventions after he screwed everything up. Not even his own party wanted to have anything to do with his sorry ass.
There is no ouch!
]
Sirs emits a DUH!
I agree that Clinton is the worst President ever , but by the second time Obama had forgiven him enough to let himm give a rousing speech full of blatant lies to the Democratic convention.
I remember the nosedive that the economy was in the first year of the Bush administration, which began during the Clinton administration. If you are blessed with good times , it is possible to spend and tax them away.
-
OUCH!!
-
Duh!²
-
Hey , if you like the Clinton economic acumen , you might like falling off the fiscal cliff.
First thing it does is remove the Bush tax cuts , returning the tax rates to the Clinton era levels.
-
The topic here was, of course, Egypt and Morsi. Please note that I did not change the subject.
The Democrats embraced Bill Clinton, along with most of the country.
It is quite unlikely that Juniorbush or "deficits don't matter" Cheney will ever speak at a GOP convention again.
-
The topic here was, of course, Egypt and Morsi. Please note that I did not change the subject.
The Democrats embraced Bill Clinton, along with most of the country.
It is quite unlikely that Juniorbush or "deficits don't matter" Cheney will ever speak at a GOP convention again.
That depends on how dissapointed we all are with President Obama's promise to return the economy to Clinton style economics.
Oh yes Egypt....(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_leoGYAeiH44/TUTkomPk8mI/AAAAAAAAMos/ijpZiRAKZKg/s400/PHO-09Sep24-179271.jpg)
For some odd reason , some of our allies think of us as fair weather friends.
http://karakullake.blogspot.com/2011/01/mubarak-with-reagan-bush-i-clinton-bush.html (http://karakullake.blogspot.com/2011/01/mubarak-with-reagan-bush-i-clinton-bush.html)
-
The topic here was, of course, Egypt and Morsi. Please note that I did not change the subject.
Not exactly true, either (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/3dhs/toldya-trade-in-one-bad-guy-for-another-and-it-was-gonna-be-so-great!-ha!/msg147220/#msg147220)
When Saddam was gassing Kurds, he was Rumsfeld's pal. No one in the US supported invading Iraq and deposing him. That happened in the1980's. The First Iraq War only sought to remove the Iraqi troops from Kuwait. Olebush did not try to remove Saddam then, either
That'd be you injecting Bush, Rumsfeld, and later on, Bush Jr. Or what would you be referring to as "changing the subject"?
-
Get stuffed, sirs.
You are a waste of time.
-
And yet you continue to respond, somewhat debunking the notion of wasting time, otherwise you wouldn't be wasting your own, Cuing Mr. Nicholson's line in "A Few Good Men"....."YOU WANT THE TRUTH?....YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH" 8)
-
A really stupid line from an overwrought film.
I do not think that you actually have even a passing acquaintance with any sort of truth.
You seem to actually believe that I have some influence with the Obama Administration,and that my refusal to debate stupid topics with you has some sort of national consequences. But of course, this is not at all true. Nor is it in any sense accurate that you are capable of rational debate.
My main point in this particular discussion is that the US cannot and should not interfere in Egyptian politics at this point, and the best thing we could do is simply wait and see how the new Egyptian constitution affects the Morsi government, as opposed to trying to foment unrest or overthrow Morsi. Morsi was elected in the fairest election in Egyptian history. I am sure I would never vote for Morsi, but then again, I am not Egyptian.
There was a good article about women's rights and social attitudes toward women in the Nov. 12th, 2012 issue of the New Yorker,in which women who protested in Tahir Square and were beaten for their efforts were interviewed. The main interviewee had to leave her conservative family and was debating whether it was better to stay in Egypt or move to Australia.
Egypt is generally regarded as the most influential country in the Arab cultural world. Women would surely be better off if Tunisia, the UAE or perhaps Qatar were, but they are not.
-
A really stupid line from an overwrought film.
You seem to actually believe that I have some influence with the Obama Administration
Still arguing points never made I see. SOP I guess
-
When will you understand that I do not give even one royal poop about what your points might or might not be?
I refuse to be restricted by your silly points. Won't you ever get it? I am not debating you.
Go handle your"truth" all by your own silly self.
-
Sirs , please , either quit talking to XO or give him his goat back.
-
When will you understand that I do not give even one royal poop about what your points might or might not be?
Perhaps when you understand that debating issues not being made or arguing claims never made, is just you being unable refute the points/claims that WERE made....so you have to pull in the proverbial deflective strawman and beat that to death, as if that was the point
You can bring up any irrelevant "silly point" you want. Just don't think you're going to get a pass at not being able to debunk the relevant points that were made
Won't you ever get it? I am not debating you.
Responding to me, IS debating me. You get to chose if you want to provide the effort at making it a serious one or moronic one
Go handle your"truth" all by your own silly self.
See, that would fall under the latter effort
-
Sirs , please , either quit talking to XO or give him his goat back.
LOL.....sorry....my bad ;)
-
Goat?
-
Goat?
It is coded XO , you can get the decoder ring and dog whistle if you start attending the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy picnicks.
-
On the menu at the next picnic:
Cooked goose, crow and humble pie.
-
That is exactly the conservative menu plan for after President Obama's financial success.
After his program is enacted and fails , there will be plenty of crow for everyone , because we do not expect it to be anything like a success.
-
What Boehner proposes in taxes raises only half as much as what the President proposes, so the Republican solution is inferior for those who understand arithmetic.
-
It's called compromise. Where's the President on his supposed "balanced approach"??. It's AWOL, demonstrating that the Democrat solution is not only inferior, but actually flunks arithmetic
-
What Boehner proposes in taxes raises only half as much as what the President proposes, so the Republican solution is inferior for those who understand arithmetic.
I think you have this more than backwards.
Nevertheless I see that we can both agree that neither of these plans is a serious plan for reduction of debt.
The other question is , which one is more destructive of the economy and employment?
-
That'd be the one that does largely squat on bringing down the debt, but saddles those who are largely the job creators the ongoign disincentive to do anything in the way of expanding or hiring, because of the higher taxes they'd be mandated to pay.
But boy, are we going to stick it to "the rich"
-
A measly 4% increase in taxes on income over $250K is not sticking anything to anyone. Don't be an idiot.
-
And since it won't even begin to dent the debt, even a measely amount, WHY DO IT, when the repercussions are to stagnate job growth and unemployment all the more....if it's not about "sticking it to 'the rich'"?
Did you flunk economics 101 as well as arithmetic? You did Ace classwarfare, I'll grant you that
-
A measly 4% increase in taxes on income over $250K is not sticking anything to anyone. Don't be an idiot.
4% is more than the profit margin of an oil company.
It isn't just the amount or the rate that matter , the context matters too.
If the top 2% are responsible for ten times as many hires as the next 2% lower is , then, a subtraction from the top two percents resorces makes ten times the diffrence to employment that a subtraction from the second 2% would.
This is probly the reason that no one is talking about the increase in payroll taxes that is coming down the road, although it will steal a bit from the workingmans standard of living , it is mostly going to bother the people who don't hire anybody.