What's new

Egypt | Army Ousts Mursi govt, violence erupts | News & Discussions

@Developereo



False. The people on the streets do not have control over the house of representatives. Even if every single citizen of Egypt, every one of the 90 millions nation, except the few hundreds representatives, were in the streets there was nothing legal to be done. According to you it is alright to completely ignore the wishes of 99.999999% of the people for 4 years at a time because they are not the few hundreds of representatives?



Your use of the word "tantrum" to describe legitimate concerns of the civilians is pure demagogy, how about we stick to arguments? I have shown supreme court has no power to impeach the president. Actually demonstrating when the actions of the government goes against the will is the true democracy. Democracy is not appointing a despot council for 4 years. In a democracy the moment the ruling class goes against the majority of the people it is automatically looses legitimacy, there is no need to wait 4 years!
Democracy is the rule of the people by the people for the people. not the right to have election every 4 years!



Ah? peaceful demonstrations are the epitome of exercising democratic rights. Taking to the streets peacefully when the government acts against the wishes of the public is exactly the right message, if you want to practice democracy that is?



You said that Mubarak family rule was not taken down ultimately by the military, I have shown it is false. As Morsi had legitimacy even though the elections were allowed thanks to the military, so would the next president should the army hold election as promised.



I was trying to sounds like you, re your remark about the USA supporting civil war, to reflects how it appears :)

I hardly ever laugh out loud over internet remarks, thank you!

You need to see a Psychiatrist as you are making no sense at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Impeachment by the appropriate authorities (House of Reps?). If the protesters were truly representative of Egyptian society at large, they could have pressured their local rep to start impeachment proceedings.
I think it's better to have the Egyptians here answer these points than I.

If there was mass dissatisfaction with Obama, would you advocate a military coup or impeachment?
Military coup is very different from impeachment. Impeachment is a legal process and the U.S. has gone through with it twice and a third president resigned as the impeachment process was about to start - the other two remained in office. Impeachment did not mean the Constitution was suspended.

In case of "mass dissatisfaction" I can't see the need for a coup. Our democratic system is pretty responsive to mass movements. But I'm not sure I can draw an accurate parallel here; we've never seen anything like the Egyptian situation where an astounding one fifth of the population participated in demonstrations - numbers greater than those who voted in favor of the M-B's "Constitution" in the first place.
 
Is it mainly because the Army is by and large secular and Morsi was an Islamist and hence inconvenient?

There are lots of theories, half of them contradicting the other half.

I honestly don't know which ones to believe.

Military coup is very different from impeachment.

I know, which is why I asked the question in the first place.

You would want the matter resolved through proper Constitutional channels instead of a military coup in the US.

That is what I was asking and why you wouldn't want the same process in Egypt. Isn't impeachment one of the crown jewels of the democratic process and a useful lesson for burgeoning democracies to learn? That democracy is a self-correcting system and there is no need for external force.
 
Muslim Brotherhood site says Egypt’s new president is secretly Jewish.
By Max Fisher, Published: July 5, 2013 at 11:02 am E-mail the writer


IkhwanOnline, the official Web site of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, posted an article on Thursday asserting that the country’s new interim president, Adly Mansour, is secretly Jewish. The article, since taken offline, suggested that Mansour was part of an American and Israeli conspiracy to install Mohamed ElBaradei, a former U.N. official and Egyptian opposition figure, as president.
Mansour, the supreme justice of Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court, was sworn in as interim president on Thursday after the military announced that President Mohamed Morsi was no longer in charge. Morsi was a close ally of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has held large demonstrations protesting his ouster. That the Muslim Brotherhood would be suspicious of Mansour, and of the military that toppled Morsi to install him, is not surprising.

Still, the IkhwanOnline article suggests that some elements of the Muslim Brotherhood may be indulging in conspiracy theories that ignore their own role in public outrage about Morsi’s rule and may be promoting the anti-Semitic ideas that engendered so much international skepticism of their rule. There is no indication that there is any truth to the article.
The article cited as its source the purported Facebook page of an al-Jazeera Arabic broadcaster, although it’s not clear whether the Facebook page is real. The article claims that Mansour is “considered to be a Seventh Day Adventist, which is a Jewish sect” (in fact, Seventh Day Adventism is considered part of Protestant Christianity). It further claims that Mansour tried to convert to Christianity but was rebuffed by the Coptic pope, a major Egyptian religious figure, who supposedly refused to baptize him.
The article goes on to connect Mansour’s appointment as president to a global conspiracy involving the United States, Israel and Mohamed ElBaradei. According to a translation by the site MBInEnglish, which is run by Cairo-based journalists and dedicated to translating Brotherhood-penned articles into English, the article claimed that ElBaradei had refused to participate in a conference that denied the Holocaust. This, it says, was “a token gesture offered to the Jews by ElBaradei so that he can become President of the Republic in the fake elections that the military will guard and whose results they will falsify in their interests. All with the approval of America, Israel and the Arabs, of course.”
The article has since been removed, suggesting perhaps that someone in the Brotherhood had acknowledged the potential for criticism. It would be wrong to conclude from just this one article that the Muslim Brotherhood was retreating back into some of its worst habits: conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism, the insistence that no disagreement could be legitimate. But now that the group has been forced from power, this is a very real risk — not just for the group and its chances of regaining power, but for an Egyptian political system that is dangerously divided.

Source: Washington Post.
 
They will get over it!! Don't call our revolution aganist facist Islamists a coup again please. People deman their basic human rights and if anybody can not accept that, they can can simply burn in hell.
 
You would want the matter resolved through proper Constitutional channels instead of a military coup in the US. That is what I was asking and why you wouldn't want the same process in Egypt. Isn't impeachment one of the crown jewels of the democratic process and a useful lesson for burgeoning democracies to learn?
It's a good point. Sorry I don't see the Egyptians here answering it - maybe because they see this as a "Turkish" thread - but there is a pretty easy answer in this case. The lower parliament, the House of Representatives that according to the Constitution runs the impeachment process, was dissolved by the courts last month and a new one wouldn't have been elected for months - assuming Morsi would have allowed its election to take place: link
 
They will get over it!! Don't call our revolution aganist facist Islamists a coup again please. People deman their basic human rights and if anybody can not accept that, they can can simply burn in hell.

Syrian revolutionaries unhappy with Egyptians!:sick:

 
Back
Top Bottom