|
Paradox Personified posted:Why's that horrible, if I may ask? Because in the past most of the people elected through the farmer/worker law couldn't even read or write, and those who did, most of them never had any form of higher education. They were not useful in any legislative, law-making process, which is the point of the parliament here.
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
Mattimer posted:And their inclusion in parliament doesn't guarantee that the sectors they're representing will "have a say", it just guarantees that people smarter than them will be able to sway their vote. I wouldn't say smarter people, I'm not saying these people are "dumb", just that they don't have the education or capacity to participate in the law-making process, and they're mostly elected through family ties in their districts. You have to remember Egypt is a country where 40%+ cannot read or write, and an even higher percentage don't have college degrees.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:24
|
|
|
Toaster Ding posted:But look where electing only 'qualified' people gets us in a highly stratified society. They will tend to consolidate power in their social class and make it increasingly harder for anyone else to break in. Couple that with the fact that political landscapes are made up of leaders and yes-men anyways and it may not be that much of a difference. I don't think this applies in Egypt since we're already in the same situation the US is in, where these people will consolidate power in their social class. These illiterate people aren't poor, they're actually relatively rich and own huge swathes of land/some corporations in their name. They're not poor, they're rich by inheritance and that's how they get seats in a mostly poor society.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
t3ch3 posted:Keep in mind that the result of a "No" vote would have been continued de facto military rule in Egypt for a year or more. Supporters of the "No" vote made noises about a technocratic advisory council to help the military manage affairs, but never agreed on a time frame for the eventual parliamentary votes. The result of a no-vote would be the writing of a completely new constitution whilst delaying parliamentary elections until non-Muslim Brotherhood or NDP political parties can actually organize for elections. quote:Still, it appears that the likely result of this "Yes" vote will be a new government with a large representation from the Muslim Brotherhood and it will be very interesting to see how the US and Israel react to that. Not this soon, you'll have to wait till the new parliament is in and see if it's MB dominated. If it is, they have the ability to rewrite the constitution as they want, effectively turning the country over to them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:41
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:Ham, I've heard predictions that this referendum helps both the Muslim Brotherhood and the NDP. Could you tell us about who is still voting for the NDP after the events of the last few months? Old elites, or is there actual support from the masses for them? Not support from the masses, but most of the NDP are businessmen extremely popular in their areas of residence/districts. These are people that can count on most people in their district voting for them out of family ties, charity etc. And there's some people who still actually support Mubarak and the NDP and they go by the slogan "We're sorry, Mr. President" and I know a few of them. NDP members are also organizing and forming new parties such as "Youth for Change" and "The youth of Januray 25th".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
Verizian posted:Sorry Ham, welcome to I don't mind the results because I believe the process was fair and conducted professionally, I accept the results but it doesn't mean I necessarily agree with them. What this really means is that non-religious parties need to seriously step up their game in the few months left to parliamentary elections so we don't have one party with most of the power.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
shotgunbadger posted:And they do actual good for the people and their 'dragging god in' is basically just a unifying force, and they're actually nothing like the republicans and the only people who doubt if they can 'handle freedom' are the same people who think 'aaah Muslim Brotherhood, terrists!' so unless they do the insane and remove them totally from the country the racists will always do that. I'm sure telling people that anyone who votes no or contradicts their opinions is an apostate worhy of death is completely benevolent. I'm not saying this is how they'll carry themselves later on, or that they will restrict freedom but it gives you something to think about when considering what could happen and what lengths they're prepared to take when they use religious power in order to sway a civil election/referendum.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 19:58
|
|
|
Narmi posted:Ham, I know the MB said they weren't going to field a candidate for the presidency, and the I'd imagine the NDP likely won't be successful either (unless they run someone under a different group), so what does this mean for the two guys (ElBaradei and Moussa) who seem to be the two biggest contenders with a chance of winning the presidency? Does ElBaradei even have a party he can run under? From what I recall, Moussa was pro-NDP, so would he get support from them? They don't need the position of the president if they control the parliament, and both Amr Moussa and Baradei aren't actually affiliated to any real parties. And no, there's no way an NDP candidate can take the presidency. quote:During the protests, they joined in pretty late in the game and kept their heads down. Also, everyone who was asked about them said they weren't worried about them making any power plays because they would get at most 10% of the vote. It seems odd that they're making a power grab all things considered. You have to consider that there's Cairo, and then there's Egypt.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
Libyan army orders immediate cease-fire.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
Need to be able to understand Arabic for this, but it's still pretty amazing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft2Ujcqnsk0 Libyan TV presenter talks about the "adoption" of resolution 1973 by other countries and Libya and says: "As we all know in Islam, adoption is haram! No one can adopt this resolution!". That rule is about child adoption....... I wonder who actually uses these hallucination pills? 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2011 01:48
|
|
|
farraday posted:Is there any chance for a word for word translation for that? "It is known that adoption may be legal according to law, but religiously uhhhh it remains a forbidden subject, I mean the prophet peace be upon him told us so and there's many examples and evidence in our islamic faith that proves that adoption is forbidden by Allah and I think that the adoption of this resolution is considered forbidden by Allah." Bla bla bla we've got a telephone call oh wait he heard my batshit crazy theory and said gently caress it then "I want to assure you, thanks to god 3 members that are Russia, Germany and China have abstained from voting, and India and Brazil had neutral stances as well...." That stuff in Islam about adoption? It's all about adopting children and she actually has it all wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
Vir posted:Seriously, are they using the English word for "adoption" and directly mistranslating it or something? No they's literally that insane, adopt in english means the exact same in Arabic, both for children and for UN resolutions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2011 02:02
|
|
|
He calls him Khadafy?  That has to be the most inaccurate pronunciation ever.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2011 23:45
|
|
|
National Democratic Party (Egypt's ruling party for over 33 years) has just been dissolved by law!http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/04/2011416125051889315.html posted:An Egyptian court has dissolved the former ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) and ordered its funds and property to be handed over to the government. Very interesting, this basically leaves the Muslim Brotherhood as the most powerful and organized voting force on the scene right now. NDP officials have said they will appeal the ruling.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 15:29
|
|
|
Jut posted:So much for democracy. Regardless of how bad the NDP may have been, it should have been up to the population of Egypt to decide via election votes if the party was worth keeping around or not. Here's excerpts from the DA's official report on the case: quote:It got dissolved for "....the NDP has ignored and stepped away from the principles and values behind it's founding; which resulted in social dysfunction, political corruption and the abuse and elimination of rights and freedoms provided by the Egyptian constitution which pushed the Egyptian people into revolting in the 25th of January Revolution.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
Jut posted:I never said there was a split, and don't pretend to imagine there is, but banning political parties goes against the spirit of democracy. They, like anyone else should have been given the right to stand for election and let the people decide, not the courts. Banning them is little different to how the MB were banned under Mubarak's rule. Anyway given the NDP's performance in the 2000 and 2005 elections, I doubt had they been allowed to stand that they would have taken a significant proportion of the vote. Jut I think you're thinking too much of this. The NDP itself is dissolved but it's members can join any other party/form other parties and still work in politics, they're not banned from political work/office. Also there's rumors the military will employ a system in the next parliamentary elections where you vote for a party, not for an individual so that if MB gets 4 million out of 20 million party votes they get 20% of the seats, so every vote "counts" as opposed to the system where you elect a certain individual. However this would shut the door in front of independents. Ham fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Apr 16, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 22:19
|
|
|
farraday posted:Except if they did that they might not be wrong since the NDP is the only group which can save us from the MB. The only thing stopping the MB or more extreme islamists from gaining a majority in parliament at this point is the military, the NDP wouldn't have stood a chance. It's better that the NDP has now dissolved so people can rally behind other secular parties to face-off against the MB instead of supporting the NDP against them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
 You guys are fun, farraday and JutJut posted:Ham, do you know anything else about the political power plays going on over there? Does it look like the military council may make a play for power during the elections? Any chance of them pulling a Iliescu? The military council at this point can't really do anything but follow on with reform. I know it's hard to believe but the group with the actual power in Egypt are in fact the people. Why do you think Mubarak, his sons and his closest allies got arrested? Why was the NDP only dissolved now? So even if the council is against reform, they have no choice but to move along with it or be removed by their own officers from within the army. As for the elections themselves, right now it's uncertain but the military has officially announced it will not be producing any candidates from the military institution, however there are rumors they might back Amr Moussa.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2011 11:22
|
|
|
  Happy news for Egyptologists everywhere - Zahi Hawass, newly appointed Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs - has been sentenced to one year in prison, removal from his job as minister and a $1800 fine for neglecting to put into effect a court ruling regarding a conflict between his former institution (where he held the title of Chief Archeologist) and a citizen over a piece of land.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
Salafis are basically extremely religious Wahhabi islamists who would like to enforce sharia 100% in Egypt to try and get back to the religious, economical and social values prevailing in 7th century Arabia by the prophet's followers. Some of them call for stuff like demolishing pharaonic artifacts, abolishing democracy since it's "against sharia" according to them and enforcing religious rule in Egypt. Other issues include separation of sexes and female clothing. They're also the guys that want this terrorist that participated in the planning of the 1993 terror bombing released from his life sentence in the U.S Images from their protest in front of the U.S embassy in Cairo five days ago: http://www.masrawy.com/News/Egypt/Politics/2011/april/21/US_Embassy.aspx This is a salafi terrorist (white beard, Abud Al Zumur) and one of the main planners of the assassination of Sadat, he was released shortly after the revolution: 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2011 21:13
|
|
|
Fatah and Hamas agree to end feud, form a new government in a deal brokered by Egypt! Palestinian Unity! http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/27/us-palestinians-reconciliation-idUSTRE73Q50820110427 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/27/us-palestinians-reconciliation-idUSTRE73Q50820110427 posted:CAIRO | Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:01pm EDT AMAZING news, kudos to the military council in Egypt, the interim government. In 2 months they managed to do what Mubarak couldn't in decades.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 18:36
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:THIS JUST IN: The facebook of the women driving campaign has been taken down, and the girl responsible has been transferred from detainment to FULL ON PRISON. also her brother was sent to detainment with the charge of encouraging his sister to do the deed. Detainment means that you hang around in a police department while prison is the hole in the ground with shivs and whatnot. Does that seriously mean what I think it means? Saudi culture is hosed up, can't believe you have people who are actually against women driving (most of the saudi forums I see online are very much against it).
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2011 15:07
|
|
|
Paradox Personified posted:No, not backwards.. Egypt's always had internet filtering but before the revolution it was only aimed at any Egyptian political blogs or websites.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2011 11:20
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:How did they "check" that those girls weren't virgins? Female military personell (usually medics and nurses) check the hymen.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2011 00:07
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:Well, gently caress. There's no one organizing protests over this. Not saying that the article isn't true, but I know several people who were arrested that day, one whom is a female, and she said she wasn't forced to do a virginity test or to take off her clothes. Still if true it's pretty horrible. Here's another fun one for you guys: Males joining the Egyptian military have to have their anus examined by a physician to verify that they're not gay. Yep. Ham fucked around with this message at 07:37 on Jun 1, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2011 07:31
|
|
|
Saleh probably staged this "attack" himself, definitely wouldn't put it past him.
Ham fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jun 3, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:NileSat, who has been ignoring the agreement made by Arab countries to stop broadcasting Libyan State TV, most likely because the owner is a friend of Gaddafi's, has been given one week to shut the channel down or face prosecution in Egypt for aiding Gaddafi with his war crimes. NileSat is a publicly traded government-run broadcasting company, it has no specific owner other than a majority stake by the government.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
I was near the Balloon theatre in Giza when it all started last night, and it wasn't really clear who was doing what. What I saw was tens of people rocking the gates to the theater and trying to break in, while the police tried to arresta few. Wasn't really sure what was going on but from later reading, apparently several of the revolution martyr's families were either denied entry to the theatre during a ceremonial event dedicated to the martyrs of the revolution, because they didn't have tickets, or a couple of college girls aggravated them by saying something about Mubarak being innocent. In anycase, breaking into theatres or acting as if in a riot isn't a very good way to pay respect to the martyr's memories, but I don't have the full story. Video of martyr families: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8o6eJGGG1E In anycase, after police clashes by the theatre, apparently they escpaed/moved towards Tahrir square on the other side of the Nile where they went to protest while faced by scores of CSF security. Video of clashes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDafD1hI2X0 Not really sure how to feel about it. I agree that SCAF is kinda bumbling about, it began with the committee they appointed to set-up the framework of a new constituion, which turned out to be a very badly worded one and then with Mubarak still being held in a hospital in Sharm El Sheikh, trials getting constantly delayed and the like, but in all it seems like the people who initiated the riot at the theatre are the ones to blame. quote:Do you think this will make the military council reconsider their position, or just making them more hardline? Which position? Mubarak's trial? Delaying elections? Constitution first?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2011 10:04
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Mainly the elections and consitution elements. I doubt it'll change their position on anything, but you have to remember that these struggles are actually for another struggle: islamists vs. secularists/liberals/socialists/capitalists. Most of the people who attack elections before constitution are the non-islamists, whatever their political orientation. They feel like the government is handing power to the islamists on a platter. Chief among these groups are the April 6 Youth, who helped organize the revolt in Mahalla Al-Kubra several years ago, and the revolution this year. This also harkens back to the "2nd Friday of Rage" some weeks ago, when secular political factions protested in Tahrir about the "apparent" agreement between SCAF and the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact it got so heated the MB called all of the protestors traitors who didn't deserve to be Egyptian. This, what's going on right now, is a mixture of 2 viewpoints: Those who feel that SCAF is being too lenient on former regime personell, and those who feel SCAF is handing Egypt to islamists on a platter. But there's a significant problem here, for most Egyptians it's economy before democracy, and Islam before equality. This means that the more groups like April 6 call for protests, the more they're ostracized out of a mainstream that increasingly sees them as the main blocking force to economic prosperity, or the pereceived prosperity they saw with Mubarak compared to post-revolution with the economy going down for Jan-May. Islamists profit in several ways here. As they're seen not to participate in these protests, but even criticize them, most of the already Islamic-leaning population will sympathize with them and with their stated cause for not participating: "restoring security and economic prosperity". El Anansi posted:E: @Ham, how'd you happen to be in that particular part of Giza last night? I live in Mohandessin, was coming back from ASU in Abbasia and took the 15th May bridge. El Anansi posted:Good god I wish people would stop paying attention to Gigi Ibrahim. Homegirl is seriously dumb as a rock and--I poo poo ye not--only got excited about revolutionary politics because she was taking a class on revolutionary politics. Although it is a testament to the disingenuousness of the American press's (It's a purely ideological struggle by brave secularist liberals who want democracy! It had nothing at all to do with economic concerns re: skyrocketing food prices and not having any drat jobs) frame of the Egyptian uprising that they made a frontwoman out of an AUC aristocrat whose family is insanely rich because of the Mubarak kleptocracy. Gigi is kind of a dolt: "Some thugs wet and threw rocks at cops, so the cops chased them and then we joined the thugs in throwing rocks at the pigs in Tahrir!!" Other than that, you have to realize that it's not just the western media that puts that face on the revolution. The Egyptian media has been doing it since Feb. 11, where they labelled it primarily as a middle class revolution for freedom, democracy and social equity. In fact, almost all the "martyr montages" people see are of middle class dudes/girls who died in the revolution. It's just a nicer face, for both the Egyptian middle class and up and the western media than basically saying: "Some poor people in Egypt protested for economy and food." One final point about this, the revolution was about many things. Some will tell you it's just about economy and food for the majority of poor people, but that's wrong. Most of Egypt's middle and upper-middle class participated, and when I was with friends it was because of police brutality, civil rights and economic reform aimed at the poor. It wasn't about our own economical gain.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2011 14:47
|
|
|
Over 1100 wounded due to the events of the riot in Cairo so far. And what the gently caress is going on here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMrMDNOFgQ0
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2011 19:04
|
|
|
Jut posted:Some news from Egypt. People are getting pissy because the transition govt is following proper legal procedure. This isn't the reason they're getting pissy. The actual reason is that the military is arranging a bunch of backroom deals with the deceased's families, such as paying them up to $120,000 in cash (the islamic diyya for the dead). The families agree to stop prosecuting the offending officers, but as they can't really waive the deceased's right, they just say "it wasn't this police officer" when there's actual evidence that would indict that officer. That means the charges are "legally" aimed at a John Doe. And the people getting pissed? Actual political activists who don't really give a poo poo about wether someone's family gets $120,000 because they died. Jut posted:The fact remains, he could have caused a hell of a lot more poo poo than he did before standing down. CQ's gone way further than he did, so I seriously doubt he's getting any kind of immunity. AllanGordon posted:Anyway didn't Mubarak order the military to fire on the protestors and it got refused? I remember hearing that said a lot during the protests in Egypt. Mubarak couldn't really have caused any more hell. He was trying to hang on to the last moment, in fact he convinced the military he would step down on Feb 10. but he didn't, which made the military force him out the next day. And what is definitely fact is that Mubarak did order the military to open fire on the protestors all over the country on the eve of 29th January, and that the top brass had previously issued a sort of poll to most units asking how they would respond to the hypothetical event of being ordered to shoot unarmed civilian protestors. The result was a resounding No, and I think the top brass never really bothered giving the order anyway, but that's unknown. There may have been a split in how the brass wanted to handle it, some say the air force and the republican guard were on Mubarak's side, but the truth probably won't go public for 10 years or more. So basically, what is definitely 100% true is that Mubarak did order the military to open fire on the protestors, and that somehow, the military didn't follow through. Anything else you read about this is probably rumor.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2011 21:58
|
|
|
Just been to Tahrir square, it's 11 PM and the mood was pretty jovial, probably about 4000-5000 people packed in already. No soldiers or officers in sight, the military is stepping out of tomorrow's demonstrations. I'll be participating, will take pictures if I can.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2011 22:11
|
|
|
Sivias posted:Hey Ham! Good to see you're doing well still. Are the demonstrations for a specific reason, or is it just general upset with how the military are performing? Not so much upset as it is egging them on really. It's basically an amalgamation of many different ideas/perspectives into one big demonstration, in the end the common points are going to boil down to: Immediate and public trial of Mubarak and his allies, faster trials for police officers and corrupt officials, better police presence, real progress towards democracy, removing government appointed university staff and former NDP governors etc. A couple important but not universally agreed upon points are delaying elections and writing the constitution first, and there's some minor points such as civilian marriage (called for by Egyptian copts who can't get a divorce unless it's sanctioned by the church) and an idiotic idea to set a maximum wage.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
Jut posted:Wouldn't this go against the results of the previous referendum? Have people changed their mind? It would go against it yes, and people haven't changed their minds. Remember that 23% voted No  It's just that those people still hold the same view. Of course it's also understandable that the military goes with the majority of voters.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2011 23:18
|
|
|
Imminent governmental change in Egypt, things have been really heating up since Friday, especially in Suez and Tahrir Square.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2011 18:46
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:
Not really. No one really knows what's going to happen, Sharaf is held back by the military. If things don't get better by the end of this month, he'll most likely resign. For a neutral observer, it seems like the beginning of a military junta. If Mubarak isn't tried/gets off on his charges, it'll be chaotic. Oh and Jut no one wants kangaroo courts, in fact the same protestors are protesting the fact the officers are getting fired without a trial, it's just that there are no fair trials, the current courts are disregarding the evidence and giving not guilty sentences because the judges are corrupt former-NDP. We don't have a jury system, 3 judges pass out sentences and if it's a not guilty sentence, an appeal is useless as you can't give a punishment higher than the first sentence, only lower. This means that if Mubarak and his sons were to receive not guilty sentences on their charges they'd be off like nothing happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2011 15:45
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Couple of small updates, Egypt Minister of Interior has annouced the largest reshuffling in the history of the police, including the exclusion of 505 police Four thousand officers in total.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2011 16:16
|
|
|
Are you guys not following anything in Egypt? Massive anti-SCAF demonstrations that started as a march from Tahrir Square to SCAF headquarters at the Ministry of Defense in Cairo, and more demonstrations in Suez and Alexandria. At least 300 wounded so far, no confirmed fatalities, demonstrators were attacked by "thugs". Spent 6 hours trying to get out of that mess, army has the whole area locked down. Things are looking pretty grim. Also the Muslim Brotherhood has announced that contrary to their previous statements, they will be actually competing for the presidency. Great day in Egypt.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2011 00:08
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:Welp, it's on. Either pro-SCAF demonstrators/residents of that area/police or military hired thugs. Probably a mixture of all three.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2011 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
el samayo grande posted:I think the reference was to the Freedom and Justice Party, which has Muslim Brotherhood members. The Freedom and Justice party IS the Muslim Brotherhood party. It's their political arm.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2011 17:19
|
|