The Egyptian coup plotters go full thug

[basketcase]

As I said, caught lying and tried to change the topic.


The Brotherhood people were told not to vote. Obviously with the massive support the vote received, the Brotherhood was still extremely successful at getting their message out. They could have been told to vote against the constitution. Either way, that is how democracy works.

Even with the boycott, more people voted in favour of this constitution than for Morsi's.

 

[fuji]

As I said, caught lying and tried to change the topic.

The Brotherhood people were told not to vote. Obviously with the massive support the vote received, the Brotherhood was still extremely successful at getting their message out. They could have been told to vote against the constitution. Either way, that is how democracy works.

Even with the boycott, more people voted in favour of this constitution than for Morsi's.

The brotherhood told people not to vote because the brotherhood were excluded from participating.

You continue to dodge the fundamentally undemocratic nature of the vote: the repression of all opposing views, the mass arrests, the violence at the polling station, the suppression of any opposition campaigning, the arrest of journalists, and the shuttering of opposing media.

There is no reason to believe that they didn't simply stuff the ballot boxes but even without doing that, the repression that characterized the election us completely undemocratic.

It was not free nor was it fair.

 

[basketcase]

The brotherhood told people not to vote because the brotherhood were excluded from participating....

What exactly are you talking about?

The Brotherhood told people not to participate in the constitutional vote. There was no reason for them to 'participate' as it was not an election. Being a referendum every citizen merely voted on whether they approve or disapprove of the constitution.

All international observers said it was a well run election (far better than the Brotherhood's vote) and despite the Brotherhood pushing for a boycott, more people approved this constitution than Morsi's. Take a look back at all the voting irregularities under Morsi and compare them to the new constitutional vote.

The Brotherhood promoted a boycott (which you got caught lying about - but you now admit to) and their supporters chose the democratic right not to vote.


No, the current government is not a paragon of open democracy but your attempts to portray the Brotherhood as democratic is laughable.

 

[basketcase]

The Brotherhood didn't "choose to promote a boycott",....

The brotherhood told people not to vote....

Hmmm.

 

[fuji]

Hmmm.

They were banned from participating, how was that a choice? Once banned they told people not to vote.

Meanwhile you continue to pull a gryfin, arguing a petty point to avoid the substantive issue of how repressive the dictatorship has been, how unfree the vote was.

 

[basketcase]

They were banned from participating, how was that a choice? Once banned they told people not to vote.

Meanwhile you continue to pull a gryfin, arguing a petty point to avoid the substantive issue of how repressive the dictatorship has been, how unfree the vote was.

You do know this was a referendum on the constitution, not an election right? People had the chance to vote yes or no. Instead of using their resources to tell people to vote no, they told their people not to vote (likely because they knew they would lose anyways). The results show how much impact the Brotherhood boycott had. Even if all the people who voted for Morsi's constitution voted against this one, they would have lost.


You keep saying that it wasn't a free vote. Care to show any evidence of this? (as opposed to the numerous irregularities reported on during Morsi's vote)

The Brotherhood didn't "choose to promote a boycott",....

The brotherhood told people not to vote....

Hmmm.

 

[fuji]

You do know this was a referendum on the constitution, not an election right? People had the chance to vote yes or no. Instead of using their resources to tell people to vote no, they told their people not to vote (likely because they knew they would lose anyways).

Their party was banned, their leaders jailed in mass arrested, their rallies dispersed with lethal force, their media banned, foreign journalists who gave them airtime arrested and prosecuted, people were arrested even for just hanging up a "vote no" sign.

What resources are you referring to?

The results show how much impact the Brotherhood boycott had. Even if all the people who voted for Morsi's constitution voted against this one, they would have lost.

You mean assuming the ballots weren't simply stuffed?

I can't imagine why you support such s horrendously undemocratic process.

You keep saying that it wasn't a free vote. Care to show any evidence of this? (as opposed to the numerous irregularities reported on during Morsi's vote)

Are you REALLY unaware of the widespread reporting on the repression that surrounded that vote?

The US State Department certainly was aware of how flawed it was:

In a statement, Mr. Kerry listed the concerns of international monitors, including the "polarized political environment," the absence of an inclusive drafting process or public debate before the vote, the arrests of those who campaigned against it, and procedural violations during the balloting

Oh and the NYT also noted:

The near unanimity of the vote was plausible because the government thoroughly suppressed any opposition to the new charter. A campaign of arrests and mass shootings has crippled the Brotherhood, the main opposition group, which**was formally outlawed**three weeks ago, and it had called for a boycott of the plebiscite. Almost no critics of the charter were able to express their views in the news media or on the streets. And several activists were arrested just for hanging signs urging a "no" vote.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/01/1...stitution-and-military-takeover.html?referrer

But we can also look at the Transparency International press release on how unfair it was (I.e., the international observers who monitored it):

Prior to the referendum, months of unrest and severe limits on the freedom of expression, association, and assembly marked the country. Transparency International voices concern that many of the government's pre-election activities undermined a level playing field for the promotion of diverse views regarding the constitutional amendments. The political context in the run-up to the referendum impaired conditions to hold a free and fair referendum compared with international standards.

Government officials openly promoted a vote in favour of the amendments; private and public media provided one-sided coverage in favour of the draft constitution; and the government harassed, arrested, and prosecuted peaceful critics, closing democratic space to promote views and debate before the referendum.

During the period leading up to the referendum, those opposed to the constitutional amendments and urging a "no" vote or a boycott of the referendum faced repression by state authorities. The space for civil society to represent the voice of the people shrunk considerably. Transparency International considers that peaceful advocacy for Egyptians to abstain from voting in the referendum to be legitimate.

Note the monitors explicit endorsement of the boycott as a legitimate response to the lack of fairness. And no, when you are repressed as thoroughly and as violently as the opposition was, a boycott isn't really a choice.


http://www.transparency.org/news/pr...to_observe_constitutional_referendum_in_egypt

Whatever you think of Morsi, it is clear that he has been replaced by a thoroughly undemocratic, thuggish dictatorship.

 

[basketcase]

...
What resources are you referring to?....

Either they had the resources to implement an extremely effective boycott or the Egyptian people massively supported the constitution.


Of course it is pretty ridiculous that you claim this referendum was corrupt while supporting Morsi's which was beset with violence and intimidation.

 

[fuji]

Either they had the resources to implement an extremely effective boycott or the Egyptian people massively supported the constitution.


Of course it is pretty ridiculous that you claim this referendum was corrupt while supporting Morsi's which was beset with violence and intimidation.

Seriously, you are just arguing against the published fact now. There was nothing remotely approaching the overt, blatant, systematic repression that I just very well documented for you.

Let me make this blisteringly clear for you: They had no resources because they were entirely repressed by a brutal state which, as the observers so clearly stated, suppressed pretty much any opposition to the election result desired by the regime. The reason why there was a low turnout of opposition voters was as much because they were beaten up if they went near polls as because of a boycott. The state made it very clear that it wanted a yes result, and that it was prepared to use violence to ensure it got one.

It would be equivalent to banning the Parti Quebecois, arresting anyone ever known to be a separatist leader, dispersing any Quebecois public gatherings with machine gun fire, then holding a referendum in Quebec on sovereignty in which anyone posting up pro-sovereigntist signs was jailed, sovereigntist supporters who tried to get to polls were beaten up, any newspaper or television station giving any airtime to a sovereigntist was shut down, and any pro-sovereignty journalists arrested and prosecuted. Then calling the result of that referendum democratic.

Really, this is the sort of thing you want to attach your reputation to around here? Beware!

 

[basketcase]

And yet they managed to institute an almost complete boycott amongst Brotherhood followers.

 

[fuji]

I don't know what you were tying to communicate but I sense you have backed off claiming that the 2014 referendum was in any way democratic.

 

[SkyRider]

According to CP 24, an Egyptian court has handed a death sentence to 529 Muslim Brotherhood members.

 

[seth gecko]

According to CP 24, an Egyptian court has handed a death sentence to 529 Muslim Brotherhood members.

Here's a little more detail:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/03/24/world/middleeast/ap-ml-egypt.html?ref=world&_r=0
And here's a well-informed opinion:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_worl...ers_sentenced_to_death_what_does_egypt_s.html

And, here's what the OP should be saying about this (assuming he isn't a big-ass hypocrite)........ "Are any of those sentenced to death NATO troops?" No! So, what's the problem?"

 

[fuji]

It would indeed be a mistake to send in our soldiers to impose democracy. Egyptians need to sort this out on their own, the best we can do is try and point the way. Getting a bunch of our guys killed won't win the war of ideas. Keeping our guys out won't win it either, but fewer of our guys die and that is good. This is obviously mostly debate by analogy to keeping our guys out of Libya, since you brought it up, nobody is proposing sending NATO to a Egypt.

Right now, I am pointing out that Egypt has become a thoroughly brutal dictatorship. Mass execution. Rigged elections. Virtually no press freedom. Political opposition outlawed.

Whatever you thought of Morsi, you would have to be retarded to think what replaced him was pro democracy.

 

[seth gecko]

A second mass trail began yesterday in Egypt; nearly 700 MB members & supporters charged with murder, inciting violence, etc etc during the riots in Minya last summer (following Morsi's ouster). Included in this group is Mohamid Badie, head honcho of the MB's in Egypt. Unlike lots of other senior MB members charged, Badie is actually in custody.

Along with his peers at the top of the MB, Badie is likely the real target here. While the death sentences already handed down are not expected to be carried out, don't be too sure about Badie. Egypt would like to "cut the head off the snake" (the snake being the MB's). Gamal Abdel Nasser set the stage for this back in the 1950's, after the MB's tried to assassinate him.
This trial is adjourned until 28 April

 

[fuji]

Leaving no doubt that the coup plotters really have gone full thug. Egyptian democracy is dead, and soon so will be anyone opposed to the dictatorship.

 

[seth gecko]

Ah, poor misguided, delusional, Fuji, thinking that the MB's represented "democracy" for Egypt. He's still not able to reconcile with his little pea-brain that winning an election doesn't make you a stalwart of democratic values. Egypt is under military rule again, as they've been since the 1950's. I'm sure that Egyptians would prefer the freedoms and lifestyle Canadians, or Swedes, or Aussies enjoy, but every once in awhile, Egyptians are faced with a very serious threat from the Islamists (guys who consider democracy incompatible with their objectives). Nasser put down the threats, as did Sadat, and Mubarak (albeit, all only temporarily). The threat GREW substantially under the very brief Morsi presidency (some MB officials wanted to scrap the longstanding Egypt-Israel peace treaty, some wanted to link it to Israels treatment of the Palestinians, a few recognized that the $$Billions in US aid was a direct offshoot of the peace accord and it would be best not to tinker with it). But, as since the time of Nasser, the majority of Egyptians are okay with the actions of the gov't in putting down the violent extremists (before some idiot....ahh who am I kidding, it'll be Fuji.....tries to claim that the MB's are moderates, there's lots of valid reports of their use of violence against their opponents during their brief tenure as the gov't of Egypt) as security and stability are cornerstones to achieving the Canadian/Swedish/Aussie dream. Nobody gives a shit about voting in a free election when you're worried every day about getting blown up or feeding your family.
The closest thing Egypt had to democracy since the 1950's revolution/coup was the electoral process that allowed the MBs to become the gov't; that process was initiated by the interim military gov't after Mubarak. Fuji focusses on the "winning" and "popularity" aspects because its two things he's never experienced (nor likely ever to).