1,100 sentenced to death for the death of one man? What, did they each give him one paper cut?
This kind of behavior seems garunteed to inspire hatred and further violence.
http://time.com/79530/egypt-mass-death-sentence-courts-muslim-brotherhood/
QuoteEgypt's Courts Mock Justice With More Mass Death Sentences
One court condemned 683 more defendants to the gallows, making 1,100 Egyptians who have been convicted in the death of a single policeman. Meanwhile, no security official has been charged for the more than 1,000 civilians killed in July
Egyptians will go to the polls at the end of May to elect a president, but Monday brought a flurry of reminders that democracy is about more than what happens at the ballot box. The courts that are supposed to provide a check on executive power were showcasing their apparently complete alignment with Egypt's security state.
The same Egyptian judge who last month sentenced to death 529 Muslim Brotherhood supporters condemned another 683 to the gallows in Minya, including the organization's Supreme Guide, Mohamed Badie. Meanwhile, the Cairo Court for Urgent Matters banned the April 6 Movement, a grassroots organization instrumental in the 2011 revolution that Egypt's military last year seized power ostensibly to protect.
The behavior of the Egyptian courts is giving human rights groups cause for great concern. "The reality is that on one side you have this legal system which is not fit for purpose," says Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission in London. "Then you add the political pressures being borne on the judiciary, and you're getting these sort of messages coming across... It's absurd. The scale of the whole thing should bring fear into the international community."
There was at least a hint that the global opprobrium that greeted last month's mass sentencing may have had some impact. After condemning the 683 to death, the court revisited the 529 sentenced to death last month, commuting the sentences of all but 37 defendants to life in prison. But the convictions remained contaminated by the trial – a single day, with no defense allowed – as well as upstaged by the record-breaking mass sentence in the second case. "The judge did not give the lawyers any time to study the case," says Ahmed Ban, an analyst for the Nile Center for Political and Strategic Studies and former Brotherhood member. "He didn't listen to witnesses."
Shadjareh notes that with Monday's verdict, more than 1,100 Egyptians have been convicted for the death of a single policeman in Minya, while no security official has been charged for the more than 1,000 civilians killed across Egypt since the military dissolved the elected government dominated by the Brotherhood in July.
Both Minya trials grew out of riots that broke out across Egypt in August, after Egyptian forces mounted an assault on a Brotherhood sit-in on a Cairo street, killing hundreds. The massacre heralded a crackdown that appears to involve every major state institution, including courts which, even during decades of dictatorship, retained a reputation for independence.
During the rule of President Hosni Mubarak and his predecessors, Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel Nasser, "the judiciary sometimes acted as a brake on the government's most authoritarian impulses," Nathan J. Brown and Michelle Dunne of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace recently wrote, " Now, all the instruments of the Egyptian state seem fully on board. Whereas Nasser had to go to the trouble of setting up kangaroo courts, today there is no need." Judges have outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestinian militant group Hamas, and now the liberal April 6 Movement, named for the date of a planned 2008 public strike in an industrial town that grew into a nationwide protest movement.
Appeals against these rulings are theoretically available, but apparently are not to be attempted. A delegate from the online human rights group Avaaz was detained and deported earlier this month while trying to coordinate a meeting with Egypt's Grand Mufti, the state official who must review every death sentence. The delegate carried a petition signed by 1.1 million people urging the Mufti to set aside the 529 death sentences.
"Look not at just what these cases mean individually, but what it means overall for Egypt," says Sam Barratt, a spokesman for Avaaz.org. "Our deeper concern is what this means to the direction of Egypt, and what that could mean to the region for an increasingly disenfranchised group of individuals who have been shown no recourse but violence."
Analysts say the fate of Badie, the Supreme Guide, may be crucial. If his sentence is carried out, Egyptian authorities will have executed the eighth holder of the office created by Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, the Egyptian schoolteacher who established the organization as a grassroots effort to apply the imperatives of Islam to modern government.
The Supreme Guide holds nominal sway over Brotherhood branches in other nations, but his primary authority has been in Egypt, where for decades the group remained the only formidable organized opposition to the secular security state held in place by the nation's powerful military. And indeed Badie and his aides in the Guide's office at times appeared to govern Egypt jointly with Mohamed Morsi, the Brotherhood official narrowly elected president in 2012, under the banner of the Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, until the July 3 coup.
Morsi's own trial is scheduled to resume May 6. The charges he faces include incitement to murder and insulting the judiciary. If Egypt's courts carry on acting as they have done, the outcome is unlikely to be a surprise.
Nobody gives a fuck.
Mass executions? In my religion of peace?
What's happening in Egypt is awful and predictable.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 09:42:41 PM
What's happening in Egypt is awful and predictable.
I don't think it was that predictable. This is Saddam Hussein level of brutality, not just from a bodycount point of view, but also from the brazen arbitrariness on display. Most Arab dictators' repression tactics are less absolute than that. The problem for the rest of us is that this kind of repression either works very well or very badly (and sometimes both, as in the case of Syria).
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 08:51:15 PM
Nobody gives a fuck.
The continued destabilization of Egypt is an important geopolitical variable.
Why? I think cotton grows elsewhere. We could possibly even grow it here again.
Obviously, we could free the Egyptian people from their nutty dysfunctional semi-democracy in a day and establish our own norms in a week, at a cost of between $30-60 million. But we won't, so why bother worrying about it?
Quote from: Ideologue on April 28, 2014, 09:57:34 PM
Why? I think cotton grows elsewhere. We could possibly even grow it here again.
It's the most populous Arab state and controls one of the world's vital sea lanes via it's possession of the Suez canal.
What is the official line from the U.S. and Israel regarding these mass death sentences?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2014, 09:58:43 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on April 28, 2014, 09:57:34 PM
Why? I think cotton grows elsewhere. We could possibly even grow it here again.
It's the most populous Arab state and controls one of the world's vital sea lanes via it's possession of the Suez canal.
If they don't let our ships through, we take it back. Cost, $30-60 million.
Quote from: Scipio on April 28, 2014, 09:39:55 PM
Mass executions? In my religion of peace?
The judge agrees with your sentiment which is why the secularist government is executing Muslim fanatics. You should feel proud.
I'm just joking, btw.
Quote from: Phillip V on April 28, 2014, 09:59:29 PM
What is the official line from the U.S. and Israel regarding these mass death sentences?
Saddened, very saddened.
Quote from: DGuller on April 28, 2014, 09:52:04 PM
I don't think it was that predictable. This is Saddam Hussein level of brutality, not just from a bodycount point of view, but also from the brazen arbitrariness on display. Most Arab dictators' repression tactics are less absolute than that. The problem for the rest of us is that this kind of repression either works very well or very badly (and sometimes both, as in the case of Syria).
It's nowhere near Hussein or Assad family brutality or psychopathy
Also this judge has form. Over the Minya cases he's now sentenced 1200 people to death. But as the article says 'Egypt's Grand Mufti, the state official who must review every death sentence'. Of the previous 550 sentences the Mufti confirmed about 40, he's expected to dismiss the majority of these too. This all shows the violence the security state are willing to consider to repress the Brotherhood, but also that the government doesn't have nearly as much control of the judiciary as it seems or they'd like. If they did then there would be less outrageous sentences coming out of the courts.
Yes there are elections coming up (in which Sisi is running as the reincarnation of Nasser and has been endorsed by the Army), Western Embassies and Tony Blair have described Sisi as a 'promising democrat' and most prefer him to the Brotherhood. But the facts look far more like this is a re-emerging police state in which the army have declared war on the Brotherhood. Given that, this is roughly what you'd expect.
At best Sisi succeeds in getting on top of Egypts economic problems and he's a new Nasser. At best Egypt will be a very managed democracy, but I think even then a military dictatorship is more likely. At worst I think another mass revolt is likely, clashing with a far more repressive state than the MB or even Mubarak. It's striking that the Army, which is the last and only trusted national institution in Egypt, have thrown their credibility behind Sisi. This was apparently against the advice of his backers in the Gulf who wanted a civilian to run for President with Sisi as the power behind the throne and the Army able to remove them if there were protests again. As it is there's no veil. If Sisi fails then the Army has failed.
I'm pessimistic on Egypt but I've said before I think they could end up like Pakistan or even worse.
How could it become worse than Pakistan without completely disintegrating?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2014, 11:07:40 PM
How could it become worse than Pakistan without completely disintegrating?
Exactly.
Their society seems too urban and densely populated to collapse like that.
Quote from: DGuller on April 28, 2014, 09:52:04 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 09:42:41 PM
What's happening in Egypt is awful and predictable.
I don't think it was that predictable. This is Saddam Hussein level of brutality, not just from a bodycount point of view, but also from the brazen arbitrariness on display. Most Arab dictators' repression tactics are less absolute than that. The problem for the rest of us is that this kind of repression either works very well or very badly (and sometimes both, as in the case of Syria).
Hey, this is what you guys wanted. We had thread on this and everyone but me and Shelf wanted to see military rule restored and Brotherhood gone. This is how it happens. What else did you expect?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2014, 11:16:45 PM
Their society seems to urban and densely populated to collapse like that.
Take a look at Lebanon in the 1980's. It was pretty urban as well.
Considerably less urban than Lebanon or Syria.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 11:21:44 PM
Considerably less urban than Lebanon or Syria.
Doesn't 95% of the population live within 20km of the river?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 11:20:17 PM
Hey, this is what you guys wanted. We had thread on this and everyone but me and Shelf wanted to see military rule restored and Brotherhood gone. This is how it happens. What else did you expect?
While I do not remember taking a stance on this I am puzzled why military rule means the brotherhood is vindicated. The main thing I wanted out of this is for the US to stop being party to brutal dictators. Not sure if I am getting what I wanted or not.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2014, 11:23:27 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 11:21:44 PM
Considerably less urban than Lebanon or Syria.
Doesn't 95% of the population live within 20km of the river?
:lol: That reminds me of the time you claimed that destroying Aswan damn would kill 90% of Egypt's population. Most of the land near the river is farmland. It's a really long river, Tim, in fact it's the longest in the world.
Quote from: Valmy on April 28, 2014, 11:26:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 11:20:17 PM
Hey, this is what you guys wanted. We had thread on this and everyone but me and Shelf wanted to see military rule restored and Brotherhood gone. This is how it happens. What else did you expect?
While I do not remember taking a stance on this I am puzzled why military rule means the brotherhood is vindicated.
Did I say the brotherhood is vindicated? I don't remember saying that.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 11:21:04 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2014, 11:16:45 PM
Their society seems to urban and densely populated to collapse like that.
Take a look at Lebanon in the 1980's. It was pretty urban as well.
I found it to be rather urbane.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 11:29:45 PM
Did I say the brotherhood is vindicated? I don't remember saying that.
Ok then what are you saying exactly? It sure sounded like you were saying this shows you were right to support the Brotherhood.
Actually, I believe the Amazon is now accredited that honor.
It would. -_-
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsedac.ciesin.columbia.edu%2Fdownloads%2Fmaps%2Fgpw-v3%2Fgpw-v3-population-density%2Fegydens.jpg&hash=7a47fbec02e18d774caf4a3ef1cce75c501f8495)
Quote from: Valmy on April 28, 2014, 11:26:58 PM
While I do not remember taking a stance on this I am puzzled why military rule means the brotherhood is vindicated.
I thought a military coup was wrong then and that the consequences of military rule were, after a brief honeymoon, pretty inevitable. Seriously within a fortnight they'd set up a public helpline for people to report local members of the Brotherhood. I still think that.
I also didn't think the situation warranted a military coup. I think there's a lot of wrong-headed belief on Islamism (see Tony Blair's recent speech) that causes hyperventilation at the sight of a beard.
At the time of the coup the Brotherhood hadn't tried to impose a dictatorship. There were elections coming up. Their proposed constitution was significantly less Islamist than Sisi's draft (and many of the controversial sections have direct comparisons with Ireland's). In addition to that they were failing. Their support was dropping and, clearly, they never had the backing of the Army or the police anyway.
Given that situation I didn't get the need for a coup. My view was you shouldn't interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake and the Army will no have responsibility for Egypt's economy which is dysfunctional for reasons way beyond Morsi.
It's not about the Brotherhood being vindicated - I'm not even sure what from. They were incredibly incompetent and are a very conservative, very narrow Islamist party. But I was a relatively convinced neo-con and I still, kind-of, am.
Quote from: Valmy on April 28, 2014, 11:33:19 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 11:29:45 PM
Did I say the brotherhood is vindicated? I don't remember saying that.
Ok then what are you saying exactly? It sure sounded like you were saying this shows you were right to support the Brotherhood.
I think it vindicates that a democratic elected government over military dictatorship.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 28, 2014, 11:20:17 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 28, 2014, 09:52:04 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 09:42:41 PM
What's happening in Egypt is awful and predictable.
I don't think it was that predictable. This is Saddam Hussein level of brutality, not just from a bodycount point of view, but also from the brazen arbitrariness on display. Most Arab dictators' repression tactics are less absolute than that. The problem for the rest of us is that this kind of repression either works very well or very badly (and sometimes both, as in the case of Syria).
Hey, this is what you guys wanted. We had thread on this and everyone but me and Shelf wanted to see military rule restored and Brotherhood gone. This is how it happens. What else did you expect?
I expected the military to do their terrorizing and extermination behind the scenes, not making headlines every week.
They killed a lot of protesters taking power, why would you expect a more subtle approach now?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 29, 2014, 12:09:42 AM
They killed a lot of protesters taking power, why would you expect a more subtle approach now?
It's hard to be subtle when you're seizing power, you don't yet have control of the secret police to quietly disappear troublemakers.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 10:42:39 PM
At best Sisi succeeds in getting on top of Egypts economic problems and he's a new Nasser. At best Egypt will be a very managed democracy, but I think even then a military dictatorship is more likely. At worst I think another mass revolt is likely, clashing with a far more repressive state than the MB or even Mubarak. It's striking that the Army, which is the last and only trusted national institution in Egypt, have thrown their credibility behind Sisi. This was apparently against the advice of his backers in the Gulf who wanted a civilian to run for President with Sisi as the power behind the throne and the Army able to remove them if there were protests again. As it is there's no veil. If Sisi fails then the Army has failed.
Exactly. This is the Tsar taking personal command of the Russian Army in September, 1915.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 11:43:25 PM
Given that situation I didn't get the need for a coup. My view was you shouldn't interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake and the Army will no have responsibility for Egypt's economy which is dysfunctional for reasons way beyond Morsi.
It's not about the Brotherhood being vindicated - I'm not even sure what from. They were incredibly incompetent and are a very conservative, very narrow Islamist party. But I was a relatively convinced neo-con and I still, kind-of, am.
I agree that one shouldn't interrupt an enemy while making a mistake, and that one has to let the Islamists ride their economies down in flames, to discredit them as rational rulers. To overthrow them, as the Egyptian military has, simply allows the Islamists to escape from their trap. When the economy hits bottom, it will be the military holding the bag, not the Islamists. The fable that the Islamists would have stopped the disaster had they not been overthrown will gain traction.
Paris is worth a mass death sentence.
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2014, 11:43:25 PM
Given that situation I didn't get the need for a coup. My view was you shouldn't interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake and the Army will no have responsibility for Egypt's economy which is dysfunctional for reasons way beyond Morsi.
It's not about the Brotherhood being vindicated - I'm not even sure what from. They were incredibly incompetent and are a very conservative, very narrow Islamist party. But I was a relatively convinced neo-con and I still, kind-of, am.
I agree that one shouldn't interrupt an enemy while making a mistake, and that one has to let the Islamists ride their economies down in flames, to discredit them as rational rulers. To overthrow them, as the Egyptian military has, simply allows the Islamists to escape from their trap. When the economy hits bottom, it will be the military holding the bag, not the Islamists. The fable that the Islamists would have stopped the disaster had they not been overthrown will gain traction.
I expect the backers will make sure the economy doesn't hit rock bottom. In return of course for actions that will please them.
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 02:23:15 PM
I agree that one shouldn't interrupt an enemy while making a mistake, and that one has to let the Islamists ride their economies down in flames, to discredit them as rational rulers. To overthrow them, as the Egyptian military has, simply allows the Islamists to escape from their trap. When the economy hits bottom, it will be the military holding the bag, not the Islamists. The fable that the Islamists would have stopped the disaster had they not been overthrown will gain traction.
Your strategy hasn't worked so well in Iran.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 29, 2014, 03:38:18 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 02:23:15 PM
I agree that one shouldn't interrupt an enemy while making a mistake, and that one has to let the Islamists ride their economies down in flames, to discredit them as rational rulers. To overthrow them, as the Egyptian military has, simply allows the Islamists to escape from their trap. When the economy hits bottom, it will be the military holding the bag, not the Islamists. The fable that the Islamists would have stopped the disaster had they not been overthrown will gain traction.
Your strategy hasn't worked so well in Iran.
Disagree completely. The regime is Iran is seen by pretty much every educated person (outside Iran as well as in it) as corrupt and hypocritical. That's pretty much the definition of my strategy working well.
Quote from: PJL on April 29, 2014, 02:47:46 PM
I expect the backers will make sure the economy doesn't hit rock bottom. In return of course for actions that will please them.
I don't think that the backers have that kind of money.
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 03:56:26 PM
Quote from: PJL on April 29, 2014, 02:47:46 PM
I expect the backers will make sure the economy doesn't hit rock bottom. In return of course for actions that will please them.
I don't think that the backers have that kind of money.
Well if they don't, then nobody does. But I doubt Egypt is so badly done that a 20-30 billion pound loan at favourable rates can't solve the issue.
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 03:54:54 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 29, 2014, 03:38:18 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 02:23:15 PM
I agree that one shouldn't interrupt an enemy while making a mistake, and that one has to let the Islamists ride their economies down in flames, to discredit them as rational rulers. To overthrow them, as the Egyptian military has, simply allows the Islamists to escape from their trap. When the economy hits bottom, it will be the military holding the bag, not the Islamists. The fable that the Islamists would have stopped the disaster had they not been overthrown will gain traction.
Your strategy hasn't worked so well in Iran.
Disagree completely. The regime is Iran is seen by pretty much every educated person (outside Iran as well as in it) as corrupt and hypocritical. That's pretty much the definition of my strategy working well.
I am sure that makes Egyptians feel better. "Lets go for the grumbler strategy. When the Islamists run our country into the ground and destroy any semblence of freedom over the next 30 years, educated people will recognize them as corrupt and hypocritical."
Quote from: alfred russel on April 29, 2014, 04:51:06 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 03:54:54 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 29, 2014, 03:38:18 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 29, 2014, 02:23:15 PM
I agree that one shouldn't interrupt an enemy while making a mistake, and that one has to let the Islamists ride their economies down in flames, to discredit them as rational rulers. To overthrow them, as the Egyptian military has, simply allows the Islamists to escape from their trap. When the economy hits bottom, it will be the military holding the bag, not the Islamists. The fable that the Islamists would have stopped the disaster had they not been overthrown will gain traction.
Your strategy hasn't worked so well in Iran.
Disagree completely. The regime is Iran is seen by pretty much every educated person (outside Iran as well as in it) as corrupt and hypocritical. That's pretty much the definition of my strategy working well.
I am sure that makes Egyptians feel better. "Lets go for the grumbler strategy. When the Islamists run our country into the ground and destroy any semblence of freedom over the next 30 years, educated people will recognize them as corrupt and hypocritical."
30 years? A mere flash in the pan for grumbler. :P
Quote from: alfred russel on April 29, 2014, 03:38:18 PM
Your strategy hasn't worked so well in Iran.
The Muslim Brotherhood aren't the same as the Iranian regime. Nowhere near.
In the 18 months that the MB were in power the Khomeini regime had fully established the Islamic Republic, wiped out most domestic opponents, purged the universities and been invaded by Iraq.
As I said at the time of the coup the Brotherhood either didn't want to establish a dictatorship, or were as incompetent in that as everything else.
Quote from: PJL on April 29, 2014, 04:44:10 PM
Well if they don't, then nobody does. But I doubt Egypt is so badly done that a 20-30 billion pound loan at favourable rates can't solve the issue.
I believe that it is. Such a loan would delay the day of reckoning, perhaps, but still wouldn't avoid it. What Egypt needs is jobs, not cash.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 29, 2014, 04:51:06 PM
I am sure that makes Egyptians feel better. "Lets go for the grumbler strategy. When the Islamists run our country into the ground and destroy any semblence of freedom over the next 30 years, educated people will recognize them as corrupt and hypocritical."
I am sure that the Egyptians would prefer that over your strategy of "let's have the military decide whether or not our elected government gets to rule us" that has worked so well in Democratic Republic of Congo and Pakistan. Democracy has always been messy, and sometimes results in the election of inefficient governments. But your military coups also bring inefficient governments into power. Better a political party like the Islamic Brotherhood lose credibility than an essential arm of the state like the army.