Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Knight Of Shadows

New Massacre In Egypt

30 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

http://www.usatoday....-cairo/2591809/

the events recived with condems by most of egyptian political parties

and blame security forced and current goverment held them responsable for it

except from tamarud party which is typical and not surprising

since in my opinion they lack any kind of morals

it should be " highly " noted

the civilian dressed people alongside security forced attacking protestors

where caught on tape .. shootings were caught on tape

by aljazeera channels

which explains why egypt been cracking down on the channel

and arresting the channel camera man

in my opinion ... you try to push away the press ..

then you are doing something hidous you don't want the world to see

i wouldn't be shocked if " Tamarud " party baltajia the ones who been alongside securty forces

attacking protestors and killing them

given how the offical egyptian press been very biased on this is sickening

i say egypt heading toward a civil war

unless some sane person put an end to al-sisi military commander madness

and put him behind bars as a criminal and muderer

these scums " baltajia " are the ones who mubarak used in first revolution

and now they being used again by al-sisi and his supporters

that tells alot

Edited by Knight Of Shadows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the military have given an ultimatum of sorts that they will be clearing out the protest site very soon. More bloodshed coming because the Mursi people will not leave. They are calling for international intervention to stop the military - sound familiar? Even El Baradei has said the military overreacted in this last episode of violence. You'd think these guys would learn to manage the conflict in a less bloody fashion. Spilled blood is the life force of revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tamaroud is a grass root movement, not a party. Why are they deemed "immoral", could it be because they are calling for the designation of the MB as a terrorist organization? They were able to collect 22 million signatures demanding the ouster of Mursi, would you extend the 'immoral thugs' claim to all those who signed? Are the +30 million who demonstrated on two separate occasions against Mursi and the MB also "thugs"? Is it that easy for you to label anyone who does not approve of the party you obviously back as thugs? You have a problem here KoS, you just called the majority of Egyptians "thugs" :D

I watched the clip, on what basis did you determine who is who in the melee? Previously when I linked clips and photos you summarily refused to even look at them and claimed that all such clips and photos are faked. Glad to see you changed your mind! Can I link now similar clips showing MB protesters holding guns and shooting, or the threats of Safwat Hegazy that he and his people will 'sprinkle blood' on those who oppose Mursi?

Speaking about thuggery, how do you define those who shot an RPG at a bus transporting civilian workers on their way to their factory, or those who tossed two teen agers off the roof of a building for simply shouting 'down with Mursi'; or those who killed civilians in Manial, Munieb, Alexandria, Helwan, Mansoura and Mahala? How do you characterize those who burnt the houses of poor people in Ezbet Abu Hasheesh today by throwing molotov cocktails from atop 6 October Bridge? How do you define those who tortured people to death then chugged their corpses, with their hands and feet still bound with rope, on trash heaps? How do you explain the arrest, torture and murder of protestors inside the grounds of the presidential palace at Itehadeyya when Mursi was still president? Explain the kidnap and torture of 16 civilians by MB members inside Qa'ed Ibrahim mosque in Alexandria yesterday and the day before. What is your position with regards to the constant killing of soldiers and officers in Sinai? How can one describe the act of shooting mourners in a funeral procession in Port Said? Those who arrange their demonstrations so that the women walk in the front while they hide behind them for the sake of a photo op are less than honorable.

You once mentioned that as a member of a minority, I was 'part of the struggle', compare the position of those like Beltagy who are asking Nato to interfere to put them back in power against the will of Egyptians, with the late Pope Shenouda who said that if saving the lives of Copts means asking for foreign intervention, then let all Copts die before that happens.

At least the present civilian government and parties had the decency and integrity to condemn the death of the 72 and demand juridical investigation is held, while the MB is busy publishing pictures of dead Syrian kids and claiming that it happened in Cairo. The MB are master media campaigners and have no compunction of offering a one sided version of events to demand foreign intervention in Egypt if that will bring them back to power.

I say Egypt is NOT heading for a civil war, despite the threats of terrorists. Al Sisi has the mandate and support of the vast majority of Egyptians who have simply had enough of the duplicity of the MB and their allies. Wishing for his demise will not change anything; you forget that he is acting on the will of the people. If he goes, there will be others who will replace him. The MB is a dying species now in Egypt. Stop indulging in wishful thinking, the fate of Egypt will be decided in Egypt by Egyptians; not in Syria or anywhere else.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article below first started as a post making the rounds on fb. Apparently it has now reached regular media. I am linking because it explains what happened in Egypt in 'American terms'. Another reason is that as the only Egyptian active member of UM I find myself obliged to respond to all these threads which repeat MB propaganda, and it's getting.... :/

Try to imagine if …

On June 30, 2012, democratically elected Barack Obama wins the election by a razor thin margin of 50.7% of the vote, takes the oath, and is sworn in as president of the United States.

The first five months of his term go relatively smoothly, where he makes almost no decisions (except for some dubious presidential pardons to a dozen convicted terrorists, including some convicted for their part in the assassination of a former president, and issues pardons to a number of convicted criminals and drug dealers ).

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tamaroud is a grass root movement, not a party. Why are they deemed "immoral", could it be because they are calling for the designation of the MB as a terrorist organization? They were able to collect 22 million signatures demanding the ouster of Mursi, would you extend the 'immoral thugs' claim to all those who signed? Are the +30 million who demonstrated on two separate occasions against Mursi and the MB also "thugs"? Is it that easy for you to label anyone who does not approve of the party you obviously back as thugs? You have a problem here KoS, you just called the majority of Egyptians "thugs" :D

I watched the clip, on what basis did you determine who is who in the melee? Previously when I linked clips and photos you summarily refused to even look at them and claimed that all such clips and photos are faked. Glad to see you changed your mind! Can I link now similar clips showing MB protesters holding guns and shooting, or the threats of Safwat Hegazy that he and his people will 'sprinkle blood' on those who oppose Mursi?

Speaking about thuggery, how do you define those who shot an RPG at a bus transporting civilian workers on their way to their factory, or those who tossed two teen agers off the roof of a building for simply shouting 'down with Mursi'; or those who killed civilians in Manial, Munieb, Alexandria, Helwan, Mansoura and Mahala? How do you characterize those who burnt the houses of poor people in Ezbet Abu Hasheesh today by throwing molotov cocktails from atop 6 October Bridge? How do you define those who tortured people to death then chugged their corpses, with their hands and feet still bound with rope, on trash heaps? How do you explain the arrest, torture and murder of protestors inside the grounds of the presidential palace at Itehadeyya when Mursi was still president? Explain the kidnap and torture of 16 civilians by MB members inside Qa'ed Ibrahim mosque in Alexandria yesterday and the day before. What is your position with regards to the constant killing of soldiers and officers in Sinai? How can one describe the act of shooting mourners in a funeral procession in Port Said? Those who arrange their demonstrations so that the women walk in the front while they hide behind them for the sake of a photo op are less than honorable.

You once mentioned that as a member of a minority, I was 'part of the struggle', compare the position of those like Beltagy who are asking Nato to interfere to put them back in power against the will of Egyptians, with the late Pope Shenouda who said that if saving the lives of Copts means asking for foreign intervention, then let all Copts die before that happens.

At least the present civilian government and parties had the decency and integrity to condemn the death of the 72 and demand juridical investigation is held, while the MB is busy publishing pictures of dead Syrian kids and claiming that it happened in Cairo. The MB are master media campaigners and have no compunction of offering a one sided version of events to demand foreign intervention in Egypt if that will bring them back to power.

I say Egypt is NOT heading for a civil war, despite the threats of terrorists. Al Sisi has the mandate and support of the vast majority of Egyptians who have simply had enough of the duplicity of the MB and their allies. Wishing for his demise will not change anything; you forget that he is acting on the will of the people. If he goes, there will be others who will replace him. The MB is a dying species now in Egypt. Stop indulging in wishful thinking, the fate of Egypt will be decided in Egypt by Egyptians; not in Syria or anywhere else.

i don't care about the brotherhood .. or morsi they can dissapear .. fade .. go away i don't care

i just have problem with an army of traitors killing civilians .. it gets to me badly

and it should get on nerves of every person with any shred of decency

the age of armies protecting " goverments " instead of people should begone from our countries

and such armies deserve to be put behind bars where they belong

the army job is to protect the people .. not kill them , period

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't care about the brotherhood .. or morsi they can dissapear .. fade .. go away i don't care

i just have problem with an army of traitors killing civilians .. it gets to me badly

and it should get on nerves of every person with any shred of decency

the age of armies protecting " goverments " instead of people should begone from our countries

and such armies deserve to be put behind bars where they belong

the army job is to protect the people .. not kill them , period

So if the majority of people in Egypt do NOT want to be ruled by the MB then the army mobilizing to put down violence BY the MB is a demonstration of the army protecting the people. "The people" never uniformly agree. The majority in Egypt have made their will known and it ISN'T for an Islamic state like what the MB want. It gets down to civil war to stop Islamists from imposing their cruelty on their brethren.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i say egypt heading toward a civil war

unless some sane person put an end to al-sisi military commander madness

and put him behind bars as a criminal and muderer

You seem awfully concerned about the miltary crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Are you equally concerned about the violent attacks that the Muslim Brotherhood and other islamists have been committing against the Egyption copts?

Your humanitarian interest seems extremely one-sided.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem awfully concerned about the miltary crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Are you equally concerned about the violent attacks that the Muslim Brotherhood and other islamists have been committing against the Egyption copts?

Your humanitarian interest seems extremely one-sided.

am concerned by military crack down on " civilians "

however you seem racially always siding with the side that kills muslims

so instead of accusing people of being racists .. fix your house of glass

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if the majority of people in Egypt do NOT want to be ruled by the MB then the army mobilizing to put down violence BY the MB is a demonstration of the army protecting the people. "The people" never uniformly agree. The majority in Egypt have made their will known and it ISN'T for an Islamic state like what the MB want. It gets down to civil war to stop Islamists from imposing their cruelty on their brethren.

that's the problem

1- they're not majortiy

2- the military is " causing " violence against civilians and killing them .. not putting down violence and not just against MB

but also against people who are protesting peacefully to protect their votes which are gone by the wind by military coup

3- MB is a failure group indeed .. but they never said they want islamic state .. or ever tried doing so

again i question your source of information

and do you think military coup is legal act in egypt ?

would you think a military coup by islamic group against a secular goverment is legal ?

both important questions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's the problem

1- they're not majortiy

2- the military is " causing " violence against civilians and killing them .. not putting down violence and not just against MB

but also against people who are protesting peacefully to protect their votes which are gone by the wind by military coup

3- MB is a failure group indeed .. but they never said they want islamic state .. or ever tried doing so

again i question your source of information

and do you think military coup is legal act in egypt ?

would you think a military coup by islamic group against a secular goverment is legal ?

both important questions

I do not think the majority of Egyptians wanted ANYTHING except to get rid of the oppressive Mubarak. They saw what happened in Libya and Tunisia and decided they could be rid of him if they had courage. When they were rewarded with his downfall they were suddenly left with no government at all and naturally the group that was the most extensively prepared for elections was going to win. Enter the MB and so far, so good. But then Mursi and his group of thugs begins to rush toward creating an Islamic state - an idea which the vast majority of young Egyptians did NOT want. So again they stood up and the military had to choose between deposing an elected president or losing the country to civil war. I believe that in this particular case the military did the right thing. When they started mowing down protesters indiscriminately they lost much support. It was a stupid thing to do and may yet lead to civil war. Yet what else could they do in the long run? Mursi's supporters were not innocent bystanders. They were only refraining from violence (mostly) to sway world opinion. They showed their true colors soon enough. Your ideas about westerners supporting seculars against Muslims is probably correct. I know that I personally do. The reason is simple. We in the west have only known secular government - have been taught to avoid religion mingling in government. And frankly KoS I would rather die than be forced to live under Sharia. If a religion is supposed to be about peace then why do those who practice it need to force others to?
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think the majority of Egyptians wanted ANYTHING except to get rid of the oppressive Mubarak. They saw what happened in Libya and Tunisia and decided they could be rid of him if they had courage. When they were rewarded with his downfall they were suddenly left with no government at all and naturally the group that was the most extensively prepared for elections was going to win. Enter the MB and so far, so good. But then Mursi and his group of thugs begins to rush toward creating an Islamic state - an idea which the vast majority of young Egyptians did NOT want. So again they stood up and the military had to choose between deposing an elected president or losing the country to civil war. I believe that in this particular case the military did the right thing. When they started mowing down protesters indiscriminately they lost much support. It was a stupid thing to do and may yet lead to civil war. Yet what else could they do in the long run? Mursi's supporters were not innocent bystanders. They were only refraining from violence (mostly) to sway world opinion. They showed their true colors soon enough. Your ideas about westerners supporting seculars against Muslims is probably correct. I know that I personally do. The reason is simple. We in the west have only known secular government - have been taught to avoid religion mingling in government. And frankly KoS I would rather die than be forced to live under Sharia. If a religion is supposed to be about peace then why do those who practice it need to force others to?

so you believe a military coup .. is legal against muslims goverment .. but against secular goverment .. it's illegal ?

again.. who said anyone wanted sharia law in egypt ? again i don't know where you get your info from bro

and i certinally hope not offical egyptian tv :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you believe a military coup .. is legal against muslims goverment .. but against secular goverment .. it's illegal ?

again.. who said anyone wanted sharia law in egypt ? again i don't know where you get your info from bro

and i certinally hope not offical egyptian tv :D

To reply to both this and #9 posts

"They are not a majority"

On what basis are you making such an assertion? Do you have any sources, statistics, and numbers to prove that?

-If 13 million voted for Mursi, and this number includes those who voted in protest against Shafik, the famous pre-marked ballots of Ameereyya (proven, case went to court DURING Mursi's tenure), the faulty electoral lists..etc, you still arrive to about 15.6% of the Egyptian population, assuming that Mursi managed to maintain the same rate of approval (which he didn't).

-Bear in mind that during the first round of presidential elections, Mursi garnered 5 million only

-Tamorod collected 22 million signed petitions; each includes the petitioners’ national number

-The most conservative estimate of the number of demonstrators on June 30th. is 14 million, most estimates vary between 20 to 30 million. In all cases the number far exceeded those of 2011, Nasser's funeral, or any pro-Mursi demonstration in which people are paid and bussed from towns & villages all over Egypt.

-A still larger number, estimated at 27-30 million turned out on July 7 to support Sisi

My question is: Assuming that you will insist on rejecting the numbers of anti-Mursi demonstrators (which I'm sure you will), and assuming that he maintained the number of his genuine supporters, how come the pro-Mursi demonstrations never arrived close to even the 5 million, and their numbers are actually dwindling (I refer you to the article I linked before)?

"The military is " causing " violence against civilians and killing them .. not putting down violence and not just against MB but also against people who are protesting peacefully to protect their votes which are gone by the wind by military coup"

This is a totally one-sided statement; the army was putting down MB violence. Peaceful protesters do not use RPGs to attack police stations, nor fire arms, shot guns, swords and knives. They usually don’t have torture chambers under the podium of their sit-ins, chuck corpses of tortured people on trash heaps, torch university and government buildings, schools, mosques (Rab'a) and churches as well as houses. They do not leave bombs in streets nor carry hand grenades. Peaceful humane protesters do not use children from orphanages as human shield and parade them in shrouds with "project of a martyr" inscribed on it. Honest people who are not after a cheap media stunt do not use a fire extinguisher to create smoke then claim the police is firing tear gas at them (Al Fath mosque).

" MB is a failure group indeed .. but they never said they want islamic state .. or ever tried doing so again i question your source of information"

If you are looking for a source, read Mursi's constitution. Why does it include the supervision of ulama on all laws (like Iran)? Why was the constitutional assembly composed of only MB and Salafists? The MB and Salafis clearly stated that they intend implementing Sharia. Why did the MB parliament discuss lowering the age of marriage for young girls instead of the urgent economic crisis? Why did Mursi pardon 2000 convicted jihadists including Sadat's assassins (then invite him at the tomb of his victim to sit next to the president, on the anniversary of Sadat's assassination, during 6 Oct. parade)? Why did he appoint one of those who are responsible for the 1999 Deir Al Bahari temple in Luxor a governor of the self-same 'scene of the crime', Luxor?

As for the 'legitimacy' issue you keep raising, the ballot box does not give any ruler a carte blanche to give himself dictatorial powers which exceed even those of Mubarak. The razor thin margin does not grant a mandate of dictatorship. He took an oath to protect the constitution then renegaded on his oath with his constitutional decree. The vote is supposedly for Mursi as an individual, not for the International Muslim Brotherhood to rule Egypt. It was the Murshid and his clique who were ruling, with Mursi being just a façade, their 'representative'. Though he officially announced his resignation from the MB, yet El Shater handled the economy, Haddad handled foreign affairs, Beltagy and Katatni issued presidential decrees! Which legitimate president sends his extra-legal militia to disperse, torture, and shoot at unarmed protesters in front of his palace, or to besiege the Supreme Court to prevent judges from ruling against his group, or to terrorize the media by beseiging Media City?

The MB in Egypt is a secretive organization with a long history of assassinations and terrorism since its inception (Al Khazandar and Al Nuqrashy). They never legalized or registered their organization, declared their financial sources, membership, budget...but they have branches in 80 countries! The MB and Mursi's deception, deviousness, incompetence all add up to a "breach of contract". Mursi delegitimized himself to the extent that all of his presidential advisors and 4 cabinet ministers resigned during his last days as president, and those include members of the Salafi Al Nour party. Even Abul Futuh of the Islamic 'Strong Egypt' party, and the Islamist Nageh Ibrahim ( a founder of Jama'a Islamia) called on him to resign. If you insist on calling it a coup, then it was a people, not army, coup.

Finally, you called the MB a “failure party” yet you are engaging in one thread after the other advocating their return to power?! Seriously? ‘They are a failure party but they should rule, and run alone, a country of 84.3 million! That really makes a lot of sense.

Edited by meryt-tetisheri
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted on another thread photos of a man who pretended to be dead 5 different times, he was Mursi's official photographer ('was' refers to the expiration of his job, not his life). He is still alive and kicking! For some reason this pic. was removed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On what basis are you making such an assertion? Do you have any sources, statistics, and numbers to prove that?

-If 13 million voted for Mursi, and this number includes those who voted in protest against Shafik, the famous pre-marked ballots of Ameereyya (proven, case went to court DURING Mursi's tenure), the faulty electoral lists..etc, you still arrive to about 15.6% of the Egyptian population, assuming that Mursi managed to maintain the same rate of approval (which he didn't).

-Bear in mind that during the first round of presidential elections, Mursi garnered 5 million only

-Tamorod collected 22 million signed petitions; each includes the petitioners’ national number

-The most conservative estimate of the number of demonstrators on June 30th. is 14 million, most estimates vary between 20 to 30 million. In all cases the number far exceeded those of 2011, Nasser's funeral, or any pro-Mursi demonstration in which people are paid and bussed from towns & villages all over Egypt.

-A still larger number, estimated at 27-30 million turned out on July 7 to support Sisi

My question is: Assuming that you will insist on rejecting the numbers of anti-Mursi demonstrators (which I'm sure you will), and assuming that he maintained the number of his genuine supporters, how come the pro-Mursi demonstrations never arrived close to even the 5 million, and their numbers are actually dwindling (I refer you to the article I linked before)?

you're not listening .. you keep saying 20 30 million protested against morsi

while the fact is the places the anti-morsi protests took place in .. those places are " incapable " in language of space and ability to withstand crowds

are incapable of holding up that number of people . the maximum number can those places withstand " combined " is 4 million at max

This is a totally one-sided statement; the army was putting down MB violence. Peaceful protesters do not use RPGs to attack police stations, nor fire arms, shot guns, swords and knives. They usually don’t have torture chambers under the podium of their sit-ins, chuck corpses of tortured people on trash heaps, torch university and government buildings, schools, mosques (Rab'a) and churches as well as houses. They do not leave bombs in streets nor carry hand grenades. Peaceful humane protesters do not use children from orphanages as human shield and parade them in shrouds with "project of a martyr" inscribed on it. Honest people who are not after a cheap media stunt do not use a fire extinguisher to create smoke then claim the police is firing tear gas at them (Al Fath mosque).

and loyal armies do not kill people who simply holding up a Koran which is caught on tape

loyal army does not let " baltajia " storm mosques while they stand and look how civilian disgusting gangs attack people in mosques

when your army meet the standards of loyal army .. and how with so much blood on their hands ?

in tahrir .. there was a rape among millions of people .. why did not the army take action ?

but raba when there was nothing like that .. just people gathered and protesting .. they get killed

so please don't accuse me of being one sided .. i maybe one sided coz the truth don't have two sides it have one side

and it doesn't change when the victim belong to certain group or religion

when muslims brotherhood supporters do something wrong i condem them

when whatever group you supporting do something wrong .. you find excuses

thats the different between us .. and sorry to be blunt but it's the way it is

while morsi was in power .. when one reporter get locked up you go in rage

but now when the goverment of egypt lock up many reporters and camera men suddenly your reaction change on the subject

why ? because the reporter was presenting something different than your liking

this is a simple and small mere example of the doubles i see in standards

am blunt .. am honest .. and i don't treat same issue different depending on religion or political stand of people

an innocent is an innocent regardless of any thing

and guilty is guilty regardless of anything

this is my phoilosphy on things in egypt .. sorry if you don't like it

If you are looking for a source, read Mursi's constitution. Why does it include the supervision of ulama on all laws (like Iran)? Why was the constitutional assembly composed of only MB and Salafists? The MB and Salafis clearly stated that they intend implementing Sharia. Why did the MB parliament discuss lowering the age of marriage for young girls instead of the urgent economic crisis? Why did Mursi pardon 2000 convicted jihadists including Sadat's assassins (then invite him at the tomb of his victim to sit next to the president, on the anniversary of Sadat's assassination, during 6 Oct. parade)? Why did he appoint one of those who are responsible for the 1999 Deir Al Bahari temple in Luxor a governor of the self-same 'scene of the crime', Luxor?

As for the 'legitimacy' issue you keep raising, the ballot box does not give any ruler a carte blanche to give himself dictatorial powers which exceed even those of Mubarak. The razor thin margin does not grant a mandate of dictatorship. He took an oath to protect the constitution then renegaded on his oath with his constitutional decree. The vote is supposedly for Mursi as an individual, not for the International Muslim Brotherhood to rule Egypt. It was the Murshid and his clique who were ruling, with Mursi being just a façade, their 'representative'. Though he officially announced his resignation from the MB, yet El Shater handled the economy, Haddad handled foreign affairs, Beltagy and Katatni issued presidential decrees! Which legitimate president sends his extra-legal militia to disperse, torture, and shoot at unarmed protesters in front of his palace, or to besiege the Supreme Court to prevent judges from ruling against his group, or to terrorize the media by beseiging Media City?

The MB in Egypt is a secretive organization with a long history of assassinations and terrorism since its inception (Al Khazandar and Al Nuqrashy). They never legalized or registered their organization, declared their financial sources, membership, budget...but they have branches in 80 countries! The MB and Mursi's deception, deviousness, incompetence all add up to a "breach of contract". Mursi delegitimized himself to the extent that all of his presidential advisors and 4 cabinet ministers resigned during his last days as president, and those include members of the Salafi Al Nour party. Even Abul Futuh of the Islamic 'Strong Egypt' party, and the Islamist Nageh Ibrahim ( a founder of Jama'a Islamia) called on him to resign. If you insist on calling it a coup, then it was a people, not army, coup.

if it's not a coup .. then it will successed .. and if the protestors are not bringin up real Revolution they will fail

the coup did not successed .. people are protesting every day against it

now weather those people go on protesting and become stronger

this will decide weather the it was " people " or " military coup "

as we say .. the people can't be oppressed forever .. they break free eventally

Finally, you called the MB a “failure party” yet you are engaging in one thread after the other advocating their return to power?! Seriously? ‘They are a failure party but they should rule, and run alone, a country of 84.3 million! That really makes a lot of sense.

i never said they should rule .. am actually glad MB are out of power

you think as syrian i liked listening to Morsi flirting with iran ? and russia ?

and nearly selling him self and the country for iran in return for few millions ?

no Mb should not rule .. but they should not be exterminated like they are not

and the army should not be in streets killing people

coz mark my words .. these actions of racisim against the MB in egypt

is going to create a generation of extremists far beyond MB

violence gives birth to more violence

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you're not listening .. you keep saying 20 30 million protested against morsi

while the fact is the places the anti-morsi protests took place in .. those places are " incapable " in language of space and ability to withstand crowds

are incapable of holding up that number of people . the maximum number can those places withstand " combined " is 4 million at max

and loyal armies do not kill people who simply holding up a Koran which is caught on tape

loyal army does not let " baltajia " storm mosques while they stand and look how civilian disgusting gangs attack people in mosques

when your army meet the standards of loyal army .. and how with so much blood on their hands ?

in tahrir .. there was a rape among millions of people .. why did not the army take action ?

but raba when there was nothing like that .. just people gathered and protesting .. they get killed

so please don't accuse me of being one sided .. i maybe one sided coz the truth don't have two sides it have one side

and it doesn't change when the victim belong to certain group or religion

when muslims brotherhood supporters do something wrong i condem them

when whatever group you supporting do something wrong .. you find excuses

thats the different between us .. and sorry to be blunt but it's the way it is

while morsi was in power .. when one reporter get locked up you go in rage

but now when the goverment of egypt lock up many reporters and camera men suddenly your reaction change on the subject

why ? because the reporter was presenting something different than your liking

this is a simple and small mere example of the doubles i see in standards

am blunt .. am honest .. and i don't treat same issue different depending on religion or political stand of people

an innocent is an innocent regardless of any thing

and guilty is guilty regardless of anything

this is my phoilosphy on things in egypt .. sorry if you don't like it

if it's not a coup .. then it will successed .. and if the protestors are not bringin up real Revolution they will fail

the coup did not successed .. people are protesting every day against it

now weather those people go on protesting and become stronger

this will decide weather the it was " people " or " military coup "

as we say .. the people can't be oppressed forever .. they break free eventally

i never said they should rule .. am actually glad MB are out of power

you think as syrian i liked listening to Morsi flirting with iran ? and russia ?

and nearly selling him self and the country for iran in return for few millions ?

no Mb should not rule .. but they should not be exterminated like they are not

and the army should not be in streets killing people

coz mark my words .. these actions of racisim against the MB in egypt

is going to create a generation of extremists far beyond MB

violence gives birth to more violence

I have to rush, no time to write a full reply. However, what 4 million are you talking about? The anti-Mursi demonstrations were NATION WIDE, i.e. from Alexandria, Port Said, Suez, Tanta, Damanhour, Cairo...all the way to Aswan. You calculated that the squares of all these cities cannot hold more than 4 million, then how can 84 million be living in Egypt? I know it's crowded, but if I take yor calculation as an indication, Egyptians must be living in layers standing on each others' shoulders! :D

Read the names of the cities on the lower right corner of each pic

1016736_10151674352222182_616833059_n.jpg

The 'continuous' support and popularity of the MB ,"the majority" according to you, is attested by the crowds which showed up demonstrating for their cause last Friday:

547721_514581841949554_64614381_n.jpg

and here is another 'million-man' rally

1234539_514583165282755_1867488632_n.jpg

by the 'peaceful' protesters who should have been left alone without any interference by the 'evil' army:

https://www.facebook...&type=2

MB propapaganda machine, faking news, using the same clip claiming it's for two different demos in 2 different cities:

1240463_514659788608426_1097060884_n.jpg

and Jazeera, check out post #9 by Orcseeker:

http://www.liveleak....=7ec_1376774646

http://www.liveleak....=c2e_1376318636

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll let you finish fully before i reply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you're not listening .. you keep saying 20 30 million protested against morsi

while the fact is the places the anti-morsi protests took place in .. those places are " incapable " in language of space and ability to withstand crowds

are incapable of holding up that number of people . the maximum number can those places withstand " combined " is 4 million at max

and loyal armies do not kill people who simply holding up a Koran which is caught on tape

loyal army does not let " baltajia " storm mosques while they stand and look how civilian disgusting gangs attack people in mosques

when your army meet the standards of loyal army .. and how with so much blood on their hands ?

in tahrir .. there was a rape among millions of people .. why did not the army take action ?

but raba when there was nothing like that .. just people gathered and protesting .. they get killed

so please don't accuse me of being one sided .. i maybe one sided coz the truth don't have two sides it have one side

and it doesn't change when the victim belong to certain group or religion

when muslims brotherhood supporters do something wrong i condem them

when whatever group you supporting do something wrong .. you find excuses

thats the different between us .. and sorry to be blunt but it's the way it is

while morsi was in power .. when one reporter get locked up you go in rage

but now when the goverment of egypt lock up many reporters and camera men suddenly your reaction change on the subject

why ? because the reporter was presenting something different than your liking

this is a simple and small mere example of the doubles i see in standards

am blunt .. am honest .. and i don't treat same issue different depending on religion or political stand of people

an innocent is an innocent regardless of any thing

and guilty is guilty regardless of anything

this is my phoilosphy on things in egypt .. sorry if you don't like it

if it's not a coup .. then it will successed .. and if the protestors are not bringin up real Revolution they will fail

the coup did not successed .. people are protesting every day against it

now weather those people go on protesting and become stronger

this will decide weather the it was " people " or " military coup "

as we say .. the people can't be oppressed forever .. they break free eventally

i never said they should rule .. am actually glad MB are out of power

you think as syrian i liked listening to Morsi flirting with iran ? and russia ?

and nearly selling him self and the country for iran in return for few millions ?

no Mb should not rule .. but they should not be exterminated like they are not

and the army should not be in streets killing people

coz mark my words .. these actions of racisim against the MB in egypt

is going to create a generation of extremists far beyond MB

violence gives birth to more violence

You realise the MB are supporting the FSA. Does that not leave some conflict of interest with you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You realise the MB are supporting the FSA. Does that not leave some conflict of interest with you?

no they did not

Morsi speeches he once said " we have same vision that Russia does on syrian solution "

they would sell to the highest bet

egypt never helped us in anything nor did we benfit from their MB

he even lat Iran get into egypt like a cancer by " tourism " or that's how they say it

and before you know it .. iran like bad cancer taking over the country

coz of that .. am happy he's out of power

no one knows how cancerous and filthy iranian influence in a country like we do

but seems like every one ignoring my point

am against army .. killing civilians and oppressing them

Edited by Knight Of Shadows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no they did not

Morsi speeches he once said " we have same vision that Russia does on syrian solution "

they would sell to the highest bet

egypt never helped us in anything nor did we benfit from their MB

he even lat Iran get into egypt like a cancer by " tourism " or that's how they say it

and before you know it .. iran like bad cancer taking over the country

coz of that .. am happy he's out of power

no one knows how cancerous and filthy iranian influence in a country like we do

but seems like every one ignoring my point

am against army .. killing civilians and oppressing them

http://www.fnvw.org/vertical/Sites/%7B8182BD6D-7C3B-4C35-B7F8-F4FD486C7CBD%7D/uploads/Syria_Special_Report-web.pdf

"Where is the money

coming from? The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, by some accounts, is funding about a

quarter to a third of the FSAs; about threequarters of the FSAs are secular in orientation."

From page 17.

I understand the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood isn't as closely tied to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood as one might expect, but it is still something to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll let you finish fully before i reply

I have now some free time for a reply, and sorry it will be a long one.

About your assertion that the demonstrations could not have possibly exceeded 4 million, I assume you are referring to Cairo, probably only Tahrir Square and surrounding main streets and bridges. It doesn’t seem that the calculations you alluded to included other massive rallies in Heliopolis in front of Itehadeyya Palace and the surrounding streets, and in other suburbs such as Shubra, Shubra Al Kheima, Boulaq…etc. or Giza. These calculations apparently totally skipped over other massive rallies and demonstrations in cities and towns all over Egypt! If however your calculations did include them, then it would be nice and convincing, if you provide your measurements of the surface area of all their squares and main streets, from Alexandria to Aswan, including the Canal cities also, so that the rest of us can also follow the calculation of individuals/m² and verify that these areas combined cannot contain 20 to 30 million.

You repeated a few times that you do not approve of the MB, and that your point is that you are against an army killing civilians, a point you feel that everyone is ignoring. I take that to mean that you are against the killing of civilians, yet in the thread “Egypt declares national Emergency” in posts 56 & 59 you said:

egypt people should take up arms and fight back like we did”;

““a Revolution is not accomplished by protests and demands on the hope dictators will answer your demands Revolutions are accomplished by strength and arms to " Force " dictators to let you free with the boots on dictator neck that's how Revolutions are done and egypt people are going to reliaze that sooner or later

there is no such thing as peaceful revolution it never fixes anything and no lession will be learned”

The problem is not that you are being ignored, rather that you offer an incoherent position; you state both the thing and its opposite as being your point! The killing of civilians is reprehensible, yet armed ‘revolutionary civilians’ have a tendency to shoot civilians they suspect are supporters of those against whom they are rebelling, or who follow a different faith, or who simply belong to the wrong group. Is it OK for innocent civilians to be killed by other civilians, but the problem arises only if the killers are in uniform? I have watched a clip of Syrian rebels who machine gunned three truck drivers because they failed to answer correctly questions about fajr prayers (I guess they were Shiites). This is what happens in an armed “revolution” when civilian is turned against civilian, yet you advocate armed rebellion, but cannot accept if it is an army that kills. Either the victim’s life has value in and off itself or it doesn’t! That an army finds itself compelled to protect the majority of citizens from a terror campaign by well-organized armed groups does not make it disloyal but the opposite. Its first loyalty was to Egypt not the government of Mursi, exactly as you said a loyal army should do.

If organizers of a demonstration insert heavily armed groups amidst the peaceful protesters and they start shooting at security forces and the inhabitants of the areas they are passing through, who is equally guilty, if not more so, the security forces (police by the way, not the army) or those who used the victims as human shields? Why did the MB dress women and little children in shrouds with “project of a martyr” then arrange for them to spearhead the demonstrations: coincidences that repeatedly occurred, or by design to induce such killings so it could be used politically to entice foreign intervention? Loss of life is always regrettable, no matter who killed; a cavalier attitude towards the life of followers should also be condemned.

In “New Massacre In Egypt”, post 15 you said:

it doesn't change when the victim belong to certain group or religion when muslims brotherhood supporters do something wrong i condem them when whatever group you supporting do something wrong .. you find excuses thats the different between us .. and sorry to be blunt but it's the way it is….am blunt .. am honest .. and i don't treat same issue different depending on religion or political stand of peoplean innocent is an innocent regardless of any thing and guilty is guilty regardless of anything this is my phoilosphy on things in Egypt

I will disregard now the personal insult implied in your post, but will instead go straight to the point. If this is your position, how come you never mentioned once the rape of nuns, the beheading of Copts, or the burning of close to 70 churches, monasteries, Christian schools…etc.? I read no condemnation or any reaction from you; instead you actually falsely accused the victims of disloyalty to their country by bringing on dictatorship for the sake of special privileges. You even went so far as to call Copts “modern day Crusaders”! I am not sure of the connotation of your use of this term:

-Crusader or ‘Abadet al Salib’ (Crucifix worshippers) a derogatory term used by some fanatical fundamentalists to refer to Christians, I sincerely hope that this is not the meaning you had in mind.

-If on the other hand you were referring to the historical Crusaders, then you need to read more about their history in the ME, and the ecclesiastical schism between the Latin and Eastern churches. Actually, Eastern Christians during the Crusades fell between ‘the rock and the hard place’: an attitude similar to Arnaud Amalric’s famous “Dieu reconnaitra les Siens” on one side; and “they are all one and the same” on the other, for the same reason, having different beliefs! In all respects, from any angle, calling Christian minorities ‘Crusaders’ is factually wrong and always unacceptable. It is amusing that some of these ‘Islamists’ like the MB’s Gehad Al Haddad and others in Egypt, or rebels in Syria, are turning now to the decedents of the Crusaders asking for help, but are calling their fellow native Christian citizens “Crusaders”!

In the same post you stated:

no Mb should not rule .. but they should not be exterminated like they are not and the army should not be in streets killing people coz mark my words .. these actions of racisim against the MB in Egypt is going to create a generation of extremists far beyond MB”

The MB are not being ‘exterminated’, their leaders and others who planned for and committed crimes like murder and arson will stand trial. The rank and file members are always invited to rejoin the political process. The final draft of the constitutional amendments is almost finished. A 50-member panel of public figures representing various parties, institutions and political groups will then amend it then it will go to a vote. Presidential and parliamentary elections are expected early next year. Egypt is not heading towards dictatorship. Also, All Egyptians are of the same race, how could they be “racist against the MB”? You didn’t take your joke about the green men from Mars too seriously, did you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meryt i have not directed or insulted you in anyway

i merely stated that when Morsi was arresting reporters " which i oppose "

you were all hot headed and passionate and against it .. which is good

but suddenly when some one you support did it .. you find excuses instead of condem it

this is fact it was not a personal insult i merely highlighted your reaction against same act

done by different parties .. and how your reaction changed depending on the party doing that act

i apologize if you think that was insult .. but this should sufice as explaination it was not

and hopefully we will get answer from you why you seem to take different opinion based on the party doing the wrong thing ?

as for the rest of the post i'll reply to it later

as you know things here are boiling up fast and with it my blood :D

therefore my country comes first in my time here .. although i love egypt

on side note .. i heard that both parties MB and Gov are trying to reach middle ground

stop protests ... release people and stop arrest

i hope this works out well for sake of egypt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well before i could talk meryt i would like to tell you

am bold .. am not shy about the truth and i speak it loudly and painfully

specially to those who may not wanna hear it

and i got long list of things i wanted to ask and post

just to inform people of how the Coup Government is oppressing egyptian people

and practicing the most ugly forms of Racisim on Offical TV none the less

with examples .. and am not nice about it

when some one does something wrong i would not pat their back and be nice

when i say that's wrong am bold about it

as for your question for the term i used " modern day crusaders "

you said " crusader " means " cross worshipper "

while strangely .. in history crusaders means bunch of lunatic religious bigots

driving havoc and trail of murders throughout the lands in name of their god

and if the term " terrorism " was found at that age .. it would have been used on crusaders

by the international laws of today's standards

which were not made by me or muslims .. so you won't accuse me of hate

but by the entire world nations

so maybe you're giving too much attention to the meanings of words

instead of what examples of these words had in our history

and i hope the mentioning of history does not insult you

now that we're off history to " my " definition of the word i used " modern day crusaders "

it's not aimed for " christians "

but as we both know .. crusaders hated muslims so much in history

and when i want to describe an individual that is so hateful of muslims

hateful enough you could see blazes fire off their eyes to the level of racism

that's when i use this " term " not based on the background religion of that person

because i often don't know the person background or religion

you can take this reply as example of how i might argue or debate my points

so if you think you can be alright with that i would post further

if not then we should leave it be

because i don't wanna bother or insult anyone

i merely want to view the truth and let everyone see it

which sometimes the truth get swallowed by the " strong side "

and the other side is left without rights and without voice

people act on their personal interests,profit,religion,sect,political stance

thus they forget about the truth .. coz it doesn't matter anymore

they no longer want the truth .. they want to silence it

or they only want their version of the truth

in best cases .. they just don't care

i see alot of people making up their mind and view based on one side of the tale

without even hearing the other side story

eerrr anyway .. i talked too much again and i was thinking to make it short post

so let me know if you're ok with that and if you're sensetive about it

we should not take it any further

and each one may post their view without cross paths

Edited by Knight Of Shadows
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the apology, it is appreciated. I do not bear grudges, but usually comments which repeatedly pop up indicate an individual’s frame of mind, his/her perception and evaluation of an idea, a group, or a belief. It is within this context that I have been taking note of particular themes which recur in your posts about minorities in the Middle East. There is a fine line between having a discussion, an exchange of ideas and opinions; and descending to bickering, generalizations, or bravado. I think we can both agree that being honest, ‘blunt’, or ‘fearless’, does not exclude being civil.

In re “Crusaders”, let me clarify that I questioned YOUR connotation of the word. As I mentioned before, you seem to be influenced by Islamist propaganda ‘in real time’: “Sisi’s (alleged) treason; prediction that the Egyptian army will split; inevitability of civil war; responsibility of non-Muslim minorities and secularists for the ouster of Mursi; and lately the use of “modern-day-Crusaders”. This term has been used by MB such as Beltagy (on record) and others, as well as some extremist sheikhs who added to it a new synonym “Salibeen”(Crusaders)=”Abadet al Saleeb” (crucifix worshippers). Your definition of the historical Crusaders as a “bunch of lunatic religious bigots driving havoc and trail of murders throughout the lands in name of their god” is rather oversimplified. However, when you juxtapose this definition with ‘seculars’ then blame both for bringing dictatorship to Egypt, then it’s logical that the question must be asked: who exactly do you mean by the term?

Your explanation that your use of the term is divorced from religious affiliation but rather depends on the degree of presumed ‘hatred for Muslims’ you think you perceive is unconvincing. In the thread "Hundreds of Thousands protest in Egypt” you repeatedly stated your opinion about the subject:

-“ we seen in in my country .. non-muslims litarly would sign a deal with the devil .. would launch a nuke and kill all muslims rather than to let them reach power in democratic way.. i heard the claims ohh copts are different than christians in syria .. it's bullocks it's all the same”(post 122)

-“ non-muslims have been making and siding with dictators forever and no good will come out of this since they are minority”(post 130)

-“ and you are using the concept " takfeer " again another thing i witness so long among non-muslims here as excuse to kill . destory . do what they want .. as long they justify it by that”(post 143)

-“ but how do they show their gratitude ? by taking side of any one who comes along to kill muslims”(post 124)

I have been also personally signaled out:

-“ with all respect to meryt .. she's part of the struggle therefore .. she litarly can't be unbiased”(post 122)

-“ but since it was muslims who got killed you defend the murderer am not blaming you .. but that's the mindset you were raised with that's how you were programmed along with all secular and non-muslims”(post 143)

I think all of the above quotations should clarify to you why I question your use of the term “modern day Crusaders”.

Despite your assertions of impartiality, I have yet to hear you condemn even once the pogrom unleashed by the MB against Copts. My position with regards to those who were killed in Rabaa is unchanged: their death is reprehensible and wrong, and the MB leadership is just as responsible for it as the army. No one should be sacrificed as human shield or cannon fodder. The MB leadership exploited its followers twice: by deliberately endangering them, and by using their death as propaganda and a political ploy.

As for Al Jazeera, its biased and often faked coverage of events in Egypt has become the butt of jokes in Egypt. Airing recorded messages by Beltagy and Eryan in which they further incited violence did not exactly help. Review the link provided by Orcseeker. Below is a clip recorded by a resident of Sphinx Square, Cairo, showing an empty square while Jazeera was reporting ‘Live’ demonstrations supposedly taking place there. It traded its professionalism for defending Qatar’s ‘strategy’ in Egypt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaIx7BK2q7o

Whether we can continue a ‘dialogue’ is not a question of sensitivities to honest or blunt opinions; but of being coherent, unambiguous, and refraining from making baseless preconceived assumptions about other people’s interests, background, mindset and “programming”, particularly when based on their faith. Honesty has to go all the way through, the same for civility.

Finally KoS, I wish you, your family, and your country well. Stay safe.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good to know ..

then i shall post few examples which you might inform us of why such things are happening in egypt

as this raise alot of questions upon freedom restrictions to certain people

and make " us " people outside question the course of events in egypt

and why we think it's going back to dictatorship days

i'll post them soon

and i wish you well too

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.