This video shows Dr. Mostafa Hegazy, the Presidential Advisor, defending the government's actions in an interview on CNN. He stresses that the roadmap is on track, with a constitution to be written within 60 days, followed by parliamentary elections (if the referendum is passed) and presidential elections.
Thursday 22 August 2013
Video Titled: CNN Interview with Mostafa Hegazy
This video shows Dr. Mostafa Hegazy, the Presidential Advisor, defending the government's actions in an interview on CNN. He stresses that the roadmap is on track, with a constitution to be written within 60 days, followed by parliamentary elections (if the referendum is passed) and presidential elections.
Article in Wall Street Journal: A Coptic Monument to Survival, Destroyed by Samuel Tadros
No one knows exactly when the Virgin Mary Church was built, but the fourth and fifth centuries are both possible options. In both cases, it was the time of the Byzantines. Egypt's Coptic Church—to which this church in modern-day Delga belonged—had refused to bow to imperial power and Rome's leadership over the nature of Christ. Constantinople was adamant it would force its will on the Copts. Two lines of popes claimed the Seat of Alexandria. One with imperial blessing sat in the open; the other, with his people's support, often hid, moving from one church to the other. Virgin Mary Church's altar outlasted the Byzantines. Arabs soon invaded in A.D. 641. Dynasties rose and fell, but the ancient building remained strong, a monument to its people's survival.
Virgin Mary Church was built underground, a shelter from the prying eye. At its entrance were two ancient Roman columns and an iron door. Inside were three sanctuaries with four altars. Roman columns were engraved in the walls. As in many Coptic churches, historical artifacts overlapped earlier ones. The most ancient drawing to survive into the 21st century: a depiction, on a stone near the entrance, of two deer and holy bread. Layers and layers of history, a testament not only to the place's ancient roots but also to its persistence. Like other Coptic churches, the ancient baptistery was on the western side, facing the altar in the east. Infants were symbolically transferred through baptism from the left to the right. The old icons were kept inside the church, the ancient manuscripts transferred to the Bishopric in modern times.
Once there were 23 other ancient churches next to it, all connected through secret passages. Only Virgin Mary Church remained. Decline and survival, loss and endurance, the twin faces of the story of the Copts who built it.
Why Virgin Mary Church endured until modern times is a mystery. Some churches in Cairo survived because Coptic popes made them their residence. Being built on a place Jesus and his mother had visited gave others in Egypt a claim to fame and a chance at survival, while in still others the miracles performed by the patron saint were a reason for pilgrims to visit and donate. Virgin Mary Church had none of these. For hundreds of years, its sole claim to miracles: a Roman column that, according to parishioners, produced oil once a year on Good Friday. The church was probably too small and too remote from the center of authority to merit notice. Its flock never abandoned it. Most of the Copts had converted to Islam over the centuries, but in Delga a critical mass remained that kept putting candles in front of the old icons.
Then, in 1829, a boy named Boulos Ghobrial was born in a village nearby. He was baptized in Virgin Mary Church's ancient baptistery and taught to read and write in its small school. He would become St. Abram, the Bishop of Fayoum, a man of deep spirituality, who performed thousands of miracles and resembled his master in his poverty. He died in 1914, and the Holy Synod would declare him a saint in 1963. Many churches would be built under his name, and his residence in Fayoum would become a huge attraction to pilgrims. His birthplace would reap some of the benefits.
Two newer churches were built next to Virgin Mary Church: St. George, about 100 years ago, and the modern St. Abram. Other buildings were soon added. A church that was a shelter from persecution under the Byzantines became a shelter from increasing discrimination and banishment from the public space in modern times. A large meeting room was built, as were a theater and retreat house. In the open space, a soccer field. Church permits became harder to get in Egypt and the small complex served 30,000 Copts.
Miracles are rare in modern times. More common is hardship, and plenty befell the churches of Delga. St. George was attacked a number of times and its domes destroyed. An enthusiastic bishop built two minarets only to have the Egyptian police destroy them. More threatening than a persecuting state was the mob. The ancient churches were attacked several times in the past. On July 28, Molotov cocktails and stones were thrown. The churches survived that day.
But survival was not destined two weeks later. The army's violent crackdown on Mohamed Morsi's supporters in Cairo unleashed a wave of attacks on churches the like of which Copts had not seen in centuries, thus laying waste to examples of a unique byway in the history of architecture, religious structures that are a hybrid of Egyptian, Greco-Roman and Christian Byzantine styles. Dozens of churches were burned and destroyed in the largest attack on Coptic houses of worship since 1321. A complete tally is still to be written. But in its latest report, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, Egypt's best human-rights organization, documents a total of 47 churches attacked, of which 25 were burned, seven looted and destroyed, five partly damaged, and 10 attacked without sustaining heavy damage.
In this maelstrom, the ancient Virgin Mary Church was not spared. In a day of brutality, the people of Delga distinguished themselves. All three of Delga's Coptic churches were destroyed. So were a Catholic and a Protestant church in the city. In place of Virgin Mary Church, the mob placed a sign: The Martyrs Mosque.
Other areas in the country attempted to compete. The school run by Franciscan nuns in Beni Suef was destroyed. It had been opened in 1889 and provided education to thousands of Egypt's girls. A symbol of a bygone time. Lost with the building were many artifacts, statues and paintings. A museum in Malawi was also destroyed. About 1,200 ancient artifacts have been looted.
A Coptic exodus has been under way for two years now in Egypt. The hopes unleashed by the 2011 revolution soon gave way to the realities of continued and intensified persecution. Decades earlier, a similar fate had befallen the country's once-thriving Jewish community. The departure of the people is echoed in the decay of the buildings. The landscape of the country is changing along with its demography. A few synagogues stand today as the only reminder of the country's Jews. Which churches will remain standing is an open question.
Mr. Tadros is a research fellow at the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom and the author of "Motherland Lost: The Egyptian and Coptic Quest for Modernity."
Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324108204579022951847863272.html?ru=yahoo%3Fmod%3Dyahoo_itp
Wednesday 21 August 2013
Article on Financial Times: Egyptians Will No Longer Put Up With Authoritarians - August 20 2013
West’s bias towards the Brothers reflects a return of orientalism, says Ezzedine Choukri Fishere
or millions of us who live in Egypt, the western bias towards the Muslim Brotherhood is unmistakable. Yes, innocent Islamists have been shot in the streets and the number of casualties is staggering. No one who is here will ever want to relive the bloodshed of the past week. The west needs to be clear about what the Brotherhood is, however.
In the past week, the group and its allies have burnt down churches, killed police and military personnel, attacked police stations with heavy weapons and terrorised residential neighbourhoods – but this is not the impression one gets from the statements from outside the country.
One never hears about how, in 2011, the Brotherhood and its allies, Islamic Jihad and Gamaa Islamiya, used the electoral victory of their candidate, Mohamed Morsi, to hijack the democratic transition. This was achieved through legislating anti-democratic laws, restricting liberties, imposing an autocratic constitution, fostering sectarianism, intimidation, discriminating against women and minorities, and threatening their opponents.
Almost exactly like Hosni Mubarak, the Brotherhood tightened its grip on the political system, making change from within impossible. And, exactly like the former dictator, Mr Morsi was removed by a popular uprising – backed by the intervention of the military. They are, for an Egyptian liberal, two sides of the same coin.
This bias would not have been so upsetting if it were merely the result of the superior media campaigning on the part of the Brotherhood and its allies. But it seems to reflect a deeper and more sinister attitude; a return of orientalism in the name of universal democratic values.
Much western media and many experts fall victim to this vision. It suggests that the Arabs are a “special breed” of people, and an inferior one that cannot speak for itself but has to be spoken for by “those who know the Arabs best” – the good old orientalists populating thinktanks and framing media discourse. In the view of those “experts”, Islamism is the most important political force in the Arab world and will remain so for decades to come. This is because, they say, Islam plays a much greater role in the lives of Arabs. Consequently, the west should support Islamists even if their rule violates the basic values of a pluralistic democracy (such as equality and individual rights).
They recognise that Islamist rule would be an imperfect democracy, maybe even a majority tyranny, but they perceive this imperfection as inevitable, stemming from orientals’ “inherent” characteristics. The alternative to this “oriental democracy” would be an autocratic rule that is harder to support and can no longer work. So Islamists will provide the stability autocrats can no longer guarantee. They will rein in the more extreme Islamic Jihad and Gamaa Islamiya and they might evolve towards more respect of pluralistic values.
Where do I fit in to this analysis? I do not, and it does not matter to the neo-orientalists. They cast me aside as westernised, a minority, misplaced and incapable of rooting and connecting to the “majority” – almost an alien. But what about the 75 per cent of us who voted for Mr Morsi’s non-Islamist rivals in the first round of presidential elections? What about the millions who took to the streets to protest against his dictatorial “Constitutional Declaration” in November? What about the millions who demonstrated this summer? What about the tens of millions who today support the military – many of whom were its sworn enemies but converted out of fear of the Brotherhood? Are we all aliens and misfits? No. We are normal people who want a normal democracy; one that respects human rights, pluralism and the rule of law. We do not want fascistic majority rule delivered in ballot boxes.
However, we are made invisible, and our voice is silenced. Why? Because it is politically useful not to see or hear us. Ignoring us and our voices legitimates western governments’ support for Islamist authoritarian rulers who will give them the benefits of stability offered by dictators, while at the same time looking democratic because they are elected. For these governments, a Morsi is a new and a better Mubarak.
Neo-orientalism is as blind as the old one, however. The majority of Egyptians do want pluralism. Although we are disorganised and leaderless, we are not insignificant: nobody can govern this country without our support. We brought down Mr Mubarak and Mr Morsi – and we will not accept a return to authoritarianism, in the name of either religion or security. We know our struggle is far from over. The
Brotherhood and its allies will not disappear overnight, but they have lost popular support. The military will not give up power easily, but we know we can stop them becoming putschists. The entrenched orientalism will not go away either, but it will not convince us to accept anything less than a truly pluralistic democracy.
Ezzedine Choukri Fishere is an Egyptian novelist and professor of political science.
Link: www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/79bd3912-08e0-11e3-ad07-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2caWHNCMO
or millions of us who live in Egypt, the western bias towards the Muslim Brotherhood is unmistakable. Yes, innocent Islamists have been shot in the streets and the number of casualties is staggering. No one who is here will ever want to relive the bloodshed of the past week. The west needs to be clear about what the Brotherhood is, however.
In the past week, the group and its allies have burnt down churches, killed police and military personnel, attacked police stations with heavy weapons and terrorised residential neighbourhoods – but this is not the impression one gets from the statements from outside the country.
One never hears about how, in 2011, the Brotherhood and its allies, Islamic Jihad and Gamaa Islamiya, used the electoral victory of their candidate, Mohamed Morsi, to hijack the democratic transition. This was achieved through legislating anti-democratic laws, restricting liberties, imposing an autocratic constitution, fostering sectarianism, intimidation, discriminating against women and minorities, and threatening their opponents.
Almost exactly like Hosni Mubarak, the Brotherhood tightened its grip on the political system, making change from within impossible. And, exactly like the former dictator, Mr Morsi was removed by a popular uprising – backed by the intervention of the military. They are, for an Egyptian liberal, two sides of the same coin.
This bias would not have been so upsetting if it were merely the result of the superior media campaigning on the part of the Brotherhood and its allies. But it seems to reflect a deeper and more sinister attitude; a return of orientalism in the name of universal democratic values.
Much western media and many experts fall victim to this vision. It suggests that the Arabs are a “special breed” of people, and an inferior one that cannot speak for itself but has to be spoken for by “those who know the Arabs best” – the good old orientalists populating thinktanks and framing media discourse. In the view of those “experts”, Islamism is the most important political force in the Arab world and will remain so for decades to come. This is because, they say, Islam plays a much greater role in the lives of Arabs. Consequently, the west should support Islamists even if their rule violates the basic values of a pluralistic democracy (such as equality and individual rights).
They recognise that Islamist rule would be an imperfect democracy, maybe even a majority tyranny, but they perceive this imperfection as inevitable, stemming from orientals’ “inherent” characteristics. The alternative to this “oriental democracy” would be an autocratic rule that is harder to support and can no longer work. So Islamists will provide the stability autocrats can no longer guarantee. They will rein in the more extreme Islamic Jihad and Gamaa Islamiya and they might evolve towards more respect of pluralistic values.
Where do I fit in to this analysis? I do not, and it does not matter to the neo-orientalists. They cast me aside as westernised, a minority, misplaced and incapable of rooting and connecting to the “majority” – almost an alien. But what about the 75 per cent of us who voted for Mr Morsi’s non-Islamist rivals in the first round of presidential elections? What about the millions who took to the streets to protest against his dictatorial “Constitutional Declaration” in November? What about the millions who demonstrated this summer? What about the tens of millions who today support the military – many of whom were its sworn enemies but converted out of fear of the Brotherhood? Are we all aliens and misfits? No. We are normal people who want a normal democracy; one that respects human rights, pluralism and the rule of law. We do not want fascistic majority rule delivered in ballot boxes.
However, we are made invisible, and our voice is silenced. Why? Because it is politically useful not to see or hear us. Ignoring us and our voices legitimates western governments’ support for Islamist authoritarian rulers who will give them the benefits of stability offered by dictators, while at the same time looking democratic because they are elected. For these governments, a Morsi is a new and a better Mubarak.
Neo-orientalism is as blind as the old one, however. The majority of Egyptians do want pluralism. Although we are disorganised and leaderless, we are not insignificant: nobody can govern this country without our support. We brought down Mr Mubarak and Mr Morsi – and we will not accept a return to authoritarianism, in the name of either religion or security. We know our struggle is far from over. The
Brotherhood and its allies will not disappear overnight, but they have lost popular support. The military will not give up power easily, but we know we can stop them becoming putschists. The entrenched orientalism will not go away either, but it will not convince us to accept anything less than a truly pluralistic democracy.
Ezzedine Choukri Fishere is an Egyptian novelist and professor of political science.
Link: www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/79bd3912-08e0-11e3-ad07-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2caWHNCMO
Tuesday 20 August 2013
Video Titled: Brotherhood attack and burn the St. Teresa Church in Assiout
This clip shows the Brotherhood once again attacking and burning churches. This church is the St. Teresa Church in the Egyptian governorate of Assiout.
Video Titled: Brotherhood Assault a Police Officer, Beating and Torturing him to Death in Fayoum
This graphic video shows scores of the Brotherhood assaulting and beating an unarmed and defenceless police officer officer to death in Fayoum.
Video Titled: Some armed Brotherhood supporters kill police officers in Aswan
This video was only released today filmed by one of the residents in the area. The video is unedited and shows police officers in Aswan police station, stripped and savagely beaten by armed supporters of the Brotherhood who stormed the police station. Contrary to the title of the video, the commentator believes that no one died, just severe injuries suffered by the police officers. The video ends at 3.33.
Article on Al Arabiya: Mahmoud Ezzat named Muslim Brotherhood's New Leader, the 'Mr. X'
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood has named Mahmoud Ezzat as its temporary leader to replace Mohammad Badie who was detained on Tuesday and faces charges of complicity in deaths during a protest last year against deposed President Mohammad Mursi.
Prior to his appointment, Ezzat served as the secretary general of the Islamist movement and was a member of its guidance council.
He was the second deputy of the general guide.
The first deputy, Khairat el-Shater, was arrested shortly after Mursi was removed from power.
Israeli military intelligence website DEBKAfile described Ezzat last month as the Brotherhood’s “Mr. X.”
Debkafile reported that Badie was “no more than an obedient front for the Muslim Brotherhood’s real leader, who was until now Mr. X.”
Ezzat is “firmly at the helm and running the show both in Sinai and Cairo from the Gaza Beach Hotel, under the auspices of the Palestinian Hamas rulers,” the website added.
Ezzat is also referred to as the "blue deputy," "Fox Brotherhood" or "the real guide." Recently Egypt's Dostorasly website described him as the mastermind of alleged Brotherhood violence against security forces.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)