@Lysander – we will see the Morsi enforcement apparatus tomorrow. There will likely be clashes at tomorrows demonstrations when the more secular folks and the MB will show up each for their own cause.

Posted by: b | Nov 22 2012 18:09 utc | 3

Pirouz_2 :-)) and it will backfire this time too.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 22 2012 18:43 utc | 5

English text of Morsi’s Constitutional Declaration

Posted by: b | Nov 22 2012 18:58 utc | 7

David Goldman think Morsi is fooling Obama
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/11/21/morsis-blackmail-irans-threats-and-turkeys-fears-play-out-in-gaza/

Posted by: nikon | Nov 22 2012 19:57 utc | 9

b, what kind of pushback will Morsi receive from the judiciary—and from the prosecutor general it sounds like he relieved?

Posted by: ess emm | Nov 22 2012 20:01 utc | 11

Libyans did not vote for the Muslim Brotherhood, it is very unlikely they can gain control in tribal militia politics.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 22 2012 20:26 utc | 13

US preparing to install Abdullah’s brother as King
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/world/middleeast/jordan-protesters-dream-of-shift-to-prince-hamzah.html?ref=middleeast

Posted by: nikon | Nov 22 2012 22:06 utc | 15

@ nikon #9
Spengler/Goldman is one big ff-ing stain on ATol, who can’t help but jump to Israel’s rescue every ff-ing time. How’s that for an ‘unbiased’ ff-ing, dual banker?
@ b,
As long as Obambi has the right to extra-judicially kill foreigners and Americans alike, without anyone being held accountable, I fail to see much difference between our colluded ‘free speech zones’ and Tahrir Square’s sputtering demos

Posted by: Daniel Rich | Nov 22 2012 23:40 utc | 17

Daniel Rich, I know you do not approve of my conjectures or criticisms of other people’s conjectures but I think MoA is a forum that is designed to do just that. As I said before I was attracted to this site because b is one of the better blog analyst I have seen.
Anyway, my point of responding is different. In a few posts back I responded to someone whose handle was “Danel Rich” and I assumed it was you. The tone of his comments were unusually nasty even by your standards. Was that you?

Posted by: ToivoS | Nov 23 2012 0:20 utc | 19

@b #3 My guess is he can only partially rely on the police forces (which might not be enough if there is a big enough turnout tomorrow) and it would be extremely awkward for him he calls out the army. His enforcement arm will have to be Salafist Baltagiya, assuming he needs any at all.
Morsi announced that he will reopen cases against the security forces during the last revolution. This was intended to win popular support, but it will not make him popular among the police he would count on to suppress any big demo. It might also make many police too frightened to use brute force, for maybe they will be on the dock next. Same WRT the army.
Morsi is counting on revolution fatigue, and the couch party’s desire for normalcy to induce a small turnout. That is probably the biggest obstacle to the opposition. A small turnout and Morsi need not bother with riot police at all. At the same time, Morsi has real support and can call out large numbers of demonstrators to back him. He can also count on Arab media (Al Jazeerah) to be on his side. Western media will ignore it, or will present oppo demonstrators in the worst popular light.
And so we wait for tomorrow. If opposition demos fizzle then you will be right. The revolution, if there ever even was one, would be dead. If turnout is substantial, there is still hope. But even then, Morsi might just back down now and regroup at a later time.

Posted by: Lysander | Nov 23 2012 1:44 utc | 21

Don, I’d like to believe Morsi has outmaneuvered US/UK/I but I’m dubious. Whenever the western media is filled with praise for an Arab leader, it’s usually because he has stabbed other Arabs in the back at their behest.
That said, Both Hamas and Islamic Jihad seemed very happy with the results of the ceasefire (whether Israel lives up to its side of the bargain remains to be seen) And in the post-ceasefire press conference press conference, Khaled Meshal and and IJ chief Ramadan Shallah praised both Iran and Egypt. I guess if they were stabbed in the back, they would have said something different.
But the key to remember is that Morsi was acting under popular spotlight because he needed popular support, which he wouldn’t have if he visibly threw Hamas under the bus. Once he becomes total dictator, he need only follow the wishes of US/UK/I.

Posted by: Lysander | Nov 23 2012 2:20 utc | 23

@Lysander – remember is that Morsi was acting under popular spotlight
Really?

The top leader of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood denounced peace efforts with Israel and urged holy war to liberate Palestinian territories on Thursday — one day after the country’s president, who hails from the movement, mediated a cease-fire between Israelis and Palestinians to end eight days of fierce fighting.

So if Morsi moves to become “a new dictator” to counter clowns like this, more power to him.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 23 2012 3:10 utc | 25

Rather a rush to make judgement on Morsi, is it not?
After all, this decree is clearly being made In Response To moves being made by others to stymie the constitutional reforms that he has being labouring to put into place. And, let’s face it, he has already had to do this once before when the military attempts to neuter both his Presidency and the parliament that his party dominated…..
So, please, some context.
Mosri’s opponents have been trying to sweep the rug out from under him, and he has decreed that This Can’t Be Done.
OK, how appalling. Now, what were those prior moves that were being made against him, and were *they* even more appalling?

Posted by: Johnboy | Nov 23 2012 5:32 utc | 27

The supreme irony will be when Mubarak’s former henchmen return to power as “guardians of the democratic revolution” by overthrowing in a violent coup those elected through the “democratic means” produced by the Egyptian revolution. Farcical, if it weren’t so tragic.

Posted by: hk | Nov 23 2012 7:46 utc | 29

#22 daniel rich says: I find it hard to believe Egypt’s ruler rules as a singular entity, but as long as I, you or anyone else doesn’t have access to whatever the real truth is, we are all right [until proven wrong with verifiable facts].
That is certainly a statement that I agree with. Our problem, us peons on the outside looking in, are trying to make some sense what the inside players are really doing. I think we agree that the power players are only giving us a small fraction of the information that they have access to and that probably 90% of the information they do give us are outright lies. This does leave us in a position of constructing hypotheses based on only fragments of truth, much missing information and many outright lies. We therefore have to use reasonable conjectures. These are difficult judgement calls but some of us, b especially, have better records than others. That is why I must disagree with your statement that all are right until proven otherwise.
I have to admit that I have been spectacularly wrong on a number of occasions. One big error was my prediction, as late as January 2003, that the US would not invade Iraq. My reasoning then was that we would not do that because if we did we would be unable to control the resulting insurrection. I was totally wrong and correct at the same time.

Posted by: ToivoS | Nov 23 2012 8:42 utc | 31

Also Don, I wouldn’t give Morsi too much credit for the ceasefire. It was clear after day 3 Israel wanted one. Morsi didn’t pressure the Israelis to stop, and the western media certainly wouldn’t be praising him if he had. It was in fact Hamas’ and Islamic Jihad’s (Iran supplied) rockets that made the Israelis want to stop.
Qatar was only interested on refocusing the world’s attention to Syria.

Posted by: Lysander | Nov 23 2012 14:52 utc | 33

@Lysander — Also Don, I wouldn’t give Morsi too much credit for the ceasefire.
I give Morsi ALL the credit. Israel was being counter-attacked effectively with rockets, Israel had the ground forces ready to go in and the U.S. was in full support. Only Morsi kept it from becoming Cast Lead II. Credit where credit is due.
There’s a new Middle East now, with Egypt and Iran in ascendance and the U.S. — pivot to Asia-Pacific in hand ((how propitious) — enjoys virtually no political power except with the Gulf fat-boys and stupid Erdogan. Iran, Iraq, plus Egypt and Turkey, are now aligned against US/Israel. How nice. Neither Iran nor Egypt (nor Turkey and Iraq) has perfect domestics, but I don’t care much about that in deference to the foreign policy aspects. Go Morsi.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 23 2012 15:30 utc | 35

Don, the whole world from the EU to the us were warning israel against a ground assault. Morsi’s two cents were hardly needed.
And they were not issuing those wsrnings out of concern for Gaza, but out of concern for the embarassment that would have ensued following the Izzies getting bogged down.
Again, the western media would not be praising him if he had put real pressure on Israel. But I grant you, he wad certainly better than Mubarak would have been.

Posted by: Lysander | Nov 23 2012 16:16 utc | 37

Don Bacon, Hamas presumably has antitank weapons now and other stuff. There is no real economy in Gaza due to the blockade, so no employment opportunities for youngsters. They have a median age of 18. So Hamas will have had no problem recruiting fighters.
Israel did not get close to Hamas fighters in the Cast Lead “invasion” to protect their own soldiers from getting kidnapped or worse. That way they had an immense Gazan civilian death versus fighter death ratio. Really bad PR. Especially in the times of the Responsibility to Protect.
An invasion would have served no military strategic purpose except a psychological deterrent punishment action which would have resulted in very bad PR for Israel and did not deter last time, pose a risk for Israelis in foreign courts in the future, would have meant dead soldiers (bad for Netanyahu’s election prospects) and risk Israeli kidnapped soldiers (bad for Netanyahu’s election prospects).
No it is clear they were desperate for a ceasefire, Israelis and Americans. Clinton would not have rushed in for Gazans or for Morsi, if Israel had wanted to continue, she would have waffled from Cambodia to the media about Israel’s right to defend itself. It is possible Americans were more desperate than Israel (though a very large part of the Israeli population had to spend the week underground for security reasons) as the Gaza operation united US allies and foes.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 23 2012 16:42 utc | 39

On this “pharaoh” business. Went to a group dinner yesterday, complete with a pre-dining benediction. paraphrasing: ‘Thank you Lord for our freedom to express our opinions, and even though we differ we had the freedom to vote in the (presidential) election.’ –Which is about all the ‘freedom’ we have, politically, voting for one clown or another every four years, as we now have the ‘freedom’ to enjoy four more years of executive orders from those who are determined to be ‘better’ than ourselves. Just sit down and shut up, with anything meaningful. I mean, yeah, I enjoy reading the rants of others and ranting myself, and it’s personally gratifying and pleasant (or I wouldn’t do it), but what’s the effect of it, really? IOW the only pharaoh may not be — or is not — in Cairo.
Okay, that’s my rant on pharaohs.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 23 2012 16:48 utc | 41

Don’t get me wrong Don. The US is in no position to bitch about democracy to anyone. And I could cut Morsi some slack if he really was going to be part of the resistance front. But im afraid he wants to be a dictator with no redeeming virtues.

Posted by: Lysander | Nov 23 2012 17:01 utc | 43

@pirouz_2
* the ‘pillar of cloud’ was NOT the will of USA, it harmed the position of US lackeys in this region
* the Americans will not allow the Israelis to escalate the crisis
* The position of Morsi/Erdogan/Qatar was ONLY and ONLY a manifestation of the will of USA
So Israel is independent of the US except when it isn’t, and when Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi warned that the ongoing airstrikes by the Israeli regime on the blockaded Gaza Strip would jeopardize security in the region, he was agreeing with U.S. rock-solid support for Israel’s right to self-defense? No.
Morsi: “I tell them (Israelis) in the name of all the Egyptian people that the Egypt of today is not the Egypt of yesterday and that the Arabs of today are different than the Arabs of yesterday.” That’s true.
PS: Please, I have no intention of having a conversation with anybody on b’s or anyone’s blog. The more perspectives the better, and let the truth be revealed thereby.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 23 2012 18:34 utc | 45

By the way Don;
I think you really give too much credit to empty words of politicians. In order to show that Morsi desrves credit you quote him as saying:

“I tell them (Israelis) in the name of all the Egyptian people that the Egypt of today is not the Egypt of yesterday and that the Arabs of today are different than the Arabs of yesterday.”

Well then I quote you Condi Rice from back in 2005:

“The US pursuit of stability in the Middle East at the expense of democracy had “achieved neither”, she admitted.
“Now, we are taking a different course. We are supporting the democratic aspirations of all people,” she said.
The BBC’s Frank Gardner said her comments marked a complete departure for the US, and were “immensely risky”.
She criticised Egypt and Saudi Arabia, where she arrived after leaving Cairo, for cracking down on dissenters.

Now should we agree that Condi was a great promoter of democracy in middle east and was doing her best to democratize Egypt ans S. Arabia?!?!?

Posted by: Pirouz_2 | Nov 23 2012 19:25 utc | 47

@ Pirouz_2
Then if I give too much credit to empty words of politicians, why ask me what Morsi meant by his words? Probably he just wanted to give Israel a verbal shot. To repeat a refrain, judge them (politicians) not on what they say but on what they do. And Morsi brought home the bacon. 🙂
Quoting me, from 20025, quoting Condi, without context — I’m at a loss for words. 🙁

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 23 2012 19:37 utc | 49

46, which leads to the point – why did Israel do it? Netanyahu did not need pillar of cloud for the elections, he looks like a fool now but presumably will still make it.
The only rational reason I can think of is that they wanted to test Iron Dome, that they want more US investment into the system (they are going to get it), that they want to market it.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 23 2012 19:57 utc | 51

re: what is going on in Egypt – this is the best analysis I could find

From 1990 to today, a new generation of coups has emerged in the global scene, and recent putschists tend to stick to democracy, especially if they depend on substantial military aid from the U.S. and need to please their patrons with some spectacle of free elections. New coups bring civilian presidents to power, but the armed forces reserve for themselves the upper hand in state affairs.
A coup d’etat usually takes place in a country that suffers from an economic crisis, has oppositional groups that are fragmented and not homogenous, and has a weak civil society in comparison to a strong military institution. In a unipolar global system in which the U.S. is the only hegemonic power and benevolent patron of third-world regimes, adhering to the American rhetoric on democracy – or the Bush Doctrine of the 2000s – is essential to the survival of any coup. Federal law in the U.S. prohibits granting any financial assistance “to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree.” Thus, to hold elections and follow the path of ballot boxes becomes the only way through which coup leaders can secure the flow of U.S. foreign aid.
The Egyptian case is a conspicuous example of the new generation of world coups. Last year, the armed putschists capitalized on the mass protests to finally get rid of Hosni Mubarak’s son Gamal, whose succession scheme threatened their economic empire and political interests. After overthrowing Mubarak, the SCAF immediately adopted a democratic discourse and held elections to meet the expectations of the U.S., which grants the Egyptian army $1.3-billion (U.S.) in annual aid.

…

Morsy is an elected son of the coup. He is the civilian president that the military council allowed to rise to power, but only after issuing a supplement to the Constitutional Declaration that deprives him of any substantial authority over the armed forces. Morsy will inherit a highly militarized state where retired army generals and colonels occupy almost every high-ranking position in the bureaucracy and the public sector. This is in addition to the fact that the military runs massive economic enterprises.
Despite the fact that the militarization of the state is a huge hurdle to any civilian president who aspires for real reform, it is significant that Morsy began his first speech by expressing his deep love for the military institution. Morsy showed no intentions during his campaign to demilitarize the state.
The U.S. had a big role to play in pressuring the military to honor Morsy’s win. A report published by Al-Watan daily newspaper said U.S. officials met with SCAF members to press the latter to announce the valid results of the election and accept Morsy’s victory. Before that, and over the course of many months or even years, the U.S. had numerous talks with Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Cairo and Washington, where the Brothers always emphasized their choice of market economy policies as well as their adherence to international agreements.
Even though Egypt has elected its first civilian president since its independence, it remains a bittersweet victory. This is not only because there is a public mistrust of the Muslim Brotherhood, but, more importantly, because Morsy’s presidency is characteristic of a new generation of military coups. The SCAF celebrates free elections only to be allowed to tighten its grip on power while securing its indispensable American funding.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 23 2012 20:29 utc | 53

Never doubted for a sec this will happen, morsi reincarnated the Pharos and the new Syrian opposition reincarnates the mukhabrat.
This is just background noise for what is really taking place. Israel and turkey are back talking again to resolve their differences. How much do you want to bet that was what Clinton offered yahoo to stop the gaza silliness. Getting turkey back is a far bigger win for yahoo than killing a few gazans. For turkey it also give erdogan a better way to squeeze Assad and all is happy, on syria’s expense. Qatar’s emir is a desert fool but I am willing to bet he is the real brain child behind this one.

Posted by: ana souri | Nov 23 2012 21:02 utc | 55

agree, Don Bacon, the world is not black and white.
Somehow this tweet by the director of Human Rights Watch tells me a lot of things have changed

21m Kenneth Roth Kenneth Roth ‏@KenRoth
Israel says no agreement yet to ease restrictions. http://trib.al/5wCaQG Not true; only implementation to be negotiated: “>http://trib.al/ipSqzS

And the New York Times article he is linking tells me something has changed there, too.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 23 2012 21:56 utc | 57

Morsi took power over the judiciary because he felt it was attempting to undo the revolution and resurrect the old military council. The court overturned one attempt Morsi made to reinstate the parliament.
The best evidence that Morsi is doing the right thing — the U.S. is against it.

U.S. has concerns about Egyptian president Mursi’s moves
WASHINGTON, Nov 23 (Reuters) – The United States is concerned about Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi’s decision to assume sweeping powers, the U.S. State Department said on Friday.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 23 2012 23:18 utc | 59

Don Bacon, :-)) “is concerned” translates into “we will not take any action”. Mursi has issued a package with some reasonable and popular moves including absolute power for himself. There is nobody who can challenge his decisions from now on if he survives this (and as he has the control of the security services and is backed by the army he will survive it. He is a civilian dictator now backed by army.
This here from 2011 explains the cross interests of Netanyahu and Obama in view of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood
Maybe this Gaza war was an attempt by Netanyahu to force Obama to back him.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 23 2012 23:44 utc | 61

You gotta break some eggs to make an omelet, and it’s best done by one cook. Perhaps you who doubt Morsi have at some time said, in effect: “If this job is going to get done right, I’ve got to do it myself.” I know I have. You have too. “You all have the freedom — to do it my way.” Or perhaps you believe in committees.
I don’t know Morsi from Adam, but I figure that I’ve got to believe in somebody person, and right now he’s my guy. Could change.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 24 2012 0:36 utc | 63

In my opinion overall the biggest winner in this last Israeli adventure against the Gaza/ Hamas was Iran. Clearly Iran was thanked by all major Palestinian fighting political resisting group that includes prime minister Ismail Haniya, Hamas political leader Khaled Mashal as well as PIJ’s Ramadan Abdullah all three publicly thanked and said that the victory was possible by financial and military support of I.R. of Iran, this alone has achieved Iran’s major policy aim which is elevation of Iran in Muslim/ Arab street public opinion which is what Iran is really after and needs for her strategic aims. Another major victory in this conflict for Iran with regard to Muslim / Arab public opinion was that just before the agreement to a ceasefire Iran publicly and without any fear of US/ Israel/ EU and possibly UNSC announced that is proud to supply military hardware and technology to Hamas which is considered a terrorist organization to most westerners, that will boost Iran’s image in Muslim street since no other Muslim country has ever been willing or even brave enough to announce. We clearly are witnessing an emerging power whom has already caused changes in her region and is aware of her power.

Posted by: kooshy | Nov 24 2012 1:52 utc | 65

It is like having a Christian Fundamentalist as US President who says his decisions are made by god and his decrees cannot be challenged or reverted. I would not wish that on anyone.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 24 2012 7:48 utc | 67

Latest on Egypt from Raw Story:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/24/egypt-protesters-tear-gassed-as-world-concern-mounts/

Posted by: ben | Nov 24 2012 14:54 utc | 69

Video from Real News and Hamid Dasbashi on Egypt:
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=9188

Posted by: ben | Nov 24 2012 15:23 utc | 71

U.S. troops in Egypt?
http://rt.com/usa/news/ceasefire-us-sinai-israel-435/

Posted by: ben | Nov 24 2012 15:34 utc | 73

@ben 73 — U.S. troops in Egypt?
Never fear, the US lacks having troops in very few places on this earth, and Egypt is not one of them. US Task Force Sinai is the largest element of the Multinational Force and Observers (“MFO”), the peacekeeping organization in place in the Sinai Peninsula since 1982. The TF includes a support battalion and an infantry battalion. Its facebook page is here; 24 more ‘likes’ will push them over a thousand.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 24 2012 16:38 utc | 75

Ben, thanks for those links. The idea of US troops guarding the Gaza border has been around for a while and even Mubarak had enough sense to nix it. If the RT article is true, it would be a disaster for all concerned. On the one hand. US troops will be highly motivated to destroy the Gaza tunnels and starve Hamas entirely. On the other, they would be an attractive target for Sinai Bedouins and jihadists who are not on good terms with the Egyptian government.
In fact it is such a dumb idea that only a neocon warmonger could love it. Then again, the USG is full of neocon warmongers.

Posted by: Lysander | Nov 24 2012 17:02 utc | 77

The Times piece describes the budding relationship between Morsi and Obama as “one with bracing potential if not a fair measure of risk for both men.” If there are more similarities than differences in these men’s approach to democracy; then Morsi, just as Mubarak, can become “like one of the family”. Didn’t State Secretary Clinton describe old Mubarak as being like “one of the family?
Perhaps the US and Egyptian presidents can have a cozy fireside chat, where they can compare notes on executive orders.

Posted by: Copeland | Nov 24 2012 17:27 utc | 79

Penney has some thoughts on how the US is preparing banksters and Big Bidnesses to pillage Syria. Part of the plan.
Looks like most of the loot/bidness/control will be going to the Gulf Emirates, if all goes as planned. But who will control the oil? Hhhhmmm.
She notes that the new Western cobbled together Gov’t in Exile for Syria, created with nary a vote from Syrian citizens, is HQ’d in Egypt.
Yes, indeed: Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza = Terrorists. Muslim Brotherhood in Syria = Important US Allies…kind of under the table allies, but utterly necessary to success of the US plans.

Posted by: jawbone | Nov 24 2012 17:39 utc | 81

Well it is obvious that he is not taming the ancien regime
Egypt’s FJP reports lawsuit against ElBaradei, Sabahi, others for sedition
FJP – Freedom and Justice Party – Muslim Brotherhood
Hamdeen Sabahi is this guy:

Hamdeen Sabahi (Arabic: حمدين صباحى‎, IPA: [ħæmˈdeːn sˤɑbˈbɑːħi]) (born 5 July 1954) the leader of the Dignity Party and a former member of parliament. An opposition leader during the Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak eras, Sabahi was jailed 17 times during their presidencies for political dissidence.[1] He was an immediate supporter and participant of the 2011 Egyptian revolution.[1] Sabahi entered the 2012 Egyptian presidential race in which he finished third place with 21.5% of the vote trailing the second place winner Ahmed Shafiq by a margin of 700,000 votes.[2]
A well known opposition figure, Sabahi ascribes to Nasserism and in 1996 he founded the Nasserist Karama (Dignity) Party.[3][4] Sabahi ran as an independent and not as the Dignity Party’s candidate. One of the few secular figures without any ties to the regime of Hosni Mubarak, Sabahi has attracted the support of several leading Nasserists. Sabahi is running under the slogan “one of us” which highlights his strong ties with the working class and advocates his socialist aspirations. Sabahi also gained the support of prominent Egyptian figures including writer and political activist Alaa Al Aswany and director and film-writer Khaled Youssef.[3][5]

Posted by: somebody | Nov 24 2012 17:50 utc | 83

@somebody 83 — Well it is obvious that he [who?] is not taming the ancien regime
OOOH — sounds bad.
from the link — “a lawyer has filed a lawsuit” wow
Move along, nothing to see here. This is another of those distracting inflammatory quotes that turns out to be all smoke and no fire.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 24 2012 18:00 utc | 85

Only a few know exactly who and/or what has decided that the time has come for an MB member to become Egypt’s PM. – Daniel
Morsi as ‘the top bottle washer’ was a natural result of the political landscape in Egypt.
Ups and downs, imponderables: only the MB could aspire to leadership with at least some ‘popular’ support.
Because, a) it was in the oppo for ages, and has credentials there, also in other parts of the ‘arab’ world, b) it was the only ‘faction’ that had some pol/social grip on the country, other strands or factions being basically non-existent nationally, no/little on-the-ground organization, and very weak (communists/socialists, unionists, secularists, women, workers, etc. but also others like the army who act from above, which was one of the main reasons for ‘revolt’..so discredited and working behind the scenes with great power imho but that is another story).
Basically, there wasn’t much choice. All that though leaves the economic organization of Egypt completely in the shade – for the people of Egypt this is the main or even only point: jobs, education, re-distribution, housing, agri, price of food .. – that may be part of the purpose.
All over the “Arab Spring countries” various factions are jockeying for power and monies. After ww2 and in the post colonialist era, nationalist and socialist, and secular in a way, yet oppressive, rapacious, highly controlling – other forces are now taking hold. They will not differ much from the previous, except in discourse.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 24 2012 18:30 utc | 87

the Egyptian situation has become intractable by our normal standards of judgement the moment “freedom-lovers” allied themselves with the military against the prospect of an Islamic state; ultimately they’ll sort it out by themselves
@somebody 86 –

The only organisations that are capable of saving Egyption democracy are the trade unions now.

The reference to trade unions is important, but not in terms of “saving democracy” as in the sense of changing the regime’s neoliberist policies

Posted by: claudio | Nov 24 2012 23:17 utc | 89

Morsi seems to be persisting in his righteous moves.
The controversy centers on Morsi’s attempt to exempt both himself and the originally 100-member constitution-drafting body, the constituent assembly, from judicial review by Egypt’s higher courts which are controlled by Mubarak-era people allied with the Mubarak-era Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. The Supreme Council issued a supplementary constitutional decree in June which gives several parties, including the head of SCAF, the right to veto any clause the assembly drafts.
This is interference, suspiciously allied with US aims.
What if, in 1775, the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia had been made subordinate to King George’s court in their drawing up of the Articles of Confederation?

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 25 2012 14:55 utc | 91

No it’s not one person alone, it’s one person defending the constitutional formation process against the old guard which wants the status quo ante.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 25 2012 16:02 utc | 93

But maybe it will be more a joke than a catastrophe – guess what – journalists are on strike

Waleed Rashed ® ‏@waleedrashed
Breaking :-Egypt State TV stopped broadcasting . !!

Posted by: somebody | Nov 25 2012 17:20 utc | 95

We sit behind our keyboards watching the doings of our society’s scum, who are collectively referred to as ‘the political elite’ as someone commented up thread we are never privy to what is actually being done/said so we’re forced to read smoke signals and reverse engineer the intelligence to try and grab ahold of the motives and actions of the criminal elite. Realisation that the whole stinking mob of ‘leaders’ are self-interested criminals provides the necessary freedom to objectively analyse their ‘works’ and releases any idealists from an obligation to apologise for the times when one of the idealist’s heroes appears to not be ‘walking the talk’.
So bitter cynicism does have its advantages except when one tries to analyse what the pols are really up do one no longer has a reference point or framework to logically conclude what the pol will do next. If the pols have no permanent objectives it becomes impossible to deduce their future actions even if you hold the leaves from every cup of tea the pol has ever drunk.
Which brings us back to Morsi; how do we deduce his motives? I am a great believer in contrarianism in these moments when there appear to be nothing tangible to indicate a leader’s underlying motives.
B began this thread with an article from NYT which praised Morsi for getting those Palestinian ragheads back into the corral god designed for em.
B was doing as many of us do – if we don’t know our friends we sure as shit know our enemies & the enemy is oblamblam and netanyahoo who are principal enemies of every human on the planet. Since Morsi and oblamblam are praised for being good mates, by applying contrarianism (whatever the NYT says the opposite is true yada yada) we can deduce Morsi is indeed one of them.
Or we could – but right now more and more of the bastions of neo-liberalism the NYT, grauniad etc. castigate Morsi for passing the decree and all but openly criticise him being just another raghead ‘dictator’.
So we apply contrarianism to those angles and adduce that if the NYT & the grauniad hate Morsi’s decree, what Morsi is doing must be a good thing.
This is tricky stuff. An obvious employee of the empire, a so called agent of influence such as tony bliar was much easier to analyse. Everything bliar did was for the benefit of the amerikan empire and their primary lever for maintaining control in the ME, zionism.
Morsi has always been his own man and while he has undoubtedly done business with agents of imperial intelligence, everything points to him doing so only when there has been a commonality of interests. If he ever decided his long term best interests would be served by jamming a shit-smeared spear into oblammer & co’s eyes, Morsi would do so in a heartbeat.
I can run just as good an argument for Morsi passing his decree in order to fix egyptian democracy as anyone can argue that Morsi is all about fucking the revolution.
Or have we all forgotten the Egyptian judiciary’s tyrannical pre-election decrees NB the bastions of neo-liberalism seem to be much less condemnatory of the courts stomping all over ‘the will of the people’ than they are of Morsi’s effort to force his will upon the courts -if that is what Morsi is doing.
So where are we? Back to tossing coins to guess what is really going on?
Nah lets apply what we do know.
Whatever any pol says or does the vast majority of Arabs like the vast majority of muslims, loathe zionism and the barbarous acts zionists wantonly commit to enforce zionism.
This will never go away. Sure the indigenous peeps of latin america eventually accepted their spanish and portugese invaders, as have native north americans (albeit reluctantly) come to terms with the english & germans who invaded their nation.
The thing is though those acts of ‘resignation to reality’ only happened because the locals were stitched up by weight of numbers – invaders vastly outnumbered the locals.
That is never gonna happen with Palestine. Since the initial post ww2 migration, the only other ‘hordes’ have been the refuseniks who ended up in Israel after Carter n Reagan blocked their entry directly into amerika once they obtained soviet exit visas.
Even if every jew on the planet could be persuaded to relocate to Palestine, root like rattlesnakes and breed flat out, Israel would still be on the wrong side of the people divide.
Morsi is no fool and he knows that repeating Mubarak’s errors by backing an overt enemy of the people such as israel, will inevitably bring him down.
If Morsi is doing what I think he is doing, he has played a very good game and left the empire – along with its zionist client fucked flatfooted.
I don’t believe Morsi’s move on the egyptian legal system coming so soon after amerika praised him for keeping the peace in Palestine is a coincidence.
Morsi may be a newbie playing poker at the top table but he’s winning.
amerika was reasonably content for a pol like Morsi to be the new boss cause they thought they could play him; now that he has played them they are nervous.
Cause a prez under the rules that had been devised was always gonna be just one force among three the other two being the military and the general’s long term support network, the judges.
Morsi has put alla that in doubt. He’s too smart to go straight for the generals, admirals and wing commanders, which would be an open declaration of war. So he takes out their supports and will over time carefully dismantle Egypt’s old power structure, building a new framework, one that is more directly responsive to Morsi and the MB.
Does this bode well or ill for the Palestinians?
Well it won’t be designed to cater to Palestinians but if it provides Egypt’s pols with more say in their decisions by reducing imperial influences, it is likely to be more advantageous to Palestinians that that which went before.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Nov 26 2012 0:54 utc | 97

somebody wrote: “The only organisations that are capable of saving Egyptian democracy are the trade unions now.”
I would say they are too weak, that is an illusion. Morsi seems to perceive the danger:
Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi has amended the country’s labour union law allowing the government to appoint its loyalists to the country’s sole trade union federation. …This is the first law to be decreed by Mursi following his 22 November declaration, which granted his decisions immunity against challenges.
http://www.business-standard.com/generalnews/news/mursi-amends-egypts-trade-union-law/84159/
From a W. pragmatic pov, the ultimate danger or creepoid dictatorial move, is the take over of the judiciary. No independent judiciary, the cake is cooked. Note, even with a change in Constitution, or a limbo, the penal and ‘serious’ admin. judiciary can continue to work and be at least semi-functional and ‘fair’ (whatever that means in the present society – it may be more appearance than deep reason…) Also, pressure can be put on it, funds can be allocated, to keep this part of the State apparatus moving on somewhat briskly or at least reasonably, stressing something like ‘an equal rule of law’ for all citizens. One can bend over towards the little guy.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 26 2012 17:36 utc | 99