The Revenge of the Police State

Originally published in Jadaliyya on 17 Aug 2013

[14 August 2013, security officer firing tear gas on protesters as they attempt to escape the attacks by the security apparatus. Image originally posted to Flicker by tarek1991]

While the ongoing violence in Egypt has contributed to a state of confusion and polarization, one thing is certain: The biggest threat facing Egypt remains the return of the police state. More specifically, the threat concerns, not only the reconstitution of a police state, which never really left since Hosni Mubarak’s ouster, but also the return of the implicit, if not overt, acceptance of the repressive practices of the coercive apparatus. In this respect, the current face-off between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood holds very damaging potential. Widespread anti- Muslim Brotherhood sentiment is currently providing the state with legitimacy to use of force against the Brotherhood, and, in the future, a potential cover for using similar tactics against other dissidents as well.

There is a problem with the way security forces have violently dispersed the pro-Mohamed Morsi sit-ins, even with claims that both Nahda and Rabea sit-ins were armed. Regardless of whether or not one agrees with the Muslim Brotherhood or with the objectives of the sit-ins, the murdering of over five hundred people goes against any sense of human decency and morality. The armed protesters’ reported use of unarmed individuals as human shields is equally despicable and reprehensible. Beyond the serious moral considerations at hand, other problems persist.

The forced dispersal of Rabaa and Nahda marks a triumph of security solutions over political ones—a trend that characterized much of the Mubarak era. Security solutions rarely solve a problem without the support of a political course of action, which seems to be missing in our current context. There is no question that the Muslim Brotherhood leaders have a long history of poor negotiating behavior, showing extreme stubbornness, and failing to uphold their end of the bargain on many occasions, in power and in opposition. But this is exactly why dealing with them demands a politically savvy approach, instead of reliance on security solutions, which will only reinforce the Brotherhood’s rigidity, not to mention the heavy human costs associated with such measures.

Instead, the military and its sponsored government chose a confrontational, security path. This path will only further empower the coercive apparatus without guaranteeing any results, in terms of political stability and social peace. As extremist groups are pushed into hiding, the security leaders will find excuses to employ intrusive surveillance measures, interrogate, torture, and abuse, all with zero transparency and accountability. Supporters of the crackdown among those who oppose the Brotherhood will gladly accept. Reinforcing this trend is the fact that the crackdown has apparently empowered radicalized elements among the supporters of the deposed president.

Some may say that the increasing influence of the security sector will only be limited to “counter-terrorism” and extremist Islamist groups that espouse violence. There are clear signs that this would not be the case. For example, immediately prior to the crackdown against the Muslim Brotherhood sit-ins, retired generals took control of governerships in an overwhelming majority of provinces. For many, this was a clear signal that the state has opted to “securitize” governance, and political files.

Additionally, those who believe that security sector will not overstep its boundaries clearly overlook the long history of the Egyptian state’s meddling in political and private affairs in the name of counter-terrorism and national security. Given that rich history, we could safely conclude that today domestic intelligence agencies are quickly gaining a blank check to meddle in our affairs for the sake of national security. Soon Egyptians will be asked to support their government in whatever decisions it takes on the grounds that the government is at the frontlines of the fight against “violent Islamists.” Political dissidents of all orientations will be vulnerable to the accusation of being soft on “terrorism” or supportive of “radical Islamists.” Will anyone care in the confusing state of insecurity?

Egypt, in other words, is on a dangerous path. There are many reasons to believe that police forces will employ their brutal practices at Mubarak era rates. The policing establishment itself has not changed in any way, never reformed, and never held to account for its past crimes. Minister of Interior Mohamed Ibrahim has even signaled that such a return is imminent, pledging, “Security will be restored to this nation as if it was before January 25, and more."

Tacit supporters of the security state will respond that there was no other way, that there was no room for negotiating with the Brotherhood, and that the forcible dispersal of the sit-ins was necessary.

Such a response, however, overlooks the major limitations of the security solution to the underlying problem, namely that calling on the police—unreformed and lacking the proper training—to resolve the standoff between the Brotherhood and the government is like asking a butcher to do a heart surgeon’s job. Additionally, one could counter and ask: Was it necessary for the police to target unarmed civilians carrying cameras? Was it necessary for security forces to shoot at unarmed crowds? Was it necessary for the police to leave unprotected all the churches that suffered attacks in the aftermath of the sit-ins’ dispersal?

But setting aside analyses of what the police could have done differently, it remains that the recent violence has only deepened people’s reliance on the security state and will exempt politicians from devising solutions to political differences. With the increase in social conflict, particularly along sectarian lines, security services will once again regain their traditional role as an arbiter of these conflicts, as well as their license to employ abusive, repressive tactics. This sustained sense of insecurity will only steer Egypt away from real justice. With the empowerment of the security sector, there will be no reason or motivation to push for revolutionary demands for real reforms inside the policing establishment. It is also likely that the escalation in violence and the pro-security rhetoric that the state has been touting will make it difficult for political dissidents, who are equally opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood and the military, to employ street action.

In some ways, the MB’s confrontational approach, wittingly or not, is handing back the coercive apparatus its license to kill and repress with impunity, but so are all those who are cheering on the security forces’ crackdown against the Brotherhood. Many such voices have criticized Mohamed ElBaradie for resigning his post as vice president in the wake of the recent violence. But in reality there is no role for a politician in a state that is poised to pick a security solution in dealing with every pressing challenge.

As we confront the question of whether or not Egypt will witness the “return” of the police of the Mubarak era, a number of critical questions arise, such as: Is there any revolutionary fervor left to resist this route? Or have revolutionary commitments been drained through all the blood and the failed attempts at establishing a democratic political order?

Whether or not a new wave of revolutionary mobilization will emerge to push back against the growing power of the security state is an open question. But it is clear that the persistence of the confrontation between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood will only deepen the securitization of politics by reinforcing demands for security solutions. What it will take to reverse the return of the police state, which revolutionary activists have worked hard to resist, is uncertain. One could argue that the brutal injustices that the police are bent on committing will always make resistance structurally inevitable. But that suggests that reviving resistance will come at a high price, one that Khalid Said, Jika, Mohamed al-Guindy, and many others have paid.

Year of the SCAF: a time-line of mounting repression

This article was initially published in Ahram Online on 11 February 2012. It is an amended version of the article entitled 'SCAF: A brief history of injustice' published 10 November 2011. Republishing it today in remembrance of past injustices at the hands of Armed Forces as they continue under the Muslim Brotherhood.

The revolutionary overthrow of Mubarak brought Egypt under the sway of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), who pledged to protect the revolution and realise its objectives. A year on, Ahram Online reviews the record

A year has passed since the military assumed power when president Hosni Mubarak was ousted in February last year. But is Egypt any closer to the freedom and justice it sought when its people rose up against the Mubarak regime?

The ruling Supreme Council of Armed Forces(SCAF) has implicitly acknowledged some injustices committed since it took the reins of power. The military council for instanceissued an apology to Egyptian women after a furore surrounded the part-stripping and beating of a female protester by military soldiers. Prime Minister Kamal El Ganzouri also acknowledged that the victims of the Maspero massacre in October and the confrontations in Mohamed Mahmoud Street in November were indeed martyrs of the revolution.

The head of the military judiciary announced on 13 October that the armed forces alone would investigate what is known as the Maspero Massacre— the clashes that took place 9 October, leaving 28 people dead and at least 325 injured, when Coptic Christians marched from Shubra to the State TV building at Maspero to protest the burning of a church in Aswan. The announcement came despite warnings by human rights groups that the killing by the military of Coptic protesters should not be covered up and must be subject to independent and open investigations.

In spite of these acknowledgements and decisions, no army or police personnel have as yet been held accountable for their actions. This may be due to a fear that if some are convicted, others may not follow orders in the future.

Since the military assumed power the investigations conducted under its reign have fallen short of standards of open and transparent scrutiny.

Most of the military’s claims with regard to the major events that have occurred contradict video evidence and eyewitness testimonies. According to human rights lawyer Gamal Eid, director of the Arab Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI), “military investigations are unacceptable. They are not independent and it is very clear they are biased.”

There are over 15 major incidents that still need to be properly investigated Many other charges of misconduct and abuses filed before and after military rule have also not been dealt with.

Post Port Said Football Clashes

Mass protests in response to the Port Said football clashes took place in the vicinity of the Ministry of Interior on Mohamed Mahmoud Street and in the city of Suez. At least 15 people were killed as police responded by heavy use of tear gas and birdshot. Even after walls were erected around the ministry, police attacked protesters chasing them into Bab El Louk. The Minister of Interior, Mohamed Ibrahim, claimed much like his predecessor Mansour El Essawy that no shots were fired.

The Port Said Football Massacre

At least 74 people have died in football clashes on 2 February in the city of Port Said following a match between Ahly and Al Masry football teams. Witnesses hold the police responsible for having failed to secure the match. There are accusations of gross negligence and some activists have accused the ruling military council of instigating these clashes. Parliament is currently overseeing investigations.

The Cabinet Attacks

A military crackdown on a sit-in outside the cabinet buildings resulted in 19 killed and 750 injured. Around one hundred of 250 arrested remain in custody; of the released 70 were minors. The events started on 16 December and continued throughout 17, 18 and 19 December making it the longest period of direct military-led violence against protestors since the revolution started.

The period also produced the most scathing body of video evidence incriminating the military, filmed mostly by citizen journalists.

The most notable exampleof this violence caught on camera was of the female protester in Tahrir who was part-stripped, beaten and dragged by military forces. In their press conference the SCAF spokesperson said that the incident was under investigation.

The Battle of Mohamed Mahmoud

The Mohamed Mahmoud Street clashes which took place between 19 and 25 November left 41 dead and over one thousand injured, according to the Egyptian Ministry of Health. Despite the presence of incriminating video evidence, the minister of interior denied that forces had fired any ammunition of any kind at protesters. One video shows a truce broken unilaterally by Central Security Forces (CSF). Both doctors and journalists were targeted in the events of Mohamed Mahmoud.

The onslaught of attacks on protesters by the police was not preempted despite evidence of targeting protesters in the eye and public pressure. There have been no serious investigations into the actions of the army or the police.

Essam Atta

On 27 October 2011, 24-year-old Essam Atta was reportedly tortured to death by prison guards. Despite Atta’s family testifying that a prison officer called Nour was involved in Atta’s torture, the police have not investigated these allegations and concluded that Atta died as a result of ingesting drugs. The Ministry of Interior statement and the forensic report are reminiscent of the official story on Khaled Said, who was murdered in plain view and whose autopsy report had been falsified. The case is currently being examined by the general prosecutor.

The Maspero Massacre

The Maspero Massacre took place on 9 October 2011 when Coptic Christians took to the streets joined by Egyptian Muslims to protest the destruction and burning of a church in Aswan. Tracing the march provides a body of evidence in terms of videos and eyewitness testimonies  that implicate the military in the killings of protestors.

Despite these implications, (SCAF) insisted on conducting investigations alone and ended by exonerating the army. Instead of a full-fledged investigation, revolutionary activists have been summoned to appear before the military prosecution. Activist Alaa Abdel Fattah was detained by military prosecution on serious charges yet no evidence has been presented to the public. General Mohamed El-Assar claimed that army personnel were unarmed and yet one of the charges against Abdel Fattah is theft of a weapon belonging to military forces. In addition, according to Bahaa Saber, another activist who was summoned but released after questioning, the army has Mina Daniel’s name on the list of those accused. Mina Daniel was one of the activists killed on 9 October. His autopsy reports the cause of death as: “projectile entered into the upper chest, exiting the lower back”.

So far there has been no announcement of the names of officers or soldiers investigated or reprimanded, despite clear video evidence and autopsy reports indicating that 12 protesters were run over by Armoured Personnel Carriers. The incitement of violence by the media has not been investigated and no investigation of Minister of Information Osama Heikal has been announced despite charges being filed against him.

The church in El-Marinab, Aswan

The destruction and burning of Mar Girgis Church in the village of El-Marinab, Edfu, in Aswan on 30 September triggered a wave of angry protests. Despite recommendations to remove the governor of Aswan and take corrective action, nothing was done. This deliberate inaction led to the protests that ended in the Maspero Massacre.

Torture of two men by army and police

In the latter half of September 2011, a video of policemen and army personnel torturing two detainees was circulated over the Internet. The military promised a swift investigation, and swift it was. The findings were that the video was fake, and the army officers were released.

The battle of Abbasiya

On 23 July, thousands of protesters tried to march from Tahrir Square to the Ministry of Defense to decry the unmet demands of the 8 July sit-in. Attacks on the protesters resulted in the death of activist Mohamed Mohsen.

On 30 July, state owned Akhbar Al-Yom published the findings of the National Council for Human Rights’ investigation into the incident, according to which the battle of Abbasiya was planned thuggery while video evidence has been presented to the prosecutor general documenting the attacks.

General Hassan El-Reweiny was accused of incitement when he went on air with Dina Abdel Rahman on the Dream TV satellite channel before the march and claimed that protesters would be armed with Molotov cocktails. Charges have been filed against him with the general prosecutor. The case was transferred to the military prosecution office and no action taken.

Assault on martyrs’ families

On 28 June 2011, clashes broke out between protesters and the police after families of martyrs killed in the January 25 Revolution were attacked near the Balloon Theatre in Agouza. The fact finding committee suggested that the clashes were premeditated, yet no action was taken to bring about justice.

Mohamed Gad, known as “Sambo”, was sentenced to five years imprisonment despite activists insisting he did not intend to take possession of a firearm he was photographed holding and actually returned it to the Omar Makram Mosque in Tahrir Square on 29 June. Despite the use of excessive force by the police, officers have not been investigated.

Nakba Day protests

Nakba Day on 15 May witnessed protests outside the Israeli embassy in Cairo in solidarity with Palestinians. Demonstrators were dispersed using live ammunition, tear gas and rubber bullets leaving 350 people injured. Over 150 arrests were made. It is unclear until today why the army used excessive force.

Ramy Fakhry

Despite promises to investigate the death of Ramy Fakhry, we have yet to hear the results of the investigation. Ramy Fakhry was a 27-year-old electrical engineer who was allegedly killed by the army on his way to work on 13 May 2011. “An investigation could reveal who was present at the time of the shooting,” Eid told Ahram Online, but so far no results have been announced.

The Imbaba church attacks

7 May 2011 marked another case of sectarian violence when a church in Imbaba was attacked and set ablaze. Twelve people died in the ensuing clashes and 186 were injured.

Despite the arrest of over 190 people, results of the investigation have not been announced to the public. A large number of those arrested were released and the investigation did not include charges of hate speech. The incompetence of the military prosecution in bringing to light any investigation results casts doubt on the validity of charges against those in custody.

8 April officers

On 8 April a group of army officers joined Tahrir square protesters in solidarity with the revolution’s goals. In the early hours of 9 April the military dispersed the protesters violently. Witnesses say live ammunition was used, in addition to tasers, batons and teargas. Egyptian human rights organisations called for an immediate investigation into the excessive violence and shootings. According to Gamal Eid, an investigation was promised but no results have been announced, nor is there reason to believe an investigation did take place.

Zamalek vs Africain match

On 2 April 2011 thousands of angry Zamalek fans stormed the pitch in a match between Egypt’s Zamalek club and Tunisia’s Africain club. The military council vowed to investigate the events of the match. We have yet to hear the results of these investigations.

Torture and virginity tests

On 9 March, the sit-in at Tahrir Square was dispersed violently with reports of mass arrests and torture in the vicinity of the Egyptian Museum. Virginity tests were also carried out on female detainees as reported and documented by the El-Nadeem Centre for the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Violence and Torture, Amnesty International, The Washington Post and CNN. The army initially denied that the tests had been carried out, and then promised to launch an investigation. Numerous calls to bring those responsible to justice have been ignored despite numerous eyewitness accounts and evidence.

The church of Atfeeh

In early March, the church in Sol, Atfeeh, in the governorate of Helwan was set ablaze and demolished as a result of sectarian tensions. There have been calls for an investigation into the events so that the perpetrators are held accountable. However, in an interview with Amr Adeeb, SCAF General Hassan El-Reweiny alluded to how preposterous it was to ask for the investigation results after the church has been rebuilt.  No one has been held to account for the attack to date.

Corruption, abuses and miscellaneous others

No justice has been realised in cases like the killing of protesters, the Battle of the Camel, the bombing of the church in Alexandria and many others. Nobody has been held accountable to numerous incidents as SCAF chooses to turn a blind eye to these crimes. 

Civilians caught in the military trials system are tried and convicted in days and sometimes hours with little to guarantee a fair trial while perpetrators of the crimes listed here have yet to be brought to justice. Many charges remain uninvestigated even after being submitted to the prosecutor general.

“Military prosecution only targets activists and the poor, as if it is a trap for revolutionaries and activists,” Eid told Ahram Online. “All investigations and trials under the army serve political ends.”

Summary

Case	Date
Mohamed Mahmoud/Mansour	2-6 February 2012
Port Said Football Riots	1 February 2012
The Cabinet Attacks	16-19 December
Mohamed Mahmoud	19-25 November
Essam Atta	27 October 2011
Maspero Massacre	9 October 2011
The church in El-Marinab	30 September 2011
Torture video of two men by army and police	28 September 2011
The battle of Abbasiya	23 July 2011
Assault on martyrs' families	28 June 2011
Nakba Day protests	15 May 2011
Ramy Fakhry	13 May 2011
Imbaba church attacks	7 May 2011
8 April officers	8/9 April 2011
Zamalek vs Africain match	2 April 2011
Torture and virginity tests	9 March 2011
Church demolition and burning in Atfeeh	5 March 2011
Corruption, abuses and miscellaneous others	February 2011 –  to date.

Nasser: Tyrant by Popular Demand

In memory of a coup that gave unjust individuals dominion over an entire nation.

Those not well versed in the real history of our nation may view Gamal Abdel Nasser as a charming and sincere leader who had a few flaws but was nevertheless trying his best to make Egypt a better nation, trying to endow it with pride and dignity. In a nutshell, Nasser's great achievements can be summarized as the nationalization of the Suez Canal, the building of the high dam and the spreading of notions of social equality and Pan-Arabism. His short comings were allowing his buddies to take over the country, nationalization, expulsion of foreigners, huge military failures, a culture of fear, a police state, torture and dictatorship. This is the sugar coated version provided by his apologists. However, the most prevalent view of Nasser is founded upon propaganda rather than facts. The real history seems to be filled with details contrary to popular myth.

Naguib
One of the most sordid decisions by Nasser was placing Naguib under house arrest for the greater part of his life. Naguib was rumored to have been a passive figure-head that took charge first till Nasser was known. It is common myth that he was chosen for his rank and had no real part in the military coup of 23rd July of 1952. This was something Nasser wanted to propagate so that the isolation of Naguib could be less painstaking to the people's conscience. But it was in fact Naguib who warned the other officers that the coup should take place earlier than their planned date of 5th of August for fear of arrests.

Naguib did not believe that Egypt should continue under military rule without parliamentary life and wanted Egypt to return to civil rule and to become a democracy. Testimonies about Naguib prove him to be a decent man and perhaps that’s why he was to endure a horrible fate. Not even the biggest advocates of Nasser can justify why he treated Naguib horribly, not in a manner that doesn't make Nasser seem evil anyway.

Nasser Apologists
There are numerous explanations that justify the reign of evil under this charismatic leader's rule, they're just logically deficient. One explanation is that Egypt needed this sort of rule at the time. Egypt had always had a political life with some form of democracy. Nasser was responsible for stealthily depriving Egyptians of that for a long time to come. At the hands of Nasser, those who called for democracy met an unfortunate fate. It was not just Naguib but also Nasser's fellow 'free officer' and friend Khaled Mohi El Din who was exiled. There were many others who were eliminated one way or another for challenging the dictatorial rule of the revolutionary council controlled by Nasser.

An implausible explanation which excused Nasser from the atrocious regime we inherited is that he wasn't running the country at all, or wasn't aware of how it was run or that those around him tricked him. But even if it were true, that would make Nasser incompetent yet still accountable. Nasser, however, was a born tactician according to Khaled Mohi El Din, and was aware of everything that went on around him. Nasser personally spied on and listened in on those around him, those he feared, those he was envious of and those he mistrusted. It's true that later on he claimed that the country was ruled by a criminal gang, but he created that gang, and he was at its root and its leader. Nasser knew what he was doing but simply didn't care.

Nasser's Dream
In all likelihood Nasser's dreams were not related to acquiring wealth; he left theft to his gang. His dream was to be in the forefront, shining, glamorous and in the lead. This was evident from the start, from before there was a coup.

According to Naguib, in 1948, Nasser was reported to have been hiding away in his bunker during an important battle in Iraq al-Manshiyya, (a Palestinian town that used to be located 32km northeast of Gaza City). Later when pictures were being taken, he moved forward amidst commanding officers who outranked him displaying from early on his desire for attention. He moved back with his fellow officers when Naguib rebuked him.

Nasser was also accused of staging his own assassination attempt in order to shine. The event took place in Alexandria in Mansheya when a member of Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) appeared to have tried to shoot him but failed. This may have been staged since he came out unhurt even though he was shot at close range.

This event had a two fold effect, it vilified the Ikhwan and gave Nasser an excuse to eliminate them (even though he had been one of them) and put him under the spot light. It is only after he began to shine that he managed to carry out his plans of forcing out Naguib.

So what's wrong with ambition and desire to lead? Nothing, except that we have to ask ourselves two questions: What means can one use to get there? And what do you do when you get there? Nasser failed on both counts.

According to Khaled Mohi El Din, Nasser paid 4000 L.E to orchestrate protests against democracy. Even before gaining power on January the 8th, 1952, Nasser along with three other officers were involved in an assassination attempt on General Hussein Serry Amer (an officer loyal to the king). After the failed attempt Nasser suffered psychologically.

According to Psychiatrist Mostafa Hussein, "Narcissistic individuals are highly ambitious, have a sense of entitlement (they think they are special) and grandiose. This makes them desire higher positions. They are arrogant and envious of other people and have very low tolerance for criticism. They also have limited empathy."

Does this not fit Nasser perfectly? He got to power through deceit attempting to satisfy his and other officers' greed at whatever cost without empathy for the masses he ruled or those who opposed him.

People have thought Nasser to be a socialist on account of his political leanings and orations. But such a position was only taken when US support became impossible and Egypt had to turn to the Russians.

In his book Memories of a Revolution, Khaled Mohi El Din tells us of an incident showing us a classist Nasser:

As we walked down the stairs after leaving Ahmad Fuad's apartment, Gamal Abd al Nasser, who was still under the spell of that mysterious and well versed person asked, "Who is that Comrade Badr?" … "I mean what did he do before he became secretary general?"
…
I simply said, "A mechanic."
"Mechanic!" exclaimed Nasser. "This means that you could become a member of this party and receive your orders from a mechanic!"
..
The idea of the mechanic stuck in Nasser's mind, and he would often bring it up. Sometimes he would be contemptuous of it and sometimes he would denounce it, even after the revolution. At a meeting at the Revolutionary Command Council he once pointed at me and said, "His leader is a mechanic!"

Nasser's humble beginnings did not enable him to serve the people, on the contrary, it instilled envy within him. Jamal Hammad, one of the Free Officers and author of the revolution's first proclamation, tells us that in an argument with university professors about the democracy, Nasser is quoted to have said, "I don't care about the people I care about the military."

The Fate of the Free
Nasser's Free Officers Movement wasn’t entirely his either; many of the officers were based on a pre-existing group formed by the Muslim brotherhood. The Free Officers were filtered out after gaining power, unfortunately for us it was the wrong filter. Officers who were paramount to the success of the revolution like Mohamed Naguib, Khaled Mohi El Din, Abdel Latif El Baghdady and Yousef Sideeq were displeased by dictatorship and cruelty, and in effect each was sidelined in one way or another. Only the wicked and power-hungry stayed on temporarily till they were eliminated by Nasser. Despite no causalities in the coup, bloodshed was inevitable; they paneled a few death sentences, tortured a few innocents, and fabricated a few charges.

In exchange for glory and power, Nasser gave his friends authority to plunder, torture and control. They amassed great wealth and destroyed many people along the way in the name of nationalization. A prominent example of corrupt power was his close friend and fellow 'free officer' Abdel Hakim Amer who was promoted from Major to General in 1953, skipping four ranks, and made commander and chief of the entire military.

Naguib, Nasser and the Free Officers

Premeditated Defeat
If all this isn't enough to prove that a tyrannical sordid Nasser did exist, perhaps the intricacies of the '67 defeat could offer some insight. Our loss in '67 was almost premeditated by Nasser. He was informed of the attack date of June 5th after having done everything possible to provoke Israeli aggression. Moreover, he asked the military commanders to sustain Israel's first strike; our planes were arranged for Israelis to destroy. We did not even fire defense missiles at the planes that attacked us either because Nasser ordered his troops to stand down or because Amer was in the air at the time.

Speculations as to why we suffered this defeat have circulated. The most noteworthy of which interprets this premeditated defeat as a means for Nasser to gain control exerted by Amer over the army and the country. Nasser's compatriots had become too strong for him to handle and he sacrificed numerous lives to reassert control. Irrespective of how close to reality these speculations are, the fact is that Egypt's army was crushed in what is known as the six day war and much of the blame for needless deaths lie with Nasser.


Big Brother
Egypt in the 1950s started the journey of becoming an Orwellian 1984 with Big Brother watching. This big brother like the one in the novel did not want money, just power. In fact this big brother left little behind in terms of wealth, but managed to leave a fake legacy; a falsification of truth for generations to consume and a country in utter chaos.

Nationalization was a bully's way of giving legitimacy to stealing; the people never gained from it. Equality and respect were corrupted. According to witnesses of the age, the actions taken by Nasser ensured a general deterioration in people's mannerisms. Confidence in the spoken word broke down completely. A clear example of this is when people spoke to stock brokers over the phone asking them to buy shares, the following day, people would find the companies nationalized and would not pay the broker. (Another example was when Nasser nullified bank notes of 50 and 100 LE in one day).  Hence grew mistrust in this and all other fields.

Equality and respect became confused, through Nasser, respect was given only to those who had the power to hurt, and people started to disrespect one another and called it equality.  Today, all that remains is the mutated Animal Farm commandment, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Nasser remains loved despite all his ugly deeds and unstable psyche of control and power. Those who love him are moved by his charisma and the notion of what he could have become. Today I talk about Nasser's history disapprovingly, but I have the luxury of never having seen him, never having felt what he meant to people at the time nor heard his moving voice. I have the luxury of burrowing through books and memoirs after the facts have surfaced.

The falsified history they teach us makes him a very appealing man. Even some of those he imprisoned and tortured cannot but love him. His charm was undoubtedly exceptional and I have never been able to debate it or doubt it. I cannot blame those who love Nasser, he gave hope, was a leader and managed to control the country and those around him. Those who are fans of complete control should not but love him. I suppose he knew what Egyptians really wanted and managed to give it to them: a tyrant by popular demand.

Incensed at Injustice

I just realized something. I'm incensed by injustice. I know what it sounds like. I just think that there's a difference between thinking something and realizing it. I realized that I'm not just pretending to be incensed by injustice to seem modern and philanthropic. I really am. There was a time when I used to pretend and I thought I really felt incensed. That was some time back. But now I realize that I cannot stop being angry and full of rage at injustice.

I think the reason behind this fury of mine is that I know what it's like not to be able to get what's rightfully yours. I know what it's like to be surrounded by evil from all sides. I know what it's like to live in an immoral world that offers no true justice. I know what it's like to be lied to and for places of power to hide behind slogans. I know how it is to be afraid to fight a bully. It's not enough to be right, you have to have enough power to enforce it. I know what it's like to pretend that you are angered by injustice to seem moral, liberal and democratic.

To sum it up, the reason I'm incensed is because I know what it's like.

I've never been a true advocate for the Palestinian cause, nor have I been a true adversary of the Egyptian government. I have never been the most arduous activist streamlined with what I call 'slogany' things. I haven't been any of that. Of late, I'm forced to take sides I never wished to take. I've learned to judge quick based on history, I've learned to understand where lies lie and where truths try to appear.

It's not that justice in the worldly sense is satisfying. Executing someone who has killed an innocent never brings an innocent back. You can't even kill someone a thousand times over if they've killed a thousand people. But you know what? It's the next best thing. Worldly justice is the next best thing and it's not even great. So to take that away, to think of life as offering so much less is infuriating.

This is an angry post and it says nothing. Maybe some time I'll express exactly why I feel that bullies getting on a ship and killing civilians is infuriating. Maybe I'll explain why it's annoying that the whole world is just good at talking and won't do shit to stop atrocities and injustice. Maybe I'll explain why I feel that condemnation is broken record that doesn't change a thing. The laws of the world are like the laws of the jungle, only slightly refined. Humans are equal, but some humans are more equal than others. That's the way of the world, no matter what Obama says. That's the way of the world, no matter how civilized you pretend to be.

Once in a while a Ghandi comes or a Martin Luther King Jr. and they prove to the world that this is not the way the world works, but how possible is it to wait on one of those?

First Editions can be Dangerous

Serbia made it to the world cup. In celebration of their victory the Serbian president Boris Tadic celebrated by opening a bottle of champagne and proposing a toast. Apparently it is illegal to consume alcohol in sports venues and so the president was fined.

When I heard the news, it made me really sad to think that even in such an event the president could be accountable for his actions when breaking the law. Needless to say, it's sad because of our current situation.

In contrast, our government has done something quite ridiculous, this same piece of news was published in Al Ahram newspaper's first edition (see below).

In the second edition, this piece of news was removed (see below)

Is there someone in charge of looking at all these first editions and removing any threat to the presidency and the government? Why would they remove such a piece of news? It's already known that our president is above the law. What does the removal of this piece of news say about our own government? I think it just means they're afraid and that it must not be ingrained in the minds of Egyptians that the law applies to the president. It's almost funny that there's someone with enough power to influence a newspaper going through silly pieces of news to identify threats to national security.

The act of removing news items and images in the second print is a common practice, which means that all newspapers are closely monitored and that there is great interference in what is published. Instead of all that energy to monitor the news, why doesn't the government do the multitude of jobs where there is obvious dereliction?

The bottom line is to watch out for first editions and enjoyEgyptian lunacy...

Turkish March

Coming home after a very annoying day with traffic and crap I followed a show called 90 Minutes with Motaz El Demerdaash on a channel called El Mehwar. I saw a man with bruises on his face telling the story of how he was attacked by dogs in the movenpick hotel (media city) where the dishonorable prince Turk (or Turkey) resides. I hate relaying events with details but briefly this so called prince owns these vicious dogs and lets them loose in the hotel, and they eat with guests and basically he has made the whole hotel his palace irrespective of the guests. What happened is that some of these guys were playing football when one of the dogs felt like attacking and so they all ran, but one of them tripped and the dog bit his face. As scandalous as this is, that’s not what gets to me most.

What gets to me is that a few weeks back there was a little girl who was nearly killed by those dogs. I don’t mean the Saudis living in the hotel, I mean the dogs they own. Even though this was publicized nothing was done about it. To make matters even more annoying I found out that there were 90 other charges filed to the police. 85 of which were withdrawn by applying pressure and threats to the victims. If 90 cases reached the police, how many incidents did actually happen?

In any case the so called prince has stayed in Tunis but was kicked out after assaulting one of the workers there, not even a guest. He was kicked out of the Hilton as well after a series of disgraceful events. His body guards are accustomed to beating up anyone, people staying at the movenpick or the security guards there. He has become untouchable.

Now this was very brief, but the reason I’m writing about it is to convey my anger about this whole situation. The greedy bastards want his money at the hotel and so what if a few hundred ordinary lives are sacrificed for the prince’s money. It is also well known that he has investments in Egypt and that the government will not kick him out unless he commits a murder and even then I’m not entirely certain if they will. A few ordinary lives are worth much less than the money. So what if he harms people, he pays for their blood with his money. The government can live with it, the hotel can live with it and the people through their passiveness have chosen to live with it.

Let me ask this, why do we let corrupt people govern us? What happened to the good people up there (if there are any)? We really have no choice about whom we’re governed by and the truth is that good people have no power because the normal has been total disregard for human life. So why should Turk’s situation be any different? We’ve seen already in the constitution that they’ve sacrificed the well being of not just hundreds, but millions of lives so that those in power continue to gain more. Why should this be any different? Turk’s millions should account for hundreds of lives; after all we’re talking about hundreds not millions.

I have three reasons for stripping Turk out of his undeserved rank of prince. First and foremost because of a book by Thomas Paine called Common Sense that explains why monarchy is ridiculous (using common sense). Secondly I personally have no king or prince. Thirdly because the victim has also stated that such conduct is not befitting a prince. He said that on air and I jumped from my seat and I applauded him right then and there. I literally clapped several times, something I wouldn’t normally do even in some conventions that are cluttered with applause.

The funny thing is that the victim has stated very clearly that he expects nothing to be done, and right he is. How is it that the state of our affairs has become so miserable that we don’t expect any sort of justice? That’s even far worse than seeking justice and not finding it. It’s because we know that justice in this country is unattainable. If we’re continuously subjected to injustice by the same people who swore to uphold it, how can we expect them to give us justice when it is equal to being deprived of money?

A greedy lot we’ve become from years of deprivation. A defeated lot we’ve become from all the injustice. Suppose by some remote chance that after all the propaganda some sort of action is taken against Turk, that’s just pressure from the media. It just means that 85 previous cases meant nothing to them. It means that in ordinary circumstances you should not expect justice. It means that there’s no point in trying to play fair except for your own personal beliefs.

There must be a God to judge those few who have oppressed millions. If there is no God then they have the right to do anything and get away with it. Why not? If this life is all you can get and there’s no justice in this life, why even seek it? If that moral sense is not present then why not step on everyone? If you don’t believe in God then you must believe in Karma, otherwise you have no choice but try to be like them. Something in my heart tells me that there are so many things wrong with being just like them. Something tells me I’d rather fight for some sort of justice than be unjust to an entire nation. I don’t know if they have that same voice in their hearts or if they have hearts at all though.

Enough is enough. It’s too disturbing to keep hearing these stories. We live in a land that gives no justice, privacy, rights or even a chance to serve it in any way. If you don’t like it, leave… but even that is not an option. We’re trapped inside a very large prison.

This March doesn’t belong to Egyptians; even the days aren’t ours anymore. This March belongs to his highness prince Turk. So is it Government March, Saudi March or Turkish March? Either way this month, and probably every other, is not ours anymore.

Prince Turk owns a piece of land in a country that is allegedly mine. He has more rights, more respect and more of everything than I do. That is the case with most foreigners here because Egyptians are cheap. In the show and many others like it, people call in and say Egyptians are valuable, Egyptians are precious, we will not accept, etc.. etc.. But the victim on the show laughed, and I laughed too, because it’s all a croc. Egyptians are cheap and we know it. We might say we’re not and we might have some sort of false pride, but we know that Egyptians are cheap. They’re not worth a Saudi, not even in their home country.


Of course I’m not talking about the big guys. The big guys are valuable, untouchable just like the Saudi prince. I’m talking about us, the common folk. Yes even the Amn El Dawla officer reading this. He’s in no better state than we are. He has no choice but to think of the rest of us as inferior and think that he belongs to those with power.

Has Egypt changed so much since Saad Zaghlool said “Mafeesh Fayda?”(it’s useless)

I don’t know how to answer this question, are we better off or worse? For the first time I understand what it means that Egypt has been sold. It’s sold its soul to the devil in exchange of a few pennies and some power.

I sometimes wonder if we organized a protest to demonstrate against the horrid state that policemen themselves are in, would those poor soldiers who we’re protesting for beat us with sticks and try to silence us? I think they would, because they’re in such a horrible state that they don’t even know what they’re standing for. They’ve been deprived of thought and choice. We’ve been deprived of choice, the only thing we can choose to do is protest and get beaten and get arrested.

A People Subdued

After reading a certain post on sandmonkey's blog I have something to say.

I've certainly gone to bed many times with utter disdain for my countrymen. Egyptians are a people subdued; for so long that they can't do anything but be passive even when given the chance to do something, and probably just out of sheer habit.

There were those who escaped arrests and that in itself is hopeful. It's hopeful because one day we may be able to escape the tyranny inflicted upon us by our own countrymen.

Enemy Drums

I woke up to the sound of drums,
But they were not music, they were bombs,
Yet with precision was the rhythm of their sound,
Every two seconds, three would hit the ground.

Four of my neighbor’s five children died,
And amidst the bombs the one that survived,
Buried his siblings all day long,
Wondering what it is they did wrong.

The sound of bombs muted our own,
And this was no longer for us a home,
But there’s no escape from where we are,
The helping hands and hearts are far.

But it wasn’t that which choked our souls,
Hearing the news was like eating burning coals,
Five were wounded from the enemy’s side,
While one hundred of my neighbors died.

Yet the story of those five was written in one large page,
Condemnation was bitter and it was told with such rage,
And the hundred were mentioned in half a line,
Any tears for us just had to be dried.

We’re dying but terrorists is what we’re called,
They play their drums, but with us the world's appalled.
The voices of hundreds who died, unheard,
The pleading of wailing mothers deferred.

The news, it burns, it tells the enemy's story,
And it seems as though they suffer with glory.
But in our land we’re slaughtered and killed,
And their lust for murder is never fulfilled.

So hear my voice or let me die,
Listen to my truth and decide if it’s a lie,
But don’t keep me waiting for too long,
I’m dead very soon, but I’ll take others along.

I’m a rat in a cage, tortured without end,
The torturer kills and for help he will send,
He will cry like a victim and torture me again,
Strong are his allies and feeble are my friends.

Not a word of those four children was said,
They’re sleeping in their graves, their killer in his bed.
Those innocent dead are criminals in the world’s eyes,
And still the drums keep beating with lyrics made of lies.