Egyptian Court Sentences Muslim Brotherhood Chief and 682 Others to Death

I'm sure Obama will explain how this is not 21st Century behavior, and how it's in both Egypt's and America's best interests to reinstate the Muslim Brotherhood to power.

From the AFP via Drudge:

An Egyptian court sentenced 682 alleged Islamists and Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Badie to death on Monday, a lawyer and prosecutor said, after two brief sessions the defence partly boycotted.

  

The same court in the southern province of Minya also reversed 492 of 529 death sentences it passed in March, commuting most of those to life in prison. 

The court, presided over by judge Said Youssef Sabry, had sparked an international outcry with its initial sentencing last month amid an extensive crackdown on supporters of ousted Islamist president Mohamed Morsi. 

The crackdown has extended to secular-leaning dissidents who supported Morsi's overthrow but have since turned on the army-installed regime.  

[...]  

Under Egyptian law, death sentences are referred to the country's top Islamic scholar for an advisory opinion before being ratified. A court may choose to commute the sentences, which can later be challenged at an appeals court. 

Of the 683 sentenced on Monday, only 73 are in custody, prosecutor Abdel Rahim Abdel Malek said. The others have a right to a retrial if they turn themselves in. 

Monday's hearing lasted just 10 minutes, said Khaled Elkomy, a defence lawyer who was in court. 

The verdict was the first against Badie, spiritual head of Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, in the several trials he faces on various charges along with Morsi and other Brotherhood leaders.

Gee, you'd think this would be bigger news since the Obama Administration supported both the overthrow of Mubarak and Morsi's takeover. I guess when Obama backs the wrong horse, it's not news in the U.S.

Obama Admin. Withholds Military Aid and Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in Aid to Egypt

Those Egyptians dared to act in their own best interests rather than Obama's political needs. Now they must pay the penalty. I wonder if Obama will release the National Park Service on them to "make it hurt" even more.

From Fox News:

The Obama administration was criticized by an Egyptian government official Thursday in the wake of its decision to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars in cash and military aid in response to the ouster of President Mohamed Morsi and the crackdown by the military-backed government on his supporters.  

"The decision was wrong. Egypt will not surrender to American pressure and is continuing its path towards democracy as set by the roadmap,'' Foreign Ministry spokesman Badr Abdelatty told an Egyptian radio station, according to Reuters.
The State Department announced the decision late Wednesday afternoon, after press reports emerged that an aid cut-off was imminent.  

The U.S. provides $1.5 billion in aid each year to Egypt. While the State Department did not provide a dollar amount of what was being withheld, senior Senate leadership aides shared with Fox News some of the details of a conference call with staffers from the State Department and the office of the Secretary of Defense.  

The U.S. is "holding" -- as in not sending to Cairo -- a dozen F-16s; a similar number of AH-64 Apache helicopters; four M-1/A-1 tank kits (tanks that are shipped in pieces and assembled in the receiving country); and an unspecified number of Harpoon missiles (typically an anti-ship missile).  

Also, the U.S. is not proceeding with the planned transfer of $260 million in cash to the Egyptian government. However, these funds were already on hold pending the outcome of talks between the Egyptians and the International Monetary Fund.  

The U.S. is also not proceeding with a $300 million loan guarantee slated as part of our foreign military financing programs.   

[...]  

Importantly, officials did not invoke the "coup" clause -- which would be a determination that aid must be cut off because a "coup" was deemed to have taken place.  

Officials said they plan to revaluate this decision on a constant basis going forward, to see if the Egyptian interim government is moving rapidly towards a "sustainable, inclusive, non-violent transition to democracy."  

The U.S. decision to cut aid to Egypt, though, will create new friction in Washington's already uneasy relations with the government that ousted the first democratically elected Egyptian president. And the consequences won't end there. The move will anger Persian Gulf states, push Egypt to seek assistance from U.S. rivals and upend decades of close ties with the Egyptians that that have been a bulwark of stability in the Middle East.  

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in a statement Wednesday that the U.S. will withhold delivery of certain large-scale military systems as well as cash assistance to the Egyptian government until "credible progress" is made toward an inclusive government set up through free and fair elections.

Hmm. So Obama's State Department won't deliver military aid and money until the Egyptians vote in more Islamists? Okay, that's not exactly what they're saying, but it's pretty close. Ah, Obama's international relations is just so darn intelligent. It's good to see "smart diplomacy" in action.

Egypt Bans Muslim Brotherhood

It's a blow to Obama's pro-Muslim Brotherhood policies.

From the AP:

An Egyptian court on Monday ordered the Muslim Brotherhood to be banned and its assets confiscated in a dramatic escalation of a crackdown by the military-backed government against supporters of the ousted Islamist president Mohammed Morsi.  

The ruling opens the door for a wider crackdown on the vast network of the Brotherhood, which includes social organizations that have been key for building the group's grassroots support and helping its election victories. The verdict banned the group itself - including the official association it registered earlier this year - as well as "any institution branching out of it or ... receiving financial support from it," according to the court ruling, made public on Egypt's state official news agency MENA.  

[...]  

The Brotherhood was outlawed for most of its 85 years in existence. After the 2011 ouster of autocrat Hosni Mubarak, it emerged to work openly, opening a formal headquarters and forming a political party for the first time, and rose to power in a string of post-Mubarak elections. Still, its legal status remained hazy. In March, it registered as a non-governmental organization, but its entire network was not brought under the association's aegis.  

[...]  

The military removed Morsi after mass protests by millions demanding he step down, accusing him of power abuse and allowing the Brotherhood and other Islamists to monopolize rule. 

Since Morsi's ouster, security forces have arrested some 2,000 of the group's members, including many of its senior figures and a large swath of its middle ranks. Morsi, held in secret military detention, faces trial on charges of inciting the killing of protesters during his year in office. The Brotherhood's top leader and his deputies are also on trial, and figures are expected to be referred to courts soon, and already assets of many senior figures' assets have been ordered frozen. Officials and sympathetic media accuse the group of fomenting a wave of violence in retaliation for the coup.

Obama's been skirting the Egypt situation. Not surprising since much of Egypt is currently identifying him as the devil.

Egypt's Spiral Toward Mass Hunger Under Morsi

Most people have really no idea how close the Egyptian state is to completely failing and collapsing into chaos. Egypt is not itself a rich country and survives by outside money, primarily in the forms of tourism and foreign aid.

Tourism has probably declined by around 2.5 billion dollars [citation below] following the instability that eventually brought about Mubarak's fall. Morsi's preoccupation with enshrining himself and the Muslim Brotherhood as the new ultimate powers in Egypt resulted in the coming crisis. The protests that recently flooded the streets of Cairo were not not just about political opposition to Morsi's attempts at dictatorship, but also because of the steep downward spiral of Egypt's economy.

In various ways, the Egyptian government essentially feeds the poor of Egypt-- of which there are millions. In 2011 it was reported "Nearly half of all Egyptians live under or just above the poverty line, which the World Bank sets at $2 a day." An oft sited statistic is that more than 15 million Egyptians live on less than $1 a day.

Morsi chose to attempt to consolidate power rather and enshrine the Muslim Brotherhood as a permanent, and likely ultimate, power in Egypt, rather than to maintain or to even seriously address the Egyptian's teetering economy.

From an article in Ablawaba's Business section:

Egypt's economy was a key casualty for the one-year rule of former Islamist president Mohammad Mursi, according to economic experts. 

As the military toppled Mursi on July 3 following three days of mass street protests against him, economic figures available show that Mursi has deepened the populous country's economic woes. 

When Mursi took office on June 30, 2012, Egypt had foreign currency holdings of $16 billion compared to $36 billion when his predecessor Hosni Mubarak was forced to step down in February 2011. The reserves, necessary to cover Egypt's food and fuel imports, dropped to $14.9 billion at the end of May, according to the Central Bank of Egypt. The figure includes $11.5 billion in grants and loans from Qatar, Libya, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. 

"Mursi and his Muslim Brotherhood, in economic terms, were worse than Mubarak," said Rashad Abdu, the head of Cairo-based Egyptian Economic Forum. "The Brotherhood members are mainly merchants with no clear economic vision or managerial skills. So, Egypt's economic problems have gone from bad to worse at their hands," Abdu told Gulf News. 

"Nor did Mursi and his group show any interest in depending on competent specialists in all fields. Their sole obsession was to tighten their hold on all state institutions by employing people, whom they trust, not efficient experts." 

Abdu gave the example of Mursi's prime minister, Hesham Qandil, who is an expert on irrigation and water resources. "He had no idea about how to fix the economy," said Abdou, adding that Mursi's insistence on keeping Qandil in the post was a potent message that his administration was not serious about revitalizing the economy.  

[...]  

According to official figures, unemployment rates in the final year of Mubarak stood at 3.9 per cent of Egypt's workforce. They rose under the generals who took over after him and ruled for 16 months to reach 10.5 per cent. At the end of Mursi's first year in office, unemployment hit 13.3 per cent, reported the state-run Central Agency for Public Mobilisation and Statistics. 

"When Mursi became president, the budgetary deficit was estimated at 170 billion Egyptian pounds (around Dh100bn). On leaving, the figure soared to 220 billion pounds," said Abdou. 

"While around 300 million-dollar-worth new investments entered Egypt under Mursi, 14 billion left during his first year in power because of his failure to end political and street turbulence in the country." 

The tourism, a key earner for Egypt, failed to achieve a complete recovery due to security breakdown and frequent clashes between Mursi's backers and supporters.
Around 11.5 million tourists visited Egypt in 2012, generating revenue of around 10 billion dollars, compared to 14.7 million tourists in the pre-revolution peak 2010 when the industry earned 12.5 billion dollars. 

Mursi's rule was marred by daily problems in petrol, electricity and water supplies, fuelling public discontent.

I would take the official figures of unemployment with a grain of salt. However what they do reflect, no matter the likely low-balling of at least the 3.9% unemployment number under Mubarak, is the steady increase in unemployment and the declining businesses that this reflects.

And now this is being reported by Reuters:

Egypt has less than two months' supply of imported wheat left in its stocks, ousted President Mohamed Mursi's minister of supplies said, revealing a shortage more acute than previously disclosed.  

Speaking to Reuters near midnight in a tent at a vigil where thousands of Mursi supporters are protesting against the Islamist president's removal, former Minister of Supplies Bassem Ouda said the state had just 500,000 metric tons of imported wheat left. Egypt usually imports about 10 million metric tons a year. 

Two and a half years of political turmoil have caused a deep economic crisis in Egypt, scaring away investors and tourists, draining foreign currency reserves and making it difficult to maintain imports of food and fuel. 

Egypt is the world's largest importer of wheat, half of which it distributes to its 84 million people in the form of heavily subsidized saucer-sized flat loaves of bread, which sell for less than 1 U.S. cent.

While not completely begun under Morsi, his rule has presided over a dangerous dropping of Egypt's basic economic needs, among them food supplies. Whether by Morsi's incompetence or by design, this failing economy is what mainly what drove the millions of Egyptians into the streets. Should a prolonged civil war in Egypt follow its current violence, a terrible humanitarian crisis will result.

At Least 42 Islamists Killed in Egypt

Violence in Egypt continues to escalate. According to Resuters, at least 42 people were killed during a pro-Muslim Brotherhood demonstration.

From Reuters:

At least 42 people were killed on Monday when Islamist demonstrators enraged by the military overthrow of Egypt's elected President Mohamed Mursi said the army opened fire during morning prayers at the Cairo barracks where he is being held.

But the military said "a terrorist group" tried to storm the Republican Guard compound and one army officer had been killed and 40 wounded. Soldiers returned fire when they were attacked by armed assailants, a military source said.

The emergency services said more than 320 were wounded in a sharp escalation of Egypt's political crisis, and Mursi's Muslim Brotherhood urged people to rise up against the army, which they accuse of a military coup to remove the elected leader.

[...]

As an immediate consequence, the ultra-conservative Islamist Nour party, which initially backed the military intervention, said it was withdrawing from stalled negotiations to form an interim government for the transition to fresh elections.

The military has said that the overthrow was not a coup, and it was enforcing the will of the people after millions took to the streets on June 30 to call for his resignation.

But pro- and anti-Mursi protests took place in Cairo, Alexandria and other cities, and resulted in clashes on Friday and Saturday that left 35 dead.

It leaves the Arab world's largest nation of 84 million people in a perilous state, with the risk of further enmity between people on either side of the political divide while an economic crisis deepens.

It's a very tumultuous time in Egypt and very hard to predict the ultimate outcome. Normally looking at the backers of the country would give some clue, but the U.S. backed Morsi but their both Obama's credibility and determination are lacking. Saudi Arabia's is being rather cautious and ambivalent to the whole thing, even though the Muslim Brotherhood enjoys a fair amount of financial backing from rich and influential people within the country.

Everyone is hedging their bets, so very few clues as to how this is going to work out. It'll be bloodier in days to come, but that's pretty obvious.

Violence Continues in Egypt; Obama Calls for Inclusion of Muslim Brotherhood in New Government

Despite the unrealistic hopes of the West, violent clashes in Egypt have continued. Morsi's supporters aren't letting things go without a fight.

From The Wall Street Journal:

Two days after Egypt's military replaced the country's president, it sent soldiers into the streets to quell demonstrations, as a week of tensions between Islamists and the military transformed into deadly confrontations that heightened some Egyptians' fears of civil war.  

Demonstrations turned bloody Friday as hundreds of thousands of Muslim Brotherhood supporters turned out to protest this week's military-led ouster of President Mohammed Morsi. Muslim Brotherhood officials said police opened fire on protesters in the Cairo suburb where Mr. Morsi and 12 aides were being held under house arrest, killing five people. The military denied those allegations.  

Later in the day, armored personnel carriers arrived on the October 6 bridge, near Tahrir Square, to restore order after rival camps clashed with rocks, fireworks and, according to several witnesses, gunfire from automatic weapons.  

At least 30 people died in violence across the country, with another 1,076 injured, officials said.  

The street-level military intervention was a rare occurrence in more than two years of turmoil since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak—but it echoed a dominant Egyptian theme of Mr. Mubarak's long reign, one of a military-backed state pitted against Islamists. 

Such fears were renewed late Friday as state television confirmed the arrest of Khairat El Shater, the Muslim Brotherhood's influential second-in-command. 

Earlier Friday, the Muslim Brotherhood's leader addressed tens of thousands of supporters who gathered for "Rejection Friday" protests, urging them to continue protesting until Mr. Morsi is reinstated.  

[...]  

The military's unparalleled position in Egypt's public life is a result, in part, of the perception that it is a dispassionate defender of the country's broad public. The military made that face particularly visible in recent days, sending its jets into the sky above the fray—flying triumphal missions that left contrails in the shape of hearts, or the colors of the Egyptian flag, above Cairo.    

But in intervening directly as jilted Islamists demanded Mr. Morsi's reinstatement, the military runs the risk of being seen as siding against Islamists and vindicating many Egyptians' fears of an impending civil war.

Hard to say if a civil war is brewing-- there will certainly be more violence, but whether it will escalate to the point of being comfortably called a civil war is uncertain. What's definitely coming is years of political unrest. Egypt is in awful economic straits and has been unable to feed a large portion of its people for some time now-- a large part of why so many Egyptians demanded Morsi's ouster. No amount of violence can solve this basic problem, and Egypt is not in any position, politically nor economically, to really address this issue to a majority of Egyptians' satisfaction. The situation is dire.

Meanwhile Obama is offering useless and pithy advice and holding out hope for the Muslim Brotherhood.

From Bloomberg:

The Obama administration’s call for an “inclusive” political process in Egypt with a role for the Muslim Brotherhood has been overshadowed by deadly clashes between security forces and supporters of the Islamist group.  

[...]  

While President Barack Obama’s administration has stopped short of condemning the July 3 military takeover, it has called on Egyptian leaders to pursue “a transparent political process that is inclusive of all parties and groups,” including“avoiding any arbitrary arrests of Mursi and his supporters,”Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said July 4 in a statement.

Is it just me or does a lot of the Obama administration's public statements seem like bad corporate consultant speak? We need to further utilize the growing gap in technology industries so we can find the consumer niche that is profitable. Geez. Of course all of these power words are useless since any solution must address the economic chaos in Egypt. Of course no mention of that in any White House statement. They treat this as though it's a privileged Occupy Cairo movement. Ridiculous.

As Egypt seeks a transition to democracy, it’s hobbled by the lack of a road map to follow, according to Amy Hawthorne, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and a former State Department official who worked on the country’s transition after Mubarak’s ouster.  

First, the military made an arrangement with the Islamists to the exclusion of other groups in Egypt, she said.  

“Now we might see the military doing a deal with non-Islamist groups and excluding the Islamists,” Hawthorne said.“The only way Egypt is going to be able” to establish democracy “is if all groups agree on the basic rules of the game.”

Yeah... right. There's really no chance of any meaningful coalition government when Egypt itself is teetering along the brink. This talk about agreeing to the rules of the game is useless and it's not what's happening in Egypt. You might as well be talk about organizing and getting the rules down for kickball game while the Titanic seeks.

And I just love how she ignores Morsi's move to enshrine himself as dictator, and to convert the Egyptian military into an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. It's as though all of that were just perfectly reasonable actions that should have no consequences. Oh, why can't the Egyptians just get with the program and do what Obama's chosen one, Morsi, wants them to do?

These broad, generalized strokes that Hawthorne and her ilk like to paint when describing trouble spots is either willfully ignorant, or a vaudevillian attempt to say something palatable when there really isn't anything good to say. It's a slightly dressed up version of "can't we all just get along?"

Misunderstandings on the Failed State of Egypt and Obama's Lack of Care

Caroline Glick has a very interesting opinion piece over at CarolineGlick.com. I highly recommend reading the whole thing at the link below.

Among Glick's observations is the fact that the state of Egypt is failing to feed and house its people. While many in the West either puzzle as to why the Egyptians overthrew Morsi or believe it to be some occupy-ish popular movement similar to the so-called "Arab Spring", the fact is Egyptians are in middle of a food crisis and an economic meltdown. Of course Morsi is not solely to blame for this state. Yet, his presidency focused more on consolidating dictatorial power and turning the Egyptian military into an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, rather than to address Egypt's pressing economic matters. Morsi's administration also seemed to be both completely clueless as to how to run an economy and wholly unfit for the job.

From Glick's opinion piece:

US reporters and commentators today portray this week's protests as the restoration of the Egyptian revolution [the "Arab Spring"]. That revolution, they remain convinced, was poised to replace long-time Egyptian leader and US-ally Hosni Mubarak with a liberal democratic government led by people who used Facebook and Twitter.

 

Subsequently, we were told, that revolution was hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood. But now that Morsi and his government have been overthrown, the Facebook revolution is back on track.

 

And again, they are wrong.

 

As was the case in 2011, the voices of liberal democracy in Egypt are so few and far between that they have no chance whatsoever of gaining power, today or for the foreseeable future. At this point it is hard to know what the balance of power is between the Islamists who won 74 percent of the vote in the 2011 parliamentary elections and their opponents. But it is clear that their opponents are not liberal democrats. They are a mix of neo-Nasserist fascists, communists and other not particularly palatable groups.

 

None of them share Western conceptions of freedom and limited government. None of them are particularly pro-American. None of them like Jews. And none of them support maintaining Egypt's cold peace with Israel.  

[...]  

There are only three things that are knowable about the future of Egypt. First it will be poor. Egypt is a failed state. It cannot feed its people. It has failed to educate its people. It has no private sector to speak of. It has no foreign investment.

 

Second, Egypt will be politically unstable.

 

Mubarak was able to maintain power for 29 years because he ran a police state that the people feared. That fear was dissipated in 2011. This absence of fear will bring Egyptians to the street to topple any government they feel is failing to deliver on its promises - as they did this week.

 

Given Egypt's dire economic plight, it is impossible to see how any government will be able to deliver on any promises - large or small - that its politicians will make during electoral campaigns.

 

And so government after government will share the fates of Mubarak and Morsi.

Beyond economic deprivation, today tens of millions of Egyptians feel they were unlawfully and unjustly ousted from power on Wednesday.

 

The Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists won big in elections hailed as free by the West. They have millions of supporters who are just as fanatical today as they were last week. They will not go gently into that good night.

 

Finally, given the utter irrelevance of liberal democratic forces in Egypt today, it is clear enough that whoever is able to rise to power in the coming years will be anti-American, anti- Israel and anti-democratic, (in the liberal democratic sense of the word). They might be nicer to the Copts than the Muslim Brotherhood has been. But they won't be more pro-Western.

 

They may be more cautious in asserting or implementing their ideology in their foreign policy than the Muslim Brotherhood. But that won't necessarily make them more supportive of American interests or to the endurance of Egypt's formal treaty of peace with Israel.  

[...]  

Wednesday's overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government is a total repudiation of the US strategy of viewing the unrest in Egypt - and throughout the Arab world - as a struggle between the good guys and the bad guys.

 

Within a week of the start of the protests in Tahrir Square on January 25, 2011, Americans from both sides of the political divide united around the call for Mubarak's swift overthrow.

 

A few days later, President Barack Obama joined the chorus of Democrats and Republicans, and called for Mubarak to leave office, immediately. Everyone from Sen. John McCain to Samantha Power was certain that despite the fact that Mubarak was a loyal ally of the US, America would be better served by supporting the rise of the Facebook revolutionaries who used Twitter and held placards depicting Mubarak as a Jew.

 

Everyone was certain that the Muslim Brotherhood would stay true to its word and keep out of politics.  

[...]  

Shortly after Mubarak was overthrown, the Obama administration began actively supporting the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

The Muslim Brotherhood believed that the way to gain and then consolidate power was to hold elections as quickly as possible. Others wanted to wait until a constitutional convention convened and a new blueprint for Egyptian governance was written. But the Muslim Brotherhood would have none of it. And Obama supported it.

Five months after elections of questionable pedigree catapulted Morsi to power, Obama was silent when in December 2012 Morsi arrogated dictatorial powers and pushed through a Muslim Brotherhood constitution.

Obama ignored Congress three times and maintained full funding of Egypt despite the fact that the Morsi government had abandoned its democratic and pluralistic protestations.

 

He was silent over the past year as the demonstrators assembled to oppose Morsi's power grabs. He was unmoved as churches were torched and Christians were massacred. He was silent as Morsi courted Iran.

 

US Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson and Obama remained the Muslim Brotherhood's greatest champions as the forces began to gather ahead of this week's mass protests. Patterson met with the Coptic pope and told him to keep the Coptic Christians out of the protests.

Obama, so quick to call for Mubarak to step down, called for the protesters to exercise restraint this time around and then ignored them during his vacation in Africa.

 

The first time Obama threatened to curtail US funding of the Egyptian military was Wednesday night, after the military ignored American warnings and entreaties, and deposed Morsi and his government.

 

This week's events showed how the US's strategy in Egypt has harmed America.

In 2011, the military acted to force Mubarak from power only after Obama called for it to do so. This week, the military overthrew Morsi and began rounding up his supporters in defiance of the White House.

Personally, I hold out a bit more hope for Egyptians laying down a viable framework for a more stable government in the future. This hope is a bit baseless, I admit. Ideally the Egyptian military can provide enough food until a new system-- one hopefully with a constitution-- can be constructed-- something that learned from the Morsi debacle. That's a very optimistic view when taking into account the huge obstacles Egypt faces, I know.

The U.S. does still hold a fair amount of sway over Egypt in the form of massive amounts foreign aid, and if we had a president that was at all interested in stability in the Middle East there might be further cause for optimism. But Obama holds the American Leftist view of the world, a silly and ridiculously over-simplified viewpoint of victim and victimizer. Think of the ludicrous "A People's History of the United States" by Marxist historian Howard Zinn and you've got a pretty good grasp of Obama's beliefs.

So Obama's real position is to simply continue the policy of apologetic redemption seeking-- useless apologies for actions embarrassing mostly from an American point of view, and redemption only in the eyes of Leftist Americans. As is evidenced by Obama's actions in the near past (his consistent support for an, at best, incompetent Morsi, his silence at the Muslim Brotherhood's attacks upon the Copts,  Morsi's power grabs and moves for destabilizing the Mid-East, Obama's threat against the Egyptian military for Morsi's removal), his concern for the Egyptian people, the Israeli people, and indeed all the people of the Middle East is minimal.

It's pathetic and egotistical to the extreme, but Obama's first and foremost concern is to satisfy the American Left's pompous version of a "moral" America. Allies' and others' welfare is of little matter. As can be seen with Obama's brush-off of impoverished Africans' living conditions, Obama has little sympathy for the lives of others when they interfere with Leftist agendas designed to satisfy their own "moral" quest. So, if numerous lives of Egyptians, Israelis, and whomever else must be sacrificed for this self-indulgent, American apologist agenda/viewpoint, so be it says the Light-bringer.

Egypt: Military Seizes Power then Calls for Presidential and Parliamentary Elections and Rewrite of Constitution

Well, looks like Morsi is out. We can only hope that the next head is better. And perhaps Egypt learned something from the debacle that was Morsi's reign.

From the Business Inside article by Michael Kelly:

The Egyptian military chief has announced President Mohamed Morsi has been removed from power and the Egyptian constitution has been suspended.
The Muslim Brotherhood leader, who served as head of state for about a year, has been replaced by Adly Mansour, who is the chief justice of Egypt's constitutional court. 

Military chief General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi called for presidential and then parliamentary elections, the establishment of a panel to rewrite the constitution, a national reconciliation committee that would include youth movements, and a national coalition cabinet. 

In the hours following Morsi's departure, Egyptian military forces have been arresting pro-Islamist supporters and Muslim Brotherhood officials. They also reportedly broke into a live Al Jazeera broadcast, arresting reporters and shutting down coverage. 

Here's a live feed of Tahrir Square, where the crowd is jubilant. 

Morsi, who has been moved to an undisclosed location, has rejected the military declaration and called for citizens to peacefully resist the "military coup." 

His office tweeted that he urged "civilians and military members to uphold the law & the Constitution not to accept that coup which turns Egypt backwards. 

Sisi warned that the armed forces and police will deal "decisively" with violence responding to the army's decision.

Morsi wants Egypt to not move backwards? You mean away from his progressive policies of Jew hating/scapegoating and a de facto dictatorship?

As I said, I hope the Egyptians learned a little from Morsi's time in power and will choose their leaders more carefully.

Breaking: Reports of Military Coup in Egypt

Tweets are coming in reporting of the Egyptian military moving toward presidential grounds in armored personnel carriers (APCs). Twitter feed here at Leagl Insurrection.

If true, this doesn't bode too well for Morsi nor, in the long term, for Syrian rebels.

Will update with links to story/post if I can find it.


UPDATE: BBC reports:

President Mohammed Morsi has repeated his offer of a consensus government, but still refuses to step down. 

A spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood, to which Mr Morsi belongs, tweeted that a "full military coup" was under way.  

As the army deadline passed, cheers echoed in Cairo's Tahrir Square, where thousands of protesters had gathered.  

BBC correspondents have reported an increased military presence in the capital and armoured vehicles have been seen moving through the streets. 

The army had earlier held meetings with political and religious leaders to discuss the crisis.

Of course it is only the Muslim Brotherhood saying it right now-- hardly the most reliable source.

UPDATE 2: Pic of Egyptian APC reportedly moving toward presidential grounds:

And outside presidential palace:

More APCs

Obama Warns Egyptian Military that a Coup Against Muslim Brotherhood-backed President Would Result in Cut Off of Aid

"We must keep Morsi in power. Otherwise who will threaten Israel and further radicalize Egypt?"

Amazing. Obama must love the Muslim Brotherhood, and I guess Obama thinks he's gotta to keep his hand-picked brutal leaders in power. An incredible number of protesters filled the streets of Cairo, have won the support of the Egyptian military. Together both have demanded that Muslim Brotherhood backed Morsi step down. In response Obama has threatened to cut off military aid to Egypt if there is a coup.

From the NRO piece by David French:

First, on May 10, 2013, the Obama Administration elected to waive human rights restrictions placed on American military aid to Egypt, freeing up $1.3 billion for the Muslim Brotherhood regime’s military without the required showing that the “Government of Egypt is supporting the transition to civilian government, including holding free and fair elections and implementing policies to protect freedom of expression, association, and religion and due process of law.”  

In other words, the Morsi government could keep funding the military even as it brutally oppressed dissent, including Egypt’s embattled Coptic Christian community.
Fast-forward to Monday, July 1, 2013. The corrupt, oppressive Muslim Brotherhood government had just faced what some were counting among the largest public protests in history. And here’s our president: 

On Monday, the US president, Barack Obama, indicated that Morsi had not yet lost his backing. “We don’t make those decisions just by counting the number of heads in a protest march but we do make decisions based on whether or not a government is listening to the opposition, maintaining a free press, maintaining freedom of assembly, not using violence or intimidation, conducting fair and free elections,” he said.

Wait. What? Do you not remember that you just waived those very same human rights requirements not even two months ago? How much could you possibly care about these basic liberties?   

Now fast-forward to today, July 3, when we learn that the Administration does actually care:

Officials have also warned the Egyptian military that a military coup [against the Muslim Brotherhood] would trigger U.S. legislation cutting off all U.S. aid, which totals about $1.5 billion per year.

For those keeping score at home, the Obama Administration waives human rights requirements when the Muslim Brotherhood is in power but then threatens to impose those very same waived requirements when the military — our decades-long ally within Egypt — threatens to assert control.

Bizarre. Obama didn't back U.S. ally former Egyptian president Mubarak-- in fact he essentially demanded that Mubarak step down. And then Obama doesn't threaten to cut off aid to Egypt when Morsi openly threatened our ally Israel. He didn't threaten to cut off aid when Morsi moved to consolidate himself as dictator-- a failed effort no thanks to the U.S. But Obama does threaten to stop aid when Morsi is threatened by popular unrest.

French is quite correct when he later states:

It’s [Obama's foreign policy in Egypt] not chaos. It makes perfect sense in context with Administration actions from the Green Revolution to the “Arab Spring.” Allies are thrown under the bus with alacrity, enemies are wooed with money and weapons — and through it all, radicals prosper and Christians die.

Obama has made his feelings clear in this matter: Enemies are friends, allies are enemies. It's the basic knee-jerk reactionary dogma of the hard Left, and now both America and the world are paying for this backwards worldview having been given power.

A Very Bad Sign in Egypt: Morsi Sees Yom Kippur War as an Egyptian Victory

Egypt's president Mohamed Morsi is celebrating Egypt's great "victory" against Israel during the 1973 Yom Kippur War in a rally attended by tens of thousands.

From the ynet news article by Elior Levy and Yonatan Gonen (h/t Instapundit):

"Addressing tens of thousands of Egyptians Saturday evening during a ceremony commemorating the 39th anniversary of Egypt's 'victory' over Israel during the October 1973 war, President Mohamed Morsi said, 'It was a monumental event. We will never forget the heroes and shahids (martyrs).'

"Morsi was elected president of Egypt after Hosni Mubarak, a hero of the Yom Kippur War, was ousted. Earlier this week, on Thursday, he laid a wreath on slain president Anwar Sadat's grave in a rare homage from an Islamist leader.

[...]

"During the memorial ceremony, which was held at Cairo's soccer stadium, Morsi said 'today is a day of victory. This has been a happy day for the past 39 years. The commanders and soldiers crossed the Suez Canal, demolished the Bar-Lev line and entered Sinai. It was a decisive campaign, and thanks to Allah Egypt retrieved not only its land, but also its dignity and pride.'

"Morsi linked Egypt's achievements during the war to the January 25 revolution, which led to Mubarak's downfall. 'The 1973 war was a historic victory that restored the dignity of all Egyptians. The second victory came during the January 25 revolution, when the people and the army united. The January 25 Revolution was peaceful before the hand of betrayal turned it violent.'"

Egypt was soundly defeated by Israel in the Yom Kippur War.

From Wikipedia:

"The war began with a massive and successful Egyptian crossing of the Suez Canal during the first three days, after which they dug in, settling into a stalemate. The Syrians coordinated their attack on the Golan Heights to coincide with the Egyptian offensive and initially made threatening gains against the greatly outnumbered Israelis. Within a week, Israel recovered and launched a four-day counter-offensive, driving deep into Syria. As Sadat believed that capturing two strategic passes located deeper in the Sinai would make his position stronger during the negotiations, he ordered the Egyptians to go back on the offensive, but they were decisively defeated; the Israelis then counterattacked at the seam between the two Egyptian armies, crossed the Suez Canal, and advanced southward and westward in over a week of heavy fighting while suffering severe casualties especially during the battle of the Chinese Farm.

"On October 22 a United Nations-brokered ceasefire quickly unraveled, with each side blaming the other for the breach. By October 24, the Israelis had improved their positions considerably and completed their encirclement of Egypt's Third Army and the city of Suez. This development led to tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. As a result, a second ceasefire was imposed cooperatively on October 25 to end the war. At the conclusion of hostilities, Israeli forces were 40 kilometres (25 mi) from Damascus and 101 kilometres (63 mi) from Cairo."

Quite the Egyptian victory, huh? No it wasn't quite the Six Day War's thrashing, but to interpret Egypt's outcome as victorious is delusional.

When a country begins celebrating historical defeats as victories, then there is nothing ahead but troubles.

Morsi is whipping up anti-Israel sentiment in his own country, while simultaneously attempting to create a myth about Egypt's performance in their last war. Coupling this drumbeating with Morsi's strengthening of Egypt's ties with Iran, dramatically increases the chances of a renewed open conflict with Israel. We'll have to see if Morsi continues this line in the near future.

US Foes Encouraged by Middle East Turmoil and Sense Opportunity

While many in America romantically laud the Egyptian uprising, American foes have been encouraging such uprisings for many years. Israel is being squeezed into a more and more precarious position as radical Islamic groups successfully jockey for political control and Western legitimacy amidst the chaos.

From The Wall Street Journal article by Jay Soloman:

"The so-called resistance bloc of nations and Islamist movements, led by Iran and Syria, believes it is increasingly on the ascent as unrest seethes in the Middle East.

"United in its opposition to the U.S. and Israel, this coalition is seeing many of its chief regional adversaries weakened—particularly Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah II.

"Tehran and Damascus have also been buoyed by last month's toppling of Beirut's pro-Western government at the hands of Hezbollah, the Lebanese political party and militia the two countries fund and arm.

"'[The unrest] proved that the global arrogance's era of domination and control of the region has come to an end,' Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said on Tehran's state television this week, using Iran's catch-phrase for the U.S."

But what about the contention that this unrest is part of a popular revolt against oppressive regimes? Well, few Middle Eastern regimes are more repressive than Syria and Iran. Personally I'll buy the hype when Syria begins to feel the heat. Iran won't since it weathered the Green Revolution following the sham elections.

The article continues:

"Syria is emerging as a bellwether to gauge the shifting power balance in the region.

"Damascus technically remains at war with Israel and, along with Tehran, is the principal financier and arms supplier for Hezbollah and the Palestinian organization Hamas, which controls the Gaza strip in the Palestinian territories. Hamas's leadership, headed by political director Khaled Meshaal, is headquartered in Syria.

"Organizations opposing the rule of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have pledged to launch their own protest movement this week and have cited Saturday as a 'day of rage.' Any sustainable movement against the Syrian leadership would buttress the argument that the protest wave is a broad-based effort driven by economics and concerns about lack of political freedoms, Western diplomats said.

"Mr. Assad on Sunday told The Wall Street Journal that his regime remains stable and that the true targets of the unrest are Washington's allies who have supported the war in Iraq and the Arab-Israeli peace process. He said Iran, Turkey and Syria will likely emerge with greater influence as the political transformation of the region continues.

"'As long as the people have a major say in the future [of the Middle East], then you are going to have the minor say in the United States,' Mr. Assad said.

[...]

"Iran has been particularly vocal in calling for Mr. Mubarak's overthrow in Egypt. Iranian leaders have drawn similarities between the events in Cairo and the 1979 Islamic revolution that deposed the U.S.-backed shah in Tehran. Iran has also voiced support for the Muslim Brotherhood, a Cairo-based group banned in Egypt that hopes to meld the Islamic religion with Egypt's legal system. The movement is expected to gain significant influence in any post-Mubarak government in Cairo.

"'With [the region] assuming a new shape and the developments under way, [we hope] we would be able to see a Middle East that is Islamic and powerful,' Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters in Tehran on Monday.

"Mr. Meshaal, the Hamas chief, has kept his silence in Damascus since the uprising against Arab governments broke out. Mr. Mubarak has closely cooperated with Israel in imposing an economic siege on the Gaza strip since Hamas took power in the Palestinian territory in 2007.
However, Hamas officials said in interviews this week that what's happening could be to the Islamist movement's advantage. They expect the changes in Egypt and Jordan, in particular, to give them more room to operate.

"'We like what's happening,' a senior Hamas official said.

"Two other countries that could emerge more powerful are Qatar and Turkey.

"The tiny emirate of Qatar is home to the Pentagon's Central Command in Doha and provided logistical support to the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it also funds the Arab television channel, al-Jazeera, which has been a major voice calling for political changes in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen. Qatar has also increasingly provided financial and diplomatic support for Hamas and Hezbollah."

When the American media and Hamas are both pleased with what they see in the Middle East, it's time to worry a little.

The US Misunderstanding of Egypt and the Nature of Religion as a Social Force

Caroline Glick has yet another excellent op-ed, this time in regards to the Egyptian uprisings. I highly recommend reading the entire piece (link below). She points out the terrible misunderstandings that both the American Left and Right operate from regarding specifically Egypt, but also in foreign relations in general.

Americans have generally embraced the Egyptian protesters, siding firmly against Mubarak. This is not stunning news considering Mubarak's heavy-handed (too put it mildly) regime frequently imprisons and tortures Egyptians, and is, in many ways, responsible for the crushing poverty in Egypt.

Yet, I believe that Glick is absolutely correct when she points out that both the American Left and Right operate from flawed assumptions and have produced an unrealistic paradigm in the Middle East.

From Glick's piece "Clueless in Washington":

"What has most confounded Israeli officials and commentators alike has not been the strength of the anti-regime protests, but the American response to them. Outside the far Left, commentators from all major newspapers, radio and television stations have variously characterized the US response to events in Egypt as irrational, irresponsible, catastrophic, stupid, blind, treacherous, and terrifying.

"They have pointed out that the Obama administration's behavior - as well as that of many of its prominent conservative critics - is liable to have disastrous consequences for the US's other authoritarian Arab allies, for Israel and for the US itself.

"The question most Israelis are asking is why are the Americans behaving so destructively? Why are President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton charting a course that will necessarily lead to the transformation of Egypt into the first Salafist Islamic theocracy? And why are conservative commentators and Republican politicians urging them to be even more outspoken in their support for the rioters in the streets?

"Does the US not understand what will happen in the region as a result of its actions? Does the US really fail to understand what will happen to its strategic interests in the Middle East if the Muslim Brotherhood either forms the next regime or is the power behind the throne of the next regime in Cairo?

"Distressingly, the answer is that indeed, the US has no idea what it is doing. The reason the world's only (quickly declining) superpower is riding blind is because its leaders are trapped between two irrational, narcissistic policy paradigms and they can't see their way past them.
The first paradigm is former president George W. Bush's democracy agenda and its concomitant support for open elections.

"Bush supporters and former administration officials have spent the last month since the riots began in Tunisia crowing that events prove Bush's push for democratization in the Arab world is the correct approach.

"The problem is that while Bush's diagnosis of the dangers of the democracy deficit in the Arab world was correct, his antidote for solving this problem was completely wrong.

"Bush was right that tyranny breeds radicalism and instability and is therefore dangerous for the US.

"But his belief that free elections would solve the problem of Arab radicalism and instability was completely wrong. At base, Bush's belief was based on a narcissistic view of Western values as universal.

"When, due to US pressure, the Palestinians were given the opportunity to vote in open and free elections in 2006, they voted for Hamas and its totalitarian agenda. When due to US pressure, the Egyptians were given limited freedom to choose their legislators in 2005, where they could they elected the totalitarian Muslim Brotherhood to lead them.

"The failure of his elections policy convinced Bush to end his support for elections in his last two years in office.

"Frustratingly, Bush's push for elections was rarely criticized on its merits. Under the spell of the other policy paradigm captivating American foreign policy elites - anti-colonialism - Bush's leftist opponents never argued that the problem with his policy is that it falsely assumes that Western values are universal values. Blinded by their anti-Western dogma, they claimed that his bid for freedom was nothing more than a modern-day version of Christian missionary imperialism.

"It is this anti-colonialist paradigm, with its foundational assumption that that the US has no right to criticize non-Westerners that has informed the Obama administration's foreign policy. It was the anti-colonialist paradigm that caused Obama not to support the pro-Western protesters seeking the overthrow of the Iranian regime in the wake of the stolen 2009 presidential elections.

"As Obama put it at the time, 'It's not productive, given the history of US-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling, the US president meddling in the Iranian elections.'

"And it is this anti-colonialist paradigm that has guided Obama's courtship of the Syrian, Turkish and Iranian regimes and his unwillingness to lift a hand to help the March 14 movement in Lebanon.

"Moreover since the paradigm claims that the non-Western world's grievances towards the West are legitimate, Obama's Middle East policy is based on the view that the best way to impact the Arab world is by joining its campaign against Israel. This was the central theme of Obama's speech before an audience dominated by Muslim Brotherhood members in Cairo in June 2009.

"Like the pro-democracy paradigm, the anti-colonialist paradigm is narcissistic. Whereas Western democracy champions believe that all people are born with the same Western liberal democratic values, post-colonialists believe that non-Westerners are nothing more than victims of the West. They are not responsible for any of their own pathologies because they are not actors. Only Westerners (and Israelis) are actors. Non-Westerners are objects. And like all objects, they cannot be held responsible for anything they do because they are wholly controlled by forces beyond their control.

"Anti-colonialists by definition must always support the most anti-Western forces as 'authentic.' In light of Mubarak's 30-year alliance with the US, it makes sense that Obama's instincts would place the US president on the side of the protesters.

"So there we have it. The US policy towards Egypt is dictated by the irrational narcissism of two opposing sides to a policy debate that has nothing to do with reality.

"Add to that Obama's electoral concern about looking like he is on the right side of justice and we have a US policy that is wholly antithetical to US interests."

Glick points out that a recent Pew poll points toward a radicalized Egypt. "According to a Pew opinion survey of Egyptians from June 2010, 59 percent said they back Islamists. Only 27% said they back modernizers. Half of Egyptians support Hamas. Thirty percent support Hizbullah and 20% support al Qaida. Moreover, 95% of them would welcome Islamic influence over their politics. When this preference is translated into actual government policy, it is clear that the Islam they support is the al Qaida Salafist version.

"Eighty two percent of Egyptians support executing adulterers by stoning, 77% support whipping and cutting the hands off thieves. 84% support executing any Muslim who changes his religion."

So, as Obama demands that Mubarak do something now (although what he wants done is left conspicuously absent from Obama's remarks-- as Michelle Malkin has pointed out) he is, in essence, encouraging the radicalization of Egypt's government. This move would have far-reaching effects in the Middle East, placing Jordan, Kuwait, and possibly even Saudi Arabia in terrific jeopardy of internal revolution. Israel, having given up numerous strategically important lands for the promise of a non-existent peace, is placed in a tightening vice of Islamic radicalism. Furthermore, Obama's current stance presents an America that does not stand by its allies, which would further increase moves of countries in the region toward closer ties with Iran or perhaps China.

For various reasons, Egypt and the world is faced with two unhappy possibilities. Either there will be an Egypt with an oppressive, brutal secular government that tortures people amid crushing poverty, or there will be an oppressive, brutal, radical Islamic government in Egypt that tortures people amid crushing poverty. Any other possibility is highly unlikely in the current political climate-- and has been since WWII.

This is not to suggest that the results of either outcome will be the same. For Egyptians, the ultimate result will be very significant for the populations and will determine, among other consequences, which sets of people will be oppressed, which will prosper, which sets will be tortured, which sets will be given benefits or enriched, etc. Likewise, the fallout within international relations will also be significantly different depending on the outcome, especially for America, much of Europe, Israel, the rest of the Middle East, and China.

Whatever happens, the US will likely be surprised by the outcome, based on the current expectations people have which are, in turn, based on misinformation and unrealistic paradigms with imposed American values.

I believe that part of the problems that Americans have in understanding the world around them (especially the Middle East) stems from not really understanding the nature of others' religions. For the most part Americans regard religion (like much of the West) as merely a benefit / reward belief system. It's almost a capitalistic exchange. One invests so much time in going to church and then expects a spiritual return of some sort-- going to heaven, God's favor, etc.

Yes, religious beliefs shapes our moral character. Yet, American morality is often defined, not through religious faith, but believed to be according to personal (and thus highly varied) dictates logic and reason. In practical matters, religion may influence the morality of our laws, but the laws themselves are what become important, and increasingly become more of the arbiter of morality. The secularization of law has, to various degrees, lessened the importance of religion in the lives of people (and incidentally strengthened Marxist convictions of the State's moral "responsibilities"). Of course there are exceptions in society, but the American character is not defined by these exceptions.

As a consequence, few Americans understand the true nature of religion. Likewise, many do not understand that religion is not merely something that rewards good deeds, but rather is a moral structure that shapes, in all aspects, our perceptions and evaluations of the world around us. It takes on an almost metaphysical reality-- not unlike the Marxist doctrines of the Left-- and is not to be dismissed as irrelevant or merely local color.

For the statist-minded Left which often, at best, believe that religion is merely a conduit toward promoting their opinions of social justice (Rev. Wright, et al.), foreigners' religious beliefs are viewed as being simple, quaint, and hollow. Or they may be openly scoffed at (even by theists), as the Leftist moral stance (based on current American political and social conditions and theories) are never in line with foreign senses of morality-- the more foreign the worse it is.

Even religious Right Americans, such as many neo-conservatives, discount the power of religion in favor of the power of economics and the power of their "universal" moral system based largely in acknowledgment of individual property rights. Their idea has consistently been that economic laws which they champion will dictate behavior in all countries-- trumping culture and religious conviction.

I suppose I should pause for a moment, and state that I am not trying to criticize Americans' (nor anyone's for that matter) faith and morals, nor am I advocating a state religion. In my view, it has always been of tantamount importance for people to freely choose (or reject) their religion, and to choose how much religious beliefs and customs affects their lives. I am merely trying to describe, without moral judgement, what I see happening around us.

Further, Americans don't seem to understand how rare the stability of our government actually is. The US government has remained, with modifications, intact for over 200 years. Very few modern governments can make the same claim. This stability, that Americans take for granted, has led us to overestimate the power of foreign governments and underestimate the power of non-governmental belief systems on foreign countries' populations. This is further reinforced by the Left's Marxist conviction that government can and does dictate human morals and conduct. The idea that religion offers stability in an unstable world is largely lost on Americans, who may mouth a superficial understanding of it, but do not comprehend the eventual effects of the situation on peoples attitudes, beliefs and actions.

American foreign policy has blundered clumsily along for years, adhering to a Cold War policy of purchasing the friendship of foreign governments with foreign aid. Such a policy has been effectively defunct for decades. With the spectre of Soviet communism a thing of the past, and without a competing foreign power to replace it, such payments often stopped being about friendship. More and more this foreign aid became bribes, a paying out of protection money to keep stability. This is an untenable situation, hastened, perhaps, by the rise of radical Islam as a significant, although disorganized and ultimately doomed, political player.

America must rethink both what it hopes to accomplish from its foreign policies, and how to go about to attain these goals. Simply continuing on with the same mind-set that has been in place, with slight variation, for thirty years is futile, expensive, and downright stupid.

For any foreign policy to be effective it must understand the character of the foreign nations with whom it interacts. Likewise, it must understand the reality of the situation, and formulate its possibilities from this knowledge. An effective foreign policy cannot be based around ideological fantasies. As long as policy-makers in the US base their perceptions and policies around "universal truths" based in either American capitalist or American anti-establishment/Marxist ideology, they are doomed to failure. And the consequences for ourselves and our allies around the world are inching toward catastrophic.

Egypt Claims Shark Attacks Could Be Israeli Plot

Several shark attacks have occurred recently in tourist areas off Sinai. Egyptians officials are apparently attempting to confirm that it was the fault of the Israeli Mossad. Yes, they really said that. Someone apparently believes that the Mossad is seeding the oceans with killer sharks.

From The Jerusalem Post article by The Media Line's By Arieh O’Sullivan:

"Egyptian officials say they have not ruled out the possibility that a fatal shark attack in Sinai on Sunday could have been a plot by the Mossad.

"'What is being said about the Mossad throwing the deadly shark [in the sea] to hit tourism in Egypt is not out of the question, but it needs time to confirm,' South Sinai Gov.

"Muhammad Abdel Fadil Shousha was quoted as saying by the Egyptian state news site egynews.net.

"Israeli officials said the claims were too ludicrous to comment on. Israel has issued an advisory warning against travel to Sinai due to plots against Israelis by terrorist groups linked to al-Qaida.

"The fatal shark attack in the Red Sea off the coast of the resort town of Sharm e-Sheikh killed a German tourist, just days after four Russians were mauled by sharks and Egypt declared that the waters were safe.

"Experts said that despite announcements that Egypt had caught the shark, the one actually responsible for the maulings was still on the loose."

Hmm. This is starting to sound like the plot from Jaws-- although I don't recall any of the townspeople claiming that the Israelis were responsible.

More from the article:

"Sunday’s attack happened at Nama Bay when a shark bit off the arm of a snorkling German tourist. The woman reportedly died immediately, reports said.

"The general manager of the Sharm e-Sheikh Marriot Hotel in Nama Bay, Nagy Arafat, told The Media Line that they closed the beaches until further notice.

"'This is something I’ve never seen before. I have never had any sightings of sharks in the area and if we ever did, it was in the deep waters and not up on the beach,' Arafat said.

"He stressed that the mood was 'calm and cool.'

"'We don’t see it affecting the tourism industry in any big way,' Arafat said.

"But Aviv Levy, a shark expert and the curator of the Underwater Observatory Marine Park in Eilat, said the Egyptians usually engaged in 'smoke screening' when it came to shark attacks.

"'Something is very strange here. The Egyptians are trying to hide it,' Levy told The Media Line. 'This is very bad news for the sharks. It was strange after the first attacks last week and now even more so.'

"Egyptian authorities launched a hunt for sharks after four Russian swimmers were mauled at the Red Sea resort last week. Over the weekend, government conservation officials released photos of two captured sharks: an oceanic whitetip and a mako.

"The mayor of Sharm e-Sheikh had announced that the beaches were reopened after authorities deemed that the sharks no longer posed a threat and that it was safe to go back into the waters. The sandy resort at the tip of the Sinai Peninsula is popular with European tourists and attracts over 3 million visitors a year."

Man, this is the plot of Jaws. Multiple shark attacks, a woman killed while swimming, a Mayor under financial pressure from tourism dollars declaring the waters safe when they're not, decoy sharks being caught and displayed... Uh, oh.