After reading this article I am perplexed and frustrated with the progression of the Arab Spring outcome. I know there is no conclusion and perhaps there may not be, but with the regime beaten it seems like a free for all leadership. My first insight would simply be; what now of leadership? My second insight is that having the regime leader out of the way and other groups trying to bully their way into control, what of organization? Moving forward what national identity will strengthen the citizens. Not the regime or emergency law. The Brotherhood is not wanted, but military rule seems worse than emergency law. Third insight, what is said of justice if there are court proceedings in the middle of the dessert and defendants are unable to speak, let alone kept in cages. The author kept saying it was like a zoo, but it is a mockery of a justice system. Courtroom was makeshift and inappropriate gesturing is not the way a nation should begin its evolution. 4th insight deals with the interesting relationship the author has with one of the men on trial. This was an interesting in the narration of the article, and very sad to learn about the death of the man’s daughter. 5th and lastly, the protests go one and marches continue. With so many people in discontent and so many interested parties trying to make sense of the revolution, it is difficult to move for forward.
Firstly I find it interesting and scary that these trials needed to be held at The Cairo Police academy away from the capitol and civilization so that the threat of protests or attacks would be negated. With the two former presidents on trial, this seems like the best option especially with the majority of the Egyptian population against these men.
Secondly, the author claims that the courtroom appeared makeshift and described it as being improvised. I feel this is a strong bias because of the use of his descriptive words such as “frontier” and “makeshift”. Personally I feel that the lack of décor and way the courtroom was portrayed made it seem more intense in that the ex-president was on trial.
I also find it interesting how they are trying to show that the revolution of January 25 is less important than that of June 30 and how years from now people will have forgotten the events of January only recognizing the events in June. The article then speculates a third wave of revolutions only with a strong brave leader because many of the previous electoral candidates were imprisoned.
“"We don't control everything on the ground, but what's happening in Sinai, as a response to this military coup, will stop the second Sisi announces that he has stepped back from this coup," Beltagy said. Many Egyptians believed that this statement meant that the Brotherhood was sponsoring terrorism, although there has been no evidence of this and the group has repeatedly condemned such acts. Nevertheless, in December the government officially designated the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.” The argument over whether it is correct to call the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization is very interesting and in depth. Although called a terrorist group by the government, it could be a biased optinion because of suspicion and also because they were supporters of the old regieme.
It’s really interesting how the article talks of a prison break freeing 11 thousand prisoners including the pervious president, Morsi. This seems like such a major event yet this article is the first time I have heard of it. Its also interesting how the article says the descriptions of the event was not all sound and how there was possible conspiracy theory’s in play.
Megan Spiezio-Davis
ReplyDeleteNew Yorker Article
After reading this article I am perplexed and frustrated with the progression of the Arab Spring outcome. I know there is no conclusion and perhaps there may not be, but with the regime beaten it seems like a free for all leadership. My first insight would simply be; what now of leadership?
My second insight is that having the regime leader out of the way and other groups trying to bully their way into control, what of organization? Moving forward what national identity will strengthen the citizens. Not the regime or emergency law. The Brotherhood is not wanted, but military rule seems worse than emergency law.
Third insight, what is said of justice if there are court proceedings in the middle of the dessert and defendants are unable to speak, let alone kept in cages. The author kept saying it was like a zoo, but it is a mockery of a justice system. Courtroom was makeshift and inappropriate gesturing is not the way a nation should begin its evolution.
4th insight deals with the interesting relationship the author has with one of the men on trial. This was an interesting in the narration of the article, and very sad to learn about the death of the man’s daughter.
5th and lastly, the protests go one and marches continue. With so many people in discontent and so many interested parties trying to make sense of the revolution, it is difficult to move for forward.
Firstly I find it interesting and scary that these trials needed to be held at The Cairo Police academy away from the capitol and civilization so that the threat of protests or attacks would be negated. With the two former presidents on trial, this seems like the best option especially with the majority of the Egyptian population against these men.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, the author claims that the courtroom appeared makeshift and described it as being improvised. I feel this is a strong bias because of the use of his descriptive words such as “frontier” and “makeshift”. Personally I feel that the lack of décor and way the courtroom was portrayed made it seem more intense in that the ex-president was on trial.
I also find it interesting how they are trying to show that the revolution of January 25 is less important than that of June 30 and how years from now people will have forgotten the events of January only recognizing the events in June. The article then speculates a third wave of revolutions only with a strong brave leader because many of the previous electoral candidates were imprisoned.
“"We don't control everything on the ground, but what's happening in Sinai, as a response to this military coup, will stop the second Sisi announces that he has stepped back from this coup," Beltagy said. Many Egyptians believed that this statement meant that the Brotherhood was sponsoring terrorism, although there has been no evidence of this and the group has repeatedly condemned such acts. Nevertheless, in December the government officially designated the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.” The argument over whether it is correct to call the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization is very interesting and in depth. Although called a terrorist group by the government, it could be a biased optinion because of suspicion and also because they were supporters of the old regieme.
It’s really interesting how the article talks of a prison break freeing 11 thousand prisoners including the pervious president, Morsi. This seems like such a major event yet this article is the first time I have heard of it. Its also interesting how the article says the descriptions of the event was not all sound and how there was possible conspiracy theory’s in play.