EGYPT ?

[anneasquith]

WATCHING NEWS 24......IS IT TOO EARLY TO SAY " POWER TO THE PEOPLE " ?

[jno]

that would be nice. Less nice if it turns out to be "power to the Muslim Brotherhood" like the revolution in Iran hijacked by hardline Islamists.

[Prudie]

From what I've just heard on R4 more likely to be military rule next (which is even worse) so too early regrettably

[ubasses]

Yes. There could be civil war, extremist may move in and fill the void and all this new freedom could be shortlived

[anneasquith]

it is a very fragile situation. . latest,,,,,,,, he is making a statement 8pm egypt time.,,10pm british time,

[jake-the-peg]

Military rule could be bad or it could be good.

Someone needs to take control until there can be elections - as long as the military keep behaving as well as they have things are promising.

Civil war looks unlikely in this situation there are no strong opposing forces.

It's putting a lot of trust in the Army but then they've had a dictator for 30 years they don't trust Mubarek What's there to lose?

And before anyone starts off about the Muslim brotherhood they should note that they are a non-violent group

[boxtops]

Sounds like they are expecting a statement from the President, any time now.

[DTCwordfan]

wrong way round - Cairo is ahead of us time wise.....

My fear is instability in the area as Yemen and Jordab are restless too - personally I think that the Iranians arre stirring this or a fundamental wing of the Wahibis....

And Israel are not going to hold back if they feel threatened......

instead of the old Chinese adage, "May you live in interesting times" replace it with "May you live in dangerous times."

[anneasquith]

jtp.......i agree re the muslim brotherhood. ive seen interviews, from them and they state they have no wish to be the ruling party in egypt.

[GrumpyPom]

Could this be a case of be careful what you wish for?

[jno]

the Muslim Brotherhood don't need to be violent: others have been doing the rioting for them. There seems no very strong secular leader among the rioters, though: ElBaradei isn't really at the forefront, as far as I can see. That means you may end up with a power vacuum, and the Brotherhood could well be the group with the best organisation to fill it. Or the military could. We'll see.

[anneasquith]

well......he*s not going anywhere until september it would seem ?

[anotheoldgit]

jake-the-peg

/// And before anyone starts off about the Muslim brotherhood they should note that they are a non-violent group ///

The objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood.

/// One citation from the document "General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" makes the objectives of the MB clear: "The process of settlement is a 'Civilization-Jihadist Process' with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

How do they hope to achieve this jake, by peaceful means?

[anotheoldgit]

vibrasphere

Neither have the NF, the BNP or the EDL

But that is not to say we should not be wary of them.

http://tinyurl.com/yjuerol

[jake-the-peg]

There are plenty of links to violence in those three AOG

Got any links to violence for the Muslim Brotherhood?

[R1Geezer]

"links to violence of the Muslim brotherhood" - PMSL, have you been in a cave for the last 10 years jake, 9/11 was sort of violent wouldn't you say? how about 7/7? madrid? Bali? etc etc....

[R1Geezer]

are there any sisters in this brotherhood?

[jno]

Geezer, the Muslim Brotherhood - with a capital B; not just any old Muslim brotherhood - is an Egyptian group. They weren't behind 9/11, 7/7, Bali or anything else.