Isn't that a problem with the way the constitution is/was drafted as much as Morsi's wish to impose Islamic law on his people? Shouldn't any constitution contain safeguards to prevent any one person having the power (temporary or otherwise) to enact laws unilaterally?

[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/when-is-a-military-coup-not-a-military-coup-when-it-happens-in-egypt-apparently-8688000.htmlRobert Fisk[/url

How long will the next president get? If a few thousand take to the streets a month after the new president is sworn in, will the army step in again? How many protesters does it take, 1,000, 10,000, 1 million.

Seems like the army just have the power to do what they want.

Shambles. He was democratically elected.

See El B's post above. That isn't the issue

Who says he 'went beyond his powers etc'? Is this a fact or is it one army general that decides? What some Egyptians probably thought was unconstitutional others thought was necessary.

Reading through some of his decisions it appears some of his first decisions were to challenge and limit the powers of the generals - no wonder they wanted rid of him. I don't blame him for trying as it's obvious who has the power in that country.

It seems that Egypt is so divided that large swathes of the population will be upset at any one time depending on who is in office. So let the Army show their 'road map' - another election will follow but when the protests begin again, the army will step in again. A true democracy cannot be built in such a way.

I would be surprised if there is any Muslim Brotherhood candidates.

Firstly 300 hundred have been arrested - how many are left?

Secondly why would you bother? Assuming you were elected, as soon as the protests began you would be ousted by the Army and thrown in a cell.

Effectively the Army's influence is going to be twofold.

1. They will control who can stand for election; and

2. They will influence policy and the direction of the country as the next president knows they will be waiting in the wings should they make unpopular decisions.

Unpopular decisions? Have you not read what they tried to do?

Wait...Wait for it...If we're all very quiet and listen very carefully we might just hear the sound of a Wikipedia page opening

Well, yes; which is why I've repeatedly explained that same point myself

Steady on. No need for girlie stuff.



My humour is [ialways[/i funny, but for many, it's just ahead of its time. Oh and I do regularly predict hypothetical future consequences. My bookie's flash motor is a fair measure of my success.

Yes indeed.
I think you've put your finger on it right there.

So, who gets to draw up a constitution?

You've all got it wrong: [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10159983/It-is-capitalism-not-democracy-that-the-Arab-world-needs-most.htmlit's capitalism, not democracy, that Egypt needs now.[/url

The aardvark's a lawyer, isn't he? I reckon he should have a crack at it.

Just don't tell the guinea pigs.

Would the Egyptians appreciate the couple of spoof clauses included for a laugh though?

No offence, Ferocious.

And while I haven't seen any evidence either way suggesting the army was behind the protests, surely democracy is about the [upeople[/u deciding, and if a "democratically-elected" president goes off the deep-end as Morsi appears to have done, surely it's still democratic for the people to say enough is enough and go on the march again?

I may be misinterpreting it and tbh I haven't read up a great deal but although the army are clearly benefitting, are they not just supporting the new popular uprising?

TBH, I haven't been reading that much on it either. But it struck me that this analysis, if nothing else, tells us that the [iTelegraph[/i – or at least this writer – appears to conclude that capitalism is not the same as democracy. Which sounds very different from all the old Cold War rhetoric.

Not only that, but the really important thing is private property ownership, without which you have chaos and terror and violence. Just like in the UK before the entire right-to-buy push in the 1980s.

It also ignores things such as the oil and even tourist industries in Egypt, which rather seem organised as capitalist industries on the basis of what I understand of them.

Now the Army are gunning people down the pro-democracy protesters in the street. Oh dear.

Unfortunately that's what happens when you advance/storm on places where the army are.

Doesn't justify killing innocent demonstrators. There are many ways to quell a protest, indiscriminately firing into a group of people isn't the way to do it.

Are you saying that the protests should have been quelled?
If so, how then should the very large number of people make their objections heard when the elected gives himself absolute power?

Forget it mate, he's already managed to confuse pro-Morsi supporters with pro-democracy supporters

Like you'd know anything about been in fear of your life.

How is that relevant?

It could be one of the contributing factors why rounds were fired.

So really relevant.