Clashes Erupt in Cairo's Tahrir

Clashes Erupt in Cairo's Tahrir

english.aljazeera.net

The army has intervened in Tahrir Square in Cairo, the Egyptian capital, after dozens of men armed with rocks attacked several hundred pro-reform protesters, in an effort to drive them out of the square.

Officers fired warning shots in the air to break up the two sides and seven people were arrested. The flow of traffic through the square on Wednesday was cut off but has since been restored.

"I saw two people injured in the head, carried away by people," Ahmed Fathy, a witness, said.

Activists said they had caught one man who said he had been paid to attack the protesters.

Follo

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.ibtimes.com
english.aljazeera.net

The question is, in light of continued clashes, violence and (pardon the melodramatic term) microcosmic social chaos, how long do you really think martial law will be in effect for? The country isn't ready for a power vacuum, Suleiman seems to have been identified as a CIA puppet, Muslim Brotherhood are labelled as extremists and there doesn't really seem to be anyone suitable to transfer power to yet.

Indeed, time will tell whether the next party to step up will be a suitable one or not. However, without anyone really looking ready to take the reigns one must assume that the military will continue to hold power indefinitely in light of religious clashes.

If people are being paid to attack the protestors, as one of them claimed, then who would are the ones paying them? Is it the military government? Another article claims that the military arrested 100 men carrying knives and other weapons that were intending to attack the protestors. This article is cited below. Why would they do this if they had paid these people to do so? If it is not the government then perhaps foreign powers?

I think the protesters may be jumping to conclusions or being fed disinformation, but what they are demanding is an end of the 30 year emergency rule and a trial for Hosni Mubarak. Why would foreign powers waste resources trying to quell this? Doesn't seem that reasonable to want to attack these people anyway.

In any case, I can't help feeling that many of the 'pro-democracy' protesters are slightly too idealistic and are focusing on the wrong aims. When they were calling for Mubarak to step down, no one asked 'well what then?', 'erm.. whatever Mubarak out!'. Now that he's out they're focusing on having him tried rather than on how to move Egypt forwards into a democracy, almost as if they're still caught up in the hysteria of being part of a movement. Too many people cling onto the concept of 'Democracy' without even understanding what it is, or how they are going to get there. Most modern democracies are oligarchies in disguise anyway.

Of course it was necessary to force Mubarak out from power in order to break the cycle of oppression and police enforced violence, but time will tell if it was wise to hand power over to the military, or perhaps whether they should have let him stay a bit longer and host proper elections. Where is Egypt headed from here? Martial law has never been an effective form of democracy, nobody even requested that the military take power from Mubarak, they didn't seem to care who did. This is one of the dangers of rhetoric. But maybe, for now it is better than chaos?

Might seem like I'm rambling a bit, does not necessarily reflect my views - just a bit of food for thought..

Edit: Bit more info from this source:Link

"Hundreds of men carrying knives and swords entered Tahrir," the AFP news agency quoted a report on Egypt's state TV as saying.

The TV channel showed footage of hundreds of people involved in a stand-off and throwing stones at each other.

"A group of gangsters attacked us with stones, they seemed to be wanting us to leave the square," Gamal Hussein, one of the pro-democracy protesters, later told Reuters.

Later on Wednesday, army officers were seen removing demonstrators' tents and asking them to leave the square.

Groups of activists have continued to gather in Tahrir Square even after Mr Mubarak's departure. They are demanding a complete break with the Mubarak regime.

Insecurity has been rife across Egypt after police disappeared from the streets of major cities during the mass protests.

On Tuesday, at least 13 people died and 140 were injured in clashes between Muslims and Coptic Christians in Cairo.

Egypt's military, currently governing the country, has struggled to keep control of the situation.

english.aljazeera.net
(visit the link for the full news article)

They are not just attacking protesters, they are abducting people as well: twitter.com...#!/Caravan_AUC/status/45514297476001792

Details emerging in #AUC student's kidnapping. Reports of two white vans used in the abduction #egypt #cairo. We're tracking this info ...

academic.aucegypt.edu...


This all happening all of a sudden after protesters stormed State Security HQs this week, can not be a confidence. The old regime has the ability to mobilize all the bad elements in society to its will, nearly 40,000 of them. Thats the terror they are able to unleash. As the people who have maintained order for 30 years can also as easily create chaos. Also the NDP, mubarak's party was full of a consortium of very wealthy businessmen who own huge corporations; they might be behind all this as well, since they are about tot be put in prison very soon. Heres one of them: en.wikipedia.org...

These attacks are just too well organized to be some random clashes. Foreign media are always very reluctant to make such conclusions for obvious reasons. I would like to find out how these thugs receive their orders, how does it work exactly, and how does the old regime operate in the shadows still?

Although you are not alone in suggesting that the military had something to do with this, they often don't attack the thugs and end up dispersing the protesters with gun fire. It could be a tactic of theirs, the certainly dont like those demonstrations, so that could be their way of stopping it. But to me thats too far out there, I think its the old regime/SS.

The eruption of religious sectarian strife, peaking in yesterday's clashes and killing 13 protesting the burning of a church, may have been instigated by a state security body bent on revenge and counter-revolution...

Mounir Megahd, a spokesperson for Egyptians Against Discrimination, says it’s likely the State Security apparatus has orchestrated the clashes.


"Recent reports released have shown the close ties between the state security apparatus and the Salafist movement,” he adds. “It has been reported that state security has used them to bomb the Two Saints Church in Alexandria (on the first of January).”


This is evidence, he says, that state security has infiltrated the Salafist movement and is using them now in their attempt to foment a counter-revolution.

english.ahram.org.eg...


Interesting about the Salafist part, wonder if this is true. Salafists, never heard much of them, it was always muslim brotherhood in the news so who are these guys and whats their motives.

Yeah the media only offered very limited information about the political spectrum of Egypt, I haven't heard much about them either! The major news stations basically pushed the agenda of 'hey anyone but the Brotherhood'. Most people don't even know all that much about them either. Thing is, a lot of the problems the Egyptians had weren't related to the lack of Democracy - it was the conditions they were living in. If Mubarak was a brilliant ruler and Egypt was a wonderful place to live in under him, why would they have gotten so worked up? There's plenty of examples where benign dictatorship works. But did they really think that Mubarak was running the entire country all alone? Fine, him and his cronies are gone, but the heads of the military seem very very sneaky to be honest.