Square One: A Conspiracy Theory

"It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful to success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order, this lukewarm-ness arising partly from fear of their adversaries, who have the laws in their favor; and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly believe in anything new until they have had actual experience of it. Thus it arises that on every opportunity for attacking the reformer, his opponents do so with the zeal of partisans, the others only defend him halfheartedly, so that between them he runs great danger." ~Niccolo's Machiavelli "The Prince"

I must admit, this article is speculation, in fact, as much as I hate them, this can be called a conspiracy theory, but a lot of it is based on actual events and facts. In other words, the facts are there, but the conclusion is my own. In fact, I apologize in advance and ask you to bear with me if the information seems too fragmented, because my own thoughts on the matter are not really 100% organized, and frankly considering it's a conspiracy theory, I’m not even 100% convinced of it myself, but it's a possibility, and I’d be betraying myself if I didn't put it out there.

After research on what happened to Ukraine post revolution and witnessing recent events in Egypt, I have become increasing suspicious that events are being skewed towards a particular direction that will have disastrous results for Egypt, the initial step being an attempt to revalidate an already invalid constitution with some weak modifications. 

The problems with the constitution are many fold, Mainly in that even with the current amendments, it gives too much power to the next president, whoever he maybe, and does not really include any guarantees that anything will happen.

Some of the Articles in question that should've been amended but weren't include (taken from the Egyptian Government Website):

Article 137: The President of the Republic shall assume executive power and shall exercise it in the manner stipulated in the Constitution.

Article 142: The President of the Republic shall have the right to convoke the Cabinet and to attend its meetings. He shall also preside over the meetings he attends and is entitled to demand reports from the Ministers.

Article 143: The President of the Republic shall appoint the civil and military officials, and the diplomatic representatives and dismiss them in the manner prescribed by the law. He shall also accredit the diplomatic representatives of foreign states.

Article 144: The President of the Republic shall issue the necessary regulations for the implementation of the laws in the manner that would not modify, delay, or exempt them from execution. He shall have the right to vest others with authority to issue them. The law may determine whoever issues the decision requisite for its implementation.

Article 145: The President of the Republic shall issue control regulations.

Article 150: The President of the Republic shall be Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces. He shall have the authority to declare war after the approval of the People’s Assembly.

Article 173: A Supreme Council, presided over by the President of the Republic shall supervise the affairs of the judiciary organizations. The law shall prescribe its formation, it competences and its rules of action. It shall be consulted with regard to the draft laws organizing the affairs of the judiciary organizations.

Article 182: A Council named “The National Defense Council " shall be established and presided over by the President of the Republic. It shall undertake the examination of matters pertaining to the methods ensuring the safety and security of the country. The law shall establish its other competences.

Article 184: Police authority shall be a civil disciplinary body. Its Supreme Chief shall be the President of the Republic. Police Authority shall perform its duty in the service of the people maintain peace and security for the citizens, preserve order, public security and morality, and undertake the implementation of the duties imposed upon it by laws and regulations, in the manner prescribed by the law.

Now as you can see, these articles all give too much power to one man, and yet no one even considered amending them, even in the slightest.

I am loathe to believe that the few amendments made during the past period were anything but a bad joke, considering that most of those "amendments" had already been drafted for years, and would've taken all of five minutes to put in.

Note: Amendment to Article 75: The president must be an Egyptian of at least 40 years of age, have never had another nationality, with two Egyptian parents with no other nationality and have never had another nationality, and must not be married to a non-Egyptian. The amendment reinforces the existing nationality criteria.

This is the one amendment that raised the most questions: Who asked for this amendment? Who demanded it? Why was manpower wasted on it? Why does it reek of discrimination and Nazism ("Purity" Clause)? In fact, the amendment to article 75 directly violates article 40 and article 46 of the constitution, and probably a few other clauses as well. So why was it put in? Specifically why is the amendment more or less EXACTLY similar to the main rule for being a military officer in the Egyptian Army?

Also, why was no time or effort spent on balancing the rights of the presidential powers? Why was there no method of checks and balances included between judicial, executive and legislative powers?

Now I’m going to jump for to a different point, and that is slander campaigns.

It's no secret that Mohamed ElBaradei and Amr Moussa are our best choices for a new Egypt, as they're the only two widely supported secular/liberal leaning candidates, Regardless of what you personally think of them.

Now the question I asked a while back, why are those two in particular being bombarded with ruthless slander campaigns? I'm not defending Moussa here (in fact I’m not really a fan nor do I have any plans to vote for him), but the interview being spread all over about him supporting Mubarak was taken completely out of context, on good personal authority I know that In fact Moussa is one of the main reasons we haven't had Gamal Mubarak as president for the past while, and partially due to the concept pointed out by that interview, it's not an opinion or viewpoint, it's a fact. With Baradei, It's no surprise that the slander about him being the reason the USA invaded Iraq is a complete lie, and in fact he was one of the main reasons the USA wasn't able to get the backing it desired when it came to invading Iraq. Not to mention, some of the documents claimed to have been recovered from the State security buildings by revolutionaries specifically slandered Moussa and Baradei, even though their authenticity has not yet been verified, however if they are somewhat legit (in that they really are SS documents, not in that the information in them is legitimate) why were these documents left behind to be easily found?

Now again I ask, who is behind those slander campaigns and why? Think outside the box, don't think of the typical reasons, but considering the campaigns against both started quite some time before either said they'd officially run. Think for a second outside the box, who is behind those slander campaigns and more importantly why?

Note there have been no strong slander campaigns against Hamdeen Sabahi or Ayman Nour, even though both have officially declared they would run. Why have there been no strong slander campaigns against any of the possible MB (Muslim Brotherhood) candidates?

Going back to amendment 75 on this same line of thinking, has no one wondered why Zueweil (who btw, has expressed interest in running for president on an educational and scientific reform agenda, and before you say "But he said he wouldn't run" of course he wouldn't state it bluntly. Moussa and Baradei denied it at first as well) appeared suddenly, and then suddenly disappeared? Was the amendment to article 75 created specifically to keep him out of the presidential seat? What about the Male bias in the amendment? Is it meant to exclude any possible female candidates?

Why have some of the major NDP (National Democratic Party, The main corrupt party under Mubarak's Regime) players like ElSherif, Sourour or Azmy not been charged with anything? Why are they not being investigated even with strong indications pointing to them being the men behind the recent turmoil in Egypt? Is one of them going to be the NDP backed candidate? Safwat ElSherif already announced that he's starting the "Freedom" political party. Hossam Badrawi (previously a prominent member of the NDP) is starting the "January 25th Party". The Irony is not subtle.

Furthermore, while I have no personal issues against this man, but has no one else recently noticed the subtle media campaign to "polish" Lieutenant-General Sami Hafez Anan? Including murmurs that he was the man that put a stop to the orders given by Mubarak to the Army to shoot protesters? One of the links that attribute to the following is an article (Arabic) that claims that Sami Anan stopped an attempt by the republican guard commander to stage a coup and shoot the protesters, which doesn't make sense because according to my research, the republican Guard is under the control of the Minister of Defense, which was previous Field Marshal Tantawi, and currently under control of Major General Samy Dyab , Both of who Anan is friendly with and currently works with, so how is this possible? Also considering  the "polishing" is it possible Anan could possibly be backed by the NDP?

Now shifting momentarily to something else, the only groups that want the current amendments to pass are the following: The NDP, The Muslim Brotherhood and the Army. Each group states its own reasons, but the reality is the real reasons might not be so straightforward. Each is also using its own scare tactics (Lies that the "1971 constitution will be restored if people vote no" by the NDP, The army hinting that it will enforce marshal law if the amendments don't pass, and the Islamic movements claiming a wide variety of grade A bullcrap.), in fact the army are pushing so hard that they assigned 47 dead judges and 52 overseas judges to oversee the referendum electoral boxes in some places.

The fact remains, that the constitution of 1971 is currently invalid, and any vote of yes will re-validate a draconian disastrous constitution once more. It is no secret that the only two groups that would benefit politically from the amendments passing are the MB and the NDP. 

But the fact also remains that The NDP are buying votes for "Yes" (why is this not illegal yet? or why is the punishment not enforced if it is?) , the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic groups claim voting "Yes" is "Wageb shar3y" (Religious Duty) , Imams in Mosques are calling on people to vote "Yes" to avoid the establishment of a "secular state", with the Muslim Brother hood even claiming that the People advocating for a "No" vote are foreign agents on their website, before quickly retracting their "story" when people noticed and pointed it out. Again mixing religious zealotry and retarded rumors with politics. 

As stated by a trustworthy good friend of mine: 

"regarding how disgusting it is to realize that people are back again to using the religious voice to herd people again like sheep. 

It’s actually disgusting get to know that imam's in mosques are calling for that when they were the same ones (at least the majority) who kept quite during all the riots. I found it really sickening to hear a Friday speech about something that has absolutely nothing to do with the revolution at a time people were asking for their rights. don’t get me wrong I haven’t lost respect for my religion but I did lose a lot of respect to some imam's who feared the regime more than fearing God at time where they should be setting an example for others in being courageous and speaking the truth when all fears for his own. "

And there is more proof of this, as shown in the following two images:

Printed flyer claiming that it's a religious duty to vote Yes to avoid the establishment of a non religious state

Advertisement Printed in ElAhram Newspaper again claiming that voting yes is a religious duty.

Why would the army that claims it's looking out for the wishes of the revolution, push for something that only has support from the biggest Non-democratic movements in Egypt (NDP and Islamic movements)? And if as most people claim, we'll get a new constitution "anyway" why would these groups be campaigning so hard for a "Yes" vote unless they get some benefit from it?

Another thing that seems unrelated but is relevant is the release of Zomor (One of the men responsible for the Assassination of former President Anwar Elsadat). Now I do not "normally" understand this: The man is guilty of high treason (assisting in the assassination of a president), anyone guilty of treason either gets death, or life in prison. Why was he only given 25 years? Why when we still have approximately 20,000 political prisoners does the army take the time to release this man? Why was he put on TV? Why was he portrayed as a hero? Why are people under the impression that Zomor can run for president, when it's well known that a president cannot have a criminal record? Who gave them that idea? There is a disastrous result of his TV interview, that some people now honestly believe the Emergency law "wasn't that bad", some even becoming convinced that the "strong handed tactics used by the regime" were justified if they kept filth like Zomor out of the streets. Was Zomor released to scare people?

While I am not entirely afraid of them, but rather I'm cautiously suspicious of them, Another aspect that seems to concern me, is that the source of the "information" being spread around about the MB aiming for 30-35% of the parliament seats is based on LAST years elections under the Mubarak regime, meaning they can probably pull more if the amendments pass NOW with no corruption, not to mention they're forming a party with a misleading name. It is not at ALL unreasonable to assume that other religious parties will obtain at least 16-21% of the seats if the MB only get the original 30-35% they aimed for last year and not more. That would create a religious coalition that has 51% or more of the seats in parliament. This is mainly possible, ONLY if the referendum passes now, before the liberal opposition have enough time to mobilize. 

And in case no one realized it yet, an MB/Salafi/Islamic majority government would bring Egypt under the Saudi sphere of influence.

Also, Why are the MB being portrayed as Heroes by some people now? They didn't initiate the revolution, they didn't officially take part for day, Hell even the MB claim that they fought off the thugs during the battle of the camels has been disputed by the Football Hooligans known as the "Ultras" That claim they're the ones that fought off the thugs that day.

Also There are three truths people seem to not want to think about or admit, but are absolutely critical:

1- The Egyptian army IS the "Nezam" (System/Regime). The "Nezam" Had a political Arm and a military Arm. All the Military did so far was sacrifice the political arm to save the rest of the system. 

2- The Military had a lot to gain by the old regime, especially considering military factories and businesses constituted at least 20% of all production in Egypt. The wealth of Military leaders has come into question before.

3- People in Egypt are unlikely to revolt again for a long time. They have suffered as a result of the revolution , the economy has been affected, people they know have been hurt or killed...etc The likelihood of them revolting again within the next 50 years, is VERY small and almost negligible. The claim of "the people will just revolt again" is not entirely true, because if they don't revolt again within the next two months, they will not for a very long time.

Now I know this article so far hasn't been the most coherent article ever, and quite confusing, and I apologize,  but I’m approaching my point: All the above factors lead my paranoid mind to think that we have one of two scenarios being aimed at and we're being manipulated into:

1- (What I think is more likely) That we will be left with only two/three viable presidential candidates after the slander campaigns against Moussa and Baradei are complete and successful: An NDP backed Candidate (possibly a military figure such as Lieutenant-General Sami Hafez Anan), an Islamist Candidate, and Lieutenant-General Sami Hafez Anan (or another Military Figure, if not already the NDP supported figure)

2- The Muslim movements take over, Army stages a coup, takes control with world backing and financial support.

Based on scenario number 1, if the Islamist candidate wins (regardless of leanings be they moderate or not), we'll be led to the above scenario 2, and with the Army in control, we'll be back at stage one, it'll be like the revolution never happened.

If the NDP candidate or Army Candidate ( Lieutenant-General Sami Anan or anyone else) wins, there is nothing to stop them from reverting to one man rule with minor "reforms" (see the Ukraine example), and we'll be back at square one, and it'll be like the revolution never happened except for some minor reforms being pushed through.

In any case, the plan seems to include scaring people into submitting their rights (with actions like the release of Zomor), so that in any of the above cases, the people will be so afraid of the alternative, that they'll support the Army or the "System" 100% , regardless of which scenario is followed.

So my point really is at the end, is this the big plan to restore the status quo? Is this the plan to go back to Square one? Conspiracy as it is, and as much as I personally do not believe it fully (even though I wrote it and it's my idea), it's still food for thought. What if we're being kept busy with minor details and problems, while this is what they're really aiming for? I really hope I'm wrong, and I'll assume that I most likely am wrong, But regardless, remember that this is all SPECULATION.

Hope this makes sense, since I’ve been writing in rambling fashion.