Irish Teen Fears Execution in Egypt

WarZ · 06-10-2015 4:07pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Then link.

emmm....are you unable to read?

jesus just read the actual quoted that I quoted. Some people should use their head more

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 4:09pm

WarZ wrote: »

emmm....are you unable to read?

jesus just read the actual quoted that I quoted. Some people should use their head more

:pac:

So that's a no to providing any prof of what is being said. Funny that. There is a report button as well if post are offensive.

WarZ · 06-10-2015 4:10pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

:pac:

So that's a no to providing any prof of what is being said. Funny that. There is a report button as well if post are offensive.

I think this has gone completely over your head.

the 'one page back' is underneath a quoted post that proves exactly what I was saying.

Slow day chief?

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 4:13pm

WarZ wrote: »

I think this has gone completely over your head.

the 'one page back' is underneath a quoted post that proves exactly what I was saying.

Slow day chief?

Depends on loads of stuff the one page back. Including how many post you have selected per page for example. If your on a phone or tablet as well. So why not just link it ? His family Reported he is on hunger strike.

ohnonotgmail · 06-10-2015 4:14pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And that's a good thing. If there's no opportunity to debate people with opposing views, there's never a possibility of either understanding them or changing them.

This is why I generally oppose moderation on controversy or "I think we'll leave it there" grounds. Debates need to be had.

In this case, I'm trying to understand how anyone can side with a military dictatorship which has banned political parties in a manner which the Western world has long recognised as unacceptably repressive, and denied the right to free assembly and protest which the Western world has long recognised as a fundamental human right.

This guy went over there to fight for ideals which Europe and the United States purport to support in repressed nations. For that reason alone we should be opposing his execution or conviction.

Would anyone who is argue against him care to explain exactly what they believe he has done wrong? Is the right to protest not a fundamental human right?

the right to violent protest is not a fundamental right in any country. the ideals he went over to fight for amounted to a dictatorship imposed by Morsi.

WarZ · 06-10-2015 4:17pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Depends on loads of stuff the one page back. Including how many post you have selected per page for example. If your on a phone or tablet as well. So why not just link it ? His family Reported he is on hunger strike.

I still don't think you're getting it mate!

If you actually read the post that I posted you will see I have DIRECTLY quoted one such comment.

I can't make this any clearer for you.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 4:20pm

WarZ wrote: »

I still don't think you're getting it mate!

If you actually read the post that I posted you will see I have DIRECTLY quoted one such comment.

I can't make this any clearer for you.

Yes I have seen it, And I'm asking for one to link post claiming posters where calling for a persons execution. He has apparently been on hunger strike a very very long time.

end of the road · 06-10-2015 5:00pm

323 wrote: »

OK, so this man, (he's not a kid) goes there to stir up trouble and commit violence.

he went to protest

323 wrote: »

Gets caught, and pulls an Irish passport like its some kind of get out of jail free card!

he didn't. he used his irish passport to be deported but then couldn't go because the military were going to kill egyptian citizens left in the mosq once all foreigners left.

323 wrote: »

What right has our government to dictate to the Criminal justice system of another sovereign country?

every right when that country is ruled by a corrupt government, and has a non functioning justice system that doesn't live up to the high standards expected of such justice system.

323 wrote: »

So his day in court has been postponed nine times! Ever consider that this could be because the Egyptian criminal justice system is just massively overrun dealing with tossers like this.

no, it would be something else rather then being over run dealing with protesters.

end of the road · 06-10-2015 5:05pm

Alexis Sanchez wrote: »

I'm amazed people are still defending an Islamic fundamentalist regime that tried to give themselves unlimited powers, while criticizing the military for legally seizing power, as per the Egyptian constitution, because the majority of Egyptians wanted Morsi out, hence the protests preceding the coup.

they were democratically elected. democracy worked. its not as if you actually care about the MB considering you support the military junta who are effectively the same

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:05pm

end of the road wrote: »

he went to protest

he didn't. he used his irish passport to be deported but then couldn't go because the military were going to kill egyptian citizens left in the mosq once all foreigners left.

every right when that country is ruled by a corrupt government, and has a non functioning justice system that doesn't live up to the high standards expected of such justice system.

no, it would be something else rather then being over run dealing with protesters.

That's a blatant lie, the military were actually protecting those inside form the lads whose property they had been burning down in the area. Did one forget the snipers on the roof as well ?

On the second point so we should storm the Dail now as well ? Our legal system is terrible. Loads of human rights abuse here Ireland has been infront of the UN recently.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:05pm

end of the road wrote: »

they were democratically elected. democracy worked. its not as if you actually care about the MB considering you support the military junta who are effectively the same

Is creating a way to rule like a dictator democratic now ?

end of the road · 06-10-2015 5:09pm

323 wrote: »

Funny indeed, how this guy is continuously referred to as a teenager, as if he is a child. In most of the world, even Ireland I believe, he's of an age to be treated as an adult.

So. Regardless of skin color, religion, being an Irish citizen or not, he's therefore responsibility for his own actions.

Rather than wasting consular time on this guy just because he holds an Irish passport. Think it time Ireland should be considering legislation similar to what Denmark is introducing, Denmark to get tough on foreign fighters' 'treason'

treason is an illegitimate redundant charge that belongs back in history. it means nothing and is irrelevant in a modern world. the irish government aren't wasting any time on this irish citizen, any time spent on him is worth everything

end of the road · 06-10-2015 5:10pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

What's that supposed to mean ?

did you not read the post? it says exactly what it says

end of the road · 06-10-2015 5:15pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

None of the going over to protest is true apparently they were on holiday. Protest are fine, Governments tend to not like the whole burning buildings down killing police and military personnel funny that. Snipers were shooting off the top of the building they were caught in. Inciting violence is generally frowned on here as well.

it was the military junta burning down buildings. police and military were killed in self defence once they opened fire on protesters. they deserved to be put down in self defence to protect the freedom of protest. the snipers were military and police snipers. there was no Inciting of violence apart from the government

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:15pm

end of the road wrote: »

treason is an illegitimate redundant charge that belongs back in history. it means nothing and is irrelevant in a modern world. the irish government aren't wasting any time on this irish citizen, any time spent on him is worth everything

We have that here best get off to the Dail to bring down this illegitimate government.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:15pm

end of the road wrote: »

it was the military junta burning down buildings. police and military were killed in self defence once they opened fire on protesters. they deserved to be put down in self defence to protect the freedom of protest. the snipers were military and police snipers. there was no Inciting of violence apart from the government

Link

end of the road · 06-10-2015 5:18pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

That's a blatant lie, the military were actually protecting those inside form the lads whose property they had been burning down in the area. Did one forget the snipers on the roof as well ?

On the second point so we should storm the Dail now as well ? Our legal system is terrible. Loads of human rights abuse here Ireland has been infront of the UN recently.

oits the truth, the military were told by the government to kill all in the mosq once all foreigners were out.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:19pm

end of the road wrote: »

did you not read the post? it says exactly what it says

What is "For the likes of you" supposed to mean exactly.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:19pm

end of the road wrote: »

oits the truth, the military were told by the government to kill all in the mosq once all foreigners were out.

link

hatrickpatrick · 06-10-2015 5:24pm

WarZ wrote: »

It's more just the fact that some of the comments it has been attracting are absolutely disgusting and really reflect badly on the boards.ie community.

But again that's a good thing - it's better to know how people feel about an issue regardless of how repulsive some may find those views. Censorship of opinions breeds not only ignorance, but a false belief that no campaigning or lobbying is needed on whatever that issue might be.

hatrickpatrick · 06-10-2015 5:26pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

None of the going over to protest is true apparently they were on holiday. Protest are fine, Governments tend to not like the whole burning buildings down killing police and military personnel funny that. Snipers were shooting off the top of the building they were caught in. Inciting violence is generally frowned on here as well.

In this case, the army forcefully dispersed peaceful protests and banned a legitimate political organisation. That should be grounds for the West to totally refuse any friendly terms whatsoever with the current Egyptian regime. They do not deserve respect, regardless of their motives for taking power in the first place.

Should we not be cheering ordinary people who are willing to stand up for freedom?

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 5:28pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In this case, the army forcefully dispersed peaceful protests and banned a legitimate political organisation. That should be grounds for the West to totally refuse any friendly terms whatsoever with the current Egyptian regime. They do not deserve respect, regardless of their motives for taking power in the first place.

Should we not be cheering ordinary people who are willing to stand up for freedom?

Yes of course, But rabble rousing and inciting violence is not something we support here. Neither do we support killing people like police army. I would not support violent riots would you ?

ohnonotgmail · 06-10-2015 5:34pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In this case, the army forcefully dispersed peaceful protests and banned a legitimate political organisation. That should be grounds for the West to totally refuse any friendly terms whatsoever with the current Egyptian regime. They do not deserve respect, regardless of their motives for taking power in the first place.

would that be the legitimate political party that tried to suspend the constitution and create a dictatorship? we have different ideas of legitimacy in that case.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Should we not be cheering ordinary people who are willing to stand up for freedom?

they were standing up for the freedom to create a dictatorship. nothing else.

skooterblue2 · 06-10-2015 5:49pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Apparently he is very naive and stupid, even though being an Engineering student.

Correction ...... he never completed his Leaving cert and never got to UCD/Trinity. The Arab spring was in April before he did his leaving cert.
These were aspirations rather than actual facts portrayed in the media.

K.Flyer · 06-10-2015 7:15pm

end of the road wrote: »

oits the truth, the military were told by the government to kill all in the mosq once all foreigners were out.

Is there any reliable documented proof of what you are saying?
Have you seen proof of this on a dependable media?
Can you post a link to it?

The reason I ask this is because I have not seen any mention of this in any of the DofFA statements.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 7:21pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

Is there any reliable documented proof of what you are saying?
Have you seen proof of this on a dependable media?
Can you post a link to it?

The reason I ask this is because I have not seen any mention of this in any of the DofFA statements.

I have only seen it here and in relation to one poster.

emo72 · 06-10-2015 7:26pm

end of the road wrote: »

oits the truth, the military were told by the government to kill all in the mosq once all foreigners were out.

where would it be even possible to get that information? unless you have it first hand.

AlekSmart · 06-10-2015 7:28pm

WarZ wrote: »

Maybe boards.ie should close this thread, there are posters literally cheerleading the execution of a 19 year old Irish citizen. It's a bit of a sick thread and reflects on the boards.ie community very badly in my opinion.

It's only a matter of time before major media outlets pick up on this thread with posters calling for his execution, expressing their sadness he called off his hunger strike and is still alive and labelling Ibrahim and his family everything from being scum to terrorists etc.

It is worth pointing out that Ibrahim Hawalla currently does NOT face charges which carry the Death Penalty (Equally a detail which could well be "picked up on by the mainstream Irish Media).

In choosing to focus upon a few OTT posts concerning ill-will towards Mr Halawa,there is a danger of disregarding those who simply do not find the accounts of this family to ring true.

The arguement appears to boil down to preferences about who governs Egypt.

Ireland recognises the current Egyptian regime as legitimate.

In common with most Western Democracies,Ireland maintains full consular relations with this Egyptian Government.

The Irish Consulate in Cairo has been FULLY engaged with this family since their arrest.

The then Irish Ambassador,Isolde Moylan,brokered a deal which secured the release of ALL of the imprisoned family members,but which was taken up only by the females involved.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/egypt-rules-out-special-treatment-for-irish-teenager-31211355.html

Ms Gendi claimed that the then-Irish ambassador to Egypt, Isolde Moylan, had negotiated safe passage from the mosque for Halawa and his three sisters.

"They should have accepted the safe haven they were offered," said Ms Gendi.

Halawa's sister Somaia (29) confirmed that embassy officials had told them by phone that their safe passage from the mosque had been guaranteed.

In addition,even after the Halawa sisters left their Egyptian home,the Irish Consulate continued to be fully involved with the Egyptian authorities on his behalf.

Mr Hawala's case has been regularly raised at Ministerial level,and also by the Irish President,Micheal D O'Higgins.

In adition to this Governmental attention,Ibrahim Hawala also has a local Legal Team,in addition to the monitors of Amnesty International.

The Hawala sisters,upon their return from Egypt,have mounted a prolonged and strident campaign maintaining their innocence,however,when repeatedly asked for clarification on Video and Aural evidence relating to their roles in the protests,they either failed to respond or removed the elements under discussion.

Continually attempting to portray their involvement in the protests as something which they were drawn unwittingly into,whilst on holiday,has been definitively shown to be innacurate.

Making demands of the Irish State,and accusing both State and sceptical bystanders of racism and xenophobia did little to build upon any latent "support for the underdog" which Ireland supposedly has a reputation for.

Perhaps if the Hawalla's and their supporters displayed somewhat greater transparency in their accounts,it might be possible to accept their criticisms of the current Egyptian Government a tad more readily.

In the meantime,I would suggest a big congratulations to Minister Charlie Flanagan,and his Consular Staff in Cairo,who have gone above and beyond their call of duty for this family.

skooterblue2 · 06-10-2015 7:36pm

AlekSmart wrote: »

Mr Hawala's case has been regularly raised at Ministerial level,and also by the Irish President,Micheal D O'Higgins.

How could it be raised from Ministerial level to Presidential level if the hobbit cannot reach for the file? In an announce ment from Aras an Uchtaran. The President has agreed to pen a strongly worded poem about the Egyptian Government...... that will show them Juntaists..... West side!!!

ohnonotgmail · 06-10-2015 8:01pm

skooterblue2 wrote: »

How could it be raised from Ministerial level to Presidential level if the hobbit cannot reach for the file? In an announce ment from Aras an Uchtaran. The President has agreed to pen a strongly worded poem about the Egyptian Government...... that will show them Juntaists..... West side!!!

Ah now thats a bit harsh on Michael D. He's an idealist. Very much in short supply in irish politics.

Patrick Wheelock · 06-10-2015 8:06pm

War Z wants to shut down debate. Typical left wing tactic espoused by the likes of Hugh McCabe.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 8:07pm

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

War Z wants to shut down debate. Typical left wing tactic espoused by the likes of Hugh McCabe.

Ha I never noticed at all... Oh wait :pac:

KingBrian2 · 06-10-2015 8:21pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yes of course, But rabble rousing and inciting violence is not something we support here. Neither do we support killing people like police army. I would not support violent riots would you ?

Their are laws designed to prevent such actions known as (sedition laws) they really need to be upgraded for the 21st century. Some classes of people have to be removed from the list while those that actually pose a threat to society lets lock them up. The Muslim Brotherhood fits the description of a terrorist organisation to the letter. They actively support overthrowing the gvt, they want to emulate Saudi Arabia and they well known to others to be capable of committing heinous crimes.

end of the road · 06-10-2015 8:23pm

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

War Z wants to shut down debate. Typical left wing tactic espoused by the likes of Hugh McCabe.

its not "typical left wing" anything, as the right are into the old shutting down of debate themselves

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 8:24pm

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Their are laws designed to prevent such actions known as (sedition laws) they really need to be upgraded for the 21st century. Some classes of people have to be removed from the list while those that actually pose a threat to society lets lock them up. The Muslim Brotherhood fits the description of a terrorist organisation to the letter. They actively support overthrowing the gvt, they want to emulate Saudi Arabia and they well known to others to be capable of committing heinous crimes.

Aye most secular Egyptians saw what way it was going and had a rethink of the guy in power. Most wanted nothing to do with hard line religion and beliefs and laws.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 8:26pm

end of the road wrote: »

its not "typical left wing" anything, as the right are into the old shutting down of debate themselves

Has one stormed the Dail yet in relation to Irelands HR issues or Terrible legal system and courts ? or having Treason on the books ? You know as one gave them as Reasons in relation to Egypt.

weldoninhio · 06-10-2015 11:15pm

WarZ wrote: »

I still don't think you're getting it mate!

If you actually read the post that I posted you will see I have DIRECTLY quoted one such comment.

I can't make this any clearer for you.

The person you quoted asked how he was still alive when he went on "hunger strike" months ago. Hardly "cheerleading his execution" is it.

hatrickpatrick · 07-10-2015 12:41am

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yes of course, But rabble rousing and inciting violence is not something we support here. Neither do we support killing people like police army. I would not support violent riots would you ?

If they were against an illegitimate and repressive regime? 100% absolutely. That's how Ireland earned its freedom from a similar regime.

hatrickpatrick · 07-10-2015 12:46am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

would that be the legitimate political party that tried to suspend the constitution and create a dictatorship? we have different ideas of legitimacy in that case.

they were standing up for the freedom to create a dictatorship. nothing else.

It was the military junta who suspended the constitution, not the MB. I agree that the MB were fairly appalling in office which is why I don't necessarily oppose their forced removal from office - provided that they are free to run in any subsequent election so that the people, all of the people, can choose whether or not they want them gone.

Banning a political party, imprisoning its members, and violently crushing protest and dissent is not ok. The military junta should be utterly shunned by every country calling itself a democracy.

hatrickpatrick · 07-10-2015 12:49am

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Aye most secular Egyptians saw what way it was going and had a rethink of the guy in power. Most wanted nothing to do with hard line religion and beliefs and laws.

And if that was the case, then they would have voted against the Brotherhood in an election following Morsi's deposition. We will never know whether this would have happened, because the military junta banned the organisation as an entity, killed a bunch of its members, imprisoned others, and refused to allow any protests about this.

That's not ok in any country which calls itself a democracy. You cannot have the military deciding who is and who is not allowed to run for election - if you do, then the people do not have a proper choice about who to elect.

darkpagandeath · 07-10-2015 1:17am

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And if that was the case, then they would have voted against the Brotherhood in an election following Morsi's deposition. We will never know whether this would have happened, because the military junta banned the organisation as an entity, killed a bunch of its members, imprisoned others, and refused to allow any protests about this.

That's not ok in any country which calls itself a democracy. You cannot have the military deciding who is and who is not allowed to run for election - if you do, then the people do not have a proper choice about who to elect.

Problem is Egypt never was a democracy it's an experiment that failed horribly due to the guy in power wanting to set-up a dictatorship basically. Based on Religion and Religious law.

ohnonotgmail · 07-10-2015 10:01am

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It was the military junta who suspended the constitution, not the MB. I agree that the MB were fairly appalling in office which is why I don't necessarily oppose their forced removal from office - provided that they are free to run in any subsequent election so that the people, all of the people, can choose whether or not they want them gone.

Banning a political party, imprisoning its members, and violently crushing protest and dissent is not ok. The military junta should be utterly shunned by every country calling itself a democracy.

Any political party that tried to impose a dictatorship is not a political party in any legitimate sense. It is a terrorist organisation.

SeanW · 07-10-2015 10:04am

end of the road wrote: »

oits the truth, the military were told by the government to kill all in the mosq once all foreigners were out.

You have the slightest shred of evidence for this?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It was the military junta who suspended the constitution, not the MB. I agree that the MB were fairly appalling in office which is why I don't necessarily oppose their forced removal from office - provided that they are free to run in any subsequent election so that the people, all of the people, can choose whether or not they want them gone.

Banning a political party, imprisoning its members, and violently crushing protest and dissent is not ok. The military junta should be utterly shunned by every country calling itself a democracy.

Would you have said the same if the German military had deposed the Nazis in a coup between 1933 and the start of World War 2? Remember, just like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Nazis won democratic elections, despite their policies being virtually indistinguishable.

If the German military had deposed Adolf Hitler in 1935 and banned the NSDAP, would you have considered this a bad thing?

07-10-2015 1:32pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If they were against an illegitimate and repressive regime? 100% absolutely. That's how Ireland earned its freedom from a similar regime.

Not aimed at the poster.

But the above statement sounds exactly like all those here that were applauding what was happening in Libya just a few years ago. BS romanticized armchair ideals of democracy, being promoted by warmongers. Didn't work out so well.
The military taking over in Egypt is far from an ideal situation but its probably the only thing that prevented Egypt going the way Libya and Syria at present.

end of the road · 07-10-2015 1:33pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Any political party that tried to impose a dictatorship is not a political party in any legitimate sense. It is a terrorist organisation.

you agree then the military junta are a terrorist organisation. good, we are getting somewhere

ohnonotgmail · 07-10-2015 2:15pm

end of the road wrote: »

you agree then the military junta are a terrorist organisation. good, we are getting somewhere

You mean the military that have scheduled elections? :rolleyes:

hatrickpatrick · 08-10-2015 1:20am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You mean the military that have scheduled elections? :rolleyes:

Elections in which the party which won the last election will not be allowed to participate.
Sure, that's incredibly democratic. :rolleyes:

Gringo180 · 08-10-2015 1:25am

SeanW wrote: »

You have the slightest shred of evidence for this?

Would you have said the same if the German military had deposed the Nazis in a coup between 1933 and the start of World War 2? Remember, just like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Nazis won democratic elections, despite their policies being virtually indistinguishable.

If the German military had deposed Adolf Hitler in 1935 and banned the NSDAP, would you have considered this a bad thing?

Isn't hindsight a great thing.....

end of the road · 08-10-2015 1:25am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You mean the military that have scheduled elections? :rolleyes:

elections which are unlikely to happen, so my point still stands

hatrickpatrick · 08-10-2015 1:25am

SeanW wrote: »

Would you have said the same if the German military had deposed the Nazis in a coup between 1933 and the start of World War 2? Remember, just like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Nazis won democratic elections, despite their policies being virtually indistinguishable.

If the German military had deposed Adolf Hitler in 1935 and banned the NSDAP, would you have considered this a bad thing?

Banning the party? Yes. No election can be regarded as democratically legitimate if a popular party is prevented from participating. By all means individuals within a party who commit crimes should be tried and imprisoned for those crimes, and by all means there should be international intervention in cases of crimes against humanity, but actually banning an ideology from being part of the democratic process is by far the worse of two evils. And it only ever leads to trouble, as it has in Egypt.

And you comparison is a little nonsensical to begin with. In what way was Morsi's government comparable to the Nazis?

Again, I don't disagree with him being deposed. I've always believed that a system of recall is essential for a proper democracy, and relatively few countries in the world have anything like that, but for him and his fellow party members to subsequently be banned from participating in the following election was strike one. Violently suppressing people's legitimate right to protest was strike two. Reintroducing a police state including torture, brutality and corruption was strike three.

The Egyptian regime is not and never will be legitimate. Ergo, they should not be afforded one scrap of legitimacy by the West.

Irish Teen Fears Execution in Egypt

Comments