We drink one cup of coffee in morning watching CNN just to educate on latest global banking 1% propaganda so we can then REALLY EDUCATE on what global 1% are hiding with this FAKE NEWS.
CNN as we said has an OLD WORLD global banking freemason CUOMO who, while giving this report told listeners THIS WILL NOT STOP SMART CITIES DRIVERLESS VEHICLES. This policy is PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION and as US public transportation is enfolded into PORT OF BALTIMORE PRIVATE AUTHORITIES promoting only SMART CITIES TECHNOLOGY----UBER and self-driving vehicles will keep MOVING FORWARD. Baltimore is the same test site as this Arizona site---no mention of stopping for public safety here in Baltimore---we have no PUBLIC SAFETY.
The goal of MOVING FORWARD transportation as we said is driverless vehicles that move people within global corporate campuses and transport between campuses eliminating the need for personal cars----for public buses---you know, all of what gives 99% WE THE PEOPLE freedom of movement.
UBER/DRIVERLESS VEHICLES MILLIONS OF SATELLITES CIRCLING EARTH TAKING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF ENERGY TO CONTROL THESE TECHNOLOGY OF MOVEMENT AND POPULATION CONTAINMENT.
There is no need for a RED LINE LIGHT RAIL when the goal is massive global corporate campuses and global factories in East and West Baltimore and Baltimore Co with driverless vehicles the only way to move around....nothing more global corporate PROPRIETARY with no transparency then 'public' transportation tied to SMART TECHNOLOGY.
Here is that ANNE ARUNDEL community college and its AFFINITY GROUP tied to SMART TECHNOLOGY driving the kinds of courses, job training-----all silencing any public discussion AGAINST MOVING FORWARD SMART CITIES
'The Affinity Group and SMART are two organizations that help "connect the dots" between education and Port related jobs and careers'.
Uber self-driving car kills pedestrian in first fatal autonomous crash
by Matt McFarland @mattmcfarland March 19, 2018: 1:40 PM ET
Uber has removed its self-driving cars from the roads following what is believed to be the first fatality involving a fully autonomous car.
A self-driving Uber SUV struck and killed 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg as she walked her bicycle across a street in Tempe, Arizona, Sunday night, according to the Tempe police. The department is investigating the crash.
Rafael Vasquez, a 44-year-old test driver from Uber, was behind the wheel of the Volvo XC90 SUV at the time, the police said.
Based on preliminary information, the car was going approximately 40 mph in a 35 mph zone, according to Tempe Police Detective Lily Duran.
Police say the investigation does not at this time show significant signs of the SUV slowing before the crash. The Maricopa County Attorney's Office will determine whether charges will be filed.
"The vehicle involved is one of Uber's self-driving vehicles," the Tempe police said in a statement. "It was in autonomous mode at the time of the collision, with a vehicle operator behind the wheel."
Autonomous mode means the car is driving on its own. During tests, a person sits behind the wheel as a safeguard.
Uber is conducting tests of autonomous vehicles in Arizona, Pittsburgh, Toronto and other areas. Uber said it has stopped testing the vehicles throughout the United States and Canada.
Uber said it is "fully cooperating" with local officials. "Our hearts go out to the victim's family," Uber said in a statement.
The National Transportation Safety Board said it is launching an investigation.
For self-driving cars, dealing with pedestrians and bicyclists is a challenging task. The self-driving industry has found quicker success with highway driving, which is a less complicated environment.
Uber has previously grounded its vehicles while investigating a crash. In 2017, Uber briefly pulled its vehicles from roads after an Uber self-driving vehicle in Tempe landed on its side.
Arizona is a hotbed of self-driving car development. Earlier this month, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey updated an executive order to allow self-driving cars to drive on state roads without a test driver behind the wheel.
Meanwhile, Waymo, the self-driving arm of Google's parent company, is launching a public self-driving car service this year in the Phoenix, Arizona, area. Companies such as GM's Cruise and Intel are also testing in the state.
Arizona has little inclement weather. This makes it more appealing for self-driving cars, which can struggle in rain or during snowfall.
This isn't the first futuristic car involved in a fatal crash. In 2016, a man driving a Tesla was killed while its autopilot system was activated. But Tesla Autopilot is partially autonomous. A human driver is required to handle much of the driving.
However, Uber's system is designed to fully replace a human driver.
Third world developing nations have CIVILIAN review boards because they have no public sector and they are not CITIZENS.
The US does not need CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS because we have 3 branches of government, strong US Rule of Law, 99% of WE THE PEOPLE elect politicians to represent us---and we the public have the right of oversight and accountability of all public agencies---local, state, and Federal.
When did these CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS for policing especially start being created? During CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA. Who installs these in US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES? Well, below we see OAKLAND------we have them installed in BALTIMORE-----they are installed in NYC-----Hmmmm, wasn't POLICE COMMISSIONER BATTS in all these departments just as US JUSTICE DEPARTMENT released a DECREE OF REFORM? Indeed.
We have shouted these few decades that a Clinton/Bush/Obama US Justice Department wasn't dishing out US 99% justice---it was using FAKE social justice in pretending to help in policing justice while MOVING FORWARD DEEP, DEEP, REALLY DEEP STATE global militarized corporate policing in all US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
CITIZENS OVERSIGHT MODEL------and yet we have watched these few decades as only 5% to the 1% freemason/Greek players find their way to these PUBLIC BOARDS.
'BART Police Citizen Review Board Overview
The BART Police Citizen Review Board shall have the authority to exercise its duties and responsibilities as outlined in the BART Citizen Oversight Model, with regard to law enforcement and police activities or personnel operating under the authority of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District'.
Third world developing nations having no system of government use CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS. These are replacing the strongest in world history US public government 3 branches with checks and balances government.
Civilian Complaint Review Board
- Welcome to NYC.govwww1.nyc.gov/site/ccrb/index.page
Police officers should always treat you with respect. If you want to learn more about the types of misconduct the Civilian Complaint Review Board pursues, or if you ...
Filing a Complaint
The Citizens’ Police Review Board (CPRB) was disbanded on December 15, 2017, pursuant to Section 604, Police Commission, subsection (e)3, Budget and Staffing, of the Charter for the City of Oakland, and the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA) was created in its place.
Oakland City Charter, Section 604(f)(1) states: "The Agency shall receive, review and prioritize all public complaints concerning the alleged misconduct or failure to act of all Department sworn employees, including complaints from Department non-sworn employees. The Agency shall not be required to investigate each public complaint it receives, beyond the initial intake procedure, but shall investigate public complaints involving uses of force, in-custody deaths, profiling based on any of the protected characteristics identified by federal, state or local law, and First Amendment Assemblies. The Agency shall also investigate any other possible misconduct or failure to act of a Department sworn employee, whether or not the subject of a public complaint, as directed by the Commission. The Agency shall forward a copy of each complaint received to the Internal Affairs Division of the Oakland Police Department within one business day of receipt."
The CPRA operates under the direction of the Oakland Police Commission, which was created by Measure LL, and replaces the CPRB which was phased out by that measure.
The CPRA’s website is currently under construction, however, the CPRA will still accept and investigate complaints of police misconduct committed by Oakland Police officers.
You may submit a completed complaint form to our office.
Community Police Review Agency
City of Oakland - Dalziel Building
250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 6302 (Floor 6)
Oakland, CA 94612
Fax: (510) 238-6834
You may also request a complaint form from the CPRA office by calling 510-238-3159 or by downloading a form from the following links:
We are not discussing police brutality or injustice this week ---we are discussing PUBLIC AGENCIES, CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS to hold our public officials and agencies accountable with oversight.
We shouted during the OBAMA era against POLICE BODY CAMERAS because we KNEW this policy was not about justice for the 99% of WE THE PEOPLE---it was always a global militarized police and security corporation policy being used in overseas FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----where PRIVACY LAWS regarding individual citizens' rights to privacy inside their owned-home or business. Overseas there are no laws protecting citizens' privacy----here in US we have 300 years of citizens' rights to privacy in their own home or business.
POLICE BODY CAMERAS WERE ABOUT SKIRTING THOSE US PRIVACY LAWS TIED TO HELPING THE POOR WITH JUSTICE.
This same goal is tied to POLICE REVIEW BOARDS------CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS. There is no intent of these boards helping to protect the poor. The goal is loading these civilian boards with PLAYERS that protect the illegal actions of MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD DEEP, DEEP, REALLY DEEP STATE.
We discussed how in Baltimore media presented a FALSE FLAG news article pretending police cameras were being used to stop corruption in drug and gun planting and home invasion theft of money from Baltimore citizens. We shouted the terms of these cameras---as below we see now police are allowed to turn cameras and sound off for this reason or that reason----and VOILA----there is no 99% WE THE PEOPLE protection from police corruption from these cameras.
The 5% to the 1% pols and players pushing these laws as LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE KNOW the goals are far-right, authoritarian, militaristic repressive. Global banking 1% will MUTE police cameras---they will ERASE footage at will----they will swear there is no footage to protect MOVING FORWARD global militarized police and security trained not to serve and protect the 99%---but to do what they are told.
Why did Sacramento officers who shot Stephon Clark mute their bodycams?
The unanswered questions about the muted cams have stoked suspicion among Clark's family and protesters.by Jon Schuppe / Mar.26.2018 / 6:52 PM ET / Updated Mar.27.2018 / 10:52 AM ET
Police officials in Sacramento, California, boast about their use of body cameras, and the quick release of the footage they capture, as centerpieces of a larger effort to improve the public's trust.
But the fatal shooting by police officers last week of an unarmed black man, Stephon Clark, has exposed a potential flaw in that effort and opened up a new front in the national debate over body cameras: officers' ability to turn off the microphone on the device.
Body cam footage from the two officers who shot Clark in a residential backyard after dark on March 18 includes the chase, one officer shouting "gun" in a mistaken belief that Clark was armed, then the gunfire. It also covers the aftermath, as backup arrives and the officers walk to the street. During their exit, one officer says, "Hey, mute." Then the audio on both cameras goes silent while the video continues to show authorities responding to the scene.
Why the officers muted their body cameras remains unclear. Police Chief Daniel Hahn said last week that he could not explain it. He said there were "various reasons" why officers would turn off their cameras' audio, but he would not say if the Clark shooting was one of them. The muting, he said, would be part of his agency's investigation of the shooting.
The unanswered questions about the muted cams have stoked suspicion among Clark's family and protesters, who have criticized the shooting as an illegal use of force.
"When I heard [about the muted cameras] I felt it was intentional," Sonia Lewis, a cousin of Clark's, said last week. "You're muting something you don't want the public to hear what you're saying, and that means that if you don't want the truth to come out then all of it is a lie."
The family's attorney, Benjamin Crump, plans to file a wrongful-death lawsuit, he told the Daily Beast. Crump said in a statement to NBC News that "we're exploring every legal remedy possible to get justice for Stephon Clark." He also said that Clark's family "feels that the muting of the mics suggests they were up to something nefarious; to them it suggests they were conspiring to be deceitful."
Betty Williams, president of the Sacramento branch of the NAACP, said at a Monday news conference that she had demanded that the police department share its protocol for muting body cams, and consider changes.
The mute function on body cams is a relatively recent development. Axon, the company that makes the cameras used in Sacramento, said its "second generation" cameras are delivered without the mute function active, but it is "provided as an option for the agencies if they want to use it."
Sgt. Vance Chandler, a Sacramento police spokesman, declined on Monday to say why the department decided to activate the mute function on their cameras. He said officers are taught during body-cam training "to utilize mute" in certain situations, but would not say what they were.
"That's part of what we are looking at in this incident," he said. He added, "We want to determine if this was an appropriate time for them to mute it or not."
The city's body-cam policy, which is posted online, does not mention muting at all. It says that officers should record "any enforcement or investigative activity" until that operation has "reasonably concluded." The policy adds that officers may deactivate their cameras under some circumstances, including talking about confidential or tactical matters, or for privacy concerns, as long as the reason is documented afterward
MILITARY DICTATORSHIPS HAVE CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS.
'The request came as an independent review panel prepared to release the results of its investigation into revelations that Maryland State Police operatives posed as activists while conducting surveillance in 2005 and 2006 on war protesters and death penalty opponents, The Washington Post reported Wednesday'.
The US has in modern history policing policy keeping our police from spying and collecting photographs of US 99% of citizens going about the business of CITIZENSHIP ACTIVISM. Police have not been allowed to keep files on what are ordinary PUBLIC AFFINITY groups------and MD was openly MOVING FORWARD with police intimidation as regards these kinds of citizen political meetings.
What did far-right wing global banking 5% pols and players do? They placed police cameras on officers recording and photographing continually every citizen activity complete with photos and ability to send to FILES------all under the guise of protecting 99% WE THE PEOPLE from police corruption.
'NOOR: Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and Councilman Brandon Scott agree the board needs to be revamped, but say this needs to happen with a change in state law in Annapolis'.
RAWLINGS-BLAKE AND BRANDON SCOTT ARE TWO GREAT BIG GLOBAL BANKING 5% PLAYERS PUSHING FOR MORE LAWS JUST TO HAVE OUR PUBLIC OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THIS PUBLIC AGENCY.
Our right wing 99% loving authoritarian structures ---better WAKE UP to what MOVING FORWARD DEEP STATE will look like. Here is our FAKE ALT RIGHT MD ACLU-----tell us this ACLU? US cities deemed FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES policy designed to allow these regions operate independent of any US Rule of Law, US Constitutional right, any Bill of Right----don't you think that is a ACLU GORILLA-IN-THE-ROOM ISSUE?
Md. ACLU seeks state police spy files
Oct. 1, 2008 at 8:32 AMFollow @upi
ANNAPOLIS, Md., Oct. 1 (UPI) --
Dozens of activist groups say they want Maryland authorities to release information on spying activities by the state police.
The request came as an independent review panel prepared to release the results of its investigation into revelations that Maryland State Police operatives posed as activists while conducting surveillance in 2005 and 2006 on war protesters and death penalty opponents, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a freedom of information request on behalf of such groups as Progressive Maryland, which promotes liberal causes, and Defend Life, a Washington-area anti-abortion coalition, the newspaper said. The groups want to see government files to determine if they were among those infiltrated by state police.
The state probe is expected to determine why officers assigned to the state's Division of Homeland Security and Intelligence infiltrated meetings and rallies and if they broke any laws, the Post said.
"The police said they were spying because they were worried about disruptive or violent anti-death penalty protests," ACLU staff attorney David Rocah told the newspaper. "If that worry was the true motive, it could exist with respect to any and all of the groups we are filing for."
'Yet that policy risks encouraging Egypt to become another Pakistan — where an unaccountable military deals directly with Washington, while elected civilians are sidelined'.
MAO'S GREAT LEAP FORWARD is today's global banking 1% MOVING FORWARD with goals of global militarized security and policing with 5% to the 1% candidates for local, state, and Federal office more and more being former military players. Egypt and Pakistan are those MILITARY DICTATORSHIPS where the military generals are those global banking 1% BILLIONAIRES making any civilian elected government MOOT.
We all know the Middle-East ARAB SPRING was global banking civil unrest and we know that Egypt and Pakistan military generals were installed by global banking 1%.
Here in US MOVING FORWARD has goals of installing these same global banking militarized and security structures to SUPERSEDE anything an elected group of officials would do even if they were not 5% TO THE 1% PLAYERS black, white, and brown freemason/Greeks.
MOVING FORWARD IN US CITIES LIKE BALTIMORE-----PRIVATIZATION OF YET ANOTHER PUBLIC AGENCY TO QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES-----CIVILIAN POLICE BOARDS.
The Post's View
A bad decision on Egypt
By Editorial Board March 17, 2012
WHEN HALF a dozen Americans were allowed to leave Egypt on March 1 despite being criminally charged with illegal political activity, the Obama administration insisted that its concern about the case — which it had warned could jeopardize military aid to Egypt — was not limited to the U.S. citizens.
Yet now the administration is considering going forward with military aid to Egypt — even though the criminal case in Cairo proceeds against more than two dozen Egyptians and civil society remains under assault. It’s hard to imagine another move that could do more damage to U.S. interests and the cause of democracy.
The trial is due to resume April 10. The nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), including the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute and Freedom House, have not been registered, and property seized in a December raid against them has not been returned. Some 400 other NGOs in Egypt are under official investigation. More broadly, Egypt’s ruling military council continues to violate basic norms of democracy and human rights.
To provide aid under these circumstances, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton likely would issue a “national security waiver” exempting the administration from a congressional requirement that the State Department certify that Egypt is “implementing policies to protect freedom of expression, association, and religion, and due process of law.”
After a year of turmoil, U.S. relations with Egypt’s political actors — from the military to the secular elite to the ascendant Islamist political parties — are shaky. A waiver would send the wrong message to all of them. It would confirm the widespread suspicion in Cairo that Washington cared only about its own citizens, not the underlying democratic principles in the NGO case. It would tell the military that, provided Americans are not harmed, it is free to persecute peaceful citizen activists and subvert the democratic transition. It would cruelly break faith with those Egyptians who went to work in U.S.-funded democracy and human rights programs and now will face an unjust trial alone.
There is no legitimate national security reason why a decision on military aid cannot be made after July 1, when Egypt should have completed a transition to a new democratic government. That transition should mandate an across-the-board rethinking of aid and a discussion with the new civilian authorities in Cairo about what is appropriate. Administration officials say that they plan such a review and that the purpose of resuming aid now would be to avoid a crisis with the outgoing regime. Yet that policy risks encouraging Egypt to become another Pakistan — where an unaccountable military deals directly with Washington, while elected civilians are sidelined.
Sources suggest that the administration is also worried that a production line of F-16s, which Egypt is using the aid to purchase, might have to shut if aid is suspended. That might be an election-year jobs issue, but it is not a national security issue. The real threat to U.S. security is that the transition in Egypt will end in a disaster: The military will refuse to yield power, or a democratic government will be forced by a popular backlash to rupture relations with the United States. By handing the generals money when they have failed to meet basic democratic tests, the administration would make each of those outcomes more likely.
Here is captured national media selling the idea that CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS are populist protecting US citizens from police corruption when the goal of global banking 1% policy is the OPPOSITE.
Here is GATEWAY PUNDIT------making 99% of WE THE PEOPLE believe this is civil rights in the making-----GATEWAY is of course a term for MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE. Forget that St Louis arch.
US CITIZENS DO NOT FIGHT FOR GLOBAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS FOR GOODNESS SAKE.
We KNOW any citizen or group supporting these quasi-governmental structures are 5% TO THE 1% GLOBAL BANKING POLS AND PLAYERS
Surprise! RIOT BREAKS OUT at St. Louis Civilian Review Board Meeting #Ferguson (VIDEO)
by Jim Hoft January 28, 2015
What a shock.
Tonight a riot broke out at the Civilian Review Board meeting at St. Louis City Hall.
An altercation broke out at St. Louis City Hall during a meeting Thursday to discuss the possibility of creating a civilian review board so citizens could have a more direct line to police.
Witnesses told News 4 the fight began when a woman who was getting ready to leave was pushed aside by the Business Manager of the St. Louis Police Officers Association, Jeff Roorda. Roorda was addressing 18th Ward Alderman Terry Kennedy.
“I was literally just trying to leave the meeting and I got caught in whatever Roorda and Kennedy had going on in their exchange,” said Cachet Currie, the woman who was pushed. “Roorda just jumped out into the aisle, pushed me over, and tried to get to Kennedy. I’m like ‘wait a minute, don’t push me.’ Then he started going off on me, pushing me.”
Roorda called the hearing a “sham” that lacked any type of order. Roorda wore a bracelet that had words “I am Darren Wilson” written on it.
Modern day GENERALS in third world dictatorships-----from MAO/STALIN/HITLER/MUSSOLINI/PINOCHET/Musharraf now MYANMAR generals all have one thing in common------they are billionaires because they work for global banking 1% pushing global naked neo-liberal capitalism. National media always makes it seem these generals are protecting US interests-----but they have always been protecting the global 1% and their corporations.
MOVING FORWARD INSTALLS THESE STRUCTURES IN OUR US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES COMPLETE WITH CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS. FORGET CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC VOICE FOR A US 99% WE THE PEOPLE.
Arab Spring was simply global banking 1% cleaning out those global 2% players allowed to have some power and wealth for a few decades.
MEDIEVAL PRAETORIAN GUARD NO DOUBT
We do not want these quasi-agencies expanding to take every US public agency ====local, state , and Federal.
Hmmmm, looks like far-right wing, authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty LIBERTARIAN MARXISM.
Ambitious men in uniform
The generals who deposed the Muslim Brotherhood are keener on power than they let on. Will Egypt return to military rule?
ONCE reluctant to appear in the media, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt’s top general (pictured), is now very much seeking the limelight, perhaps because he would like to run for president. A recent video of him addressing army officers appeared to be shot for public consumption and duly went viral. His spokesman has said that although the general was not yet standing for office there was nothing to prevent him from so doing if he retired from the army.
Egypt’s press has started comparing Mr Sisi to Gamal Abdul Nasser, the hero-general who eventually became president after deposing the country’s last monarch in 1952. Protesters who helped the army to end the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood last month have plastered the streets with posters of the army chief. Many see him as a font of the dignity and security which they feel Egypt has lacked since Nasser’s time. “It is very clear he is entertaining the idea of the presidency,” says Robert Springborg, an expert in the Egyptian armed forces at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.
In his politics, the general appears to mix nationalism and Islam. He frequently inserts Koranic verses into conversation and is a more pious man than his predecessor, Hussein Tantawi, who was army chief from 1991 to 2012. During part of this time Mr Sisi was a military attaché in Saudi Arabia. He also studied at the US Army War College in Pennsylvania for a year. Sherifa Zuhur, who taught him, says that one of his daughters wore the niqab, the full face veil, and another wore the hijab, covering her hair, but not her face.
Mr Sisi’s image is tainted by the uproar he caused in 2012 when he was the military spy chief and publicly defended members of the army who had subjected female protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square to virginity tests “to protect the girls from rape as well as to protect the soldiers and officers from rape accusations”.
At the war college in America, Mr Sisi expressed a belief that the army must be above politics. Ms Zuhur remembers having the impression that Mr Sisi agreed that Egypt should gradually become a more pluralist state. “But [he] was also cognisant of all the difficulties that entailed for a population which had not ever participated, at that time, in an open election,” she adds.
Until recently, observers saw this opinion as typical of younger and more enlightened officers. The army “displays little interest in governing, wishing instead to protect privileges,” says a 2012 report by the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think-tank. The generals’ experience of governing during the first year after the Arab spring seemed to bolster this preference. Being in charge brought untold difficulties and undermined popular support for the men in uniform.
Still, the generals acquired an appetite for power. They initially considered having Mr Tantawi elected as president—a non-starter. In the 2012 presidential election, won by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Morsi, the army leant towards supporting Ahmed Shafik, a former air-force commander who was runner-up.
Following the election, the generals formed an alliance of sorts with the Muslim Brotherhood. Mr Sisi was appointed defence minister last August and purged the army of dozens of officers closely linked to his unpopular predecessor. He cautioned against interfering in politics, warning that interventions such as that which followed the ousting of Hosni Mubarak in 2011 could turn Egypt into Afghanistan or Somalia.
At the same time Mr Sisi shored up his support in the ranks. He handpicked the members of the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. “Hady”, an ordinary soldier who declined to be named, says that unlike Mr Tantawi, Mr Sisi stressed decent treatment for conscripts. “The ministry of defence became more serious about any complaint from a soldier against an officer,” he says. “The ministry now seriously punishes any officer who is proved to be abusing soldiers.”
However, as the Muslim Brotherhood grabbed more power and simultaneously lost popularity, the generals’ ambitions as well as their interests led them to revise their pledge to stay out of politics. Following last month’s coup, Mr Sisi made himself first deputy prime minister in addition to his post as defence minister. He did also promise to hold elections quickly and appointed Adly Mansour, a judge, as president, but he has done little to suggest a return to the pluralism of the past two years. Scores of Brotherhood leaders have been detained and it looks as if they will be tried. More than 100 of their supporters have been shot by security forces during protests.
The generals’ long-term intentions are hard to make out. Perhaps even they themselves are unsure what they want. Observers see the top brass as surprisingly inept strategists. Yezid Sayigh, a senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center, a think-tank in Beirut, says that the Egyptian army has asserted its right to intervene in the political process. That has set it on course for more intervention. But, unlike the Turkish army, it has no real concept of state-building. “They beat the nationalist drum,” says Mr Sayigh, “they talk about fighting terrorism, but none of this is an agenda, none of this is a policy for reform.”
For inspiration the generals seem to look to Pakistan, where officers feed off a vast business empire and pay lip service to Islam and helping the poor—while in reality they line their own pockets and rule from behind a protective shield with the help of pliable civilian leaders. And if the civilians get uppity, the army simply resets the political clock.
But the Egyptian armed forces are not even as able as their chaotic Pakistani counterparts. They reached their peak military effectiveness in the 1980s when memories of their wars with Israel were still fresh. A 2008 cable from the American embassy in Cairo obtained by WikiLeaks cites analysts and former officers as saying that the armed forces were no longer capable of combat. For evidence, look to the army’s failure to quell an Islamist insurgency in the Sinai peninsula in the past two years.
According to Mr Springborg, the Sinai shows that the army is not equipped for counter-insurgency or peacekeeping—vital roles for a modern army—because neither Mr Mubarak nor General Tantawi wanted that. Instead they have thousands of tanks and 240 F-16 jets that are, he says, “basically useless. The pilots are lousy, too.” The army is the 14th-largest in the world and has a budget of $4.21 billion in 2012. It also has four museums.
The army often treats civilian institutions with disdain and at times thinks it knows better than ordinary Egyptians what is good for the country. When the armed forces build roads, they are referred to as “gifts to the people of Egypt”. In the Nasser era, propaganda murals showed soldiers marching into the future hand in hand with peasants, workers, teachers and intellectuals. Today similar posters show a soldier in combat gear cradling a baby that is meant to represent the people.
In the 1990s other security forces gained ground and seemed to compete with the army. The interior ministry gained more sway over domestic law and order. The army initially regarded the other security forces as a threat but over time inserted its men into their bureaucracies. Since the ousting of the old regime this development has come full circle. The army once again has the upper hand. The current interior minister is a general, Muhammad Ibrahim. He is resurrecting several notorious units dissolved following the Arab spring, including departments dedicated to monitoring “extremism”, religious groups and political parties. He said he would reinstate officials who had been dismissed since 2011. It was interior ministry forces that committed most of the recent deadly attacks against pro-Brotherhood protests. Mr Ibrahim and the army have denied that they used live ammunition, but that is contradicted by video footage.
As a whole, Egypt’s army is far more than a fighting force. Indeed, combat is perhaps its least developed facility. During the three-decade Mubarak era soldiers became involved in civil administration. Senior officers began to crop up everywhere in the state apparatus as well as in the economy. They wielded power not so much explicitly—unlike under Nasser the cabinet was mostly civilian—as by bureaucratic penetration. Officers sat in monitoring and administrative agencies as well as in local government. Since the 1990s, more than half of the regional governors have been drawn from the army. Meanwhile, buoyed by a privatisation programme, the officer corps captured large chunks of the economy. This provided post-retirement careers and financial security.
OMG----SOUNDS JUST LIKE THESE FEW DECADES OF CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA
Today tax holdings amount to a business empire. It generates income that bypasses public scrutiny and ranges from defence manufacturing to consumer goods. Army-owned firms dominate the markets for water, olive oil, cement, construction, hotels and gasoline. Estimates as to their size vary from 8% to as much as 40% of GDP. Army families also inhabit a parallel universe. They mainly live in separate military cities and go to shops, buy fuel at petrol stations and socialise in clubs run by the army. How sure can they be of hanging on to such privileges?
The army relies on support from civilians who are willing to govern alongside it. Without them, the impression of outright military rule would be overwhelming. Following the ousting of the Brothers, political heavyweights such as Mohamed ElBaradei, the former presidential candidate, and Ziad Bahaa el-Din, a lawyer, lent their support. It is too early to tell if they are puppets or wield real influence. But some have already voiced unease. Mr Bahaa el-Din said the new government should not copy the “oppressive and exclusionary policies” of its foes.
Waxing and waning
For the moment, the army remains remarkably popular. A poll in May gave it a 94% approval rating—compared with around 30% for then-President Morsi and the opposition. But Egyptians have short memories. The army was extolled in the wake of the Mubarak uprising as the protector of the revolution, but later came to be seen as working against revolutionary aspirations. A video from December 2011 of soldiers dragging the “blue bra woman” through the streets of Cairo marked a turning point. Today, in the wake of what Egyptians regard as a second revolution, many once again cheer the army regardless of its past abuses. But for how long? Since Mr Mubarak’s fall the army has tried hard to rebrand itself as the people’s friend rather than a protector of the regime. It is more reliant on public support than ever.
Opinions may turn against the army once again if it cannot fix the broken economy. The Brothers, too, were popular when they came to power, only to find that the people expected them to provide jobs and services that never materialised. For the army to do better, it will have to bring about reforms that the Brotherhood and Mr Mubarak shied away from—or get civilians to do so. But that would threaten its own business empire. It is, after all, a beneficiary of Egypt’s restrictive and anti-competitive practices. Mr Sisi may want to sweep these away, but many of his fellow officers are unlikely to see it like that. He could argue that an unshackled and therefore booming economy would benefit all. But lazy rent-seekers will know better. At least that is what Mr Sisi’s predecessors found.