Protest in Black
UPDATE
Sorry, I just saw that Issandr posted below on the same demo. Sorry for all the redundant material - but there are differences between the posts.
________________________
PICTURES:
For pictures of yesterday’s demonstration and meeting at the Journalist Syndicate, go to this album. Feel free to circulate these.
___________________
NDP-supporters and thugs are not very consistent.
Upset at Kifaya-sponsored protests and their opposition to Mubarak (or ‘Mobarak’ as their signs say), they had showed up at the past two protests on the 13th May and 25th May. At those protests they traded insults and eventually attacked Kifaya demonstrators (including women). Yesterday, however, their zealous fever and thuggery was absent as the Egyptian Mothers Association and the White Ribbon Association called for a protest in black. The reason for their absence is likely to do with a lack of orders rather than a lack of enthusiasm.
The protest, held at one of the scenes of the last week’s crime (the Journalist Syndicate), turned out between 500-700 people either dressed in black or in regular clothes with black cloth attached to their shirts. Everyone assembled at the syndicate’s stairs, where al-Amn al-Markazi sealed off and stood two-deep on the other side of the barrier.
Despite that this was the largest of the opposition protests since December (excluding MB protests), the street was kept open to traffic and security officers were keen to keep photographers inside the barrier so that it was difficult to capture a wide angle shot of the sea of black.
Yet, when one ventured outside the security cordon to have a look down the street, plenty of security - including “thugs-on-standby” - were visible. Fortunately, the security figures decided against using their services.
In addition to the increase in numbers, in which I saw new elements of AUC professors/Cairo university professors protesting to supplement the swelling numbers of women, the atmosphere was noticeably different from previous demos.
As people coalesced and hoisted their signs, one could feel the anger bubbling amongst the protesters - particularly from the women. Rather than being a feeling of general discontent, a focused hatred and faces stared down the security in a unsaid taut that dared them to “bring the thugs on”.
The day’s demands were somewhat less focused. Some wanted a public apology from the president. Others wanted victims to press charges against ‘their’ particular group of thugs. The commonality was the call for the resignation of the interior minister, Gen. Habib al-Adly. The reason they gave was because they connect the use of thuggery to his office. Whether this is true or not (I doubt there is a written order to prove such an allegation) seemed inconsequential. The real reason they want al-Adly’s resignation is because of an assault on the dignity of Egypt’s sons & daughters.
Dignity is a funny concept. Impossible to measure and quantify, you felt the deep impact of dignity driving the anger and the harshest criticisms yet forwarded to the regime.
Speaking to activists old and new about their participation, there is a sense that the violence against men and women last Wednesday was simply a bridge too far for most to handle turning apolitical individuals into mobilized opposition. One women I spoke with had not been involved in a protest since 1972. Whether this is the emergence of a new trend or a one-day thing will remain to be seen.
For about an hour, people stood in black under the hot summer sun. Someone brought green, blue, and yellow umbrellas to protect people from the rays. Others feigned the umbrellas in favor of getting into the security’s face with signs of al-Adly which an X crossed over it that read “Make Him Resign”. Others carried sings with pictures of security personnel which read “Try him [in court]“. Another sign read “the dignity of Egyptian women plus the dignity of Egyptian men equals the dignity of the Nation. We will not give up our Nation’s dignity.”
The symbol of Egyptian women was a journalist for the paper al-Geel called Nawal Ali. Nawal had been leaving the syndicate last week after an English class when she was put upon by the rent-a-thugs. She was beaten and her clothes practically ripped off. She lost gold and her mobile in the attack. Nawal, since her humiliating day, turned into a voice of those attacked through her confrontation with the Crimes Editor of Egypt’s largest daily - al-Ahram. The day after the referendum, al-Ahram choose to give the violence light coverage. It appeared in the crime section of the paper on page 26. In the article, editor Ahmad Mosa approved that the article read that lewd women began ripping their own clothes off and blaming NDP-supporters. Nawal Ali was pointed out in this particular article. Had the assault not been bad enough, her dignity and honor were further tarnished publicly. A few days later, Ali appeared on Orbit satellite TV opposite of Mosa to have it out. She demanded an apology and Mosa backed down…kinda. The following day, his crime section printed a two line apology saying it was not Ali but another unnamed disreputable women. Hence it was a half-retraction. For any of you that cannot detect where this is going, it was not enough (mish Kifaya).
Nawal prominently stood on the steps and retold her story to the press in an effort to clear her name. At one point she almost broke down before her fury re-emerged.
After nearly an hour, a journalist syndicate meeting/press conference was held inside the air-conditioned syndicate.
Inside, the syndicate’s secretary-general, Yehia Qallash, and president, Galal Arif, delivered introductory speeches that essentially argued that the syndicate was being active in this matter. They remarked that they were contacting NGOs and gathering testimonies to submit to the public prosecutor. They repeatedly said that the syndicate was a non-partisan bastion of democracy available and open to all people of any political trend. Their profession as journalist brings them together as the conscious of the people. Arif then got about as controversial as he could. He said that a state that uses violence and thuggery in its streets was heading for danger. Among the audience this was seen as an understatement but drew no reaction. Then `Arif made his mistake. He said, “We at the syndicate will continue to work with and cooperate with the state to stop the violence.”
The audience erupted. Journalists rose to their feet screaming at the Arif saying that the violence was state-sponsored. What could he be talking about, they exclaimed. the S-G intervened and tried to hush some of the more vocal participants. This backfired as well. Frustrated one of the audience members asked, “you’re silly. I know you must be from the NDP.” Qallash responded curtly, “Yeah, I am a member of the NDP, whatever you say. And what are you a member of?” Enraged the journalist, who works for the Labor party’s al-Shab newspaper, screamed, ” I am working for justice and God.” Qallash snidely remarked, “It figures.” At this point another journalist rose and told Qannash, “You have no right to prevent him from expressing his opinion. Behave yourself.” There were applause all around.
Nawal Ali then took the microphone and explained that she wanted the resignation of Habib al-Adly. She went on to attack al-Ahram’s Ahmad Mosa by saying that he took her honor and that he was nothing more than the “interior ministry’s representative in the syndicate.” She called for his membership to be revoked in a no-confidence vote. She said that she wanted girls and women behind her. Lastly, she had faith in president Mubarak, who if he knows what happened to one of Egypt’s daughters will surely respond publicly.
Syndicate members took to the floor for question and answer, which mainly turned into people pontificating.
The first gentleman rose and said, “Ustaza Nawal, I can tell you right now - don’t have any faith in the president.” Rapturous applause overtook the auditorium. He continued to say that he was “shocked at what happened to you but we stand with all women who have had this happen throughout the years.” Then he concluded by saying, “and who is this Ahmad Mosa character? I will tell you. He is the same guy who was a tattletale in primary school that would run to the teacher and tell on the other students so he could be the teacher’s pet.” The hall burst into laughter.
Others rose and spoke in order. Continuing the government bashing, one journalist said, “This regime is illegitimate and it is impossible to have a dialogue with it. They are the sponsors of violence and we want an apology.” He was less interested in the interior minister resigning. From his point of view, whether it is some spokes-person from the NDP’s policies secretariat or the interior minister, it is all relative. He argued that these types of people are don’t have any real power because, “it all comes from above”. In this vein, he felt Egyptians need to look for the “root of their problem, not at the branches.”
At this point, Arif interjected and said that they were talking about the state and not the government officials and that the state is higher than the government. Again, this did not go over well.
Mohamad Sayid Idris got up and sensibly argued that what the journalist syndicate needs to do is come up with a unified position like the judges and university professors.
A lefty from al-Arabi newspaper got up and argued that beatings and imprisonments were no longer deterrents. He said the syndicate’s call should not be for al-Adly’s resignation but rather call for the resignation of the president of the republic.
Another member got up and said the syndicate was already infiltrated by thugs. The thugs he spoke of are journalists working for Ahram and Gumhuriya papers.
People were also calling for their to be weekly demonstrations every Wednesday until the government takes its demands over resignations seriously.
___________________
Around this time and seeing that this was going to go on for a while, I left the auditorium and bumped into some friends. I saw Raba Fahmy, who was highlighted on the Arabist. She is doing well but still very pissed off.
Another friend - the former activist - and I were speaking. He was a bit shell-shocked. He said to me, “two years ago, this was unimaginable what they are saying about Mubarak in public”. I agreed that it was quite a change but was unsure of what to make of it.
________________
You know…People connected to the party sponsored thugs to beat up the Kifaya people. In the past week, I cannot tell you how many conversations I have had that concluded that their was a seriously personal element to the beatings of the 25th. Their aggressiveness was rooted in the fact that for months “these Kifaya elements” were talking smack on the president. Those attacking protesters wanted to teach them a lesson for being insolent towards the president. Yet, the repression led to wider appeal and greater discontent towards the state.
Now, the security services and their masters find themselves in another predicament. Do they allow Kifaya and the women organizations to continue to demonstrate and slowly, slowly gain street credibility? Or do they crackdown and risk further polarizing society? Neither is an attractive option from the state’s point of view. I suppose their are other means at the state’s disposal such as law suits, smear campaigns, and whatnot. But the best advice at the moment seems to be to leave its citizens’ dignity out of its plans.
Published by Josh Stacher June 2nd, 2005Categories: Egypt.
9 Responses to “Protest in Black”
- 1 Pingback on Jun 3rd, 2005 at 1:03 am
- 2 Pingback on Mar 26th, 2007 at 1:24 pm











Issandr, thanks very much for this. It’s really fun to read about the syndicate’s debate. Regarding why the interior minister, I don’t think it is because of the thugs (in that case they would call for the resignation of senior NDP people) but because the security forces stood by and watched “on orders.” Also in some cases the security barricaded Kefaya people and others (like the journalists) in small stores with the thugs as if they were trying as hard as possible to get them beat up without doing the actual beating. The security forces ARE directly tied to the minister of Interior. The thugs aren’t.
Whoops, I meant to say, Josh, not Issandr, I got mixed up with the similar post below. Sorry…
Anna,
While I see your point - based off the statement that was passed around yesterday and posted below under “youm al-Iswid” - I think the demonstrators are calling for the resignation of al-Adly by linking the thugs to the attacks rather than your suggestion of the security services failure to protect or act.
Check it out below.
I think the general view is that the hired thugs were simply acting under orders from ’somewhere high up’ in the regime, but being co-ordinated and organized by the police and state security forces. That co-ordination focuses blame quite naturally, in my view, on the Minister of the Interior, since it is pointless to blame either hired criminals, or ’somewhere high up’ - and perhaps a bit daunting in the latter case.
On another note, regarding both Josh’s and Issandr’s comments that there were thugs visible on wed. 1st June, I don’t think that that is quite correct. The picture Issandr posted is of plainclothes ‘mukhbireen’ (undercover low-ranking policemen, used to infiltrate crowds to eavesdrop, nab and rough up specific demonstrators, etc.) who have always been around but are distinct from the ndp-banner-wielding hired thugs. I can’t believe I am saying this but I found the sight of the regular crowd control security we are used to was actually a relief!
BTW I think you can break down the hired thugs into three broad groups. a) Bodybuilders/bodyguards who are often hired by shady businessmen (I wonder how the ndp mps found out about them!
) b) convicts/suspects of violent crimes ‘musgaleen khatar’ - not the first time they are used by security, they were used in large numbers on Friday 21 March 2003, the women who beat up rab3a were from this group; and lastly c) young ’shabaab’ from poor backgrounds used regularly by ndp mps in their pariamentary campaigns to chant for them, and in this case do a bit of groping and kicking.
Lastly (I promise!), I think both Josh and Issandr underestimate the numbers who attended on 1st June, I would put the total number between steps, entrance and conference hall at well over 1500. Kifaya is saying 2000.
Good points Ihab and I love the breakdown of the types of thugs. Very interesting and adds a bit of depth to a group of folks observers (such as me) usually lump together.
As re the numbers, the most I saw in the press yesterday was 1000. The rest said hundreds (sometimes 500). I don’t know. I have not had a math class since high school and thus numbers are not my thing. The hall where the meeting/press conference happened was pretty large and mostly full (how is that for non-exact language?). So I defer to others on the numbers portion of my reporting.
hi josh,
i know this is a bit late..
i saw that u asked for consultation if anyone wanted to use the pics of the vigil, while u didn’t have the same request at the pics from black wednesday.
i used 2 of black wed pics (with refernce to u ) not knowing that u would like to be asked first.
sorry!
if u don’t like me using them, don’t hesitate to tell me.
thanks.
Mohammed,
No it is fine to use the shots, that is what they are for. I am just trying to keep track of where they are. I don’t want or need neo-cons using them to make some useless point on some right-wing blog.
It is more or less just to keep track of things. Go ahead and use away ya habibi.