Tonight and yesterday?!

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

Tonight means here what President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi did when he decided the fate of the end of the current presidential term in 2030 and the constitutional interpretations that accompanied it, and the promise to complete what happened in El-Mahrousa is enormous. How will we prepare to fortify the next stage with rational leadership that will sustain the path? At the same time, the President submitted to the House of Representatives a request for authorization to deploy armed forces outside the country to defend the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The application of Article 200 of the Constitution proceeded on its legislative path, despite the majority’s approval of the mandate based on the needs of national and Arab security; The parliamentary minority pushed towards preferring the diplomatic path in order to stop the war and create peace. Yesterday, she brought up her memories of when Iraq occupied Kuwait, and there was an Arab and Egyptian majority with the necessity of Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait and then contributing to the use of force. While the minority took shelter behind diplomacy and an Arab solution to the issue, as Saddam's fingers did not stop pressuring and strangling Kuwait. The aggression contained nothing of Arabism, nor of fraternal relations, but rather of slander and invoking the Palestinian cause and the Israeli occupation as a shield for one of the episodes of Arab rape.

In fact, Saddam Hussein's missiles were arriving and exploding in Israel and Saudi Arabia at the same time, and the Arab solution was not able to prevent the missiles from hitting their sites. He was not able to contribute to saving Kuwait, but the result was setting fire to Kuwait and occupying and destroying Iraq.

What prompted me to restore the analogy is that the Journalists Syndicate, following the transfer of the issue to the House of Representatives, issued a statement calling for upholding the language of dialogue and diplomatic solutions in Arab conflicts, stressing that all Arab blood is forbidden, and that the Israeli occupation is the primary beneficiary of these “disagreements,” while emphasizing Egypt’s historical role in protecting Arab national security. Since I am outside the country, I have not come across any news about the union summoning its members to consider a case of this seriousness because it directly affects Egyptian national security. The signature on the statement came from the Journalists Syndicate and not the Syndicate Council, so it is counted among the council members. Rather, signing this way was contrary to the truth in a political position that ignores the direct threats to Egyptian national security since the attacks of the “Houthis” began, and they are not an Arab country, but rather a rogue political group that rebelled against the Yemeni state, according to the estimates of the United Nations, which gave legitimacy to its owners in Yemen.

Dealing with the bloody facts in this way does not involve any political or journalistic confrontation of one of the most delicate and critical topics affecting Egypt and the Arab nation. Egypt, which, without being harmed by the Houthis, cut off international trade, closed the Bab al-Mandab Strait, and dropped missiles on it, which were mistakenly said to be on their way to Israel, on the cities of “Dahab” and “Nuweiba.” Over a period of time, the Suez Canal stopped working. There are no parties here, no “disagreements,” but rather explicit aggression against Egypt. Followed Tuesday

Quoted from “Al-Masry Al-Youm”