As they say, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”  Since 1952 when Nasser ousted King Farouk, Egypt has always been ruled by the military.  Albeit, the head of state usually wore civilian garb, make no mistake, the military was the force behind the man.  And so it remains today and will always remain the force in the background.  Egypt and Turkey are quite similar.  In reality it’s not the type of government that’s at fault, it’s the economy!  Give the masses enough food, affordable goods, housing, sufficient medical care and they wouldn’t care who rules them.  In every uprising, insurrection, revolution, there is always an economic element.  Now take Bahrain——the Emir sensed a disturbance within the people and he immediately ordered that every family or individual, whatever the case may be, would receive a stipend of a little less than $3000.  Needless to say that quenched any potential uprising.

Vocabulary suggestion:  The word “miscegenation” should be dropped because its meaning (coming out of the 18th and 19th centuries) is marked by its prefix “mis-” as in mistake, misinformation, miscarriage etc. It carries inescapable negative implications. It has been promulgated largely by whites with either conscious or unconscious belief in white supremacy.  I haven’t heard the word for years and I hate to hear it now. In fact, we are rather stuck for a less offensive word—indicative, perhaps, of our mutually unconscious unwillingness to accept the situation itself.  Maybe not, but I wouldn’t be surprised.

no constitution, no parliament, military rule… to whom will the ‘golden youth’
turn? - will they manage to expel the IMF? - might that have something to say
about who runs the show?

consider this - http://video.foxnews.com/v/4533175/consensual-coup-in-
egypt/?playlist_id=87937

‘consensual coup’ - ‘nobody knew’ - ‘investigations will ensue’ - smoke and
mirrors par tout

now consider this: http://tarpley.net/world-crisis-radio/