Sky News cameraman Mick Deane has been shot and killed in Egypt this morning.
Mick had worked for Sky for 15 years, based in Washington and then Jerusalem.
He was part of our team covering the violence in Cairo. The rest of the team are unhurt.
The Head of Sky News John Ryley described Mick as the very best of cameramen, a brilliant journalist and an inspiring mentor to many at Sky.
Sky's foreign affairs editor Tim Marshall called Mick "a friend, brave as a lion but what a heart� what a human being", adding he was "humorous and wise".
Prime Minister David Cameron tweeted: "I am saddened to hear of the death of cameraman Mick Deane, covering Egyptian violence.
"My thoughts are with his family and the Sky News team."
"DrCaleb" said Very sad. There is no need for such actions.
Sure, there is. Because if the islamist militants are allowed to gin up momentum and take control of the government they'll do far worse to everyone else.
And in their brief moment in the sun with Morsi in charge they managed to persecute the Copts and get away with executing approximately 300 known homosexuals and, of course, the Western media gives them a total pass on this stuff and instead presents them as poor victims of the mean old secular military.
"BartSimpson" said Very sad. There is no need for such actions.
Sure, there is. Because if the islamist militants are allowed to gin up momentum and take control of the government they'll do far worse to everyone else.
And in their brief moment in the sun with Morsi in charge they managed to persecute the Copts and get away with executing approximately 300 known homosexuals and, of course, the Western media gives them a total pass on this stuff and instead presents them as poor victims of the mean old secular military.
I don't mean to support the things Morsi supporters or Morsi detractors do; but sending in snipers to put bullets in the heads of people who won't leave the camps isn't the answer either. The military has shown they will not allow Egypt to become an islamist state (that Syria is in danger of becoming).
I just think there was a better way to disperse the crowds other than with gunshots.
I don't mean to support the things Morsi supporters or Morsi detractors do; but sending in snipers to put bullets in the heads of people who won't leave the camps isn't the answer either. The military has shown they will not allow Egypt to become an islamist state (that Syria is in danger of becoming).
And given the examples that have been set in Libya and Syria the military is responding in the correct manner against an adversary that has amply demonstrated their inclinations to wage war.
"DrCaleb" said
I just think there was a better way to disperse the crowds other than with gunshots.
I disagree. Gunshots are damned effective at clearing crowds!
I don't mean to support the things Morsi supporters or Morsi detractors do; but sending in snipers to put bullets in the heads of people who won't leave the camps isn't the answer either. The military has shown they will not allow Egypt to become an islamist state (that Syria is in danger of becoming).
And given the examples that have been set in Libya and Syria the military is responding in the correct manner against an adversary that has amply demonstrated their inclinations to wage war.
I guess I'm just na�ve in thinking that the job of a military is to defend a country, and the job of Police is to defend the rule of law. As such; tear gas, riot police, flashbangs, firehoses, shotguns with beanbags and even claymore style deployed tasers are what you use against civillian crowds. Snipers, not so much.
I recall phycological studies I read; that because Militaries are trained to fight outside enemies, if they are deployed against civillians as law keepers, over time they tend to see the civilians they are charged to protect as 'the enemy' and nothing good comes of it.
I dunno, I'm just a computer geek.
"BartSimpson" said
I just think there was a better way to disperse the crowds other than with gunshots.
I disagree. Gunshots are damned effective at clearing crowds!
Yea, but going all G-20 on them also is effective, without all the adverse international attention.
While the above posters are right about the nastiness of the MB when they were in power, is this really the best way to deal with them? They already had essentially marginalized themselves, now they could be legitimate martyrs after today.
"xerxes" said While the above posters are right about the nastiness of the MB when they were in power, is this really the best way to deal with them? They already had essentially marginalized themselves, now they could be legitimate martyrs after today.
The Muslim Brotherhood has been at war with the Egyptian Government for decades and this latest setback won't stop them in their quest to turn their country into another Iran.
So to say they're marginalized by this latest setback isn't exactly accurate but to say that Egypt has been in and is reverting to the state of civil war again is.
Sky News cameraman Mick Deane has been shot and killed in Egypt this morning.
Mick had worked for Sky for 15 years, based in Washington and then Jerusalem.
He was part of our team covering the violence in Cairo. The rest of the team are unhurt.
The Head of Sky News John Ryley described Mick as the very best of cameramen, a brilliant journalist and an inspiring mentor to many at Sky.
Sky's foreign affairs editor Tim Marshall called Mick "a friend, brave as a lion but what a heart� what a human being", adding he was "humorous and wise".
Prime Minister David Cameron tweeted: "I am saddened to hear of the death of cameraman Mick Deane, covering Egyptian violence.
"My thoughts are with his family and the Sky News team."
Very sad. There is no need for such actions.
Sure, there is. Because if the islamist militants are allowed to gin up momentum and take control of the government they'll do far worse to everyone else.
And in their brief moment in the sun with Morsi in charge they managed to persecute the Copts and get away with executing approximately 300 known homosexuals and, of course, the Western media gives them a total pass on this stuff and instead presents them as poor victims of the mean old secular military.
So you could have that, or you could have those same Morsi fans being chased by the Egyptian Military down the street. Choose.
State of emergency declared.
150 dead.
curfew coming at 7pm.
Very sad. There is no need for such actions.
Sure, there is. Because if the islamist militants are allowed to gin up momentum and take control of the government they'll do far worse to everyone else.
And in their brief moment in the sun with Morsi in charge they managed to persecute the Copts and get away with executing approximately 300 known homosexuals and, of course, the Western media gives them a total pass on this stuff and instead presents them as poor victims of the mean old secular military.
I don't mean to support the things Morsi supporters or Morsi detractors do; but sending in snipers to put bullets in the heads of people who won't leave the camps isn't the answer either. The military has shown they will not allow Egypt to become an islamist state (that Syria is in danger of becoming).
I just think there was a better way to disperse the crowds other than with gunshots.
I don't mean to support the things Morsi supporters or Morsi detractors do; but sending in snipers to put bullets in the heads of people who won't leave the camps isn't the answer either. The military has shown they will not allow Egypt to become an islamist state (that Syria is in danger of becoming).
And given the examples that have been set in Libya and Syria the military is responding in the correct manner against an adversary that has amply demonstrated their inclinations to wage war.
I just think there was a better way to disperse the crowds other than with gunshots.
I disagree. Gunshots are damned effective at clearing crowds!
I don't mean to support the things Morsi supporters or Morsi detractors do; but sending in snipers to put bullets in the heads of people who won't leave the camps isn't the answer either. The military has shown they will not allow Egypt to become an islamist state (that Syria is in danger of becoming).
And given the examples that have been set in Libya and Syria the military is responding in the correct manner against an adversary that has amply demonstrated their inclinations to wage war.
I guess I'm just na�ve in thinking that the job of a military is to defend a country, and the job of Police is to defend the rule of law. As such; tear gas, riot police, flashbangs, firehoses, shotguns with beanbags and even claymore style deployed tasers are what you use against civillian crowds. Snipers, not so much.
I recall phycological studies I read; that because Militaries are trained to fight outside enemies, if they are deployed against civillians as law keepers, over time they tend to see the civilians they are charged to protect as 'the enemy' and nothing good comes of it.
I dunno, I'm just a computer geek.
I just think there was a better way to disperse the crowds other than with gunshots.
I disagree. Gunshots are damned effective at clearing crowds!
Yea, but going all G-20 on them also is effective, without all the adverse international attention.
While the above posters are right about the nastiness of the MB when they were in power, is this really the best way to deal with them? They already had essentially marginalized themselves, now they could be legitimate martyrs after today.
The Muslim Brotherhood has been at war with the Egyptian Government for decades and this latest setback won't stop them in their quest to turn their country into another Iran.
So to say they're marginalized by this latest setback isn't exactly accurate but to say that Egypt has been in and is reverting to the state of civil war again is.