...Considering the citizenship rights Copts enjoyed in the early-to-mid-20^th century, how did things come to this pass? Much of this reversion can be traced to Mubarak's predecessor, Anwar Sadat, who altered Egypt's Constitution — by adding Article 2, "sharia is the principle source of legislation" — only to be rewarded, ironically, with assassination by the Islamist "Frankenstein monster" he had empowered. Since then, there has been a tacit agreement between the government and the Islamists. As Youssef Ibrahim puts it, the agreement "turned over to Islamists control in media, education, and government administrations in return for allowing Mr. Mubarak's rule to go on unchallenged, setting the stage … for his son, Gamal, to succeed him. As part of the deal, [Mubarak] agreed to feed Egypt's Christians to the growing Islamic beast."

The Copts now find themselves in a dire situation. Magdi Khalil, a human rights activist at the forefront of the "Coptic question," states that "Egypt is on the verge of chaos and change of regime, and there is a plan for Copts to pay the price of this predicted chaos, by directing the surplus violence, hate and barbarism towards them." This redirection onto the Copts is obvious even in subtle things: aside from the habitual anti-Copt indoctrination that goes on in mosques — all of the demonstrations occurred immediately after Friday's mosque prayers. Egypt's state-run public education system also marginalizes, if not ostracizes, the Copts (see, for example, Adel Guindy's "The Talibanization of Education in Egypt.")

More obvious proof of the government's complicity is the fact that, not only has it not prevented or dispersed the increasingly rabid demonstrations against the Copts — the way it viciously and unequivocally does whenever any protests are directed against itself — but Egyptian security, as Magdi Khalil affirmed in a phone conversation, actually facilitates, and sometimes participates, in these mass demonstrations. After all, Islamists who publicly call for the death of the Pope do so, writes Ibrahim Eissa, "knowing quite well that State Security will not touch them, since demonstrations are directed against the Pope and not the President, the Church and not the inheritance issue [Gamal Mubarak as successor of his father]. Those who go out in Jihad against 'inheritance,' democracy and election fraud are beaten mercilessly by security forces, but those who go out to incite sectarian violence between Muslims and Christians believe …that they are the friends and 'buddies' of the police and the State Security."

On Friday, September 24, thousands of Islamists demonstrated in front of Ibrahim Mosque in Alexandria demanding the detainment of Bishop Bishoy and insulting Pope Shenouda and throwing shoes at his photos.

Members of al-Azhar's Islamic Research Council held an emergency meeting led by the institution's head, Grand Imam Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb (right), repudiating Bishop Bishoy's comments and accusing him of provoking sectarian tension.

A "Statement to the Nation" was released by the Council on Saturday, September 25 in which al-Tayeb said "This kind of behavior is irresponsible and threatens national unity at a time when it is vital to protect it." He also warned against repercussions these sorts of statements can have among Muslims in Egypt and abroad.

The Statement went on to say the Council stresses the fact that Egypt is an "Islamic State" according to the text of its Constitution, which represents the social contract between its people. "From this stems the rights of citizenship, as taught to us by the Messenger of Allah in his pact with the Christians of Najran, in which he decided that they were to enjoy rights and duties as the Muslims. However, these rights are conditional to respect for the Islamic Identity and the citizenship rights as set by the Constitution."

Magdy Khalil, head of the Middle East Freedom Forum, issued a press release on September 27, saying the Al-Azhar's "Statement to the Nation" brings us back to the era of Dhimmitude. He thinks this statement, which is addressed to the Islamic nation and Muslims in Egypt and abroad, undermines completely the concept of modern citizenship, replacing it with their perception of an alternative Islamic citizenship, which corresponds to that promoted by various groups of political Islam. "citizenship in the traditions of the Islamic Research Council is conditional to non-Muslims in the Egyptian State by their acceptance of the Islamic State, respecting the Islamic identity and accepting the rule of Sharia," said Khalil, "meaning that the Council has reproduced the unfortunate Dhimmi status as a condition for the Copt to being a citizens in his own country."

He believes the "Statement to the Nation" does not strengthens national unity in Egypt but rather contributes to the increased agitation of the Islamized people, increases the feeling of religious superiority towards the Coptic minority and contributes to the destruction of what remains of the pillars of the civil state.