Bloody clashes in Tahrir Square as Egypt tensions mount (AFP)

CAIRO (AFP) – Bloody clashes between protesters and anti-riot police that raged overnight in Cairo's Tahrir Square erupted in new scuffles on Wednesday amid mounting frustration with Egypt's military rulers over the pace of reform.

The health ministry said there were 1,036 injured in the clashes. Those included 120 who were hospitalised and most of whom were later released.

By Wednesday evening calm had been restored in central Cairo as protesters made their way to Tahrir Square-- the epicentre of protests that toppled president Hosni Mubarak-- in response to calls for an open-ended sit-in to push for reforms.

Dozens were arrested in connection with the clashes, including an American and a Briton, state media reported.

A military source said the two were not among 50 protesters who had been referred to the military prosecution earlier on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns called for an "open and inclusive" process in Egypt after talks with Field Marshall Hussein Tantawi, the head of the ruling military council.

Burns said that during talks with officials, he emphasised "American support for an open and inclusive political process in Egypt, the importance of following through on their commitment to lift the emergency law before the elections, the importance of protecting freedom of expression and freedom of assembly."

Hours after bloody overnight clashes, hundreds of angry protesters gathered in front of the interior ministry headquarters in central Cairo, burning tyres and pelting police with stones, a security official said.

Egyptian stocks fell on Wednesday as the clashes raised fears of widespread unrest, with main EGX-30 index closing down 2.03 percent at 5,283.81 points.

Witnesses said the overnight disturbances were some of the most violent in months in the square, which was the focal point of protests that forced veteran president Hosni Mubarak from power in February.

Police fired tear gas and protesters threw stones, amid scenes reminiscent of demonstrations during the uprising.

Protesters accused loyalists of the ousted leader of stirring up the violence after municipal councils they dominated across the country were dissolved by court order on Tuesday.

Activists have called for an open-ended sit-in in the square. The ruling military council warned of a plot to destabilise the country.

The April 6 Movement said a protest to push for democratic reforms that was scheduled for July 8 "will begin today and a sit-in will carry on until there are clear signs that the demands are met."

But the army called on protesters not to give in to "schemes" aimed at sowing chaos.

"The regrettable incidents in Tahrir Square... are designed to destabilise the country and pit the revolutionaries against the police," the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces said.

The clashes "have no reason behind them except to destabilise Egypt's security and stability in accordance with a carefully thought out and organised scheme," the council said.

The interior ministry blamed families of victims killed in the uprising saying some of them stormed a theatre where a memorial service was being held for those who died, which led to clashes with security.

But activists said police beat the families who had been barred from joining the service prompting activists back to the streets.

Nearly 850 people were killed during the popular revolt that brought an end to Mubarak's 30-year rule.

Witnesses told AFP that buses unloaded young men armed with sticks and knives, and accused loyalists of the old regime of stirring up the trouble.

After protests erupted against Mubarak's rule on January 25, the authorities deploying hired thugs in a bid to quell the unrest.

Tuesday's clashes broke out just hours after a Cairo court ordered the dissolution of municipal councils across the country, all of which were dominated by members of Mubarak's now disbanded National Democratic Party.

"I don't think the timing of these clashes is a coincidence," one witness told satellite channel ON TV.

"It came just after the dissolution of the local councils, a decision which I'm sure will make many people (from the old regime) very angry," the witness in Tahrir Square said.

Protesters who first took to the streets to demand the overthrow of Mubarak, have begun to shift their anger to the ruling military council, accusing it of using Mubarak-era tactics to stifle dissent.

Yahoo! News

Sides to square off over Georgia immigration law

Atlanta (CNN) -- Supporters and critics of Georgia's controversial new immigration law faced off in court Monday, but a federal judge said he had not reached a decision in the case.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash Jr. said he hopes to issue a written ruling before July 1, when the law is scheduled to go into effect.

Attorneys representing plaintiffs in the class-action suit asked Thrash to issue a temporary injunction that would stop the law, known as HB 87, while the court considers the case.

"HB 87 is deeply flawed and fundamentally unconstitutional," said Omar Jadwat, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Attorneys representing the state filed a motion to dismiss the case.

"Sometimes the law is harsh, there's no question about that, but that doesn't make it unconstitutional," said Devon Orland, senior assistant attorney general for the state.

Thrash asked numerous questions during the two-hour hearing.

"Don't you concede that this provides local law enforcement with a tremendous amount of discretion?" he asked Orland.

He repeatedly asked about the purpose of the bill and said it could be used to target Hispanics.

"We like the people at the restaurant. Let's not bother the cook or the guy that does the mayor's yardwork. They're a nice family. But we're going to make it so difficult for everybody else they're going to leave," he said.

"Let's not forget, just because we're economically dependent on something unlawful, doesn't change it to being lawful," Orland countered, arguing that the law does not allow racial profiling.

As attorneys made their arguments, a small group of protesters rallied outside the federal courthouse in downtown Atlanta, chanting, "What do we want? Injunction. When do we want it? Now!"

The law, which is aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration, allows police to ask about immigration status when questioning suspects in certain criminal investigations.

It also allows the imposition of prison sentences for people who knowingly transport illegal immigrants during the commission of a crime and says that workers convicted of using fake identification to get jobs could be sentenced to 15 years in prison and fined $250,000.

"Georgia's immigration scheme will undermine federal immigration enforcement priorities by subjecting countless individuals in Georgia to detention," the lawsuit says.

Organizations and individuals who are plaintiffs in the case fear discrimination and racial profiling, according to the suit.

Attorneys representing the state argue that those fears are unfounded.

"Any such fear is purely hypothetical and speculative in light of the clear terms of HB 87 that prohibit unconstitutional racial profiling and require criminal conduct before any verification of immigration status would enter the realm of possibility," says the attorneys' brief supporting their motion to dismiss the case.

The ACLU, the National Immigration Law Center, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Asian Law Caucus are representing plaintiffs in the Georgia lawsuit.

Several organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, have filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the lawsuit. The governments of 12 Latin American countries also filed friend-of-the-court briefs.

"Mexico respectfully submits that, if HB 87 is allowed to take effect, it will have a significant and long-lasting adverse impact on U.S.-Mexico bilateral relations, and on Mexican citizens and other people of Latin American descent present in Georgia," the Mexican government said in its brief.

The Georgia lawsuit is the latest battle in a nationwide skirmish between state and federal officials over who controls immigration enforcement.

Arizona's controversial law aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration catapulted the issue onto the national stage last year, drawing a lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Justice, which argues the law is unconstitutional.

Lawmakers in at least 20 states weighed similar proposals during the past year, according to the National Immigration Forum.

Earlier this month Alabama's governor signed what he billed as tough illegal immigration legislation, requiring police to check the status of anyone they suspect may be in the country illegally when stopped for another reason.

Last month, a federal judge in Utah blocked a strict immigration enforcement law in that state just 24 hours after it went into effect. And the ACLU filed a similar lawsuit against a new Indiana immigration law, also scheduled to go into effect July 1.

In April, a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Justice Department and against Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed Arizona's law last year. Brewer announced last month that the state would appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Earlier this month a spokeswoman for Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal said Georgia's legislation is markedly different from the Arizona law.

"These organizations falsely claim HB 87 is a copycat of Arizona's legislation. It is not," Press Secretary Stephanie Mayfield said.

CNN