Obama Backing ElBaradei?

Franklin Lamb



USA: Mohammad ElBaradei (L), US President Barack Obama (R)According to well-connected Washington sources, including a Congressional staffer whose job description includes following political events in Egypt, once it became evident that Egyptian President Mohammad Mursi might well be ousted by Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed  Forces (SCAF), it did not take Mohammad Mustafa ElBaradei, the Sharia legal  scholar, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, and for 12 years (1997-2009) the Director  General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) very long to  contact the Washington, DC law firm of Patton Boggs. That was this past Tuesday.

The very next day, ElBaradei’s representatives  reportedly also made contact with the Conference of Presidents of Major  American Jewish Organizations which claims to represent the 52 largest  American Jewish groups. ElBaradei, perhaps the current front-runner to  replace his long-time nemesis, Mohammad Mursi, moved fast to organize some key allies in Cairo and Washington to pick-up where his earlier failed  Presidential campaign left off in January 2011.

Patton Boggs, the K Street, NW Washington DC law firm, which last year had  550 lawyers and 120 lobbyists and is arguably the firm closest to the White House and most likely to secure for its clients what they want from the approximately 5000 key dcision makers in the US Capitol. The other nearly  11,800 federally registered lobbyists in Washington (there were only 300 as recently as when Lyndon Johnson was US President) lag far behind Patton Boggs in terms of political influence. Patton Boggs new client wants the Pentagon and the White House to squeeze Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) who deposed President Mursi and arrange for himself to be appointed the interim President of Egypt pending early elections. What ElBaradei’s representatives are reportedly offering the White House in exchange for Obama’s discrete assistance, is that the 1979 Camp David Accord, including all its elements, will be observed. In addition, Egypt under ElBaradei can be expected to toughen its stance on Iran’s nuclear program including publicly adjusting some of his pre-2012 comments on Iran that the White House and Israel criticized as being “soft on the Islamic Republic.” Also being promised by ElBaradei’s agents is that security cooperation between Egypt and Israel will grow stronger. ElBaradei’s objective is to secure Barack Obama’s personal support during his jockeying for the expected forthcoming Egyptian presidential election. Once again the Obama administration was caught by surprise as the “Arab spring,” still in its infancy, increasingly portends ill for Western-installed potentates in all the Sykes-Picot artificially created “countries.”

According to Congressional insiders, Obama reportedly has some doubts. Those following events in Egypt will likely recall his praise of Mursi after the two former University Professors had a chance to sit together and get to know one another. “I like this man,” Obama reportedly told some staff members, “he thinks like me.”

When Mursi was deposed, Obama lamented:

“We are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian armed forces to remove President Mursi and suspend the Egyptian constitution. I now call on the Egyptian military to move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process, and to avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Mursi and his supporters.”

Meanwhile, the SCAF, at the urging of ElBaradei’s team, is paying sweet lip service regarding Obama’s expressed concerns. Shortly before the words were uttered by Minister of defense, Brig. Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the State Department received a copy of the speech with the first paragraph highlighted to assuage Obama:

“The armed forces will not interfere in the realm of politics or governance and will not overstep the role that it is assigned in a democracy, which stems from the desire of the people.” Those words sound good also in Foggy Bottom.

Patton Boggs talking points to the Congress and Obama Administration are that President Mursi had more than a year to show progress to the Egyptian people, with both institutional political legitimacy derived from their election victories, and that he enjoyed strong popular support when he assumed full power from the armed forces in June 2012 but that he failed badly and the new government — hopefully led by ElBaradei — will now act more efficiently to move the country towards credible and legitimate institutions of governance. ElBaradei’s campaign, as reported in the July 4th edition of the New York Times also worked hard to convince the White House of what he called the necessity of forcibly ousting President Mursi, presenting several arguments that included documentation that Mursi had bungled the country’s transition to an inclusive democracy and wasted a year without following thru on any of his pledges. Some Congressional analysts believe that one of Mursi’s biggest mistakes resulted from a deliberate policy of accommodation and not, as is commonly believed, confrontation. He allowed the military to retain its corporate autonomy and remain beyond civilian control. Furthermore, he included in his cabinet a large number of non-Muslim Brotherhood figures who abandoned him within months when the going got tough, thus presenting to the public an image that the government was on the verge of collapse. Some have suggested that Mursi should have brought the military to heel soon after he assumed power and was at the height of his popularity, just as the military was at its lowest point in public perception. Monday morning quarterbacking is now rampant to explain Mursi’s failures. What the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohammad Mursi’s supporters do in the coming days at Tahir Square and across Egypt will likely determine the route and the ultimate success of ElBaradei growing juggernaut. Meanwhile, as of today, it appears that President Barack Obama may well help usher Mohammad ElBaredei into Egypt’s Presidential Palace. If the Obama administration has success there will be joy in Tel Aviv, and at Patton Boggs’ victory party, where a good number of the invited guests will almost certainly be carefully vetted by AIPAC.

Source: Al-Manar Website
06-07-2013 – 17:32 Last updated 06-07-2013 – 17:32 |

Mohammad El Baradei

barad3i copy

The murderer of Iraqi children , the stooge of the World Order , the pet of the UN and of dark Zionist forces who engineered the war on Iraq , the head of the IAEA at the time of the Iraqi war who brought over to Iraq as part of his team the Zionist agents who put on the ground the map of the destruction of the country . One of the main responsible for the Iraqi plight who killed and deformed -in this century- more children than were ever killed and deformed and this due to the report he wrote for the UN on the WMD in Iraq that was confusing enough to give room to different interpretations and permitted the US assault and invasion of Iraq in year 2003. An NGO stooge , former board member until 2012 of the International Crisis Group – ICG- along with Brzezinsky and George Soros of the Open Society Institute which is a very shadowy international organization that meddles with countries’ internal affairs and have an agenda of interference in Syria and other countries . El Baradei is an NGO stooge and pet of the World order member of a major steering group that works for the global elite . A criminal of a high caliber and at a much larger scale than Mursi. The question is : Why Egyptians are doing this to themselves ?

Egypt: What if the President Is Toppled?

Egyptian Islamist groups led by the ruling Muslim Brotherhood take part in a demonstration to mark the upcoming one year anniversary since President Mohamed Morsi was elected, on 21 June 2013 in Cairo. (Photo: AFP -Gianluigi Guercia)

By: Muhammad al-Khouli

Published Wednesday, June 26, 2013

What if the “revolution” planned for June 30 succeeds? Does the opposition have an alternative to the current ruling system? The opposition-aligned political factions have devised several proposals to avoid a repeat of the pitfalls of the January 25 Revolution.

Cairo – Who will be chosen as a replacement? The ruling Muslim Brotherhood is posing this question to Egyptians calling for the overthrow of President Mohamed Mursi on June 30.

“Either me or chaos.”

Deposed President Hosni Mubarak asked the same question. Before stepping down, he famously said, “Either me or chaos.” Oddly, the Brotherhood finds itself uttering these same words as it deploys its supporters throughout every street, village, and province in Egypt.

Yet it seems that opposition political forces have learned their lesson from February 11, when Mubarak stepped down and ordered the armed forces to run the country, after which Egypt went through a transitional period that many politicians described as the worst in the country’s history.

On Saturday, June 22, the opposition forces launched an initiative dubbed “After the [President’s] Departure.” During a two-day conference, experts in all fields deliberated economic affairs, national security, the Sinai, and even the future of the Nile, following the Ethiopian bid to go ahead with the construction of the Grand Renaissance Dam. Their goal: to manage the post-Mursi transition.

The opening session was attended by Dustur Party head Mohamed el-Baradei, Popular Movement founder Hamdeen Sabahi, and a plethora of other opposition leaders. In a speech, Baradei called on Mursi to resign “for the sake of Egypt and a new era.”

Baradei said that the Muslim Brotherhood regime has divided Egypt and taken the country back to the Middle Ages, while Sabahi declared that the Egyptian people would not return to their homes on June 30 until Mursi steps down.

Sabahi stressed that everyone taking part in the June 30 protests will report to the leadership of the “Tamarrud,” or Rebellion, campaign, which must be credited with calling for the ouster of Mursi and his regime.

The conference organizers sought to deliver a clear message to the Egyptian people: “There is a real alternative to the current Brotherhood regime.” More importantly, according to Egyptian opposition party leaders who spoke to Al-Akhbar, the political forces must have a plan for the potential transitional phase.

Hossam Mounis, spokesperson for the Popular Movement, said that an agreement must first be reached among the political and popular forces over a unified vision for the transitional phase. For his part, Mahmoud Alayli, leader in the Free Egyptians Party and the opposition National Salvation Front, said that agreement on the vision is crucial.

Ahmad Eid, a Dustur Party official, said that the majority of opposition forces agreed that the chairperson of the Constitutional Court would take over presidential powers during any transitional period, provided that the post would be “honorary.” Full powers would be given to a government consisting of technocrats led by a figure that has popular approval and the respect of all political forces.

This government’s task would be to supervise security and the economy during the transition, while a committee would be formed to draft a new constitution and prepare laws for presidential and legislative elections.

This scenario proposed by Ahmad Eid is almost identical to the one put forward by the coordination committee for the June 30 protests, and called on all political factions to agree over it.

“After the Departure” also has a legal aspect. One demand is that the president should call early elections. According to legal experts, this would give the president the right to choose his successor, as Mubarak had done by transferring his powers to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF).

In this regard, Counselor Mahmoud Zaki, vice president of the State Council, told Al-Akhbar that there are several legal scenarios in the event the post of president becomes vacant.

If the president steps down, Zaki said, according to Article 153 of the current constitution, the speaker of the parliament takes over presidential powers. As this is not possible since the parliament was dissolved, the powers go to the head of the Shura Council. Currently, that post is occupied by Ahmed Fahmi, a Muslim Brotherhood leader.

Although the Constitutional Court ruled that the Shura Council was invalid, its opinion was the council can continue to function until a new parliament is elected. This would continue to be the case even if the president steps down, and consequently, his powers would be transferred to the head of the Shura Council.

The second scenario, meanwhile, would come into effect if the State Council deems the Constituent Assembly and the referendum on the constitution invalid. This would invalidate the article of the constitution that deals with the powers of the president should he step down, according to Zaki.

Dawoud al-Baz, professor of constitutional law at the University of al-Azhar, gave Al-Akhbar another legal opinion. He said that if the president steps down, his powers would be transferred to the prime minister. Baz noted that if the head of the Shura Council assumes presidential powers then this would be a matter of protocol but not necessarily one that is constitutional.

Otherwise, Baz said, if the president resigns under popular pressure, then a presidential council can be formed, or the head of the Constitutional Court or any other person chosen by the rebels can become president.

In that case, the constitution would go along with the president, and would thus not be a reliable authority.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Fatwa in Egypt Permits Killing Morsi Opponents


Saad al-Katatni, head of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice party, talks during a news conference next to former Egyptian foreign minister Amr Moussa (L) and Egyptian liberal politician Mohamed ElBaradei (R) after a meeting in Cairo, Jan. 31, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Asmaa Waguih)

By: Mohammad Hisham Abeih Translated from As-Safir (Lebanon).

اقرا المقال الأصلي باللغة العربية
The assassination of prominent Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid sent ripples across Egypt. That owes partly to the similar political circumstances in both countries, where Islamists are the ruling majority, but also because the assassination coincided with the issuance of a fatwa by an Al-Azhar cleric sanctioning the killing of National Salvation Front members who oppose the Muslim Brotherhood regime. Prominent among these are Constitution Party leader Mohamed ElBaradei, Popular Current Party head Hamdeen Sabahi and National Congress Party head Amr Moussa.

The cleric who issued the fatwa was Mahmoud Shaaban, who received a doctorate degree from the Faculty of Arabic and Islamic Studies. One of the most famous and controversial television preachers, he appears on the Salafist Al-Hafez satellite channel, which has become very popular over the past year. Shaaban uses frequent obscenities when he speaks about opponents of Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi.

Shaaban said in his fatwa that “what many do not know is that the National Salvation Front and its leadership, which is obviously only seeking power, must be killed according to the law of God.” He cited a hadith which says, “If a man takes an oath of allegiance to a leader, and puts his hand on his hand and does it with the sincerity of his heart, he should obey him as much as possible. If another man comes and contests him, then behead the other one.” He asked the opinion of senior scholars in Al-Azhar about Morsi’s opponents. This appeared to incite killing opponents of the regime.

All parties dissociated themselves from Shaaban’s fatwa. The presidency issued a statement saying that “the promotion and instigation of political violence by some is foreign to Egypt, as is sanctioning killing because of political differences by others who claim to speak in the name of religion. This is terrorism.” The statement added that the presidency “stresses its absolute rejection of hate speech falsely cloaked by religion.”

Egyptian Prime Minister Hesham Kandil said that he is examining ways to bring legal action against anyone who issues or promotes calls for fatwas that incite violence. He condemned “extremist” fatwas.

Members of the Islamic Studies Academy met yesterday [Feb. 7] with Al-Azhar Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb, who issued a statement rejecting the fatwa. He stressed his rejection of what he described as the false and incorrect understanding and use of religious texts. The academy warned that such views open the doors to sedition, chaos, killing and bloodshed. He stated that both killers and those who incite them are accomplices in sin and punishment, in this world and the afterworld. The Islamic Studies Academy urged Egyptians not to listen to such aberrant views, which are rejected by reason.
The al-Nour Party also denounced the fatwa. The party’s spokesperson, Nader Bakkar, demanded that Al-Azhar take a decisive stand against the issuer of the fatwa.

The interior ministry deemed the fatwa a public threat. Its spokesman said yesterday that Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim had ordered security chiefs to intensify patrols and provide 24-hour surveillance around the houses of opposition political figures ElBaradei and Sabahi.

ElBaradei tweeted, “When clerics issue a fatwa sanctioning killing in the name of religion and are not arrested, then bid farewell to the regime and its state.” He added, “How many crimes are being committed in the name of Islam?”

Sabahi chose to respond to the fatwa by participating in demonstrations scheduled to start today against the Brotherhood’s rule, dubbed by the organizers as the “Friday of Dignity.”

For her part, Samar Foda — the daughter of prominent thinker Faraj Foda, who was assassinated in 1992 by Islamic groups at the height of takfiri activity — warned ElBaradei and Sabahi of assassination after the fatwa was issued. She wrote on Facebook: “ElBaradei and Hamdeen: They killed my father after sanctioning his blood through a fatwa. Do not underestimate what is happening and what they are saying. They are sick. They believe that they are protecting Islam.”

Ironically, Abboud al-Zumar — the leader in the Gamaa Islamiya and a former army officer implicated in the murder of former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat — rejected the fatwa, saying that “it is not acceptable to deal with political opponents with arms. This is unacceptable. Whoever resorts to assassination is using weak pretense.”

Shaaban, the issuer of the “deadly fatwa,” did not deny his statements. However, he added that he did not declare the National Salvation Front as infidels, but only called on the judiciary and ruler to apply the Prophet’s hadith. He expressed his willingness to appear before the public prosecutor for investigation. The public prosecutor quickly issued a decision referring a notice submitted by a lawyer to the Supreme State Security Prosecution that accused Shaaban of inciting the killing of opposition figures, which is a routine procedure usually taken by the Attorney General for all notices.
It is the second time a cleric from the Al-Hafez satellite channel has been referred to court. Abdullah Badr was sentenced to one year in prison and a 20,000 pound [$3,000] fine on charges of slandering the artist Elham Shahin. In the same case, a court ordered the suspension of the channel for 30 days. However, the TV owners appealed the decision and were able to continue broadcasting.

Read more:
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!


by Daniel Mabsout,
The revolutions of the NGOs are not revolutions , nor is the revolution of the Ikhwaan a revolution nor is Mursi a revolutionary and never will he be one . Neither Barad’i nor Amru Moussa will ever be revolutionaries , they’re a bunch of reactionary people who fit for museums to figure among fossils , they will make you cry , A revolutionary like Wa’el Ghonim will make you cry also , nominee for Nobel Peace Prize, a sandwich revolutionary from Google . Sheikh Imam did not live to witness the Google Revolution not the Face Book Revolution or the Qatari Revolution of Moza and al Jazeera. The revolutions of the oil Gulf princes . Sheikh Imam did not see all this .

There are plenty of these Revolutions everywhere , Revolutions of Hillary and NATO and of good Egyptian kids who have taken the western world for model and example and whose mind is controlled by Hillary . Good Egyptian kids who will do as they are told and not transgress the limits lady Hillary has set for them . Sheikh Imam did not live to see all this . A revolution lead by ghosts and heading to a ghostly place , Sheikh Imam did not live to see a mediocre president brought to power to rule after millions took to streets and then threatened to be deposited by no less mediocre protesters, by other stooges waiting in line for their turn to come and for the US/Israeli green light to show .

Sheikh Imam did not live to see a Revolution lead by hired stooges , where the peasant and worker and soldier were not present as such . Sheikh Imam did not live to see a revolution that did not close the Israeli embassy , nor retrieved the shameful peace agreements with Israel , nor embraced the Palestinian cause , nor defended the armed Resistance nor opened the border of Rafah .

Sheikh Imam was spared all this , spared the shameful attitude regarding Syria , spared the hosting of the so called Syrian /NATO opposition funded by the corrupt Saudis , he was spared the shameful attitude of the Arab League and spared the shameful affiliation of Egypt to Western agendas , spared to see a masquerade called revolution and a staged event called Spring cooked in the back stages of foreign embassies Sheikh Imam was spared all this , because Sheikh Imam deserved much better than this , deserved the real Revolution he praised and embraced , the real Revolution of the Real Egypt , of the authentic Genuine Egyptians , of the soldier and the worker and the peasant and the poet, of the student and the teacher and the artist , of the struggle against the real enemy, the sworn enemy of the nation . Sheikh Imam deserved much better than this . And Egypt deserves much better than this, than Mursi or Barad’i or Moussa or Ghonim .

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Egyptians React Angrily To Morsi’s New Powers

Thousands of protesters carried banners emblazoned with photos of the January 2011 uprising victims and protested President Mohammed Morsi’s constitutional declaration granting him sweeping powers in Cairo, Friday Nov. 23. (photo by Mohannad Sabry)

By: Mohannad Sabry Posted onFri, Nov 23.

CAIRO — In reaction to President Mohammed Morsi’s stunning constitutional declaration on Thursday night, Nov. 22, thousands of angry demonstrators marched to Cairo’s iconic Tahrir Square in protest of what they described as “a coup on legitimacy.” Thousands were led by Muslim Brotherhood officers to show support at the walls of the presidential palace.

Presidential spokesman Yasser Ali announced on Thursday night that President Morsi had passed a constitutional declaration granting full immunity to the disputed 100-member assembly charged with writing the constitution as well as the remaining Upper House of Egypt’s dissolved parliament, in addition to retiring the general prosecutor and ordering the retrial of Mubarak-era officials, including those acquitted through several trials held in the aftermath of the January 2011 uprising.

The second constitutional declaration passed by Morsi in less than four months in power included the “revolution protection law,” which grants him the power to single-handedly take all “necessary measures to confront any dangers threatening the January 25 revolution, the life and safety of the nation, national unity or standing in the way of state institutions in performing their duties.” Such decisions could not be revised, appealed or revoked by any other authority, including the country’s Supreme Constitutional Court.

A statement signed and published by liberal, democratic and secular parties as well as Egypt’s Popular Current, a coalition of leftist and Nasserite parties, condemned the decision it described as “a complete crime committed by President Mohammed Morsi in the name of a new constitutional declaration.”

“It represents a full coup on the legitimacy that brought him to power and a tyrannical usurping of the state’s authorities. It creates a dictator Egypt has never known, even in the era of Mubarak,” said the statement.

Hamdin Sabahi, Egypt’s popular Nasserite and a 2012 presidential candidate, led a massive march to Tahrir Square on Friday, Nov. 23 along with Mohamed El-Baradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency and founder of the Constitution Party. They signed the statement of condemnation published after an emergency meeting of liberal and secular political powers held immediately after Morsi’s declaration on Thursday night.

“Morsi’s declaration is preparing Egypt for a new era of dictatorship,” said Amira Hafez, a producer at Egypt’s state-owned television channel who joined the anti-Morsi protest on Friday. “But his political ignorance actually united the secular powers against those who are controlled and regularly mobilized to serve the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood and its fellow Islamists.”

Morsi’s assistant for Democratic Transformation Affairs, Samir Morcos, resigned his post in reaction to the declaration.

“I resigned in protest of the constitutional declaration, which I was surprised to hear on television on Thursday night,” Morcos told local press.

Meanwhile, Islamist figures and top Muslim Brotherhood officers cheered the president’s decisions.
“History will remember that such decisions were Allah’s salvation to the revolution and its noble men and the people of Egypt,” said Essam El-Erian, Deputy Chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party. “This will be the end to the dictator, the unjust, the hypocrite and whoever follows them.”

At 3:45 p.m., Morsi addressed the public from a stage erected overnight by members of the Freedom and Justice Party at the walls of the presidential palace in eastern Cairo, the same stage from which Islamist clerics and leading figures of the Muslim Brotherhood cheered the president, called for the application of Islamic Shariah law, and led an all-day attack on those who oppose the declaration.
“I will never be biased against any son of Egypt; I am with all Egyptians, supporters and opposition,” said Morsi, addressing thousands of supporters at the presidential palace while central security forces fired tear gas and birdshot at protesters right off Tahrir Square.

“I am working to accomplish the political and economic stability of Egypt,” said Morsi in defense of his decisions. “The powers of evil and the remnants of the former regime are trying to block our procession. But I will never allow anyone to stand in the way of the revolution’s goals.”

Morsi’s confirmation that “he does not intend sole control over the country,” and that he is physically standing on a Muslim Brotherhood stage but his “heart and brain are all over Egypt,” failed to absorb the rising anger of tear gas-breathing protesters in Tahrir Square.

“The president has divided Egypt into seculars and religious and will lead us to bloody confrontations,” said Maged Atef, a bookstore manager who joined thousands of protesters in Tahrir Square.

“It is shocking to see the president passing a constitutional declaration and putting it above the law by granting it full immunity,” said Atef. “I fear he will be making more tyrannical decisions since he is immune.”

“The public and especially the judicial authorities have to immediately start civil disobedience or else the revolution will be over,” said Atef.
Mohannad Sabry is an Egyptian journalist based in Cairo. Follow him on twitter@mmsabry.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

IAEA: “Iran is a ‘peace-seeking’ state”

It seems, the secretary-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the nuclear ‘Watchdog’ has turned into an Israel-hater. On Friday, Yukiya Amano accompanied by his deputy director-general Herman Nackaerts attended the 33rd birthday party of 1979 victory of Islamic Revolution at Iran’s embassy in Vienna (Austria). At the event, Amano hailed Islamic Iran as a “peace-seeking” state.
Some US-Iran observers consider participation of two top IAEA officials in the party and Amano’s praise of Iran as a slap on USrael face for lying about Tehran’s nuclear program. A welknown Jewish columnist, M.J. Rosenberg, a former director of policy at Israel Policy Forum, wrote that powerful Israel Lobby (AIPAC) is pushing Barack Obama to attack Iran immediately or let the Zionist regime do it. The later scenario is bound to pull America into war on Israel’s side within a few days once Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas retaliate.

Yukiya Amano is no friend of Islamic Republic or any Muslim state which is not ‘friendly’ to Israel for that matter. The 2009 US diplomatic cable released by the Wikileaks, says that though Yukiya Amano works for all world nations, he serves only the US imperialist agenda especially in case of the Islamic Republic.

Last year, Former IAEA director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient who spent 12 years at the IAEA, told the US Jewish investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, “I have not seen a shred of evidence that Iran is building nuclear-weapons facilities and using enriched materials“.
On June 9, 2011 – six former ambassadors to Iran, Richard Dalton (US), Paul von Maltzahn (Germany), Steen Hohwü-Christensen (Sweden), Guillaume Metten (Belgium), François Nicoullaud (France) and Roberto Toscano (Italy) wrote in daily Guardian – confirming that there is no evidence Islamic Republic is building a nuclear bomb and that Tehran is complying with international law.
On January 9, 2012 the IAEA Watchdog agency’s spokesperson, Gill Tudor confirmed that Iran’s underground enrichment facility near Qom remains under the Agency’s containment and surveillance.
If one follows Washington’s past record in the so-called “rapprochement” with Tehran – he will find that Washington always deceived Tehran. For example, in 1989, George Bush Sr. sought then Iranian President Ayatullah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani’s help to secure the release of western hostages in Lebanon. Washington agreed to unfreeze and return over $14 billion that were held in the US since the fall of its puppet King Reza Shah in Tehran. Tehran also demanded that Washington get some of Lebanese hostages released from Israeli jails. Even against Rahbar Ayatullah Ali Khamenie’s advice – Rafsanjani decided to trust Bush. However, once western hostages in Lebanon were released – Washington neither released Iranian assets nor faciliated release of Lebanese hostages.

After September 11, 2001 – Tehran helped the US to set-up military alliance with the Afghan Northern Alliance to oust Taliban from Kabul, Kandhar and Mazar-e-Sharif. During 2002-2005 period, Tehran cooperated with IAEA – even some of later demands which were against Iran’s rights as a signatory of NPT. However, every time Tehran fulfilled Western demands concerning its nuclear program – under USraeli pressure the IAEA, US and EU countries simply fabricated new set of demands for the benefit of the Zionist entity.

Iran’s ‘moderate’ President Ayatullah Mohammad Khatami made several political and religious overtures to the West, but received no fair response from the US or the EU. Iran also used its influence over Muqtada Sadr and other Shia leaders to cooperate with US occupation authorities in Iraq.
Iranian leadership has reached to the conclusion that as long as the country maintains its policy of supporting resistance groups (both Muslims and Christians) in the Muslim East, Washington cannot afford to have peace with Tehran due to powerful domestic Israel Lobby.

Iran’s Spiritual Leader Ayatullah Ali Khameini has warned successive US governments that Iran will never follow Washington’s dictation being the sole superpower. In his words the only way to resolve US-Iran differences, is to discuss the issues as equal parners. He told George Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama that bullying and sanctions will never force Iranian people to submit to USraeli domination of the Muslim East.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya who is in Tehran to attend the 33rd anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution – reaffirmed on February 11 that “Palestinian nation will confront and stand against the US and Zionist regime’s threats against Iran“.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Egypt: US-funded Agitators on Trial

US “Democracy promotion” = foreign-funded sedition

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

AP reported that US General Martin Dempsey has met directly with the military leaders of Egypt to discuss an Egyptian “crackdown on Western-funded pro-democracy groups.” Threatened with a cut-off from US aid, the Egyptian military is expected to abandon their campaign against US “NGOs.”

As usual, AP attempts to diminish the veracity of Egypt’s concerns with deceptive language and innuendos such as, “Egypt, which regularly blames anti-military protests on foreign meddling,” and “in an indication that authorities will continue to push the line that foreigners are stirring up trouble.” Of course it is not a “line” that the Egyptian government is pushing, it is a well documented fact.

Images: From Tunis and Tahrir Square to the Oval Office shaking hands with the US President and receiving the NED 2011 “Democracy Award,” the forces behind the “Arab Spring” not only weren’t spontaneous nor indigenous, but they most certainly were orchestrated, funded, directed, and finally celebrated and well-rewarded by the US State Department through their National Endowment for Democracy. Egypt’s crackdown on these disingenuous NGOs is long overdue and an example for all nations to follow. http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-1897954795849722&output=html&h=60&slotname=8230781418&w=468&lmt=1329043934&ea=0&flash=


AP goes on to explain the plight of the International Republican Institute (IRI) Egypt office-head, Sam LaHood, son of US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who is now on trail amongst 16 American “civil society employees.” They are charged with using US State Department funds to fuel unrest throughout Egypt.

Despite the feigned skepticism of AP, there is conclusive evidence that from 2008, the US State Department had begun a concerted effort to recruit, train, equip, fund, and in some cases arm, dissidents not only from Egypt, but from Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Iran, Russia, Belarus, Myanmar, Malaysia, Thailand, and even North Korea. This was accomplished not only through the US State Department, but through a myriad of subsidiaries starting with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and including LaHood’s IRI.

Far from Egyptian Paranoia – Documented US Meddling in Egypt

In January of 2011, we were told that “spontaneous,” “indigenous” uprising had begun sweeping North Africa and the Middle East, including Hosni Mubarak’s Egypt, in what was hailed as the “Arab Spring.” It would be almost four months before the corporate-media would admit that the US had been behind the uprisings and that they were anything but “spontaneous,” or “indigenous.” In an April 2011 article published by the New York Times titled, “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings,” it was stated (emphasis added):

“A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington.”

The article would also add, regarding the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED):

“The Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department. “

It is hardly a speculative theory then, that the uprisings were part of an immense geopolitical campaign conceived in the West and carried out through its proxies with the assistance of disingenuous organizations including NED, NDI, LaHood’s IRI, and Freedom House and the stable of NGOs they maintain throughout the world. Preparations for the “Arab Spring” began not as unrest had already begun, but years before the first “fist” was raised, and within seminar rooms in D.C. and New York, US-funded training facilities in Serbia, and camps held in neighboring countries, not within the Arab World itself.

In 2008, Egyptian activists from the now infamous April 6 movement were in New York City for the inaugural Alliance of Youth Movements (AYM) summit, also known as Movements.org. There, they received training, networking opportunities, and support from AYM’s various corporate and US governmental sponsors, including the US State Department itself. The AYM 2008 summit report (page 3 of .pdf) states that the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, James Glassman attended, as did Jared Cohen who sits on the policy planning staff of the Office of the Secretary of State. Six other State Department staff members and advisers would also attend the summit along with an immense list of corporate, media, and institutional representatives.

Shortly afterward, April 6 would travel to Serbia to train under US-funded CANVAS, formally the US-funded NGO “Otpor” who helped overthrow the government of Serbia in 2000. Otpor, the New York Times would report, was a “well-oiled movement backed by several million dollars from the United States.” After its success it would change its name to CANVAS and begin training activists to be used in other US-backed regime change operations.

The April 6 Movement, after training with CANVAS, would return to Egypt in 2010, a full year before the “Arab Spring,” along with UN IAEA Chief Mohammed ElBaradei. April 6 members would even be arrested while waiting for ElBaradei’s arrival at Cairo’s airport in mid-February. Already, ElBaradei, as early as 2010, announced his intentions of running for president in the 2011 elections. Together with April 6, Wael Ghonim of Google, and a coalition of other opposition parties, ElBaradei assembled his “National Front for Change” and began preparing for the coming “Arab Spring.”

Quite clearly, it is not a “line” that the Egyptian government is “pushing” in regards to so-called “civil society employees,” rather it is a verified, documented fact that these “employees” are conducting espionage and political destabilization under the increasingly tenuous guise of “democracy promotion.”

An April 2011 AFP report would confirm that the US government had trained armies of “activists” to return to their respective countries and enact political “change,” when US State Department’s Michael Posner stated that the “US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments.” The report went on to explain that the US “organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there.” Posner would add, “They went back and there’s a ripple effect.”

That ripple effect of course, was the “Arab Spring” and the subsequent destabilization, violence, and even US armed and backed warfare that followed. While nations like Libya and Tunisia are now run by a BP, Shell, and Total-funded Petroleum Institute chairman and a US NED-funded “activist” respectively, Egypt has managed to ward off and expose the US proxy of choice, Mohammed ElBaradei, who’s own movement was forced to denounce him as a Western agent.

By striking at the meddling, seditious NGOs, Egypt seeks to undermine the source of destabilization, the conduit through which US money and support is funneled through to “activists,” and expose the true foreign-funded nature of the political division that has gripped the nation for now over a year.

The AP article reports that Egypt’s generals have stated, “we face conspiracies hatched against the homeland, whose goal is to undermine the institutions of the Egyptian state and whose aim is to topple the state itself so that chaos reigns and destruction spreads.” Clearly, this an accurate observation, not a political ploy, with similar US-hatched conspiracies documented and exposed from Tunisia all the way to Thailand.

Stepping Back from the Brink

Egyptians must step back and examine the obvious fraud behind their “Arab Spring” revolution, as well as ensure that this nationalist streak by the Egyptian military is genuine. All sides presuming ownership over Egypt’s destiny must exhibit through policy, programs, and action that they will be serving the Egyptian people, not opening doors to US free trade, bending to the will of Wall Street and London’s military ambitions throughout the region, or lending credibility to the West’s contrived international institutions.

Egypt’s military has made a promising first step by exposing and prosecuting foreign-funded sedition in their country, helping strip the deceitful veneer off of Western NGOs that have long operated with impunity under the cloak of humanitarian concern. Another step could be by showing support for Syria’s besieged government, facing similar foreign-funded destabilization and now foreign-funded terrorists vying to overthrow yet another Arab nation and installing a Western proxy regime.

For those in the streets of Egypt who genuinely seek better lives, they would be best served by exposing the foreign-funded frauds amongst them seeking to exploit the well-intentioned, and then developing a program of pragmatism rather than one of politics. Those merely calling for first Mubarak, and now the military to step down and make way for clearly US-backed proxies like ElBaradei and the MI6-creation, the Muslim Brotherhood, are only paving the way for another oppressive regime to lord over them well into the foreseeable future. However, unlike with Mubarak, there will be no foreign aid flowing in to overthrow this new foreign-funded proxy regime, only aid to ensure its endless perpetuation.

Tony Cartalucci is a syndicated investigative journalist. Please visit his blog at LandDestroyer.blogspot.com

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

"The US is headed toward another strategic disaster in the Middle East!"


“Ever since Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei stepped down as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in late 2009, the United States and some of its allies have pushed Baradei’s successor, Yukiya Amano, to ratify Western arguments that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Today, Amano authorized the release of an IAEA report, see here, purporting to do just that.
Predictably, the report is being treated in some quarters as an effective casus belli. As the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy commented after the document’s release, … the report “should serve to shift the public debate from whether Iran is developing a nuclear weapon, to how to stop it”. It is not difficult to imagine how Republican presidential candidates will strive to “out-hawk” one another—and, especially, President Obama—during their next debate this coming Saturday as to their willingness to go to war to stop the Islamic Republic from building a nuclear bomb.   

But the report—arguably the most anticipated document of its kind since the NPT was first advanced in 1968—does not in any way demonstrate that Iran is “developing a nuclear weapon”. Rather, it once again affirms, as the IAEA has for decades, Iran’s “non-diversion” of nuclear material. In other words, even if the Islamic Republic wanted to build nuclear weapons (and Tehran continues to deny, at the highest levels of authority, that it wishes to do so) it does not have the weapons-grade material essential to the task.    

Nevertheless, Amano chose to focus the report on unsubstantiated intelligence reports, provided almost entirely by the United States, Israel, and other Western governments, alleging that the Islamic Republic is working on a nuclear weapons program. Most of this information has been available to the IAEA for years. But Baradei refused to publicize it during his tenure as the Agency’s chief—because he could neither corroborate it nor be confident about its provenance and quality. Remember, Baradei had been right about the state of Iraq’s nuclear program in 2002, when all of the intelligence services and national governments that would later try getting him spun up about Iran had been spectacularly wrong. And he was not going to let the United States or anyone else steamroller him on Iran.      

Amano, unfortunately, does not bring the same kind of intellectual and political integrity to his job as his predecessor. The United States, Israel, and other Western governments had to work hard to get the IAEA’s Board of Governors to elect Amano in 2009, by the narrowest possible margin, barely overcoming a challenge from South Africa’s distinguished ambassador to the Agency, Abdul Minty. But Washington and its allies got what they wanted. An October 2009 cable from the U.S. mission to the IAEA, published last year by Wikileaks, see here, reported that Amano had “reminded [the U.S. Ambassador to the IAEA] on several occasions that he would need to make concessions” at times to developing countries, “but that he was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision”, including “the handling of Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program.”  

And so the latest IAEA report treats its readers to sensational stories of Iranian nuclear weapons designs and experiments on things that can supposedly only be applied to the fabrication of nuclear weapons. None of these stories is corroborated by hard evidence, but the Amano-led IAEA passes them on anyway, with its effective imprimatur. … … … …

Iranian efforts to develop a “nuclear weapons capability”, as described by Baradei, may make American and Israeli elites uncomfortable. But it is not a violation of the NPT or any other legal obligation that the Islamic Republic has undertaken. While the NPT prohibits non-nuclear-weapon states from building atomic bombs, developing a nuclear weapons capability is, in Baradei’s words, “kosher” under the NPT, see here. It is certainly not a justification—strategically, legally, or morally—for armed aggression against Iran.     

In the end, the United States and its allies have a choice to make. They can continue down a path that will ultimately prompt them to launch yet another illegal and ill-considered war for hegemonic domination in the Middle East. But the consequences of attacking Iran are likely to be far more damaging for America’s strategic position in the Middle East than the reverses it suffered as a result of its 2003 invasion of Iraq. (We would ask anyone who questions whether the Iraq war was profoundly counter-productive for the United States simply to compare Washington’s standing and influence in the Middle East 10 years ago to its standing and influence there today; viewed through this prism, the measure of self-inflicted damage to America’s strategic position in this critical region is truly extraordinary.)
Alternatively, the United States and its allies can accept the Islamic Republic as an enduring political order with legitimate interests and sovereign rights, and come to terms with itmuch as the United States came to terms with the People’s Republic of China in the 1970s. In the nuclear arena, specifically, this means accepting, in principle and in reality, the continued development of Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium, while working with Tehran to put in place multilateral arrangements to ensure that the proliferation risks associated with uranium enrichment in Iran (as in any other country) are controlled.

Based on our conversations with senior Iranian officials, we are convinced that this is precisely the sort of conversation Tehran wants to have with Western and other international interlocutors about their nuclear program. But the United States—under the Obama Administration every bit as much as under the George W. Bush Administration—refuses to pursue this sort of dialogue.
Until that changes, the United States is headed toward another strategic disaster in the Middle East. And, by succumbing to American pressure, the IAEA has raised the odds that this is precisely what will occur. “


‘Failing yet again to absorb the lessons of Iraq & WMD’

“… Fast-forward to 2011 and we’re left wondering if these same newspapers have really taken on board the lessons of Iraq. Here, for example, is David Sanger, chief Washington correspondent of the New York Times, writing in its Sunday Review last weekend:

At the White House and the CIA, officials say the recently disclosed Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States – by blowing up a tony Georgetown restaurant frequented by senators, lobbyists and journalists – was just the tip of the iceberg.

Note how the allegation of an “Iranian plot” in the US – which was greeted with a good deal of scepticism when it first surfaced last month – now appears to have become an established fact (even though it has yet to be tested in court). Not only that. Sanger’s anonymous officials are now asking us to believe it is part of a bigger and even more menacing Iranian plot which stretches across continents from the Yemen to Latin America.
At the Washington Post, meanwhile, Joby Warrick has been briefed by David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector who now heads the Institute for Science and International Security. Citing Albright, Warrick describes Iranian work on a detonation device known as the R265 generator:

“According to the intelligence provided to the IAEA, key assistance in both areas [design and testing] was provided by Vyacheslav Danilenko, a former Soviet nuclear scientist who was contracted in the mid-1990s by Iran’s Physics Research Center, a facility linked to the country’s nuclear programme.”

The way this is presented in the Washington Post, it points very clearly to the idea that Iran was working on a trigger for a nuclear bomb. But look elsewhere and that interpretation becomes less certain: possibly it wasn’t nuclear at all, but (See MoonOfAlabama) a project to manufacture nanodiamonds.
Of course, these are extremely murky waters and I’m not at all sure who to believe. There is probably a lot of deception taking place on both sides. But what seems to me extraordinary is the reluctance of journalists – especially in the US mainstream – to acknowledge the uncertainties and their willingness to accept what, as far as Iran is concerned, are the most incriminating interpretations.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

War Winds Target Iran

by Stephen Lendman

Anti-Iranian rhetoric and saber rattling is one thing, baseless accusations another if serve as pretext for aggressive war.
Whether or not it’s coming isn’t known. Heated tensions are worrisome if boil over. Leaked information on an imminent IAEA report may or may not precipitate it even though what’s coming lacks credibility.
During his tenure as IAEA director general (December 1, 1997 – November 30, 2009), Mohamed ElBaradei carefully avoided anti-Iranian rhetoric and baseless charges. Numerous times he discounted a potential threat with comments like:
People should stop claiming “Iran will be a threat from tomorrow and that we are faced right now with the issue of whether Iran should be bombed or allowed to have the bomb. We are not at all in that situation. Iran is a glaring example of how, in many cases, the use of force exacerbates the problem rather than (solves) it.”
Referring to “extreme people (with) extreme views,” he once said “you do not want to give additional argument to some of the ‘new crazies’ who want to say let us go and bomb Iran.”
He said “Israel would be utterly crazy to attack Iran.” The same holds for America, Britain, and/or France. Doing so would “turn the region into a ball of fire and put Iran on a crash course for nuclear weapons with the support of the whole Muslim world.”
He believes nonproliferation “lost its legitimacy in the eyes of Arab public opinion because of the perceived double standard” on Israel, a known nuclear power.
He called claims about Iran developing nuclear weapons “overestimated. Some even play it up intentionally.”
During and after his tenure, ElBaradei took lots of flack for his comments. Repeatedly he said no evidence suggests an Iranian nuclear weapons program.
As a result, Washington and Western allies replaced him with Yukiya Amano, known to be more amenable to their interests. Six ballots and heavy pressure eliminated South Africa’s Abdul Samad Minty.
Amano hasn’t disappointed, providing conjecture, dubious intelligence, and fabricated allegations about an alleged Iranian nuclear program. Suggesting one exists without evidence could “turn the region into a fireball” as ElBaradei warned.
Nonetheless, in February 2010, Amano issued dubious material suggesting “possible military dimensions” to Iran’s nuclear program. No evidence proved it, just unsubstantiated conjecture and undocumented studies.
Many claims then and perhaps now were supposedly found on a laptop smuggled out of Iran. Whether it exists isn’t known, or if “laptop” is code language for one or more unnamed sources. Alleged documents weren’t made public. If they exist, their authenticity is very suspect.
On November 6, Washington Post writer Joby Warrick headlined, “IAEA says foreign expertise has brought Iran to the threshold of nuclear capability,” saying:
Alleged intelligence “shows that Iran’s government has mastered the critical steps needed to build a nuclear weapon, receiving assistance from foreign scientists to overcome key technical hurdles, according to (unnamed) Western diplomats and nuclear experts briefed on the findings.”
Former Soviet nuclear expert Vyacheslav Danilenko “allegedly tutored Iranians over several years on building high-precision detonators of the kind used to trigger a nuclear chain reaction, the officials said.” Pakistani and North Korean involvement was also claimed.
Danilenko acknowledged assisting in civilian engineering projects unrelated to weapons development. Unsubstantiated allegations suggest otherwise.
Other “secret” sources were also cited, disputing evidence a previous article provided as follows:
“We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program; (perhaps it never had one); we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons…”
True or not, dozens of nations may consider them, for defense, not offense, in a hostile world. American and Israeli nuclear arsenals and other destructive weapons pose enormous threats – less because they exist; mostly because of stated intentions to use them.
The NIE also said:
“We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop (them).”
“Tehran’s decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop (them) than we have been judging since 2005.”
In February 2010, America’s Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said:
“We do not know….if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.” No evidence of an ongoing program was presented.
In March 2011, the US Intelligence Community Worldwide Threat Assessment for the Senate Armed Services Committee said precisely the same thing. Nothing new suggested an Iranian nuclear weapons program.
Nonetheless, baseless IAEA allegations claim “secret intelligence….reinforce(s) concerns” about Iranian nuclear weapons development. Views pro and con are circulating. Some US arms control groups cautioned about exaggerating an unknown risk.
Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran’s Foreign Minister and former top nuclear official, said IAEA’s agenda is “100 percent political.” It’s “under pressure from foreign powers” to target Iran.
Its alleged intelligence and other sources aren’t named. That alone makes them suspect.
On November 6, New York Times writers David Sanger and William Broad headlined, “US Hangs Back as Inspectors Prepare Report on Iran’s Nuclear Program, ” saying:
Making “the case is hardly conclusive….And however suggestive the evidence about what (IAEA) calls ‘possible military dimensions’ of Iran’s program turns out to be, the only sure bet is that the mix of sleuthing, logic and intuition by nuclear investigators will be endlessly compared with American intelligence agencies’ huge mistake” about Iraq’s WMDs.
Unmentioned was Times writer Judith Miller’s lead role, hyping them daily in front page features. She functioned duplicitously as a Pentagon press agent, and never apologized for lying.
On November 7, Press TV said senior Iranian cleric Ayatollah Seyyed Ahmad Khatami called IAEA head Amano a spineless US tool. Publishing fabricated documents about an alleged Iranian nuclear threat undermines the agency’s credibility. Under Amano, it has none.
Appearing Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Washington should consider tougher penalties against Iran’s government and do “everything we can to bring it down.”
Russia Today (RT.com) reported that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned against attacking Iran, saying:
Military solutions won’t solve international conflicts. “We get evidence to that every day when we see how problems around Iran are being solved: whether it’s in Iraq or Afghanistan or what is happening in other countries of that region.”
University of Tehran Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi told RT that Israel’s hostile rhetoric “is to put pressure on Iran and also (on) other countries – independent (ones) like China, Russia and others – to agree with new sanctions by sort of portraying (Iran) as a mad dog, attack dog that needs to be somehow controlled, so that if they agree to new sanctions, something bad will be prevented from happening.”
There’s a “general trend to corner Iran.” IAEA’s report lacks credibility. It’s “based on forged documents. There is absolutely nothing new in (them). All the documents (are) from 2004 and before. And (former IAEA head) ElBaradei’s assessment was completely” opposite what Yamano says based on the same information. “All these documents have been refuted in the past.”
Yet political Washington, Israeli hard-liners, and complicit media scoundrels hype them. They also bogusly claim Iranian President Armadinejad wants Israel “wiped off the map.”
He, in fact, believes Israel’s belligerence is self-destructive. Others share that view, including about America. Countries living by sword sooner or later die by it.
At issue now is cooling tensions to prevent what no one but crazed militarists want – destabilizing the entire region and risking general war by attacking Iran and/or Syria. Preventing it is crucial.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Ashraf Bayoumi: No Compromise, “Israel” Should Dissolve and We Demand An Independent Egypt


Ashraf Bayoumi: A True Voice of revolution

Nour Rida

For the 15th consecutive day, the Egyptian people continue to pour into the Tashrir (Liberation) square in Cairo, and the squares and streets of Egypt joining tens of thousands spending their nights in open air, as they refused to leave the streets at night despite heavy military presence and overnight curfews.

The crowds will be addressed in the coming period by a unified leadership that was formed on Monday. Five major groups have formed “a revolutionary committee” and chosen individuals to represent them.

This morning, prominent Egyptian political analyst Ashraf Bayoumi told moqawama.org right before heading to the Tahrir square to stand along his Egyptian brothers that the streets are never empty since the 25th of January, and will remain to be the arena of revolution until the a new regime is formed, and not the same regime with new faces.

“I am heading towards Tahrir Square now, thousands are pouring to the Tahrir square because the revolution is not finished yet; and attempts to abort this revolution are ongoing from various sources,” said analyst Bayoumi.

US Dual Stances to Serve Its Goals

According to Bayoumi, foreign sources have been major players in the Egyptian game. “Let me begin with the United States, Europe and “Israel”. There is no question that this revolution is counter the objectives and policies of foreign dominant forces, or more explicitly, imperialism and Zionism,” he said adding “We have seen how the US have been saying Mubarak has to remain in office so that no constitutional void happens, which is nonsense.”

Then, again stances emerge from the US administration supporting the revolution and describing it as pro-democratic, the analyst highlighted explaining “, it is definitely a pro-democratic movement, but it is also more important than that.”

The dual stances of the US administration serve its goals, and that is why Bayoumi says the public should be aware and understand this two-face policy. “We should differentiate between public stances and real policy. This applies to the US administration issuing statements for local American and Arab consumption but in reality the intention of the US is to have the same corrupt regime but maybe with new faces. This is a colonic plan based on tourism, on services and also continuation of policies which support the American objectives and the Zionist entity,” he underscored.

Egyptian Figures, Puppets of US and “Israel”

So the protestors are steadfast and holding tight onto their demands of a new regime, a just regime that will bring reform and change. That is one part of the picture in Egypt.

The other is that of an alliance between the police, the portion that has been enjoying exorbitant wealth, who according to Bayoumi have gained billions of dollars, some organizations, the media, and a portion of intellectuals who have deceived the people for many years.

Bayoumi highlighted an important fact about two major figures that have emerged lately, and suddenly became pulpits to the Egyptian people.

THE ZIONIST MASTERS OF REGIME CHANGE now have the tables turned on them.

“In addition there are Nobel prize winners like Ahmed Zuel and Mohammad Al Baradei who are cast in the same US mold, trying to bind with the revolution,” Bayoumi said with rage on the Egyptians who he considers as betrayers to their people and country.

“We have to tell the people all over the world that Al Baradei has served the US imperialism for more than 12 years at the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

We cannot forget the scene when he met with Sharon and we cannot forget his statement that he understands the position of the Zionist state as far as its “nuclear arsenal”, he has not opened his mouth once in support of the Palestinians or Iraqis until very recently.”

Zuel (prominent Chemistry scientist), who visited “Israel” and got a prize from the Zionist entity called the Wolf prize, and gave a speech in the Knesset, he is also the official employ of Obama in the middle east region for Science and technology, who also suddenly said he separates between science and politics, projected himself as a leader and issues a statement as if he is about to be in office.”

On the PM caretaker government Mubarak assigned a week ago, Bayoumi said “Omar Suleiman is the person who spent a great deal of his time negotiating with the “Israelis” in Tel Aviv and the head of the security and intelligence. He is a genuine part of the regime the issue is not Mubarak alone, it is a complete system that has ruled, oppressed, and impoverished the Egyptian people and ruined the economy of Egypt and diverted the objectives of the Egyptians who aim to be an independent, developed and free state.”

Others like Ayman Nour, I quote him as he sent a letter to the wall street journal, “I support the peace treaty and strongly oppose any aggression against “Israel”.

Therefore, there are many players who are with this corrupt regime who aim at oppressing the peole and are puppets to the US and “Israel”.

Revolution to Continue Until Demands Met

Bayoumi said that today, tomorrow, Friday and every other day will remain to be days of revolution, with its primary objective to dismiss Mubarak and all his supporters who have been using various excuses like stability and avoiding violence to continue their oppression of the people.

“They (the regime and its allies) are the ones who promoted violence, released prisoners from the jails and who are instigating violence against the people as hundreds have been martyred and thousands wounded,” the analyst continued.

He assured on behalf of himself and the people that this revolution is a movement for attaining freedom, justice and national sovereignty. “We are not only demanding political freedom, we are asking for boycotting “Israel”, for destroying the separation wall across the Gaza borders and the sanctions against the Palestinian people, we are refusing the alliance and association with “Israel” and the United states,” Bayoumi said adding “In addition we are demanding social justice, which means a new economic philosophy based on industrial development, agricultural development, using science and technology for development that is how we can combat issues like unemployment and the tremendous gap between the wealthy and the poor. This regime has impoverished millions of Egyptians, so the government of Mubarak is the last to speak about stability and security.”

Egyptians Never to Accept Compromise, “Israel” Must Dissolve

Bayoumi highlighted that the current regime has compromised the national sovereignty of Egypt in favor of the American interests. “Let us not forget that this regime let the Egyptian army conduct maneuvers dubbed the Bright Star with the US army. We will not forget what happened in Iraq and how the (Egyptian) regime opened its airspace and the Suez canal for the US forces that attacked and occupied Iraq, this could not have happened if it were not for a regime like that of Mubarak, who was in full support of the US and “Israel”.”

He assured “The Egyptian people will never EVER accept a Zionist state in the Middle East, we are not speaking of compromises like West Bank and Gaza, and this Zionist entity must dissolve even if takes us years.”

At the end, he said “The Arab people must liberate themselves from this Zionist entity which is an agent of US and European imperialism.”


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

%d bloggers like this: