Hijacked Egyptian Revolution’s 7th Anniversary


Egyptian Revolution’s 7th Anniversary
Designed by: Nour Fakih

Egyptian Revolution's 7th Anniversary


مرشد الإخوان محمد بديع مع آن بيترسون سفيرة واشنطن في القاهرة

مرشد الإخوان محمد بديع مع آن بيترسون سفيرة واشنطن في القاهرة


وثائق أمريكية تكشف: كلينتون عرضت على مرسى إرسال خبراء لـ"هيكلة الداخلية"


Where to, Egypt?

An Egyptian street vendor sells the country’s national flag and masks of the Egypt’s Defence Minister General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi as voters queue outside the polling station during the second day of voting on a new constitution on January 15, 2014 in the southern Cairo Giza district. (Photo: AFP – Khaled Desouki)

Published Wednesday, January 15, 2014
The Egyptians worship two deities, God and State: the creator of life and its organizer. Both often met in the form of a pharaoh, then separated, but their placenta kept them firmly tethered. The state is needed to organize and maintain the flow of the Nile. Egypt, first and foremost, was “the gift of the Nile.”
Then, Egyptians discovered on June 30, 2013 how leaving the bosom of the state to those who remained outside it for eight decades would be an uncalculated adventure. Returning to the state – despite the corruption of its institutions and its tyranny – would be safer and more reliable than following unknowledgeable crowds.
The fall of the Muslim Brotherhood from its pinnacle in early 2011, to its darkest depths two and a half years later, can only be accounted for by its inadequacy and fragility. The interpretation is not helped by saying the media sullied its image, or the Gulf – except Qatar – funded a war against it. Above all, the Brotherhood’s failure to provide a convincing alternative was the main reason behind its seismic tumble; it became a near acolyte to the West. It had abundant cadres but weak quality. It lacked a socioeconomic model, except that of the capitalist with a beard. It lacked a collective revival project.
The Brotherhood spent four decades building a wide and securely financed organization within the confines of counter-revolutionary regimes. It contributed greatly to sealing the image of Egypt of the July Revolution in the collective consciousness. This guaranteed its spot as the power ready to replace Hosni Mubarak. And so it was: Mubarak fell and the Muslim Brotherhood was ready. This was coupled with Washington adopting an approach of empowering the Brotherhood as an antidote to three poisons: Sunni jihadism, Iran and the Shia, and Arab nationalism. The Brotherhood was the most able to push ahead with an “American” mediation with Israel.
Washington was not aware that the Brotherhood’s image from the outside did not reflect its insides. It started to get this feeling in early 2013, yet it fought it. Society as a whole could not wait for the the state, so it came out in masses on June 30.
Ever since, a strange sight began to appear on the horizon: a Nasserite street and an elite, which mostly looks up to Sadat. They formed an odd mixture, which is impossible to sustain. Between the two, the army sits waiting and trying to avoid the “strife” of having to choose, keeping its options open. In particular, it is because the economy of Egypt is about to fall into a ditch without bottom. Its security is breached in Sinai, which is about to become an Egyptian Kandahar, and across its western borders, brimming with arms. This is on top of the Brotherhood’s disruptions in the streets, where it has reverted to arms.
The army’s deviation from the US scenario, which hoped for coexistence with the Brotherhood, found it tactical allies in the region: those who saw the Brotherhood’s rule over a central Arab country to be an existential threat, especially the rulers of Saudi, the UAE, and Kuwait. These countries only want Egypt to float, not to rise or sink, since both will cause danger. Therefore, the army will walk with them to the crossroads.
By voting yes on the constitution, the Muslim Brotherhood would have been completely defeated. The Brotherhood’s defeat will not be in security, despite its blatant appeal, but with society spitting it out and sending it back to its previous situation of decades prior, when saying someone was part of the Brotherhood was an insult.
With Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi’s advance to the presidency, the military elite – which controls half the economy and realizes its monopoly on violence – is threatened by jihadists and, now, the Brotherhood’s call to arms. It will face difficult choices: Where to get the money to rise? What shall we do with those who carry arms? What is Egypt’s position in the tremors hitting the region? Who do we latch onto internationally, and how do we face our fate?
The Nasserist-Sadatist alliance will break up. The question is: To whose benefit? Logic dictates that Egypt’s safe exit into the wide space of immunity could only occur through a modern Nasserism. However, the remnants of dependency interests will fight this to the end.
The answer remains with Sisi.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Morsi’s Power Grab Should Be No Surprise


While reading the following article about Muslim Brotherhood’s Pragmatism, I remembered my battle at deliberation with sectarian Khalid Hamayreh, a brotherhood mouth piece, who believe that Shea = LIARS because they practice Taqiyya

Taqiyya and Jihad are among many terms misunderstood by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The Anti-Muslim and anti-shiites Muslims love to talk about the so called, rule that permits Muslims to lie to spread Islam or spread Shiism. They manipulate their meanings to their convenience.
Anti-Muslims presume Muslims are guilty, claiming innocence is an aditional evidence of their quilt, anti-shiites sunnis do the same, a shiite is a Liar while telling the truth
In real life the whole mankind practice Taqiyya naturally, calling it other names like: “Kittman” `tolerance’, `diplomacy, ‘deception’ and `common sense’, pragmatism.
Deception is a daily bussiness praticed by leaders, states, spies, media..
It is the basis of international relations.
“In the Biblical account of Abraham, Sarah and Pharaoh we notice Abraham (and Sarah) concealed the fact Sarah was his wife as he feared death:

When the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me but will let you live.
Say you are my sister, so that I will be treated well for your sake and my life will be spared because of you.”
[Genesis 12:12-13 NIV”

In Quran we have the verses 16:106 about Ammar Ibn Yasser’s famous case of Taqiyyah read by Brotherhood, without comprehending, millions of times.
مَن كَفَرَ بِاللّهِ مِن بَعْدِ إيمَانِهِ إِلاَّ مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالإِيمَانِ وَلَكِن مَّن شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْرًا فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِّنَ اللّهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ (106)
Who so disbelieveth in Allah after his belief – save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with the Faith – but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom. [Quran 16:106]
So, while reading the following article, replace Replace Pragmatism with Taqiyya, and note that Shea and all Muslims practiced  and conceal their faith when they were under threat.
In Egypt Muslim brotherhood used Taqiyya as a tool for deception, calling it Pragmatism
First: to highack the Egyptian Revolution,
Second: to cheat Egyptians and get elected.
Third: to Turn against the military junta
Fourth: to crown their Pharaoh
In Syria the brotherhood are comitting war crimes against humanity and call their crimes JIHAD

Morsi’s Power Grab Should Be No Surprise

Tahir Square Now
By:Nervana Mahmoud
Posted on Mon, Nov 26.
Following his recent edict granting himself unprecedented powers, President Mohammed Morsi addressed his supporters in front of the presidential palace — the place originally chosen by Mubarak to serve as the formal presidential building — declaring that he would “cure Egypt from the woodworms.” This particular remark sums up his attitude toward the current crisis: the president and his ruling party view their opponents as woodworm beetles in need of removal.

For anyone who is following closely and understands the history of the country and the ruling party, the Muslim Brotherhood, the recent events should not come as a huge surprise. It should be seen as an inevitable outcome in a country that is still seduced by selfish politics that aim for dominance rather than unity. Although the Brotherhood has undergone many changes to recast their image as “moderates” who support a democratic society, the group did not embrace any serious transformation of their way of thinking. The concept that “It is either me or them” is entrenched inside their mindset. There are some basic rules that have continued to govern its decision-making processes:

First, pragmatism is a tool that protects, rather than replaces, ideology. The pragmatism that Morsi has shown in negotiating the Gaza cease-fire between Israel and Hamas may have surprised many, particularly in the United States. This pragmatism is one of the Islamists’ tools to protect their beliefs when they sense that current conditions are not ripe to force a more preferable outcome. Their aim is rather to secure their basic foundation; pragmatism is the fleece that protects the ideology without compromising it.

Second, the Brotherhood is a monolithic entity. Many analysts argue passionately that the Brotherhood is not a monolithic group and that there are a variety of principles and beliefs among its members. That is true but with clear limits to this diversity. The group can accept differences in opinion but only within certain boundaries. Individualism is not allowed in a group founded on obedience. Those who express strong opinions may be forced to leave the group.

Third, ambiguity is a policy. Since the revolution, the Brotherhood has adopted an approach of deliberate ambiguity in their dealings with the general public and with other political parties. They are always clear about what they are against but are much more elusive as to what they endorse. The phrase “civil state” is one example: the choice of words clearly rejects secularism, yet it does not specifically invoke the notion of an Islamic state. Their ambiguity was reflected in the deliberations over the new constitution, which is precisely why many non-Islamists group who wanted clear protection of liberties and rights within the new constitution were forced to quit the constitutional assembly.

Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, is hidden insecurity. Years of oppression have earned the group tenacity, but also a chronic suspicion of the wider society. The group always boasts about their strength yet their actions reveal their insecurity. Their persistent claim of conspiracy — even by hints by Morsi in his last speech that some are plotting against the revolution and seeking outside help, and his hints of phone tapping of those alleged plotters — reflect a rattled party, utterly uneasy with their new position as rulers. Their desire for power grabs is, in fact, part of self-protection strategy against an outside world that, in their eyes, is full of enemies and non-friends.

Understanding the above points is essential in explaining the unfolding events in Egypt.

Morsi was pragmatic when pragmatism was needed. He happily made deals with other groups, like the Sixth of April Movement, to secure victory in the election. Deliberate ambiguity has helped him in abandoning that to which he never clearly commits. His united party allows him to consistently mobilize supporters and create an illusion of a majority by using what Egyptians now describes as “buses democracy” by mobilising crowds from various regions to fill the squares in a matter of hours. Now, his insecurity has tempted him to fast track his plan to cleanse the political sheet.

In his mind, Morsi views Egypt as a malfunctioning machine that must be restored back to its factory settings with Islamic instruction and an Islamist semi-monopoly that is geared to produce law-abiding citizens who agree rather than oppose, and worship rather than reject. An Islamic constitution and restoring a majority in the next parliament are musts, and for them, any path or actions are justified. Morsi’s desired transformation is aimed to achieve a made-to-measure democracy, with some elements autocracy that is deemed by him as necessary.

The problem with the “woodworms” approach to politics is that it was tried before in Egypt and failed drastically. Gamal Adbel Nasser, Egypt’s president from 1956 till his 1970 death, treated them as Muslim Botherhood as a dangerous worm — yet despite his ruthless oppression, he failed to prevent their spread in the Egyptian society.

Regardless of the outcome of the current crisis, and whether the president choses to compromise or persevere, a serious transformation in the mindset of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood is much needed if they are seriously willing to move the country and break with old attitudes.

However, and to be honest, I am not holding my breath, Egypt has not had successful revolutions in two consecutive years, the Brotherhood seems to be firmly in control, while their opponent still have no clear plan for the day after, both are not willing to look back at the history books and learn from it.

Nervana Mahmoud is a blogger and writer on Middle East issues. You can follow her on Twitter: @Nervana_1

Mursi’s Declaration Provokes Unrest in Tahrir Square

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’s Morsi the New Mubarak

Is Egypt’s Morsi the New Mubarak?

By:Alaa al-Aswani posted on Sunday, Sep 30, 2012

I did not vote for President Mohammed Morsi. Before the elections, I appealed to the Egyptians through As-Safir to boycott in protest of Ahmed Shafiq’s nomination for the presidency before the 35 corruption cases against him were investigated. The boycott failed.

Millions of Egyptians saw that they had no choice but to vote for Morsi, not because they agreed with his ideas or those of the Muslim Brotherhood, but simply to prevent the restoration of Mubarak’s regime at the hands of Shafiq. So Morsi became president and I said that the will of the people must be respected. I thought it unfair to attack President Morsi before he was given a chance.
But three months after he took office his political orientation has become clear. Unfortunately, his actions and decisions have been disturbing, as exemplified by the following:
 1) One of the most important causes of the revolution was the Interior Ministry’s brutal repression. The people demanded that the state security apparatuses be eliminated, that the Interior Ministry be cleansed of Mubarak’s corrupt men and that those responsible for torture be held accountable.
However, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) refused to make any changes to the Interior Ministry during the transitional period. Then, after Morsi became president, we were surprised that he too refused to cleanse the Interior Ministry. Instead, he made use of the old leadership, such as Interior Minister Ahmed Gamal al-Din.
It seemed as though a bargain had been struck between the Brotherhood and the Interior Ministry’s men whereby the latter would retain their posts and privileges and remain exempt from accountability for their crimes in exchange for them restoring security and protecting the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Security was somewhat restored but acts of repression have also come back. Egyptians are again being humiliated in police stations.
Last week, an engineer named Mohammad Fahim was driving in Mansoura. A police officer stopped him and asked for his driver’s license. Mohammad noticed that he had forgotten it at home so he politely asked the officer to permit him to go home with a police officer to get the license.
The officer said: “That kind of conversation is more appropriate with your mother.”
When Mohammad objected to this slight, the officer beat him, had his men lay Mohammad on the ground for a while, then took him to the police station, where they tortured him, fabricated a charge against him and transferred him to the prosecution. He was then remanded in custody pending further investigation.
There have been many similar incidents, which indicates that President Morsi — like President Mubarak — doesn’t mind that citizens are being tortured and are having their dignity violated.
In fact, the dignity of the Egyptians abroad is not better than the ones at home. It is well known that the Saudi legal system does not conform to international standards of justice. But even though the Saudi legal system does not touch foreigners, hundreds of Egyptians are held in Saudi prisons either without trial or as a result of unfair trials.
Among them is Ms. Najla Wafa, who is being flogged every week because she had a fallout with one of the many princesses from the Saudi royal family.
There is also the case of Ahmed al-Gizawy. This lawyer is being tried on trumped-up charges because he dared to speak about human rights violations against Egyptians in Saudi Arabia.
During President Morsi’s first visit there, he exchanged hugs and had his picture taken with Saudi officials. Yet he did nothing to help his citizens who are detained in Saudi Arabia. Moreover, in Egyptian military prison there are thousands who have been detained during protests on false charges.
The 8 April officers were arrested for taking part in a demonstration on 8 April 2011, to protest an attack on a sit-in.
There also the “April 8 officers” who joined the demonstrations in Tahrir Square. They were arrested and subjected to severe torture. They are still locked up. Before he was elected, President Morsi promised to release them as soon as he took office, but so far he has not done so.
2) When President Morsi formed the government, we were surprised to see that it included several ministers from the former regime. This indicates that Mubarak and Morsi’s policies are not very different.
egyptian, workers, demand, a, say, in, the, new, egypt, under, president, morsi,
President Mubarak was partial toward the rich, whom he tried to please and help increase their wealth, while he didn’t care about the poor’s suffering. Morsi is unfortunately no different than Mubarak in that regard. Morsi is now close to the businessmen who belonged to Mubarak’s regime. When he visits foreign countries, he takes them with him aboard his plane.
As he tries to deal with the economic crisis, Morsi is not considering cutting state spending nor laying off advisers who are unduly being paid millions. He is not considering imposing a progressive tax on the rich nor stopping gas and electricity subsidies to factories that sell their goods at international rates. President Morsi is not considering making such moves because they threaten the interests of the rich.
He borrows like Mubarak: he requested $4.8 billion from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) without revealing the loan’s terms to the public.
We should mention that former Prime Minister Kamal Ganzouri also wanted to borrow from the IMF but at the time the Brotherhood strongly objected, saying that borrowing would increase Egypt’s debt and that paying interest is against Islamic law.
But now, here they are cheering president Morsi’s loan request, which they suddenly discovered to be in conformity with Islamic law because “it is a necessity,” and the ends justify the means. It seems the Brotherhood has multiple doctrines from which it picks and chooses whatever suits its interests.
3) The Mubarak regime used to control the media and the national newspapers, which it utilized to spread lies and depict Mubarak as an inspiring and wise leader. Rather than make the newspapers independent and eliminate the Information Ministry, President Morsi appointed a Brotherhood member as Information Minister and the Brotherhood-dominated Shura Council appointed atop the national newspapers new editors who are well aware that they owe their positions to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Egypt’s Information Minister Salah Abdel Maqsood tells
Lebanese TV host
“I wish your questions are not as hot as you are,”

The Brotherhood’s influence over the media is becoming clearer by the day. As it did with Mubarak, state television keeps broadcasting images of President Morsi.
Even the private channels want to solidify their relationship with the Brotherhood. They have started replacing journalists who oppose the Brotherhood with ones who are more friendly to it. Morsi’s recent television interview was an exact copy of Mubarak’s:
The president sits majestically and full of confidence, and in front of him sits a TV announcer who is shuddering with fear because he knows that one wrong word could end his career or even his life.
The TV announcer asks the president softball questions and the latter answers with hollow and meaningless slogans. Then suddenly, the announcer looks at the president’s face in wonderment and says:

“Your Excellency works tirelessly for the sake of Egypt. When do you get to rest?”

President Morsi has maintained Mubarak’s corrupt media, which he is now using to his advantage.
4) The Constituent Assembly is now controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood. This means that no matter how many hearings and discussions they hold, the Brotherhood’s “supreme guide” will have the final say in determining Egypt’s constitution.
Before he was elected, Morsi promised to make the Constituent Assembly representative of all parts of society. But as usual, he broke that promise and kept the assembly unchanged. The assembly is writing unacceptable articles that limit public freedoms, women’s rights and the freedom of the press.
It is likely that the assembly will write a constitution that serves the interests of the Brotherhood and then call for a quick referendum whereby the Brotherhood’s mighty political machine in the mosques would convince the ordinary people that they must approve the constitution to ensure their entry into heaven.
5) President Morsi promised that public freedoms would flourish under his reign. But the opposite has happened.
Newspapers were seized and al-Faraeen channel was closed. Regardless of how we felt about that channel, we do not accept that it be closed by an administrative order because then any channel that Morsi does not like can also be closed.
Islam Afifi is accused of insulting Prophet Mohammed .
SORRY, I mean President Mohammed Morsi
There is an Egyptian citizen named Bishwi al-Buhairi who will spend two years in prison for insulting President Morsi on Facebook. There are also senior journalists being tried on the same charge. The charge of “insulting the president” does not exist in a democracy, but president Morsi seems to want to put his opponents in prison. He refuses to decriminalize the so-called “publishing crimes.”
Brotherhood official Mahmoud Ghozlan said that journalists will not be exempt from imprisonment because they are not better than others.
This statement betrays Ghozlan’s ignorance on what happens in civilized countries, where writers and journalists are not imprisoned because of their opinions or writings but are punished by paying a fine, if convicted.
Freedoms may not be better under Morsi than under Mubarak. In fact, they could get worse.
6) President Morsi was elected by the people but he also belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a secret organization and no one knows its rules, regulations or funding sources.
We have repeatedly demanded that the Brotherhood’s status be codified and that its funding sources be placed under state supervision.
But it seems that President Morsi prefers to keep the Brotherhood a secret group that supports him from behind the scenes.
The president’s connection with the group has resulted in behavior unacceptable in any democracy.
Brotherhood official Khairat Shater behaves as if he were the prime minister. He makes statements on government projects. He travels abroad and meets with foreign officials with which he negotiates and signs agreements. But under what capacity is he doing that?
We really don’t know who rules Egypt: President Morsi or the Brotherhood’s supreme guide?
The situation has become worrisome. It seems that after the revolution nothing changed except the president. Mubarak was simply replaced with Morsi.
President Morsi moves around guarded by 3000 troops. When he prays at the mosque he prevents police officers from entering the mosque in order to keep the president secure.
When Morsi traveled to Rome he stayed at the same luxury hotel where Mubarak used to stay, costing the state thousands of pounds per night.
The revolution made a great achievement when it deposed Mubarak, tried him and threw him in prison with his followers. The revolution’s task now should be to prevent the Muslim Brotherhood from controlling the state.
If the national forces do not immediately unite to prevent the Muslim Brotherhood from fully controlling the state then we and our children will pay a high price.
On the 42nd anniversary of Nasser’s Death: 4 Nasserist Parties merge to stop selling out Egypt
The people who made this great revolution are capable of protecting it, God willing.
Democracy is the solution.

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

Gaza: Mursi Disappoints

“the situation of the crossing under Hosni Mubarak was better. The situation today is somewhat chaotic.” Iki is surprised by “Hamas’ silence regarding this decision.”

“Hamas does not want a tense relationship with Egypt’s rulers, the MB. It knows that if it loses its relationship with the MB, it will lose an ally and its situation would get worse.” Political analyst, Ibrahim Abrash, told Al-Akhbar

Khalid Hamayreh who failed in turning deliberation into a sectarian mouth outlet, he returned to his PIC to spread is sectarian poison.
In his latest “Final ANAL-ysis” he called

“the Islamic movements should see to it that alternative and effective media outlets be founded in order to help shape an Islamic public opinion which can be mobilized when necessary. This is a paramount matter since the existing public-sector media in countries such as Egypt and Jordan is decidedly anti-Islamist if not anti-Islamic.”

He urged Islamic movements

“to create as many new satellite TV stations as possible along with a large number of attractive and versatile internet sites in various languages in order to communicate the Islamic message and accurate information to the largest possible audience.”

The Big Filthy mouth who ignored the inhuman siege on Gaza, the destruction of Gaza life lines ended his call saying:  

This is not to say, of course, that the Islamic movements should scale down its devotion to the Palestinian cause and confrontation with Zionism and Israel. 

In the final analysis, the Islamic movement’s commitment to the Palestinian cause is the single most important factor contributing to Islamists’ popularity among the masses.

Thus, revealing that his main concern is not the Palestinian cause, but the Isalamists popularity among the masses.

Gaza: Mursi Disappoints

Palestinian men transport bags of cement through tunnels used for smuggling goods, including food, fuel and building materials, along the Gaza-Egypt border in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, on 23 August 2012. (Photo: AFP – Mohammed Abed)
Published Sunday, August 26, 2012
When Mursi won the presidency in Egypt, Gazans were ecstatic and publicly celebrated their expectations of better times to come. Today, their disappointment is just as immense as their previous elation.
Palestinians were feeling frustrated with the Egyptian decision to only open the Rafah border crossing south of the Gaza Strip for three days a week. They had hoped that their situation would improve dramatically after Mohammed Mursi’s victory in the presidential election. After all, Mursi is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), Hamas’ ally.
Greetings in Egypt (MB Days VS Mubarak Days)

Al-Akhbar visited Gaza to speak to the residents about their situation. Amani Shnino said:

“I think it’s unfair to only allow three days for travel. The whole of Gaza is a humanitarian crisis and we were deceived by Mursi.”

Walid Iki (24 years old) expressed his wish that “the Rafah crossing would be open for longer, allowing any Gazan citizen to travel freely.” He pointed out that “the situation of the crossing under Hosni Mubarak was better. The situation today is somewhat chaotic.” Iki is surprised by “Hamas’ silence regarding this decision.”
After the Sinai incident in which 16 Egyptian soldiers were killed on August 6, the Egyptian authorities closed down the Rafah crossing. The Hamas government announced it would close the tunnels along Gaza’s southern borders, stopping citizens from leaving the country and stopping the entry of food items and fuel into Gaza.
As a result, people panicked and flocked to gas stations to store up on fuel and queues of cars were seen lining up. Closing the tunnels led to a gas shortage and a price hike and to scarcity in some items in Gaza’s markets.
Gazans were deeply disappointed after all their elation at Mursi’s victory.
The health sector was hit the worst by the repercussions of the crossing’s continued closing. Scores of patients have been unable to travel for operations and treatment outside Gaza.
The spokesperson of the Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip Hamas government, Ashraf al-Qudra, said that

“each day the crossing is closed, the waiting lists of patients supposed to travel to Egypt increases by 40 patients. This requires the immediate opening of the crossing for a whole week so that patients can travel for treatment.”

He added: “Any delay in these cases exacerbates their medical conditions.” Qudra asked Egypt to “open the crossing all week long.”
Hamas has denied any relation to the incident in Sinai, accusing Israel of standing behind the attack. Its security agencies declared their willingness to cooperate fully with the Egyptian leadership to reveal the perpetrators and asked for the reopening of the crossing and the tunnels.
The deputy prime minister and foreign minister in the Gaza government, Muhammad Awad, told Al-Akhbar:

“We are hoping that the Egyptian decision will not be permanent or long-term. We need the Rafah crossing to be open at all times and to implement the agreement that was signed a month ago to open the crossing. Otherwise the Gaza Strip will face a real crisis and a health disaster.”

Political analyst, Ibrahim Abrash, told Al-Akhbar:

This Egyptian measure under the Mursi presidency is no different from previous measures under Hosni Mubarak. Egyptian national security takes priority regardless of the president or the party in charge. Egyptians give priority to their interests and their national security over any other ideological considerations. It appears that Egypt took this decision while awaiting the results of the Rafah investigations fearing that some Palestinians were involved in the Sinai incident.”

When asked about Hamas’ silence concerning this decision, Abrash said, “Hamas does not want a tense relationship with Egypt’s rulers, the MB. It knows that if it loses its relationship with the MB, it will lose an ally and its situation would get worse.”
After all, Hamas is an offshoot of the MB.” Abrash pointed out that Hamas received assurances that opening the crossing is connected to closing the Rafah investigations.
In the meantime, the office of the prime minister of the Hamas government, Ismail Haniya, announced that the prime minister ended consultations regarding a cabinet reshuffle in his government, though no details were released. A statement said that: “Haniya ended his consultations after an adequate period of time,” and he is expected to present the new cabinet before the parliament soon for a vote of confidence.
Haniya’s expected decision is considered a new attempt at Palestinian reconciliation taking place with Egyptian sponsorship. The cabinet reshuffle comes as a response to a similar reshuffle in Salam Fayad’s government in the West Bank.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

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 just annulled Mubarak’s natural gas giveaway- Will Sadat’s Camp David and the Zionist Embassy be next?

Franklin Lamb

Egypt just annulledMubarak’s natural gas giveaway
the gas line to Israel was severed 14 times in 12 months
Will Sadat’s Camp David and the Zionist Embassy be next?
Milestone 1
Milestone 2
Milestone 3
During Mubarak’s presidency, billions were lost due to corruption,
Milestone 4

The Egyptian people are demanding the return of their sovereignty. According to recent opinion surveys they believe it was partially ceded to Israel by the two post-Nasser dictators, Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak, at the behest of American administrations, from Nixon to Obama.

The removal of three humiliating shackles for Egyptians, the gas give-away scheme, the 1979 Camp David Accords and the US forced recognition of Israel, constitute a strategic national security objective for most of Egypt’s 82 million citizens. 

Egyptian hold pictures of Hassan Nasrallah
and Egyptian flags with Arabic writing
“No for gas deterioration, stop exporting Egyptian gas”
during a protest in Cairo on Feb. 2, 2009.
(AP file photo)

According to the results of an opinion poll, conducted for Press TV and published on October 3, 2011, 73 percent of the Egyptian respondents opposed the terms of the agreement. Today the figure is estimated at 90%.
For the past eight years, the 2004 gas deal has been widely unpopular, and one of the charges in the current indictment against Mubarak is that the deposed President sold Egypt’s gas as part of a sweetheart deal involving kickbacks to family members, associates and Israeli officials.

In the recent parliamentary elections and now during the presidential campaign, Egyptians have been debating relations with Israel publicly for the first time. Previously Mubarak was Israel’s protector and like some other Arab leaders still clinging to power, ignored his people’s demands for actively supporting for the liberation of Palestine.

In late January 2012, an Alexandria University student briefed this observer and a small group of Americans and Europeans sitting on benches opposite the wonderful ancient city’s majestic Great Library.  
A free Palestine
Free from the River to the Sea

 He explained, recalling the demands of the Tahrir Square protests on January 25, 2011,

“Our slogans at Tahrir Square were bread, freedom, dignity, and social justice. That was almost exactly one year ago. God willing, we will soon achieve the demands of our historic revolution which includecanceling Camp David and withdrawing recognition of the Zionist regime still occupying Palestine. Egypt must again lead the Arab Nation’s sacred obligation to liberate Jerusalem and all of Palestine from the river to the sea.”

A stunning hijabed female student continued the dialogue, giving us her opinion:

“The USA bought some of our leaders with billions in generous cash from your people but without any real benefit to ours. Camp David was essentially a private agreement by Sadat and then Mubarak. Our people had no say and were never asked whether we agreed. If we protested, we were jailed or worse. Now, the Egyptian people are gaining power despite a likely military coup by the SCAF military junta before the scheduled June elections.”
Israeli officials, in tandem with the US Zionist lobby are claiming that the abrogation of the gas agreement constitutes an “existential threat”. According to a researcher at the US Congressional Research Service in the Madison Building on Capitol Hill whose job includes keeping track of Israeli claims, it’s the 29th“existential threat” the Zionist colony has identified in its 64 year history.

These perceived existential threats range from the internationally recognized Right of Return for Palestinians ethnically cleansed from their homes during and since the 1948 Nakba, to various Palestinian groups, more than two dozen UN Resolutions including, 194 and 242, Hezbollah naturally, international solidarity movement projects, a Jewish academic or two, Iran for sure, the rise of internet blogs, and potentially virtually every Christian, Arab and Muslim on the planet, not to mention the claimed rise of global anti-Zionism which the US Zionist lobby has recently decreed was always just another form of virulent anti-Semitism.

Despite all these perceived “existential threats”including recently the so-called “Road Map”, Israeli leaders continue to eschew any substantive negotiations which could mean Arabs and Jews sharing Palestine as part of one democratic, secular state on the basis of one person one vote, minus any ‘chosen people’ lunacy.

Yuval Steinitz, Israel’s finance minister warned that Egypt’s questioning its relations with Israel was “a dangerous precedent that threatens the peace agreements between Israel and Egypt.”

Ampal, the Israeli company which buys the gas, said that it considers the termination of the contract “unlawful and in bad faith”, and demanded its full restoration. Ampal, is planning to use international arbitration to attempt redress and is sending a corporate delegation to Washington to meet with AIPAC and administration officials to ask them to get the Egyptian action nullified and to force Egypt to keep selling its natural gas at below market prices. One congressional staffer joked in an email that Israeli companies get way better constituent services out of Congress than American companies, or even the voters who elect its members.
Israeli political analyst Israel Hayom wrote last weekend:

” The painful conclusion from the collapse of the gas agreement with Egypt is that we are regressing to the days before the peace agreement with Egypt and the horizon does not look rosy at all. Camp David is in mortal danger. The painful conclusion is, once again, that we have no genuine friends in the region. Certainly not for the long term.”
The ADL’s Abe Foxman lamented,

“Israel gave Egypt a great deal in exchange for the Camp David peace agreement, much more than we should have. Among other things, a free trade zone, in which we veritably pushed for the establishment of sewing workshops and an Egyptian textile industry so that they would be able to easily export cheap cotton and other goods to the United States as well as to Israel. We made the Egyptians a respectable people in the eyes of the American public. And this is how we are repaid what they owe us?”

Never idle for long, AIPAC began circulating a draft resolution this week to its key Congressional operatives aimed at having the US Congress condemn the cancellation of the gas giveaway and demanding its immediate renewal under threat of the US terminating aid to Egypt. The lobby has also begun to squeeze the Obama administration, threating a cut off of Jewish donors if nothing is done to convince Egypt “to get real” in the words of ultra Zionist Howard Berman, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The political reality is that American diplomats, AIPAC, and Israeli officials, sometimes difficult to distinguish from one another, have been bracing for a breach in Egyptian-Israeli relations since last spring’s demonstration in Tahrir Square. They rightly fear that Camp David and the Israeli embassy in Cairo will be next on the chopping block as the Egyptian people stand up.

Regarding the expected closing of the Israeli embassy, according to the daily Yedioth Ahronoth:

“What we have at the moment is a swift deterioration in relations: Israelis can no longer set foot in Egypt, and the Egyptian consulate in Tel Aviv does not have a mandate to issue entry visas. Anyone who insists on going to Egypt from Israel even with a foreign passport can expect to get into trouble. His name could join the list of spiesandMossad agentsThey dont want us. It’s that simple and it is very dangerous now for Israelis to be in Egypt.”

According to Netanyahu spokesman Mark Regev,

There is also no one who will rent a building to the Israeli embassy in Cairo, for the small embassy staff headed by Ambassador Yaakov Amitai. Due to security considerations, we have cut drastically their work week. The staff lands every Monday afternoon and leaves early Thursday. Every time an address is found for the embassy (at an exorbitant price), the local security officials shoot down the deal. As far as the Egyptians are concerned, the Israeli diplomats can stay in Jerusalem until their next president is elected and then we will see what happens.”

Franklin LambFranklin Lamb is doing research in Lebanon. He is reachable c\o fplamb@gmail.com

He contribute to Uprooted Palestinians Blog
Please Sign http://www.petitiononline.com/ssfpcrc/petition.html

Beirut Mobile: +961-70-497-804
Office: +961-01-352-127

Shatila Palestinian Refugee Camp

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!

Egyptian Presidential Candidates Discover Sinai


Published Friday, April 27, 2012
People attend Friday prayers in Tahrir square in Cairo 20 April 2012.
Tens of thousands of Egyptians demanded on Friday that their
military rulers stick to a pledge to hand over power by mid-year
after a row over who can run in the presidential election raised
doubts about the army’s commitment to democracy.
The banner reads, “military council has no role.”
(Photo: REUTERS – Mohamed Abd El Ghany)
Pledges to put an end to years of marginalization under Mubarak have fallen on skeptical ears in an area of Egypt that is used to hearing scores of unfulfilled promises.

Abd al-Halim Hafez’s song “Good Morning Sinai,” adapted from the poem by Abd al-Rahman al-Abnoudi, is always sung on the anniversary of the liberation of the Sinai Peninsula from Israeli occupation. Egyptians celebrated the 30th anniversary on Thursday.

For the past 28 years, the celebration was accompanied only by images splashed over TV screens and newspapers of deposed president Hosni Mubarak laying a wreath on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, and another on the grave of his predecessor, Anwar Sadat.

This year was different. Field Marshal Muhammad Tantawi assumed Mubarak’s wreath-laying role. Meanwhile, Sinai was treated to an unprecedented series of campaign visits from candidates in the forthcoming presidential elections, led by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Mursi and the revolutionary forces’ nominee, Hamdeen Sabahi. All hopefuls voiced their commitment to developing the region and addressing its people’s numerous grievances, making promises that sounded familiar to those frequently made but never delivered during the Mubarak years.

The “Country of Turquoise,” for which thousands of Egyptians gave their lives, was never a development priority under Mubarak. He always appointed trusted retired generals as its governors. Sinai’s economic resources – whether real estate, oil, or the gas that supplied 40 percent of Israel’s needs – were meanwhile placed at the disposal of Mubarak’s friend, Hussein Salem, now a fugitive.

Mubarak and Salem viewed Sinai purely as the territory of the Camp David agreement with Israel. Everything they did there was related to bolstering that accord, under which Sinai was divided into three zones, each demilitarized to different degrees to ensure that Israel faced no threat from the Egyptian army. The official media scarcely mentioned Sinai other than in the context of “security campaigns,” illegal weapons, smuggling, the tunnels to Gaza, or Israel – whose citizens filled the region’s hotels.

The January 25 revolution brought little more to Sinai than a visit from former Prime Minister Essam Sharaf last April. This initially raised hopes that the peninsula might finally be freed from the siege and exclusion imposed on it by Mubarak’s regime and his close ties with Israel. But only empty promises followed. Although Sharaf pledged that those living in Sinai would be accorded land ownership rights, nothing has been done.

There were abundant promises, too, from the presidential hopefuls who flocked to Sinai ahead of the second liberation anniversary after the revolution.

They were preceded by their published election programs, in which most acknowledged the need to address Sinai’s problems, though rarely devoting more than a couple of lines to the matter.

Sabahi’s program sufficed with saying that he would be committed to the development of Sinai if elected president, without specifying how his vision of the region’s development differs from the one which Mubarak always claimed to have.

Independent Islamist candidate Abd al-Moneim Abul-Futouh’s program included Sinai as one of several border areas in which he promised to increase state investment, along with outlying regions in the west and south of the country.

Mubarak’s former Foreign Minister Amr Moussa echoed his ex-boss’ approach to solving Sinai’s problems by affirming in his election manifesto that he would give top priority to restoring security in Sinai. It also said that he would enable local people to acquire ownership rights over their lands, overcome discrimination against them in obtaining public sector jobs and joining the army, police and judiciary, and bring an end to the decades of marginalization, exclusion, and injustice they have suffered.

Mursi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate, outdid all the others by not just visiting Sinai and discussing its problems with local people, but also devoting a special section in his election program to it. Titled “Sinai Development Plan,” it envisaged dividing Sinai into five economic zones, and focusing development efforts on specific sectors in each (agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, and livestock herding in the northern zone around the provincial capital at al-Arish; mining and small industry in the central zone; agriculture, commerce, and livestock in the west; tourism in the southeast; and tourism along with mining and petroleum extraction in the southwest). Railways would also be built linking Sinai to Suez and Ismailia under the plan, which Mursi estimated would cost Egyptian Pounds (LE) 20 billion (US$3,300,000,000) over a period of five years.

Nevertheless, local observers saw the presidential candidates’ visits as little more than electioneering, pointing out that their proposals for aiding the region’s development and addressing its grievances were vague and not properly thought out – reminiscent of the Mubarak-era promises.

According to writer Masaad Abu-Fajr, what the people of Sinai want from Egypt’s forthcoming president is something altogether different. Numbering over half a million, they only have one representative in parliament. Mubarak treated them as traitors or agents, and did not even acknowledge many of them as Egyptian. In all his years in power, all Mubarak did for Sinai was divide it administratively from one governorate into two. The next president, says Abu Fajr, must firmly re-establish the sense of Egyptian identity for those living in Sinai.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

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!

%d bloggers like this: