Kissinger Bombshell: Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan targeted to stop food-independence

[Gordon_Shumway]

Dig, why do you do those 10 page copy pastes. Why dont you do an own tread for them. Its hard to read anything related to egypt when this thread is full of those threads.

Can you say how many hours have you watched al jazeera english for example? Its full of phone calls from people in Tahrir square and other places and they tell a clearer picture on what is happening there then some 7 year old article from some magazine that mentions Egypt.

[Dig]

Walsh Iran / Contra Report
Part XI
Concluding Observations

The underlying facts of Iran/contra are that, regardless of criminality, President Reagan, the secretary of state, the secretary of defense, and the director of central intelligence and their necessary assistants committed themselves, however reluctantly, to two programs contrary to congressional policy and contrary to national policy. They skirted the law, some of them broke the law, and almost all of them tried to cover up the President's willful activities.

What protection do the people of the United States have against such a concerted action by such powerful officers? The Constitution provides for congressional oversight and congressional control of appropriations, but if false information is given to Congress, these checks and balances are of lessened value. Further, in the give and take of the political community, congressional oversight is often overtaken and subordinated by the need to keep Government functioning, by the need to anticipate the future, and by the ever-present requirement of maintaining consensus among the elected officials who are the Government.

The disrespect for Congress by a popular and powerful President and his appointees was obscured when Congress accepted the tendered concept of a runaway conspiracy of subordinate officers and avoided the unpleasant confrontation with a powerful President and his Cabinet. In haste to display and conclude its investigation of this unwelcome issue, Congress destroyed the most effective lines of inquiry by giving immunity to Oliver L. North and John M. Poindexter so that they could exculpate and eliminate the need for the testimony of President Reagan and Vice President Bush.

Immunity is ordinarily given by a prosecutor to a witness who will incriminate someone more important than himself. Congress gave immunity to North and Poindexter, who incriminated only themselves and who largely exculpated those responsible for the initiation, supervision and support of their activities. This delayed and infinitely complicated the effort to prosecute North and Poindexter, and it largely destroyed the likelihood that their prompt conviction and appropriate sentence would induce meaningful cooperation.

These important political decisions were properly the responsibility of Congress. It was for the Committees to decide whether the welfare of the nation was served or endangered by a continuation of its investigation, a more deliberate effort to test the self-serving denials presented by Cabinet officers and to search for the full ramifications of the activities in question. Having made this decision, however, no one could gainsay the added difficulties thrust upon Independent Counsel. These difficulties could be dealt with only by the investment of large amounts of additional time and large amounts of expense.

The role of Independent Counsel is not well understood. Comparisons to United States attorneys, county district attorneys, or private law offices do not conceive the nature of Independent Counsel. Independent Counsel is not an individual put in charge of an ongoing agency as an acting U.S. attorney might be; he is a person taken from private practice and told to create a new agency, to carry out the mission assigned by the court. It is not as though he were told to step in and try a case on the calendar of an ongoing office with full support of the Government behind him, as it would be behind the United States attorney. He is told to create an office and to confront the Government without any expectation of real cooperation, and, indeed, with the expectation of hostility, however veiled. That hostility will manifest itself in the failure to declassify information, in the suppression of documents, and in all of the evasive techniques of highly skilled and large, complex organizations.

The investigation into Iran/contra nevertheless demonstrates that the rule of law upon which our democratic system of government depends can be applied to the highest officials even when they are operating in the secret areas of diplomacy and national security.

Despite extraordinary difficulties imposed by the destruction and withholding of records, the need to protect classified information, and the congressional grants of immunity to some of the principals involved, Independent Counsel was able to bring criminal charges against nine government officers and five private citizens involved in illegal activities growing out of the Iran/contra affair.

More importantly, the investigation and the prosecutions arising out of it have provided a much more accurate picture of how two secret Administration policies -- keeping the contras alive ``body and soul'' during the Boland cut-off period and seeking the release of Americans held hostage by selling arms to Iran -- veered off into criminality.

Evidence obtained by Independent Counsel establishes that the Iran/contra affair was not an aberrational scheme carried out by a ``cabal of zealots'' on the National Security Council staff, as the congressional Select Committees concluded in their majority report.1 Instead, it was the product of two foreign policy directives by President Reagan which skirted the law and which were executed by the NSC staff with the knowledge and support of high officials in the CIA, State and Defense departments, and to a lesser extent, officials in other agencies.

1 Majority Report, p. 22.

Independent Counsel found no evidence of dissent among his Cabinet officers from the President's determination to support the contras after federal law banned the use of appropriated funds for that purpose in the Boland Amendment in October 1984. Even the two Cabinet officers who opposed the sale of arms to Iran on the grounds that it was illegal and bad policy -- Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger and Secretary of State George P. Shultz -- either cooperated with the decision once made, as in the case of Weinberger, or stood aloof from it while being kept informed of its progress, as was the case of Shultz.

In its report section titled ``Who Was Responsible,'' the Select Committees named CIA Director William Casey, National Security Advisers Robert C. McFarlane and John M. Poindexter, along with NSC staff member Oliver L. North, and private sector operatives Richard V. Secord and Albert Hakim. With the exception of Casey who died before he could be questioned by the OIC, Independent Counsel charged and obtained criminal convictions of each of the men named by Congress. There is little doubt that, operationally, these men were central players.

But the investigation and prosecutions have shown that these six were not out-of-control mavericks who acted alone without the knowledge or assistance of others. The evidence establishes that the central NSC operatives kept their superiors -- including Reagan, Bush, Shultz, Weinberger and other high officials -- informed of their efforts generally, if not in detail, and their superiors either condoned or turned a blind eye to them. When it was required, the NSC principals and their private sector operatives received the assistance of high-ranking officers in the CIA, the Defense Department, and the Department of State.

Of the 14 persons charged criminally during the investigation, four were convicted of felony charges after trial by jury, seven pleaded guilty either to felonies or misdemeanors, and one had his case dismissed because the Administration refused to declassify information deemed necessary to the defendant by the trial judge. Two cases that were awaiting trial were aborted by pardons granted by President Bush. As this report explained earlier, many persons who committed crimes were not charged. Some minor crimes were never investigated and some that were investigated were not solved. But Independent Counsel believes that to the extent possible, the central Iran/contra crimes were vigorously prosecuted and the significant acts of obstruction were fully charged.

Fundamentally, the Iran/contra affair was the first known criminal assault on the post-Watergate rules governing the activities of national security officials. Reagan Administration officials rendered these rules ineffective by creating private operations, supported with privately generated funds that successfully evaded executive and legislative oversight and control. Congress was defrauded. Its appropriations restrictions having been circumvented, Congress was led to believe that the Administration was following the law. Numerous congressional inquiries were thwarted through false testimony and the destruction and concealment of government records.

The destruction and concealment of records and information, beginning at the twilight of Iran/contra and continuing throughout subsequent investigations, should be of particular concern. Oliver North's destruction of records in October and November 1986 caused an irretrievable loss of information to the executive agencies responsible for regulating clandestine activities, to Congress, and to Independent Counsel. John Poindexter's efforts to destroy NSC electronic mail nearly resulted in comparable damage. CIA Costa Rican Station Chief Joseph F. Fernandez attempted to hide phone records that would have revealed his contacts with Enterprise activities.

This sort of obstruction continued even after Independent Counsel's appointment. In the course of his work, Independent Counsel located large caches of handwritten notes and other documents maintained by high officials that were never relinquished to investigators. Major aspects of Iran/contra would never have been uncovered had all of the officials who attempted to destroy or withhold their records of the affair succeeded. Had these contemporaneous records been produced to investigators when they were initially requested, many of the troublesome conflicts between key witnesses would have been resolved, and timely legal steps taken toward those who feigned memory lapses or lied outright.

All of this conduct -- the evasions of the Executive branch and the Congress, the lies, the conspiracies, the acts of obstruction -- had to be addressed by the criminal justice system.

The path Independent Counsel embarked upon in late 1986 has been a long and arduous one. When he hired 10 attorneys in early 1987, Independent Counsel's conception of the operational conspiracy -- with its array of Government officials and private contractors, its web of secret foreign accounts, and its world-wide breadth -- was extremely hazy. Outlining an investigation of a runaway conspiracy disavowed by the President was quite different from the ultimate investigation of the President and three major agencies, each with the power to frustrate an investigation by persisting in the classification of non-secret but embarrassing information. Completing the factual mosaic required examining pieces spread worldwide in activities that occurred over a three-year period by officials from the largest agencies of government and a host of private operatives who, by necessity, design and training, worked secretly and deceptively.

The Role of Independent Counsel


Given the enormous autonomous power of both the Legislative and Executive branches in the modern state, the rightly celebrated constitutional checks and balances are inadequate, alone, to preserve the rule of law upon which our democracy depends.

As Watergate demonstrated, the checks and balances reach their limits in the case of criminal wrongdoing by Executive branch officials. The combination of an aggressive press, simple crimes, the White House tapes, and principled defiance by Department of Justice-appointed counsel all combined to bring Watergate to its conclusion without an independent counsel statute. It was apparent then, however, as it should be now in light of Iran/contra, that the competing roles of the attorney general, as a member of the Cabinet and presidential adviser on the one hand and chief law enforcement officer on the other, create an irreconcilable conflict of interest.

As Iran/contra demonstrated, congressional oversight alone cannot make up for deficiencies that result when an attorney general abandons that law-enforcement role in cases of Executive branch wrongdoing. Well before Attorney General Meese sought an independent counsel in December 1986, he had already become, in effect, the President's defense lawyer, to the exclusion of his responsibilities as the nation's top law enforcement officer. By that time, crucial documents had already been destroyed and false testimony given.

Congress, with all the investigatory powers it wields in the oversight process, was not able to uncover many of these documents or disprove much of that false testimony. That inability is structural, and does not result from ill will, impatience, or character flaw on the part of any legislator. With good reason, Congress's interest in investigating Executive branch wrongdoing extends no farther than remedying perceived imbalances in its relations with the Executive branch. Except in the case of impeachment, Congress's interest does not, and should not, extend to the law-enforcement goals of deterrence, retribution and punishment.

In normal circumstances, these law-enforcement goals are the province of the Justice Department, under the direction of the attorney general. As the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, the attorney general represents the people of the United States -- not the President, the Cabinet or any political party. When the attorney general cannot so represent the people, the rule of law requires that another, independent institution assume that responsibility. That is the historic role of the independent counsel.

Problems Posed by Congressional Immunity Grants


The magnitude of Iran/contra does not by itself explain why Independent Counsel took so long to complete the task assigned by the Special Division which appointed him. The word ``independent'' in Independent Counsel is not quite accurate as a description of his work. Time and again this Independent Counsel found himself at the mercy of political decisions of the Congress and the Executive branch. From the date of his appointment on December 19, 1986, Independent Counsel had to race to protect his investigations and prosecutions from the congressional grants of immunity to central Enterprise conspirators. At the same time, he had to wait almost one year for records from Swiss banks and financial organizations vital to his work. Once Congress granted immunity, Independent Counsel had to insulate himself and his staff from immunized disclosures, postponing the time he could get a wider view of the activities he was investigating.

Despite extraordinary efforts to shield the OIC from exposure to immunized testimony, the North and Poindexter convictions were overturned on appeal on the immunity issue. While the appellate panels did not find the prosecution was ``tainted'' by improper exposure to the immunized testimony of North or Poindexter, they ruled that the safeguards utilized by the trial courts did not ensure that witnesses' testimony was not affected by the immunized testimony.

Although Independent Counsel warned the Select Committees of the possibility that granting use immunity to principals in the Iran/contra matter might make it impossible to prosecute them successfully, he has never contended that Congress should refrain from granting use immunity to compel testimony in such important matters as Iran/contra. In matters of great national concern, Independent Counsel recognizes that intense public interest and the need for prompt and effective congressional oversight of intelligence activities may well force the Congress to act swiftly and grant immunity to principals.

But, in light of the experience of Independent Counsel in the Iran/contra cases, Congress should be aware of the fact that future immunity grants, at least in such highly publicized cases, will likely rule out criminal prosecution.

Congressional action that precludes, or makes it impossible to sustain, a prosecution has more serious consequences than simply one less conviction. There is a significant inequity when more peripheral players are convicted while central figures in a criminal enterprise escape punishment. And perhaps more fundamentally, the failure to punish governmental lawbreakers feeds the perception that public officials are not wholly accountable for their actions. In Iran/contra, it was President Reagan who first asked that North and Poindexter be given immunity so that they could exculpate him from responsibility for the diversion. A few months later, the Select Committees did that -- granting immunity without any proffer to ensure honest testimony.

The Classified Information Procedures Act


After Independent Counsel brought the principal operational conspiracy cases, he was forced to dismiss the central conspiracy charges against North, Poindexter, Hakim and Secord because the Administration, which had opposed the charge in the first instance, refused to declassify the information needed to proceed in the North case. Later, the entire case against Joseph F. Fernandez, the CIA's station chief in Costa Rica, was dismissed when the Administration declined to declassify information necessary for the trial. In both instances, Independent Counsel concluded that the classified information in question was already publicly known, but the Administration declined to engage in meaningful consultation with Independent Counsel before making its decision.

In any prosecution of a national security official, a tension inevitably arises between the Executive branch's duty to enforce the criminal law and its obligation to safeguard the national security through protecting classified information. The Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) was enacted in 1980 to assist the Department of Justice and other Executive branch agencies in resolving this tension in a manner consistent with our nation's commitment to the rule of law. Under CIPA, only the attorney general has the authority to make the decision between the Government's need to enforce the law and the Government's need to withhold information for national security reasons. If the intelligence agencies decline to declassify information deemed necessary by the trial court for the fair trial of a case, only the attorney general can overrule them. Likewise, if the attorney general decides that the information should not be disclosed, he is empowered to file a CIPA 6(e) affidavit to prohibit the disclosure. Current law does not require that the attorney general's decision to withhold classified material from disclosure at trial meet any objective or articulated standard. No court can challenge the substance of a 6(e) affidavit; no litigant has standing to contest the attorney general's decision to file one.

The Administration has the power to make the CIPA process work when it wants to, as in the case of alleged spies or in the trial of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega. Since CIPA became law in 1980, no attorney general killed a prosecution by filing a 6(e) affidavit until Attorney General Richard Thornburgh forced the dismissal of the Fernandez case in November 1989. As the Fernandez and North cases show, the Administration also has the power to derail the CIPA process when, for reasons of its own, it chooses not to make it work.

The attorney general's unrestricted CIPA 6(e) authority becomes questionable when an independent counsel, rather than the Justice Department, has jurisdiction over the prosecution. An independent counsel is appointed only when the attorney general determines, after a preliminary investigation, that high-level officials within the Executive branch may have been involved in criminal activity or that the Department of Justice may be perceived to have a conflict of interest. The problems of conflict are compounded in CIPA because the issue involves classified information controlled by an intelligence agency in a case charging one or more of the officials of that agency in criminal activity. Congress could not have intended that CIPA -- a statute designed to facilitate trials involving classified information -- be used by the attorney general to control prosecutions of independent counsel.

Final Thoughts


The Iran/contra investigation will not end the kind of abuse of power that it addressed any more than the Watergate investigation did. The criminality in both affairs did not arise primarily out of ordinary venality or greed, although some of those charged were driven by both. Instead, the crimes committed in Iran/contra were motivated by the desire of persons in high office to pursue controversial policies and goals even when the pursuit of those policies and goals was inhibited or restricted by executive orders, statutes or the constitutional system of checks and balances.

The tone in Iran/contra was set by President Reagan. He directed that the contras be supported, despite a ban on contra aid imposed on him by Congress. And he was willing to trade arms to Iran for the release of Americans held hostage in the Middle East, even if doing so was contrary to the nation's stated policy and possibly in violation of the law.

The lesson of Iran/contra is that if our system of government is to function properly, the branches of government must deal with one another honestly and cooperatively. When disputes arise between the Executive and Legislative branches, as they surely will, the laws that emerge from such disputes must be obeyed. When a President, even with good motive and intent, chooses to skirt the laws or to circumvent them, it is incumbent upon his subordinates to resist, not join in. Their oath and fealty are to the Constitution and the rule of law, not to the man temporarily occupying the Oval Office. Congress has the duty and the power under our system of checks and balances to ensure that the President and his Cabinet officers are faithful to their oaths.

[Gordon_Shumway]

We tare talking Tahrir square and Egypt man, not Iran contra.

[Dig]

Dig, why do you do those 10 page copy pastes. Why dont you do an own tread for them. Its hard to read anything related to egypt when this thread is full of those threads.

Perhaps Twitter would be a more appropriate form of communication that can assist in continually captivating your attention rather than a forum based on sourced information with a commitment to expose in great detail the intricate details of current events and relations to the New World Order's plans for total depopulation and enslavement. Or Qatar/CFR's Al Jazeera might also be more appropriate. I am sure they have a forum on their site where you can repeat their staged narratives in nice, easy to digest sound bites.

Can you say how many hours have you watched al jazeera english for example? Its full of phone calls from people in Tahrir square and other places and they tell a clearer picture on what is happening there then some 7 year old article from some magazine that mentions Egypt.

Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. The articles are decades old and this is the same Iran/Contra/BCCI/Stephens guys who take orders from Bilderberg. The relationship between the staged protests and the CIA's manual can hardly be ignored. Additionally, Kissinger is explaining that he wants this done all over the world (that would include the US). Monitoring Twitter and Al-Jazeera may assist in your attempts to ignore the Bilderberg connections to this Tragic Theater we are seeing, but some historical perspective likely will be a lamp in the darkness concerning the more comprehensive threats to the inalienable rights of man and the globalist agenda to use social networking against the people.

[Dig]

We tare talking Tahrir square and Egypt man, not Iran contra.

Please research the CIA/MI6 connection to the Muslim Brotherhood and the staged revolution in the late 1970's which allowed Bush/Rockefeller/Harriman to commit crimes against humanity.

Why would you say this is not Iran/Contra when all evidence indicates that the controlling elites are the same that pulled off that staged coup? Do you have any evidence refuting the dozens of sourced references and information linking the two?

[Georgiacopguy]

I smell pork.

[Dig]

Mir-Hossein Mousavi's Iran/Contra Connection?
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_56032.shtml
By Reza Fiyouzat, Revolutionary Flowerpot Society
URUKNET  Monday, Jun 15, 2009

What do Michael Ledeen (the American 'neo-conservative'), Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the Iranian presidential candidate of 'change') and Adnan Khashoggi (the opulent Saudi Arabian jet-setter) have in common?

They are all good friends and associates of Manuchehr Ghorbanifar (an Iranian arms merchant, an alleged MOSSAD double agent, and a key figure in the Iran/Contra Affair, the arms-for-hostages deals between Iran and the Reagan administration). In one or two, at most three, degrees of separation, these people hung out in the same circles and very likely drank to the same toasts.

You can find all kinds of trivia about Ghorbanifar in the Walsh Report on the Iran/Contra affair. In Chapter 8, for example, we learn:

"Ghorbanifar, an Iranian exile and former CIA informant who had been discredited by the agency as a fabricator, was a driving force behind these proposals [for arms-for-hostages deal];" or, "Ghorbanifar, as broker for Iran, borrowed funds for the weapons payments from Khashoggi, who loaned millions of dollars to Ghorbanifar in "bridge financing'" for the deals. Ghorbanifar repaid Khashoggi with a 20 percent commission after being paid by the Iranians,"

Here is a bit from an article by Time magazine that shows Ghorbanifar's circle of associates; it is from a January 1987 cover story (The Murky World of Weapons Dealers; January 19, 1987):
"By [Ghorbanifar's] own account he was a refugee from the revolutionary government of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini, which confiscated his businesses in Iran, yet he later became a trusted friend and kitchen adviser to Mir Hussein Mousavi, Prime Minister in the Khomeini government. Some U.S. officials who have dealt with Ghorbanifar praise him highly. Says Michael Ledeen, adviser to the Pentagon on counterterrorism: "[Ghorbanifar] is one of the most honest, educated, honorable men I have ever known." Others call him a liar who, as one puts it, could not tell the truth about the clothes he is wearing," (emphasis added).
This second bit is from Chapter 1 of Walsh Iran/Contra Report:

"On or about November 25, 1985, Ledeen received a frantic phone call from Ghorbanifar, asking him to relay a message from [Mir-Hossein Mousavi] the prime minister of Iran to President Reagan regarding the shipment of the wrong type of HAWKs. Ledeen said the message essentially was "we've been holding up our part of the bargain, and here you people are now cheating us and tricking us and deceiving us and you had better correct this situation right away.''
[...]
"In early May, North and CIA annuitant George Cave met in London with Ghorbanifar and Mir, where the groundwork finally was laid for a meeting between McFarlane and high-level Iranian officials, as well as financial arrangements for the arms deal. Among the officials Ghorbanifar said would meet with an American delegation were the president and prime minister [Mousavi] of Iran and the speaker of the Iranian parliament," (emphasis added).
And to remind how Michael Ledeen became involved in the Iran/Contra affair in 1985, here is a bit from Chapter 15 of Walsh Report:

"[McFarlane] authorized Michael A. Ledeen, a part-time NSC consultant on anti-terrorism, to ask Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres to check on a report that the Israelis had access to good sources on Iran. By early August 1985, Ledeen's talks had led to a direct approach by Israeli officials to McFarlane, to obtain President Reagan's approval to ship U.S.-supplied TOW missiles to Iran in exchange for the release of American hostages in Beirut. McFarlane said he briefed the President, Regan, Shultz, Weinberger, Casey and perhaps the Vice President about the proposal in July and August 1985. McFarlane said that Casey recommended that Congress not be informed of the arms sales."

There you have it. Now, I'm no investigative journalist, so I'll leave it to the professionals to dig deeper into this.

But, I do have to wonder aloud: Seeing how we cannot ignore his 'neo-con' credentials and that Michael Ledeen maintained his very good relations with Ghorbanifar, (who at least used to be) a good friend of Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the 'candidate of change' in the Iranian presidential elections); and given the support that Mousavi's candidacy has been receiving from the American 'moderates', maybe this kind of 'change' is the 'regime change' the Americans have had in mind for Iran?

[Dig]

Hey, look who Mubarak kicked out of the country and who Iran/Contra psychos are protecting:


Ali Mohamed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Mohamed


Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, (علي محمد) (born June 3, 1952) is a double agent[1] who worked for both the CIA and Egyptian Islamic Jihad simultaneously, reporting on the workings of each for the benefit of the other.

He came to the United States working as a translator for Ayman Zawahiri, who toured California mosques to raise money to fight the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. While there, Zawahiri encouraged him to infiltrate the United States, to whom he later presented himself as defecting. Since he simply walked into the CIA office in Cairo and asked to speak to the station chief and offered his services, the Americans assumed he was an Egyptian spy, but nevertheless recruited him to be a junior intelligence officer.[2] When tasked to infiltrate a mosque with ties to Hezbollah, he simply informed the leadership he was an American spy intending to collect information; since a loyal American spy was also in the congregation, he reported Mohamed's bizarre behaviour to the CIA, who dismissed him and sought to ban him from entering the United States.[2] Ironically however, he was simply picked up by the Special Forces in the American army, who sent him to the Special Warfare school and encouraged him to pursue a doctorate in Islamic Studies and teach courses on the Middle East.[2]

In the 1980s Mohamed trained anti-Soviet fighters en route to Afghanistan. FBI special agent Jack Cloonan called him "bin Laden's first trainer".[3] Mohamed was charged with the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. In October 2000, he pleaded guilty to five counts of conspiracy to kill nationals of the United States and to destroy U.S. property.

Mohamed has been described as "Six-foot one, 200 pounds, and exceptionally fit, ... a martial artist and skilled linguist who spoke fluent English, French, and Hebrew in addition to his native Arabic. He was disciplined, clever, and gregarious, with a marked facility for making friends."[4]

Mohamed was a major in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit, until being discharged for suspected fundamentalism in 1984. He enlisted in the U.S. Army and used U.S. military information to train al-Qaeda and other Muslim militants, and write al-Qaeda's multivolume terrorist training guide. [4]

In the United States

In 1984 Mohamed offered his services to the CIA in Cairo station and was stationed in Hamburg Germany. There he "entered a mosque associated with Hezbollah and immediately told the Iranian cleric in charge that he was an American spy assigned to infiltrate the community." The mosque had already been penetrated and his announcement was passed on to the CIA, which, according to Lawrence Wright, "terminated Mohamed" and "sent out cables labeling him highly untrustworthy." By this "time, however, Mohamed was already in California on a visa-waiver program that was sponsored by the agency itself, one designed to shield valuable assets or those who have performed important services for the country." [4]

In America he married an American woman from Santa Clara, California after a 6 week courtship and became a U.S. citizen.[5] He enlisted in the U.S. Army and managed to get stationed at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, North Carolina until 1989.[1] "His awed superiors found him 'beyond reproach' and 'consistently accomplished'." [4]

According to Cooperative Research, Mohamed was a Drill sergeant at Fort Bragg, and was hired to teach courses on Arabic culture at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center.

In 1988 Mohamed informed his superior officers in the U.S. Army that he was taking some leave time to fight Soviets in Afghanistan. "A month later, he returned, boasting that he had killed two Soviet soldiers and giving away as souvenirs what he claimed were their uniform belts."

Mohamed's commanding officer, Lt. Col. Robert Anderson, said he wrote detailed reports aimed at getting Army intelligence to investigate Mohamed — and have him court-martialed — but the reports were ignored.

"I think you or I would have a better chance of winning Powerball, than an Egyptian major in the unit that assassinated Sadat would have getting a visa, getting to California ... getting into the Army and getting assigned to a Special Forces unit," he said. "That just doesn't happen."

It was equally unthinkable that an ordinary American GI would go unpunished after fighting in a foreign war, he said.

Anderson said all this convinced him that Mohamed was "sponsored" by a U.S. intelligence service. "I assumed the CIA," he said.[6]

Mohamed also took maps and training manuals off base to downsize and copy at Kinko's and used them to write al-Qaeda's multivolume terrorist training guide that became playbook.[4]

Mohamed also conducted clandestine military and demolition training through the Al Kifah Refugee Center. While in the United States, he helped train a number of jihadis, like El Sayyid Nosair and Mahmud Abouhalima, who assisted Ramzi Yousef in his 1993 attack on the World Trade Center.[7]

In the early 1990s Mohamed returned to Afghanistan, where "he trained the first al-Qaeda volunteers in techniques of unconventional warfare including kidnappings, assassinations, and hijacking planes, which he had learned from the American Special Forces." According to FBI special agent Jack Cloonan, in one of Mohamed's first classes were Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and other al-Qaeda leaders.[3][8]

In 1993 Mohamed also traveled to Africa to survey embassies in Africa such as the Nairobi, (Kenya) embassy which Al-Qaeda later bombed.[9] He became an FBI informant.[citation needed]

In 1994, al-Qaeda operative Mohammed Atef refused to allow Mohamed to know which name and passport he would be traveling under, expressing concerns that Mohamed could be working with the American authorities.[10]
Arrest

While he was subpoenaed in Rahman's trial, Ali Mohamed was not arrested until years later — on 10 September 1998, when he attempted to flee to Egypt after being subpoenaed in the aftermath of the embassy bombings in Nairobi and Tanzania. After eight months of imprisonment, Ali Mohamed entered a guilty plea in May 1999. What happened after that is unclear. The trial proceeded, but there is no record of any sentencing or even a conviction. As late as February 20, 2002, CBS News reported that "Mohammad pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing."[2]
Speculated cooperation with US Intelligence

In October 2001, the Raleigh News & Observer noted that Ali Mohamed may be cooperating with the US government. "Defense lawyers and many other observers believe that Mohamed, who has not yet been sentenced, is now cooperating with the United States, though the government has never confirmed this. When he is sentenced he could receive as little as 25 years under his plea agreement."[11]

Further news sources in 2001 seem to suggest that Ali Mohamed is providing information on Bin Laden and al-Qaeda in an attempt to reduce his sentence,[12] and that his sentencing "has been postponed indefinitely."[13] In 2006, Mohamed's wife, Linda Sanchez, was reported in 2006 as saying, "He's still not sentenced yet, and without him being sentenced I really can't say much. He can't talk to anybody. Nobody can get to him. They have Ali pretty secretive...it's like he just kinda vanished into thin air."[14]


References
^ Ton Hays and Sharon Theimer, "Egyptian agent worked with Green Berets, bin Laden", Jerusalem Post, December 31, 2001 (copy). Archived 2009-10-25.
^ a b c Temple-Raston, Dina. "The Jihad Next Door", 2007. p. 83
^ a b Interview with FBI special agent Jack Cloonan, Frontline, PBS, October 18, 2005.
^ a b c d e Wright, Lawrence (2006). Looming Tower. p. 180. ISBN 1400030846.
^ Bin Laden's man in Silicon Valley
^ Lance Williams and Erik McCormick, "Al Qaeda terrorist worked with FBI ...", San Francisco Chronicle, November 4, 2001.
^ Benjamin, Daniel & Steven Simon. "The Age of Sacred Terror", 2002
^ Wright, Lawrence (2006). Looming Tower. p. 181. ISBN 1400030846.
^ 9/11 Commission Report, chapter 2, p.68 (HTML version)
^ Sullivan, John. Raleigh News and Observer, "Al-Qaeda Terrorist Duped FBI, Army", October 21, 2001
^ Raleigh News & Observer 10/21/2001
^ San Francisco Chronicle 9/21/2001
^ Associated Press 12/31/2001
^ Peter Lance, Triple Cross, Harper Collins 2006
^ Complete 911 Timeline, Cooperative Research
^ "By The Book", 60 Minutes II, CBS News, February 20, 2002

Bibliography
Williams, Lance and Erin McCormick. "Al Qaeda terrorist worked with FBI, Ex-Silicon Valley resident plotted embassy attacks",San Francisco Chronicle, November 4, 2001. Accessed April 4, 2006
Aita, Judy. "Ali Mohamed: The Defendant Who Did Not Go to Trial, Pled guilty to conspiracy in African embassy bombing case", International Information Programs, US Dept of State, May 15, 2001. Accessed April 4, 2006
"Hunting Bin Laden: The Suspects & Charges". PBS Frontline. 2001-05-29. Retrieved 2006-04-04.


I just want to post this again because I cannot even believe I am reading it and need to break it down:

1: Mohamed was a major in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit,

2. until being discharged for suspected fundamentalism in 1984.

3. He enlisted in the U.S. Army

4. and used U.S. military information to train al-Qaeda and other Muslim militants,

5. and write al-Qaeda's multivolume terrorist training guide.


W T F ?

[Dig]

Peter Lance on Triple Cross
http://fora.tv/2007/04/17/Peter_Lance_on_Triple_CrossInterview: Triple Cross: A Conversation With Peter Lance
http://www.internetwritingjournal.com/dec06/lance5.htm9/11's Trainer in Terrorism Was an FBI Informant - Peter Dale Scott
http://forum.grasscity.com/general/129207-9-11s-trainer-terrorism-fbi-informant.htmlTerrorism and Censorship: An Interview With Peter Lance: Part 1
http://www.writerswrite.com/blog/710091Terrorism and Censorship: An Interview With Peter Lance: Part 2
http://www.writerswrite.com/blog/712091
Egyptian Islamic Jihad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_Islamic_Jihad

The Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Arabic: الجهاد الإسلامي المصري‎) (EIJ), formerly called simply Islamic Jihad (الجهاد الإسلامي and Liberation Army for Holy Sites[1]) originally referred to as "al-Jihad," and then "the Jihad Group", or "the Jihad Organization",[2] is an Egyptian Islamist group active since the late 1970s. It is under worldwide embargo by the United Nations as an affiliate of al-Qaeda.[3] It is also banned by several individual governments including that of the Russian Federation.[4] Since 1991 it has been led by Ayman al-Zawahiri.

The organization's original primary goal was to overthrow the Egyptian Government and replace it with an Islamic state. Later it broadened its aims to include attacking the United States and Israel interests in Egypt and abroad.

EIJ has suffered setbacks as a result of numerous arrests of operatives worldwide, most recently in Lebanon and Yemen.[citation needed] In June 2001, Al Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which had been associated with each other for many years, merged into "Qaeda al-Jihad."[5]

History

“Farj used to deliver Friday sermons in a private mosque that had been built by his in-laws. During the ensuing discussions with his listeners, he managed to convince some to join in a clandestine organization to eventually wage violent jihad. ... The Cairo branch was composed of five or six groups, loosely connected and each with its own emir (one of whom was Ayman al-Zawahiri). They had autonomy but met weekly to work out a general strategy. ..."[6]   ”

Al-Jihad or "Tanzim al-Jihad" was formed in 1980 from the merger of two clusters of Islamist groups: a Cairo branch, under Muhammad abd-al-Salam Faraj, and a Saidi (Upper Egypt) branch under Karam Zuhdi.[6] Faraj wrote the 1980 book al-Faridah al-Ghaiba (The Neglected Obligation), setting forth the standards for EIJ, of which 500 copies were printed.[7]

After the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian government succeeded in rounding up the membership of Tanzim al-Jihad, but "was rather lenient in the ensuing trial". In prison, the Cairenes and Saidis reverted into two factions, the Cairo militants later becoming the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and the Saidis later forming the al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, or the Islamic Group. According to Zawahiri, the EIJ was "different from the Takfir wal Hijra group as we do not consider people infidels because of their sins. And we are different from the Muslim Brotherhood because sometimes they do not oppose the government".[8]

The leader of the Cairo militants was Abud Zumour, "a onetime army intelligence officer serving a life sentence for his part in the plot to kill Sadat." This faction, the Islamic Jihad, "was small and tightly disciplined".[9]

Most of the middle-rank members were discharged from prison after only three years and fled to Pakistan and Afghanistan to help the mujahideen there and escape persecution at home.[10]
Pakistan and Afghanistan

In the mid-1980s, in Peshawar Pakistan, the militants reconstituted themselves as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, "with very loose ties to their nominal imprisoned leader, Abud al-Zumur." A physician by the name of Sayyed Imam Al-Sharif or "Dr. Fadl" was head of EIJ for some time,[11] although eventually Ayman al-Zawahiri, "whose leadership style was autocratic," would take over. During this time EIJ became more extreme, with for example, Dr. Fadl emphasizing the importance of takfir and execution of apostates, which he argued should include those who registered to vote, since this was a violation of God's sovereignty over governance.[12]

It was also at this time that some saw "the Egyptians" of the EIJ begin to exert an influence on Osama bin Laden, who at the time was known as a wealthy and well-connected fundraiser for the jihad in Afghanistan. Egyptian filmmaker Essam Deraz, "bin Laden's first biographer," met bin Laden in the "Lion's Den" training camp in Afghanistan and complained that the Egyptians "formed a barrier" around bin Laden and "whenever he tried to speak confidentially to bin Laden, the Egyptians would surround the Saudi and drag him into another room."[13] One of those who complained of being elbowed aside[14] was a former mentor of bin Laden Abdullah Azzam, the original exponent and organizer of global jihad on behalf of the Afghan mujahideen.[15]

In 1991, EIJ broke with al-Zumur and al-Zawahiri took control of the leadership. At this point, Marc Sageman (a former foreign service officer who was based in Islamabad from 1987 to 1989), says "the EIJ became a free-floating network without any real ties to its original society or to its surrounding society."[16]
Sudan

Al-Jihad (EIJ) had a blind-cell structure, meaning members in one group did not know the identities or activities of those in another, so that if one member were captured they would not be able to endanger the whole organization. However, Egyptian authorities captured the membership director of EIJ, the one member who had all the other members names. The database in his computer listed every member's address, aliases, and potential hideouts. Al-Jihad leader al-Zawahiri bitterly lamented "the government newspapers" elation over “the arrest of 800 members of the al-Jihad group without a single shot being fired."[17]

In August 1993 al-Jihad unsuccessfully attempted to kill the Egyptian Interior Minister, Hasan al-Alfi, who was leading a crackdown on Islamic militants. A bomb-laden motorcycle exploded next to the minister's car, fatally wounding Nazih Nushi Rashed and killing Tarek Abdel-Nabi (Dia al-Deen) instantly.[18][19] The attack marked the first time Sunni Islamists had made use of suicide in terrorism, a technique made famous by Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon. It is "likely that the notion of suicide bombing" was inspired by Hezbollah as al-Zawahiri had been to Iran to raise money, and had sent his underling Ali Mohamed, "among others, to Lebanon to train with Hezbollah".[20]

A few months later in November Al-Jihad made another bombing attempt, this time to kill Egypt's prime minister, Atef Sidqi. The car bomb exploded close to a girls' school in Cairo as the minister was driven past. The minister, protected by his armored car, was unhurt, but the explosion injured 21 people and killed a young schoolgirl, Shayma Abdel-Halim. Unfortunately for al-Jihad this bombing was preceded by two years of terror by a larger terror group, al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya that had killed 240, and the patience of the Egyptian public had run short. "Little Shayma's death captured people's emotions as nothing else had" and "when her coffin was borne through the streets of Cairo, people cried, `Terrorism is the enemy of God!`" A harsh police crackdown followed and 280 EIJ members were arrested, with 6 eventually given a death sentence.[21]

EIJ's longtime association with al-Qaeda became closer at this time when "most" of its members were reported to have gone "on the al-Qaeda payroll." EIJ leader hoped this would be a temporary measure but later confided to one of this chief assistants that joining with bin Laden had been `the only solution to keeping the Jihad organization abroad alive.`"[22]
Mubarak assassination attempt

In June 1995 another failed assassination attempt caused yet a greater setback. Operating from its exile base in Sudan, EIJ joined forces with the Egyptian al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya and Sudanese intelligence[23] in an attempt to kill Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak while he was in Ethiopia for a conference of the Organization of African Unity. The leader of the plot was "Mustafa Hamza, a senior Egyptian member of the Al-Qaeda and commander to the military branch of the Islamic Group." The plotters had been planning the attack for more than a year, and even married local women in Ethiopia. They received assistance from Sudanese intelligence services, which smuggled weapons into their embassy in Ethiopia.[24][25]

Their hope was to decapitate the Egyptian government thereby eliminating the "iron grip" of the state security services, and creating a power vacuum which Islamists could then fill. Unfortunately for this plan, the attack was foiled by a malfunctioning grenade launcher and Mubarak’s bulletproof limousine.
Expulsion from Sudan

Back in Egypt, Mubarak launched a ruthless campaign to crush anyone involved in Islamist terrorism,[25] but in Sudan the EIJ had even worse troubles. In 1994, Ahmad Salama Mabruk's 17-year old son Musab, as well as the 15-year old son Ahmed of Mohammed Sharaf, were captured by the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate and sexually abused. They were blackmailed with videotape of the sodomy, until they agreed to act as informants against their fathers' group. Musab went through his father's files and photocopied them for the Egyptians, but the Sudanese intelligence service saw the covert meetings and alerted al-Jihad, recommending that they treat the boys leniently if they confessed. al-Zawahiri convened a Sharia court, where Musab confessed he had been given explosives by the Egyptians which he was told to detonate at the next Shura council meeting. They were each found guilty of "sodomy, treason, and attempted murder", and sentenced to death by firing squad. The trial, and the execution, were filmed and copies of the film were distributed by al-Jihad.[26]

When the Sudanese found out about the executions in its jurisdiction, al-Zawahiri and the rest of EIJ were ordered to leave the Sudan.[24] It was a devastating blow to the group. "In Zawahiri's hands, al-Jihad had splintered into angry and homeless gangs."[27]

Bin Laden was also weakened by this failed operation. The core of his al-Qaeda group was made up of members of Islamic Jihad. Because of Sudan's collaboration in the plot, the United Nations voted to impose sanction on the country.[28] To rehabilitate itself in the international community, the Sudanese government pressured bin Laden to leave the country.[24][29] Bin Laden and many EIJ returned to war torn Afghanistan having lost many members and almost all of bin Laden's assets.[30]

On November 19, 1995 EIJ bombed the Egyptian embassy in Islamabad killing 16 and wounding 60. The attack served as a prototype for future attacks by its sister organization al-Qaeda, such as the 1998 bombings of American embassies in Africa.
Albania

According to journalist Lawrence Wright, based on testimony given at the trial of the Albanian cell members in the late 1990s or early 00's, EIJ membership had dwindled to 40 members outside Egypt, and none at all inside the country where "the movement had been eradicated".[31]

In 1998, three al-Jihad members were arrested in Albania, and the United States intervened to ensure they were extradited to Egypt to face charges.[32] In Afghanistan Zawahiri wrote the 1998 fatwa for the "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders," calling for the killing of Americans and their allies, both civilian and military, which was signed by representatives of several jihadi organizations, including EIJ.[33] In August 1998, Issam Abdel-Tawab was extradited to Egypt from Bulgaria.[34]

Dissent among EIJ members to this change of direction and abandonment of the taking over Egypt as the group's primary goal, was so strong that "in the end, Zawahiri pledged to resign if the members failed to endorse his actions. The organization was in such disarray because of arrests and defections, and so close to bankruptcy, that the only choice was to follow Zawahiri or abandon al-Jihad." One of those who did abandon al-Jihad was Zawahiri's own brother Muhammed, the military commander of EIJ.[35]

Merger with al-Qaeda

In June 2001, Al Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad merged into an entity formally called jamaa'at Qa'idat al-Jihad,[5] with leadership of EIJ "comprises the majority" – six of nine seats – "of al Qaeda's ruling council (shura)."[36][37] Consequently it often considered synonymous with Al-Qaeda, (for example by the U.S. Treasury Department),[38] although some refer to it as a separate organization with al-Zawahiri as its leader and global jihad's main ideologist.[39] [Yes, all the MSM Mockingbird puppets are openly supporting an Al-Qaeda takeover of Egypt - WTF!]
Activities

The organization specializes in armed attacks against high-level Egyptian Government personnel, including cabinet ministers, and car-bombings against official US and Egyptian facilities. The original Jihad was responsible for the attempted assassinations of Interior Minister Hassan al-Alfi in August 1993 and Prime Minister Atef Sedky in November 1993. Egyptian Jihad and rival armed group launched a wave of violence against Egypt's secular government in 1992, a campaign they only abandoned at the end of the decade. Nearly 1300 people died in the unrest, including policemen and government officials. It is responsible for the Egyptian Embassy bombing in Islamabad, Pakistan in 1995. In 1998 a planned attack against the US Embassy in Albania was thwarted by a roundup of suspects who are now called the Returnees from Albania.
Leadership

Al-Sharif passed the Jihad leadership to Ayman al-Zawahri amid dissent within the movement in the mid 1980's. The al-Zawahri faction subsequently formed an alliance with Al-Qaeda leading over time to the effective merger of the two groups operations inside Afghanistan.

Although al-Zawahri is frequently referred to as a 'lieutenant' or 'second in command' of Al Qaeda this description is misleading as it implies a hierarchical relationship. The modern Al Qaeda organization is the combination of Bin Laden's financial resources with al-Zawahri's ideological and operational leadership. Despite the effective merger of al-Zawahri and Bin Laden's groups in the Afghanistan area of operations there is evidence that suggests that at least part of the Islamic Jihad group continuing to operate in Egypt remains independent of Bin Laden's organization and reports to al-Zawahri personally.[citation needed]
External Aid

The extent of its aid from outside of Egypt is not known. The Egyptian Government claims that both Iran and Osama bin Laden support the Islamic Jihad. It also may obtain some funding through various Islamic nongovernmental organizations, cover businesses, and criminal acts.[citation needed] Unlike other militant counterparts, EIJ was noted for condemning only the government as apostate, and seeking to recruit soldiers, reporters and government workers who were untainted by jahiliyya.[7] Iraq March 1993 agreed to renew relations with the Islamic Jihad Organization in Egypt.[40]

See also
Sayyed Imam Al-Sharif
Hani al-Sibai
Returnees from Albania
Ali Mohammed
Abu Ayyub al-Masri
al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya

References
^ Global Briefings, Issue 27, September 1998, “Osama Bin Laden tied to other fundamentalists”.
^ Wright, Lawrence, Looming Tower, Knopf, 2006, p.123
^ Affiliates of al-Qaeda and the Taliban, United Nations Security Council Committee 1267
^ ‘Terror’ list out; Russia tags two Kuwaiti groups, Arab Times, February 2003
^ a b The Man Behind Bin Laden"
^ a b Sageman, Marc, Understanding Terror Networks, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004, p.134
^ a b Benjamin, Daniel & Steven Simon. "The Age of Sacred Terror", 2002
^ al-Zayat, Montasser, "The Road to al-Qaeda", 2002
^ Murphy, Caryle, Passion for Islam: Shaping the Modern Middle East: the Egyptian Experience, Simon and Schuster, 2002, p.67
^ Sageman, Marc, Understanding Terror Networks, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004, p.147
^ Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright, NY, Knopf, 2006, p.122
^ Looming Tower, by Lawrence Wright, NY, Knopf, 2006, p.124
^ 1988 visit to Lion's Den, in Looming Tower, by Lawrence Wright, NY, Knopf, 2006, p.129
^ Looming Tower, by Lawrence Wright, NY, Knopf, 2006, p.130
^ Looming Tower, by Lawrence Wright, NY, Knopf, 2006, p.107-8
^ Sageman, Marc, Understanding Terror Networks, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004, p.148
^ Wright, Looming Tower, (2002), p.184-5
^ Mickolus, Edward F. "Terrorism: 1992-1995: A Chronology of Events", p. 468
^ Reuters, "Egypt rounds up 20 militants in bombing", August 20, 1993
^ Wright, Looming Tower, (2002), p.186
^ Wright, Lawrence, Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11, by Lawrence Wright, NY, Knopf, 2006, p.186
^ Wright, Looming Towers (2006), p.185
^ BBC News | AFRICA | Egypt and Sudan repair relations
^ a b c Sageman, Marc, Understanding Terror Networks, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004, p.45
^ a b Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.213-215
^ al-Shafey, Mohammed. Asharq Alawsat, Al-Qaeda's secret Emails: Part Four, June 19, 2005
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.216
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.216, 220
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.220
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.222-3
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.336
^ Le Figaro, "CIA said hunting Bin Laden group in Tirana", September 30, 1998
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.259
^ Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Summary of the Security Intelligence Report concerning Mahmoud Jaballah, February 22, 2008. Appendix A.
^ Wright, Looming Towers, 2006, p.260-1
^ Sageman, Marc, Understanding Terror Networks, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004, p.63
^ Wright, Looming Tower, (2006), p.336
^ SDN and SDGT list, US Department of the Treasury
^ Sageman,Understanding Terror Networks, (2004), p.63
^ http://a.abcnews.com/images/pdf/Pentagon_Report_V1.pdf

Further reading
Jamaat al-Islamiyya (and) Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Council on Foreign Relations, October 2005
In the Spotlight: Al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad), Center for Defense Information, 17 September 2002
Al-Jihad al-Islami, Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies
Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Australian National Security, Australian Government
Egypt's Jihad Group leader wants end to violence
Violence won't work: how author of 'jihadists' bible' stirred up a storm

[Gordon_Shumway]

Please research the CIA/MI6 connection to the Muslim Brotherhood and the staged revolution in the late 1970's which allowed Bush/Rockefeller/Harriman to commit crimes against humanity.

Why would you say this is not Iran/Contra when all evidence indicates that the controlling elites are the same that pulled off that staged coup? Do you have any evidence refuting the dozens of sourced references and information linking the two?

Hey dude, i know all those connections. I have listened to alex jones from 2003 so thats probably thousands of hours of radio. Theres a lot of sourced information that gets hidden in the last page of washington post and you hear it from alex jones radio.

It still doesnt mean that I dont have the right to have disagreements on the tactical viewpoints of how nwo keeps control of egypt.

You didnt answer how many hours you have watched al-jazeera. If you dont want then dont...



+ How is the "CFR color rockefeller nwo" revolution going? Pentagon-Mubarak is still in control. If it would be CFR/nwo revolution, wouldnt they have accomplished a lot more by this time?

[Dig]

http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/egyptian_islamic_jihad.htm

Egyptian Islamic Jihad - Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Arabic: الجهاد الإسلامي المصري ; also formerly called simply Islamic Jihad,  الجهاد الإسلامي , "al-Jihad," a"the Jihad Group", "the Jihad Organization," ("tanzeem al Jihad)   is a violent Islamist terrorist group dedicated to world Jihad and to overthrow of the Egyptian government, establishment of an Islamic state in Egypt and eventually world domination by Islam in a renewed Caliphate. It was closely allied to, part of, or father to, the Gamaa al Islamiya and shared with it for many years basic ideology, leadership and participation in various terrorist activities. (see here for a detailed account of some of the interrelationships)

The Egyptian Islamic Jihad was founded in 1979 or 1980 by a merger of a group founded by Mohammed Abd al-Salam Farraj in Cairo and a Saidi (Upper Egypt) branch under Karam Zuhdi. In the 80s, the groups may have split apart again, with one branch becoming the Gama'a al Islamiya  (see here). Ayman Zawahiri is a member or leader of both groups .

The charter or founding manifesto of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad was written by the group's founder Mohammed Abd al-Salam Farraj. It is called   "al-Faridah al-Gha'ibah." - the neglected duty.  Farraj begins by stating that "Jihad for God's cause...has been neglected by the Ulema of this age." He goes on to expound the interpretation of Jihad as violent struggle (Jihad by the sword) - a duty incumbent on all Muslims. This theology is familiar from the writings of Sayyed Qutb and Hassan al Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Islamic Jihad can be viewed as nothing more than the continuation of the original Muslim Brotherhood ideology, after the Ikhwan Muslim brotherhood in Egypt had renounced violence.

Islamic Jihad's initial terrorist operation was the murder of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in October 1981. Sadat was ostensibly murdered because he had reneged on his promise to institute Sha'aria law, because he had made peace with Israel and because of his ties with the United States. In fact however, the assassination was to have been the prelude to an Islamic takeover of Egypt, just as previous attempts on the life of Gamal Abdel Nasser had attempted to achieve. The Egyptian police rounded up a great many leaders of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Gamaa al Islamiya including Ayman Zawahiri, Farraj, Colonel al Zuhour who apparently had plotted the takeover of the government, Khaled Istambouli who carried out the assassination and roughly 300 others. They were tried in civil and military courts. Farraj, al-Islambouli and his fellow assassins were executed in April 1982, while al-Zumor, Ayman al-Zawahiri and others were given lengthy prison sentences. However, al-Zawahiri won an appeal, and was released and subsequently traveled first to Saudi Arabia, and then to Peshawar Pakistan where he and Osama Bin Laden formed a dilletantish group of Arabs who more or less vicariously participated in the struggle against the Soviet backed government in Afghanistan. Zawahiri became actual leader of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (or "al Jihad") about 1991.

The Egyptian Islamic Jihad had a blind-cell structure, like that of the Leninist Communist party. Members in one cell did not know the identities or activities of those in another, so that if one member were captured they would not be able to endanger more than a few people. However, Egyptian police captured the membership director of EIJ. The database in his computer listed every member's address, aliases, and potential hideouts. Al-Jihad leader al-Zawahiri bitterly lamented "the government newspapers" elation over the arrest of 800 members of the al-Jihad group without a single shot being fired."

In August 1993 Al-Jihad attempted to kill the Egyptian Interior Minister, Hasan al-Alfi. who was leading a crackdown on Islamic militants and their terror campaign. A bomb-laden motorcycle exploded next to the minister's car, killing the bomber and his accomplice," but not the minister. The attacked marked the first time Sunni Islamists had made use of suicide in terrorism, a technique made famous by Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon.

A few months later in November Al-Jihad made another bombing attempt, this time to kill Egypt's prime minister, Atef Sidqi. The car bomb exploded close to a girls' school in Cairo as the minister was driven past. The minister, protected by his armored car, was unhurt, but the explosion injured 21 people and killed a young schoolgirl, Shayma Abdel-Halim. This bombing was preceded by two years of terror by al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya that had killed 240, and the patience of the Egyptian public had run short.  A  police crackdown  arrested 280 Egyptian Islamic Jihad members. Six were executed eventually. 

Egyptian Islamic Jihad became increasingly dependent on al-Qaeda. Most of its members were reportedly on the Al-Qaeda payroll. Zawahiri explained to an assistant that joining with Osama Bin Laden was the only way to keep the group afloat.

In June 1995 another failed assassination attempt caused yet a greater setback. Together with Gamaa al Islamiya.  Egyptian Islamic Jihad plotted the assassination of president Hosni Mubarak during a visit to Ethiopia. The attack was planned a year in advance by Mustafa Hamza, a senior Egyptian member of the Al-Qaeda and commander of the military branch of the Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya.

As with the Sadat assassination, the group hoped to decapitate the Egyptian government thereby eliminating the "iron grip" of the state security services, and creating a power vacuum allowing Islamists to take over the government. Two groups of assassins waited for Mubarak en-route from the airport. When the first attack failed however, Mubarak ordered his limousine back to the airport, escaping harm.  Mubarak launched a ruthless campaign to crush anyone involved in Islamist terrorism.

In Sudan the Egyptian Islamic Jihad then enraged the Sudanese intelligence service by executing two sons of senior Egyptian Islamic Jihad members on Sudanese soil after promising not to. The boys, Ahmed, the son of Mohammed Sharraf, and Mus'ab, son of Abu al-Faraj, had been drugged and blackmailed by the Egyptian intelligence service and were collaborating with them. Sudanese intelligence service captured them and allowed Egyptian Islamic Jihad to interrogate them. The boys confessed, were found guilty of "sodomy, treason, and attempted murder," and sentenced to death under Sharia law. Al-Zawahiri ordered their execution by firing squad and distributed videotapes of the execution. The Sudanese ordered the Egyptian Islamic Jihad to leave the Sudan. Osama Bin Laden, then in Sudan, was also weakened, as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad made up the core of his own group.

Because of Sudan's collaboration in the plot against Mubarak, the United Nations voted to impose sanction on the country. Facing pressure from Egypt, the UN, the United States, the Arab League and Saudi Arabia, the Sudanese government pressured bin Laden to leave the country. Bin Laden and many Egyptian Islamic Jihad members  returned to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bin Laden himself had squandered almost his entire fortune in bankrolling Sudanese development and was relatively impoverished.   

On November 19, 1995, Zawahiri nonetheless demonstrated that he and the Islamic Jihad were still viable, by bombing the Egyptian embassy in Islamabad. This served served as a prototype for attacks by al-Qaeda in 1998 bombings on American embassies in Africa.

In 1997, the sister and rival Gamaa al Islamiya group supposedly renounced violence, apparently as a result of a deal struck with the Egyptian government.  The group would renounce terror, in return for a massive release of its jailed members. In the USA Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman initially gave his blessing to the deal, apparently in hopes of being released from jail. He soon reneged on the his support.

From his exile with Osama Bin Laden,  Islamic Jihad head Ayman Zawahiri organized a massive terrorist attack in Luxor Egypt in 1997, to sabotage the turn to moderation. The attack was planned for a spectacular tourist attraction at the ruins of the temple of Hatshepsut. In the attack, six men dressed in police uniforms machine-gunned and hacked to death with knives 58 foreign tourists and four Egyptians. "The killing went on for 45 minutes, until the floors streamed with blood. The dead included a five-year-old British child and four Japanese couples on their honeymoons." Altogether 71 people were killed. The attack stunned Egyptian society, ruined tourism for years, and destroyed much popular support for violent Islamism in Egypt.

Some of the attack's supporters recanted. The day after the attack, Rifai Taha claimed that the attackers intended only to take the tourists hostage, despite the evidence of the systematic nature of the slaughter. Others denied Islamist involvement completely. Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman blamed the Israeli Mossad for the killings, and Zawahiri maintaining the Egyptian police were responsible. However, he added that the attack was praiseworthy, since tourists pollute the land. (Wright, Lawrence, The Looming Tower, pp 256 ff).

In Afghanistan Zawahiri apparently wrote or co-authored the 1998 fatwa for the "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders," calling for the killing of Americans and their allies, both civilian and military, which was signed by representatives of several Mujahedin ("jihadi") organizations, including the Islamic Jihad. This represented a departure from the goal of revolution in Egypt and aroused dissent among members. In Egypt itself, the group may have disappeared almost totally. Most group members may have merged with Al Qaeda to form "Qaedat al Jihad" - the base of Jihad. That organization claimed responsibility for the June 2008 bombing of the Danish embassy in Islamabad (see Al Jazeera, June 5), an attack reminiscent of the 1995 bombing of the Egyptian embassy.

[carlee]

Field report from midan el tahiri - RIGHT NOW :
Over 3000 people injured ,We caught some of them and have their ID cards which read amn markazy "central security" and amn dawla "national security". They have molotov bombs and gas tanks (anabeeb botagaz). The army is standing idly while people are dying. WE have some doc...tors but we can't treat everyone.
People in Tahrir say they would rather die than give into regime mobs.
They have been peavefully protesting for 8 days and as soon as the mobs were sent on them, they had 150 people injured within 15 minutes.
People are dying in Tahrir and there is no one to protect them, they are unarmed. Please spread the word, please help save them.
Egyptian media is covering all this up we need to get the message across.
This is a field account that I Rana El Hattab just received via phone

[Dig]

Hey dude, i know all those connections. I have listened to alex jones from 2003 so thats probably thousands of hours of radio. Theres a lot of sourced information that gets hidden in the last page of washington post. It still doesnt mean that I dont have the right to have disagreements on the tactical viewpoints of how nwo keeps control of egypt.You didnt answer how many hours you have watched al-jazeera. If you dont want then dont...+ How is the "CFR color rockefeller nwo" revolution going? Pentagon-Mubarak is still in control. If it would be CFR/nwo revolution, wouldnt they have accomplished a lot more by this time?

They tried to sell this to progressives as a clean regime change, but now there are too many complexities in my opinion. The Muslim Brotherhood is an obvious CIA/MI6 operation stemming back many years.

I think they wanted to make it seem like Gaza where they elected more radical factions. They wanted to make it look like there was a natural overthrow which blindsided all of us.

But now everyone sees they were planning it for years. They wanted it to look like: "see, those countries want radical fundamentalism so the war on terror needs to keep on going". But, when you look deeper, you see that the banksters first controlled the food then the intelligence operator/provocateurs hijacked a likely peaceful movement and shited it to the original mandate of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad/Al Qaeda. And the top guy was a fricking drill sargeant at Fort Bragg.

I mean you cannot make this shit up if you tried!

[carlee]

-@moftasa just told me they are using green lasers to blind thugs throwing molotovs off rooftops at the Museum frontline

[Dig]

Field report from midan el tahiri - RIGHT NOW :
Over 3000 people injured ,We caught some of them and have their ID cards which read amn markazy "central security" and amn dawla "national security". They have molotov bombs and gas tanks (anabeeb botagaz). The army is standing idly while people are dying. WE have some doc...tors but we can't treat everyone.
People in Tahrir say they would rather die than give into regime mobs.
They have been peavefully protesting for 8 days and as soon as the mobs were sent on them, they had 150 people injured within 15 minutes.
People are dying in Tahrir and there is no one to protect them, they are unarmed. Please spread the word, please help save them.
Egyptian media is covering all this up we need to get the message across.
This is a field account that I Rana El Hattab just received via phone

who is reporting this? Are these narratives written out of Langley? Everybody knows the CIA staged this. Why doesn't Kissinger get off his fat ass and save some of the cannon fodder he pushed into the powder keg?

What about Google? Why don't they help? Their top executive was pushing for people to commit martyrdom. How is Google not helping to show how they were paid to help run this "New World Order" revolution in military affairs?

What about Twitter? Why don't the tell the banksters to stop causing hyper inflation so that the 80 million Egyptian people have enough to eat?

What about William Lynn III who likely is sitting in his new Cyber Command Center which all of us had to pay for so that he can conduct these crimes against humanity in our name.

[Dig]

-@moftasa just told me they are using green lasers to blind thugs throwing molotovs off rooftops at the Museum frontline

WHERE ARE THE MESSAGES FROM AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ, WE STILL GOT 2 WARS GOING ON AND KISSINGER IS PUSHING US INTO A THIRD ONE!

[Gordon_Shumway]

who is reporting this? Are these narratives written out of Langley? Everybody knows the CIA staged this. Why doesn't Kissinger get off his fat ass and save some of the cannon fodder he pushed into the powder keg?

What about Google? Why don't they help? Their top executive was pushing for people to commit martyrdom. How is Google not helping to show how they were paid to help run this "New World Order" revolution in military affairs?

What about Twitter? Why don't the tell the banksters to stop causing hyper inflation so that the 80 million Egyptian people have enough to eat?

What about William Lynn III who likely is sitting in his new Cyber Command Center which all of us had to pay for so that he can conduct these crimes against humanity in our name.

I think that text came from a young egyptian. I have watched 4 hours of Al-Jazeera today and seen those battles live on my tv (well computer screen http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/ ) and they really are happening.


Situation in Egypt looks like this: Mubarak thinks that after his speech yesterday, he can just use violence to get the last protesters go back home. if there is not a real revolution where they put him hanging on a rope, the violence gestapo machine and other systems will stay intact in Egypt and he will throw some stooge in the coming elections in september and he will be put in power.

[Dig]

I think that text came from a young egyptian. I have watched 4 hours of Al-Jazeera today and seen those battles live on my tv (well computer screen http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/ ) and they really are happening.

So why isn't Kissinger helping him? NATO has complete command and control over the situation. They could force the banksters to lower inflation rates and all of this would be over. Instead of Golman Sachs bailing out Facebook for $1.5 Billion to then use it for military operations...they could have stopped manipulating the Egyptian monetary system. The IMF creates the starvation, but the ones that would serve the IMF the most are being guided into control.

Situation in Egypt looks like this: Mubarak thinks that after his speech yesterday, he can just use violence to get the last protesters go back home.

Situation is like this, an outside force is attempting to take control of 80 million humans for cybernetic eugenics enslavement. Mubarak has already dealt with it, but the thousands of US/UK Intel officers taking orders from Kissinger and CSIS are continuing to manipulate the cannon fodder served up because of offshore baking elite monetary policies.
 

if there is not a real revolution where they put him hanging on a rope,

Iraq was an illegal genocide where they put him on a rope. There was no revolution. These things are done by outside influence. 

the violence gestapo machine and other systems will stay intact in Egypt and he will throw some stooge in the coming elections in september and he will be put in power.

I agree with that one and just like in the US, 9/11 was a globalist operation who used elements of the US to pull it off likely including the VP, several MIC corps, etc. But it was an outside the scope of the constitution and was anti-constitutional government. After 9/11 we got the terrorist organization: ANSER Institute of Homeland Security to run the US gestapo. I think the key is to actually expose the true terrorists who hate us for our freedom and who operate outside the constitution. The top elite are moving chess pieces on a new game board. The blood is real, the massacres are real, but the event is coreagraphed just like 9/11.

[HAZMAT]

There is no way this is a coup. We are trying too hard to keep Egypt's current dictator in power at least for just a few months so we can select who takes his place. Also, undercover military and police fighting the protesters...

[Gordon_Shumway]

Friend of regime caught in Dubai with 500 million dollars...of cash. lol.

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000619367&fid=1725




hah, they are showing girl on Egyptian national tv who says she was trained by Usa and israel to topple Mubarak away. The regime is getting desperate, trying to say its Usa and israel behind this revolution.

I read the text here: http://www.facebook.com/elshaheeed.co.uk

[shipgeek]

Whatever we think about Glenn Beck he had an interesting and most educational show about the Muslim Brotherhood today.

This is the link to the full program.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTYoUjMzGzI&feature=player_embedded#

Toward the end of the program he talks about the obvious link between El Baradei and the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

hmmm.... Al Jazeera is talking about a "NEW ORDER" in Egypt.

 

[Dig]

There is no way this is a coup. We are trying too hard to keep Egypt's current dictator in power at least for just a few months so we can select who takes his place. Also, undercover military and police fighting the protesters...

We are trying too hard? The offshore banksters manufactured the food crisis. Military/CIA controlled Twitter and Facebook provides logistics and "nudging" of people to sway wherever Kissinger wants them to sway. CIA/MI6's Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian Islamic Jihad are providing the RockefellerFoundation "random gangs" for civil unrest.

Kissinger and the other globalists wanted him to be out already and ElBaradei in. They were expecting to get 3 other countries by now in this new weapon of mass deception.

[Dig]

Whatever we think about Glenn Beck he had an interesting and most educational show about the Muslim Brotherhood today.

This is the link to the full program.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTYoUjMzGzI&feature=player_embedded#

Toward the end of the program he talks about the obvious link between El Baradei and the Muslim Brotherhood.

29 Jan/11 Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood and Revolution
http://torontoparadise.com/iranian/iran-the-muslim-brotherhood-and-revolution/

[Dig]

they are showing girl on Egyptian national tv who says she was trained by Usa and israel to topple Mubarak away. ...its Usa and israel behind this revolution.
I read the text here: http://www.facebook.com/elshaheeed.co.uk

How come this is not on CNN? Doesn't it have as much credibility as the other stuff?

I mean I find it unlikely that this is true because they do not need to, US/UK already founded and funded the Muslim Brotherhood. Why risk direct training?

[HAZMAT]

We are trying too hard? The offshore banksters manufactured the food crisis. Military/CIA controlled Twitter and Facebook provides logistics and "nudging" of people to sway wherever Kissinger wants them to sway. CIA/MI6's Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian Islamic Jihad are providing the RockefellerFoundation "random gangs" for civil unrest.

Kissinger and the other globalists wanted him to be out already and ElBaradei in. They were expecting to get 3 other countries by now in this new weapon of mass deception.

The Muslim brotherhood is not in charge in this situation. I believe this is bad for the globalists, sorry, I just don't buy that this is staged. They are trying to hard to keep this guy in power (U.S. & Israel mainly).

[Gordon_Shumway]

Well I think the girl was not trained but she was given candy so she would say that in front of the national nile tv.

[Dig]

The Muslim brotherhood is not in charge in this situation. I believe this is bad for the globalists, sorry, I just don't buy that this is staged. They are trying to hard to keep this guy in power (U.S. & Israel mainly).

HOW CAN YOU BE SERIOUS?!!?!?!?!

If the Muslim Brotherhood is not a major player in this manufactured coup then why the f**k are the psychotic trilateral terrorists at the treasonous Brookings Institute trying to tell Americans not to fear their inevitable control over 80 million Egyptians?

BROOKINGS INSTITUTE SPECIAL REPORT:
Don't Fear Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood
www.brookings.edu/opinions/2011/0128_egypt_riedel.aspx
Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Saban Center for Middle East Policy January 28, 2011

The Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia has sent a shock wave through the Arab world. Never before has the street toppled a dictator. Now Egypt is shaking, Hosni Mubarak’s 30-year-old regime faces its most serious threat ever. The prospect of change in Egypt inevitably raises questions about the oldest and strongest opposition movement in the country, the Muslim Brotherhood, also known as Ikhwan. Can America work with an Egypt where the Ikhwan is part of a transition or even a new government?

The short answer is it is not our decision to make. Egyptians will decide the outcome, not Washington. We should not try to pick Egyptians' rulers. Every time we have done so, from Vietnam’s generals to Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai, we have had buyer’s remorse. But our interests are very much involved so we have a great stake in the outcome. Understanding the Brotherhood is vital to understanding our options.

The Muslim Brethren was founded in 1928 by Shaykh Hassan al Banna as an Islamic alternative to weak secular nationalist parties that failed to secure Egypt’s freedom from British colonialism after World War I. Banna preached a fundamentalist Islamism and advocated the creation of an Islamic Egypt, but he was also open to importing techniques of political organization and propaganda from Europe that rapidly made the Brotherhood a fixture in Egyptian politics. Branches of the Brotherhood grew across the Arab world. By World War 2, it became more violent in its opposition to the British and the British-dominated monarchy, sponsoring assassinations and mass violence. After the army seized power in 1952, it briefly flirted with supporting Gamal Abdel Nasser’s government but then moved into opposition. Nasser ruthlessly suppressed it.

Nasser and his successors, Anwar Sadat and Mubarak, have alternatively repressed and demonized the Brotherhood or tolerated it as an anti-communist and right-wing opposition. Technically illegal, it has an enormous social-welfare infrastructure that provides cheap education and health care. In Egypt’s unfair elections, it is always the only opposition that does well even against the heavily rigged odds.

The Egyptian Brotherhood renounced violence years ago, but its relative moderation has made it the target of extreme vilification by more radical Islamists. Al Qaeda’s leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri, started their political lives affiliated with the Brotherhood but both have denounced it for decades as too soft and a cat’s paw of Mubarak and America.

Egypt’s new opposition leader, former International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei, has formed a loose alliance with the Brotherhood because he knows it is the only opposition group that can mobilize masses of Egyptians, especially the poor. He says he can work with it to change Egypt. Many scholars of political Islam also judge the Brotherhood is the most reasonable face of Islamic politics in the Arab world today. Skeptics fear ElBaradei will be swept along by more radical forces.

The truth is that Mubarak held on to power for so long--with no vice president, no succession process anointing an heir (even his son Gamal has never been publicly made the chosen one), and no end to martial emergency rule--that Egypt is entirely uncharted waters now. No one knows how the army and security forces will react to changes that could threaten their hold on power and their prerogatives. No one knows who really controls the street or if the demonstrations will have legs. But it looks like the beginning of the end of Mubarak’s time.

For America, this is all uncharted waters, too. Washington has been confronted with unexpected change in big Muslim countries before, Iran in 1978 and Pakistan in 2007, and never gotten right the difficult balance of helping history move forward and preserving our equities.

The most problematic issue between the Ikhwan and America will be Israel. The Brotherhood raised an army to fight Israel in its war of independence in 1948. Its Palestinian branch was the nucleus for Hamas, and the Brotherhood retains links to the rulers of Gaza. The Ikhwan’s leaders understand the peace treaty with Israel is the cornerstone of modern Egyptian foreign policy and underwrites America’s $2 billion annual aid as well as the lucrative tourist trade, but they are very critical of Israel, its leader, and policies. Their base is fundamentally opposed to any Egyptian cooperation with Israel.

The Israelis find themselves in the very unpleasant position of having a huge stake in the outcome of what happens in Egypt and absolutely no ability to influence the course of events, except to do harm by foolish statements or actions. No wonder a former Israeli ambassador to Cairo said this week that “I am very much afraid that [the opposition] wouldn’t be as committed to peace with Israel and would be bad for Israel.”

The crisis in North Africa has come up unexpectedly for President Obama and Secretary Clinton. They have moved quickly to grasp the challenge. They know the stakes and the delicacy of our options. Neither complacency nor panic is the right American response.

They should not be afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood. Living with it won’t be easy but it should not be seen as inevitably our enemy. We need not demonize it nor endorse it. In any case, Egyptians now will decide their fate and the role they want the Ikhwan to play in their future.

[Dig]

Latest from Drudge...


Amanpour: Angry mob surrounded us, shouting they hate America...

WH shuts out media; reporters file complaint...

Gibbs: Some Things 'Have To Be Done Away From TV Cameras'...

[carlee]

Black smoke has begun billowing up from somewhere very close to the eastern wall of the Egyptian Museum, among pro-Mubarak crowd

[Dig]

Hey look at The Brooking Institute which has a satellite office in Qatar which is also where Al-Jazeera is run out of...

BROOKINGS INSTITUTE SPECIAL REPORT:
Continue pushing the terms "spontaneous and indigenous"
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2011/0131_egypt_telhami.aspx?p=1
Shibley Telhami, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Saban Center for Middle East Policy January 31, 2011

Ever since Egypt’s public demonstrations calling for regime change began, Washington has been debating what the White House should or should not say, as if American words in the middle of an upheaval that is not our doing can affect the outcome in Egypt and turn the tide of Arab public opinion in favor of the United States. But if there is any lesson to be learned from Tunisia, and from the U.S. policy in the region in the past few years, it is that these historic and indigenous events in Egypt must not become about the United States. One reason the Tunisian revolution succeeded in toppling the president without major ramifications for the U.S. is that the revolt was not viewed as directly related to the West. When the Bush administration used the Iraq War as a vehicle to spread democratic change in the Middle East, anger with the United States on foreign policy issues — particularly Iraq and the Arab-Israeli conflict — and deep suspicion of U.S. intentions put the genuine democracy advocates in the region on the defensive. The outcome has been that, every year since the Iraq War began, polls of Arabs revealed their sense that the Middle East is even less democratic than before.  As we witness the remarkable and inspiring events in both Tunisia and Egypt, one has to wonder whether these events could have taken place even earlier had there not been the diversion of the Iraq War — and whether these upheavals might have swept away Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship without shots being fired from the outside.  Even in Iran, where there is obvious public opposition to the clerical regime, as indicated by the contestation over the 2009 presidential election, one wonders whether the Iranian people might succeed if the regime were robbed of its ability to point fingers at the West.

The United States, for its own sake, must side with people standing for self-determination and freedom, who are prepared to risk their lives for them.  But let’s have no illusion about the effect of what we say on the outcome in Egypt — or throughout the Arab world. Events in Egypt are mostly out of our control. It’s not up to the United States to determine who the next president of Egypt will be. In any case, America’s inability to engineer political outcomes in the region — or even predict them — has been demonstrated in events ranging from the outcome of the Iraq War itself to contests for power in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.  Whether President Barack Obama publicly calls for President Hosni Mubarak to resign will very likely have little effect on Arab and Egyptian public opinion.  To be sure, many democracy advocates want to see a more forceful U.S. voice on behalf of regime change in Cairo. But others, including those in places supporting an Egyptian revolution, like the Al Jazeera network, are already asking whether the Egyptian upheaval was instigated by Washington — with some “evidence” presented. If and when the United States does take a forceful position, we must have no illusion about how it will be spun by many Arabs. Washington is likely to be seen as attempting to control events — moving to pre-empt the public will and engineering an outcome to its liking. It will quite likely be mocked by Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah — just as he mocked France for how quickly it abandoned its client after Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali’s departure from Tunisia. There is a sense in U.S. national discourse that the anger with the United States is only about its support for authoritarian governments in the region. It is partly about that. But it’s deeper and more complex — as we have seen in the attitudes of the Iraqi people, many of whom were happy to get Washington’s support to throw off their dictator but were still unhappy with U.S. foreign policy.

Resolving Washington’s dilemma in its relationship with authoritarian rulers in the region will not be addressed by White House speeches or even the elimination of U.S. foreign aid. As long as the United States has a heavy military footprint in the region, is fighting wars in the Middle East and is invested in the outcome of the Arab-Israeli conflict, it will continue to prefer cooperative regimes over a public will that goes against it. The Iraq War was most telling. Even as the United States was waging a war partly in the name of democracy, the vast majority of the Arab public passionately opposed it, and even many governments counseled against it — largely for fear of public opposition. But we insisted and we rewarded and we threatened — and got our way with most. The net result was that those governments that went against the will of the overwhelming majority, which made them even more insecure, reacted in the way they knew best: They became even more repressive. Today, our closest institutional relationships in the Arab world, driven by strategic U.S. priorities, are military to military, intelligence to intelligence, security service to security service. These agencies are the anchors of repression in the region, regardless of who rules at the top. Given that repression now appears to be failing, this is a moment for a bigger assessment of U.S. policy in the region — beyond what happens in Egypt. The United States must always stand for freedom and self-determination, and our leaders must articulate that — even when the outcome is uncertain and our interests are at stake. Still, Egypt is not just another country in the Middle East. It has been the anchor of the U.S. approach to the region since the 1970s, and what happens in Cairo will inevitably have consequences.  Have no illusion: Egypt is already profoundly changed — no matter who will be at the top tomorrow or next year. But we must resist the temptation to insert ourselves in an environment in which we have little control. Washington must, of course, prepare for contingencies and assess ways to protect its interests regardless of the outcome.  But today, to honor those seeking freedom in the Arab world and the principles for which we stand, America must resist the temptation to make the Egyptian uprising about us.

[Dig]

Why is AL JAZEERA using Brookings Institute expert opinion??
http://ampal.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-is-al-jazeera-using-brookings.html
Sharif Hamid, "Expert" - Supposedly one of the experts taking about 10 our of every 60 minutes on AJE. They mention the Doha Brookings Institute. The Saban Center (created by Israeli media mogul HAIM SABAN) I dont know if I can trust Al Jazeera when their research center experts are run by the likes of Martin Idyk and Bruce Katz...

A ‘one-issue guy’, Saban funded Brookings as his personal power ranger
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/05/a-one-issue-guy-saban-funded-brookings-as-his-personal-power-ranger.html
by Philip Weiss on May 4, 2010

Key excerpts from Connie Bruck's profile of Democratic moneybags Haim Saban in the New Yorker. I do wonder (not having read the piece; this is social media; a trusted friend sent me the excerpt) whether Bruck slighted the Israel lobby angle, as she did in her profile of Saban's Republican doppelganger Sheldon Adelson. Remember that Bruck is herself married to a stalwart in the lobby, former California congressman Mel Levine who as I recall was courting Saban for Obama 2 years back.

At a conference last fall in Israel, Saban described his formula. His “three ways to be influential in American politics,” he said, were: make donations to political parties, establish think tanks, and control media outlets. In 2002, he contributed seven million dollars toward the cost of a new building for the Democratic National Committee—one of the largest known donations ever made to an American political party.

That year, he also founded the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, in Washington, D.C. He considered buying The New Republic, but decided it wasn’t for him. He also tried to buy Time and Newsweek, but neither was available. He and his private-equity partners acquired Univision in 2007, and he has made repeated bids for the Los Angeles Times.

In targeting media properties, Saban frankly acknowledges his political agenda. He has tried repeatedly to buy the Los Angeles Times, because, he said, “I thought it was time that it turn from a pro-Palestinian paper into a balanced paper.” He went on, “During the period of the second intifada, Jews were being killed every day over there, and this paper was publishing images of a Palestinian woman sitting with her dead child, and, on the Israeli side, a destroyed house. I got sick of it.” Saban said he tried to buy the paper in 2007 but lost to Sam Zell, who purchased the Tribune Company, including the L.A. Times. In early 2008, he says that he tried to buy the paper from Zell but that Zell wanted more than he was willing to pay. After the Tribune Company went into bankruptcy, in 2009, Saban said he informed the creditors of his interest. “They’re not going to do anything until they get out of bankruptcy. So am I still interested in the L.A. Times? I am, yeah, I am,” he said. Saban also said that he asked the New York investor Steven Rattner to let the Sulzbergers know that he would like to buy the New York Times, but Rattner told him they weren’t interested. “What’s it worth now, the whole thing—a billion dollars?” Saban said dismissively. “But it’s a family legacy or something, I don’t know.” If the Sulzbergers were to change their minds, he said, “I would be jumping all over it.”

As Saban has said, “I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel.” [OMG, what the f are they planning in the Sinai penninsula?]

For example, Saban continued, “Obama was asked the same question Hillary was asked—‘If Iran nukes Israel, what would be your reaction?’ Hillary said, ‘We will obliterate them.’ We . . . will . . . obliterate . . . them. Four words, it’s simple to understand. Obama said only three words. He would ‘take appropriate action.’ I don’t know what that means. A rogue state that is supporting killing our men and women in Iraq; that is a supporter of Hezbollah, which killed more Americans than any other terrorist organization; that is a supporter of Hamas, which shot twelve thousand rockets at Israel—that rogue state nukes a member of the United Nations, and we’re going to ‘take appropriate action’! ” His voice grew louder. “I need to understand what that means. So I had a list of questions like that. And Chicago”—Obama campaign headquarters—“could not organize that meeting. ‘Schedule, heavy schedule.’ I was ready and willing to be helpful, but ‘helpful’ is not to write a check for two thousand three hundred dollars. It’s to raise millions, which I am fully capable of doing. But Chicago wasn’t able to deliver the meeting, so I couldn’t get on board.”

[Dig]

Why is AL JAZEERA using Brookings Institute expert opinion??
http://ampal.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-is-al-jazeera-using-brookings.html
Sharif Hamid, "Expert" - Supposedly one of the experts taking about 10 our of every 60 minutes on AJE. They mention the Doha Brookings Institute. The Saban Center (created by Israeli media mogul HAIM SABAN) I dont know if I can trust Al Jazeera when their research center experts are run by the likes of Martin Idyk and Bruce Katz...

A ‘one-issue guy’, Saban funded Brookings as his personal power ranger
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/05/a-one-issue-guy-saban-funded-brookings-as-his-personal-power-ranger.html
by Philip Weiss on May 4, 2010

HE IS EGYPTIAN, NEOCON, WARMONGERER, ISRAEL FIRST!

Then why is he supporting the Muslim Brotherhood overthrow of Mubarak? Maybe because he needs a new threat as the neocons lose power in Israel?

Egypt-born Jew looks to buy 50% of Al-Jazeera
Haim Saban first showed a reported interest in the Doha -based network after a visit in 2004.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/egypt-born-jew-looks-to-buy-50-of-al-jazeera-1.6471
Published 04:15 08.10.09 By Nimrod Halpern

Egyptian-born Jewish businessman Haim Saban is negotiating with Qatar's emir the purchase of 50 percent of the Al Jazeera television network, the independent Egyptian newspaper Al-Mesryoon reported earlier this week. Saban was first reported to be negotiating the purchase of half the Doha -based network in 2004, after visiting the emirate with former U.S. President Bill Clinton. The media mogul, estimated to be worth more than $3 billion, brought the Power Rangers franchise to the Arab world and made a fortune out of developing and selling the Fox Family cable network together with News Corp. In Israel, Saban owns a controlling stake in Bezeq. Last month Saban blasted calls to boycott Israel for the occupation of the West Bank. He called those who support boycotting the Toronto film festival's decision to showcase Tel Aviv "anti-Semites" and "Jew haters." "The world always had anti-Semites," the Hollywood financier told the Los Angeles Times in an e-mail exchange last month. "It has now and always will, but the people of Israel always have, and always will live and prosper. Sorry Jew haters. You lose."  Among the artists who signed the petition calling for a boycott of the festival's Tel Aviv Week in August were Ken Loach, Julie Christie, Danny Glover, David Byrne and Jane Fonda ¬ though Fonda later retracted her decision. Meanwhile, a number of Hollywood Jews, including Jerry Seinfeld, Sacha Baron Cohen and Natalie Portman, issued a counter-statement in defense of the festival's decision.

[citizenx]

Mubarak backers attack foes with firebombs, bricks
By HADEEL AL-SHALCHI and SARAH EL DEEB, Associated Press Hadeel Al-shalchi And Sarah El Deeb, Associated Press – 14 mins ago


CAIRO – Thousands of supporters and opponents of President Hosni Mubarak battled in Cairo's main square Wednesday, raining stones, bottles and firebombs on each other in scenes of uncontrolled violence as soldiers stood by without intervening. Government backers galloped in on horses and camels, only to be dragged to the ground and beaten bloody.

At one of the fighting's front lines, next to the famed Egyptian Museum at the edge of Tahrir Square, pro-government rioters blanketed the rooftops of nearby buildings and dumped bricks and firebombs onto the crowd below — in the process setting a tree ablaze inside the museum grounds. Plainclothes police at the building entrances prevented anti-Mubarak protesters from storming up to stop them.

The two sides pummeled each other with hurled chunks of concrete and bottles at each of the six entrances to the sprawling plaza, where the 10,000 anti-Mubarak protesters tried to fend off the more than 3,000 attackers who besieged the square. Some on the pro-government side waved machetes, while the square's defenders filled the air with a ringing battlefield din by banging metal fences with sticks.

continued:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110202/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt

[shipgeek]

I was just watching live pictures without the lousy comments.
The situation is becoming hectic with all these flying projectiles and firebombs.

 

How long they will let this go on is a complete mystery.

[citizenx]

Opposing sides clash in fierce Cairo street battles
By the CNN Wire Staff
February 2, 2011 -- Updated 2042 GMT (0442 HKT)
   
 

Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- Pandemonium reigned Wednesday in the epicenter of Cairo's demonstrations, where violent street battles unfolded between supporters and foes of embattled President Hosni Mubarak...

...Scores of people have already been wounded. Blood streaming down their faces, they were carried away from the square into a nearby makeshift clinic.

Egypt's health minister said 611 people were injured, Nile TV reported. Many suffered head injuries. Ministry spokesman Abdel Rahman Shaheen also reported the death of a security forces member in an incident at a nearby bridge over the Nile River.

entire article:

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/02/egypt.protests/index.html?hpt=T1

[citizenx]

http://www.infowars.com/300-reported-dead-in-egypt-protests/

300 reported dead in Egypt protests
         

Haareetz
February 2, 2011

The U.N. human rights chief said on Tuesday she had unconfirmed reports that up to 300 people may have been killed and over 3,000 injured in the unrest that has engulfed Egypt for the past week.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, was appalled by reported death toll and injury count, saying, “I urge the Egyptian authorities to ensure police and other security forces scrupulously avoid excessive use of force.”

Pillay urged investigations into the role of security forces during the violence and their sudden disappearance from the streets of Cairo, leaving what she described as a “security vacuum.”

[worcesteradam]

"Now the question is how to rebuild this, that's not only true for Egypt, (it) can be true also for countries where you didn't have this kind of unrest but are almost in the same situation.
"And of course the IMF is ready to help in defining the kind of policy that could be put in place."

[carlee]

[Gordon_Shumway]

The lower are police and other criminals and top is anti-mubarak freedom fighters.

[lamourlady]

Well, if it was a test I think it surpassed the imagination of everyone!  Although ripe to begin the blackmail and manipulation, coup d'tat or not...this 'test' works for both sides:  Even if coopted it still shows the sheer force and determination of the people and that is a good thing.  Anything is possible if we stand together!!!!