Cartoon by R.J. Matson

By Stephen Lendman * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

What's unfolding looks different than what protesters demand. World headlines partly reflect it, mostly outside America, especially on US television reporting an illusion of change, when, in fact, coup d'etat rule is in charge, headed by authoritarian generals used to giving, not taking orders.

On February 13, Al Jazeera's said, "Egypt army tries to clear Tahrir," adding:

Scuffles broke out "as soldiers tried to remove activists from the epicenter of Egypt's uprising...." Hundreds courageously remained, saying they won't leave until "more of their demands are met."

As a result, "(S)oldiers shoved pro-democracy protesters aside to force a path for traffic to start flowing through Tahrir Square for the first time in more than two weeks."

Tents were removed. Al Jazeera's James Bays reported "flashpoint" confrontations, saying:

"I think it reflects a bigger problem, that the military believes that now Mubarak is out, it's time for stability. But some of the protesters think not enough has been done yet. They don't want to clear that square until the army (is) handed over to a civilian government."

As a result, they threaten more rallies if Egypt's ruling Supreme Military Council ignores their demands. Protest leader Safwat Hegazi spoke for others saying:

"If the army does not fulfill (them), our uprising and its measures will return stronger."

They demand:

• -- Mubarak's cabinet and all remnants of his regime ousted, especially top officials like Omar Suleiman, a hated man they'll never accept in any capacity;
• -- an immediate end to Egypt's Emergency Law, a harsh police state measure since 1981;
• -- dissolution of its parliament in place after rigged late 2010 elections;
• -- a transitional five-member presidential council made up of four civilians and one military person to prepare for free, fair and open democratic elections in nine months or sooner;
• -- a new constitution;
• -- media freedom;
• -- abolition of military and emergency courts;
• -- free formation of political parties, and more.

It's not happening, a cabinet spokesman saying no major reshuffle will occur, adding:

"The shape of the government will stay until the process of transformation is done in a few months, then a new government will be appointed based on the democratic principles in place."

A senior army officer announced on state television that the military will "guarantee the peaceful transition of power in the framework of a free, democratic system which allows an elected, civilian power to govern the country to build a democratic, free state."

Take those comments with a grain of salt as well as most other official statements, concealing what's likely planned. Nonetheless, on February 13, Al Jazeera said military officials dissolved parliament, suspended the Constitution, and announced September elections, giving no other specifics.

What it means remains to be seen under militarized coup d'etat rule. It assures no democracy as long as it lasts and none afterwards if likely manipulated elections follow, leaving generals in charge behind the scenes.

Military rulers also pledged to honor "all regional and international obligations and treaties." That one's likely true to avoid confrontations with their Washington paymaster and Israel after nearly four decades of peace.

Al Jazeera's Sherine Tadros, however, said questions remain over how civilian rule transition will occur, quoting one activist saying:

"I'm worried about the future. Nobody knows what's coming. We need to rebuild our country and economy because we are venturing into the unknown."

Indeed, they've got great reason to worry because what's planned won't tolerate real democracy, only its facade as in America, Israel, and most other states. For sure expect none in Egypt and other Arab countries controlled by imperial Washington.

BBC's top story headlined, "Egypt's army struggles to clear Tahir Square protesters," saying:

"There is a tense stand-off in Cairo's Tahrir Square as protesters who have camped there for 20 days thwart army effort to clear the area."

Moreover, thousands more joined them after military police head, Mohamed Ibrahim Moustafa Ali, said, "We do not want any protesters to sit in the square after today."

As a result, anger grew as they saw "hundreds of policemen (enter) the square," chanting: "It's a new Egypt, the people and the police are one." Crowds chanted back: "Get out, get out!" Scuffles then broke out, BBC's Paul Danahar saying:

"There was growing anger in the square as more soldiers began slowly but forcefully to squeeze the protesters out of the areas they had been holding for weeks. Then a roar went up from the crowd as they realized hundreds of policemen had entered the square," the same ones who attacked, gassed, beat, and arrested them days earlier. "There was a tense stand-off as the two sides confronted each other before the police" moved back and left.

Haaretz featured a Reuter story headlined, "Thousands flood Cairo square, defying army bid to quell protests," saying:

Using loadspeakers, protesters said: "They must respond to our demands," (not) remove us from the square." They explained that some of their leaders were detained, dozens more taken to an army holding area near Egypt's museum.

New head of state Field Marshall Mohamed Hussein Tantawi called for an immediate return to normality. Mubarak's appointed Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq said:

"The first priority, no question about it, is security. An equally important priority is to provide the elements needed for the daily life of citizens."

Protesters responded saying:

"There is no enmity between the people and armed forces....We ask you not to attack our sons. This is not the (behavior) of the armed forces. This is a peaceful protest. We demand that the armed forces release all our sons that have been arrested in Tahrir."

"We stood by the army in their revolution (the 1952 coup toppling King Farouk). They need to stand with us in ours. The goal was never just to get rid of Mubarak. The system is totally corrupt and we won't go until we see some real reforms," one protester adding, "I am going to be buried in Tahrir. I am here for my children. Egypt is too precious to walk away now."

Another said, "I was going to leave today, but after what the military has done, the millions will be back again. The corrupt system still stands. It has gone back to using the only thing it understands - force. If we leave, they won't respond to our demands."

London's Guardian, Telegraph, Independent and other newspapers featured the same story about protesters refusing to leave.

On February 12, Robert Fisk's London Independent Article headlined, "A tyrant's exit. A Nation's joy," saying:

"All day, the demonstrators had been telling the soldiers that they were brothers. Well, we shall see." Assuming power, "a series of contradictory (military) statements (followed), indicat(ing) that Egypt's field marshals, generals and brigadiers were competing for power in the ruins of Mubarak's regime."

Israel wants Suleiman. Head of state Field Marshall Tantawi wants his chief of staff, General Sami Anan, to handle day-to-day affairs.

Pro-democracy supporters "are thus now less important than the vicious infighting within the army." In fact, Egypt's military high command was part of Mubarak's regime. His vice president, prime minister, deputy prime minister, defense minister, and interior minister were all generals. So was Mubarak.

"Sadly," said Fisk, "Egypt is the army and the army is Egypt....It therefore wishes to control...." Its rhetoric stresses normalcy, leaving affairs of state to them to establish reforms. In fact, they intend "divid(ing) up the ministries of a new government," to solidify military control, whatever new faces emerge.

Fisk recalled celebratory outbreaks after WW I ended. Everyone "burst out singing." It was "genuine and deserved. Yet that peace led to further immense suffering." Unless pro-democracy advocates stay vigilant and keep protesting, expect weeks of sustained courage again ending in tears, Fisk saying:

Rhetorically, (t)he army has decided to protect the people. But who will curb the power of the army," hungry to get power portfolios now that they're up for grabs.

AP headlined, "Protesters press for voice in Egyptian democracy," saying:

After 30 years under Mubarak, they're making demands they want met. Egypt's military now runs the country, its future to "be shaped by three powers: the military, the protesters, and the sprawling autocratic infrastructure of Mubarak's regime" still in place, including "the bureaucracy, the police, state media and parts of the economy."

Despite promising change, "elderly generals are no reformers, and their move to push out Mubarak may have been more to ensure the survival of a ruling system the military has (controlled) since a 1952 army coup." The powerful, "deeply secretive military has substantial economic interests, running industries and businesses that it will likely seek to preserve."

Response from America's Media

Overseas headlines in part, at least, reflect reality, what's largely suppressed at home, reporting pretense of a new nonexistant dawn. Front page news in The New York Times, early Washington Post editions, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune reported nothing about Tahrir Square clashes. Instead, The Times headlined, "Military Offers Assurances to Egypt and Neighbors," saying:

"As a new era dawned in Egypt on Saturday, the army leadership sought to reassure Egyptians and the world that it would shepherd a transition to civilian rule and honor" all international commitments and obligations. Though protesters want democratic change, they "embraced their new reality with humor, mild arguments and celebrations," quoting one of their leaders, Amr Hamzawy, saying the military's tone has been "very, very positive."

A later Times Kareem Fahim/J David Goodman article headlined, "Egypt's Military Dissolves Parliament; Calls for Vote," saying:

"The announcement went a long way toward meeting the demands of protesters," when, in fact, specifics are absent, most demands haven't been met, Mubarak regime officials remain, and militarized coup d'etat control is in charge. Four words only mentioned protests: "(P)ockets of protests continued," the article stressing "normalcy return(ing) to the capital...."

The Los Angeles Times reported, "Tents give way to traffic in Tahrir Square," reflected "the military's determination to restore normalcy to the nation's capital."

The Chicago Tribune headlined, "A reborn Egypt gets back to business....tingling with freedom, look(ing) ahead," quoting one protester, Ragab Abdou, saying: "I woke up with the idea that we can do something. Democracy. Freedom. Do something we haven't done for 30 years." They haven't done it now either, an explanation the Tribune omitted.

A later Washington Post edition headlined, "Egyptian soldiers clear protesters from Tahrir Square, as pockets of tension bubble up in Cairo," saying:

"Some weary demonstrators evacuated voluntarily. Others stood their ground or scuffled with soldiers," implying they might be agitators, not committed pro-democracy fighters.

The Wall Street Journal.com also headlined, "Egypt's Military Moves to Clear Tahrir Square," saying:

It wants "to restore order after weeks of mass demonstrations," quoting Egypt's new military rulers pledging "a peaceful transition of power in the framework of a free and democratic system." No timetable or specifics were given.

For now, entrenched military rule will "oversee a political transformation" in its own image far different from democratic change. Savvy protesters fear it, vowing to continue struggling until their demands are met. They're far from being free and won't be without sustained mass grassroots pressure, the only way change ever comes, never from the top down anywhere.

* Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.

Related posts:

• Freedom dawns in Egypt
• The US arms industry and the people’s revolt in Egypt
• On the wrong side of history: Obama’s wavering on Egypt

By Stephen Lendman * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Illustration by carlos Latuff

Times rhetoric way overstated reality as resolution remains very much in doubt, though odds strongly favor continuity, not populist change. More on that below.

For the moment, however, huge Tahrir Square crowds erupted in celebratory euphoria, perhaps forgetting their liberating struggle just began. It didn't end with Mubarak's resignation. That was a baby step, removing an aging dinosaur Washington and Egypt's military wanted out. Now he's gone. Focus must follow through on what's next, requiring sustained popular protests. Otherwise, everything gained will be lost.

Behind the scenes, Washington and Egyptian military maneuvers were involved. They're always crucial, not visible orchestrated events. As a result, discerning reality is crucial. Hopefully, Egyptians understand, knowing the folly of letting up now and losing out.

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen believes Obama waffled to buy time for CIA operatives to secure and purge Egypt's torture and rendition files, dating from when Attorney General Eric Holder was Clinton's Deputy Attorney General in the 1990s.

He also said Secretary of State Clinton wanted her husband protected, and former White House chief of staff (now CIA head) Leon Panetta had the same aim. Doing so, of course, requires keeping Washington-favorites in power, permitting no uncertain alternatives, people Egyptians need for real change.

Besides short-lived confrontations, orchestrated street violence was avoided. Whether it continues, however, is unknown as Egypt's military is notoriously brutal, a different reality than most on Cairo streets believe. Among them were hundreds, perhaps thousands experiencing its harshness, for the moment at least lost in a sea of celebratory humanity.

Behind the Scenes Washington Maneuvering

Notably on January 31, Obama sent former US diplomat Frank Wisner (son of WW II era intelligence chief Frank Wisner) to Cairo ahead of Mubarak's February 1 address. His mission: tell him not to resign until after September elections.

Publicly, Wisner confirmed what White House officials claimed reflected his position, not US policy. In fact, diplomats, past or present, convey only the latter.

Wisner noteworthy credentials include:

• Career Ambassador (the highest foreign service rank) after serving as Under Secretary of State for International Security Affairs, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and ambassador to India, the Philippines, Zambia and Egypt (1986 - 1991) when he and Mubarak became good friends;
• numerous corporate boards, past and present, including Enron, AIG, Ethan Allen Interiors, eogresources, Commercial International Bank (a leading Egyptian bank), Pharaomic American Life Insurance Company (ALICO, Egypt), Pangea3, and the American University in Cairo; and
• currently an international affairs advisor to Patton Boggs, an influential Washington-based lobbying firm.

High-level and well-connected, his Cairo mission showed Washington behind-the-scenes maneuvering to replace Mubarak, delay transition, and install new faces under old policies, publicly portraying change - the old bait and switch con on a world stage, though whether it works remains highly uncertain. Expect months before clarity, maybe longer.

Obama's Public Statement on Egypt

Rhetoric always conceals policies, Obama's February 10 statement Exhibit A, saying:

"As we have said from the beginning of this unrest, the future of Egypt will be determined by the Egyptian people. But the United States (stands for) core principles. We believe that the universal rights of the Egyptian people must be respected, and their aspirations must be met. We believe that this transition must immediately demonstrate irreversible political change, and a negotiated path to democracy (with) a roadmap to elections that are free and fair."

Note:

• no transition timeline was mentioned, nor did Obama call for Mubarak's immediate resignation with his entire regime popular outrage wants out;
• political change masks business as usual;
• universal rights weren't specified nor were free and fair elections defined; Washington won't tolerate either anywhere, including at home; and
• vague sentiments were enunciated, masking Washington's real agenda for new regime faces under old policies - no compromises, no alternatives, no dissent, just hardline Realpolitik for unchallengeable imperial control; not just in Egypt; everywhere.

Obama's Real Agenda

As part of Washington's Greater Middle East Project, it includes neutralizing opponents, securing unchallengeable imperial control, preventing democracy, rigging elections to assure it, militarizing the region strategically, exploiting its resources and populations, orchestrating events covertly, and deciding how and when they play out.

In Egypt and throughout the region, they look similar to US-orchestrated color revolutions in Serbia (the 1990s prototype), Georgia (Rose), Ukraine (Orange), Myanmar (Saffron), Tibet (Crimson), Iran (Green), and currently perhaps Tunisia (Jasmine), and elsewhere in the Middle East, color-coded or not.

They all have a common thread: what the Pentagon calls "full spectrum dominance" for total global, space, sub-surface and information control. Whether it succeeds, however, remains uncertain given America's declining world influence and stature, including on Cairo streets.

A previous article discussed past color revolutions, accessed here.

Egypt: What's Ahead

For sure, Washington, the Pentagon and Egypt's military will decide, not Mubarak (an aging, now ousted dinosaur), Suleiman or other hated regime figures. Stratfor's George Friedman believes Egypt's military aims to save the regime, not Mubarak, suggesting three possible outcomes before he resigned:

• continuing standing aside, letting crowds assemble and march peacefully to the presidential palace and elsewhere on Cairo streets;
• blocking more protesters from entering Tahrir Square, containing those already there; or
• replacing Mubarak with temporary military rule.

Egypt's military coup ousted him. He didn't resign. He was pushed, the heavy shoving from Washington. It's not clear if Suleiman will stay on. Hopefully public anger won't tolerate him or other regime figures, given how much they're hated.

So far, confrontations have been avoided. Doing so now "would undermine the military's desire to preserve the regime" and its people-friendly perception. Friedman believes options one and two were unacceptable. "That means military action" unseating him. Only the timing wasn't known until now.

On February 11 Friedman's Red Alert update said:

"Egypt is returning to the 1952 model of ruling the state via a council of army officers. The question now is to what extent the military elite will share power with its civilian counterparts."

"The fate of Mubarak's National Democratic Party (NDP)" remains unknown. Without it, "the regime will have effectively collapsed and the military could run into greater difficulty in running the country," ahead of elections whenever they're held.

For now, Egypt's military council comprises provisional rule. Very likely it'll want retained NDP elements and opposition parties help in managing transition. It's biggest challenge is "avoid(ing) regime change while also dealing with a potential constitutional crisis."

Popular pressure, however, must demand regime change, a clean sweep, ending emergency law powers immediately, and democratic constitutional changes.

Al Jazeera: "Hosni Mubarak Resigns as President"

On February 11, Al Jazeera reported massive crowds in Tahrir Square, a day called "Farewell Friday." Cairo and Alexandria images showed wall-to-wall humanity as far as the eye could see, by far the largest demonstrations so far after protesters called for millions to come out for "a last and final stage."

Despite mass public anger, tensions between army forces and crowds were absent, restraint very much shown, but how long will depend on unfolding events under the new military rule.

Earlier, AP said Mubarak flew to Sharm el-Sheik, the Red Sea resort 250 miles from Cairo.

The New York Times also reported a "Western official (saying) that Mr. Mubarak had left the capital, (and that) the Supreme Council of the Egyptian Armed Forces issued a statement over state television and radio indicating that the military, not Mr. Mubarak, was in effective control of the country."

In fact, a coup d'etat replaced him, but what follows or its timeline isn't known. What is known is that mass public anger and nationwide strikes effectively shut down the country beyond what any force could control.

The reaction following Mubarak's address, followed by Suleiman's, showed two officials disengaged from reality. As a result, Mohamed ElBaradei, now an opposition figure, responded bluntly, saying:

"I ask the army to intervene immediately to save Egypt. The credibility of the army is being put to the test."

In a top-featured February 11 New York Times op-ed, he said:

"Egypt will not wait forever on this caricature of a leader we witnessed on television yesterday evening, deaf to the voice of the people, hanging on obsessively to power that is no longer his to keep....We are at the dawn of a new Egypt....We have nothing to fear but the shadow of a repressive past."

Al Jazeera reported him saying Egypt "will explode" unless military forces intervene. They did but haven't explained what's ahead beyond commonplace boilerplate rhetoric - for sure no democracy according to Reuters quoting a National Security Council participant saying:

"What the US isn't saying publicly is that it's putting its power behind (Egypt's) generals. The goal is to stack the deck in favor of the status quo - a scenario that removes Mubarak, yet is otherwise more about continuity than change."

In other words, Obama's "orderly transition democracy," substitutes rhetoric for constructive change neither he nor others in Washington will tolerate. As a result, people power faces imperial Washington and Egypt's military, united against populist change. However, what develops regionally remains unknown. Resolution can go either way or some unacceptable middle-ground compromise. Avoiding it is crucial, but doing so means continuing daily protests until all essential demands are met.

A Final Comment

According to Human Right Watch (HRW) and London Guardian reports, the professed neutrality and public persona of Egypt's military belie its harshness.

On February 9, Guardian writer Chris McGreal headlined, "Egypt's army 'involved in detentions and torture,' " saying:

Military forces "secretly detained hundreds and possibly thousands of suspected government opponents since mass (anti-Mubarak) protests began, (and) at least some of these detainees have been tortured, according to testimony gathered by the Guardian."

Moreover, HRW and other human rights organizations cited years of army involvement in disappearances and torture. Former detainees confirmed "extensive beatings and other abuses at the hands of the military in what appears to be an organized campaign of intimidation." Electric shocks, Taser guns, threatened rapes, beatings, disappearances, and perhaps killings left families grieving for loved ones.

HRW researcher Heba Morayef said, "I think it's become pretty obvious by now that the military is not a neutral party. The military doesn't want and doesn't believe in the protests and this is even at the lower level, based on the interrogations."

Allied with Washington, the Pentagon and US intelligence, it supports power, not populist change, a dark reality street protesters better grasp to know what's coming from a post-Mubarak regime. Unless challenged, promised reforms will leave entrenched policies in place, enforcing predatory capitalism with police state harshness, what Americans also endure under friendly-face leaders.

* Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.

Related posts:

• The spirit of Egypt’s Tahrir Square
• The US arms industry and the people’s revolt in Egypt
• Mubarak Calls on Obama To Step Down as President [Satire]

Christmas Bombing Audio Tape Lamest Yet You Were Caught, Admit It And Move On With Life

By Gordon Duff* | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

The new audio tape from "Osama bin Laden" taking responsibility for the idiotic and childish incident in Detroit where moronic Nigerian armed with a useless "bomb" is simply too much. Now using audio tapes because, supposedly, nobody in Al Qaeda got a flash drive video recorder for Christmas is even more of a joke. Please, with the hundreds of millions our Saudi allies have given to terrorists, a video camera the size of an Ipod might have been a nice touch. Even funnier was releasing the audio, using algorithm software probably illegally downloaded off the internet, and giving it to Al Jazeera.

Pundit Debbie Schussell, former Mark Siljander (VT staff writer) staffer, has bitterly complained about the strong ties between Fox News and Al Jazeera. Fox owner, Rupert Murdoch, is the most powerful "influencer" of the ultra-rightists in Israel. Attempts by the press to present Al Jazeera of today as the "pro-terrorist" media it seemed like many years ago is an epic misrepresentation.

A further abuse, of course, is not only that we are no longer seeing the easily debunked bin Laden doubles whose video tapes were "mysteriously" released by SITE Intelligence, the Rita Katz/Israeli group that seems to find them in trash bins behind delicatessens. The "new" audio tape itself contains statements claiming credit for 9/11 in direct contradiction to the real bin Laden videos, the only ones authenticated. If you wondered why the FBI doesn't list Osama bin Laden as a suspect in 9/11, I think you have your answer. If they think the bin Laden "admissions" aren't credibile, I wonder who the FBI is investigating or if they have simply been told to mind their own business.

The terrorist incident itself is the last thing Al Qaeda would ever take responsibility for despite the claims by SITE Intelligence that they found an unnamed and unverified internet site that confirmed this. Who in the name of all that is holy would want to take responsibility for an idiot who was led onto an American bound plane by passing around searches, customs and passport control in an airport run by an Israeli security company but who carried a "bomb" designed by a three year old.

Who would be so stupid as to try to pass off this childish tape when reliable witnesses saw the terrorist being led onto the plane in Amsterdam in a manner that required full cooperation from security personnel, passport control and the airline itself. We don't even have to go into the fact that the "terrorists" in Yemen that supposedly claimed responsibility were released from Guantanamo under the personal signature of Vice President Cheney in 2007 or that before the incident, the government of Yemen tied these individuals to Israeli controllers thru captured computers.

I am only thankful that the duped terrorist, or as Lee Oswald had said, "patsy", was the moronic son of a long time Mossad business associate in Nigeria. Mr. Mutallab, banker, but mostly head of Nigeria's defense industry, DICON, managed almost entirely by Israelis, may have much more story to tell other than the one he told CIA Chief of Station on November 19, 2009. Do we want to follow former Homeland Security director Chertoff, not only a Jewish activist but currently representing companies selling body scanners to airports and the mysterious ability for someone on worldwide terrorist watch lists to be escorted onto a US bound airliner without passport or search?

Billions in profits were realized almost instantly after this incident. Companies tied to Chertoff, Israel and India were on the receiving end.

The only reliable information the world has on Osama bin Laden is that he was killed by American troops on December 13, 2001 and buried outside Tora Bora by his following, 30 Mujahideen. At least 6 of these witnesses were alive at last check. Since his death, every "leaked" video or statement has been timed for convenient electoral "terrorist" scares, been childishly unprofessional and has only worked to discredit Islam.

Every effort has been made by the MSM/corporate press to cover the facts behind the Christmas "bombing" and push the blame on everyone but the obvious culprits. That effort was deemed so successful that now a brazen attempt to resurrect long dead Osama bin Laden to take responsibility for trying to set off a bomb with a flame igniter that could only be exploded using a blasting cap, is being made.

Is this an attempt to make Al Qaeda look stupid?

"My name is Osama bin Laden. I had a moron carry a defective bomb onto a plane full of Islamic families returning to Detroit, the most Muslim city in the west, as part of a terror campaign. I chose a flight that connected from the Middle East so I could kill as many of the innocent faithful as possible. Please excuse this and the dozen or other mistakes made but being dead has left me less sharp than I once was. No, I do not work for the Mossad, they simply tape and distribute my interviews. This is part of an agreement with my talent agent who is Jewish. All talent agents are Jewish, ask anyone in Hollywood. What do you expect, miracles? 10% of nothing is nothing.

For my faithful followers, I expect to be a regular on Californication next season on Showtime. I'll be the guy with the beard who seems dead."

The second possibility, one designed for the "spiritual" crowd is this:

"I am Osama, the ghost of Tora Bora. Please give more money to Israel, vote to extend the Patriot Act and buy new airport scanners from the companies listed on my weekly newsletter distributed by SITE Intelligence. Watch for more insane threats coming in the future and have a nice weekend. Remember to stop eating pork."

Any group that could make 5 airliners outwit NORAD, the most advanced air defense system in the world, any group that could train terrorist pilots inside the United States itself with nobody catching on, and it gets worse. Sources tell us that FBI Special Agent Stephen Butler may have "accidentally" been cashing checks for and paying rent for two of the 9/11 hijackers. Can people who can get this kind of thing done put a moron on an aircraft at an airport secured by an Israeli company, "extremely closely" related to the same company that managed security at all of the airports used on 9/11?

When Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell and his wife witnessed the famous, "he has no passport, he is a Sudanese refugee, we do this all the time", incident in Amsterdam, only a phony bin Laden tape could make America forget, or so "they" hope. Imagine our terrorist being taken to meet the security head for the "airline" with his "Indian looking" handler, bomb strapped to his underwear. Think of this exploding moron and his handler and who they would have had to know to get past, not only airline security and the Israeli company guarding the airport but Dutch passport control as well.

Anyone with the power to load the "crotch bomber" on a plane with no passport could have put a nuclear weapon in luggage easier. Nukes are seldom on watch lists or have parents running to the CIA reporting them as "terrorists." Next time we are being lied to, please, have more respect. Not everyone is a dumb as a Fox News, CNN, the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times.

It is one thing claiming that poor, long dead Osama bin Laden runs terrorists in Yemen. It is quite something else proving that he manages an airport in Europe or runs the Dutch government. When US Senators can't get thru airport security without being detained, bin Laden's ability to get diplomatic VIP treatment for known terrorists makes him more than a threat, it makes him a magician.

We are thankful that nobody was seriously injured and that we can all laugh about this, maybe not all of us. The people of Nigeria don't think it is funny. Millions of Muslims aren't seeing the joke either. Air travelers are having their bad moments also. Some, however, have benefitted in a major way, politically, financially and militarily. None of those people, however, are ever openly accused of terrorism.

* Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, grunt and 100% disabled vet. He has been a UN Diplomat, defense contractor and is a widely published expert on military and defense issues. He is active in the financial industry and is a specialist on global trade. Gordon Duff acts as political and economic advisor to a number of governments in Africa and the Middle East.

Related posts:

• Same intelligence experts who said Saddam had WMD’s, say Bin Laden tape real!
• What Role Did the U.S.-Israeli Relationship Play in 9-11?
• New Bin Laden called Abd el Malik Regi, supported by USA!

By Haitham Sabbah

The Israeli soldiers fired tear gas at Jacky Rowland, Al Jazeera's correspondent who was covering live event from near the village of Bilin.

Israeli forces also shoot two demonstrators with live ammunition in the West Bank village of Ni'lin.

Eyewitnesses reported that the Army began to shoot live ammunition towards demonstrators. David Reeb, an Israeli citizen and prominent film-maker, was shot in his thigh with live ammunition from around 20 meters. Reeb frequently films Ni'lin demonstrations. Hamoudeh Saeed Amirah, a Ni'lin resident, was shot in his leg with live ammunition, though the bullet did not enter. Amirah films the Ni'lin demonstrations for Press TV.

On Monday, Israeli soldiers also shot dead a Palestinian teenager in the occupied West Bank.

Today, a Palestinian child has died of gunshot wounds after Israeli troops opened fire on him in the northern sector of the Gaza Strip. The 13-year-old boy, Ghazi Maher Al Zaaanen, was shot in the head by Israeli troops stationed east of the town of Beit Hanoun.

And the Israeli war crimes continues.

Related posts:

• Haitham Sabbah – Photos of the day
• 30 Israeli Soldiers Killed 8-Year-Old Palestinian Girl
• Haitham Sabbah – Obama Peace Plan

[Via Abdurahman - No Longer at Ease]

A report on the role of race (and racism) in the US election by Al Jazeera English's Casey Kaufman received more than a million views, and was written about in Washington post. Casey speaks to people attending a Sarah Palin rally and most of them have clearly racist feelings Obama, here is some of what they've said:

From an older white woman: "I'm afraid if he wins, the black [sic] will take over. He's not a Christian. This is a Christian nation! What is our country gonna end up like?"

An older white man: "When you got a Negro running for president, you need a first-stringer. He's definitely a second-stringer."

A young white man holding a child: "He seems like a sheep -- or a wolf in sheep's clothing to be honest with you. And I believe Palin -- she's filled with the Holy Spirit, and I believe she's gonna bring honesty and integrity to the White House."

An older white man: "He's related to a known terrorist, for one."

An older white man: "He is friends with a terrorist of this country!"

An older white man: "He must support terrorists! You know, uh, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck. And that to me is Obama."

A young white woman: "Just the whole, Muslim thing, and everything, and everybody's still kinda -- a lot of people have forgotten about 9/11, but . . . I dunno, it's just kinda . . . a little unnerving."

A white woman: "Obama and his wife, I'm concerned that they could be anti-white. That he might hide that."

An older white woman: "I don't like the fact that he thinks us white people are trash . . . because we're not!"

Watch the video, it's a great piece of report:

Here is Washington Post article.

Related posts:

• Racism turns on itself
• Al Jazeera interview with Project Censored
• Racism in Israel

1. Is There a 'Foxification' Underway at Al Jazeera Television?
By Danny Schechter (Source: MediaChannel)

Sources inside Al Jazeera who are in a position to know what is going on now confirm to MediaChannel.org that there is an internal struggle underway that may dilute Al Jazeera’s independence and steer it in a more pro-western, pro-US direction.

"There is already a change of tone and focus in the news," a veteran insider reveals. He blames the shift on a reorganization of the network’s governing structure a month ago that has put a former Ambassador from Qatar to the USA in a commanding position.
[...]
"You don’t need to bomb Al Jazeera to change its direction," said my source. "There is a softer way to influence its direction by taking it over from within and it can happen quietly almost as if in slow motion. You ‘broaden’ some programs, announce new ‘guidelines,’ issue new edicts reinforcing top-down control, purge some professionals you don’t like, and then give more positive unchallenged airtime to backers of US foreign policy. Washington would not be open about any behind the scenes role it is playing in all this for fear of triggering a very negative public reaction."

The irony here is that for many years Al Jazeera made a point of giving substantial airtime to US officials and their surrogates to show fairness. This even led some hardliners in the Arab World years ago to accuse of the station of being CIA-backed and even pro-Israel. But whatever exposure they got was never enough for a Pentagon that practices "Information Dominance" and seeks to exclude all contrary views. They expect the kind of uncritical coverage they received on American TV.

Ironically, a former US military briefer became so disgusted with US media manipulation that he joined Al Jazeera.

2. One Man, One Vote
by Charley Reese (Source: AntiWar)

Palestinians should give up the idea of a two-state solution. It is as plain as a hippopotamus at a tea party that the only kind of state the Israelis will give them, if at all, is a politically and economically unviable collection of tiny enclaves separated by Israeli territory.

Instead, Palestinians should demand a unified Palestine, with one-man, one-vote democratic government and equal rights for all.

Of course, the Israelis won't agree to that, either. They know that while initially Palestinian Arabs would be a minority, in a few years they would become a majority because of a larger birthrate and a decline in Jewish immigrants.

Zionist ideology demands that Israel have a Jewish majority and Jewish control, which is why, to this day, the Israelis persist in various ways to try to ethnically cleanse the land of the original majority, which was Arabs.

3. Don't Be Fooled by Propaganda
by Charley Reese (Source: LewRockwell.com)

The word "jihad," which is so over-used these days, has, like a lot of words, more than one meaning. It means basically to struggle, but this can be personal or spiritual, or a peaceful political struggle. Only if Islam is attacked are Muslims required to defend it. As for that obnoxious propaganda term "Islamo-fascist," just recall that fascism is a European invention by nominal Christians. To my knowledge, the only fascist governments ever to exist on this planet were all European and nominally Christian.

Another canard is that Islam promotes forced conversion. Not so. Even when the Arab empire was expanding, rarely were any of the conquered people forced to convert. The Quran even forbids it, as I recall. Naturally, once Muslims were in charge, a lot of people decided it was in their own self-interest to convert, but this is just one of the sleazy aspects of human nature...

It was Christian Europe that slaughtered the Jews, and nothing remotely resembling the Holocaust is to be found in the history of Islam. In fact, during the past, when Jews were being persecuted by Christian Europe, they frequently fled to and found sanctuary in the Muslim countries. Until Israel was established, practically every Muslim country had sizable Jewish populations dating back centuries. And there are still Jews and Christians in some Muslim countries.

A final suggestion is that when you hear some individual radical Muslim being quoted, just remember he is one of a billion people and speaks only for himself and his small following. And be wary of the quotations he uses, for they are often deliberately fabricated or distorted.

If Muslims really desired to conquer the world, don't you think it's strange that we've been living in peace with them for nearly a millennium and a half, except for those times when we attacked them (the Crusades, the European colonial movement and our invasion of Iraq)? Don't forget either that some of the countries the Bush administration calls allies are themselves Muslim - Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, etc.

4. Congressional Time Warp
By MJ Rosenberg (The Director of Israel Policy Forum's Washington Policy Center)

It is not news to readers of this column that I believe that in recent years the United States Congress has done very little to advance peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors. And marking the end of the Six-Day War, without any mention of restarting the peace process, is another example of Congress sending the wrong signals and missing an opportunity to do something productive.

On the contrary, Congress has specialized in legislation making it more difficult to provide aid to any and all Palestinians in the name of keeping aid away from terrorists. No matter that our policies have weakened the moderates willing to live in peace with Israel and mightily strengthened Hamas and company.

Even now when international relief agencies report that Congressional restrictions make it near-impossible to deliver aid to non-Hamas Palestinians because the existing law is so harsh, Congress is looking at ways to tighten it. The name of the game is Arab-bashing which Congress views as a sure crowd - i.e. donor - pleaser.

5. Twilight Zone / Cry, the beloved country
By Gideon Levy (Source: Haaretz)

PRETORIA, South Africa - It was like being in the movies. Only there would you see an inert photo suddenly come to life. We were standing at the memorial museum in Soweto, next to a photo of a dead boy with other children around him, and our guide Antoinette was telling us about it. Antoinette said that the young girl in the picture was her.

The photo is at the entrance of the museum, built to commemorate the blacks' struggle against apartheid, which began here. Across the way is Nelson Mandela's tiny hut, nearby is the house of Desmond Tutu and down the street is the present home of Winnie Mandela.

The picture was stunningly familiar to us. We were four: MK Ran Cohen (Meretz); Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations; Diana Buttu, a former legal advisor to the PLO; and myself. We were all making the same associations: Hector is Mohammed al-Dura; the white soldiers shooting at children are us.

6. Throw a pebble at Goliath: don't buy Israeli produce
By Yvonne Roberts (Source: Guardian)

The Israeli treatment of Palestinians shows a total disregard for human rights. Apartheid doesn't seem to me to be too strong a word - and its consequence, as many have pointed out, is a recruitment drive for Islamic fundamentalists.

In this month's New Internationalist, psychiatrist Samah Jabr, describes his work in Ramallah and Jericho and the "mental health emergency" under way. For a population of 3.8 million, there are 15 psychiatrists and disastrously too few nurses, psychologists and support staff. He points out that 53% of the population is under 17 - especially vulnerable to family deaths, absent fathers and constant warfare.

Add poverty, affecting 67% of the population, unemployment at 40%, 20% of the population are prisoners and ex-prisoners, many suffering the psychiatric after-effects of isolation, and the daily violence does the rest.

Palestinian factionalism and Israel's brutal retaliation, plus its pre-emptive strikes and demolition of homes hits the Palestinian people with a savagery that destroys any semblance of normal living. (The ordinary Palestinians in the Lebanon are again paying the heaviest price.) Of course, ordinary Israelis are affected too - but their community remains robust, well cared-for, with needs met. Psychological trauma, for many Israelis, is at best held at bay and at worst given help. Hundreds of Israeli political prisoners are not rotting in Palestinian jails.

A boycott is neither self-indulgent gesture politics nor an indicator of powerlessness, as Hirsh suggests. It is an international protest against the way in which Israel behaves on a daily basis in an area that will, in all probability, never see peace.

June 9 sees the Global Day of Action on Palestine. Throw a pebble at Goliath - don't spend your pennies on Israeli produce.

7. What Congress Really Approved: Benchmark No. 1: Privatizing Iraq's Oil for US Companies
By Ann Wright (Source: t r u t h o u t)

This threat could not be clearer. If the Iraqi Parliament refuses to pass the privatization legislation, Congress will withhold US reconstruction funds that were promised to the Iraqis to rebuild what the United States has destroyed there. The privatization law, written by American oil company consultants hired by the Bush administration, would leave control with the Iraq National Oil Company for only 17 of the 80 known oil fields. The remainder (two-thirds) of known oil fields, and all yet undiscovered ones, would be up for grabs by the private oil companies of the world (but guess how many would go to United States firms - given to them by the compliant Iraqi government.)

No other nation in the Middle East has privatized its oil. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain and Iran give only limited usage contracts to international oil companies for one or two years. The $120 billion dollar "Support the Troops" legislation passed by Congress requires Iraq, in order to get reconstruction funds from the United States, to privatize its oil resources and put them up for long term (20- to 30-year) contracts.

What does this "Support the Troops" legislation mean for the United States military? Supporting our troops has nothing to do with this bill, other than keeping them there for another 30 years to protect US oil interests. It means that every military service member will need Arabic language training. It means that every soldier and Marine would spend most of his or her career in Iraq. It means that the fourteen permanent bases will get new Taco Bells and Burger Kings! Why? Because the US military will be protecting the US corporate oilfields leased to US companies by the compliant Iraqi government. Our troops will be the guardians of US corporate interests in Iraq for the life of the contracts - for the next thirty years.

With the Bush administration's "Support the Troops" bill and its benchmarks, primarily Benchmark No. 1, we finally have the reason for the US invasion of Iraq: to get easily accessible, cheap, high-grade Iraq oil for US corporations.

8. My search for the West Bank's 'invisible' town
By The Observer

"Sarah Helm set off by car to see Palestinians in Jenin but soon found that her road map was of no use. In the four decades after the Six-Day War, a labyrinth of walls, unmarked roads and checkpoints has arisen, hiding whole towns from Israeli eyes."

'Jenin? you want to go to Jenin?', asked a Palestinian villager, standing near an unmanned Israeli roadblock somewhere in the northern West Bank. The villager scratched his head as if surprised to hear the city's name, although we could not have been more than five miles away as the crow flies. 'It's a problem', he said.

'Where exactly is it? Which direction?' I asked anxiously. Having circled the area for so long, I had lost my bearings. I was last in Jenin - due north of Jerusalem beyond the Palestinian cities of Ramallah and Nablus - five years ago to write about a suicide bomber who killed himself and 15 Israelis, including a family of five, in a Jerusalem pizzeria. Back then Jenin was still on the map.

But now this city of nearly 36,000 Palestinians seemed to have disappeared. In fact, apart from my villager friend, I had hardly seen a Palestinian since entering the West Bank.
[...]
Not only can Israelis nowadays not 'see' Palestinians any more, but to all intents and purposes whole Palestinian cities have disappeared. Journeying through the West Bank my own disorientation began from the moment I set out from Jerusalem. At first I tried to leave the city by one of my old routes, but just before the Arab suburb of Abu Dis I ran into the Wall. 'Warsaw ghetto/Abu Dis ghetto' was emblazoned on the wall at this point and my friends were quite unreachable on the other side.

9. Israel: Mythologizing a 20Th Century Accident
By Gabriel Kolko

Zionism was original but at the turn of the century it's following was close to non-existent. An important exception was the interest of Lord Rothschild. Moreover, from its inception Zionism was symbiotic on Great Powers-principally Great Britain-that saw it as a way of spreading their colonial ambitions to the Middle East. As early as 1902 Herzl met with Joseph Chamberlain, then British Colonial Secretary, to further Zionist claims in the region bordering Egypt, and the following year he hired David Lloyd George-later to become prime minister-to handle the Zionist case.2

Herzl also unsuccessfully asked the sultan of the Ottoman Empire if he might obtain Palestine, after which he advocated establishing a state in Uganda-although his followers much preferred the Holy Land. Only the principle of a Jewish State, anywhere, appealed to him-but mainly for Jews in the Russian Empire. Herzl was only the first in the Zionist tradition of advocating a state for others; he was never in favor of all Jews moving there. Chaim Weizmann wrote Herzl in 1903 that the large majority of the young Jews in Russia were anti-Zionist because they were revolutionaries--which only reinforced Herzl's convictions. In 1913 British Intelligence estimated that perhaps one percent of the Jews had Zionist affiliations, a figure that rose in the Russian Pale-which contained about six million Jews-as the war became longer.
[...]
It is a Zionist myth that there were many Jews who wished to go to a primitive hot, dusty place and did so. They did not-and all of the available numbers prove this conclusively. After the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 the Pale was abolished and a very large number of the Jews in it moved to Russia's cities; many of them saw the Bolsheviks as liberators and filled the ranks of the revolution at every level.4 If they emigrated, and here the numbers are very important, it was not-if they had a choice--to Palestine.

From 1890 to 1924 about two million of the 20 million immigrants to the United States were Jews-overwhelmingly from East Europe. Other nations in the Western Hemisphere also attracted about a million Jews during this period, to which we must add Jewish migration to South Africa, Australia, West Europe, and the like. This does not mean that Jews were not "Zionists" but they had no intention whatsoever of embarking on Aliyah-of going to Palestine themselves. As Herzl believed, it was a project for others.
[...]
What is certain is that Hitler's importance must always be set in a larger context. Without him there never would have been a flow of Jews out of Germany, and very probably no state of Israel, but also crucial was the U.S. 1924 Immigration Act. Migrants went to Palestine out of necessity, in the vast majority of cases, not choice. Both of these factors were crucial, and to determine their relative importance is an abstract, futile enterprise. But without either the Zionist project of creating a Jewish state in Palestine would have remained another exotic Viennese concoction, never to be realized, because while the Jews in the Diaspora were in favor of a Jewish state, virtually none living in safe nations were ever to uproot themselves and embark on Aliyah-the return to the ancient homeland. They had no reason to do so.

There were many promised lands and Herzl's exotic ruminations were scarcely the inspiration for the flow of Jews out of Europe. Israel's existence was an unpredictable accident of history. The past century has been full of them, everywhere. That is why the world is in such a perilous condition.

Related posts:

• Weekend read: Biased Media, War Crimes, One-State Solution and ‘Right to Exist’
• Weekend Read: Holocaust, AIPAC, Azmi Bishara and Social Injustice
• Weekend read: Israeli Flag, anti-Semitism, citizenship, U.S. bombs, Non-Violent Protest, Prisoners and Cease-fire