By Jonathan Cook * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Israeli officials have expressed alarm at a succession of moves by the interim Egyptian government that they fear signal an impending crisis in relations with Cairo.

The widening rift was underscored on 4 May when leaders of the rival Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah signed a reconciliation pact in the Egyptian capital. Egypt's secret role in brokering the agreement last week caught both Israel and the United States by surprise.

The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, called the deal "a tremendous blow to peace and a great victory for terrorism".

Several other developments have added to Israeli concerns about its relations with Egypt, including signs that Cairo hopes to renew ties with Iran and renegotiate a long-standing contract to supply Israel with natural gas.

More worrying still to Israeli officials are reported plans by Egyptian authorities to open the Rafah crossing into Gaza, closed for the past four years as part of a Western-backed blockade of the enclave designed to weaken Hamas, the ruling Islamist group there.

Egypt is working out details to permanently open the border, an Egyptian foreign ministry official told the Reuters news agency on 1 May. The blockade would effectively come to an end as a result.

The same day Egypt's foreign minister, Nabil Elaraby, called on the United States to recognize a Palestinian state – in reference to a move expected in September by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, to seek recognition of Palestinian statehood at the United Nations.

Israel and the US have insisted that the Palestinians can achieve statehood only through negotiations with Israel. Talks have been moribund since Israel refused last September to renew a partial freeze on settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

According to analysts, the interim Egyptian government, under popular pressure, is consciously distancing itself from some of the main policies towards Israel and the Palestinians pursued by Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president overthrown by a popular uprising in February.

Mubarak was largely supportive of Israel and Washington's blockade policy to contain Hamas's influence. Egypt receives more than 1.3 billion dollars annually in US aid, second only to Israel.

But the popular mood in Egypt appears to be turning against close diplomatic ties with Israel.

A poll published last week by the Pew Research Centre showed that 54 per cent of Egyptians backed the annulment of the 1979 peace treaty with Israel, with only 36 per cent wanting it maintained.

Israel's Yedioth Aharonoth daily reported this week that Egyptian social media sites had called for a mass demonstration outside the Israeli embassy, demanding the expulsion of the ambassador, Yitzhak Levanon.

In comments to several media outlets last weekend, unnamed senior Israeli officials criticized Egypt's new foreign policy line. One told the Wall Street Journal that Cairo's latest moves could "affect Israel's national security on a strategic level".

Another unnamed official told the Jerusalem Post that "the upgrading of the relationship between Egypt and Hamas" might allow the Islamic movement to develop into a "formidable terrorist military machine".

Silvan Shalom, Israel's deputy prime minister, told Israel Radio on 1 May that Israel should brace for significant changes in Egyptian policies that would allow Iran to increase its influence in Gaza.

Egypt's chief of staff, Sami Hafez Anan, responded dismissively on his Facebook page to such statements, saying, "Israel has no right to interfere. This is an Egyptian-Palestinian matter."

In a sign of Israeli panic, Netanyahu is reported to be considering sending his special adviser, Isaac Molho, to Cairo for talks with the interim government.

In recent weeks, Netanyahu has repeatedly complained to visiting European ambassadors and US politicians about what he regards as a new, more hostile climate in Egypt.

Late last month Elaraby said Egypt was ready to "turn over a new leaf" in relations with Tehran, which were severed after the signing of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty more than three decades ago.

Egyptian officials have also warned that the supply of natural gas to Israel may be halted. The pipeline has been attacked twice on the Egyptian side, including last week, in acts presumed to be sabotage.

Even if Egypt continues the flow of gas, it is almost certain to insist on a sharp rise in the cost, following reports that Mubarak and other officials are being investigated on corruption charges relating to contracts that underpriced gas to Israel.

Yoram Meital, an expert on Israeli-Egyptian relations at Ben Gurion University in Beersheva, said Egypt's policy change towards Gaza threatened to "provoke a severe crisis in Egyptian-Israeli relations" by undermining Israel's policy of isolating Hamas.

With the toppling of Mubarak's authoritarian regime, Meital noted, the Egyptian government is under pressure to be more responsive to local opinion.

"We are at the beginning of this crisis but we are not there yet. However, there is room for a great deal more deterioration in relations over the coming months," he said.

Analysts said Cairo wanted to restore its traditional leadership role in the Arab world and believed it was hampered by its ties with Israel.

Menha Bahoum, a spokeswoman for the Egyptian Foreign Ministry, told the New York Times last week: "We are opening a new page. Egypt is resuming its role that was once abdicated."

That assessment is shared by Hamas and Fatah, both of which were looking to Egypt for help, said Menachem Klein, a politics lecturer at Bar Ilan University.

He noted that Abbas had lost his chief Arab sponsor in the form of Mubarak, and that the Hamas leadership's base in Syria was precarious given the current upheavals there.

With growing demands from the Palestinian public for reconciliation, neither faction could afford to ignore the tide of change sweeping the Arab world, he said.

Meital said: "We are entering a new chapter in the region's history and Israeli politicians and the public are not yet even close to understanding what is taking place".

* Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" and "Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair".

By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Demands: Embassy Closure and Withdrawal from The Camp David Accords in Wake of Renewed Attacks on Gaza

From Exclusive Video Coverage of The Embassy Seige

Editor's notes: The western press and even Al Jazeera have failed to report today's demonstrations in Tahir Square, Cairo accurately. Thousands of Egyptians marched from the square to the Israeli Embassy, demanding that the current military government end diplomatic relations with Israel in wake of the recent assault on Gaza by the IDF.

Israel claims that a school bus was attacked with a mortar round this week and it was necessary for the army to respond with tanks, helicopters, rockets and a step-up of the nightly bombing campaign that has gone on for months.

Skeptics doubt Israel's claim of an attack from Gaza, citing Israel's propensity for fabricating threats and the bizarre choice of weapons. From an American intelligence source who has worked with Israel for decades:

Israel has been using the "mortar attack" story more and more. Any small explosive charge can be made to look like a mortar attack. even a hand grenade. You only need to throw a few shards of metal around, the cheapest and dirtiest "false flag" possible and Israel has done this dozens of times.

Hamas has mortars but they also have thousands of RPGs. That's the weapon used to go after a vehicle. Saying someone shot a mortar at a bus is simply idiotic. If Gaza has the weapons Israel claims, Russian Kornet and RPG 29s which are capable of destroying Israel's Merkava tanks quite readily, as Hizbollah proved, the "school bus" story is even more fictional.

EXCLUSIVE TODAY VIDEO

VIDEO LINK: http://youtu.be/u6jC4gCGH4s

Background, The Egyptian Anti-Israeli Backlash

Egyptians marching to the Israeli embassy in cairo, protesting over Israeli strikes of Gaza.

On this very day, April 8th since 41 years the Israeli air force struck the village of Bahr el-Baqar – an Egyptian small village near Suez Canal. The raid resulted in the total destruction of an elementary school full of school children. Five bombs and 2 air-to-ground missiles struck the single-floor school. Of the 130 school children who attended the school, 46 were killed, and over 50 wounded, many of them maimed for life. The school itself was completely demolished.

That tragic day marked the first encounter of the Egyptian people with the brutality and the indiscriminate aggression of the Israelis that targeted the innocent and unarmed civilians. This air raid demolished not only the school building but also the remains of any hopes for Israel to be seen as a friendly neighbor state.

From then on Israel was the absolute enemy in the eyes of every average Egyptian.

This terrorist attack on the innocent Egyptian school children has been deeply engraved in the memory of all Egyptians. And to make sure that no one forgot what Israel had done on that day, Egyptians made April 8th a mourning day for the killed school children of Bahr el-Bakar and to be commemorated every year for the last 41 years.

Only this year it was rather different.

Egypt-Israel relations in the last 40 years

Egypt has just emerged from its worldwide celebrated revolution which managed to topple the long lasting in power dictator, Hosni Mubarak.

So many things happened in Egypt since the Israeli raid on April 8th, 1970.

• Egypt retaliated against years of Israeli military aggression and political arrogance in the glorious October war 1973 against Israel.

• President Sadat signed – on an individual initiative- a peace treaty with Israel 1979 (based on Camp David accords) that never managed to naturalize relations between Egyptians and Israelis.

• Mubarak ruled Egypt since 1980 and began a long era of not only observing the terms of the peace treaty but to acting as the closest friend of Israel and the White House in the Middle East.

• Mubarak, through his corrupt reign, helped Israel tighten its shameful siege on Gaza and even supplied Tel Aviv with the natural gas they needed for power and electricity production with prices well under the world rates. (enriching himself in the process) But his most appreciated contribution to the Zionist regime in Israel was the complete Egyptian withdrawal from actively participating in the key issues of the Arab- Israeli conflict.

Gaza under fire again

Lately, the unrest began to resurface again at the border line between Gaza and Israel. On Friday April 8th Five Palestinians have been killed and around 45 wounded in Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip following an offer of a ceasefire from Hamas after a surge in cross-border violence that was dramatically reduced by Israel and sold to the world as the usual "selective" Palestinian attack, by their most primitive handmade rockets, on a school bus – an area of specialty long mastered by the Israelis since Bahr el-Bakar school massacre.

Thus began another expected scenario of disproportionate Israeli attacks on the civilians and children in Gaza with the civilized world muted and turning a blind eye as usual.

The world has grown numb and painfully insensitive to the crimes of Israel against the Arab Palestinians in Gaza and the west bank.

And with judge Richard Goldstone bowing out and going back on his indictment of the Israeli crimes committed during the war on Gaza 2009; the world seems like a barren place for the Palestinians devoid of any free voices left to stand up against the Israeli insolence.

And just when the Palestinians in Gaza thought they were facing this new Israeli attacks alone and with their backs against the wall, they found out they forgot, over the years, that they had brothers in Egypt who are willing not only to accompany them in their struggle against Israel but to protect their backs as well.

Embassy under siege

On the very same day of April 8th and as Egyptians were protesting in Tahrir square demanding that Mubarak and his inner circle of aids to be put on trial and as the news of the Israeli attacks on Gaza made its way to the square at the heart of Cairo, thousands immediately took to the district where the Israeli embassy in Cairo is located.

Egyptians held back – by the military forces- from advancing into the building where the embassy lies practically surrounded the embassy in what seemed like a gigantic human shield. The angry protesters held flags of both Egypt and Palestine and raised big posters of al Aqsa mosque- temple mount in Jerusalem.

On a live coverage by Aljazeera of the march to the Israeli embassy- that somehow failed to make it to the news headlines- some of the protesters expressed their anger at the recent unjust Israeli attacks on Gaza and they made it clear they expected nothing less than the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador out of Egypt and taking the Israeli flag off the embassy building.

Some of the protesters went far as to demand the immediate end to the siege imposed on Gaza from the Egyptian side and a freeze of the Egyptian supply of natural gas to Israel. But the most daring request came by many protesters who called for a public referendum to allow the Egyptian people to have their say about the peace treaty president Sadat had signed 30 years ago.

Amidst that overwhelming atmosphere of antagonism to Israel and its unacceptable and inhuman war of ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians the Israeli embassy at the top floor of the building on the other side of the Nile opposite to Tahrir square found no other option than to dim out the lights and keep its staff hiding inside.

While the Egyptian crowd down in the streets were still swelling in great numbers around the embassy with the intensity of their enthusiasm rising high as they chanted for eternal solidarity with Palestinians the Israeli embassy's lights were almost turned off with the Israeli flag kept as unapparent and way out of sight as possible.

On this April 8th night, and on the very same day that witnessed the massacre of Bahr el-Bakar the Israeli embassy with all the Israeli diplomatic mission in Cairo seemed under siege.

It must have been a terrible night for the Israeli diplomats in Cairo but at least they have experienced, even it was for few hours how it feels to be vulnerable, threatened and under relentless siege.

This public display of the Egyptian anger and dissatisfaction of the Israeli aggressive policy against the Palestinians may pass unreported by the main stream media but never unnoticed by the analysts of the Arab- Israeli conflict especially in the post-Mubarak era in Egypt for what happened on that night of April 8th, 2011 might well depict the scene of the coming Egyptian-Israeli state of affairs.

On this day of commemoration, May the souls of innocent Egyptian and Palestinian children, massacred by the Israeli criminal forces, rest in peace.

* Dr. Ashraf Ezzat: Apart from the medical experience, he's always been engaged in writing activities. He writes articles about ancient Egyptian history, Ancient Near Eastern history, comparative religion and politics especially the Arab- Israeli conflict. Founder and board member of the bibliotheca Alexandrina friends society. Some of His articles have been published in Egyptian magazines and online publications.

By Mamoon Alabbasi * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Millions of Egyptian kneel to pray Friday in Cairo's Tahrir Square, where demonstrations were billed as a "Day of Victory and Continuation." (Hussein Malla)

It is easy to see that these protestors come from diverse backgrounds, have different political views and do not necessary share the exact same list of grievances. Not if your view of the region is influenced by an unhealthy negative obsession with Islam. In such case, so called analysts put on their binary world view glasses and see only 'Islamists' or 'the rest' – not that they have an accurate definition for each of those categories. They ignorantly put Al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran in one bag, and like to think that everyone else that remains falls into what they claim is a liberal category.

With this in mind, western observers who were against the uprising in Egypt were quick to warn that this was (or will be) an 'Islamist' revolution, while those who backed it went to great lengths to stress that the Muslim Brotherhood was an insignificant part of it. They cannot see Egyptians outside this two-dimensional view. That's all that matters: not the humanity and suffering of 80 million Egyptians but how powerful will the Brothers emerge in a democratic Egypt. And if the revolution is going to be a success story then they mustn't appear as having played any part in it.

Of course religious Egyptian protestors who are not officially part of the Brotherhood would automatically be calculated as part of 'the rest', even though many of them may hold views that are more conservative. Demonstrators who complained from the former regime's restriction on religious freedoms or its foreign policy (especially with regards to the US, Israel and Palestine) are also conveniently ignored if they are not members of the Brotherhood. Following this logic you'd be forgiven for thinking that being a cyber activist and a devout Muslim are mutually exclusive.

The fact is this was a revolution of the whole of the Egyptian people, including the Brotherhood (and of course Christians too). But the Brothers did not catch up with the revolution late in the day; it was the masses that finally joined their struggle against the regime. Their activists had long been tortured or routinely detained in the regime's jails decades before the 2011 uprising. Every time there was an election, their campaigners were the first usual suspects to be rounded up.

They played a very positive part in the demonstrations and even their former critics commended their role in protecting protestors when they were attacked. They also never sought to hijack the revolution or claim it as their own. In fact they tried to stay out of the limelight to avoid US animosity towards the uprising. They insist that they do not want a 'religious state' and called for democratic reforms (although they too need to reform). They are a part of Egypt, so who stands to gain from dividing Egyptians? Why do outsiders push for hatred instead of free and fair polls?

In a truly democratic Egypt, political parties will have a place, the strength of which would be determined by the ballot box. The Brotherhood may not be the perfect party (despite improvements over the years) for everyone, but the unwarranted demonising of the group by non-Egyptians is a great disservice to the whole of Egypt. We have witnessed great solidarity between Christians and Muslims during the anti-Mubarak protests, which shows that Egyptians – if left to their own devices – can live together without serious sectarian tensions. There were rare scenes of people holding up copies of the Koran and crucifixes shoulder to shoulder. These people included ultra-conservative Muslims; men with long beards, women with niqabs – all of whom expressing sentiments of unity with their fellow Christian citizens.

This inspiring sense of compassion between Egyptians must not be lost. It is even a greater gain than the fall of Mubarak, because united Egyptians can topple any future dictator. Those who have failed to suppress the Egyptian revolution now seek to derail it or rebrand it to keep the status quo of division and mistrust among the people. But Egyptians of all walks of life need to remember their moments of unity in Tahrir Square and across Egypt: do they want this spirit to continue or will they let their ill-wishers divide (and rule) them once more?

* Mamoon Alabbasi (M.A. in applied linguistics) is a news editor and translator based in London. His op-eds, reports, poetry, and reviews have appeared in a number of media outlets.

By Yousef Munayyer * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Thirty years ago the Soviet Union was at the beginning of a long campaign in Afghanistan, the average person was lucky to have an advanced recording technology called a "VHS tape," and Mohammad Hosni Mubarak took control of Egypt, the most populous nation in the Arab Middle East. This week, the last of these beginnings came to an end when millions of Egyptian protestors succeeded in toppling one of the longest standing rulers in the 5,000-year history of Egypt.

But as with all eras, Hosni Mubarak's established norms, some national and others regional, which have now irreversibly changed. What type of government may take form in Egypt in the coming weeks and months is yet to be seen, however, it is highly unlikely that any new government can afford to repeat the mistakes of the previous regime which eliminated pluralistic political participation in the formulation of both domestic and foreign policy.

Many different global players had an investment in the outcome of the drama that finally concluded in Egypt with Mubarak's departure. So after this transformational moment, who are the winners and who are the losers?

The Winners

1. The People of Egypt – After only 18 days, the people of Egypt succeeded in removing a ruler who had governed Egypt for three decades. But the victory for the people of Egypt is far greater than the removal of one person like Mubarak or his family. The fall of Mubarak means the fall of various other players who had been involved in central roles in Mubarak's political party and have used this power to garner wealth while half of Egypt's population lived below the poverty line. The extent to which the people of Egypt remain in the winner's category depends on what happens from this day forward. Transfer of power from an octogenarian dictator to the "supreme military council" is not exactly democratic reform. The next few weeks and months will determine if the generals now in control of Egypt will be willing to genuinely cede power back to the people, and – if this process comes to fruition – if Egypt's future will be bright.

2. The Palestinian People (Especially in Gaza) – For several years, the Mubarak regime has played a direct role in the coordinated siege of Gaza. The siege has, of course, had a devastating effect on the economic status and humanitarian needs in Gaza, and has effectively led to the collective punishment of Gaza's civilian population. The siege has been a major rallying point among Arabs and Muslims and people of conscience around the world who have been appalled by the callous treatment of a largely civilian population, and it should go without saying that Egypt's role in this siege was wildly unpopular in Egypt itself. The regime regularly began demonizing elements in Gaza – creating a boogeyman – to justify the siege among its population as a national security interest. Only days before the fall of the regime, the detested Ministry of Interior, now under house arrest, blamed the horrific bombing of a church in Alexandria, which risked the onset of sectarian violence, on Palestinians from Gaza.

A democratic Egypt, or at least an Egypt which must account for popular sentiment in its foreign policy making, is highly unlikely to cooperate with the Israeli siege of Gaza. Certainly, Israeli and American pressures to maintain this policy will persist regardless of what government is formed, but this newly displayed and remarkable popular outcry will factor heavily into the state's decision calculus in a way that didn't exist before. The Palestinian people, especially those in Gaza for whom Egypt and the Rafah crossing are the only access to the outside world, may finally find relief from the ongoing struggle to secure food and fuel, and travel without threat of prolonged imprisonment or death in a smuggling tunnel.

3. Al Jazeera – The Qatari-backed satellite news network, which was already the most popular news outlet in the Arab world, took tremendous steps forward during this transformational moment. Not only did Al Jazeera's English and Arabic language networks have the best coverage of all other regional networks, they had the best coverage of the situation throughout the world. While most networks were asleep at the control room, Al Jazeera had reporters on the ground in Tahrir Square from the onset covering the event live from every angle and in both languages. This advantage caused various American news networks to rely on Al Jazeera footage and reporters, and, in a rather rare occurrence, the overall narrative on Al Jazeera was mimicked by major news networks in the United States. For all the credit given to the internet and social media, one must note that when Mubarak hit the internet kill switch, the world relied on Al Jazeera to see what was happening in Egypt. This was coupled with an amazing surge in visits to Al Jazeera's Arabic and English websites where viewers from around the world went to watch live coverage.

But Al Jazeera is also in the winner's column because the biggest individual loser, Mubarak, expressly made Al Jazeera his enemy. While most journalists were targeted by the regime's crackdown, Al Jazeera's crew came under significant pressure and their offices in Cairo were set on fire. The network's satellite signal was jammed by the regime in the very early days of the uprising and it was forced to change its frequency numerous times. And while the regime was resisting the demands of the people, both Hosni Mubarak and Omar Suleiman repeatedly blamed "outside influence" and specifically warned people not to watch "satellite channels" clearly referring to Al Jazeera. Ultimately, when news finally came that Mubarak was stepping down, most Egyptians, Arabs and many others around the world watched it live on the Al Jazeera network.

The Losers

1. The Palestinian Authority – It was only days before the January 25th revolution began that Palestinian Authority (PA) officials were making the exact same argument about Al Jazeera that the Mubarak regime was making in its last throws. Al Jazeera was airing an exposé on the "Palestine Papers," documents from behind closed-door negotiations between Israel and the PA that thoroughly embarrassed the Ramallah-based authority, and led Chief Negotiator Saeb Erakat to resign. In response, the PA told Palestinians not to listen to Al Jazeera and argued that the network and the outside forces which control them were attempting a coup against the PA.

But it is not simply the PA's being on the Mubarak side of Al Jazeera which places them in the loser column. The PA relied heavily on the Mubarak regime for several things and it entrusted Mubarak and his intelligence chief Omar Suleiman to handle any negotiations between them and their political rivals Hamas. The reason that the PA was so enthralled by Mubarak's regime is perhaps best illuminated by a Wikileak-ed State Department cable where Suleiman "explained that Egypt's three primary objectives with the Palestinians were to maintain calm in Gaza, undermine Hamas, and build popular support for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas."

Even during the final days of the Mubarak regime, the PA's security apparatus repressed demonstrations in Ramallah being held in solidarity with the Egyptian people. Shortly after the crowds were dispersed and some of their members arrested, a pro-Mubarak demonstration was permitted to take place. There is little doubt that that the PA was worried that their best friend in the region maybe going on permanent vacation. With a post-Mubarak Egypt, which is unlikely to operate as the old Egypt did, the PA will be increasingly lonely in a region which has grown skeptical of the U.S.-backed regime in Ramallah.

2. Israel – Egypt was Israel's biggest strategic military threat before a peace agreement was signed between the two in 1979. Since then, an Egypt led by Mubarak had become Israel's best friend in the region and cooperated with Israel on the siege of Gaza, but also other strategic and military endeavors. A more democratic Egypt will likely not mean the end to the 1979 Camp David peace accords. Surely, there will be plenty of American pressure on Cairo to make sure that this is the case. But the days of close Egyptian-Israeli security coordination are likely as much a part of the history books as Mubarak himself.

It is not simply the change in the Israeli-Egyptian relationship which will negatively impact Tel Aviv. The impact of the successful overthrow of Mubarak will spread throughout the region which means Arab publics throughout the region will feel empowered – a thought that makes Israeli leaders shiver. Few things have benefited Israeli security more than pacified Arab publics. Moreover, if Egypt's official posture turns away from Israel as expected, it is likely to make things increasingly more uncomfortable for another of Israel's neighbors, Jordan. The Hashemite Kingdom, which signed peace with Israel in 1994, may now be Israel's only friend in the region. With Turkey's realignment away from Israel in recent years, and now Egypt's transformation toward democracy, Jordan will find it more difficult to deflect regional and domestic criticism of security cooperation with Israel and maybe forced to adjust its position as well.

3. Saudi Arabia and other "moderates" – Like most around the world, Saudi Arabia was caught off guard by the events which took place in Tunisia leading to the overthrow of Zein Al-Abidine Ben Ali. When no one else would take the first modern Arab dictator to be deposed, Saudi Arabia offered him refuge. But the last thing Saudi Arabia wanted was to start a collection, and it was critical for the United States' oldest ally in the region that what happened in Tunisia stayed in Tunisia. Tunisia could be explained away as a rare event, but if Mubarak fell, the domino effect would be undeniable and the reverberations would head throughout the Middle East.

When the United States began to distance itself from Mubarak, the Saudis notably objected calling on the United States to handle Mubarak with care. Then, when Washington began to question their $1.3 billion in aid to Egypt, the Saudis announced that if U.S. aid to the regime was cut off, they'd be happy to step in and replace it.

In the end, of course, Mubarak stepped down and the revolution in Egypt achieved similar results to the revolution in Tunisia less than a month earlier. Saudi Arabia now has the unique reputation of being the regime which stuck by the most unpopular man in the region up to the very last minute. Mubarak was also a key member in an axis of "moderate" states, which is the typology used in Washington to describe allies like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Yemen (and previously Egypt and Tunisia), and has little to do with the actual political temperament of the states. This "moderate" axis often had to deflect criticism for unpopular policies in support of U.S. objectives. Now, this collective has lost its most strategically important member in Mubarak, who projected the narrative and interests of the "moderates" in his policy toward Israel/Palestine, the conflict which has helped define politics in the Arab world for the better part of a century.

4. The Global Sectarians – From Islamophobes here in the United States who rejected pro-democracy demonstrations in Egypt arguing that this is the beginning of a new caliphate, to radical extremists who have targeted Christian minorities in the Middle East, the global sectarians who preach a narrative of tension between faiths in the region suffered a significant blow. Images of Egypt's Copts alongside Egypt's Muslims calling for a new regime put an end to the Mubarak-sponsored myth that a strong-armed dictator was desired for the implementation of secularism. While the secular Arab nationalism that swept the region in the early post-colonial period relied on Arab identity as its backbone, what we are seeing today even transcends that commonality. The unity of protestors of different faiths in Tahrir square showed that Christians and Muslims in the region had more in common than just an Arab or Egyptian identity; they also equally yearned for freedom and were ready to pay the ultimate price for it. This is not to say that religious minorities have no concerns about the future of Egypt, but this newly demonstrated unity can lay the foundations of a state with strong respect for civil and religious rights.

In Between

The United States – The jury is still out on whether the United States is a winner or a loser after the revolution in Egypt. President Obama made an important statement after Mubarak stepped down calling the events in Egypt "historic" and saying "The people of Egypt have spoken, their voices have been heard, and Egypt will never be the same.... The United States will continue to be a friend and partner to Egypt." But despite President Obama's world-renowned oratory skills, it is not likely the people of Egypt will forget the United States' 30 years of support for the regime which repressed them, especially since tear-gas canisters labeled "Made in the USA" were just recently used against them.

The relationship between Egypt and the United States will depend on what happens from this day forward. The United States must not only be a friend and partner to Egypt, but it must also not interfere in Egypt's democracy and respect its new found independence if the new government is less aligned with U.S. and Israeli interests than the last one was. Only time will tell how the United States will respond when Egypt reaches that inevitable juncture.

* Yousef Munayyer is the Executive Director of the Jerusalem Fund and the Palestine Center.

WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE

By Mantiq al-Tayr * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

1. The Egyptian people deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. To be more accurate, the Nobel Peace Prize is not good enough for the Egyptian people, but still it would be a great gesture and would make lots of Arab regimes even more uneasy than they are now. Fortunately for them, most likely rich white men will not want to bestow it upon that incredible people, but you can sign the petition here. I only wish the petition also called for stripping Obama of his.

2. Remember that New Years day bombing of the Coptic Church in Alexandria? 23 people were killed and the media were all to happy to report that "Mooselim extremists" had done the deed. In fact, some tiny faction of Palestinian morons known as JundAllah ("Assholes" in Arabic), is said to have done the deed, though they did deny it. The group, perhaps because they knew what really happened, or perhaps because they just are out and out assholes, said that it "praised" those who did do it. Back to that very shortly.

But hell, the Bullshit Broadcasting Network (BBC) pinned it on them, so it had to be true.

Interior Minister Habib al-Adli said Cairo had "decisive proof" that the Army of Islam carried out the attack in the northern Egyptian city.

And of course all of the Main $tream Media went along for the ride. I mean, if Interior Minister Habib al-Adli said it was true and that he had evidence, well then it had to be true. Mooselims did the killing, radical horrible Mooselims, the worst kind of Mooselims, Palestinian Mooselims.

Well, if these reports turn out to be true, al-Adli did have proof, all of the proof. How did he get it so fast? Because his subordinates planned and initiated the attack setting up the fall guys in the process. Yup, if the reports are true – and the current Egyptian government is now investigating prosecuting al-Adli for these murders – then we have an interesting story indeed. Again.

The story is that Adli's people planned the attack, got the patsies involved, killed one of them at the site of the bombing and then arranged to have the other two arrested at a meeting a few days later. Inexplicably, these latter two were let out of jail when Mubarak turned the thugs in Egypt's prisons loose in order to punish his people. They then went to the British embassy and reported what had happened. Could all be baloney, but . . .

And of course, if it turns out that the Egyptian government did orchestrate the killings, then we have yet another piece of evidence that no terrorist bombing can ever be taken at face value. None. Not one. But I'm sure most readers of this blog already know that anyway. You need evidence – and that evidence is pretty darn hard to get, especially when you have to rely on the MSM.

Oh, and Al-Adli is also being investigated for his role in killing innocent Egyptian demonstrators. Oh, and the link I am giving you for this is on the Muslim Brotherhood website for the benefit of all you "patriot" bloggers who are now acting like Egypt experts. (I am not an expert on Egypt, and claim only to know that lots of Egyptians seem like wonderful people.) Browse around the site. You expert Arabists who think you know something about Egypt, and you know who you are, you might want to try the MB's Arabic website too.

3. A while back a regular reader of this blog inquired about a website known as the "The Angry Arab News Service" asking if it were any good. I replied in the affirmative and recommended she keep visiting the site.

The Angry Arab (Dr. As'ad AbuKhalil) has been especially good the past three weeks or so with his commentary on and his links to the tremendous events in Egypt. I'm going to single out a couple of them here but I strongly recommend to anyone who wants to learn more about what's happened in Egypt to scroll through his site, especially "alternative" media bloggers so many of whom have recently anointed themselves as experts on Egypt and are filling the internet with articles and podcasts about what's been going on there. Oh, I forgot, I already mentioned them. Sorry. Back to the main idea.

First of all, despite some indications that the military leaders are hijacking the revolution, I want to point to Dr. AbuKhalil's post here where he lists 14 points to keep in mind as events unfold in Egypt. He's spot on. Give them a good read.

Oh, and I have to comment on point 14, which just might be my favorite point on this list. Dr. AbuKhalil informs us (no doubt correctly):

14) The vulgar singer, Sha'ban 'Abdul-Rahim who sang for Husni Mubarak will come out with songs against him.

As all the experts on Egypt out there on the internet know, did I mention that there sure as hell are a lot of experts on Egypt, out there? Oh, I'm digressing. Anyway, as all you experts on Egypt know, Abdul-Rahim's most famous song is "I hate Israel."

I can hear you all now, "Mantiq, that sounds like a great song? Is it on youtube so we can hear it?"

Well, yes it is and it exists in different versions. You can find one of them here. And listen carefully to the words and maybe you will understand why the Angry Arab says what he says. (The video has some great pics in it too.) My favorite part of the song is when he sings "I love Husni Mubarak because he is so smart, when he takes a step he really thinks things out." (Hey, I made it rhyme. )

I guess one could hope that Shaban was just being funny and put those words in to get past the censors.

Dr. AbuKhalil also links to this article which provides some interesting historical perspective. It is also well written. It compares the events of the past weeks with the 1919 revolt in Egypt. Read the whole thing. I provide you with two excerpts:

Ms. Ifdal Elsaket writes:

The anxious jubilation and the revolutionary vivacity that permeated the atmosphere of Egypt's cities were reminiscent of the events that unfolded during Egypt's popular uprising of 1919, when, for the first time in the history of the modern Egyptian state, thousands of ordinary Egyptians of all classes, men and women, young and old, Muslim and Christian, took to the streets to demand political change. In that year, after decades of British occupation, political discontent, and worsening economic conditions, the Egyptian nation rose – its people becoming an unwavering force to be reckoned with. . . .

Tellingly, as I write this, and in an expression of profound historical poignancy, one of Sayyid Darwish's song's "Biladi", popular with the protestors of 1919 and adopted in 1979 as the Egyptian national anthem, roars through the Square. At this moment, one can not help but think that perhaps, almost 100 years later, the aspirations of 1919 might finally be fulfilled.

I liked this post too. It's very short. So short even Shas Party members can pay attention to it. In fact, I'll quote it here in full.

"When you watch the Egyptian people, you have to say this: they are the most articulate people one knows. They never run out of words to say and they never pause for the right word. This is true for the educated and the less educated alike. Their journalists are very good with words, their politics aside. In some way that is also true of the Syrian people."

4. The all-knowing all-wise master informs us:

But here's the big question in Egypt now: Can this youth-led democracy movement take the power and energy it developed in Tahrir Square, which was all focused on one goal - getting rid of Hosni Mubarak - and turn it into a sustainable transition to democracy, with a new constitution, multiple political parties and a free presidential election in a timely fashion? Here, the movement's strength - the fact that it represented every political strain, every segment and class in Egyptian society - is also its weakness. It still has no accepted political platform or leadership.

Let me take a minute to point out the Arabic expert who wrote this that the movement's focus was not on one goal. They made this clear early on and they repeatedly stated their goals in the Arab and the international press. They also printed them and raised them on banners in Tahrir Square and elsewhere. Friedman, read this, for example.

Or try this one.

Okay, okay, you can read it in English here.

Also, for an excellent read on the upside of not having the kind of leadership the all-knowing all-wise one calls for, go here. Warning, it is written by an Egyptian who was there and the article has not been through the MSM filtering process so it can be published under David Sanger's name in the NYT: you might get a perspective that would disturb the Israeli lobby, Eric Cantor and Jane Harman.

5. I really did want to write about Mossad Jane Harman's resignation from Congress while poking great fun and an awful article about that resignation in the Jerusalem Washington New York Times Post (JEWNYTP), but I just don't have time. Hopefully in the next post.

6. I might have an interesting tidbit for regular readers of this blog if something I've been trying to arrange behind the scenes works out of the next day or so. I'll post it to the site quickly if it happens and put out a notice on twitter and facebook.

7. The Mermaid put this on her facebook page. Beautifully done. Join in with the Egyptians as they celebrate. The voice of freedom is calling you too.

* Mantiq al-Tayr is a blogger who is attempting to wake up other American citizens to the true dangers and challenges which face their country and is devoted to justice for the Palestinian people. Truth is his objective, satire is his tool. He also enjoys reading the Qur'an from time to time. See his website.

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.

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.

Illustration by Carlos Latuff

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

In fact, repression throughout the Middle East is largely ignored except some reporting on protests in Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan, and Algeria, but they've faded with focus mainly on Egypt.

Though important, most Arabs live in 21 other countries and territories from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Sea, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Horn of Africa and Indian Ocean on two continents. Their combined populations approach 340 million people, most of them denied freedom and dignity for centuries.

Their plight stretched from Ottoman 16th century rule through WW I, then British and French control, and now America and Israel. They're ruling hegemon partners, mainly Washington, of course, allied with its key regional partner. Together, they virulently oppose Arab nationalism and democratic freedoms. Edward Said once explained that:

"The basic premise of Arab nationalism in the broad sense is that, with all their diversity and pluralism of substance and style, the people whose language and culture are Arab and Muslim (the Arabic-speaking peoples) constitute a nation and not just a collection of states scattered between North Africa and the western boundaries of Iran."

However, any "independent articulation of that premise was openly attacked," by the French, British, Americans, and Israelis through wars and repressive occupation and dispossession of indigenous Palestinian people.

Washington and Israel especially remain deeply hostile to Arab nationalism and attempts to unify Arabs politically. Their goal, in fact, is divide, conquer and control, redrawing the Middle East to suit imperial, not Arab interests. They thrive on "Arab fragmentation, collective inaction, and military and economic weakness," Said explained.

He also said Arabs largely never achieved collective independence in "whole or in part" because outside powers coveted their lands and resources. For over half a century, in fact, Washington based its Middle East agenda on three policies:

• supporting Israel;
• controlling regional oil supplies; and
• assuring Arab states remain reliable vassals, Egypt especially as the region's lynchpin but also Palestine under leaders it controls along with Israel.

Said called it "an unprecedented crisis. Unprecedented means are therefore required to confront" what he said was "a wholesale attack....by an imperial power, America, that acts in concert with Israel, to pacify, subdue, and finally reduce (Arab peoples) to a bunch of warring fiefdoms whose first loyalty is not to their people but to the great superpower" under puppet rulers enriching themselves at their expense.

Kings do it. Shekh leaders do it. Mubarak did it, and so don't Mahmoud Abbas, Salam Fayyad and other key Palestinian Authority (PA) fellow travelers, profiting at their own people's expense as reliable Israeli enforcers.

In fact, they cooperate actively in pursuing, facilitating, or ignoring systematic attacks against civilians and property in Occupied Palestinian communities. As a result, a typical week resembles late January through early February, including:

• PA security forces arresting targeted figures, including Hamas members;
• Israeli settlers, with impunity, killing two Palestinian civilians, wounding a third in Nablus and Hebron;
• an IDF explosive killing a Gaza child;
• its forces targeting Palestinian workers, farmers, children and fishermen in Gazan waters;
• using brute force against peaceful protesters, causing injuries and at times deaths;
• bombing tunnels south of Rafah numerous times, causing more of them;
• other bombings of a Gaza medicine factory, setting it ablaze, and attacking a metal workshop in northern Gaza; at least 10 injuries overall were reported;
• announced plans for an electric security barrier to wall off Egypt; and
• Israel forces making 31 lawless incursions into Palestinian West Bank communities, arresting 23 civilians, including seven children and a PA representative.

Moreover, Gaza remains besieged over seven months after Israel's Security Cabinet's decision to ease closure. As a result, reconstruction is severely impeded, including the rebuilding of schools, hospitals, residential neighborhoods, and vital civilian infrastructure.

In addition, food insecurity as well as high unemployment and poverty rates remain major concerns. Also, virtually all exports are banned, exacerbating dire economic conditions, worsened because Israel severely restricts entry of humanitarian organizations, international diplomats, journalists, and others wanting to assess conditions or help.

In the West Bank and East Jerusalem, daily life involves severe movement and speech restrictions, including 585 permanent roadblocks, manned and unmanned checkpoints, and closure or militarized control of around two-thirds of all main roads between 18 Palestinian communities. Overall, about 500 km of West Bank roads are restricted, and about one-third of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is inaccessible to Palestinians without IDF-issued (very hard to get) permits.

This is how police states work, daily responsible for crimes against humanity, especially against those who dare resist. As a result, Palestinians suffer grievously, largely out of sight and mind, more than ever perhaps with world attention on Egypt.

For them, daily life involves militarized repression, police state harshness even more brutal than Mubarak's because the entire population suffers, especially besieged Gazans, suffocating under near total closure for over three and a half years, except for restricted exceptions.

On February 7, IRIN, OCHA's humanitarian news and analysis service said Egypt's uprising exacerbated Gaza's humanitarian crisis because Rafah crossing and tunnels have been closed. It explained that:

"The problem is getting fuel to the border inside Egypt. There are no military forces on the Egyptian side....so smugglers are getting hijacked on the road from Cairo and all their stuff (is) stolen. It's very dangerous for them...."

"There is nothing coming through the tunnels now." Only limited fuel amounts are available at triple the recent price. Without relief, it means "no cars, but also no electricity," that's already in short supply, forcing widespread use of fuel-powered generators.

Hospitals are also affected. Shifa Hospital, Gaza's largest, has less than a week's supply of fuel, creating a potentially critical situation. A senior intensive care unit nurse expressed great concern, saying:

"This unit, especially, is entirely dependent on electricity. If there's a power cut we have to operate the ventilators manually before the generator kicks in. There are power cuts here for four hours every day. It will be impossible to keep people alive without our generators - the monitors, the ventilators, everything - will be gone."

Bassam Abu Hamad, a senior Gaza health consultant, also said greater closure puts lives at risk, adding:

"People in need of radiotherapy, and advanced surgery in particular, are simply unable to get treatment. While Rafah is closed, we will see increased loss of life here in Gaza."

Already prices have skyrocketed, affecting fuel, food, other consumer goods, and the limited amounts of available building materials.

On February 9, IRIN said tunnels resumed supplying petrol, a week after it was cut off. However, Egypt's crisis means everything is uncertain, including high prices making vital supplies unaffordable for many. In addition, Rafah remains closed, affecting patients unable to reach Egypt for treatment. WHO's Gaza officer in charge, Mahmoud Daher said:

"In cases of closure, like we're seeing now," patients without Israeli permits to leave "struggle to get adequate health care in Gaza. The longer Rafah remains closed, the higher the possibility that these patients' prognosis will be affected. This is a very worrying situation." It promises to stay that way as Egypt's uprising shows no signs of ebbing.

On February 9, Al Jazeera said Egyptian labor unions went on nationwide strike, supporting street protesters. Around 20,000 factory workers were involved. Demonstrators held signs saying "Closed until the fall of the regime."

Correspondent Stefanie Dekker said there's "even an Internet campaign aimed at mobilizing thousands of expatriates to return and support the uprising." Activist Ahmad Salah told Al Jazeera that protesters are "more emboldened by the day....This is a growing movement, it's not shrinking."

Whether or not Egyptians prevail, besieged Gazans face increasing hardships heading toward crisis conditions if essential supplies and services remain spotty or unaffordable. Yet media reports largely ignore them. Even Al Jazeera offers only occasional accounts.

A brief February 9 one headlined, "Egypt events spark Gaza fuel panic," saying Gazans scrambled to make due best they can in coverage running barely over two minutes compared to hours devoted to Egypt.

It's nothing new for Palestinians. They've suffered mostly in silence. Major media coverage largely ignored them for decades, except during two Intifadas and Israeli wars when unjustly they were called terrorists, not heroic freedom fighters, struggling for rights long denied them.

They still do out of sight and mind in most Western societies, especially Americans given carefully filtered managed news, infotainment and junk food news. It leaves large majorities out of touch and uninformed, believing fantasies opposite of realities, including aggressive wars called liberating ones against people only yearning to be free.

A Final Comment

It's no exaggeration saying millions across North African and Middle East countries harbor decades of pent up anger, expressed powerfully by courageous Egyptians after 16 days of protest showing no signs of ebbing. It's also true that Washington maneuvers plan new faces under old policies, creating the impression of change, a longstanding scheme initiated numerous previous times, usually successfully, and odds favor it this time.

As a result, it's hard distinguishing between pro and anti-reformists pretending to want change, perhaps including made for television heros. The latest one comes to mind without knowing whether or not he's credible. At least, be wary. Accept nothing at face value. What's portrayed publicly may be more fiction than fact, so viewers should demand proof. Without it, remember numerous past times manufactured heros were fakes, but don't conclude it arbitrarily.

The latest one comes to mind - Wael Ghonim, Google's regional head of marketing the New York Times called "emotive and handsome....the movement's icon," quoting Professor Ibrahim el-Bahrawy (a former ruling party member) saying, "His emotions exploded. I was very, very moved."

Who, in fact, is Ghonim, a fair question since he practically emerged out of thin air, and overnight become a prime catalyst of revolt? He's Google's Middle East/North Africa head of marketing, who in January, created the Facebook "We Are All Khaled Said" page, honoring the young Egyptian blogger beaten to death by police last June.

Operated anonymously as "El Shaheed" (the martyr), the page helped rally anti-government protests beginning on January 25. On January 27, Ghonim went missing, his same day Twitter feed saying:

"Pray for #Egypt. Very worried as it seems that government is planning a war crime tomorrow against people. We are all ready to die #Jan.25."

For days, no one knew his whereabouts until learned authorities held him. On February 7, 12 days later, he emerged unharmed, and on Dream 2, a private Egyptian channel, gave a highly emotional interview, admitting he administered the Facebook page.

He also created Mohammed ElBaradei's official web site, the former IAEA head who suddenly parachuted into Egypt after living outside his native country for 30 years. Did he come voluntarily, or was he brought, perhaps serving America's imperial agena, another unanswered question.

For many in them, Egypt's jails operate like roach motels, those entering disappear after lengthy torture/ interrogations. Ghonim, however, said he wasn't harmed, just kept blindfolded incommunicado, his family unaware what happened.

After release, he said many others contributed to the Facebook page, adding, "This was a revolution of the youth of all of Egypt. I'm not a hero," endearing him to protesters.

Though so far no evidence suggests it, at issue is whether a Google executive "Internet activist," in fact, was enlisted for his role. If so, it wouldn't be the first time made-for-television heros were, in fact, villains. Hopefully, he's not the latest, but be wary until known for sure.

* 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.

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

Illustration by Carlos Latuff

On January 15, 2009, ambassador Margaret Scobey called security force brutality "routine and pervasive," saying:

"(P)olice using force to extract confessions from criminals (is) a daily event. (US informants) estimate there are literally hundreds of torture incidents every day in Cairo police stations alone."

Political activists and opponents are also targeted, Scobey adding:

"(T)he GOE (government of Egypt) is probably torturing (an April 6 activist) to scare other....members into abandoning their political activities." It also referred to the "sexual molestation of a female 'April 6 activist,' " and that another victim's torture only stopped "when he began cooperating."

Moreover, "standing orders from the Interior Ministry between 2000 and 2006 (instructed) the police to shoot, beat and humiliate judges in order to undermine judicial independence."

A July 28, 2009 embassy cable said:

"(A) recent series of selective (government) actions against journalists, bloggers and even an amateur poet illustrates the variety of methods available to the GOE to suppress critical opinion, including an array of investigative authorities and public and private legal actions."

A January 12, 2009 cable admitted that Mubarak ruled through police state "emergency powers" for decades, saying:

"Egypt's State of Emergency, in effect almost continuously since 1967 (since Nasser and Sadat), allows for the application of the 1958 Emergency Law (EL), which grants the GOE broad powers to arrest individuals without charge and to detain them indefinitely," omitting what's also common in America and US-controlled offshore torture prisons extra-judicially.

According to the International Federation for Human Rights (IFHR), Egypt's EL grants "broad power to impose restrictions on the freedoms of assembly, movement or residence; the power to arrest and detain suspects or those deemed dangerous, and the power to search individuals and places without the need to follow the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code."

It violates Egypt's constitutional personal freedom, inviolability of private homes, and freedom of movement, letting Mubarak trash legal principles and rule despotically. It also criminalized assembly of five or more people that could "threaten public order."

Other cables identified Egypt's military as the real center of power. One on July 30, 2009 said, along with state security forces, it:

"would ensure a smooth transfer of power, even to a civilian," to assure seamless succession under new leadership.

Moreover, cables revealed longstanding US knowledge of extreme security force brutality, including recent arrests, torture, and assassinations of protesters demanding regime change.

Egypt also partnered with Washington and Israel by enforcing Gaza's siege. Moreover, it did it for internal security reasons because of the Muslim Brotherhood's alleged ties to Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas.

Anatomy of Mubarak's Dictatorship

Since the 1970s, Egypt shifted from defying Western imperialism to becoming a reliable strategic partner. Sadat hastened a trend already underway called "infitah," or open-door policy, to attract foreign capital by loosening currency controls, creating tax-free investment zones, and privatizing state industries. Political changes followed, including rapprochement with America to resolve conflict with Israel and remove the threat of war.

At the time, Egypt's crumbling infrastructure, fragile transportation and telecommunications networks, as well as fear of re-nationalizations deterred foreign investments. As a result, relaxed import controls facilitated flooding Egypt's market with luxury goods for the rich, not economic growth that deteriorated instead, mostly harming its workers and poor.

In November 1977, Sadat extended peace overtures to Israel in Jerusalem. A year later, Camp David followed, establishing full diplomatic and economic relations as well as getting Egypt expelled from the Arab League (AL), its headquarters moved from Cairo to Tunis. In 1989, Egypt was readmitted. In 1990, AL's headquarters returned to Cairo.

Sadat hoped economic growth would follow as well as US aid. His October 1981 assassination elevated former air force commander/deputy defense minister/air chief marshall/vice president Mubarak to power, replacing him. From then until now, he served reliably as a US puppet, profiting handsomely from the relationship, besides what he gained from other high positions.

He allied with America's 1991 Gulf War, collaborating again in 2003 by giving Pentagon forces priority Suez Canal access and unrestricted use of Egypt's airspace. At the time, David Welch, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs called America's partnership with Egypt "a cornerstone of our foreign policy in the Middle East." It leveraged its relationship to secure other regional allies. In return, Mubarak and Egypt's ruling class profited handsomely at the expense of their deeply impoverished people, the spark, along with extreme repression, that erupted in protests.

In her February 4 Foreign Policy article titled, "Anatomy of a Dictatorship: Hosni Mubarak," Elizabeth Dickinson said millions of Egyptians forced him not to run again for office, but demand more. "The president, they charged, was an autocrat, a repressor, and a tired leader. He had to go....Mubarak's Egypt," in fact, "is a textbook police state. For 30 years, anger and frustration brewed among his subjects, bottled up and sealed with fear."

Egypt's brutal police enforced hardline control, targeting activists, dissidents, Islamists, opposition forces, and anyone perceived threatening as well as ordinary citizens suspected of crimes or looking suspicious. In June 2010, a young man, Khaled Said, was beaten to death for not showing his identity card after entering an Alexandria Internet cafe. Torture and disappearances are also commonplace as are sham elections.

"Even if a candidate manages to successfully jump through (numerous) hoops, the Political Parties Commission, (responsible for registering parties) has broad authority to close offices, seize funds, or refuse to recognize a party in the first place - meaning that in practice, elections are only as competitive as Mubarak wants them to be."

A 2010 WikiLeaks released cable said the "Interior Ministry uses (state security) to monitor and sometimes infiltrate the political opposition and civil society, and to suppress political opposition through arrests, harassment and intimidation."

Mubarak also claims threatening Islamic extremism to justify harsh repression and extract more Western aid. Moreover, a 1996 press law criminalizes defamation, insults, and libel as a way to suppress press freedom and speech, including against bloggers.

"Academia isn't safe either: Since the state controls promotions, appointments, and university administration, a subtle self-censorship prevails." As a result, professors have been fired and students harassed, especially leaders for organizing.

Moreover, women are regularly mistreated, their rights compromised by sexual abuse, harassment, and assaults. A 2008 Egyptian Center for Women's Rights report said over 80% of women suffered public sexual humiliation, from groping to criminal attacks.

Gays and other minorities are targeted as well, including mass arrests of men accused of homosexual acts. Though religious freedom is allowed, Christians at times clashed with police.

Especially disturbing "are reports of the regime's treatment of street children," numbering thousands in Cairo alone. Human Rights Watch estimated 11,000 arrests and detentions for weeks in unsanitary, hazardous conditions, "often with adult criminal detainees who abuse them." In addition, they're denied adequate food, water, bedding and medical care.

Amnesty International's 2010 Egypt Report

It explained that Emergency Law powers are used "to detain peaceful critics and opponents as well as people suspected of security offenses or involvement in terrorism." Some are detained administratively. Others get unfair military trials. Many are tortured. Death sentences are freely imposed. Freedom of speech, assembly and association are extremely restricted.

"Rising food prices and poverty fueled a wave of strikes by private and public sector workers." A UN Special Rapporteur for human rights criticized Mubarak's counterterrorism policy, human rights abuses, and repressive emergency powers, called the "norm" under his regime.

Besides various lawless acts discussed above, forced evictions have also been commonplace. In 2008, residents of 26 Greater Cairo areas were affected, their communities called "unsafe" under a government master development plan. Administrative orders were implemented "without notice or prior consultation," preventing the likelihood of legal challenge.

In November 2009, AI issued a report titled, "Egypt: Demand Dignity: Buried Alive: Trapped by Poverty and Neglect in Cairo's Informal Settlements," saying:

Evictions from areas called unsafe "breached the international standards that states must observe, (requiring they) have procedural safeguards in place." Instead, hundreds of homes were demolished with inadequate or no notice or consultation given affected communities, including plans for resettlement. As a result, homelessness and other state-imposed harshness followed. Egypt's poor, marginalized population suffers grievously under repressive regime policies.

A Final Comment

Given this backdrop and sustained visceral mass protests, the Obama administration is stalling for time, a White House February 5 press release saying:

"The President emphasized the importance of an orderly, peaceful transition, beginning now, to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people, including credible, inclusive negotiations between the government and the opposition."

In fact, Omar Suleiman's vice presidential appointment signified Washington approving his leadership heading new faces with old policies, what Egyptian masses won't accept. They demand all remnants of Mubarak's regime ousted, replaced by new officials they choose in free, fair, open elections.

On February 7, Al Jazeera said two weeks of protests show no signs of abating despite some emerging normality in parts of Egypt's capital. Dr. Sally Moore, representing the Popular Campaign in Support of ElBaradei (one of six groups comprising the "Youth of the Egyptian Revolution" coalition) said:

"The word 'stability' is a word the regime uses all the time - but - what is stability without freedom. We are in for the long haul. The regime is trying to play us against the people in Tahrir Square, but we always remind them they are our people, our families. (They) want radical change, not minor reform."

Al Jazeera's Cairo correspondent said:

"Protesters tell me Obama still hasn't come up with any statement that they want to hear. They want immediate change and the feeling among many of them is that the way the US is handling this crisis is not good for the way America is perceived both here and in general in the wider region."

In fact, from the outset, the Obama administration acted duplicitously to maintain imperial control throughout the region, especially by ensuring continuity in Egypt, under Suleiman and other reliable figures. On February 5, Secretary of State Clinton endorsed him saying:

"I think it's important to support the transition process announced by the Egyptian government, actually headed now by Vice President Suleiman (and) an orderly establishment of the elections that are scheduled for September."

She also backed Egypt's military "as a respected institution" and its banking sector. In other words, money and martial power are crucial ingredients of Washington's imperial control.

In contrast, Sunday protesters declared February 6 a "day of martyrs," commemorating thousands of Mubarak security force torture, disappeared, and murder victims.

How and when this ends remains uncertain, but one thing is clear. Millions of Egyptians exhibited extraordinary sustained courage. So far, they're not backing down from one of the region's most brutal regimes, financed and supported by imperial Washington, maneuvering to keep it empowered as a reliable vassal state.

* 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.

WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE

By Mantiq al-Tayr * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

1. (By Mark Griffe Janine Witte Zacharia Sanger. Cairo, Feb. 6. Mantiq al-Tayr Press – MTP) In a breathtaking move to seize the initiative in Cairo, Egyptian President Mohamed Hosni Mubarak appeared on the podium in Tahrir Square today and addressed not only the Egyptian people but also the entire world. The crowd of over a quarter of a million onlookers looked up in stunned silence as Mubarak appeared on the podium, picked up the microphone and began his address. The address was as shocking and dramatic as it was unexpected.

"Oh people of Egypt" he began, "it's time for you to go home and start leading normal lives again. If you don't, I am going to turn the army loose on you. They've wanted to kill all you sons of bitches from the very first day of this ridiculous waste of time, but I have been the one who has stopped them. As of the curfew time's beginning today, and that's in about 2 hours from now, I have ordered them to squash you people like the fucking little wretched cockroaches you are."

"Before I go on, I want to take a moment and tell that arrogant half-breed American President, Barak Obama, to shut the fuck up. In fact, I call on you, Obama, to step down immediately and begin a transition to a US government that isn't run by a bunch of fucking pussies. Yes, I said it, pussies! You could either have sided openly with me, or if you had had the courage, you could have even called on me to step down in no uncertain terms. But no, you didn't have the balls to openly side with me or with these soon to be dead miscreants who are standing here in Tahrir square. So get the hell out of office and put someone else in charge who has about as much regard for the US constitution as you or I do, how about Donald Rumsfeld? He and Umar are pretty good friends you know. Yeah, he'd be just the guy."

Suddenly, Mubarak reached into his breast pocket and pulled out a yellow document and waved it in the air saying "And this President Obama, this is my mother fucking birth certificate! Where the hell is yours? I may be a corrupt blood-thirsty, Israeli-ass kissing, two-bit tyrant just like you, but at least I am a fucking Egyptian."

Mubarak put the paper back inside his jacket pocket, paused for just a moment, and then said:

"One other thing before I close. After I get done kicking your asses from here to the Aswan dam, I going to shut up those damn Palestinians in Gaza once and for all. Oh, hey, Abu Mazen, listen to this. I have had it with you too. Once I'm done with Hamas, I coming after your ass. Fuck the PLO, fuck Palestine. Everyone knows that Arabs pretty much all hate the Palestinians anyway, we may as well just let everybody know so we can put an end to this bullshit peace process. My government hates the Palestinians, the Syrian government hates the Palestinians, the Jordanian government hates the Palestinians and God only knows that every single Lebanese citizen would gladly put all the Palestinians in a big fucking gas chamber and let Netanyahu pump in the gas and they'd all dance around it singing "Nah nah nah, hey hey, good-bye."

"Okay, you've got two hours to get the hell out of here and go back to your worthless stupid peasant lives in this shit-hole called Cairo. If you don't, well what do you think we have this huge bloated corrupt military for you idiots? It's not to fight the Israelis, hell, even today they'd kick our asses all the way to Casa Blanca – besides if they wanted to, they'd just nuke the Aswan dam and then all of you sons of bitches would drown. No, the Army isn't there to fight Israel, or anyone else for that matter. It's there for times like this when you uppity over-educated useless eaters get out of control. I order General Tantawi, the head of the Egyptian armed forces, to kill anyone who is demonstrating anywhere in Egypt as of 3:00 pm today, Egypt time. You have about an hour and forty-five minutes folks. Go home and eat that shitty mulukhiyya stuff you claim you love so much. I'm going to the palace and downing a whole barrel of Kentucky Fried Chicken while I watch the Super Bowl. God, I hate the Steelers, but I digress."

Mubarak then ended his address with the traditional:

"Peace be upon you and the mercy and blessings of God, you mother fuckers."

The reaction was muted at the White House. Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs said that Obama was pleased that Mubarak had been able to resolve the crisis and hoped that the Egyptian people would then move forward with their lives. Gibbs said Obama was busy watching the Super Bowl eating a huge barrel of Kentucky Fried Chicken and would probably phone Mubarak during half-time of the game.

2. I kind of find this interesting:

(JTA) - Cuban prosecutors will seek a 20-year prison sentence for accused spy Alan Gross, a U.S. government contractor that the State Department says was assisting Cuban Jews.

Gross is accused of "Acts Against the Independence and Territorial Integrity of the State," Reuters reported, citing a Feb. 4 report by Cuban state media via a government-run website. . .

Cuban authorities detained Gross on Dec. 3, 2009 on his way out of the country, saying he was a spy.

Gross' family and State Department officials say he was in the country on a U.S. Agency for International Development contract to help the country's Jewish community of about 1,500 to communicate with other Jewish communities through the Internet.

The main Jewish groups in Cuba have denied any contact with or knowledge of Gross or the program.

3. I have an idea. Why don't we trade Jonathan Pollard for Yigal Amir?

4. Elliot Abrams has announced he will not run for Egyptian President next year.

5. "Eliyalu Eliezer Werdesheim, 23, a Shomrim volunteer and former Israeli special forces soldier, and his brother Avi Werdesheim, 20, who does not work with Shomrim, have been charged with false imprisonment, second-degree assault and possession of a deadly weapon. Both are scheduled to be arraigned in Baltimore City Circuit Court on Feb. 16."

If a Sunni Muslim group engaged in this kind of thing, they'd ALL be in jail.

* Mantiq al-Tayr is a blogger who is attempting to wake up other American citizens to the true dangers and challenges which face their country and is devoted to justice for the Palestinian people. Truth is his objective, satire is his tool. He also enjoys reading the Qur'an from time to time. See his website.

Cartoon by Joep Bertrams, The Netherlands

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

And Tunisians, and Yemenis, and Algerians, and Jordanians, and Lebanese, and, of course, Palestinians, suffering for over six decades after Israel stole their historic homeland, over 43 years under brutal, suffocating occupation. Their struggle is ours, and it's high time we reacted, showing spirit as courageous as theirs.

In her latest January 31 article, Phyllis Bennis headlined, "Tunisia's Spark and Egypt's Flame: the Middle East is Rising," asking:

"Is this how empires end, with people flooding the streets, demanding resignation of their leaders and forcing local dictators out? Maybe not entirely, (but the) legacy of US-dominated governments across the region will never be the same. The US empire's reach in the resource-rich and strategically vital Middle East has been shaken to its core....The years of Washington calling the shots (based on its) version of 'stability' are definitively over."

On February 3, Haaretz writer Ari Shavit agreed, headlining "The Arab revolution and Western decline," saying:

"After half a century during which tyrants have ruled the Arab world, their control is weakening. After 40 years of decaying stability....rot is eating (it). The Arab masses will no longer accept" old ways. It's "been roiling beneath the surface" for years....suddenly (erupting) in an intifada of freedom." The Tunisian "bastille fell, the Cairo (one) is falling and" others in the Arab world will follow. "The old order is crumbling." So is Western "international hegemony....The West has lost it. (It's no longer a global) leading and stabilizing force....In Cairo's Tahrir Square....Western hegemony is fading away."

On February 3 Immanuel Wallerstein headlined, "The Second Arab Revolt: Winners and Losers," saying:

Britain and France betrayed the 1916 revolt "led by Sharif Hussein bin Ali for Arab independence from the Ottoman Empire." After WW II, America succeeded them as regional hegemon. For years, "(t)he second Arab Revolt has been brewing," ignited by events in Tunisia. At issue is why this succeeded when others failed, and what's next?

Regime "fissures" created opportunities. At this point, events are fluid, outcomes uncertain. Months will pass before winners and losers are known. "(N)o Arab state today (has) a strong organized, secular, radical party like the Bolsheviks (in Russia), ready to take power." Most "organized movements are the Islamist ones," but they vary from moderate to extreme, as well as "in-between varieties (like) the Muslim Brotherhood." As a result, outcomes are uncertain.

Also important is outside influence, mainly Washington's, so far the "great loser," evident by its waffling when decisiveness is needed. The revolt's backdrop includes outrageous wealth distributions, growing global poverty and depravation, and America's weakened dominance, exacerbated by Middle East events.

In contrast, Iran is the biggest winner, though non-Arab, then Turkey by supporting the Arab revolt and confronting Israel. Hopefully, over time, Arabs will benefit most. So far, it's too soon to tell, especially since obstacles facing them are formidable.

A Spark Turned Into Revolt

First in Tunisia, popular dissent spread quickly, Egypt its epicenter as Washington's regional imperial lynchpin, rocked by mass outrage, so far sustained. Rarely ever have Americans matched it. Today, they're practically quiescent, despite an unaddressed worsening economic crisis devastating millions.

On February 1, a New York Times editorial headlined, "Beyond Mubarak," urging him to step aside and let an interim government run "truly free elections." Where's The Times' outrage about America's fantasy democracy, imperial lawlessness, dysfunctional governance, rigged elections more kabuki theater than real, and its corporate-run dictatorship, causing appalling levels of unaddressed human need.

Why isn't it urging public outrage demanding change, instead of worrying about "Egypt's next government (being less) friendly to Washington (than) this one," and saying if "Egypt devolves into chaos, it will feed extremism throughout the region."

In fact, populist liberating extremism is glorious, whether or not Barry Goldwater meant it, saying "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, (and) moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

Uprisings are testing America's Middle East iron grip. Matching homeland ones are now crucial, demanding real, not fake democracy, freedom, jobs, education, health care, and overall economic justice, the kind Franklin Roosevelt suggested in his last State of the Union address, proposing a second bill of rights, saying the first one "proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness."

His solution: an "economic bill of rights," guaranteeing:

• employment with a living wage;
• freedom from unfair competition and monopolies;
• housing;
• medical care;
• education;
• social security and more, overall what he inadequately provided in his first 11 years, except for measures like the 1935 Wagner Act letting workers, for the first time, bargain collectively on even terms with management, and the landmark Social Security Act, keeping millions of retirees, disabled, and qualified survivors from impoverishment's ravages.

He also stressed other measures, including:

• "A realistic tax law - which will tax all unreasonable profit," corporate and individual;
• "A cost of food law" with floor and ceiling limits on prices; and
• reenactment of the October 1942 stabilization statute, pertaining to prices, wages and salaries affecting the cost of living, saying:

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence."

Today, these ideas are abandoned at a time of an unprecedented wealth gap, and officials ignoring essential needs of growing millions, on their own and out of luck because both major parties spurn them.

Instead they rampage globally, bail out bankers and other corporate favorites, and enact repressive laws, heading America toward banana republic harshness, tyranny and ruin. No matter. So far, public outrage is absent. For how long is at issue.

Spreading Revolutionary Fervor

On February 1, trends watcher Gerald Celente headlined, "Revolutionary Fervor to Spread Beyond Arab States; Europe Next," saying:

"The unintended consequences of the regime changes in North Africa and the Middle East" will be as dramatic in Europe, resulting in governments ousted. World leaders and media aren't "recognizing the Egyptian uprising for what it is: a prelude to a series of civil wars that will lead to regional wars, that will lead to the first 'Great War' of the 21st century."

In spring 2010, Celente published a report titled, "The History of The Future: Trends 2012 - The Great War," saying:

Gripped by the "Greatest Depression," he suggested possible "Armageddon Day" in December 2012. "Who would have thought," he asked? "On the way....there was no hint of it in the media, mainstream or alternative," despite plenty of "obvious dots" to connect, revealing "a range of possible outcomes."

What's ahead? "Renaissance or Ruin," he asked. Prepare yourself! "The path to war is already clearly defined. The fires of hatred and revenge have been fueled by decades of persecution and injustice....In the absence of a 'Great Awakening,' there will be a 'Great War.' " Or is a "Renaissance 2012" possible, similar to when:

• America's role model was Main Street, not Wall Street;
• Bedrock middle class values mattered;
• Industrial America offered high-pay, good benefit jobs;
• new generations bettered previous ones;
• Family, not factory, farms fed people;
• Real, not Frankenfood, was commonplace;
• "Quality counted, not just the bottom line;"
• corporate power was less dominant;
• community businesses flourished;
• public schools taught, offering inner-city kids chances for higher education achievement and real futures; and
• hope persisted for better times ahead.

That America is gone, yet rebirth is possible "based on the recognition that much of what worked in the past, in principle, could be effectively and profitably applied to the 21st century." However, getting there requires "rethinking and revaluat(ing)....(d)destructive habits masquerading as 'progress,' (reversing) America's quality-of-life decline" that, so far, shows no signs of materializing.

Will future uprisings roil Europe and America? Who can know or when, but without them, real change won't come, just more double talk and false promises, heading America, and perhaps Western civilization, for tyranny and ruin before whatever emerges on the other side, if there is one.

* 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.

By Paul J. Balles * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Illustration by J.D. Crowe, Alabama -- The Mobile Register

"The military was greeted warmly on the streets of Cairo. Crowds roared with approval as one soldier was carried through Tahrir Square today holding a flower in his hand," reports Democracy Now! senior producer Sharif Abdel Kouddous.

He speaks of "a great sense of pride that this is a leaderless movement organized by the people. A genuine popular revolt. It was not organized by opposition movements, though they have now joined the protesters in Tahrir."

According to Abdel Kouddous, "The Muslim Brotherhood was out in full force today. At one point they began chanting "Allah Akbar" only to be drowned out by much louder chants of "Muslim, Christian, we are all Egyptian."

What he describes, reflected in the TV coverage, is truly a "people's revolution". Will it play out that way? So far, the main concern of the protesters has been to get rid of Hosni Mubarak, Egypt's "president"-cum-dictator for the past 30 years.

The US has kept Mubarak in power, giving his regime 1.5 billion dollars in aid last year – mainly because he supported America's pro-Israel policies, especially by helping Israel to maintain its stranglehold on Gaza.

Egypt has been the number-two recipient (after Israel) of US foreign aid. In both 2009 and 2010, the economic aid amounted to 250 million dollars while military aid reached 1.3 billion dollars.

US military aid to Egypt has been spent primarily on strengthening the regime's "domestic security" and its ability to confront popular movements.

In a report for the Carnegie Foundation on US aid to Egypt, Ahmad al-Sayed El-Naggar asks: "Why don't Egyptians notice the role of American aid to their country? The simple answer is that US economic aid to Egypt, which amounted to 455 million dollars in 2007, translated to only 6 dollars per capita."

It was even less in 2010 when the total economic aid of 200 million dollars could provide less than 3 dollars per capita income. The people have suffered poverty while Mubarak supported his army and the US military-industrial complex.

The US has no reason to begrudge the amounts of military aid to Egypt. Much of it goes back to American defence contractors. Lockheed Martin received a 213 million contract for 20 new F-16s for Egypt in March 2010, boasted the company on its website.

BAE Systems, General Dynamics, General Electric, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin have all done business with the Egyptian government, selling tanks, fighter jets, howitzers and radar arrays to its military.

Meanwhile, half the people of Egypt live on less than 2 dollars a day. Is it any wonder that they have taken to the streets in protest?

When the tanks rolled into Cairo, some protesters climbed on them to a friendly reception by the soldiers. A couple of noisy fighter jets swooped threateningly overhead, but the protesters and the army remained friendly. Throughout the day people chanted: "The people, the army: one hand."

That wasn't the case when the police and the security forces threw tear gas canisters with labels "Made in America" into the crowds. The security police have represented much of what the Egyptian people have come to hate about Mubarak.

Meanwhile, the US administration has been waffling when asked whether they support the Egyptian public or Mubarak.

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, stressed that Egypt's future lies in the hands of its people, hewing to the administration line of refusing to take sides publicly.

However, the administration has a growing fear that a government hostile to the US could gain control of such a large and important Arab nation.

The unspoken fear is that American arms manufacturers will lose a reliable customer.

* Paul J. Balles is a retired American university professor and freelance writer who has lived in the Middle East for many years. He’s a weekly Op-Ed columnist for the Gulf Daily News. Dr. Balles is also Editorial Consultant for Red House Marketing and a regular contributor to Bahrain This Month.

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

Cartoon by Fares Garabet, Syria

His administration is "discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for (Mubarak) to resign immediately and turn over power to a transitional government headed by Vice President Omar Suleiman with the support of the Egyptian military," including Lt. Gen. Sami Enan, armed forces chief, and Field Marshall Mohamed Tantawi, defense minister.

The alleged plan includes constitutional reform, a transitional government with opposition groups like the Muslim brotherhood, and "free and fair elections in September."

Testifying during a February 3 Senate hearing, senior CIA official Stephanie O'Sullivan said earlier tracking of Cairo instability showed conditions were "untenable," but "we didn't know what the triggering mechanism would be."

On February 4, Times writer David Kirkpatrick headlined, "Egyptian Government Figures Join Protesters," saying:

During Friday protests, "(c)racks in the Egyptian establishment's support for (Mubarak)" emerged with Amr Moussa, Arab League head, and other notable figures appearing on Cairo streets, including defense minister Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the first member of Egypt's ruling elite to do so.

Non-Negotiable People Demands

Obama's proposal is absurd, an insult to courageous people risking their lives for real change, not replacing one despot with another with the same regime in place. They demand ouster of all Mubarak officials, followed by free and fair elections for new ones they choose. Getting it is another matter, and Obama losing faith in Murabark masks his uncompromising support for continuity.

The New York Times as well in its disingenuous February 3 editorial headlined, "Egypt's Agonies," saying:

Attacking protesters and targeting journalists are "familiar tactics of dictators who want to brutalize their citizens without witnesses." Mubarak telling "ABC News that the government is not responsible - is patently absurd. (He's) chosen survival over his people. He told ABC that he had to stay in office to avoid chaos. In fact, his presence ensures only more chaos and instability."

Then, cutting to the chase, The Times said, "The cost of the turmoil is being felt. Tourists are fleeing. The economy is paralyzed. Egypt and its people need a quick transition...."

In other words, profits, not social democracy matter. It's been uncompromising Times policy for decades, including support for legions of US-allied despots, Mubarak a longtime favorite before falling from grace.

What's Next?

Workers suffer painfully from neoliberal harshness, often hardened by IMF diktats, including mass privatizations, layoffs, wage and benefit cuts, and public debt service over people needs, causing massive impoverishment and human suffering. Replacing one regime with another with this agenda leaves deep-rooted misery unaddressed. Examples are numerous, including Corazon Aquino replacing Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines in February 1986.

Despite two decades of loyalty, Marcos turned liability and had to go. Aquino was ideal to replace him. Wife of assassinated political opponent Benigno Aquino and endorsed by conservative Cardinal Jaime Sin, she represented elitist interests with generous National Endowment for Democracy funding.

Her legacy includes subservience to Washington, human rights violations, corruption, and the worst of neoliberal harshness - business-friendly policies at the expense of popular needs she ignored, as did her successors to this day, including a decade under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from January 2001 - June 2010.

She ran a death squad regime, targeting unionists, human rights activists, peasants, and anyone against state policies. Yet Washington strongly supported her like Mubarak, practicing the same agenda for three decades until falling out of favor.

South Africa Under Nelson Mandela

In 1994, the African National Congress (ANC) gained power under Mandela after generations of brutality and decades of apartheid harshness, the worst form of racism. From 1948 - 1993, pass laws segregated blacks from whites, restricted their movements, required pass books be carried at all times, and produced on demand or face arrest and prosecution. Evolving from the 18th and 19th century until their 1986 repeal, they restricted entry to cities, forcibly relocated blacks, denied them most public services, many forms of employment, and became apartheid's most hated symbol.

An anti-apartheid activist, Mandela was imprisoned in 1962 for life, served 27 years until released on February 11,1990, days after President FW de Klerk ended the official ban against anti-apartheid organizations, including the ANC.

Addressing the nation, Mandela said:

"I am a loyal and disciplined member of the African National Congress. I am therefore in full agreement with all of its (social justice) objectives, strategies and tactics."

"There must be an end to white monopoly political power and a fundamental restructuring of our political and economic systems to ensure that the inequalities of apartheid are addressed and our society thoroughly democratized."

He quoted his own 1964 words saying he was prepared to die for "a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities." As president, he reneged, surrendering totally to finance capital, though not at first rhetorically.

On May 10, 1994, two weeks after taking office, he addressed parliament, endorsing ANC Reconstruction and Development Program (RDP) socioeconomic issues, including, democracy, growth, development, reconstruction, redistribution and reconciliation. Specific concerns were housing, healthcare, land reform, jobs, education, public works, clean water, and electrification.

He called the RDP the "centerpiece of what this Government will seek to achieve, the focal point on which our attention be be continuously focused."

Five years later in his last parliamentary speech, he ignored RDP mandates after abandoning them in principle.

During his tenure, he shifted from RDP to GEAR - Growth Employment and Redistribution Program based on neoliberal free market diktats. It reflected IMF harshness, serving capital not popular needs.

State assets were privatized. Mass layoffs followed. Services were commodified, harmfully raising prices for millions. Markets were opened for trade. Taxes for corporations and the rich were cut, and social spending reduced. Bottom-line priorities trumped other issues. Record profits followed. Accessing healthcare, education and other essential services required "user fees." Few could afford them.

Wealth distribution benefitted rich whites at the expense of poor Blacks, worse off than ever, their average income declining 19% from 1995 - 2000, while whites rose 15%.

ANC-run South Africa empowered elite Blacks, enriched white capital more than ever, and created far greater inequality, poverty and depravation than under apartheid, reflecting neoliberal betrayal, exploiting the poor for the rich.

Post-Soviet States

Free market shock therapy devastated them, lowering, not raising, living standards, Poland one of its victims. In the 1980s, Solidarnosc (Solidarity) unionized 10 million members, gaining the right to bargain and aspire to transform state-controlled companies into worker-run cooperatives. Instead, mines, shipyards and factories were privatized, subsidies slashed, and price controls lifted, skyrocketing unemployment, poverty, depression, and overall worse times than before.

On January 18, Michael Hudson and Jeffrey Sommers headlined their article, "The Spectre Haunting Europe: Debt Defaults, Austerity, and Death of the 'Social Europe' Model," saying:

"(D)ecades of neoliberalism....crashed the US and several European economies. Years of deregulation, speculation and lack of investment in the real economy left them with rising inequality and little consumer demand, except for what was financed by running up debt."

In an earlier April 2010 interview, Hudson explained that suffering economies "from Greece to the Baltics and Iceland (were) directed to pay the financial sector first - international bankers, creditor-nation governments (like America, Britain, France and others), the IMF, World Bank, and financial institutions - before (spending) on sustaining their own employment and economic growth."

In other words, depriving their people for finance capital as well as balancing their budgets on their backs. IMF diktats shrink economies. As a result, enormous hardships throughout Eastern Europe were created, targeted nations having no choice but go along.

It's a "financial war against industry, against labor, against the post-Soviet economies, against the Third World....(It's) a war against government, against public spending. Its solution to unpayable debts is to demand that governments sell off whatever assets remain in the public domain. (It's) the most naked property grab since the Viking invasions."

It's opposite of what responsible governments should do, putting popular interests ahead of predatory foreign lenders. It's redistributing wealth equitably and fulfilling a social contract. It's growing their economies, not shrinking them.

Forced to go along under threat of economic and political reprisals, no wonder people yearn for the "good old Soviet days" with jobs and basic needs met. Today they're cursed with neoliberal hardships, proving commissars were friendlier than bankers.

Economic Hit Men Enforcers

In his book "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," John Perkins discussed his own work with the IMF, World Bank and other global financial institutions, saying his job was to convince countries to accept unaffordable loans for infrastructure development, contracted to US corporations.

He defined economic hit men as:

"highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, (USAID, the IMF), and other foreign 'aid organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization."

His mandate was to impoverish and bankrupt countries, trapping them in debt bondage, those refusing facing economic, political or other reprisals.

Starving Third World Economies

In her February 3 article titled, "The Egyptian Tinderbox: How Banks and Investors Are Starving the Third World," Ellen Brown explained:

"that roughly 40 percent of Egyptians struggle (with incomes) of under $2 per day," facing unsustainable annual 17% annual food price inflation. As a result, "as much as 60 to 80 percent of (their) incomes go for food, compared to just 10 to 20 percent in industrial countries."

Credit, not Fed policy is at fault, hiking prices "by too much money chasing too few goods, but the money is chasing only certain selected goods" like food and fuel.

Speculation and market manipulation also hammer economies unwilling to deregulate and allow free capital flows. Methods include hot money created real estate, stock and other asset bubbles as well currency attacks, causing destructive devaluations, debt bondage and impoverishment.

A Final Comment

Independent new leaders face enormous challenges, including destructive reprisals for defying Western diktats. As a result, most accede, accepting neoliberal harshness over public needs, no matter their popular mandate or desire. That's Egypt's dilemma whatever new regime emerges. If Mandela failed South Africans, how will new Egyptian leadership fulfill campaign pledges if doing so means economic disaster, political isolation or worse.

As a result, expect new faces continuing old policies, letting everything look changed but be the same, including deep-rooted needs. That spark ignited Tunisia and spread regionally, assuring Mubarak's regime ends, leaving his policies in place unless heroic new figures defy risks, no matter potential consequences.

* 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.

By Franklin Lamb * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Cartoon by Petar Pismestrovic, Kleine Zeitung, Austria

One can quickly recall a long list of geographic place names that are indelibly etched in the annals of humanity's quest for freedom and whose very geographical place name connotes resistance to aggression, oppression, occupation and tyranny. Names like Le Place de la Resistance, Tiananmen Square, the Gdansk Shipyards, Bunker Hill, Iran's Azadi Square, Bogside, Martyr's Square, Karbala, Aita Shaab, among scores of others. Tahrir Square has become a name symbolizing every people's willingness, indeed insistence, to make personal, potentially life taking, sacrifices to achieve freedom from an illegitimate, corrupt, brutal, treasonous dictatorship or from occupiers or aggressors.

Less than one week after few outside Egypt had heard of or much less could locate on a blank map of Cairo, "Tahrir Square" the World now realizes it as the epicenter of the Middle East's unfolding and unpredictable earthquake event. The Tahrir Square uprising has led to one Arab diplomat, currently posted to Beirut, observing yesterday: "If there were to be an Arab League meeting this week attended by all the Arab Heads to State, an honest participant might suggest to the assembled potentates to look to their right and then look to their left and realize that in perhaps 24 months close one third may not be attending subsequent Arab League summits.

The Tahrir uprising may, following a cursory examination, appear unconnected with much outside the Egyptian publics urgent longings to escape poverty, unemployment, lack of educational opportunities, caused by decades of regime economic mismanagement, police brutality and government torture chambers, and pervasive corruption that has seeped into nearly every aspect of Egyptian life. But increasingly it appears that other forces are influencing recent events as noted below.

The eyes, hope and solidarity of much of the Middle East are on Tahrir Square and the bloodied but unbowed Egyptian people, who, old and young, religious and secular, illiterates and lettered, paupers and moneyed, all of whom today, following upon the glow of a spontaneous intifada in the cradle of civilization stand to win or lose so much for the region.

As the Mubarak regime plots a path for the beleaguered President to stay in power it is employing the well tested bromide of most despots including citing the need for stability, orderly transition, prevention of religious fanatics and extremists from taking over and the need for fighting "terrorism." The pro-Mubarak Egyptian daily Al-Yawm Al-Sabah is claiming that Hamas is behind much of the instigation to violence in Tahriri Square and other areas of the country.

Not buying all of these scare tactics, the Obama Administration's is revving up its "now means three days ago and counting" demands. Mr .Mubarak told CNN on 2/3/11 that he's fed up and would like nothing better than to step down but chaos and the Muslim Brotherhood would surely follow. His closest political confident and just appointed Vice-President Omar Suleiman also predicted chaos if Mr Mubarak resigned, saying it would leave a body without a head. The White House is still leaning toward Omar Suleiman but believes that Suleiman was aware of the campaign in recent days to intimidate the opposition, and are staffers are wondering whether he is still an acceptable choice. Late word from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is that the Obama Administration may support Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa, who has joined anti-Mubarak protests in Tahrir Square, and is hinting he may run for president in the upcoming election. Israel would support him over Mohammad al Baradei who many view as pro-Iranian.

Still, the Mubarak regime is not without supporters. Former Israeli Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer has defended Egyptian President Hosni Mubrak, saying his collapse will be a "tremendous loss" for Israel. The former army general praised Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for supporting Israel for thirty years, Israel's Arutz Sheva newspaper reported. "When I watched his speech in which he said he would step down, it pained me to see his collapse," Ben-Eliezer said on 2/2/11 about Mubarak.

Both Washington and Tel Aviv are were reported shocked by the speed of the Egyptian revolt and their intelligences agencies admit not seeing it coming. Much of the American reaction is being scripted by AIPAC and other Israel lobby agents who regularly contribute campaign cash to 90 percent of the US Congress , including 390 of the 435 Members of the House of Representative ( 89.7%) who voted to support Israel after it committed repeatedly condemned serial murders of innocent civilians and myriad crimes against humanity in Gaza. These Israeli-pushed "American" initiatives will likely range from possibly terminating aid to Lebanon ( some Obama Administration friends of Israel claim there is a a link between the South Beirut Hezbollah neighborhood of Dahiyeh and Cairo's Tahir Square events ) and cutting off Egypt's nearly 30 years of annual multi-billion dollar cash grants as well as massive military hardware.

The US-Israel imperative appears designed to immediately regain control and co-opt the Tahrir uprising and quickly channel the uprising into a political cul de sac until Egypt can be returned to "normal", meaning US-Israel shared hegemony.

What will ultimately determine in which ways the Middle East moves following Tahrir Square events is not the armed might of the regional super power or the weapons of the global superpower. Both Israel and the US can have a short term impact but the former is shaking while the latter, equally impotent to subdue 83 million Egyptians and perhaps soon millions of Palestinians, Jordanians, Yemenis and others, is trying to stall any major regime change in favor of cosmetic adjustments to the current government. Even the Obama Administrations current public choice, Omar Sulieman is meeting with increasing resistance in Washington as details of his CV emerged including being a torture specialist and possibly a Mossad agent.

What both Israel and the US fear most is a determined and successful grass roots movement than will liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation. The Obama administration can be expected to continue to temporize events as best it can while calculating how to insert its choice of a compliant President in Mubarak's palace. As one Congressional commented by email: " The last thing the White House or Israel want is an Egyptian Chavez, or even someone like Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Completely unacceptable would be anyone with even the hint of pro-Iranian or Hezbollah leanings. The State Department favors another strong man, with an essentially rubber stamp Parliament after "free elections" as long as there are no troublesome Algerian, Gaza, or Lebanon style election results. The US-Israel bottom line is that Egypt's next government must be one that will guarantee that the 1979 Camp David Accords and Egypt's willingness to continue accepting a total of more than three billions in US taxpayer dollars annually as bribe money to collaborate with Israel against Palestine.

History is filled with ironies. One of them is the coincidence that two of the fundamental causes of the unfolding Egyptian revolution happened within months of each other both 30 years ago- soon to be followed by the beginning of the current Mubarak dictatorship---the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the US sponsored Camp David Accord. The Camp David giveaway and cave-in to colonialist Israel was never accepted by the Egyptian people, by the Islamic Republic, or by any but a small percentage of the people of the Middle East.

The hegemonic objectives of the 1979 Camp David have rolled across the region for three decades, being rejected and increasingly confronted by a growing culture of Resistance set in motion with the 1979 Imam Khomeini-led revolution. Both 1979 events fueled myriad other more immediate causes including those noted above and significantly inspired the current Egyptian eruptions, some of the paths of which are predictable while the results are unknown.

There are many other Tahrir Squares in the Middle East. One of which is Al Aksa square in Jerusalem, the eternal and indivisible capital of Palestine. It remains to be seen when or if Palestinians will revive Jerusalem as a modern day resistance place name and whether like Tahrir Square, Egypt, Jerusalem will rise up in support of increasing cries for Palestinian liberation as the inspiration and revolution of their neighbors in Tahrir Square spreads.

* Franklin Lamb is Director, Americans Concerned for Middle East Peace, Beirut-Washington DC, Board Member of The Sabra Shatila Foundation, and a volunteer with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign, Lebanon. He is the author of The Price We Pay: A Quarter-Century of Israel's Use of American Weapons Against Civilians in Lebanon and is doing research in Lebanon for his next book. He can be reached at fplamb@gmail.com

Illustration by Carlos Latuff

Mubarak's day of departure is his day of delay

By Christopher King * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

The people of Egypt restore one's faith in humanity's spirit and its aspirations. Despite vicious attacks by government thugs the demonstrators have remained peaceful while defending themselves. They long for democracy; so they should and their high spirits on the prospect of achieving it are justified. We see in Tahrir Square an inspirational spirit of cooperation in a people's desire for freedom. One is shamed to reflect that Britain is a primary colluder with the dictator who had kept them poor and repressed and is still attempting to maintain his grip.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and his government clearly do not want to resign. Despite unprecedented demonstrations across Egypt, well televised from Cairo and Alexandria, Mubarak and his government offer token concession but not Mubarak's immediate resignation and no promise of immediate elections. These are what the demonstrators want; they have made that clear.

Mubarak is attempting to disperse the demonstrators with verbal concessions that have no guarantees of being kept even if they were to be acceptable. The people do not trust him. They know him best and do not accept his proposals for transitions arrangements. They know that his objective is to stay in power and do what he does best: arrest opponents, disappear activists, intimidate and tighten the grip of the security forces and secret police.

Do America and Europe want democracy in Egypt?

The roles of the United States and the European Union are highly suspect. President Obama and White House spokesmen have been finding it difficult to speak of Egypt. They speak hesitantly, evasively in vague, rambling, impenetrable language. Obama vaguely "prays that the rights and aspirations of the people of Egypt will be realized." Hillary Clinton and Obama speak about peaceful "transition". It has been commented that "transition is one of the most abused words in recent memory."

Catherine Ashton, the European Union's High Representative for External Affairs, also uses vague language about transition, peaceful and calm streets, freedom, moving forward, building democracy, how democracy was valued etc, etc. At least she used the word democracy but took care to say that democracy was not achieved in a day or a year. It is true that other countries should not tell the Egyptians how they should run their country, nor that their president should leave. That is between Mubarak and his people.

What is noticeable is that neither the Americans nor the EU want to simply say that immediate free and fair democratic elections should be held. There is nothing in that to tell the Egyptians how they should be running their country. That is the well known American narrative of its world mission – to spread democracy to the oppressed and downtrodden. It has no hesitation in pressing this message elsewhere even if it has to bomb and invade countries such as Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan to bring democracy to them. One would imagine that it would leap to support the longing for democracy by the people of Egypt.

The fact is that neither the United States nor European Union want Egypt to become a true democracy. Dictators are much easier to deal with. It is merely a matter of bribery with taxpayer money and supply of weapons. Greed and self-interest are reliable; democratic ideals and patriotism are much less susceptible to manipulation.

We know that the White House is in contact with Mubarak through its envoy, Frank Wisner. Significantly, it was immediately after Wisner arrived in Egypt that the violent attacks, organized by the security services and police against the demonstrators, commenced.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon has called for early elections. He deplored the government's restrictions on the media and television.

The Egyptian revolution's effects on Europe

I will not rehearse the disgraceful behaviour of America and the European Union through NATO's activities, nor their propaganda against Iran and denial of democracy to the Palestinians when it did not suit them. The establishment of democracy in Egypt will undermine all the American policies that Europe follows. To be more analytical, European politics has two camps: the humanitarian which favours peace, trade and democracy; the militaristic that promotes NATO and the US policies of armed invasions. The success of the Egyptian revolution and its effects throughout the Muslim world will undermine the militaristic camp. That would be an extremely positive outcome. Europe would be forced to re-examine both its Middle Eastern policies and the failure of ethics and humanitarianism on which they are based. It will be forced to examine the role of NATO and America's role in Europe. The spirit of Tahrir Square will resonate in Europe.

The Egyptian revolution in America

The world is watching Egypt and America with fascination. Everyone knows that Mubarak is an American puppet. It might be that the White House will decide to embrace the democratic aspirations of the Egyptians and support Mubarak personally in exile. That would be a very satisfactory outcome. Mubarak must go now or soon in any case. The White House will be concentrating, therefore, on having someone who will be sympathetic to their policies replace him. One should not imagine that President Obama will leave the Egyptian people to select their leader without interference no matter what he says.

American political and public opinion is very different from that of Europe. Americans are generally Islamophobic and see the alternatives in Egypt as either a radical Islamic state that they fear or a dictatorship that they control and can live with. It is possible that a democratic outcome in Egypt will cause some reappraisal of Islam and the US role in the Middle East but I am not hopeful.

The American public is accustomed and receptive to propaganda by its elites that demonizes other countries. Americans are not given to questioning their government's foreign policy nor granting to foreigners the same rights that they enjoy themselves. It is unlikely that fundamental change will occur within America. If America must change its Middle Eastern policies or even withdraw from the Middle East, it will refocus on closer countries, in particular Canada for energy and minerals and South America.

What happens next?

The great question is what will happen if Mubarak does not step down. The demonstrators have been peaceful until now but there are financial pressures on individuals and economic pressures on the country. Will it be necessary for Mubarak to be forcefully deposed?

The people have already voted by their numbers and their presence on the streets. At a certain point, before the revolution becomes violent it would be preferable for the army, that is behaving well, to escort Mubarak to the airport and fly him to a destination of his choice. The army should note the vote of the people, which is absolutely clear. In maintaining the peace it might have to choose between the people and a dictator.

Catherine Ashton has spoken of the formation of new committees that are presumably multiparty groups. If Mr Mubarak can be removed speedily there is no reason why elections cannot be quickly organized.

Mubarak and his sympathizers are delaying, attempting to out-wait the demonstrators and biding their time before attempting to re-take control. If that should occur, Obama will say that it is nothing to do with him. Some estimates are that about 300 persons have been killed and many more wounded. Too much blood has been spilled already. If there is more bloodshed, Mubarak's trial will be demanded no matter where he might go.

I welcome the Egyptian revolution and the prospect of real democracy not only for the people of Egypt, but also for its effects on Europe.

* Christopher King is a retired consultant and lecturer in management and marketing. He lives in London, UK.