Search This Blog

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Little Hope for Change Among Egypt’s Poor

Published Saturday, June 30, 2012
Boys play in a destroyed car at Manshiyet Nasser
shanty town in eastern Cairo 28 June 2012.
(Photo: Reuters - Amr Abdallah Dalsh)
While Mursi is now tackling the difficult task of juggling affairs concerning the SCAF and international powers, Egypt’s poor are wondering if they will yet again be forgotten.

Ordinary Egyptians do not expect the future to differ much from the past with the arrival of a new president. That seems to be the prevalent attitude among Egypt’s urban poor and residents of its teeming working-class districts and shanty towns. Their accumulated impressions of the two candidates in the presidential run-off – the military’s candidate Ahmad Shafiq and Mohammed Mursi of the Muslim Brotherhood – appear to have prevented them from supporting either in large numbers.

Egypt’s poor suffered badly under the three-decade rule of Hosni Mubarak, who Shafiq described as his “highest example.” His regime treated them as an undesirable burden at best, or simply neglected them.

Few were therefore rooting for Shafiq, despite his campaign promises to maintain fuel and bread subsidies, provide benefits to the unemployed, extend medical insurance to everyone, double the Health Ministry’s budget, and set a minimum wage. He also said he would build new towns to house the poor, increase the provision of clean drinking water, and write off small farmers’ debts. People did not believe Shafiq because they had frequently heard similar pledges from his role-model, Mubarak.
But neither did poor Egyptians greet the news of Mursi’s election with general rejoicing, nor vest high hopes in the fact that he hails from the Brotherhood, which treats the poor as deserving of compassion, alms and charity.

What Egypt’s poor want is recognition that they have rights which have been denied them, and that these go beyond occasional charitable handouts. The Brotherhood is well known for distributing food in working-class districts. It does so all year round, but increases the quantity ahead of any elections. Besides, there was little difference between Mursi and Shafiq in terms of their championing of the free-market economy, which invariably puts the poor last. Both strongly support the private sector, whose only concern is businessmen and their bank balances, and for which the poor are merely cheap labor.
But what do poor Egyptians think about their new president now that the Brotherhood candidate has won?

Evidently, many were strongly influenced by the ferocious anti-Brotherhood media campaign that has been waged in recent weeks by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). When asked, residents of working class districts of Cairo often said that they expected the Brotherhood to take the country to war against Israel, or force women to wear the hijab or niqab. Others thought it would amputate the hands of thieves, slit the throats of murder suspects, and sentence people to lashings for failing to perform prayers. These were the kind of fears raised about the Brotherhood by the likes of widely-watched talk-show host Tawfiq Okasha, as part of the effort to misrepresent and discredit the Brotherhood and improve the image of SCAF and, subsequently, Shafiq.
Few respondents in these neighborhoods thought the new president represented them, and many said neither of the contenders was the kind of president they wanted for the country after the revolution. Many expressed support for Nasserist candidate Hamdeen Sabahi, who came third in the first round and narrowly failed to make it to the run-off.

“People felt Hamdeen was the closest to them,” he said Muhammad Saad, who lives in the central Cairo district of Bulaq Abul-Ila. “But he didn’t have the money to match the financial resources of the Brothers, or of Shafiq who was backed by the fuloul – the “remnants” of Mubarak regime – and the military.”

There was widespread dismay in such districts at Sabahi’s defeat, and at being left with a choice between the Brothers and the fuloul. Those who went on to back Shafiq generally did not do so out of admiration for or confidence in him, but dislike of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Yet all concur that there is much for the new president to do.

Muhammad Ibrahim, a young man from the working class Cairo district of Duweiqa, said he wanted the president to treat poor Egyptians “as though he is one of them,” not as objects of charity but as people with rights. “We wanted a poor president, but elections cost a lot of money for advertising and paying for campaigns,” he said.

“Suitable housing and a decent job,” said Hassan Nada, another resident of the neighborhood, when asked what he wanted from the new president. “I wish I had somewhere to sleep without worrying about scorpions and snakes.” Duweiqa, where many people live in barely habitable wood and corrugated iron shacks, has been suffering a major infestation of parasites.

“The new president should provide jobs for young people and put an end to unemployment,” said Naased Abd al-Sattar from the Sayyeda Zeinab quarter. “If he did that, Egypt would be the best country in the world,” he added. “The youth are poor and need jobs so they can find somewhere to live and lead a normal life.”

Safaa al-Agrouti wanted the new president merely to “be a man and keep his word,” by doing what he said he would in his election program.

The demands of Egypt’s poor may be simple, but much political will and focus will have to be mustered if they are to be fulfilled.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Farewell Sectarian Sheikh

by Daniel Mabsout
Saturday, June 30th, 2012
The last thing we heard about Sheikh Ra’ed Salah was the differences he had with the British authorities. Lately the sheikh- A.K.A. the Sheikh of al Aqsa, and who takes pride in his Palestinian identity has fallen in the pit of Sectarianism siding with the enemies of Syria and calling on the Syrians to overthrow their president after achieving which they are to liberate the Golan and then Jerusalem.

It seems -according to our Sheikh -that it is Bashshar al Assad -who has been in post for a decade only -who is standing as an obstacle to the liberation of Palestine and Jerusalem and once Bashshar removed, Palestine shall be free from the river to the sea, forgetting that the only Arab land that has been liberated ie the Lebanese south was so because of Syria’s support and protection of the Lebanese Resistance.
The Sheikh as a matter of fact was not joking, he was serious in his call thinking that the Arab hired armed thugs at the payroll of the prince of Qatar and who busy in slaughtering families will rush to answer his call and will be the next morning heading to Jerusalem with the sheikh ready to receive them.
There is no doubt that the sheikh during his last activities in Italy and on the Mavi Marmara and in England and whom we think is affiliated to many NGOs has been promoting himself as a prominent religious figure to be used like any useful NGOs in several schemes that serves Israel and the western establishment.
We say farewell to the Sheikh of sectarianism and of NGOs who deceived us for many years by giving the impression that he was defending the Aqsa and Palestine while he was promoting his little self & NGOs. NGOs are one thing and liberating Aqsa and Palestine is another thing, but since he has made his choice we can bid farewell to the sectarian sheikh.

Reports of Troop Movements Near Syria's Borders

Stephen Lendman,

My PhotoAfter Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced new rules of engagement, Turkey deployed missile batteries, rocket launchers, and anti-aircraft weapons close to Syria's border.

About 30 military trucks arrived in Iskenderun. From there, they moved toward Syria's border 30 miles away.

Armored military vehicles also headed for Sanliurfa and Reyhanli in Southern Turkey's Hatay Province.

On June 29, Reuters headlined "Syrian tanks amass near Turkish border, FSA (Free Syrian Army) general says."
According to General Mustafa al-Sheikh, Syria deployed around 170 tanks north of Aleppo within 19 miles of Turkey's border. No independent confirmation was provided.

Speaking to Reuters by phone, al-Sheikh said:

Tanks from the 17th Mechanized Division "are now at the Infantry School. They're either preparing to move to the border to counter the Turkish deployment or attack the rebellious (Syrian) towns and villages in and around the border zone north of Aleppo."
On Thursday, Turkey belligerently sent troops and weapons close to Syria's border. Damascus perhaps reacted defensively.

Expect no imminent attack by either side. Ankara won't act without orders from Washington. It hasn't come, but could given escalating violence and rhetoric.

Saber rattling suggests public opinion is being conditioned for war. On June 28, Ankara's National Security Council (MSK) said:
Turkey will act with determination and make use of all its rights within international law against this hostile act.
It referred to Syria downing its aircraft. It provocatively entered its territory low and fast. Damascus was blamed for Ankara's belligerence. Expect more provocations to follow.
Meanwhile, Mossad-connected DEBKAfile (DF) headlined "Saudi forces mass on Jordanian, Iraqi borders. Turkey, Syria reinforce strength," saying:
(H)eavy Saudi troop movements (headed) toward the Jordanian and Iraqi borders (with Syria) overnight and up until Friday morning....after King Abdulah put the Saudi military on high alert for joining an anti-Assad offensive....
Units include tanks, missiles, special forces and anti-air batteries. Two units were deployed. "One will safeguard Jordan's King Abdullah against potential Syrian or Iranian reprisals from Syria or Iraq."
The second will cut north through Jordan to enter southeastern Syrian, where asecurity zone will be established around the towns of Deraa, Deir al-Zour and Abu Kemal – all centers of the anti-Assad rebellion.
DF said Western forces reported Jordan "on war alert."

Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and other regional states know Syria poses no threat. If confirmed, deploying Saudi troops to Syria's border escalates tensions. It may also reflect belligerent intent.

On June 28, Assad was interviewed on Iran's IRIB channel 4. He blamed Turkey for inciting violence. He's hopeful military action won't follow.

Libya's model isn't "a solution to be copied because it took (the country) from one situation into a much worse one. We all now see how the Libyan people are paying the price," he said.

"The policies of the Turkish officials lead to the killing and bloodshed of the Syrian people," he added.

He said reports about Iranian and Hezbollah forces aiding Syria are false.
This is a joke that we hear many times in order to show that a rift has been created within the army and that therefore there is not an army.
Pointing fingers at Washington, he said:
The colonialist nature of the West has not changed. From the colonialist standpoint, regional countries should not move according to their national interests and if any country moves against their (Western) values and interests, they say no, like what happened in the case of Iran’s nuclear program.
Western states are opposed to Iran’s access to nuclear knowhow; they are more fearful of Iran’s expertise in the nuclear field than what they claim to be a nuclear bomb.
He also called insurgents "gangs of mercenaries and criminals." Outside forces are directing them.

For them and their sponsors, "reforms are not important, since the very forces that claimed (a lack of) reforms were the problem. They never benefited from them...all they wanted was (continued) unrest."
He heavily criticized Arab League states. Their policies harm their own people. They supported NATO's war on Libya.
Syria was the only country that opposed the move and therefore we had to pay the price for this policy.
"Consequently, immediately following our decision," Western states "acted through the Arab League to put the attack on Syria on their agenda."
"This has been the Arab League reality in the past, as it is at present."
He acknowledged that Western-instigated violence ravages Syria. Thousands of ceasefire violations occurred. He has no information about planned military attacks. However, some countries "are making efforts to guide the situation toward" one.
The West expresses support for the Annan Plan on the one hand, while on the other hand, they seek a plan to overthrow (the government).
This is the same double standard (approach) and political hypocrisy.
Westerners speak of human rights but give Israel weapons to kill Palestinians. This Western hypocrisy has not changed and will not change.
He holds "outlaws, saboteurs and armed terrorist gangs" responsible for Syrian violence. He'll continue confronting it responsibly.
On June 30, Hillary Clinton and Sergei Lavrov will discuss Syria in Geneva. Expect no breakthroughs. Washington wants regime change.
Moscow wants Syrians alone to decide who'll lead them. Lavrov and other Russian officials have been firm opposing foreign intervention. Expect neither side to yield on Saturday.
DF sounded an ominous warning, saying:
The failure of (US/Russian) talks "would spell a worsening of the Syrian crisis andprecipitate Western-Arab military intervention, which according to military sources in the Gulf is scheduled for launch Saturday, June 30.
Determining when DF is right or wrong isn't easy. The above comment sounds like bluster. It's also about conditioning public opinion for war. Events on the ground bear watching.

Visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.


After he received a kiss and a hug from the Lebanese minister of interior during one of his sits in down town Beirut as a sign of the policy of openness and tolerance adopted by the ministry , the notorious Sheikh Ahmad al Assir -who has mastered all kinds of knowledge- felt secure enough to appear on one Lebanese local TV and send threats to Sayyed Hassan Nasrullah ( May God preserve him) directly from the screen .

A VOICE OF IGNORANCE DARKNESS AND BETRAYALThe fake Sheikh said that he will do his best to deprive Sayyed Hassan from all kinds of sleep forgetting that the Sayyed of the Resistance is ever vigil protecting –day and night -the country and the people.
The channel that hosted such pitiable drama is none other than Al Jadeed or the Lebanese New TV that used to be supportive of the Resistance but now is seriously drifting towards Gulf policy after Saudi al Waleed bin Talal of the ruling family and of Rotana channel signed several deals with it.
Inspiration had fallen upon the Sheikh and the Lebanese channel at the same time in terms of big amounts of petro dollars enough for a religious man to forsake his religion for fitna and for a local channel to change its policy for direct affiliation .

Well , the show of threats and slanders performed by the all knowing fake Sheikh must not have been a great success or was half a success to the taste of both the Sheikh and the channel . Sayyed Hassan who had more important things to do than to listen to the delirium of the ambitious mediocre Sheikh did not respond , it was as if no one had said anything .

For this reason , and in order to add some pep and maybe some petro dollars to the story , the dark forces of sectarianism –active on the Lebanese ground –and to which our venerable Sheikh belongs- sent- the next day – a group of thugs to attack the channel and burn tires at its front doors.

The thugs had covered faces and weapons and they started shooting at the channel building terrorizing people. One of them who was caught seeking refuge in a Palestinian camp had precedents with the army and the police

After all this the unfortunate Sheikh accused Hizbullah of attacking the local channel while the truth is- according to some -that the Sheikh himself has probably sent the thugs- with the consent of the channel -to give a touch of reality to the whole thing and to increase the expected retribution .

Money can definitely work miracles for those who think otherwise ; but there is something that the venerable fake Sheikh is not aware of that neither he nor his masters nor his likes -who are on the payroll of some corrupt Saudi prince -can disturb anything or affect in any way the life of the leader of the Umma , be it his sleep or his waking ; all they can do is play their number, get paid and go home. God bless our leader, the hero of the Resistance ever vigil and awake whose integrity no one can touch or disturb .

Ahmad al-Assir: Crisis or Opportunity?

Why all the worry that the actions of Assir and his followers could set the stage for a clash which in turn triggers widespread strife in the country? (Photo: Haitham Moussawi)
Published Saturday, June 30, 2012
It may be hard to discuss the issue of Saida and Sheikh Amad al-Assir.

He has managed to make many enemies in a short period of time. These are essentially from the club of traditional political players, whose membership seems to elude him. He denies wanting to join it. Yet he accuses “the political representatives of the Sunni sect in Lebanon” of failing in their duty, and he hopes to “achieve that which would safeguard the dignity” of the community so he can go back to his mosque and resume his mission as a preacher.

It may be hard for many people to adopt Assir’s discourse. Some of those who enthused about him after he started making his political voice heard have clearly stepped back. Perhaps they concluded that continuing to follow his lead would entail more sacrifices than they could bear. Others saw him as their spokesman, but not their leader. A third group felt that Assir was going further than his supporters would have wanted in pressing his demands.

The majority of the above had either gone along with Harirism, or were politically disillusioned. Assir also unsettled Harirism’s Christian and even Druze allies, Walid Jumblatt’s overture to him notwithstanding. But most worrying of all is Assir’s willingness, if only rhetorically, to enter into an all-out confrontation with the two most powerful forces in the Shia sect.
What may be even harder is persuading the powers-that-be, both in government and opposition, that someone should breach the wall with the aim of extending a hand to Assir. A dialogue needs to be sought with him to discuss what he deems to be public demands, and to work out solutions that convince him to abandon the plans he has recently been putting into action.
The difficulty here lies in the fact that most of the major players in government and opposition refuse to treat Assir as a general trend. They insist on considering him to be a confined individual case, which can be isolated and bypassed. This is because Assir does not possess the same stature as the country’s main political forces. He cannot claim to speak for a Sunni majority, nor is he capable of getting all other Islamist groups in Lebanon to join an action that leads to the unknown.
So why all the worry that the actions of Assir and his followers could set the stage for a clash which in turn triggers widespread strife in the country?
The real answer lies in the fact that Assir, with his actions and his rhetoric, is filling a vacuum among Syria’s and Hezbollah’s Sunni enemies in Lebanon. He proclaims out loud what most of them say in their homes, private discussions, workplaces and late night chats. His show of defiance is one which many believe that Sunni political leaders should be mounting themselves.

When Assir says his actions hinge on the resolution of the issue of weapons, he does not mean, and cannot reasonably mean, that he wants a quick resolution to the question of the arms held by the resistance in Lebanon.

He is in fact – regardless of whether some people like this reasoning or reject it – urging on a debate about the relationship between the different groups in Lebanon.

This absent, or rather abandoned, debate has many themes, the weapons issue being one of them. But its aim is to reformulate the rules of Lebanon’s governance and the relationship of its citizens to the state. Assir may be uninterested in much of that, but he has seized on an issue that goes to the heart of Lebanon’s current difficulty, which stems from the profound dispute between the political leaders of the majority of the country’s Shia and the majority of its Sunnis.

In short, the problem will not be solved either by cracking down on Assir’s group, as some hot-heads believe, or by the sheikh obtaining a clear and convincing answer about the future of Hezbollah’s weapons.

For a solution to be reached, those concerned must dare to take two simultaneous steps.

The first of these concerns Assir himself. He needs to provided with an acceptable ladder with which to climb down from his tree.

The second step is more general, and relates to the essence of the issue. In this regard, the onus lies with those who wield the most influence. With Syria preoccupied by its domestic crisis, the main regional parties to such a dialogue now would be Saudi Arabia (plus perhaps the new Egypt) and Iran, and the main local ones Hezbollah and the Future Movement.

There may be no sign of that happening. But Assir’s actions managed to bring antagonistic parties in Saida together around a single table to confer about what should be done. A get-together could be more focused and effective if it involved the main players in the Sunni-Shia cold war which the country and the region are witnessing.

As recent and earlier experience has taught us, and as the ongoing tragedy in Syria underlines, attempts to avoid dialogue in order to pursue gains, by this side or that, only succeed in postponing the inevitable.

Eventually, all the players must sit around the table to produce a feasible compromise that ensures they can continue living together.
Ibrahim al-Amine is editor-in-chief of al-Akhbar.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.


Congratulations for to the Statue of Liberty and for Lincoln who freed the slaves , and congratulations to the United Nations of Ban Ki Moon .
All these lies inculcated to children at schools by the Western Establishment now will surface again . It is in Syria that these lies are surfacing again , in Syria where truth will be told by dead journalists , by killed newsmen and women shot dead at the hands of thugs armed by the Saudi king and by the prince of Qatar and organized by the UN and by Obama and Cameron . You have to listen to Syria and to watch Syria so that you know the truth for this is from where truth is coming , don’t listen to anything else if you are a truth seeker , just watch . Get to know the people who are ruling you , get to know and get acquainted with what they do and how they kill .

From Syria you can know all , how they kill helpless people and how they kill journalists .Get acquainted with the killers , the killers of women and children and of so many others . Get acquainted with the monsters who are ruling you , the monsters of this world, get to know Obama the killer and Cameron the killer and Sarkozy or Hollande , get to know Ban Ki Moon the killer . Get to know Columbus the killer , and George Washington the killer and the queen of England , get to know all these killers descendents of killers and who will bear killers in their turn.

Forget about their great discoveries and their cities and their cartels , forget about the great inventions and great theories , forget about their scientific progress and technological achievements , forget about their letters and about their art and music , forget about their great innovations, forget the space and the moon and the satellites , forget about their spaceships and space probes . Forget about all this . Just look at how they kill and who they kill and why they kill , just look at this . This is not only the Saudi king or the prince of Qatar or mediocre Erdugan . This is the dynasty of killers that has started hundreds of years ago in Europe and then in the States .

The dynasty of killers is now performing in Syria art works of slaughters and massacres . It is creating masterpieces that they have the guts to accuse others of committing. They have the guts to accuse Kaddhafi or al Assad or whoever of their own massacres . Previously they killed using Zionist Jews , they killed and killed and killed and are still killing , now they are killing through Muslim Sunni fanatics and they kill and kill and kill and tomorrow they will still be killing for this is their daily bread , this is what they have been doing and what they will still be doing .

As you buy your loaf of bread they go out in the early morning and start killing , from the White House and the Congress and L’Elysee , from Downing Street they start killing and from Buckingham Palace and the Vatican , they organize meetings for the whole week , they meet and decide whom to kill this week and how are they going to kill, and it goes from week to week .

Who are they ? They are the rulers of this world , They are the al Qa’ida if you’re not aware . The rulers of this world are the terrorists of this world , or did you think al Qa’ida is made only of the few poor people recruited in some camps or some poor neighborhood, given some money and some weapons and explosives to tie to someone waste and then off to paradise ? Did you think really that al Qa’ida is only constituted of these poor credulous people with beards and beeds , of ambitious blind mediocre believers ? Not at all , for Al Qa’ida is Obama, is Ban Ki Moon , is Sarkozy and Cameron and Bush and her Majesty the queen of England and his eminence the pope . This is the al Qa’ida, this is the first rank of al Qa’ida and the others are subordinates, the Netenyahu and Peres and Hamad and Abdullah are nothing but subordinates , they carry on the orders of the first rank ,It is al Qa’ida that is ruling you and it is time for you to know..

Mursi vows to rule for all Egyptians stopped short of specifically mentioning the 1979 Peace Treaty with Israel

Published Friday, June 29, 2012

Egypt's Islamist President-elect Mohammed Mursi took an informal oath of office on Friday in a speech to supporters in Cairo's Tahrir Square, in a slap at the generals trying to limit his power.
Paying tribute to Egypt's Muslims and Christians alike, Mursi symbolically swore himself in as the country's first elected civilian president.

Mursi, who won a run-off election earlier this month, was received with applause by the tens of thousands of people gathered in the birthplace of the revolt that overthrew dictator Hosni Mubarak last year.

He promised a "civilian state" and praised "the square of the revolution, the square of freedom," in what he called an address to "the free world, Arabs, Muslims... the Muslims of Egypt, Christians of Egypt."

"There is no power above people power," the former Muslim Brotherhood figure declared to wild cheers from the crowd.

"I was one of you and I still am, and I will continue to always be one of you. I came to you because I believe that you are the source of power and legitimacy above all sides," he added.

In a speech short on specific policies, Mursi promised to reassess the country's foreign policies, warning that foreign powers would no longer be able to dominate the country, as the US was accused of doing during the era of Mubarak.

But Mursi stopped short of specifically mentioning the 1979 Peace Treaty with Israel.

"We are capable of responding and even preventing any assault or aggression against us. Together my citizens, we will bring about a new understanding with respect to foreign powers," he said,
"I warn against anyone, whoever he may be, to try and harm Egypt's dignity. I warn against anyone thinking of harming Egypt."

Following the speech the crowd demanded an end to the military council, which has ruled Egypt since Mubarak's fall.

"Down, down with military rule," they chanted.

Critics accused the council of grabbing power after they passed a decree limiting Mursi's influence over many areas of policy.

Mursi will be unable to declare war without the military's backing and cannot make any decisions concerning the armed forces.

(Al-Akhbar, Reuters)

Meanwhile King Abdullah of Jordan confers with MishaalKing Abdullah II of Jordan conferred with Khaled Mishaal, the political bureau chairman of Hamas, and his accompanying delegation on Thursday on a number of regional developments.

Israeli El Al: ‘From spying to PR’

Israeli El Al: ‘From spying to PR’
The staff of Israel’s national airline El Al is known for spying for entity’s secret police, the Shin Bet. In 2009, its former employee Jonathan Garb, a South African Jewish citizen who received his military training in Israel – admitted when South African government expelled two of El Al for spying on Blacks and Muslim passengers at Johannesburg international airport.

Earlier, El Al staff had helped Israeli Mossad in kidnapping and smuggling Zionazi leader, Adolph Eichmann, from Argentina to Israel where he was executed in 1961 as result of a Jewish kangroo-trail.
The Israeli Consulate in New York posted on its website on June 29, 2012 – the establishment of a new Israeli propaganda lies project (Hasbara). “The El Al Ambassadors is a new joint initiative between El Al Israel airlines, the Jewish Agency for Israel, the Stand With Us organization and the Israeli Foreign Ministry, that places pilots and flight attendants at the forefront of Israeli diplomacy in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Los Angeles and Toronto. For the first time in Israeli history a private sector corporation has decided to take on an active roll in Israeli Hasbara, and this project is revolutionary for its unique approach in ‘People-to-People’ programming. This initiative is the brainchild of El Al’s CEO Major General (Res.) Eliezer Shkedy, who decided to take part in the joint efforts to improve Israel’s image around the world, and strengthening the relationship between Jews in Israel and Jews in the Diaspora,” says the official bulletin.

Netanyahu, even has a Hasbara Minister in his cabinet by the name Yuli Edelstein. According to Hasbara Ministry website, it generates official lies in five different languages to over 100,000 Jewish volunteers on social media networks in addition to hundreds of bloggers.

An old Persian wisdom says: “You can put all the lipstick you want on a pig. But at the end of the day, it’s still a pig“.

I guess this is going to be another failed project to counter the international process of delegitimization of the Zionist entity. It cannot hide the truth behind Israel Hasbara Committee’s propaganda lies. Watch a video below.

Friday, June 29, 2012

Once and for All

Yitzchak Ginsburgh

Under the pretext of a "chosen people and promised land":

They have invaded and colonized Palestine for decades causing and continue to cause unimaginable suffering to indigenous Palestinians for many generation.

They have caused the destruction of 531 (five hundred and thirty one) Biblical villages of World Heritage and still continue their destruction.

They have ethnically cleansed more than 70% of native Palestinians, throwing them into the cruelty of refugee camps or the Chilliness of Diaspora.

Under the pretext of "security" and "war on terror":

They have promoted Islamophobia and through their media outlet continued to incite hatred, fear and suspicion against Islam and against its almost two billion adherent Muslims.

They have designed the war on Afghanistan causing millions of some of the poorest nations on Earth to suffer for more than a decade.

They have pushed for the war on Iraq, and have already succeeded in destroying one of the world oldest civilizations.

Not yet satisfied, they continue to "teach" and "train" Americans the "art" of war, and continue pushing and planning for a new war on Iran and fantasizing and drooling over yet another war on Egypt.

The boil that festers underneath all this aggression and destruction appears to have stemmed from one misperceived misconceived word which turned sour, nay, in the eyes of the nations it looks atrociously hideous, and on their tongues it tastes awfully bitter: CHOSENNESS

This one word, a taboo not to be mentioned, uttered or discussed, seems to be the engine behind what we see in the arrogant behaviour of Jewish-Zionist colonizers in Palestine and the contempt they exhibit when dealing with Palestinians, the "unchallengeable" sense of entitlement: to world leadership, divine ownership and uncontrollable drive for power and control.

Once and for all, let us poke that boil, before it burst into a global catastrophe, dragging the entire world into a nuclear biocidal war causing the destruction of all what we cherish in our beautiful planet and what humanity has achieved throughout its history.

In the subsequent two articles quoted towards the end, we get a glimpse into the mind and psychological state of two people who were religiously educated and indoctrinated with that concept.
The first being Dina Avramson, we feel her agony struggling to reconcile her intrinsic egalitarian humanity with such indoctrinated irrational supremacy, as she explains: "I would laugh if it wasn’t so sad the self-conviction that Jews possess all that is pure and noble and maintain a constant connection to divinity and to infinite light, while all other nations of the world are overcome by promiscuity, lust and robbery. We are holy, yet they are filled with darkness and spiritual impurity."

Then she goes on to say: " As a graduate of religious Jewish education, I notice that to this day I face a mental-psychological barrier when facing non-Jews. I discover that deep within me I believe that I am nobler than them and I stutter when I need to explain why I cannot marry a gentile. What can I tell them, that a Jew must not mix in with a gentile soul because it is of lower strata? When I search for the word “soul” online, I find explanations on religious websites noting that Jews have two souls, a beastly one and a divine one, while non-Jews only have one, beastly soul."

The following links give an introductory taster to that misperceived concept of CHOSENNESS.

“70 % "Israeli Jews believe they are the chosen”

"We are the Chosen"

"If you are chosen, act it"

"Safed rabbi: Gentiles jealous of chosen people"

Palestinians are the prime victims of this "Chosenness"

Secular manifestation of chosen-ness: "elitism and specialness"

Other manifestations: "tribal loyalty and exclusivity"

"A chosen people that believes in its God. That is Israel, circa 2012. God have mercy on us"

The first article:

Chosen people? Not quite

Op-ed: Dina Avramson says Jews should dispose of notion that they are superior to other people
Dina Avramson
Published: 05.28.12, 10:02 / Israel Opinion
On the eve of Shavuot I dressed up in white; they say it’s the wedding day of God and His people, so I was ready for it. I prepared all the requirements: Plants to adorn the table and a cold cheese cake in the fridge. All that was left was to clarify the essence of this prominent day, decide to again assume the Torah’s burden upon myself, and read it the whole night as one reads love letters; to recall how God chose us from all the nations and what this really means.

He chose us? From all nations? Really? I read online one story of how God went from one nation to another and offered His holy Torah, yet no one wanted it. The Ishmaelites wanted to keep murdering, the Edomites wanted to keep committing adultery, and only the righteous and pure Israelites, who never murder and never commit adultery, told God: “We shall do and hear.”

Stalled Promise?

Why won’t God reveal himself again? / Rabbi Levi Brackman

According to tradition, collective transcendence above ego was key for revelation
Full story

Religious singer Avraham Fried went even further. Instead of singing about Ishmaelites and Edomites, he sang about adulterous French, greedy Brits, Americans who don’t know how to honor their father and mother, and thieving Arabs. Yet only the Jew with the prayer shawl is the righteous hero and is given the Torah. We’re so lucky.
I would laugh if it wasn’t so sad – the self-conviction that Jews possess all that is pure and noble and maintain a constant connection to divinity and to infinite light, while all other nations of the world are overcome by promiscuity, lust and robbery. We are holy, yet they are filled with darkness and spiritual impurity.
So is that the case? No, would say those in the know. It’s not about us being above them; we are simply like an elite unit. We chose to assume the burden for the sake of the others. We took upon ourselves tougher missions in order to lead the world to a better place. I may be able to accept this explanation – the understanding that we chose strict laws in order to achieve lofty goals – yet I most certainly cannot accept the distinction between us and the rest of the world, as if we are the chosen son.
Does God love them less? Based on my limited knowledge, I believe that every nation has its way of connecting to God. The Indians, who hail from the element of wind, do well with lengthy meditations, while Islam, which hails from the fire element, is required to assume great modesty. The Sufis connect via dance and song, and native Americans who come from the element of earth drink a muddy beverage that that leads them to divinity.

Does God love them less? Does He appreciate their work less? Is a Buddhist monk who sits in a cave for three years less connected than me?
As a graduate of religious Jewish education, I notice that to this day I face a mental-psychological barrier when facing non-Jews. I discover that deep within me I believe that I am nobler than them and I stutter when I need to explain why I cannot marry a gentile. What can I tell them, that a Jew must not mix in with a gentile soul because it is of lower strata? When I search for the word “soul” online, I find explanations on religious websites noting that Jews have two souls, a beastly one and a divine one, while non-Jews only have one, beastly soul.

I realize that my knowledge is only akin to a drop in the ocean and that had I immersed myself in studies I would be able to understand the issues more thoroughly. However, most people do not spend hours upon hours studying and are therefore left with the superficial knowledge of the chosen people’s superiority. Only this week I received an invitation on Facebook to join a group called “Let’s show the Sudanese that we rule!” This is what happens when you think you’re better than someone else.
Perhaps the time has come to leave behind this flawed way of thinking, as though we are favored and better understand what’s right for the world, as though our Torah is the exclusive truth across the universe and there are no other ways to experience a revelation, and as though any foreigner who wishes to live in our country is a threat.
So on the eve of Shavuot I got dressed in white and headed to the synagogue to read, with love, the words of the Torah. I know that for me this is the most suitable way to connect to the infinite light, but I also know that somewhere on the other side of the planet there are different people who connect to it in a different way, and they are considered no less precious children.
The second article:

Exclusive: Hate All Non-Jews,

"A recently published book written by a Skver hasidic rabbi and endorsed by the Skvere Rebbe himself tells Skvere hasidim and other Jews to hate all gentiles. Gentiles are wholly evil, the book says. They spiritually pollute the world, and even looking at their faces is harmful."
"However, to separate with a million degrees of separation, a gentile is an impure thing. The entire essence of the gentile is evil and impure. Even if he occasionally does good deeds he does not thereby become good."
"As is also well known, even educated gentiles who guarded themselves because of their clear understanding of what is right, nonetheless failed when they were tested, because a gentile has no power for goodness within him."

"On the contrary, the evil thoughts of gentiles contaminate the world’s atmosphere and create ordeals for Jewish children. As the Remnant for Pinchos {i.e., the author of the book Sheairit L’Pinchas} says, the thoughts of gentiles, even when they are dead, still linger in and contaminate the atmosphere."
"He says that to be protected from this there is only one solution; to completely despise the thoughts of gentiles and to realize that all their thoughts are only evil. (Hate doesn’t mean wanting to do something to a gentile, but it means not being able to tolerate him, not being able to stand him, because of his great impurity, especially when one realizes how harmful this {impurity} is {to Jews and to the world}.) Understandably, loving a gentile is the exact opposite of this."

"So also the Holy Light of Life {i.e., the author of the book Ohr HaHayyim} writes, in the portion of Vayigash {in his book entitled Oh HaHayyim}, that the nature of the righteous ones is to hate gentiles."
"the nature of the righteous ones is to hate gentiles."

Armed French citizens responded to the call of Jewish Defence League and came to lend a hand to their brethren

"The second point is; one is not to concentrate on the face of a gentile. As the Willows of the Valley {the author of the book Arvei Nahal} writes on the Talmudic passage, “it is forbidden to look upon the face of an evildoer”, because the other side [the devil] {the sitra achra} cloaks himself in the guise of an evildoer and it is a danger to look at him. This passage refers to a Jew who has, God forbid, become an evildoer. Certainly, beyond any doubt, a gentile whose whole nature is essentially evil, looking at his appearance is defiling."

"one is not to concentrate on the face of a gentile... it is forbidden to look upon the face of an evildoer...even looking at their faces is harmful."
You can even find this troubling concept mentioned on Wikipedia:
Distinction between Jews and non-Jews
A number of medieval Kabbalistic sources contain statements to the effect that the Jewish soul is ontologically different from the soul of non-Jews; for example, it is held by some that Jews have three levels of soul, nefesh, ruach and neshamah while non-Jews have only nefesh. The Zohar comments on the Biblical verse which states "Let the waters teem with swarms of creatures that have a living soul" as follows: "The verse 'creatures that have a living soul,' pertains to the Jews, for they are the children of God, and from God come their holy souls....And the souls of the other nations, from where do they come? Rabbi Elazar says that they have souls from the impure left side, and therefore they are all impure, defiling anyone who comes near them" (Zohar commentary on Genesis).
Some later Kabbalistic works build and elaborate on these ideas. One point of view is represented by the Hasidic work Tanya (1797), in order to argue that Jews have a different character of soul: while a non-Jew, according to the author Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi (b. 1745), can achieve a high level of spiritually, similar to an angel, his soul is still fundamentally different in character, but not value, from a Jewish one.[49] A similar view is found in early medieval philosophical book Kuzari, by Yehuda Halevi (1075-1141 AD).

Another prominent Habad Rabbi, Abraham Yehudah Khein (b. 1878), believed that spiritually elevated Gentiles have essentially Jewish souls, "who just lack the formal conversion to Judaism", and that unspiritual Jews are "Jewish merely by their birth documents".[51] The great 20th century Kabbalist Yehuda Ashlag viewed the terms "Jews" and "Gentile" as different levels of perception, available to every human soul.
Racism, supremacy, specialness, entitlement, arrogance and tribal elitism are an inevitable outcome cultivated and nurtured from that one seed of chosenness.

The burden of challenging and fighting that concept to the point of total defeat lies within the Jewish communities themselves. It is of no good to keep denying the existence of this elephant in the room... It is of no good to keep pointing fingers and screaming "ANTI-SEMITE", at gentiles who feel extremely alarmed and distressed with that concept. Fair minded and principled people from Jewish background should take it upon themselves to go inside their communities and convince them to abandon that concept and pull it out from its roots.
Failing to do so, will no doubt have dire consequences not only on Palestinians and other gentiles who feel the brunt of this racist ideology but also on decent Jews who with all their heart reject this concept and feel ashamed and shackled by it.
As long as the concept of chosenness is not challenged and eradicated, once and for all, it is not possible to dream of a just world or imagine an egalitarian society built on brotherhood and equality.
Get rid of the CHOSENNESS in theory and practice, and watch Anti-semitism shrivel away.

Rumsfeld’s Papers: The Perennial Anti-Syrian

Yitzhak Shamir (R) meets with Ronald Reagan (L) in the oval office at the White House. (Photo: Al-Akhbar)
Published Thursday, June 28, 2012
In the second installment of “Rumsfeld’s Lebanon Papers,” Al-Akhbar publishes the minutes of his meetings with the Israeli prime minister and defense minister at the end of 1983.

Rumsfeld does not request anything from the Israelis, nor does he interrogate them like he does with Lebanese and Arab counterparts. His meetings with the Israelis are closer to deliberations concerning common interests.
In the published documents going back to the period between 2001 and 2006, the most noteworthy seems to be a memo written following the 11 September 2001 attacks.

In the memo, Rumsfeld explains his “war on terror” strategy and its main objectives to former US President George W. Bush.

It spells out five main steps in the war, including “Syria out of Lebanon.” This came true four years later following the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on 14 February 2005.

Rumsfeld Engineers a Lebanese Propaganda Campaign Against Syria

Following a shuttle diplomacy tour of the Middle East, Rumsfeld presented the results of his visit to five Democratic and Republican congressmen, in a breakfast meeting on 24 January 1984.
Rumsfeld spoke about “state-sponsored terrorism,” “those who don’t share our values,” and “the radical wing” (terms that would be later heard in the Bush era).

The US envoy warned about “the radical wing” gaining ground in the Arab world, which is made up of Syria, Iran, Libya, and South Yemen.

He tried to convince the participants of the necessity of keeping US forces in Lebanon. “If we decide as a country [...] that we can thus use only diplomatic and economic means to pursue mid- to long-range US goals, we will have effectively yielded the field to those who don't share our values,” he said.
He was asked about the reason why US troops should remain in Lebanon although it is not geographically strategic and in circumstances that makes them easy targets for the Soviets and their proxies.

Rumsfeld replied that a pullout from Lebanon “would almost surely bring down the constitutional government.”

In addition, “Jordan is convinced that they are next on the Syrian list” at a time when King Hussein is being considered as a “linchpin of a rejuvenated peace process with Israel.”

“Syria, virtually the only Soviet card in the Middle East, will have proved that standing up to the US pays dividends,” he maintained. Although he said it was “clear that Assad desires to maintain a line of contact with the West.”

“The IDF remains only 23 kilometers from Damascus,” said Rumsfeld.

On the other hand, a memo dated 3 February 1984, shows Rumsfeld preparing a secret propaganda campaign to support the implementation of the US’s new plans regarding Lebanon’s security.
Rumsfeld said that “Syria and Syrian factions in Lebanon have been winning the public relations battle.” He insisted that the Amin Gemayel government must “unambiguously demonstrate to the world” that they are seeking reconciliation.
Rumsfeld suggested that “this might include publicized requests” by Gemayel for PSP leader Walid Jumblatt and Amal leader Nabih Berri to come to the Presidential Palace and meet with him.
He proposed that Gemayel gives “a public speech well in advance of any possible military step” to say the government has made an offer for national reconciliation but that “Syria and factional leaders” are the ones blocking it.
“In short there needs to be a concentrated public effort to demonstrate that it is Syria that is blocking the political reconciliation process [and] the formation of the GNU [Government of National Unity] [...], that is conducting the infiltration into the city of Beirut, [and] that is maintaining artillery within the range of Beirut for political intimidation,” Rumsfeld explained.
He proposed that the idea of Lebanon’s inability to confront Syria on its own, therefore it will need US and/or Israeli support, and the only solution remaining is military.

Yitzhak Shamir: The Lebanese Are Too Soft

“Something must be done to ‘liberate’ Beirut,” Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir told US envoy Donald Rumsfeld in a meeting held on 16 January 1983. By “liberate” Shamir meant getting rid of what he called the terrorists. But how?
Shamir said that they “must support Gemayel” politically. On the ground, they must get rid of terrorist targets in Beirut and its suburbs, in a manner similar to the attack on what he called an Iranian Revolutionary Guard training camp in Bekaa that led to 30 persons being killed.

He stressed that Beirut must be cleaned up and that US-Israeli allies must be protected because they are in constant danger.

Shamir warned that Hafez al-Assad will prepare for the “grand war” on Israel after taking control of the PLO. “Syria must also accept the principle that Lebanese territory could not be used by the PLO or the Iranians for terrorist purposes,” he maintained.
Rumsfeld also relayed to Shamir that Gemayel was unhappy with Israeli involvement in attempts to create a Druze “mini-state” in the Chouf region. The Israeli PM replied by saying that the Lebanese side must cooperate better.
He held that “[US] Ambassador [and special envoy to the Middle East Philip Habib] had previously stressed the importance of intelligence cooperation but there had been no results.”
“Gemayel had to realize [that the Druze] wanted to have their piece of the political cake and they had a considerable fighting force to back up their position,” Rumsfeld added.
The both agreed on saying that the Lebanese are “too soft” and “have become accustomed to depending on the support of others.”
On 17 November 1983, Rumsfeld met with the Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Arens to discuss the Lebanese and Syrian conflicts.
Strategically, they agreed on the “necessity for both the US and Israel to bolster [Amin] Gemayel’s position in every possible way” to realize the “shared US-Israeli goals for Lebanon.”

Arens believed that “if the US withdraws its Marines [from Beirut], then Gemayel would be finished” and warned of a prolonged war with Hafez al-Assad in Lebanon.

“If the worst case eventuates, you will take Amin Gemayel out of Beirut and we will end up having to stay in South Lebanon,” Arens continued.

The Israeli Defense Minister indicated that the Lebanese forces will not “fall apart. Their morale is indeed poor and they are upset about what they see as President Gemayel’s mistakes in his not being sufficiently pro-Christian, pro-Israeli, and strong enough in standing up to the Muslims in general and Syrians in particular.”
“Gemayel wants it both ways. He wants to attack us publicly while telling us privately that he needs our help. He wants to tell the Syrians that he detests the Israelis but has to keep the agreement in order to get rid of us, while telling us privately to back him up,” Arens maintained.

Syria Out of Lebanon

On 30 September 2001, just 19 days after the attacks on New York and Washington DC, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld sent a memo to President George W. Bush elaborating his “strategic thoughts” on the “war on terrorism,” which should be implemented without haste.
He begins by defining the general framework of the war plans, arguing that “the US strategic theme should be aiding local peoples to rid themselves of terrorists and to free themselves from regimes that support terrorism.”
Practically, “US Special Operations Forces and intelligence personnel should make allies of Afghanis, Iraqis, Lebanese, Sudanese, and others who would use US equipment, training, financial, military, and humanitarian support to root out and attack the common enemies.”
The second practical suggestion was to conduct “some air strikes against al-Qaeda and Taliban targets” in Afghanistan soon.
“We should avoid as much as possible creating images of Americans killing Muslims until we have set the political stage that the people we are going after are the enemies of the Muslims themselves,” he stressed.

One of the main goals of the war “would be to persuade or compel States to stop supporting terrorism. The regimes of such States should see that it will be fatal to host terrorists who attack the US as was done on September 11.”

“If the war does not significantly change the world's political map, the US will not achieve its aim,” he maintained.
He concluded that the US government “should envision a goal along these lines:
- New regime in Afghanistan and another key State (or two) that supports terrorism,
- Syria out of Lebanon.
- Dismantlement or destruction of WMD capabilities [in two countries whose names have been removed].
- End of [name removed] support to terrorism.
- End of many other countries' support or tolerance of terrorism.”

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.