Egypt to try Israelis for arms trafficking
Press TV – December 27, 2011
Egyptian authorities have charged two Israelis as well as a Ukrainian national with smuggling weapons into Egypt.
Egypt’s State Prosecutor said in a statement on Monday that the three would be put on trial in a security court usually used for terrorism cases, although no date has yet been set for the trial.
According to the statement, the smuggled weapons were to be used in “illegal operations aimed to implicate Egyptian security.”
In June, Egypt arrested an Israeli for spying during the revolution. The Israeli spy was later freed in a swap deal with Tel Aviv.
The development comes as more than one hundred people have been killed in clashes between protesters and security forces as well as in sectarian violence since former President Hosni Mubarak was ousted in February.
The deaths, coupled with the brutality committed by army forces against the protesters, have prompted some activists to consider suing the ruling generals in local courts or have them put on trial before the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
‘Huffpo’ gives Ginsberg platform to push for illegal covert war against Iran
By Philip Weiss on December 11, 2011
The Democratic Party is in a shambles over the Iran question. Marc Ginsberg, former U.S. Ambassador to Morocco under Clinton, has just used the pages of the Huffington Post to try and undermine Leon Panetta’s reluctance to use force against Iran, and to push a policy of internationally illegal assassinations, sabotage, and covert war against Iran:
when the Secretary of Defense bares his understandable hesitations against the use of military force, which he did last Friday — no matter how meritorious they are — it only undermines the signals his administration is broadcasting…
More robust and coordinated covert action by western and Arab nations against Iran’s nuclear facilities must become an urgent priority. Mysterious computer viruses such as the Stuxnet worm, undeniably set back Iran’s spinning uranium enrichment centrifuges. But their success was short lived. Assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists may have created a climate of fear, but also have not prevented Iran from moving more quickly to its finish line.
Last week’s “accidental” explosion which destroyed one of Iran’s largest solid-fuel missile construction bases was a gift that may keep on giving. It not only killed a key Revolutionary Guard commander in charge of missile solid fuel rocket development, the explosion also compels Iran to rely more on liquid fuel missiles that are easier to detect on the ground via satellite surveillance.
The escalating use of stealth drones conducting surveillance above Iran is an indication that the administration is not reluctant to push the covert envelope. The question is what to do with the treasure trove of data the drone surveillance program yielded?
Accidents do happen. Bigger “accidents” are needed. Rather than relying further on economic sanctions, we need a more effective “accidents regime” that may do what economic sanctions have failed to do. Of course, Iran has demonstrated a huge tolerance for international isolation and economic pain. There is no assurance that escalating covert action will achieve a better outcome than economic sanctions… but its worth the risk given the stakes involved.
There are targets aplenty throughout Iran, including remote pipelines, ships bound for Iran supplying oil distillates, banking computer networks, and aviation facilities. And the regime has a lot of enemies, including many of its own citizens to do the dirty work. No return U.S. address needed.
I’ll Never Do It Again
kenny’s sideshow | December 8, 2011
Like a little kid who just got caught stealing and begs his mama not to spank him, Eric Holder stated in the House Judicial Hearing that “the tactics used during operation Fast and Furious would never be used again by the Justice Department” and that on the distinction between lying and misleading Congress, Holder said it was a matter of a person’s “state of mind.”
That’s reassuring.
Holder earned his stripes as a cover up agent in the Clinton administration working under Janet Reno to stifle the truth about the Oklahoma City bombing and the related murder of Kenneth Trentadue. Holder’s role in Clinton’s pardon of Mossad asset billionaire criminal Marc Rich shows how eagerly he will bow to Israeli lobbying and bribery.
Holder was one of many to be interviewed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and as Attorney General continues the coverup of that event to this day. Commentary from this video:
Eric Holder was chosen because they planned to rape justice and Eric is the right kind of criminal. The person in charge of the Justice system in America is the same person that runs {aids} Al-CIAeda planning to attack Americans on Christmas in Portland or Detroit. The reason you will never see justice for the real crimes being committed against Americans is because Eric represents another form of “justice.” Obama runs Al-CIAeda, and Eric Holder is Al-CIAeda’s lawyer. Eric Holder protected the Mumbai mastermind with a fake trial in Chicago. Eric Holder staged a fake spy swap for the media, using the justice system as a game for a show. Eric Holder was part of the Lockerbie bombers legal paperwork “release.” Eric Holder is a top “inside job” suspect, for 9/11, The USS Cole, and the Bombings at the US Embassy’s in Africa, front and center starring in the whole Bin Laden show.
What is pathetic about the house ‘furious’ hearing is that some are using it as an agenda for more gun regulations against honest Americans in the name of stemming the flow of weapons to Mexico. Although Holder said he will pursue prosecutions of those under his watch if laws were broken, the administration’s ultimate policy is to disarm citizens out of fear that one day they may feel the need to take a stand against the police state’s disregard of the constitution and Bill of Rights and overall government criminality.
As serious as this ‘gunwalker’ issue is, and make no mistake – this was not a sting operation but deliberate trafficking for reasons yet not clear, the house hearing was a sham. We will not be seeing hearings about the money draining scam of the ‘War on Drugs,’ the ever expanding drug running of the CIA and other governmental agencies with protection of Afghan opium crops and heroin producing facilities, drug money laundering by all of the big banks and the kickbacks to politicians who allow it all to happen. We won’t be hearing a word from Congress about Obama and Holder’s promise to end the Bush-era attacks on sellers of medicinal marijuana and the patients who use it which turned into nothing but lies.
Holder and cronies make Rod Blagojevich look like an amateur. Few of the top criminals are even investigated much less go to jail. ‘Walking’ is what those do who are so entrenched in the corrupt system that they are above the law. The ‘gunwalking’ is minor compared to wall street and war crimes in terms of both lives and theft.
Another crime boss, Jon Corzine, also testified before Congress today on the MF Global ‘failure.’ Not being under indictment he didn’t exactly say he would never do it again but did blame it on his his predecessors’ bad financial decisions, said that he never intended to break rules requiring to safeguard client funds and that he doesn’t know what happened to an estimated $1.2 billion that went missing.
I think his testimony qualifies him to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.
There’s one guy who will not say “I’ll never do it again.” That would be the Newt. He will do it again and again, especially when it comes to his subservience to Israel and Jewish money.
He’s working to free Jonathan Pollard, would relocate the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and promised to reappoint war whore John Bolton. Newt is falling all over himself to outdo Romney for more of the Jewish pot of gold.
As with so many who have sold out and are Israel firsters, Newt has his 9/11 connection.
From Michael Collins Piper:
Gingrich has an unusual connection to Larry Silverstein, a controversial figure whose name has been in the forefront of the circumstances surrounding the cover-up of 9-11.
While in Congress, Gingrich benefited from the lucrative Israeli-connected activities of his then-second wife, Marianne, who was on the payroll of the Israel Export Development Company (IEDCO), which promoted the importation into the United States of Israeli products—even as Gingrich was using his influence as a member of Congress to advance U.S.-Israeli trade.
The aforementioned IEDCO was an operation run by mob-connected Silverstein, the billionaire owner of the World Trade Center towers at the time of the 9-11 tragedy.
IEDCO’s Silverstein once even admitted to The Wall Street Journal that Gingrich was one of a number of members of Congress who was lobbied to support Silverstein’s company’s proposals—when his wife was on Silverstein’s payroll. more {Marianne Gingrich Denies Israel Job Is a “Political Payoff” 1995}
Please … someone reassure me that the primaries won’t be rigged to give Gingrich the nomination, that Corzine won’t walk free to steal again and that Holder and Obama and Congress will be held in check and not allowed to sabotage what’s left of this country.
I know, you can’t. The whole political system is a crime scene and for lack of a better answer … it’s our fault.
Bombing Towards A Sectarian War?
Moon of Alabama | December 6, 2011
A bomb went off in Kabul today during a Shia Ashura mourning gathering. Some 55 people wwre killed and over 160 were wounded (video, graphic pictures). This happened near the Abdul Fazl shrine in Murad Khani, Kabul’s old city, and right in front of the Ministry of Defense and the palace. That area should be secure.
Another bomb went off at a Shiite gathering in Mazar-e-Sharif that killed four and injured 16 others today. Another blast took place in Kandahar city in southern Afghanistan, wounding 6 people, though it is not yet known if that one is related.
One source said the Pakistani militant group Sepah-e-Sahaba (also called Lashkar-e-Jhangvi) claimed responsibility for the Kabul blast. The group is known for sectarian killings in Pakistan but has up to now not been active in Afghanistan.
Indeed during the last years sectarian killings like this have been quite rare in Afghanistan. The attacks today seem intentionally designed to incite sectarian violence.
After the attack mourners chanted anti-US and anti-Pakistan slogans. In Mazar-e-Sharif a scuffle between Shia and Sunni students at the Mazar University turned violent. Five people were injured before the police intervened.
In an email to the media, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujaheed strongly condemned the bombing of Shiites in Kabul and Mazar and called them an act of their enemies. He blamed the “invaders” for the bombing and claimed they were designed to foment insecurity to extend the foreign presence.
These incidents remind me of the bombing of the al-Askari mosque in Samara, Iraq, in 2006. That bombing, done by people in Iraqi Special Forces uniforms, ignited a brutal sectarian civil war. Then the officials blamed Al-Qaeda in Iraq for that atrocity but others claimed that the U.S. was behind it.
As always the question that needs to be asked is: “Cui bono?”
Into who’s plans does this fit and who might believe they would benefit from an additional sectarian aspect in war in Afghanistan? Whoever it is is playing with fire.
Are Assad’s Enemies Expecting No Reaction?
By Ibrahim al-Amin | Al-Ahkbar | November 16, 2011
As though there weren’t already enough clowns in the cast, the beloved king of Jordan took the stage to call on the Syrian president to stand down. The hawker of Jordan’s public assets – scion of a dynasty whose monthly payments from the CIA continue to this day, and whose upbringing and education is supervised by British intelligence’s finest instructors – judged that the Syrian crisis makes it necessary for Assad to go. One wonders if the man might one day face a mirror.
Whatever the case, the drama continues to unfold as scripted. To pump up the excitement, it has apparently been decided to screen more than one episode per day. Syrian film-making will be dealt a blow. Neither extra episodes of home-made TV dramas, nor the dubbing of more Turkish soap operas, can hope to compete with the rolling blockbuster being brought to us by US-Franco-Qatari Revolutions Inc.
The producers have so far made do with the blood already being shed in Syria. But later, and perhaps soon – for the production schedule is tight – some bloodier scenes may have to be loaded onto the reel. But what exactly is required? Bombings in public markets? Assassinations of regime leaders? More sectarian killings? Nobody is yet sure what pitch will have the right effect on the relevant international human rights organizations, whose executives have begun rubbing their hands in anticipation of a new boon. But give it another day or two and Nabil al-Arabi will summon them to come over immediately and without delay. The oil states will pay the expenses. Hamad bin-Jasem has assured his Arab counterparts, and informed the Arab League secretariat not to worry about the funds needed for the planned foreign intervention aimed at toppling Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
One act in the spectacle was supposed to have been wound up on Tuesday in Cairo —though there was no guarantee against hitches. This was to feature Syrian opposition figures uniting in a single organization so they can then be recognised as the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people. The Syrians who support the regime and those who oppose foreign intervention do not count. For once, the intellectual colossus Ahmet Davetoglu will have been correct in his analysis. Assad’s supporters will be treated as irrelevant: a ‘zero problem’.
In Cairo, a special kind of adhesive tape had to be used. It is not designed to last long. It only has to stick things together for now, and hold them in place for a few weeks or months to make a structure that can be called the unifying framework of all sections of the Syrian opposition. Someone or other will then select a name and logo for it, and it will have a seat reserved at the Arab League. Many are competing to fill that seat. But while the photographers will focus on the occupant, nobody will wait to listen to his or her views, as the decisions have already been made. However, they will have the honour of reading them out. Those who cooked the decisions up think they’ll suffice to topple the Assad regime.
Meanwhile in Rabat – where Arab foreign ministers are due to discuss upping the pressure – there will also be much verbal one-upmanship about human rights and the incessant blood-letting in Syria. But everyone there, too, will be waiting for further decisions. It is unlikely that any will have an answer to Syria’s request for the convening of an emergency Arab summit.
The series will carry on until further notice. The Arab and Western capitals concerned believe that a lot can be achieved between now and the end-of-year holiday season. They’re hoping for scenes of rejoicing as Bashar al-Assad’s downfall is celebrated on the streets of Damascus, Aleppo and other Syrian cities, as well as the world’s capitals. They certainly don’t want the TV cameras to be tracking the plane flying the last American occupation troops out of Baghdad, and the accompanying celebrations in Syria as well as Iraq itself, Lebanon and Iran. The US and its Arabs want the cameras focused on Syria’s towns. They do not care what images they convey, provided they feature anguish, pain and blood. All is fair game in the service of the shared objective: for Syria’s opposition to US-Israeli hegemony to cease.
The Arab and Western players involved in this lunacy assume that the Syrian regime will be unable to bear a combination of diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions, and acts of sabotage and destabilization. They are counting on armed groups – which have been or are being put in place – to mount extensive military actions in border areas adjoining Turkey, or even Lebanon. This will then be used to move on to the ‘protected areas’ phase. Some border incident will be sufficient to trigger the creation of such enclaves, without awaiting permission from the UN Security Council or anyone else. The only impediment is that the planners are still waiting for a final decision from Turkey on whether to allow such a step to be taken.
The movie has already become tiresome, but it seems as though viewing it will be both compulsory and lucrative. All expenses paid out of the blood and sweat of the Syrians themselves, and of fellow Arabs too. But this film has yet to be completed by the production company, which is also doing the promotion and casting.
One wonders whether the shareholders in this venture have paused to consider how the other side might react. Do they really think that the fact it has avoided causing problems is a sign of weakness, and that it has no tricks of its own up its sleeve?
Let’s wait!
Ibrahim al-Amine is editor-in-chief of al-Akhbar.
Occupy Building 7
November 19 and 20
- March from Liberty Plaza to WTC 7 at noon each day.
- Occupy the park in front of WTC 7 until nightfall.
- General Assemblies will be held at 2pm each day to discuss the direction and continuation of the Occupy Building 7 occupation after 11/20.
To all those who continue to fight for the truth about 9/11 to be revealed:
It is time for us to occupy.
The Occupy Wall Street movement is a much needed response to decades of growing inequality, financial deregulation, and zero accountability for the crimes that brought about our current economic crisis. Millions throughout the nation and across globe who feel they have no voice in our political system have come to embrace “Occupy” as an expression of their anger, frustration and hope.
Ten years later, it is time for us to give voice to our own growing frustration by aligning firmly with the Occupy movement and making 9/11 one of the key issues the Occupy movement stands for.
On Saturday November 19 and Sunday November 20, we will march from Liberty Plaza to Building 7 and occupy the park in front of Building 7 until nightfall. We hope this will mark the beginning of a sustained Occupy Building 7 movement that will grow and finally bring meaningful attention to the obvious demolition of World Trade Center Building 7 and the dire need for a new 9/11 investigation. At 2pm each day we will hold a General Assembly to discuss the direction and continuation of the Occupy Building 7 occupation after November 20.
Go to OccupyBuilding7.org to learn more and to start following #OccupyBuilding7 on Twitter. On the website you will find fliers that you can print and hand out at Liberty Plaza as well as web banners that you can post on your website to help spread the word.
We are attempting to get Occupy Building 7 on the official Occupy Wall Street calendar, and we anticipate being joined by hundreds of Occupy Wall Street protesters. Most of the protesters at Liberty Plaza are keenly aware of 9/11. A lot of them already knew about it; others have been educated over the last several weeks thanks to the 9/11 activists who have given their time and energy to be there. Let us hope that by the time November 19 rolls around, there will be hundreds, if not thousands of Occupy activists eager to help us make Occupy Building 7 a part of the broader Occupy movement.
If you can make it to New York on November 19, please meet us at Liberty Plaza at noon, and let’s make history.
Former Mujahadeen Khalq Leader Confirms Alleged Iran Terror Plot Conspirator Affiliated with MEK
By Richard Silverstein | Tikun Olam | October 19, 2011
You’ll recall that the the U.S. claimed that the Iranian alleged conspirator in the terror plot against the Saudi ambassador, Gholam Shakuri, was a Revolutionary Guard (IRG) official. Though many Iranians have scoured every resource they could think of, none have found evidence of such a person with any IRG affiliation. If the U.S. has such evidence it ought to produce it if it wants to be believed. Yesterday, the well-placed Alef site, run by an Iranian majlis member who’s run for president twice, alleged that Shakuri is in fact a high level Mujahadeen al Khalq (MEK) leader. It offered evidence to support the charge.
Today, the official MEK leadership has denied that Shakuri is a member and the U.S. has also denied the charge. But in fact, a former high-ranking MEK leader, Massoud Khodabandeh (he has allowed me to use his name), writing in the Gulf2000 listserv, confirmed that Shakuri is in fact an MEK member. He cautions that there may be more than one Gholam Shakuri, and the one who is the MEK member may not be the same Shakuri the U.S. has named. While this may be true, this new development moves Shakuri a lot closer to being MEK than being IRG. And moves the entire U.S. account of this supposed crime closer to the trash heap.
In its story containing the U.S. denial, the NY Times quotes U.S. sources responding to the Iranian charge that Shakuri held or holds a U.S. passport:
Mr. Shakuri is not a United States citizen and does not have an American passport.
I have no doubt that Shakuri is not a U.S. citizen and also that he may not currently have a U.S. passport. But this statement, at least as portrayed by Scott Shane, does not say the U.S. never issued such a passport in his name. There are many ways and reasons a non-U.S. citizen may obtain a U.S. passport including fraud and the possibility that Shakuri was performing a task for the U.S. government or CIA and needed such a document. I am speculating, but in light of the paucity of evidence the U.S. has offered to support its claims, we must parse the information it has distributed to try to determine credibility and accuracy.
There is another intriguing element that the Alef story added to the mix. It claimed that Interpol had released information allowing confirmation of Shakuri as an MEK official. The NY Times says this:
An Interpol spokeswoman declined to comment. But an American official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Interpol had discovered no link to the opposition group, calling the Iranian news report “pure fiction.”
While I do not know the protocols that Interpol follows in making public statements, I’d think that if the organization had been portrayed falsely by Iran, that it would want to say so. I’d also think that the U.S. would be a far more important national partner to Interpol than Iran and that Interpol would also want to deny this story if it were false because the U.S. would benefit from this. The fact that it refuses to do so raises if not a red, then surely a yellow flag for me.
The fact that a U.S. official seeks to speak on behalf of Interpol and under the cloak of anonymity is highly dubious. If they want us to believe what they claim, then I’m afraid it will have to be Interpol speaking on its own behalf.
Provoking a Path to Persia
The Saban Center’s prescient paper on war with Iran
By Maidhc Ó Cathail | October 20, 2011
In June 2009, the Saban Center for Middle East Policy published “Which Path to Persia?—Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran.” Writing in a tone strikingly reminiscent of the Project for a New American Century’s infamous pre-9/11 paper “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” the six co-authors noted that, “It seems highly unlikely that the United States would mount an invasion without any provocation or other buildup.” For a think tank specifically established by media mogul Haim Saban to protect Israel, this could prove to be a formidable obstacle impeding their desired march—of U.S. troops—to Tehran.
“In fact, if the United States were to decide that to garner greater international support, galvanize U.S. domestic support, and/or provide a legal justification for an invasion, it would be best to wait for an Iranian provocation, then the time frame for an invasion might stretch out indefinitely,” Saban’s think-tankers ruefully observed.
“With only one real exception, since the 1978 revolution, the Islamic Republic has never willingly provoked an American military response, although it certainly has taken actions that could have done so if Washington had been looking for a fight. Thus it is not impossible that Tehran might take some action that would justify an American invasion. And it is certainly the case that if Washington sought such a provocation, it could take actions that might make it more likely that Tehran would do so (although being too obvious about this could nullify the provocation). However, since it would be up to Iran to make the provocative move, which Iran has been wary of doing most times in the past, the United States would never know for sure when it would get the requisite Iranian provocation. In fact, it might never come at all.”
Seemingly undeterred by Iran’s frustrating unwillingness to provide the requisite provocation, the analysts continued to examine this option:
“As noted above, in the section on the time frame for an invasion, whether the United States decides to invade Iran with or without a provocation is a critical consideration. With provocation, the international diplomatic and domestic political requirements of an invasion would be mitigated, and the more outrageous the Iranian provocation (and the less that the United States is seen to be goading Iran), the more these challenges would be diminished. In the absence of a sufficiently horrific provocation, meeting these requirements would be daunting.”
Ruling out the likelihood of “an overt, incontrovertible, and unforgivable act of aggression—something on the order of an Iranian-backed 9/11 … given Iran’s history of avoiding such acts,” the authors went on to explore where “the question of provocation gets murky.”
“Most European, Asian, and Middle Eastern publics are dead set against any American military action against Iran derived from the current differences between Iran and the international community—let alone Iran and the United States,” they wistfully noted. “Other than a Tehran-sponsored 9/11, it is hard to imagine what would change their minds.”
Even Iran’s long-time Sunni rival in the region appeared recalcitrant to the idea. “Saudi Arabia is positively apoplectic about the Iranians’ nuclear program, as well as about their mischief making in Lebanon, Iraq, and the Palestinian territories,” the pro-Israeli analysts empathised. “Yet, so far, Riyadh has made clear that it will not support military operations of any kind against Iran. Certainly that could change, but it is hard to imagine what it would take.”
Would a dastardly plot to blow up King Abdullah’s “hand-picked, trusted envoy” in a D.C. restaurant suffice, perchance?
At least, the lead author of “Which Path to Persia?” seems to think so. On October 11, Kenneth Pollack opined on “Iran’s Covert War Against the United States”: “It’s shocking, but not entirely surprising to learn that the United States government has evidence that the Iranian regime was trying to kill Saudi Ambassador to the United States Adel al-Jubeir.”
Posing as a responsible sceptic regarding the ludicrous plot, Pollack concluded that the ultra-cautious regime he analysed for the Saban Center two years previously—relevant information not provided to the reader—may have changed for the worse: “But, if this incredible claim is proven true, it should remind us that Iran also is not a normal country by any stretch of the imagination, and that in a Middle East already in turmoil we now face a more aggressive, more risk-taking Iran that may be looking to stir the pot in ways that it once found imprudent.”
As Stephen M. Walt remarked about an earlier Tehran-baiting paper by the Saban Center director, “It is hard to read this piece without hearkening back to Pollack’s The Threatening Storm, the book that convinced many liberals to support the invasion of Iraq in 2003. What made that book especially persuasive was Pollack’s depiction of himself as a former dove who had oh-so-reluctantly concluded that there was no option but to go to war.”
Interestingly, The Daily Beast/Newsweek which published Pollack’s op-ed is partly owned by Jane Harman, whose service in Congress reportedly included a quid pro quo with an Israeli agent, involving political donations from billionaire Haim Saban, to lobby the Department of Justice to reduce espionage charges against two officials at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Pollack, a former member of the National Security Council, was mentioned in the indictment against Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman as one of the government officials who provided information to the two former AIPAC employees about—you guessed it—Iran.
When asked “who would want to create the impression” that the United States needs to engage in military activity against Iran, former CIA operative Michael Scheuer replied, “If I was looking at a counterintelligence operation to decide where this information came from, I’d be very interested to see if I could find an Israeli hand or a Saudi hand.”
Thanks to Kenneth Pollack, that search can now be narrowed.
Maidhc Ó Cathail is a political analyst and editor of The Passionate Attachment.


