Total Pageviews

Friday 17 February 2012

PACBI-Educators can’t stay silent about Israeli apartheid

Today the systematic dispossession of the Palestinian people continues unabated and largely unchallenged by the United States and the European Union. Barriers to Palestinian mobility, social and political development are visible everywhere.

While Jewish-Israeli citizens pass freely, more than 500 police and military checkpoints regulate Palestinian movement between the occupied West Bank and Israel. Passing through these checkpoints on a recent fact-finding tour organized by the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, we witnessed Palestinians endure a daily ritual of subordination, humiliation and suspicion.

Abutting the Aida refugee camp near Bethlehem, the massive Israeli separation wall annexes Palestinian land for the expanding settlement of Gilo. For Palestinian families who find themselves on the “wrong” side of the wall, what had once been a short walk to school now takes several hours.

Since 1992, Jewish-Israeli settlement within the West Bank has increased by more than 50 percent; some 500,000 Jewish settlers now live among 2.5 million Palestinians. Walled, gated and connected by a sophisticated road network that bypasses the dilapidated infrastructure used by Palestinians, these illegal settlements maintain privileged access to the most fertile lands, water and energy resources.

In Hebron, a few hundred Jewish settlers backed by the Israeli military control the eastern part of the city inhabited by some 35,000 Palestinians. There we saw how settlers have seized houses above the souq, the main market street, and pummeled Arab merchants with garbage, excrement and acid in order to strangle the commercial life of the city and render it prone to future settlement.

Second class citizens

Israel’s status as the one true “democracy” in the region rests in part on the myth that the 1.5 million Palestinians living within Israel enjoy equal rights. In truth, they are Israel’s second-class citizens, governed by exceptional legal proscriptions and subject to special scrutiny by the security services.

Palestinian citizens of Israel do not have the right to live with their spouses from the West Bank, Gaza, or overseas inside the post-1948 boundaries of Israel. They are denied many social benefits and employment opportunities because, unlike Jews, they are not required to perform mandatory military service — a prerequisite for housing subsidies, government or security jobs.

Meanwhile, any person whom the state recognizes as Jewish can settle inside Israel, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and receive instant citizenship, residency rights, as well as housing and education subsidies. In short, Israel’s legal regime and political culture discriminates against Palestinian citizens on the basis of their ethnicity and nationality. The objective is to “purify” the Jewish state by substantially reducing or transferring Palestinians beyond its walls and borders — a direct violation of international law and human rights.

Houses pillaged

We witnessed first hand the human scale of this violation in East Jerusalem. We heard testimony from four Palestinian families in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem, refugees from 1948, who in November 2008 and August 2009, were forcibly evicted from their homes in the dead of night by the Israeli military. Their houses were pillaged and seized by settlers who tossed their belongings into the street.

We learned that Israel denies residency permits to some 10,000 Palestinian children who live in East Jerusalem because their parents live in the rest of the West Bank or in Gaza, thus curtailing their access to education, health and social services. Meanwhile, Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem have been linked to the western half of the city by a state-of-the-art light rail system built by the French transportation giant Veolia, in direct violation of the 1907 Hague Regulations on the laws and customs of war which prohibit infrastructural changes that do not benefit the occupied population or serve a military purpose.

The evictions, demolitions, population and zoning restrictions, new infrastructure and walling projects in East Jerusalem aim to produce a Jewish demographic majority throughout what Israelis call “Greater Jerusalem.” Since 1992, more than 110,000 Palestinian residents of Jerusalem have been effectively expelled from the city by the separation wall, which the International Court of Justice advisory opinion found violates international law in 2004.

The justification for these appalling violations of Palestinian human rights and human dignity is defense of Israeli security in the face of terrorism. We do not accept security as a rationale for the dispossession of an entire people, for the racist devaluation of their lives, or for the blatant disregard of their claims to social and political rights and economic opportunity.

America’s culpability

For this reason, we question why our own government continues to subsidize the Israeli occupation to the tune of $8.6 million per day. Indeed, we believe that the militarization of security that Israel and the US increasingly share is a source of escalating violence in the region, not peace and stability as it purports to be.

As members of an international community of scholars, cultural workers and activists, we are attuned to the role that knowledge production, dissemination and exchange plays in both upholding and challenging relations of unequal power. Palestinian scholars and students do not enjoy academic freedom under occupation. Israel has routinely closed Palestinian universities under security pretext, denied visas to international and Palestinian scholars living abroad who have faculty appointments in the occupied West Bank, blocked imports of equipment needed to teach basic science and engineering, and prevented Gaza students from attending West Bank universities.

Even Israeli scholars who dissent from state policy are marginalized and harassed. And yet, most Israeli (as well as US) academic institutions have been either silent or complicit in the face of Palestinian scientific and educational suffocation. Israeli universities are culpable for violating Palestinian human rights and international law — from expropriating Palestinian lands to providing demographic, sociological, medical, legal and scientific research in the service of Israel’s apartheid policies.

Boycott: a tool of solidarity

While other countries may have worse human rights records, Israel is the world’s most egregious example of an occupation that has persisted for almost half a century in flagrant violation of international law. Neither periodic pressure from diplomats and non-governmental organizations, nor international legal judgments condemning Israel’s wall in the West Bank, the settlements, or the siege of Gaza, nor the ongoing, and now visibly fraudulent “peace process” itself, have pierced the veil of Israeli impunity.

In response to a call from within Palestinian civil society, we therefore declare our support for the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel. The academic and cultural boycott emerges in the context of a broader call for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel until it fully abides by its obligations under international law.

The call for boycott has been endorsed by a majority of Palestinian unions, political parties, non-governmental organization networks and civic organizations. We believe that it is one of the more hopeful signs in ongoing Palestinian resistance to occupation and systemic inequality within Israel and a powerful means to build international solidarity with the Palestinian people.

We refuse to be silent or passive in the face of gross violations of principles of universal human rights that both Israel and the US publicly purport to uphold. As was the case with the US removal of tribal nations, the US South under anti-black “Jim Crow” laws, or South Africa under apartheid, Palestine today is the measure of the meaning and value of human rights in our time.

By challenging injustice there, we call into question US and Israeli state policies that normalize military colonialism, mass incarceration and permanent war - a security regime for the global one percent that today jeopardizes basic aspirations for opportunity and freedom. Prospects for self-determination and human rights wither under heavily policed states, particularly those subject to occupation, colonialism, segregation, or discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality or religion.

We urge our academic colleagues to join us in endorsing the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel and upholding the principles of boycott, divestment and sanctions in solidarity with our Palestinian counterparts. We believe that the perpetuation of the international travesty of colonial occupation in a post-colonial world must be brought to an end for it ultimately threatens the rights, dignity and security of everyone who believes in self-determination, equal justice and human rights.

J. Kēhaulani Kauanui is an associate professor of anthropology and American studies in Wesleyan University; Robin D.G. Kelley is a professor of American history at the University of California Los Angeles; Bill V. Mullen is a professor of English and American studies in Purdue University; Nikhil Pal Singh is an associate professor of social and cultural analysis and history in New York University; Neferti Tadiar is a professor and chair of women’s, gender and sexuality studies in Barnard College.

http://electronicintifada.net/content/educators-cant-stay-silent-about-israeli-apartheid/10928

Posted on 14-02-2012

























Educators can’t stay silent about Israeli apartheid

The Real Identity of Israel



The Real Identity of Israel

I am Israel. I came to a land without a people for a people without a land. Those people who happened to be here, had no right to be here, and my people showed them they had to leave or die, razing 480 Palestinian villages to the ground, erasing their history.
I am Israel. Some of my people committed massacres and later became Prime Ministers to represent me. In 1948, Menachem Begin was in charge of the unit that slaughtered the inhabitants of Deir Yassin, including 100 men, women, and children. In 1953, Ariel Sharon led the slaughter of the inhabitants of Qibya, and in 1982 arranged for our allies to butcher around 2,000 in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila.
I am Israel. Carved in 1948 out of 78% of the land of Palestine, dispossessing its inhabitants and replacing them with Jews from Europe and other parts of the world. While the natives whose families lived on this land for thousands of years are not allowed to return, Jews from all over the world are welcome to instant citizenship.
I am Israel. In 1967, I swallowed the remaining lands of Palestine - the West Bank and Gaza - and placed their inhabitants under an oppressive military rule, controlling and humiliating every aspect of their daily lives. Eventually, they should get the message that they are not welcome to stay, and join the millions of Palestinian refugees in the shanty camps of Lebanon and Jordan.
I am Israel. I have the power to control American policy. My American Israel Public Affairs Committee can make or break any politician of its choosing, and as you see, they all compete to please me. All the forces of the world are powerless against me, including the UN as I have the American veto to block any condemnation of my war crimes. As Sharon so eloquently phrased it, “We control America”.
I am Israel. I influence American mainstream media too, and you will always find the news tailored to my favor. I have invested millions of dollars into PR representation, and CNN, New York Times, and others have been doing an excellent job of promoting my propaganda. Look at other international news sources and you will see the difference.
I am Israel. You Palestinians want to negotiate “peace!?” But you are not as smart as me; I will negotiate, but will only let you have your municipalities while I control your borders, your water, your airspace and anything else of importance. While we “negotiate,” I will swallow your hilltops and fill them with settlements, populated by the most extremist of my extremists, armed to the teeth. These settlements will be connected with roads you cannot use, and you will be imprisoned in your little Bantustans between them, surrounded by checkpoints in every direction.
I am Israel. I have the fourth strongest army in the world, possessing nuclear weapons. How dare your children confront my oppression with stones, don’t you know my soldiers won’t hesitate to blow their heads off? In 17 months, I have killed 900 of you and injured 17,000, mostly civilians, and have the mandate to continue since the international community remains silent. Ignore, as I do, the hundreds of Israeli reserve officers who are now refusing to carry out my control over your lands and people; their voices of conscience will not protect you.
I am Israel. You want freedom? I have bullets, tanks, missiles, Apaches and F-16s to obliterate you. I have placed your towns under siege, confiscated your lands, uprooted your trees, demolished your homes, and you still demand freedom? Don’t you get the message? You will never have peace 

or freedom, because I am Israel.

UN Special Rapporteur calls for the release of Palestinian hunger strike detainee

Professor Richard Falk, has called on the Israeli authorities to release the Palestinian detainee

Professor Richard Falk, has called on the Israeli authorities to release the Palestinian detainee.

The UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Professor Richard Falk, has called on the Israeli authorities to release the Palestinian detainee, Khader Adnan, who has been on hunger strike for two months now.

On Wednesday, the UN News Centre reported that Falk had expressed grave concerns about Adnan's health. Falk described the situation as urgent and pressed the international community to intervene stating that, "In view of the emergency of his situation, the Government of Israel must take immediate and effective action to safeguard Mr Adnan's life, while upholding his rights."

"The improper treatment of thousands of Palestinian prisoners by the Government of Israel should be of utmost concern to the international community, and it is a problem that I am paying close attention to in the context of my on-going visit to the region," he added.

Adnan, a 34-year-old Palestinian from the village of Arraba near Jenin in the north of the West Bank, began his hunger strike in December approximately one week after he was taken into administrative detention. His actions are a poignant protest against the arbitrary use of administrative detention policy and improper treatment of Palestinians in Israeli custody.

























UN Special Rapporteur calls for the release of Palestinian hunger strike detainee

Activities in solidarity with hunger strike prisoner, Khader Adnan, continue

Please, share this post. Adnan Khader has been on a hunger strike for 60 days.




Activities in solidarity with hunger strike prisoner, Khader Adnan, continue

The Deputies and participants in the protest placed the full responsibility for the life of Adnan Khader on the Israelis and for any harm that may come to him or his health.

On Wednesday 15.02.2012, activities in solidarity with the hunger strike prisoner, Khader Adnan, continued across West Bank cities where the Organisation of Conscience and Palestinian Youth Movement, alongside representatives of the Legislative Council and official and popular personalities, held solidarity protests outside the Zionist Ofer Military Detention Centre in Beitouna to the West of Ramallah and in front of the Red Cross Headquarters in the town of Bireh in the centre of the West Bank.

The participants called on International and Human Rights Organisations, and the Red Cross to urgently and immediately intervene in order to ascertain Khader Adnan's situation, which has entered an extremely dangerous stage, and to provide treatment and care for him. In a letter written by Khader Adnan at the Israeli Safed Hospital where he is currently admitted, he mentioned that he was proud of the Palestinian people who have stood by him and supported his just demands and paid tribute to all those who have stood by him and his family. Adnan confirmed that he would continue his hunger strike until his release.

In a speech delivered by the Islamic deputies during the protest, they stressed that Khader Adnan had become a model of patience, resistance and steadfastness. They confirmed that administrative detention was an unfair sentence suffered by many prisoners, most notably, Dr Aziz Dweik, the Chairman of the Palestinian Legislative Council alongside approximately 30 other deputies and ministers.

The Deputies and participants in the protest placed the full responsibility for the life of Adnan Khader on the Israelis and for any harm that may come to him or his health in the case that his just demands are not met.

It is worth mentioning that Khader Adnan has begun his 60th consecutive day of hunger strike in protest against his administrative detention and to demand that he'd be released from prison.






















Activities in solidarity with hunger strike prisoner, Khader Adnan, continue

The Assassination of Iranian Scientists: In What Way is Iran a Threat to Israel?




Global Research, February 17, 2012









To avoid restating the obvious, or repeating what others have already established, I take these facts as givens: that the main perpetrator of the assassination of Iranian scientists has been the Israeli spy agency Mossad, assisted by various covert operations agencies of the United States and its allies; that the claim of Iran's possessing or pursuing a nuclear arms program is false; and that, therefore, the assertion that Iran poses an “existential” threat to Israel is, likewise, a fiction designed to justify plans of war and regime change in that country.

I would also like to make it clear at the outset that while the imperial powers of the West and their allies, including the Iranian expats collaborating with them, certainly pursue their own nefarious objectives in hunting for regime change in Iran, the focus of this essay is primarily on Israel, and its motives for trying to overthrow the Iranian government.

IN WHAT WAY IS IRAN A THREAT TO ISRAEL?

A statement or an answer to a question can of course be false simply because of a lack of knowledge of the true answer. The claim that Iran's nuclear program poses an “existential” threat to Israel, however, is false not because those who make the claim lack the knowledge that Iran’s nuclear program does not entail arms production, but because they apparently need to fabricate a pretext for the purposes of destabilization and regime change in that country.

However, while its nuclear program poses no threat to Israel (or any other country), Iran nonetheless poses a threat of a different nature to the expansionist plans of Israel and its allies in the region. That threat stems from Iran’s national sovereignty, its independence from imperial powers, its unwavering exposition of (and challenge to) the radical Zionist project of “greater Israel,” and its defense of the rights of the Palestinian people to their land and their homes.

Iran under the Shah was a close ally of Israel, upholding military and diplomatic ties and supplying it with oil. Since the overthrow of the Shah (1979), however, Iran has switched alliances from the oppressor to the oppressed, the Palestinian people. Not that Iran denies the right of the Jewish people to live in the historical Palestine; but it maintains that such co-existence should be based on international laws and conventions: that is, in a united (one) state and under a democratically-elected government based on one person, one vote, with equal rights to all citizens.

Not only does Iran expose Israel’s formal gestures of peace negotiations with Palestinians as disingenuous delaying tactics, it also exposes the shameful collaboration of most of the Arab leaders with Israel and its imperialist masters in this charade. As this makes Iran’s policy of national sovereignty popular in the Arab-Muslim world, it also earns it the wrath of not only the Israeli and Imperialist powers but also of most of the Arab leaders—hence, the unholy alliance of them all against Iran.

Israel’s fear of Iran is, therefore, a fear of being exposed for what it is, and what it stands for, that is, fear of the truth, not of Iran’s non-existing nuclear weapons.

What frightens Israel and its allies most is the example of the Iranian revolution of 1979, and its subsequent national independence from external powers. Contrary to the distorted image of Iran in the West, the country’s resistance to the Zionist-imperialist pressure is quite popular in the Arab/Muslim world. This is clearly reflected in a number of public opinion polls (taken by well-known pollsters of the United States and other Western countries) that consistently rank President Ahmadinejad of Iran (and Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanon’s Hezbollah) above the corrupt and cringing rulers of Arab countries—despite the fact that Iran is neither Arab nor Sunni, as most Arab countries are.

Not surprisingly, many observers of the recent social upheavals in the Arab/Muslim world, known as the Arab spring, argue that these revolutionary movements may have in subtle and roundabout ways been inspired by the Iranian revolution. Nor is it surprising that, to put an end to these revolutionary upheavals, Israel and its allies have gone all out on a relentless mission to destroy the Iranian example of national sovereignty through policies of destabilization and regime change.

A STATE OF TERRORISM, BY TERRORISM, FOR TERRORISM

It is no secret that the state of Israel was created through the expropriation of the Palestinian land by terrorizing and evicting them from their homes—750,000 in the initial 1948 raid alone. Nor is it a secret that Israel has since its creation held to and expanded territory also through terrorism. It is equally clear that militant Zionist leaders of Israel base their future policies of occupation and control on sheer military force and terrorizing strategies—hence, Israel a state of, by and for terrorism.

In an article titled, “The Israeli Terrorist State and its Mossad Assassins,” the late professor Israel Shahak, a Holocaust survivor, and chairman of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights from 1970 until 1990, famously wrote: "There is nothing new in the fact that Israel is a terrorist state, which, almost from its inception, has used its intelligence service (the Mossad) to assassinate people on foreign soil with any violence or terror it considers necessary for its ends."

Of course, the Palestinian people bear the bulk of the brunt of the Israeli carnage. The policy of violent obliteration of “existential threats,” real or perceived, to the expansionist plans of Israel, however, goes beyond Palestinians and their supporters in the Arab/Muslim world; it also includes targets in other parts of the world, including the United States, Israel's most generous benefactor and staunchest ally.

The following is a small sample of instances of Israel's acts of violence against targets viewed as threats to its existence or interests (there is no chronological or any other type of order in the list provided below).

• One of the most notorious acts of Israeli terrorism occurred in the immediate aftermath of its surprise invasion of Palestine in 1948, when Jewish forces, members of the LEHI underground (also known as the Stern Gang) assassinated Swedish Count Folke Bernadotte, a U.N. appointed mediator. Bernadotte was killed on September 17, 1948, a day after he offered his second mediation plan which, among other things, called for repatriation and compensation for the Palestinian refugees [1].

• There is also “evidence that in 1991 an Israeli undercover team planned to assassinate a U.S. president. The intended victim was George Herbert Walker Bush.” The plot was planned to be carried out when President Bush “went to Madrid for the opening day of the peace conference to be held that year.” Bush’s sin was that he had attempted to pressure Israel into ending its illegal settlement expansion on confiscated Palestinian land by withholding loan guarantees to Israel until it ended this practice. The planned assassination was not carried out, however, presumably because Victor Ostrovsky, a former Mossad agent, who had written a book exposing Israel’s spy agency, had given it away [2].

• Iranian scientists are not the first to fall prey to Israeli-orchestrated targeted killings. Israel has over the years “assassinated a number of scientists of various nationalities.” For example, “In 1990 a Canadian-American scientist and father of seven, Gerald Bull, was assassinated in Belgium. All indications are that it was an Israeli Mossad hit team that drilled five bullets into the back of his head and neck” [2].

• In a similarly cold-blooded fashion, a number of US peace activists have in recent years been “intentionally killed, maimed, and injured by Israeli forces, including 23-year-old Rachel Corrie, 21-year-old Brian Avery, 37-year-old Tristan Anderson, 21-year-old Emily Henochowicz, and 21-year-old FurkanDogan” [2].

• In 1967, Israeli air and sea forces perpetrated an almost two-hour assault in which they tried to sink a U.S. technical Navy ship (USS Liberty) with a crew of 300. While the attack failed to sink the ship, it succeeded in killing 34 Americans and injuring 174. Analysts have conjured that this was a false-flag operation, intended to blame Egypt for the attack, had the ship gone down and the evidence of Israeli culpability was not discovered [2].

• In 1954, Israeli secret agents planted explosives in the U.S. diplomatic and “cultural” centers in Cairo and Alexandria in an effort to create animosity between Egypt and the United States by blaming the plot, known as the Lavon Affair, on Egyptians. A premature detonation of one of the devices undid the plot before it could cause horrendous death and destruction. Israel later honored the perpetrator, Marcello Ninio [3].

• The first known act of deliberately shooting down a civilian airline was carried out by Israel in February 1973. “Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114 was a regularly scheduled flight from Tripoli to Cairo via Benghazi. . . . The aircraft was piloted by a mostly French crew . . . under a contractual arrangement between Air France and Libyan Arab Airlines.” On the orders of the then Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, the plane was shot down by Israeli fighter jets, killing 107 of its 113 passengers, including the entire French crew [4].

• Zionist terror did not even spare Jews. In 1940, MenachemBegin's Irgun ZweiLeumi terrorist gang bombed the ship Patria in Haifa harbor, killing 240 Jewish refugees, so as to put the blame on the British for political gain. And in 1950-1951, Israeli agents were dispatched to Iraq where they tossed hand grenades into the crowded Massauda Shem-Tov synagogue, causing numerous deaths, in order to blame it on the Iraqis and encourage reluctant Iraqi Jews to immigrate to Israel [3].

THE ORIGINAL SIN

Horrendous as these crimes are, they do not mean that radical Zionist planners and/or perpetrators of such offenses are born with terrorist genes. They are rather indicative of the fact that their perpetrators are captive to a selfish and self-inflicted ideology of apartheid that aims to build an exclusive or predominantly Jewish state in the historical Palestine that would stretch from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean coasts, the so-called “greater Israel.” It should not be difficult to see how a plan of creating and maintaining an unlawful state in the homes and lands of other people might create a siege mentality of paranoia proportions in the minds of the occupiers, reacting violently to any questioning of the legitimacy of such a state. Writer/researcher Ronald Bleier has aptly called the ideological foundation of the state of Israel, Zionism, the “Original sin”:

“Israel's Original sin is Zionism, the ideology that a Jewish State should replace the former Palestine. At the root of the problem is Zionism's exclusivist structure whereby only Jews are treated as first-class citizens. In order to create and consolidate a Jewish State in 1948, Zionists expelled 750,000 Palestinians from their homeland and never allowed them or their descendants to return. In addition, Israeli forces destroyed over 400 Palestinian villages and perpetrated about three dozen massacres. In 1967, the Israelis forced another 350,000 Palestinians to flee the West Bank and Gaza as well as 147,000 Syrians from the Golan Heights” [1].

Terrorism is a logical outcome of this “Original sin,” or radical Zionism, since a major component of the scheme of establishing and maintaining the state of Israel is removal (including physical elimination) of any and all threats, real or perceived, to this plan. Elimination of any and all threats—this is key to a better understanding of Israel’s policy of terrorism, whether it is wholesale terrorism carried out by unilateral wars and aerial bombardments, or retail terrorism and targeted assassinations. It also helps explain the brutal assassination of Iranian scientists, as part a well-established pattern of targeted killings.

CONCLUSION

The well-documented pattern of Israel’s policy of targeted killings shows that the assassination of Iranian scientists is neither the first nor the last of Israel’s acts of terrorism. It also shows that the claim that Iran’s nuclear program presents an “existential” threat to Israel is no more than a harebrained excuse to deflect attention from the real threat to Israel: hardline Zionism, or the ideology of colonization and occupation by military force.

As long as this poisonous ideology (which is dangerous not only to the Palestinian people but also, ultimately, to the Jewish people) persists, so would resistance and opposition to it. Today that alleged threat is said to come from Iran and Hezbollah, yesterday it came from Nasser’s Egypt and the PLO, tomorrow it would be from other sources of anti-occupation in the region … and the day after it would be from anti-apartheid forces worldwide, including many among Jewish people, just as it happened in South Africa.

Many well-intentioned critics, including a large number of far-sighted Jews, have long warned against the inherent limits and dangers of occupation and rule by military force. Such concerns are perhaps best expressed by these sage yet simple words of Albert Einstein: “Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding.” Radical Zionist leaders have responded, in a patronizing fashion, that while Einstein was a good scientist, he was politically naive. The logic of things, the history of Israeli relationship with its neighbors, as well as its uncertain future show, however, that Einstein’s warning is indeed prophetic.

Ismael Hossein-zadeh is Professor Emeritus of Economics, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. He is the author of The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave – Macmillan 2007) and the Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser’s Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989). He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, forthcoming from AK Press.

References

[1] Ronald Bleier, “In the Beginning There Was Terror,” The Link, Vol. 36, No. 3 (July-August 2003): http://desip.igc.org/InTheBeginning.html

[2] Alison Weir, “Israeli Assassinations and American Presidents,” http://original.antiwar.com/alison-weir/2012/01/24/israeli-assassinations-and-american-presidents/

[3] Ismail Zayid, “A ShortHistory of Israeli State Terrorism,” http://www.canpalnet-ottawa.org/Israel%20state%20terrorism.html

[4] Wikipedia, “Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_Arab_Airlines_Flight_114


Ismael Hossein-Zadeh is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Ismael Hossein-Zadeh

























The Assassination of Iranian Scientists: In What Way is Iran a Threat to Israel?

SOCIAL MEDIA "TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION": Spying and Propaganda using Facebook, Twitter



Global Research, February 15, 2012









A new study by the Mediterranean Council for Intelligence Studies’ (MCIS) 2012 Intelligence Studies Yearbook points to the use of social media as “the new cutting edge in open-source tactical intelligence collection”. IntelNews.org's Joseph Fitsanakis, who co-authored the study, reports:

We explain that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and a host of other social networking platforms are increasingly viewed by intelligence agencies as invaluable channels of information acquisition. We base our findings on three recent case studies, which we believe highlight the intelligence function of social networking. (Joseph Fitsanakis, Research: Spies increasingly using Facebook, Twitter to gather data, intelNews.org, February 13, 2012)

What the study fails to mention, however, is the use of social media by intelligence agencies for other purposes. The study leads us to believe that social media is solely an intelligence gathering tool, when in fact, a number of reports have shown that it is used for propaganda including the creation of fake identities in support of covert operations. Those practices are discussed in Army of Fake Social Media Friends to Promote Propaganda, Social Media: Air Force ordered software to manage army of Fake Virtual People and Pentagon Seeks to Manipulate Social Media for Propaganda Purposes, published on Global Research in 2011.

The MCIS study is partly based on the “Arab Spring” framework which allegedly “prompted the US government to begin developing guidelines for culling intelligence from social media networks”. (Ibid.)

Again, this leaves out the fact that the U.S. Government provides “activist training” to foreign nationals to destabilize their country of origin. This tactic is detailed in Tony Cartalucci’s latest article, Egypt: US-funded Agitators on Trial: US "Democracy Promotion" = Foreign-funded Sedition.

“Cyber dissidence” is sponsored among others by CIA-linked Freedom House. The First of The Bush Institute’s Human Freedom Events, Co-Sponsored by Freedom House was titled “The Conference on Cyber Dissidents: Global Successes and Challenges”.

The Conference on Cyber Dissidents highlighted the work, methods, courage and achievements of its eight dissident guest speakers, from seven nations. Five of these nations are places where freedom has been extinguished (all rated “not free” by Freedom House): China, Cuba, Iran, Syria, and Russia. Two others are places where freedom is in peril (both rated “partly free” by Freedom House) because of an authoritarian government accumulating more power, as in Venezuela, or because of the threat of internal terrorist groups, as in Colombia. (The Conference on Cyber Dissidents: Global Successes and Challenges, The George W. Bush Presidential Center)

Countries where “freedom has been extinguished” and which are U.S. allies, such as Bahrain or Saudi Arabia, are not listed above. The only U.S. ally listed is Colombia and its freedom is said to be threatened by terrorist groups, rather than by its governement. It is worth noting that the Colombian government has been accused of spying on its journalists and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) says freedom of expression 'barely exists' in Colombia.

The goal of “activist training” by U.S. NGOs is to destabilize America’s political enemies in the name of freedom. “Cyber dissidence” is in turn used by intelligence agencies for covert operations.


Global Research Articles by Julie Lévesque

























SOCIAL MEDIA "TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION": Spying and Propaganda using Facebook, Twitter

Monday 13 February 2012

Harper's reckless foreign policy in the Middle East | rabble.ca

| February 13, 2012

It is hard to credit the latest statements and actions by Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird. On both Iran and Israel, Baird seems to almost deliberately seek to humiliate both himself and the country he is supposed to represent on the international stage. Taking an ultra-orthodox rabbi (whose organization opposes any Palestinian state) with him on an official visit to Israel is not just bizarre but dangerous. And suggesting, essentially, that Iran has a first-strike policy against Israel (with non-existent nuclear weapons) while comparing its leader to Hitler, puts Baird firmly in the company of drunks in a barroom exchange of tough talk.

For Stephen Harper to let this crude and ignorant political storm trooper loose as our principal face to the world may only be understandable if we assume that everything Harper does is for a domestic audience. He simply doesn't care what the world thinks. There has always been a kind of visceral disdain for things foreign amongst the population which makes up Harper's core vote. Perhaps wilful ignorance and a penchant for barroom tough talk is exactly what qualifies Baird for his job.

It is hardly new that Harper's ministers and Harper himself operate with little reference to the professional civil service that most governments rely on for policy advice. He doesn't trust bureaucrats or their traditional role of guiding government policy. For Harper, the civil service is at best an impediment to his agenda, at worst a political enemy -- the equivalent of another political party. He has now effectively gagged every public employee who might otherwise brief the media -- and citizens -- on even the mundane day-to-day operations of government.

By now, the Harper government's Middle-East policy is well known -- continuous posturing about Arab dictatorships and terrorists and a sycophantic pandering to the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu. Harper treats all Palestinians, even elected representatives, as if they were terrorists. While Canada's official position on a two-state solution (based on 1967 borders) hasn't changed, Harper refuses to utter the phrase. While he pays lip service to the need for diplomacy regarding Iran, his predominant posture is war-mongering at it worst. If he had a sabre, he would be rattling it.

But even in this extremist context, Baird's recent behaviour is outrageous and a national embarrassment. It is what happens when you give an anti-intellectual thug free reign -- his natural tendencies eventually become full-blown. His recent trip to Israel even embarrassed his hosts who, according to the Globe's Patrick Martin, were extremely uncomfortable with Baird's companion, Rabbi Chaim Mendelsohn, the head of the Chabad organization in Canada -- an ultra-orthodox Hasidic movement noted for its aggressive proselytizing. The movement believes its former leader, Menachem Schneerson, was the Messiah.

What nuanced public policy goal was intended by bringing this controversial rabbi on an official trip is impossible to decipher. Indeed, it seems a complete contradiction of any public policy objective, certainly any that might have been put together by the professionals at Foreign Affairs. Baird was so over the top in his praise of Israel -- constantly repeating that Canada was Israel's best friend -- that Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz mused: "I think Canada's an even better friend of Israel than we are."

Orthodox Jews and their parties have always played an important role in Israeli governments, being part of any governing coalition. But in recent years they have become more aggressive in Israel society, especially in their efforts to restrict the rights of Israeli Arabs. Secular and Liberal Jews have become so uncomfortable with this trend that many have left the country.


Just what message Baird thought he was delivering to his hosts and to Israelis in general is anyone's guess. But it is in the area of the peace process, such as it is, that Baird's choice of companion is most troublesome. Chabad is a firm believer in Greater Israel -- which includes all of the Palestinian land seized in the 1967 war. According to Chabad, Greater Israel "...is the land promised to us by G-d -- not the UN. And we may not give away an iota to our enemies, for it is ours by Divine Will." This stance effectively eliminates any possibility of land for peace and certainly any negotiations based on 1967 borders -- the position of virtually every key player in the "peace" process, including the United States.

It is also the basis for Canada's official policy. Indeed, last June it was Baird who made this clear, telling the media after the G8 meetings: "We support, obviously, that the solution has to be based on the '67 border, with mutually agreed upon swaps, as President Obama said." If it's so obvious, then why would Baird bring with him as part of his official delegation the head of Chabad in Canada, an organization whose beliefs make such a solution impossible?

It begs the question: who is actually determining Canada's policy towards Israel and who, or what organization, persuaded Baird that taking Rabbi Chaim Mendelsohn along on an official visit was a good idea?

Baird's statements on Iran are almost as bizarre and troublesome. It is as if Baird simply shoots from the lip without any consultation with his own officials -- but with the apparent blessing of his boss in the PMO. Responding to hyperbolic rhetoric from Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei about excising the Israeli "cancer" from the region, Baird casually compared the religious leader to Adolph Hitler: "Hitler wrote Mein Kampf more than a decade before he became Chancellor of Germany..." But he was just warming up: "...it's not just an Israeli question. The fear in the Arab world, in the entire region, the Gulf, and the entire Middle East is palpable on this issue. And it's increasingly a significant security threat for the West: for Canada, the United States and our allies in Europe."

This is little more than adolescent running off at the mouth -- again, no strategic thought involved, just a reckless analogy and sweeping, unsubstantiated statements about the most politically complex region in the world. In the same CTV Question Period interview, Baird stated that "of course" diplomatic efforts must be maximized and given every chance of succeeding. I wonder how Baird would explain his comparison with Hitler to Iran's leadership were he to play a role in such diplomacy.

At the same time as he was pointlessly demonizing Iran's leadership, Baird was repeating one of his most preposterous claims -- that Iran would actually use nuclear weapons if they had them. On the latter point, Baird and Harper ignore the fact that U.S. intelligence agencies and the Pentagon -- despite renewed rhetoric about Iran's nuclear program -- are still not even convinced that Iran is trying to build a bomb. Iran's promise of a major nuclear announcement will almost certainly relate to nuclear power, not weapons. Baird has stated: "We believe Iran constitutes the greatest threat to peace and security in the world." This is a country that has never invaded any of its neighbours and compared to the Israeli penchant for intervening wherever it pleases, is isolationist. Yet for Baird it is more dangerous than Pakistan and North Korea, which actually have nuclear weapons and are extremely unstable.

Baird's conviction that Iran would use nuclear weapons matches Stephen Harper's rhetoric: "In my judgment, these are people who have a particular, you know, a fanatically religious worldview, and their statements imply to me no hesitation about using nuclear weapons if they see them achieving their religious or political purposes." Such a thoughtless analysis is irresponsible -- the suggestion that Iran would use a nuclear weapon against Israel (which has 200 of them) for "religious or political purposes" is an opinion unsupported by any other Western leader.

Were this rhetoric emanating from a youth parliament or an all-night bar we could treat it with bemusement. But these casual and ill-informed "diplomatic" interventions are focused on one of the most volatile regions in the world where every word from Western leaders is pored over, parsed and parsed again in a search for new trends or positions. If Iranians pay any attention to them (let's hope they don't) the effect will be to generate even more public support to the Ayatollahs and political hard-liners -- the most likely sources of support for the development of nuclear weapons. All of the Harper government's statements imply support for military intervention in Iran. And that, according to literally every Middle-East expert, would be catastrophic.

A conservative foreign policy is one thing, a reckless one something else again. At the moment, Canada's approach in the Middle East is simply dangerous. We would contribute more by saying nothing.

Murray Dobbin is a guest senior contributing editor for rabble.ca, and has been a journalist, broadcaster, author and social activist for 40 years. He writes rabble's bi-weekly State of the Nation column, which is also found at The Tyee. He is the curator of rabble's Reinventing democracy, reclaiming the commons series.

Dear rabble.ca reader... Can you support rabble.ca by matching your mainstream media costs? Will you donate a month's charges for newspaper subscription, cable, satellite, mobile or Internet costs to our independent media site?

























Harper's reckless foreign policy in the Middle East | rabble.ca

ORWELLIAN DRONES: "Eye in the Sky" Spying on Americans



Global Research, February 13, 2012





0digg

18Share

Money power runs America. So do lobbies representing all corporate and other interests.

The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) represents dozens of influential companies.

They include Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Bell Hellicopter Textron, Sikorsky Aircraft, Goodrich, General Dynamics, Honeywell, Booz Allen Hamilton, Hill & Knowlton, and many more promoting unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) drone technology.

Against targeted countries, it's America's newest sport. From distant command centers, operators kill by remote control. They use computer keyboards and multiple monitors. UAVs stand ready round-the-clock for missions.

Predator drones perform sanitized killing on the cheap compared to manned aircraft. Independent experts believe militants are hit about 2% of the time. All others are noncombatants, despite official disclaimers.

In 1995, Predator drones were used for the first time in Bosnia. In 2001, the Global Hawk drone was used in Afghanistan. Throughout the Afghan and Iraq wars, the Pentagon used various type drones for combat and spying missions.

In Libya, Obama authorized Predator drones. They operated throughout the war. They're also used in Yemen, Somalia, and wherever Washington designates targets to kill.

US citizen Anwar al-Aulaqi was assassinated this way. So can anyone anywhere on America's hit list, including perhaps domestically before long.

Washington plans escalated drone killing, as well domestic spying on Americans. Currently, around one in three US warplanes are drones. One day perhaps they'll all be unmanned.

Domestic Drone Spying in America

On January 10, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) staff attorney Jennifer Lynch headlined, "Are Drones Watching You?" saying:

EFF sued the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for information on domestic drone use. Who's flying UAVs it asked?

Drones carry surveillance equipment, including video cameras, infrared ones, heat sensors, and radar for sophisticated virtually constant spying. Newer versions carry super high resolution "gigapixel" cameras. They enable tracking above 20,000 feet. They can monitor up to 65 enemies simultaneously, and can see targets up to 25 miles away.

Predator drones can eavesdrop on electronic transmissions. A new model's able to penetrate Wi-Fi networks and intercept text messages and cell phone calls covertly.

Even domestically, drones may be weaponized with tasers, bean bag guns, and other devices able to harm or perhaps kill.

Currently, the US Customs and Border Protection uses UAVs for surveilling borders. State and local law enforcement agencies also use them to investigate "cattle rustling, drug dealing, and the search for missing persons."

Flying above 400 feet requires FAA certification. Information's unavailable on who obtained authorizations for what purposes.

FAA comes under the Department of Transportation (DOT). It failed to respond to EFF's April 2011 FOIA request. EFF attorney Lynch said:

"Drones give the government and other (UAV) operators a powerful new surveillance tool to gather extensive and intrusive data on Americans' movements and activities."

"As the government begins to make policy decisions about the use of these aircraft, the public needs to know more about how and why these drones are being used to surveil United States citizens."

Drones "could dramatically increase the physical tracking of citizens - tracking that can reveal deeply personal details about our private lives. We're asking the DOT to follow the law and respond to our FOIA request so we can learn more about" what the public has a right to know.

The Supreme Court hasn't been people friendly on many issues, including privacy. In United States v. Place (1983), the court held that sniffs by police dogs trained to detect illegal drugs aren't searches under the Fourth Amendment.

They're sui generis, intended only to reveal the presence or absence of narcotics. In other words, Fourth Amendment protections don't apply to non-human searchers. As a result, privacy rights are on the chopping block for elimination. Already, in fact, they're gravely compromised under institutionalized Bush administration surveillance policy.

In 2007, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) authorized spying through the National Applications Office (NOA). It was described as "the executive agent to facilitate the use of intelligence community technological assets for civil, homeland security and law enforcement purposes within the United States."

With or without congressional authorization or oversight, the executive branch may authorize state-of-the-art technology, including military satellite imagery, to spy on Americans covertly.

Though initial plans were delayed, eye in the sky spying ahead potentially will monitor everyone everywhere once full implementation's achieved. Included will be thousands of Big Brother drones watching.

On February 3, the FAA Reauthorization Act (HR 658) cleared both houses of Congress after differences between Senate and House versions were resolved. Expect Obama to sign it shortly.

It authorizes domestic drone spying under provisions to test and license commercial drones by 2015. Estimates of up to 30,000 UAVs could overfly America by 2020. Privacy advocates are concerned. Steven Aftergood, head of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy, said:

"There are serious policy questions on the horizon about privacy and surveillance, by both government agencies and commercial entities.”

According to Electronic Privacy Information Center's Amie Stepanovich, "Currently, the only barrier to the routine use of drones for persistent surveillance are the procedural requirements imposed by the FAA for the issuance of certificates."

Changing the rules changes the game. Expect it. It's coming once Obama signs HR 658. UAV proliferation already is expanding rapidly. A July 2010 FAA Fact Sheet said in America alone, "approximately 50 companies, universities, and government organizations are developing and producing some 155 unmanned aircraft designs."

America's expected to account for about 70% of global growth. In 2011, Congress, DOD, state and local governments, as well as AUVSI pressured the FAA to review and expand its current "Certificate of Authorization or Waiver (COA)" program related to unmanned aircraft (UA).

The agency's also examining its own rules for small UAs. It's expected to authorize expanded COA use shortly.

ACLU Concerns

On February 6, the ACLU headlined, "Congress Trying to Fast-Track Domestic Drone Use, Sideline Privacy," saying:

In fact, Congress already authorized expanded domestic drones. Obama's poised to sign HR 658 into law. Provisions in it include requiring FAA:

(1) to simplify and accelerate permission for drone operations. The agency's already working on loosening regulations by spring 2012.

(2) to establish a pilot project within six months for six test zones to integrate drones "into the national airspace system."

(3) create a comprehensive plan within nine months "to safely accelerate the integration of civil (privately operated) unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system."

(4) after submitting a comprehensive plan, publish final rules within 18 months to allow civil operation of small (under 55 pounds) drones in America's airspace.

On December 15, the ACLU published a report titled, "Protecting Privacy From Aerial Surveillance: Recommendations for Government Use of Drone Aircraft," saying:

They're coming to America. Privacy may be seriously compromised. Protections are urgently needed. The report recommends that "drones should not be deployed unless there are grounds to believe that they will collect evidence on a specific crime."

"If a drone will intrude on reasonable privacy expectations, a warrant should be required." The report also urges "restrictions on retaining images of identifiable people, as well as an open process for developing policies on how drones will be used."

Overflying America with drones unrestrained changes the game. A "surveillance society" will be institutionalized to monitor, track, and record "our every move."

Given a bipartisan penchant for spying, expect the worst. Privacy, like other civil and human rights, is fast disappearing under policies in place or coming to destroy it.


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. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/


Global Research Articles by Stephen Lendman
























ORWELLIAN DRONES: "Eye in the Sky" Spying on Americans

Egypt: US-funded Agitators on Trial: US "Democracy Promotion" = Foreign-funded Sedition.


Global Research, February 13, 2012








AP reported that US General Martin Dempsey has met directly with the military leaders of Egypt to discuss an Egyptian "crackdown on Western-funded pro-democracy groups." Threatened with a cut-off from US aid, the Egyptian military is expected to abandon their campaign against US "NGOs."

As usual, AP attempts to diminish the veracity of Egypt's concerns with deceptive language and innuendos such as, "Egypt, which regularly blames anti-military protests on foreign meddling," and "in an indication that authorities will continue to push the line that foreigners are stirring up trouble." Of course it is not a "line" that the Egyptian government is pushing, it is a well documented fact.


Images: From Tunis and Tahrir Square to the Oval Office shaking hands with the US President and receiving the NED 2011 "Democracy Award," the forces behind the "Arab Spring" not only weren't spontaneous nor indigenous, but they most certainly were orchestrated, funded, directed, and finally celebrated and well-rewarded by the US State Department through their National Endowment for Democracy. Egypt's crackdown on these disingenuous NGOs is long overdue and an example for all nations to follow.
....

AP goes on to explain the plight of the International Republican Institute (IRI) Egypt office-head, Sam LaHood, son of US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who is now on trail amongst 16 American "civil society employees." They are charged with using US State Department funds to fuel unrest throughout Egypt.

Despite the feigned skepticism of AP, there is conclusive evidence that from 2008, the US State Department had begun a concerted effort to recruit, train, equip, fund, and in some cases arm, dissidents not only from Egypt, but from Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Iran, Russia, Belarus, Myanmar, Malaysia, Thailand, and even North Korea. This was accomplished not only through the US State Department, but through a myriad of subsidiaries starting with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and including LaHood's IRI.

Far from Egyptian Paranoia - Documented US Meddling in Egypt

In January of 2011, we were told that "spontaneous," "indigenous" uprising had begun sweeping North Africa and the Middle East, including Hosni Mubarak's Egypt, in what was hailed as the "Arab Spring." It would be almost four months before the corporate-media would admit that the US had been behind the uprisings and that they were anything but "spontaneous," or "indigenous." In an April 2011 article published by the New York Times titled, "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings," it was stated (emphasis added):

"A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington."

The article would also add, regarding the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED):

"The Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department. "

It is hardly a speculative theory then, that the uprisings were part of an immense geopolitical campaign conceived in the West and carried out through its proxies with the assistance of disingenuous organizations including NED, NDI, LaHood's IRI, and Freedom House and the stable of NGOs they maintain throughout the world. Preparations for the "Arab Spring" began not as unrest had already begun, but years before the first "fist" was raised, and within seminar rooms in D.C. and New York, US-funded training facilities in Serbia, and camps held in neighboring countries, not within the Arab World itself.

In 2008, Egyptian activists from the now infamous April 6 movement were in New York City for the inaugural Alliance of Youth Movements (AYM) summit, also known as Movements.org. There, they received training, networking opportunities, and support from AYM's various corporate and US governmental sponsors, including the US State Department itself. The AYM 2008 summit report (page 3 of .pdf) states that the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, James Glassman attended, as did Jared C0hen who sits on the policy planning staff of the Office of the Secretary of State. Six other State Department staff members and advisers would also attend the summit along with an immense list of corporate, media, and institutional representatives.

Shortly afterward, April 6 would travel to Serbia to train under US-funded CANVAS, formally the US-funded NGO "Otpor" who helped overthrow the government of Serbia in 2000. Otpor, the New York Times would report, was a "well-oiled movement backed by several million dollars from the United States." After its success it would change its name to CANVAS and begin training activists to be used in other US-backed regime change operations.

The April 6 Movement, after training with CANVAS, would return to Egypt in 2010, a full year before the "Arab Spring," along with UN IAEA Chief Mohammed ElBaradei. April 6 members would even be arrested while waiting for ElBaradei's arrival at Cairo's airport in mid-February. Already, ElBaradei, as early as 2010, announced his intentions of running for president in the 2011 elections. Together with April 6, Wael Ghonim of Google, and a coalition of other opposition parties, ElBaradei assembled his "National Front for Change" and began preparing for the coming "Arab Spring."

Quite clearly, it is not a "line" that the Egyptian government is "pushing" in regards to so-called "civil society employees," rather it is a verified, documented fact that these "employees" are conducting espionage and political destabilization under the increasingly tenuous guise of "democracy promotion."

An April 2011 AFP report would confirm that the US government had trained armies of "activists" to return to their respective countries and enact political "change," when US State Department's Michael Posner stated that the "US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments." The report went on to explain that the US "organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there." Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect."

That ripple effect of course, was the "Arab Spring" and the subsequent destabilization, violence, and even US armed and backed warfare that followed. While nations like Libya and Tunisia are now run by a BP, Shell, and Total-funded Petroleum Institute chairman and a US NED-funded "activist" respectively, Egypt has managed to ward off and expose the US proxy of choice, Mohammed ElBaradei, who's own movement was forced to denounce him as a Western agent.

By striking at the meddling, seditious NGOs, Egypt seeks to undermine the source of destabilization, the conduit through which US money and support is funneled through to "activists," and expose the true foreign-funded nature of the political division that has gripped the nation for now over a year.

The AP article reports that Egypt's generals have stated, "we face conspiracies hatched against the homeland, whose goal is to undermine the institutions of the Egyptian state and whose aim is to topple the state itself so that chaos reigns and destruction spreads." Clearly, this an accurate observation, not a political ploy, with similar US-hatched conspiracies documented and exposed from Tunisia all the way to Thailand.

Stepping Back from the Brink

Egyptians must step back and examine the obvious fraud behind their "Arab Spring" revolution, as well as ensure that this nationalist streak by the Egyptian military is genuine. All sides presuming ownership over Egypt's destiny must exhibit through policy, programs, and action that they will be serving the Egyptian people, not opening doors to US free trade, bending to the will of Wall Street and London's military ambitions throughout the region, or lending credibility to the West's contrived international institutions.

Egypt's military has made a promising first step by exposing and prosecuting foreign-funded sedition in their country, helping strip the deceitful veneer off of Western NGOs that have long operated with impunity under the cloak of humanitarian concern. Another step could be by showing support for Syria's besieged government, facing similar foreign-funded destabilization and now foreign-funded terrorists vying to overthrow yet another Arab nation and installing a Western proxy regime.

For those in the streets of Egypt who genuinely seek better lives, they would be best served by exposing the foreign-funded frauds amongst them seeking to exploit the well-intentioned, and then developing a program of pragmatism rather than one of politics. Those merely calling for first Mubarak, and now the military to step down and make way for clearly US-backed proxies like ElBaradei and the MI6-creation, the Muslim Brotherhood, are only paving the way for another oppressive regime to lord over them well into the foreseeable future. However, unlike with Mubarak, there will be no foreign aid flowing in to overthrow this new foreign-funded proxy regime, only aid to ensure its endless perpetuation.


Tony Cartalucci is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Tony Cartalucci

























Egypt: US-funded Agitators on Trial: US "Democracy Promotion" = Foreign-funded Sedition.