Archive | February 9th, 2011





Suleiman: Egypt ‘Not Ready for Democracy’



‘IsraHell, US destabilizing ME region’



Cantor: US Goal in Egypt to Stop ‘Radical Islam’



Algeria insists on enhanced Iran ties



Pollard Espionage Ring Still Unfolding



IsraHell openly opposes democracy in ME



Rep. King Won’t Let ‘PC’ Derail Probe of Muslims



IsraHell planes violate Lebanon airspace



Obama Pushes for End to Egypt’s Emergency Law, Extension of US PATRIOT Act



IsraHell Nazi airstrikes on Gaza injure 10



IsraHell Says Enlisting Hackers to Attack Websites



‘US pushes for Zionist Mu-Barak copycat in Egypt’



IsraHell Long Favored Zionist Suleiman Succession, Leaked Cables Show



Prices soar in Gaza as Rafah, tunnels close



U.K. urges Nazi IsraHell to tone down ‘belligerent’ rhetoric amid Mideast uprisings



Arab Media: U.S. Is Hijacking Egyptian Uprising



Police issue arrest warrant for Nazi Rabbi that supported book which justifies killing non-Jews



Tel Aviv police arrest three on suspicion of forcing tourist into prostitution



Zio-Nazi army spokesman visited U.K. incognito for fear of targeting by pro-Palestinian protesters

Posted in WorldComments Off on News**News**News

Power to The People of Historic Egypt



Ancient Egyptians established a lingering centralized government with the king dominating and ruling like God over a highly organized society.

By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat 

The Great Pyramids

Whenever Egypt is mentioned the great pyramids are likely to be referred to in the discourse. The pyramids of KhufuKhefre and Menkaure stand witness to the power and splendor of the ancient Egyptian old kingdom (2686-2181BC) but what a lot of people are not aware of is the fact that the fall of this once mighty kingdom had been due to a relentless political turmoil during which ancient Egyptians protested over social and economic grievances in what most Egyptologists now view as one of the first political upheavals in history.

The eclipse of the royal power came shortly after the reign of King Pepy II (Neferkare) who ruled for over 90 years, but his long reign was not the reason behind the collapse of the old kingdom but rather his policy that lacked compassion and care for the dispossessed and those in need.

Egypt goes back in history thousands of years. Ancient Egyptians didn’t only build enduring wonders like the obelisks and temples but they also established a lingering centralized government with the king dominating and ruling like God over a highly organized society.

That political system was perfect and appropriate for those times in the remote past but not today. As a matter of fact when the centralized and strong government of ancient Egypt was fully engaged in the megaprojects of building the pyramids societies around the world were still struggling out of their prehistoric ages.

Relief from Karnak temple showing Egyptian farmers harvesting -Ancient Egypt, New Kingdom(1550-1069 BC)

People in Egypt always adapted to the tyranny of the ruler and in a way thought that it was somehow predestined. The loyalty and reverence to the pharaoh had transformed over thousands of years to be replaced by total submission to the ruler. And what people were allowed to do was to show patience and wait for heaven or destiny to intervene.

Modern Egyptians are not unfamiliar with uprising, they protested gallantly during the era of the British colonialism. They couldn’t carry on under the rule of foreign power which ended in 1936.

It took Egyptians almost 60 years to figure out that the national leaders of the republic who followed the ousting of the Egyptian monarchy and the British mandate had not been any different if not worse.

 The rule of the late two presidents over Egypt had its flashy moments of glory and people’s satisfaction likeNasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal in 1956 and the glorious war against Israel in 1973 during Sadat’s rule unlike the reign of Mubarak which lasted for thirty years now and which brought nothing except more corruption that seemed to propagate and spread into all aspects of the Egyptian socio-political life.

Mubarak’s regime is one of the final models of a lingering post- Cold war authoritarian rule. A rule that lost contact with the people and did nothing to improve their living conditions politically and economically. But are the Egyptians protesting only over political and economic grievances or there is more to it than just that?

The hope generation

During the last 2 decades a new generation has emerged, a generation of the information age, the internet age which gave the young people a never felt before sense of individualism and independence but which at the same time didn’t prevent them from belonging to a globalized world with universal and equal standards of shared human rights and values.

The new generation saw things differently than before, they couldn’t tolerate living in the information age while they were still getting caught and thrown into prison for expressing their opinions about the politics of their country. They couldn’t tolerate not to protest in a country where only the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, where politics is all about being a puppet government for foreign powers and playing friend with the enemy.

They couldn’t see living in a country where criminals are on the loose running the government whiles the police is intimidating and humiliating the ordinary people and especially the younger generation of activists and bloggers who dared criticize the regime. Some of those bloggers have been repeatedly imprisoned and subjected to physical violence and even sexual harassment. 

One can adapt to poor living conditions, unemployment and lack of freedom of speech but who can adapt to humiliation and hurt dignity.

One can go to bed on an empty stomach but I doubt any one falling into sleep with wounded pride.

Egyptian street protests

… that`s why this new generation of the Egyptian youth took to the streets to not only protest to decades of dictatorship but to mark a new page in the modern history of Egypt.  Those young people long for a new Egypt where they could feel their dignity restored, where they could actually discern a change of attitude on behalf of their government. They long for a new Egypt where they are treated as equal and free citizens and not as dispensable and muted subjects.

 Those thousands of sincere young men and women and in their aspiration to change the political scene of Egypt have never thought that their uprising would turn to be a global phenomenon especially that this was supposed to be a one day event and not the non stopping nationwide protests it turned out to be.

This new movement of January 25th and over a few days has become the main political power in Egypt. They have managed to bring down a whole cabinet of ministers and to force the president to concede to many of their demands of legislative and constitutional reforms and even bring 30 years of police state to an end.  They have been doing all that in the most spontaneous way and in the ultimate grassroots picture with no apparent leadership what so ever. One could see the thousands of them gathered at tahrir square chanting out their slogans as if they were singing “Power to the people”

This lotus revolution which has been sparked by the aspirations and sacrifices of thousands of dedicated revolutionary young people is unfortunately bound to end up with their disappointment and agony over handing it over to a bunch of hawkish and professional politicians.

Now that President Mubarak has conceded to a lot of the protesters demands but at the same time refused to step down before the end of his term, this grassroots uprising has come to a critical crossroad.

But whether Mubarak steps down now or later and whether those courageous young men and women stop marching for Tahrir Square today or next week, one thing is certain, Egypt is not going to be the same ever again and this proud generation of Egyptians will be remembered in history as the free souls and rebels who have brought this era of authoritarianism in the Middle East to an end.

Posted in Egypt1 Comment

Three Decades of a Joke That Just Won’t Die


Egyptian Humor Goes Where Its Politics Cannot


A protester holds up a sign referencing a popular joke about President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo’s Tahrir Square on Feb. 1 during a march to call for Mubarak’s ouster (Photo: MIGUEL MEDINA)

By Issandr El Amrani

What would happen if you spent 30 years making fun of the same man? What if for the last decade, you had been mocking his imminent death — and yet he continued to stay alive, making all your jokes about his immortality seem a bit too uncomfortably close to the truth?

Egyptians, notorious for their subversive political humor, are currently living through this scenario: Hosni Mubarak, their octogenarian president, is entering his fourth decade of rule, holding on to power and to life through sheer force of will. Egyptian jokers, who initially caricatured their uncharismatic leader as a greedy bumpkin, have spent the last 10 years nervously cracking wise about his tenacious grasp on the throne. Now, with the regime holding its breath as everyone waits for the ailing 82-year-old Mubarak to die, the economy suffering, and people feeling deeply pessimistic about the future, the humor is starting to feel a little old.

A friend of mine has a favorite one-liner he likes to tell: “What is the perfect day for Mubarak? A day when nothing happens.” Egypt’s status-quo-oriented president doesn’t like change, but his Groundhog Day fantasy weighs heavily on Egyptians. Mubarak has survived assassination attempts and complicated surgery. After he spent most of the spring of 2010 convalescing, everyone in Cairo from taxi drivers to politicians to foreign spies was convinced it was a matter of weeks. And yet he recovered, apparently with every intention of running for a sixth term in September. Egypt’s prolific jesters, with their long tradition of poking fun at the powerful, might be running out of material.

Making fun of oppressive authorities has been an essential part of Egyptian life since the pharaohs. One 4,600-year-old barb recorded on papyrus joked that the only way you could convince the king to fish would be to wrap naked girls in fishing nets. Under Roman rule, Egyptian advocates were banned from practicing law because of their habit of making wisecracks, which the dour Romans thought would undermine the seriousness of the courts. Even Ibn Khaldun, the great 14th-century Arab philosopher from Tunis, noted that Egyptians were an unusually mirthful and irreverent people. Egyptian actor Kamal al-Shinnawi, himself a master of comedy, once said, “The joke is the devastating weapon which the Egyptians used against the invaders and occupiers. It was the valiant guerrilla that penetrated the palaces of the rulers and the bastions of the tyrants, disrupting their repose and filling their heart with panic.”

And there has been plenty of material over Egypt’s last half-century, marked as it has been by a succession of military leaders with little care for democracy or human rights. While Egyptians may be virtually powerless to change their rulers, they do have extensive freedom to mock, unlike in nearby Syria, where a wisecrack can land you in prison. In Egypt’s highly dense, hypersocial cities and villages, jokes are nearly universal icebreakers and conversation-starters, and the basic meta-joke, transcending rulers, ideology, and class barriers, almost always remains the same: Our leaders are idiots, our country’s a mess, but at least we’re in on the joke together.

Egypt’s rulers before Mubarak, Arab nationalist Gamal Abdel Nasser and Nobel Peace Prize winner Anwar Sadat, were flamboyant characters, and the jokes told about them reflected their larger-than-life personas. The paranoid Nasser was said to have deployed his secret police to collect the jokes made up about him and his iron-fisted leadership, just as the KGB anxiously monitored the fabled kitchen-table anekdoty about its gerontocratic leadership to really understand what was happening in the latter days of the Soviet Union. Sadat, though best known in the West for making peace with neighboring Israel, was the butt of joke after joke about his corrupt government and attractive wife, Jehan.

When Mubarak came to power after Sadat’s assassination, he was received with a mixture of relief and skepticism — relief because he appeared to be a steadier hand than Sadat, who grew increasingly paranoid in the year before his death, and skepticism because Mubarak was the opposite of anything like the charismatic leadership that Sadat and Nasser embodied. Mubarak was also, at least early on, something of a joker himself. Not long into his reign, he quipped that he had never expected to be appointed vice president. “When I got the call from Sadat,” he told an interviewer, “I thought he was going to make me the head of EgyptAir.”

For decades many derided Mubarak as “La Vache Qui Rit” — after the French processed cheese that appeared in Egypt in the 1970s along with the opening up of Egypt’s markets — because of his rural background and his bonhomie. The image that dominated Mubarak jokes during that period was that of an Egyptian archetype, the greedy and buffoonish peasant. One joke I remember well from the 1980s played off Mubarak’s decision not to appoint a vice president after he ascended to the presidency: “When Nasser became president, he wanted a vice president stupider than himself to avoid a challenger, so he chose Sadat. When Sadat became president, he chose Mubarak for the same reason. But Mubarak has no vice president because there is no one in Egypt stupider than he is.”

THE JOKES TURNED BITTER in the 1990s as Mubarak consolidated his power, started winning elections with more than 90 percent of the vote, and purged rivals in the military. One oft-retold story had Mubarak dispatching his political advisors to Washington to help with Bill Clinton’s 1996 reelection campaign after the U.S. president admires Mubarak’s popularity. When the results come in, it is Mubarak who is elected president of the United States.

But Mubarak jokes really settled into their current groove in the early 2000s, when Mubarak entered his mid-70s and a nationwide deathwatch began. One joke imagines a deathbed scene, the ailing Mubarak lamenting, “What will the Egyptian people do without me?” His advisor tries to comfort him: “Mr. President, don’t worry about the Egyptians. They are a resilient people who could survive by eating stones!” Mubarak pauses to consider this and then tells the advisor to grant his son Alaa a monopoly on the trade in stones.

In another deathbed scene, Azrael, the archangel of death, comes down to Mubarak and tells him he must say goodbye to the Egyptian people. “Why, where are they going?” he asks. Azrael is a common figure in such jokes, the most famous of which is a commentary on the increasingly brutal turn the Mubarak regime took in the 1990s:

God summons Azrael and tells him, “It’s time to get Hosni Mubarak.”

“Are you sure?” Azrael asks timidly.

God insists: “Yes, his time has come; go and bring me his soul.”

So Azrael descends from heaven and heads straight for the presidential palace. Once there, he tries to walk in, but he is captured by State Security. They throw him in a cell, beat him up, and torture him. After several months, he is finally set free.

Back in heaven, God sees him all bruised and broken and asks, “What happened?”

“State Security beat me and tortured me,” Azrael tells God. “They only just sent me back.”

God goes pale and in a frightened voice says, “Did you tell them I sent you?’

It’s not only God who is scared of Mubarak — so is the devil. Other jokes have Mubarak shocking the devil with his ideas for tormenting the Egyptian people, or dying and being refused entry to both heaven and hell because he’s viewed as an abomination by both God and Satan.

The Internet has opened new avenues for humor. One-line zingers that used to be circulated by text message are now exchanged on Twitter, while on Facebook fake identities and satirical fan pages have been established for the country’s leading politicians. Widely circulated video mash-ups depict Mubarak and his entourage as the characters of a mafia movie or unlikely action heroes, including one spoofing a Star Wars poster with Mubarak standing in for the evil Emperor Palpatine.

But the bulk of today’s jokes simply stress the tenacity with which Mubarak has held onto life and power. Hisham Kassem, a prominent publisher and liberal opposition figure, told me this recent joke:

Hosni Mubarak, Barack Obama, and Vladimir Putin are at a meeting together when suddenly God appears before them.

“I have come to tell you that the end of the world will be in two days,” God says. “Tell your people.”

So each leader goes back to his capital and prepares a television address.

In Washington, Obama says, “My fellow Americans, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that I can confirm that God exists. The bad news is that he told me the world would end in two days.”

In Moscow, Putin says, “People of Russia, I regret that I have to inform you of two pieces of bad news. First, God exists, which means everything our country has believed in for most of the last century was false. Second, the world is ending in two days.”

In Cairo, Mubarak says, “O Egyptians, I come to you today with two pieces of excellent news! First, God and I have just held an important summit. Second, he told me I would be your president until the end of time.”

Kassem quips that the Mubarak regime’s main legacy may be an unparalleled abundance of derision about its leader. “Under Nasser, it was the elite whose property he had nationalized that told jokes about the president,” he told me. “Under Sadat, it was the poor people left behind by economic liberalization who told the jokes. But under Mubarak, everyone is telling jokes.”

Yet an increasing number of Egyptians no longer think their country’s situation is all that funny, and they are turning the national talent for wit into a more aggressive weapon of political dissidence. The anti-Mubarak Kifaya movement has used humor most poignantly to protest the indignity of an entire country becoming a hand-me-down for the Mubarak family, as the leader presses on with plans to anoint his son Gamal as his heir. Other protesters complaining about the rising cost of living and stagnating salaries use cartoons to depict fat-cat politicians and tycoons pillaging the country. And since the beginning of 2010, Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei, former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency and a potential presidential challenger, has become a symbol of the kind of dignified leadership the Egyptian opposition has sought for decades. Notably, he recently scolded Mubarak for an inappropriate joke about a ferry crash that killed more than 1,000 Egyptians in 2006.

But even if Egypt’s democrats fail to prevent the inheritance of the presidency, they will certainly keep making fun of Mubarak’s son Gamal. One epic satire comes in the form of a popular blog called Ezba Abu Gamal (“The Village of Gamal’s Father”). The blog is a collection of entries, usually from the perspective of Abu Gamal, mayor of a small village. He is constantly being nagged by his wife to promote his son, about whom he has misgivings; he doesn’t understand all this talk about reform and laptops and so on. It is a biting portrait for those initiated into the details of Egyptian politics. Mubarak’s “cunning peasant” persona re-emerges and Gamal is depicted as a wet-behind-the-ears incompetent manipulated by his friends, while countless ministers and security chiefs make appearances as craven village officials. Were it publishable in Egypt, it would make a hilarious book.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Three Decades of a Joke That Just Won’t Die

How We Got Were We Are?



“The son would kill more, millions in fact, rig two elections and run up more national debt in a single month than Jimmy Carter did in four years.  America would have its own GESTAPO, called “Homeland Security” but managed by his good friends in Israel, cementing their partnership with what was once the party of Reagan, now running America into the ground, from “triple crown winner” to “glue factory nag” in 8 long and painful years.”

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Political dialog in America is a sick joke.  Only Ron Paul ever talks about issues and can’t move in Washington without continual snickering behind his back.  He is seen as a joke, a caricature, a anachronism, part of the “lunatic fringe” of “conspiracy theory” folks.  Paul, of course, totally charisma free and with the leadership ability of a cantaloupe, is the only one talking about the issues, albeit in a waffling “left handed” manner. 

He knows very well that he is politically hopeless unless he packages himself for the Israeli lobby, an effort that would require him to reverse every stand he has ever taken.  Expect him to do just that, everyone else has.

Wait for it, his statements on 9/11 alone show him to be morally flexible enough to succeed.  He could be “Obama 2″ or even “Bush 3.”

YouTube – Veterans Today –

After all, why should Ron Paul want to die of loneliness, talking about 9/11 conspiracies or the Federal Reserve.  According to the media, these issues don’t exist, in fact I am not sure what the issues are.  Every two years we get a few “bumper sticker” slogans and personal smears, what now passes for electioneering in the United States, interspersed with a generous helping of race hatred, class envy and religious bigotry.

With the people of Egypt hitting the streets, a real outpouring of courage and political awakening, the kind of yearning for democracy that Americans have, for 235 years, talked about spreading around the world, we here at home sit complacent in an increasingly totalitarian and dictatorial state.

Where did it get us?  Where are we? What have we earned for ourselves with our new version of political activism, bullied into compliance by news censorship and domination of the media by New World Order disinformationalists.  Oh, are we dragging out the “NWO” term today?  Oh yes we are, thank you very much, I call it as I see it..

This is where we are:

  • Broke-busted, we can’t even file bankruptcy, China won’t let us.  America is 5 minutes away from a currency collapse.  94% of America’s 15 trillion dollar debt, built over 235 years, came from 3 presidents, Reagan, Bush and Bush.  That wasn’t money that was “trickling down.”

  • Continual decline in standard of living since Reagan and not by accident, the borders weren’t opened by the same people who crushed labor unions for nothing. 

  • 20 million empty homes, where did the people go?

  • Hyperinflation, totally artificial, totally planned, driven by speculation in oil and commodities, price fixing in health care and Wall Street looting of the economy is hitting now.  Buying gasoline, food and paying utilities will push millions of Americans into poverty.  The extra 75 cents a gallon for gasoline alone is the biggest tax increase in history, one no American voted for, not knowingly.

  • 80% of Americans believe their “news” is continually lying to them but continue to watch, accept and believe anyway.  The American media is an outlet for press releases from the New World Order and nothing else.  It doesn’t get any better than this!

  • When the Supreme Court gave corporations full political rights, they created a class of feudal overlords.  Americans are now indentured serfs in their own country!

  • Israel receives, not 3 billion but between 10 and 20 billion yearly from the US, inclusive of “off the books” military aid and “no bid” contracts.  2 billion of that is spent in “pump priming,” paying off American politicians to take the real figure to 30 billion soon.  Problem is, Israel is one of the richest countries on earth with nearly half the world’s 1000 billionaires holding Israeli passports though only 18 were born in Israel.  Israel could give the United States 30 billion a year and not even notice it.  Where did you think the 3 trillion dollars lost during the Bush administration went to?  Check the names.

  • After 9/11, an event Ron Paul rightly fears calling the “false flag” attack it was, laws were passed in the US that ended all constitutional rights for Americans including the right to bear arms.  When habeas corpus was suspended in 2006, gun rights went with it, yes, the 2nd Amendment was eliminated but only when the government feels guns are a threat.  The best part, they get to decide “when.”  Under the Patriot Acts, which nullify the constitution further, they can enter any home, take guns, seize any property and jail any person indefinitely without legal representation or trial.  When  habeas corpus went, due processwent with it, you know, all that stuff about trials and confronting your accuser, jury of your “peers,” etc, etc. (and you were worried about “Obamacare”…)

  • Almost 900,000 Americans have security clearances with 100,000 “top secret” and over 50,000 “SCI” (Special Compartmented Intelligence).  One thing that isn’t a secret is that Israel has their pick of any American secrets, peddling our military technology to the highest bidder and sending the rest to ”Wikileaks.”  The only people kept in the dark are the American people and the information kept from them is done so for a good reason.  If the American people knew the truth, they might just so something about it, and we don’t mean “vote.”

  • Since the collapse of 2007-8, most state and municipal governments, including school systems, have been bankrupt.  None have cash reserves, only debt underwritten by bonds, and a few assets.  Those assets are quickly being sold off, including, here in Ohio, the state’s turnpike system may be heading to China.  If you don’t think you may have to have a credit card out when privatized police arrive at your home to seize your guns or take you to debtors prison, you aren’t paying attention.  I hear that the prisoners in Gitmo are having to pay for torture.  Are we waterboarding with Perrier now?

How we got here is obvious.  Reagan put us here, or did he.  Dick Eastman writes about that today:

“I can’t resist defending Ronald Reagan  — and losing friends as happens whenever I defend that even greater man, Richard Nixon.

Reagan was really a good guy — but he didn’t know his enemy, and didn’t even recognize them when they infiltrated his administration  — when they arranged an assassination attempt to but GHW Bush in the Oval Office  — and then when it failed they controlled Reagan by gatekeeping non-Rockefeller viewpoints and actually actually slipping him poisons that degraded his functioning.

Donald Regan, his Secretary of the Treasury was part of the sabotage of the US economy  — the co-architect with Burns and Volker of the so-called S & L scandal  — that diverted all investment to junk while looting savers and destroying the Savings and Loan industry to effect greater financial-intermediary concentration in Rockefeller/Morgan/Sachs/etc hands — the biggest economic crime since crashing of the stock market in 1929.  But Ronald Reagan did not know what Donald Reagan was up to.

But I know Reagan was not evil  — although he was used by evil  — because I myself held exactly the same views without realizing the evil behind them  — in 1980 I was in the doctoral program in economics at Texas A & M  – a convinced Misesian and Friedmanite Monetarist and reader of Ayn Rand  — such a perfect antidote for Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter economics (of Samuelson, Galbraith, the “inflationists” Miller)  — who really understood what Donald Reagan, Volker and the rest were up to at that time?

Reagan looked up to Wall Street as the bastion of “free enterprise” — I doubt he had heard of social credit  — I know I had not  (except for reading something about Kitson in the library one day  — but then forgetting the name — until I rediscovered him and first learned about Douglas and Kitson in the early 2000s.  These thinkers just were not known to Americans in Reagan’s time  — communism and inflation and the welfare state were the issues.    Yes, the big trade deficits began under Reagan, but there were justified as temporary and necessary for buying China off to keep her from reuniting with the USSR against us etc.  — or so we thought.

I believe that Reagan of 1980  — if he could be moved to our time and given time to study the situation  — would be a populist  — would undergo the same realizations that I did  — because the basic American virtues that are in many of us  – most certainly lived in him.  He really was a good guy, and no one is going to convince me otherwise.”

When Ron Paul spoke in front of the House of Representatives, to an empty room of course, pinning the blame for Saddam invading Kuwait on President Bush:

(from the Congressional Record)

“It had been long assumed that the United States Government, shortly before Iraq invaded Kuwait in August of 1990, gave Saddam Hussein a green light to attack.A State Department cable recently published by WikiLeaks confirmed that U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie did indeed have a conversation with Saddam Hussein one week prior to Iraq’s August 1, 1990, invasion of Kuwait.

…Ambassador Glaspie affirmed to Saddam that “the President had instructed her to broaden and deepen our relations with Iraq.” As Saddam Hussein outlined Iraq’s ongoing border dispute with Kuwait, Ambassador Glaspie was quite clear that, “we took no position on these Arab affairs.”

There would have been no reason for Saddam Hussein not to take this assurance at face value. The U.S. was quite supportive of his invasion and war of aggression against Iran in the 1980s. With this approval from the U.S. Government, it wasn’t surprising that the invasion occurred. The shock and surprise was how quickly the tables were turned and our friend, Saddam Hussein, all of a sudden became Hitler personified.

The document was classified, supposedly to protect national security, yet this information in no way jeopardized our security. Instead, it served to keep the truth from the American people about an event leading up to our initial military involvement in Iraq and the region that continues to today.

{time} 1440

The secrecy of the memo was designed to hide the truth from the American people and keep our government from being embarrassed. This was the initial event that had led to so much death and destruction–not to mention the financial costs–these past 20 years.”

Stepping this back further into time, the October Surprise, once thought to be a “conspiracy theory” also, again George H.W. Bush the actor.  Bush, a private citizen, meeting with Iranians in Paris, telling them that if they kept Americans hostage, he would reward them with advanced weapons systems, although they were “technically” an enemy.  During the Iran Contra hearings, we learned of the weapons sales, missiles of all kinds, advanced systems, millions in profit for Bush friends. 

When the younger Bush took office, based on this history, 9/11 was a given.  Now proven to have been in the planning since 1999, even before taking office, it was the son upstaging the father.  Dad had rigged an election by selling out American diplomats.  Later, as president, he “green lighted” Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait and the subsequent war that killed hundreds of thousands.  Remember when he sold out the Kurds in Iraq, allowing them to be slaughtered by Saddam, a favor for his friends in Turkey?

The son would kill more, millions in fact, rig two elections and run up more national debt in a single month than Jimmy Carter did in four years.  America would have its own GESTAPO, called “Homeland Security” but managed by his good friends in Israel, cementing their partnership with what was once the party of Reagan, now running America into the ground, from “triple crown winner” to “glue factory nag” in 8 long and painful years.

This is how we got where we are.

Now a new generation of American geniuses are looking at Jeb Bush.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on How We Got Were We Are?

Washington Faces arab Revolts Sacraficing Dictators to Save State


The anti-dictatorial moment is only the first phase of a prolonged struggle toward definitive emancipation not only in Egypt but throughout the Arab world.

The outcome depends on the degree to which the masses develop their own independent organization and leaders.

By Prof. James Petras


To understand the Obama regime’s policy toward Egypt, the Mubarak dictatorship and the popular uprising it is essential to locate it in an historical context.  The essential point is that Washington, after several decades of being deeply embedded in the state structures of the Arab dictatorships, from Tunisia through Morocco, Egypt, Yemen, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority, is attempting to re-orient its policies to incorporate and/or graft liberal-electoral politicians onto the existing power configurations.

While most commentators and journalists  spill tons of ink about the “dilemmas” of US power , the novelty of the Egyptian events and Washington’s day to day policy pronouncements, there are ample historical precedents which are essential to understand the strategic direction of Obama’s policies.

Historical Background

US foreign policy has a long history of installing, financing, arming and backing dictatorial regimes which back its imperial policies and interests as long as they retain control over their people.

In the past, Republican and Democratic presidents worked closely for over 30 years with the Trujillo dictatorship in the Dominican Republic; installed the autocratic Diem regime in pre-revolutionary Vietnam in the 1950’s; collaborated with two generations of Somoza family terror regimes in Nicaragua; financed and promoted the military coup in Cuba 1952, Brazil 1964, Chile in 1973, and in Argentina in 1976 and the subsequent repressive regimes.  When popular upheavals challenged these US backed dictatorships, and a social as well as political revolution appeared likely to succeed,

Washington responded with a three track policy: publically criticizing the human rights violations and advocating democratic reforms; privately signaling continued support to the ruler; and thirdly, seeking an elite alternative which could substitute for the incumbent and preserve the state apparatus, the economic system and support US strategic imperial interests.

For the US there are no strategic relationships only permanent imperial interests, name preservation of the clientstate.  The dictatorships assume that their relationships with Washington is strategic:  hence the shock and dismay when they are sacrificed to save the state apparatus.  Fearing revolution, Washington has had reluctant client despots, unwilling to move on, assassinated (Trujillo and Diem).   Some are provided sanctuaries abroad (Somoza, Batista),others are pressured  into power-sharing (Pinochet) or appointed as visiting scholars to Harvard, Georgetown or some other “prestigious” academic posting.

The Washington calculus on when to reshuffle the regime is based on an estimate of the capacity of the dictator to weather the political uprising, the strength and loyalty of the armed forces and the availability of a pliable replacement.  The risk of waiting too long, of sticking with the dictator, is that the uprising radicalizes:  the ensuing change sweeps away both the regime and the state apparatus, turning a political uprising into a social revolution.  Just such a ‘miscalculation’ occurred in 1959 in the run-up to the Cuban revolution, when Washing stood by Batista and was not able to present a viable pro US alternative coalition linked to the old state apparatus.  A similar miscalculation occurred in Nicaragua, when President Carter, while criticizing Somoza, stayed the course, and stood passively by as the regime was overthrown and the revolutionary forces destroyed the US and Israeli trained military, secret police and intelligence apparatus, and went on to nationalize US property and develop an independent foreign policy.

Washington moved with greater initiative, in Latin America in the 1980’s.It promoted negotiated electoral transitions which replaced dictators with pliable neo-liberal electoral politicians, who pledged to preserve the existing state apparatus, defend the privileged foreign and domestic elites and back US regional and international policies.

Past Lessons and Present Policies:

Obama has been extremely hesitant to oust Mubarak for several reasons, even as the movement grows in number and anti-Washington sentiment deepens.  The White House has many clients around the world – including Honduras, Mexico, Indonesia, Jordan and Algeria – who believe they have a strategic relationship with Washington and would lose confidence in their future if Mubarak was dumped.

Secondly, the highly influential leading pro-Israel organizations in the US (AIPAC, the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations) and their army of scribes have mobilized congressional leaders to pressure the White House to continue backing Mubarak, as Israel is the prime beneficiary of a dictator who is at the throat of the Egyptians (and Palestinians) and at the feet of the Jewish state.

As a result the Obama regime has moved slowly, under fear and pressure of the growing Egyptian popular movement.It searches for an alternative political formula that removes Mubarak, retains and strengthens the political power of the state apparatus and incorporates a civilian electoral alternative as a means of demobilizing and de-radicalizing the vast popular movement.

The major obstacle to ousting Mubarak is that a major sector of the state apparatus, especially the 325,000 Central Security Forces and the 60,000 National Guard are directly under the Interior Ministry and Mubarak.  Secondly, top Generals in the Army (468,500 members) have buttressed Mubarak for 30 years and have been enriched by their control over very lucrative companies in a wide range of fields.  They will not support any civilian ‘coalition’ that calls into question their economic privileges and power to set the political parameters of any electoral system. The supreme commander of the Egyptian military is a longtime client of the US and a willing collaborator with Israel.

Obama is resolutely in favor of collaborating with and ensuring the preservation of these coercive bodies.But he also needs to convince them to replace Mubarak and allow for a new regime which can defuse the mass movement which is increasingly opposed to US hegemony and subservience to Israel.  Obama will do everything necessary to retain the cohesion of the state and avoid any splits which might lead to a mass movement – soldier alliance which could convert the uprising into a revolution.

Washington has opened talks with the most conservative liberal and clerical sectors of the anti-Mubarak movement.  At first it tried to convince them to negotiate with Mubarak – a dead end position which was rejected by all sectors of the opposition, top and bottom.  Then Obama tried to sell a phony “promise” from Mubarak that he would not run in the elections, nine months later.

The movement and its leaders rejected that proposal also.  So Obama raised the rhetoric for ‘immediate changes’ but without any substantive measures backing it up.  To convince Obama of his continued power base, Mubarak sent his formidable thug-lumpen secret police to violently seize the streets from the movement.  A test of strength:  the Army stood by; the assault raised the ante of a civil war, with radical consequences.  Washington and the E.U. pressured the Mubarak regime to back off – for now.  But the image of a pro-democracy military was tarnished, as killings and injuries multiplied in the thousands.

As the pressure of the movement intensifies, Obama cross pressured by the pro Mubarak Israel Lobby and its Congressional entourage on the one hand, and on the other by knowledgeable advisors who call on him to follow past practices and move decisively to sacrifice the regime to save the state while the liberal-clerical electoral option is still on the table.

But Obama hesitates and like a wary crustacean, he moves sideways and backwards, believing his own grandiloquent rhetoric is a substitute for action … hoping that sooner or later, the uprising will end with Mubarakismwithout Mubarak: a regime able to demobilize the popular movements and willing to promote elections which result in elected officials following the general line of their predecessor.

Nevertheless, there are many uncertainties in a political reshuffle:  a democratic citizenry, 83% unfavorable to Washington, will possess the experience of struggle and freedom to call for a realignment of policy, especially to cease being a policeman enforcing the Israeli blockage of Gaza, and providing support  for US puppets in North Africa, Lebanon, Yemen,  Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Secondly free elections will open debate and increase pressure for greater social spending, the expropriation of the seventy billion dollar empire of the Mubarak clan and the crony capitalists who pillage the economy .The masses will demand a reallocation of public expenditure from the overblown coercive apparatus to productive, job generating employment.   A limited political opening may lead to a second round, in which new social and political conflicts will divide the anti-Mubarak forces, a conflict between the advocates of social democracy and elite backers of neo-liberal electoralism.  The anti-dictatorial moment is only the first phase of a prolonged struggle toward definitive emancipation not only in Egypt but throughout the Arab world.  The outcome depends on the degree to which the masses develop their own independent organization and leaders.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Washington Faces arab Revolts Sacraficing Dictators to Save State

PAKISTAN: Fissile Material Quandary



Proposing a Fissile Material Treaty…

By Air Commodire Khalid Iqbal

Pakistan’s nuclear capability has been security driven and not status motivated. Nuclear threat became a reality for Pakistan after India’s first nuclear test in 1974. The contentious issue of fissile material stocks stimulates Pakistan’s reservations regarding FMCT negotiations. Both the Shannon Mandate 1995, as well as the 2006 draft FMCT excluded the issue of existing stocks from the purview of the treaty and sought to control only future production of fissile material. Pakistan’s principle worry is its disparity with the Indian stockpile of fissile material that threatens the strategic stability in the region.

Pakistan is keen to debate across the board nuclear disarmament on non-discriminatory basis at the Conference on Disarmament (CD). Pakistan is proposing a Fissile Material Treaty that should deal with existing stocks as well as the future production.

In the plenary session of CD, Pakistan has cautioned the world community in categorical terms that growing international support for India’s nuclear programme would destabilize the region and force Pakistan to augment its deterrence. Pakistan’s Ambassador Zamir Akram sharply criticized the moves to bring India into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and other bodies that allow trade in nuclear materials. It is interesting to recall that the NSG was created in 1975 to standardize nuclear trade rules as a reaction to India’s testing of a nuclear explosive device in 1974. To carry out that explosion, India had clandestinely diverted Plutonium from a power reactor provided to it by Canada.

Zamir Akram aptly pointed out, “Apart from undermining the validity and sanctity of the international non-proliferation regime, these measures shall further destabilise security in South Asia…As a consequence, Pakistan will be forced to take measures to ensure the credibility of its deterrence. The cumulative impact would be to destabilise the security environment in South Asia and beyond.” Earlier he told journalists that Pakistan “would like a treaty that deals with stocks not just future production.”

US disarmament ambassador Laura Kennedy told journalists that negotiations on a ban, a Fissile Material Cut off Treaty (FMCT), were a priority for Washington. “We believe that this is long overdue, it’s a priority. And this sense of urgency is not, again, simply one of the United States, but is widely shared,” Kennedy said.

India, like Pakistan, is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) but extension of aggressive cooperation in the field is a classic example of creating exceptions and meting out discriminatory treatment in similar situations. It is strange that a country, which was first to introduce nuclear weapons in South Asia, is being rewarded in every possible way but the country that has been offering concrete proposals to make the region free of nuclear weapons faces discrimination and intimidation.

At this time only Pakistan, India, and probably North Korea and Israel, produce fissile material for weapons. The major nuclear powers, after having accumulated thousands of weapons, have declared unilateral moratoriums on its production. Likewise, issue of fissile material is not very significant to any Non Nuclear Weapon State that is party to NPT, because these states have already abdicated their right to pursue nuclear program for military purposes.

President Obama’s vision of nuclear weapons free world is held hostage to intricately  intertwined Indian policies of nuclear security and power generation. India has piled up 1300 tons of reactor grade fissile material churned out by its nuclear power reactors over the previous years. Reactor grade Plutonium was used in one of the Indian nuclear explosions of 1998.

To understand the real significance of the FMCT for Pakistan, one needs to dig deeper into India’s nuclear energy program. Pakistan’s principal worry is India’s accumulation of reactor grade plutonium for its fast breeder reactors.

India’s rationale for accumulating such a vast inventory of reactor grade plutonium stems from its three-stage nuclear energy program. The Fast Breeder Reactors (FBR) are envisaged as the mainstay of this plan. By producing more Plutonium than they consume, FBRs provide a widow for diverting surplus fissile material for weapon programmes; especially so when India has not accepted any safeguards on its fast breeder reactors.

FBRs form the backbone of India’s grand plans for nuclear energy. Their number would increase by 5 times by 2020 and more than 60 times by 2050. To realize this design, India is poised to construct hundreds of FBRs.

India’s ambitious plan for fast breeder reactor technology has serious implications for the nuclear stability in the region.

This conundrum has compelled Pakistan to block the negotiations on FMCT at the CD. Despite pressuring Pakistan to fall in line on the issue, Americans know it well that spoiler is someone else. Pakistan’s principal worry is the perpetually snowballing disparity with the Indian stockpile of fissile material.

Current impasse on FMCT emanates from the most unlikely cause that is India’s nuclear energy policy rather than its nuclear security policy. Therefore, any progress on the FMT would only be possible if India is willing to completely separate the domains of nuclear energy from that of nuclear security under an effectively verifiable regime.

Pakistan looks forward towards a global disarmament regime, which should be legally binding, internationally verifiable and universally acceptable. In this context, Pakistan wants to negotiate a Fissile Material Treaty (FMT) that caters for complete elimination of all existing stocks of nuclear fissile material on non-discriminatory basis and also prohibits its further production. Pakistani proposal is disarmament based in nature and is compatible with the ‘Global Zero’ concept.

Pakistan’s position is neither the first, nor the only example of a country insisting in multilateral arms negotiations that its security interests be accommodated in a binding treaty. Arms control efforts over the decades have always been flexible enough to address the security concerns of participating states.

CD’s work should not become hostage to one issue that is fissile material management. It should comprehensively proceed on disarmament matters; so that its work is on equal pace on all interlocked agenda issues like disarmament of outer space, negative assurances, abolishing of missile defence shields, conventional arms race and fissile material management etc. Moreover, envisaged treaty must take into account the security concerns of all states.

America’s emphasis on early adoption of controversial FMCT, in isolation, is quite unfortunate. This amounts to treating the symptoms while ignoring the root causes.   Where hard calculations of security are involved, nations have to be engaged to forge agreements; they must be neither isolated nor coerced.

Posted in WorldComments Off on PAKISTAN: Fissile Material Quandary

IsraHell Espionage in America, A National Security Scandal


“How do I want to rob, cheat and lie to thee.  Let me count the ways… military, nuclear, political, academic, media and your law enforcement institutions.”

The biggest national security scandal story of our times is the extent that Israeli espionage has gone on  here for decades. There is an aspect of the War on Terror on which our elite leadership refuses to level with the public…how terrified our defense, political, counter intelligence and legal institutions are when it comes to rooting them out and shutting it all down. All other terrors pale into insignificance. They treat this affliction with an age old cure…denial.

"Taking Sides" "Steven Green" "Jim W. Dean" "Veterans Today"

My first exposure to Israeli espionage scholastically was through Steven Green’s book‘Taking Sides: America’s Secret Relations With A Militant Israel’ (1984).  Green was one of the earliest users of the then new Freedom of information Act, filing hundreds of requests to get previously classified military and diplomatic Intel reports.

The book is a gold mine, so much so that some in the Reagan administration considered a rump prosecution of Green to scare others off from doing similar work. Cooler heads prevailed and they ended up reclassifying some of the best parts of the book despite Green’s archives being publicly available at the Hoover institute. There is a phrase to describe this…’contempt for the public’.

Green found some of the Zionist early espionage involved extensive weapons hijacking and theft operations to support their 1948 war which gave them complete military superiority in the number and quality of weapons, and training.  Post war Czechoslovakia provided the base for this training. The Zios showed their appreciation by delivering a prototype jeep mounted radar system stolen right from under our noses by their many helpers.

The Israeli WMD program started prior to the 1948 war,  where our military intelligence reported Zionist agents were combing war ravaged Europe looking for chemical and biological weapons, including Sarin nerve gas.  And this was followed soon after the ’48 war with the beginning of their nuclear program.

What they could not get through aid or purchase, they simply stole. Weapons grade uranium was obtained in England and here from a reprocessing plant Pennsylvania owned by a American Zionist, still alive today. The investigation of the material pilfered from Westinghouse fuel rods had the FBI agent in charge instructed to make no written notes of any of his interviews, but to report verbally.

"President_Lyndon_Johnson" "Mossad Honey Pot"

Lyndon Johnson

President Johnson, caught up in a Mossad ‘honey pot’ trap, helped arm the Israelis for offensive level operations, and also did nothing when they attacked the USS Liberty in the 1967 war to destroy its battlefield communications intercept capabilities, with 75% casualties.

Let’s go down the overview list with a few comments and later I will come back with a piece on each.

Political: Our Congress is completely tunneled. Israeli Intel assets sit on most of their staffs to keep an eye not only on the Congressman’s staff, but the elected officials themselves.

"United States Capitol"

These are sometimes volunteer liaison people. Bribery and blackmail (using sex and ‘financial irregularities’) are some of the age old tools used to compromise them.  The money and campaign workers they supply at election time creates a climate where saying no to a Jewish Lobby demand is rarely even considered. And when the President occasionally does, the Lobby just pulls their puppet strings and Congress out votes  the rare presidential veto.

Pro Israeli resolutions are introduced sometime several time a session just for a public head count. And when our counter intelligence people are about to bust a big Israeli spy case, the word comes down from the executive branch to stop the investigation in order  to avoid the national embarrassment of our ‘ally’.

The executive branch has to give them a few slots in return for their major campaign support. For the White house the Israelis lean toward the National Security Council slots. What once was chief deputy  plum spots are now NSC members themselves. Israeli spies just walk in the front door, pick up what they have ordered from their NSC asset, and walk out the front door. The Secret Service has a front row seat on all of this, and always has. So does the FBI who has them under surveillance.

Most of our top loyal Intel people who are aware of all this tell us that even bringing up the idea of a prosecution is instant career destruction.

Yes, you figured it out. The retired folks have filled us in on all this stuff as they felt humiliated having to work around that level of corruption.

"US Department of Justice"

Department of Justice

Law enforcement: Part of the Jewish Lobby’s payoff for campaign help, from either Republicans or Democrats, is to plant their key people in places where they can protect Israeli interests.  In the Justice Department they want people where they can have early warning on any investigations. Another main focus are those in the Justice Department and FBI that seem too interested in catching Israeli spies. It is a dual approach. Those who play ball with the Lobby traitors are helped to move up, and those who do not, their career start running into problems.

Lobby schmooze groups like the Anti-Defamation League are staple lecturers at the FBI Academy priming young agents to be more open to helping out our good ally Israel someday when they need to be tipped off about something.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, Morris Dees and crowd are now on a Homeland Security advisory board doing diversion work Our limited counter intelligence resources are wasted watching over  returning war theater veterans and traditional American groups they deem not subservient enough to Lobby and Israel’s interests, or whose persecution and harassment please a political ally they want to get some pay back from, ie., ALWAYS support anything and everything Israel wants.

"Pentagon" "Washington DC"

The Pentagon

Military: The Pentagon is also another long time tunneled institution.  Israeli espionage assets are put in place through the high level political appointments, with Dems and Repubs competing for campaign donations by how many of these high level positions they will give the Lobby people.

The public got to see this for the first time with the bogus Intel that was stove piped into the Pentagon to give Bush the cover he needed for invading Iraq. Before that the ‘intelligence’ we were shown on Afghanistan came from Hollywood style screen writers, complete with mountain fortresses with nuclear bomb labs. None of this was true of course…and not a single person has even been reprimanded. To date not even a single Al Qaeda training facility has ever been located by NATO forces in Afghanistan.  As Gordon Duff has reported multiple, the bogus jungle gym training videos all come from Israel.

The military brass is not immune. All up and coming brass are profiled for their pro or not pro enough on Israel quotient to size them up for co-option or dead career assistance.

Their religious backgrounds are checked to see if the Christian Zionist button is the best approach. How about living beyond their incomes? Or might they  like an impressive post military career with a few hundred thousand a year in low labor directors fees, a nice think tank position,  or maybe a high profile  talking head mass media expert slot.  All this is available to those who want to play ball.

This is an all out attack  on America as the Founding Fathers wisely warned early on that  ’an informed  public would be key to preserver the Republic’.

If you want a list of names of their best prospects just ask the Lobby front orgs for their recruiting lists.

They use the standard spy recruiting tool, the lavish all expense paid tour to Israel where spy recruits get the five star treatment…classified briefings, meeting the top political leaders who fawn over them, and a taste of what more might be available for ‘team players’.

They do this with law enforcement brass also, from State Bureau Investigation heads down to key city sheriffs, those able to provide information to good friends if they want to, or tipping them off to FBI investigations, and they do.

Years ago in Atlanta, a David Irving talk attendee got lost entering the meeting facility and opened an unlocked door to find the actual head of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation sitting down with his headphones on, personally running the taping equipment. He and his Mrs. subsequently participated on one of these five star Israel junkets…just a co-incidence I am sure.

After our attorney general, this was the top law enforcement officer in the state. That folks, is what you call tunneling.

"MIT Dome"

Academic: Israeli espionage here focuses  primarily on keeping our young people with the pro Israeli attitude. Next is keeping the professors in line, particularly in areas like the Mid East Departments.  Life can be  tough for those who do not openly portray themselves as pro Israel. And for those who openly challenge their major positions, they usually find their employment under assault by a gang banging of Jewish groups, politicians and media.

Norman Finklestein got nailed at DePaul University, with his being denied tenure. The school administration disgraced American academia through their being total pawns for the Jewish Lobby in punishing Finklestein for his anti-Zionist activism.  But Prof. Kevin MacDonald has survived multiple purge attempts at California State University, Long Beach, with the university administration getting caught red handed taking orders from Jewish Lobby domestic terrorists.

Jewish campus youth groups like  Hillel are recruiting grounds for nice Jewish kids to spy on their professors and fellow students, particularly the ones that look like potential political comers. Every word they say or gets printed is reviewed for any clues on support or non support for Israel, and the proper notation is made in their files.

The Israelis think long term on their penetrations. For nuclear spies, the best PhD. candidates coming out of the top schools are profiled similarly to the generals and admirals…religion, poor childhood, egos, or…how about a little help getting a first job at the top nuclear labs.

“We have friends in those places and we could put a good word in for you.” This is no theory folks. This is how it is done. They know it. We know it. They know we know it.

Only the public ends up as the real chumps here, as they are the last to know.  All of these Israeli espionage facilitators do not want to be pestered with silly questions like “why have we never broken up a single Israeli spy network here…is it illegal or something to catch them?”

New Yord Times

Media: Ah…the media. The spy recruiter’s choice of all assignments. Media spies are a gold mine. They have some Supreme Court case protection on sources. They have the wonderful tool of asking important people about classified material ‘off the record’. And if they run into some problems the media employers generally pay the legal bills as they did Judith Miller.

Some of them come pre trained like Wolf Blitzer, formerly spending years at the Jerusalem Post being groomed for his future assignment. They rarely use someone with a high profile like this too openly, but an exception was made with Blitzer. They blew his cover by having him write the whitewash book on Jonathan Pollard, who killed more CIA agents and more of our overseas spies than all of the rest of the Cold War combined. Pollard destroyed almost an entire generation of intelligence expenditures, and Wolf Blitzer got paid off by making him an anchor…another demonstration for those hesitant to play ball.

So Jim Dean, what are we going to do about it?

"George Schultz" "Jim W. Dean" "Veterans Today" "Jonathan Pollard"

George Shultz

I will be writing more on the Jonathan Pollard presidential pardon. The pro Pollard pressure list reads like a who’s who of the Israeli fifth column here, even including past Secretary of State George Schultz, and former CIA director James Woolsey.

"James Woolsey" "CIA" "Jonathan Pollard release" "Jim W. Dean" "Veterans Today"

James Woolsey

I am happy to report that a lot of 100% patriotic Americans in law enforcement and counter intelligence are in a rage over this. A lot have occupations where the Lobby terrorists can punish them.  I do not.  So we will be sharing with you what they have been sharing with some of us here at Veterans Today.

The working title I have for this series is ZioLeaks. We are going to take you through it all…the past and the present, show you who is working for them and why…things like the think tanks that are bull pens for spies or assets waiting to be placed in key administration patronage slots, political, defense, media, law enforcement or academia.

The easy part about this is what is called in the trade  ‘front door’ espionage. It is done in the open. Their assets are revealed as kind of showing off that the fix is in so deep, that it doubles as a recruiting advertisement for them.

Hence the Herculean effort to get Pollard released…simply to demonstrate to all those working for Israeli intelligence, directly or indirectly, that, “we will take care of you, no matter what it takes…whoever we have to compromise, including Secretaries of State  and  CIA directors.”

Jonathan Pollard: New Information Revealed

Jonathan Pollard American Traitor

What they don’t know that is coming at them is what Mubarak and his looting cronies did not see coming.  And it is coming here. All that is required to trigger it off is for the good folks to fully learn how thoroughly they have been screwed over, and by whom.

Our VT people have fought on the front lines, behind the lines, or in the culture wars where we saw good Americans pitted against good Americans in what was clearly the classic Intel divide and counter play.  With the years that some of us in our 60′s have left, frankly…we would like to devote most of it to some good old payback to America’s worst friend in the Mideast. How about you???

Israeli espionage here is a glaring example of deep corruption. They are working Homeland Security now laying the ground work  for prosecuting those who want to catch them…for hate.  They want to put their critics in jail. Egypt is here people, brought to us by the Israelis.

Our counter intelligence institutions are fully aware of all of this but do absolutely nothing to warn the public. Why?…political consequences. It would be just one more small step to put the politicians in the cross hairs, and they have lots of tools to punish whistle blowers.  The main one would be attacking  their budget requests, or being brutalized in Congressional hearings with Jewish Lobby smear material being hand fed by insiders to the committees.

Maybe we can have a band of these Tunisians and Egyptian folks come over here and give us a few pointers. Veterans Today will try to bring some of them on through our new multimedia expansion. After all, what do we have to lose?

2011 Copyright –  Jim W. Dean

Posted in USAComments Off on IsraHell Espionage in America, A National Security Scandal

Egyptian Intifada: A Timeline (Week 1)



By Adam Morrow and Khaled Moussa al-Omrani

CAIRO; Feb 8, 2011 (Veterans Today) — Whoever comes out on top after the dust settles in Egypt, one thing’s for certain: the political equation in the Middle East — characterized for decades by Israeli regional hegemony — will never be the same again.

Along with being the Arab world’s most populous country, with a majority-Muslim population of more than 80 million, Egypt represents a strategic bridge between Asia and Africa. What’s more, Egypt — Washington’s best friend in the region after Israel — also controls the Suez Canal, a vital means of transit both for international commerce and US naval forces in the Middle East.

And, perhaps most importantly for neoconservative policymakers in Washington, Egypt shares a 260-kilometer border with Israel and a 14-kilometer border with the Hamas-governed Gaza Strip. While Cairo has had official relations with Tel Aviv since 1979 under the terms of the Camp David peace agreement, the peace is a cold one, and the agreement deeply unpopular with broad swathes of the Egyptian public.

Under the 30-year-old rule of President Hosni Mubarak, Egypt has gradually become a de facto ally of the self-proclaimed Jewish state, despite deep-rooted pubic opposition — opposition driven largely by Israel’s litany of crimes committed at the expense of the Palestinian people. This alliance has culminated in the almost four-year-old siege of the Gaza Strip, initiated by Tel Aviv and abetted by Cairo, which has effectively made prisoners of the strip’s 1.5 million inhabitants.

If Egypt were allowed to hold democratic elections and produce a truly representative leadership, Cairo’s foreign policy orientations would no doubt be subject to dramatic change. The looming battle for control of Egypt, therefore, will largely determine the shape of the region’s future geopolitical landscape.

Tuesday, Jan. 25: ‘The Day of Anger’

A “day of anger,” originally organized by online activists to protest police abuses and official corruption, quickly snowballed beyond anyone’s expectations. Thousands of protesters — tens of thousands in some areas — turned out across the country to demand relief from skyrocketing inflation and rampant unemployment, twin features of the Mubarak regime’s “neo-liberal” economic policies. In addition to these economic grievances, demonstrators also demanded free elections and the termination of Egypt’s draconian Emergency Law.

In Cairo, protesters gathered in the centrally-located Tahrir Square, where demands for economic and political reform soon gave way to calls for Mubarak’s ouster. “The people — want — the fall of the regime!” they shouted, in what would become the uprising’s rallying cry.

The demonstrations in Egypt came quick on the heels of a popular uprising in Tunisia in mid-January. Tunisia’s “Jasmine Revolution” ended with the fall of the regime of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, who had ruled the country with an iron fist for 23 years.

Wednesday, Thursday; Jan. 26, 27

By Wednesday morning, police had managed — with the use of teargas, water cannons and rubber bullets — to flush protestors from Tahrir Square. Unbeknownst to most observers, however, the wave of demonstrations — destined to become a nationwide popular rebellion — had only just begun.

Despite warnings from the Egypt’s interior ministry that police would adopt a zero-tolerance policy against further protests, demonstrations continued in most Egyptian cities for the next two days, with the biggest taking place in Cairo, Alexandria and the northern canal city of Suez.

Police, meanwhile, used increasingly heavy-handed tactics to disperse the rapidly swelling crowds. By Thursday evening, at least six protesters had been killed and hundreds more injured in mounting violence. Thousands more were said to have been arrested by police.

Wednesday and Thursday also saw the arrest of hundreds of leading members of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s largest — if unlicensed — opposition movement. The government justified the move by claiming falsely that the group stood behind the growing wave of demonstrations.

Meanwhile, calls circulated online for countrywide protests, dubbed a “Friday of Rage,” to be staged the next day following Friday noon prayers.

Late Thursday night, in anticipation of the planned Friday protests, Internet access and mobile-phone communications in Cairo, Alexandria and Suez were abruptly cut. Land-line communications, however, remained intact.

Friday, January 28: ‘The Friday of Rage’

Demonstrations climaxed following noon prayers, when more than a million Egyptians poured out of the nation’s mosques to hold protests in city centers and public squares in cities throughout the country. In Cairo, more than one hundred thousand people, coming from all over the capital, gathered again in Tahrir Square, where they vowed to remain until Mubarak’s ouster.

Clashes of unprecedented violence soon erupted between protesters and police, who fought vainly to quell the escalating unrest. At 5:00 PM, Mubarak decreed that a curfew — from 6:00 PM to 7:00 AM the next morning — be applied in Cairo, Alexandria and Suez. Demonstrators, however, their numbers swelling by the hour, ignored the curfew and continued to roam the three cities’ streets.

In the early afternoon, it was reported that Israel’s embassy staff in Cairo had hastily departed the country due to the mounting unrest.

At about 6:00 PM, dozens of unidentified gunmen attempted to break into Egypt’s national museum in Tahrir Square, home to one of the world’s most extensive collections of archaeological artifacts. Following a violent confrontation between gunmen and protesters, in which several of the latter were killed, the armed men were found to be carrying police identification cards.

At about 7:00 PM, the Egyptian Army, in an effort to secure important symbols of governance, deployed on the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and Suez. Protesters welcomed the appearance of the Egyptian armed forces, which — unlike the police — are widely respected by much of the public for the role they played in past wars with Israel.

To the cheers of demonstrators, who called on the army to save them from police aggression, tanks and armored personnel carriers rolled through the streets of the capital for the first time in decades. Meanwhile, the police — which, unlike the army, are broadly disliked due to their reputation for abuse and corruption — were completely withdrawn from the capital only hours earlier.


Offices of Mubarak’s ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), along with numerous local police stations, were burnt down in several provinces. Twenty-six police stations were torched in Cairo alone immediately following the withdrawal of police. Evidence would later emerge strongly suggesting that elements of the police themselves were behind much of the arson.

By the end of the day, hundreds of protesters had been killed in clashes with police, while thousands more were injured. Satellite news channels began airing images of dead protesters sprawled in hospital morgues.

Saturday, January 29: ‘The Day of Terror’

In a televised address shortly after midnight, Mubarak — in his first appearance since the uprising began — announced the dismissal of his government, which had been dominated largely by wealthy busy tycoons.

At about 10:00 AM, mobile-phone services were restored in Cairo, Alexandria and Suez.

In the early afternoon, state television reported that Mubarak had, for the first time since becoming president in 1981, appointed a vice-president — General intelligence chief Omar Suleiman — meeting a longstanding demand of the Egyptian opposition. About two hours later, Mubarak appointed a new prime minister, Ahmed Shafik, a former air-force commander and civil aviation minister.

The concessions, however, failed to satisfy protesters, who vowed to maintain nationwide demonstrations until Mubarak’s unconditional ouster. Tens of thousands of demonstrators in Tahrir Square also demanded the release of arrested protesters, the formulation of a new constitution, and democratically-held parliamentary and presidential elections.

Since the early morning, reports had circulated about rooftop snipers picking off protesters near the Interior Ministry building, not far from Tahrir Square. By the end of the day, 13 demonstrators were said to have been killed by the as-yet unidentified shooters.

In the late afternoon, Mubarak again imposed a curfew on the three most volatile cities, from 4:00 PM to 8:00 AM the next morning. For the second night in a row, however, the curfew was largely ignored, as protesters continued to spill out on the streets in force.

In the early evening, it was reported on several news channels that prominent regime figures, along with their families, had fled the country. These included Mubarak’s son, Gamal, an influential member of the ruling party who many had believed was being groomed to succeed his 82-year-old father.

Shortly after sunset, rumors spread that major commercial streets in Cairo, Alexandria and Suez were being looted and torched by roving gangs of armed criminals. Word had it that the looters were going house to house, robbing and killing local residents. There were even scattered reports of rape. Most if not all of these rumors later proved unfounded.

Unconfirmed reports also spread quickly that large numbers of convicted convicts had escaped from prisons in and around Cairo. While most of these reports originated from state television, the rumors spread like wildfire, fueling panic among the already-terrified population.

The chaos and confusion — which were largely orchestrated by elements of the police and government — had its desired effect, as large numbers of terrorized demonstrators ran back to their homes to protect their families and property.

Throughout the night, gunfire could be heard in most neighborhoods throughout the three cities. As fear mounted, local residents organized neighborhood patrols to deter would-be looters. Throughout the night, local residents could be seen on almost every street corner brandishing cleavers, crowbars and tire irons.

Sunday, January 30

“We are anxiously monitoring what is happening in Egypt and in our region,” Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu was quoted as saying at a morning meeting with his cabinet. “Peace between Israel and Egypt has endured for over three decades and our goal is to ensure these relations continue.”

It was also reported that Tel Aviv had allowed the Egyptian army to deploy two army battalions in the Sinai Peninsula. Under the terms of the Camp David peace agreement, Egypt is prohibited from making military deployments in Sinai without Tel Aviv’s consent.

At noon, Egyptian authorities abruptly closed the Cairo offices of Qatar-based satellite news channel Al Jazeera. Up until that point, Al Jazeera — both its Arabic- and Engish-language channels — had provided the closest coverage of the ongoing uprising.

Countrywide demonstrations, meanwhile, continued to gather momentum. At about 2:00 PM, hundreds of university professors and reformist judges — the latter of whom had long demanded an independent judiciary — joined the hundreds of thousands of protesters already arrayed in Tahrir Square.

Shortly afterward, thousands of demonstrators attempted to storm the now-evacuated Israeli embassy in central Cairo. But the army, whose presence on the streets was now pervasive, quickly intervened to stop them.

At about 3:00 PM, a neighborhood patrol in the Nile Delta city of Mansoura announced that it had detained 78 men caught looting shops in the area. According to reports, the men were later found to be members of the government’s secret police.

At about 4:00 PM, F-16 warplanes began making sorties over the skies over Cairo.

At about 4:30, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared that Washington wanted “to see an orderly transition [of power in Egypt], so that no one fills a void.” She called for “a well thought out plan that will bring about a democratic participatory government.”

Clinton’s statements were met with derision by Egyptian political figures and commentators, who opined that Clinton was “the last person who should be talking about democracy in Egypt.”

At about 5:30 PM, Internet services were fully restored countrywide.

At this point, reports began to emerge that elements of the police had in fact been behind much of the reported looting and vandalism — an apparent attempt to promote the false impression that the withdrawal of police would inevitably lead to security breakdowns. It was also to emerge later that elements of the police had intentionally released thousands of convicted criminals from police stations in and around Cairo.

Meanwhile, anti-regime demonstrations continued to rage across the country, despite the extension of the curfew from 3:00 PM to 8:00 AM. Along with Cairo, Alexandria and Suez, massive protests were also staged in Mansoura, Mahalla, Ismailia, Fayoum, Port Said and Aswan, along with numerous other Egyptian cities and towns. In the city of Menoufiya, Mubarak’s home town, thousands turned out to demand Mubarak’s ouster.

As the death toll continued to climb, calls at Tahrir Square for Mubarak’s resignation turned into calls for putting regime leaders on trial for murder.

At about 10:00 PM, a White House spokesman announced that US President Barack Obama had told the leaders of Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the UK that the US supported “an orderly transition to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people.”

Monday, January 31

At about 10:30 AM, as demonstrations continued nationwide, Mubarak announced on state television that he had instructed the new government to begin talks with protest leaders.

At noon, Al Jazeera reported that Suez Canal traffic was functioning normally, if behind schedule. One hour later, Arabic-language news channel Al-Arabiya reported that the Alexandria seaport had been indefinitely closed.

Shortly after 1:00 PM, it was reported that Mubarak had appointed a new interior minister, Mahmoud Wagdi, to replace the highly unpopular Habib al-Adli. State television broadcast images of other new government ministers being sworn in by the president.

At about the same time, Israeli President Shimon Peres was quoted by the press as saying: “We always have had and still have a great respect for Mubarak. I don’t say everything that he did was right, but he did one thing for which all of us are thankful to him: he kept the peace in the Middle East.”

Roughly one hour later, Mubarak appointed former North Sinai governor Murad Muwafi to replace Omar Suleiman, now the vice-president, as Egypt’s chief of general intelligence.

The hundreds of thousands of protesters still in Tahrir Square, along with hundreds of thousands more in Alexandria, rejected the new appointments, reiterating their demand for Mubarak’s ouster. Activists began issuing calls for a million-man protest in the square the following day.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, warned that the ongoing uprising could lead to an Iran-style Islamic revolution in Egypt. “Our real fear is of a situation that could develop… and which has already developed in several countries including Iran itself — repressive regimes of radical Islam,” he was quoted as saying.

At about 8:30 PM, Reuters reported that international oil prices had jumped to $101 on the back of ongoing political turmoil in Egypt.

Shortly afterward, an army spokesman announced on state television that the Egyptian Armed Forces “recognized the legitimate demands of the people.” He went on to vow that that the army “had not and would not use force against the people.”

At about 10:30, as roads into Cairo were closed in an effort to stop the would-be protesters now pouring into the capital, newly-appointed VP Suleiman announced his readiness to hold talks with the opposition and carry out “political and economic reforms.” Protesters, however, simply reiterated their demand for Mubarak’s removal.

Shortly before midnight, it was reported that Washington had dispatched former US ambassador to Egypt Frank Wisner to Cairo to consult with the embattled Egyptian president. “As someone with deep experience in the region, [Wisner] is meeting with Egyptian officials and providing his assessment,” said a White House spokesman.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Egyptian Intifada: A Timeline (Week 1)

As Tahrir Square Goes so goes the Middle East?


As Tahrir Square goes so goes the Middle East?



by Franklin Lamb, Al Manar


It is difficult to overstate the potential for Egyptian citizens advancing universal aspirations for freedom, dignity and basic human rights now spreading from the determination of those who for more than a week have risked their lives while inspiring much of the World at Cairo’s Tahrir (“Liberation”) Square.  Tahrir public plaza near central Cairo has been the traditional site for numerous major protests and demonstrations over the years, including during the 1977 Egyptian Bread Riots and the March 2003 protests against the American war in Iraq. Washington DC and Tel Aviv are reportedly shocked by the rapidly unfolding and unpredictable revolution.

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

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

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

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

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

Not buying all of these scare tactics,  the Obama Administration’s is revving up its “now means three days ago and counting” demands.  Mr .Mubarak told CNN on 2/3/11 that  he\’s fed up and  would like nothing better than to step down but chaos and the Muslim Brotherhood would surely follow. His closest political confident and  just appointed Vice-President Omar Suleiman also predicted chaos if Mr Mubarak resigned, saying it would leave a body without a head. The White House is still leaning toward Omar Suleiman but believes that  Suleiman was aware of the  campaign in recent days to intimidate the opposition, and are staffers are wondering whether he is still an  acceptable choice.

Late word from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is that the Obama Administration may support  Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa, who has joined anti-Mubarak protests in Tahrir Square, and is hinting he may run for president in the upcoming election. Israel would support him over Mohammad al Baradei  who many view as pro-Iranian.

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

Both Washington and Tel Aviv are were reported shocked by the speed of  the Egyptian revolt and their intelligences agencies admit not seeing it coming. Much of the American reaction is being scripted by AIPAC and other Israel lobby agents who regularly contribute campaign cash to 90 percent of the  US Congress , including  390 of  the 435 Members of the House of Representative ( 89.7%)  who voted to support Israel after it committed repeatedly condemned  serial murders of innocent civilians and myriad crimes against humanity in Gaza.

These Israeli-pushed “American”  initiatives will likely range from possibly terminating aid to Lebanon ( some Obama Administration friends of Israel claim there is a  a link between the  South Beirut Hezbollah neighborhood of Dahiyeh and Cairo’s Tahir Square events ) and cutting off  Egypt’s  nearly 30 years of annual multi-billion dollar cash grants as well as massive military hardware.

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

What will ultimately determine  in which ways the Middle East moves following Tahrir Square events is not the armed might of the regional super power or the weapons of the global superpower. Both Israel and the US can have a short term impact but the former is shaking  while the latter, equally impotent to subdue 83 million Egyptians and  perhaps soon millions of Palestinians, Jordanians, Yemenis and others, is trying to stall any major regime change in favor of  cosmetic adjustments to the current government.

Even the Obama Administrations current public choice, Omar Sulieman is meeting with increasing resistance in Washington as details of his CV emerged including being a torture specialist and possibly a Mossad agent.

What  both Israel and the US  fear most is a determined and successful grass roots movement than will liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation. The Obama administration can be expected to continue  to temporize events as best it can while calculating how to insert its choice of a compliant President in Mubarak’s palace.

As one Congressional commented by email: “ The last thing the White House or Israel want is an Egyptian Chavez, or even someone like Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.  Completely unacceptable would be anyone with even the hint of pro-Iranian or Hezbollah leanings.

The  State Department favors another strong man, with an essentially rubber stamp Parliament after “free elections” as long as there are no  troublesome Algerian, Gaza, or Lebanon style  election results. The US-Israel bottom line is that Egypt’s next government must be one that  will  guarantee that the 1979  Camp David Accords and Egypt’s willingness to  continue accepting a total of more than three billions in US taxpayer dollars annually as bribe money to collaborate with Israel against Palestine.

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

The hegemonic objectives of  the 1979 Camp David have rolled across the region for three decades, being  rejected and increasingly confronted by a growing culture of Resistance set in motion with the 1979 Imam Khomeini-led revolution.

Both 1979 events fueled myriad other more immediate causes  including those noted above and significantly inspired the current  Egyptian  eruptions, some of  the paths of which are predictable while the  results are unknown.

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

Posted in EgyptComments Off on As Tahrir Square Goes so goes the Middle East?

Why Did the President Cross the Road?



by David Swanson  

To kneel before the corporate throne of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. And here’s what he had to say there on Monday…..


President Obama again stressed that he wanted to freeze non-war/military spending well into the next president’s tenure:

“That’s why I’ve proposed that we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. Understand what this means. This would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and bring this spending — domestic discretionary spending — down to the lowest share of our economy since Eisenhower was president. That was a long time ago.”

Obama Speaks at U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Obama Speaks at U.S. Chamber of Commerce

President Obama again pretended that Social Security is breaking a budget that it is not in any way a part of, and that Social Security is in trouble. (In reality the damage he did to it a few months back could be repaired and more by simply requiring people with large incomes to pay in at the same rate as people with small ones):

“Because the driving force on our deficits are entitlements spending. And that’s going to require both parties to work together, because those are some tough problems that we’re going to have to solve. And I am eager to work with both parties and with the Chamber to take additional steps across the budget to put our nation on a sounder fiscal footing.”

Which branch of the government is the Chamber exactly? I need one of those Constitutional refreshers that Congress attaches to bills now. And how can the Chamber support, i.e. destroy, Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid if it is not a branch of government?

Obama avoided, at least for a while, the topic of spending on that majority of the budget that goes to the military and wars, and which he has proposed not to freeze. There were more important matters to attend to first. Such as lowering corporate taxes (who knew there still were any?):

“Now, another barrier government can remove — and I hear a lot about this from many of you — is a burdensome corporate tax code with one of the highest rates in the world. You know how it goes: because of various loopholes and carve-outs that have built up over the years, some industries pay an average rate that is four or five times higher than others. Companies are taxed heavily for making investments with equity, yet the tax code actually pays companies to invest using leverage. As a result, you’ve got too many companies ending up making decisions based on what their tax director says instead of what their engineer designs or what their factories produce. And that puts our entire economy at a disadvantage. We need something smarter, something simpler, something fairer. That’s why I want to lower the corporate rate and eliminate these loopholes to pay for it, so that it doesn’t add a dime to our deficit. And I’m asking for your help in this fight. I think it can be done.”

And removing regulations:

“Which brings me to the last barriers we’re trying to remove, and those are outdated and unnecessary regulations. I’ve ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them. Already we’re dramatically cutting down on the paperwork that saddles businesses with huge administrative costs. We’re improving the way FDA evaluates things like medical devices, to get innovative and lifesaving treatments to market faster. And the EPA, based on the need for further scientific analysis, delayed the greenhouse gas permitting rules for biomass.”

Obama threw in praise for regulations along with his promise to reduce them. And then he came, in a roundabout way, to the topic of war:

“And I’m reminded, toward the end of the 1930s, amidst the Depression, the looming prospect of war, FDR, President Roosevelt, realized he would need to form a new partnership with business if we were going to become what he would later call the ‘arsenal of democracy.’ And as you can imagine, the relationship between the President and business leaders during the course of the Depression had been rocky at times. They’d grown somewhat fractured by the New Deal.”

Somewhat fractured? Yes, I suppose an attempted coup qualifies. The funny thing is, though, that FDR did not propose any of the remedies laid out above. He did, however, spend tons and tons of public dollars on the military.

“Some, like the head of GM, hadn’t previously known the President, and if anything had seen him as an adversary. But he gathered his family and he explained that he was going to head up what would become the War Production Board. . . . And in the years that followed, automobile factories converted to making planes and tanks. And corset factories made grenade belts. A toy company made compasses. A pinball machine maker turned out shells. 1941 would see the greatest expansion of manufacturing in the history of America. And not only did this help us win the war; it led to millions of new jobs and helped produce the great American middle class.”

Never mind that investing in peaceful jobs would have produced more and better paying jobs. Obama’s pretense that investing in war saved the economy illustrates where he is headed. If he wanted jobs he could invest in green energy or infrastructure or education and produce many more jobs with a broader impact on the whole economy. Instead he wants to turn plowshares into swords. He wants to push the war economy to the breaking point.

Obama could have walked a block east and visited the AFL-CIO, which would have gone right along with his agenda. But he didn’t want to. He doesn’t want unions interfering in the Chamber’s winning of the future. He doesn’t, in other words, want a middle class. He wants to be liked by the boys at the Chamber. He may even aspire to running the place someday. That vision might be characterized by some people as embodying the audacity of hope. I have other words for it

2011 copyright – David Swanson

Posted in USAComments Off on Why Did the President Cross the Road?

Shoah’s pages


February 2011
« Jan   Mar »