Archive | October 11th, 2011




A few days ago I compared two critiques of my new book ‘The Wandering Who”. One was by rabid Zionist Mark Gardner and the other by American academic Kevin MacDonald. I called my piece Supremacists on The Wandering Who’.

In my article I labeled Gardner as a ‘Jewish Supremacist’ and MacDonald as a ‘White Supremacist’. However, since the publication of my column it has been pointed out by a few readers that I may have been insufficiently careful in the way I attributed supremacism to Kevin MacDonald.

The definition of supremacism is actually pretty straightforward. It is the belief that a particular race, species, ethnic group, religion, gender, sexual orientation, belief system or culture is superior to others, and thus entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not.

What is clear beyond any doubt is that such a definition fits Zionist ideology, discourse or practice like a glove. Zionism is driven by the belief that Jewish people are entitled to dominate, control and rule their supposed ‘promised land’ at the expense of its indigenous population i.e. the Palestinians.   But is this only true of Zionism? Is not any Jewish ‘progressive’ discourse, driven by tribal and racial inclinations towards segregation and determined to enforce on others how their struggle must be conducted, is not this also fundamentally supremacist?

My point is actually very simple and, also it seems, devastating. I believe that every single Jewish political discourse is chauvinist to the bone and is either already supremacist or on the verge of becoming supremacist.

But what about Kevin MacDonald? Is he a White Supremacist? Well, now I‘m not so sure. He’s certainly concerned with his white heritage and, like many Jews, he is also concerned with his genetic pool. MacDonald’s world view is clearly shaped by biological determinism and this is something I am very uncomfortable with.  Yet, does he insist upon privilege? Does he seek to ‘dominate’, ‘control’ or ‘rule’ other non-white people? I’m not so sure, but I’m certainly going to look into it and it may take some time. But I will come with an answer.


I also asked myself, why did I label MacDonald as a White Supremacist without really elaborating on the topic or explaining myself?  My answer is slightly embarrassing.  For quite a while, I’ve seen the ‘White Supremacist’ tag attached to MacDonald and to so many other people, and at some point I must have let my guard down and allowed this highly charged terminology to infiltrate my vocabulary.  I didn’t even notice the glaring fact that those who have bombarded us with this inflammatory label are themselves the ultimate supremacists –  ADL, Zionists and even some Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists.

It’s now clear to me why Jewish ethnic leaders toss around the ‘White Supremacist’ label. It is there to divert attention from the true depth of their own Jewish Supremacism, an ideological tendency deeply embedded in every form of Jewish identity politics. For every Jewish political collective is a ‘Jews only’ exclusive club concerned primarily with Jewish particular interests.

It is more than likely that what we have here is a clear case of projection.

Projection is basically a psychological defense mechanism whereby one ‘projects’ one’s own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, and feelings onto someone else. It seems likely that many amongst those who attribute supremacism to others are themselves supremacists. I will obviously have to look into my own psyche and find out why, on this occasion, I tossed around the supremacist tag. I guess that my escape from Jewishness is not yet complete and from time to time I follow my tribal instinct. In retrospect, this is, indeed, a matter for regret.


I ended my piece last week by quoting some beautiful lines by Indian Guru Satya Sai Baba suggesting that they depict fairly my thoughts about race, ethnicity and origin:

“There is only one RACE

The race of humankind

There is only one religion

The religion of LOVE

There is only ONE language

the language of the HEART”

(Sri Satya Sai Baba)

May I now add just a few words of my own? Though I agree with Sai Baba that there is only one race, the race of humankind, I also contend that we are also very different from each other, and that this differentiation is actually precious and it is this diversity that makes life meaningful.

I would love to see all people maintain their culture and heritage but certainly not at the expense of others. Let me be precise. As far as I am concerned, it is totally kosher for an orthodox Jew to celebrate his or her heritage in his or her environment. However, a ‘progressive’ Jew opposing the burka in the name of ‘women rights’ may as well be regarded as ‘kosher’ by some but as far as I am concerned, it is also nothing less than sheer supremacism.

 You can now order the book on


Posted in Politics1 Comment

Dead Men Tell No Tales: The CIA, 9/11 and the Awlaki Assassination

By Tom Burghardt

On September 30, the CIA and Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) assets under the Agency’s control, assassinated the alleged “external operations” chief of the Afghan-Arab database of disposable Western intelligence assets, also known as Al-Qaeda, Anwar al-Awlaki, and a second American citizen, Samir Khan, the 25-year-old editor of Inspire magazine, in a drone strike in Yemen.

As The Washington Post reported last month, the “commingling” of CIA officers, JSOC paramilitary troops and contractors “occupy an expanding netherworld between intelligence and military operations” where “congressional intelligence and armed services committees rarely get a comprehensive view.”

Or any “view” at all, which is precisely what the CIA and Pentagon have long desired; an oversight-free zone where American policymakers operate, as Dick Cheney infamously put it, on the “dark side,” a position fully-embraced by the “hope and change” administration of Barack Obama.

Awlaki’s state-sponsored killing, like the May 2 murder of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, resurface many unanswered questions concerning the 9/11 attacks, the so-called trigger for America’s global “War on Terror.”

But before turning to those issues, it is necessary to take a detour and examine administration actions; specifically the deliberations undertaken by Obama’s national security team which culminated in Awlaki’s death.

White House “Death Panel”

Unlike the fantasies of the corporate-controlled Tea Party who charged during the run-up to the White House sell-out of health care reform that the administration would create “death panels” to deny care to the elderly, it has since emerged that Team Obama has stood-up the authentic article.

According to The Washington Post, President Obama’s Justice Department “wrote a secret memorandum authorizing the lethal targeting” of Awlaki. The Post reports that the memorandum “was produced following a review of the legal issues raised by striking a U.S. citizen and involved senior lawyers from across the administration. There was no dissent about the legality of killing Aulaqi.”

That memorandum, according to The New York Times, was drafted in June 2010, some six months after Awlaki had been placed on the White House hit list, by Office of Legal Counsel attorneys “David Barron and Martin Lederman.”

Both former OLC lawyers are prominent “liberals” from prestigious universities; Barron at Harvard and Lederman at Georgetown University.

Ironically enough, in several scholarly articles they had railed against the previous administration’s adaptation of the “Unitary Executive Theory” promulgated by “torture memo” authors Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Under Bush, OLC opinions were used to justify everything from warrantless wiretapping, the domestic deployment of the military to arrest Americans, to the torture and indefinite detention of “terrorist” suspects at the Guantánamo Bay prison gulag and CIA “black sites.”

This of course begs the question: if Awlaki’s murder was “legal,” why then was the authorization to do so reached in camera by officials following a deliberative process which can’t be shared with the public because of “national security”?

The answer should be chilling and shocking to all Americans: because the nucleus of a death squad state recalling those stood-up in Chile and Argentina during the “dirty war” period of the 1970s may now exist.

Reuters disclosed that Americans “are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.”

“There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel,” reporter Mark Hosenball wrote, “which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council. … Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.”

According to Reuters, “targeting recommendations are drawn up by a committee of mid-level National Security Council and agency officials. Their recommendations are then sent to the panel of NSC ‘principals,’ meaning Cabinet secretaries and intelligence unit chiefs, for approval.”

A “former official” told Hosenball that “one of the reasons for making senior officials principally responsible for nominating Americans for the target list was to ‘protect’ the president,” i.e., provide Obama legal cover under the thin veneer afforded by “plausible deniability.”

McClatchy News reported that “broadly speaking” White House orders to kill Awlaki were based on claims that “the nation’s inherent right of self-defense [is] recognized under international law.” However, “international law also imposes limits: Targeted killing is banned except to protect against ‘concrete, specific and imminent’ danger.”

And although the administration now claims that Awlaki was targeted for death because “his role in AQAP had gone ‘from inspirational to operational’,” Reuters disclosed that “officials acknowledge that some of the intelligence purporting to show Awlaki’s hands-on role in plotting attacks was patchy.”

In fact, the White House has failed to provide any proof whatsoever that Awlaki posed an “imminent danger” to the United States, although there is considerable evidence that he was on the radar of U.S. and allied secret state intelligence agencies for more than a decade, had close ties to several of the 9/11 hijackers and could have been picked up and indicted at any time.

Instead, federal law enforcement officials gave Awlaki a green light to leave the United States, unlike thousands of innocent Muslim-Americans swept-up and detained by the FBI in the post-9/11 hysteria that followed the attacks.

A “former military intelligence officer who worked with special operations troops to hunt down high-value terrorism targets,” told the right-wing Washington Times: “I think it’s pretty easy to understand why they didn’t take him alive. Would you want to deal with the hassle of trying to put him on trial, an American citizen that has gotten so much press for being the target of a CIA kill order? That would be a nightmare. The ACLU would be crawling all over the Justice Department for due process in an American court.”

That about sums up the dominant mindset of an Empire in sharp decline: the rule of law and due process for criminal suspects reduced to a “hassle.”

Slouching Towards Dictatorship

Obama’s national security team justified whacking Awlaki, as with their earlier hit on Osama Bin Laden, by referencing the Bush-era Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), hastily passed by Congress in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

“A decade later,” McClatchy reported, “the Obama administration contends that this wartime authority remains even if it’s evolved for reasons the administration won’t fully elucidate.”

The relevant section of AUFM reads: “IN GENERAL — That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.” (emphasis added)

Readers will undoubtedly note that in passing the resolution, Congress not only ceded its authority to declare war to the Executive Branch but also planted the seeds of the administration’s preemptive war doctrines along with an unprecedented expansion of its domestic surveillance powers.

More pertinently, is the reason why the administration “won’t fully elucidate” how the Bush-era AUMF “evolved” chiefly due to the fact that secret annexes now exist which authorize the killing of Americans, not only in Yemen or other “War on Terror” fronts, but right here in the United States itself?

After all, it’s not beyond the Obama administration to play fast and loose with the truth or hide repressive policies under layers of top secret presidential “findings” or a multitude of CIA and Pentagon black programs, as did the previous Bush government.

Recall that during the run-up to the reauthorization of three expiring provisions of the USA Patriot Act, civil libertarians decried the use of secret legal memos justifying everything from unchecked access to internet and telephone records to the deployment of government-sanctioned malware on private computers during “national security” investigations.

Recall too, that the Obama administration, as The New York Times disclosed in June, handed the FBI “significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents, allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention.”

These “news rules,” the Times averred, will give agents “more latitude” to investigate citizens even when there is no evidence they have exhibited “signs of criminal or terrorist activity.”

It gets worse.

Last month, The New York Times revealed that the FBI “is permitted to include people on the government’s terrorist watch list even if they have been acquitted of terrorism-related offenses or the charges are dropped.”

Under these new standards, the Bureau may deem someone a “known or suspected terrorist,” not based on evidence gathered through a criminal investigation, but solely if officials have “particularized derogatory information,” including that derived from First Amendment protected activities, to support to support an individuals’ watch listing or placement on a “no-fly” list.

One administration wag, speaking on condition of anonymity because to do otherwise would reveal “closely held deliberations within the administration,” but did so anyway because this was clearly a sanctioned leak to stenographer Peter Finn, told The Washington Postthat “what constitutes due process in [the Awlaki case] is a due process in war.”

“The administration officials refused to disclose the exact legal analysis used to authorize targeting Aulaqi,” Finn wrote, “or how they considered any Fifth Amendment right to due process.”

We now know, thanks to Reuters, that authorization came from a White House death panel, an extra-constitutional committee of anonymous officials operating outside the rule of law.

As we have seen since Barack Obama took office, as under the previous Bush government, the Constitution is a meaningless scrap of paper with some words on it, duly trotted out on national holidays only to be cast aside in practice; that is, when it isn’t used as a rhetorical hammer against assorted “new Hitlers” or geopolitical rivals whose resources corporate America seek to “liberate.”

Dead Men Tell No Tales

As toxic to democratic norms and the rule of law as the Awlaki affair clearly is, there are underlying parapolitical themes surrounding his murder which strengthen suspicions that what took place in Yemen on September 30 is more than just another story about an overt power grab by the Executive Branch.

While the government and media continue to cover-up the role played by the CIA and other secret state agencies in alleged intelligence “failures” leading up to the 9/11 attacks, evidence suggests that the Awlaki killing, as with last May’s murder of former bête noire and on-again, off-again ally, Osama Bin Laden, may have been a “clean-up” operation designed to remove inconvenient witnesses with knowledge of Agency involvement in the plot.

As Antifascist Calling reported nearly two years ago in the wake of the aborted 2009 bombing of Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day over Detroit, a plot for which Awlaki was accused of orchestrating, though evidence can’t be supplied because it’s “secret,” The Washington Post disclosed that Awlaki had extensive contacts with 9/11 hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi, Khalid Almihdhar and Hani Hanjour who “had spent time at his mosques in California and Falls Church.”

In a series of 2010 articles (hereherehere and here), I reported on the stark parallels between September 11 and the Flight 253 affair.

Similar to the 2001 attacks we were told “changed everything,” far from being a failure to “connect the dots,” intelligence and law enforcement officials possessed sufficient information that should have prevented accused bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, from boarding that plane and placing the lives of nearly 300 air passengers at risk.

And wile Awlaki wasn’t given a free pass by the administration in that botched attack, earlier government failures to apprehend him certainly set the stage.

According to History Commons, “shortly before the [FBI] investigation [into Awlaki’s alleged ties to the now-shuttered Holy Land Foundation] is closed,” in 2000, Awlaki “is beginning to associate with hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar shortly before the investigation ends.”

“For instance,” History Commons avers, “on February 4, one month before the FBI investigation is closed, al-Awlaki talks on the telephone four times with hijacker associate [and suspected Saudi intelligence agent] Omar al-Bayoumi.”

“The 9/11 Commission will later speculate that these calls are related to Alhazmi and Almihdhar, since al-Bayoumi is helping them that day, and that Alhazmi or Almihdhar may even have been using al-Bayoumi’s phone at the time. Al-Bayoumi had also been the subject of an FBI counterterrorism investigation in 1999.”

Keep in mind that at least two of the hijackers, Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar, figure prominently in recent revelations by researcher Kevin Fenton, the author of Disconnecting the Dots.

In a recent conversation with Boiling Frogs Post’s Sibel Edmonds and Peter B. Collins, Fenton said that during the course of his investigation, drawn from the Congressional 9/11 Joint Inquiry, the 9/11 Commission, the Justice Department’s Inspector General’s report, and the CIA’s still-redacted Inspector General’s report, he discovered that the CIA had deliberately withheld information from the FBI that the future hijackers had entered the United States with multiple entry visas issued in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Even though the Agency had identified the pair as international terrorists who attended a 2000 Al-Qaeda summit in Malaysia where they and others, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Khallad Bin Attash, one of the principle architects of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, planned the assault on the USS Cole and the 9/11 attacks, they kept this from the FBI, information that could have led straight to the heart of Al-Qaeda’s “planes operation.”

Fenton provides substantial evidence that the CIA’s Alec Station Director Richard Blee and deputy, Tom Wilshire, concealed intelligence from investigators, concluding this “information was intentionally omitted in order to allow an al-Qaeda attack to go forward against the United States.”

As part of this continuing cover-up, Awlaki’s ties to the 9/11 hijackers were far more extensive than secret state officials have led us to believe.

In fact, although the Obama administration has justified killing Awlaki with false claims that he was AQAP’s “external operations” chief, his role before 9/11 was substantially more significant from an investigatory perspective: that of a “fixer,” first in San Diego where he assisted Saudi spook Omar al-Bayoumi in “settling” Alhazmi and Almihdhar, and later in Falls Church, Virginia, where he did the same for Hani Hanjour.

In 2002, Newsweek revealed that “some federal investigators suspect that al-Bayoumi could have been an advance man for the 9-11 hijackers, sent by Al Qaeda to assist the plot that ultimately claimed 3,000 lives.”

“Two months after al-Bayoumi began aiding Alhazmi and Almihdhar,” Newsweek disclosed, “al-Bayoumi’s wife began receiving regular stipends, often monthly and usually around $2,000, totaling tens of thousands of dollars.

Payments arrived “in the form of cashier’s checks, purchased from Washington’s Riggs Bank by Princess Haifa bint Faisal, the daughter of the late King Faisal and wife of Prince Bandar, the Saudi envoy who is a prominent Washington figure and personal friend of the Bush family.”

With startling similarities to the Awlaki case, ten days after the attacks, al-Bayoumi is picked up by British authorities in London, where he had relocated in July 2001, at the request of the FBI. Although his phone calls, bank accounts and associations are scrutinized, the Bureau claim they found no connections to terrorism.

The Washington Post will report that by 2002 the FBI had concluded, the same year Awlaki leaves the U.S., “that no evidence could be found of any organized domestic effort to aid the hijackers.”

Recall that new information linking some members of the Saudi royal family and its intelligence apparatus to the attacks has recently surfaced. Last month, The Miami Herald revealed that two weeks before the kamikaze assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a Saudi family “abruptly vacated their luxury home near Sarasota, leaving a brand new car in the driveway, a refrigerator full of food, fruit on the counter–and an open safe in a master bedroom.”

Investigative reporters Anthony Summers and Dan Christensen learned that “law enforcement agents not only discovered the home was visited by vehicles used by the hijackers, but phone calls were linked between the home and those who carried out the death flights–including leader Mohamed Atta–in discoveries never before revealed to the public.”

“Ten years after the deadliest attack of terrorism on U.S. soil,” Summers and Christensen wrote, “new information has emerged that shows the FBI found troubling ties between the hijackers and residents in the upscale community in southwest Florida, but the investigation wasn’t reported to Congress or mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.”

In a follow-up piece that significantly advanced the story, researcher Russ Baker reported on the WhoWhatWhy web site “that those alleged confederates were closely tied to influential members of the Saudi ruling elite.”

Building on information first disclosed by the Herald, Baker, the author of Family of Secrets, reports that this “now-revealed link” between those who consorted with the hijackers in Florida “and the highest ranks of the Saudi establishment, reopens questions about the White House’s controversial approval for multiple charter flights allowing Saudi nationals to depart the U.S., beginning about 48 hours after the attacks, without the passengers being interviewed by law enforcement–despite the identification of the majority of the hijackers as Saudis.”

Is there a pattern between the hands-off treatment afforded well-connected Saudis and Anwar al-Awlaki’s casual, and inexplicable, flight from the United States?

“After 9/11” History Commons points out, “the FBI will question al-Awlaki, and he will admit to meeting with Alhazmi several times, but say he does not remember what they discussed. He will not claim to remember Almihdhar at all.” Other accounts suggest that the relationship was much closer.

“The 9/11 Congressional Inquiry,” History Commons avers, “claim that Alhazmi and Almihdhar ‘were closely affiliated with [al-Awlaki] who reportedly served as their spiritual adviser during their time in San Diego. … Several persons informed the FBI after September 11 that this imam had closed-door meetings in San Diego with Almihdhar, Alhazmi, and another individual, whom al-Bayoumi had asked to help the hijackers’.”

“Around August 2000,” History Commons reports, “al-Awlaki resigns as imam and travels to unknown ‘various countries.’ In early 2001, he will be appointed the imam to a much larger mosque in Falls Church, Virginia. During this time frame, Alhazmi, Almihdhar, and fellow hijacker Hani Hanjour will move to Virginia and attend al-Awlaki’s mosque there.”

Anecdotally, in 2003 Newsweek reports: “Lincoln Higgie, an antiques dealer who lived across the street from the mosque where Aulaqi used to lead prayer, told Newsweek that he distinctly recalls the imam knocking on his door in the first week of August 2001 to tell him he was leaving for Kuwait. ‘He came over before he left and told me that something very big was going to happen, and that he had to be out of the country when it happened,’ recalls Higgie.”

The antiques dealer later told The New York Times, that when he learned that Awlaki would be permanently leaving San Diego, “he told the imam to stop by if he was ever in the area–and got a strange response.” Higgie said, “‘I don’t think you’ll be seeing me. I won’t be coming back to San Diego again. Later on you’ll find out why’.”

Although the FBI suspected Awlaki “had some connection with the 9/11 plot,” authorities claim there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him, nor can he be deported because he’s an American citizen. And when the Bureau hatched an ill-conceived plan to arrest him on an obscure charge of “transporting prostitutes across state lines,” that plan collapsed when Awlaki left the U.S. in March 2002.

“But on October 10, 2002,” History Commons reports, “he makes a surprise return to the U.S.” Although his name is on a terrorist watch list and he is detained by Customs’ officials when he lands in New York, they are informed by the FBI that “his name was taken off the watch list just the day before. He is released after only three hours.”

“Throughout 2002,” History Commons informs us, Awlaki is the “subject of an active Customs investigation into money laundering called Operation Greenquest, but he is not arrested for this either, or for the earlier contemplated prostitution charges. At the time, the FBI is fighting Greenquest, and Customs officials will later accuse the FBI of sabotaging Greenquest investigations.”

Awlaki again leaves the U.S., this time for good. Although the FBI admits they were “very interested” in Awlaki, they fail to stop him leaving the country. One FBI source told U.S. News and World Report, “We don’t know how he got out.”

Inexplicably however, it was not until 2008 that secret state officials concluded that Awlaki was an Al-Qaeda operative! This beggars belief, and raises the question as to why he was allowed to leave in the first place. It certainly can’t be for lack of evidence or that when Awlaki set-up shop, first in London and finally in Yemen, he is continually under surveillance by British, Yemeni and American intelligence agencies.

Although interviewed four times by the FBI after September 11, the Bureau concluded, according to The New York Times, that Awlaki’s “contacts with the hijackers and other radicals were random.”

Other investigators however, disagreed. “One detective,” the Times reported, whose name has been scrubbed from 9/11 Commission files, told staff that he believed Awlaki “was at the center of the 9/11 story.” At the time of the Flight 253 affair, I wrote that “despite, or possibly because of these dubious connections he was allowed to leave the country.”

In fact, the curious disinterest exhibited by authorities in bringing Awlaki to ground following September 11, were neither “errors in judgement” nor “mistakes” by overtaxed investigators but are rather, a modus operandi which suggests that Awlaki and others were part of a CIA domestic operation which allowed the 9/11 plot to go forward.

Nothing in what I have written above should be construed as justification for the extrajudicial assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki. In fact, the opposite conclusion can be drawn. The available evidence indicates that Awlaki could have been arrested multiple times. At theleast serious end of the criminal justice spectrum he could have been charged with providing “material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization,” to whit, Al-Qaeda, and legally taken out of circulation.

That he wasn’t and continued to operate freely as a propagandist, despite substantial corroboration from multiple law enforcement sources that he was a key figure in the pre-9/11 domestic support network, suggests that Awlaki may have been a double agent, albeit one who had decidedly gone “off the reservation.”

Awlaki’s handling by authorities raise serious questions about just how extensive U.S. support for Al-Qaeda was prior to, and possibly even after the September 11 attacks, particularly in resource-rich global hot-spots.

As numerous journalists and researchers have painstakingly documented, Al-Qaeda, allied terrorist outfits and international narco-trafficking networks have a long, sordid history of supporting U.S. covert operations that targeted America’s geopolitical rivals even as Bin Laden’s far-flung organization plotted to attack the United States itself.

In this light, Awlaki’s “targeted killing” as with the earlier hit on Osama Bin Laden, may be part of a larger CIA/Pentagon operation to remove inconvenient participants and witnesses from the scene who might have a thing or two to say about the crimes and intrigues hatched by the imperialist Empire.

After all, dead men tell no tales…

Posted in USAComments Off on Dead Men Tell No Tales: The CIA, 9/11 and the Awlaki Assassination

Clashes between Christians and Muslims in Egypt a Western plot


A prominent analyst warns about Zio-Nazi intention to destabilize and break Egypt up into manageable pieces and how the latest clashes serve this interest.

Following the burning of a Christian church in Egypt and Molotov cocktails being thrown at security forces during a protest, which was met with a deadly response, Press TV talks with Mark Glenn, of the Crescent Cross and Solidarity Movement in Idaho about the timing of the violence when elections are due and how this only benefits the Zionist state of IsraHell.

He reminds readers of the overall strategy of the Zionists to create crisis between Christians and Muslims through covert means and that what we are seeing now is an example of that. Following is an approximate transcript of the interview.

Press TV: What can you tell us about the clashes that are occurring in Egypt?

Mark Glenn: The first thing we have to ask is whether or not this is what it appears to be on the surface or whether there are interested parties that are deliberately fomenting this clash.

Not wanting to sound like a broken record, nevertheless, this old strategy of divide and conquer is something that Israel and her intelligence agents are constantly doing.

Let’s not forget about the fact that there has been several spy scandals that have erupted in Egypt within the last year involving Israeli spies who have been caught and arrested. This is exactly the kind of thing – the destabilization of Egypt and the breaking of it up into different sectarian regions is something that benefits only one entity in the region and that is Israel.

So, in my opinion what we see taking place right now has all of the fingerprints of some intelligence agency behind it. The first question we have to ask is who burned down the church recently? And with regards to the present clashes that are taking place – Who started throwing Molotov cocktails at the security forces that resulted in them firing live rounds on these demonstrators?

We have to ask these questions. We are not at the luxury anymore of just taking events like this at face value. We have to ask these questions whether or not there are interested parties who are deliberately fomenting these things in order to create an atmosphere of instability in Egypt.

Press TV: When you say fomenting a destabilizing atmosphere who would you say this is occurring against in Egypt?

Mark Glenn: It has been Israeli policy now going on for 30 years that eventually Egypt and the other Arab countries would need to be broken up into smaller factions and there was a policy paper that had been written on an official level entitled “Israel’s strategy in the Middle East for the 1980s” by Oded Yinon and one of the specific things he talked about in this policy paper – that was adopted by the Israeli government – was breaking Egypt up along sectarian lines between Christians and Muslims in order to make it easier to manage instead of one big large Arab country such as Egypt.

And everyone knows that Egypt is the powerhouse Arab country in the region. Instead of one large Arab country they would like to see it broken up into four or five smaller countries. This has been specifically discussed – creating a separate area of Egypt known as Coptic Egypt.

So, these events taking place right now would fit exactly in with what Israel and other Western intelligence agencies would like to see happen in the region, which is to break these countries up into smaller, easier to manage entities.

Press TV: Isn’t it odd that these protests are occurring right before the parliamentary elections coming up on November 28th?

Mark Glenn: Of course. As we said earlier – all of these things have the fingerprints of western intelligence services all over them. When things like this happen – particularly this close to parliamentary elections – we have to at least suspect that there are interested parties who want to make sure the ship of state is steered in a direction that is going to benefit western and Israeli foreign policy objectives.

And so who benefits from something like this at this time – a mere few weeks before these elections? Of course, again to create this air of instability and to basically get this new Egyptian government off with broken legs so that it cannot even function as a viable political entity, why not bring something like this into the picture.

Keep in mind something like this is very easy to orchestrate – all it takes is a gallon of gasoline and a few matches to burn a church down to anger the Christian community at a time when Christian Muslim relations are already strained in Egypt and then to have a protest where you have a few well-placed individuals who have been trained at causing mayhem and escalating violence to start throwing Molotov cocktails or rocks or whatever it may be.

And of course security forces who are already on edge – they have had a years’ worth of political and social upheaval – they’re already on edge so it’s very easy to have something like this take place – it doesn’t take a lot of planning or anything like that to bring something like this about. And again all of this is only going to benefit one interest in the region and of course that is Israel.

Press TV: The main focal point of the violence has occurred because the protesters want the downfall of Field Marshal Tantawi, the leader of SCAF. Where do you think that will come in play?

Mark Glenn: Well, we’re assuming of course that this is a genuine desire on the part of these Egyptian partisans. I’m not saying that it’s not; we just have to remember that in a situation like this, information is managed.

The real question that people and particularly people in the West should be asking is this – Why at this time? The ratio in Egypt you have 80 million people living in that country, 10 percent roughly of which are Christian – we’re talking about as many as 8 million Christians living in a mostly Muslim country – So why now? Why literally within just a few months do we see all of this upheaval taking place?

Of course the narrative that we receive in the West is that Christians and Muslims cannot get along and therefore they might as well just pick up their guns and their knives and go at each other and may the best man win. Of course, in the end there is only one entity that profits from this and it is Israel and her Zionist lobby throughout the world.

That’s the real question that has to be asked is – Why now? Why at this particularly period in history when Islam has been around for 1400 years do we see the Christians and Muslim’s fighting.

This is an artificial conflict that is taking place. It has been started and is being managed by a third party who is going to benefit from centuries of warring between the two singularly largest civilizations in the world – we’re talking about half the world’s population being encompassed within the Christian and Islamic world. There’s only one party going to benefit by these two civilizations wiping each other out and it is the Zionist entity.

So this is the real question that has to be asked…This is the filter through which all of this information has to be considered as we see these things taking place. It is an artificial conflict – the Christians and the Muslims are perfectly capable of living peacefully side by side with each other, they have for centuries.

This is an arson – a cultural arson of sorts. Somebody has shown up with a gallon of gasoline and some matches and has set this thing on fire in order to collect the insurance money that’s going to follow after it’s all over with and it’s the Jewish lobby worldwide – let’s just call it for what it is.

Christians and Muslims need to put down their guns and understand that they have everything in common with each other not the least of which are two vibrant civilizations as I said that make up half the world’s population. And that they have a common enemy that would love nothing more than to see them wipe each other out so that what’s left of the carcass the vultures can come in and pick clean.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Clashes between Christians and Muslims in Egypt a Western plot

A. Loewenstein Online Newsletter

Rest easy, Israel, the storm has passed, keep on occupying

10 Oct 2011



What’s that about an Israeli media bubble? You say there’s nothing to worry about? Sorry what? Occupying Palestinians is fine? Rising racism against Arabs best avoided? Yes, of course it is. Guy Bechor writes in Yediot, the country’s biggest paper, that Israel is now emerging from a down-turn and even falsely claims Australia has outlawed Welcome to paradise, Zionists:

Israelis were the first ones of all people to raise the de-legitimization argument: Israel would turn into the new South Africa as result of its isolation in the Western world, they said. They inflated this claim, which almost turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy. However, there was never much substance to this argument, and even if there was, it was curbed in the past year.

Why did it happen? Because we are not talking about the establishment of a Palestinian state. Israel has agreed to it. We are now talking about the conditions for establishing such state, and here the Palestinians went back to their rejectionist role. A world premised on dialogues and talks is unwilling to accept a unilateral Palestinian dictate that has no peace, no recognition and no security.

Australia currently heads the states that decided to put an end to the racism festival. After an emotional debate in parliament, officials decided to make all protests and boycotts against Israeli businesses a criminal offense. Minister for Consumer Affairs Michael O’Brien said that “To think you are going to influence the policies of the government of Israel by attacking a business running in this state is just appalling.”

The change is already being felt in campuses worldwide. Dozens of Jewish and Israeli groups are being set up. They present the Israeli case and enjoy positive resonance. The universities are no longer reckless, as used to be the case in the past, even though some of them are still dominated by confused liberal discourse. Here’s an example of this change: Columbia University, which last year received Ahmadinejad with great honor, forbade him from visiting this year. This is a precedent that shall affect other global academic institutions.

Codifying secrecy as a way of doing business, thanks to Obama

10 Oct 2011

In case anybody still had any illusions about the obsession of the Obama administration to pursue whistle-blowers or anybody who seriously embarrasses them, read on (via the Wall Street Journal):

The U.S. government has obtained a controversial type of secret court order to force Google Inc. and small Internet provider Inc. to turn over information from the email accounts of WikiLeaks volunteer Jacob Appelbaum, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Sonic said it fought the government’s order and lost, and was forced to turn over information. Challenging the order was “rather expensive, but we felt it was the right thing to do,” said Sonic’s chief executive, Dane Jasper. The government’s request included the email addresses of people Mr. Appelbaum corresponded with the past two years, but not the full emails.

Both Google and Sonic pressed for the right to inform Mr. Appelbaum of the secret court orders, according to people familiar with the investigation. Google declined to comment. Mr. Appelbaum, 28 years old, hasn’t been charged with wrongdoing.

Posted in Nova NewsletterComments Off on A. Loewenstein Online Newsletter

Zio-Nazi returns body of Palestinian militant after 35 years


Zio-Nazi army hands body over body of Hafez Abu Zant to Palestinian Authority due to Supreme Court ruling.

Zio-Nazi Defense Forces spokesman said Sunday that the army has returned the remains of a Palestinian militant to the West Bank 35 years after he was killed.

Maj. Guy Inbar said Hafez Abu Zant belonged to an armed group. IsraHelli forces killed him in 1976 during an exchange of fire, and his remains were buried in an IsraHelli cemetery for enemy casualties.

Acting on a ruling by Zionist Supreme Court, the army handed the body over to the Palestinian Authority on Sunday.

Palestinian Authority officials say Abu Zant will be buried in an official funeral in the West Bank. They say more than 300 Palestinian militants are buried in Zionist military cemeteries. The officials say they are also negotiating with the Zionist regime for their transfer.

Posted in Human RightsComments Off on Zio-Nazi returns body of Palestinian militant after 35 years

Zionist lobby hypes a new Cold War with Russia


Ken Silverstein has a very interesting piece in Salon magazine on the lobbyists for Georgia who “wine and dine eager Washington journalists in a campaign to undo Obama’s ‘reset’ on Russia.” Silverstein, a contributing editor for Harper’s magazine, explains how Randy Scheunemann’s Orion Strategies creates a media echo chamber on Georgia and Russia:

Essentially it works like this: Tbilisi’s lobbyists generate contacts and information that they feed to sympathetic journalists. Orion frequently arranges interviews with Georgian officials and, not infrequently, stories centering on their charges magically appear soon afterward. Orion has wined and dined some reporters on its tab or picked up their travel expenses. There’s certainly nothing illegal about that but it’s worth noting that lobbyists are barred from maintaining these sorts of relationships with members of Congress because it so clearly presents, as we say in Washington, at least the appearance of impropriety.

Orion is friendly to and works with government officials and politicians who its reporter friends regularly cite (especially [John] McCain). Orion also works very closely with experts and organizations cited by these reporters, like the Foreign Policy Initiative, whose board of directors includes William Kristol, Robert Kagan and other neocons from the PNAC and the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq.

The journalists pick up on and spread each other’s work and [Orion’s Michael] Goldfarb, naturally, hawks their stories at his Twitter feed. Just last week, he called a new [Eli] Lake story a “must read.” The piece  at the Newsweek/Daily Beast, featured an exclusive interview with Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili, who alleged that the bombing at the U.S. Embassy was “ordered at the most senior levels of the Russian government.” He was quoted as saying that Putin “is crazy about planning the individual details of special operations … I cannot imagine somebody touching a topic as sensitive as Georgia is for Russia, especially for Putin, without Putin having firsthand knowledge or command of it.”

Orion helps create a collective media reality that policymakers have to respond to. Other foreign governments  also play this game, as do liberal and conservative interest groups, but rarely as well or so brazenly.

Silverstein notes that when Eli Lake alleged on the front page of the Washington Times on July 22 that a bomb blast near the U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi, Georgia, the previous September had been “traced to a plot run by a Russian military intelligence officer, according to an investigation by the Georgian Interior Ministry,” Senators Mark Kirk, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman and John McCain — the latter duo he aptly dubs “Senators Echo and Echo” — sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanding intelligence briefings on the incident. As observers of the Israel lobby know only too well, the famous five are among AIPAC’s most reliable mouthpieces on Capitol Hill.

Among Orion’s other friends in the media, Silverstein names the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin, formerly of Commentary magazine; the Weekly Standard’s Daniel Halper and Matthew Continetti; James Kirchick, an assistant editor at the New Republic; and Foreign Policy’s Josh Rogin. Like Orion’s friendly senators, these pro-Georgian journalists are also well known for their staunch pro-Israeli views. While Silverstein doesn’t mention this, he does note that Rubin’s attendance at this year’s Herzliya Conference was paid for by the Emergency Committee for Israel with which Kristol and Goldfarb are associated.

To his credit, Silverstein admits that he “found it unpleasant to write this story” because he knows and likes some of the people involved. Moreover, he acknowledges that Orion also represents an organisation affiliated with George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, which funds some of his current research — “though not this article.” Silverstein doesn’t say anything, however, about the key role that Soros’s “philanthropy” played in fomenting the “Rose Revolution” that brought the billionaire financier’s not-so-democratic protégé to power. Or about how Saakashvili’s subsequent provocations of Moscow are hardly unconnected to Soros’s and the neocons’ grievance against Putin over his opposition to the looting of Russia by the predominantly Jewish oligarchs, some of whom have since fled to Israel.

Posted in RussiaComments Off on Zionist lobby hypes a new Cold War with Russia

Increasing incidents of anti-Arab Nazi hate graffiti


Anti-ArabUgly Nazi’s

Hate-graffiti reported across the Zionist state after Tuba-Zangaria mosque arson last week; Zio-Nazi Police Commissioner meets with Muslim, Christian community leaders after tense weekend in Jaffa.


Jaffa was quiet on Sunday following a tense weekend in which vandals spray-painted slogans such as “Death to Arabs” in two cemeteries – one Muslim and one Christian – and hurled a Molotov cocktail at a synagogue.

Police Commissioner Yohanan Danino sought an urgent meeting with the leaders of Jaffa’s Muslim and Christian communities on Sunday, and the meeting was quickly set for that evening in Jaffa. By the time it occurred, police had also learned about similar graffiti in nearby Bat Yam, along with new slogans such as “There will be no Arabs on Maccabi Haifa” (a soccer team) and “Death to Russians.” But Bat Yam residents say this graffiti is more than two weeks old.

Police said that ever since last week’s torching of a mosque in Tuba-Zangaria, in northern Israel, they have been receiving reports of hate-graffiti from all over the country.

Prior to their meeting with Danino, Jaffa leaders met among themselves to formulate a list of demands they planned to present to him with the goal of bolstering security in the city. They agreed that the city’s Arabs felt threatened, and some even said they feared Arabs would soon be attacked en route to prayers at local mosques.

Danino prepared by receiving a briefing on the investigation from Tel Aviv and Jaffa police officers. The police’s current thinking is that even though one of the spray-painted slogans was “price tag,” a phrase usually associated with right-wing extremists, the vandalism was not ideologically motivated, but was rather the work of local hoodlums, possibly soccer fans.

Danino opened his meeting with Jaffa’s leaders by telling them, “I was born in Jaffa and spent much time there as a child. I’m very familiar with the city’s coexistence and fabric of life.”

He then said the force has have recently been working to “bolster policing and service in Arab communities.”

“We view the incident that took place here as a grave one,” he said. “The incident will be dealt with at the highest level; we’ll make every effort to find the perpetrators and bring them to justice. Our top people will be devoted to this matter. I ask the community to continue to aspire to coexistence and a shared life while upholding law and order.”

The community leaders said afterward that they would prefer less talk and more action.

Earlier yesterday, Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai also met with leaders of Jaffa’s Arab community and denounced the cemetery vandalism harshly.

“I expect the hands of those who commit such acts to be chopped off,” he said, speaking figuratively. “But our job as public figures is to sit together and resolve the issues, as we have invested enormous efforts in recent years in maintaining life as usual here. The Jaffa public was always more mature than all the extremists, and we’ll find a way to return to normal, despite the provocations.”

Sheikh Saliman Setel, who heads the Islamic Movement in Jaffa, termed the meeting with Huldai positive and pledged to do his best to calm tempers in the city.

“For now, the situation is calm; there’s nothing special happening,” he said. “We don’t want this to be temporary. Such things happen every year or two, and it’s not acceptable to anyone. We live in coexistence; we don’t want problems. Just as we respect everyone’s holy sites, we want others to respect our holy sites.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Increasing incidents of anti-Arab Nazi hate graffiti

Zio-Nazi ADL: Arab press “promotes anti-Semitism”


Zio-Nazi Anti-Defamation League says editorial cartoons in mainstream daily newspapers focusing on US intention to veto Palestinian UN statehood bid are rife with vicious anti-Jewish stereotypes

ed note–we hate to have to point out the painfully obvious here, but notice–it is never obnoxious Jewish behavior that ‘promotes anti-Semitism’, but rather Gentile backlash against that obnoxious behavior. Sadly, Zionist as a people are a backwards, self-absorbed, self-obsessed culture so much in love with themselves that they do not engage in self-relection as to what they have done to warrant the way they have been treated throughout history.

The Palestinian effort to seek full membership in the United Nations was big news in the Arab media – and the focus of a number of editorial cartoons in Muslim and Arab newspapers across the Middle East.

According to the Zio-Nazi Anti-Defamation League, many of those caricatures, which focused on the declared intention of the United States to veto the membership bid should it come to a vote in the Security Council, were rife with vicious anti-Semitic caricatures and stereotypes.

Zio-Nazi ADL Audit finds slight increase in number of incidents; states with highest totals include California, New York and New Jersey  

Full story

On Thursday the Jewish group released a compilation of selected cartoons on this theme appearing in recent weeks in mainstream daily newspapers across the Middle East.

According to Racist ADL, the images illustrate how the Arab media continues to promote anti-Semitic imagery and conspiracy theories about Jewish and Zionist “control” of international forums and the US government, depicting Zionist puppet’s Barack Obama and Zio-Nazi Prime Minister Benjamin Naziyahu using grotesque imagery and anti-Jewish themes.

“Anti-Semitism is once again the leitmotif for cartoon commentary Muslim and Arab newspapers since the Palestinians took their statehood bid at the United Nations,” says ADL National Director Zio-Nazi Abraham H. Foxman.

“Rearing its ugly head in the visual depiction of stereotypical hook-nosed or black-hatted images of Jews plotting to control the United States government and the world is a theme lifted right out of the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion.’

“Arab newspaper cartoonists have been engaging in this type of anti-Semitic incitement for decades, and yet it is especially troubling in the current context, the very antithesis of encouraging peacemaking.”

In the run-up to the Palestinian statehood bid, editorial cartoons on the subject appeared in newspapers in Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Syria, the Palestinian territories and elsewhere in the region. Many called up traditional anti-Semitic stereotypes.

Some cartoonists demonized American and IsraHelli opposition to the Palestinian appeal by playing on themes of Jewish and IsraHelli domination and control of the United States, President Barack Obama or the UN.

A cartoon appearing on September 30 in the Qatari daily newspaper Al-Watan typifies that sentiment: A caricature of a bearded Orthodox Jew with hook nose and black hat is shown in the driver’s seat of an automobile, his hand resting on a stick-shift representing President Barack Obama’s head, and the steering wheel in the shape of the UN symbol.

Other recent examples of this theme include:

A smiling President Obama and an American flag stick out of the suit-pocket pocket of a fat-cat Jew with a Star of David emblazoned on his tie (Ad-Dustur, Jordan, September 23). 
Netanyahu and Obama as serpents entwined around the globe with a caption that reads, “American foreign policy in the Middle East” (As-Sabil, Jordan September 25). 
A Palestinian Arab man wearing a shirt that reads “The Palestinian State” is shown being crucified on the letter “T” in the word “VETO” (Tishrin, Syria, September 22).

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zio-Nazi ADL: Arab press “promotes anti-Semitism”

LOL!!! Rabbis claim ‘Price tag’ attacks against Gentiles “contradicts Torah”

Religious leaders from all sides of national-religious spectrum strongly condemn Jewish ‘acts of revenge’ against Arab targets. Chief military rabbi urges yeshiva heads to act against phenomenon

ed note–This is as blatent a lie as one could tell concerning the real nature of Judaism. We present here just A FEW small excerpts of the Torah, specifically those that instruct the Jews to do EXACTLY what has been done here in the so-called ‘price tag’ attacks.

 “And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying, ‘Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye are passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan, then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and destroy all their pictures, and destroy all their molten images, and quite pluck down all their high places, and ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it. ” Numbers 33:50-56

“And when the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou…And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them…Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son…For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly…But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire…For thou art a holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.   Deuteronomy 7:1-8


Chief Military Rabbi Brigadier-General Rafi Peretz has demanded that hesder yeshiva rabbis condemn “price tag” activities and act against them, in light of the torching of a mosque in the northern Arab village of Tuba Zangaria and the desecration of Arab graves in Jaffa.

Peretz spoke Sunday during a conference organized by the Hesder Yeshivot Association for dozens of yeshiva heads. “The ‘price tag’ phenomenon must be strongly condemned,” he said. “I expected yeshiva heads to act against this phenomenon.”

Senseless Jewish thugs

Rabbi Haim Drukman, a member of the Hesder Yeshivot Association’s management, who attended the event, joined in on the IDF rabbi’s remarks, saying that “price tag” activities were “strictly prohibited”.

Two of the most senior Religious Zionism rabbis, Ramat Gan Rabbi Yaakov Ariel and Safed Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, issued a joint statement of condemnation against the recent incidents.

“We heard about the torching of the mosque in Tuba Zangaria and the desecration of graves in Jaffa. These acts are prohibited and completely contradict the way of Torah, and therefore we believe and hope that they were not committed by Jews.”

Another issue discussed during the conference was women’s singing in the IDF, following the dismissal of cadets from an officers’ course after walking out of a military event in protest of female soldiers’ performance.

“The starting point is working together with the army,” said Rabbi Peretz, stating that “nothing will come between me and the army, even if the world turns over.”

He sought to appease the rabbis by saying that the religious public’s absolute loyalty to the IDF was clear to the army leaders. The yeshiva heads, on their part, expressed their support for the Military Rabbinate’s way of handling the affair, following criticism voiced against the army rabbi in recent weeks.

The Hesder Yeshivot Association issued a statement saying that the rabbis fully support the Military Rabbinate and its chief in terms of halachic issues in the IDF and handling “sensitive issues which have been on the agenda recently.”

Rabbi Drukman added, “The Military Rabbinate institutions in the IDF must be strengthened rather than weakened. The Military Rabbinate headed by Rabbi Peretz has reached significant achievements in a variety of fields related to the integration of Halacha into the IDF. 

“We have no other Military Rabbinate, and therefore we must all unite and offer our support for the handling of the complex reality it faces in light of the sensitive issues surrounding the relations between Halacha and the army.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on LOL!!! Rabbis claim ‘Price tag’ attacks against Gentiles “contradicts Torah”

Zionist issues urgent Sinai travel advisory ahead of Sukkot


Counter Terrorism Bureau urges Israelis vacationing in Sinai to leave popular holiday destination immediately and return home, fearing attacks or abductions.


Israel’s Counter-Terrorism Bureau on Monday warned Israelis to stay away from the Sinai Peninsula during the upcoming week-long Festival of Tabernacles (Sukkot), which begins Wednesday night, for fear of possible attacks from militants based there.

Sinai is a popular vacation spot for Israelis, but in recent months, Israel has become increasing concerned that militant groups have become entrenched there and seek to attack or kidnap Israeli vacationers.

The warning came hours after 24 people were reportedly killed in clashes between Christians and military police in the center of Cairo.

On August 18, a large group of militants infiltrated Israel from the peninsula, shooting up vehicles near the border and killing seven people. The attack was planned in the Gaza Strip by the Popular Resistance Committees and perpetrated by terrorists who crossed from Gaza into Sinai via smuggling tunnels. They then traveled some 200 kilometers to reach an area of the border protected only by a tattered wire fence, about 15 kilometers north of Eilat.

Two weeks ago, unknown assailants blew up an Egyptian pipeline in Sinai that supplies Israel and Jordan with gas. The pipeline has been blown up by assailants believed to be opposed to selling Egyptian gas to Israel six times since President Hosni Mubarak was ousted in February.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Zionist issues urgent Sinai travel advisory ahead of Sukkot

Shoah’s pages


October 2011
« Sep   Nov »