The prosecution of George W. Bush for murder

On the tenth anniversary of the American invasion of Iraq (March, 2003), numerous articles appears in the American mass media reflecting on the biggest blunders committed in the history of the U.S. by the Bush administration. The few people who were concerned about American national interest predicted this tragedy.

However, the major newspapers of the media began to dance to the tune of music set by the Bush administration and the lobbyists representing those who would benefit from the invasion of Iraq.

The American congress, which Harry Reid described as the most corrupt in the history of the U.S., supported the invasion without examining any evidence in support of the war.

The consequences of the invasion reflect some serious problems, such as:

1)   The cost of the war to American taxpayers has been estimated to exceed $2.5 trillion. All of this money was borrowed from foreign governments, especially China. It was a war that was fought on credit cards.

2)   More than 4,500 American soldiers were killed in vain and an additional 32,000 were injured. In addition to the negative psychological and emotional impact of the war on veterans is reflected in—among other things—high suicide rates, at almost one per day.

3)   The negative impact of the war in Iraq has been disastrous to humans, as well as environmentally, politically, and economically. Literally speaking, Iraq was destroyed. The U.S. government put it on a silver platter and turned it over to Iran.

The tragedy is that no one has been tried for these blunders, including Bush and his criminal gang. The U.S. political system is filled with loopholes, which encourages politicians to lie and mislead the public without consequences for this deception.

As Vincent Bugliosi, chief prosecutor, wrote in his book ‘The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder’, “the United States of America can return to the great nation it once was again. Bugliosi believes that the first step to achieving this goal is to bring those responsible for the war in

Spring or Winter Revolution

During the past two years, several Arab states—including Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen— experienced massive uprisings that led to the removal of their authoritarian regimes. The revolution is still going on in Syria, where more than 70,000 have been killed and over a million have become refugees in neighboring countries. The west and the east are using the Syrian tragedy to settle their own differences.

In the mean time, some Arab states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar are fueling the revolution in Syria. Ironically both regimes are authoritarian.

A few days ago, the Arab newspapers reported the arrest of 167 peaceful demonstrators in Saudi Arabia. These protestors were demanding humane treatment for their arrested relatives. Also, it was reported that the Qatar court sentenced Mohammed Al-Ajami, a Qatar poet, for his poem attacking the Amir of Qatar. He was given a life sentence but the court commuted the sentence to 15 years. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are in no position to criticize the Syrian regime because they are in an even worse governmental position than Syria. Qatar has the highest Gross National Income (GNI) in the world—over 86,000 per person per year—with a population of less than two million people.

Qatar can afford to incorporate the one million Syrian refugees who are living in tents and are deprived of basic daily needs. I do not want to give the impression that I am a supporter of the Syrian regime, because I am not. For the benefit of readers, the Assad family has ruled over Syrian since the 1960s, the result of the American CIA’s military coup in 1948. That military coup removed the freely and democratically elected Syrian president, Mr. S. Al-Quatley. He refused to let American oil companies extend their oil pipelines from Iraq through Syria. Since the end of World War II, the U.S. government has been a major source of political instability in the Middle East region in general and the Arab world in particular, which is still occurring today.

I consider Saudi Arabia and the Qatari regimes as puppets for the U.S. Furthermore and regrettably to say, the Morsi government in Egypt is of the same type of government. Unfortunately, the younger Egyptian population that initiated the January 25^th Revolution to save their country from the corrupt regime of Hosni Mubarak (paying in blood to do so) has been marginalized by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood is spreading their political influence in every government institution at the expense of others. They are worse than the previous regime, are ignorant, and will end up paying a heavy price.

The Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian Model

The Iranian model of 1979 is emerging in Egypt.

Recently several high-ranking Iranian officials have visited Cairo under the pretext of improving relations between Iran and Egypt.

President Morsi’s political-religious acts and that of his party, al Hureyya wel Adala, as well as the Muslism Brotherhood’s organization, reflect similar trends to that of the 1979’s Iranian revolution. This similarity is reflected in the followings:

1.   Liberal-secular and Islamic political groups protesting the corruption of the Shah regime, Mohamed Reda Pahlavi, initiated the Iranian revolution. They succeeded in removing the Shah from power. He was overthrown, and the first head of the new revolutionary regime was a liberal and secular.

2.   The religious leader in exile in France, Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran. He was received as a Mahdi. A year later, 1980-81, the Islamists stole the revolution and eliminated the secular political leaders who originally began the revolution.

3.   The Islamist political leaders under the leadership of Khamenei began the Islamization of all governmental institutions. The opposition was accused of being atheists, enemies of Islam who deserved to be killed!

4.   The Islamist government began to develop a military group known as the Iranian National Revolutionary guards. This step was taken to prevent any attempts from the regular army to interfere in the policy of the emerging Islamic regime.

5.   The opposition consisting of liberal groups began to vociferously oppose the Islamic regime. This opposition has been going on for more than three decades.

6.   The highest spiritual religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameni, is the real power in Iran. His authority is higher than that of president Ahmad Najad. This political authority is shaped in a pyramidal form with the religious authority established at the top of the pyramid.

It is clear the emerging Egyptian political structure has many similarities with that of Iran. Is this intentional? Or, is this a typical model of any religious group interested in gaining political power?

1.   Young liberals sparked the Egyptian revolution of January 25, 2011. They were supported by millions of Egyptians. The Muslim Brothers were later joiners of the Revolution.

2.    The Mubarak regime fell on February 11, 2011. The Egyptian Higher Military Council and the Muslim Brothers united in order to prevent the realization of any further demands from young, liberal revolutionaries. However, the young revolutionaries continued to call for “Freedom, Social and Economic Justice.” They further insisted on the punishment of those behind the killings of many young protesters. Actually, they have not been brought to justice until now.

3.   The Muslim Brothers, as Egyptians maintain, stole the Revolution. Morsi was elected president in June 2012. He was able to abolish the original Higher Military Council and to nominate a new and young Defense Minister, El Sessi. There was more than one Prime Minister who consequently resigned. President Morsi finally nominated Hisham Kandeel as prime minister. The later is a young man who lacks experience and above all lacks presence and political savoir-faire.

4.   The different political groups were excluded from sharing in the new government. The Egyptian press is continually referring to the power behind the throne, which is that of the Murshid, leader of the Muslim Brothers, and his deputy Khayrat el Shater. Neither of the two men was elected!

5.   The Egyptian president, Morsi, issued in November 2012, a constitutional decree giving himself unlimited power. Such decree allowed him to neutralize the power of the Higher Egyptian Constitutional Court. He then dismissed 7 outspoken judges who have asked for dissolving the Egyptian Parliament on the basis that the election of its members was in violation of the Constitution.  Furthermore, those judges began to investigate the election of the new magliss el shoura as well as the Committee appointed by the dissolved Parliament to draft the new constitution. Morsi then removed the General Prosecutor, el guindi, replacing him by a sympathizer to his policy.

6.   The Morsi regime, similar to the Iranian religious regime, created its own militia. According to the Egyptian newspaper, al wafd (1/31,2013) the Minister of Interior, Mohamed Ibrahim, allowed this Militia to join the police in order to suppress any revolt by the demonstrators. They were violent in their tactics, many were killed. This   violates the new Constitution, article 109!!

7.   The unfortunate further strategy of president Morsi was his trial to destroy the freedom of press. He appointed a Minister of Information, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. It should be stressed however the fact that until now the Egyptian media is still quite defiant toward any government pressures.

Anyone familiar with the history of the Iranian revolution (1979) cannot but see the similar steps the new Egyptian regime is undertaken. Is this intentional? It remains to be seen.

The Muslim Brotherhood, for the past 80 years, has been dreaming of assuming power. It will be very hard to remove such regime!

However, I would like to stress here, during the past two years and since the election of president Morsi and his negative policies, the Muslim Brothers have lost credibility among a large number of Egyptians. 

It is an interesting time to be in Egypt and to follow the trend and development of events.

US Government and the Muslim Brotherhood

On January 28, 2013 the Egyptian newspaper ‘al watan’ reported ‘Khayrat el Shater, deputy director of the Muslim Brotherhood, met with the American ambassador, Ann Paterson.’ El Shater was seeking US support for president Morsi.

Since 2007, according to the Egyptian press, US government officials have been meeting with some members of the Muslim Brotherhood organization. The Muslim Brothers spokesman denied such meetings.

The puzzling question to Egyptians is why did the US ambassador meet with Khayrat el Shater who is not an elected figure?

Having thoroughly studied and followed US government’s policy toward the Arab Word such meeting does not surprise me.

US government officials will meet with anyone they see fit to help achieving their foreign policy in the Middle East in general and in the Arab World in particular.

Two major issues influence the US foreign policy toward the Arab World:

1.   The safety of Israel and its military superiority in the region.

2.   The preservation of the Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel. The Muslim Brother’s leaders have assured the US government of their support for the Peace Treaty.

3.   The control of the flow of oil to the West.  In reality, such concern is not triggered by the American national interest, but rather by American lobbyists.

The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and American oil company’s lobbyists are among the most influential group shaping American foreign policy irrespective of its impact on the American national interest. Hence, when American foreign policy makers publicly request the implementation of democracy in Egypt, it is simply for public consumption.

History reveals the fact that American officials, in general, have supported ruthless dictators, all over the world, as along as they implement their policy. Once those dictators fail to fulfill such policy, American support is withdrawn.

Is history going to repeat itself in the case of Egypt? It remains to be seen!

President Morsi Public Speech

On the eve of January 25, 2013, president Morse addressed the nation expressing his concern about the protesters’ impact on Egyptian society.

The president declared Marshall law to be imposed for a whole month on three governorates: Suez, Ismailia, and Port Said. The public was astonished that those three cities were only targeted and not the whole country since demonstrators and violence have occurred in many other cities.

The media criticized the declaration because of its unconstitutionality. The foreign press has also criticized president Morsi’s decision in imposing Marshall law.

 The Egyptians, in general, are disappointed in Morsi’s policy. He failed to implement promises he made during his electoral campaign. Furthermore, it became clear that the real power behind the throne is the leader (murshid) of the Muslim Brothers and his deputy, Khayrat el Shater. Morsi lost credibility as well as his presidential authority. This is very well reflected in Egyptian humor. Caricatures, humoristic articles and TV programs have all been entertaining the disappointed Egyptian public.

The people of Suez, Ismailia and Port Said are disregarding the curfew imposed on them. The curfew is supposed to begin at 9:00 PM, and this is when then public begins to play soccer games the whole evening. Streets are filled with inhabitants, men, women and children, chanting, holding flags and shouting slogans against the Muslim Brothers’ government.

It is a kind of filibuster or marathon through which they defied Morsi’s authority, and calling for his removal. The daring of the public is one positive result of the January 25th Revolution. Egyptians are not afraid anymore.

Facing such turmoil, the minister of Defense publically declared that Egypt is facing internal threats, which is of concern to national security. He, then declared according to the Constitution, the Egyptian military is ready to assume its responsibility toward the country!

Doesn’t this ring a bell?????

Eye Witness to the Second Anniversary of the Egyptian Revolution

January 25, 2011 my wife and I were in Egypt and witnessed the beginning of the Egyptian Revolution, which led to the collapse of the Mubarak regime. We have decided to return to Egypt every year, at the same time, to observe the yearly anniversary of the Revolution.

Unfortunately, January 25, 26 and 27, 2013, Egypt faced chaotic demonstrations.

 What caused such an upheaval? Why is the opposition angry? Why are there demonstrations occuring in many Egyptian cities? The following points are in our opinion the causes that led to the deterioration and upheaval within the Second Republic after the Revolution of January 25, 2011.

1.   The Revolution’s main objectives have not been achieved. The protestors are blaming the Muslim Brothers and their political party, Freedom and Justice, for such failure.

2.   The exclusion of other political and secular groups in the new government. The young Egyptians who initiated the Revolution were completely ignored.

3.   The failure of the Muslim brothers to implement promises made before the elections. After the collapse of the Mubarak’s regime they publically declared that their party, Freedom and Justice, would nominate candidates for the parliament to run in one third of the districts. However, they did not keep their promise and ended up nominating candidates in all districts of Egypt. Furthermore, they stated they will not nominate a candidate for the presidency and Dr. Mohamed Morsi was indeed nominated.

4.   The new president issued a constitutional decree granting him unlimited authority thus controlling the Executive, Legislative and Judicial powers. He then removed seven judges from the Higher Constitutional Court who were appointed by the deposed president Mubarak. President Morsi then transferred the authority of the dissolved Parliament to the Maglis al Shoura (Advisory Council), which is controlled by Islamist groups.

5.   The Constitutional Committee nominated by the dissolved Parliament and whose most members belonged to Islamist groups was kept to draft the new Constitution. This was in contradiction of President’s Morsi promise during the electoral campaign to dissolve such committee since it did not represent Egyptian society in Toto.

6.   The removal by the president, of the Attorney General, Abel Meguid, and the appointment of a new one. The Higher Judicial Council vehemently opposed this move.

7.   The abolition of the Higher Egyptian Military Council, established during the Revolution under the leadership of Marshal el Tantawi, and the nomination of a new minister of defense, General el Sessi. This political act neutralized the authority of the military. However, it should be mentioned here that such act was welcomed by most of the revolutionary groups. Alas, it turned out that the new military ruler is nothing but a puppet for the new president!

8.   The deterioration of Egyptian economic condition, the increase of unemployment rate, the high cost of living, the deterioration of security conditions, all led to an increase in the rate of crimes. This chaotic situation has given rise to unprecedented angst feeling among peaceful Egyptians.

Presently, Egyptians opposing the government are demanding the followings:

1.   Curtailing the influence and interference of the Muslim Brothers in governmental affairs.

2.   Recognizing the objectives of the Revolution, which was ignored by president Morsi and his cabinet.

3.   Abolition of the New Constitution, which does not reflect the interest of all Egyptians or recognized the rights of women and other segments of the society.

4.   Prosecuting those responsible for the massacring of young protestors during the past two years.

5.   Bringing an end to political corruption by removing all influence of the previous regime and narrowing the influence of the Muslim Brothers which is reflected in the new nomination of two critical ministers: the minister of interior and the minister of information.

6.   Replacing the government of Prime Minister Hisham Kandil by a capable national cabinet consisting of experts in different fields.

In conclusion, President Morsi is more interested in implementing the Muslim Brothers strategy over Egyptian national interest. He failed to reform economic and security institutions. Democracy has not been established. As a matter of fact, some of the most fanatic Islamists, such as the Salafis are claiming that democracy is in violation of Islam!!!

It is unfortunate that such groups as the Muslim Brothers and other political Islamist groups are putting their own interest ahead of Egyptian national interest. They are in the process of securing their influence and domination over all governmental institutions. The majority of Egyptians rejects such near sighted political policy as it is reflected in the recent violence. According to the statement issued by the Minister of Health, the violent protest of the past few days ( January 25, 26. 27) caused the death of 41 Egyptians and 1139 personal injuries. Egyptians are not afraid any more and the government ought to be concerned about the recent

Spring Revolution in Iraq

The recent mass protest movements that have been taking place in several Iraqi governates can be classified as the beginning of a spring revolution in that country. These protests took place when in al-Anbar, Nineveh, Salahuddin, Mosul Fallujah and Al-Ramadi.

The Sunni protestors are reacting to Prime Minister Nouri-al-Malik’s (Shiite) suppression against them and the jailing of some of their Sunni political leadership including the Sunni Iraqi women’s ill treatment in prison.

The arrest of members of the Sunni community in Iraq on suspicion of terrorist activities is in reality a political policy to marginalize their roles in the political arena.

The protestors were demanding:

1)   The resignation of Nouri al-Maliki’s government

2)   The release of many thousands of Sunni men and women from prisons

3)   The cancelation of the law that was initiated by the U.S. occupation forces banning the Baath party from the Iraqi political arena and permitting their reentry into public life.

4)   The cancelation of the same law that dissolved the Iraqi army and prohibited members of the previous Baath party from being employed by the government.

5)   The improvement of the economic, social and environmental conditions.

6)   Stop the Iraqi government support of the Syria regime under Bashar al-Assad.

7)   Stop taking orders from the Iranian government (Shiite regime)

8)   Removal of Article 4 from the Constitution and stop implementing death sentences of suspected terrorists.

It is unfortunate to point out that the American invasion of Iraq produced many negative consequences. First, it eliminated the authoritarian regime of Saddam Hussein, which was the most secular in the Middle East region. The previous regime suppressed any political religious group from entering the Iraqi political arena. At the same time, Iraqi secular Shiite individuals were incorporated into the regime and many occupied high political positions in both the government and the army.

It should be of interest to refer to an order that was issued by the American occupational authority in 2003 for the arrest of the 52 top Iraqi political officials. The American order was issued in the form of a deck of cards of pictures of those who were to be arrested, which included Saddam Hussein and his two sons. Thirty-seven out of the 52 people were Iraqi Shiites. This reflects that the previous regime did not permit the practice of sectarianism.

The phony type of democracy that the U.S. introduced in Iraq encouraged            sectarianism. It should also be made clear that the religious political conflict between the Sunni and Shiite sects has been part of Islamic history, which started after the death of the Prophet Mohammad more than 1,300 years ago.

The Sunni-Shiite conflict has been manipulated by Western colonialist powers, which has been part of their political strategy “divide and rule”. This conflict has been a major source of instability, especially in the Arab world and some Islamic states.

The impact of the Arab spring revolution as is reflected in Iraq at the present is also going on in Syria, where the Alawi (Shiite) minority regime is facing a Sunni majority rebellion that has been going on for nearly two years. In Bahrain, the situation is the opposite, where a Sunni minority is suppressing the Shiite majority.

The sectarian conflicts will continue to be a destabilizing source of conflict in the region. The only way to stop such a conflict is to establish real democratic institutions in the Arab-Islamic states in order to i

The newThe new constitution and the polarization of Egyptian society

Since the fifth day after the start of the January 25^th Revolution, the strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood and their political arm, “The Justice and Freedom Party”, has been based on lies and deception. Such a strategy is not based on intelligence, rationale, or clever thinking. The revolution ended by replacing one authoritarian regime with another.

The new constitution has been ratified by 63% of voters, according to the national election committee. There have been reports issued by journalists, human rights organizations, and some judicial observers, that claim that the election was rigged by representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood at polling stations. It has also been reported that some Copts were prevented from entering polling stations. Others waited in line for more than eight hours and in the end were unable to vote.

It is unfortunate to point out that President Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood supporters have played an exclusive role by preventing opposition political groups from participating in drafting the constitution, which has led to the following results:

First, the committee that drafted the constitution did not represent the majority of the Egyptian population. 75% of the 100 members were representative of Islamist political groups. The other 25% were not able to participate, which led them to resign from the committee.

Second, the committee that drafted the constitution was illegally appointed by the dissolved parliament that consisted of a majority of Islamist political members. As a matter of fact, during his political campaign, President Morsi promised to dissolve that committee and create a new one that would be more representative of the various segments of the Egyptian population.

After his election, Morsi failed to implement what he promised those who elected him. This was not the first violation, nor was it the last of the Muslim Brotherhood’s lies.

Third, the new constitution ahs been poorly drafted and does not represent all groups within Egyptian society. The constitution has been framed by more Islamic criteria than secular ones.

Fourth, minorities such as Copts, women and children are not protected or treated equally.

Fifth, the newly approved constitution will lead to a new stage of conflict, which will further enhance instability and increase violence in Egyptian society.

Sixth, the new constitution has polarized the split of Egyptian society into two major political opponents: conservative Islamists vs. liberal secular Muslim and Christian groups. This is the result of the Muslim Brotherhood’s political strategy that is based on excluding others from sharing political power.

Seventh, 30% only of the eligible voters have participated in the election. From a legal point of view, the new constitution should be rejected and a new one should be drafted. Moreover, the drafting committee should represent the Egyptian society as a whole.

The Muslim Brotherhood monopolized Islam to achieve political control. For how long will such a policy continue? Ti

Political Polarization in Egypt

The recent military flare up in Gaza between Hamas and the Israeli military forces led to the killings of more than 160 Palestinians and more than 1,200 injuries. Adding to the devastation was the destruction of homes and public and economic facilities. President Morsi of Egypt played an important mediator role between the feuding parties, which led to a truce and a ceasefire.

President Morsi gained recognition from the U.S. government and other western powers for his efforts. Right after this achievement, President Morsi committed a political blunder by issuing constitutional decrees granting himself unlimited political power and preventing any legal possibility of interfering in any decision he makes. He also froze Egypt’s Higher Constitutional Court and promised to reorganize it after the ratification of a new constitution and the election of a new parliament. Furthermore, he ordered a new trial for all previous officials, including Hosni Mubarak and the top ranking officials who were set free by Egyptian courts.

Morsi also gave political immunity from outside interference to Maglis al-Shura and the constitutional committee. Both are dominated by a majority membership from the Muslim Brotherhood. He also appointed a new public prosecutor to replace Mubarak’s appointment of Mahmoud. Abdel Meguid

These actions were condemned by the Egyptian Judicial Council and considered an interference with the independence of the Egyptian judicial system. Some judges in various Egyptian governorates have declared publicly that they will not preside in courts in protest of President Morsi’s decisions. In the meantime, the Egyptian public prosecutor Mahmoud Abed al-Megid whom Morsi removed will challenge the legality of the president’s decision.

President Morsi accused high-ranking officials in the judicial system of not performing their official functions, including the Egyptian general prosecutor. The rationale used by President Morsi is that the official decree he made is to ensure the protection of the revolution from the followers of the previous regime. He referred to the dangers of the revolution due to the slow progress being made in the economic sector because frequent protests scare foreign investors.

The rationale used by President Morsi as a justification for the official decree he issued was rejected by nearly all-secular political parties, whose numbers exceed 26 groups. They accused the president of trying to create a dictatorship and pave the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to dominate Egyptian society. President Morsi’s political agenda has contributed to the political polarization of Egypt.

President Morsi’s political actions enhanced protests that have been calling on Morsi to resign even before he issued the new decrees. In addition, nearly all secular political parties and groups have joined the young protestors in Tahrir Square, rejecting Morsi’s political agenda and continuing the call for his resignation.

The headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood in Alexandria, Port Said and Ismailia and other headquarters were attacked by protestors. In the meantime, the followers of the Muslim Brotherhood organized their followers in front of the presidential palace in support of President Morsi’s decisions. They also called for protests to take place on November 27^th in support of the president.

Let me conclude by pointing out that President Morsi’s political decision has exceeded his legal authority. Such decrees should have been left to the future elected Egyptian parliament to deal with.

Finally, it is important to point out, as I did in several previous posts, that the Muslim Brotherhood and their political arm, “The Freedom and Justice Party”, have been following a strategy based on lies and deception from the beginning of the Egyptian Revolution. Their intentions and political strategy have begun to appear to the Egyptian public. At the end, they will be the losers.

Religious fanaticism is a Byproduct of ignorance

On November 13, 2012, Mr. W. Al-Ibrashi on Dream TV Channel hosted controversial Islamic Sheikh Morgan, who was among the followers of Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Sheikh Morgan has been threatening to destroy Egyptian antiquities such as the Sphinx and the Pyramids. He is under the illusion that such antiquities are being worshipped, something that is in violation of Islamic beliefs. Sheikh Morgan is a fanatic ignorant and dangerous person, not only for Egypt but also for world stability, by his own admission. He was involved in the destruction of the largest Buddha statue in Afghanistan, so he says. It is of interest to notice that during the talk on Al-Ibrashi’s program, none of the participants raised the possibility that the destruction of the Buddha statue in Afghanistan led to the ugly violence that has been taking place against the Muslim minority by Buddhists in Myanmar.

It is also amazing that such an extremist and ignorant man like Sheikh Murjan is left to issue threats against Egyptian antiquities. This person should be prosecuted and put behind bars, because he has already created fears that will impact the Egyptian tourist industry. Tourism is the major source of revenue for Egypt, which has already been negatively impacted by the lack of security during the past 18 months. Sheikh Morgan is a dangerous person to be left free and if President Mursi’s government is afraid to prosecute him, then he should be sent to Myanmar and I am sure he will be tried there for the offenses he committed against their beliefs.

It is interesting to notice here that the day following the airing to this program, the channel Dream was taken off the air!!!!!