Stop Coddling Egypt's Military

The Obama administration should do more to demand that Egypt's military rulers make good on their promise to pursue an inclusive democracy.

It's increasingly evident that the military rulers of Egypt are determined to intimidate and silence their political opponents, whether they are members of the Muslim Brotherhood or secular Egyptians who believe the generals are betraying the spirit of the "Arab Spring." Yet the Obama administration continues to entertain the pious hope that Egypt is on the road to an inclusive democracy.

In recent days the military-backed government has declared the Brotherhood a terrorist organization — blaming it for an attack on a police headquarters for which another group claimed responsibility — and has seized the financial assets of hundreds of Brotherhood activists and other Islamist figures.

But the Brotherhood isn't the only target. Three leaders of the protests in 2011 that toppled President Hosni Mubarak have been sentenced to three years in prison for violating a law that criminalized street protests. And as part of an attempt to deny opposition groups publicity, authorities arrested four journalists from the satellite channel Al Jazeera English and charged them with "broadcasting false news."

The U.S. response to the continued crackdown has been polite to the point of pusillanimity. A State Department spokeswoman said the administration was "concerned" about the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group and that recent actions by the Egyptian government "raise questions about the rule of law being applied impartially and equitably, and do not move Egypt's transition forward."

Inadequate as that statement is, it's an improvement over some past comments by Secretary of State John F. Kerry. Last summer Kerry suggested that the Egyptian military was "restoring democracy" when it deposed Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood member who was chosen president the previous year in a free and fair election. In November, after the U.S. suspended some aid to Egypt and delayed delivery of some weapons systems, Kerry said during a visit to Cairo that the action was "not a punishment."

The sad truth is that U.S. military aid to Egypt is designed not to reward Egypt for adherence to democracy but to shore up the Arab-Israeli peace treaty and suppress terrorism in the Sinai Peninsula and elsewhere.

Even so, the Obama administration could be more consistent and forthright in insisting that the generals make good on their stated desire to follow a path to democracy. Clearly the current policy of trying not to offend them isn't working.

By The Times Editorial Board

Egypt's Regime: Nasty, Brutal and Barbaric

This past week the confrontation between Egypt’s ruling regime and the country’s Muslim Brotherhood intensified. In an act that should make anyone familiar with this ongoing struggle sit up and shake their head, the “military-backed government” in Cairo declared Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood a “terrorist organization.” In case anyone is inclined to get the sides mixed up, it is the Muslim Brotherhood that is defending democracy in this confrontation, and the media’s use of the euphemism “military-backed government” is to be understood as whitewash for military dictatorship.   

The truth is that the Muslim Brothers have behaved in a civil fashion. Indeed, they have shown great restraint in the face of the violent, sometimes terrorist-style provocations of the Egyptian military and police. Always advocating nonviolent demonstrations against the military coup that brought down Egypt’s first honestly elected government in modern times, the Brothers and their supporters have been met with murderous official violence that has killed, wounded and jailed thousands. Thus, when the generals brand the Muslim Brothers “terrorists,” they are using an Orwellian propaganda ploy. As is so often the case, it is the dictatorship that practices terrorism and many of those who are resisting are destined to be its victims. 

On the other hand,  rarely have the actions of what now passes for a government in Egypt been labeled “extremist” in the media, although the generals have repeatedly killed and maimed nonviolent protesters. In truth it is the dictatorship itself which has set down the options for those who resist it: either give up entirely or pick up the gun. This stands as a lesson in ends and means – the means employed by dictatorial regimes usually don’t allow for peaceful protest and thereby steer the end that is resistance in the direction of violence. 

Abandoning The Democratic Road 

There will be many who rationalize Egypt’s military dictatorship by pointing to the flaws of the deposed Morsi government. Some will point out that, even though freely and fairly elected, the Morsi government was soon rejected by growing numbers of Egyptians. Thus, before the coup there were large demonstrations against the elected government. This is true, though the assertion that the protests represented a majority of the population is a politically motivated exaggeration. The problem with this rationale is that, unlike conditions under a dictatorship, there were democratic options open to the those who disliked the elected government. 

They likewise could have kept up the demand for broader input into government policy until the government compromised. Just before the coup, there were signs that this point was being reached. They could have waited until the next election cycle to attempt to turn the Morsi government out. There is no evidence that Morsi would have prevented future free and fair elections. It is to be noted that one thing the elected government did not do is shoot down protesters in the streets. 

It might be that, except for a relatively small youth movement, most of the anti-Morsi coalition were never seriously interested in democracy. From the start of the demonstrations against the elected government, there was little or no hesitation by this coalition to abandon democratic practices. The regulations and procedures put in place by the prior Mubarak dictatorship were repeatedly used to stymie Morsi’s administration. Prominent in the use of this tactic were the courts and judges appointed by Mubarak. It soon became apparent that the anti-Morsi coalition did not have the patience to follow a democratic/electoral route to settling the question of Egypt’s ultimate character. Theirs was an all-or-nothing attitude which quickly led them to call on the military to “save the nation.”

What was salvation to look like? One thing that is certain is that the Egyptian military lacks the skill to save, and indeed any interest in saving, Egyptian democracy. 

What did this strategy get the anti-Morsi coalition? Did it get them a secular government that respects civil and human rights? Did it get them a government that can be trusted to hold free and fair elections? Certainly not, for the means they employed could not lead to such ends. It got them relief from the maybe of Sharia law in exchange for the certainty of a military coup and the violence through which all military dictators rule.   

What do the military dictators of Egypt think their arbitrary and violent use of power will accomplish? Do they think that the country will return to the situation under Nasser-Sadat-Mubarak when authoritarian intimidation kept religious organizations under control and civil society quiet? Do they think that anyone will really be fooled by the rigged elections they are planning for 2014? If so, they have failed to consider the possibility that the democratic election of Mohammad Morsi may well have changed the historical equation. In terms of history, what they should be referencing is not their own dictatorial past but the events of Algeria in the 1990s. In that place and time, another military regime shut down the pro-Islamic results of a democratic election and triggered a decade of savage civil war. This is an end that is quite consistent with the means used by the Egyptian generals in 2013. 

The Evolving U.S. Response 

The United States government had been a consistent backer of Egyptian dictatorships ever since Anwar Sadat made his historic peace with Israel in March of 1979. From that time on the U.S. treasury has been paying out at least $1.55 billion dollars (the publicly used low figure) in mostly military aid to Egypt. That aid has helped sustain a corrupt Egyptian officer corps that now controls a good part of the Egyptian economy and has no one to fight except its own people.  

In February 2011 a genuinely popular and mostly nonviolent revolt forced the collapse of the Mubarak dictatorship. This led to Egypt’s first internationally monitored, free and fair election. For a while it looked like the Egyptian military would be forced out of politics, and U.S. President Barack Obama seemed to accept this turn of events. Even when the Egyptian generals returned to form and pulled off their coup in July 2013, the Obama administration reacted with displeasure and cut off some of the annual aid payments. The only ones in the Middle East who found this objectionable were other U.S.-supported dictatorships such as those in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates. 

However, now the U.S. government might be considering to  once more support an Egyptian dictatorship. Suggestions that this might be the case came recently from Secretary of State John Kerry in a speech delivered on 20 November 2013 to the State Department’s Overseas Security Advisory Council. Here Kerry showed an embarrassing lack of knowledge about the events that brought down the Mubarak dictatorship and a remarkably naive notion of what it takes to make and sustain a revolution.  Thus:  

“Those kids in Tahrir Square, they were not motivated by any religion or ideology. They were motivated by what they saw through this interconnected world, and they wanted a piece of the opportunity and a chance to get an education and have a job and have a future, and not have a corrupt government that deprived them of all of that and more. And they tweeted their ways and Facetimed [sic] their ways and talked to each other and that’s what drove that revolution. And then it got stolen by the one single most organized entity in the state, which was the Brotherhood.”    

The fact that Kerry could make such a diagnosis to a group of allegedly knowledgeable security advisers is chilling.  Kerry is way off the mark and here is why: 

- The very brave youths of Cairo and Alexandria who began the 2910-2011 protests against the Mubarak dictatorship laid the basis for the conditions that eventually brought down that regime. But they alone could not and did not achieve that goal. 

- These youth were not devoid of either religion or ideology. Most were Muslims of varying degree of practice and almost all of them believed in a democratic ideology.    

- Despite their use of social networking and other technologies, the youth groups were too small to make a revolution.  

- The revolution became possible only when much greater numbers were introduced into the streets to transform the demonstrations from large to massive. The decision to bring out those numbers was taken by the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that is religious but was also willing to follow a democratic path. 

- The Brotherhood could manage to bring out the large numbers not just because it was “the most organized entity in the state” but because for decades it has also been the most effective and popular social service organization in Egypt.  

The truth then is that the Brotherhood did not “steal” the revolution, it made it possible.   

Conclusion 

Today’s Egypt is a mess. It is an economic mess thanks to decades of military dictatorship, corruption and greed. It is a political mess for the same reason. Whatever faults might be laid at the feet of the elected Morsi government, none of them warranted a return to thuggish military rule – an action which, for all practical purposes, brought the ideals of the Arab Spring to a tragic end. 

One can only hope that the U.S. government, rising above the historical ignorance of John Kerry and his speech writers, will hold to principle and have as little as possible to do with the regime in Cairo. It is a nasty regime, brutal to its own people, barbaric in its policy toward the imprisoned population of Gaza and, not surprisingly, in bed with the Zionists and autocratic Gulf monarchs. 

As for Egypt’s democratic revolution that almost was, one can hope that it survives as a precedent for the future.

Lawrence Davidson is a retired professor of history from West Chester University in West Chester PA. His academic research focused on the history of American foreign relations with the Middle East. He taught courses in Middle East history, the history of science and modern European intellectual history.

What Is An Egyptian Human Life Worth?

Prior to the 14 August clashes, the two main protest sites, al-Nahda and Rabaa al-Adawiya, were densely populated with women, children, and men who have been staging a 47 days-long peaceful sit-in to protest the removal of President Mohammed Morsy. Both sit-ins would at certain moments have a gathering of at least 115,000 people. On July 31, the Egyptian cabinet authorized the interior minister to "take all necessary measures to face these dangers and put an end to them within the framework of the constitution and the law." More than 40 international and national human rights organizations have warned the Egyptian Authorities not to use abusive and excessive force in the dispersal of protesters as Egypt's riot police have consistently responded with excessive and unlawful lethal force in dispersing demonstrations and have showed insufficient respect to protecting the right to life.

This warning resulted from previous massacres committed by the Egyptian Armed Forces and Security Forces against peaceful protesters just a few weeks before. On 8 July, 51 people were killed when lethal force was used on protesters gathered outside the Officer's club, followed by another massacre on 27 July when 74 people were killed, many shot in the head and chest.

On July 19, the EuroMid Observer for Human Rights issued a statement, signed by 11 international human rights organizations, demanding the Egyptian Authorities to protect human lives , emphasizing that "Egyptian security forces and the army are responsible for protecting all protestors, including both supporters and opponents of the deposed president. However, instead, a serious escalation in human rights violations - such as extrajudicial killings; arbitrary arrests; excessive use of force; and deprivation of freedoms of association, speech and expression – has been documented, targeting those who oppose the military's ouster of President Morsi. The Egyptian authorities have not only perpetrated such acts, but also turned a blind eye to their practice by others."

As the Egyptian cabinet was considering the pro-Morsi sit-ins a "threat to national security", human rights organizations and governments around the world kept urging the Egyptian Armed Forces to show restraint, to seek for a peaceful dispersal of the sit-ins and to avoid the escalation of violence.

Yet Egypt has been ruled since its independence by the generals who have since then committed severe human rights violations, showing little respect to human rights and dignity and acting with blatant disregard for human life.

Violating The Rights To Freedom Of Peaceful Assembly and Of Association Of The Protesters

The violence started around 6.30 a.m. on Wednesday 14 August as Central Security Forces (riot police) backed by helicopters and snipers, surrounded both sit-ins and fired tear gas from three different entries while heavy semi-automatic bursts of gunfire were heard. 

Eyewitnesses' reports and video footage showed the sounds of successive gun shots and men in the crowd falling to the ground right away, which means that security forces were using live gunfire as snipers were firing tear gas and live ammunition from rooftops and helicopters. EuroMid researcher counted 42 victims in the first hour. Security forces shredded through the labyrinthine networks of tents and tarpaulin shacks, setting them on fire, with women and children still inside of them, causing many casualties and injuries. An eyewitness told EuroMid "a mother and her baby were crushed to death inside the tent", as severe chaos rose among the bloodshed.

The Egyptian Authorities have blatantly violated the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association of the protesters, which states that: "Everyone has the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association [...] and these rights are essential components of democracy".

Responses to demonstrations and sit-ins must comply with international standards, even when some participants err by resorting to violence, including the use of firearms. International standards forbid the excessive use of lethal force, and do not justify the intentional murder of protestors by police or military snipers. The use of force must not exceed what is required to prevent the use of violence. Firing live ammunition at crowds is intolerable and should be considered a criminal act.

Extrajudicial Executions

The Egyptian Security Forces had announced one safe corridor from which protesters could exit the Rabaa sit-in parallel to Tayaran Street. Protestors and eyewitnesses stated that the security forces deliberately targeted protesters who were using the safe corridor, and attacked physically and verbally protestors as they were trying to escape. Men were executed on the spot while walking with their hands above their heads. The police unlawfully killed protesters who were clearly not engaged in any form of violence.

This was clearly not an attempt to break-up a peaceful sit-in, but a huge military operation against unarmed civilians. The use of deadly fire on such a scale and the killing of so many by the security forces prove that there was an intention to kill with no regard for people's lives.

Within less than 3 hours, the Field Hospital itself and the adjacent halls were completely full with corpses and injured protesters. The injuries varied from bird-shots to live bullets, burns and asphyxiation. Medical staff reported that the "majority of the bullet injuries were to the head, neck, and chest, as well that the angle of gunshot wounds indicated they were shot from above, as some of the deaths were judged to be targeted killings, as the position of the shots could only result in death".

The Egyptian Security Forces are guilty of extrajudicial executions, which are acts outside the realm of rule of law and hence deprive the targeted individual(s) of their right to life, as well as the right to defend themselves against charges against them. The killing of a person by governmental authorities without the sanction of any judicial proceeding or legal process is an unlawful punishment that violates the Declaration of Human Rights.

But who will hold the Egyptian Forces accountable? They have not opened or announced any investigation into any of those cases, which is contrary to the provisions of Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, which state the need to investigate cases of unlawful killings and that the "purpose of the investigation shall be to determine the cause, manner and time of death, the person responsible, and any pattern or practice which may have brought about that death," and that "the body of the deceased person shall not be disposed of until an adequate autopsy is conducted by a physician".

But as death tolls rose, the Egyptian authorities attempted to cover up the numbers of the massacre. The police are refusing to register the cause of death as murder and push families to list the cause as accidents or suicide. The EuroMid researcher was shown official certificates of death were the cause of death was not mentioned.

Places designated for the sole protection of civilians, such as hospital zones, should not be the object of military operations

Additionally, the Egyptian Security Forces imposed a siege on the Rabaa Field Hospital, preventing ambulances from coming through from the very beginning of the violent crackdown. At least one ambulance medic was shot in the head. Snipers were targeting anyone coming in and out of the hospital. It is a criminal act to deliberately attack a hospital or other medical units, whether civilian or military. Medical personnel in general may not be attacked.

According to the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, when whenever the use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall ensure that assistance and medical aid are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment. This obligation was violated by Egyptian Forces, specifically by imposing a siege on the Field Hospital, and blocking its entrance, and eventually setting it on fire.

Unlawful Use Of Teargas

Rules under international customary law ban the use of certain weapons as an instrument to contain assemblies. Central Security Forces (riot police), backed by the Egyptian Army, fired teargas canisters and gas bombs directly at the densely populated sit-ins, causing severe cases of asphyxiation and injuries among women, children and elderly. Eyewitnesses reported that as a result of the excessive use of teargas, the stampede rushed forward, and some people were crushed to death. It appears that security forces firing tear gas at the stampeding protesters exacerbated the situation, as people could not see a safe passage and may have been the cause of some of the deaths.

No Respect To Human Life Right and Dignity

The Egyptian authorities may decide, in accordance to national law, to disperse a demonstration, they are bound to comply with a series of obligations, namely, they should respect and protect the life and security of all personas. The Egyptian Security Forces have clearly failed in safeguarding Egyptian lives.

Considering the evidence in the case of Egypt, security agents used lethal force when it was not necessary to protect lives or prevent serious injury and hence clearly violated the international law and standards. They have used live ammunition at crowds; they have extrajudicially killed dozens; they have used excessive teargas, resulting in some people crushed to death and hundreds asphyxiated; they have targeted medical personnel, setting a hospital on fire, and they have not spared women and children. Men were executed on the spot while walking with their hands above their heads. More than 700 have been victims of arbitrary arrests and at least 1500 are missing until this moment.

While human rights organizations are overwhelmed with the magnitude of the Rabaa massacre, a new one followed just 3 days later. Hours after Egyptian army chief General Abdel Fattah El Sissi urged the Muslim Brotherhood to pursue dialogue instead of "terrorism," 52 prisoners were killed while being transported to a prison outside Cairo. The Egyptian Security Forces are prohibiting human rights organizations and journalists from investigating this new incident. Egyptian security forces are guilty of a pattern of excessive and unwarranted lethal force, which have led to an unlawful mass massacre, unprecedented in modern Egyptian history.

On 15 August, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay stated that "the number of people killed or injured, even according to the government's figures, point to an excessive, even extreme, use of force against demonstrators. There must be an independent, impartial, effective and credible investigation of the conduct of the security forces. Anyone found guilty of wrongdoing should be held to account" she said.

Since the deposal of President Morsy on July 3, at least 1500 people have been killed in Egypt as a result of the erupted violence. But who will investigate these violations of national and International laws? Interim Prime Minister Hazem el-Beblawi, on Egyptian TV, defended and justified the clearing as "necessary to restore the security of Egyptians" and praised the Ministry of Interior and police for showing "restraint to the maximum level". 

While Egyptians rose in January 25 to put a halt to all these violations, it is clear, one massacre after the other, that the new military-installed regime does not appear to be interested in safeguarding Egyptian human rights. The path to democracy has vanished under the bloody boots of the army.

Hanine Hassan is a Researcher in Human Rights violations and doctoral student studying aspects of mental torture and humiliation under occupation. She tweets at @hanine09.

Have Some Popcorn خد فيشار

The so-called "news" the Egyptian media produces isn't based in reality and is closer to the stuff of science fiction movies. So Joe skewers the media lies and propaganda in a creative and witty video.

General Sisi Murdered His Own Soldiers

By Alaa Sadek


كتب د.علاء صادق على موقع التواصل الاجتماعي عبر الفيسبوك نقلاً عن صفحة كلنا د.علاء صادق: "الفاعل غبي و المخطط أجنبي - جنودنا قتلهم السيسي و لفق الحادث،

و هذا هو الدليل".

الغباء جند من جنود الله، الإنقلابيين قتلوا الجنود و قدموا لنا الدليل بأيديهم.

بعد دراسة و فحص دقيق لصورة الباص التي نشرها الإنقلابيون في محاولة منهم لحبك قصة العملية الإرهابية الأخيرة، المزعومة ضد جنودنا في سيناء انكشف المستور و انقلب السحر على الساحر.

الباص الذي صوروه على أنه باص الجنود باص خرب قديم مركون على جانب الطريق منذ عدة أعوام، و لست أدري ما الذي جعل الباص المزعوم يسير في الرمال خارج الطريق كما هو ليتم تفجيره بزعمهم خارج الطريق و ليس عليه؟!!!

و إليكم تحليل الصورة:

1- إدَّعى الإنقلابيين أن سيارة تحمل 150ك متفجرات اصطدمت بالباص في عملية انتحارية.
بالمرور بقلم الرسم على شاصي الباص تبين عدم وجود أي انبعاج (صورة 1)، و ليس به أي أثر اصطدام من الأمام، و الجوانب ليست منبعجة للداخل، مما يعني استحالة أن تكون السيارة المزعومة صدمت الباص لا من الأمام و لا من الجوانب، كذلك لا أثر لهيكل السيارة المزعومة التي صدمت الباص فهل تبخرت؟!!!

2- يلاحظ اندفاع جزء من سقف الباص لأعلى و اندفاع الجوانب إلى الخارج مما يعني أنه إن كان ثمة انفجار فقد تم بوضع عبوة تفجير داخل الباص و ليس من الخارج (صورة رقم2- الأسهم الحمراء تشير للأجزاء المندفعة للخارج و الخضراء تشير لإتجاه الإنفجار).

3- حقائب الجنود المغدورين التي يفترض أنها كانت بصحبتهم داخل الباص أو في درج الحقائب سليمة و نظيفة مما يعني أنها لم تكن في الباص المزعوم نهائياً و إلا لتمزقت و احترقت (صورة رقم3).

4- لاحظ غوص ثلث العجلة الأمامية في التراب و ارتفاع التراب أمام الباص و إحاطة العشب بزاوية و جانب الباص و عدم احتراق العشب مما يعني أن الباص له عدة سنوات متوقف في هذا المكان( صورة4).

5- في الصور المقربة لجانب الباص لاحظ آثار الصدأ و ليس الحريق مما يؤكد أيضاً وجود هذا الباص منذ عدة سنوات في هذا المكان(صورة 5).

6- الباص مشدود و مثبت إلى الأرض بحبل معدني (واير حديدي)، واضح جداً في الصورة (لاحظ الصورة رقم 6سهم رقم 1 يشير إلى الواير و سهم2 يشير لنقطة الربط بالباص و سهم3 يشير لنقطة التثبيت بالأرض خلف الحقائب)، الأمر الذي يقطع باستحالة صحة الرواية التي يدعيها الإنقلابيين.

الفاعل غبي و المخطط أجنبي.

الإنقلابيين ينفذون أفكار و أساليب الموساد من خلال طرقهم البدائية و عقولهم المتحجرة.
الغباء الذي سلطه الله عليهم من نعم الله علينا و جند الله الذي أعاننا به، و هو الذي يعجل بانكشافهم و زوالهم قريباً جداً بإذن الله تعالى.

السيسي محرك أحاسيسي

By JoeTube

الحرم لا يدوم يا سيسي

Joe is creative and hilarious!

Egypt's Military Regime Builds Memorial To Its Own Massacres

Builders work on a memorial under construction in the center of Cairo's landmark Tahrir Square Photo: AFP/Getty Images

Egypt's military-backed regime is... setting up memorial sculptures at sites of protests where its army and police gunned down demonstrators.

Residents and passers-by in Cairo's Tahrir Square, made famous the world over by the 2011 revolution, have watched... puzzled in recent days as a circular stone creation has begun to take shape in the grass-covered central roundabout.

On Sunday, the authorities announced it would be unveiled on the eve of Tuesday's anniversary of the so-called Mohammed Mahmoud massacre, several days of protests in 2011 when scores of demonstrators against the then interim Supreme Council of the Armed Forces were shot dead on the street of that name that leads away from the Square.

In addition, several more lost eyes to a military police marksman who was later convicted of deliberately targeting them with birdshot.

The memorial is the second in a sequence. Earlier this month, another sculpture consisting of two angular arms, representing the police and army, protecting a silver orb, representing the people, was completed in the square in front of Rabaa al-Adawiya Mosque, where the army killed more than 600 Muslim Brotherhood demonstrators in August.

This sudden outburst of public art has angered those revolutionary youth movements:

"The killer is building a memorial to his victims," said Sally Touma, one youth activist. 

"They kill the people and then celebrate them."

Sisi Should Be Behind Bars Not President Morsi

سياسي ألماني: القفص للسيسي وليس لمرسي

قال السياسي والخبير الإعلامي الألماني البارز يورغن تودنهوفر إن قائد الانقلاب العسكري في مصر عبد الفتاح السيسي أولى بوضعه في قفص الاتهام وليس رئيس الجمهورية المنتخب ديمقراطيامحمد مرسي، واعتبر انقلاب السيسي وإطلاقه الرئيس المخلوع حسني مبارك انتصارا للثورة المضادة بوسائلها غير الديمقراطية وعنفها الدامي.

وقال تودنهوفر الذي شغل سابقا منصب رئيس لجنة التسليح في البرلمان الألماني (بوندستاغ) في بيان نشره على موقعه على شبكة التواصل الاجتماعي "فيسبوك" إن توجيه تهمة القتل لمرسي يعتبر وضعا مقلوبا لأن الرئيس المصري الذي أطاح به الانقلاب شدد دائما على دعوة أتباعه للسلمية في الاحتجاجات.

وأضاف أن محاكمة مرسي مجرد استعراض يظهر أن ما يجري هذه الأيام بالقاهرة يجسد قانون الأقوياء وشرعة المنتصر وليس له علاقة بالعدالة أو إقرار الحق. ورأى أن ما اقترفه السيسي منذ انقلابه في صيف 2013 وإزهاقه لألفي روح فاق ما ارتكبه مبارك من تعد وحشي على المتظاهرين في ثورة 25 يناير/كانون الثاني 2011.

انقلاب مبارك

وذكر تودنهوفر الذي شغل منصب نائب رئيس مجلس إدارة مجموعة بوردا الألمانية العملاقة وعايش ثورة 25 يناير، أن بقايا نظام مبارك ممثلين بجهازه القضائي وقادة جيشه، الذين لم يكونوا مستعدين للتخلي عن ذرة من نفوذهم وسلطانهم، سعوا منذ يومهم الأول بعد سقوط الدكتاتور إلى إعداد ثورتهم المضادة للإجهاز على ثورة ميدان التحرير.

مصريون يتظاهرون أمام سفارتهم ببرلين تنديدا بمحاكمة مرسي (الجزيرة)

وأشار إلى أن نظام مبارك القديم صعّد من مقاومته بعد فوز جماعة الإخوان المسلمين بالانتخابات البرلمانية في ديسمبر/كانون الأول 2011 وانتخاب مرسي رئيسا للجمهورية، ولفت إلى أن هذا التصعيد تبدى في تعطيل الجهاز القضائي علنا لعمل الحكومة، ورفع الجيش المتحكم في معظم الاقتصاد المصري -بلا حياء- لتكاليف الحياة لإثارة عداء المصريين للرئيس مرسي وجماعة الإخوان.

ونوّه السياسي الألماني البارز المنتمي للحزب المسيحي الديمقراطي -الذي تتزعمه المستشارة أنجيلا ميركل- إلى أن الصراع الحالي على السلطة في مصر لم يحسم بعد ويحتاج إلى وقت مثلما احتاجت فرنسا 80 عاما بعد ثورتها لإقامة ديمقراطية مستقرة، وانتظار ألمانيا الغربية 30 عاما وشقيقتها الشرقية السابقة 70 عاما لتحقيق الهدف نفسه.

بديل الدم

وقال تودنهوفر إن التجارب التاريخية للثورات وما يعقبها من ثورات مضادة تظهر أن المصريين تنتظرهم سنوات من الاضطرابات وعدم الاستقرار ليتخلصوا بعدها من الانقلابيين المتوقع عجزهم مثلما عجز مبارك.

وخلص إلى أن البديل الوحيد لتجنيب مصر طريقا دمويا طويلا هو إجراء مفاضلة انتخابية حرة بين مرسي والسيسي.

وأوضح أن هذه الانتخابات ستحدد خيار المصريين الحر بين رئيس ديمقراطي منتخب وانقلابي مستبد، وبين الديمقراطية وسلطة العسكر. وختم بأن هذا يتطلب خيالا وشجاعة يفتقدهما السيسي وامتلكهما المتظاهرون المصريون يوم 11 فبراير/شباط 2011.

Israeli Security Firm Protecting Egypt's Suez Canal

The Egyptian military reaches out to its historical enemy: Israel, and entrusts the security of its Suez Canal to Seagull Maritime Securities, This was a catastrophic move by Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi.

Seagull Maritime Securities loyalty will be to Israel and not it's client, Egypt. As long as it's allowed to protect the Suez Canal, it will be extremely easy for it to collect intelligence on the canal and Egyptian military units near the canal.

If Egypt chooses to challenge Israel's dictates at any point in time, Seagull Maritime Securities can always employ false flag operations to disable the canals maritime traffic, and this will cripple Egypt's economy, since the Suez Canal is the primary and stable source of the nations national revenue.

If war breaks out in the future between Egypt and Israel, Seagull Maritime Securities can always sabotage the canal and blame it on Egypt, and since the canal is a global strategic waterway, it can be internationalized and placed under international supervision, therefore, reversing the nationalization of the canal by Gamal Abdel Nasser.

In the event of a war, Seagull Maritime Securities can employ its Special Operations Units to conduct sabotage operations that would prevent the Egyptian Army from deploying to the Sinai Peninsula, and thus severing the Sinai from Egypt and this will permit Israel to easily occupy the Sinai once again.

Clearly the Egyptian military can't protect the nation or it's people. It can't subdue an infant and amateurish insurgency in the Sinai. It can't subdue peaceful civilian protests that are waged against the military coup that removed and is holding hostage Egypt's first and only democratically elected President, Mohamed Morsi.

If a war was to break out today between Egypt and Israel, the Egyptian army would be easily and quickly
dispatched by the IDF. Even if the Egyptian Army was to invade Gaza and fight Hamas, it would suffer heavy loses and would be unable to win.

The current Egyptian Army is no more than a glorified police force and cannot go head-to-head with an external conventional military, and that's the brutal truth!

Information About Seagull Maritime Securities:

SEAGULL MARITIME SECURITY LTD

Seagull Maritime Security Ltd. was founded in 2008 by Mr. Kfir Magen, an Israeli Navy commando veteran, to address maritime security threats and to supply high quality professional service based on the elite Israeli commando force knowhow.

Seagull Maritime Security is registered in Israel and Cyprus as a Limited Liability Company. This enables us to be in contact and execute our services in all countries and ports worldwide.

Seagull Maritime Security is a subsidiary of the Shahaf Security Group, a well-regarded Security company in Israel, which was established on 1989. Shahaf provides security to a variety of clients, including governmental agencies, local authorities and other institutional organizations and private companies. Shahaf employs more the 2,000 employees and owns hundreds of registered weapons for its missions.

Seagull Management Team

The management of Seagull Maritime Security has extensive experience in commanding and leading special operations, both in the IDF Naval Commando and elite Special Operations units. We bring to the Maritime security industry an approach of comradeship, honesty, loyalty, transparency, sensitivity and professionalism, together with an experienced business environment.

Our Top Management:

Admiral (Ret.) Ami Ayalon – Head of Advisors, is one of Israel's top security professionals. Ayalon served as the Israeli Navy Commander and, later, as an Israeli cabinet minister who was directly involved in the peace process. Ayalon has a Master’s in Public Administration from Harvard University and a Master’s in Law from Bar-Ilan University. Admiral Ayalon if one of few who has been decorated with Israel's highest award, the Medal of Valor.

Kfir Magen – CEO - Served as a commanding officer in the elite Israeli Naval Commando and has acquired years of maritime operational experience. Kfir holds a BSc. degree from the Technion, Israel Institute of Technology.

Jeremy Weiss – VP Business Development, Marketing & Sales - Served for over 20 years as Senior Commander in the Special Forces. Following, he was an Executive Director at InSightec a Hi-Tech medical device company. Jeremy holds an Executive MBA from Northwestern Uni. Kellogg School of Management.

Yuval Brenner – COO - an officer in an elite IDF Scout unit. Yuval Worked at Zim Integrated Shipping services as Logistic and Equipment Senior Manager. Mr. Brenner joined Seagull in 2010. He holds a BSc. Degree from the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology.

Gilad Appelbaum – CFO – Graduated the Academic College of Management in Rishon Lezion, Israel, and holds a B.A in Finance and a M.B.A. Gilad worked at the Central Bank of Israel as a supervisor at the Book Keeping Department, and at the Central Department of Banking Supervision as an inspector.

Amir Mavor (Advocate) - Legal Advisor – founder of the legal firm Amir Mavor & Co. Lawyers Incorporated which he established in 1993. Amir graduated the City of London College in 1988. Following his studies he worked at the leading maritime law firm Holman, Fenwick & Willan in London. Among others, Amir specializes in Maritime Law and international contracts in a variety of fields.

Yaniv Perelshtain – Manager, Operations Dept. – is a veteran of the Israeli Navy. Mr Perelshtain holds a BSc in Aeronautical and Space Engineering from the Technion - Israel Institute of Technology.

Yaniv manages the daily operations and logistics of Seagull's deployed security teams and operations.

Ron Ben-Simhon - Regulatory & Intelligence Manager – is a veteran of the IDF Special Operations Forces, where he served as a team commander. Ron studied Terrorism, Security, and Society at King’s College London and graduated with merit. Mr. Ben-Simhon worked as a security project manager for a fuel distribution facility in Haiti where he conducted risk assessments & incident investigations.

Seagull Maritime Security Offer The following:

1.  Professional Security Guards: Highly professional and experienced armed security guards who have been trained and instructed by       Israeli Naval Commando commanders. Our Security professional are trained to adapt their combat and security qualifications to the           maritime business environment.

2.  Legal and Regulatory Compliance: Compliance with all legal and regulatory requirements

3.  SOP & RUF: Clear, in-depth and efficient maritime security doctrine (SOP & RUF)

4.  Embark/Disembark In All Ports: Embark and disembark in all ports throughout the HRA and proven ability with clearances to enter        ports with armed teams on board (detailed ports list-below)

5.  Intelligence & Risk Analysis: Up-to-date intelligence and risk analysis

6.  24/7 Call Center: Call and Operations Center - 24/7, 365 days a year - for quick response, intelligence updates and risk assessment.

7.  Security Equipment: A range of non-lethal prevention equipment and advanced firearms suitable for the naval combat. All equipment      and weapons are owned by Seagull.

Egypt's Lobby By Proxy Wields Outsize Influence In DC

Washington's soft line on Cairo's military coup is shaped by pro-Israel and defense lobbies, not democracy

By Zaid Jilani

News recently broke that the Obama administration would be cutting military aid to Egypt in response to the country's military coup and its crackdown against nonviolent protesters. These cuts will be limited and include $250 million in cash assistance and the nondelivery of Apache helicopters and other military hardware. The president's action is "more of a symbolic slap than a punishing wound to the military-backed government," The Associated Press reported. "(The U.S.) will keep providing support for health and education and counterterrorism, spare military parts, military training and education, and border security and security assistance in the Sinai Peninsula."

Why did the Obama administration take so long to cut funding to Egypt's military government? And why is it that the administration failed to cut off all military aid to Egypt, as U.S. law requires in the event of a military coup?

One way countries maintain influence in Washington is by employing lobbyists. But during all of last year up until the beginning of this month, Egypt had no lobbyists in Washington. Indeed, the Egyptian government ended its contracts with high-powered Washington lobbyists Tony Podesta, Bob Livingston and others in January 2012.

So how did Egypt maintain so much influence from January 2012 through October 2013 that it maintained its military-aid package without having to employ any lobbyists, even as the military massacred nonviolent activists and cracked down on independent media?

The answer is that Egypt's military didn't need its own lobbyists because there are already very powerful pro-coup lobbies in place: the pro-Israel lobby and the defense industry.

The True Egypt Lobby

In late July, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced an amendment to redirect $1.5 billion in Egyptian aid to rebuilding U.S. infrastructure instead. The amendment was soundly defeated, with 86 nay votes. Why did the amendment meet such opposition? The Daily Beast's Ali Gharib noted one salient factor: the principal issue during floor debate was whether the amendment would hurt Israel.

For example, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, said the Senate must consider the "implications for U.S. national security and for our ally Israel." He later said, "When you have hundreds of tunnels in the Sinai being used by extremists to send weapons into Gaza to attack Israel, it is about their security."

Menendez's framing of the Egyptian-aid question likely pleased his financial backers. Data from the Center for Responsive Politics show that he received more money from the pro-Israel lobby than any other victorious senator in the 2012 races (The only candidate who received more was Nevada's Shelley Berkley, who lost.)

"We do not support cutting off all assistance to Egypt at this time, as we believe it could increase the instability in Egypt and undermine important U.S. interests and negatively impact our Israeli ally,"urged the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the most vocal pro-Israel lobbying group, in an open letter to Menendez before the vote.

Some senators even went so far as to cite AIPAC's position as decisive. "The fact is, AIPAC and the Israelis are adamantly opposed to this amendment," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said. He recently switched his position as human-rights abuses have grown more severe.

However, other best friends of the pro-Israel lobby in Congress continue to defend aid to Egypt. Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., told ABC News in August that he does not think it is time to suspend U.S aid. "Egypt's an important country," he said. "We have to be very careful before we willy-nilly just cut off aid."

With hundreds dead after a brutal military crackdown, it is not entirely clear what action Engel would not deem willy-nilly. But it is worth noting that Engel received $94,150 from the pro-Israel lobby during the last election cycle, the second most he received from any group.

---

Egypt has multiyear contracts with U.S. weapon manufacturers that allow purchases before congressional appropriations to pay for them. 

---

In addition, the Israeli government has joined the domestic pro-Israel lobby in pushing to keep U.S. aid to Egypt. "Israel plans this week to intensify its diplomatic campaign urging Europe and the United States to support the military-backed government in Egypt despite its deadly crackdown on Islamist protesters, according to a senior Israeli official involved in the effort," Judi Rudoren reportedin the New York Times in August, when pressure mounted for the administration to cut off aid.

Egypt's Hired Guns

In the second week of October, after the Obama administration's "symbolic slap," Egypt's military government finally hired its own lobbyists. It chose the Glover Park Group, a lobbying shop staffed primarily by top-level Democrats that has also been retained by Lockheed Martin, JPMorgan Chase and other powerful interests.

The choice of Glover Park is not surprising. The firm's Democratic Party–aligned staffers are likely to have the most influence with the Democratic administration. For example, Glover Park's managing director of government affairs is Susan Brophy, who served as White House deputy assistant to the president and deputy director of legislative affairs for President Bill Clinton. The firm has hired Jennifer Loven, The Associated Press' White House correspondent for the first two years of the Obama administration. Her lobbying clients include the American Bankers Association, the Nigerian government and the Campaign to Fix the Debt. Former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers also works at Glover Park. The first woman to be White House press secretary, Myers is an avowed supporter of women's rights and wrote a 2008 book titled "Why Women Should Rule the World." She now works for a firm representing a government unable or unwilling to protect women who have been subject to sexual assault by both demonstrators and the military.

Several other staffers at Glover Park are tied to the Israel lobby. Jason Boxt, senior vice president at the firm, was the national deputy political director at AIPAC, which is "one of the most influential lobbying organizations in the United States," his bio boasts. Arik Ben-Zvi, a Glover Park managing director, worked for Vice President Al Gore's presidential campaign, giving him cachet in Democratic politics, and served as a consultant for "national and local elections in Israel," as his bio on the firm's site states. Matt Mandel, a Glover Park vice president, worked in the legislative department of AIPAC.

Joined By The Defense Lobby

The efforts of the domestic pro-Israel lobby and Egypt's new salesmen in Washington are matched by another center of influence: supporters of the massive U.S. defense industry. Egypt's military is "doing the right thing," Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., said in an interview with Al-Monitor in late July. "I think we have to be very careful to not do anything to disrupt their movement toward getting back to democracy."

McKeon is chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and the top recipient of defense-industry cash in Congress. In fact, he gets more defense- industry dollars than any other two members of Congress combined.

U.S. weapon contractors are heavily invested in Egypt. For example, General Dynamics is still processing a $395 million Egyptian tank contract it received in 2011, for which some of the work will be completed by a plant in Tallahassee, Fla. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., not only opposed Paul's amendment but also, in an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, called for a restructuring of aid to Egypt that might include material to combat Egypt's "internal" threats, like "Islamists who want to turn the country into another Islamist-run" country — a clear reference to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Rewarding members of Congress with campaign donations and jobs in their districts is not the only recourse for private contractors dependent on government largesse. Thanks to a system called cash-flow financing, Egypt has multiyear contracts with U.S. weapon manufacturers that allows purchases before congressional appropriations to pay for them. These are essentially unfinished contracts, and if "aid were cut," Thomas Hedges writes, "defense contractors would overwhelm the U.S. government with lawsuits demanding compensation for lost profits."

Who Speaks For Democracy?

The backlash against Obama's modest step by some of these unofficial lobbyists has already begun. "I am disappointed that the administration is planning to partially suspend military aid to Egypt," said Engel in response to the move. "During this fragile period, we should be rebuilding partnerships in Egypt that enhance our bilateral relationship, not undermining them."

"This White House is trying to have it both ways," said Morris Amitay, a former executive director of AIPAC. "It's doing just enough to alienate the Egyptian military, who we will need to preserve the peace, and to alienate those people in Congress demanding tougher action because of the coup. Either way, it's a lose-lose proposition, with grave implications for stability and our already eroding credibility in the region."

One Israeli official said to The New York Times, "If America is seen to be turning its back on Egypt, an old ally, how will it be seen? People will see it as the United States dropping a friend." 

Thus the mystery of Egypt's lack of a strong lobby in Washington is solved. Egypt's military government has finally hired its own registered Beltway lobbyists, but they join a chorus of other powerful pro-coup lobbyists for domestic pro-Israel and military-contract interests.

All this influence peddling has come at the price of democracy. First, the Israel lobby and the defense industry advance interests contrary to Egypt's pro-democracy activists. Second, the the will of the American people, 6 in 10 of whom say aid to Egypt's military government should be reduced or eliminated, is being ignored. If money and special-interest lobbying did not so distort the U.S political process, if the country were a genuine democratic republic, Congress and the Obama administration would take a harder line.