Canary In The Coal Mine

Islam’s Cultural Revolution

by Giulio Meotti  |  FrontPageMag.com  |  May 24, 2012

 

Mao’s Cultural Revolution was one of the darkest chapters of the 20th Century: communist zealots, known as “the Red Guards,” attached revolutionary messages to Buddhist statues; seventeen professors from the Shanghai Music Conservatory committed suicide; intellectuals were harassed in public trials during which they had to confess their “sins,” kneeling on makeshift rostrums; thousands of churches, temples and monasteries were demolished; ancient libraries went up in smoke; imperial ceramics were smashed and religious relics melted down. Millions of people were killed.

A new Cultural Revolution is now taking place in the Middle East, where Islam’s Red Guards are obliterating the non-Muslim heritage. If Mao’s Guards took inspiration from the “red book,” Islamic zealots have the Koran. Their targets are Jewish shrines, Christian churches, ancient monuments and  cultural masterpieces.

A few days ago in Timbuktu, Mali, Islamists destroyed the tomb of a Sufi saint, Sidi Mahmoud Ben Amar. Timbuktu is known as “the city of the 333 saints”, classified as Unesco World Heritage Sites. Sufism is a mystical dimension of Islam, but extremists believe Sufi shrines are “sacrilegious.” The UN cultural body didn’t raise its voice against this Islamic iconoclasm.

A few weeks before, Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah Al al-Sheikh, the grand mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, issued a religious fatwa, saying it is “necessary to destroy all the churches in the Arabian Peninsula.” The most important Muslim cleric in the land that gave birth to Islam called for the destruction of churches without his rule attracting any global condemnation.

While in Libya Jews have been throw out again after trying to restore Tripoli’s ancient synagogue, Egyptians are planning to block Israelis from making the pilgrimages to the tomb of a Jewish saint, Yaakov Abuhatzeira.

An Islamic mob destroyed the Institute of Egypt in Cairo, founded by Napoleon and containing 192,000 books and documents from as far back as the XIX century. Now, it’s gone. Napoleon’s legendary “Description de l’Egypte” is also lost (in 1822 Jean-François Champollion used this document to unveil the mistery of the hierogliphycs). Unesco, again, stood silent. As it stood silent when Egypt’s former cultural minister, Farouk Hosni, said he “would burn Israeli books in Egyptian libraries”.

Like in Mao’s China, Islamic salafists are trying to ban ancient statues that dot Egypt and suggested that the pagan treasures “could be covered with wax”. The sirens that embellish the fountain of Zeus in Alexandria have already been deemed “inappropriate” by the Salafist party, which decided to “veil” them completely with a sheet. Salafi leaders are also terrifying liberal intellectuals by calling for banning the novels written by Naguib Mahfouz, the only Arab Nobel Prize laureate for Literature who has been called “Egypt’s Balzac”, because his works “encourage drinking alcohol and using drugs”. Mahfouz’s novel “Awlad Haretna” is labelled as “atheistic”. Islamists also want to ban the greatest masterpiece of oriental literature, “One thousand and one arabian nights”, because it’s “depravity” and “offensive to the public good”.

In Israel, Palestinian Muslims are erasing any Jewish trace on the Temple Mount, Judaism’s most holy site. In 2005 thousands of Arabs torched the synagogues in Gaza’s Katif Bloc. It was an orgy of hate, like that of the Red Guards. Twelve years ago, Arabs destroyed Joseph’s tomb, Judaism’s fourth holy site, smashing the stone structure and ripping it apart, brick by brick, as the Red Guards did with Tao’s temples. The arson attack on the Shalom al Yisrael synagogue in Jericho and the continuing gunfire at Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem are two other examples that come to mind in the Israelo-Palestinian conflict.

Islam’s cultural revolution began when the Taliban destroyed the two wonderful Buddhas in Bamyan, Afghanistan. It was a turning point for a proto-Nazi ideology bent on the physical eradication of its enemies and their religious symbols. If Mao’s Red Guards destroyed the imperial Chinese heritage, Islam’s Red Guards want to cancel any non-Muslim trace in the Middle East. It’s a Koranic Inquisition.

 

Source: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/05/24/islams-cultural-revolution/

Video: Female Egyptian Writer Speaks Out On 'What's Really Happening' In Middle East To Women

From: FamilySecurityMatters.org  |  May 24, 2012

 

 

 

Source: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/blog/detail/female-egyptian-writer-speaks-out-on-whats-really-happening-in-middle-east-to-women

 

Stakelbeck on Terror Video: Will Iran Strike New York City on 9/11 Scale?

by Erick Stakelbeck, CBN News Terrorism Analyst  |  CBN.com  |  May 16, 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York City: It's the center of the U.S. financial system and for many people, the capital of the world. That's why the Big Apple remains a top terror target.

From the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to 9/11, and more recently, the Times Square bomber, terrorists have repeatedly targeted Manhattan.

Now Iran, the world's largest state sponsor of terror, is reportedly taking aim.

A recent warning about the threat posed by Iran and its terror proxy, Hezbollah, came from lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

"We know Hezbollah operatives are here," Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.,  told a House committee on homeland security in March.

"The question is whether these Hezbollah operatives have the capacity to carry out attacks on the U.S. homeland and how quickly they can become fully operational," he said.

King said hundreds of operatives are here and that some Iranian diplomats stationed at the United Nations are much more than they appear.

"Several of their comrades in the U.N. mission in New York were sent back to Iran after the NYPD caught them photographing the city's rail systems in the years since 9/11," he said.

According to one NYPD official, there have been at least five other instances of what he called "hostile reconnaissance" against New York City by Iranian agents.

"They see that attacking New York or threatening the facilities in New York will destabilize the financial markets and automatically harm the U.S. economy," former CIA double agent Reza Kahlili told CBN News.

Kahlili was once a member of Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps. His book, A Time to Betray, lays out Iran's potential plots against America.

"Many cells are present here. And they have their eyes set on our power plants, water supply, food distribution, bridges, tunnels -- anything that could create fear and also disrupt the daily life of Americans," he warned.

One Iranian naval commander said recently that Iran's forces can move within three miles of New York City if they so choose.

Kahlili said an attack against Iran's nuclear facilities could be the trigger.

"They believe that an attack on Syria or Iran would be sufficient to trigger a response, which would be terrorist attacks on the world stage against U.S. and Israeli interests, an attack on Israel and attacks on U.S. soil," Kahlili said.

Iran shocked many analysts with last year's plot to attack foreign diplomats in Washington, D.C. A nuclear-armed Iranian regime would likely become even bolder.

"You can tell that Iran gets more aggressive the closer they get toward a nuclear weapon," Ryan Mauro, a national security analyst for RadicalIslam.org, told CBN News.

"Rather than international pressure making them restrain themselves, it's actually making them act more and more aggressively," he said.

Iran and Hezbollah already have an extensive network in Latin America, which they could use to strike at the United States. And according to Kahlili, Iranian agents also have a presence in some American mosques.

 

 

 

Source: http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/May/Iran-Plotting-Next-911-Intel-Says-Yes/

Report: Russia Shipping Arms to Assad

From: IsraelNationalNews.com  |  May 24, 2012

 

A Russian ship with arms intended for forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad is expected to dock at the Syrian port of Tartus on Saturday, according to a Thursday afternoon report by Al-Arabiya. Russia has a naval base there.

The West has accused Russia of helping the Assad regime survive, while the Moscow government says the United States is equipping opposition forces to overthrow the Damascus government.

 

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/240827

US Special Envoy to Combat Anti-Semitism visits Latvia

by Gil Shefler  |  JPost.com  |  April 23, 2012

 

US Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism Hannah Rosenthal (Pictured) completed a four-day visit to Latvia on Monday.

During her stay the diplomat met with the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other local leaders over the Baltic nation's role in combating anti-semitism and extremism.

The next stop in her tour of northern Europe will be Sweden, where Rosenthal will meet the controversial mayor of Malmo Ilmar Reepalu, who has often offended the Jewish community in the city."I will be meeting with the mayor, I am aware of his remarks and I will express my concern," Rosenthal told JTA last week.

 

 

Source: US Special Envoy to Combat Anti-Semitism visits Latvia

Convicted Nazi Criminal John Demjanjuk Dead at 91

by Reuters  |  JPost.com  |  March 17, 2012

 

Photo: Reuters

 

Ukrainian-born man convicted last year for assisting in the murder of nearly 28,000 Jews dies in German care home.

John Demjanjuk, convicted last year for his role in killing 28,000 Jews at a Nazi death camp during World War Two, died on Saturday at the age of 91 in a care home in southern Germany, police said.

A Munich court convicted Ukrainian-born Demjanjuk in May 2011 of helping to kill the Jews at the Sobibor death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland. He was sentenced to five years in prison but freed, pending appeal, because of his age.

The Bavarian police said in a statement Demjanjuk had died in the early hours of Saturday at the care home near Rosenheim, south of Munich, where he had been living.

Demjanjuk was extradited to Germany from his home in the United States in 2009 to stand trial. He attended the 18-month court proceedings in Munich -- birthplace of Adolf Hitler's Nazi movement -- in a wheelchair and sometimes lying down.

He denied the charges against him but otherwise did not speak at his trial.

The court verdict said guards had played a key role at extermination camps like Sobibor, where at least 250,000 Jews are thought to have been killed despite only 20 German SS officers being there.

Once top of the Nazi-hunting Simon Wiesenthal Center's list of most wanted Nazi criminals, Demjanjuk said he was drafted into the Soviet army in 1941 and then taken prisoner by the Germans.

Prosecutors had faced several hurdles in proving Demjanjuk's guilt, with no surviving witnesses to his crimes and heavy reliance on wartime documents, namely a Nazi ID card indicating he had worked at Sobibor.

Demjanjuk was initially sentenced to death two decades ago in Israel for being the so-called "Ivan the Terrible" camp guard at Treblinka in Poland.

The guilty verdict was overturned on appeal by the Supreme Court in 1993 after new evidence emerged pointing to a case of mistaken identity.

Demjanjuk emigrated to the United States in the early 1950s and became a naturalized citizen in 1958, working as an engine mechanic in Ohio.

 

Source: http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?ID=262214&R=R1&t=t

Argentina's Cozy Relations with Iran

by Anna Mahjar-Barducci  | Hudson-NY.org  |  December 16, 2011

 

Hector Timerman (Pictured) recently rebutted an article, "Argentina Flirts with Iran as the West Watches Nervously," published by Reuters in which Reuters underlines Buenos Aires' "quietly reaching out to Iran, worrying key Western powers and Israel as they try to tighten Tehran's international isolation over its nuclear program."Reuters also quoted unnamed diplomats as saying that Argentina's motives for warming up to Iran are unclear: "In addition to boosting trade with Iran, some envoys said Argentina was pursuing a Brazilian-style foreign policy emphasizing ties with nonaligned developing nations,"

Timerman's reply was immediate. In Telam, the national news agency of Argentina, the Minister, while accusing Reuters of having refused to publish his reply to the article, strongly defended Argentina's relations with Iran. Timerman said that the growth of the bilateral trade with Iran was not the result of the political will of the government, but rather of private agents. He added that he felt irritated by the allegation that he had offered the Iranians to abandon the investigation into the 1994 terrorist attack in Buenos Aires against the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA): "Our commitment is to the victims of AMIA and to the desire of justice shared by all the Argentines. Iran's cooperation [to solve the AMIA case] is relevant to advance this cause, and that explains as a necessary gesture of good will the fact that our U.N. delegate did not abandon his seat while the Iranian President was making his presentation before the General Assembly."

Timerman's letter, however, appears contradictory and full of meaningless explanations. He affirms that Argentina is not isolating Iran because a constructive dialogue with Teheran is "relevant" for the progress of the AMIA investigation. Hence, he claims people should regard, as a "gesture of goodwill," Argentina's ambassador to the UN, Jorge Arguello's having remained deferentially seated to listen to the usual rigmarole of the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against Israel and the promises to destroy it -- thus breaking with the tradition observed by other Western states to leave the hall when Ahmadinejad delivered his hate-filled speeches.

So, let us get this straight: To have Iran "help out" in the investigation of the bombing of the Jewish center in Buenos Aires, ?Argentina is ready to give a goodwill gesture in support of Iran's ambition to erase the whole of Israel off the map?

Timerman then said he felt irritated by the allegation that he offered the Iranian government Argentina's abandoning the investigation on the AMIA attack. In April 2010, however, the Argentinean paper Perfil stated it had received verifiable information that in a meeting in January with Iran's ally, Syrian President Bashar Assad, Timerman had offered to drop investigation relating to Iran's 1994 bombings in Buenos Aires in return, it seems, for deepening economic relations between Argentina and Iran.. According to Perfil, Syria then passed Timerman's offer to Iran. In a leaked cable quoted by the newspaper, Iran's Foreign Minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, allegedly told the Iranian President that "Argentina is no longer interested in solving those two attacks, but in exchange prefers improving its economic relations with Iran."

The Iranian government, perhaps secure in the knowledge that Argentina was not oing to pursue serious investigations, said that it now wanted to "uncover the truth" behind the AMIA bombing. Iran's Foreign Ministry wrote a statement declaring that, "the ministry denounces the fact that the truth about the criminal action has become the target of plots and political games and that Argentine officials at the time, whose illegal actions have been disclosed and convicted by the court in this regard, misled judicial investigation and set the stage for the escape of the real culprits behind the atrocity from the hands of justice through pointing a finger of blame at a number of nationals of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Despite these contradictory remarks, Timerman said that Iran's offer was "an unprecedented and very positive step" [sic]. The Islamic Republic, however, denies that Iranian citizens were involved in the Buenos Aires bombing, and said that it is preparing its own report on the bombing to bring forth the truth. Given that in the past the Iranian government has accused the "Zionists" of perpetrating the 1994 bombing, what the report will most likely bring forth are loopy allegations that the "Jews" committed the attack against the Jewish center in Buenos Aires. Timerman apparently qualifies Iran's allegations as a "positive step" towards solving the AMIA's case.

For more than a decade, Argentina had done little to investigate the attacks. When Nestor Kirchner became president of Argentina in 2003, however, he vowed to reopen the case, and called the neglect of it "a national disgrace." Several years later, former Iranian President Ali Rafsanjani was among those indicted by Argentine prosecutors and sought by Interpol.

Relations between Iran and Argentina have been virtually frozen for years, but apparently the frost was only superficial; underneath, business was as good as ever, and getting better and better. Last year, Argentina's exports to Iran rose by 70%. reaching a hefty $ 1.5 billion. Iran has also become the most important buyer of Argentina's corn. It looks now as though even that superficial layer of frost has thawed.

One major forward step was made by Argentina's president Cristina Fernandez when, last September, she told the UN General Assembly that her country was ready to seek mediation with Iran. The timing of the announcement could not have come at a better time for Iran, then struggling against sanctions imposed by the West and looking for friends, old and new, who could help the Ayatollahs overcome their current difficulties. Her announcement could not have come in a worse time for Western chancelleries, which are aware that their current chance of success in the tug of war against Iran depends on the compactness of the Western front to impose harsh sanctions.

Reuters also reported that a Western diplomat had declared that "Iran and Argentina have recently been taking a number of overt steps - in some cases in response to pressure brought to bear by Iran - to open a clean slate in the countries' political relations."

Apart from obvious trading advantages, Argentina seems to be pursuing the path of other Latin American countries in a revival of non-aligned countries, which are anything but non-aligned. Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez has created a pro-Iranian, anti-Western school of thought in Latin America; Argentina's government is evidently among his disciples.

 

Source: http://www.hudson-ny.org/2675/argentina-iran-relations

Video: The Muslim Brotherhood’s Progress in the Middle East and What it Means for the World

by Erick Stakelbeck, CBNNews Terrorism Analyst  |  CBN.com  |  December 13, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

On this week's edition of the Stakelbeck on Terror show, CBN News analyzes the Muslim Brotherhood's recent success across the Middle East and North Africa, as well as the group's plans for global domination.

See how the Brotherhood is making major inroads across Europe and even in the United States government.

CBN News also sits down with Israeli Defense Forces spokeswoman Lt. Col. Avital Leibovich to discuss the rising threats toward Israel and the rest of the Middle East.

Also, a leading Iran expert explains why the country wouldn't hesitate to use a nuclear weapon.

 

 

 

Source: http://www.cbn.com/media/player/index.aspx?s=/Archive/News/Stakelbeck_Terror_121311_WS&search=stakelbeckepisodes&p=1&parent=0&subnav=false

No Way to Please the American Government, Media, Experts

by Barry Rubin  |  JPost.com  |  December 18, 2011

 

In a world that has moved so far to the political Left, it is hard to know anymore just what a ‘centrist’ Israeli view would be.

There is a constant effort – especially by the anti-Israel Left (and also by its anti- Semitic portions) to portray those who express mainstream public and professional Israeli views as “right-wing” or “Likudnik.”

This leads me to wonder what one would have to say to please these people. What would be centrist? What would be the equivalent of “liberal?” I presume one would have to say that US President Barack Obama is the best American president for Israel ever (even he says so!), and that there are no problems in the US-Israel relationship. Furthermore, even if there were to be problems, they would be entirely due to the Israeli government’s selfish, short-sighted and unreasonable intransigence.

To them, the only acceptable liberal view would state that peace with the Palestinians could be achieved within a few months if only Israel would make a few more concessions and stop being so belligerent and stubborn. The Palestinian Authority wouldn’t even have to change any of its policies, wouldn’t have to stop anti-Israel and anti-Semitic incitement or admit openly, clearly and in Arabic that the Jews have a right to an independent country in the historic land of Israel, nor would the Palestinians be required to negotiate or compromise. Israelis should never talk about these things.

I suppose the only acceptable liberal view is that the PA sincerely wants peace, and if given the West Bank plus a corridor to the Gaza Strip and all of east Jerusalem it would be a reliable partner and keep all of its commitments. In exchange for a peace agreement, Israel should withdraw to the 1967 borders with minor modifications and dismantle all settlements. But to ask for recognition by the PA of Israel as a Jewish state, prior agreement to resettle all Palestinian refugees in Palestine (or where they are living now), and demilitarization are unreasonable demands and should be dropped because these demands only block peace.

IF ALL the above were to happen, the liberal view must be that the Middle East would become quiet and peaceful. Islamists would either become moderate or lose support. Terrorism against the West would cease and America would be very popular, nor is the PA-Hamas partnership really a problem, because once there is a peace agreement, Hamas will give up its goal of wiping Israel off the map and there will be no more rocket, mortar, or cross-border attacks. But if Hamas does attack Israel from the Gaza Strip then Israel shouldn’t retaliate since to do so would inevitably involve disproportionate force and hurt Palestinian civilians.

The failure of Western countries to keep their commitments to Israel in 2006 to keep Hezbollah out of southern Lebanon and stop arms smuggling is unimportant, and Israel should not mention it.

That fact is unimportant and should not influence Israel’s thinking or actions, and neither should the experiences of the 1990s peace process and 2000 Camp David meeting.

As for Islamist takeovers in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, Israel really has nothing to fear. The Muslim Brotherhood is really moderate, and Israel should stop talking about a supposed threat from these groups. It is up to Israel to patch up relations with Egypt and it should not be concerned about cross-border terrorist attacks, repeated assaults on the natural gas pipeline or the government permitted mob takeover of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo. Perhaps Israel should agree to renegotiate the Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

Same with regard to Turkey.

Israel should apologize to Ankara for letting IDF soldiers defend themselves after being attacked by jihadi terrorists on the Mavi Marmara.

It should pay compensation to the families of the attackers and allow the whole-scale import of advanced weaponry to the Gaza Strip. The collapse of the Israel- Turkey relationship was completely Israel’s fault.

Israel should give up any option of attacking Iran’s nuclear weapons’ facilities at any time, not only now to prevent Tehran from getting such weapons but presumably in the future as well if there is a perceived threat from Iran. Instead, Israel should depend on US protection. If Iran hits Israel with nuclear weapons, the United States will then (probably?) retaliate.

I HONESTLY don’t think I’ve exaggerated the attitudes of American and European leftists (including many Jews) about “proper” Israeli policy.

Strangely, I don’t see the Kadima or Labor parties adopting such a program. It would be amusing to survey random Israeli pedestrians on the street in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem about what they think of the “liberal” plan for Israel.

As always, since the mainstream Western media generally does not allow a real response to the ridiculousness of the program for Israel it so often advocates you won’t be reading any of the points made above there. People will just be left to believe that the current government is just unreasonably reactionary; that most Israelis support Obama (or that they deserve what they get if they don’t); and that the region would be just fine if only Israel would let the American far- Left choose its government.

Indeed, if any left-wing blog mentions this article it will only be to brand it “right-wing.”

The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and a featured columnist at Pajamas Media. His new book, Israel: An Introduction, will be published by Yale University Press in January.

 

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=249971

Coming War Threat: Terrorists Developing a Safe Haven in Egypt to Attack Israel

by Barry Rubin  |  PJMedia.com  |  December 18, 2011

 

 

 

 

What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,

That he should weep for her? What would he do,

Had he the motive and the cue for passion

That I have? He would drown the stage with tears

And cleave the general ear with horrid speech…. 

–William Shakespeare, “Hamlet”

Or, in other words, do these writers, policymakers, and “experts” care  what happens in the Middle East? War? Bloodshed? Repression? Christians fleeing; women being turned into chattel? Just a possible boost to their careers and a test for their theories. A good luncheon topic. But this is real, all too real.

First, a word on contingencies. Governments and political analysts are supposed to examine likely problems in order that they can be evaded or minimized. The time to be alarmed is not when problems become visible but when governments refuse to recognize their existence. Western regimes and analysts are generally taking a best-possible-case view on Egypt and other developing issues in the region. I’m tempted to say they are taking a fantasy view. They dismiss not just worst-case but highly likely case scenarios. Now that’s what’s alarming.

In the Sinai Peninsula, Hamas is building support bases and arms-manufacturing facilities including those for building rockets. Over time, these rockets will no doubt be upgraded.  In other words, Egypt is becoming a safe haven for anti-Israel terrorism. We know that these attacks will come from the Gaza Strip. The only question is whether at some point they will come directly across the Egypt-Israel border.

Israel had a long experience with three comparable situations. In the  1950-56 era, Egypt was a safe haven for terror attacks into Israel; in the 1967-1970 period, Jordan played this role. During the 1970s and 1980s, even down to today, Lebanon did so, with the safe haven in Syria. The difference was that Israel did attack into Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and even occasionally into Syria in reponse to this situation.

Such an attack into Egypt in response to Egyptian involvement in attacks through the Gaza Strip is unthinkable given what an Egypt-Israel war would look like. And that doesn’t mean there won’t be sporadic attacks across the Egypt-Israel border also that would present similar problems.

There is a pattern here.

Israel, of course, is quickly building a border fence, paid for by a 2 percent cut in the budgets of government agencies, and thus the salaries of government employees.

Meanwhile, too, Libyan weapons, including Russian-made anti-plane rockets that can be fired by one man, are also making their way into the Gaza Strip. From there, or from Egyptian territory, one of them could be fired at an Israeli passenger plane on the Tel Aviv-Eilat route.

Israel has permitted more Egyptian military units to enter Sinai even though this was restricted by their peace treaty. But that doesn’t mean those forces will do anything, or at least do much, against these activities. After all, would Egypt’s army dare suppress Hamas though it is seen by most Egyptians — and soon by a majority in Egypt’s parliament — as heroic? What! Will they act as bodyguards for the evil Zionist entity that is allegedly committing genocide right next door? (That last sentence was a paraphrase of what a leading Egyptian “moderate” claimed in speaking to an American university audience.)

And let’s not forget that there are corrupt officers and also officers who sympathize with Hamas. What if they just don’t follow orders from Cairo?

So Israel’s first step is to go to the Egyptian army and ask that it do something. If it says “yes,” well and good. But what if it doesn’t do much or anything? Have you noticed that even now, the army keeps backing down to the Brotherhood? For example, the military junta claimed a share in writing the new Constitution and when the Brotherhood rejected this, the generals then pulled back. The parliament dominated by the Brotherhood and Salafists will write the Constitution without outside interference.

What does this tell us about the army’s future willingness or ability to stop the Islamists from running wild, attacking Israel, etc.?

There will also be the large Salafist contingent in parliament to keep happy. The Salafists will build networks to protect and help Hamas and small groups that might want to attack Israel from Egypt. Indeed, large parts of the Sinai are already developing toward anarchy and becoming a safe haven zone for international terrorists.

Next, what happens when there is an Islamist parliament, a president who is either Islamist or dependent on Brotherhood support, and an Islamist constitution? Who is going to order Egypt’s army to crack down on Hamas and to close its facilities?  Nobody.

And finally, what happens when Israel goes to the United States and asks President Obama to put pressure on Egypt to close down Hamas operations? Just guess.

Here’s a wonderful example of how this system works in another country. In Lebanon, Hizballah is creating its own secure strategic communications network without any government sanction. In one place, local people attacked workers building Hizballah facilities in their village. The Lebanese communications minister refused to interfere, supporting Hizballah’s actions. He explained that the Lebanese government accepted the project since almost anything was justified since Hizballah was fighting Israel. The opposition publication, Now Lebanon, responded that this is “a phone network that will be used by Iran and Syria (let’s not mince words) to carry out its regional ambitions.”

But Lebanon’s government has no interest in restricting any war-making activities on Israel. So what can we expect in Egypt?

What counter-forces are going to make the problems go away? The army does not have to close Hamas facilities to maintain its own interests. Nor does it have to do so to keep U.S. aid. There is nothing that is going to block this from happening unless Hamas makes the huge mistake of interfering in Egyptian politics and becoming involved with those staging armed struggle within Egypt. Hizballah made that mistake a few years ago.

Want to know how Middle East politics really work? A couple of years ago Israel noted that the Egypt-Gaza smuggling level had gone way down. Western media praised Egypt for acting. In fact, what had happened was that Egyptian officers on the border had demanded a higher price in bribes; the smugglers had refused, so the officers had cracked  down until they got more money at which point they opened the gates again.

I repeat: to point out the likelihood of such contingencies is of vital importance. The Israeli government is aware of these things and working to deal with them. What kind of planning and thinking for such dangerous situations is going on in the West? Little or none, because they don’t take these things seriously.

Source: http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/12/18/a-coming-war-threat-terrorists-are-developing-a-safe-haven-in-egypt-to-attack-israel/?singlepage=true