Israel shocked by Obama's "betrayal" of Mubarak

[T-Rex]

There are more jews in Iran than anywhere in the middleeast

Who has more rights - Jews in Iran, or Arabs in Israel? - Yahoo! Answers

Persian Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


vids:

********.com - Jewish Community in IRAN

YouTube - Jews of Iran (Persian Jews) || ?????????? ?????

Yet this so-called Jewish state has unhealthy obsession to bomb Iran back to the stone age.
Quite an extraordinary considering that Israel was created to protect the jews around the world. I guess they uphold the exact same ideas that HAMAS has afterall Hamas was created by Israel.

Ron Paul: Israel Created Hamas To Counter Arafat Video

Hamas is a Creation of Mossad


What a mad world we live in

CIA created the Taleban movement, that is a well known fact; I don't know about Hamas. Anyway, the lesson is when you dig a hole for others you end up in it.

 

[CardSharp]

You are giving AIPAC more credit than is actually due. Contrary to popular belief, its not the AIPAC which holds the reigns of power, its not the AIPAC which "endorses" certain candidates to become President or get elected to public office. Is the protestant Church (IIRC the presbyterian Churches) goers in the Bible belt who hold the keys to that power.

AIPAC is just a political entity whose sole interest is to foster good relations between US govt and Israel. Israel's greatest supporters are not the Jews in US but the ordinary Christians who strongly believe that the second coming of Christ is very near!

People here are blindly and ignorantly blaming the US Jews for US foreign policies, when infact its the US citizens who clearly drive its foreign policies!

Sorry if I imply more but all I meant was that presidential candidates need AIPAC endorsment.

Also I think you're wrong about the religious vote. After Bush, if they were desperate enough to go for the Mitt Romney (a mormon), it basically means they are done politically for now.

 

[gubbi]

Sorry if I imply more but all I meant was that presidential candidates need AIPAC endorsment.

Its not so much of an endorsement but more of being seen as a supporter of people from the Holy Land. AIPAC 'endorsement' effectively means that people believe that the 'candidate' would be strong enough to protect the interests of Holy Land from other contenders.

Also I think you're wrong about the religious vote. After Bush, if they were desperate enough to go for the Mitt Romney (a mormon), it basically means they are done politically for now.

I digress. It was more of people getting fed up with Neo-Con politics who had come to wield more power in the Republican party but not among its supporters. The neo-cons pushed through Palin hoping to get their base back but failed. John McCain never had a chance.

Mitt Romney along with Mike Huckabee were a breath of fresh air from the hardline policies from previous years, but ultimately the electorate decided otherwise. There was more to the 2008 elections than just religion or support for Israel.

 

[fallstuff]

]Sorry if I imply more but all I meant was that presidential candidates need AIPAC endorsment[/B].

Also I think you're wrong about the religious vote. After Bush, if they were desperate enough to go for the Mitt Romney (a mormon), it basically means they are done politically for now.

Elections are decided with slim margins, not more than 8 percets, every vote counts.

 

[Mani2020]

hmmm So are they JEWS first or Americans first ???? Their allegiance is to their country America or Israel ?

They are JEWS first ,even living in america still they are working for Israel due to the strong feeling of attachment and bonding they have with israel idiologically and religiously ,if you will do bit of research you will be amazed to know that how collectively they are working for a common goal and how firmly they hold their scriptures.

 

[Xeric]

By voicing concerns over Obama's insupportive attitude toward Mubarak Israel has again undermined the essence of democracy and the reality of freedom (of speech, choice etc).

If people of Egypt doesnt need a Mubarak to run their country, it's their choice, right?

 

[Developereo]

AIPAC is just a political entity whose sole interest is to foster good relations between US govt and Israel. Israel's greatest supporters are not the Jews in US but the ordinary Christians who strongly believe that the second coming of Christ is very near!

People here are blindly and ignorantly blaming the US Jews for US foreign policies, when infact its the US citizens who clearly drive its foreign policies!

Correct. One of the masterstrokes of the Israeli lobby was to bring the evangelicals to their side by playing up the Rapture prophecy (Jesus' second coming).

AIPAC is just one aspect of the Israeli lobby ( LRB · John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt · The Israel Lobby )

The Israel lobby has the US political, media and academic world by the balls. It is well explained in the article above. People who haven't lived in the US can never appreciate how utter and complete the Zionist domination of that country is. Israel can literally drop a nuke in the Middle East preemptively and, after some noise, the US will go back to staunch, unconditional support of Israel.

If there is even the slightest suggestion that a politician may not support Israel, their career is finished. Presidential candidate Howard Dean once suggested that the US should be fair towards Palestinians. Not favor them over Israel; only be more balanced. He knew before the words were fully out of this mouth that his presidential bid was finished.

Obama dared to insult Netanyahu on his first visit to Washington and practically grovelled for forgiveness when Bibi returned next time.

Its actually Hosni Mubarak who has played US all this time.

The US wanted a tyrant who would crush democracy in Egypt and play nice with Israel. It was willing to pay $2billion/year. Mubarak signed up for the job.

 

[T-Rex]

Well, Mubarak's time is up, uncle sam has to find another great traitor. Perhaps El Baradei can be persuaded to do the dirty job for uncle sam and israel.

 

[monitor]

CIA created the Taleban movement, that is a well known fact; I don't know about Hamas. Anyway, the lesson is when you dig a hole for others you end up in it.

Taleban were born them self i think but when the america saw that they bought some stability in afganistan they stated supporting them as they were anti iran too. by a

Well, Mubarak's time is up, uncle sam has to find another great traitor. Perhaps El Baradei can be persuaded to do the dirty job for uncle sam and israel.

agree . infact america is providing support for the anti mubarak group
they are already provided with 14 million dollar .

By voicing concerns over Obama's insupportive attitude toward Mubarak Israel has again undermined the essence of democracy and the reality of freedom (of speech, choice etc).

If people of Egypt doesnt need a Mubarak to run their country, it's their choice, right?

agree

 

[monitor]

Obama presses Mubarak to move 'now'


By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 2, 2011


President Obama, clearly frustrated by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's intention to retain his hold on power until elections later this year, said Tuesday evening that he has told Mubarak that a transition to representative government "must begin now."

In brief remarks at the White House, Obama made no mention of Mubarak's announcement that he had decided not to stand for reelection. Instead, Obama said he had told the Egyptian president in a telephone call that this was a "moment of transformation" in Egypt and that "the status quo is not sustainable."

Obama's message appeared carefully calibrated to avoid publicly calling for Mubarak to stand down, while making clear he should stand aside. Administration officials say they are seeking a transitional government, with or without Mubarak as its titular head, formed by representative reform leaders and backed by the Egyptian army that will address legitimate grievances, restore stability and plan for a free election.

"The key part of the statement was 'now,' an administration official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

Obama's message to Mubarak had been conveyed earlier in the day by special envoy Frank G. Wisner during a meeting in Cairo. While Wisner said it would be useful if Mubarak made it clear that he had no plans to run in the scheduled September election, officials said, the bulk of the meeting was spent urging Mubarak to turn over control far sooner.

While Mubarak appeared to understand the first part of the message, it was not clear to the White House until his speech was broadcast that he had dismissed the second part. In Cairo, protesters greeted the speech with continued demands that Mubarak leave office immediately.

"All of us who are privileged to serve in positions of political power do so at the will of our people," Obama said. It was "not the role of any other country to determine Egypt's leaders," he said. But "what is clear, and what I indicated tonight to President Mubarak, is my belief that an orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful, and it must begin now."

Obama was effusive in his praise for the Egyptian military, which did not interfere in protests Tuesday that were the largest yet in a week of massive demonstrations in Cairo and other cities. He spoke of "the sense of community in the streets" and the "mothers and fathers embracing soldiers."

Addressing the protesters, Obama said their "passion and dignity" was "an inspiration to people around the world, including here in the United States and to all those who believe in the inevitability of freedom."

"I want to be clear, we hear your voices," he said.

"Throughout this process, the United States will continue to extend the hand of partnership and friendship to Egypt," Obama said. "We stand ready to provide assistance that is necessary to help the Egyptian people as they manage the aftermath of these protests."

An administration official said that Obama's 30-minute conversation with Mubarak, which occurred after the Egyptian leader's televised speech, was "direct and frank," and similar to the public statement Obama then made at the White House

Obama told Mubarak that "it was clear how much he loves his country, and how difficult this is for him," the official said. Obama also told him that "an orderly transition can't be prolonged - it must begin now."

Obama and his national security team - including Vice President Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon - watched Mubarak's address, and the public reaction to it in Cairo, in the White House Situation Room.

Their meeting then continued with a discussion of how to respond to Mubarak and to protests spreading across the Arab world. After demonstrators took to the streets in Jordan, King Abdullah II announced in Amman on Tuesday that he had fired the Jordanian prime minister and dismissed the government.

Officials declined to comment on whether Obama had called Abdullah and other regional leaders Tuesday.

Before the Situation Room meeting adjourned after about an hour and 10 minutes, Obama decided to call Mubarak personally and to make a public statement. As speechwriters began to compose the statement, the president went to the Oval Office to make the call.

The administration's position is similar to that spelled out Tuesday morning by Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who called for Mubarak to both declare that neither he nor his son would run in September and to pledge to work with the Egyptian army and civil society to establish "an interim, caretaker government as soon as possible to oversee an orderly transition in the coming months."

Kerry, whose comments appeared in an op-ed article in the New York Times, said that Egypt's stability "hinges on [Mubarak's] willingness to step aside gracefully to make way for a new political structure."

In a statement issued after Mubarak's remarks, Kerry again called on him to "work now with the military and civil society to establish an interim caretaker government."

 

[somebozo]

Off course that is the game...support a dictator until he is rotten..then join hands with opposition to install new one..otherwise how will imperial powers ensure its continued stronghold !

 

[500]

Why Israelis always think America should do the dirty work for them ????/

Mubarak was America's ally for decades. Betraying ally is always bad and nothing to do with Israel.

Even Hugo Chavez that hates Israel noticed that:

EGYPT: Venezuelan president calls U.S. role in crisis 'shameful'

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Sunday the United States was playing a "shameful" role in the Egyptian crisis and accused it of hypocrisy for supporting, then abandoning, strongmen around the world.

Chavez told Reuters news agency he had spoken to Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi and Syria's President Bashar Assad on the protests in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world.

“In Egypt, the situation is complicated," Chavez said.

“Now you are seeing comments from Washington and some European nations. As President Kadafi said to me, it's shameful, it makes you kind of sick to see the meddling of the U.S., wanting to take control.”

On Sunday, President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other U.S. officials urged an orderly transition to democracy in Egypt to avoid a power vacuum but stopped short of calling on President Hosni Mubarak, an ally of three decades, to step down.

Chavez has generally cast himself as pro-Arab, opposed to the policies of Israel and the United States.

But in brief comments carried on state TV, he avoided any further specific comment on Egypt, saying only that “national sovereignty” should be respected.

Chavez scoffed at what he called the United States' changeable foreign policy.

“See how the United States, after using such-and-such a president for years, as soon as he hits a crisis, they abandon him. That's how the devil pays,” he said.

“They didn't even give a visa or anything to the president of Tunisia,” he said, referring to President Zine el Abidine ben Ali, who fled this month after failing to quell the worst unrest of his more than two-decade rule.

EGYPT: Venezuelan president calls U.S. role in crisis 'shameful' | Babylon & Beyond | Los Angeles Times

 

[ARSENAL6]

Pro and Anti Murbarak​

This is an account of Mustafa Khalili in Eygpt

Cairo clashes: How chants turned to violence between pro and anti-Mubarak factions​

'Scores of people were getting hit' says witness injured in Egyptian demonstration

I was watching a pro-Mubarak demo half a mile from Tahrir Square: about 300 to 400 people, who grew to thousands as they made their way to the square.

It was a mixed crowd, with women and children chanting peacefully in support of their president and many carrying photos of him. The problems started as this crowd got to the square and ran into the demonstrators calling for Mubarak to stand down.

Both sides chanted at each other; one lot pro, the other anti. Suddenly the pro-Mubarak protesters charged. A few of them shouted "Forward! Forward!" then hundreds charged towards the demonstrators. And then some of them started picking up rocks to throw.

It was a barrage, not just one or two. But for a good 10 minutes the anti-Mubarak crowd resisted responding. At one point mediators within the pro-Mubarak lot tried to make them calm down, shouting "Peaceful". Unfortunately this didn't last long. Before you knew it, the anti-Mubarak demonstrators were throwing rocks back. The distance apart was 20 metres, and it was a constant stream of rocks.

Scores of people were getting hit. I saw a young child hit in one leg so she couldn't walk; an older woman was hit in the head and bleeding profusely. I was hit during a charge by the pro-Mubarak lot, struck on my head by a rock which knocked me to the ground.

I was bleeding heavily. People took me to a makeshift medical centre run by nurses who had obviously come straight from hospital to help, where they bandaged my head. They said I needed stitches, but there were so many other injured to look after.. There must have been more than 50 injuries, some of them horrific. I saw one guy whose left eye was bleeding, men with broken arms, broken teeth where they had just been hit in the face by rocks

There were no police, no security forces. The army was there, but was not intervening. The two sets of protesters were left to fight it out.

Injured pro-Mubarak supporters were being taken into the Square for treatment. Some of the demonstrators tried to attack them on the way in for treatment but others were shielding and protecting them and calling for unity, saying 'These are our brothers'.

People with more serious injuries were taken out towards ambulances and driven away. The demonstrators in Tahrir Square were far bigger in numbers than the pro-Mubarak lot but as the evening went on the pro-Mubarak forces started getting stronger. The main skirmish had been going on in the Square, but there were other struggles on the roads leading in.

I had been trying to leave but I couldn't get out. When I finally left, there were Mubarak supporters carrying metal gym weights, with Molotov cocktails being thrown and sporadic gunfire. That was about 5pm UK time. They now won't let anyone into the Square. If people aren't being kettled by the army it's by the protesters themselves who are trying to control things. It's still going on right now.

Cairo clashes: How chants turned to violence between pro and anti-Mubarak factions | World news | The Guardian

Mustafa Khalili
guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday 2 February 2011 21.07 GMT

Well, Mubarak's time is up, uncle sam has to find another great traitor. Perhaps El Baradei can be persuaded to do the dirty job for uncle sam and israel.

Off course that is the game...support a dictator until he is rotten..then join hands with opposition to install new one..otherwise how will imperial powers ensure its continued stronghold !

By reading both T-rex and somebozo
what we get is this

THe pro Murbarak - keep Murbarak and let him continue his corrupt way inorder stop a new dictator who is also a puppet for the US.

Anti-Murbarak - Get rid of Murbarak because he's a dictator and puppet for the US and have a leader to replace him who will eventually follow the US lead.

THis could eventually lead peole to vote an Islamic govt Egypt

Henery Kissinger did state that the US does not wanted to see an Islamic govt. If the people does diecide eventually what kind of action will the US take ?

 

[ARSENAL6]

Deleted post //////////////////

 

[illuzioN]

Yes. But why US should always bend over for them at the cost of own Americans and their lives ?

Because we supplied Egypt with Billions of dollars and its an interest for us and our allies? Think about it