"al-CIA-duh" Egypt.

.
.
.
.
The current mess in Egypt is the fault of the Egyptians generals who betrayed Mubarak, and yielded to the American/Israeli conspiracy earlier this year.

Things will get far worse in Egypt under "al-CIA-duh"......... that is was the intention.

__________________________

ISRAEL LOVES EGYPT'S ISLAMISTS by aangirfan

Israeli run Islamists through the CIA and Western Intelligence. Look for the introduction of some strange new "Islamic Laws" which aren't actually very Islamic in Egypt meant to divide and destroy and discredit Egypt as a cohesive secular modern society.

Israel, the USA and NATO want Moslem countries to be backward, weak and divided. Israel has always seen Egypt as its main Arab enemy. Israel is now happy. Egypt has now voted for the Islamists. The Islamists will ensure that Egypt loses tourists and inward investment. The Islamists will ensure that the country is deeply divided - Islamists against Christians, Islamists against the military, Islamists against liberals, Islamists against Islamists. Reportedly, the Muslim Brotherhood is run by the CIA and its friends.

(The use of the Muslim Brotherhood by MI6 and the CIA.)

The Muslim Brotherhood was used to topple the Shah in order to try to keep Iran backward.

The new Egypt

On 10 December 2011, The Economist reports on the Islamists everywhere on the rise:

1. In the first round of voting in Egypt:

The Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party has won 46% of the seats with 37% of the (party-list) vote.

The Salafist Party of Light, ('Nour' - puritanical extremist Wahhabi) has won 21% of the seats with 24% of the (party-list) vote.

The biggest secular (non religious) party got 10% of the seats.

Mubarak's party was banned.

The turnout was around 59%


'Islamists' work for the spooks

2. Why vote for the Muslim Brotherhood?

They give financial help to widows.

They supply water buffaloes on easy repayment plans to landless peasants.

3. Why vote for the Salafists?

They distribute cut-price food.

They appear on Saudi-funded satellite TV channels.

Some Mubarak supporters voted for the Salafists, to frustrate the Muslim Brotherhood.

A weakened Egypt now provides Israel with a chance to grab the Sinai. Syria had better look out.

4. The Muslim Brotherhood's 80-page manifesto mentions neither Israel nor Palestine.

5. The Salafists want a 'restricted' democracy.

They want to ban alcohol, adopt the veil and segregate the sexes in public.

Balkanizing Egypt.

.
.
.
.
The American trained Egyptian security apparatus helped the USA/Israel topple Mubarak, and now the Egyptian military are failing Egypt again, as further destabilization engulfs the country. It is possible the country could be Balkanized, and divided creating a Christian enclave near Alexandria, and NATO occupation of the Suez...........all this must be blamed on the American trained Egyptian military who also STILL take American military aid.

__________________________

EGYPT BEING BROKEN UP by aangirfan.

Cairo, October 2011.

On 10 October 2011, we learn that at least 24 people have been killed in Cairo.

At least three of the dead are said to be soldiers.

Christians, protesting about an attack on a church in Aswan in Upper Egypt, have clashed with military police.

Army vehicles have been set alight.

Agent provocateurs may be at work.

Reportedly, the CIA and its friends want the Christians in Egypt, 10% of the population, to form a separate state in Upper Egypt, a state that would help control the Nile.

Cairo, October 2011

"This is a dark day in the military's history. This is betrayal, a conspiracy, murder," Magdy el-Serafy wrote on Twitter. (Egypt cabinet to meet over violence that kills 24‎)

"What happened in front of the state TV building is exactly what happened on Jan. 25," wrote Muslim activist Asmaa Mahfouz.

"What happened today is unprecedented in Egypt. 17 corpses crushed by military tanks," Hossam Bahgat, human rights activist tweeted from hospital. "I saw bodies missing hands and legs, heads twisted away or plastered to the ground."

Protesters also took to the streets in Alexandria.

Everything peachy and dandy in "liberated" Muslim Brotherhood Egypt.

.
.
.
.
The vast majority of Israelis want peace, but a cabal of men in Israel, and the West thrive on conflict and subsequent war. This may be based on HOMOSEXUAL URGES (Sado machismo...deriving sexual pleasure from pain).....or financial interests, obtaining greater access to minerals in the target country whilst shutting out competition from other countries, and therefore better business advantage.

Thus the USA backed revolution in Egypt against Mubarak, and the subsequent instability affords them this opportunity. It renders the Egyptians STATE weak, helpless and clueless too busy with its own problems.

The primary traitors who allowed this USA game to take place in Egypt was the Egyptian military, who failed to support Mubarak at the critical time.

The Egyptian military is trained by the USA, with 1000 personnel going to the USA annually for "training", and military aid......most of the Egyptian military equipment is USA supplied, which means should the USA invade Egypt, the Egyptian military will not be able to resist the Imperial invader, as it has been infiltrated, indoctrinated, brainwashed, and made wholly dependent on the JEWSA.

The Egyptian military followed the orders of the USA and the strategic requirements of that countries Jewish elite who have their own peculiar set of priorities, AND not the strategic needs of Egypt (which are stability, rapid economic development, good governance, good government, anti-corruption drive, checking Western Capitalist hegemony.....politically, militarily, culturally, socially and at all other levels.......and peaceful co-existence with Israel, whilst helping the Palestinian people where practically possible as fellow Arabs and for the sake of justice)

______________________________

EGYPT IN A STATE OF ANARCHY by aangirfan

On 13 September 2011, we read that Egypt is in a state of anarchy s

Zvi Mazel was Israel’s ambassador to Cairo between 1996 and 2001.

According to Mazel:

1. There is now so much violence on the streets of Egypt that Egyptian militias have purchased weapons to protect their neighbourhoods.

2. Looting of stores is prevalent in all the large cities and no one is even trying to control the anarchy.

3. "From the moment the army seized power they've been weak and have let the street dictate their conduct...

"These generals do not know how to run a state.

"Egypt is in a state of anarchy."

4. "Opening a front against Israel will force Egypt to transfer all the money to the army and from that moment there will be no reforms."

5. "Although the Egyptian government is weak and not able to take control, there are still clever people there who know they have no other option but to maintain the peace with Israel.”

~~

One of the reasons for the CIA coup in Egypt was to weaken Egypt.

The USA-Israel-NATO may be planning an invasion of the Sinai and a seizure of the Suez canal?

~~

The London Telegraph has admitted that the new rulers of Libya are genocidal racists.

"In the Telegraph's article Gaddafi's ghost town after the loyalists retreat, it is reported that rebels have taken the city of Tawarga, where the entire civilian population was either killed, rounded up, or exiled."

Libya: V Day + 3 Weeks

Saudi Jewish Wahabism/Salafism must be challenged

.
.
.
.























_______________________________

Egypt Sufis plan mass rally to counter Salafist and Wahhabi muscle flexing

By Ahram Online


Traditionally apolitical, Egypt’s Sufis decide to join liberals in a mass rally under the banner ‘For the Love of Egypt’ in response to the encroachment of Salafists and other Wahhabi-oriented Islamists on Egypt’s political arena.

Sheikh Mofamed Abdel Khaleq El-Shabrawi, the leader of the Shabrawia Order, one of the largest Sufi spiritual orders in Egypt, said that Sufis are planning a massive rally on Friday 12 August in Cairo to call for national unity and a civil state.Salafists have been tugging the rope towards a theocratic government, whereas most political forces are tugging towards a ‘civil state’, which accepts the status quo with regards to the recognition of Islam in the Constitution and would replace the de facto military rule with a civilian one.

Sufi and various pro-democracy political forces have been discussing ways to respond to this rising tide of conservative Salafist forces.

Sufi leaders, who tend to favour religious tolerance and generally abstain from politics, were alarmed after hundreds of thousands of Islamists organised mass protests around the country on 29 July to call for the establishment of an Islamic state in Egypt.

In Egypt, at least six million people – or one in every three young men – belong to one or another of the more than 40 Sufi orders.

Millions of followers of Sufi orders, both men and women, attend more than 40 massive moulids(festivals that honour specific spiritual iconic figures of different orders) throughout the country.

Many Islamist and Salafist political forces have attacked several Sufi mausoleums in the aftermath of the 25 January Revolution, and charge that Sufi rites and practices, especially gender-mixing, are un-Islamic.

Sheikh El-Shabrawi said that Sufis will focus their Friday rally on advocating for national unity, and, therefore, they have decided to call the event: For the Love of Egypt.

El-Shabrawi added that Sufis might opt not to hold their rally in the central Tahrir Square in order not inconvenience the public during the holy month of Ramadan.

Sufi leaders and other forces had planned to stage a huge indoor rally next Friday’s action at the Nasr City conference hall in north eastern Cairo, but that plan has since morphed into a RamadanIfitar (breaking of the fast meal) in Tahrir Square.

The iconic square has been locked off to gatherings and people by the army and security forces since they violently cleared the sit-in there last Monday.

USA destabilising Egypt for Eretz Israel.

.
.
.
.
If there is any instability in any Third World nations around the issue of Democracy, the first thing to do is shut down the USA/UK embassies.

Then you close ALL the Western based NGO's........then the instability will suddenly stop.

The USA is a client power of Israel, and Likud Israel has certain agenda's which require Egypt to be destabilized and taken over by Muslim Brotherhood orientated parties/FRONTS.....aka Mullah Iran 1979, when the destabilization of the Shah led to an eventual Mullah victory gradually between 1979--1982, with the help and guidance of the USA, and UK when the embassy in Iran was taken over.

El Baradei is believed to be an agent of Mossad.

____________________

Junta, Parties Fume as US Millions Bankroll Egypt NGOs

US Envoy Says Mass Grants 'Will Serve as a Model' for Other Nations

by Jason Ditz, at antiwar.com

With Egypt’s first post-Mubarak elections drawing ever closer, both the nation’s interim military junta and opposition political leaders are expressing growing disquiet about the massive amounts of US grants being provided to key NGOs across the nation.

Reports have the US already committing some $200 million in grants to “assist with their participation in the political life of the country.” Many see this as an attempt by the US to buy the election or at least to exert undue influence on it.

US Ambassador Ann Patterson (former service in Pakistan) has defended the moves, saying that they “will serve as a model for the rest of he Arab world,” but it is not just the junta complaining. Reports have both Islamist and liberal factions complaining that the junta should ensure that the first “free elections” in the nation’s history be free of foreign intervention.

Faced with the complaints, the junta has set up a committee to investigate the funding as well as ordering all banks to keep on eye on a list of NGOs and would-be political movements known to have asked USAID for funds, eager to see which are being granted a bankroll and what impact it might have on the vote.

Mullah Iran part II

.
.
.
.

The usual nations involved in the destabilization of the Shah (USA, Israel, UK), and his replacement by the Ayatollah mullah's are also involved in Egypt's (and else where......Libya, Tunisia, Syria) destabilization, the over throw of Mubarak...........instability, chaos, economic slum ....and the Muslim Brotherhood in the ascendancy.

Unlike the 1977---79 Iran Revolution, the Muslim Brotherhood, though very visible in the protests against Mubarak aren't at the center of the revolution.

Through elections, through their organizational zeal, and Western backing the Muslim Brotherhood could eventually come to power in Egypt.

The Mullahs of Iran after all assumed absolute power only in 1982, after purging the country of the Tudeh left front. Between 1979--1982 Iran was a coalition government. It was the Tudeh left front which played the greatest role in toppling the Shah of Iran in 1979........and it is the urban Middle Class nihilists of Egypt who were at the fore front of protests against Mubarak, AND the American trained and bought Egyptian military which actually toppled the Mubarak regime on the orders and directions of Washington.

The future bodes ill for Egypt.

Mubarak should not have been toppled like that, at such a time. Mubarak had faults and he was attempting through his family to establish a pharaoh dynasty. But a nation should never carry out revolutions just because well organized urban Middle Class nihilists want it.............and Washington sanctions it, through the Presidents speech.

There will come a day in the future when Egyptians will ruefully look back to the stable years of Mubarak.....just as many Iranians ruefully look back to the stable prosperous years of the Shah of Iran.

When the Muslim Brotherhood comes to power in Egypt eventually:

1. The Suez will be occupied. Egypt with its American trained officers, and supplied arms will never be able to resist Israel/USA/NATO.

2. Sectarian violence will increase, and the country divided as with Sudan.

3. Egypt under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood as with mullah Iran will become a pariah state.

4. Economic chaos will continue with massive refugee flights from Egypt to the Persian Gulf and Europe (especially of middle class technical skill based groups, as with Mullah Iran 4 million Iranians live abroad, mostly middle class......800,000 unofficially in the USA).

Revolutions with nice English soundbites and slogans written in Washington are good if at the end of it you get a perfect leadership, under a perfect political organization, which perfectly addresses ALL the grievances of the protesters in short order.

This is clearly not the case with Egypt NOW or any time soon........shame on the Egyptian military.

"al-Qaeda" has announced their new leader, and he is from the Egyptian military (how appropriate)

___________________________

EGYPT IN FREE FALL by aangirfan.

Egypt by Desertman On 27 May 2011, the New York Times has an article entitled:

Egypt’s Next Crisis

In this article we read about a political meeting, in the town of Kafr Shukr, where a chicken farmer named Ayman Dahroug declares: "The truth is, there are no leaders in Kafr Shukr anymore. "It’s only the Muslim Brotherhood that works here now. "They are in Kafr Shukr every day."

The Muslim Brotherhood buy imported meat at a discount and sell it to the poor in
the town.



























According to the New York Times article:

"Egypt is in the agony of self-discovery... "Other Arab revolutions founder or lapse into civil wars... "(In Egypt) workers are striking throughout the country... "Many ... warn of a possible takeover by Islamists, who could assume power through the ballot box only to impose an Iran-style theocracy.

"These fears are not groundless; there are certainly people, in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world, who do not want to see a popular revolution succeed...


























"With Egypt’s economy in free fall, they are rightly anxious that mass hunger, rising inflation and joblessness among Egypt’s 83 million people could imperil everything they have achieved so far. "Already, there are signs of slippage: a street battle in a Cairo slum on May 7, sparked by sectarian rumors, left a dozen dead and two churches in flames.

"Street crime and prison breaks are on the rise...

"A welter of Islamic groups has emerged since the revolution, many of them previously living in shadows. "One of the best known is the Islamic Group, the militant faction responsible for terrorist campaigns in the 1980s and 1990s that killed hundreds of police, soldiers, civilians and foreign tourists in Egypt... "One of the most common slogans in Tahrir Square during the revolution was 'bread, freedom, social justice'...























Mullah Iran still buying arms from ISRAEL, via Spain, Europe, and Turkey.


"It is tragic," I was told by Osama Leheta, an owner of one of Egypt’s oldest tourism companies. "Production in Egypt has come to a near-standstill.

"Foreign reserves are being depleted.

"Our currency is under extreme pressure.

"You could have millions of Egyptians with no food, and they will demolish everything in their path... "Inflation is soaring to levels not seen in years. The results are going to be catastrophic..."


(American aid will not solve this long term structural problem of a revolution which aims to bring Islamists into power, after which fact the aid will presumably stop from the G8)






































According to the New York Times article: "The challenge of fighting corruption will remain... "If police officers and civil servants continue to receive wages far too low to support a family, they will continue to demand kickbacks and bribes, and the societywide corruption that helped trigger the revolt will go on. ~~



























Most of the media has lied about Mubarak. So, God bless the Kansas City Star for giving us the truth! On 11 February 2011, an article at the Kansas City Star, by top economist Keith Marsden (Egypt Inc. -- a look at the numbers), told us the following:

1. The protestors claimed that '40% of Egyptians' live below the poverty line. The truth is that less than 2% of Egyptians live below the poverty line. Compare that with 41.6% in India. (The 'poverty line' is that which is recognised internationally/UN)

2. The share in wealth of the poorest section of society has been increasing in Egypt. Total household consumption expenditure per capita (in constant prices) rose by 2.2% annually in Egypt from 2000-08.


























3. Higher incomes, improved nutrition and better health services have helped to raise the average life expectancy at birth in Egypt to 70 years in 2008.


4. The under-five child mortality rate (per 1000) dropped to 25 in Egypt in 2008, from 53 in 1990. Compare that with 89 in Pakistan, 69 in India, and 67 in South Africa.

5. The maternal mortality ratio (per 100,000 live births) was estimated to be 130 in Egypt in 2005, compared with 1,000 in Nigeria. Egypt spent 6.3% of its GDP on health services in 2007 (Pakistan 2.7%).




























6. The net enrollment rate for primary education rose to 94% in Egypt in 2008 (Pakistan 66%).

7. The World Bank reports an enrollment rate at the tertiary level (university and college) in Egypt of 35% in 2007 (South Africa 15%, India 12%, Pakistan 5%).

8. The most recent World Bank data show an economy-wide unemployment rate of 8.7% of the Egyptian labor force. (South Africa 22.9%).


























9. Mubarak's Egypt boosted investment. Egypt’s 'gross capital formation' soared by 7.4% annually from 2000-2008 (Israel 2.3%). An improved business environment, including a low corporate tax rate of 20% stimulated foreign direct (private) investment. Egypt’s Inflows rose to 9.5 billion dollars in 2008 from 0.6 billion dollars in 1995. Egypt’s stock market capitalization was valued at 91 billion dollars in 2009, a more than threefold increase from the year 2000.

10. Egypt’s merchandise exports increased more than seven fold from 1990 to 2007. Inbound tourists spent 12.1 billion dollars in Egypt in 2008. The benefits were widely spread among the Egyptian people in the form of more jobs and higher incomes.



















11. Egypt gets relatively little in foreign aid. The net inflow of foreign official development assistance (ODA) to Egypt has fallen from 1.3% of Egypt’s Gross National Income in the year 2000 to 0.8% in 2008. Egypt has been getting nothing from bodies such as the IMF and World bank.

(The total net official financial flows to Egypt from bilateral sources, the international financial institutions (such as the IMF and World Bank) and the United Nations have turned negative.

Repayments of principal exceed disbursements. Egypt’s net outflows to bilateral sources reached 960 million dollars in 2008, topping its 118 million net inflows from multilateral sources.)

12. Egypt’s total military expenditure amounted to 2.3% of GDP in 2008 ( Israel 8.0%), down from 3.2% in 2000.

Keith Marsden has worked as an economist for the UN, the World Bank and the private sector in over 60 countries, including two years in Egypt.
Reportedly, the CIA and Mossad were planning a coup in Egypt at least as early as 2008.

aangirfan's list of blogposts on the topic:

CIA PLOTS IN EGYPT
EGYPTIAN PSY OP
PRO-MUBARAK
ANOTHER CIA COUP IN EGYPT?

EGYPTIANS WORKING FOR THE CIA-MOSSAD-NATO?
PIPER & SCHOENMAN; TRUTH & LIES ON EGYPT
MUBARAK OPPOSED USA'S 'GREATER MIDDLE EAST'
CIA AND MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD VERSUS MUBARAK

AFTER EGYPTIAN COUP - ISRAEL INVADES?
EGYPT RIOTS GOOD FOR USA
WINNERS AND LOSERS IN EGYPT
ISRAEL WANTS MUBARAK TOPPLED

MUBARAK SUPPORTERS
ISRAEL'S PLANS FOR EGYPT
EGYPT - LOOK AT THE PATTERN
Q & A ON EGYPT REVOLT

EGYPT - THE NEW IRAQ?
WHO CONTROLS THE EGYPTIAN MILITARY? HISTORY OF MAN...
US BACKS EGYPTIAN COUP
WHAT THE USA REALLY THINKS ABOUT EGYPT

CIA, MOSSAD & SOROS VERSUS MUBARAK
THE PUZZLING CASE OF MOROCCO

The American embassy is the lead agency destabilising Egypt, working with other Westerners in Egypt, and their Egyptian WHORES.

.
.
.
.
.
The Egyptian government needs to make 3 lists.

List number 1, the Americans who are destabilizing Egypt.

List 2. The Westerners who are helping the Americans destabilize Egypt.

List 3. The Egyptian WHORES who are helping the American's destabilize Egypt.

Then deal with them, for the security and survival of Egypt.

Omer Suleiman the American whore favored and chosen by them, of 30 years keeps making threats, and threats and threats against the Egyptian people. No true Egyptian leader of the people should make such threats against his own. A true Egyptian leader should be firm, strong and if necessary TOUGH like a strong father. But an Egyptian leader of the people should not make endless threats, AND then send out the police with knifes and guns on Horses.......to attack unarmed demonstrators??????!!!!! This is a propaganda victory for Egypt's enemies.

The Egyptian demonstrators are not the real problem.........they are puppets who are being manipulated by foreign powers to destabilize Egypt. Some of them maybe are genuinely angry, because they are poor, food and fuel prices have increased recently from 2008, because their children cannot go to good schools, because they cannot get work......because...because.

These Egyptians must be treated strongly for breaking the law, and destabilizing the state (subversion)...and for destroying the economy (economic sabotage).......but not with real hate, because ultimately they are not the real problem.

The regime must focus its real anger and energy on.......

List number 1, the Americans who are destabilizing Egypt.

List 2. The Westerners who are helping the Americans destabilize Egypt.

List 3. The Egyptian WHORES who are helping the American's destabilize Egypt.

This is much more logical, and pragmatic which Omer Suleiman the American trained whore must understand.

__________________________

Iran and the Shah: What Really Happened

Written by James Perloff at NEWAMERICAN blog.

Americans have been hearing for several years about potential war with Iran. For instance, on September 17, 2006, Time magazine reported, “The U.S. would have to consider military action long before Iran had an actual bomb.” On October 10, under the heading “A Chilling Preview of War,” Time warned: “As Iran continues to enrich uranium, the U.S. military has issued a ‘Prepare to Deploy’ order.”

In September 2007, US News & World Report stated: “Amid deepening frustration with Iran, calls for shifting Bush administration policy toward military strikes or other stronger actions are intensifying.” And in June 2008, President-to-be Barack Obama declared: “The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.”

However, suppose a progressive, pro-Western regime ruled Iran, representing no threat? War discussions would be unnecessary. Yet many forget that, until 30 years ago, exactly such a regime led Iran, until it was toppled with the help of the same U.S. foreign policy establishment recently beating war drums.

(America's Policeman in the Gulf, buying $100 billions worth of arms like Saudi, and significant trade with the USA, enjoying good relations, AND UNDER TOTAL COOPERATIVE RELATIONS WITH THE USA, devoid of speculation, suspicion and unwarranted fear mongering, and threats of war.....which is sadly the case now.)


Meet the Shah

From 1941 until 1979, Iran was ruled by a constitutional monarchy under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran’s Shah (king).

Although Iran, also called Persia, was the world’s oldest empire, dating back 2,500 years, by 1900 it was floundering. Bandits dominated the land; literacy was one percent; and women, under archaic Islamic dictates, had no rights.

The Shah changed all this. Primarily by using oil-generated wealth, he modernized the nation. He built rural roads, postal services, libraries, and electrical installations. He constructed dams to irrigate Iran’s arid land, making the country 90-percent self-sufficient in food production. He established colleges and universities, and at his own expense, set up an educational foundation to train students for Iran’s future.

(The process of modernizing the country, and unifying it as a modern nation state with strong central institutions.....with a modern military, bureaucracy, industry, infrastructure, modern secular laws had begun in the 1920's, 30 years earlier under the tutelage of the Shah's father Colonel Reza Khan, taking notes and ideas from Ataturk in secular Turkey to a certain extent, and his drive to modernize Turkey)

To encourage independent cultivation, the Shah donated 500,000 Crown acres to 25,000 farmers.

In 1978, his last full year in power, the average Iranian earned $2,540, compared to $160 25 years earlier.

Iran had full employment, requiring foreign workers.

The national currency was stable for 15 years, inspiring French economist André Piettre to call Iran a country of “growth without inflation.”

Although Iran was the world’s second largest oil exporter, the Shah planned construction of 18 nuclear power plants.

He built an Olympic sports complex and applied to host the 1988 Olympics (an honor eventually assigned to Seoul), an achievement unthinkable for other Middle East nations.

(Dreamed of being the 5th largest economy in the world by 2000)

Long regarded as a U.S. ally, the Shah was pro-Western and anti-communist, and he was aware that he posed the main barrier to Soviet ambitions in the Middle East. As distinguished foreign-affairs analyst Hilaire du Berrier noted: “He determined to make Iran … capable of blocking a Russian advance until the West should realize to what extent her own interests were threatened and come to his aid.... It necessitated an army of 250,000 men.” The Shah’s air force ranked among the world’s five best. A voice for stability within the Middle East itself, he favored peace with Israel and supplied the beleaguered state with (subsidized) oil.

(Israeli embassy in Tehran. SAVAK created by MOSSAD/CIA. Joint ops between MOSSAD and SAVAK, in Iraq and other Arab countries. Bought arms from Israel......all this went beyond normal relations between two states. Rumors that the Shah's father was of Jewish decent, as with Ataturk of neighboring Turkey who was also believed to be Doenme Jewish, and Stalin of the Soviet Union from Georgia)

On the home front, the Shah protected minorities and permitted non-Muslims to practice their faiths. “All faith,” he wrote, “imposes respect upon the beholder.” The Shah also brought Iran into the 20th century by granting women equal rights. This was not to accommodate feminism, but to end archaic brutalization.

Yet, at the height of Iran’s prosperity, the Shah suddenly became the target of an ignoble campaign led by U.S. and British foreign policy makers. Bolstered by slander in the Western press, these forces, along with Soviet-inspired communist insurgents, and mullahs opposing the Shah’s progressiveness, combined to face him with overwhelming opposition. In three years he went from vibrant monarch to exile (on January 16, 1979), and ultimately death, while Iran fell to Ayatollah Khomeini’s terror.

(The USA/UK played the lead role in the destabilization of the Shah from 1973, when he joined Arab countries in quadrupling the price of oil for the first time

from about $3 a barrel to $12. He then went on Western Television boasting about it, and flaunting his role........numerous examples can be found on youtube.com. He also went on Western TV, and "spoke his mind", and said amongst other topics that Jews in the USA were too powerful sometimes and that this was not good for the USA or for Israel in the long term. Yes all this may be true, and is right, AND PROBABLY stated with honest intentions, not malice.....but as a PUPPET LEADER in power because of the USA.......these are things which are best not said openly, save for private exclusive dinner guest in Tehran)

Houchang Nahavandi, one of the Shah’s ministers and closest advisers, reveals in his book The Last Shah of Iran: “We now know that the idea of deposing the Shah was broached continually, from the mid-seventies on, in the National Security Council in Washington, by Henry Kissinger, whom the Shah thought of as a firm friend.”

Kissinger virtually epitomized the American (NEO-JEWISH) establishment: before acting as Secretary of State under Republicans Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, he had been chief foreign-affairs adviser to Nelson Rockefeller (Crypto-Jew of Moreno origin), whom he called “the single most influential person in my life.” Jimmy Carter defeated Ford in the 1976 presidential election, but the switch to a Democratic administration did not change the new foreign policy tilt against the Shah. Every presidential administration since Franklin D. Roosevelt’s has been dominated by members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the most visible manifestation of the establishment that dictates U.S. foreign policy along internationalist lines. The Carter administration was no exception.

(In addition the CIA was neutered of 800 field officers by Carter, some of whom might have developed close relations with the Shah's regime, developed over many decades and experience. Some where in all this Bernard Lewis the Jewish British Svengali also has a role when he moved from London to the USA for "teaching" purposes in the early 1970's....Greek's to Rome........."Clash of Civilization".........Brzezinski's "Arc of Crisis" ...backing Islamic Fundamentalism in "Operation Cyclone" and "Greenbelt", such as the Muslim Brotherhood...this speaks of a far greater and significant British involvement, as a PURE CRITICAL INTELLECTUAL CONCEPT......which is somehow then sold as good for the USA strategically. NOT.

Replacing reliable, extensively invested with money, effort, equipment with unreliable, uncontrollable, embassyless Mullahs is OK for the UK, but not for the USA....if in addition the potential business loss is factored in of $600----$1000 billion between the two nations, from 1979---2011. All those American jobs, and business profits lost. It was a dumb choice for the USA )

Nahavandi writes:

The alternation of parties does not change the diplomatic orientation of the United States that much. The process of toppling the Shah had been envisaged and initiated in 1974, under a certain Republican administration.... Numerous, published documents and studies bear witness to the fact, even if it was not until the beginning of the Carter administration that the decision was made to take concerted action by evoking problems related to human rights.

(The Shah with the help of the MOSSAD/CIA trained SAVAK maybe killed 3000 political prisoners between 1953--1979, most probably less, far less. The mullahs of Iran have killed at least 1,000,000 Iranians since assuming power through war which would not have taken place if the Shah was still in power, and his considerable military fully intact. Other Iranians have died under the mullahs through civil wars, and simple political repression.......and the primitive use of and interpretation of the law........The puppet Shah in that senses was a kinder, gentler leader of his people. Its also supremely ironical, mixed with JEW CHUTZPAH for Saint Jimmy, who did a couple of interesting things himself in South America, South Korea and of course Pakistan between 1977--1981 to lead a covert campaign against the Shah based on Human Rights abuse!!!!!!)

The Shah’s destruction required assembling a team of diplomatic “hit men.” Du Berrier commented:



When the situation was deemed ripe, U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan — the man reputed to have toppled the pro-American government of General Phoumi Nosavan in Laos — was sent to urge the Shah to get out.

(Never look at simple wholesome logic in trying to explain certain USA policy.....Henry Kissinger, "It is more dangerous being an ally.....")

In December Mr. George Ball, an instant “authority on Iran,” was sent as a follow-up with the same message.


Sullivan (CFR), a career diplomat with no Middle East experience, became our ambassador to Iran in 1977. The Shah recalled:


Whenever I met Sullivan and asked him to confirm these official statements [of American support], he promised he would. But a day or two later he would return, gravely shake his head, and say that he had received “no instructions” and therefore could not comment.... His answer was always the same: I have received no instructions.... This rote answer had been given me since early September [1978] and I would continue to hear it until the day I left the country.

(No true leader of a nation relies on the USA and its ambassador to justify or seek the agreement of the USA in order to rule their country........The Shah puppet brought into power by the USA/UK did. He relied on the USA too much)

The other key player du Berrier named, George Ball, was a quintessential establishment man: CFR member, Bilderberger, and banker with Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb. The Shah commented: “What was I to make, for example, of the Administration’s sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran? I knew that Ball was no friend.”

Writes Nahavandi:

George Ball — that guru of American diplomacy and prominento of certain think-tanks and pressure groups — once paid a long visit to Teheran, where, interestingly, the National Broadcasting Authority placed an office at his disposal. Once installed there, he played host to all the best-known dissidents and gave them encouragement. (As with Obama/Clinton administration inviting Egyptian dissidents to Washington in May 2009) After he returned to Washington, he made public statements, hostile and insulting to the Sovereign.

Joining the smear was U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy, whose role Nahavandi recalled in a 1981 interview:

But we must not forget the venom with which Teddy Kennedy ranted against the Shah, nor that on December 7, 1977, the Kennedy family financed a so-called committee for the defense of liberties and rights of man in Tehran, which was nothing but a headquarters for revolution.

Suddenly, the Shah noted, the U.S. media found him “a despot, an oppressor, a tyrant.” Kennedy denounced him for running “one of the most violent regimes in the history of mankind.”

At the center of the “human rights” complaints was the Shah’s security force, SAVAK.

Comparable in its mission to America’s FBI, SAVAK was engaged in a deadly struggle against terrorism, most of which was fueled by the bordering USSR, which linked to Iran’s internal communist party, the Tudeh. SAVAK, which had only 4,000 employees in 1978, saved many lives by averting several bombing attempts.

Its prisons were open for Red Cross inspections, and though unsuccessful attempts were made on the Shah’s life, he always pardoned the would-be assassins.

Nevertheless, a massive campaign was deployed against him.

Within Iran, Islamic fundamentalists, who resented the Shah’s progressive pro-Western views, combined with Soviet-sponsored communists to overthrow the Shah. This tandem was “odd” because communism is committed to destroying all religion, which Marx called “the opiate of the masses.” The Shah understood that “Islamic Marxism” was an oxymoron, commenting: “Of course the two concepts are irreconcilable — unless those who profess Islam do not understand their own religion or pervert it for their own political ends.”

For Western TV cameras, protestors in Teheran carried empty coffins, or coffins seized from genuine funerals, proclaiming these were “victims of SAVAK.” This deception — later admitted by the revolutionaries — was necessary because they had no actual martyrs to parade.

Another tactic: demonstrators splashed themselves with mercurochrome, claiming SAVAK had bloodied them.


The Western media cooperated.

When Carter visited Iran at the end of 1977, the press reported that his departure to Teheran International Airport had been through empty streets, because the city was “all locked up and emptied of people, by order of the SAVAK.” What the media didn’t mention: Carter chose to depart at 6 a.m., when the streets were naturally empty.

An equally vicious campaign occurred when the Shah and his wife, Empress Farah, came for a state visit to America in November 1977. While touring Williamsburg, Virginia, about 500 Iranian students showed up, enthusiastically applauding. However, about 50 protestors waved hammer-and-sickle red flags. These unlikely Iranians were masked, unable to speak Persian, and some were blonde. The U.S. media focused exclusively on the protesters. Wrote the Shah: “Imagine my amazement the next day when I saw the press had reversed the numbers and wrote that the fifty Shah supporters were lost in a hostile crowd.”

On November 16, the Shah and Empress were due to visit Carter. Several thousand Iranian patriots surrounded the White House bearing a huge banner saying “Welcome Shah.” However, as Nahavandi reports:

The police kept them as far away as possible, but allowed a small number of opponents [again, masked] to approach the railings … close to where the Sovereign’s helicopter was going to land for the official welcome. At the exact moment, when courtesies were being exchanged on the White House lawn, these people produced sticks and bicycle chains and set upon the others.... Thus, the whole world was allowed to see riotous scenes, on television, as an accompaniment to the arrival of the Imperial Couple.

Terror at Home

Two major events propelled the revolution in Iran. On the afternoon of August 19, 1978, a deliberate fire gutted the Rex Cinema in Abadan, killing 477 people, including many children with their mothers. Blocked exits prevented escape. The police learned that the fire was caused by Ruhollah Khomeini supporters, who fled to Iraq, where the ayatollah was in exile. But the international press blamed the fire on the Shah and his “dreaded SAVAK.” Furthermore, the mass murder had been timed to coincide with the Shah’s planned celebration of his mother’s birthday; it could thus be reported that the royal family danced while Iran wept. Communist-inspired rioting swept Iran.

Foreigners, including Palestinians, appeared in the crowds. Although the media depicted demonstrations as “spontaneous uprisings,” professional revolutionaries organized them. Some Iranian students were caught up in it. Here the Shah’s generosity backfired. As du Berrier pointed out:

In his desperate need of men capable of handling the sophisticated equipment he was bringing in, the Shah had sent over a hundred thousand students abroad.... Those educated in France and America return indoctrinated by leftist professors and eager to serve as links between comrades abroad and the Communist Party at home.

When the demonstrations turned violent, the government reluctantly invoked martial law. The second dark day was September 8. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in Tehran were ordered to disperse by an army unit. Gunmen — many on rooftops — fired on the soldiers. The Shah’s army fired back. The rooftop snipers then sprayed the crowd. When the tragedy was over, 121 demonstrators and 70 soldiers and police lay dead. Autopsies revealed that most in the crowd had been killed by ammo non-regulation for the army. Nevertheless, the Western press claimed the Shah had massacred his own people.

(Foreign agents provocateurs???)

The Shah, extremely grieved by this incident, and wanting no further bloodshed, gave orders tightly restricting the military. This proved a mistake. Until now, the sight of his elite troops had quieted mobs. The new restraints emboldened revolutionaries, who brazenly insulted soldiers, knowing they could fire only as a last resort.

Khomeini and the Media Cabal

Meanwhile, internationalist forces rallied around a new figure they had chosen to lead Iran: Ruhollah Khomeini. A minor cleric of Indian extraction, (Khomeini is believed by the old establishment of Iran to have an Indian father, and that he was a British agent whose family spent time in the British dominated Persian Gulf before assuming Iranian identity credentials.......not far fetched if you follow British covert antics in that region, and Khomeini's total elimination of American influence in Iran after the Revolution in 1979......Ditto Egypt if the Ikwan MB come to power in Egypt on the back of the current Revolution.....LONDON "wins" again) Khomeini had denounced the Shah’s reforms during the 1960s — especially women’s rights and land reform for Muslim clerics, many of whom were large landholders. Because his incendiary remarks had contributed to violence and rioting then, he was exiled, living mostly in Iraq, where Iranians largely forgot him until 1978.

A shadowy past followed Khomeini. The 1960s rioting linked to him was financed, in part, by Eastern Bloc intelligence services. He was in the circle of the cleric Kachani Sayed Abolghassem, who had ties to East German intelligence. Furthermore, in 1960, Colonel Michael Goliniewski, second-in-command of Soviet counter-intelligence in Poland, defected to the West. His debriefings exposed so many communist agents that he was honored by a resolution of the U.S. House of Representatives. One report, declassified in 2000, revealed, “Ayatollah Khomeini was one of Moscow’s five sources of intelligence at the heart of the Shiite hierarchy.”

Nevertheless, as French journalist Dominique Lorenz reported, the Americans, “having picked Khomeini to overthrow the Shah, had to get him out of Iraq, clothe him with respectability and set him up in Paris, a succession of events, which could not have occurred, if the leadership in France had been against it.”

In 1978, Khomeini, in Iraq since 1965, was permitted to reside at Neauphle-le-Château in France. Two French police squads, along with Algerians and Palestinians, protected him.

Nahavandi notes:

Around the small villa occupied by Khomeini, the agents of many of the world’s secret services were gathered as thickly as the autumn leaves. The CIA, the MI6, the KGB and the SDECE were all there. The CIA had even rented the house next door. According to most of the published witness-statements, the East Germans were in charge of most of the radio-transmissions; and, on at least one occasion, eight thousand cassettes of the Ayatollah’s speeches were sent, directly to Tehran, by diplomatic bag.

Foreign-affairs analyst du Berrier reported:

French services quickly verified that Libya, Iraq and Russia were providing money. Young Iranians, members of the Tudeh (communist) Party, made up Khomeini’s secretariat in France. Working in cooperation with the French Communist Party they provided couriers to pass his orders and tapes into Iran. Their sympathizers in Britain turned the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) into a propaganda organ.

Journalists descended in droves on Neauphle-le-Château; Khomeini gave 132 interviews in 112 days, receiving easy questions as their media organs became his sounding board. Nahavandi affirms that, within Iran “the Voice of America, the Voice of Israel and, especially, the BBC virtually became the voice of the revolution, moving from criticism, to overt incitement of revolt, and from biased reporting, to outright disinformation.”

Khomeini’s inflammatory speeches were broadcast; revolutionary songs aired on Iranian radio. One journalist, however, stunned Khomeini by bucking the trend: intelligence expert Pierre de Villemarest, hero of the French Resistance in World War II, anti-communist, and critic of the CFR.

Interviewing Khomeini, de Villemarest asked:

"How are you going to solve the economic crisis into which you have plunged the country through your agitation of these past few weeks?... And aren’t you afraid that when the present regime is destroyed you will be outpaced by a party as tightly-knit and well organized as the [communist] Tudeh?"

Khomeini didn’t reply. The interpreter stood, saying, “The Ayatollah is tired.” De Villemarest registered his concern with the French Ministry of the Interior, but reported, “They told me to occupy myself with something else.”

Ending the Shah’s Rule:

Iran’s situation deteriorated. As Western media spurred revolutionaries, riots and strikes paralyzed Iran. The Shah wrote:

At about this time, a new CIA chief was stationed in Tehran. He had been transferred to Iran from a post in Tokyo with no previous experience in Iranian affairs. Why did the U.S. install a man totally ignorant of my country in the midst of such a crisis? I was astonished by the insignificance of the reports he gave me. At one point we spoke of liberalization and I saw a smile spread across his face.

The Carter administration’s continuous demand upon the Shah: liberalize.

On October 26, 1978, he freed 1,500 prisoners, but increased rioting followed. The Shah commented that “the more I liberalized, the worse the situation in Iran became. Every initiative I took was seen as proof of my own weakness and that of my government.” Revolutionaries equated liberalization with appeasement. “My greatest mistake,” the Shah recalled, “was in listening to the Americans on matters concerning the internal affairs of my kingdom.”

Iran’s last hope: its well-trained military could still restore order.

The Carter administration realized this. Du Berrier noted: “Air Force General Robert Huyser, deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe, was sent to pressure Iran’s generals into giving in without a fight.”

“Huyser directly threatened the military with a break in diplomatic relations and a cutoff of arms if they moved to support their monarch.”

“It was therefore necessary,” the Shah wrote, “to neutralize the Iranian army. It was clearly for this reason that General Huyser had come to Teheran.”

Huyser only paid the Shah a cursory visit, but had three meetings with Iran’s revolutionary leaders — one lasting 10 hours. Huyser, of course, had no authority to interfere with a foreign nation’s sovereign affairs.

Prior to execution later by Khomeini, General Amir Hossein Rabbi, commander-in-chief of the Iranian Air Force, stated: “General Huyser threw the Shah out of the country like a dead mouse.”

U.S. officials pressed the Shah to leave Iran.

He reflected:


You cannot imagine the pressure the Americans were putting on me, and in the end it became an order.... How could I stay when the Americans had sent a general, Huyser, to force me out? How could I stand alone against Henry Precht [the State Department Director for Iran] and the entire State Department?

He finally accepted exile, clinging to the belief that America was still Iran’s ally, and that leaving would avert greater bloodshed. These hopes proved illusions.

A factor in the Shah’s decision to depart was that — unknown to most people — he had cancer. U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan (CFR) assured the Shah that, if he exited Iran, America would welcome him. Despite the pleadings of myriad Iranians to stay, he reluctantly left. However, shortly after reaching Cairo, the U.S. ambassador to Egypt effectively informed him that “the government of the United States regrets that it cannot welcome the Shah to American territory.”

The betrayed ruler now became “a man without a country.”

Iran’s Chaotic Descent

On February 1, 1979, with U.S. officials joining the welcoming committee, Ayatollah Khomeini arrived in Iran amid media fanfare. Although counter-demonstrations, some numbering up to 300,000 people, erupted in Iran, the Western press barely mentioned them.

Khomeini had taken power, not by a constitutional process, but violent revolution that ultimately claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. (not less than 1,000,000 since 1979)

Numerous of his opponents were executed, usually without due process, and often after brutal torture.

Tehran police officers — loyal to the Shah — were slaughtered.

At least 1,200 Imperial Army officers, who had been instructed by General Huyser not to resist the revolution, were put to death.

Before dying, many exclaimed, “God save the King!”

“On February 17,” reported du Berrier, “General Huyser faced the first photos of the murdered leaders whose hands he had tied and read the descriptions of their mutilations.”

At the year’s end, the military emasculated and no longer a threat, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.

More Iranians were killed during Khomeini’s first month in power than in the Shah’s 37-year reign. Yet Carter, Ted Kennedy, and the Western media, who had brayed so long about the Shah’s alleged “human rights” violations, said nothing.

Mass executions and torture elicited no protests. Seeing his country thus destroyed, the exiled Shah raged to an adviser: “Where are the defenders of human rights and democracy now?” Later, the Shah wrote that there was

not a word of protest from American human rights advocates who had been so vocal in denouncing my “tyrannical” regime! It was a sad commentary, I reflected, that the United States, and indeed most Western countries, had adopted a double standard for international morality: anything Marxist, no matter how bloody and base, is acceptable.

Exile

The Shah’s personal tragedy wasn’t over. He stayed briefly in Egypt and Morocco, but did not wish to impose risks on his hosts from Muslim extremists. Eventually he welcomed Mexican President Lopes Portillo’s hospitality.

However, in Mexico the Shah received an invitation from CFR Chairman David Rockefeller, who used influence to secure permission for the Shah to come to America for medical treatment. Rockefeller sent a trendy Park Avenue MD to examine the Shah, who agreed — against his better judgment — to abandon his personal physicians and fly to New York for treatment. In October 1979, he was received at the Rockefeller-founded Sloan-Kettering Memorial Hospital for cancer treatment. Here the Shah experienced a fateful delay in spleen surgery that some believe accelerated his death.

The Shah’s admission to the United States had another outcome. Partly in retribution, on November 4, 1979, Iranians took 52 hostages from the U.S. embassy in Tehran. (According to Nahavandi, Soviet special services assisted them.) This embarrassed Jimmy Carter, who had done so much to destroy the Shah and support Khomeini. The seizure made the Shah a pawn.

While in New York, Mexico inexplicably reversed its welcome, informing the Shah that his return would contravene Mexico’s “vital interests.” One can only guess at the hidden hands possibly influencing this decision.

Carter faced a dilemma. Iran wanted the Shah’s return — for a degrading execution — in exchange for the American hostages. However, a direct trade might humiliate the United States.

Therefore, Panama was selected as intermediary. Following treatment in New York, the Shah was informed he could no longer remain in America, but Panama would welcome him. In Panama, however, the Shah and Empress were under virtual house arrest; it was apparent that it would only be a matter of time before the Shah would be sent to Iran in exchange for the hostages. A special cage was erected in Tehran. Khomeini’s followers envisioned parading him in the streets before final torture and bloody execution.

However, Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian president and the Shah’s friend, discerned the scheme, and sent a jet to Panama, which escorted the Shah and Empress safely to Egypt.

(Sadat Killed by Ikwan MB members a year later)

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi died on July 27, 1980. His last words: “I wait upon Fate, never ceasing to pray for Iran, and for my people. I think only of their suffering.” In Cairo, a grand funeral honored him. Three million Egyptians followed the procession.

Anwar Sadat who, like the Shah, advocated a peaceful Middle East, and defied the American establishment by saving the Shah from infamous death, did not survive much longer himself. The following year, Muslim extremists assassinated him under circumstances remaining controversial.

(The Ikwan MB was created by the British in the 1920's, and enjoys close relations with British and American Intelligence)

The Issues

Why did the American establishment, defying logic and morality, betray our ally the Shah? Only the perpetrators can answer the question, but a few possibilities should be considered.

Iran ranks second in the world in oil and natural-gas reserves. Energy is critical to world domination, and major oil companies, such as Exxon and British Petroleum, have long exerted behind-the-scenes influence on national policies.

The major oil companies had for years dictated Iranian oil commerce, but the Shah explained:

"In 1973 we succeeded in putting a stop, irrevocably, to sixty years of foreign exploitation of Iranian oil-resources.... In 1974, Iran at last took over the management of the entire oil-industry, including the refineries at Abadan and so on.... I am quite convinced that it was from this moment that some very powerful, international interests identified, within Iran, the collusive elements, which they could use to encompass my downfall."

(To facilitate the Iranian Revolution BP stopped buying 60% of Iran's oil exports, or 3 million barrel from the total exports of 5 million barrels annually....in 1978, thus creating a major financial crisis for the Shah's regime)

Does this explain the sudden attitude change toward Iran expressed by Henry Kissinger, beginning in the mid-seventies? Kissinger’s links to the Rockefellers, whose fortune derived primarily from oil, bolsters the Shah’s view on the situation.

However, other factors should be considered.

Although the Shah maintained a neutral stance toward Israel, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, he allowed critical supplies to reach Egypt, enabling it to achieve a balance of success, and earning Sadat’s undying gratitude, but wrath from influential Zionists. Did this impact the West’s attitude change in the mid-seventies?

We should not overlook that the Shah opposed the powerful opium trade, now flourishing in the Middle East.

(a major problem for Iran with 3 million addicts now. The Opium trade based in Afghanistan and SE Asia is based in London, where the drugs money is laundered in High Street British banks.....as has been the case for 200 years.....London, with NY are both Dope.inc Capitals)

Finally, the Shah was a nationalist who brought his country to the brink of greatness and encouraged Middle East peace. These qualities are anathema to those seeking global governance, for strong nations resist membership in world bodies, and war has long been a destabilizing catalyst essential to what globalists call “the new world order.”

What is the solution to modern Iran? Before listening to war drums, let us remember:

It was the CFR clique — the same establishment entrenched in the Bush and Obama administrations — that ousted the Shah, resulting in today’s Iran. That establishment also chanted for the six-year-old Iraq War over alleged weapons of mass destruction never found. Therefore, instead of contemplating war with Iran, a nation four times Iraq’s size, let us demand that America shed its CFR hierarchy and their interventionist policy that has wrought decades of misery, and adopt a policy of avoiding foreign entanglements, and of minding our own business in international affairs.