Gunboat diplomacy: How US military support aids Bahrain’s dictatorship

For now, Bahrain is where America wants to stay, crushing the hopes and dreams of anyone wanting an “Arab Spring” in the Persian Gulf.

One of the largest warships in the world, the USS Nimitz, docked in the Persian Gulf country of Bahrain in the past few days. The timing is instructive – pro-democracy protestors are preparing to demonstrate for human rights in the capital, Manama. The Nimitz, lead Flat-top of President Obama’s Carrier Strike Group 11, rolled into harbor as if to say out loud: “The United States will not tolerate democracy in this island kingdom, home to the US Fifth Fleet. The USA supports the dictatorship installed here in the 18th century.” 

Confident of American support, the dictatorial Bahraini regime soon prepared deportation orders for an American human rights activist, Erin Kilbride. This month, Bahrain’s King introduced new legislation to stifle dissent. Amnesty International called the decrees “draconian measures [that] will be used in an attempt to legitimize state violence as new protests are being planned for 14 August.”

It is no surprise that US President Barack Obama continues to support anti-democratic regimes: the hallmark of his presidency has been double talk. For his political base, there is rhetorical flourish penned by his speechwriters – usually paeans to the virtues of democracy. Yet simultaneously, Obama uses federal agencies to fight unconstitutional wars against Americans and ever more brutal terror abroad against the weak, the poor and those fighting for democracy. The result of foreign policy made by Democrats in the 21st century Oval Office is clear to see: America had to shut down around 20 of its embassies for fear of attack from Al-Qaeda – groups that the USA has given succor to, via their military policies in Syria, Pakistan, Yemen and Afghanistan. 

It is now well known – except perhaps to the media-tranquilized swathes of America’s heartland – that US policy consistently supports nebulous militancy under the banner of Al Qaeda. And it has done so since the 1980s. But President Obama’s de facto support for Al-Qaeda today has reached new dimensions. Washington is now not only recruitment sergeant for the perpetrators of 9/11, it is now active in doing the public relations, strategic planning and even resource provision for “Al Qaeda,” too. As the USA, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Qatar attempt to destabilize the secular government of Syria, so do their weapons end up in the hands of those who wish to do harm to America and Americans. That is why so many US ambassadors had to run for the hills in the past few days.

As yet, there is no provision for “pivoting” US policy away from supporting those who wish for either an international Caliphate or perpetual royal dictatorships in the energy-rich Middle East. There are now no moves to reposition the US Fifth Fleet base. And while Bahrain’s people may weep, it is at least a bonus for Africa. For some time now, Obama’s neocon National Security Advisor Susan Rice has cast a shadow over Africa, with rumored plans of the Fifth Fleet boosting the Italian-based Sixth Fleet. The intention was to prop up Washington’s continuing destabilization efforts courtesy of US Africa Command (AFRICOM). But for now, Bahrain is where America wants to stay, crushing the hopes and dreams of anyone wanting an “Arab Spring” in the Persian Gulf.

Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed

Anti-apartheid comparisons

So what should Bahrainis, targeted by massive US military might, do to free their country from dictatorship? So far, they have opted for largely peaceful protest as their main strategy. Should they become more violent?

Peaceful protest was the strategy of the pre-Nelson Mandela African National Congress in South Africa during the fight against US- and Israeli-backed apartheid. There are parallels because South Africa had a non-white majority and Bahrain has a majority opposed to its US-backed dictators. Mandela, however, championed violence as the way to break apartheid in marked contrast to the liberal left who favored peaceful protest and trade union strike action. The rationale of the anti-apartheid protest movement before Mandela’s call to arms was that a non-white majority in South Africa could win because the people were with them. With Mandela’s rise, the armed struggle involved the killing of civilians and collaborators, employing a “by any means necessary” approach to revolution against US-backed injustice. 

Given the routine arrest, imprisonment, kidnapping and torture of Bahrainis, the tactics of the Persian Gulf’s revolutionaries are in the spotlight. Today, if Obama did not aid Bahrain’s killers, a peaceful strategy would surely still be an option. But there was a US-backed mass murder of protesters in the capital Manama in February 2011. We know from a report commissioned by the Bahraini dictatorship itself that arrests in the wake of pro-democracy protests demonstrated a pattern of behavior "designed to inspire terror in the arrested persons." 

Unsurprisingly, given US (and British) support for the killing, the report outlined the use of torture to extract confessions. Torture – as we know from the case of whistleblower Bradley Manning – is becoming a hallmark of the Obama administration. 

An unnamed former US government official quoted by the Reuters news agency has said that the military aid package Obama signed last year tends to communicate "business as usual" to Bahrain’s dictators. What does business as usual mean? Well, the US State Department said one year ago that exports of materiel to kill people in Bahrain totaled $1.4 billion since the beginning of 2000.

Since the protests began, Bernie Ecclestone’s Formula 1 Grand Prix races have been held on the island and as for Bahrain’s dictators, they were welcomed on the international stage at the White House and at Buckingham Palace.  August 14th 2013 may be one of the last times that peaceful protest can be tried as a means of catalyzing a democratic revolution in Bahrain. If the protestors are met with the violence of old then an urgent re-evaluation of the tactics of those fighting for liberty and revolution in Bahrain must surely be in order. If it is not violent insurrection, before all the country’s human rights leaders are killed or detained it might be sensible to apply a campaign of naming and shaming Bahrain’s Western friends.

Those wanting to see democracy in Bahrain could do worse than study those Western companies being paid by the regime to launder the nation’s reputation so that no one ever hears about this ongoing struggle. According to Bahrain Watch (https://bahrainwatch.org/pr/) run by Bahraini activists, since February 2011, the following firms have helped sanitize the slaughter: In London - Bell Pottinger, Cloud Media Entertainment, G3, Mark Stewart Productions, M&C Saatchi, New Century Media, Olton; In Washington - BGR Group, Hill + Knowlton Strategies, Joe Trippi & Associates, Potomac Square Group, Qorvis Communications, Sanitas International and Sorini, Samet & Associates. 

Snowden: American media 'abdicated their role as check to power'

Snowden: American media 'abdicated their role as check to power'

(L-R) Laura Poitras (Reuters / Lucy Nicholson), Edward Snowden (AFP Photo / The Guardian) and Glenn Greenwald (Reuters / Sergio Moraes)

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has gone on the offensive against his critics in the US, accusing the mainstream media there of failing their audiences “for fear of being seen as unpatriotic and punished in the market.”

In a rare interview, Snowden explained why he chose a UK journalist and a documentary filmmaker for his leaks.

In an encrypted e-mail correspondence with journalist Peter Maass, the former NSA contractor-turned-whistleblower presented his candid opinion of the US media and what finally persuaded him to go public on the NSA’s worldwide surveillance program.

The heightened level of nationalism prevalent in the United States following the attacks of 9/11 precluded US media from engaging in any serious discussion on the excesses of government behavior for fear of seeming “unpatriotic,” Snowden argued in the interview published in The New York Times – his first since gaining temporary asylum in Russia.

“After 9/11, many of the most important news outlets in America abdicated their role as a check to power — the journalistic responsibility to challenge the excesses of government — for fear of being seen as unpatriotic and punished in the market during a period of heightened nationalism,” the NY Times reported Snowden as saying.

The former CIA employee said this strategy by the American media establishment had “ended up costing the public dearly.”

Snowden then revealed what led him to divulge his explosive information to Laura Poitras, the documentary filmmaker who served first as an intermediary between Snowden and Glenn Greenwald, an investigative journalist with The Guardian, and now with Maass.

“Laura and Glenn are among the few who reported fearlessly on controversial topics throughout this period, even in the face of withering personal criticism, and resulted in Laura specifically becoming targeted by the very programs involved in the recent disclosures,” Snowden said.

Poitras “demonstrated the courage, personal experience and skill needed to handle what is probably the most dangerous assignment any journalist can be given — reporting on the secret misdeeds of the most powerful government in the world,” Snowden said in the NY Times interview, adding that those qualifications made her “an obvious choice.”

Demonstrators hold up a placard in support of former US agent of the National Security Agency, Edward Snowden in front of Berlin's landmark Brandenburg Gate (AFP Photo / John Macdougall)

The interview then focused on what made Snowden, who arrived on May 20 in Hong Kong with details of the NSA’s PRISM program, confident that he could place his trust in Poitras.

Snowden told Maass that he discovered Poitras was “more suspicious of me than I was of her, and I’m famously paranoid.”

The former CIA employee continued: “The combination of her experience and her exacting focus on detail and process gave her a natural talent for security, and that’s a refreshing trait to discover in someone who is likely to come under intense scrutiny in the future, as normally one would have to work very hard to get them to take the risks seriously.” 
Snowden revealed that working with Poitras allowed him to “open up without fearing the invested trust would be mishandled.”

He then spoke at length on the subject of encrypted communications, specifically for journalists.

“I was surprised to realize that there were people in news organizations who didn’t recognize any unencrypted message sent over the Internet is being delivered to every intelligence service in the world,” he said.

In the wake of this year’s disclosures, it should be clear that unencrypted journalist-source communication is “unforgivably reckless,” Snowden added.

Snowden, 30, landed in Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport on June 23, prompting President Vladimir Putin to describe the American's sudden presence in Russia as an “unwanted Christmas gift.” After initially applying for asylum to some 20 countries, Snowden eventually accepted temporary asylum in Russia on the condition that he “not further harm US interests.”

Moscow’s decision to grant one-year temporary asylum to Snowden has caused consternation in the United States, even prompting President Barack Obama to cancel a meeting with Putin in Moscow scheduled for September.

The Kremlin, in turn, expressed its disappointment with the White House’s decision, while reminding Washington that it had declined extradition requests on the part of Russia in the past.

“We are disappointed by the US administration’s decision to cancel the visit of President Obama to Moscow that was planned for the beginning of September,” Russia’s presidential aide Yury Ushakov told reporters. “It is clear that the decision is related to the situation around the former intelligence agency employee Snowden – something that was created not by us.”

According to Ushakov, the US has “for many years dodged entering into an extradition treaty” with Russia and “invariably refused” Moscow’s extradition requests, citing the absence of such a treaty.

“This situation shows that the US is still not ready to build relations with Russia on an equal footing,”Ushakov said. 

California city in radical plan to help homeowners using eminent domain

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/AFP

A city in California has become ground zero in a battle with mortgage lenders and now the federal government in its push to implement a radical new plan to assist homeowners who cannot meet the terms of their loans.

The Bay Area city of Richmond is the first to push for the use of eminent domain in a plan that would see mortgages in repayment delinquency seized from lenders and investors, or rather sold at a deep discount, by the city, and then refinanced on behalf of borrowers with more affordable terms.

The US Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, has now said that it will move to halt the use of eminent domain by cities to seize underwater mortgages from lenders.

Richmond, a working-class city of 106,000 people in the East Bay, has a large population of both blacks and Latinos, and was hard hit by the US housing crisis, with homeownership rates considerably below the national average according to the LA Times.

Richmond’s plan is unusual since eminent domain is usually only invoked to obtain land needed for public projects such as highways, or at other times to take possession of run down and abandoned structures. The concept itself is deeply ingrained in both the US Constitution and that of state constitutions.

The federal housing agency indicated on Thursday that it has no intention of allowing the city to go forward with its mortgage plan, and will instruct Fannie and Freddie to "limit, restrict or cease business activities" in any jurisdiction using eminent domain to seize mortgages according to the Los Angeles Times.

The agency’s move on Thursday has now set the stage for a battle that has been developing since last week, when three mortgage-bound trustees filed a suit in a federal court in Northern California and asked for a preliminary injunction against the city of Richmond and Mortgage Resolution Partners, a firm contracting with the city to implement its planned strategy.

The mortgage holders involved in last week’s suit were prompted to sue by firms including Newport Beach-based Pacific Investment Management Co., BlackRock Inc. of New York and DoubleLine Capital of Los Angeles. According to the lawsuit, Richmond’s program could potentially cost investors losses of $200 or more.

Though the lawsuit involves large players in the mortgage securities business Mortgage Resolution Partners Chairman Steven Gluckstern seemed unphased, calling the suit “without merit” and that actions by his firm and the city of Richmond were “entirely within the law.”

“No investor in any trust will be made worse off by the sale of any loan,” Gluckstern said in the statement.“Rather, it is these trustees that are wasting trust assets at the expense of America’s pensioners by pursuing fruitless litigation.”

The court filing presents a number of potential legal hurdles in Richmond’s plan to assist underwater homeowners, including violation of the interstate commerce clause since mortgages are held by companies and investors outside of California. According to the suit, the city’s plan may be violating eminent domain law along with the US Constitution and the California Constitution.

Now, with the added weight of the federal housing authority threatening to choke off mortgage lending to Richmond, the city looks set to become the first battleground as a number of other cities around the country have also considered using eminent domain to seize underwater mortgages.

Mortgage Resolution Partners has reportedly marketed its eminent domain plan to two cities in California’s San Bernardino County, with formal discussions also taking place with four other state municipalities. According to the LA Times, North Las Vegas, Nevada has approved a similar plan, and both the cities of Seattle, Washington and Newark, New Jersey are considering adopting such a measure.

Although cities may be looking to help out homeowners who cannot cope with their mortgage payments, legal challenges by lenders, and now Freddie and Fannie could mean severely restricted lending and residents facing prohibitively high lending costs, which could in chill real estate markets.

The legal implications of using eminent domain by cities to seize mortgages, meanwhile, seems to just be scratching the surface.

Richmond Mayor Gayle McLoughlin responded defiantly to the lawsuit filed against the city.

"The fact these threats are being put out there are very, very disturbing — but we are not afraid to go to court," McLoughlin said. "We are looking forward to it, because we think fully that our legal reasoning will win."

Meanwhile, Cornell Law professor Robert C. Hockett, who has advised Mortgage Resolution Partners on the eminent domain proposal, said that the federal housing finance agency was acting beyond the scope of its authority by issuing threats.

"How many times must it be repeated that principal write-downs on deeply underwater mortgage loans increase the value of the loans — even while keeping homeowners in their homes and communities intact?" Hockett said.

"This is not only illegal, it is disgusting," he added. 

US misprinted 30 mln new $100 bills

Newly redesigned $100 notes lay in stacks at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing on May 20, 2013 in Washington, DC. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images/AFP)

The US is approaching the release date of its new $100 bills, but the Bureau of Engraving and Printing is facing an embarrassing problem: 30 million bills were incorrectly printed, and fixing them will cost taxpayers an estimated $3.79 million.

The new $100 bills were designed to reduce counterfeiting, and were initially scheduled to be released in 2010. But that summer, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing noticed that the bills were being produced with a blank sliver, due to a fold in the paper. The release date was therefore pushed back to 2011, and again pushed back to Oct. 2013.

But additional printing problems could once again delay the release of the “Benjamins”.

The new $100 bills are designed to contain a Liberty Bell that changes its color, 3-D images that move when the bill is tilted, and a hidden message on the collar of Benjamin Franklin, one of the Founding Fathers.  Two currency factories are responsible for printing all US bills.

But the Washington, D.C. factory produced “clearly unacceptable” versions of the $100 bills, according to a July memo that the New Yorker obtained from the bureau. Recent batches that came from the factory were “mashed”, which means they were produced with too much ink and the lines are not as crisp as they should be. The New Yorker compared it to a kid trying “to carefully color inside the lines – using watercolors and a fat paintbrush.”

Once these bills were delivered to the Federal Reserve, they were rejected. Officials have sent back about 30 million of them, and refuse to accept any more bills from the Washington, D.C. factory.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images/AFP

Instead, the factory in Fort Worth, Tx., is now expected to compensate for the defective currency. The currency release date is Oct. 8, and it remains unclear if the government will be able to obtain enough of the bills to get them into circulation. The blunder is also expensive: since it costs about 12.6 cents to produce each bill, making another 30 million costs about $3.78 million, the Atlantic estimates.  Additionally, the cost of disposal of the defective bills could be around $12,000.

“There are dire consequences here because BEP sells Federal Reserve notes to the Board to finance our entire operation,” BEP director Larry Felix wrote in an internal memo. “If the BEP does not meet the order, the BEP does not get paid.”

A spokesperson for the BEP told the Atlantic that the Federal Reserve is still planning to release the new currency on Oct. 8, despite “concerns during production validation.”

“We have confidence in our process and employees,” a BEP representative told the New York Daily News, reemphasizing that the agency does not plan to delay the release date a third time.

The art of Hitler salute: German court acquits painter over Nazi gesture

German artist Jonathan Meese (AFP/DPA)

A German court acquitted controversial artist Jonathan Meese for performing the outlawed Hitler salute during a performance ruling that it was a form of artistic expression.

The two Nazi salutes, which outraged the German public, were made at the “Megalomania in the Art World” event, which was organized by German Der Spiegel magazine in Kassel University last June. 

Meese had been invited there as an expert on both art and megalomania. He was advocating the“dictatorship of art” during the public discussion and used a Nazi greeting to make his point more clear.

The 48-year-old has argued that his use of Nazi symbols and gestures is satirical and aimed to lessen, not to promote their potency.

The judge decided on Wednesday that Meese isn’t guilty as the Nazi gesture isn’t a violation if it’s done “in order to promote art.” 

"It is clear that the defendant doesn’t share sympathies towards the symbols of National Socialism or towards Adolf Hitler. Irony can be rather traced in his actions,” the judge explained his ruling. 

Meese has thanked the court for protecting his freedom of expression, saying: "Art has triumphed. Now I am free."

"I can paint an apple without ever having eaten an apple. I can do the Hitler salute without having anything to do with it," he added, DPA news agency reports.  

Previously, the artist told Der Spiegel that he’s “innocent” because what he does on stage “is protected by the artistic freedom clause in the German constitution.”

Section 86a of the German Criminal Code prohibits “the use of symbols of unconstitutional organizations,” which includes demonstration of flags and coats of arms of the Third Reich as well use of Nazi greetings. But the scope of the law is restricted with a paragraph, saying that such behavior is not punishable if it involves art.

The prosecutors, who demanded the painter, sculptor and artist to be punished with a 12,000 euro fine, are yet to decide whether they’ll appeal against the court ruling. 

Meese now faces another trail in Mannheim as he displayed Nazi salutes and mannequins, decorated with swastikas, during a show, which took place in the city last year. 

The Hitler salute is nothing new in the German art. In 2009, Ottmar Hörl caused an uproar with his sculpture of garden gnomes, with their arms raised in a Nazi greeting.  

Back then, the public prosecutors decided not to take the artist to court, saying that his exhibition clearly expressed opposition to Nazi ideology.

Four journalists killed covering Egypt clashes

Four journalists killed covering Egypt clashes

Reporters run for cover during clashes between Muslim Brotherhood supporters of Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi, and police in Cairo on August 14, 2013, as security forces backed by bulldozers moved in on two huge pro-Morsi protest camps, launching a long-threatened crackdown that left dozens dead. (Mosaab El-Shamy)

Four journalists have been killed in violent clashes which swept Egypt on Wednesday, with a number of the press core suffering serious injuries in the clashes. At least 238 civilians died in total as security forces brutally broke up pro-Morsi rallies.

Egypt has been swept by horrific street violence, showers of gunfire, blazing fires and tear gas as relentless clashes have shaken cities in government attempts to break up the demonstrations.

Among the 238 protesters killed were children, including the 17-year old daughter of a Muslim Brotherhood official. Police stations were torched or stormed by pro-Morsi groups amid the ruthless government suppression.

The violence also took the lives of Sky News cameraman Mick Deane and Dubai-based XPRESS journalist Habeeba Abdelaziz. Both had been covering the pro-Morsi protests in Egypt’s capital which security forces began to ‘disperse’ earlier in the day. 

Deane, 61, was shot as he was documenting the turmoil in Cairo. Despite receiving medical treatment for his injuries he died shortly afterwards, according to a statement from Sky.  

An undated handout picture taken at an undisclosed location and released by Sky News on August 14, 2013 shows Mick Deane, TV cameraman for Britain's Sky News who was shot and killed while covering violence in Egypt on August 14, 2013. (AFP/Sky News)

“He was an astonishingly good cameraman, took some brilliant pictures,” said John Ryley, head of Sky News. 
Habeeba Abdelaziz was a 26 year old Egyptian reporter from Dubai, who worked for XPRESS – a ‘sister’ publication to the country’s Gulf News. 

“It’s hard to believe she’s gone. She was passionate about her work and had a promising career ahead,” XPRESS Deputy Editor Mazhar Farooqui told Gulf News, commenting that the entire team was in a state of shock. 

Abdelaziz had been covering protests near Cairo’s Rabaa al-Adawiya Mosque, which has been the site of one of the largest protests for over a month, and a subsequently heavy-handed crackdown by governmental security forces. They reclaimed the area late on Wednesday.  

The third journalist killed was Egyptian Ahmed Abdel Gawad of Al Akhbar newspaper. He died while covering the clashes  at Rabaah al-Adawiya. The Egyptian Press Syndicate, a journalist union, confirmed Gawad's death, but did not provide any details. 

The fourth reporter to have been confirmed killed is photojournalist Mosab El-Shami Rassd of the news website (RNN), an alternative pro-Islamist media network, Ahram online reports. The agency wrote that he “was killed by the hand of betrayal while covering the Rabaa massacre at the hands of those who executed the coup,” wrote the network on its Facebook page.

Reuters photojournalist Asmaa Waguih also suffered serious injuries after being shot in the leg during protests. Shortly afterwards, she was moved to the international medical center to receive treatment. The Committee to Protect Journalists has released a statement on the issue, saying that the group condemned the killing of Sky News cameraman Mick Deane, prior to hearing of the second death. 

“We call on Egyptian authorities to issue clear orders to security forces to respect the right of journalists to work freely and safely while covering events in Cairo and the rest of the country,” said CPJ Deputy Director Robert Mahoney. 

“The killing of Mick Deane underscores the urgent need for such action and for all sides to show restraint and allow the media to do their job. The authorities must investigate all attacks on journalists and hold those responsible to account,” he said.

A supporter of Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi walks through the debris following clashes with police in Cairo on August 14, 2013, as security forces backed by bulldozers moved in on two huge pro-Morsi protest camps, launching a long-threatened crackdown that left dozens dead. (AFP Photo)

Other journalist were also treated for wounds. An AP photographer was hit in the back of the neck by two birdshot pellets, while Al Jazeera claims its cameraman Mohammed al-Zaki was shot in the arm. In addition, Paris-based Reporters Without Borders says that Tarek Abbas — a reporter for local Al-Watan newspaper sustained gunshot wounds to his leg and eye; and photographer Ahmad Najjar was wounded in the arm. 

Approximately a dozen other journalists were arrested or threatened as they tried to document the mayhem: Reuters’ Tom Finn tweeted his own arrest. Daily Beast reporter Mike Giglio also said on Twitter he was arrested alongside two photographers named Mahmoud Abou Zeid and Louis Jammes, stating they had been beaten too.

A state of emergency was declared on Wednesday after Egyptian security forces violently broke up the sit-in camps of Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Cairo. Health Ministry officials say that over 2000 were injured in the nationwide violence, alongside the 278 who were killed including policemen.

“The dead are both from police and civilians,” said the ministry's spokesman, Hamdi Abdel Karim.

However, Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Gehad El-Haddad claimed that as many as 2,000 people had been killed and 10,000 injured in the police operation.

Security forces succeeded in gaining control of the protest camps by the end of the day after turning the capital into what journalists called “a war zone”. A state of emergency has been declared and curfew imposed in major cities including Cairo, Alexandria and Suez. The curfew is set to last for the next month – or until further notice. 

Violence no tool to solve Egyptian divide

Violence no tool to solve Egyptian divide

A supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi gestures during clashes with police in Cairo on August 14, 2013, as security forces backed by bulldozers moved in on two huge pro-Morsi protest camps, launching a long-threatened crackdown that left dozens dead. (AFP Photo/Mossaab El-Shamy)

The situation in Egypt is desperate as the army’s plan to return to Mubarak era is likely to fail due to political Islam firmly striking roots in the country in recent years, journalist and author, Hugh Miles, told RT.

A vigorous police crackdown on the sit-ins supporting Egypt's ousted Islamist president Mohammed Morsi has turned Cairo into a battlefield.
Health and security officials are so far only talking of dozens of confirmed casualties, although the Muslim Brotherhood claims more than 500 have been killed.

Hugh Miles says that the new wave of violence in the Egyptian capital comes as no surprise, with the army issuing warnings to the pro-Morsi protesters beforehand.  

“Well, the military have been preparing for this for some time, there have been leaks about this for several days. We were expecting it right after the Eid holiday, which was a couple of days ago. But I think the square was just too full of people then for it to be safe and they thought that maybe they could frighten some people off by leaking about the attacks in advance. But now the military felt they had to make this move because this protest is blocking up the major thoroughfare in the center of Cairo. It’s causing serious disruption, they’ve been there for many, many days. So, this is why they’ve gone ahead and taken this move.”

The journalist believes “anything is possible” in Egypt, which is equally split between the backers of civil society and the Islamists.   

“Egypt is obviously sliding into a very desperate condition. The future is highly uncertain and all the predictions so far about what’s going to happen in Egypt have all turned out to be wrong. So, it’s very difficult to say what’s going to happen. Various historical precedents, the Algerian model, the Syrian model, the Iranian model – none of them particularly attractive." 

'What’s clear is that Egypt is a very divided society, the Islamists – having won the last four democratic elections – are very popular. They can`t just be swept under the table. It’s not possible to turn the clock back to the Mubarak era. And that seems to be the plan at the moment for General [Abdel Fattah] el-Sisi and his backers to try and go back to the kind of status quo before 2011 revolution. But I think if that’s their plan, they are dreaming because Islamists in Egypt are now used to being free and being able to practice their religion in the way they want. And it’s not going to be easy to deny these people, what they have become accustomed to.” 

A supporter of Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi walks through the debris following clashes with police in Cairo on August 14, 2013, as security forces backed by bulldozers moved in on two huge pro-Morsi protest camps, launching a long-threatened crackdown that left dozens dead. (AFP Photo/Mossaab El-Shamy)

By relying on methods of force, the military has shown that it doesn’t have the clear view of what’s happening in the Egyptian society where the influence of Islam has recently increased, Miles explained.

“Well, the Egyptian people are very divided and not all behind this move at all. I mean this a move which is being orchestrated, as far as we can tell by General Sisi and the army. And, of course, the army have spent decades ruling Egypt and have long been opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood. And they’re very separate from the Muslim Brotherhood. The army tries to keep the Muslim Brotherhood out of the ranks. So, the army and the security services generally in Egypt are very used to dealing with these enemies. This is a kind of back to the old school. It`s back to the old rule book in Nasser’s time or Mubarak`s time. The Islamists are a threat to the state and they can be locked up, repressed, shut down. And that’s what we’re seeing now. 

"But it just seems like times have changed since this tactics worked. And it seems that the military is out of touch with the make-up of Egyptian society today where Islamism has become extremely popular and what we’re really seeing now in Egypt is a clash between people who want Islam as their frame of reference against people who want a more secular kind of European style frame of reference. And that’s a very fundamental divide. It divides families and it divides Egypt. Probably, roughly half and half is the best guess.”

According to the journalist, the only way out of the crisis for the split society in Egypt is compromise, but no sides seem eager to make concessions.  

“Egypt has to find a way of squaring this circle. And an obvious way is to have some kind of political reconciliation: some kind of power sharing government, where, for example, president Morsi is allowed back, but he has no other Muslim Brotherhood ministers and Mohamed El-Baradei is a deputy and maybe Hamdeen Sabahi can run this ministry and Amr Moussa can run another ministry. So, everyone shares power like as happened in South Africa after the end of the Apartheid. 

"But unfortunately there has been no indication of any kind of broad inclusive reconciliatory gesture. And what we`re seeing instead is that the army and its supporters seem to think that they can go this alone without having any Islamists counting on into the power sharing  at all. And certainly the army has got powerful backers, they have got allies, there are many people who support them and would like very much to turn the clock back to the Mubarak era because this model suited many other countries in the region: Egypt was predictable, it was manageable, yes, it had problems but it was easy to deal with. And the alternative, which is an Islamist style government, is a huge unknown quantity, which frightens just about every country in the region and many countries in the West.” 

Supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi throw stones during clashes with security forces in Cairo on August 14, 2013, as security forces backed by bulldozers moved in on two huge pro-Morsi protest camps, launching a long-threatened crackdown that left dozens dead. (AFP Photo/Mossaab El-Shamy)

Egyptian political activist, Ebtesam Madbouly, disagrees with Miles‘s claim of a fifty-fifty split in the Egyptian society, saying that the Morsi supporters are in minority in the country, despite him claiming over half of the votes in last year’s election.

“Let me tell you this: its 50 percent of the people, who went to the election, there are lots and lots of people who didn’t go. And let me tell you: on the night of the June 30, there were 30 million people on the street. The night of the June 26 there were 40 million people on the street. People who elected Morsi were not only pro-Morsi people, there also were lots and lots of people who were just against the Mubarak regime.”

Her words were echoed by political sociologist, Dr. Said Sadek of American University in Cairo, who stressed that every month public opinion polls, locally and internationally, showed a decline in the popularity of President Morsi.

“People elected him only on one platform, that he would achieve the objectives of the Egyptian revolution, not the objectives of his own organization. This is what he really did. He began to use his office to put his own people, to turn Egypt into a semi totalitarian state. He began to a play a political game. He used democracy as a ladder to reach power.”

The current turn of events in Cairo was provoked by the Muslim Brotherhood members, who refused to restore order in the city, Sadek added.  

“The strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood was to control and destabilize Cairo by controlling the traffic, by controlling some districts and even try to expand them. They also tried to use flash-mobs to besiege some ministries, like yesterday they tried to besiege seven ministries and cause chaos, troubling traffic of Cairo. The Egyptian government after taking all the mandates waited enough, they started acting and the brought foreign media; they brought human rights organizations to see how things are being done.”

A supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi looks on during clashes with security forces in Cairo on August 14, 2013, as security forces backed by bulldozers moved in on two huge pro-Morsi protest camps, launching a long-threatened crackdown that left dozens dead. (AFP Photo/Mossaab El-Shamy)

Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood spokeswoman in the UK, Mona Al Qazzaz, told RT that the actions of the military are only increasing the divide in the Egyptian society.   

“They (the army) didn’t show even a single sign of good will gestures. They didn’t show any step towards reconciliation. What they’re doing is actually making the polarization within Egypt even deeper. We hold General Sisi, the military junta and all the Egyptian authorities and the civilian façade responsible for every single Egyptian blood that is shed.”

She also said that it’s “the silence of the international community,” which has given the military a mandate to use force against the “largely peaceful” pro-Morsi protesters.   

“Our protests have been there for 46 days – they have been largely peaceful. Obviously, the protests aren’t a centralized protest. We have no control of what is happening in the other cities. What erupted today in every single province of Egypt was a spontaneous outrage of the Egyptian people, who saw the massacre on Egyptian TV and could do nothing, but go to the streets and say: this is enough, it’s enough for the military rule, it’s enough for this military junta we’re getting back our free Egypt.”

An assistant professor of The American University in Cairo, Mohamed Elmasry, also put the blame for the violence on the interim government, which “instigated a military coup and then proceeded to carry out mass repression” in Egypt.

“Any time you deviate from democratic norms, usually, it spells disaster. In Egypt we had a democratic society in place. The opposition could’ve competed in elections; could’ve competed for parliamentary seats. We had regular elections scheduled. We had term limits. We had balance of powers – the prime minister was about as powerful as the president. I could go on: the right to form political parties for anyone; the right to establish a newspaper without permission from the government. 

"Now, all of that has been abandoned. And we’re living essentially in a military state and some of the people, who supported this coup continue to state that their optimistic about the future. Although, frankly, I don’t understand how people based on the reality that we’re seeing on the ground in terms of the violence and also in terms of the policies.” 

US presses Mexico to arrest, extradite drug lord freed by 'powerful dark forces'

ile picture of former top Mexican drug cartel boss, Rafael Caro Quintero, under custody at the "Puente Grande" prison in Guadalajara on January 29, 2005. (AFP/PFP)

US law enforcement officials have officially asked the Mexican government to re-arrest a notorious drug lord who is wanted in the US for killing a federal officer, yet was released from a Mexican prison last week on a technicality.

Rafael Caro Quintero served 28 years of a 40 year sentence for the 1985 kidnapping, torture, and murder of Enrique “Kiki” Camarena, an undercover agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). A three-judge panel in the western state of Jalisco overturned Quintero’s sentence on the basis that he should have initially been tried in a state, not federal court. 

He was last seen early Friday morning leaving the prison on the outskirts of Guadalajara.

Quintero was one of the leaders of the powerful Guadalajara cartel, an early incarnation of the Sinaloa cartel now under the control of Joaquin “Shorty” Guzman, perhaps the most feared drug lord in Mexico. Quintero ordered Camarena’s torture and murder in retaliation for a series of successful drug busts. The narcotics agent was found alongside his Mexican driver in a shallow grave a month after he disappeared. 

Mexican police failed to arrest Quintero before he escaped to Costa Rica, though, where he owned several luxurious real estate properties. He was apprehended in April 1985 while in possession of a diamond-encrusted firearm, two sports cars, and 300,000 dollars in cash. 

The murder and ensuing search for Quintero is today seen as one of the lowest points in US/Mexican law enforcement cooperation. 

Quintero remained one of the DEA’s most-wanted fugitives during his imprisonment and currently ranks within the agency’s top five. Authorities were adamant that Quintero was still involved with the cartel during his time behind bars.

“Caro Quintero has used a network of family members and front persons to invest his fortune into ostensibly legitimate companies and real estate projects in the city of Guadalajara,” Adam Szubin, the Director of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, previously stated. 

Mexican Foreign Minister Jose Antonio Meade expressed outrage at the court’s sudden decision but, because the Mexican judicial branch is separate from the executive, it is unclear whether top leadership has the power to reverse the decision. 

The Association of Former Federal Narcotics Agents in the US called the decision an “outrage” and implied corruption is responsible for Quintero’s new found freedom.  

“The release of this violent butcher is but another example of how good faith efforts by the US to work with the Mexican government can be frustrated by those powerful dark forces that work in the shadows of the Mexican ‘justice’ system,” it said. 

While it is far from clear how police will re-arrest a known drug trafficker equipped with a network of underground loyalists, the extradition process offers little to consolation. Mexican authorities have said they were unaware of any US extradition request pending when Quintero was released. 

“Once the detention order against Rafael Caro Quintero is effected, the United States government will have 60 days to present its formal extradition request,” an official from the Mexican Attorney General’s office said.

A source from the Mexican Attorney General’s office told Reuters that Quintero would not be extradited to the United States because of a decision from the Mexican Supreme Court forbidding the extradition of Mexicans to countries that allow the death penalty or life imprisonment, two punishments forbidden under Mexican law.

US officials, however, have complained that they were offered no prior notice of Quintero’s release, with the Justice Department asserting that it “has continued to make clear to Mexican authorities the continued interest of the United States in securing Caro Quintero’s extradition so that he might face justice in the United States.” 

Further, Quintero’s lawyer said he is now pursuing the release of Ernesto Fonseca Carrillo and Miguel Angel Felix, both of whom were convicted and jailed for helping plan Caramena’s kidnapping and murder.

Syria accepts essential terms of chemical weapons probe - UN

UN chief Ban Ki-moon (AFP Photo/Farooq Naeem)

Syrian government has accepted the ‘essential modalities’ under which the UN was ready to investigate whether chemical weapons had been used in the country, the body has announced, signalling that experts will shortly be traveling to Syria.

"The departure of the team is now imminent," UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a statement. “As agreed with the Government of Syria, the team will remain in the country to conduct its activities, including on-site visits, for a period of up to 14 days, extendable upon mutual consent.” 

The Secretary-General has expressed his appreciation to the Syrian government for accepting “the modalities essential for cooperation to ensure the proper, safe and efficient conduct of the Mission.”

The statement also reminded that the use of chemical weapons “by any side under any circumstances”would constitute an “outrageous crime.”

Two weeks ago the United Nations said that an agreement had been reached with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government as to the three locations that UN inspectors would be investigating, led by Swedish scientist, Ake Sellstrom.

One site to be visited by the UN team is Khan al-Assal in Aleppo, where the country’s government says rebels used chemical weapons in March. The two additional locations have yet to be confirmed. 

Both Syria’s government and rebel forces have long been accusing each other of using chemical weapons, and both have denied it.

Last month Russia submitted “a full set of documents” to the UN and its analysis of samples taken west of Aleppo. Russia’s findings indicated that it was rebels behind the Khan al-Assal incident, in which more than 30 people died. 

The United States cast doubt on the Russian findings saying its own intelligence services believed Syrian government forces had used chemical weapons. However, Paulo Pinheiro, chairman of the UN commission’s inquiry into rights violations in Syria, said the evidence provided by the US did not meet standards as his commission was “very worried about the chain of custody of the substances.” 

In this image made available by the Syrian News Agency (SANA) on March 19, 2013, people are brought into a hospital in the Khan al-Assal region in the northern Aleppo province, as Syria's government accused rebel forces of using chemical weapons for the first time. (AFP/SANA)

Back in March Damascus has requested UN investigators to visit Khan al-Assal. The UN formed a mission back then, but reluctant to send it, demanding “unconditional and unfettered” access across the country, according to Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky. 

Syria’s Foreign Ministry rejected UN effort to broaden a probe claiming that it was “at odds with the Syrian request” and that its “possible hidden intentions” could violate Syrian sovereignty.

In total, the UN received some 13 reports of alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria and the UN inspectors will be investigating the “allegations” of chemical weapons use, rather than determining who was responsible for the attacks.

White House rejects idea of 'gun-free zone' around Obama

US President Barack Obama (C) (AFP Photo/Jim Watson)

After the Newtown shooting, 40,000 people signed a petition calling for the establishment of a “Gun Free Zone” around the president. The White House this week responded, rejecting the petition and claiming Obama faces “serious” threats every day.

After 26 children were massacred in Newtown last December, pro-gun advocates launched a “We the People” White House petition, calling for Gun Free Zones and the elimination of armed guards around the president, vice president, and their families. The gun-advocates were troubled by the fact that the Obama administration wanted stricter gun control laws in wake of the shooting, while relying on heavily armed guards to protect themselves.

Their petition closely mirrored a National Rifle Association advertisement, which called Obama an“elitist hypocrite” for providing his daughters armed guards. The ad’s narrator asked, “are the president’s kids more important than yours?” and called for a fair share of security by protecting Second Amendment Rights. 

“Gun Free Zones are supposed to protect our children, and some politicians wish to strip us of our right to keep and bear arms,” the “We the People” petition reads. “Those same politicians and their families are currently under the protection of armed Secret Service agents. If Gun Free Zones are sufficient protection for our children, then Gun Free Zones should be good enough for politicians.”

More than 40,000 people signed the petition, which was the required threshold to force a response from the White House at the time. The White House has since increased the threshold to 100,000 signatures.

The Obama administration this week dismissed the request, explaining that Congress mandates round-the-clock protection for the president – a law that was established after the 25thUS president, William McKinley, was shot and fatally wounded in 1901. 

The White House argued that President Obama and other elected leaders and representatives face“serious persistent and credible threats on a daily basis.”

“Those who are the subject of ongoing threats must receive the necessary and appropriate protection,” the White House wrote. “At the same time, all of us deserve to live in safer communities, which is why we need to take responsible, commonsense steps to reduce gun violence, even while respecting individual freedom.”

The White House response also urged lawmakers to “pass safe gun safety legislation that closes loopholes in the background check system and makes gun trafficking a federal crime” – a proposal that Senate Democrats were unable to push through in April.

“Even those who are mere candidates in a national election become symbols of our country, which makes them potential targets for those seeking to do harm to the United States and its interest,” the White House added, thereby dismissing the call for a Gun Free Zone around the president while still advocating for stricter gun control.

US contractor accused of Abu Ghraib human rights violations suing former prisoners

Baghdad Central Prison in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib (Reuters/Mohammed Ameen)

After a US federal judge ruled that CACI International, a US corporation, was not culpable for torture allegations at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, lawyers for the defense contractor have filed a suit against the former detainees seeking legal expenses.

A group of 256 Iraqis originally sued CACI International in 2004 accusing the company of committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, sexual assault, participating in torture and a variety of other allegations at Abu Ghraib prison. 

Publicity around the torture, fueled by graphic pictures of soldiers and contractors humiliating Iraqi detainees, led to calls for US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation and is widely considered one of the most disgraceful events of the US war in Iraq. 

A federal judge dismissed the prisoners’ case in June 2013, ruling that because the alleged abuse took place overseas the US District Court in Alexandria, Virginia had no jurisdiction. Engility, another contractor sued in connection with the human rights violations, settled with former Abu Ghraib detainees for $5.28 million earlier this year. 

CACI has now filed suit against prisoners who accused the company of wrongdoing in 2004, asking the accusers to pay a $15,580 bill for legal expenses. 

The plaintiffs oppose the measure, saying they “have very limited financial means, even by non-US standards, and dramatically so when compared to the corporate defendants in this case,” a recent court filing said. “At the same time, plaintiffs’ serious claims of torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and war crimes were dismissed on very close, difficult – and only recently arguable – grounds.” 

“Given the wealth disparities between this multi-billion dollar entity and four torture victims, given what they went through, it’s surprising and appears to be an attempt to intimidate and punish these individuals for asserting their rights to sue in US courts,” Bazer Azny, the legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, told Common Dreams. 

The plaintiffs are appealing the decision, arguing that by operating within a US military facility corporation employees were still subject to US law. As a government contractor, CACI is immune under Iraqi law. 

This ruling could prove to be an important precedent for contractors accused of similarly heinous war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor, told the Washington Post that the dismissal is a “blind spot” in US law. 

“We talk a good game about our government being subject to the rule of law, but we have created this expanding exception where the government and its contractors can shield the worst possible abuses,” Turley said. “The government and its contractors are virtually without a check or balance in our system.”

BP files lawsuit against US government for enacting ban on new business

BP files lawsuit against US government for enacting ban on new business

BP has filed a lawsuit against the US government following a ban on new federal contracts for the oil company, enacted after the company plead guilty to charges stemming from its 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the largest spill in American history. In November of 2012 the US Environmental Protection Agency cited BP’s “lack of business integrity” in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon incident that left 11 workers dead, and millions of barrels of oil spread into coastal waters. Though the suspension only impacts new contracts and not existing ones, BP has argued in its suit that the ban causes the company “irreparable harm.” BP has incurred about $42.4 billion in charges related to the April 20, 2010 oil spill, reports Reuters. "We believe that the EPA's action here is inappropriate and unjustified as a matter of law and policy, and we are pursuing our right to seek relief in federal court," said Geoff Morrell, BP's head of U.S. communications.