WE ARE THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AND WE ARE HERE TO HELP!

When I read this article, I couldn't help but feel sorry for the youth of Egypt.

They are the ones that really brought about change in Egypt and they are the ones that paid the price with their own blood to live a free life.

Now, they are the ones that have been overcome by the slow, methodical, relentless mechine called the Muslim Brotherhood.

It was the Brotherhoods plan from day one... .let the youth do the bleeding and then step in and steal the victory!

As I read Sondos Asem's comments, I felt just as sorry for her as I did for all the kids she represents.

The only thing this poor girl is missing are the strings hanging from her shoulders and head!

As an educated young women, she knows deep in her heart the MB is playing her as a front-man or in her case a front-woman.

After realizing this story was more about the danger of what this farce may mean to those who swallow the story, I really began to worry about the age old saying, " the enemy of my enemy is my friend"!

What groups in the US will align themselves with this so called new Muslim Brotherhood?

What organizations will take advantage of a perhaps sincere section of the MB?

An optimist would love to believe this "new MB" is truly the beginning of an acceptable Islamic movement... ya I know. we already have one in the form of Saudi.. but we all know Saudi could dance to the fiddle of the Devil himself as long as they continue to pump the oil.

So, the Muslim Brotherhood comes to court the US?

Where this heads is going to be very interesting to watch...

Does it become an issue before the November elections? perhaps!!!

I know this.. when young Asem goes to bed at night... she wonders how long the MB will really let her walk out in front of the movement!!!

Good luck young lady... you are about to grow up in a real fast moving world!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/03/world/analysis-muslim-brotherhood/index.html?iref=allsearch

SUSPICION... THE OTTOMAN... PERSIAN RELATIONSHIP!

So, Mohsen Rezaie makes a public statement that Turkey has not fulfilled some of the "agreements" for the upcoming Iranian nuclear program talks?

I have to wonder what those " agreements" might be, but more importantly, I really have to question if Iran is not simply doing what they always do... attempt to change the rules at the last minute?

Or, is it really an issue of trust between the Iranians and the Turks?

If not trust, then how about the classic Middle Eastern issue of one-upmanship?

In these difficult times for Iran, perhaps giving Turkey too much credit is simply not a wise thing to do!

The only things that rises before the Sun in the Middle East are the egos!!

Could it be that Iran simply doesn't want the Ottomans, who seem to have everything going their war right now, to take all the credit for the next round of worthless talks?

See... Turkey doesn't really care if any progress is made with these talks.

They get the credit for hosting the event and that keeps Turkey on the FrontPage!

Remember, it was Turkey's idea to host the talks... not Iran's!!

We also can't rule out Rezaie's ego!!!

He has been a player in Iran for a long time and it's well known he is no friend of Ahmadinejad.

The fact that other influential members of Iran's government made well timed comments leads me to believe the ego battle is more at the Nation State level.

So, whatever is going on here is worthy of paying attention to.

The Ottoman... Erdogan is not short on ego himself and I would be some answer to these comments will be coming soon.

The facts seem to be clear if you keep the big picture simple....

The Ottomans and the Persians continue to grind on each other and that will only create more heat!!

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=264609

MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD FOR PRESIDENT??? GO FIGURE!!!

So, the MB changes their mind on running a candidate for President?

I'm shocked!

This is the same MB / FJP / that swore they would not run too many candidates for the parliament in order to keep from obtaining a majority.

This is the same MB that turned its back on one of its members, Dr Al-Fetouh, because he wanted to run for president... perhaps his liberal viewpoints got in the way of the MB's real goals.

Some of the people talking about this event are correct when they say the danger comes from the FJP splitting the votes too much.

Between Amr Moussa and Al-Shater, the real hardliners may win the day... the An-Nour party... Hazem Islamiel!!

Egypt looks to be heading back into a political and social mud hole.

The problem is, Syria and Iran are now the topics of the day and most of the world is not going to focus on Egypt again without a huge violent event.

Nobody understands this more than the MB and this is exactly why they took this action now.

When Egypt first started to falter, I posted my belief the MB would run the country after it was all said and done.

Meanwhile, we continue to see a growing  viewpoint in this country that is based upon "accepting" a moderate, more compassionate, more understanding Islamic movement with the Egyptian MB being the shining example.

What the MB has begun to master is the art of " going slow"!

Fast.. Loud.. Violent events create panic.. .and reaction... counter reaction.

These are the actions of young, visionary.. Delusional..  Dumb College kids and those with no real " plan".

The is not how the MB operates.

The idea of letting the youth start the movement, let them take the heat on the streets of Egypt, bring down the government and then slowly shape the future to meet the vision of the Brotherhood... that is the vision.

The world is distracted and the MB plan continues to move on.

Al-Shater has a "relationship" with the Egyptian military and the MB knows it.

When does the MB decide to betray that relationship?

Let the Egyptian military continue to have it's economic perks, and they will continue to turn a blind eye.

My bet is, this plan is going to work!!!!

But........ Let's see who tries to "interfere"?

I have my opinions!!  

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/04/20124214426815765.html

CAN PARANOIA BRING DOWN THE AL-ASSAD REGIME?

 I was reading this story on CNN today and I found it interesting the reported conflict between Asef, the brother-in-law, and Maher, the Younger, meaner, brother of Bashar.

As I was digesting   what that might mean, when  I then read the part about the strained relationship between Asma, The Syrian First Lady and the Sister in-law, Bushra.

Ok, all the makings of the typical dysfunctional elitist, rich, family.

Just the kind of internal weakness needed to start the fire from within.

This cannot be news to those that know Syria and it's surly not news to the people trying to hold the Al Assad clan together... Iran... The Sunni Business class that refuses  to turn on him....  

Paranoia!!!

I've talked about the danger of such a sickness for the entire region, but paranoia just maybe the key to bringing down the Syrian government.... it wouldn't be the first time it's happened.

In the Middle East.. .blood feuds ... and family feuds run long and deep!!!

Could Asef and Maher be leveraged.... to pull down the empire?

Is someone already taking this track?.. Hmmm.. now who could pull such a stunt off???

If the plan was to get the inner circle under pressure, then why not add a few extra levels of stress?

Many years ago, in one of my former lives... I once convinced a real bad-guy.. that another bad-guy, who he trusted, was giving him up and it seemed both where too dumb to figure it out.

The damage was done... the trust was gone.. and the end result was exactly what I was looking for!

The Rumor Game:

Any Street Cop worth their weight in donuts will tell you the damage you can do to an "outfit" by utilizing the " Rumor Game"!

Just think what rumors could do to a whole group of paranoid elitist?

Rumor: Maher is out to strike a deal with Iran and give up his Brother..

Rumor: Bushra and her husband are out to blame Maher for everything and strike a deal to leave with her Brother's family to a neutral country.

Rumor:  Iran is looking to replace Al - Assad with someone the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood would support but would still work with Iran behind the scenes.. more than a rumor!!!!

Rumor: key Syrian Generals are quietly talking to the FSA and SNC to turn over their forces for amnesty!!!

Ok, everyone gets it..

The Rumor Game could be the most powerful weapon in the Syrian conflict right now..

Lets see who knows how to play the game!!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/26/world/meast/assad-family/index.html

IF TRUE.. AND I SAY IF... THEN ITS ANOTHER REAL BAD SIGN!

Ok, I'm going to gamble here and say Egypt is probably telling the truth when they state the two people they arrested for plotting to bomb a ship in the Suez Canal.

The fact that Egypt stopped, or claims to have stopped, such an event might be Egypt's way of showing the West the real value of their partnership at a time when they were relying on continued US military aid.

Adding the storyline of the plot being Iranian and an Israeli ship could be part of the, "see how vital we are to you", plot of this story.

What is really freighting is the fact the story may actually be true!!!

Israeli intelligence has the capability and the relationship with Egypt's military to determine if the story is factual.

If it's true, Israel will make a huge deal out of this event; one that will rival the Saudi Ambassador story.

Ok, lets face the facts.. if this story is true, then Iran and the events of the past six months are truly indicating to the world how far they are willing to go to defend their vision of their future.

If true, I simply don't know how anyone would speculate a military exchange with Iran will be " limited"!!!

These attempts.. are not the actions of a nation thinking of "limited actions".

This story snuck by most given the events in Syria, but it might boil back to the top soon!

 http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-iran-planned-to-bomb-israeli-ship-in-suez-canal-1.420463

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=263219

FEEDBACK FROM A FRIEND.

This is from someone I've worked with in the Middle East in the past. He  has forgotten more about how the region really works than most "Talking Heads" will ever now.

I trusted him at all times and I never allowed myself to show concern with his suggestions or the suggestions of those he called friend.

What he says in this email is more profound to me than anything else I hear from others who I've worked with.

I have also great fears concerning Syria, no matter how things will turn.

Unfortunately with the lack of Western resolve and support on the ground or from the air, the Islamists are just going to gain ground for many reasons:

-First, the amount and level of repression by Assad's men is just

unbelievable:

Bombing whole neighborhoods and cities, then ethnic cleansing involving butchering entire families, gang raping of women to defile Sunni women and to scare others from rebelling and looting and destroying properties on a massive scale.

When any people are confronted with such horrors, it is just normal they will turn to religion and God.

Perfect ground for Islamism to grow and to fester into a Sunni Jihadi movement, even though the demonstrations started out as peaceful and mainly secular.  However Assad has tapped on the West fear of Al Qaeda and has rallied the Alawi sect to defend itself by attacking entire Sunni neighborhoods and committing crimes against humanity.  I heard on Al Jazeera that Damascus Has 25 000 Chabbiha (Thugs) and Aleppo 31 000, who go into areas to clean up, kill, rape and loot with no mercy, and have been out of control.

The Baath regime with its actions, is setting the seeds of Islamic fundamentalism, especially that the most dedicated fighters against Assad are Islamic fighters or guided by the Jihad conception of defending their houses and families.  Now of course you might say Al Qaeda will benefit from such scenario, especially that Al Qaeda or Jihadi groups are on the ground in Syria.

It should be mentioned that Jihadi groups were previously supported by the Syrian regime to go fight US troops in Iraq. Well guess what, the chicken are coming home to roost for the Eye Doctor-dictator.

-Second, the Shiaa (mostly very pro-Iran) have gotten stronger since the Iraq war:  Pro Iranian parties are controlling Iraq since 2004, courtesy of the US invasion of Iraq.  What ensued was an ethnic cleansing of Baghdad and Southern Iraq of major Sunni population groups, mostly done by the Mahdi Army and SCIRI. 

Of course the Iraqi Government was citing de-Baathification and fighting Al-Qaeda, which translate mostly into de-Sunnification (even though Baath was from all religious groups.)

When Iyad Allawi's alliance won the last parliamentary elections, Maliki used the de-baathification again as a tool to disqualify 3 or 4 winning candidates, and therefore turn the elections result to his advantage.

So much for democracy Iranian ayatollahs'style.

Same strategy was used in Lebanon to weaken the winning majority of Saad Hariri's bloc in the last parliamentary Elections.  Hizbollah and their cronies managed to reverse the elections'

results through threats and political

manipulations.  Again, same trend is showing: Ayatollahs' democracy in action.

Now, the Sunni world is wide awake to the Iranian threat, especially after the Syria's massacres, again of mainly Sunni populations (In Homs, Edlib, Daraa, Damascus countryside.)  and again they see the same trend from pro-Iranian Shiaa sectarian parties like in Iraq and Lebanon, which is the threatening or massacring Sunnis.  It is inevitable that there will be an awakening of Sunnis, and the armed faction of it will be definitely Jihadi, but not necessary Salafi. 

The GCC countries are definitely feeling the Iranian threat, and are definitely supporting the Salafi Jihadi trend, For simple reasons:

-First of all, the GCC countries are the prime target of Iran and in their direct line of fire.

-Ideologically speaking, Salafism is GCC made, nurtured and properly funded.

-For practical reasons, Salafi Jihadis will fight, especially that they consider the Shiaa as heretics  and blasphemous.

-Finally, if the Shiia fear something, it is the Salafis (who don't even consider the Shiaa as true Moslems)  and the grand Sunni awakening.

So having said that, the imbalance we created in 2003 by making the Shiia and Iran stronger, need to be counterbalanced in Sunni's eyes by a rise of Sunnis, especially Jihadis (We have to consider that the Sunni educated middle class of Lebanon and Syria are not fighters.)  Who will fight for the Sunnis?  It will be this hardcore Jihadi element who now see the Shiaa and Iran as their main enemy.

Like you said in a previous article, there is a Sunni-Shiaa war going on in the Middle east, staged and funded by Iran.

I don't think there will be a turn back to Sunni quietism.  Now the Sunnis are rallying, Syria was their breaking point, And became the rallying point.

History again is repeating itself in the Middle East!

My initial fears for the event in Syria are growing by the day.

He was responding to this email I sent him last week.

The classic, "damned if you do and damned if you don't" probably applies here.

Finding a balance for support of the resistance in Syria is so incredibly difficult.

The concept the islamist will simply wait to take advantage of the conflict seems to be a foregone conclusion now.

If it was difficult before to get the free world to support the movement, it will become nearly impossible now.

How factual the Islamist issue is will not be the problem.... perception is the issue and perception rules when it comes to the Middle East.

I would love to listen to Israeli leadership discussing the future of Syria.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_SYRIA_RISING_ISLAMISTS?SITE=AP&SEC

TION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-03-21-18-03-33

SO... WHAT IS A " REGIONAL WAR"?

If you've been following the events in the Middle East for the past 20 years, you've heard the term, "regional war", over and over and over again.

Let's ask a fundamental question, what is a " regional war"?

When you do the standard Google search you get something along the lines of, " A conflict with two or more countries that involves structural and collateral damage".

When you search US Military Doctrine, you will find a definition written by some Think Tank Academic that resembles a lawyer describing a Baseball game.

But, why is this issue important?

Simple; everybody and their Brother has jumped on the bandwagon, to include me, that the Middle East could be heading for a " Regional War".

Here is my problem!

I am convinced my definition of a Middle Eastern "Regional War" is most likely much different from the ones depicted by the Media Talking Heads or the Academics trying to make it sound so complicated that everyone is forced to buy their book to figure it out.

 Here is the basic problem with finding a definition for " Regional War".

What constitutes an " involved nation"?

Who do we determine the true list of " actors", especially in the murky world of the Middle East where certain " partners" are kept on a low profile?... No not Israel!!

If one nation accuses another of being, "involved" does that make it true?

Who determines who is involved and to what level?

The UN???

Please!!!

The regional war would be over by the time the UN could figure out  something that complex.

 Ok, I could spin this issue around and around and the next thing we would know, I would have a book on the Middle East and be wearing a black Turtleneck Shirt on CNN or FOX... Inside joke!!!

I can't paint you a picture of what everyone else understands a " Regional War" may look like in the Middle East, but I can tell you what I believe one may look like, and even then that is dependent on a stack of variables too large to review.

So, let me pick a scenario and then try and show what my theory of "Regional War" would look like.

Scenario:

Iran executes a Hezbollah backed attack against Israeli citizens, outside of Israel, resulting in a huge loss of life.  

Now I say outside of Israel given I believe this is what Iran is looking to accomplish at this point in time.

Just look at the events of the past three months.

Why would Iran want this method of attack?

Israel's reaction would have the appearance of attacking innocent Lebanese's citizens  given the attack didn't physically originate from Lebanon.

Their goal would be to punish or even possibly eliminate Hezbollah operations in Lebanon.

Ok, at this point in the "regional war".. who are the most physical  players?

Physical Players:

Israel. Lebanon...The Palestinian  Authority, remember they have camps in Lebanon as well... depending on how saver the Israelis respond would determine if these camps would be impacted.  Hezbollah doesn't operate out of these camps, but with a little effort Hezbollah could insure they were targeted.

Is this a "Regional War"????

Again, who are the sideline players? and does their indirect involvement make this a "Regional War"??

Sideline players:  Nations that would be directly  working to limit the conflict.

Turkey.. Egypt... Jordan... US.. Britain... France... Russia... Saudi.. the GCC...

Ah yes... how confusing can this all really get????

Ok, lets push the scenario further.

If Iran's master plan was to have Israel attack Lebanon and the Hezbollah forces, then lets assume they would also involve the factions of Hamas an other radical Gaza units.

A large scale, over 200 in a few hour period, rocket and missile attack is launched from Gaza into Israel and this all happens within two days of the initial Hezbollah attack somewhere else in the world.

Israel strikes into Gaza with a force designed to neutralize any threat coming out of Gaza.

Now, who are the physical players at this point?

Physical Players:

Israel, Lebanon, the PA.. ....... still no real change!!!

Who are the sideline players:

Sideline Players:

Turkey.. Egypt... Jordan... US.. Britain... France... Russia... Saudi.. the GCC..... still no real change!!! Maybe..

Did the escalation now make this a "Regional War"??? no!!!

Would many in media to include the virtual army of " talking head experts" start foaming at the mouth over a "Regional War" threat?

You bet!!!

By now we are probably adding a new level of players...

The " active sideline support players!

Who are they?

Sideline Support players:

Iran.... providing Hezbollah with follow on world wide targeting guidance and logistical support.

Some of the sideline players now become sideline support players..

The US would most likely be providing information to both Israel and several other nations in the region for the primary purpose of limiting the paranoia of escalation. yes.. this has is not new news.  

I bring this up because these are the two key nations that most experts , and I use that term lightly, are currently warning a "Regional War" might involve.

Ok, at this point, we have Israel pounding Hezbollah in Lebanon.. oh ya.. did I mention there are UN Forces in Lebanon??? How fast they can depart the battlefield I hope is a very practiced drill... we have Gaza under a land invasion.... we most likely have some level of armed conflict in the West Bank... we have Hezbollah potentially executing follow on Terror attacks around the world.. if Iran calls for them.. depends on what plan they unleashed. 

this is all starting to get confusing even to me..... but... here is what we don't have and this is the picture most of these so called experts keep depicting or at least have the average citizen thinking!!!!

We don't have Egyptian Tanks pushing through the Sinai...

We don't have the Syrian Air Force being shot down in one day by Israel.. Old news...

We don't have Jordanian troops backing up Egyptian ground troops...

We don't have Iranian armored divisions crossing into Iraq..

We don't have Iraq supporting anyone for any reason.

We don't have Saudi forces moving on Israel.

In my book.. by my doctrine.. we do not have a "total warfare / regional war"..

Again.. .what is a " Regional War"?????

yes.. .we have a war unlike Desert Storm or Iraqi Freedom, but we do not have 1973.

what we do have is an event that is just as deadly as 1973 if not more so... for you see.. the weapons of war are vastly improved and the body counts can rise just as quickly and the buildings can fall just a fast as they did in 1973.

Ok, here come the icing on the cake and then  I will tell you why it will still not be a "Regional War" like the one the talking heads keep depicting.

The decision could then be made by Israel that given their level of activation for such an event and given the pending nuclear issue with Iran.. Israel decides to solve that issue at the same time.

Israel decides, as they have historically done before, to take their nation to " total warfare" and deal with Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran to the fullest extent possible.

Now, who are the physical players?

Physical players:

Iran, Israel, Lebanon, the PA

Sideline Support Players:

US, Britain, France... do they support the attacks on Iran? perhaps logistically, but the main drive would be to keep the Straits open.  limited support would be the most likely course of action.. thus... sideline support.

Everyone else is completely immersed in keeping the event limited.. calming the world economic markets to the extent possible... in other words.. they are looking out for themselves.. to include the Arab States..

There is no Arab army... There is no Arab Air Force.. there is no Arab Navy and this is not an Arab War!!

This is why Israel will be willing to go to war.. This is why nations like Saudi and Jordan, will let this event take place..

When the dust settles.. there is money to be made and that is what drives the Middle East.