≡ Menu

Obama’s Covert Sabotage of Iranian Regime Recalls Nixon’s Support for Allende Overthrow

teheran moneychanger

Teheran money changer (AP)

Israeli and western media are filled with stories about the collapse of Iran’s currency over the past week.  The articles contain a strong element of Schadenfreude, gloating at the suffering of others.  Specifically when those others are the Iranian “enemy.”  But are they?  More on this later in this post.

John Dickerson pointed me to a most interesting 2009 Truthout article which presciently noted that the then-new Pres. Obama had not renounced George Bush’s massive campaign of covert black ops directed against the Iranian regime.  One of the specific elements of subversion involved manipulation of Iran’s currency.  So one has to ask: in addition to strangling economic and financial sanctions which may be causing this nose dive, what other covert manipulations may be occurring?

For all those who cheer any pain inflicted on Iran, ask yourself who’s being hurt?  Is it the Revolutionary Guards, the Basij, the generals, ayatollahs, etc.?  Or is it the workers, the children, the poor?  Who will suffer first and most under these conditions?  Look at what we did to Iraq.  Sanctions there didn’t harm Saddam or his Baathist nomenklatura.  It starved the babies, the sick, the underclass.  They absorbed this blow and died in the hundreds of thousands.

There is little doubt that Obama, Netanyahu and western nations will have the cries of starving babies as a part of their political legacy.  These sanctions will likely not bring Iran to heel and not achieve their stated aim.  But they will kill real people.

We also have another parallel to invoke: Israel’s siege against Gaza, now six years old.  Though it is less severe than in the past, it still stymies economic development in Gaza.  Who did the siege hurt?  Hamas?  No. The Islamist group smuggled all its needs into the enclave using tunnels.  Did it stymie terrorists?  No again.  They too brought in weapons via the tunnels.  It DID hurt the pregnant mothers and newborns for whom there was little nourishment to be found.

Another important parallel between the Iran and Gaza blockades is that their goal is unclear.  Israel claims it laid siege to Gaza to prevent importing weapons for terror attacks, a bogus argument.  The U.S. claims its sanctions are designed to get Iran to renounce its entirely legal nuclear program.

But the Truthout article notes that the U.S. intensively destabilized another regime in the same way we’re now undermining Iran: the Salvador Allende government in Chile.  Which brings us around to the issue of regime change.  Clearly, Israel wants to topple the Iranian government.  It appears that the U.S. has a similar goal.  Or at least it’s offering that regime an either/or proposition: either you renounce your nuclear program or we bring you to your knees in hopes that your own people will topple you.

The question to consider is this: will Iranians blame their leaders for their hunger or the western nations strangling it?  That’s a no-brainer.  Countries under attack always unite against their foreign oppressors.  This makes the leaders stronger and less likely to fall.

Bufferfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail
youtubeyoutube

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Tibor October 2, 2012, 5:40 AM

    Glee over the suffering of others is not right and in fact I don`t even think it is true. The hope is that it will be a short period of harsh times followed by liberation and renewed prosperity. As they say “No pain no gain” and short of wars and cyber-attacks, which are worse, economic sanctions are simply the only conceivable way to achieve the higher goal of ridding the Iranian nation from a regime it does not deserve, as well as a whole array of broader goals: preventing the panic in the region and beyond from the nexus of a rogue regime and nuclear bombs, protecting the oil-supply routes (critical to the world economy) from the threat of possible sabotage acts, helping the Syrian nation to get rid of a dictatorship (that is now heavily supported by Iran in different ways, in total oblivion to the suffering of the people there), freeing Lebanon from the overarching influence of Hezbollah (which suffocates its special free-spirit Levant-European nature) and other.

    • PersianAdvocate October 2, 2012, 7:58 AM

      Tibor, what do you think a new government forced to replace the last will look like in Iran? IMHO, it will be fanatically (not just rhetorically as currently) ready to eliminate the NeoZionist onslaught without the stigmatization associated with the current government. Even the “Green Movement” will not step back one iota on Iran’s legal right allowable by accepted international treaty.

      Indeed, not only do Iranians unanimously support Iran’s rights in this arena, but they also know the sanctions are based on lies by a non-signatory that violates every aspect of its own complaint.

    • Deïr Yassin October 2, 2012, 9:57 AM

      @ Tibor
      “Economic sanctions are simply the only conceivable way to achieve the higher goal of ridding the Iranian nation from a regime it does not deserve”

      Does that mean you’re positive to economical sanctions against Israel too in order to help the Palestinians to get rid of a colonization they don’t deserve ? And contrary to the Iranians who haven’t asked for any sanctions against their regime, Palestinians are encouraging such sanctions.

      “Preventing the panic in the region”
      Don’t you know who the overwhelming majority in the region consider the source of danger, and panic ?

      Are you aware that your comments comes out as extremely paternalistic ? Because I’m sure your considerations for the well-being of the peoples in the region has nothing to do with Israeli interests….

      • mary October 2, 2012, 12:03 PM

        Interesting how Israelis perceive the BDS movement as an existential threat, yet sanctions are a such a good deal when it comes to Iran.

        Come to think of it, perhaps sanctions should also be placed on Israel for its “ambiguous” nuclear weapons program and for its refusal to sign the NPT.

        • Castellio October 2, 2012, 12:42 PM

          Long overdue.

        • Davey October 2, 2012, 10:06 PM

          Reminding me of the CIA’s role in toppling Allende really gets my blood going, again! The documentary about this, “The Battle of Chile” was impossible to obtain in the US for decades and decades. Anyway — sanctions are a form of war by other means, to paraphrase. Imposing sanctions should require electorate consent and a clear statement of purposes. Americans don’t even know the thousands of lives due to US led sanctions on Iraq. Given this war by other means and just about everything else that passes for foreign policy in the US, it is a wonder that Americans can travel just about anywhere in the world without disappearing altogether.

          • Deïr Yassin October 3, 2012, 2:38 AM

            Thank you so much, David. I didn’nt know that documentary, and went looking for it on the net. It’s there in full version in Spanish and French but I couldn’t find it in English.
            Chile has the biggest Palestinian community outside the Middle East: 400.000 Chileans are of Palestinian descent (such as the last mayor of Santiago de Chile and the famous filmmaker Miguel Littin).
            On 9/11 2001 in the morning (European time) I was speaking with a Chilean professor I know. He asked me: ‘do you know what day it is today ?’, and I answered ‘no’. ‘The anniversary of the Coup d’Etat against the Allende-government’, he answered. How could I forget that ! We spoke about that for a while, and when I later in the afternoon heard about the Twin Towers attacks, I felt very weird. Many different emotions (some of them I’ll keep to myself….) went through me for an instance before I realized the horror of the event. I met the same professor a week later, and he (a former political prisoner, tortured and mutiliated in Pinochet’s prisons) told me that the aircraft (US-made and according to some also with US-military onboard) bombing the Presidential Palace had set off from a Argentinian airport at 8:51 local time….
            “Missing” with Jack Lemmon and Sissy Spacek by Greek-French filmmaker Costa-Gavras is a great film on the events too, based on a true story, and clearly showing the US-implications in the overthrow of Allende.

          • Davey October 3, 2012, 6:54 AM

            (Deir Yassin — Off-topic a bit: There was another documentary decades later by the same filmmaker seeking out memories and the social impact of Allende murder etc. The filmmaker demonstrates that the Allende affair is completely lost in Chile now, that people on the street don’t care one wit about all that. I’ve often wondered on “Missing” ever got mainstream footing in the US, but now I realize it may simply be that nobody cares any more. I have seen, and may own, “Battle of Chile” in English. Spent literally years trying to get hold of it.)

          • Deïr Yassin October 3, 2012, 8:06 AM

            @ David [OFF-TOPIC too]
            If you live in San Diego, former Mexican territory, you’re fluent in Spanish, arent’t you ? ;-)
            The whole three part documentary is on the net in case. 1. La Batalla de Chile: La insurreccion de la Burguesia 1/10. 2. La Batalla de Chile: El Golpe de Estado. 3. La Batalla de Chile: El Poder popular.
            I don’t know about Missing and it’s mainstream coverage in the US, but it won the Palme d’Or and Jack Lemmon won Best Actor in Cannes 1982, and it is considered a major film in Costa-Gavras’ carreer. I love that man, one of the best filmmakers around, and courageous too. His film about Palestine, Hanna K,(1983 – also on the net) was the first international film to speak about the Nakba, and the pro-Israel Lobby made heavy noice and eventually managed to get the film withdrawn in the US (cf. its wikipedia-page). Costa-Gavras never spoke about it, but I read a interview with his wife, saying that he was very touched by the negative critique. I guess they called the film antisemitic…. I’ve also read that Jill Clayburgh’s career was negatively influenced by her role in that film.
            Missing (1/13):
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3Sx8yl4pKk

          • Castellio October 3, 2012, 9:11 AM

            Nostalgia for the Light: an elegiaic documentary that ends up being one of the more powerful political films of our times. If you have a chance, it is a “must see”.

          • Davey October 3, 2012, 11:12 AM

            Deir Tassin — I thought “Missing” mainstream because of the top Hollywood talent and high production values (money). It is certainly is powerful and credible.

      • Tibor October 2, 2012, 1:42 PM

        @Deir Yassin
        It is true that Israelis because of the inherently precarious situation of the country tend to live in a shell – focus mainly on the survival of the state with a degree of alienation from the Arab world`s own problems. But believe it or not the scenes from Syria penetrate the most hardened soul – it is a human tragedy of a massive scale.

        • Richard Silverstein October 2, 2012, 2:20 PM

          Yet the suffering of Palestine doesn’t. Instructive, no?

        • Deïr Yassin October 2, 2012, 3:11 PM

          @ Tibor
          You didn’t answer my question at all. Why don’t you read my comment once again. I didn’t mention anything about Syria, and international sanctions ARE already imposed on Syria. And believe it or not, no Syrians ask for your “help”.

      • TheAZCowBoy October 3, 2012, 9:25 AM

        In ‘One-Nuke-Israel’ the solution seems so much simpler – and complete!
        One U-HAUL shipping container loaded with a borrowed Paki nuke in Tel Aviv’s harbour
        As for the UNITED SNAKES (US/Israel) and the Palestinians problem (In finding a ‘final solution?’).
        Simple: Read line #1.

  • David Nelson October 2, 2012, 7:09 AM

    Tibor,

    I think i am starting to get the hang of your logic.

    Liberate the Iraqis, even though they don’t ask for it. Liberate the Iranians, even though they don’t ask for it. Liberate the Syrians, even though they don’t ask for it. Liberate the Lebanese, even though they don’t ask for it. Don’t liberate the Palestinians, even though they ask for it. Is this about right?

    • David Nelson October 2, 2012, 8:41 AM

      This must be the “George Costanza” approach to conducting world affairs. Just do the opposite of what comes natural.

    • Davey October 2, 2012, 10:08 PM

      Well done! American policies in a nutshell.

    • TheAZCowBoy October 3, 2012, 9:31 AM

      [comment deleted for comment rule violation]

  • PersianAdvocate October 2, 2012, 7:39 AM

    Richard, astute analysis regarding the obvious Iranian reaction to foreigners trying to stifle Iran’s progress. The Iranian streets are fully aware of the aggression and blame Israel. Whereas, in fact, Iranians by a majority used to support the Israeli people’s struggle – often risking themselves by being advocates within the country – the majority opinion has changed for the worse. Even the people who couldn’t care less about Israel (far away from Iran) now express desires to dis in Tel Aviv if they have to because they have been threatened for so long without anything perceivable to really follow those threats and intimidate them. They know this is a game.

    On the other hand, this is a propaganda campaign plain and simple. By all counts, Iran has been on the verge of collapse for over 100 years now but has proved itself capable of still functioning like a normal country where people have access to good healthcare, can travel outside, vote, and get educated. Today, Iran leads the NAM movement, a coalition of 120 willing members (as opposed to those blocs composed of members caught in some superpower’s tractor beam), and thus group has voiced full intent to aid Iran to circumvent sanctions based on lies.

    The truth is the inverse – Iran is gaining power by being forced to become resourceful. Meanwhile, Europe is being floated by East Asia, and the US faces inescapable collapse due to the inherent nature of the “Federal Reserve” banker borne ponzi scheme exhausting its full course. Indeed, it is the international banking cartel that fears a dead end and wishes to create new corridors by creating chaos and sanctioning the Iranian people to weaken them before a full on war.

    It was Churchill who stated something to the tenor of, “The Iranians are unique: if one tries to break them by force they will come back thrice; but fatten the Iranians and they will turn lazy, happy, and harmless.” Maybe Netanyahu should defer to his greater master.

    BTW, zero Iranians have self-immolated. Doesn’t the timing of this press campaign raise a stink for anyone else? ;)

    • PersianAdvocate October 2, 2012, 8:06 AM

      I should note that the MEK terror cult now delisted thanks to the Israeli-Neocon lobby does perform self immolation due to being brainwashed drones on a propaganda mission rather than suicide for righteous statement. Looking forward to seeing this in the news following my post here. Sickos…

      • Bob Mann October 2, 2012, 9:15 AM

        Here’s some info about the MEK group that some people may not be aware of:

        Many in Iraq, and other dispassionate observers, such as the Rand Corporation, believe that MEK is also a cult. It is led in perpetuity by a married couple, Mariam and Masoud Rajavi, who require their most active members to divorce and get rid of their children. Former residents of Camp Ashraf who have left the MEK say that they were allowed just one phone call a year to talk to their children. The MEK claims the divorces are voluntary and enable members to focus more intensely on regime change. As for the children sent to pro-MEK foster families in Europe and North America, the MEK says it’s for their own good.

        http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/107690/our-new-iran-plan-help-put-cult-in-power#

        Cult truly seems to be the right word for this group.

        • TheAZCowBoy October 3, 2012, 9:37 AM

          With the MEK now part of ‘Hillary’s A-team.’
          Gee AmeriKKKa, we hardly know ya, anymore!
          Hey History Channel: Better double up on those old V-E tapes out of your archives, V-J Day too!

  • Javaad October 2, 2012, 8:00 AM

    As an Iranian and a long-time follower of your blog, I feel obliged to write a comment applauding the work you have done so far in trying to shed a light on who’s behind the suffering of the Iranian people.

    First, the person in charge as President is not voted for by the normal Iranian citizens as we already demonstrated and distinguished ourselves from the administration currently in charge following the 2009 Iranian presidential elections. Second, the sanctions in place hurt the normal Iranian citizens such as myself more than anyone and indirectly unite he majority of us against the foreign element causing it because we know Iranian government is not to blame for the hardening of our daily livings as they lack the means and the knowledge required to be doing so. If they were so smart and wisely sophisticated, they could have done a better job at rigging the 2009 elections. The excel files on the ministry of interior’s website are still showing different results for some electoral districts than what was announced officially. Third, the Israeli president Netanyahu is not making himself or the Israeli people a friend for the long-time in the region by targeting the normal Iranian people and exacerbating their suffering. We are the same Iranian people who were amongst the first to support the establishment of the State of Israel and the second in the Islamic world after Turkey to recognize it as a sovereign nation. So there is a line here making the difference of opinion between the government and the people quite clear as even to date, there are Jews living in Iran namely in the cities of Shiraz and Yazd and Tehran. Jews have peacefully and continuously lived within the borders of the State of Iran for more than 3000, making Iran the country with the longest running presence of Jews outdating the Muslim presence even. So there is no question of hostility towards Jews from other Iranians. Iran’s Bazar is controlled by two Jewish brothers, namely the Asgaroladis. Now the question is why should the Iranian people pay the price for something that they did not ask for and resisted with their protests in 2009? This placard here I think the plight of the normal Iranian people quite nicely, better than I can describe in words: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A32ED_oCMAAdL8n.jpg

    Here a real life example of how it could effect the young population:
    Suppose my little brother wants to go to South Africa to study for his LLB, and so learn about the Western world, the legal system and be enlightened on the issue of Holocaust about which there is a lack of teaching and education in Iran. The democratic system there might also make him realise the backwardness imposed upon our people by the government and the religious institutions. He may be familiarised with the democratic system and aspire to have it in his own country. There might be thousands of other kids who would like to carry on the same path towards western education, and thousands who have but as a result of the sanctions are now returning to Iran en masse, an example being myself. In the long-run we’ll all end up in the Iranian military due to conscription for all males. There we’ll strive for a better living and might, in a completely professional fashion, unknowingly help the government with its anti-Israeli policies. In Iran we keep getting told people responsible for our misfortunes are the Americans with their role in the coup d’etat that topples the democratically elected government of Mosaddeq. I am afraid a similar discourse that’s being followed today by Israeli politicians will only add Israel’s name to that list, and that may be taught to kids for generations and further divide our people.

    A brief comment was my intention initially but here goes the opinion of a normal Iranian citizen with western education in Science and Engineering now due to start his military service, and unwantedly about to start serving a cause he despises so much.

  • Joel October 2, 2012, 10:08 AM

    Allende wanted the bomb?

    • Richard Silverstein October 2, 2012, 2:22 PM

      Just as bad, he wanted “socialist revolution” if you can believe the paranoid delusions of the CIA, Nixon & Kissinger.

  • mary October 2, 2012, 11:57 AM

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/wikileaks-israel-aimed-to-keep-gaza-economy-on-brink-of-collapse-1.335354

    “Three cables cited by the Aftenposten newspaper, which has said it has all 250,000 U.S. cables leaked to WikiLeaks, showed that Israel kept the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv briefed on its internationally criticized blockade of the Gaza Strip.”

    The purpose is collective punishment – the forcing of the people of Gaza to renounce Hamas. It isn’t working. And it is illegal.

    • Castellio October 2, 2012, 12:50 PM

      But the question is this: Have the American people accepted the principle of collective punishment? The Israelis certainly act as if they have done so, and have repeatedly justified it; has the American population as well?

      • mary October 2, 2012, 6:30 PM

        I think Americans’ eyes gloss over when the subject turns to sanctions and collective punishment. All sanctions are collective punishment, IMHO. But in Iran’s case I would prefer them to Israeli air strikes.

        I don’t know if Americans understand the ramifications of collective punishment perhaps because the experience has never been visited upon them. The worst they ever experienced was gas rationing in the late 70’s. I think also it is because of the news media’s failure to cover the siege on Gaza in any adequate way. We hear about missiles landing in southern Israel but not the deaths of children in Gaza due to lack of adequate medical equipment. We don’t hear about how many children in Gaza suffer from malnutrition and stunting of growth. Tonight I had a conversation with a young Gazan man whose American wife waited for him on the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing for 8 days, but he wasn’t allowed through. I myself cannot visit Gaza without getting an invitation from an official source justifying my visit; i cannot simply go to visit my friends. (In fact, if I want to visit my friends in the West Bank, I have to lie and say i’m visiting Israel – I don’t dare say I am visiting Palestinians.) Lack of respect for human dignity is the ultimate collective punishment.

  • Tibor October 2, 2012, 1:20 PM

    The gist of what I was trying to highlight is that while Iran keeps describing Israel as the main source of all troubles in the region in reality it is Iran that is so.
    It is in confrontation with the Arab gulf states; It threatens to close the Hormuz straits (vital to oil flow from the gulf); It provides a lot of support of all kinds to Assad`s regime merely because it serves its regional interests and in total disregard to the aspirations of the people there and likewise in undermining Lebanon`s erstwhile special nature.
    On top of all of that now comes the nuclear issue, which is bound to have far-fetching regional (not just Israel!) ramifications and beyond.

    • mary October 2, 2012, 6:37 PM

      And Israel bombs Gaza on a regular basis, threatens the Egyptians when they deploy soldiers in the Sinai to deal with terrorist groups there, regularly engages in threats and insults the Lebanese government (last year at the UN meeting on the question of admitting Palestine as a member state, Netanyahu called them “terrorists”), commits extrajudicial assassinations on foreign soil, bombs what it thinks are nuclear facilities outside its borders, violates foreign air space, refuses to disclose its nuclear weapons program or sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty, yet demands transparency from Iran?

      Who, really, comes off as the threat here?

      • Davey October 2, 2012, 10:19 PM

        “total disregard to the aspirations of the people..”? I know some other cases of this strange blindness.

    • Deïr Yassin October 3, 2012, 3:40 AM

      @ Tibor
      It’s not because you claim the same thing twice that it becomes more true. People in the region do NOT consider Iran the main source of all troubles in the region, and Zionists like you are NOT deciding what other peolpe think !
      I can’t get access to the PDF of the latest Brookings Institute Poll by Professor Shibley Telhami, American of Palestinian descent, but the one from 2008 – that is before Cast Lead and the killing of Iranian scientists en masse by Israel – finds that to the question: ‘two countries that are the biggest threat to the region’, 95% mention Israel, and 85% the US. In the 2011, Poll only 18% mention Iran as one of the two biggest threats, it leaves an average 90% to the US and Israel. Or maybe Sweden …
      In the 2009-poll, only 29% of the polled said that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapon would be positive. In 2010, 57% considered Iranian nuclear weapon positive. In the 2011-poll, 64% of the polled think Iran has a right to develop nuclear weapon. Why do you think the % is rising ? And the countries polled are rather conservative ones.
      http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2011/11/21-arab-public-opinion-telhami

      • Bob Mann October 3, 2012, 7:14 AM

        Great points. People outside of the region tend to not have a very good handle on what people inside the region think and believe.

  • bar_kochba132 October 2, 2012, 1:54 PM

    It is ironic the Nobel-Peace Prize Winner President Obama, who was denied that there was anything special about that there is anything “special” about the US is now going around demanding that countries like Egypt and Syria become democracies. Who says Obama and the US have the only “right” way to run a goverment and can go around messing around in other countries affairs. American exceptionalism was once viewed by both Republicans and Democratis as being self-evident. Even Robert Kennedy, in his annoucement that he was running for President in 1968 stated that the US had the right to moral leadership of the planet. See how easy it is for Obama to chuck out his beloved “progressive” ideas when it suits his desire for power?

    • Richard Silverstein October 2, 2012, 6:14 PM

      Are you worried that Obama will “go around demanding” that Israel become a democracy too? In fact, Obama hasn’t demanded anything. It is the native citizens of these Arab countries which have demanded their freedom from petty tyrants. The U.S. has actually been quite slow to embrace this movement since it’s overthrown those autocrats with whom we had such cozy relationships.

      If Romney’s election chances weren’t in the toilet you’d be telling us he was going to beat Obama as you told us McCain was going to beat Obama. So now that you can’t proclaim Obama’s defeat you do the next best thing & proclaim him a sell-out to his principles. But that’s nothing new here because that’s precisely what I’ve been saying here for a year or more. Except that I write out of sincerity & you write out of cynicism since you enjoy pointing out that he’s a sell-out while I don’t.

      • mary October 2, 2012, 6:50 PM

        Uh, my recollection is that no such “demand” was ever made by Obama regarding Egypt. On the contrary, he did and said everything possible to keep Mubarak in power until it looked like his ouster was inevitable; in fact, Joe Biden even opined that “Mubarak is not a dictator.” Obama did not want to lose his favorite pro-Israel toady.

        The problem for the US is that should the Arab countries become democracies it will lose control over their governments, which is something it cannot afford to do if it wishes to continue to serve the interests of Israel. The US cannot promote democracy and hope realistically that any and all democratically elected governments will be cooperative and pro-zionist. Look at what happened in Egypt; the US was semi-apoplectic over the very possibility that an Islamist government would be voted in. Luckily, it has economic leverage to wield against Egypt for the time being, but when Egypt’s economy improves and it no longer needs US economic aid, it is pretty obvious where things will be heading, and Israel will also have to deal with that uncomfortable new reality.

        As for the present – Romney’s head may be up his ass, but his election chances haven’t hit the toilet just yet. I just saw a poll showing Obama only 7 percentage points higher than Romney. The debates are going to make or break the election for Obama, and debating isn’t his strong suit, unfortunately.

        • Davey October 2, 2012, 10:23 PM

          Yep, we see how warmly the US (and Israel) welcomed the democratic government of Gaza.

          • mary October 3, 2012, 6:07 AM

            Not only did we see it, but we also learned how they tried to tamper with the elections, courtesy of Seymour Hersh. So no wonder Egypt got a bit ticked off by all the Americans in Cairo who were claiming to help Egypt to “develop its democracy.”

        • bar_kochba132 October 3, 2012, 11:33 AM

          Can you please clarify for me how an “authentic” Egyptian leader would deal with Israel? Should they unilaterally cancel the peace agreement? Unilaterally send troops into the Sinai to confront Israel? To allow the terrorists in the Sinai to attack Israel? Go onto a war-footing with Israel? Open the border with Gaza to allow free flow of weapons and terrorists into the Gaza Strip? Please elucidate.

          • mary October 3, 2012, 4:01 PM

            That’s off topic, bar kochba132. Egypt is not the one Israel is threatening to attack (yet).