Egyptian sources reported, Sunday, that the Egyptian police and security forces uncovered a cell that operated on behalf of Israel in the Sinai area in Egypt.
The sources said that cell members were spying on Egypt and were on constant communication with Israeli security officers.
Israeli Yedioth Aharonoth reported that the spies are eight Palestinian and Egyptian men working for Israel, and that Egypt managed to intercept phone calls between cell members and Israeli officers.
Sameeh Shadi, in charge of the security in northern Sinai, reported on Sunday afternoon that the security forces managed to apprehend the eight, and that the person who ran the spy cell is from the Egyptian city of Rafah, who also managed to pass sensitive information to Israel.
Cell members have been under constant surveillance over the last four months, and were operating in Cairo and northern Sinai.
The Egyptian security services said that it has several tapes of recorded calls cells leaders made with persons in Egypt and Israel security officers.
The Zionist entity’s vaunted Iron Dome anti-missile system failed to intercept at least two rockets fired from Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. The two rockets hit the occupied Red Sea resort town of Eilat early on Wednesday with no casualties reported.
Israeli military sources said the vaunted Iron Dome anti-missile system, which was recently deployed around Eilat, did not engage to intercept the rockets.
“We’ve found two explosion sites in the city, we’ve also closed off the airport as a precaution,” police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld told AFP, saying one landed in “an open area close to one of the neighborhoods.”
He said the sirens had sounded but that there were no initial reports of casualties. “Bomb disposal experts are searching the area,” Rosenfeld said.
The military spokesman said both rockets had struck open areas.
“There were two rockets fired from Sinai, both landed in open spaces,” he said. Later on, Israeli website, Haaretz, reported that the airport in Eilat reopened.
Egypt denied that rockets were fired from its territories, and senior military official said troops were “investigating” the incident.
Hours later, a Salafi group called the Mujahedeen Shura Council posted a statement online saying its militants had “managed to target occupied Eilat with two Grad rockets” without saying where they were fired from.
“Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us”
Oded Yinon, World Zionist Council, 1982.
On the third of September one of the central figures behind “Innocence of Muslims” also released a statement on the National American Coptic Assembly website calling for the balkanisation of Egypt into five states one of these being a Coptic state with Alexandria as it’s capital.
It was released by Morris Sadek, who incidentally would become the new state’s Vice President. Sadek is anextremist, Coptic-Zionist who is denounced by mainstream Coptsin Egypt as an anti-Islam fanatic who dishonestly pushes his extremist agenda. However, in the US Sadek, has forged alliances in his anti-Islamic crusade with the lunatic fringes of the Christian-rightand the Zionist-funded anti-Islam propagandistssuch as Brigitte Gabriel of ACT! For America and Robert Spencer of Jihadwatch.
A September 1st Arabic News article suggested that there are moves afoot in Egypt to charge Sadek and his Coptic co-conspirators for treason.
So it may come as no suprise that Sadek’s vision for the Middle-East neatly parallels “The Zionist Plan For The Middle-East” The following is a section from a report written in 1982 by Oded Yinon who worked The Foriegn Ministry of Israel and was published by The World Zionist Organisation:
17
In the course of the Nineteen Eighties, the State of Israel will have to go through far-reaching changes in its political and economic regime domestically, along with radical changes in its foreign policy, in order to stand up to the global and regional challenges of this new epoch. The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil.9 The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs.
18
(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979.10
18
(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements.
(…)
19
Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect
(…)
Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands … Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run.
(…)
20
Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.
(…)
21 The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run.
The report fantasizes over the the establishment of Israel as an expanded regional superpower ruling over weak and defenseless, Muslim mini-states ravaged by internal strife. Coincidentally or not this process has already begun – Sudan has been split, Somalia and Libya aren’t actually controlled by a central government and the two other main focuses/threats (Syria and Iraq) have been destroyed or are in the process of being destroyed.
The Tel Aviv regime says it will not accept any changes to the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty, as the ties between the two sides continue to sour.
“There is not the slightest possibility that Israel will accept the modification of the peace treaty with Egypt,” Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said on Sunday.
The 1979 peace treaty was signed following the Camp David Accords, agreed upon by then Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat and then Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin on September 17, 1978, at Camp David in Washington DC.
“We will not accept any modification of the Camp David Accords,” Lieberman further said.
Lieberman’s comments come amid speculations that Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsi will seek alterations to the agreements.
Tensions have been simmering between Cairo and the Tel Aviv regime over the security of the Sinai Peninsula and the heavy deployment of Egyptian forces to the region.
Egypt boosted its military presence in the Sinai after militants killed 16 Egyptian border guards on August 5.
However, the Camp David treaty limits the number of Egyptian troops that can be present in the territory.
Lieberman also stated that Egypt should fulfill its obligations in the peninsula.
Tel Aviv has warned Cairo to pull out the military reinforcements from the region.
It all began on 5th of August when masked gunmen attacked Egyptian border guards in Sinai Peninsula killing 16 of them and injuring many others. The attackers then sneaked into Israel, six of whom were killed in a firefight with the Israeli soldiers. No Israeli was injured.
Tel-Aviv said the incident is a “wake up call” for Egypt in dealing with it QUOTE “terrorists”.
The Egyptian President vowed to retake the Sinai Peninsula and declared three days of mourning. Hamas accused Israel of planning and executing the terrorist attack.
Israel evacuated military outpost near Rafah hours before Sinai attackThe Israel Defence Forces knew about the attack which targeted an Egyptian army post on the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, and evacuated an outpost close to the area where the attack took place in advance of the incident. The IDF’s southern area commander was involved in taking the decision to evacuate army personnel.
According to reports on Hebrew Radio, intelligence warning about Sunday’s attack was received last Friday; this pushed the IDF to take a number of preventive measures a few hours before the bombings. The moves included ordering all Israeli tourists and nationals to leave Sinai and the evacuation of an Israeli military outpost near the attack site.
The radio reports claim that the IDF noticed a small Egyptian armoured vehicle about two kilometres from the border which started to weave its way around concrete barriers before it was fired upon by the Israeli soldiers. Nevertheless, the vehicle managed to make its way towards the Karam Abu Salem crossing point where heavy machine guns were used against it. It is alleged that the focus was on a small cart which apparently contained high explosives and exploded as soon as it was targeted by the Israelis.
The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt stated that Sunday’s attack against an Egyptian military base in the Sinai, “could be attributed to the Israeli Mossad”, adding that this attack aimed to foil efforts of newly-elected Islamist President Mohammad Morsi.
In an online statement, the Brotherhood said that Israel is trying to foil the achievements of the Egyptian revolution that removed former President Hosni Mubarak from power. The Brotherhood added, “this attack pushes all related sides into reconsidering the articles of the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement”.
The Brotherhood stated that after the Egyptian revolution several groups tried to sabotage popular achievements and began plotting against the country and its people.
“Yesterday, a group of criminals attacked our policemen, killed nearly twenty soldiers, brothers, in an ugly crime, before the criminals managed to hijack two armored vehicles and drove them towards the border”, the Brotherhood said. “Immediately after the attack, Zionist media agencies accused fighters in Gaza of being behind the criminal attack; the timing of the attack comes to create a rift between Gaza and Egypt”.
The Brotherhood also said that the attack aims to prove the failure of the new Egyptian government, formed just three days ago, “to foil the reform agenda of the newly elected Islamic president”.
“This crime carries the signature of the Israeli Mossad as Israel has been trying to sabotage the achievements of the revolution, especially when taking into consideration that just a few days before this attack was carried out, Israel called on its tourists to leave Sinai”, the Brotherhood added.
The Muslim Brotherhood further called on the Egyptian people to counter the criminal activities collaborators, and to stand with the newly elected president in his efforts to restore law and order, and to maintain a strong security situation.
On Sunday 5 August a number of unidentified militants carried out an attack in the Egyptian Sinai in which several Egyptian soldiers were killed, and Israel’s border was penetrated. After Iftar as the Egyptian Muslims were breaking their fast, unknown militants killed 16 Egyptian soldiers and stole an Egyptian armoured vehicle. Using a pick-up truck packed with explosives, the militants breached the Egypt-Israel border at the ‘Kerem Shalom’ crossing and subsequently drove approximately one mile into Israel using the armoured vehicle they had commandeered.
This event brings severe geopolitical repercussions for Egypt, and is characterised by extremely suspicious circumstances. Resultingly we must carefully consider this attack within its proper context.
Israel had foreknowledge of the attack
The Israeli military knew in advance that the Sinai attack would occur, which even allowed them to have aircraft defending the area in advance – hence why the armoured vehicle was blown up shortly after crossing the border and the attack was thwarted within 15 minutes of its advent.(1) IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz wasted no time in pointing out that “a large disaster was averted.”
This begs the question, why did the Israelis not inform the Egyptian military to allow them to prevent the attack in the first instance? The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports,(2)
Israeli intelligence had information on the planned attack, which allowed the military to have helicopters in the area to strike the vehicle, an Israel Defense Forces spokesman said Monday.
Israel and Egypt remained in close contact during the attack, Barak said, according to reports.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak curiously blamed the attack on an unidentified ‘global’ Jihadi terror group. Although Barak is unable to identify the group, we are supposed to believe his alarmist assertion that it is global in nature.
Compulsive liar and Israeli Ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, tried to pin the attack on Iran within hours, stating on his Twitter account,
“Iranian backed terrorists again struck at our Southern border today killing 15 Egyptian guards and attempting to massacre Israeli civilians,”
Obviously it was too soon for him to be in possession of evidence linking the attack to Iran, and Oren subsequently deleted his Twitter post. Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu did precisely the same thing with regard to the Burgas terror attack in Bulgaria, subsequently retracting his claim that Iran was behind the carnage, instead blaming Hezbollah. At the time of writing, the identity of the perpetrator of the Burgas attack is unknown to Bulgarian and US authorities.
“Perhaps this will be necessary wake-up call for the Egyptians to take matters in their hands in a more serious way,”
Israel’s designs on the Sinai
There are alarming indications that Sunday’s events were a false flag attack designed to give Israel the pretext it requires to carry forward its regional agenda. The Sinai raid must be considered within the context of Israel’s longstanding designs on the Sinai Peninsula.
In February 1982 an important Hebrew paper appeared in a Jewish journal named KIVUNIM (Directions). Penned by Oded Yinon and titled ‘A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties‘, the essay delineates strategies for Israel to become a regional hegemon in the Middle East. The short and long term strategies discussed involve the dissolution of the surrounding Arab states, and the expansion of Israel beyond its current undeclared borders.
Israel covets the Sinai for not only ideological reasons (the realisation of ‘Eretz Yisrael’ – Greater Israel), but also economic ones. Yinon makes no secret of Israel’s designs on the Sinai:
The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil. The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs.
(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979.
Israel’s ultra-secure border was penetrated during the August 5 attack in which 16 Egyptian soldiers were killed; the operation was sophisticated and ambitious. Considering this in hand with the fact that Israel had foreknowledge of the event, it is highly likely that this attack was carried out by (or with the support of) Israel’s notorious ‘thou shalt wage war by deception‘ intelligence agency, the Mossad.
The raid serves as a perfect pretext for Israel to realise its desire to reoccupy the Sinai. As Israeli propagandists crawl out of the woodwork and baselessly blame unknown ‘global’ terror groups in addition to Iran, we would be terminally foolish not to treat this event with the utmost suspicion.
Notes
(1) ‘Barak hopes Sinai attack will be a ‘wake-up call’ for Egypt’ – Jerusalem Post, 6 August 2012
(2) ‘Barak calls Sinai attack, border inflitration a ‘wake-up call’ for Egypt’ – Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 6 August 2012
(3) ‘MK: Prepare for War If Egypt Deploys in Sinai’ – Arutz Sheva, 27 November 2011
GAZA CITY – The attack on a Sinai police station that killed 16 Egyptian officers on Sunday was an attempt to strain relations between Egypt and Gaza, political analysts said Monday.
“What happened in Egypt was a crime and organized terror meant to drive a wedge in Palestinian-Egyptian relations. It is possible that external hands are interfering with Egypt after Muhammad Mursi became president,” Gaza-based analyst Mustafa al-Sawwaf told Ma’an.
Palestinians have no interest in attacking Egyptian forces, but Israel has been unsettled by the improvement in relations between Gaza rulers Hamas and Egypt’s recently elected Muslim Brotherhood president, al-Sawwaf said.
Egypt’s former President Hosni Mubarak, who was overthrown by a citizen revolt in Jan. 2011, had played a key role in maintaining Israel’s siege on the Gaza Strip, but Mursi has pledged measures to ease the blockade and held several high-level meetings with Hamas.
Al-Sawwaf said some parties within Egypt and at an international level were uncomfortable with Hamas’ friendly relations with Mursi. Hamas has condemned the Sinai attack and vowed not to let anyone threaten Egypt’s security.
Faysal Abu Shalha, a Fatah MP in Gaza, said he hoped Mursi would still implement his pledges to aid Palestinians in the besieged enclave.
But Akram Atallah, a political analyst based in Bethlehem, said he feared residents of Gaza could pay a heavy price for the deaths of the Egyptian officers, particularly if militants in Gaza were involved in the attack.
Mursi had promised to extend the opening hours of the Rafah crossing but Egyptian security officials said the Egypt-Gaza border was indefinitely closed in the wake of the attack.
Attallah told Ma’an he suspected Israel was involved in the attack. He said Israel knew about the raid and noted that it had advised its citizens to leave Sinai days earlier.
He added that Israeli forces assassinated a man in Gaza earlier on Sunday claiming that he was involved in a plot “to execute a terror attack against Israeli civilians via the Israel-Egypt border.”
Hamza Abu Shanab, a Gaza-based analyst, said the Sinai attack was an opportunity for Mursi to cancel Egypt’s 1979 peace agreement with Israel.
The Camp David agreement limits the number of soldiers Egypt can deploy to Sinai, Abu Shanab noted, and so Mursi must ask Israel’s permission to enlarge its force in the peninsula.
An Israeli refusal would be embarrassing as Tel Aviv has called on Cairo to tighten its grip on Sinai, Abu Shanab added.
In a piece titled “A Toxic Brew in Sinai,” JINSA fellow Evelyn Gordon notes “how badly the security situation in Sinai has deteriorated” in a post-Arab Spring Egypt, and concludes:
With Syria in flames and the Iranian nuclear crisis rapidly approaching climax, the last thing the world needs is an Israeli-Egyptian war. But absent intensive international engagement, the Sinai tinderbox is liable to spark one.
An Israeli-Egyptian war may be the last thing the world — especially, an already troubled Egypt — needs, but it may be exactly what some Greater Israel advocates have long wanted. As Israeli strategist Oded Yinon argued back in 1982:
(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. [...] and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979.
Yinon did not consider that this would prove too difficult to achieve:
Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day.
Presumably today’s Israeli war-planners would be equally as confident of success.
… It has been just about fifty years since undeclared war was waged in Laos, the tiny country sandwiched between Vietnam and Thailand. Although the roots of this war were entangled in the complex and reckless politics of US foreign policy at that time, the results are clearer: after nine years of war, seven billion dollars, three and a half million tons of bombs, a half-million dead, and 750,000 homeless, the US had failed to achieve any of the objectives it had aimed for. … Read full review
This article will examine some of the connections between the US and UK National Security apparatus and the appearance of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory beginning after the accident at Three Mile Island. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney. Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.