Monday, July 22, 2013


The Muslim Brotherhood has been working to implement the Israeli plan to break up Egypt.

Nabil Naim is a former leader of the Islamic Jihadist movement in Egypt.

He was once close companion of the current al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

In a TV interview, Nabil Naim says that the Muslim Brotherhood announced the formation of a 'Free Egyptian Army' in Egypt, similar to the Free Syrian Army.

He states that the goal is to break up Egypt and weaken it as part of an Israeli plan.

He also says that the current head of the Free Syrian Army Salim Idriss was in Israel a few days ago.

Source: al-Balad (Egypt)


Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

New Leader for Al Jazeera America

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Aang, thank you for your incredible splendid work !

Al-Qaeda Vows to Rescue Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt
Kurt Nimmo
July 4, 2013
Now that the Muslim Brotherhood – the CIA’s “color revolution” proxy in Egypt – has been deposed, another CIA asset, al-Qaeda, has vowed to come to the rescue.

Anonymous said...

I know the muslims are stupider then camel poop, but WHY would they work WITH Israel?

Anonymous said...

Countercoup by Egyptian Military Blocks Bid by Morsi, Moslem Brotherhood to Usurp War Powers Vs Syria, Ethiopia

Anon said...

WHY would they work WITH Israel?

The Muslim Brotherhood, al Qaeda and the Salafi-Wahabbis are all inventions of the Western intelligence services.

Lots of Moslems and Christians work for Israel, either because they share the same fascist philosophy, or because they are bribed...

Unknown said...

“There are three possible outcomes. An Assad victory. A Sunni victory. Or an outcome in which the various nationalities agree to co-exist together but in more or less autonomous regions, so that they can’t oppress each other. That’s the outcome I would prefer to see. But that’s not the popular view.”

Common arguments for partitions include:

historicist — that partition is inevitable, or already in progress [HITLER]
last resort — that partition should be pursued to avoid the worst outcomes (genocide or large-scale ethnic expulsion), if all other means fail [HITLER]
cost-benefit — that partition offers a better prospect of conflict reduction than the if existing borders are not changed [HITLER]
better tomorrow — that partition will reduce current violence and conflict, and that the new more homogenized states will be more stable [HITLER]
rigorous end — heterogeneity leads to problems, hence homogeneous states should be the goal of any policy [HITLER]

Common arguments against include:

It disrupts functioning and traditional state entities [LINCOLN]
It creates enormous human suffering [LINCOLN]
It creates new grievances that could eventually lead to more deadly violence, such as the Korean and Vietnamese wars. [KENNEDY]
It prioritizes race and ethnicity to a level acceptable only to an apartheid regime [KENNEDY, LINCOLN, MANDELA]
The international system is very reluctant to accept the idea of partition in deeply divided societies [KENNEDY]

Unknown said...

Site Meter