Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for December 02/12
Unusual activity at Syrian chemical weapons sites amid rumors Assad is dead or fled
'West worried by Syrian chemical site activity'
Kuwait elects new parliament, stocks rally
Thousands take part in Hasan commemoration
Abducted Pierre al-Feghali found dead in Lebanon’s Falougha
Future bloc MP Khaled Daher: Only four Lebanese killed in Syria ambush
Lebanon following up case of fighters killed in Syria: Charbel
Lebanese Army Seeking to Reveal Fate of Lebanese Men Reportedly Killed in Tall Kalakh
Lebanese Army Sergeant Killed while Chasing Criminal
Saniora to Suleiman: No Dialogue with Cabinet that Provides Cover to Murder Suspects
Al-Rahi Says New Cabinet Should Oversee Polls Through New Law
Coordinator of March 14’s General Secretariat, Fares Soueid: March 14 only “humanely” supporting Syria rebels
The leader of the Lebanese Forces, Dr.Geagea: Lebanon confrontation is “national”
Future MP, Ghazi Youssef: March 14 erred in accusing Miqati over Hassan killing
Lebanese MP, Ghazi Zeaiter calls for referendum to decide on electoral law
sheikh Ahmad al-Assir says Hezbollah behind Hariri killing
Al-Asir Lashes out at Hizbullah over 'Hegemony' of Arms
Arslan Calls for Constitutional Amendment, Says Proportionality Guarantees Political Stability
Mansour Advocates Dialogue as Only Solution to Syrian Crisis
Egypt's Top Court Suspends Work Indefinitely after Islamist Pressure
Egypt's Copts will vote "yes" on constitution - Salafi spokesman
5 German Tourists, 2 Egyptians Killed in Bus Crash
Benjamin Netanyahu thanks Stephen Harper for UN vote on Palestinians
Ashton Urges Israel to Annul Massive Settlement Plan
Swiss Report: 60 Samples Taken in Arafat Poison Probe
Sheikh Khalifa Says UAE's Security is 'Sacred'
Passion or politicking?
Netanyahu brushes off condemnation of settlement plans
Olmert: Settlement move is a slap in Obama's face
Syrian army pounds rebel strongholds around capital
Kuwait elects new parliament, stocks rally

Unusual activity at Syrian chemical weapons sites amid rumors Assad is dead or fled
DEBKAfile Special Report December 2, 2012/Western intelligence officers were seeing new signs of activity at Syrian chemical weapons sites, they told the New York Times Sunday, Dec. 2. “It’s in some ways similar to what they’ve done before,” a senior U.S. intelligence official said. “But they’re doing some things that suggest they intend to use the weapons. It’s not just moving stuff around. These are different kind of activities.”debkafile’s Middle East sources add rumors were flying around the region Saturday night and Sunday morning that President Bashar Assad had been killed or fled Syria. Neither is confirmed. However, the rebels have in recent days made major strategic gains and begun to turn the tide of war against's Assad forces. The new rumors tie in with the suggestive movements of chemical weapons detected by Western intelligence without any indication of their likely target.Since the Syrian uprising erupted against his regime last year, Assad has often declared he would fight his enemies to the end and threatened that if his back was against the wall and life and regime were in jeopardy, he would rather set the entire Middle East on fire than surrender.

Thousands take part in Hasan commemoration
December 02, 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Thousands of Lebanese took part Sunday in a commemoration for an intelligence chief killed in a car bomb in October, amid tension over the fate of Lebanese fighters said to have been killed in Syria. In Lebanon’s Tripoli residents, members of Hasan’s family, local politicians and dignitaries of the March 14 coalition gathered to pay tribute for Brig. Gen. Wissam al-Hasan, 40 days after the explosion that killed him in Beirut’s Ashrafieh district. Addressing the gathering, Future MP Nohad Mashnouq slammed Prime Minister Najib Mikati, accusing him of failing to address security incidents in Lebanon. “Haven’t you grown tired of half stances and half words?” said Mashnouq, in reference to Mikati. Mashnouq also hailed the stances of President Sleiman, but said dialogue hasn’t spared the country political assassinations. “I have sincere appreciation for your patriotism, but what has dialogue achieved for the martyrs?” said Mashnouq, addressing the president.
“We will not return to dialogue except after the resignation of the government,” he added. Mashnouq also vowed to avenge the death of Hasan. “We will avenge you, Wissam, in Lebanon and in Syria,” the lawmaker said. He said his group’s support for the Syrian revolution is not an accusation, but something to be proud of.
“Our support for the Syrian revolution is an accusation that we don't deny, it is rather an honor we claim ... The freedom of the Syrian people is a national Lebanese interest,” Mashnouq said.
Speaking on behalf of Hasan’s family, Seeraj al-Hasan, a cousin of the slain general, thanked President Sleiman and former Prime Minister Saad Hariri for their support for the family and the positions they have taken in support of Hasan. Strict security measures were in force in the city, as Army units deployed in different neighborhoods, particularly in the Bab al-Tebbaneh and Jabal Mohsen neighborhoods, where repeated violence has erupted this year. Meanwhile, conflicting reports emerged about the fate and the number of young fighters from North Lebanon said to have been killed in an ambush by the Syrian army in the town of Tal Kalakh over the weekend. Media reports said some might have been kidnapped while others might have escaped.
Two days after the incident the city’s residents and even officials preferred to keep silent on the topic until the picture is clearer. Private meetings were held among some of the city’s political and religious dignitaries to address what happened. Future MP Mohammad Kabbara told The Daily Star Sunday that the fighters went to Syria of their own accord, motivated to protest against the crimes of the Assad regime. “The fighters were driven by anger and felt they needed to do something to support the Syrian people.... They went to Syria without even telling their families,” said Kabbara.
Kabbara, who said his group is against military involvement in the Syrian crisis, blamed Hezbollah for provoking incitement among the Lebanese people and said the young fighters were provoked by Hezbollah’s chief Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah’s defense of the Assad regime.
The Future lawmaker, who enjoys a wide popularity among Tripoli inhabitants, said the Tal Kalakh incident will not hold back residents from taking part in Hasan’s commemoration, but will rather them further motivation to participate. “The killer of Hasan and the young fighters is one. It is the Syrian regime,” said Kabbara.Following the Ashrafieh blast, the March 14 coalition, including the Future Movement, accused Assad of being behind Hasan’s killing and blamed the Cabinet of Prime Minister Najib Mikati for providing cover for the crime.
“The rally is to commemorate Hasan firstly and talk about how exceptional the man was,” said Kabbara. He added that the gathering will reiterate the March 14 coalition’s call on Mikati to step down and will stress the need to end political assassinations in Lebanon.

Abducted Pierre al-Feghali found dead in Lebanon’s Falougha
December 2, 2012 /A businessman who had been kidnapped in Lebanon’s Jounieh was found dead on Saturday night in the Mount Lebanon town of Falougha. Initial investigations into the incident revealed that Pierre al-Feghali’s kidnappers had killed him and dumped his body in his car in the resort town, the National News Agency reported. It added that investigations uncovered that the perpetrators also robbed $100,000 from the victim.Feghali had owned a cell-phone shop in the East Beirut suburb of Furn al-Shubbek. -NOW Lebanon

Daher: Only four Lebanese killed in Syria ambush
December 1, 2012 /Future bloc MP Khaled Daher said on Saturday that only four of the Lebanese citizens reportedly killed in an ambush in Syria were actually dead. “Only four of the fighters were killed in the ambush in Syria, two of the fighters are detained and the rest are either missing or fled,” Daher told LBC television. Daher also called on the Lebanese and Arab youths not to go to Syria to fight along with the rebels. “The Syrian people do not need fighters. I call on the Lebanese and Arab youths not to go to Syria to fight because this would be pointless,” Daher said during a separate interview with MTV television. A Lebanese security source and an Islamist leader told AFP on Friday that 22 young men, including a Palestinian man from Tripoli, were killed in the Syrian border town of Tal Kalakh.
-NOW Lebanon

Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir says Hezbollah behind Hariri killing
December 2, 2012 /In a speech delivered before supporters, Salafi sheikh Ahmad al-Assir accused the Shiite group of being behind the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, according to LBC television website. “[Hezbollah Secretary General] Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah disrespected the Lebanese people by saying that May 7 was a glorious day,” Assir said.
On May 7, 2008 gunmen led by Hezbollah took over West Beirut following a government decision to shut down the party’s telecommunications network and replace the security chief at Rafiq Hariri International Airport because of his alleged ties to Hezbollah. Four Hezbollah members were indicted by the UN-backed Special Tribunal for Lebanon for involvement in the murder of Hariri who was killed in a massive car bomb near central Beirut in 2005. The Sheikh also criticized the Lebanese Armed Forces for conducting “sectarian motivated investigations.”
Sectarian tension rose last month when three people were killed in Sidon in a gun battle between supporters of Hezbollah and the hardline Sunni cleric.
According the National News Agency, the march organized by Assir prompted the Lebanese army and Internal Security Forces to set up security checkpoints and patrols in several of the city’s neighborhoods. Regarding the developments in neighboring Syria, Assir said: “it is not in our interest to be involved in the field of battle in Syria. There is, however a difference between those who support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and those who are on the same side as [innocent victims of the regime].”
The Lebanese political scene is split between pro-Syrian regime parties affiliated with the March 8 alliance and Western-backed forces associated with the March 14 coalition.
Fear of the involvement of some Lebanese factions in the fighting gripping Syria rose after 22 young men, including a Palestinian man from Tripoli, were reported on Friday to have been killed in the Syrian border town of Tal Kalakh.-NOW Lebanon

Coordinator of March 14’s General Secretariat, Fares Soueid: March 14 only “humanely” supporting Syria rebels
December 2, 2012 /The coordinator of March 14’s General Secretariat said that the pro-Western alliance supports the Syrian people in “humane and political ways only.”
“March 14 stands in solidarity with the Syrian people in their uprising against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in only political and humane ways,” Fares Soueid said in remarks published Sunday in Kuwaiti newspaper As-Seyassah. His comments come amid reports that Future bloc MP MP Okab Sakr has been funneling arms to Syrian rebels and March 8 accusations that March 14 forces have military supported the rebels in conflict-stricken Syria.The former MP also said that “whoever threatens to use their arms against Israel and instead sends militants to fight alongside the Syrian regime cannot promise to avoid pointing these arms domestically,” in an implicit to reference to Hezbollah.Lebanon’s political scene is deeply divided between supporters of the Bashar al-Assad regime, spearheaded by the March 8 group, and its pro-western opponents represent by the March 14 coalition.Soueid also expressed March 14’s solidarity with MP Boutros Harb’s initiative to gather opposition politicians active in parliamentary committees to discuss the current situation of the legislature they are boycotting. March 14 announced in late October that it would cut all ties with the government – mainly comprised of March 8 politicians – including parliamentary meetings. -NOW Lebanon

The leader of the Lebanese Forces, Dr.Geagea: Lebanon confrontation is “national”
December 2, 2012 /The leader of the Lebanese Forces said that the “confrontation” in Lebanon is of a national quality, and not merely between political parties.  “The confrontation in Lebanon is not a traditional one between political parties; it is rather a national confrontation between two different views of the country,” Samir Geagea said on Saturday night during an LF event. Geagea called on the Lebanese people to “contribute to the cause of freedom and maintain our country to reach the Lebanon we want,” according to a statement issued by his party. The LF leader reiterated that “no one is allowed to touch our country’s national sovereignty and if we want to be free and to have actual stability, we must make a decision to have a state in Lebanon.”The Lebanese political scene is split between pro-Syrian regime parties affiliated with the March 8 alliance and Western-backed forces associated with the March 14 coalition. -NOW Lebanon

Future MP, Ghazi Youssef: March 14 erred in accusing Miqati over Hassan killing
December 2, 2012 /Future bloc MP Ghazi Youssef said that the March 14 coalition mistakenly accused Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Miqati of being responsible for the October 19 slaying of the Internal Security Forces intelligence chief. “March 14 accused Miqati of General Wissam al-Hassan’s assassination when it is actually the entire cabinet’s responsibility,” Youssef told Voice of Lebanon (93.3) radio station on Sunday. The Future MP clarified that “March 14 is not boycotting the parliament, nor its speaker Nabih Berri; it is rather boycotting the parliamentary committees who are convening in the presence of a minister representing the cabinet, which March 14 is boycotting.” Parliamentary activity in Lebanon has been disrupted since the opposition March 14 coalition announced that it would cut all ties with the current government, including meetings held by parliamentary committees to discuss proposals transferred by the cabinet. The boycott decision followed the assassination of Hassan on October 19 in Beirut’s Ashrafieh. Youssef also commented on the killing of Lebanese men in the Syrian town of Tal Kalakh. “The incident’s goal is to prove that March 8 is not the only party fighting in Syria, but its circumstances are still undefined.”Twenty-two young men, including a Palestinian, from the Lebanese city of Tripoli were killed in the Syrian border town of Tal Kalakh. The men were allegedly on their way to join rebel forces fighting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. -NOW Lebanon

Lebanese MP, Ghazi Zeaiter calls for referendum to decide on electoral law
December 2, 2012 /Development and Liberation bloc MP called for a referendum to determine Lebanon’s electoral law reflecting the will of the Lebanese people, the National News Agency reported.
“We should go back to the Lebanese people and have a referendum to choose which electoral law they want,” Ghazi Zeaiter said during a press conference on Sunday.
Lebanon is set to elect new parliamentary representatives in 2013, but the country's political circles are divided over the adoption of a new electoral law to govern the elections.
The MP added that “the opposition’s boycotting of the government and the parliament is a democratic right reserved by law and the constitution, but by boycotting parliamentary affairs, the MP is boycotting what the people have elected him to do.”Parliamentary activity in Lebanon has been disrupted since the opposition March 14 coalition announced that it would cut all ties with the current government, including meetings held by parliamentary committees to discuss proposals transferred by the cabinet. -NOW Lebanon

Lebanon following up case of fighters killed in Syria: Charbel
December 01, 2012/By Dana Khraiche/The Daily Star/BEIRUT: The government is following up on the case of the Lebanese fighters who were killed in Syria, Interior Minister Marwan Charbel said Saturday, as Muslim scholars urged north Lebanon residents not to join the fighting in its neighbor. "We are trying to get information and what is available to us now is that there were some Lebanese who were killed, some kidnapped and others who escaped," Charbel told The Daily Star, quoting an official security report he received. "But we cannot determine the exact number that were killed," he added.
A Lebanese security source told The Daily Star Friday at least 20 Lebanese fighters from the northern city of Tripoli were killed in an ambush by the Syrian army in the town of Tal Kalakh.
However, there have been conflicting reports about the exact number of Lebanese who were killed in Tal Kalakh, which lies some 5 kilometers from the border with Lebanon.
Some residents in Tripoli, where most of the fighters hail from, said Saturday they had managed to get in contact with their loved ones and that the total number of fatalities may have declined.
The interior minister could only confirm that three people were killed in the ambush and said two were kidnapped while four were missing.
"The picture is still unclear,” he said. “We need at least 24 hours to understand what happened," he added. The Lebanese official also appealed to Lebanese “not to implicate the country in the Syrian crisis."
In the wake of the uprising in Syria, Lebanese leaders agreed during a National Dialogue session in mid-2012 to keep Lebanon neutral from developments surrounding it, particularly in its Arab neighbor. The Lebanese government has also adopted a policy of disassociation toward events in Syria, where battles rage between forces loyal to President Bashar Assad and the Syrian rebels.
Tensions ran high for a second day in Tripoli following news of the death of the Lebanese fighters and the military maintained its upgraded presence in the port city where clashes have repeatedly flared between supporters and opponents of Assad. Commenting on the news of the Lebanese deaths in Syria, Future Movement and Douniyeh MP Ahmad Fatfat described the men as "martyrs" but blamed the government for not sealing off the poorly demarcated border between the two countries. "There are enthusiastic young men willing to fight for a cause they believe in and of course they are martyrs. This is why we have asked for the borders to be completely closed," Fatfat told The Daily Star. He added that his party, which enjoys large support in Tripoli, was against intervening in Syria militarily.
He also said that the government should do more to protect the border. Meanwhile, the Committee of Muslim Scholars urged young men in north Lebanon not join the fighting in Syria. “We ask young men in the north not to listen to the voices that ask them to join the fighting in Syria because it is not right in terms of the principles of Sharia,” the committee said in a statement. “The responsibility for the death of the young men who were killed in Tal Kalakh falls with the person who sent them to the wrong place because our enemy and the enemy of Lebanon and peace is Israel,” it added.

Future bloc MP Khaled Daher: Only four Lebanese killed in Syria ambush
December 1, 2012 /Future bloc MP Khaled Daher said on Saturday that only four of the Lebanese citizens reportedly killed in an ambush in Syria were actually dead. “Only four of the fighters were killed in the ambush in Syria, two of the fighters are detained and the rest are either missing or fled,” Daher told LBC television. Daher also called on the Lebanese and Arab youths not to go to Syria to fight along with the rebels. “The Syrian people do not need fighters. I call on the Lebanese and Arab youths not to go to Syria to fight because this would be pointless,” Daher said during a separate interview with MTV television. A Lebanese security source and an Islamist leader told AFP on Friday that 22 young men, including a Palestinian man from Tripoli, were killed in the Syrian border town of Tal Kalakh.
-NOW Lebanon

Lebanese Army Sergeant Killed while Chasing Criminal
Naharnet /The Lebanese Army command said Sunday that a soldier was killed after a suspect opened fire on him during a chase in the town of Jounieh, north of Beirut. A terse communique said that an intelligence patrol was chasing Hassan Ahmed Gharib for committing different crimes when he opened fire towards the vehicle and killed Sergeant Samson Antranikian. Members of the patrol returned fire and injured Gharib, who was seized and taken to a nearby hospital, it said. The incident took place at dawn Sunday.

Lebanese Army Seeking to Reveal Fate of Lebanese Men Reportedly Killed in Tall Kalakh
Naharnet /The Lebanese Army is holding contacts with Syrian authorities to reveal the fate of around 25 men from northern Lebanon after reports emerged that they were killed as they tried to enter the Syrian town of Tall Kalakh, near the Lebanese border, An Nahar daily reported Sunday. Several youth from al-Mankoubeen area in the northern city of Tripoli have erected tents near al-Nour mosque in protest and warned they would take escalatory measures if the Lebanese authorities brought no new information about their fate. The protesters hinted they would block the international highway in al-Baddawi area on Monday. Students from the Lebanese University's Faculty of Sciences also called for a strike after news broke out that one of the students was among the 25 men who allegedly died in Tall Kalakh. But An Nahar received information that only four of them were killed and three were captured by Syrian regime forces. As for the rest of them, they sought refuge with the rebel Free Syrian Army, the newspaper said. Al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc MP Khaled al-Daher confirmed on Saturday that four of the Lebanese were killed but said two others were arrested. “The rest either escaped or are missing,” he added. He described the youth, some of them only 18-year-olds, as “enthusiastic,” who wanted to head to Syria to help the rebels in their fight against President Bashar Assad's forces. The Lebanese army has deployed heavily along the aptly named Syria Street dividing the districts of Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen in Tripoli, whose traditional rivalry has sharpened over the uprising in Syria.

Saniora to Suleiman: No Dialogue with Cabinet that Provides Cover to Murder Suspects
Naharnet /Al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc leader Fouad Saniora told President Michel Suleiman that it would be useless to sit at the dialogue table in the presence of a government that gives cover to the suspects in ex-Premier Rafik Hariri's Feb. 2005 assassination, An Nahar daily reported on Sunday. “What's the point of (engaging in) dialogue in the presence of a government that covers up suspects in ex-PM Rafik Hariri's murder and the assassination attempt of MP Butros Harb,” An Nahar quoted Saniora as telling Suleiman during a meeting they held at Baabda Palace on Saturday. Saniora visited Baabda in the aftermath of the March 14 opposition alliance's announcement that it would continue to boycott the national dialogue as long as Prime Minister Najib Miqati's government is in power. Lebanon plunged in a political crisis in October following the assassination of Internal Security Forces Intelligence Bureau chief Wissam al-Hasan. March 14 blamed the government for the killing and pointed its finger at Syria. “The only way out is through the formation of a neutral salvation cabinet that removes tension and overseas the next parliamentary elections,” Saniora reportedly told Suleiman.
“We have repeatedly participated in the (national) dialogue but the other party (March 8 coalition) … rejects commitment,” he said.
Suleiman postponed a new round of all-party talks that were set to be held last Thursday to January 7 after the opposition rejected to take part in the meeting.
An Nahar quoted him as telling Saniora that the Constitution does not give him the authority to change the current government. “It is up to the parliamentary majority” to do so.
Following the meeting, Miqati, who was at the presidential palace, shook hands with Saniora after coming face to face with the head of al-Mustaqbal bloc.

Al-Rahi Says New Cabinet Should Oversee Polls Through New Law
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi called on Sunday for the formation of a new government that resolves the country's economic and social problems and holds parliamentary elections on time.
During his sermon, al-Rahi called for “dialogue and national reconciliation” to end the “divisions” among the country's politicians. He said the politicians should first start with drafting a new electoral law that best represents the Lebanese and allows the citizen to participate in the polls without the influence of vote-buying. Such a law should respect coexistence and the division of shares between Muslims and Christians, al-Rahi said. Dialogue on an electoral law should also be “accompanied by the formation of a new government that assumes its responsibilities … resolves the economic and social crisis and drives the country towards holding parliamentary elections at their constitutional time,” he added. Al-Rahi also said it was time for the Palestinian people to have a free and independent state.
The patriarch celebrated mass for the first time since his return from Rome where he was officially appointed as Cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI.

Al-Asir Lashes out at Hizbullah over 'Hegemony' of Arms
Naharnet /Salafist cleric Sheikh Ahmed al-Asir slammed on Sunday what he called Hizbullah's “hegemony” in Lebanon through the force of weapons. “Some people are intentionally trying to create hegemony in Lebanon through their arms,” al-Asir told his supporters during a rally held in the southern city of Sidon. “No matter how hard Nasrallah's party tries, we will not change our convictions,” said the cleric whose supporters clashed with Hizbullah gunmen last month, leaving three people dead. The gunfight erupted following a dispute on Hizbullah posters in the city. Al-Asir accused Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah of killing ex-Premier Rafik Hariri. He also said the Army Intelligence was carrying out sectarian investigations. “We want to live in peace- Sunnis and Shiites, Muslims and Christians,” al-Asir said. The cleric made his speech after his supporters marched in Sidon's streets, raising black flags and chanting anti-Nasrallah slogans. The protesters vowed to avenge the death of the three people, including two of Asir’s bodyguards. The march took place amid heavy security measures taken by the Army and security forces. It came after several meetings that Interior Minister Marwan Charbel held with top security officials in the city to prevent any unrest. Charbel earlier told Voice of Lebanon radio (93,3) that the security forces will do their best to preserve security in Sidon and keep things under control.

Egypt's Top Court Suspends Work Indefinitely after Islamist Pressure
Naharnet/Egypt's top court said Sunday it has begun an open-ended strike in what it called a "black day" for the judiciary after Islamist protesters blocked the courthouse ahead of a key ruling. The Supreme Constitutional Court said it would "suspend work for an indefinite period... and until there is no more psychological and material pressure," in a statement carried by the official MENA news agency.
The move will be seen as an escalation in the standoff between the judiciary and President Mohamed Morsi who last week issued a decree expanding his powers and rendering his decisions immune from judicial oversight. The court, which looks into the constitutionality of laws and is made up of 19 judges, was due on Sunday to examine the legality of an Islamist-dominated panel that drafted the new constitution. Hundreds of Morsi supporters had spent the night outside the courthouse, forcing judges to delay the potential scrapping of the panel. In its statement, the court expressed its "utmost sorrow and pain" over the "moral assassination of its judges.”The new charter has become the focal point of Egypt's biggest political crisis since Morsi was elected in June, squaring Islamist forces against secular-leaning opponents. Agence France Presse

Benjamin Netanyahu thanks Stephen Harper for UN vote on Palestinians
The Canadian Press /OTTAWA—Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has thanked Prime Minister Stephen Harper for Canada’s vote at the United Nations this week against recognizing a Palestinian state. Harper tweeted on Saturday that he spoke to Netanyahu and that he “thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN.” Foreign Affairs John Baird blasted the UN for what he called a “regrettable decision” to allow the vote, and told the General Assembly it would undermine attempts to reach a comprehensive, lasting and just settlement for both sides.The next day, Baird announced that Canada was temporarily recalling senior diplomats from Israel, the West Bank and the UN missions in New York and Geneva. Canada’s $300-million in aid spending for the Palestinians is also under review.

Stephen Harper is not doing Israel any favours: Siddiqui
Saturday December 01, 2012
By Haroon Siddiqui
If the UN decision to recognize Palestine was as meaningless as it’s made out to be, why did its opponents fight so ferociously against it?
Of course, the vote was significant. Its critics knew that as well — hence the panic, before and after it.
The vote was overwhelming, more than two-thirds in favour — 138 for, 9 against and 41 abstentions. Much to Canada’s shame, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird was among the loudest pipsqueak noises against the tide of history.
Even the United States, chief patron of Israel, was subdued, dishing out brief boilerplate statements. But the voluminous Baird was keen to showcase Canada in the august company of the Czech Republic, Panama, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau.
Now he’s threatening to retaliate against the Palestinian Authority. Earlier this year, he retaliated against Iran by ending all ties. Before that, the Harper government offended so many Arab and African states that they killed Canada’s 2010 bid for a Security Council seat.
The resounding UN call in support of a viable, independent Palestinian state came days after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was forced to retreat from his war on Gaza and agree to a detailed deal with the terrorist Hamas.
At the UN, he lost to Hamas’s rival, the Palestinian Authority, whose non-violent leader Mahmoud Abbas is ostensibly the favoured Israeli interlocutor. The Gaza operation only helped garner more support at the UN, including that of Hamas.
Earlier, Netanyahu had lost the gamble of forcing President Barack Obama into a war on Iranian nuclear facilities. And in siding with Mitt Romney, he failed to sway Jewish American voters, 70 per cent of whom voted for the president.
Netanyahu has not served Israel well. But that’s for Israelis to judge in their election next month. However, in supporting his recklessness, Harper has not done Israel any favours, either.
The prime minister portrays himself as a staunch ally of Israel, and tends to brand those who don’t agree with him as anti-Semitic and bully them — as discovered by the Christian ecumenical group Kairos, the Canadian Arab Federation and Palestine House, whose funding was cut, and Montreal-based Rights and Democracy, which was destroyed.
In fact, what Harper has done is to take sides with the right wing in an ideological and political struggle within Israel and the Jewish diaspora. He could have sided with those who do not agree with Israeli expansionism and permanent war on the Palestinians.
At the UN, the Palestinians were not taking a “short cut” to statehood, as he charged. The vote does not replace the peace process, only augments it. But that process has already been undermined by Netanyahu, who refuses to end illegal Jewish settlements.
As Ehud Olmert, former Israeli prime minister, said, the Palestinian path to the UN is “congruent” with the two-state solution.
There’s also nothing “unilateral” in turning to the world’s biggest multilateral institution, which, pre-Harper, Canada used to support enthusiastically. The Palestinians have gone to the same body that helped create Israel in the 1940s.
They are not breaching the 1993 Oslo Peace Accord, either. That was derailed long ago, by Netanyahu during his first stint as prime minister. He may now use the UN vote to gut it completely and move the goalposts with new conditions for peace. On Friday, he approved additional Jewish housing in East Jerusalem, which Hagit Ofran, of the Israeli Settlement Watch project for Peace Now, called a potential “deal breaker for the two-state solution.”
UN “non-member state” status would let the Palestinians participate in General Assembly debates. It may allow them to join the World Trade Organization, the World Health Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the World Bank and the International Criminal Court.
The fuss over the UN vote comes from those who want to keep the Palestinians at the mercy of Israel — and whack them at the slightest show of defiance.
This is what the U.S. did last year after UNESCO voted overwhelmingly to grant them membership. It yanked its $80-million annual contribution. That did not stop the organization from defining West Bank holy sites sacred to both Jews and Muslims as “Palestinian.”
Now, Congress might cut its $500-million-a-year funding to the Palestinian Authority — even though that would only reduce the ability of the PA to maintain security for Israel.
Netanyahu may go further. He may withhold the tax revenues Israel collects on behalf of the PA. His foreign minister may want to “topple” Abbas, as per a leaked memo.
It is such self-defeating tactics, and the 45-year occupation of Palestinian lands and the perpetually expanding Israeli borders, that have left Israel so sadly isolated.
By backing those policies, Harper has isolated Canada as well and undermined Canada’s once-honoured place in the world.
*Haroon Siddiqui is the Star’s editorial page editor emeritus. His column appears on Thursday and Sunday. hsiddiqui@thestar.ca

Question: "How should a Christian view materialism?"
GotQuestions.org/Answer: Materialism is defined as “the preoccupation with material things rather than intellectual or spiritual things.” If a Christian is preoccupied with material things, it is definitely wrong. That is not to say we cannot have material things, but the obsession with acquiring and caring for “stuff” is a dangerous thing for the Christian, for two reasons.
First, any preoccupation, obsession or fascination with anything other than God is sinful and is displeasing to God. We are to “love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5), which is, according to Jesus, the first and greatest commandment (Matthew 22:37-38). Therefore, God is the only thing we can (and should) occupy ourselves with habitually. He alone is worthy of our complete attention, love and service. To offer these things to anything, or anyone, else is idolatry.
Second, when we concern ourselves with the material world, we are easily drawn in by the “deceitfulness of wealth” (Mark 4:19), thinking that we will be happy or fulfilled or content if only we had more of whatever it is we are chasing. This is a lie from the father of lies, Satan. He wants us to be chasing after something he knows will never satisfy us so we will be kept from pursuing that which is the only thing that can satisfy—God Himself. Luke 16:13 tells us we “cannot serve both God and money.” We must seek to be content with what we have, and materialism is the exact opposite of that contentment. It causes us to strive for more and more and more, all the while telling us that this will be the answer to all our needs and dreams. The Bible tells us that a person’s “life is not in the abundance of the things which he possesses” (Luke 12:15) and that we are to “seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness” (Matthew 6:33).
If materialism was ever to satisfy anyone, it would have been Solomon, the richest king the world has ever known. He had absolutely everything and had more of it than anyone, and yet he found it was all worthless and futile. It did not produce happiness or the satisfaction our souls long for. He declared, “Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income” (Ecclesiastes 5:10). In the end, Solomon came to the conclusion that we are to “fear God, and keep His commandments. For this is the whole duty of man” (Ecclesiastes 12:13).

Passion or politicking?
Justin Salhani, December 2, 2012 /Now Lebanon
A mural of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in Lebanon’s Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp. March 14 sent a delegation to Gaza this week, though many viewed it as just politicking. (AFP photo)
Last week’s visit to Gaza by a March 14 delegation ended with a warm welcome into the home of senior Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh. According to Fares Soued, coordinator of the March 14 General Secretariat, the purpose of the visit—which included Jamal al-Jarrah of the Future Movement, Amine Wehbe of the Democratic Left and Antoine Zahra of the Lebanese Forces—was to show solidarity with the people of Gaza in the wake of Israel’s weeklong assault on the territory earlier this month.
“Defending major causes is not the monopoly of any Lebanese or Islamic party,” said Soueid.
“The Lebanese delegation’s visit was positive,” said Mounir Maqdah, the former head of Fatah in Lebanon. “We hope the Lebanese unite to confront occupation and greed.”
While the trip was hailed a success by March 14 and many leading Palestinian figures, it left some wondering if it indeed indicated a shift in policy toward Palestinians in Lebanon.
“The trip was clearly related to Lebanese politics first and foremost,” said Yezid Sayigh, a senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
Sayigh said he felt the visit was a bit contradictory considering the current plight of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, Lebanon has over 430,000 registered Palestinian refugees, though because many have returned to Gaza or the West Bank over the years the figure is thought to be closer to 200,000. Many of these refugees live in poorly constructed homes erected illegally in over-crowded camps and are not given certain basic civil rights.
“Have you ever been to a camp in Lebanon? It’s a disaster and it’s not logical to have people live this way,” Jarrah told NOW.
“It is imperative to improve [the Palestinians’] livelihoods by granting them the right to ownership and to work,” Wehbe said.
Sayigh said that while he felt it was normal for members of the Future Movement to visit Gaza, it was “unusual” for the Lebanese Forces, as Christian parties have come out against the Palestinian cause over the decades. Zahra’s inclusion on the trip was additionally surprising for many considering his alleged history of involvement with the notorious Barbara checkpoint, a place where many Palestinians were killed during the Lebanese civil war. NOW contacted Antoine Zahra but was told he only does interviews with TV and radio media.
One major concern traditionally voiced by Christian parties about granting Palestinians broader civil rights is that they may eventually obtain citizenship, therefore tipping the sectarian balance in the Muslims’ favor.  “I believe when discussing these issues, particularly with the Christian parties, we must convince that improving the livelihoods of Palestinians does not mean granting them citizenship,” Wehbe said.
Jarrah said, “The Lebanese Forces and the Kataeb was not against this issue. I talked to Samir Geagea personally on this topic and he was convinced these people should have their human rights.”
For his part, Carnegie’s Sayigh maintains that Lebanese political parties are engaged in “political posturing and propaganda” regarding Palestinian refugees. He emphasized that proper dialogue in Lebanon over civil rights for Palestinians is needed.
Wehbe said that to have this dialogue and eventually grant “some rights” to the Palestinians was “reasonable enough.” He added, “All that the Palestinians suffer from is due to the fear of Lebanese people.”
Additional reporting by Ranya Radwan and Amani Hamad


The negotiations will come at our expense
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
The US Secretary of State recently announced that her country is ready to hold bilateral talks with Iran, with regards to its nuclear program, as long as Tehran “is ready to engage”. This current US willingness contradicts its previous rejection of the same issue on the eve of the presidential elections, so for what reasons does America want to negotiate now?
Hillary Clinton describes Iran as the most difficult issue she has dealt with as US Secretary of State, “because of the dangers that its behavior already poses and the geometrically greater danger that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose”. These words are true, but one of the most prominent reasons for Iran’s danger and difficulty is America’s laxity towards Tehran, especially during the current US President’s term in office. The US does not have to strike Iran militarily, but its laxity towards the mullahs in Tehran certainly cannot be described as pragmatic. Even if President Obama is taking into account the interests of his own country, for example, when handing Iraq over to Iran on a silver platter, this is still a grave political error. Likewise, pragmatism does not mean President Obama continuing with his outstretched hand policy towards Iran for four years, only to impose more sanctions on Tehran now. The problem with the current US administration is that the carpet merchants, i.e. the Iranians, understand full well that Washington is not trying to change what has already changed; rather it is seeking to coexist with the new status quo, even if this status quo is the result of a coup, as can be seen in Egypt now! The problem with the current US administration is that it has ignored the most important piece of political advice, namely the advice of former US President Theodore Roosevelt, who said: “Speak softly and carry a big stick”. This is what the Iranians understand, and of course something that the current US administration has failed to grasp.
Before we answer the question why does America want to negotiate now, we must consider what Reuters reported with regards to Hillary Clinton’s comments about America’s readiness to negotiate directly with Iran. Regarding direct negotiations between Washington and Tehran, the news agency reported that one option could be “for each side to put more on the table - both in terms of demands and possible rewards - than in previous meetings in a bid to break the stalemate”! It is important to note the expression “demands and possible rewards” here because it is very accurate, and the most important demand and reward that Iran is seeking is to have a greater role in the region, at the expense of our security and interests. This is what President Ahmadinejad has expressed clearly in a number of statements, the latest of which came on his recent visit to New York, where he said that there are issues which the Iranians and Americans can cooperate on, referring to the security of the Arabian Gulf! Of course the Iranians have already talked about Afghanistan and Pakistan, and this is no secret, so Tehran is taking an active interest in the whole region in an attempt to strengthen its negotiation chances, while the concerned Arab states are preoccupied with a number of open fronts or with Iranian meddling! Thus, the simple answer to the above question is that Iran and the US will negotiate at our expense, i.e. at the expense of all those in the Middle East and of course the Gulf, and this, unfortunately, is decisively clear. This is the strategic Iranian goal; either to use a nuclear weapon to impose its influence or to use negotiations as a means to extend that influence, while America’s behavior in this regard is lax. The Americans only care about the security of Israel and want to move forward with the least possible losses, but this is a short-sighted viewpoint that the US will pay the price for sooner or later. So are the Arabs, particularly those in the Gulf, paying attention to this?

Egypt's Copts will vote "yes" on constitution - Salafi spokesman
02/12/2012/By Waleed Abdul Rahman.
Cairo, Asharq Al-Awsat – Egyptian cleric and official spokesman for the al-Da’wa al-Salafiya group, Sheikh Abdul Moneim al-Shahat, informed Asharq Al-Awsat that he believes that approximately 80 percent of Egyptian society will ratify the Egyptian draft constitution at the forthcoming 15 December referendum.
The Salafist cleric also said that he expected Egypt’s Christian Coptic community to also vote yes, saying “I believe that a large number of the Christians in Egypt may not adhere to the viewpoint of the Church and will vote yes on the constitution, particularly in light of the presence of Article III that says that their personal status laws and religious affairs will be based on Christian principles. I believe this represents a gain for them, at least morally, that will push them to vote yes.”
Article III of Egypt’s draft constitution states that “the canon principles of Egyptian Christians and Jews are the main source of legislation for their personal status laws, religious affairs and the selection of their spiritual leaders.”
Egypt’s new Coptic Christian Pope, Tawadros II, recently said that he would reject any constitution that imposes a religious state in the Muslim-majority country. He said “a constitution that hints at imposing a religious state in Egypt is absolutely rejected” adding “if the constitution addresses one part of the community and ignores another, it will take society backwards.”
Sheikh al-Shahat also launched a fierce attack against the political elites who have rejected this draft constitution, saying “I do not expect them to withdraw from their rejectionist position.” He called on these political elites to explain the reasons behind their withdrawal from the Constituent Assembly tasked with drafting this new constitution, asserting that “these elites were present within the Constituent Assembly and they participated in the discussions and they called on al-Azhar to intervene to convince us [the Islamists] to withdraw from certain wordings of the text that we believed were more clear and conservative in terms of Islamist Sharia law, and we responded to al-Azhar’s intervention. They also initially responded to and signed off on this, but then they withdrew under mysterious circumstances.” He added that “the ball is now in their court, and they must explain to the public why they withdraw in such a surprising manner.”
Liberal, secular and Christian members of the 100-member Constituent Assembly had been withdrawing to protest against what they called the Islamists’ hijacking of the constitution drafting process. Then acting-pope, Bishop Pachomios, announced the official withdrawal of all Egypt’s Church representatives from the Constituent Assembly on 17 November, saying “the ongoing process within the Constituent Assembly will not guarantee a constitution that will provide national consensus or that reflects the identity of Egypt.” Whilst in June, “Egyptian bloc” parties, including the Free Egyptians, the Egyptian Social Democratic Party, the Tagammu Party and others, initiated a walk-out, followed by the Karama Party and the Democratic Front Party, in protest to “Islamist monopolization” of the Constituent Assembly.
For his part, the al-Da’wa al-Salafiya official spokesman stressed the “balance” of the draft constitution, informing Asharq Al-Awsat that “if we speak about the issue of identity, for example, we will find that the constitutional article dealing with this was drafted via al-Azhar, and the Salafist wording of the article that called for a higher degree of clarity was not included, nor was the secular wording…which was very lenient regarding the identity issue.”
He added “regarding identity and Islamic Sharia law in the constitution, this can all be attributed to one party, and that is the al-Azhar constitution, rather than the constitution of the Salafists or Muslim Brotherhood.”
Sheikh al-Shahat stressed that “we did not withdraw, even though we wanted a more defined constitutional text than the one that was drafted. However we are talking about a text drafted by al-Azhar, which is the primary reference for the Egyptian public, and the Salafists and Muslim Brotherhood will vote yes on this out of respect for the role of al-Azhar and the belief that the constitution must be written as wanted by the majority of the people, even if we have a different view.”
He added “as for law and freedoms and balance between authorities, then there is a real leap forward regarding this issue in comparison to other constitutions drafted in Egypt, and I believe that when the people saw the final voting on the constitution articles on satellite television many people would have been surprised regarding what this constitution contained in this regard.”
Part II of Egypt’s draft constitution pertains to rights and freedoms, and in total is made up of 50 separate articles, starting with Article 31 that states that “dignity is the right of every human being, safeguarded by the State”, whilst Article 34 confirms that “all citizens are equal before the law. They have equal public rights and duties without discrimination.”
This section also includes the article dealing with Freedom of the press [Article 48], which stresses that “freedom of the press, printing, publication and mess media shall be guaranteed. The media shall be free and independent to serve the community and to express the different trends in public opinion, and contribute to shaping and directing in accordance with the basic principles of the State and society.”
The Salafist party spokesman stressed that this draft constitution is balanced, and was drawn up with the cooperation and coordination of elites from all backgrounds of Egyptian society, including well-known Islamists and religious scholars, as well as representatives of various political trends, parties and trade unions.
He said “I am talking about a constitution drawn up by an elite group of people” adding “I do not think that anybody in society can compete with this elite.” He said “when the Egyptian people become aware of the biographies of those who draw up this constitution…they will find it very difficult to vote no.”
Sheikh al-Shahat asserted that he expected many of the people who have announced their objection to the constitution to retreat from this position and vote yes at the forthcoming referendum after actually studying the constitution’s articles. He said “I believe that many who were enthused by the [opposition] elite’s rejectionist calls will vote yes” adding “this elite announced its position rejecting any attempt to increase the Islamic Sharia reference from the 1971 constitution, therefore this is a disaster for them, particularly as they have never hidden the fact, since the beginning of the revolution, that they went to move in the opposite direction and delete Article II of the constitution, or amend it and weaken it.”
Article II of the draft constitution states that “Islam is the religion of the state and Arab its official language. Principles of Islamic Sharia law are the principle source of legislation.” This is in line with the text of Egypt’s 1971 constitution.


Will he truly use chemical weapons?
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Alawsat
Of course it was not maintenance or a technical malfunction when internet and telephone networks were disrupted, airport traffic was halted, and roads were closed. This is all part of the war in Damascus. We have now entered very difficult and dangerous days in the war to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. Yesterday an awareness campaign, directed at the Syrian people, was launched to provide information about what to do in the event of al-Assad’s forces resorting to lethal chemical and biological weapons. Here we are talking about the prospect of terrible massacres as the rebels reach advanced stages in their assault on the capital, as they are now knocking on the doors of Damascus. This is not psychological warfare or scaremongering; we know that this regime is stupid as well as criminal, but we hope it won’t commit its greatest mistake in the end.
Lethal weapons are signs of the regime’s dilapidated forces and its imminent collapse. It is the last resort for a regime that wants revenge and to inflict the greatest possible harm on its opponents. Perhaps, al-Assad thinks this tactic might stop the rebel assault, force the world to intervene and ensure a political deal to rescue him. In this endeavour he will tell the same lies about the massacres his forces have committed over the past months, and hold the opposition responsible.
In the 1980s Saddam Hussein killed thousands of civilians in Halabja, Iraqi-Kurdistan. We saw the gruesome images of the dead… parents with their children lying on the doorsteps of their homes and on the streets, as they tried to flee in panic. We remember the horrific moments when Saddam’s forces, protected with masks, sprayed innocent families with chemicals and killed them like flies.
In Syria, for a year and a half, the regime has not denied that it possesses a huge stockpile of chemical and biological weapons; indeed it admitted as much when threatened with certain international intervention if al-Assad attempted to use them or deliver them to other parties, such as Hezbollah. The Syrian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs subsequently announced that his government pledges not to use chemical and biological weapons, or to transfer them to other parties. This declaration was followed by monitoring convoys, the distribution of masks in a number of Syrian troop centres, and reports of small-scale gas operations.
Because we understand the danger of a horrific chemical and biological massacre that threatens thousands of innocent people, we must urge the international community to intervene rapidly and establish a deterrence system before al-Assad does anything. Otherwise the issue will be just another case of a UN investigation and another ugly chapter of history.
This is an international responsibility that cannot be evaded, especially after the killing and suffering the Syrian people have been exposed to at the hands of their regime, whilst not receiving the minimum degree of attention from the UN. Al-Assad depends on Russian and Chinese protection as well as Arab and Western cowardice.

The Trinity of the Group, the Party and the State
By Adel Al Toraifi
Asharq Alawsat
The Egyptian opposition demonstrations passed without major incidents so far. President Mursi – and the Muslim Brotherhood behind him – continues to refuse to withdraw the decrees that have granted him unrestricted constitutional powers. Meanwhile, the Brotherhood and their Salafi allies have warned that they will not sacrifice all they have achieved in terms of political gains, in light of limited international criticism of the Brotherhood’s moves. This power grab scenario could in fact be a way of testing the equation “Egypt in exchange for peace”, as more than one observer has pointed out, in reference to the praise that Mursi received from the US President Barack Obama and Israeli officials for his role in the ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas.
However, what President Mursi did was nothing new. Every Egyptian President since 1952 has sought to assume more power, and to open the way for their organization or party to seize the state apparatus.
In order to understand what is really happening, it is best to return to recent history. In an interview conducted by the late President Anwar Sadat with the journalist Ali Amin, he emphasized the need to distinguish between the “Arab Socialist Union” (ASU) and official state organs to eliminate any duplication in governance. Here Sadat drew attention to the fact that the ASU was suffering from a tendency to seize the decision-making apparatus in the country (Al-Ahram newspaper, 12 April 1974).
The ASU was effectively the ruling party, despite parties being outlawed during the Naserrite era, and it played the role of a secret organization, a political party, and a state at the same time. There was, without doubt, a contradiction between the concept of the state – concerned with national interests – and the Arab nationalist organization and party, which saw the state as a mere tool to be used in the wider and more comprehensive regional project. In truth, Sadat was planning to eliminate the ASU, because he saw in it a revolutionary political legacy that was incompatible with his political project. He also saw its leading figures as rivals and saboteurs, capable of thwarting his attempts to take Egypt out of its military and economic crisis, and especially his plan to sever ties with the Soviet Union.
The performance of the Egyptian army in the October War gave President Sadat popularity on the street, and an opportunity to issue the call to remedy the ASU’s under the pretext of developing it, and soon he began the battle to dissolve the union completely in 1978. In this endeavor Sadat relied on his international success and American and European support for his policies, especially his project for peace with Israel. However, the crisis mushroomed and with it the arrest list began to expand, including many opponents of the regime from the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian left. Western newspapers criticized the president’s stances and his “dictatorial” decisions, but Sadat argued that his decisions and powers were temporary and necessary to cleanse the state’s institutions of the old guard of the former regime.
Of course, Sadat ended up being assassinated, and shortly after his death the Brotherhood, the left and even the Nasserites cheered the arrival of President Mubarak, who they saw as a savior from the past. Mubarak released prisoners, a move welcomed by his opponents, but it was not long before he enacted emergency laws and issued presidential decrees. Mubarak defended his decrees by claiming they were temporary and necessary to restore stability to Egypt. Don’t these chapters in Egypt’s history bring to mind what is happening in Tahrir Square over the last few days? Here the Brotherhood are trying to eliminate their former partners in the “revolution”, and are removing independent and opposition figures from state organs, such as the judiciary and the security apparatus, calling for these institutions to be cleansed of “remnants”. It is surprising that the Brotherhood has adopted this path so quickly, for less than six months after Mursi’s election the new president has been able to gain control of the army establishment and the judiciary, and has pursued opponents abroad, like Ahmed Shafik and Murad Muwafi.
In my opinion the problem is not confined to the president seizing power with a constitutional declaration on a temporary basis – as he says – but rather because the president, with the support of the Brotherhood, is determined to merge the state organs on the one hand, and the Freedom and Justice Party and the wider Brotherhood organization, represented by the General Guide and members of the Guidance Bureau, on the other. In other words, he is seeking to create a one-party state.
The Baathists in Syria used to say they were not the state; rather they were a pan-Arab organization representing the Arabs as a whole, not Syria alone. However, the truth is that they abolished the state in favor of their organization. There is no doubt that the Brotherhood in Egypt, and those who sympathize with it abroad, feel severely restricted and defensive, and therefore all their responses and comments accuse their opponents of hostility towards Islam. However, nothing can hide the reality that the Brotherhood aims to shape the constitution to their design, to exclude their opponents from power, and to fill the vacant seats with loyalists.
There are those who say that Mursi’s decisions may bring about the birth of a united opposition, and this is true, but we must remember that oppositions of this kind are slow to form, but quick to disintegrate and divide. President Mursi is facing a major challenge to prove the good intentions of his government and its independence from the Brotherhood, and this will only be achieved if he retracts his decrees, or if the Brotherhood transforms completely into a political party that can be held to account for its policies. In other words, the concept of the civil state must prevail or the Brotherhood will attempt to swallow the state, which it is incapable of digesting.