4:18
|
[28 Jan 2014] Morsi calls himself the country\'s legitimate leader, as his trial resumes near the capital, Cairo - Engli
Egypt\' ousted president Mohamed Morsi has questioned the legality of his trial, as he appears before a court for a prison break in 2011.
Morsi and 130 others are accused of the prison break...
Egypt\' ousted president Mohamed Morsi has questioned the legality of his trial, as he appears before a court for a prison break in 2011.
Morsi and 130 others are accused of the prison break during the uprising against former dictator Hosni Mubarak. The former president told the judges from inside a glass-encased metal case that he remains the country\'s legitimate leader, and that the court itself is illegal. Morsi was flown by helicopter from the Borg al-Arab prison in Alexandria. The trial has now been adjourned until February 22. His other trial on the charge of inciting violence against anti-government protests, will resume on Saturday. The case has been delayed twice since it opened in November. Egypt \'s first democratically-elected president has been implicated in two other cases. The country has been gripped by mass protests since the military toppled him in early July last year.
More...
Description:
Egypt\' ousted president Mohamed Morsi has questioned the legality of his trial, as he appears before a court for a prison break in 2011.
Morsi and 130 others are accused of the prison break during the uprising against former dictator Hosni Mubarak. The former president told the judges from inside a glass-encased metal case that he remains the country\'s legitimate leader, and that the court itself is illegal. Morsi was flown by helicopter from the Borg al-Arab prison in Alexandria. The trial has now been adjourned until February 22. His other trial on the charge of inciting violence against anti-government protests, will resume on Saturday. The case has been delayed twice since it opened in November. Egypt \'s first democratically-elected president has been implicated in two other cases. The country has been gripped by mass protests since the military toppled him in early July last year.
4:01
|
[30 Jan 2014] Egyptian security forces kill mosque imam in Alexandria - English
Security forces in Egypt have killed a mosque Imam in Alexandria after raiding his house and severely beating him.
Sheikh Akram was the Imam of the Ali Ibn Abi Taleb Mosque, in the Ajamy area of...
Security forces in Egypt have killed a mosque Imam in Alexandria after raiding his house and severely beating him.
Sheikh Akram was the Imam of the Ali Ibn Abi Taleb Mosque, in the Ajamy area of the northern city. Officials accused him of promoting anti-government sentiments in his lectures. The imam\'s family says security forces threw him off the balcony of his house. But security forces claim the imam fell while trying to escape arrest. Meanwhile, security sources in the northern part of the city have killed another protester. The man was killed in Alexandria\'s Janaklis area. Meanwhile, explosions hit outside a police station in the Ramal area of the city. Egypt plunged into chaos after the army toppled the country\'s first democratically-elected president in July.
More...
Description:
Security forces in Egypt have killed a mosque Imam in Alexandria after raiding his house and severely beating him.
Sheikh Akram was the Imam of the Ali Ibn Abi Taleb Mosque, in the Ajamy area of the northern city. Officials accused him of promoting anti-government sentiments in his lectures. The imam\'s family says security forces threw him off the balcony of his house. But security forces claim the imam fell while trying to escape arrest. Meanwhile, security sources in the northern part of the city have killed another protester. The man was killed in Alexandria\'s Janaklis area. Meanwhile, explosions hit outside a police station in the Ramal area of the city. Egypt plunged into chaos after the army toppled the country\'s first democratically-elected president in July.
0:50
|
[12 Feb 2014] Egyptian prosecutor general urged to probe - English
A human rights organization in Egypt has urged the prosecutor general to launch an independent probe into alleged systematic torture of political detainees.
The Arabic Network for Human Rights...
A human rights organization in Egypt has urged the prosecutor general to launch an independent probe into alleged systematic torture of political detainees.
The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information has said in a statement that torturing the detainees is not an arbitrary practice but a planned one. The Cairo-based body says the torture incidents reported by those arrested during the third anniversary of the 2011 revolution has surpassed those under the worst dictatorial regimes. It says the national human rights council has already been informed of the violations of prisoners\' rights. The Arab Network for rights information has also accused Egypt\'s Interior Ministry of refusing to arrest officers allegedly involved in killing of protesters.
More...
Description:
A human rights organization in Egypt has urged the prosecutor general to launch an independent probe into alleged systematic torture of political detainees.
The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information has said in a statement that torturing the detainees is not an arbitrary practice but a planned one. The Cairo-based body says the torture incidents reported by those arrested during the third anniversary of the 2011 revolution has surpassed those under the worst dictatorial regimes. It says the national human rights council has already been informed of the violations of prisoners\' rights. The Arab Network for rights information has also accused Egypt\'s Interior Ministry of refusing to arrest officers allegedly involved in killing of protesters.
The Suez Crisis 1 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Gamal Nasser and Prime Minister Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim world in...
This documentary tells the story of Gamal Nasser and Prime Minister Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim world in this crisis. ---------- FROM WIKIPEDIA SUEZ CRISIS THE PROTOCOL OF SEVRES Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state. - Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. --
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Gamal Nasser and Prime Minister Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim world in this crisis. ---------- FROM WIKIPEDIA SUEZ CRISIS THE PROTOCOL OF SEVRES Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state. - Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. --
The Suez Crisis 2 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 3 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 4 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 5 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 6 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 7 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 9 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
The Suez Crisis 8 of 9 - the other side of Suez - English
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From...
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
More...
Description:
This documentary tells the story of Nasser and Eden wrestling over the control of the Suez Canal. Israel as always plays the role of a STAB IN THE HEART of the Muslim World in this crisis. - From WIKIPEDIA - SUEZ CRISIS - The Protocoal of Sevres - Three months after Egypts nationalization of the canal company a secret meeting took place at Sevres outside Paris. Britain and France enlisted Israeli support for an alliance against Egypt. The parties agreed that Israel would invade the Sinai. Britain and France would then intervene instructing that both the Israeli and Egyptian armies withdraw their forces to a distance of 16 km from either side of the canal. The British and French would then argue that Egypts control of such an important route was too tenuous and that it need be placed under Anglo-French management. - The interests of the parties were various. Britain was anxious lest it lose access to the remains of its empire. France was nervous about the growing influence that Nasser exerted on its North African colonies and protectorates. Both Britain and France were eager that the canal should remain open as an important conduit of oil. Israel wanted to reopen the canal to Israeli shipping and saw the opportunity to strengthen its southern border and to weaken a dangerous and hostile state.- Prior to the operation Britain deliberately neglected to take counsel with the Americans trusting instead that Nassers engagement with communist states would persuade the Americans to accept British and French actions if they were presented as a fait accompli. This proved to be a fatal miscalculation for the colonial powers. ---
4:16
|
Hizbullah Shuhada - Arabic and All
hizbullah hezbollah yaroun lebanon iraq palestine syria egypt shi3a sunni tripoli
hizbullah hezbollah yaroun lebanon iraq palestine syria egypt shi3a sunni tripoli
2:03
|
Gazan women demand Rafah reopening 02-Nov-08 - English
Hundreds of Palestinian women have staged a protest march calling on Egypt to reopen the Rafah border crossing to relieve Gaza suffering. PressTv Report.
Hundreds of Palestinian women have staged a protest march calling on Egypt to reopen the Rafah border crossing to relieve Gaza suffering. PressTv Report.
9:10
|
9:58
|
DISTURBING SCENES - Beirut to Bosnia - The Martyrs Smile 4
...... Warning....The video contains some disturbing scenes.....An example of how advertising and lobbying groups censor American news this three part documentary by the famous middle east war...
...... Warning....The video contains some disturbing scenes.....An example of how advertising and lobbying groups censor American news this three part documentary by the famous middle east war correspondent Robert Fisk was banned by the Discovery channel in 1993. The films seek to explain the rise of anti-Western sentiment throughout the Muslim world by highlighting the oppressiveness of Western supported governments Israel and Egypt in particular and the Wests broader anti Muslim racism. The Discovery channel pulled the films in response to a letter campaign by pro Israel groups. Here is Fisks summary of the incident from a speech at Concordia University in 2002. Back in 1993 I made a 3 part documentary film for the Discovery Channel in the United States and also for Channel 4 in Britain. It was called Beirut to Bosnia and it attempted to find out why an increasing number of Muslis had come to hate the West. Indeed the title was Why Muslims Have Come to Hate the West. In due course we discovered that Discovery was being sent American Express cards cut in half. American Express being one of the sponsors of the original series. Discovery rang me in Beirut to say they were receiving lots of letters condemning the films from various groups. Then director Mike Dutfield and I heard that Discovery had canceled the reshowing. In an imperishable letter to Dutfield Bunting wrote and I ask you not to laugh until the end quote Given the reaction to the series on its initial airing we never scheduled a subsequent airing. So theres not really an issue as to any scheduled re airing being canceled. When I read those words ladies and gentlemen I was ashamed to be a foreign correspondent. ...Part I... The Martyrs Smile... This Films for the Humanities production focuses its capable eye on Lebanons guerilla war that aims to liberate southern Lebanon from Israeli control. The scope of this tragic conflict is brought into sharp focus in this documentary through the use of extensive interviews with participants from the Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad movements views of civilian casualties caused by Israeli air attacks and photographic evidence of the ongoing destruction of life and property in the region. The viewer should be advised that this video contains some disturbing scenes of this conflict.
More...
Description:
...... Warning....The video contains some disturbing scenes.....An example of how advertising and lobbying groups censor American news this three part documentary by the famous middle east war correspondent Robert Fisk was banned by the Discovery channel in 1993. The films seek to explain the rise of anti-Western sentiment throughout the Muslim world by highlighting the oppressiveness of Western supported governments Israel and Egypt in particular and the Wests broader anti Muslim racism. The Discovery channel pulled the films in response to a letter campaign by pro Israel groups. Here is Fisks summary of the incident from a speech at Concordia University in 2002. Back in 1993 I made a 3 part documentary film for the Discovery Channel in the United States and also for Channel 4 in Britain. It was called Beirut to Bosnia and it attempted to find out why an increasing number of Muslis had come to hate the West. Indeed the title was Why Muslims Have Come to Hate the West. In due course we discovered that Discovery was being sent American Express cards cut in half. American Express being one of the sponsors of the original series. Discovery rang me in Beirut to say they were receiving lots of letters condemning the films from various groups. Then director Mike Dutfield and I heard that Discovery had canceled the reshowing. In an imperishable letter to Dutfield Bunting wrote and I ask you not to laugh until the end quote Given the reaction to the series on its initial airing we never scheduled a subsequent airing. So theres not really an issue as to any scheduled re airing being canceled. When I read those words ladies and gentlemen I was ashamed to be a foreign correspondent. ...Part I... The Martyrs Smile... This Films for the Humanities production focuses its capable eye on Lebanons guerilla war that aims to liberate southern Lebanon from Israeli control. The scope of this tragic conflict is brought into sharp focus in this documentary through the use of extensive interviews with participants from the Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad movements views of civilian casualties caused by Israeli air attacks and photographic evidence of the ongoing destruction of life and property in the region. The viewer should be advised that this video contains some disturbing scenes of this conflict.
9:59
|
DISTURBING SCENES - Beirut to Bosnia - The Martyrs Smile 3
...... Warning....The video contains some disturbing scenes.....An example of how advertising and lobbying groups censor American news this three part documentary by the famous middle east war...
...... Warning....The video contains some disturbing scenes.....An example of how advertising and lobbying groups censor American news this three part documentary by the famous middle east war correspondent Robert Fisk was banned by the Discovery channel in 1993. The films seek to explain the rise of anti-Western sentiment throughout the Muslim world by highlighting the oppressiveness of Western supported governments Israel and Egypt in particular and the Wests broader anti Muslim racism. The Discovery channel pulled the films in response to a letter campaign by pro Israel groups. Here is Fisks summary of the incident from a speech at Concordia University in 2002. Back in 1993 I made a 3 part documentary film for the Discovery Channel in the United States and also for Channel 4 in Britain. It was called Beirut to Bosnia and it attempted to find out why an increasing number of Muslis had come to hate the West. Indeed the title was Why Muslims Have Come to Hate the West. In due course we discovered that Discovery was being sent American Express cards cut in half. American Express being one of the sponsors of the original series. Discovery rang me in Beirut to say they were receiving lots of letters condemning the films from various groups. Then director Mike Dutfield and I heard that Discovery had canceled the reshowing. In an imperishable letter to Dutfield Bunting wrote and I ask you not to laugh until the end quote Given the reaction to the series on its initial airing we never scheduled a subsequent airing. So theres not really an issue as to any scheduled re airing being canceled. When I read those words ladies and gentlemen I was ashamed to be a foreign correspondent. ...Part I... The Martyrs Smile... This Films for the Humanities production focuses its capable eye on Lebanons guerilla war that aims to liberate southern Lebanon from Israeli control. The scope of this tragic conflict is brought into sharp focus in this documentary through the use of extensive interviews with participants from the Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad movements views of civilian casualties caused by Israeli air attacks and photographic evidence of the ongoing destruction of life and property in the region. The viewer should be advised that this video contains some disturbing scenes of this conflict.
More...
Description:
...... Warning....The video contains some disturbing scenes.....An example of how advertising and lobbying groups censor American news this three part documentary by the famous middle east war correspondent Robert Fisk was banned by the Discovery channel in 1993. The films seek to explain the rise of anti-Western sentiment throughout the Muslim world by highlighting the oppressiveness of Western supported governments Israel and Egypt in particular and the Wests broader anti Muslim racism. The Discovery channel pulled the films in response to a letter campaign by pro Israel groups. Here is Fisks summary of the incident from a speech at Concordia University in 2002. Back in 1993 I made a 3 part documentary film for the Discovery Channel in the United States and also for Channel 4 in Britain. It was called Beirut to Bosnia and it attempted to find out why an increasing number of Muslis had come to hate the West. Indeed the title was Why Muslims Have Come to Hate the West. In due course we discovered that Discovery was being sent American Express cards cut in half. American Express being one of the sponsors of the original series. Discovery rang me in Beirut to say they were receiving lots of letters condemning the films from various groups. Then director Mike Dutfield and I heard that Discovery had canceled the reshowing. In an imperishable letter to Dutfield Bunting wrote and I ask you not to laugh until the end quote Given the reaction to the series on its initial airing we never scheduled a subsequent airing. So theres not really an issue as to any scheduled re airing being canceled. When I read those words ladies and gentlemen I was ashamed to be a foreign correspondent. ...Part I... The Martyrs Smile... This Films for the Humanities production focuses its capable eye on Lebanons guerilla war that aims to liberate southern Lebanon from Israeli control. The scope of this tragic conflict is brought into sharp focus in this documentary through the use of extensive interviews with participants from the Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad movements views of civilian casualties caused by Israeli air attacks and photographic evidence of the ongoing destruction of life and property in the region. The viewer should be advised that this video contains some disturbing scenes of this conflict.
7:02
|
8:59
|
2:24
|
4:17
|
Zionists are Godless Criminal Thugs - Arabic Sub English
If the impact of AIPAC & Zionists' damage to U.S. Interests in the Middle East & Muslim World could be measured, the number would be in zillions of dollars. Through manipulating U.S. national...
If the impact of AIPAC & Zionists' damage to U.S. Interests in the Middle East & Muslim World could be measured, the number would be in zillions of dollars. Through manipulating U.S. national elections & forcing the U.S. foreign policy towards fanatic (faith-based) objectives in blindly supporting even the most reactionary & fascist-oriented policies of apartheid Israel, AIPAC, Zionists & their traitor agents operating within the U.S. executive & legislative branches are working against the strategic & long-term interets of the United States all over the World & particularly in the Middle East & among the 1.5 billion Muslim population of the World. The U.S. national government has been hijacked by AIPAC & Zionists.
Abkhazia Angola Argentine Australia Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Bolivia Botswana Brazil Bosnia Cambodia Chad Chile China Colombia Congo New Zealand Costa Rica Croatia
Cuba Cyprus czech Denmark Ecuador Taiwan El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland Ghana Greece Greenland Greneda Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Iceland Turkey Kuwait Bulgaria Kosovo Albania Saudi Arabia Qatar Oman Hungary Austria Palestine Egypt Sudan Jordan Pakistan Kurdistan Azari Armenia Uzbek Turkeman Dari Krgyz Arab Bulgaria Germany France United Kingdom England United States Canada Sweden Spain Algeria Tunisia Morroco Libya Dubai Yemen India Indonesia Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea Kyrgyz Latvia Lebanon Liberia Libya Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexican Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Nagorno-Karabakh Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zeland Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Palestinian Panama Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Puerto Rico Qatar Russian Rwanda Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Slovenia Somalia South Africa Ossetia Spain Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Swiss Syrian Tanzania Thailand Tunisian Turkmenistan Uganda United Kingdom Great Britain Uruguay Uzbekistan Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Zambia Zimbabwe
More...
Description:
If the impact of AIPAC & Zionists' damage to U.S. Interests in the Middle East & Muslim World could be measured, the number would be in zillions of dollars. Through manipulating U.S. national elections & forcing the U.S. foreign policy towards fanatic (faith-based) objectives in blindly supporting even the most reactionary & fascist-oriented policies of apartheid Israel, AIPAC, Zionists & their traitor agents operating within the U.S. executive & legislative branches are working against the strategic & long-term interets of the United States all over the World & particularly in the Middle East & among the 1.5 billion Muslim population of the World. The U.S. national government has been hijacked by AIPAC & Zionists.
Abkhazia Angola Argentine Australia Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Bolivia Botswana Brazil Bosnia Cambodia Chad Chile China Colombia Congo New Zealand Costa Rica Croatia
Cuba Cyprus czech Denmark Ecuador Taiwan El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland Ghana Greece Greenland Greneda Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Iceland Turkey Kuwait Bulgaria Kosovo Albania Saudi Arabia Qatar Oman Hungary Austria Palestine Egypt Sudan Jordan Pakistan Kurdistan Azari Armenia Uzbek Turkeman Dari Krgyz Arab Bulgaria Germany France United Kingdom England United States Canada Sweden Spain Algeria Tunisia Morroco Libya Dubai Yemen India Indonesia Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea Kyrgyz Latvia Lebanon Liberia Libya Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexican Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Nagorno-Karabakh Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zeland Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Palestinian Panama Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Puerto Rico Qatar Russian Rwanda Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Slovenia Somalia South Africa Ossetia Spain Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Swiss Syrian Tanzania Thailand Tunisian Turkmenistan Uganda United Kingdom Great Britain Uruguay Uzbekistan Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Zambia Zimbabwe
Viva Palestina convoy on the PressTV - English
The documentary 'Lifeline to Gaza' about the Viva Palestina convoy
A message from George Galloway
More than 1,300 dead – more than 400 of them children – and still they are dragging bodies...
The documentary 'Lifeline to Gaza' about the Viva Palestina convoy
A message from George Galloway
More than 1,300 dead – more than 400 of them children – and still they are dragging bodies from the ruins.
The death toll in Gaza is rising, while the world’s leaders and media look away in search of a new story.
We will not look away. The Palestinians in Gaza need our help now, just as they did when Israel’s bombs and illegal weapons were dropping.
Thousands of people have contacted me to say that they have marched, cried at the television pictures and feel helpless in the face of the suffering.
That’s why I have launched a major initiative in response to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. I will be leading an aid convoy from London to Gaza leaving on 14 February and travelling through France, Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and through Rafah and into Gaza. It will bring material aid and raise the banner of Palestine in all the countries that we visit.
The convoy will be led by a British fire engine, ambulances, and many trucks full of practical aid given by the various communities in Britain.
It is quite an undertaking, which I anticipate will have a high public profile throughout its journey and on its arrival in Gaza, god willing, some 30 days later.
The convoy is already supported by the Stop the War Coalition – which organised the largest demonstrations in British history – as well as the Anglo-Arab Organisation, several British trade unions and a large number of Muslim organisations. Fundraising for the convoy is taking place all over Britain.
We urgently need your help
Money: please organise fundraisers, collections, donations which the convoy will get directly to the people of Gaza.
Cheques should be made payable to “Lifeline for Gaza” and sent to
Lifeline for Gaza c/o Flat 6, 1-2 Bowling Green Place, London SE1 1YL. or donate online
More...
Description:
The documentary 'Lifeline to Gaza' about the Viva Palestina convoy
A message from George Galloway
More than 1,300 dead – more than 400 of them children – and still they are dragging bodies from the ruins.
The death toll in Gaza is rising, while the world’s leaders and media look away in search of a new story.
We will not look away. The Palestinians in Gaza need our help now, just as they did when Israel’s bombs and illegal weapons were dropping.
Thousands of people have contacted me to say that they have marched, cried at the television pictures and feel helpless in the face of the suffering.
That’s why I have launched a major initiative in response to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. I will be leading an aid convoy from London to Gaza leaving on 14 February and travelling through France, Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and through Rafah and into Gaza. It will bring material aid and raise the banner of Palestine in all the countries that we visit.
The convoy will be led by a British fire engine, ambulances, and many trucks full of practical aid given by the various communities in Britain.
It is quite an undertaking, which I anticipate will have a high public profile throughout its journey and on its arrival in Gaza, god willing, some 30 days later.
The convoy is already supported by the Stop the War Coalition – which organised the largest demonstrations in British history – as well as the Anglo-Arab Organisation, several British trade unions and a large number of Muslim organisations. Fundraising for the convoy is taking place all over Britain.
We urgently need your help
Money: please organise fundraisers, collections, donations which the convoy will get directly to the people of Gaza.
Cheques should be made payable to “Lifeline for Gaza” and sent to
Lifeline for Gaza c/o Flat 6, 1-2 Bowling Green Place, London SE1 1YL. or donate online
2:50
|
4:00
|
5:32
|