'Arab Spring' Subversion is U.S. Funded

It's Official: "Arab Spring" Subversion is U.S. Funded

Doubts laid to rest; counter revolutions to come

By Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer
April 15, 2011

Bangkok, Thailand April 15, 2011 - As American bombs rain down upon Libya on the premise that Qaddafi was brutalizing indigenous pro-democratic demonstrators, the accusing fingers of Libya, Iran, China, Syria, Belarus, and a growing number of other nations are pointing at Washington for funding and plotting regime change against their respective governments. Either in an act of absolute hubris or to spin emerging evidence that the US indeed has been funding and preparing the ground for the "Arab Spring" for years, New York Times has recently published "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings."

Essentially throwing these activists under the bus, New York Times exposes that the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, and Entsar Qadhi of Yemen amongst others, received training and financing from the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, and the Neo-Conservative lined Freedom House.

The New York Times goes on to explain that these organizations are in turn funded by the National Endowment for Democracy which receives 100 million USD from Congress while Freedom House receives most of its money from the US State Department. While the New York Times asserts "no one doubts that the Arab uprisings are home grown," leaders of groups now admittedly funded and trained by the US are anything but "home grown." The most prominent example is the April 6 Movement of Egypt led by Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Crisis Group. ElBaradei sitting along side George Soros, Kenneth Adelman, Wesley Clark, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, within a US foreign policy think-tank engenders a considerable amount of "doubt."

Also conceding involvement is the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), chaired by various Council on Foreign Relations and Brookings Institute alumni. POMED claims that they helped protesters develop skills and to network. Such training has taken place annually under Movements.org starting in 2008 where Egypt's April 6 movement among many others, learned techniques to subvert their government. Movements.org of course is sponsored by a conglomerate of corporations and government agencies including the US State Department, Google, MTV, the Edelman public relations firm, Facebook, CBS News, MSNBC, Pepsi, and others. Despite the claim that such meddling is "promoting democracy," looking at the sponsors and war mongering interests involved in this operation, it appears to be more about promoting global military and economic hegemony.

The role of NGOs and the so called "civil society" used to support the unrest is also included in the New York Times piece, as well as the displeasure expressed by Arab leaders berating the US for meddling in their internal affairs. Such accusations have now reach a crescendo with China, Iran, Syria, and Belarus making similar claims.

The New York Times piece ends by describing cables indicating that many activists who became aware of US involvement in funding and directing the movements became disenfranchised. Such activists were "ousted." Training was conducted outside of target countries, including in Jordan, Morocco, Serbia, and the United States. What the New York Times omits are the similar connections and involvements corporate special interests hand in steering human rights organizations in support of these operations as well. Such organizations had amply laid the rhetorical groundwork needed to justify the ever expanding war in Libya.

Of course, one needs only remember the feigned ignorance exhibited by the US State Department, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, along with the litany of lies purveyed by the mainstream media to see a disingenuous plot in motion. This is because everyone from the US State Department and the corporate owned media had been involved, for years, preparing to bring the "Arab Spring" to fruition. With open admissions now being made by a global corporate-financier mouthpiece like the New York Times, one must consider the serious implications of what may come next.

Behold the circus that is the mainstream media. MSNBC feigns ignorance and
confusion over unrest they had been involved in engineering since at least 2008.

Surely this information is going to incite a counterrevolution. In Egypt, suspicion over Mohamed ElBaradei has already seen the interloping globocrat pelted with rocks and his agenda derailed. Many activists truly believed in their cause and risked their lives for the idea that they were fighting not only their own corrupt dictatorships, but the West as well who had been propping them up for years. Such a perception was exasperated during the early stages of the of the uprisings with the West lavishing support on embattled regimes in order to maximize the disenfranchisement of the people. With ongoing operations to seize Libya by force, and to see through similar US backed uprisings in Syria, Yemen, Iran, and even as far as Thailand and China, it will be interesting indeed to see how nation-states tailor their response to what is now clearly foreign funded subversion.

In what manner this realization will manifest itself is not certain. However, it would be wise for activists, pundits, politicians, and concerned citizens genuinely interested in truth, to think very carefully before making their next move. As George Bush had once attempted to say, "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. "

Ultimately, and upon examining the architects behind this global gambit of deceptive destabilization, we must look past the puppet politicians and the disingenuous liars that presume to give us "the news." We must see the global corporate-financier empire as the source of the problem and its removal and replacement as the solution.

For ways to battle the globalists by achieving self-sufficiency and freedom through independence please read on:

Boycotting: One Corporation at a time
Self-Sufficiency
Alternative Economics
The Lost Key to Real Revolution
Boycott the Globalists
Naming Names: Your Real Government

Muslim Brotherhood and the Revolutions

Exposing the International Arbiters

Supposedly mapping “freedom.”

The corporate funded exploitation of freedom, democracy, and human rights.

By Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer
April 10, 2011

The colorful maps of press freedom, democracy, and other metrics we are told are indicative of a free and prosperous society are the products of wholly corporate funded special interest lobbying groups like “Reporters Without Borders,” “Transparency International,” and the fraudulent “Human Rights Watch.” In giving us a clear picture of freedom, prosperity, and human rights throughout the world, they are about as accurate and as useful as divining rods are at finding water.

These large multinational organizations may include professional, dedicated, and immensely sincere people from all walks of life who believe in their cause, however, the vector sum of their effort is to advance the collective interests of the corporations that populate the board of directors and fund them.

Libya

The hyped, unverified hearsay coming out of Egypt, Libya, and now Syria regarding “alleged” brutal crackdowns on “unarmed” protesters has been lent legitimacy by being repeated through organizations like Human Rights Watch (HRW). In fact, nearly all of HRWs reports are merely collections of witness accounts, allegations, and hearsay, generally from protesters and opposition members and entirely devoid of any empirical evidence. Hearsay, one would reasonably think, is a good impetus for further investigation, not drawing a conclusion. For HRW however, the conclusion is usually already politically predetermined. In Libya’s case, Qaddafi’s ouster was a given, leaving HRW the task of simply filling in a compelling narrative.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, after admitting to funding sedition worldwide, demands that Qaddafi leave power based on still unfounded accusations. Perpetuating these accusations are corporate funded organizations like HRW.

Some samples of HRW reports regarding Libya:

HRW: “Libya: Allow Eman al-’Obeidy to Leave Tripoli” Regards allegations of Eman al-Obeidy who claimed she was raped and tortured by Qaddafi forces in Tripoli before stumbling fortuitously into a hotel lobby full of foreign reporters. Her allegations remain as such, however this has not stopped the media or HRW from exploiting the story to bolster anti-Qaddafi sentiment.

HRW: “Libya: African Rights Court Issues First Ruling Against a State” Again, unverified allegations serve as the basis for a contrived court’s decision using entirely contrived laws to berate Libya and undermine the government’s legitimacy. To this day allegations against Libya’s military for intentionally targeting civilians are not only unsubstantiated, but refuted even by Western military analysts engineering the war.

HRW: “Libya: At Least 370 Missing From Country’s East” Here we have 72 “possible disappearance” cases “documented” by HRW, but based on interviews with family members or witnesses to the arrest of the “apparently” missing persons.

A pattern of consistently misleading propaganda becomes apparent – designed to undermine the Libyan government in support of the predetermined “Qaddafi must go” narrative. As the West’s aggression against Libya unfolds, evidence is emerging that not only is HRW’s propaganda misleading, but much of it is verifiable lies. Evidence is now emerging that these “freedom fighting” rebels are in fact Al Qaeda fighters, many of whom quite literally just got back from fighting Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq including one of the current rebels leaders, Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi.

Funding HRW are the regular corporate suspects including
the Soros’ Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation,
and the CFR lined Atlantic Philanthropies.

Thailand

In Thailand, a combination of metrics stemming from these disingenuous groups are fueling another attempted color revolution trying to ride the current wave of destabilization started by the West through the US State Department, and equally disingenuous groups like Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy.

The leader of the Thai color revolution is globalist stooge Thaksin Shinwatra, a former adviser to the Carlyle Group who was literally standing in front of the CFR in NYC on the eve of his ousting from power in 2006. Since 2006, he has been represented by fellow Carlyle man James Baker and his Baker Botts law firm, International Crisis Group’s Kenneth Adelman and his Edelman Public Relations firm, Belfer Center adviser Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers, and now Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Peroff, a major corporate member of the globalist Chatham House. To say Thaksin has the support of multinational corporate interests is an understatement.

The opposition party operating under Thaksin has been attempting to undermine the government’s legitimacy through a steady stream of contrived metrics regarding “freedom,” “democracy,” and “human rights,” provided by Human Rights Watch, Freedom House, Transparency International, and Reporters Without Borders.

Often cited is the Freedom House’s “Freedom in the World” report where Thailand was downgraded from free under the globalist-friendly cleptocratic Thaksin regime, to partly free under the current Thai government who has been steadily distancing itself from free-trade with the US, ignoring US calls to enforce “intellectual property,” and pursuing a more protectionist policy in regards to the West and its unraveling economy.

What those who cite Freedom House forget to mention is that upon its board of trustees sits Kenneth Adelman who was Thaksin’s paid lobbyist. Such a conflict of interest derides Freedom House’s legitimacy entirely, and similar personalities and corporate sponsors involved in the organization have also directly benefited financially from conflicts started on lies given legitimacy through Freedom House’s “work.” These include both George Soros and signatories of the war mongering Project for a New American Century.

Reporters Without Borders is funded by the corporate-lined National Endowment for Democracy, and has downgraded Thailand as well regarding it as a “nation under surveillance.” The organization cites the crackdown on the elements involved in the foreign-backed color revolution as the reasoning behind its judgment, using the NED funded Prachatai website in particular as an example. Reporters Without Borders attempts to portray such crackdowns as an affront to freedom, even as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton openly admits to funding subversion worldwide.

Freedom House is a big fan of NED funded Prachatai as well.
Prachatai is an over-the-top propaganda clearinghouse for
the Thai red color revolution.

One must wonder how the United States would deal with foreign funded sedition when they are already labeling collector coin dealers “domestic terrorists” and dealing them out 10 year prison sentences.

Perhaps the most ludicrous of all is Transparency International which has been frequently cited by the color revolution for downgrading Thailand’s score on the “Corruption Perception Index” from 3.6 under Thaksin to a negligible 3.4 under the current government. Transparency International, however, is funded by perhaps the most corrupt corporations on earth, in human history, including: Anglo American, Ernst & Young, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, Merck, Procter & Gamble, Shell International, Abu Dhabi National Energy Company, and Wal-Mart. Foundation support includes the eugenicist Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the criminally run World Bank.

What exactly do these corporate-financier oligarchs have against Thailand? A lot of it stems from the failed US-Thailand FTA Thaksin tried to ramrod through into law before being ushered out of power. A quick look at the corporations (listed on page 8 here) of the US-Thailand FTA Business Coalition reveals some of the largest, most influential corporations on earth, many of which are also found on lists naming the key corporate members behind the global corporate-financier agenda. Impeding the US-Thailand FTA doesn’t just deny these power-mad corporations another market to plunder, it impedes the entropy of global oligarchical megalomania in general.

Thailand and Libya are but two examples. These organizations are manipulating public opinion and providing armies of seditious agents worldwide with statistics and official looking reports, leveraging the very noble causes of human rights, democracy, and freedom for their own nefarious agenda. As chaos attempts to consume Syria, Iran, and even Moscow and Beijing, remember the names of these organizations – Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders, Freedom House, and the ridiculous Transparency International and recognize the disingenuous agenda they are peddling.

Muslim Brotherhood and the Revolutions

Troops Fire on Yemen Protest, 6 Killed, 30 Wounded

Associated Press
April 4, 2011

Security forces and plainclothes gunmen opened fire on crowds of Yemenis marching through a southern city Monday, killing at least six and wounding more than 30, in an intensifying crackdown against the uprising against the 32-year rule of President Ali Abdullah Saleh.

Witnesses described troops and gunmen, some on nearby rooftops, firing wildly on thousands of protesters who marched past the governor's headquarters in Taiz in the second straight day of violence in the southern city. Some — including elderly people — were trampled and injured as the crowds tried to flee, witnesses said.

Violence has swelled in recent days amid frustration over behind-the-scenes efforts to convince Saleh to step down in the face of a nearly two-month-old uprising. The United States and European countries have been contacting Saleh and his opponents, trying to find a formula for the president to leave his post with a stable transfer of power , an opposition spokesman said.

Saleh has been a key ally of the United States, which has given him millions in counterterrorism aid to fight al-Qaida's branch in the country, which has plotted attacks on American soil. So far, Washington has not publicly demanded that he step down, but the diplomatic effort was a clear sign that the Americans have decided the danger of turmoil and instability outweighs the risks if Saleh leaves.

Mustafa al-Sabri, a spokesman for a coalition of opposition parties, said U.S. and European diplomats who had been in contacts with Saleh had asked the opposition for their "vision" for a transition. In response, the opposition over the weekend gave the Americans a proposal that Saleh step down and hand his powers to his vice president, who would then organize a process for rewriting the constitution and holding new elections, al-Sabri said.

But the 65-year-old president has dug in against the idea.

On Sunday, Saleh took a tough line, saying no negotiations could be held without a "halt to all protests and the mutiny by some units in the military."

"We are prepared to explore the peaceful transfer of authority in the framework of the constitution. But arm-twisting will absolutely not work," he said.

The U.S. Embassy has not commented on its efforts, saying only in a statement over the weekend that "Saleh has publicly expressed his willingness to engage in a peaceful transition of power; the timing and form of this transition should be identified through dialogue and negotiation."

Saleh has managed to cling to power even after many of his top allies in the government and military abandoned him and joined the opposition because of the harshness of his crackdown on the protesters. The opposition has been holding continual protest camps in main squares of the capital Sanaa and other cities around the country, and hundreds of thousands turned out for the biggest and most widespread marches yet on Friday. At least 97 people have been killed since demonstrations began Feb. 11.

The violence in the mountain city of Taiz began when thousands of protesters down its main street toward Freedom Square, where demonstrators have been camped out, surrounded by security forces.

As the march passed the governor's headquarters, troops stationed there blocked the procession, and clashes broke out, with some protesters throwing stones, witnesses said.

Troops on nearby rooftops opened fire with live ammunition on the crowd and the marchers then turned to besiege the governor's headquarters, said Bushra al-Maqtara, an opposition activist in Taiz, and other witnesses.

"It was heavy gunfire from all directions. Some were firing from the rooftop of the governor's building," said one man in the crowd, Omar al-Saqqaf. He said he saw military police load the bodies of two slain protesters into a car and then speed away.

At least six protesters were killed and more than 30 wounded, some with gunshots to the head and chest, said Zakariya Abdul-Qader, a doctor at a clinic set up by protesters in Freedom Square. Other doctors at the clinic confirmed the figure.

The military has clamped down on the city of nearly half a million, about 120 miles (200 kilometers) south of the capital, Sanaa. For a second day, tanks and armored vehicles blocked entrances to the city to prevent outsiders from joining the protests. They also surrounded Freedom Square, bottling up the thousands in the protest camp there and arresting anyone who tries to exit.

Saleh's top security official in Taiz, Abdullah Qiran, to oversee security in Taiz, is accused by demonstrators of orchestrating some of the most brutal crackdowns against demonstrators, particularly in the southern port town of Aden, where he was previously stationed until his transfer several weeks ago. On Sunday, police attacked a march by thousands of women in Taiz, sparking a battle with a separate group of male protesters.

Marches in solidarity with the Taiz protesters erupted in the cities of Mukalla, in the east, and Hodeida, on Yemen's western Red Sea coast. In Hodeida, protesters tried to march on a presidential palace in the city but were blocked by security forces, who opened fire with tear gas and live ammunition, said activist Abdel-Hafiz al-Abbasi.

He said three people were wounded.

Protesters massed in a Sanaa square they have renamed Taghyir, or Change, Square, said they too would hold a march Monday in support of Taiz. At the same time, pro-government gunmen in civilian clothes were seen taking up positions on a man boulevard in the capital, raising worries of a new confrontation.

Over the crisis, Saleh has offered to step down in 2013, when his term ends, or as early as the end of this year — if a transfer of power acceptable to him is reached. The opposition fears that Saleh is using the discussions over stepping down to stall for time — either to stay in power or to ensure he is succeeded by one of his sons, a prospect the opposition has staunchly rejected.

But the opposition is not united on their demands. A group of official opposition parties put forward the proposal that Saleh hand over power to his vice president, Abd Rabou Mansour.

The youth activists who have been organizing the protests are distinct from the opposition parties — and many of them have refused the proposal, believing that it would mean an extended transition that would keep Saleh in power for a longer time.

"We refuse any initiative or proposal that doesn't explicitly state the immediate departure of the president and his sons. That is a central issue that we will not put aside," said Adnan al-Odeini, an activist leader of the protests in Sanaa.

Military Rule in Egypt

Reuters
March 28, 2011

Egypt will hold a parliamentary election in September, its military rulers said on Monday, setting a date that analysts said would suit well-organized Islamists and remnants of former leader Hosni Mubarak's party.

The ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces said emergency laws that have helped crush political life for decades would be lifted before elections, but did not say when, and approved a law easing restrictions on political party formation.

"It is a challenge for the new forces that came up as a result of the revolution," said Mustapha al-Sayyid, a political scientist, referring to the timetable for elections. "This period is relatively short for these parties."

Many secular reform groups have been calling on the military, which has governed since Mubarak was deposed on February 11, to extend the transitional period to allow political life to recover from decades of oppression.

The Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group formally banned under Mubarak, has emerged as the country's best organised political force. Other fledgling groups are trying to organize.

"Parliamentary elections will be in September," said Mamdouh Shaheen, a member of the ruling military council. A date for a presidential election, which will follow the legislative polls, had yet to be set, he added in a news conference.

The elections are major milestones on the path set by the military in a transition that will end with the army relinquishing power to a civilian, elected government.

The military also said on Monday a curfew in place since the start of the uprising that swept Mubarak from power was shortened to three hours from 2 a.m. (0000 GMT) to 5 a.m. -- a sign of growing confidence in the police that have returned to the streets in recent weeks to restore law and order.

"The time is short but we will work with all our capacities to take part," said Abou Elela Mady, leader of the recently licensed Wasat Party (Center Party). "It doesn't give us a full opportunity but it's a good start."

The Brotherhood has voiced support for quick elections. But it has sought to reassure Egyptians worried about its relative strength by saying it will not seek the presidency or a parliamentary majority.

PARTIES "NEED YEARS, NOT MONTHS"

The Islamist group and other reformists are discussing the idea of entering the legislative election in an alliance to produce a "revolutionary majority" that will take the lead in drafting a new constitution once the parliament is elected.

The military suspended the constitution and dissolved parliament after Mubarak stepped down. Shaheen said the army would issue a constitutional decree that will provide a legal basis for its rule in the coming days.

The military council said the state of emergency which has been in force since the assassination of President Anwar Sadat in 1981 would also be lifted before any elections were held.

"We have said before that parliamentary or presidential polls will not be held while emergency law is still in force," Shaheen said.

The military council also approved a law that will ease restrictions on the formation of political parties.

Under the new law, Shaheen said new parties would need the approval of 5,000 members from at least 10 of Egypt's 29 provinces, increasing the number of signatures from 1,000 outlined in a draft law approved by cabinet last week.

The Brotherhood is one of the groups expected to now begin steps toward forming a political party.

A plethora of new parties are expected to apply for an official license from a committee formerly headed by a leading figure in Mubarak's party. Under the new law, it will be headed by a judge.

"The September date is not too soon," said Amr Hashem of the Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.

"The argument that parties will need more time to prepare is wanting. Parties will need years, not months, so any delay we are talking about now is not going to make that much of a difference," he said.

Syria's Assad Deploys Army in Port to Keep Order

March 27, 2011

President Bashar al-Assad, facing the gravest crisis in his 11-year rule, deployed the army in Syria's main port of Latakia for the first time after nearly two weeks of protests spread across the country.

State television showed deserted streets in Latakia littered with rubble and broken glass and burned-out vehicles. Damascus cited attempts by 'armed groups', possibly backed by foreign powers, to stir sectarian conflict across the country.

Dozens have died in pro-democracy demonstrations in the southern city of Deraa and nearby Sanamein as well as Latakia in the northwest, Damascus and other towns over the last week.

Witnesses said major cities appeared calm on Sunday, but several hundred men were holding a sit-in at the Omari Mosque in the town of Deraa, the original focus of protests and scene of a crackdown by security forces last week.

Syrian officials had said Assad, 45, who has made no direct public comment since protests began, was expected to make a television address; but by late evening he had not appeared.

The dispatch of troops to the streets of Latakia late on Saturday signals growing government alarm about the ability of the security police to maintain order there. Latakia is a potentially volatile mix of Sunni Muslims, Christians and the Alawites who constitute Assad's core support.

Its residential areas house large secret police complexes.

"There is a feeling in Latakia that the presence of disciplined troops is necessary to keep order," one resident told Reuters. "We do not want looting."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States deplored the bloodshed in Syria, but that a Libya-style intervention should not be expected.

The unrest in Syria came to a head after police detained more than a dozen schoolchildren for scrawling graffiti inspired by pro-democracy protests across the Arab world.

Such demonstrations would have been unthinkable a couple of months ago in this most tightly controlled of Arab countries, where the Baath Party has been in power for nearly 50 years. Modern Syria gained its independence from France in 1946.

Assad, a British-educated eye doctor, pledged to look into granting greater freedom but this has failed to dampen a protest movement emboldened by uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia.

Assad adviser Bouthaina Shaaban told Al Jazeera television news that the emergency law hated by Syrian reformists for the far-reaching powers it gives to security services would be lifted, but did not give a timetable.

Lawyers say the emergency law has been used by authorities to ban protest, justify arbitrary arrests and closed courts and give free rein to the secret police and security apparatus, which have all severely compromised the rule of law.

BID TO DEFUSE PROTESTS

In another step to placate protesters, Syrian authorities released political activist Diana Jawabra, her lawyer said, along with 15 others arrested for taking part in a silent protest demanding the release of children responsible for the graffiti.

This followed news of the freeing of 260 political prisoners.

Assad also faces calls to curb his pervasive security apparatus, free political prisoners and reveal the fate of tens of thousands of dissidents who disappeared in the 1980s.

There have also been protests in Hama, a northern city where in 1982 the forces of President Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's father, killed thousands of people and razed much of the old quarter to put down an armed uprising by the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood.

Middle East analysts do not rule out a harsh crackdown to crush the current demonstrations.

Syria's establishment, including its army, is dominated by members of the minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam to which the Assads belong. This causes resentment among Sunni Muslims who make up some three-quarters of the population.

Latakia is mostly Sunni Muslim but has significant numbers of Alawites.

"An official source said attacks by armed elements on the families and districts of Latakia in the last two days resulted in the martyrdom of 10 security forces and civilians and the killing of two of the armed elements," SANA news agency said.

The source said 200 people, most of whom were from the security forces, had been wounded. Rights activists told Reuters at least six people had been killed in Latakia in two days.

"Decades of pent-up feelings are generating these confrontations. But this is not a mass Sunni-Alawite strife," the Latakia resident told Reuters by telephone. "Cooler heads are prevailing in Latakia."

STATE OF EMERGENCY

Deraa is a center of Sunni Muslim tribes who resent power and wealth amassed by the Alawite minority. During protests, a statue of the late Hafez al-Assad, who ruled Syria with an iron fist for 30 years until his death in 2000, was toppled.

There were at least three funerals for those killed in the unrest in villages around Deraa on Sunday, which passed off peacefully with no security in evidence. Mourners in one of the funerals chanted: "The people want the downfall of the regime."

Asked about security forces opening fire in recent days, government spokeswoman Reem Haddad told Al Jazeera on Sunday:

"The security forces were given very strict orders not to shoot at anyone and they did not shoot at anyone at all until those people shot at them and at other citizens.

"Now obviously when you have people shooting then it becomes a matter of national security and you can't just have that happening," she said, adding that she suspected foreign powers were involved in the unrest.

The United States, France and Britain have urged Assad to refrain from violence. A week ago they launched a U.N.-backed air campaign to protect opponents of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi.

WEB OF CONFLICTS

But analysts see little likelihood of heavily armed Syria, which is part of an anti-Western, anti-Israel alliance with Iran and sits within a web of conflicts across the region, facing the sort of foreign intervention seen in North Africa.

Syria also has links to the Palestinian Islamist militant group Hamas and the Lebanese Shi'ite political and military movement Hezbollah.

Assad was welcomed as the fresh face of reform when he replaced his father, a master of Middle Eastern politics who brooked no dissent at home and made the refusal to bend on the Arab-Israeli conflict the heart of Syrian policy for 30 years.

Syria Deploys More Soldiers at Flashpoint Town Deraa

Reuters
Mar 27, 2011

Syria's army beefed up its presence in the southern city of Deraa, a focal point of bloody protests across the country, and soldiers took to the streets in a northern port where tensions are rising, residents said on Sunday.

The protests, which started in Deraa eight days ago, pose the most serious challenge to the 48-year rule of the Baath Party, and its leader, President Bashar al-Assad.

The demonstrations, in which protesters in some towns set fire to ruling party headquarters, would have been unthinkable a couple of months ago in the tightly controlled Arab country.

The army has so far taken a secondary role to secret police and special forces that have been sent to the city to try to quell more than a week of protests in which at least 55 people have been killed in and around Deraa, a rights group said.

The protesters have called for political freedoms and an end to corruption, but they have also directed their wrath at Assad, and torched a statue of late President Hafez al-Assad, who ruled Syria with an iron fist for 30 years until his death in 2000.

Security forces had fired on protesters on Friday in Deraa and there were reports of more shootings in other parts of Syria. Authorities have blamed the violence on "armed gangs."

SOLDIERS ON STREETS OF LATAKIA

The unrest spread to the heavily fortified main port city of Latakia, where, according to a Syrian official source, twelve people -- including security forces, civilians and "armed elements" -- have been killed in two days of clashes.

Latakia is a mostly Sunni city but also has many Shi'ite residents from the Alawite sect who have moved into the city from nearby mountains over the past several decades.

A resident of Latakia said soldiers took to the streets of the city on Saturday night to help secret police and security forces control the city after confrontations between Alawite and Sunni youth.

"Decades of pent up feelings are generating these confrontations. But this not a mass Sunni-Alawite strife. Cooler heads are prevailing in Latakia," the resident said.

He said no tanks or troop carriers were to be seen and the army was restricting its presence to soldiers on foot.

"There is a feeling in Latakia that the presence of disciplined troops is necessary to keep order. We do not want looting," he added.

An official source said security forces had not fired at protesters in Latakia but that an armed group had taken over rooftops and fired on citizens and security forces, killing five people since Friday.

PROMISES NOT ENOUGH

In an attempt to placate protesters, Assad freed 260 prisoners on Saturday and earlier in the week made a rare public pledge to implement reforms, such as "studying" an end to emergency law and proposing draft laws that would grant greater freedoms in the media and the formation of political parties.

But protesters did not seem to be mollified by the promises and in Deraa, at least, they have called for the "downfall of the regime," a refrain heard in uprisings across the Arab world which have unseated the entrenched rulers of Tunisia and Egypt.

Syrian authorities said on Saturday the country was the target of a "project to sow sectarian strife."

Syria's establishment is dominated by members of the minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam, a fact that causes resentment among the Sunni Muslims who make up some three-quarters of the population.

Demonstrations in support of Assad have also take place in Damascus and other cities, where thousands of Assad's loyalists marched or and drove around, waving flags, to proclaim their allegiance to the Baath party.

A Lebanese security source told Reuters that Syrian border police were stopping a number of Syrians entering from Lebanon.

In Beirut, a Syrian protester was slightly wounded when unknown assailants fired a few gunshots at a pro-Assad rally.

Sarkozy Warns Arab Rulers About Libya Precedent

EUOBSERVER
March 25, 2011

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has warned all Arab rulers that they risk Libya-type intervention if they cross a certain line of violence against their own people.

The president told press at an EU summit in Brussels on Thursday (24 March) that UN Security Council resolution 1973 authorising air strikes on Libya has created a legal and political precedent on the "responsibility to protect."Referring to deadly violence in Syria, he explained:

"Every ruler should understand, and especially every Arab ruler should understand that the reaction of the international community and of Europe will from this moment on each time be the same: we will be on the side of peaceful protesters who must not be repressed with violence."

Sarkozy indicated that he is ready to tolerate a certain level of violence, but that any country which orders its army to open fire on crowds will cross a red line.

"In any democracy there can be demonstrations which can turn violent. But no democracy can accept that the army shoots live ammunition at protesters. This is the position of France and it does not change no matter what the country concerned."

He drew a difference between Egypt, Tunisia and even Yemen, where dozens have been killed but where the armed forces have begun to defect, versus Libya, where Colonel Gaddafi's tanks and planes have waged open war on rebels.

He suggested that the Ivory Coast, where President Laurent Gbago's forces recently fired a heavy artillery shell into a market square, will be next in line for a UN vote on intervention.

Sarkozy noted the political sensitivity of Western military action in the Arab world.

He said that there is a new post-UNSC 1973 model of "world governance. But he added that it can only work if Libya coalition powers "precisely ... rigorously ... scrupulously" stick to the UN mandate to protect civilians instead of playing God on who should take power after Gaddafi.

Recalling the "extremely moving" scenes of Libyan rebels in Benghazi celebrating the arrival of French warplanes and the "extreme importance" of the United Arab Emirates' and Qatari involvement in the coalition, he called Libya a "historic opportunity" for "reconciliation between the two worlds."

"What's at play here is Europe as a political force, with a military means serving its political ambitions, and its relations with the Arab world," the French leader went on. "It's a moment of extreme importance for the political future of Europe and for the future of relations between Europe and the Arab people."

The hawkish speech comes amid criticism of EU "double standards" on tolerating violence in strategically important countries such as Bahrain, Syria and Yemen. Palestinian diplomats have also pointed out the EU did nothing when Israeli jets bombed civilians in Gaza in 2009.

Syrian president Bashar al-Assad earlier on Thursday put forward a package of political reforms designed to soothe tensions and pulled back troops from the hotspot town of Daraa near the Jordanian border.

More protests are expected after prayers on Friday however, with one Arab commentator describing the al-Assad reforms as "essentially transforming Ba'athist Syria into [pre-revolutionary] NDP Egypt."

Syria protests spread, authorities pull back
Syrian forces shoot protesters, kill 6 in mosque
Syria: dozens more dead, US and France divided

Muslim Brotherhood and the Revolutions

Obama is Said to be Favoring Arab Sovereignty Over the Temple Mount!

"The Middle East peace plan that United States President Barack Obama will unveil soon involves the creation of a Palestinian Authority state by 2011 and the transfer of Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem [presumably including the Temple Mount] to Arab-Muslim sovereignty... He intends to set an ambitious timetable for completing the peace deal -- something that will please Arabs but may irritate Israel." - Gil Ronen, Obama Plan: Temple Mount Under Arab-Muslim Sovereignty, Israel National News, August 23, 2009

By David Bay, Cutting Edge Ministries
August 24, 2009

There is no doubt that the Illuminati plans to address the issue of sovereignty over the Temple Mount.

In NEWS1052, I report that the New England Director of the House of Theosophy stated that one of the "breakthrough" events in allowing Antichrist to appear would be the creation of a single worship center for all Monotheistic faiths in the region, i.e., Jews, Muslims, Christians. However, the Director refused to answer my specific question as to whether this combination worship center would be built on the Temple Mount.

"As the U.N. General Assembly meets in late September, Obama aims to announce the opening of a new negotiating process between Israelis and Palestinians, along with 'confidence-building' steps by Israel, the Palestinian Authority and a number of Arab governments ... Obama 'will probably lay out at least a partial vision of the two-state settlement that all sides now say they support, and the course that negotiations should take. More significantly, he intends to set an ambitious timetable for completing the peace deal -- something that will please Arabs but may irritate Israel'."

I cannot fathom how Prime Minister Netanyahu could force this part of the plan for a Palestinian State down Israel's throat. The Temple Mount Faithful has created a cornerstone for the next Temple and enjoys wide public support. Even many secular Jews support the building of a new Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount, which means that Israel must control that area.

Could immensely strong Orthodox resistance to Arab control over the Temple Mount lead to a public campaign against them which would erode their power by making them appear to be unrealistic and too radical? After all, the Director of the House of Theosophy in Boston stated that one of the major goals of the "New Jerusalem Covenant Project" was to eliminate the Orthodox influence in Israel.

We can only wait to see how this Palestinian State plan unfolds, but one matter is certain: events are going to be very interesting and will fulfill prophecy.

Prophecies of Daniel 9:24-27, Matthew 24:15 and Revelation 11:1-12 reveal that Solomon's Temple is built for Antichrist to use. This prophetic reality means that the new Temple is built after the World War III, which is designed to produce the Man of Sin. Most significantly, the Illuminati Plan, as revealed in "The Armageddon Script," states that the New David (Antichrist) will travel to the Temple Mount and stand amongst the "rubble of the Dome of the Rock" ( p. 233-35).

Thus, the Illuminati plans to destroy the Dome of the Rock during the World War III fighting so that their Antichrist can rebuild Solomon's Temple. This reality means that Arabs will retain control over the Temple Mount until the moment Antichrist comes to the world scene and seizes it for the Jews so his temple can be created.

Read More...

Globalist Fueled Color Revolutions are Attempting to Transform Entire Regions - First the Middle East and Then the World

The Middle East & Then the World

LandDestroyer.com
February 18, 2011

Beginning in North Africa, now unfolding in the Middle East and Iran, and soon to spread to Eastern Europe and Asia, the globalist fueled color revolutions are attempting to profoundly transform entire regions of the planet in one sweeping move. It is an ambitious gambit, perhaps even one born of desperation, with the globalists' depravity and betrayal on full display to the world with no opportunity to turn back now.

To understand the globalists' reasoning behind such a bold move, it helps to understand their ultimate end game and the obstacles standing between them and their achieving it.

The End Game

The end game of course is a world spanning system of global governance. This is a system controlled by Anglo-American financiers and their network of global institutions ensuring the world's consolidated nations conform to a singular system they can then perpetually fleece. As megalomaniacal oligarchs, their singular obsession is the consolidation and preservation of their power. This will be achieved through a system of population control, industrial control, and monetary control, which together form the foundation of their Malthusian policies.

These policies are on full display in the UN's "Agenda 21," and by policy wonks like the current White House Science Adviser John Holdren in his book titled "Ecoscience."

Malthusian as their policies may be, they surely do not believe the world is in danger due to over-population or the environmental hazards posed by industrial progress. Instead, like all tyrants in history, they are establishing a convincing narrative to defend the immense concentration of undue power within their elitist hands and the implementation of measures to ensure such power stays in their hands indefinitely.

The immediate dangers posed to their plans are numerous, including an alternative media increasingly exposing the true nature of their agenda, and thus awakening a vast number of people who simply refuse to go along with it. There is also national sovereignty, where nations are openly challenging this Anglo-American centric world order and refusing to implement the conditions of their own enslavement.

These sweeping color revolutions, and coordinated military operations, both overt and covert, are dealing with the latter of these two challenges, while censorship, cognitive infiltration, and a tightening police state spanning the Western world under the very false premise of a "War on Terror" confronts the former.

Red = US-backed destabilization, Blue = US occupying/stationed.
China's oil and seaways are all covered.

The Middle East

With the globalist fueled destabilization in progress, concessions and regime changes are being made from Jordan to Egypt, all in the name of "democratization." The protesters' calls are verbatim repeats of the their local US funded NGOs' mission statements. Skeptical as many may be that all of this is being orchestrated by the West, one needs only read the RAND Corporation's 2007 report titled "Building Moderate Muslim Networks" where breathtaking confessions are made to not only reorder the Muslim world according to the West's interests, but how they would follow the same model of "civil society networks" they have already used for decades during the Cold War.

Egypt's recent "transition" played out as a direct translation of RAND's blueprint for meddling in the Muslim world. From the protest organizers and NGOs to the protest leaders, to the behind-the-scenes meddling by America's military leadership, the Egyptian uprising was entirely a US production. Even the drafting of the new Egyptian Constitution is being carried out by organizations funded by George Soros and the US National Endowment for Democracy.

The regional destabilization is resetting the geopolitical board in favor for a renewed effort to affect regime change in Iran. It has been extensively covered that the globalists have intricate and extensive plans, in the form of Brookings Institute's "Which Path to Persia?" report, to fund color revolutions, support terrorism inside of the Islamic Republic and even provoke war with a nation they concede would rather avoid conflict. No sooner did North African and Arab regimes begin to crumble did the "Green Revolution" in Iran start up again. As if reiterating the summation of Brookings' report, the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has recently and overtly called on the US to back the "Green Revolution."

Iran's fall to the globalists, the extraction of its wealth, and the end of its support for Chinese and Russian economic and military ambitions would isolate the so-called Shanghai Cooperative Organization further.

NATO creeping forward, suffering failures in Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia.

Russia's Encirclement

Russia, along with China appear to be the two biggest blocs of opposition to the Anglo-American establishment. Indeed there are plenty of people and organizations within each nation gladly working hand-in-hand with the globalists, who in turn, are overtly trying to tempt and coerce the two nations to integrate themselves into their global world order.

Men like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who rose to power in Russia amongst an era of immense corruption, began building networks of NGOs modeled directly after those of the Anglo-Americans in the West, even naming this network the "Open Russian Foundation" after George Soros' Open Society Foundation. According to geopolitical researcher William Engdahl, this Open Russian Foundation included Henry Kissinger and Lord Jacob Rothschild on its board of directors and its goal was to transform Russia from a sovereign state and into something more palatable for globalist consumption.

Whatever Khdorkovsky's early successes may have been, they were cut short by Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin, who has safely confined Khodorkovsky behind the bars of a Siberian prison. Today, Khdorkovsky receives lobbying and legal services from notorious globalist lawyer Robert Amsterdam who leads international efforts to vilify Russia and justify the nation's encirclement by NATO.

After Tunisia fell and protests began brewing in Egypt, Foreign Policy magazine published the Freedom House's list of "Who's Next?" On the list was Belarus' Aleksandr Lukashenko, leader of a European nation directly bordering Russia's western border, staring Moscow in the face. NATO itself admits the reluctance of Belarus to join its now unjustified organization, while the mainstream media berates the Belarusian government for putting down protests launched after the results of recent elections that saw the Western-backed opposition defeated.

Looking at a map of Russia, not a nation touching its borders has been spared the globalist treatment, from the Ukraine and their US-backed Orange Revolution, to Georgia and its US-backed invasion of South Ossetia. For Russia, they seem more than prepared to fight back, humiliating the US-trained and equipped Georgian military on the battlefield and overseeing the results of the US-funded Orange Revolution overturned, with Ukrainian talks to join NATO halted.

By targeting the Middle East, and in particular Iran, which both China and Russia have been using to check the West's world domineering ambitions, the globalists' hope is to renew political unrest in Russia's satellite regions and complete its campaign of encircling Russia, thus forcing it to concede to its place amongst the new global order.

SSI's "String of Pearls:" China's oil lifeline.

China's String of Pearls

It is no secret China depends on oil imports to not only keep its economy growing, but to keep its vast population busy and prosperous, thus keeping the ruling government in power. This has been a long known realism by both China and the West. For China's part, they have begun building a presence on continental Africa, especially in Sudan where they have established a 1,000 mile oil pipeline from the vast nation's heartland to Port Sudan on the Red Sea. They have also provided relief to the country from UN sanctions and buys the majority of Sudan's oil exports.

China also imports an immense amount of oil from Iran. In fact, the Islamic Republic represents the world's second largest exporter of oil to China, behind Saudi Arabia.

From Sudan and Iran, across the Indian Ocean, and back to China's shores in the South China Sea, represents a "String of Pearls," or a series of geopolitical assets China is developing to protect this vital logistical route. This "String" includes a Chinese port in Pakistan's Baluchistan region, another facility in Myanmar (Burma), and expanded facilities in the South China Sea off the coast of Vietnam. China is also building up the size and capabilities of its fleet, including submarines which now shadow America's carrier groups, and the outfitting of their first aircraft carrier which is nearing completion.

The term "String of Pearls" was used as the title of the US Strategic Studies Institute's (SSI) 2006 report "String of Pearls: Meeting the challenge of China’s rising power across the Asian littoral." In this report, China's ambitions to project its power along this route is viewed as a direct challenge to American supremacy as well as a threat to the West's unipolar vision of a "new world order."

While China may not be a champion of human freedom, they do appear to favor a multipolar world where sovereign nations coexist instead of the Anglo-American unipolar world where, unsurprisingly, the British and American oligarchs dominate the planet.

To prevent such a multipolar world from coming into existence, the SSI report suggests several strategies regarding China, from engaging and enticing it to become what globalist pusher Robert Zoellick calls a "responsible stakeholder" in the "international system," to outright military confrontation and containment.

Of course this report was written in July 2006, and the ink hadn't even dried before Israel suffered a humiliating defeat in its war with Lebanon, the war with Iran stalled, and globalist minion Thaksin Shinawtra was ousted from power in Thailand in a display of jealously defended sovereignty in Southeast Asia.

It appears that the globalists, over the following years, would present China with a flattering role to play in their global order while simultaneously destabilizing nearly every nation along the "String of Pearls." The US has expanded its war in Afghanistan and is attempting to balkanize Pakistan in the process, specifically the Baluchistan region where China is establishing a naval presence. Pakistan's Baluchistan region is also the seaside starting point of an energy and logistical conduit running northward through the Himalayas and into Chinese territory. The US is also heavily involved in destabilizing Myanmar (Burma) to affect regime change and subsequently establishing a Washington dependent government.

Thailand neighbors Myanmar to the east and possesses the narrow Kra Isthmus China would like to develop into a Suez/Panama Canal-like project to shorten trips for its oil laden, China-bound tankers. Thailand also serves as an overland conduit, running north and south as in Pakistan, with a developed rail system connecting Singapore's shipping yards to Laos' capital of Vientiane. China has begun the development of a rail system through Laos and the upgrading of Thailand's rail system. Thailand also is one of the world's largest rice exporters, which makes the nation vital to China's future growth.

It is no surprise then, that Thailand, like Myanmar, has suffered multiple attempts by the US to affect regime change. Their man, Thaksin Shinawatra is an overt globalist, having formally served as an adviser to the Carlyle Group, and since his ousting from power in 2006, has been lobbied for by everyone from James Baker's Baker Botts, to ICG's Kenneth Adelman and the Edelman PR firm, to his current lobbyist and lawyer, Robert Amsterdam.

It is quite clear that Washington is using its control of the Middle East and its control of the seas, albeit challenged control, to check China's vastly superior financial and economic position. It is also clear that Washington is investing a great amount of military resources and intelligence assets to destabilize the entire "String of Pearls" to confound, contain, and leverage concessions from China, with the ultimate goal of folding the emerging Asian giant into the unipolar Anglo-American global order.

How well this strategy is working is debatable, however, the US military is politically hobbled, strategically stretched, and led by vastly incompetent leaders in Washington who have lost the faith and trust of their own population, not to mention the world. The bold and perhaps desperate gambit the US is playing out in the Middle East could be a bid to rectify years of failure against China and the Shanghai Cooperative since the SSI wrote their report in 2006. Regime change in Iran is still the linchpin in making this latest bid a success.

South America

Even South America is not spared. There has been a lull in overt American meddling, allowing South America to become a bastion of sorts against the agents of globalization, however, covert operations and staging has been ongoing.

Troubling reports coming from South America's Argentina, no stranger to the ire of Anglo-American ambitions, indicate that tension is building up between Buenos Aires and Washington. It has culminated in a diplomatic row over a recently seized US C-17 transport chalk full of suspicious equipment and an even more suspicious explanation. This is leading many, including the government of Argentina, to believe the US is staging another round of destabilization efforts in South America.

Venezuela and Bolivia have been overtly targeted by the West in recent years by efforts to undermine and even overthrow their respective governments. The muted-confused response over the coup in Honduras also raises suspicions that America has begun striking back against the wave of regional nationalism sweeping South America. A visit over to Movements.org reveals that the US State Department/corporate funded organization is backing dissidents in Venezuela and encouraging the spread of "civil society," gleefully noting the insidious effects it is having on bolstering the anti-Chavez opposition.

Conclusion

The recent US-backed wave of revolution sweeping the Middle East is just the beginning of a greater move to dislodge Iran and begin regaining ground against Russia and China after several years of disappointing results geopolitically. The ultimate goal in mind is to force Russia and China to accept their role as "responsible stakeholders" in the unipolar Anglo-American "new world order." The unipolar world of Anglo-American financier domination requires that all competition be eliminated, all nations become interdependent, and most importantly, all governments conform to the globalists' model of "civil society" which in turn answers to centralized global institutions.

Understanding the overarching plan reveals the danger of being apathetic or complacent about the current unrest in the Middle East. It will surely spread, and depending on the Shanghai Cooperative's response and their determination to remain the masters of their own destiny, greater confrontation may ensue. For the United States and its dwindling power, its meaningless offers to the world's nations to join their bankrupt, one-sided model of world governance, and their growing economic mire, there is no telling what their desperation may transform into. This unpredictability and desperation may be perhaps the only card they have left in their hand worth playing, and one that should trouble us all.

Anglosphere Plots Color Revolutions Around the World?

The Daily Bell
February 12, 2011

Hosni Mubarak has resigned. The Egyptian "color" revolution (ie: a peaceable one), carried out by heroic people risking life and limb, has been apparently been a success. I only wish it were that simple. But there is ample evidence the revolution has been manipulated and that the Anglo-American elite plans to replicate the Egyptian revolution not just in the Middle East but worldwide via the use of the Internet and swelling youth demographics.

The latest and most astonishing global gambit is called AYM and Wikipedia provides us some information about the group, as follows:

"The Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) began with a December 2008 summit in New York City to identify, convene, and engage 21st century movements online for the first time in history. The United States Department of State partnered with Facebook, Howcast, MTV, Google, YouTube, AT&T, JetBlue, Gen-Next, Access 360 Media, and Columbia Law School to launch a global network and empower young people mobilizing against violence and oppression."

According to Wikipedia,

"Founders of AYM include Jared Cohen, former advisor to both Secretaries of State Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton and now Director of Google Ideas at Google, Jason Liebman, CEO and co-founder of Howcast and Roman Tsunder, co-founder of Access 360 Media. Speakers at the 2008 summit included actress Whoopi Goldberg, Facebook Co-Founder Dustin Moskovitz, The Obama Campaign's New Media Team, and then-current Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs of the United States James K. Glassman."

A 2010 article at Wired.com covers a recent AYM summit in breathless detail, as follows:

"I'm at the Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) summit in London, at the Intercontinental Hotel. The two-day summit, which ends tomorrow, is an impressive gathering of youth activists from more than 18 countries, NGOs and tech giants, here to learn more about using online tools to promote their extraordinary range of social movements and promote non-violent change."

The Wired article, entitled "AYM summit: A meetup for the world's youth activists," then further explains the transformative changes that the "world's youth" are capable of making:

At the opening reception last night, hosted at Google's headquarters, I met a smart bunch of people from organizations such as Blue State Digital (which ran Obama's online campaign), Howcast, Middle East peace activists One Voice, and the East London-based Young Foundation. But the highlight is an A-list bunch of conference speakers at the conference today and tomorrow – including Jack Dorsey of Twitter, Sir Martin Sorrell of WPP, Scott Heiferman of MeetUp, as well as top people from Google, YouTube and the World Bank. Other keynote speakers include Jeremy Gilley, the former actor who founded Peace One Day, and Joe Rospars, who was the new-media director for Obama for America.

There's strong representation here from Washington DC. This morning, Jared Cohen, of the US State Department, moderated a session titled Seizing the Moment: Responding to Crises and Mobilizing Around Key Events. That had speakers from Mobile Accord, Ushahidi, Mazahery Law, AccessNow and the Censorship Research Center. I'm now sitting in a session called Turning Video into Tangible Action, featuring experts such as Ramya Raghaven of YouTube, Levi Felix of Causecast, and Chris Sarette, Invisible Children ...

It's an inspiring event, geared towards helping activists share top-level information and making connections that lead to significant change. You can sense the scale of their practical ambition from the title of some of the sessions: one is called Tech Solutions to Repressive Regimes; another is titled Effective Strategies for Mobile Content to Increase Empowerment.

The above was a report on the third AYM Summit in 2010. Online you can find a transcription of Hillary Clinton's "Video Message for Alliance of Youth Movements Summit" that was apparently a keynote for the second AYM Summit in Mexico City, October 16, 2009. Here's an excerpt:

I want to congratulate all of you who have come to Mexico City, in person and online, to be a part of this groundbreaking summit. You are the vanguard of a rising generation of citizen activists who are using the latest technological tools to catalyze change, build movements, and transform lives. And I hope this conference provides an opportunity for you to learn from each other and discover tools and techniques that will open new doors for activism and empowerment when you return home. All over the world, young people like you are driving progress.

In Colombia, two young college graduates, fed up with the violence in their country, used Facebook to organize 14 million people into the largest antiterrorism demonstrations in history. In Iran, we saw young people using twitter and YouTube to communicate with each other and the world despite a government crackdown designed to keep them silent. And in India, a 14-year old high school student from Mumbai used social networking to link together half a million people who sought solidarity and support in the aftermath of the November 2008 terrorist attacks ...

Governments can't do it alone. Citizens, organizations, businesses, universities – everyone with a stake in our shared future must take responsibility for shaping it. That's what we call 21st century statecraft. So thank you for being on the front lines of progress, and I can't wait to see what all of you do next.

Of course what came next apparently was Africa and the Middle East: first Tunisia, now Egypt and surely other countries to come. It would seem, then, that Mubarak never attended an AYM meeting. But certainly he and his supporters have in fact discovered the limits of Western Anglo-American elite loyalties: One is useful until one is not.

So here's my supposition: Despots throughout the Middle East, Africa, Asia and South America (those who have gotten used to billion-dollar annual handouts from the US to "sustain stability" via the use of torture, famine and censorship) are probably online just this minute investigating timeshares in Lear Jets. Hillary's keynote speech is quite clear. Each AYM Summit is like a tolling of a bell. And it tolls for 20th-century thugs that cast their lot with the Anglosphere.

It's not exactly an original story. During the era of the initial Gutenberg press and the Renaissance, the Great Venetian banking families of the day suppposedly set out to destroy the power of the Catholic church. The Venetians may have funded Martin Luther and his Reformation to split the Church, and further funded other schisms. Of course it didn't work out quite as planned. The Reformation seems to have spun out of control and numerous free-thinking sects (the results of the Reformation and Protestant revolution) ended up in America, creating anarchical, horizontal societies that took Western elites centuries to stamp out. In fact, the elites ended up with one good century – the 20th. The 21st we speculate will be a far bumpier ride thanks to the next iteration of the Gutenberg press – the Internet.

Because of the Internet, it's hard to be cynical about the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. It would be my hope that these revolutions would usher in some real change. But that is not what the revolution's handlers want.

The Anglosphere's operations are being carried out in two phases.

1. First comes the revolution.
2. Then comes "aftermath" that must inevitably resolve itself into Western-centric regulatory democracies, including manipulative central banks, endless, intrusive, brand-intensive corporatism and, generally, spirit-sapping regulatory democracy.

Alternatively, the Anglosphere's revolutions end up generating Islamic republics – but that's OK too. Islamic Republics come in handy in building a larger Islamic enemy that provides justification for further authoritarian depredations at home.

The process is already at work in Tunisia. The mainstream media is not covering ongoing (considerable) unrest in Tunisia anymore because the dominant social theme – the agreed upon narrative – is that the Tunisians had their "color" revolution and now that a "unity" government is in charge, the revolution has run its course. Reform is on the way; a consensus will be reached and Western-style regulatory democracy will be installed in that small, bleeding country – unless of course militant Islam shoulders it aside.

As incredible as it is to contemplate, these manipulations apparently run even beyond the arrogance of inciting worldwide revolution. Another dominant social theme that's been launched seems to involve Julian Assange and his psyops WikiLeaks program, if that's what it is. We recently explained WikiLeaks operations as follows:

Each WikiLeaks "release" only seems to confirm the dreary conclusion that the entire enterprise is a kind of concoction intended to facilitate Western intelligence interests and further reinforce Western messaging. Is this so farfetched? It is a well-documented fact that Wall Street funds were funneled overseas (via the Red Cross) to help gain victory for the Red communist factions (and Lenin) during the Russian Revolution. And it is just as certain that Anglo-American elites created the economic conditions that allowed for the rise of Adolf Hitler – and then provided massive industrial funding as well. The American Bush family was directly involved in this latter transaction.

For this reason we identified Assange as a key figure in an upcoming global, elite promotion almost from the very beginning when we wrote a fictionalized speculation called "Comes a Blond Stranger." We weren't positive then and we won't make a definitive statement now, but the evidence continues to pile up. If we are correct, it may be in fact almost impossible to overstate the importance of Julian Assange and his role in the "history" that the elites are now busily creating. He could end up being the first leader of a world government – a six-foot-four (or five or six) inch blond rebel with an electronic cause and a commitment to global transparency (see below).

http://www.thedailybell.com/1750/Frauds-of-WikiLeaks.html

WikiLeaks has been in play for nearly a year. The gambit of "color" revolutions has been revitalized only recently. But they may have the same roots. Consider, please, Egyptian heroic rebel Wael Ghonim, conveniently of Google, an American Internet corporation that has close ties to American intel. Just yesterday, Ghonim tweeted,

"Dear Western Governments, You've been silent for 30 years supporting the regime that was oppressing us. Please don't get involved now".

This sounds quite admirable. But let's take a further look at Google's Ghonim. A summary from alternative news website Infowars:

"Having been living abroad in Dubai, [Ghonim's] Facebook page didn't pop-up overnight, it was actually created nearly a year ago in tandem with Mohamed ElBaradei's arrival in Egypt during February 2010. Ghonim also created ElBaradei's official campaign website. Ghonim and ElBaradei then concurrently campaigned for the coming November 2010 Egyptian election and built up an opposition network in support for ElBaradei. This network included the April 6 Movement, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the independent labor unions now making up the bulk of the protests."

Infowars informs us of information that is readily available all over the ‘Net – that the Egyptian protests were planned by Western operatives and that Ghonim and the "Revolutionary Youth Movement," were intimately involved along with an "opposition network ElBaradei had been busy building since early 2010." This information has been reported by the mainstream media as well. The UK Telegraph reported on US involvement in training Egyptian youth protests more than a week ago. The Wall Street Journal recently reported how organizers selected places for the protests and even walked the routes to figure out timelines.

More from Infowars:

"Perhaps Wael Ghonim ... doesn't know who ElBaradei really works for and that he consorts with the very men making the US policy he feigns to deplore. Perhaps he is unaware of what designs such men have for his "new" Egypt and has no clue that everyone involved in his protest has been networked, funded, backed, and even directed by foreigners with nothing but exploitation in mind for Egypt's future."

And who is Mohamed ElBaradei? According to Tony Cartalucci at alternative-news site landdestroyer.blogspot.com, "ElBaradei, the self-proclaimed leader of the unfolding Egyptian protests, is actually sitting on the Board of Trustees of the Zbigniew Brzezinski/George Soros globalist think-tank, the International Crisis Group." Cartalucci adds:

The mainstream media has been backing ElBaradei's ownership of the protests, hailing this Nobel Laurette and former UN IAEA director as the potential next president of Egypt and the "hero" of the protests. The New York Times refers to him as the "Nobelist" portraying him as standing "toe-to-toe" with hundreds of riot police and promising to run for president if and only if elections were "free and fair." While ElBaradei poses as a critic of the United States, it is not because of their meddling with Middle Eastern affairs, it is because they are not meddling enough. ElBaradei berates the United States for not intervening in what he calls "social disintegration, economic stagnation, and political repression" in Egypt.

Cartalucci eventually goes off the tracks. He is convinced that the color revolutions are being fomented by the West to encircle Iran and ensure that Iran does not create nuclear devices. However as we've pointed out before there is considerably controversy over the origins of the Iranian revolution. Khomeini's father may have been a British agent (so some reports speculate) and Khomeini himself may have been trained by MI5/MI6. On the flight back to Iran, Khomeini reportedly said some nasty things about Iranians and generally didn't sound as if he was very happy about returning there. Finally, Khomeini apparently redrew various oil contracts in favor of the West when he arrived back in Iran – hard as that sounds to fathom.

http://www.thedailybell.com/1310/Maybe-US-Wants-Iran-to-Have-the-Bomb.html

It is not always clear what the Anglosphere is doing or why. But as usual in this world nothing is as it seems. I would advise those who wish to follow such things generally, (the continuing war between the Anglosphere and the Internet) to wait and see how events play out. Over time the reasons for what's happening will start to come clear. It may even happen sooner than later as the elite seems increasingly rushed.

It seems increasingly clear: Instead of taking 20 or 30 years to unpack a promotion, it is implementing them in three or four years. This leads to sloppiness. Julian Assange apparently provides us with a key to the modern-day promotions that the elite wants to emphasize. The Youth Movements may offer us insights into how the elite intends to build a new world order, one regulatory democracy at a time. For the most part, one may need pliable candidates in seats of power. And certainly the elite wants to be seen as participating in the transformative power of the 'Net. It may even be that they've realized the inevitability of convulsive change and are trying to get out ahead of it and to control it via such artifices as AYM.

The strategies of Western powers-that-be are always startling in their intricacy and boldness. But I will end this essay by pointing out that many of these global schemes were plotted, apparently, as long as a century ago, or even more. The Internet was not a consideration, then, though it surely is now. And given the haste with which the PE is operating at every level, I would argue that the Internet is exposing these plans in an intolerable way. The elites will continue with their business plan of global consolidation but much now militates against it. In the era of the Internet, it is easier to implement such plans than it is to bring them to a successful conclusion. I stand with the Egyptians in their heroic struggle and wish them well, though the hard part may be yet to come.

The Struggle for Self-Determination in the Arab World: The Alliance between Arab Dictators and Global Capital

Global Research
February 14, 2011

...The U.S. is trying to play a two-sided game. The New York Times, which is highly supportive of U.S. foreign policy, suggests that the U.S. government seeks a form of stage-managed democratization in Egypt. Ross Douthat states:

"[L]ook closer, and it's clear that the [Obama] administration's real goal has been to dispense with Mubarak while keeping the dictator's military subordinates very much in charge. If the Obama White House has its way, any opening to democracy will be carefully stage-managed by an insider like Omar Suleiman [the current vice-president of Egypt], the former general and Egyptian intelligence chief who's best known in Washington for his cooperation with the C.I.A.'s rendition program. This isn't softheaded peacenik dithering. It's cold blooded realpolitik."

As long as the current structure of the Egyptian regime remains unchanged in the wake of Mubarak's departure, neo-colonial interests will continue to be served. As long as their interests are secured, they would have sacrifice Mubarak. The face of a regime does not matter; it is the interests that it serves.

Whether correct or incorrect, the Mubarak regime has claimed that the U.S. and Israel have been behind the mass protests throughout Egypt. Iran, Hezbollah, Qatar, and Hamas have also been accused of helping orchestrate the protests alongside the U.S. and Israel by Cairo. These accusations by Mubarak's regime are meant to demonize and delegitimize the protest movement as foreign ploys and to divide the Egyptian protesters.

The U.S. government seeks to maintain the same kleptocratic status quo in place in Egypt and Tunisia, either under continued dictatorship or under an outwardly appearing democratic political system. In other words, the aim is to keep the same substance, but to change the form. Kleptocracy can work under dictatorship or "managed" democracy.

As the protests across the Arab World gain momentum, the U.S. and its allies are working to "try" to mix their own "opposition" figures amongst the protest movements and to bring their "agents" into power. In other words, the U.S. is politically hedging its bets. If the Arab protest movements are not attentive to this process of infiltration, the emerging wave of so-called democratization in the Arab World could end up being a manipulated process which retains the control of foreign powers...

Read More...